For many years now, the sit up and its variations have gotten a bad rap by the majority of fitness "experts" who claim that sit ups are damaging to your spine. Where did this opinion come from? The way the sit up has been detested by the fitness community; you would suspect that countless six pack abs seekers have permanently damaged their backs while performing this dangerous exercise! Luckily, that's not the case...not even close.
The "never do sit ups during an ab workout" mantra that is chanted throughout gyms around the world actually started in the lab. Studies have shown that sit ups do stress the spine more so than crunches do. So what? Lying on a bed of cotton balls stresses the spine less than crunches! Does this mean that lying on cotton balls is a better exercise than crunches is? Where do we draw the line? Remember, every exercise puts some stress on the body. It is this very stress that causes your body to get stronger and adapt, thus eliciting a positive training effect.
Let's take a moment to investigate the sit up a little further. The reason why the critics say sit-ups stress the spine more than crunches is because of the activation of the hip flexors during a sit up motion. They state that this hip flexor involvement leads to compressive forces in the spine, and therefore, should be avoided. Is this simply an overreaction, or do they have a valid point?
Well considering that athletes and fitness enthusiasts have been performing sit ups safely for decades, it should be completely obvious that this "fear" is unsubstantiated in the real world. In fact, after being in the fitness industry for over 16 years, I can say with certainty that I have NEVER seen a single back injury result from performing a set of sit ups.
I know that some trainers are saying, "Alright, you convinced me that sit ups are not as dangerous as the "experts" claim, but since crunches work the abs just as well as sit ups do, why should I bother doing sit ups, anyway?" Let me explain.
It is true that during a sit-up, your abs are only directly responsible for the bottom portion of the movement. Once the spine is flexed (when you have finished the "crunch" part of the sit up), the hip flexors predominately take over to finish the movement. What is often overlooked is that even though the hip flexors provide most of the movement during top range of a sit up, the abs are still working hard isometrically (contracting without producing movement). This contraction totally contributes to a positive abdominal training effect.
Another positive "side effect" of the sit up is the caloric deficit that it creates. The sit up requires you to move through a large range of motion and incorporates the hip flexors as well as the abdominal musculature. Thus, a sit up burns a significantly greater number of calories than a crunch does. If you want six pack abs, burning calories and losing body fat are of the utmost importance.
I personally recommend sit ups to any individual who fits the "sit up" criteria. The criteria are simple: no pre-existing back problems, and a solid base of abdominal strength. Couple that with proper form, and you will not have any problems!
The "never do sit ups during an ab workout" mantra that is chanted throughout gyms around the world actually started in the lab. Studies have shown that sit ups do stress the spine more so than crunches do. So what? Lying on a bed of cotton balls stresses the spine less than crunches! Does this mean that lying on cotton balls is a better exercise than crunches is? Where do we draw the line? Remember, every exercise puts some stress on the body. It is this very stress that causes your body to get stronger and adapt, thus eliciting a positive training effect.
Let's take a moment to investigate the sit up a little further. The reason why the critics say sit-ups stress the spine more than crunches is because of the activation of the hip flexors during a sit up motion. They state that this hip flexor involvement leads to compressive forces in the spine, and therefore, should be avoided. Is this simply an overreaction, or do they have a valid point?
Well considering that athletes and fitness enthusiasts have been performing sit ups safely for decades, it should be completely obvious that this "fear" is unsubstantiated in the real world. In fact, after being in the fitness industry for over 16 years, I can say with certainty that I have NEVER seen a single back injury result from performing a set of sit ups.
I know that some trainers are saying, "Alright, you convinced me that sit ups are not as dangerous as the "experts" claim, but since crunches work the abs just as well as sit ups do, why should I bother doing sit ups, anyway?" Let me explain.
It is true that during a sit-up, your abs are only directly responsible for the bottom portion of the movement. Once the spine is flexed (when you have finished the "crunch" part of the sit up), the hip flexors predominately take over to finish the movement. What is often overlooked is that even though the hip flexors provide most of the movement during top range of a sit up, the abs are still working hard isometrically (contracting without producing movement). This contraction totally contributes to a positive abdominal training effect.
Another positive "side effect" of the sit up is the caloric deficit that it creates. The sit up requires you to move through a large range of motion and incorporates the hip flexors as well as the abdominal musculature. Thus, a sit up burns a significantly greater number of calories than a crunch does. If you want six pack abs, burning calories and losing body fat are of the utmost importance.
I personally recommend sit ups to any individual who fits the "sit up" criteria. The criteria are simple: no pre-existing back problems, and a solid base of abdominal strength. Couple that with proper form, and you will not have any problems!