JFIFC    $ &%# #"(-90(*6+"#2D26;=@@@&0FKE>J9?@=C  =)#)==================================================" }!1AQa"q2#BR$3br %&'()*456789:CDEFGHIJSTUVWXYZcdefghijstuvwxyz w!1AQaq"2B #3Rbr $4%&'()*56789:CDEFGHIJSTUVWXYZcdefghijstuvwxyz ?؆HdBO@VOj÷ yct}1[҆X$(HRr{T+6dLI $#=֮E̤ɦ%;MMO3a\qox#CsYJvv5>h\ɦ w!8o)Fx2WoQC^gp~1\A32 *펣.,.e \tzaZȏNy+*v* lp \6Jq&q9z9nvR@3L&f ^񐄎| E{TT+(e=h&VqKٴcE3L@crlW$H=S998{Z.zb$VhF=5WZN m(^?/΅wU7j;E.`hDno?peomrAcb\˧yf)d9jC4:hYз@A55෹[U \b6VvֳZǧo-n$g,*H( V/$IR9.m GOzjTr4,e qzb/mO _sRq=$^)m͖X s0[U:wvm]Cc29Ęנw~ m[N{c\IiƷ!mpI>Rqx\aYc,ά3NqEPå,YH0吠= ̹J٥L3oc+cSýXAy/M9d3`pOaU r]vSM98n8SׁFF]q*׊ÔM tb1׮ F!Ǹt GWMV<*}Si8CtMj',6f{l)Is1[PxOԅqjo`zX2ͦAr<ٌ}qjI|`l 6wn S1ֹ&!ך!ۨ+Yojf¹ MkqBRA2#UZpʫ"*q䜟ή[a0K"ȶ};VIddt}\Al.9oIbۖ]a=qP['c"[ՆvO ;Jv'03]7Xn,IPN7lz+goFBߥu0zYmM+n> RRҜe'w7F Kβz,7읁ރhӜj49~n,467f;8kB$vf4H-1j0|SeZ osWg H;>qų1k'1y;``g&1L>S / Ypym&Hn`1`7&Lv7F})Zػd;o#AbzwuneYPۏOcT;ADU M ΨvY"<Nֺ/T-"JSy=im o#F7)u&4HtvX65i+*6nmfVr##nHB1>zS mvU@Nsqߥn[hy 5SA;+l8IF)N\l/-R<oѬP۴Hb21ؠn=sZ uDhΧ~Xq""[+Gwq%wJ]EkKgر -mǿ͜9܆I B^bFdža0Riny8R!4,i#wǵt%2nGLs¹%8Jbk[Dr_:)al#9J7 C:$V cMV#x$ksޓK̭fQ6@e)C\LײI ½IPB}ȸ ɎH;s$<3<4D+p#U<`+xL>'k"ikq5KpMO&VJ;r&_$,~nŠjREoR5P8e ̎;6?56 M1:QVHnd{uFX ՛i a]Y\ɏl1h9C.餈i;hݔ"z@g5qjs֤u+Kٶ3%x'wTS&vE0'<0ሥU+ b': 8iK/\5 *"gzUOL1y l⓸q:6*ܩ z[i֖ZEK;jF=;UoΓxS1H9]6RE30``*Oac B$f8=֡յL#`NЀ WiiqO+Ό2Ȟ=xGxOS3s?^igE@Yu{TLHUz|ǚ쮼wɘfNyWL;'ധhV&;N/${ի;ľ["I1wRCQH^&oV@b~J5n_]e_x:e2D%k:O>reϦI5c[L/Q3"P/lge4?A0ZD9Um5ζ㼵I緱", h溊 !$~ةB`a$[GS ,gV:MNs\2ȶHawCa yh_i1!Ar+yy!772f\F;ñgĚ"I1TW'=mxpq=*}Z#4E'-Sϴ ~hJc-|`o'Rm͓ Ҭ-H96{rv1 ۑ9Y[l%w޵3ih-%͌ @QƪYiK}q.|.N3ICdd>{ʓS7k 091+^He Ar:ҼTUL X8v^#olLv.yR=_ʋh'cyS$ tPIGYsR_6\[3M;b5;}jl#]|]iii% }+z? Ov9 ~4=B]{3(;]O]螭=khȲ1 s[!ѵ[EOH\.^FL(p$aE6 L+u4S91֊#òB9P{_s]$IEm? X&@!+dU nXBiTB"ϥ)ubHQd\ +Ղ3#ڣ, '%**OTXMC<[I+,$FCqRMAHg5x5撤wxG^tZ`w0\z Eu՗눖h1\#) 0.`Iit"; BTؓrǽolqKcsZw.842ѭW#Ѣ98]~2J9#?uzt1韥9%mjf79'OncSNd\ye1i#K( ۱ֳ?eӓLJn4n;/%G^a+[-O&~aiGq= ʇG,7Q-IPV^AiI㉰kaEG$ܪ `)L85㴺ё8QQ-68aQ6ʫkb_)N$VeHԓ#V =8ET zSQ@a%Tn(P*ƹОJjaE7=Z1P}{R~cEe+(݆ Pt{ğrP>b*%yGQErimarily to hormonal influences, not injury. Adressing this subject is Mel Siff, Ph.D., an exercise scientist whose doctorate thesis examined the biomechanics of soft tissues. <br> It has never been shown scientifically or clinically that the periodic imposition of large forces by weight training on the growing body causes damage to the epiphysial plates, says Siff, in his book Facts and Fallacies of Fitness.  It is extremely misleading to focus on the alleged risks of weight training on children when biomechanical research shows that simple daily activities such as running, jumping, striking or catching can impose far greater forces on the musculoskeletal system than very heavy weight training. <br>To illustrate his point, Siff compared the stress of squatting with running.  