PPST 2d ed Question

[UnBalanced]

Mark:
Thanks for PPST 2d ed. Obviously great book. Am looking forward to the Texas method when I finish out my linear progression.

Anyway, quick question re p. 70: the heart images. I understand that resistance training and endurance training cause different adaptations to cardiac muscle size and ventricle size/volume, but WHY is one superior to the other, from a cardiac health standpoint? I already agree that the pursuit of stength through barbell training is good and that long slow distance "cardio" as they say is bad, but my question is not about how to train - rather the effect of training on the heart. Obviosuly, a bigger, thicker, stronger heart is a good thing. So lift weights and get stronger. I get it. But it seems to me that a larger/wider/more voluminous ventricle is also a good thing, since it is that much bigger, can push more blood (i.e. it's a bigger bucket to bail out the boat), gets less clogged by whatever it is that clogs blood vessels, etc.

So, perhaps you (or perhaps Dr. Kilgore?) could explain which cardiac adaptation is superior for general cardiac health and why. Also, are they (the two different cardiac adaptations) mutually exclusive, or can metabolic conditioning work (whether through running, sprints, biking, tire pounding, tabata squats, whatever) combined with barbell trainign cause BOTH adaptations - perhaps the best of both possible worlds.

Thanks, again.

[Lon Kilgore]

Both adaptations provide a useful end result. With weight training and a thicker muscular wall, the ability to push blood effectively against higher resistances has benefits. I can more effectively get blood to tissues during maximal and submaximal efforts ? the former preventing syncope and the latter aiding with endurance performance. Since coronary artery disease is a large clinical problem and it is obstructive/resistive in nature, it is likely that symptoms will be staved off by the ability to produce higher forces of flow.

As for larger ventricular volumes, I can think of lots of performance advantages but exactly how that can combat obstructive/resistive circulatory problems is escaping me.

And as for mutual exclusivity, in human physiology nothing is black and white beyond alive or dead. We know that specific stressors will cause specific adaptations. If you are including both types of training, you will get both types of adaptation. It will just take longer to achieve high levels of both compared to if you focused on inducing only one adaptation.

[UnBalanced]

Thanks. I understand your answer. I thought that maybe a larger "tube" (which appers to be what is created by long slow distance training) would be less likely to close up, since the same volume of clogging material would leave a larger "tube"

Anyway, thanks for the clarifcation and for all your hard work with Rip