Place · Level 3
Youth & adolescent training
AAP 2020 + NSCA 共识: 监督到位的抗阻训练对 5-18 岁是安全、有益的 · 举铁长不高是被泛化的旧案例报告, 不是机制
Last updated
Story path
Chapter 1
The 'lifting stunts growth' myth
The 'lifting stunts growth' myth
The 'lifting stunts growth' claim didn't come out of nowhere. In the 1970s-80s a handful of youth growth-plate injury case reports came out, almost all from unsupervised settings with poor technique attempting single-rep maximal loads. Those anecdotes spread through media and parents, and gradually generalized into 'any kind of resistance training is dangerous'.
The modern evidence paints a different picture. Behringer 2010 in *Pediatrics* pooled 42 studies in a meta-analysis and confirmed that supervised pediatric resistance training reliably builds strength without any signal of elevated injury rate. Faigenbaum 2009, writing the NSCA position statement, emphasized technique-first progressive loading and called such training safe and beneficial for 5-18 year-olds. The AAP 2020 clinical report (Stricker et al.) tightened the language: compliant resistance training should be recommended, not discouraged.
The height question is more direct: adult stature is ~80-90% genetic; the rest is split among nutrition, endocrine factors, sleep, and overall health. Malina 2006 reviewed long-term follow-up data and reached a clear conclusion: supervised resistance training has no measurable negative effect on final adult height.
The modern evidence paints a different picture. Behringer 2010 in *Pediatrics* pooled 42 studies in a meta-analysis and confirmed that supervised pediatric resistance training reliably builds strength without any signal of elevated injury rate. Faigenbaum 2009, writing the NSCA position statement, emphasized technique-first progressive loading and called such training safe and beneficial for 5-18 year-olds. The AAP 2020 clinical report (Stricker et al.) tightened the language: compliant resistance training should be recommended, not discouraged.
The height question is more direct: adult stature is ~80-90% genetic; the rest is split among nutrition, endocrine factors, sleep, and overall health. Malina 2006 reviewed long-term follow-up data and reached a clear conclusion: supervised resistance training has no measurable negative effect on final adult height.
Why the old narrative is sticky
Case reports travel further than meta-analyses because they come with a picture: one kid, one deadlift, one X-ray. But case reports have no denominator and no control arm.When the entire youth-training population is placed in the same denominator, Hamill 1994's injury statistics show resistance-training injuries per 100 training hours run far below soccer, basketball, rugby, and gymnastics.
So the precise version is not 'lifting is dangerous' but 'unsupervised maximal lifts are dangerous'. The difference is exactly what Fitnuhealth keeps emphasizing: dose + supervision + technique — not the movement label itself.
机制 · 孩子变强, 强在哪里
孩子练力量确实会变强, 但变强的地方常常不在你以为的位置。出力这件事, 是大脑先发指令。一条运动神经连着一小撮肌纤维, 合起来叫一个运动单位; 你能使出多大劲, 取决于大脑同时叫醒了多少个运动单位、叫得有多密, 以及几块肌肉之间配合得有多默契。青春期之前, 让肌纤维变粗的那几种激素还没上量, 所以这个阶段训练带来的进步几乎全部发生在这条指挥线路上: 原本调不动的运动单位被调动起来, 神经冲动发放得更密, 主动发力的时候, 对面那块本来会拽住你的肌肉学会了及时松开。
这解释了家长最常见的一个困惑: 孩子引体向上从只能做一个到能连做十个, 胳膊看上去却没怎么变粗。力气先长在神经里, 后长在围度上。
往下推一步, 就明白这个阶段为什么该把动作练标准, 而不是急着加重量: 你正在给一套还在布线的控制系统写默认动作模式 —— 蹲下去膝盖往哪儿走、拉的时候肩胛怎么收、发力时腰背怎么绷住。这套模式一旦写进去, 会被身体一直调用。等激素上量、肌肉真正开始变粗的时候, 是这套已经写好的模式去承接更大的负荷; 如果当初写进去的是代偿动作, 那么后面加的每一公斤, 都是在把那个代偿动作练得更牢。
所以 NSCA 的立场声明和 AAP 的临床报告把青少年训练的目标定在技术和动作质量上, 而不是定在负重数字上 —— 这不是保守, 是这个阶段的身体本来就在这一层给回报。
Chapter 2
Growth plates and the real risk
Growth plates and the real risk
The epiphyseal plate (growth plate) is the cartilage structure at the ends of long bones responsible for longitudinal growth. It is weaker than mature cortical bone, so injury is theoretically possible. But the real driver of growth-plate trouble is not a routine 8-12 rep moderate-load set — it's a single maximal effort: an untrained adolescent attempting, without supervision, a load clearly beyond their control.
