urban pump

The above clip is an interview with Walter Bortz, Associate Professor of Medicne at Stanford. He comes clean about how the health care industry really operates. He says that 95% of the cancer out there is preventable simply by liefstyle choice, and that the health care industry is more about profits than actually healing people (I know, big surprise). 

I have suspected that for some time. The main reason I did was because with all of the knowledge we have today, the best treatment they have for fighting cancer is chemo therapy. In ther words, blasting the body with radiation that kills healthy cells to get the bad cells? Come on. They have to do better than that.

Truth be told, a good diet and moving the body along with decreasing stress is the best way to keep the body healthy. Let's not complicate this. Let's just do it...

Heed this doctor's advice. He knows that of what he speaks.

Damn! I love hamburgers. We make it once a week when we have the kids. We also have meatloaf once a week too. I just learned of a trick the food industry uses to make hamburger go farther. When all the beef is cut away, there is a mixture sinew, ligaments, and fascial tissue with some meat attached. What the food producers do with this is put it in a centrifugal device to seperate the the bits from the meat, then they pour ammonia and water into the meat to clean out the bacteria and pathogens. Finally they grind it up and mix it in with hamburger. It is called "pink slime". By USDA standards, they can mix up to 15% of this stuff to hamburger. It is a filler that adds more bulk to the hamburger. Lovely, isn't it? Below is a youtube clip describing the process.

What can you do? The only thing the guy in the video suggests you can do is have the butcher grind the beef in front of you. It's the only way to be sure. Personally, after seeing the video, it is that important to us. From now on that is what we will do. How about you?

I have a client that was diagnosed with restless leg syndrome before he started working with me. What is restless leg syndrome? WebMd explains:

 Restless legs syndrome (RLS) is a disorder of the part of the nervous system that affects the legs and causes an urge to move them. Because it usually interferes with sleep, it also is considered a sleep disorder.

People with restless legs syndrome have uncomfortable sensations in their legs (and sometimes arms or other parts of the body) and an irresistible urge to move their legs to relieve the sensations. The sensations are difficult to describe: they are an uncomfortable, "itchy," "pins and needles," or "creepy crawly" feeling in the legs. The sensations are usually worse at rest, especially when lying or sitting. The sensations can lead to sleep deprivation and stress.

I know what this is like. I do not have restless leg syndrome, but if I go on vacation and/or take a long plane ride and do not move very much, my legs start bothering me this way. They get tight and painful. It's not only me, but Sharon has the same problem too. Stretching helps a little bit, but the only thing that gives us complete relief is intense muscular contractions such as strength training. If we do not have access to a gym, we would do sprints. An hour later we would be fine again.

Anyway, back to my client. Since he started working with me, his restless leg syndrome issues went away too. He also added vitamin D to his diet, for his doctor said it would help his restless leg syndrome along with exercise. In my client's case, both of these remedies worked. He is no longer in pain.   

This has me wondering; could the phenomena of restless leg syndrome have more to do with simply being sedentary? Could it also be that when people exercise, often times they do not put enough intensity into their exercise program to prevent it?

This much I do know...when I do intense training, I feel a deep release in my muscles that I do not get any other way. It may be stress release, it may be a depletion of the glycogen stores. It most likely is both, or a combination of other factors as well. All I know is that my muscles feel better and more relaxed if I train hard than if I don't.

If you have restless leg syndrome and nothing else you have tried brings relief, try a semi-hard leg exercise program. See if it helps.

Good News! You do not have to see a decline in your aerobic capacity as you age. A study published in The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research (I do not know the exact article. I got the information from The New York Times). For the study, the researchers recruited 51 competitive runners aged 18 to 77. Each trained regularly and placed very high in his or her age group in a 5 or 10 kilometer road race. The result? The runners 60 and older were just as physiologically economical with their aerobic capacity as the younger runners, even those in their 20s and 30s.

Wow! I like hearing this. Up until now, all the studies showed a decline in oxygen uptake. This study refutes that. It really shows that exercise can stave off ageing. This can also be demonstrated by the times set by older runners between 1980 and 2009. The older runners in the latter group saw a big decrease in running times from the earlier older competiters. Among men the drop was more than seven minutes, while for women it was more than 16 minutes. This, in and of itself, is amazing.

