Preaching to the choir here, but nonetheless: <dl><dt class="about">J Strength Cond Res. 2008 Jan;22(1):95-102. Related Articles, <script language="**********1.2"><!-- var Menu18296961 = [ ["UseLocalConfig", "jsmenu3Config", "", ""], ["LinkOut", "window.top.location='/sites/entrez?Cmd=ShowLinkOut&Db=pubmed&TermToSearch=18296961&ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbstract' ", "", ""] ] --></script>Links </dt><dd class="title"> [SIZE=+1]Trunk muscle activity during stability ball and free weight exercises.[/SIZE] Nuzzo JL, McCaulley GO, Cormie P, Cavill MJ, McBride JM. Neuromuscular Laboratory, Department of Health, Leisure & Exercise Science, Appalachian State University, Boone, North Carolina, USA. The purpose of this investigation was to compare trunk muscle activity during stability ball and free weight exercises. Nine resistance-trained men participated in one testing session in which squats (SQ) and deadlifts (DL) were completed with loads of approximately 50, 70, 90, and 100% of one-repetition maximum (1RM). Isometric contractions during 3 stability ball exercises (quadruped (QP), pelvic thrust (PT), ball back extension (BE)) were also completed. During all exercises, average integrated electromyography (IEMG) from the rectus abdominus (RA), external oblique (EO), longissimus (L1) and multifidus (L5) was collected and analyzed. Results demonstrate that when expressed relative to 100% DL 1RM, muscle activity was 19.5 +/- 14.8% for L1 and 30.2 +/- 19.3% for L5 during QP, 31.4 +/- 13.4% for L1 and 37.6 +/- 12.4% for L5 during PT, and 44.2 +/- 22.8% for L1 and 45.5 +/- 21.6% for L5 during BE. IEMG of L1 during SQ and DL at 90 and 100% 1RM, and relative muscle activity of L5 during SQ and DL at 100% 1RM was significantly greater (P < or = 0.05) than in the stability ball exercises. Furthermore, relative muscle activity of L1 during DL at 50 and 70% 1RM was significantly greater than in QP and PT. No significant differences were observed in RA and EO during any of the exercises. In conclusion, activity of the trunk muscles during SQs and DLs is greater or equal to that which is produced during the stability ball exercises. It appears that stability ball exercises may not provide a sufficient stimulus for increasing muscular strength or hypertrophy; consequently, the role of stability ball exercises in strength and conditioning programs is questioned. SQs and DLs are recommended for increasing strength and hypertrophy of the back extensors.</dd></dl>
It will never catch on. Squats and Deadlifts require too much effort. Flopping around on a ball is fun.
I've never seen them used in strength and conditioning circles myself. They're used a lot in health and fitness situations though, ie women in the local health club. They have their uses though.
Well... for all those people that want to go to personal trainers for "a strong sexy core" and get stuck on the balls because their trainer reads magazines.... but the profit margin on barbells and the like is not as good as the gimmick devices so we will always have things like exercise balls around
I never understood that reason even if it were easy to get big and bulky. I mean who wouldn't want to be big and strong? And if it were so easy to get big and bulky wouldn't it be easier to undo it? I suppose logic has no place among morons...
Great article, can't wait till I can squat and deadlift again. OT: Mike, I apologize if this has been asked before, but I've noticed that you are very well read and always have interesting articles. Where do you find them? I am very familiar with scientific articles but my knowledge is mostly relegated to basic science publications (ACS, PubMed, Blackwell Synergy, etc - due to my pre-med undergraduate studies). Are you on some sort of mailing list, etc? I'm interested in reading more articles along the S&C and Nutrition side of things. Thank you.
Thanks for the compliments, FNT; I'm envious, because as an undergrad, you probably have better access than me to full studies. Most of the nutrition (and some strength/conditioning) studies I get are from various blogs and websites; I've complied quite a subscription list on my Google reader, and have to sift through about 100 pages a day to find the relevant stuff.
Ah interesting, I guess I'll have to start accumulating a proper google reader list. I've never thought of using my library resources for my hobbies (s&c, nutrition, etc), probably because the last thing I want to do in my free time is read more scientific papers. I'm probably going to be gaining access to a lot more journals when I start medical school in August, I'll try to work out a way to give you access also. Not sure how it would work, I'll think on it. Thank you.
Good work, Batman. I always get asked about stability balls by the folk I train. There's nothing quite like the cold, dead hands of science to strike that shit down.