Growth-plate closure isn't a mysterious window either. In females they close around age 14-15, in males around 16-18. Before then, the safety boundary for resistance training is not 'cannot train' — it's 'don't use 1RM testing as daily training' and 'don't let peer competition pick the load'. AAP 2020 is explicit: under qualified coaching, ages 5-9 can begin bodyweight training, age 10+ can progressively add external load, and adult-style volumes only after technical competence is in place.
Real-world injury data support the boundary. Hamill 1994 estimated resistance-training injury rate at ~0.0017 per 100 participant-hours — far below most youth team sports. Put differently: half-court basketball poses higher joint risk than coach-supervised dumbbell rows.
Growth-plate closure isn't a mysterious window either. In females they close around age 14-15, in males around 16-18. Before then, the safety boundary for resistance training is not 'cannot train' — it's 'don't use 1RM testing as daily training' and 'don't let peer competition pick the load'. AAP 2020 is explicit: under qualified coaching, ages 5-9 can begin bodyweight training, age 10+ can progressively add external load, and adult-style volumes only after technical competence is in place.
Real-world injury data support the boundary. Hamill 1994 estimated resistance-training injury rate at ~0.0017 per 100 participant-hours — far below most youth team sports. Put differently: half-court basketball poses higher joint risk than coach-supervised dumbbell rows.
机制 · 这片工地分成四带
把生长板放到显微镜下, 它不是一块均质的软骨, 而是从骨骺一侧到骨干一侧分成几个作业带, 一带交给下一带。最外面是后备带: 软骨细胞安静地待着, 是这片工地的种子库。往里是增殖带: 种子细胞开始分裂, 而且分裂出来的细胞不是乱堆一团, 是像一摞硬币那样, 沿着骨头的长轴排成一根根柱子。骨头之所以是变长而不是变胖, 就是因为这些柱子的方向。
再往里是肥大带: 柱子里的细胞停止分裂, 转而把自己撑大好几倍, 同时向周围放出信号。这一带是整片工地最脆的地方 —— 细胞体积膨胀之后, 细胞与细胞之间那点承力的基质被挤得很薄, 整层结构等于一排排大气泡中间夹着薄壁。最里面是钙化与骨化带: 血管从骨干那一侧钻进来, 带来清除细胞和造骨细胞, 把撑大的软骨细胞清走, 沿着留下的软骨支架铺上真正的骨。柱子往外堆了多长, 骨头就往外顶了多长。
到这里, 怕横向、不怕纵向这句话才有了解剖上的理由。柱状结构对顺着柱子方向的压力是有办法的: 力沿着支架一层层传下去, 而且骨组织是活的, 反复但在承受范围内的压力会让它长得更结实 —— 抗阻训练能给青少年攒下骨密度, 走的就是这条路。但横向错动是另一回事: 肥大带那层薄基质里, 几乎没有横着把上下两半拉住的纤维, 一旦剪切力足够大, 整根骨头里最先滑开的平面就是它。
所以两件都叫受力的事, 结局完全不同: 教练盯着、每周只加一点点的深蹲, 是沿柱子方向的、可预期的负荷; 而一次没控制住的落地、一次被拽住的扭转、一次咬着牙硬拽起来的极限重量, 是瞬间的、方向不受控的剪切。危险的从来不是重量本身, 是方向和失控。
When to stop and check
Three signals deserve serious attention:Persistent pain > 2 weeks: joint or peri-joint pain after training, especially at the distal knee, wrist, or elbow (common growth-plate sites)Acute swelling + restricted motion: any sharp, sudden joint pain with marked swelling or loss of range of motionWorse after activity, not relieved by rest: pain that intensifies immediately after exercise and doesn't ease with rest
Any one of these warrants stopping training and seeing pediatrics or sports medicine for a physical exam ± imaging.
The conservative tone is deliberate: once a growth-plate injury actually occurs, delayed handling can leave long-term consequences. Fitnuhealth doesn't replace clinical judgment — it just lays out the early signals that parents tend to miss.
