loco,

I still have not had a chance to wade through all that (was about to). Saving me some time.

Few notes:

1) Feel is dubious and for beginners quite misleading. cha59 doesn't post about his lats in bench because he is a mean spirited and terrible troll. He genuinely believes that his lats are important to his bench. That is obviously deluded and totally wrong, but he, in theory, should have some degree of procioception. Novices obviously do not and its misleading to claim one needs to just "feel it".
2) Non-vertical shins are obviously not dangerous. No one would be able to squat if this were the case. Look at old split snatch videos for people catching weights in a deep lunge, which is certainly more stressful than literally just stepping forward. (Well assuming you're healthy and don't have any issues, etc)
3) You somehow made the leap from lunges to split squats, which while pretty much the same, may be different? I don't really know.

BK,

Don't BTN press. That is a pretty well known exercise for should impingement.

M05; I remember reading to avoid BTN Press in 'Starting Strength' (and I did avoid it for a long time) but even Rip says it can be done safely at lower weights and I've seen it recommended more and more recently usually with this sort of caveat:

https://www.t-nation.com/training/ov...ur-body-weight
https://www.t-nation.com/training/5-...azis-get-wrong

Essentially, if you can do it pain free it's probably fine, is the meme. Not the first way to start training and not the heaviest and you can certainly avoid it if you're afraid of it. Having tried it and done it for a while, I've found it a useful accessory or change of pace. Actually, I prefer it for push presses now because dropping the weight onto my chest hurts like a ***** and this way I don't get used to using a knee-bend in strict OHP position.

Also this is the beginner thread but BK isn't a total beginner--he's been pressing enough to stall at 5x5.

It is also more likely to expose not so much a "problem", but that you have one of the 3 unfavorable acromion bone configurations which makes any type of overhead difficult but I would wager makes it way worse for BTN.

Can you expand on this? How does one recover well? Basically, how can I not be sore all the damn time?

Sleep and food (macro and micronutrients) are by far the biggest factors.

^ to add to that. Regarding soreness the more often you train a muscle group the less sore you get. If you have 1x a week frequency try twice.

Have a question regarding egg whites/yolks I'm sure it's been covered somewhere but I've recently started losing weight started around 187 lbs and now at 165, trying to get down to around ~150 but hit a wall hard at 165. I've been smashing hard boiled eggs lately for first meal of the day (usually around 1-2pm) as it's the only way i can tolerate eating eggs more than once a week. I mostly do 4-6 with ~1 yolk an some salt not sure if this is ideal/terribad for me. Here's my latest note from blood tests done in jan:

thoughts?

Also thanks for all the advice in all the other threads as a lurker it has really helped along the way!

What is current thinking on sets and reps? I lift for fitness and to avoid injury when playing sports.

Are there any good things to read to help me understand this better?

People around here often do something like 3 to 5 sets of 5 reps for main work sets for compound movements such as bench press, squat, deadlift. Sets of 2-4 reps can also be useful, though often less so for beginners.

Some trainees, generally those with more bodybuilding oriented aspirations, train with a higher volume of sets of 6-10 reps even for compound movements. Whether this is comparably effective for a natural athlete compared to a 5x5 type approach is highly contentious in the strength training community.

Assistance exercises that use smaller muscle groups or isolate individual muscles are often approached with like 3-5 sets of 10-20 reps. 3x10 is standard

The reasons are relatively complicated. Maybe someone can link theory.

If your goal is literally for injury prevention, by which I assume healthy tendons and ligaments (and muscle size) - higher rep sets make more sense. 10-20 reps

If your goal is to add strength, lower rep sets make more sense. 3-6 reps

A lot of solid programs are built in a way that you get to go through all different rep/set schemes over time. Like (for example) 4 weeks around 10-12 reps, 4 weeks around 6-8, 4 weeks around 3, repeat.

Congrats on the 22 lbs lost! How long has that taken?

