Lower body workout neccesary?

In article <[email hidden]>, "Edward J. Wurtz"

Quoted message said:

I use my treadmill five days a week, four miles a day, at four mph and
twelve percent incline. Is it really necessary to include a lower body
workout with my home gym? BTW, I exercise to maintain fitness (I am not an
athlete).

Yes, I think it is necessary. The problem with walking or jogging is the
limited ROM. So strength and endurance are built on a very limited ROM.
Knee and hip problems are common and I think could be minimized if some
concern was given to developing a large active ROM.

So I would include some full ROM movements such as squats (bodyweight deep
squats are fine) and some dynamic stretches for the hips and hamstrings.

--
Keith

Edward J. Wurtz said:

I use my treadmill five days a week, four miles a day, at four mph and
twelve percent incline. Is it really necessary to include a lower body
workout with my home gym?

Yes.

Quoted message said:

BTW, I exercise to maintain fitness (I am not an athlete).

Riiiiiiiiight.

"The Queen of Cans and Jars" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Edward J. Wurtz said:

I use my treadmill five days a week, four miles a day, at four mph and
twelve percent incline. Is it really necessary to include a lower body
workout with my home gym?

Yes.

it depends(tm)

necessary for what?

i know plenty of people who only workout (with weights) upper body, and do
running, etc. for lower body

that is not the way to optimal leg development, but it's ok if that's what
you want

whit

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

BTW, I exercise to maintain fitness (I am not an athlete).

Riiiiiiiiight.

Edward J. Wurtz said:

I use my treadmill five days a week, four miles a day, at four mph and
twelve percent incline. Is it really necessary to include a lower body
workout with my home gym? BTW, I exercise to maintain fitness (I am not an
athlete).

no kidding. unless you're disabled, you might consider
lowering that incline and upping the speed. i hope you're
not holding on.
....thehick

In news:[email hidden],
Surfact <[email hidden]> typed:

Quoted message said:

"The Queen of Cans and Jars" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Edward J. Wurtz said:

I use my treadmill five days a week, four miles a day, at four mph
and twelve percent incline. Is it really necessary to include a
lower body workout with my home gym?

Yes.

it depends(tm)

necessary for what?

i know plenty of people who only workout (with weights) upper body,
and do running, etc. for lower body

that is not the way to optimal leg development, but it's ok if that's
what you want

So, then, no workout at all is okay too if that's what you want?

Quoted message said:

whit

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

BTW, I exercise to maintain fitness (I am not an athlete).

Riiiiiiiiight.

Surfact said:

The Queen of Cans and Jars said:

Edward J. Wurtz said:

I use my treadmill five days a week, four miles a day, at four mph and
twelve percent incline. Is it really necessary to include a lower body
workout with my home gym?

Yes.

it depends(tm)

necessary for what?

i know plenty of people who only workout (with weights) upper body, and do
running, etc. for lower body

that is not the way to optimal leg development, but it's ok if that's what
you want

If you what you want is imbalance, sure.

The Queen of Cans and Jars said:

Surfact <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

that is not the way to optimal leg development, but it's ok if that's what
you want

If you what you want is imbalance, sure.

Lots of athletes have "imbalances."

-Adam

Adam Fahy said:

The Queen of Cans and Jars said:

Surfact <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

that is not the way to optimal leg development, but it's ok if that's what
you want

If you what you want is imbalance, sure.

Lots of athletes have "imbalances."

Lots of people smoke crack.

That doesn't make it right.

"Edward J. Wurtz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I use my treadmill five days a week, four miles a day, at four mph and
twelve percent incline. Is it really necessary to include a lower
body
workout with my home gym? BTW, I exercise to maintain fitness (I am
not an
athlete).

I'd like to see that - 4 mph at 12% is a tough workout for more than a
few minutes.

"Fitness" is whatever you want it to be - if you're happy, just do what
you're doing, but I like Keith's line of thinking - some full range of
motion, or at least a greater range of motion, would be good. I've
always found a little bicycling a great match with any sort of running
or walking, and if "fitness" means primarily aerobics to you, you might
add a little biking to your routine, although I'd strongly recommend you
_not_ take the approach you're taking on the treadmill and opt instead
of a cadence of at least 80 rpm, preferably 90-100, and a suitably low
resistance level.

