Just like every other licensing regulation, it would be developed *by* incompetent trainers. Those who seek to regulate wish to insulate themselves from competiton. It's never about your safety or well-being. Ever.Originally Posted by dpg
TMPHBITEU
Yeah, and the Government is just the organization we need to do the protecting, since they're so good at it already. Remember back when there used to be horrible doctors, lawyers, hairdressers, plumbers, and drivers? And then the Government stepped in, and they're all gone now. All gone!!. Happy Happy!!
You are either very young, or very very dumb.
I read the aggregators on the web, like Drudge and Instapundit, and links from all their linked stories. The problem with the state-run media is not what they report, which is always biased, but what they omit.
Member
Just like every other licensing regulation, it would be developed *by* incompetent trainers. Those who seek to regulate wish to insulate themselves from competiton. It's never about your safety or well-being. Ever.
TMPHBITEU
Never ever. It's about the money. And children like dpg make it possible.
Member
In my view a lot more harm would come to an unsuspecting public if anyone could call himself or herself a dentist, plastic surgeon, airline pilot, lawyer, auto mechanic, or building contractor without demonstrating his or her credentials. But a license requirement for hair braiding? Come on. Though I did hear one time that some of those hair weaves are surgically attached to the scalp.
TMPHBITEU
Child, are you not aware of the fact that all states license hairdressers?
Member
I don't think we need the state to protect us from a bad haircut, perm, coloring, etc. But when you start cutting into people, yeah. You recognize the shortcomings of government but fail to apply the same skepticism to business - people who have a financial incentive to rip us off, endanger our health, and send the economy into a tailspin. In the big, messy, complicated real world (not the make believe model of small producers and Leave it to Beaver that conservatives carry in their heads) adults realize that some government regulation is needed.
Member
And credentials always, always mean the holder is competent, right?In my view a lot more harm would come to an unsuspecting public if anyone could call himself or herself a dentist, plastic surgeon, airline pilot, lawyer, auto mechanic, or building contractor without demonstrating his or her credentials.
Member
My wife and I own a salon. She has often expressed her frustration that state law prevents her from hiring people to wash hair unless they are licensed hair stylists /cosmetologist. If she could hire dedicated hair washers all of the stylists could serve more customers per day and they could then tip out the washers. Many states allow this, but apparently my state is concerned that unless you are certified and licensed, you may screw up and unintentionally water board clients or something. I guess licensed and experienced hair stylists are not capable of training newly hired employees how to wash hair.
Member
Aside from one problem, setting standards is a great idea to ensure at least a minimum of professional competence. I would love it if someone had to be knowledgeable in order to be a coach, and having the right standards would go a long way in that direction.
The only problem, and it's a tiny one at that, is that there's roughly a %100 chance the standards would be unhelpful. More than likely they would be actually harmful, given the popular opinions about training and, to use the reoccurring example, deep squats.
So rather than getting competent coaches who can show you how to build strength, you get coaches who are "competent" to show you how to squat to no lower than parallel (and higher is safer), or better yet, just do leg curls and leg extensions, since they do the same thing without the nasty risk of knee injuries that deep squats have.
I wouldn't even trust Rip to be 100% correct in making coaching standards, and he's at least willing to admit when he was mistaken about training. I'm definitely not going to trust government officials who don't even train to decide what can or cannot be coached.
Starting Strength Coach
This is an area I'm going to start looking into in the near future. I've heard rumblings of proposed regulations, but nothing that scares me...yet. Partly because I think that the gym industry as a whole likes things the way they are...you're not going to find many gyms clamoring for PT regulation.
Whether regulation will ultimately come to fruition depends, I think, on the regulation proposed. If it's a licensure regulation (like doctors or lawyers), then I think it will be controversial. If it's a title regulation (i.e., you can't use title X unless you're certified, but other than that you can do whatever you want), then I think it will be a lot less controversy. And it's hard to know this kind of stuff in advance, especially given how diverse states can be in their approaches to perceived problems.
The good news is, this stuff won't be regulated nationally--it's going to be your state government, which means that small but vocal groups have a lot more influence. If you see this kind of stuff brewing in your state, sound the alarm and start calling individual state reps. Especially if you know one personally.
Well, that's enough musings for today. But thanks for the article--I've pulled it and will review with interest. Perhaps this is a good topic for a follow-up article in the near future...
Posting Permissions