I have trouble understanding the basis for articles like these. As far as it goes, asking which exercises might provide the best real-world gains is a sensible question, but the question of why a 40 yr old man wants to be able to push 235 lbs away from his chest when lying reclined is never even asked.
Does he know why he wants this?
From a biological perspective, a specimen might want to be able to do this to signal to potential mates that he is worthy of reproduction (the reason why we do alot of the things we do that no one ever quite explains). But at age 40, this is a suspect answer... without knowing any details of his personal life it seems unlikely that he's finally looking to settle down and start a family. Besides, if he is a late bloomer, the success of his career and his paycheck matter much more than body fat percentage. A male's ability to provide benefit to a female just doesn't lean much towards the "fighting off sabertooth tigers" anymore, nor even in the western world towards "fighting off other males".
I'm continually surprised how much time, effort, and money people will waste on these activities that seem devised to attract mates when they want few or no children, when they already have mates, and at times even when they have mates superior to any they're likely to acquire in the future. It's almost as if even as the desire to reproduce erodes, their desire to attract reproductive mates increases.
I started Starting Strength because I didn't want to be sedentary anymore. I thought I would maintain my weights after a few months, but I soon realized that it feels good to move weight and then more weight. The satisfying part is the challenge.
You should try and get a 150lb bench press and then see if you would want a 200lb bench press and then a 235lb bench press. You might be a "male specimen" that sees no logic to strength, but neither should you be dismissive of people that like to be strong. (Some are women, by the way.)
>From a biological perspective, a specimen might want to be able to do this to signal to potential mates that he is worthy of reproduction
You've made a lot of assumptions about his motivations. In Starting Strength, Rippetoe basically makes the claim that these exercises are the most effective way to improve someone's overall health and fitness. His attitude is probably best summarized by the following quote:
>Humans are not physically normal in the absence of hard physical effort.
Now, I'm not going to argue with you about whether humans need exercise to be healthy or if so, which kinds. But for the people who do come to that conclusion (that apparently includes the author), there's plenty of motivation beyond attracting mates.
> that these exercises are the most effective way to improve someone's overall health and fitness.
This doesn't explain anything, however. It's tautological... he wants to increase his fitness, to increase his fitness?
> Now, I'm not going to argue with you about whether humans need exercise to be healthy or if so,
To what end? To eke out another 3 years at the end of his life, probably in a nursing home?
If he was trying to avoid diabetes, that makes sense to me, that affects anywhere from 10-40 years of your life, and is a very extreme quality-of-life factor.
This doesn't explain the ever-present fitness craze.
>If he was trying to avoid diabetes, that makes sense to me, that affects anywhere from 10-40 years of your life, and is a very extreme quality-of-life factor.
Sure and two of the biggest factors in preventing/treating diabetes are exercise and weight maintenance.
>This doesn't explain anything, however. It's tautological... he wants to increase his fitness, to increase his fitness?
Nope. He is performing weight bearing exercise to, not only become better at performing those exercises, but also with the goal of achieving better body composition, bone density, stamina, mental well being, etc. These have huge impacts on quality of life. You've established that you don't value longevity and quality of life, but it shouldn't be hard to understand why others seek that out.
> Sure and two of the biggest factors in preventing/treating diabetes are exercise and weight maintenance.
60 years ago, your grandfather's generation had no problems with this at all. They didn't go to the gym.
While exercise is a factor, these people have taken the required level of exercise and kicked it up 10,000%.
> Nope. He is performing weight bearing exercise to, not only become better at performing those exercises, but also with the goal of achieving better body composition,
Better in what sense?
Again, you're being tautological.
> mental well being
Huh? The only way it increases his mental well being is that he believes that if he doesn't meet some abstract ideal he'll have failed... an ideal which he chose in the first place.
The hamster doesn't run on the wheel because it thinks that being a fatty is deplorable, but because it's become mentally ill trapped in its cage.
> You've established that you don't value longevity
My maternal grandfather weighs 300 pounds. He turns 81 this year.
