At What Age is it Safe to Make Kids Non-Functional?

There's a lot of studies out there regarding when it's safe to have kids start lifting weights. Any time you're asking a question about how safe it is to do something, you have to weigh the risk against the reward and you have to determine whether or not it makes sense.. For example, it's not safe for a kid to have a license until they're 17 (and this is arguable with a lot of kids out there).. But the reward justifies the risk because now the kids can get places on their own and get jobs, etc.. That makes sense... With weightlifting, people are asking the wrong questions. They're asking whether or not its safe to lift weights instead of asking whether or not it even makes sense. Why would it ever make sense to take a kid who's, let's say 14, and start teaching his body to isolate muscles and restrict natural movement patterns? Name me one activity in the real world where the bench press or the preacher curl helps you function better. I'm going to go grab another cup of coffee while you're thinking about that one. Be right back........... OK, what did you come up with? It makes you look better on the beach? Right. I love seeing "that guy" on the beach who spends hours in the gym on his chest and biceps and has those skinny little legs. He looks like the engorged tick you just pulled off your dog. I can see the old school football coaches scowling at me right now because they know how much better their players perform with a properly executed weightlifting program.. Sorry, coach. The bench press will really only help your football players who find themselves on the ground a lot and need to push people off of them. Those players need to be cut, they don't need to bench more weight. I can't think of another scenario in football where your back is completely supported while you press weight off your chest. And as far as biceps curls go, if your players are pulling other players closer to them then maybe it will help. Unless the game has evolved into something I'm not aware of, the idea is to keep the opposition away from you, not pull them closer.

At the conference Michele and I were at last weekend there was a presenter who said "Arnold Schwarzenegger was the best thing and the worst thing to ever happen to the fitness industry.". He was the best thing because he brought fitness into the mainstream like nobody else ever has. He was the worst thing because now everybody wanted to become a bodybuilder.. It was great that people wanted to get in shape, but now they all wanted to do it the wrong way. There's a place for isolation exercises and it's in physical therapy. After an injury or surgery, you will most likely need to isolate a particular muscle to develop strength in it so that it can start to be used again in a functional manner along with all the other muscles in your body. Other than PT, there's no use for isolation exercises. Life is a full body sport. All athletics require full body strength, agility, endurance, coordination. There isn't one isolation exercise that enhances any of those requirements. So why do them? Because Arnold did? Because your fat 67 year old football coach told you it was good for you? And this is a topic for another day, but is it just me, or are 90% of football coaches grossly deconditioned? I saw a pop warner team practicing last Fall and there were 3 coaches there screaming their heads off to a bunch of 10 year olds and they easily tipped the scales at a collective 1000 pounds. More coaches look like Charlie Weis (pre-gastric bypass surgery) than Jon Gruden and that's a shame. (not sure why Gruden popped into my head, but to look at him, he looks pretty fit and that is my point)

Part of the problem is education and stubborness. A lot of people think that weighlifting was what we did when we were younger so that's the way it should still be. A lot of people don't even know what functional conditioning means.. Thanks to the swiss ball people, functional conditioning has become synonymous with "off-balance". You see people on Youtube standing on a swiss ball pressing a dumbell overhead with one hand while reading a book and this is supposed to be "functional conditioning".. That's not functional, that's a circus act. Functional conditioning is not Cirque Du Soleil. Functional conditioning is exactly what it sounds like. Conditioning the body to be functional. This means training movements, not muscles. It means having all of the joints in your body being able to move properly through their intended ranges of motion with and without resistance. It means being able to execute explosive, ballistic movements using kinetic chains that extend from your toes to your finger tips. It means developing great core strength. Core strength is not a defined six-pack. Core strength comes from the large and small muscle groups all the way around your midsection and glutes. You don't develop that doing crunches. You develop that doing kettlebell swings and turkish getups.

So back to the original question.. When is it safe to make kids non-functional and get them weightlifting? It's never safe.. And it's not smart. Coaches shouldn't be sending kids to the weight room, they should be training them the way we train at Dynamic Strength and Conditioning. Developing full body strength, endurance and power. Increasing flexibility and mobility. Training movements, not muscles, and performing at a much higher level.

Train smart,

kevin