However, all is not roses. Another study showed vulnerabilities of the older runners. They were much more prone to injuries with Achilles tendons, hamstrings, and calf muscles. Other shortcomings were noticed with weaker upper body strength and loss of flexibility in the lower extremeties.

This does not surprise me. The assumption by the researchers about the increase in injuries is that the older runners need more time to repair than younger runners, and that they don't take the time to do it. I think it is a little more than that. Runners tend to overtrain for a long time. When you are younger you can do that and not feel the damage, but the damage happens none the less. It is chronic wear and tear that adds up. The body starts breaking down when the runners are older.

As a trainer who deeply understands the consequences of overtraining, here is what I would recommend: Cut back training volume by 25%. Train harder when you do. Add a strength training program for the whole body to work the fast twitch fibers. These muscle fibers improve support for the joints and connective tissues so necessary for injury protection. Runners in particular need a flexibility program for the lower extremity. The study also showed excess tightness there.

These recommendations are not only for the older runners. I would encourage younger runners to follow this advice as well. It would set a better foundation for a long, healthy career. It is my belief that by following this advice, the new generation of runners would break the running times of the older runners now when they get older...and be more injury free.

Here are some stats I recerived from a friend of mine:

Where do you typically go for physical exercise?

• Gym/ Fitness center                             15%
• Outdoor activities                                13%
• Work out of my home                          28%
• Work out at another persons home       0%
• Work out at work                                 3%
• Other                                                 5%
• Don't exercise regularly                        35%

Now my stats:

When I first started training 20 years ago:

• People in the U.S. over weight?                  40%
• People in the U.S. obese?                          15%

And Now?

• Overweight                                              60% 
• Obese                                                     30%

Something to think about.      

Replacing a hip means that your quality of life will be permantly altered. Even though you would be able to walk and do light exercise, you will not be able to do many activities that you once could do. With that in mind, it makes much more sense to take steps to prevent the need for hip replacement than to have to deal with it at some later point in time. What are the main causes?

• Osteoarthritis. This is age and "wear and tear" related. In other words, if you abused your hip joints from too much exercise, the wrong type of stretching, a lot of contact sports, or just plain neglect, you will have hip problems when you get older.
• Rheumatiod arthritis. This is an autoimmune disease. The synovial membrame becomes inflammed and thicken.
• Post traumatic arthritis. This happens from an acute injury to the hip. It can also fall under the category of osteoarthritis.
• Avascular necrosis. An injury to the hip that limits the blood flow to the femoral head.
• Childhood hip disease. Some infants are born with hip problems.

From my experience as a trainer, there are two main sources that I personally witnessed. One, ironically, was from yoga. I trained two young yoga instructors that complained of hip pain (one in her 20's and the other in her 30's). At the time I had a conversation with a physical therapist that delt specifically with overstretched ligaments, and she said the number one cause of this type of injury that she saw was from yoga. Needless to say she was not too big a fan of yoga. The other source I was familiar with was a type of acute injury, usually football or some kind of contact sport related incident.   

Today a doctor/client of ours and I got into the discussion about this very topic. He shared yet another eye opening perspective. He said the number one cause was avascular necrosis. Lack of blood flow to the femoral head, leading to hip degeneration. He said this of the people needing hip replacement: if most people would lose weight and stop smoking, it would eliminate half of the hip replacement surgeries happening today.

My advice? Exercise (preferably a good strength taining program), maintain a healthy body weight, stop smoking, and don't overwork your joints (this does not mean low intensity exercise. It means proper exercise with plenty of rest and recovery between exercise bouts). Following this advice will go a long way to a high quality of life when you are older. 

Here is the source about the main causes of hip pain. OrthoInfo. 

One of our clients showed us a diet given to her from a trainer of in her past. She had success when she stuck to it, and wondered if there was anything special about the diet that made fat loss easier. Below is an example from one day.

Breakfast:

• 2 egg whites and one whole egg microwaved.
• 4 oz Chicken or 2 slices Turkey Bacon.
• One glass of juice.
• Coffee, black.
• 1 piece of whole wheat toast.

Snack:

• One peach or
• Protein bar or
• One can water packed tuna or
• Protein shake or
• 10 12 almonds.

