Did the economics course also mention that correlation doesn’t equal causation? You seem to be miffed that someone refuted your point. What’s funny is saying it’s funny that people will go to “lengths” to argue about something unrelated to the the topic at hand when you brought up a fallacious point in the first place.
ps - I was able to find the link to the Harvard paper pretty easily. Here it is if you want to read it:
Yeah so that study doesn’t disprove that fatalities increase post seat belt implementation. Here’s what it actually says:
A remaining puzzle concerns the positive and highly significant coefficient on the primary enforcement dummy for the non-occupant regression, as reported in Table 7. This coefficient seems quite robust, even when we include usage rate in the regression, as well as for different choices of subsamples.39 Taken at face value, this coefficient might suggest that some sort of Peltzman effect does exist, and it replicates some of the results in the existing literature. However, given our results for usage rate, it seems that this is not the right interpretation, but rather that there is something else, left unexplained, that makes non-occupant fatalities go up when primary enforcement laws are passed. This strengthens our point that usage rate data is essential for a rigorous test of the Peltzman effect.
Their response is “we don’t think it’s the Peltzman Effect, even though it looks like it. We think it’s something else, we just don’t know what it is. But fatalities for sure go up after seat belt law enforcement”.
To argue that people don’t exhibit riskier behavior when safeties are in place makes no sense to me. That’s the point I was trying to make, and I used an example that people have beef with. I don’t know what else you want from me.
Happy to talk training, but this is clearly a derail from a fine article.
Thanks for the study.
Ok - so that’s a better response (still don’t 100% agree with your conclusion but I see where you’re coming from). And while it might not seem related to the article, it is as it speaks to how we form opinions and draw conclusions.
IMHO it’s important to be able to support an argument/position with some sort of evidence or reasoning that is based on sound theory. I don’t spend a ton of time here but will see comments made as gospel that don’t have a lot of sound reasoning behind them. I like this article because it does have some sound reasoning. So while the seatbelt thing is a bit of a detour, I think it brings up an important point about the quality of debate. Cheers
This is very well stated! Thank you for your adding this to the discussion.
You may not be a carpenter, but you NAILED IT with this!
There’s a saying about not providing a specific reply/answer to a general statement/question and vice versa because it switches context.
That said, you’ve done a great job here of summarizing the specific examples that correctly counter what I’m saying in my article, while recognizing the perspective form which I had when writing my article.
I don’t disagree wit any of the specific examples provide here that add nuance to my article because they don’t stand in conflict with the context I’m speaking on in the article. In that, I wrote spoke generally in my article, and speaking generally isn’t speaking universally.
I will add that I do feel some joint potions while dealing the heavier load (relative to ones strength level), such as fully straitening your elbow during a preacher curl or the supinated arm in mixed grip heavy deadlifts, are more of a universally risky thing because they’re not really a mater of one’s movement ability (form) or skill. They’re simply placing your joints in a disadvantageous position, much like when you go very deep during a dumbbell pec fly.
I have no specific science to qoute for this, but I don’t think we need it in this case because the general rule of joints is to avoid extreme end ranges of motion while dealing with heavy loads. And, unless one is a circus performer, I don’t see the reason why one would attempt to invest so much time trying create graded exposure to train extreme end rage joint positions because it takes time away from doing other exercises that could have a higher transfer to physique goals and field, court and combat sports performance.
I like this article. Any tips that can reduce “user error” injuries is welcome. One of the issues i have found with strength training is the need to be perfect or risk injury. Over the 40 years i have trained, no contests just training, seen many injuries that are “user error” and chased people from the gym that could have been prevented with simpe tips.
Sometimes the need for proper form can get in the way of progress or even ability to train as it is damn near ompossible to be perfect for 40 years! Not talking contest pros, but normal people trying to stay healthy and fight off old age.
Thanks, keep bringing the tips to keep us in the gym. At some point for us all, it will become less about personal bests and more about health. Key fact, got to stay in the gym and keep everything functioning to make progress!
So I am enjoying the discussion on this topic. Do we actually know if the Trap bar is “safer”? I know it’s easier but does anyone know if this point has been studied? I like a trap bar for weighted carries but thats all I use it for. I always feel Inconsistent in my setup on a trap bar as there is no “landmark” for where to set the shins and hips and the fact that the arms have to be in one place (or two depending on the types of handles). I do like having my palms facing inward but are we sure there are actually fewer injuries with a trap bar?
