Introduction
Humans are often compared to smaller animals like ants, which can carry many times their body weight. Ants have been documented lifting up to 20× their own weight – if a human could do the same, it would equate to roughly 4,000 pounds (1,814 kg), about the weight of a small SUV . In reality, no human has ever verifiably hoisted anywhere near 20× their mass, and even 10× body weight remains an almost mythic benchmark. This report investigates whether a 10× bodyweight lift is physically or biomechanically possible, examining different categories of lifting: raw full-range lifts (like the deadlift), partial lifts (rack or block pulls), static support lifts (e.g. back-lifts, hip lifts), and assisted lifts (using straps, power suits, or mechanical leverage). We draw on sports science, biomechanics, and historical strength records to gauge human limits and consider if future training or technology could make 10× bodyweight lifts achievable. Key examples – from powerlifting records to old-time strongman feats (such as Paul Anderson’s legendary back-lift) – will illustrate the closest humans have come to this extraordinary strength-to-weight ratio.
Raw Full-Range Lifts (Deadlifts and Similar)
Full-range “raw” lifts involve moving a weight through a normal range of motion without significant mechanical assistance. The deadlift, which is lifting a barbell from the floor to standing lockout, is a prime example. Modern powerlifting and strongman competitions set the benchmark for raw strength. The heaviest standard deadlifts in history are just over 500 kg – for example, Eddie Hall’s 500 kg (1,102 lb) deadlift in 2016 and Hafthor Björnsson’s 501 kg in 2020 . However, those athletes weighed 180–200 kg themselves, meaning these world-record deadlifts were only about 2.5× their body weight, far from 10×. Even in the lowest weight classes of powerlifting, where lifters often exhibit the highest relative strength, top deadlifts reach about 4–5× body weight at most, not tenfold. For instance, American lifter Lamar Gant (who weighed only ~56–60 kg) became the first person to deadlift 5 times his own bodyweight, lifting 300 kg (661 lb) at 59.5 kg in 1985 . He later pulled 634 lb at 123 lb bodyweight (≈5.15×) in competition . This 5× bodyweight feat, aided by Gant’s exceptional leverages (long arms and short stature due to scoliosis), remains one of the highest raw relative lifts on record . By contrast, most elite powerlifters in heavier classes achieve around 2–3× bodyweight on the deadlift or squat, and no one has come close to 10× in any authenticated full-range lift.
Several factors explain why a 10× bodyweight raw lift is beyond current human capability. Muscle strength and cross-sectional area impose natural limits – even the strongest human muscle fibers can only produce so much force per unit area, and a person’s total muscle cross-section scales with body size (which leads to the square‐cube law issues discussed later). Additionally, full-range compound lifts are limited by the weakest link in the body’s chain (often grip strength, core stability, or a vulnerable joint angle). With maximal weights, lifters risk torn tendons or structural failure well before approaching ten times their mass. The all-time raw deadlift records (~500 kg) appear to be near the upper bound of human skeletal and muscular tolerance; in fact, sports scientists have noted that historically the “upper limits” of human deadlifting lie around 500–680 kg (1100–1500 lb) even for the largest athletes . Indeed, no amount of training has yet produced a 600+ kg deadlift, let alone something on the order of 800 kg (which an 80 kg person would need to lift for a 10× ratio).
It’s also telling to compare other full-range lifts: Olympic weightlifters – who excel at overhead lifts – max out around 2–3× bodyweight in their heaviest lift (the clean & jerk). Only a handful of athletes in history have clean-and-jerked triple their body weight (for example, a 56 kg lifter clean & jerking ~168 kg ≈ 3× BW) . Even that is considered an astonishing feat, underlining how far 10× is beyond known human performance. In summary, in the realm of raw lifting, the gulf between current human records and a 10× bodyweight lift is enormous. The best ever recorded (~5× in deadlift, ~3× in overhead lifts) are only half or less of that ratio, constrained by both muscular output and the risk of catastrophic injury.