Lunch:

• 1 can of tuna in water.
• Salad with balsamic vinegar (nothing else!).
• One western fruit

Snack:

• Same as above.

Dinner:

• 5 oz. chicken.
• One western fruit.
• Salad with vinegar only.

Close examination of the diet shows that it is mainly a low calorie, high nutrient diet. In other words, you do not see any items that are calorie dense, and if you do, the diet limits how much you have. For example, the almonds are calorie dense, but this diet allows only 10 to 12. You do not see any alcohol, pastries, deserts, dressings, or heavy sauces in the diet.

Does this diet have "fat burning" properties? No. It is simply a diet that makes one take in less calories than he or she is burning off on a daily basis. That is what makes it fat burning.

The diet is basically sound, for you can stick to it and maintain good health. The problem arises when one wants to eat other items. This diet can get boring after a while. What do you do then? Most people simply go off the diet and return to their old habits. It is too strict. I would rather see our clients use portion size control and learn to eat foods they enjoy but limit those food choices so that they can make the diet more sustainable. For example, I think one or two drinks a week is fine. You can maintain a lean body and enjoy your drinks. If, on the other hand you have one or two drinks a day, you would not. Same with sweets or any other calorie dense, good tasting foods. A little every now and then is fine. A little every day is not. 

Realize this: there is nothing special about any one diet over another. All of them simply work on a calorie reduction basis (whether they outright claim it or not). Keep in mind that to lose body fat, you must take in less than you burn. Set a diet plan that you can stick to utilizing that insight, and do it.

CrossFit is the latest rage in fitness. Before that was the p90x program, and before that we had the Pilattes craze. Trends do come and go, but in most of these programs there are kernels of exercise truth that if applied over a long time can have beneficial results. Crossfit is no different. It has some good...and some bad ideas. I will examine the basic premise of CrossFit here and compare it with the HYSTRENGTH(sm) training I devised over the last 20 years. Here are the basic componenets of CrossFit:

• Short and intense workouts. You work hard and you are done in 15 to 25 minutes.
• Whole body training. No split routines.
• The workout includes Olympic style lifting, powerlifting, calisthenics, gymnastics, sprints, plyometrics and other such exercises.
• The routine changes daily.
• You train 3 days a week.

You are taught the lifts in the first one or 2 wourkouts and then you are put into a class. You compete with yourself and others in the group. The exercises are performed in a sequence over and over for 15 minutes, and you try to complete as many as you can. They have a "workout of the day", which includes a set of 3 to 4 exercises with a set amount of weight and reps to be attained on every cycle. Here is an example: 12 deep push ups, followed by 9 deadlifts with 225 pounds, and 15 jumps onto a 24 inch box. That's it. The trainees are supposed to do that as many times as they can for 15 minutes.   

Now here are the basic components of the HYSTRENGTH(sm) training program.

• Short and intense workouts. No longer than 30 minutes.
• Whole body training. No split routines.
• The HYSTRENGTH(sm) training program uses basic lifts such as leg presses, squats, dumbbell presses (on a ball), chins, pulldowns, etc. combined with functional exercises such as cable press lunge, cable squat rows, squat overhead presses, etc.; along with core exercises.
• New routines every workout.
• Training is done 3 days a week.

We start our clients with loads of about 50% of what I call the "working weight", meaning the amount of weight that challenges the body to change. Over time we increase the load to the point where they will struggle to finish 8 to 10 reps. We also pace the client more slowly at first to acclimate his/her body and mind to the workloads. If the client is preparing for sport, we add plyometric and agility training to the program, otherwise we keep it as described above.     

Here is my assessment of CrossFit. I like to intensity and short duration of the program. It fits in with what I know about how the body reponds on a hormonal level (testerosterone is running full steam for about 40 to 50 minutes of intense exercise, then cortisol kicks in after that). I also like that they combine lifts with more functional exercises, and I like that they train the whole body. Training 3 days a week is good too. It takes time after a hard workout for the body to fully recover. One other aspect that I like is that they change the program every time. This keeps the mind fresh. On those points, CrossFit is similar to the HYSTRENGTH(sm) training program. Now here is where we part in ideology:

• I still prefer to focus more in overall strength. The stronger one gets, the more tone, definition, shape, and stability one gets.
• The Olympic lifts take a lot of mastery and skill to perform. I would not have a new client do those lifts to the degree that CrossFit has their new clients do. Running through a series of exercises over and over again leads to fatigue and a breakdown of form. This can (and has) lead to injury *.       
• The HYSTRENGTH(sm) training program has more focus on the core. I have to give kudos to Pilattes for stressing the importance of that (atlhough I learned about core training from Paul Chek, who I think has done a wonderful job of bringing core training to the forefront of personal training).