We know there are lower shearing forces on the spine and, anecdotally, that it’s harder to screw up (like you say: it’s “easier”). I don’t know that we could really design a prospective or do a reasonable real-world retrospective to say there are relatively fewer injuries, but the logic feels solid.
I would say, most definitely. With the deadlift you can easily get the bar too far out in front of you. Trying to pull through that error is a greater strain on your back. Pure physics places the bar out in front of you.
With the trap bar it is designed such that you won’t find the weight too far out in front of you. You can keep your hips and lower back braced and locked to work their most efficiently throughout the full range of motion.
Hi Andrew
Here’s a link to the study:
http://www.law.harvard.edu/programs/olin_center/papers/pdf/341.pdf
I looked it up because I was curious about your statement coming from “strong opinions with no information”
I’m more of a “strong facts from actual data”
There’s so much crap in the media everywhere, it can be hard enough to know what’s real.
People are better than that.
Keep grinding man.
I’m encouraged to hear you plan to get my new book, Strength Zone Training.
I promise it’ll provide you emended value for years to come.
Thanks for your kind words, and I wish you much success in your training!
Not sure I agree. If you have the bar “out in front” gravity will quickly correct this error and bring the bar back to your shins or you won’t pick it up. With the trap bar if you pick it up in the wrong spot won’t it swing a bit and potentially cause harm? Not being argumentative and I don’t have a lot of experience with the trap bar. Most I’ve pulled on one is probably 315. I always seem to “dance around” inside it trying to figure out how to set my back correctly. Feels very odd and “loose”. Does the fact that it “free hangs” from your arms and is not stabilized against the shins and thighs any concern? Does anyone ever hurt their back on trap bar deadlift like folks do on conventional? I have been googling this issue and looks like the US Army is using it because they think it’s easier to train. I am now motivated to at least try it again and see what I think.
This is not correct. When the bar is too far in front of you, you will feel the weight on your feet move toward your toes. This is how you catch the weight and finish the lift. You cannot pull as much weight with the weight on your toes than you can with the weight on your entire foot.
When I watch someone deadlift I can see when the bar gets too far in front of them, noticing the weight of the bar move to their toes. If you are strong enough you can finish the lift. If not, you will miss the lift or rep.
Many top coaches from grassroots football all the way to professional boxers and rugby players opt for the trap bar due to its safety (as well as a few other benefits like a greater power production). Not just that but it seems that it is often the go-to option for college athletes and the elderly. Naysayers call it an “uncoached deadlift”, but I don’t see that as a bad thing. People often talk about “risk vs reward”, and I don’t like it being simplified as that as it negates the goal of the lifter and suggests that the conventional can’t be done safely.
With the trap bar it is easier to incorporate a stronger hip position, not to mention the neutral grip feels like a much more natural position for your shoulders.
For individuals with lower-back injuries or pain, the results of this study suggest that the hexagonal barbell may be the better choice for barbell selection because of its ability to
evenly distribute the load among all joints and reduce the moment at the lumbar spine. Conversely, if the goal of the training session is to emphasize strengthening of the lumbar region and hamstrings, the straight barbell seems to be the appropriate choice. Finally, the hexagonal barbell may be a more effective method for maximizing force, power, and velocity during the deadlift - https://www.researchgate.net/publication/292437161_An_Examination_Of_Muscle_Activation_And_Power_Characteristics_While_Performing_The_Deadlift_Exercise_With_Straight_And_Hexagonal_Barbells
Counteract the few percent less of hamstrings and lumbar activation you miss out on by smashing out some RDLs and you’ve got in my opinion the best deadlifting option for non-powerlifters. But of course, this is pointless having much debate over because it is goal dependant. For some people it might be a good idea to phase in both. For me? It feels way more comfortable in a hypertrophy range, way safer to max out on, and it allows me to hit RDLs heavier later in the week. It doesn’t mean I won’t ever do conventional again though.
Don’t know that I’ve seen folks doing that but I am not a professional (or even amateur) coach so I of course defer to your experience. For me if I don’t get the bar at or near mid foot (close or against the shins and thighs) it doesn’t go far.
Great info – Thank You - going to work the trap bar into my program and see what I think.
Here is another.
And a third study.
I think it’s a question of consequence, though. If you let the bar roll away with the trap bar, you just can’t lift it. If you do so with a straight bar, you increase your chances of herniating a disc