数字 · 边界画在哪里, 到底有多危险
先把边界说清楚。真正会让生长板出问题的, 不是日常 8-12 次的中等负重组, 而是重大单次最大努力: 一个未经训练的青少年, 在没人指导的情况下, 挑战明显超过自己控制能力的重量。这两件事在生理上不是同一个量级的事件 —— 前者是一组能稳稳完成、每一次轨迹都差不多的重复, 力沿着柱子方向老实地传下去; 后者是身体从没经历过的一次冲击, 必然要靠歪腰、拱背、膝盖内扣这类代偿姿势才能完成, 而代偿姿势的本质就是把力从纵向掰成横向。AAP 2020 因此把处方写成按能力推进, 而不是按年龄发令: 在合格教练监督下, 5-9 岁可以开始自重训练, 10 岁以后可以渐进加入外部负重, 技术达标后才考虑接近成人的训练量。1RM 测试可以偶尔用来评估, 但不该成为日常训练手段 —— 它每次都把人推到控制力的边缘, 而边缘正是代偿动作出现的地方。
实际伤情数据支持这条边界。Hamill 1994 给出的抗阻训练损伤率约 0.0017 / 100 小时训练时间, 远低于多数青少年集体球类项目。换句话说, 让孩子去打半场篮球的关节风险, 比让他在教练监督下做哑铃划船更高。这个对比常被误读成篮球有害, 它真正说明的是另一件事: 风险来自速度快、方向不可预测、还要跟别人身体接触的场景 —— 抢板落地时脚下有别人的鞋, 变向时对手撞了你一下, 这些正是产生横向剪切的典型时刻。器械和自重训练恰恰把这三样都拿掉了。
推演 · 长得最快的那两年最需要看着点
知道了这片工地怎么运转, 有几件事就能自己推出来。第一, 长得最快的时候, 工地最忙, 也最软。 增殖带在拼命分裂, 肥大带排着一层层撑大的细胞, 整片软骨比平时更厚。厚意味着那条薄弱面更宽, 所以同一次失控的落地, 发生在窜个子那两年和发生在闭合之后, 后果不是一回事。这也是为什么这个阶段最该练的不是重量, 而是落地怎么落、变向怎么刹住 —— 直接冲着剪切力去。
第二, 这段时间孩子突然变得笨手笨脚, 不是懒。 骨头先变长, 附着在它两端的肌肉和肌腱是被动被拉开的, 于是杠杆变了、相对长度变紧、身体在大脑里那张用了好几年的地图一时对不上号。原来闭着眼都能做对的动作会莫名其妙走样, 而走样的动作正是把纵向负荷掰成横向的那一步。这时候降负荷、回去把动作做干净, 是顺着生理走, 不是退步。
第三, 闭合之后, 最先坏掉的结构会换一个。 生长板一旦被两侧的骨头吃满、中间那条线消失, 骨头两端就成了连续的成熟骨, 原来那个最薄弱的平面不存在了。同样一次摔倒, 力量得另找出口。于是成年人和还没闭合的孩子, 在同一个动作里最容易伤到的地方并不一样。这也解释了成人训练的经验为什么不能直接照搬给孩子: 不是孩子更娇气, 是他们身上多了一层成年人已经没有的结构。
Chapter 3
PHV and age-staged prescription
PHV and age-staged prescription
The core framework for modern youth training is Long-Term Athletic Development (LTAD, Lloyd 2014), organized around one physiological fact: the Peak Height Velocity (PHV) window. Female PHV is roughly 11-12 years, male PHV roughly 13-14, with ± 2 years individual variation. The body's response to training differs across PHV.
Before PHV, neural plasticity outweighs structural gain potential. Training should emphasize movement variety: running, jumping, climbing, pushing/pulling, anti-rotation, balance, change of direction. Load isn't the point — skill and neural coordination are.
After PHV, the hormonal environment supports meaningful muscle and strength gains, and systematic resistance training enters the main menu.
A rough age frame:
5-9 years: bodyweight + game-based movement, building a wide movement-skill base10-12 years: introduce light external loads (machines, dumbbells) — technique first, load second13-15 years (most cross PHV here): enter systematic resistance training, ~80% bodyweight + machines and ~20% free weights16-18 years: closer to adult templates with quantified progressive overload — 1RM testing remains rare and supervised
Before PHV, neural plasticity outweighs structural gain potential. Training should emphasize movement variety: running, jumping, climbing, pushing/pulling, anti-rotation, balance, change of direction. Load isn't the point — skill and neural coordination are.
