What internal mechanism does ballistic training effect that regular resistance training does not that makes it superior?
One of biggest factors that differentiates high intensity training (HIT) from other exercise modes is the lack of ballistic/”explosive” training.
HIT excludes these exercise first and for most because of safety – but they are not any more effective in making one stronger or more “explosive.”
(They are actually far less effective in most circumstances)
Now I reviewed all available literature on the matter in grad school (I will post those papers again soon).
The question that I beg someone to answer for me is – What internal mechanism does ballistic training effect that regular resistance training does not?
You might have seen the link I posted the other day about Coach Gittleson’s speech on neck strength and the prevention of concussions.
This study here shows a solid link between whiplash and concussions. They studied 183 hockey players over the course of the season – all those who received a whiplash injury had concussion symptoms.
The link between neck strength and preventing whiplash is pretty obvious but if you are skeptical see this study by the same scientists.
I am not sure how many had concussion alone from this abstract – I am working on getting the full study.
The greater number with whiplash just makes for a stronger argument that strength training the neck prevents whiplash and the resulting concussions.
I see a lot of people at the gym perform exercises that look more like rehab than actual exercise.
I think a lot of times people think the exercises that got them healthy after an injury are going to keep them healthy and strong over the long haul.
This couldn’t be further from the truth.
A physical therapists job is to get you back to a strength level that allows you to function normally – not get you strong enough to prevent future injury.
To get someone who is weakened by injury stronger it doesn’t take much resistance, so the cute little things that they do – balls, bands, etc – are very effective.
I would argue that their choice in training modalities has to do with their environment as well.
PT’s see a large volume of patients in a very confined space – it would be impossible to have a lot of real strength equipment in such tight quarters. And because their patients are in such a weakened state having such equipment may be unnecessary.
So again they choose balls and bands and light dumbbells, but these modalities can only get you so far.
To get you beyond what a PT can do you need real weight training. The resistance provided by PT type exercises at some point simply won’t be heavy enough for you to make continued strength gains.
I hear all types of crazy theories at the gym about how muscle grows. The most common one I have heard that muscle grows by tearing down the muscle and it rebuilding stronger – not exactly true.
To illustrate this point I will refer you to the studyThe effects of supraphysiologic doses of testosterone on muscle size and strength in normal men by S. Bhasin el. al published in the New England Journal of Medicine July 4 1996.
The study showed that sedentary (inactive) men given high doses of testosterone would grow muscle over the course of 10 weeks.
The craziest finding from this study is that is that the group that just received the testosterone grew the same amount (statistically) of muscle as the group that actually trained but without juicing up.
The juiced up dudes that did hit the gym in this study showed a significant difference in muscle size and strength for all measure taken over the roid-heads who sat at home.
This is not an endorsement for steroids – believe me – I bring it up because from this study, the idea that muscle grows by some sort of breakdown is seriously called into question.