How much longevity would it buy me? Any number of years (realistically more like months) that I'd get will be at the end of my life, when it matters little.
> and quality of life,
My life's quality is already pretty high. What is it that I'm missing? Being able to hike up a mountain?
If your body is healthy, you're going to avoid that nursing home. My father was in such a home in his seventies, yet family friends of the same age who stayed active and fit were going on kayaking vacations around the world. If you disagree that someone who keeps their body in great shape is going to be healthier than someone whose body is out of shape, then I suspect you're either trolling or you're not old enough to recognize the ill-effects of a sedentary lifestyle.
Also, the article calls it a craze but what, objectively, is a craze? Google tells me it's a widespread but short-lived activity; a fad. This is certainly true of specific fitness programs, but the general desire for people to not be out of shape is anything but short-lived.
"A male's ability to provide benefit to a female just doesn't lean much towards the "fighting off sabertooth tigers" anymore, nor even in the western world towards "fighting off other males"
Yes, you are exactly right. And the brain knows that. Yet, our evolutionary selection criteria, eh....let's just call it what it is... the desire of people to have sex with you, hasn't caught up yet. There is a reason big breasts and biceps arouse desire when they logically shouldn't.
And this primitive holdover alone is good enough reason for some people to try to gain sexually desirable (although admittedly kind of stupid from a practical perspective) traits.
> And the brain knows that. Yet, our evolutionary selection criteria, eh....let's just call it what it is... the desire of people to have sex with you, hasn't caught up yet.
I disagree. There is a tremendous selection pressure going on, constantly.
I always chuckle when I read something by some disaffected 19 yr old whining about how girls don't like him. And what does he do? He talks about going to the gym. Even if that were to work, how likely is he to stand out among all the other thousands doing the same, some of which are almost certain to be more advantaged than he (genetics, whatever) ?
He'd do better to get a good job and start looking responsible. So few do, that even if he isn't perfect at such, he'd succeed just because he's in a seller's market (in that niche, at least).
> There is a reason big breasts and biceps arouse desire when they logically shouldn't.
There is. But I contend that this is because of a psychological defect in the human species: we want what other people want. Why do we want this?
It's advantageous. Let's assume that there is a guy called "Bob". He's not very bright, and while he does have his moments where he figures out something clever, these moments happen on a year-to-year basis, rather than a second-to-second basis (or even hour-to-hour). Figuring out what to want is a difficult intellectual problem, with thousands or millions of factors to consider.
So if Bob tries to figure this out himself, he will have to expend enormous effort to do so. And even then, he might make the wrong conclusion.
He can instead just "want what everyone wants". This takes minimal effort. You observe what seems to be popular, and want that. And even though it requires very little effort, the results are very, very close to as good as those had he expended enormous effort himself.
And so, we want what others want.
In small hunter-gatherer societies, this is very optimal. It almost never backfires. But as societies get bigger, this behavior becomes odd very quickly. We get runaway feedback loops in short order.
This doesn't mean that the behavior is now disadvantageous... in many scenarios, it works as well as it ever did. So the selection pressure to tamp this behavior down is lowered or suppressed completely.
So, if even a few people want something, with the right timing and the right random events, everyone will start wanting it. The novelty can even help, at first.
And everyone else wants it because they thought others did at some point. And as soon as they decided they wanted that thing (gym muscles) they added to the perception of others that this should be desirable. And the more people buy into it, the more extreme the desire becomes... after all, the only way to stand out among all the rest is to be the most X, for whatever X is.
The hilarious part though is how sterile this behavior is. None of the people participating in it are particularly successful from a reproductive point of view. Hell, how would they go to the gym if they had a bunch of brats to take care of?
"I contend that this is because of a psychological defect in the human species"
Oh, I don't disagree with you. We seem to have no shortage of psychological defects as a species. 100,000 years of evolution and we are still selecting for big breasts and dominating non-cooperative personalities. Fortunately most of our "selection" doesn't actually result in procreation anymore.
Now, about all those "increase your penis size" ads in my spam folder....