After PHV, the hormonal environment supports meaningful muscle and strength gains, and systematic resistance training enters the main menu.
A rough age frame:
5-9 years: bodyweight + game-based movement, building a wide movement-skill base10-12 years: introduce light external loads (machines, dumbbells) — technique first, load second13-15 years (most cross PHV here): enter systematic resistance training, ~80% bodyweight + machines and ~20% free weights16-18 years: closer to adult templates with quantified progressive overload — 1RM testing remains rare and supervised
机制 · PHV 前后, 身体换了一套引擎
PHV 之前, 身体给训练的回报几乎全在神经这一层。让肌纤维横截面变粗, 需要合成信号持续待在高位, 而这套信号在青春期启动之前一直是低档运行。于是同样练上一段时间, 孩子拿到的是: 更多运动单位被叫得动、神经冲动发放得更密、拮抗肌更早松开 —— 力气实打实地长了, 围度几乎没动。这不是训练无效, 是回报兑现在另一个账户上。PHV 前后那两年, 身体在做一件很吃力的事: 骨骼以一生中最快的速度加长。肌肉和肌腱不是主动跟着长的, 它们是被两端的骨头拉着被动延展, 所以有一段时间会显得短了、紧了; 同时四肢变长, 同一块肌肉作用的力臂也跟着变。大脑里那张用了好些年的身体地图突然不准了, 结果就是协调性短期下滑。这个阶段的正确应对是把负荷降下来、把动作重新校准, 而不是加量硬顶过去。
PHV 之后, 合成信号上量, 训练刺激第一次能被兑换成肌肉横截面的增长, 骨骼对负荷的适应也在这段时间一起兑现。系统化的抗阻训练到这里才真正物有所值。
把这三段连起来看, LTAD 为什么反复强调发育阶段优先于日历年龄就很清楚了: 同一份训练计划发给 PHV 之前和 PHV 之后的两个孩子, 一个拿到的是技能, 一个拿到的是肌肉。而如果发错了 —— 给还没到 PHV 的孩子压大重量 —— 他既拿不到肌肉, 又把本该用来把动作写对的那段时间花掉了。这就是发育阶段优先在实际操作里的意思: 不是怕受伤才推迟, 是这个阶段的身体给的回报本来就在别处。
How to estimate PHV
Parents don't need precise measurement, but a few signals help:Visible height acceleration (6-9 cm in a year is a typical PHV-period amplitude)Shoe size jumping repeatedlyShort-term loss of coordination — because the skeleton is growing faster than neural control
When these signals appear, the training center of gravity can gradually shift from 'skills first' to 'skills + strength' — there's no need to rush a calendar-based plan switch.
More importantly: don't schedule by peer age. Two 13-year-old boys may sit on opposite sides of PHV and require very different training. The LTAD model emphasizes this repeatedly: biological age > chronological age.
处方 · 按发育阶段分级
粗略的年龄分级可以这样写: 5-9 岁以自重 + 游戏化为主, 加入广泛的运动技能; 10-12 岁开始接触轻负重器械和哑铃, 技术第一、负重第二; 13-15 岁 (多数人覆盖 PHV) 进入系统化抗阻, 80% 自重和器械、20% 自由重量; 16-18 岁可以接近成人模板, 量化负重、有计划的渐进超负荷, 但 1RM 测试仍应稀少且监督。这些年龄是路标, 不是闸门。 前面说的道理在这里落地: 一个还没进 PHV 的孩子, 哪怕已经到了表里靠后的年龄段, 该做的仍然是把动作练干净, 因为他的身体这时候只会在神经那一层给回报; 一个早发育、已经过了 PHV 的孩子, 提前接触系统化抗阻也不算冒进, 因为他的合成信号已经上来了。判断依据是他现在长得多快、动作控制得住多少, 不是身份证上那一栏。
为什么中间几档一定要留一大半给自重和器械? 因为这两类动作都替你锁住了轨迹 —— 器械有导轨, 自重有你自己的骨架 —— 动作路径不容易在疲劳时突然歪掉, 也就不容易把纵向的力掰成横向。自由重量的价值在于它不锁轨迹, 逼着你自己稳住; 而这恰恰是它更晚出现、比例更小的原因: 稳不住的时候, 代价落在还没闭合的那层软骨上。
每一档之间的过渡也不是某个生日当天切换, 而是一项一项换: 先把新的动作模式加进来, 熟练了再给它加外部负重, 负重稳定了再谈加量的节奏。任何一步一旦出现动作走样, 就退回上一步, 而不是靠多加几组把它扛过去。
Chapter 4
Red flags, marketing, and decision
Red flags, marketing, and decision
What youth training really needs to watch for is not the barbell, but the ring of supplement marketing that uses 'teen' as its hook.
