A Couple of Thoughts/Questions

[ColoWayno]

Do we still not know what causes DOMS? I think we do not, so it got me thinking. Strength is a relatively long term adaptation, but it must not be the only adaptation from weight training... Otherwise why would we have DOMS after a week or two layoff? Do we know of short term adaptations from Weight training? I haven't heard of any, but if someone knows, they might have the answer to what causes DOMS.

Also, a separate question. What are the non adaptive benefits to exercise (not training)? In other words, what good comes from walking 5 miles a day, beyond the initial adaptation that got you comfortable walking that much? From what little I know, could see the lymph system benefiting from physical movement of any type. Are there some other possibilities?

ColoWayno out.

[George Christiansen]

Also, a separate question. What are the non adaptive benefits to exercise (not training). In other words, what good comes from walking 5 miles a day, beyond the initial adaptation that got you comfortable walking that much. From what little I know, could see the lymph system benefiting from physical movement of any type. Are there some other possibilities?

I think there is a certain sort of recalibration that happens that gives us spacial awareness and some other related things.

I would compare it to playing the guitar. It would take me quite a while to lose any actual ability and memory of how to play, yet if I take even just a few days off from playing I get a little sloppy and often the same happens when picking up a guitar that isn't my own. There has been know loss in ability, but I need to be reaquainted with the instrument. This might take 15 minutes or a day depending on the length of the break.

[Kyle Schuant]

DOMS is just inflammation from little muscle tears.

Part of the adaptation, as George says, is movement skills. Better movement skills mean making better use of the muscles you do have - this is why a skinny old guy can easily beat a big young guy in squash. And movement skills are needed for barbell training. Yes, even just a squat. And 10 reps is a different skill to 5s. This is why changing to a variation of a movement or sets and reps produces soreness.

[ColoWayno]

DOMS is just inflammation from little muscle tears.

Do you have a source for that? It seems right intuitively, but I remember Rip and others saying the mechanism was poorly understood.

[Kyle Schuant]

It's better-understood than the repair process which grows new muscle.

Muscle soreness and delayed-onset muscle soreness. - PubMed - NCBI

By "poorly understood" they mean in the sense that the glycolytic cycle is understood - every little chemical reaction studied in detail. Nor is it really understood why after doing 5s for a while 20s will hurt, or vice versa. That it's microtears followed by inflammation is not really in dispute. And that's enough understanding for those of us doing the lifting.

[Suwannee Dave]

... What are the non adaptive benefits to exercise (not training)? In other words, what good comes from walking 5 miles a day, beyond the initial adaptation that got you comfortable walking that much? From what little I know, could see the lymph system benefiting from physical movement of any type. Are there some other possibilities?

ColoWayno out.

You would be burning a lot more calories than by just sitting around. Frequent walking has been shown to have a number of benefits to metabolism and vascular health.

[perman]

Also, you're not sitting when you're walking. People forget that one of the main differences between people today and in olden times is how much we're sedentary every single day. It's not only what you do when you workout that counts, but what you do the other 22 hours a day. So training helps offset that, but it hardly makes you awesome in moderate doses if you're unhealthy/undisciplined the rest of the time.

[George Christiansen]

Also, you're not sitting when you're walking. People forget that one of the main differences between people today and in olden times is how much we're sedentary every single day. It's not only what you do when you workout that counts, but what you do the other 22 hours a day. So training helps offset that, but it hardly makes you awesome in moderate doses if you're unhealthy/undisciplined the rest of the time.

That depend on your definition of awesome and what you have trained to do.

I used to wor 7-12 hours a day 5-6 days a week doing manual labor that most of the current population couldn't even do. I train 3 times per week, hike a few hours most Saturdays (very flat terrain) and spend less than a couple of hours a day of combined walking and coed naked wresting most days. that is more than a couch potato, but sedentary in comparison and yet I am more awesome now at 43 then I was 21.

I can only imagine how much more awesome I'd be if my lifts were not still so low.

[perman]

That depend on your definition of awesome and what you have trained to do.

I used to wor 7-12 hours a day 5-6 days a week doing manual labor that most of the current population couldn't even do. I train 3 times per week, hike a few hours most Saturdays (very flat terrain) and spend less than a couple of hours a day of combined walking and coed naked wresting most days. that is more than a couch potato, but sedentary in comparison and yet I am more awesome now at 43 then I was 21.

I can only imagine how much more awesome I'd be if my lifts were not still so low.

Well, my point was that it's possible to counter a training program by bad living really. We have low standards for activity in this modern age, and working out a couple times a week makes puts a person in like top 10-20 percentile of activity, but it's not necessarily impressive.

Oth, people can of course make awesome results just working out 3 times a week too, but there tends to be some synergy between the workouts and what they do the rest of the time like diet and health in general then.

[George Christiansen]

Well, my point was that it's possible to counter a training program by bad living really. We have low standards for activity in this modern age, and working out a couple times a week makes puts a person in like top 10-20 percentile of activity, but it's not necessarily impressive.

Oth, people can of course make awesome results just working out 3 times a week too, but there tends to be some synergy between the workouts and what they do the rest of the time like diet and health in general then.

My point is that if you are progressing in your training then you are at least eating and sleeping enough to do so and there is no real reason to worry that you better do more or else you might not really be healthy.

Who says that those folks in the (mostly imaginary) past who moved more via having no cars and working on farms were healthier than someone who's physical activity is made up almost entirely of a few lifting sessions and maybe some conditioning each week simply because the latter takes less time to compete?

Judging health and longevity is rather sketchy because of the insane amount of factors to take into consideration when trying to assign cause and effect, but there is plenty to say that the latter provides better health than the former.