MB Madaera
Lost 31.7 lbs fat
Built 11.7 lbs muscle


Chris Madaera
Built 9 lbs muscle


Keelan Parham
Lost 30 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle


Bob Marchesello
Lost 23.55 lbs fat
Built 8.55 lbs muscle


Jeff Turner
Lost 25.5 lbs fat


Jeanenne Darden
Lost 26 lbs fat
Built 3 lbs muscle


Ted Tucker
Lost 41 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle

 
 

Determine the Length of Your Workouts

Evaluate Your Progress

Keep Warm-Up in Perspective


ARCHIVES >>

"Doing more exercise with less intensity,"
Arthur Jones believes, "has all but
destroyed the actual great value
of weight training. Something
must be done . . . and quickly."
The New Bodybuilding for
Old-School Results supplies
MUCH of that "something."

 

This is one of 93 photos of Andy McCutcheon that are used in The New High-Intensity Training to illustrate the recommended exercises.

To find out more about McCutcheon and his training, click here.

 

Mission Statement

H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy

Privacy Policy

Credits

LOG IN FORUM MAIN REGISTER SEARCH
Squats & Milk? Just Say No!
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

marcrph

Portugal

"Super Squats" written by Randall J. Strossen Ph.D., was a good book in it's day. Strossen based this best-selling book on J.C. Hise's experiment, namely, drinking lots of milk and performing "breathing squats." This is a tried and true method, a "blue-chip" routine, that delivers results in a field well known for treachery and deceit. I've gotten good results from this historic routine.

However, as good as this routine is, there are two major problems. Today's milk is sub-par. Even organic milk is homogenized. Many persons are lactose intolerant....and....allergy concerns...today's milk provides plenty of dietary concerns. Let's face the facts, milk is not an essential food even for bodybuilders.

Two....the squat exercise presents a safety concern...albeit can be minimized, but the weight of gravity including any resistance of the bar and weights provides high spinal loading forces. More enlightened strength & conditioning coaches have begun using a modern leg press to all but eliminate safety and spinal loading issues. The truth is, only power-lifters need to squat, all others can safely leg press efficiently.

So, if someone presents "Super Squats" to you, just politely say no thank you. A quality leg press and wholesome food is a much better option.
Open User Options Menu

Michael Petrella

Ontario, CAN

marcrph wrote:
"Super Squats" written by Randall J. Strossen Ph.D., was a good book in it's day. Strossen based this best-selling book on J.C. Hise's experiment, namely, drinking lots of milk and performing "breathing squats." This is a tried and true method, a "blue-chip" routine, that delivers results in a field well known for treachery and deceit. I've gotten good results from this historic routine.

However, as good as this routine is, there are two major problems. Today's milk is sub-par. Even organic milk is homogenized. Many persons are lactose intolerant....and....allergy concerns...today's milk provides plenty of dietary concerns. Let's face the facts, milk is not an essential food even for bodybuilders.

Two....the squat exercise presents a safety concern...albeit can be minimized, but the weight of gravity including any resistance of the bar and weights provides high spinal loading forces. More enlightened strength & conditioning coaches have begun using a modern leg press to all but eliminate safety and spinal loading issues. The truth is, only power-lifters need to squat, all others can safely leg press efficiently.

So, if someone presents "Super Squats" to you, just politely say no thank you. A quality leg press and wholesome food is a much better option.


I have not read Strossen's version but I have read 20 rep squat programs before his that did make a point of saying Raw milk and not it's store bought pasteurized counterpart.

Also although I will admit for some a good leg press is a superior builder of legs it will not have the overall effect on the body that the squat will.

I have witnessed people grow impressive musculature in the upperback just from having to hold a heavy barbell on it and squatting. Of course there is a great deal more stimulation of the lower back.