Partial Range Lifts (Rack Pulls and Block Pulls)
One way to lift more weight is to reduce the range of motion. Partial lifts like rack pulls (deadlifts starting from an elevated height) or block pulls allow lifters to handle weights they couldn’t move from the floor. By eliminating the most biomechanically difficult portion (usually the bottom of a deadlift), the lifter can leverage more favorable joint angles. It’s well documented that raising the bar lets athletes lift more – for example, records show that at 18 inches off the ground (a common height in strongman silver dollar deadlift events), the max lifts jump to around 580 kg, higher than the ~501 kg standard deadlift record at 9-inch height . At an even higher partial (around knee height, ~27 inches), enormous weights up to 670 kg have been lifted in exhibition settings . These partials illustrate that range of motion is a major factor: the shorter the lift, the more weight can be supported or locked out.
In terms of body-weight multiples, partials have allowed some increase in the ratio, but still nowhere near 10×. In strongman competition, the “Silver Dollar Deadlift” (bar raised on boxes ~18 in/46 cm high) has seen lifters in a mid-weight class (~90 kg) pull over 450 kg, roughly 5× bodyweight . Heavier strongmen have pulled well over 500 kg in this partial style (Oleksii Novikov set a world record of 537.5 kg in 2020, though at ~135 kg bodyweight that’s ~4×). Notably, in 2022 a strongman in the ≤90 kg category, Tyson R. Delay, hoisted 457 kg from 18 inches – over 5.1× his BW . The highest pound-for-pound partial lifts have come from small athletes doing extreme rack pulls. In 2025, 75-kg lifter Eric Kim performed an above-the-knee rack pull with ≈486 kg, an incredible 6.5× bodyweight (at only ~30–35 cm range of motion) . According to available data, this ~6.5× ratio is the largest ever documented for a partial pull, edging out all other verified partial lifting feats .
These numbers show partials can indeed inch closer to the 10× dream, but even the most extreme partial (barely a knee-height movement) reached ~6.5×, still far short of 10×. It appears that even with reduced range, human musculature and connective tissue can only take so much. Above-knee rack pulls essentially turn the lift into a static hold/lockout using favorable leverage, yet the best of those are mid-6× BW. Going significantly beyond that would likely require not just stronger muscles but also far tougher bones and ligaments – the body might simply buckle under 10× load even if it’s only moved a few inches. (As a point of reference, engineers and biomechanists note that an average human femur can fracture under roughly 10× body weight load – which implies that supporting much more than 5–6× in any form becomes perilous as you approach structural limits.) In short, partial lifts let humans flirt with higher multiples by shortening the sticking points, but no partial lift on record has come anywhere near a full 10× bodyweight, and fundamental structural limits still intervene.
Static Support Lifts (Back-Lifts and Hip Lifts)
When it comes to sheer weight supported by a human frame, the old-time strongman “back lift” and related static lifts take center stage. In a classic back-lift, the person crouches under a sturdy platform loaded with mass (often people or objects) and then extends their legs/back slightly – lifting the weight just a few inches, often without fully standing up. This type of lift uses minimal range of motion and allows the absolute heaviest weights to be handled, essentially turning the human body into a support column. Historically, strongmen achieved mind-boggling numbers in this manner. Canadian strongman Louis Cyr in the late 19th century famously back-lifted 18 men on a platform, reportedly totaling about 4,300 lbs (1,950 kg) . Cyr weighed roughly 300–350 lbs (~140–160 kg) at the time, so this feat was on the order of 12× his body weight – a huge ratio, albeit in a partial/support lift.
The most legendary claim is that of Paul Anderson, an American weightlifter and strongman, who in 1957 purportedly performed a back lift of 6,270 lbs (2,844 kg) off trestles . Anderson’s bodyweight was around 360 lbs (163 kg) then, so if true this would be nearly 17.5× his body weight, far exceeding any other human lift. This feat was widely publicized – it even made it into the Guinness Book of World Records for a time . However, it remains somewhat controversial: the exact weight was never rigorously verified, and later investigations suggest Anderson may have lifted a bit less (possibly “only” ~5,000 lbs) due to discrepancies in the equipment and reporting . In fact, Guinness eventually removed the 6,270 lb claim in the late 1980s for lack of concrete evidence . Nonetheless, Anderson’s back-lift, even if somewhat exaggerated, clearly surpassed a 10× bodyweight support and demonstrated that with optimal leverage a human could theoretically raise multiple tons a short distance. Weightlifting historians note that Anderson’s goal was to break Cyr’s 4,300 lb record, and by all accounts he did lift well above Cyr’s mark – cementing himself (at least in folklore) as the man who supported the greatest weight ever by a human .
