Post #2 (Week 6)

So this week my main focus will be about a specific website in the exercise industry that lacks credibility and evidence on their product. The website I will analyze this week will be www.shakeweight.com and https://www.shakeweightformen.com, 2 websites that sell a piece of exercise equipment known as the "shakeweight".

5 specific things I see on this page that are incredibly questionable are:

1.

How does shakeweight conclude that their product is exactly 7 times more effective than a dumbbell? Produces 7 times more strength? Size? Muscular endurance? Is it 7 times heavier? I think you get the point, basically the website is not able to justify without any direct scientific evidence as to why their product is "7 times better" than a regular dumbbell.

2.

The product claims that in 6 minutes a day it will make a man "stronger and ripped" which probably means that this product will make a man stronger and bigger. Now from a scientific view, to become bigger and stronger one must induce muscle hypertrophy, meaning one must make their muscle fibers larger and in order to induce muscle hypertrophy one must adhere to the "overload" principle which says that the muscle needs to be challenged in order to develop (Leyland, ch.4, p.10). Muscle hypertrophy is best achieved when one is working anaerobically, without oxygen readily available to the muscles, meaning that one needs to be exercising at very high intensity for approximately 1-15 seconds (ExRx, 2012). The shakeweight is an exercise that lasts for 6 minutes continuously; therefore, the shakeweight makes one exercise aerobically or when oxygen is readily available to the muscles. Alternatively, a better option for muscle hypertrophy would be weight-training which is an anaerobic and high intensity series of exercises. If you want results, in terms of strength and size, weight-training is a much better option than the shakeweight.

3.

Compare this screenshot to the previous screenshot. Notice the difference? Both these products are near identical except for the fact that the female version is 2.5lbs whereas the male version is 5lbs. The product is to be used for 6 minutes and apparently a 2.5lbs difference is enough to make a man "stronger and ripped" while for a woman it "shapes and tones". Now I'd love to see the scientific evidence as to the reasoning behind that.

4.

I'd like to challenge the statement that the shakeweight being 300% more effective than a dumbbell. Firstly, there's no data provided to prove this claim. However, controlled scientific studies have been made on the shakeweight and according to one study, by the Journal of Sports Science and Medicine, the shakeweight actually activates more upper body muscles than a dumbbell of the same weight (John Porcari, Jennah Hackbarth, Thomas Kernozek, Scott Doberstein & Carl Foster, 2011, p. 599). But it is unpractical to say one would be training constantly on a 2.5lb or 5lb dumbbell as one usually progresses to heavier weights and therefore intensity and resistance is increased. Whereas shakeweights come only in 2 relatively light weights, leaving little room for progressive resistance; which means that shakeweight users would "plateau" (progression being slowed or stopped) sooner than dumbbell users.

Furthermore, according to the same shakeweight study, the types of contractions that the shakeweight generates are closely related to isometric contractions otherwise known as static contractions where the muscle does not change its length (John Porcari et al, 2011, p599). Whereas dumbbells, when curled, produce an isotonic muscle contraction which consist of muscle concentric (shortening) and eccentric (lengthening) phases. Muscular strength is joint-specific and by using isometric contractions, one would be exercising in a very limited range of motion and only be relatively "strong" at a limited range of joint-angles; while it would be the opposite for isotonic contractions ( Leyland, ch.4, p7). Other disadvantages of isometric contractions, when compared to isotonic contractions, include:

• Isometric training does not optimally improve the ability to exert force rapidly (i.e., to be powerful).
• Motivation is poor with isometric exercises. Unlike isotonic (free-weight or machine) exercises, it can be difficult to observe progress.
• Straining-type activities, which involve sustained isometric muscle contractions, greatly increase resistance to blood flow and cause large increases in arterial blood pressure and workload of the heart.
  (Leyland, ch.4, p.4)

A dumbbell, that can challenge an individual, is definitely going to make an individual stronger, bigger, and definitely more functional than the shakeweight.

5. To be fair, in order to get the "science" behind this product you have to watch the video. Within the first 15 seconds, the video ties to compare 240 repetitions/minute of throwing/catching a medicine ball with their shake weight product. Couldn't one argue that finger tapping is an excellent exercise because one can tap their fingers over 300 times in a minute? Again like I explained earlier in problem #2, you have to look at the quantity and quality of an exercise in order to "fully" evaluate it.

I'd like to present to you a great video on Ben Goldacre, a medical doctor, talking about "bad science" or science which lacks credibility on TEDtalks:

The simple take home message for today is that the fitness industry does not have miracle products, such as the shakeweight, that can give amazing results in an absurdly short amount of time. Results take time and dedication and traditional workouts at the gym are still being widely used today for a good reason.

Works Cited:
ExRx. (2012, January 30). Muscle Mass Tips. Retrieved from http://www.exrx.net/Questions/MuscleMass.html
John Porcari, Jennah Hackbarth, Thomas Kernozek, Scott Doberstein and Carl Foster (2011). Does the Shake Weight® live up to its hype?. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine, Retrieved from https://jssm.org/
Leyland, Anthony (2011). Exercise: Health and Performance, Kendall Hunt.