As for the high spinal loading forces. Like everything else in exercise if you start at the appropriate levels and work your way up, the amount of force your spine will be able to endure will increase. Very beneficial for injury prevention. Again other ways to do this but the squat works fine and the leg press cannot match it in this regard.

The whole point of the program is hard work and real food. This simple concept is still far above what most are doing.
I have to say Marc, I know you are committed to your beliefs but telling people to say no to a tried and true method that has worked well for decades seems a little short sited.

If you feel you have a better system, then write it up, test it out, document it and let your counterparts in the field check it out.

Michael
Open User Options Menu

HeavyHitter32

I use the Powertec angled squat in the 8-15 rep range which works well for me. A lot of the stress is placed on the thighs and less on my knees and lower back. The higher rep range obviously reduces the loads as low reps can bother my lower back.

I also consume a little regular milk mostly in occasionally cereal or sometimes for a protein drink mix. I have no issues with it.
Open User Options Menu

marcrph

Portugal

Michael Petrella wrote:
I have not read Strossen's version but I have read 20 rep squat programs before his that did make a point of saying Raw milk
Undoubtedly better than what is in our supermarkets
and not it's store bought pasteurized

Notice that I wrote homogenized. Also, it's impossible to purchase raw milk in Georgia, USA.

counterpart.

Also although I will admit for some
I would say for almost all, especially women.
a good leg press is a superior builder of legs it will not have the overall effect on the body that the squat will.

Many would take offense at that remark, as the leg press is a machine that Arthur Jones approved, and worked very hard to perfect. Jan Dellinger noted the metabolic effect of the leg press also.


I have witnessed people grow impressive musculature in the upperback just from having to hold a heavy barbell on it and squatting.
I have witnessed a guy break his arm as he was trying to hold a heavy barbell for squats. Of course there is a great deal more stimulation of the lower back.

As for the high spinal loading forces. Like everything else in exercise if you start at the appropriate levels and work your way up, the amount of force your spine will be able to endure will increase.
Until a disc ruptures,or as you age,you simply don't feel comfortable with very weights on your back.
Very beneficial for injury prevention.

and perhaps causation

but the squat works fine and the leg press cannot match it in this regard.
I just beg to differ.

The whole point of the program is hard work and real food. This simple concept is still far above what most are doing.
True. I think we both differ only in small points here, but I do strongly believe the leg press is a superior exercise. I am not a squat hater, until the weights get large enough to cause spinal compression. In my opinion large spinal loads combined with gravity are hazardous.

I have to say Marc, I know you are committed to your beliefs but telling people to say no to a tried and true method that has worked well for decades seems a little short sited.

If you feel you have a better system, then write it up, test it out, document it and let your counterparts in the field check it out.

Michael


Open User Options Menu

crazeeJZ

Michael Petrella wrote:
marcrph wrote:
"Super Squats" written by Randall J. Strossen Ph.D., was a good book in it's day. Strossen based this best-selling book on J.C. Hise's experiment, namely, drinking lots of milk and performing "breathing squats." This is a tried and true method, a "blue-chip" routine, that delivers results in a field well known for treachery and deceit. I've gotten good results from this historic routine.

However, as good as this routine is, there are two major problems. Today's milk is sub-par. Even organic milk is homogenized. Many persons are lactose intolerant....and....allergy concerns...today's milk provides plenty of dietary concerns. Let's face the facts, milk is not an essential food even for bodybuilders.

Two....the squat exercise presents a safety concern...albeit can be minimized, but the weight of gravity including any resistance of the bar and weights provides high spinal loading forces. More enlightened strength & conditioning coaches have begun using a modern leg press to all but eliminate safety and spinal loading issues. The truth is, only power-lifters need to squat, all others can safely leg press efficiently.

So, if someone presents "Super Squats" to you, just politely say no thank you. A quality leg press and wholesome food is a much better option.

I have not read Strossen's version but I have read 20 rep squat programs before his that did make a point of saying Raw milk and not it's store bought pasteurized counterpart.

