Talk:Physical strength

Initial comment

Someone please get around to organizing the data into a table. I suppose I'd eventually do it but I do not intend to do so anytime soon. Well, maybe...

---

(that wasn't me; and I wasn't the one who put it into a table) if there's a reference for labelling the fibers as "slow-twitch, fast-twitch A(type I), fast-twitch B(type II)" then okay, but otherwise, I've only ever seen "slow-twitch(type I or ST), fast-twitch A(type IIa or FTA), fast-twitch B(type II or FTB)" so I fixed it. We can always add a section describing the confusion. -- Blair P. Houghton 20:06, 18 Jan 2005

---

Honestly, there are 10 types of animal muscle fibers 4 or 5 of which are found in humans and referred to by several different names (even in the same nomenclature system); if it hasn't been done already I'm going to add a page outlining it all, and take some of the irrelevant stuff about fiber types out of this page. Blair P. Houghton 05:26, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

By all means go ahead. What's stopping you? I filled out this page using the extremely-limited knowledge I had while doing self-research on how exercise affected muscles, and frankly I'm more interested on the weight-training side of things. As a side note, do you think this information could be merged with the main muscle article entry? CABAL 14:16, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I'm just a little too busy to do major things right now; and yes, that's probably a good place to subsection it. Blair P. Houghton 18:38, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Other Factors of Strength

Aside from cross sectional area of a muscle correlating with force production...

• CNS efficiency (% of recruiment, intramuscular and intermuscular coordination)
• Biomechanical advantages (anthropometrics, tendon inserts)
• Making the most of the Stretch Shortening Cycle
• Golgi Tendon Organ Reflex (and its inhibitory effect on the SSC - or lack thereof)
• Gender (in terms of hormonal disadvantage for females to increase CSA of muscle)

-- StrengthCoach 16:18, 18 December 2005 (UTC) 16:18, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

I can't remove the vandalism (it doesn't show up on the edit page), someone help please.

What Vandalism?^TalkFissionfox 05:25, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

PSI

I removed the following paragraph, and would like to take out the entire PSI section. It's unsourced, I've never heard of it, and frankly doesn't make sense.

For a normal male, the formula would estimate 75 kg x 40 % x 1 = 31.25 units.

Hypertrophy of the muscles usually results from any sort of sufficient physical activity, though to varying degrees of size, dependent upon the physical activity itself. Hyperplasia, the introduction of additional muscle fiber, has only been observed to occur in animals. Note this formula does not tell you specifically what you can lift. What you can lift is due to a number of factors such as height/composition etc.

What units does the formula refer to? The sentence on hyperplasia doesn't make sense in the context, and the last two sentences should be removed as a) useless and b) written in the second person.

I also removed some information which is better placed on one of several other pages, notably Red meat, White meat and Muscle Fiber; it's otherwise irrelevant to physical strength beyond the notation about fiber types already on the page.

WLU 18:18, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

The Hyper{throphy,plasia} section is not totally irrelevant (except the last two sentences of course) and could possibly be moved to another place in the article.

As for PSI and RME, it smells of OR.

• PSI as in physical strength index is only either mentioned in U.S. patent 6,852,069 or used as a marketing device by the "powerball" manufacturers. No other usage is common as far as I have been able to find out.
• RME in a muscle context usually means respiratory muscle endurance. The meaning relative muscle efficiency is only used in an academic paper from 2006 in Journal of Experimental Biology concerning the flight capacity of fruit flies.

I say remove, purge and eviscerate the whole PSI section. -- Adrian Lozano 08:01, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Good enough for me. WLU 10:41, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Description

There really should be some more description of strength, i.e how to increase it, the theories on increasing it (adaptation,muscle tears, rebuilding etc), and its relation to hypertrophy, even if these are linked to weight training. the definition of the amount of force exerted on an object does not surpass a low grade dictionary. Moomoo2u 06:45, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Yhou people are MAD!!!Bold text —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.213.236.209 (talk) 18:44, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion. When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). WLU 17:57, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Changed "human or animal" to just "animal", since animals are the only organisms capable of exerting "strength" in such a sense, and humans are technically animals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.139.19.171 (talk) 20:17, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

The 'brawn' disambiguation page links here, but this page does not even contain that word. Is it slang? Some particular sort of physical strength? A bad redirect? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.251.37.77 (talk) 23:36, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Too many WikiProjects!

Wikiprojects

For an article with severe source issues, this article shouldn't be part of 11 Wikiprojects.

• For WP CD, the URL returns,

  "Not Found, The requested URL /wp/p/Physical_strength.htm was not found on this server. Apache/2.2.25 Server at schools-wikipedia.org Port 80"

  The project is outdated, so I'm removing it.
• This is not a high importance Anthropology article.
• Sociology?

Categories

This article should not be classified as a physical quantity or constant, as in physics. I'm going to remove that.
--FeralOink (talk) 08:31, 9 March 2014 (UTC)