These days I subscribe to training functional strength as described in this article (Rippitoe and stronglifts 5x5 inspired)- mainly for day-to-day injury prevention in normal motions like reaching for high and low cabinets, helping friends move furniture into a house, and general injury prevention for participating in sports like mountain biking - I'm a 35 year old male.
Also I develop software so getting any kind of exercise and workout is important with all the desk-job health problems, so even without a "why bench 235?" I think this kind of strength is still a great value for general quality of life. You don't need a specific reason or goal for this to be good for you.
Looking good/feeling good are nice side-effects as well, and there's no better medicine than diet and exercise (for most people) for long-term better health over a sedentary life style.
Edit - I should also add I am not trying to get huge, just maintain general strength and flexibility - currently squat 220, bench 175, press 105, row 170, deadlift 265. Body weight 180.
>"Strength training has been shown to improve insulin-stimulated glucose uptake in both healthy elderly individuals and patients with manifest diabetes, and likewise to improve muscle strength in both elderly healthy individuals and in elderly individuals with chronic disease."
>"Low muscle mass is correlated with not only lower functional capacity, but is associated with a higher risk of falls, fractures and mortality."
>"Despite the fact that ageing is associated with a decreased muscle oxidative capacity and a reduced muscle function, a major part of this decline can be counteracted by physical activity, especially by resistance training."
Basically: muscle eats glucose. High blood glucose is bad for you. More muscle = less frail in general. It's a damn good idea for him to be doing strength training at his age.
Seconded. I genuinely don't understand the (seemingly recent) obsession with "getting big."
There are very strong reasons for wanting to lose weight and get fit, based on health reasons. I see absolutely no reason for a person working at a desk job to develop massive muscles which are literally only used in the gym.
Starting Strength is more about getting functionally strong, though an increase in muscle size would no doubt accompany that.
Taking the deadlift as an example, Rippetoe spends pages describing the proper form, and why you need to do them. This is not because he wants you to necessarily get 'big', but because the muscles involved are used on a daily basis.
"The deadlift is more functional in that it’s very hard to imagine a more useful application of strength than picking heavy shit up off the ground. "
Here are some papers (stuck behind a paywall, but conclusions are there), which show a correlation between mortality and strength. So regardless of the author's intentions, increasing your strength might actually increase your life expectancy.
> PS: Obviously the question of causality remains contested. Are healthier people just stronger or do stronger people get healthier?
That seems like a pretty big confounding variable. Fit people are generally both healthier and stronger. I highly doubt strength training, in itself, is the most effective way to increase longevity.
>I'm continually surprised how much time, effort, and money people will waste on these activities that seem devised to attract mates
You are surprised that people will spend 3-4 hours per week to look good, stay healthy, stress less, feel better, and increase the number of fun activities they can safely enjoy?
The average American spends 35+ hours/wk watching TV!
I'm not 40 or anything, but I know personally I love fitness. It's great to feel like you've accomplished something and the feeling is great after a stressful day at work. It doesn't have to be about the opposite sex if you don't want it to be.
It's something you can't understand unless you try it.
Accomplishment is a key component of happiness, and while specific strength goals may seem arbitrary, so are countless other goals and hobbies that people have. Overcoming a difficult challenge through hard work and determination can be its own reward.
Does he know why he wants this?
From a biological perspective, a specimen might want to be able to do this to signal to potential mates that he is worthy of reproduction (the reason why we do alot of the things we do that no one ever quite explains). But at age 40, this is a suspect answer... without knowing any details of his personal life it seems unlikely that he's finally looking to settle down and start a family. Besides, if he is a late bloomer, the success of his career and his paycheck matter much more than body fat percentage. A male's ability to provide benefit to a female just doesn't lean much towards the "fighting off sabertooth tigers" anymore, nor even in the western world towards "fighting off other males".
I'm continually surprised how much time, effort, and money people will waste on these activities that seem devised to attract mates when they want few or no children, when they already have mates, and at times even when they have mates superior to any they're likely to acquire in the future. It's almost as if even as the desire to reproduce erodes, their desire to attract reproductive mates increases.