Overall, I like CrossFit. I think it is a good program to do if you are in shape. I would not recommend it until you master the basic lifts (such as squats and deadlifts). However, I feel that the HYSTRENGTH(sm) training program is more complete due the core and functional exercises it utilizes, and is less prone to injury.   

* For example, Rhambdomyolysis is associated with CrossFit. Rhambdomyolysis occurs when muscle are worked so hard that the fibers break down, releasing protein myoglobin into the bloodstream (a catabolic state...we want an anabolic state from exercise). We also were told from a client of ours who had 3 out of 5 of her friends injured doing CrossFit. Our 2 clients that knew them did not. These were serious injuries: a rotator cuff tear and a badly sprained lower back.    

I do not use weight lifting belts when I do squats. I even have 2 degenerative disks in my lower back. I also do not have my clients use weight lifting belts. Why? My theory is that when you use a belt, the prime movers (quads, glutes, hamstrings) will get stronger and the stabilizer muscles (lower back and core) will not. This leads to muscle imbalances and potential injury. A study from Germany confirms it. Powerlifters who wear weight lifting belts had higher injury rates than those that did not. The researcher's conclusion? "Weightlifting belts can hide core weakness and provide a false sense of security if you feel pain". In other words, the lifters felt more secure and trained through bad pain more so with belts than without. I think it is even more than that. The imbalance created between the prime movers and stabilizers will manifest in daily living. If you have to shovel a side walk or lift heavy boxes, for example, you can get injured because the back and core muscles are not in step wiith the legs.    

My advice is this: Start with light weights, develop good form, do not use belts, increase weights gradually, and never do one rep max lifts (you do not need them). 

Our new clients always have high enthusiasm. They want to start training hard and do more exercise than they really need. They also want to cut their calories way back to see instant fat loss. I always have to temper their enthusiasm with practical, long term goals. Now there is a study that confirms what I say, mainly that if you cut calories too much, you cannot gain strength and reshape your body as effectively. The study was from Norway. Here is the gist of what it said:

It compared 2 groups of lifters-one that cut their calories enough to lose 2 pounds a week, and the other enough to lose 1 pound a week. The result was that the group that cut calories back a little bit did take longer (3 weeks) to lose 9 pounds, but they gained 2 pounds of muscle where the group that cut a lot of calories did not gain any muscle. The recommendation was to cut calories by no more than 500 a day.

I absolutely agree! This is prudent advice. Over the long run, gaining muscle is more important than short term fat loss. With more muscle, you increase your basal metabolic rate. This factor alone will help you maintain lower body fat levels for life. Besides, cutting calories that severely is hard to stick to over the long haul as well. You will fall off the wagon. I guarantee that!         

The medical community has for some time now been claiming that high cholesterol is a precursor to heart disease. The drug companies have created statins to reduce cholesterol as a prevention, but is it true? What does choleterol do anyway? Plenty, as I found out from a lecture by Bonnie Davis, D.C. Some of cholesterol's functions are:

• As a building block for hormones
• Is the most common molecule in the brain
• An integral component of all cell membranes
• It is necessary for most of the body's functions

As a matter of fact, with people that take statins, there is a 50% increase in sexual disfunction in men, and decrased cognitive function for both men and women. On top of all of this, a close examination of the studies show no improvement in heart disease prevention. Truth is, for all the United States spend on medicine and disease prevention, we fare no better than many other countries that spend far less. Why is that? Studies are done through big drug companies and they influence government policies.  

The longer I have been the fitness business, the more I find out about true health and fitness as compared to what doctors and writers say is health fitness. This is an example. View all recommendations with sceptiscm. Seek alternative therapies before you decide what you need to do.    

