Considering I just did a 6x5 back squat workout the other day, I'll say what I think now. However, that has the caveat of my squat workout (all back squat workouts at this point) being 1 set of "normal" back squat, followed by a L,R set each of the "B" squat, with loading only at approximately BW (for the 6x5, and no, it wasn't a "hard" workout for me, in case anyone feels the need to thump their chest), I don't think that spinal damage would be an issue under those parameters.
Black box style, if anyone can show me a biochemically and physically healthy elite "natural" powerlifter, retired, at a senior age, who hasn't already been declared an obscenely genetically gifted person, I'd love to see it. As always, it's not necessarily all the exercise in question, it's how it is performed and in what manner (sets, reps, load, volume, etc, etc...).
I am definitely coming to the conclusion that the loading in a front squat is more realistic/functional and thus should be *favored* in a workout scheme, IMO.
I'll do any type of squat. Not too often, not for too many reps, and definitely not with too much weight. I plan on doing this for a long, long time. Screw the "live fast, die early" mentality.
I must say, I have learned something from Rippetoe's advice regarding back squats in the CFJ. Even ditched the Manta Ray the other day in that 6x5 workout. Felt good, actually even felt like I was able to maintain a better lumbar lordosis in the bottom position.
Everyone has something to learn. Do I still think that excessive volume of overly loaded back squats could likely lead to spinal damage over time? Yes. Am I modifying what I'm doing based on what I've learned over time? Yes.
Just like with nutrients, too much of one (or too little) over time will cause problems. Some nutrients have a narrower window than others. I think back squatting, especially heavy, may be one exercise with a narrower window than some others.
Last edited by Garrett Smith; 02-07-2007 at 09:40 PM.
Reason: I'm a good proofreader