Also although I will admit for some a good leg press is a superior builder of legs it will not have the overall effect on the body that the squat will.

I have witnessed people grow impressive musculature in the upperback just from having to hold a heavy barbell on it and squatting. Of course there is a great deal more stimulation of the lower back.

As for the high spinal loading forces. Like everything else in exercise if you start at the appropriate levels and work your way up, the amount of force your spine will be able to endure will increase. Very beneficial for injury prevention. Again other ways to do this but the squat works fine and the leg press cannot match it in this regard.

The whole point of the program is hard work and real food. This simple concept is still far above what most are doing.
I have to say Marc, I know you are committed to your beliefs but telling people to say no to a tried and true method that has worked well for decades seems a little short sited.

If you feel you have a better system, then write it up, test it out, document it and let your counterparts in the field check it out.

Michael



Thank you.

Can't believe heavy 20 rep squats are being talked about like if they were, say, super-heavy low-rep squats, as far as danger goes. It's not even close.

Open User Options Menu

dhitquinn

I agree with the milk thing to a point but in no way for me is the leg press a superior option to the squat.

Michael is right slow and steady wins the race, idiots that try to squat 135 then 225 then 315 are opening themselves up to severe injury, but steady increments allow the body to adjust even if it is 2lbs each workout.

A good leg press? the are few and far between, wrecked knees and lower backs are the norms for this exercise as it is usually too easy to slap the plates on to the machine for the sake of ego
Open User Options Menu

marcrph

Portugal

Milk?

http://www.ultrawellness.com/...ould-avoid-milk

Open User Options Menu

marcrph

Portugal

Lyle Mcdonald has already wrote an article which more or less is how I feel about the leg press versus the squat debate.
Open User Options Menu

BSNMOE

Has anyone had any good or bad results with high rep leg presses? I did have some pretty good results with 10-12 rep leg presses followed by stiff leg dead lift, also 10-12 reps.

I was using Hammer Strength Leg Press and seat close for full rangs movement.
Open User Options Menu

Tomislav

New York, USA

marcrph wrote:
Today's milk is sub-par. Even organic milk is homogenized. Many persons are lactose intolerant....and....allergy concerns...today's milk provides plenty of dietary concerns. Let's face the facts, milk is not an essential food even for bodybuilders.

Hi Mark,
Milk is good for you; many of the issues listed in the article stem from partial foods (skim and lowfat milk) or untrapasteurization.

While I agree raw milk is better, Pasteurs process is not so bad and the result is still a live vital food hence the rapid expire (though not as good as raw milk and more importantly not enough bacteria to clean itself if contaminated). The problem with most organic milk though isn't that it's homogenized (that just means the fat globules have been broken up) but that it is usually ultra-pasteurized and might as well be sitting on the shelf unrefrigerated for months.

While ultra pasteurization is agreeably bad, cooked milk products such as condensed milk and evaporated milk have built muscle for centuries. Milk is a great food in many forms (think Pizza).
I've recently found a source of pasteurized half and half (most of that is ultra pasteurized too) and the difference is tremendous; I can drink it by the cup now instead of just using it as flavouring in coffee.
Open User Options Menu

johnmin

marcrph wrote:

I would say almost all

Do you have proof of this? I squat with no problems, have been for years. I know plenty of others who also squat with no problems. The leg press is a good exercise, but it will never replace the squat. I also drink lots of milk with no problems. Whole Foods sells milk that has not been homogenized.

Ask guys like Dr. Ken, Kim Wood, Mike Gittleson, etc. They'll all tell you the squat is still the king. I think their collective experience trumps yours.

Thanks
John
Open User Options Menu

marcrph

Portugal

johnmin wrote:
marcrph wrote:

I would say almost all

Do you have proof of this?


My own legs

I squat with no problems, have been for years. I know plenty of others who also squat with no problems. The leg press is a good exercise, but it will never replace the squat. I also drink lots of milk with no problems. Whole Foods sells milk that has not been homogenized.

