gym machine is the true underrated masterrace

I absolutely agree with you

>t. one who strictly uses machines

Enjoy collapsing under your own weight without those stabilizer muscles.

>>38556705
>by not doing squats you're not building the muscles required to do squats
why would I worry about "collapse under my own weight" (even though that's a retarded exaggeration) if all I do is lift with machines anyways? as mentioned, most of us came here because we wanted to look good but got memed into some retarded barbell Olympic training when the true answer has been in front of us all along

>>38556643
Because 90% of people that work out regularly DON'T need to target a single muscle group.
They also take up the majority of the gym because they only target one muscle group, whereas a bench, bar, and rack can target dozens.
Normies use machines because they're easier.

>>38556750
Do you think it's a coincidence that Parkinson's(shaking disease) has increased in the population when gym machines are more and more popular? People don't use free weights anymore and their bodies can't stabilize itself anymore (i.e. shaking).

>>38556782
Exactly.
>>38556750
While you're doing seated leg curls, leg press, and two more machines, someone is getting the same, if not better results but just squatting.

>>38556801
>Parkinson's is a direct result of people using machines in the gym
plz stop shitposting

>>38556801

>tfw basically a hypochondriac that worries everything about health
>this post

Why do you have to fuck me over like this?

I don't use them apart from the cable things and leg press, but there's nothing wrong with them alongside normal barbell or dumbbell movements imo, but I'll spergrage at my friends if I find out they use only machines

>>38556806
sure, compounds are more convenient and a better choice for athletes and whatever but for someone who's only there to gain size and some strength a split where machines are used to hit certain muscles in high volume from several angles are fine! I'm not saying it's the perfect way to lift, but it certainly isn't sent by the devil to steal out gains like many on fit seem to believe

File: 1467404059000.png (151KB, 449x442px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 449x442px

>>38556801
http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/parkinsons_disease/detail_parkinsons_disease.htm#3159_0
Jesus, you stupid fuck. Please tell me where on this page you see anything about stabilizer muscles? Its a neurological disorder due to the loss of neurons in the substantia nigra, not a muscular disorder, you fuck.

>>38556643
The answer is obliquely given in the intro to SS. Free weights are superior due to their full range of motion (stabilizers, muscle activation in multiple planes, etc.) but require training to ensure safety since the last few degrees of range of motion are an extreme mechanical disadvantage and snapping shit up is a liability or at the very least extremely bad PR. (Look at the reputation for CrossFit for injury, for example.)

While trainers exist, they command higher rates, look at the salaries of NPTI certified trainer for example. Machines have fixed ROM so less risk of dramatic end range injury, aka snap yo shit up, the kind of stuff that makes local news and causes business to drop. Never mind the fact that it leads to long range imbalances, because those aren't as dramatic as a QL or labrum tear. Moreover, the machines are simple enough that you can have an untrained kid coach the client through using it, which makes gyms easier to operate with cheaper cost.

When in doubt, most of what you see in society is the result of low cost technically acceptable satisficing

>>38556801
>Parkinson's(shaking disease) has increased in the population when gym machines are more and more popular
KEKIMUS MAXIMUS