Suppose that one child runs a few hundred meters a day in some sporting or recreational activities. This can easily involve several thousand foot strikes in which the reaction force imposed on the body can easily exceed 4 times bodyweight with every stride. Now let another child do a typical average weight training session with 3-5 sets of squats (say, with 10 reps, 8, 6 and 4 reps), with bodyweight or more for the last set. That bodyweight is divided between the two legs, so that, even taking acceleration into account, the loading per leg is bodyweight or a little more, while the spine is subjected to the full load on the bar. In other words, the legs and spine in controlled squatting are exposed to significantly less force than in running and jumping. Normally, exercises such as squatting will be done no more than twice a week for a total of about 60 repetitions, while the running child will run every day and subject the body to those many thousands of impulsive foot strikes. <br> It does not require much scientific knowledge or computational genius to see that the cumulative loading imposed by simple running activities on the lower exremities and the spine is far greater than the cumulative load of two or three times a week of weight training. Does this now mean that we are justified in recommending that children not be allowed to run, jump, throw or catch because biomechanical research definitely shows that such activities can produce very large forces on manyparts of the growing body? <br>It should be obvious then that there is nothing wrong with running and other normal activities of childhood, and therefore no reason to disallow activities of lesser impact, such as carefully structured programs of weight training.<br>Siff also notes that bone density scans have proven that youngsters who do competitive weightlifting (i.e., the snatch and the clean and jerk) have higher bone densities than children who do not use weights, and that clinical research has not shown any correlatioas possible, even the doctors, but he made it. He was discharged on September 10th, just hours before gametime. Kevin walked with his teammates onto the field and participated in the coin toss. A few days later, Kevin told his parents that he would play again during the 1999 season. But his muscles had all been damaged from the acid in his system and he had lost 30 pounds. Kevin went to physical therapy with the goal of playing in the homecoming game which was still a month away. These goals came after the doctors, who to this day still cannot explain how he survived, told Kevin he would be in the hospital for the next six months. Playing football, they said, wasn't even an option. K