I'll check this out. Thanks


Ask guys like Dr. Ken, Kim Wood, Mike Gittleson, etc. They'll all tell you the squat is still the king. I think their collective experience trumps yours.

Thanks
John

Sorry, but Kim Wood said the exact opposite HERE on THIS forum. Ditto, Dan Riley, in Dr. Darden's latest book, so I guess you can read between the lines......
Open User Options Menu

simon-hecubus

Texas, USA

Tomislav wrote:
...While ultra pasteurization is agreeably bad, cooked milk products such as condensed milk and evaporated milk have built muscle for centuries. Milk is a great food in many forms (think Pizza)...


If anyone knows of a good condensed milk product w/o shitloads of added sugar, I'd like to know about it, please!

I've recently found a source of pasteurized half and half (most of that is ultra pasteurized too) and the difference is tremendous; I can drink it by the cup now instead of just using it as flavouring in coffee.

C'mon Tomi, please don't leave us with any of your mysteries again. Is that a nat'l brand or something you've found locally?
Open User Options Menu

smanjh

marcrph wrote:
Lyle Mcdonald has already wrote an article which more or less is how I feel about the leg press versus the squat debate.


Doggcrapp put it best about him by saying Mcdonald builds 170 pound Marky Marks, and he builds 270 pound Markus Ruhls.

Great diets and so on, but certainly not the lone voice of authority on anything really.
Open User Options Menu

smanjh

crazeeJZ wrote:
Michael Petrella wrote:
marcrph wrote:
"Super Squats" written by Randall J. Strossen Ph.D., was a good book in it's day. Strossen based this best-selling book on J.C. Hise's experiment, namely, drinking lots of milk and performing "breathing squats." This is a tried and true method, a "blue-chip" routine, that delivers results in a field well known for treachery and deceit. I've gotten good results from this historic routine.

However, as good as this routine is, there are two major problems. Today's milk is sub-par. Even organic milk is homogenized. Many persons are lactose intolerant....and....allergy concerns...today's milk provides plenty of dietary concerns. Let's face the facts, milk is not an essential food even for bodybuilders.

Two....the squat exercise presents a safety concern...albeit can be minimized, but the weight of gravity including any resistance of the bar and weights provides high spinal loading forces. More enlightened strength & conditioning coaches have begun using a modern leg press to all but eliminate safety and spinal loading issues. The truth is, only power-lifters need to squat, all others can safely leg press efficiently.

So, if someone presents "Super Squats" to you, just politely say no thank you. A quality leg press and wholesome food is a much better option.

I have not read Strossen's version but I have read 20 rep squat programs before his that did make a point of saying Raw milk and not it's store bought pasteurized counterpart.

Also although I will admit for some a good leg press is a superior builder of legs it will not have the overall effect on the body that the squat will.

I have witnessed people grow impressive musculature in the upperback just from having to hold a heavy barbell on it and squatting. Of course there is a great deal more stimulation of the lower back.

As for the high spinal loading forces. Like everything else in exercise if you start at the appropriate levels and work your way up, the amount of force your spine will be able to endure will increase. Very beneficial for injury prevention. Again other ways to do this but the squat works fine and the leg press cannot match it in this regard.

The whole point of the program is hard work and real food. This simple concept is still far above what most are doing.
I have to say Marc, I know you are committed to your beliefs but telling people to say no to a tried and true method that has worked well for decades seems a little short sited.

If you feel you have a better system, then write it up, test it out, document it and let your counterparts in the field check it out.

Michael


Thank you.

Can't believe heavy 20 rep squats are being talked about like if they were, say, super-heavy low-rep squats, as far as danger goes. It's not even close.



I have said it before: you know who works out and who doesn't by their posts. Even Southbeach sometimes has a good bit to offer when he is serious and not screwing with us.