Kat is now married. She did the "bridal Package" to get in shape for the wedding. We just got the professional photos from her. She looks amazing! 

Check her out here. Scroll down to case study 5. Her back looks awesome! A very nice hour glass figure.

The biggest drug free bodybuilders weighed at best 190 pounds around 10% body fat and arms just under 17 inches. Most guys were smaller.

This is consistent with what I found. I train hard. Very hard. I have been doing it for 20 years. My weight at my peak is around 182 pounds, about 10% body fat (any lower and I lose some strength), with 16 1/4 inch arms. I look good, but not body builder good. Same with my consistent clients. In all my years, I only trained one really big, strong guy. He weighed over 200 pounds when I started working with him. Under my program, he got bigger and stronger faster than most guys can. He had good, physical talent...a lot of fast twitch fibers. This is rarer than you would think.

The take home message? Do the best you can with what you got. Odds are you will not get a big physique, but you will get much stronger with a more aesthetically pleasing look. That I guarantee you!

I have been working with a client for about 2 months now who is in her 60's. She has never done a consistent strength training program until now (plenty of yoga and aerobics). She just did over 200 pounds on the leg press (she never imagined that she would be doing that!), but most importantly, she has lost a dress size. She is shocked! She hasn't been able to lose weight in years. Now she is. She also said she has better endurance and her daily tasks are much easier...and she did this without changing her diet. This means it was all due to the exercise program. To her, I say, keep going!. You are doing very well! When all is said and done, she will be doing a leg press with at least 360 pounds...maybe more! 

I just statred working with a client with Fibromyalgia. That is a condition whereby the person has chronic pain throughout the body. Very sensitive to touch. We started with very light weights. I did not want the symptoms to flare up. She responded positively. I slowly added more weight and increased overall intensity for a month now. I asked her the last workout how her Fibromyalgia is feeling. She says she hardly notices it at all. I beleive that in 2 to 3 months, it will be completely gone. Why? Because the symptoms sound like a form of chronic tension in the muscles. It is usually from chronic stress of some type (worry, relationship issues, etc.) that adds up. After a period of time, the muscles just start to hurt because they don't relax. Most people think that strength training (because of the stress placed on muscles) will aggravate the problem. Not so. I noticed over the years with my own training program that intense muscular contractions actually release tension in the muscles. I don't know why, I just know it happens. I also think it works better than massage. It is working with my client now. Soon she will be pain free. Good going...

I started with a new client 2 months ago. She looked me up because she had a herniated disk and went through physical therapy for a year. She still had chronic pain when she came to see me. After a month, her lower back felt much better. She was able to stand for long periods of time witout it tightening up (couldn't do that before), and when her back acted up, she was able to get it better much faster than before. Now she hardly notices it at all! She is surprised with how quickly she was pain free.

This, I must admit, is what is very rewarding to me! 

I have a client who I have been working with once a week for over 12 years. She originally came to me by a recommendation by her physical therapist for her herniated disk. Over time we did a good job of eliminating her back pain and increasing her mobilty. Her quality of life improved considerably. We just found out another benefit. Improvement of bone mass in her spine. She just had her physical recently. They did a bone density test and found a 3% increase in her spine! This is the second client at Urban Pump that has shown an improvement in bone density. It certainly seems to be that strength training does help.

Once again, strength training is proving to be the fountain of youth.

Doctors have known for some time that as a man ages, he produces less testosterone. It is about 1% a year from age 30 on. The usual recommendation? Hormone replacement therapy. It seems to me an easy way out. Besides, it comes with it's own host of problems, mainly increased cancer risk. My recommendation? Strength training. It works wonders. My energy levels are quite high, and I am very strong. At 48, I have the strength of a 20 year old. Hormone replacement cannot do this. Strength training can.

Here is an article about the subject in The Daily Mail.

As can be expected, the main recommendation is hormone therapy. I say do strength training. I believe it to be the true fountain of youth. 

It seems like rich men always have attractive women, even if they are fat or out of shape. Apparently, it is true. A study actually correlates how much more a man has to earn for every 10% weight gain above a healthy BMI he needs to earn to attract the same kind of mate: a 2% increase in salary. Here is the example:

So a six-foot man weighing 180 pounds (12st 12lbs) and earning $100,000 would need to get a $2,000 pay rise if he put on 20 pounds, unless he wanted to date less attractive women, reported the New York Post.

