19

I read a bit abut these programs, I see some results in forums and in internet in general, but any reasonably good method and proper nutrition can get results.

I would like to know if:

Are there papers or academic research that proves the efficacy and efficiency of the Starting Strength and Strong lifts method? (Maybe comparing to others training programs)

I would like to see paper mainly about the linear progression and weight reset .

RMalke
  • 423
  • 2
  • 10
  • 1
    I didn't know much about Starting Strength and Strong Lifts either until I joined stackexchange. However, regarding academic research in general, there are also levels of research. Read this to learn more about the best evidence based research when it comes to "research" and "translating back to practice." http://www.pccrp.org/docs/PCCRP%20Section%20I.pdf. The point is that there is bad research; there is good research; there is great research, but there is also biased and not evidenced based research, and this is typically more of a "expert opinion." Take everything as a "grain of salt." – QikMood Mar 21 '13 at 02:32
  • Sorry I misspelled on "evidenced," should be "evidence based research." Also, should be an "expert opinion," not a "expert opinion." Watching NCAA March Madness while typing at the same time. – QikMood Mar 21 '13 at 02:39
  • 2
    possible duplicate of Stronglifts 5x5: an effective program? – Dave Liepmann Mar 21 '13 at 03:59
  • As far as I know papers and studies don't really get written on specific popular exercise routines. However, linear progression is based on the SAID principle and supercompensation, which are good terms to research. – Dave Liepmann Mar 21 '13 at 04:05
  • 3
    Read Practial Programming by Ron Kilgore and Mark Rippetoe. The second half of the book outlines the program for starting strength, while the first half is dedicated to laying the scientific foundation for why it works. If you want additional sources after that, just refer to the sources in the back of the book. – Moses Mar 21 '13 at 15:32
  • 3
    Is there academic research about [insert name of program here]: no. There are too many programs for there to be formal academic research for much of any of them. The most research done for programming was done by the Russians, which is where we got periodized programming from. – Berin Loritsch Mar 22 '13 at 16:13
  • 2
    That doesn't change their effectiveness if they are used for intended purposes. If you wanted to do your own informal study, you can collect public training logs from people who are doing the programs, and compare notes--assuming you could get information such as body weight, training experience and other metrics so you have something to correlate your results against. – Berin Loritsch Mar 22 '13 at 16:16
  • I honestly don't know what a scientific study could even start to say definitively – Dave Liepmann Nov 10 '14 at 07:36
  • A quick search at Google Scholar did not return any useful results. – Ken Gonzales Nov 14 '14 at 04:12
  • The only advice I can give you is pick one and stick to it. No shortcuts, don't increase the weight if you aren't ready, you'd only cheat yourself. StrongLifts works for beginners, I've done it and you will get stronger. Strength takes time, good luck! – PmanAce Oct 16 '15 at 03:20

1 Answers1

2

I cannot know your motivation for finding research papers on this topic, but personally I do not find papers on these matters very informative or trusty. Simply because you cannot create a really objective control group.

I am sure you can find some papers about linear progression, because it is the basis of all strength. It is generally known, that if someone has a problem with their feet, first medical doctors try to move their toes, then feet, then legs etc. That is linear progression.

here is the link;
http://startingstrength.com/articles/brian_jones_story.pdf

By the way, starting strength has a forum where you can learn mainly really cool stuff. Just be quiet on the forums, and search your way, read your way. It will help you and give you ideas.

Michael C.
  • 884
  • 4
  • 7