But, to find crap like this after disappearing for a week suggests he has spent a good bit of time Googling how squats are bad.

It is pathetic really.
Open User Options Menu

marcrph

Portugal

smanjh wrote:
marcrph wrote:
Lyle Mcdonald has already wrote an article which more or less is how I feel about the leg press versus the squat debate.


Doggcrapp put it best about him by saying Mcdonald builds 170 pound Marky Marks, and he builds 270 pound Markus Ruhls.

Great diets and so on, but certainly not the lone voice of authority on anything really.



He fails to mention steroids.
Open User Options Menu

Joshua Trentine

Ohio, USA

There is no comparison between Raw milk and anything commercial. Mine as well be talking about two different foods.

You can get Raw milk in Georgia just the same as i can get it in Ohio. Maybe even easier.
Open User Options Menu

Tomislav

New York, USA

simon-hecubus wrote:
Tomislav wrote:
...While ultra pasteurization is agreeably bad, cooked milk products such as condensed milk and evaporated milk have built muscle for centuries. Milk is a great food in many forms (think Pizza)...

If anyone knows of a good condensed milk product w/o shitloads of added sugar, I'd like to know about it, please!

I've recently found a source of pasteurized half and half (most of that is ultra pasteurized too) and the difference is tremendous; I can drink it by the cup now instead of just using it as flavouring in coffee.

C'mon Tomi, please don't leave us with any of your mysteries again. Is that a nat'l brand or something you've found locally?

Scott,
The brand is in regular stores, plastic bottle but I only see it driving through PA; also find raw buttermilk (but no other kind of raw milk) in the supermarkets there.

Regarding the condensed Milk without sugar that would be regular evaporated milk; you can buy it in any supermarket anywhere but make sure the ingredients are just milk (see some brands now come with hydrogenated oil). It's 500 calories per 12 oz can and very satisfying as an RTD.

Open User Options Menu

serf

New Zealand

None of the arguments in that article are very compelling ones for the argument against drinking milk. I've seen much better ones.

However, I live in New Zealand, and drinking milk is a big part of our culture. As willing as I would be to give up milk, what are the alternatives? Piles of vegetables instead which are full of pesticides? Not sure what I should be eating/drinking instead. No way am I going to start eating more sucrose/fructose-containing foods when I'm still hungry.

The other thing is cost. I'm not exactly rolling in it. So just what are some good alternatives to drinking milk? I've had some good results from drinking milk with my protein shakes (boosts calories and more nutritious than some foods out there). Sure, it may have some saturated fat, but it's by no means high in it.

As part of a balanced diet, I see no harm in consuming it in moderation. Milk in New Zealand may be better than US milk (all of our cattle are grass fed).

Open User Options Menu

SteveHIT

Joseph Curtis Hise, Peary Rader and John McCallum are all turning in their graves. Shame on you Macrph. lol idiot, you've already said squats intimidate you on this forum, guess what? We aren't all scared. If they aren't safe for you (even though you've had success with them for a time???), or if you prefer you're leg press then use it. Just don't feel you have to justify its use by putting squats down.
Open User Options Menu

johnmin


marcrph wrote:

I would say almost all

Do you have proof of this?

My own legs

Your statement meant almost all people have troubles squatting, your legs are not proof that almost all people have troubles squatting.
I am willing to have a reasonable conversation about this but not if you're going to change what you say to meet your own agenda.


Sorry, but Kim Wood said the exact opposite HERE on THIS forum. Ditto, Dan Riley, in Dr. Darden's latest book, so I guess you can read between the lines.....


You're doing it again. He said squatting correctly and safely can be hard for some and a good alternative for those people would be a good leg press. This in no way means he said leg presses are better than squats. In the same quote you are referring to he said he was a student of the squat. If he thought the leg press was better, then he would have said he is a student of the leg press.