Modern strongman rarely contest the back-lift due to practical difficulties (safety and apparatus standardization) . However, similar hip lifts and harness lifts have been tested under controlled conditions. In a hip lift, the lifter wears a harness around the hips and attaches it to a fixed bar or platform, then straightens the legs slightly to hoist the weight a short distance. Because of the short range and ability to use large muscle groups (hips and legs) with back support, extremely large loads are possible. In all-round weightlifting competitions (USAWA), lifters routinely lift well over 1,000 lbs in the hip lift – in fact, the top performance recorded in official meets is 2,525 lbs (1,146 kg) by John Carter in 1994 . Even lighter classes (85 kg and up) often manage over 2,000 lbs in hip lifts . For perspective, if a 85 kg lifter raised ~1,000 kg, that’s nearly 12× bodyweight – illustrating that with training and an optimal setup, double-digit multiples are at least approached in static lifts. In strongman exhibitions, a double-tire (18 inch) deadlift or a harness lift sometimes approaches similar tonnage: for example, at a 2012 event, strongmen Nick Best and Mike Jenkins achieved a hip lift of 1,150 kg (2,535 lb), albeit both athletes were well over 300 lb bodyweight (so roughly 6–8× BW) . These are staggering weights, but again they involve only stabilizing or moving the load a matter of inches.
From a biomechanical standpoint, static lifts minimize the weakest link issues and allow near-limit of skeletal load-bearing. Still, even here, the prospect of a genuine 10× bodyweight support is rare and largely historical. If Paul Anderson’s 17× claim is taken at face value, it stands alone as an outlier, and even that was not a full-range lift but a specialized stunt. The fact that Anderson’s backlift was reportedly just a few hundred pounds shy of 3 tons highlights that with optimal leverage, the human body can support tremendous mass – but it’s essentially at the brink of structural failure. Indeed, as noted earlier, the average human thigh bone can break under about a 10× bodyweight load , and Anderson’s lift (if ~17×) would have required extraordinary bone and tendon robustness (Anderson was known for his tree-trunk legs and thick joints). In summary, static support lifts have come the closest to the 10× bodyweight threshold, with documented examples in the 6–12× range and anecdotal claims beyond that. These feats rely on minimal motion and maximal leverage, pushing human skeletal strength to its limits – and possibly beyond what can be verified. They demonstrate that in very constrained conditions 10× bodyweight is barely conceivable, though not proven in a rigorously measured sense.
Assisted Lifts (Straps, Suits, and Mechanical Advantages)
Human strength outputs can be boosted by various forms of assistance or technology. In strongman and powerlifting, common aids include lifting straps (which secure the hands to the bar, eliminating grip as a limiting factor) and supportive suits or wraps (which store elastic energy and stabilize the body). These tools don’t increase muscle strength per se, but they allow lifters to handle more weight than they could “raw.” For example, in strongman deadlift events, almost all athletes use straps and deadlift suits. This is one reason strongman deadlift records (500+ kg) slightly exceed raw powerlifting records – the straps prevent grip failure and suits add rebound out of the bottom. In powerlifting, the use of multi-ply squat suits and bench shirts has enabled enormously higher numbers than raw lifts, though still not anywhere near 10× bodyweight in a single lift. An equipped (multi-ply) powerlifter might squat 1000 lbs at 250 lb BW (~4×) or bench press 800 lbs at 200 lb BW (~4×) thanks to specialized gear – huge absolute weights, but the bodyweight multiples remain in the single digits. No lifter has put up 10× bodyweight even with the most extreme powerlifting equipment; the mechanical assist of suits is significant (often adding 20–30% to a lift), but it’s not a miraculous multiplier that would double or triple what a human can lift . The lifter’s own muscles and skeleton still bear the strain, and as weights climb, risk of injury (or simply not being able to lock out) stops progress well before 10×.
