Bone growth and heavy training

**Squaggleboggin** · 07-13-2005, 09:56 PM

This is an excerpt from page 11 of "Serious Strength Training" (Second Edition) by Tudor O. Bompa, Mauro Di Pasquale, and Lorenzo J. Cornacchia pertaining to the effect of heavy training on the bones:
-----
Research in the area of anatomical adaptation suggests that training with constant and extensive high-intensity loads may decrease the material strength of the bones (Matsuda et al. 1986). This means that if the load does not vary from low to maximum, the result may be a decrease in material bone strength, which may leave the athlete prone to bone injuries. An injury-prone athlete may be one whose training exposes the bones to an intense mechanical stress without a progressive period of adaptation.

Note, however, that at an early age, or at the entry level, low-intensity training may have a positive, stimulating effect on the length and girth of one's long bones -- while high-intensity, heavy-load training may permanently restrict bone growth in beginners (Matsuda et al. 1986).

Young and entry-level strength trainers and bodybuilders should follow a long-term plan in which they progressively increase the load over several years. The purpose of training is to stress the body in such a way that it results in adaptation, not aggravation. A well-monitored load increment also has a positive effect for mature athletes, as it results in increased bone density, which allows the bones to better cope with the mechanical stresses of weight training.
-----
Obviously, this is backed up by science, or it wouldn't be put into a book such as this one with reputable authors. I've seen questions about this posted before (the search returned no results though), and as I recall it was declared a myth. I usually train with weights of at least 90% (warm ups with about 50% of the working sets). Does anyone know the extent to which bones are typically affected by heavy weights? Can this escalate into a serious health issue? Will it actually stop bone growth? If anyone knows anything about this, I would appreciate a response. Thank you.

**MyK** · 07-13-2005, 09:59 PM

how do they define young and entry level??

**TJ Cline** · 07-13-2005, 10:01 PM

I have a buddy who is a restoration artist and he said the skeletons of people who lifted heavy ( with weights or for a job) were much stronger and the bones thicker esp. at attachment sites......the article is just one opinion and I have to disagree with most of it.

**camarosuper6** · 07-13-2005, 10:02 PM

me too...

mario pasquel is the other of the diet which suggests you replace carbs with fats.... ridculous.

**Squaggleboggin** · 07-13-2005, 10:06 PM

Originally Posted by MyK

how do they define young and entry level??

I can't answer that.

Originally Posted by foremanrules

I have a buddy who is a restoration artist and he said the skeletons of people who lifted heavy ( with weights or for a job) were much stronger and the bones thicker esp. at attachment sites......the article is just one opinion and I have to disagree with most of it.

Thank you for your response, I was getting a little worried when I read that part of the book.

Originally Posted by camarosuper6

me too...

mario pasquel is the other of the diet which suggests you replace carbs with fats.... ridculous.

Thank you for your response as well. I'm glad the consensus seems to be that this is not true.

**Dale Mabry** · 07-13-2005, 10:09 PM

I think this is just common sense. Although it seems that the authors are stretching the actual truths. Of course you would want to progressively load an entry level person, I imagine loading up a bar with 500lbs without ever having squatted will have more detrimental effects than positive ones. It seems as though they are using this as evidence that everyone should alter their loads constantly, which I don't believe to be true. It is hard to tell if that is what they are saying from such a small paragraph.

**Squaggleboggin** · 07-13-2005, 10:14 PM

Oh, well I just read it thinking that they were saying that young athletes basically should not train heavy. The way you're saying it (from what I'm understanding, you're saying that one shouldn't foolishly load up too much weight on the bar) makes more sense and I would agree that this is common sense. I suppose as long as I do what I've been doing by warming up and increasing the weight slowly, I'll be fine and even strengthen my skeleton.

**Squaggleboggin** · 07-14-2005, 08:49 PM

Another question: will I actually stop growing because of using heavier weights? I don't want to cut my growth short, even as much as I love lifting. If this is true, I'm gonna have a hard time not lifting heavy. Does anyone know whether this really is true that the growth plates will fuse together? How long does it take for this to actually happen? Can I stop lifting heavy and start growing again (assuming the plates aren't fused yet)? Thanks in advance.

**TJ Cline** · 07-14-2005, 08:51 PM

Originally Posted by Squaggleboggin

Another question: will I actually stop growing because of using heavier weights? I don't want to cut my growth short, even as much as I love lifting. If this is true, I'm gonna have a hard time not lifting heavy. Does anyone know whether this really is true that the growth plates will fuse together? How long does it take for this to actually happen? Can I stop lifting heavy and start growing again (assuming the plates aren't fused yet)? Thanks in advance.

Absolutely not, the only thing that will cause premature bone closure is steroid use.

**Squaggleboggin** · 07-14-2005, 08:59 PM

Thanks for the quick response. I will most certainly stay away from steroids my entire life (I prefer not to rot from the inside out), so I guess my bones are just fine. Thanks again.

Thread: Bone growth and heavy training

Thread Tools

Display

Bone growth and heavy training

Similar Threads

High Reps vs. Heavy Weights: Which is Better for Muscle Growth?

IM products causing bone growth?

Bone Growth

Can I do Bicep training with a fractured bone?

bone growth

Posting Permissions