'Teen protein powder' is a marketing narrative, not a nutritional need. Adolescent protein RDA is ~0.95-1.2 g/kg/day, generally covered by regular meals; standalone supplementation is only needed in picky eating, strict vegan diets, severe caloric restriction, or competitive high-volume training — and even then, food-first.
Creatine is more nuanced: evidence is robust in 18+ adults, sparser but without specific safety signals in adolescents. The ISSN 2017 position statement does not prohibit adolescent use, but recommends getting the diet and training basics in place before discussing supplements.
BCAAs offer little independent clinical benefit in adolescents — more marketing-driven than evidence-driven.
The 'puberty + high-intensity training boosts testosterone' pitch inflates small transient endocrine fluctuations into a slogan; the real meaning is far smaller than the documented training gains in muscle, bone density, metabolic health, and mental health.
A decision path can stay simple. Any adolescent 8+ wanting to start resistance training, four steps:
1. Find a qualified coach (CSCS / sports-medicine physician / national-level strength-and-conditioning credential)
2. Start with bodyweight + foundational skill in six movement patterns: squat, push, pull, hip hinge, loaded carry, anti-rotation
3. Progress to external load gradually after technique is reliable — load up monthly, not weekly
4. Don't peer-compare 1RMs — treat training as a compounding multi-year-to-decade project
'Teen protein powder' is a marketing narrative, not a nutritional need. Adolescent protein RDA is ~0.95-1.2 g/kg/day, generally covered by regular meals; standalone supplementation is only needed in picky eating, strict vegan diets, severe caloric restriction, or competitive high-volume training — and even then, food-first.
Creatine is more nuanced: evidence is robust in 18+ adults, sparser but without specific safety signals in adolescents. The ISSN 2017 position statement does not prohibit adolescent use, but recommends getting the diet and training basics in place before discussing supplements.
BCAAs offer little independent clinical benefit in adolescents — more marketing-driven than evidence-driven.
The 'puberty + high-intensity training boosts testosterone' pitch inflates small transient endocrine fluctuations into a slogan; the real meaning is far smaller than the documented training gains in muscle, bone density, metabolic health, and mental health.
A decision path can stay simple. Any adolescent 8+ wanting to start resistance training, four steps:
1. Find a qualified coach (CSCS / sports-medicine physician / national-level strength-and-conditioning credential)
2. Start with bodyweight + foundational skill in six movement patterns: squat, push, pull, hip hinge, loaded carry, anti-rotation
3. Progress to external load gradually after technique is reliable — load up monthly, not weekly
4. Don't peer-compare 1RMs — treat training as a compounding multi-year-to-decade project
货架 · 逐个看那几样
蛋白粉青少年版是营销叙事, 不是营养需要。青少年蛋白 RDA 约 0.95-1.2 g/kg/天, 常规饮食基本能覆盖; 只在挑食、纯素、严格热量限制或竞技高量训练时才需要单独补充, 而且优先来自日常食物。这里值得多说一句: 蛋白粉和鸡蛋、牛奶、豆制品在小肠里被拆开之后, 送进血液的是同一批氨基酸; 换成粉末形态并没有多出一条吸收通道, 它买到的是方便, 不是更好的原料。肌酸的处境更复杂: 18 岁以上的研究证据充分, 青少年群体的研究相对少, 但已有的安全数据并未提示特殊风险; ISSN 2017 立场声明不禁止青少年使用, 但建议先把基础饮食和训练做到位, 再讨论补剂。
BCAA 给青少年几乎没有独立的临床收益证据, 更像是被营销驱动的。
