The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
And when you think about doing a set of 10, right? By the time you get to seven, eight, nine, the weight is already moving more slowly. You're starting to grind it out because it's getting more and more challenging. And so if you are using a load that that is appropriate, then the rate the the time it takes for you to complete that rep will inevitably get a little bit longer. But that's not something you're doing intentionally.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
There's always going to be a harder part of the movement and an easier part of the movement. So, we should move the weight as quickly as we can during that difficult phase and then control on the easier phase. But trying to intentionally slow down either direction is not particularly advantageous, especially if we think about like standing up from from a squat. We want to stand up from the bottom of the squat as quickly as we can under load.