What is up with the "controversy" of sit-ups and crunches? While growing up, sit-ups were very common and standard part of almost every exercise program. Now it seems as if sit-ups were practically banned and replaced entirely by crunches.
I've searched the internet. There seemed to be no scientific studies indicating that sit-ups are bad. There's a lot of stories out there for and against. If there are indeed studies, I would appreciate some links please.
I haven't had any problems doing sit-ups, but now that crunches are the "in thing", this is the question that comes to mind, "Why?" Surely the sit-ups are not equivalent with crunches. They do not necessarily work the same set of muscles, so to replace one with the other doesn't really make sense. If the purpose is intended to work the same muscles, it would make sense to replace with an exercise for the same type of muscles.
Any feedback out there would be appreciated. Thank you.
- Ceicei
I've searched the internet. There seemed to be no scientific studies indicating that sit-ups are bad. There's a lot of stories out there for and against. If there are indeed studies, I would appreciate some links please.
I haven't had any problems doing sit-ups, but now that crunches are the "in thing", this is the question that comes to mind, "Why?" Surely the sit-ups are not equivalent with crunches. They do not necessarily work the same set of muscles, so to replace one with the other doesn't really make sense. If the purpose is intended to work the same muscles, it would make sense to replace with an exercise for the same type of muscles.
Any feedback out there would be appreciated. Thank you.
- Ceicei