Beyond personal equipment, one can use mechanical advantage devices to lift more weight – essentially changing the physics of the lift. Pulleys, levers, and hydraulics can let a human move a much larger effective load by trading distance for force. In practical terms, this is seen in events like the strongman car deadlift. Athletes appear to lift a car (total mass perhaps 1,000–1,500 kg), but in reality they are only lifting one end of the car, and often via a lever frame attached to the axle. The leverage means only a fraction of the car’s weight is felt at the handles . One analysis of the car deadlift showed that with a typical setup, a “800 kg car” might translate to roughly 300 kg of force needed at the lifter’s hands due to the lever arm ratios . Thus, a strongman can say they “lifted a car” (far more than 10× their bodyweight in total object mass) when the actual load on their body was manageable. This highlights a key point: with clever mechanics, humans can move astounding weights, but the achievement is in the engineering as much as the person. Another example is using a pulley system – with enough rope and pulleys, a single person can hoist a car or a great weight slowly, because the system multiplies their input force at the cost of speed or distance. Such systems technically allow a human to “lift” many times their weight, but they fall outside the spirit of pure human strength. The original question is likely focused on direct human force, so while mechanical aids can achieve 10× or more, they underscore the difference between raw strength and assisted lifting.
It’s worth noting chemical assistance as well: performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) like anabolic steroids can significantly increase muscle mass and strength. Modern strength sports have been greatly affected by PED use – for instance, many world-record lifts were likely achieved by athletes using steroids or other drugs (powerlifting and strongman have lax testing compared to Olympics). Lifting totals on the order of 8–10× bodyweight (combined across three powerlifts) have been observed in drug-tested vs non-tested federations . For example, an elite 75 kg powerlifter might total ~750 kg (squat+bench+deadlift) with assistance of equipment and PEDs, reaching 10× bodyweight across three lifts – a level likely unattainable for a drug-free lifter . However, even with rampant doping, no single lift has hit 10×. PEDs primarily enable an athlete to approach their genetic potential (or slightly beyond it) by increasing muscle size and recovery, but they don’t rewrite the laws of biomechanics. There is growing interest in pushing these limits further – for instance, the proposed “Enhanced Games” plan to allow unlimited doping in sports to see how far human performance can go . It’s conceivable that future super-heavyweight strongmen on full PED regimens might edge the records a bit higher (maybe someone deadlifts 550–600 kg one day). Yet, given current knowledge, even extreme pharmaceutical enhancement is unlikely to bridge the massive gap to 10× bodyweight on a standard lift. Ultimately, whether using support gear, straps, or drugs, the human body itself (muscles, tendons, bones) remains the limiting factor – and those limits fall well below the fantastical 10× mark for any dynamic lift.
Scientific and Biomechanical Limits
From a scientific perspective, the difficulty of a 10× bodyweight lift can be understood through biomechanics and scaling laws. A crucial concept is the square–cube law, which states that as an animal (or muscle) grows larger, its volume (and mass) increases faster than its cross-sectional area (and strength). Small creatures like insects have incredible relative strength partly because of this scaling – their muscles and exoskeletons operate on a tiny scale where cross-sectional area is high relative to body mass. As size increases, relative strength diminishes. For example, an elephant can lift only a small fraction of its weight, whereas an ant can lift dozens of times its weight . Humans are somewhere in between. Our musculoskeletal structure is not built to replicate the ant’s feat; as noted earlier, a human trying to lift even 10× their weight would put enormous stress on bones and tendons. In fact, theoretical analysis suggests human long bones (like the femur) would fail around a 10× bodyweight load – essentially meaning our skeleton is the bottleneck. This is one reason we don’t see 60-kg people deadlifting 600 kg; even if the muscle were strong enough, the connective tissues and bones would likely catastrophically give out.
