Agreed. Grip strength is just a proxy that’s easy to measure and doesn’t require the subject to learn proper lifting techniques. The point certainly isn’t to train grip strength.
It would be more meaningful to know how well one could perform lifts that support functional movements, but the data collection would be very difficult and poor technique would introduce errors.
I like Peter Attia’s rationale for training functional lifts:
Deadlift or trap bar deadlift and farmer carry so you can carry your groceries from your car when you’re old.
Do squats so you can squat down and pick up a grandchild or great grandchild.
Overhead press so you can lift a carry on bag into the luggage bin above your seat and continue to travel.
For that matter, train for VO2 max so you can walk up a hill and keep up with the tour group.
John, Having received the “Digital Hand Dynamometer” and tried it out, I would say no, just testing (unless it was like 10 times a day) is unlikely to change your score. The instructions do tell you how to use the device to build those muscles (as an exerciser) but I won’t do that. As RapAdmin said, I’m just going to test once or twice a month and see if my score changes. The interesting thing (and it may be unlikely) is to see if any changes in diet and supplements (but not exercise) will change the score.
Turns out, it’s not grip strength per se that’s a magical measure—it’s just that it’s a solid proxy of your strength overall. And that is the metric that’s truly important, Dr. Peterson says.
This is fascinating, a causal connection between grip exercises and brain function.
"We were able to find that grip strength was directly predictive of brain health and more specifically your cognitive health. And this is the first time it’s been documented as likely causal. So it’s not just a fact of, well, people that were smarter had stronger hands. Like, well, how does that make sense? There’s no causal that way.
So the causal is this thing, the reason why, is because of the neurological component. So strength training is very specific and different than cardiovascular training because the neurological demand of strength training is very, very high. Which means you continue to keep neurological pathways activated and healthy.
You need those neurological pathways to make decisions and think and to keep your brain alive. So by challenging your ability to physically do something, that is either complex or complicated, or requires a lot of force, like a lot of strength. That requires neurological activation that requires those things to stay alive and healthy.
So by challenging your ability to physically do something, that is either complex or complicated, or requires a lot of force, like a lot of strength. That requires neurological activation that requires those things to stay alive and healthy.
[00:24:09] Jonathan Wolf: I’m totally shocked to hear this. I think you’re saying that, you know, we all have this idea that if you had to do the crossword puzzle or like, so some sort of complex task like that’s going to keep your brain working. But I think you’re saying something that doesn’t sound at all obvious to me, which is if you have to do something like lift something that’s really heavy that is also going to keep my brain having to think?
I have been training grip strength since bryan johnson shared blueprint and the devices he uses (simple hand squeezers). I do the hanging bar 1-2x a week and I do 3 sets of holding to 10 on the squeezers every other day. I am up to the 250lb squeezers. The only perceived benefit is the confidence when shaking another mans hand. I know I will likely have the better grip
Oh and i notice it when picking up heavy things and playing tennis.
I have some conceptual problems with grip strength as a marker of longevity.
First and foremost, it is a measure which is pretty sensible to fluctuations, which are mainly derived by the degree of specific training volume a person carries out with that specific function.
For example, I purchased one sturdy grip trainer and started with the lowest resistance, was able to grip harder and harder in a few months, reaching satisfactory levels of grip strength. I even had A trained colleague use my grip device to see if the resistance was actually a good one. It was, my trained colleague could barely squeeze the device once.
So, big question: Did I gain years of lifespan by increasing my grip strength thru exercise?
Then I developed tendonitis at the right forearm and could not use the device for a few months. I lost (temporarily, hopefully) that level strength.
So, the second big question: Did I lose years of lifespan by a decrease in my grip strength thru relative inactivity?
Is it possible to intervene on longevity in the same way we intervene on the accelerator pedal of our cars, by accelerations (stints of exercise) and deceleration (stints of inactivity)?
Of course, if we are lucky or smart enough we may keep training with no setbacks and ostensibly keep that higher level of longevity signal.
Takehome message: perhaps we need some home cleanup on the side of the conceptual model of grip strength and longevity
The scientist i quoted above would say that your grip strength training, because it was high intensity, lead to increased neural activation, boosting your brain health. That, in turn, might have a positive impact on your lifespan.
In addition your greater grip strength would improve your broader physical ability and that also might improve lifespan.
Much of the correlation between grip strength and lifespan however is likely to not be causal. What the split is between causal and noncausal correlation is probably anyone’s guess.
L_Hayes, OK, now the discussion starts to make more sense. Grip strength is taken not as a static marker of overall strength, but as a marker of resistance exercise done, something like an area under the curve of skeletal muscle activation, with ensuing signals beneficial to longevity and healthspan. Like the BDNF signal you cited, which slows down neuronal degeneration. Plus many other factors, some known, some others unknown.
If the above is true, then we will benefit more by exercising larger muscles in all body parts, not just the forearm and hand muscles. But again, grip strength is taken as a mere proxy of overall activity.
Practically speaking, we may throw our grip tools away and do some exercise that involves large volumes of muscle tissue.
Notwithstanding the above, I would keep the tool, a good grip is always a pleasure and a survival advantage, as previously discussed.
Grip strength is an easy functional test that pretty well everyone can get a number on. Bench pressing, for example, is much more related to training and probably requires a minimum of 20kg to measure.
Almost any exercise is good up to a point. Walking is probably more important than grip training, but using hands to grip things is a good exercise.
In the end a mixture of biomarkers will tell you what is going on.
It may be that you can calculate a biological age from a mixture of the average mitochondrial membrane potential of each cell averaged combined with the number of senescent cells issuing SASP.
However, although it would be good to have a direct tool to measure mitochondrial health (and cytosolic acetyl-CoA levels may provide this) for now I rely on standard biomarkers. Of those grip strength is IMO one of the less important, but useful ones.
it’s not grip strength per se that’s a magical measure—it’s just that it’s a solid proxy of your strength overall.
This is the key point from the article. Don’t use the grip strength handles to the exclusion of all other resistance training, lmao. Do squat / bench / deadlift / pullups, etc. and you’ll get great grip strength automatically.
All I can say is, I have lifted weights for a long time. Was my grip strength okay? sure. Does training it specifically make it better? yes. Does it make us live longer working on it in isolation? Who knows. It is pretty easy to train. So I chalk it up as a why not? I do the other stuff too.
Yes, i assume larger muscles need larger neural recruitment. So you’d be better off doing extreme squats than extreme dead hangs. But i have no evidence to support that
I understand that you 've used it as a figure of speech, but the adjective extreme should be eliminated from any workout after age of about 30, because it increases substantially the probability of injuries. Moderate is the adjective which governs when we are dealing with longevity
You’re right. I actually meant “to exhaustion” but even that has risks. I take the point about injury risk. The thesis of the podcaster ref’d is that using muscles to a high level of endurance or strength recruits high levels neural activation which has a positive brain benefit.
Probably the optimal is: to “use your muscles maximally within safe parameters”. But that’s probably impossible to determine.
There’s inevitably a trade off between injury/harm avoidance and the benefits of more extreme exercise.
I can’t grip properly with my right hand because of a joint issue which is slowly getting better since I started rapamycin. The pain on my left hand is almost completely gone and I’m much more confident with my left hand than right. I’ve always wondered if it was arthritis but the blood test for RA came back negative. It is probably psoriatic arthritis as I do get psoriasis.