青春期 + 高强度训练促睾酮的卖点, 把短期、微小的内分泌波动放大成了口号, 实际意义远不如训练带来的肌肉、骨密度、代谢和心理健康收益。把这句话拆开看会更清楚: 一次训练之后激素的起伏是以小时计的, 而肌肉横截面和骨骼的改变是以月和年计的。用前者去解释后者, 相当于拿一次涨潮去解释海岸线的形状 —— 时间尺度根本对不上。真正把这个年龄段的身体推着变的, 是持续几个月的训练刺激加上青春期本身就开得很大的那套信号, 不是某一次训练后血里多出来的那一点点。
上手 · 四步开始
决策路径可以保持简单。任何 8 岁以上、想开始抗阻训练的青少年, 按四步走:(a) 找一位合格教练 (CSCS、注册运动医学医师、国家级体能教练资质之一);
(b) 从自重和基础技能起步, 建立蹲、推、拉、髋铰链、负重携带、抗旋 6 个动作模式;
(c) 技术达标后渐进加入外部负重, 按月而不是按周加量;
(d) 不与同龄人攀比 1RM, 把训练当成几年到十几年的复利项目。
第二步那几个动作模式为什么是这几个, 值得解释一下: 它们不是几个练习名字, 而是身体所有负重场景能被拆成的几种基本受力方式 —— 把重心往下再撑起来、把东西推离身体、把东西拉向身体、让髋关节折叠再打开、扛着东西走, 以及顶住一个想把你拧过去的力。日常和运动里遇到的动作, 几乎都是这几种的组合。先把这几种练干净, 后面加的任何专项都是在一个稳的底子上叠东西; 反过来, 底子歪的时候加的每一份重量, 都在让那个歪掉的模式更难改。
第三步的按月不按周也不是保守。神经系统学会一个新动作的速度, 比肌腱、韧带和骨骼适应新负荷的速度快得多 —— 你会先感觉到这个重量我举得动了, 而承接这份力气的那套支架其实还没跟上。加重量加得比结缔组织跟得上的速度还快, 力气先到、支架后到, 中间那段空档就是青少年训练里绝大多数说不清哪儿疼的来源。按月加量, 等的就是这套支架。
Practical bottom line
If you only remember one version: supervised resistance training is safe, beneficial, and recommended for adolescents — but the word 'supervised' carries nearly all of the risk management.Technique first, load second, peer comparison lastWhen red flags appear, don't hesitate to see pediatrics or sports medicineSave supplements for after diet and training are genuinely mature
Cross-continent links: elderly-resistance-training, exercise-pregnancy, hypertrophy-mechanism, protein, bone, vitamin-d, creatine.
References · 6
- Behringer, M., Vom Heede, A., Yue, Z., & Mester, J. (2010). Effects of resistance training in children and adolescents: a meta-analysis. Pediatrics, 126(5), e1199-e1210. Meta-analysis confirming meaningful strength gains and no excess injury risk in supervised pediatric resistance training. 10.1542/peds.2010-0445
- Faigenbaum, A. D., Kraemer, W. J., Blimkie, C. J. R., Jeffreys, I., Micheli, L. J., Nitka, M., & Rowland, T. W. (2009). Youth resistance training: updated position statement paper from the National Strength and Conditioning Association. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 23(5 Suppl), S60-S79. 10.1519/JSC.0b013e31819df407
- Stricker, P. R., Faigenbaum, A. D., McCambridge, T. M., & Council on Sports Medicine and Fitness. (2020). Resistance training for children and adolescents. Pediatrics, 145(6), e20201011. AAP clinical report endorsing supervised, technique-first resistance training across pediatric age groups. 10.1542/peds.2020-1011
- Malina, R. M. (2006). Weight training in youth — growth, maturation, and safety: an evidence-based review. Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine, 16(6), 478-487. Longitudinal evidence that properly supervised resistance training does not impair stature or growth-plate development. 10.1097/01.jsm.0000248843.31874.be
- Hamill, B. P. (1994). Relative safety of weightlifting and weight training. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 8(1), 53-57. Reports resistance-training injury incidence far below that of rugby, soccer, basketball, and gymnastics in youth cohorts. journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr/abstract/1994/02000/relative_safety_of_weightlifting_and_weight.8.aspx
- Lloyd, R. S., Oliver, J. L., Faigenbaum, A. D., Howard, R., De Ste Croix, M. B. A., Williams, C. A., et al. (2014). Long-term athletic development — part 1: a pathway for all youth. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 28(5), 1439-1450. Defines the LTAD framework anchored on peak height velocity and stage-appropriate training. 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000756