Well definitely take the supplements and get some sunshine. That doesn't sound like a super-high dose of Vitamin D, if you were worried. Get retested in a month or so. Egg lunch is probably fine but "only way i can tolerate" is truly some faint praise. Hard to say if your diet is terribad without seeing your entire diet.

Obviously if you're hitting a hard wall it means you are eating at maintenance and the standard recommendations around here are to reduce calories or increase NEAT and/or exercise. Do you have any exercise you do now or any thoughts on what you enjoy/makes you feel good? Starting a log is good for that--even if you don't do it here, just having records to look back at can be really helpful.

There are a lot of new studies showing that higher doses of vitamin D are beneficial. My doctor recommended 4000 IU

This isn't a beginner comment. And that is gonna need some serious citation.

I'm on my phone and can't link but Google is your friend. There are countless studies recommending 4000+ IU and showing the flaws in the old recommendation of 600-1000 IU

I'd refrain from posting unsubstantiated bull**** when on your phone.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28498942
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28490514

Those are two of the first three studies on pubmed (vitamin D 4000 IU). Granted neither are healthy populations, but I'm sure if you weren't on your phone and unable to work the copy/paste feature, you'd manage to find them for us!

FWIW when I was back in the states my doctor recommended I take 4000 as well.

If doctors actually were educated on the subject that would be a tiny data point, except there is literally a whole field of specialists that deal with nutrition in a medical setting in a similar way I'd expect a PT to know a world more about the actual rehabilitation exercises and protocol than a MD since that is literally what they do, rather than something they are tangential to.

It seems that doctors are bumbling clowns, except when people begrudgingly go to one or they support non-EBM that they believe in. (Spinal traction, dudes rubbing your "hip girdle", random supplementation, etc. Most of which is due to people love getting their stuff rubbed by someone else.)

It would be great if there were actual heuristics that provide guidance for treatment. Like if there was a database with treatment protocol cited and updated with the latest research available for medical professionals so that we could look and see "Oh this is a recommended treatment" as opposed to "My doctor said..." which is dependent on 1) Does the doctor know wtf he is talking about 2) What the doctor actually said 3) What the patient heard.

IE

"I'm doing <x>, can I keep doing it?"
"Can't hurt."

Which some may take for an endorsement of <x>, when in reality expresses the fact that the doctor is saying that it can't hurt them.

Lol sample size at your links

http://www.wellnessresources.com/stu...e_recommended/
http://www.webmd.com/osteoporosis/fe...much-vitamin-d
http://www.mayoclinic.org/drugs-supp...y/hrb-20060400
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/vitamin-d/
Yeah, I'm gonna go ahead and follow the advice of my doctor, my father's cardiologist and the above studies and feel ok about my 4000 IU a day

None of those are studies. Nor do I see any support for 4k+ a day.

Again, cite please (actual studies kthx).

Scroll down to the bottom of the articles under "citations" or "references". You're welcome!

I'm not here to sift through dozens of studies, many of which directly contradict your proposed point.

You seem to have a bizarre view of how to make an argument.

PS: This is a no trolling thread. May wanna bone up on your argument before #mods.

For example (since I have some free time this being Sunday night and enjoying my health beneficial 2 drinks), the study referenced in the first link:

http://ar.iiarjournals.org/content/31/2/607.full

This study describes the toxicity of self-reporting Vit D levels. lol self reporting. And unsure how that supports your viewpoint other than to say "Prob not gonna overdose". Great stuff.

The second link contains this quote on the first page: "The IOM committee found no conclusive evidence that increased vitamin D levels confer increased health benefits, "challenging the concept that 'more is better.'" Beyond that it appears to contain exactly zero citations to research studies. So scrolling down to "citations" or "references" is literally impossible.

I'm sure you feel fine taking a bunch of needless supplements that may potentially harm your health. However, to recommend it in a beginner thread with such a ridiculous attitude while simultaneously so poorly armed to defend the viewpoint is... errant.

I see I've upset you. I'm done with this discussion and I'll stick with what my doctor and family cardiologist have recommended. For anyone else interested, I suggest doing your own research and then consulting a physician