Doctors

[AndrewLewis]

The SS forums is a self selecting cohort of highly motivated individuals who have all decided to embark on a tough training program with considerable delay to the gratification involved.

The average patient I encounter will never even do consistent low intensity exercise let alone train.

Even the handful of individuals who I thought might have the necessary qualities for it to be worth my time to bring SS in to the discussion have not attempted it.

Kind of depressing really…..

Rip talks about this with the doctor he did the heart attack recovery study with; they financially incentivized strength training to be in the experimental group for heart recovery, and people didn't want to do it. I can't find it at the moment, but it was an incredible discussion.

[Maybach]

The SS forums is a self selecting cohort of highly motivated individuals who have all decided to embark on a tough training program with considerable delay to the gratification involved.

The average patient I encounter will never even do consistent low intensity exercise let alone train.

Even the handful of individuals who I thought might have the necessary qualities for it to be worth my time to bring SS in to the discussion have not attempted it.

Kind of depressing really…..

I mean that's the thing though: obviously SS novice progression would be the best thing, and get them the strongest, but doing ANYTHING approaching that would be beneficial. Like 90% of people would be better off than they are if they went to the gym and wide grip pressed the empty bar, high bar squatted 85 pounds, and wobbly deadlifted 105, 3x5, three times a week. Obviously everyone working through a NLP would be the best case but there is enough real estate between the current case and the best case to satisfy the nation's asparagus needs into the far flung future.

[Mark Rippetoe]

Like 90% of people would be better off than they are if they went to the gym and wide grip pressed the empty bar, high bar squatted 85 pounds, and wobbly deadlifted 105, 3x5, three times a week.

What do you mean by "better off"?

[francesco.decaro]

I mean that's the thing though: obviously SS novice progression would be the best thing, and get them the strongest, but doing ANYTHING approaching that would be beneficial. Like 90% of people would be better off than they are if they went to the gym and wide grip pressed the empty bar, high bar squatted 85 pounds, and wobbly deadlifted 105, 3x5, three times a week. Obviously everyone working through a NLP would be the best case but there is enough real estate between the current case and the best case to satisfy the nation's asparagus needs into the far flung future.

You're assuming they're progressively increasing the weight, right? In that case you basically described the first day of NLP for a 50 year old woman with lack of shoulder mobility.
But I know what you mean, any exercise done with a relatively higher load than a treadmill or functional training stuff, regardless of sets/reps or technique, is better than the alternative.
But you forget about the stress-recovery-adaptation syndrome. It might be "better off", NOW. But if they keep doing the same thing over and over, eventually the body adapts and maintains homeostasis, it might be at a higher level than before, but time will bring it down again. If the load increases over time, then it's an NLP.

[Yngvi]

The SS forums is a self selecting cohort of highly motivated individuals who have all decided to embark on a tough training program with considerable delay to the gratification involved.

The average patient I encounter will never even do consistent low intensity exercise let alone train.

Even the handful of individuals who I thought might have the necessary qualities for it to be worth my time to bring SS in to the discussion have not attempted it.

Kind of depressing really…..

It would be interesting to know more about the specifics on what exactly separates the patients who are receptive to training from those who never will be.
We already know we are narrow casting, but systematically targeted narrow casting based on factors such as psychological profiling might be the next useful step.

[Will Morris]

It would be interesting to know more about the specifics on what exactly separates the patients who are receptive to training from those who never will be.
We already know we are narrow casting, but systematically targeted narrow casting based on factors such as psychological profiling might be the next useful step.

I’ll be honest with you here. I’ve been practicing for about a decade now. During a patient encounter, I usually know (with an extremely high degree of accuracy) if the person I am working with would be receptive to training versus those that I could never convince to do so within the first five minutes. I have only been wrong a handful of times. I think the overwhelming majority of clinicians who are like minded would probably support this observation in their own practice. I’ve been able to turn patients with some motivational interviewing techniques, but even so, those were individuals who I knew at least some of what I was saying was resonating with them.

There are numerous studies attempting to measure things like self-efficacy, and other metrics like that, but, I think most of us in clinical practice can determine this within a few minutes of just talking to a patient. Truth be told, I’d bet Rip is better at this than I am.

[Maybach]

What do you mean by "better off"?

Stronger

[Jdcuth]

I’ll be honest with you here. I’ve been practicing for about a decade now. During a patient encounter, I usually know (with an extremely high degree of accuracy) if the person I am working with would be receptive to training versus those that I could never convince to do so within the first five minutes. I have only been wrong a handful of times. I think the overwhelming majority of clinicians who are like minded would probably support this observation in their own practice. I’ve been able to turn patients with some motivational interviewing techniques, but even so, those were individuals who I knew at least some of what I was saying was resonating with them.

There are numerous studies attempting to measure things like self-efficacy, and other metrics like that, but, I think most of us in clinical practice can determine this within a few minutes of just talking to a patient. Truth be told, I’d bet Rip is better at this than I am.

If the patient/client in some way blames themselves for their whatever predicament they are in (regardless of whether this is true) they may be a candidate. They are questioning their own behaviour and how it could be modified.

If they have MULTIPLE functional diagnoses (e.g. fibromyalgia AND IBS AND depression) that is a red flag for being a no hope case

[Yngvi]

How can the experiential knowledge you, Rip and others have gained be communicated or quantified, either for targeted marketing or for use by doctors/clinicians/nurses/starting strength fan etc. to recognize and refer people who would be most receptive?