Additionally, the force generation capacity of muscle has an upper bound. Studies of muscle physiology show that maximal voluntary strength correlates with muscle cross-sectional area. There is roughly a linear relationship – bigger muscles produce more force – but there’s a limit to how much force per unit area muscle fibers can generate (on the order of 30–40 N/cm^2 of muscle cross-section for unassisted human muscle). Even with exceptional genetics and training, a human’s total muscle cross-section (especially in prime movers like quadriceps, glutes, back) will cap the force output. To lift 10× one’s weight, the required muscle force and power would be enormous. For instance, an 80 kg person lifting 800 kg in a deadlift would likely need not only vastly more muscle mass (which would in turn raise their own bodyweight, making the ratio hard to maintain) but also tendons that could handle perhaps 8,000+ newtons of force in a single instant. Human tendons and ligaments, while very strong (they routinely handle 5–7× bodyweight in activities like jumping or sprinting), become injury-prone as you approach these extreme loads. Real-world evidence of this is seen in strength sports – world-class powerlifters and strongmen sometimes suffer tendon ruptures or joint failures at far lower multiples. These injuries are an indication that biological tissues have safety limits; going to 10× might simply exceed the safe margin by a wide gap.
Another consideration is neural and metabolic limits. Lifting maximal loads requires not just strong muscles but also tremendous neural drive (the nervous system activating nearly all motor units) and stability. As weights approach the upper human threshold (say 3–5× BW), many lifters struggle with maintaining form – slight technique breakdown can make a lift impossible or dangerous. At something like 10×, even if muscles could theoretically produce the force, controlling the weight and balancing it would be a Herculean task. Any imbalance could cause a collapse or a fatal injury. The concept of “hysterical strength”, where adrenaline in life-or-death situations lets an ordinary person perform extraordinary lifts (e.g., briefly lifting part of a car off a pinned child), is often cited to suggest humans have untapped reserves. However, documented cases of so-called hysterical strength still involve relatively modest multiples (perhaps lifting a portion of a 1.5-ton car by a 70 kg person – which might be the equivalent of a 2–3× BW partial lift at most) . We have no documented evidence of anyone suddenly exhibiting the ability to lift 10× their weight via adrenaline – the body’s structural constraints remain in place no matter the hormonal surge.
In summary, exercise science suggests multiple concurrent limits – muscular, skeletal, and neural – that make a 10× bodyweight lift implausible with our current biology. The best “relative strength” performances occur in smaller individuals (who benefit from scaling) and in lifts that reduce strain (partial/static lifts), yet even those fall well short of 10×. The human body can only be so strong relative to its size before something gives. This does not mean improvements are impossible – records do inch upward over time – but they are asymptotically approaching a ceiling dictated by human anatomy. As one sports science analysis put it, there likely is a hard limit around 500–600 kg for standard human deadlifts with existing body sizes . Pushing far beyond that (like to 800 kg) would require fundamentally altering the equation – either by changing the human or using external help.
Future Prospects: Could 10× Ever Be Achieved?
Given the above, can we imagine a scenario where 10× bodyweight lifts become reality? Barring a fundamental change in human physiology, it appears out of reach with natural means. However, future developments might expand the boundaries somewhat. One avenue is advancements in training and nutrition – but realistically, modern training methods already maximize muscle hypertrophy and neural efficiency for strength (today’s champions are much closer to the human limit than past generations, thanks in part to scientific training). Incremental gains will continue (we may see a 600 kg deadlift or a 3× bodyweight clean & jerk eventually), but nothing suggests an impending doubling of strength potential.
Pharmacological or genetic enhancement is another route. We already have anabolic steroids, growth hormone, etc., which have pushed strength athletes beyond what was once thought possible. The concept of gene editing – for example, knocking out the myostatin gene that limits muscle growth – could create individuals with far greater muscle mass. There are animal precedents (mice or cattle with myostatin mutations have significantly more muscle mass). A human with such a trait (either naturally or via gene therapy) might carry significantly more muscle without a proportional weight increase, potentially improving strength-to-weight. However, that person’s tendons and bones would also need to adapt; otherwise, the extra muscle would snap the connective tissue when exerting max force. It’s an open question how far one could push that. The theoretical “superhuman” might combine large muscle cross-section, extremely robust connective tissues, and perhaps some structural support (maybe enhanced by prosthetics or implants). Short of science-fiction bioengineering, though, these remain speculative. Even the most doped, genetically gifted strongman would likely still be constrained by basic physics of size – a point of diminishing returns would hit long before 10×.