The squat is still the king of exercises. Lets face it, 20 rep squats with a weight you would normally do 10 reps with is just too hard for most people. I'd guess only 1 in a 100 people are willing to work that hard and I doubt the number is that high.

Turpin would be one of those people, and that is probably one of the main reasons he is so successful. He is willing to work brutally hard. There are others here as well, but not many. I can work very hard, but I wouldn't begin to kid myself that I work as hard as Turpin or David Landau.

Thanks
John
Open User Options Menu

smanjh

marcrph wrote:
smanjh wrote:
marcrph wrote:
Lyle Mcdonald has already wrote an article which more or less is how I feel about the leg press versus the squat debate.


Doggcrapp put it best about him by saying Mcdonald builds 170 pound Marky Marks, and he builds 270 pound Markus Ruhls.

Great diets and so on, but certainly not the lone voice of authority on anything really.


He fails to mention steroids.


Even if you take those away, the advice and end goal are different.
Open User Options Menu

Ciccio

johnmin wrote:

marcrph wrote:

I would say almost all

Do you have proof of this?

My own legs

Your statement meant almost all people have troubles squatting, your legs are not proof that almost all people have troubles squatting.
I am willing to have a reasonable conversation about this but not if you're going to change what you say to meet your own agenda.


Sorry, but Kim Wood said the exact opposite HERE on THIS forum. Ditto, Dan Riley, in Dr. Darden's latest book, so I guess you can read between the lines.....


You're doing it again. He said squatting correctly and safely can be hard for some and a good alternative for those people would be a good leg press. This in no way means he said leg presses are better than squats. In the same quote you are referring to he said he was a student of the squat. If he thought the leg press was better, then he would have said he is a student of the leg press.

The squat is still the king of exercises. Lets face it, 20 rep squats with a weight you would normally do 10 reps with is just too hard for most people. I'd guess only 1 in a 100 people are willing to work that hard and I doubt the number is that high.

Turpin would be one of those people, and that is probably one of the main reasons he is so successful. He is willing to work brutally hard. There are others here as well, but not many. I can work very hard, but I wouldn't begin to kid myself that I work as hard as Turpin or David Landau.

Thanks
John


Fyi:
Those last two guys you mentioned use leg press, no squats.



Open User Options Menu

johnmin

Ciccio wrote:

Fyi:
Those last two guys you mentioned use leg press, no squats.





Thank you for taking the bait, I was afraid my post would be ignored as I'm not part of the "regulars". Unfortunately I'm moving off topic. The whole thing really isn't about whether squats or leg presses are better. Turpin is going to get better results on the leg press than someone who squats half heartedly. It really is that simple. For the guy who trains brutally hard, like MDiguez, he is going to get better results on squats than someone on leg presses.

Can someone get big and very strong on the leg press? No doubt about it. Is it better than the squat, nope. Does it replace the squat, nope. At best it is an alternative. The rants about leg presses and leg extensions are tiring and unproductive.

Thank you
John
Open User Options Menu

Ciccio

johnmin wrote:
Ciccio wrote:

Fyi:
Those last two guys you mentioned use leg press, no squats.





Thank you for taking the bait, I was afraid my post would be ignored as I'm not part of the "regulars". Unfortunately I'm moving off topic. The whole thing really isn't about whether squats or leg presses are better. Turpin is going to get better results on the leg press than someone who squats half heartedly. It really is that simple. For the guy who trains brutally hard, like MDiguez, he is going to get better results on squats than someone on leg presses.

Can someone get big and very strong on the leg press? No doubt about it. Is it better than the squat, nope. Does it replace the squat, nope. At best it is an alternative. The rants about leg presses and leg extensions are tiring and unproductive.

Thank you
John


Too many absolutes!
For some (maybe few?) persons generally and for some others under special circumstances the leg press (and even the Leg Ex) can indeed work better then the squat. Again, best example is Turpin.



Open User Options Menu
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | Next | Last
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy