Corrective Exercise vs. “Shut Up and Lift”: Striking the Balance in Fitness Training
Naseeb Khan
6/25/20242 min read
In the fitness world, debates often emerge between different training philosophies. One such clash is between the proponents of corrective exercise and the advocates of the no-nonsense “shut up and lift” approach.
Both schools of thought have valid points, but extremes on either side can hinder progress or even lead to injury. So, what’s the best way to approach this? Let’s break it down.
Corrective Exercise: A Well-Meaning Misstep?
The rise of corrective exercise brought with it an era of detailed assessments to identify so-called “movement dysfunctions.” Trainers would prescribe specific exercises to “fix” these perceived issues, often sidelining clients from traditional strength training for weeks or even months.
While this approach was well-intentioned, it was built on shaky foundations. Here’s why:
No Universal Standards: There’s no universally accepted way to define or measure “movement dysfunction.” What might appear as “dysfunctional” is often just a natural variation in how people move.
Limited Predictive Power: Research has shown that movement patterns don’t reliably predict injury risk. What’s labeled as “improper” might not necessarily lead to harm.
In short, corrective exercises can have a place in training, but they shouldn’t be used to pathologize normal movement or delay meaningful strength work unnecessarily.
The “Shut Up and Lift” Mentality: Too Much, Too Soon?
On the other hand, the “shut up and lift” philosophy encourages skipping assessments altogether and putting clients under the bar from day one. While this approach champions efficiency, it can backfire:
No Individualization: Without understanding a client’s unique body mechanics, strengths, and limitations, trainers risk using setups that don’t work well for them.
Load Mismanagement: Pushing too much weight too soon can overwhelm a client physically and mentally, leading to poor form or injury.
This approach, while straightforward, often sacrifices safety and personalization for the sake of speed.
The Middle Ground: Individualized Assessments and Progressions
The best path lies between these two extremes. Here’s a balanced strategy:
Exercise-Specific Assessments: Instead of searching for “dysfunctions,” focus on finding the optimal starting point for key lifts. For example:
Test the depth and comfort of a bodyweight squat.
Evaluate grip and back positioning for deadlifts.
Progressive Loading: Introduce manageable weights and gradually increase intensity. Strength should be built, not tested, during early sessions.
Client Feedback: Encourage clients to communicate discomfort or difficulty, and adjust techniques accordingly.
Verdict
Blanket corrective exercises or reckless heavy lifting are both flawed approaches. The key is to respect each client’s unique needs while providing a safe, effective path to strength. Use targeted assessments to guide exercise selection and progression, but avoid overcomplicating or overanalyzing normal variations in movement.
Bottom Line: Start smart, progress safely, and remember that strength training is as much about adapting to each client as it is about building muscle and endurance. It’s not about fixing dysfunction—it’s about empowering movement.