On the technological side, exoskeletons and powered suits could allow a human operator to lift 10× or more by amplifying their strength. This is essentially a mechanical solution: for example, robotic exoskeletons (like those being developed for military or rescue use) can let a person carry hundreds of kilograms with relative ease. In such a case, it’s not the person’s muscles doing the work, but the machine – the human provides balance and guidance. While fascinating, this drifts away from the spirit of pure human strength achievements. If the question is interpreted as “can a human body lift 10× its weight under its own power,” exoskeletons wouldn’t count as fulfilling that, since they bypass human limitations. They do show that with engineering, the effective lifting capacity can be hugely increased (much like using pulleys or levers as discussed).
Finally, we should consider if maybe smaller humans could ever do it. The square-cube law tells us smaller athletes have higher relative strength, which is why the highest bodyweight multiples in lifting are found in lighter weight classes. If one were to find an extraordinarily strong small person – say a 50 kg lifter with world-class abilities – could they deadlift 500 kg? The best 52 kg class powerlifters today deadlift around 3–4× bodyweight (200 kg+). Perhaps an outlier could hit 5× or even 6× at that size in the future, but 10× (500 kg at 50 kg) seems like pure fantasy with today’s understanding. It’s nearly an order of magnitude above current records. No precedent exists for such a leap in human performance.
In conclusion, achieving a true 10× bodyweight lift (especially a full-range lift like a deadlift or squat) appears beyond the limits of human biology as we know it. The closest instances have come from exploiting physics (partial/static lifts or mechanical advantage) or from unique individuals in history whose feats bordered on legend. Sports science and biomechanics explain why – our muscles, skeleton and size scaling impose ceilings well below that mark. Future enhancements, whether pharmacological, genetic, or mechanical, could raise strength levels somewhat, but unless we fundamentally redesign humans or the rules, 10× is not on the immediate horizon. It remains a theoretical extreme, useful as a thought experiment about human potential. In the words of experts, humans have likely evolved with just enough strength to survive, not to perform ant-like miracles. For now, feats in the range of 3–5× bodyweight will continue to astonish us, and the 10× bodyweight lift will live on as a mythical benchmark – one that highlights the extraordinary gap between human strength and the realm of impossibility.
Sources and References
- BarBend – Lamar Gant’s 5× Bodyweight Deadlift , confirming the first-ever 5× BW deadlift (634 lbs at 123 lbs).
- Guinness World Records / SI – Lamar Gant’s official 5× bodyweight lift (299.5 kg at 59.5 kg) .
- BarBend – Can We Determine the Limit of Human Strength? (2025) , on deadlift records at various heights (9”, 18”, 27”) and equipment vs raw lifting.
- Eric Kim – Analysis of partial deadlift records , showing a 6.5× BW above-knee pull and other high relative partials (5×+ in silver dollar deadlifts).
- Wikipedia – Square-cube law and biomechanical scaling , noting a human femur can break around a 10× bodyweight load.
- BarBend – Remembering the Back Lift , detailing historic back-lift figures: Louis Cyr’s ~4,300 lb and Paul Anderson’s claimed 6,270 lb (with context on credibility).
- Wikipedia – Paul Anderson entry , noting the 6,270 lb back-lift claim and its removal from records due to verification issues.
- USAWA – The Hip Lift article , citing a 2,525 lb official hip lift and commonplace “1-ton” lifts in competition.
- StartingStrongman – Science of the Car Deadlift , explaining how lever setups mean only a fraction of a car’s weight is actually lifted.
- Muscle & Strength – Real World Strength Standards , anecdotal mention that some PED-using powerlifters have totaled 10× BW across three lifts (illustrating drug influence on strength).
- BarBend – The Limit of Human Strength , discussing the historical upper range of human deadlift (1100–1500 lbs) and recent record breakers.
- WIRED – Why Humans Can’t Lift as Much as Ants , comparing 20× BW ant strength to hypothetical human ability (~4,000 lb lift) for context on scaling differences.