I am always curious when someone goes to the effort of doing a study and then it
is not published in a peer reviewed journal. The skeptic in me causes some
questions come to mind. Was it submitted and rejected due to design flaws? Was
it rejected due to problems with the statistical analysis? Is there a conflict
of interest? There are many more reasons that could explain why this study was
not published in a referred journal and some of them are perfectly benign.
However, I do not assign any value to studies that are not published in referred
journals.
Ian Hutchinson wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2000 8:03 AM
> Subject: EXERCISE ORDER
>
> > Here is a study which concludes that it does not matter whether one
> carries
> > out strength or endurance exercises before or after one another,
>
> <SNIP>
> > From: http://www.fitnessworld.com/library/strength/strength0599.html
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----
> > ---------
> >
> > Dr Mel C Siff
> > Denver, USA
> > [log in to unmask]
>
> Interesting, thanks for posting this. Rather a lot of variables to
> consider...especially depending on whether you practice with trained
> athlertes or untrained people, infact previously "inactive" subjects were
> used here. For this reason I am not surprised by the finding.
>
> This study seems to suggest that when inactive folk commence a 10 week
> conditioning program of exercise (both groups used a mix of cardio-vascular
> with strength training, but the order was reversed) a conditioning effect is
> observed. Other variables are reported insignificant.
>
> IMHO, one of the most rewarding times to be involved in fitness programming
> has to be the first 10 weeks! The gains measured over that early time frame
> are not likely to be enjoyed again unless one chooses to try a more anabolic
> route, or goes back to inactivity and then later starts again! Secondly,
> with this group there is more caution in the approach and less likelihood of
> overuse over-training problems etc. Anyway I suspect this study has simply
> again confirmed the principle and effect of progressive conditioning. To
> extrapolate further to other groups may not be supported by this
> information. It does seem appropriate to use when dealing with " previously
> inactive " folk who are commencing an exercise program though, and may be
> useful in scheduling issues for such a group.
>
> My .02 worth!
>
> Ian Hutchinson
--
Douglas M. White, PT, OCS
Physical Therapist, Consultant
191 Blue Hills Parkway
Milton, MA USA 02186
P: 617.696.1974
[log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|