-S-
http://www.kbnj.com

Hobbes said:

In article <[email hidden]>, "Edward J. Wurtz"

Quoted message said:

I use my treadmill five days a week, four miles a day, at four mph and
twelve percent incline. Is it really necessary to include a lower body
workout with my home gym? BTW, I exercise to maintain fitness (I am not an
athlete).

Yes, I think it is necessary. The problem with walking or jogging is the
limited ROM. So strength and endurance are built on a very limited ROM.
Knee and hip problems are common and I think could be minimized if some
concern was given to developing a large active ROM.

So I would include some full ROM movements such as squats (bodyweight deep
squats are fine) and some dynamic stretches for the hips and hamstrings.

Another reason is to prevent loss of fast twitch fibers in the lower
body. These fibers are the first to atrophy in middle and late age.
STrength/power athletes who have trained over most of their adult life
have a reduced rate of FT2 loss than those who were not strength
athletes (or sprinters). Endurance athletes also exhibited an
attenuated loss in FT2 fibers than sedentary folks, but their FT2:FT1
ratio was less than strength/power athletes. That gives you an idea of
the rate of loss in sedentary individuals.

-------------------------------------------
"The human genome stopped evolving thousands of years ago. The growth of our brains decided
our bodies didn't need to evolve anymore. Perhaps that has now backfired."

The Queen of Cans and Jars said:

Adam Fahy said:

The Queen of Cans and Jars said:

Surfact <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

>that is not the way to optimal leg development, but it's ok if that's what
>you want

If you what you want is imbalance, sure.

Lots of athletes have "imbalances."

Lots of people smoke crack.

That doesn't make it right.

<rolls eyes>

-Adam

Adam Fahy said:

The Queen of Cans and Jars said:

Adam Fahy said:

The Queen of Cans and Jars wrote:
>Surfact <[email hidden]> wrote:

>>that is not the way to optimal leg development, but it's ok if that's what
>>you want
>
>If you what you want is imbalance, sure.

Lots of athletes have "imbalances."

Lots of people smoke crack.

That doesn't make it right.

<rolls eyes>

Now there's an effective debate tactic!

frank-in-toronto <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

unless you're disabled, you might consider
lowering that incline and upping the speed.

Why?

--
Lordy

"Lordy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

frank-in-toronto <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

unless you're disabled, you might consider
lowering that incline and upping the speed.

Why?

Because the extra impact on the knees is good for them.

:-)

Peter

The Queen of Cans and Jars said:

Adam Fahy <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The Queen of Cans and Jars said:

Adam Fahy <[email hidden]> wrote:

>The Queen of Cans and Jars wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>If you what you want is imbalance, sure.
>
>Lots of athletes have "imbalances."

Lots of people smoke crack.

That doesn't make it right.

<rolls eyes>

Now there's an effective debate tactic!

As opposed to your technique of comparing athletes to crack smokers?
Please. Retract your claws.

-Adam

Lordy said:

frank-in-toronto <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

unless you're disabled, you might consider
lowering that incline and upping the speed.

Why?

to work the calves, leg and glute muscles thru a slightly
different rom. to perhaps progress and become good
at running. to then be able to run faster and therefore
farther in the same time. all these nice things.
and mainly, to not look so silly like most of the
newbies on treadmills.
....thehick

Adam Fahy said:

The Queen of Cans and Jars said:

Adam Fahy said:

The Queen of Cans and Jars wrote:
>Adam Fahy <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>The Queen of Cans and Jars wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>>If you what you want is imbalance, sure.
>>
>>Lots of athletes have "imbalances."
>
>Lots of people smoke crack.
>
>That doesn't make it right.

<rolls eyes>

Now there's an effective debate tactic!

As opposed to your technique of comparing athletes to crack smokers?
Please. Retract your claws.

I didn't compare athletes to crack smokers. Do you know how to read?
Try to parse the following carefully - I'll type slowly and keep it to
words of two syllables or less, so you should be able to follow along
without excessive difficulty:

Just because lots of people do something doesn't mean it's the right
thing to do.

The Queen of Cans and Jars said:

Just because lots of people do something doesn't mean it's the right
thing to do.

I'll type even slower for you, although you'll have to take my word for it:

Just because you like to do extensive lower-body strength training
workouts, doesn't mean everyone has to.

-Adam

Adam Fahy said:

The Queen of Cans and Jars said:

Surfact wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

that is not the way to optimal leg development, but it's ok if
that's what you want

If you what you want is imbalance, sure.

Lots of athletes have "imbalances."

Probably so, but not as significant as 0 lifting for legs.