The study found it worked for women, but instead of increases in salary, her level of education worked to offset weight gain for attractiveness.  

So where does it leave us? If you want an attractive mate, either workout and be buff, or work on improving your income or education...or both.

Here is the study.  

   Alpha males (or females for that matter) usually rise to the top in our society. They do that because of their aggressive and ambitious personality. They simply have to be on top. With it comes fame, wealth, sex partners, and power. Seductive trappings indeed. But what about health? Research on this subject has been written about in the Wall Street Journal. They found that being on top takes it's toll. Fighting off other contenders and continually pushing puts the Alpha male under a lot of chronic stress. This produces cortisol, the hormone that weakens the immune system and raises blood pressure among other negative things.  

   The Beta, on the other hand, still work hard and accomplish many things, but they are not obsessed with always being on top. They focus a bit more on relationships and can generally let things go easier. Needless to say, they produce less cortisol as well. With this comes better overall health.  

  So, which one will it be? Alpha or Beta? As for me, I am clearly a Beta. I am not afraid to face challenges and I train very hard (almost Alpha hard). I also have no problem with working hard, but I do not care if I am sitting at the top of the heap. I also don't care if I make tons of money. I can let those things go. To me, getting the stress out of my body and being centered is very important for overall health and happiness.

    Which is it? Alpha or Beta?       

Once again, I revisit the question of how many sets you need for optimal growth. This time it is response to an article from Men's Health magazine. It is from the July/August 2011 issue. Here is the paragraph in full:

Straight from our told you so file: Scientists in Japan found that men built more muscle from doing 3 sets of dumbbell curls than by doing just one set. What makes this study unique? Twice a week, the lifters did a 3 set routine with one arm and a 1 set routine with the other. So genetic diiferences among lifters weren't a factor. Here's how much those 2 extra sets helped.

Muscle gain:    1 set    8% gain.                3 sets 13% gain.

Strength gain:   ''        20%                       ''         32% gain.

My comments: This study shows a noticeable difference between the two protocols. The author of the magazine also assumes that more is better from his experience. I like the fact that the study used the different arms on the same person. That is a good way to take out the genetic component. Now here is where I have concerns.

1) How much load was used? The author did not say. For example, if the trainee did 30 pounds with the one set protocol and 30 pounds for the 3 set protocol, it is obvious that the 3 set routine gives more overload. What if the study had the person do 1 set with 37.5 pounds and the 3 set protocol with 30 pounds? Would the results be the same? Different? If so, how?

2) How close to failure did the trainee take the sets? The study does not say. If all the sets were done with loads that were somewhat easy by the end of the sets, there is no real challenge for the fast twith fibers (the ones that get strong from strength training).

3) Duration. Was it six weeks? 3 months? 6 months? 

Just these 3 points make the study, in my opinion, incomplete. I would like to see a study similarily done that adjusts the load. I believe that one set at 37.5 pounds taken to failure would be just as effective as 3 sets of 30 pounds done to failure. What matters most is intensity, whether it is done with one set or 3 sets doesn't matter. What matters is training hard. Until these variables are accounted for demonstrating a clear superiority of three sets as compared to one (in peer reviewed and repeated studies), than I believe from my experience that one set can be just as effective as 3 sets.        

As all of my clients know, I always say that fat gain and loss is due more to the calorie in/calorie out equation than anything else. Many people maintain that a high carbohydrate diet leads to obesity because of the insulin response which promotes fat storage in spite of whether or not one exercises (or how many calories are consumed). This never made sense. The way I see it, if you eat 3000 calories a day and you burn 2000 calories a day, you are going to gain fat...even if it is all protein! If you eat 2500 calories a day and burn 3000 calories a day, you will lose fat...even if it is a high carbohydrate diet. Just seems like common sense.

Well I came across an article that shows ongoing research says the same thing. The research actually shows that the insulin response has the opposite effect than originally thought (it actually increases fat metabolism).

The conclusion: people are just eating more total calories now than in the past, and exercising less. There is one caveat: the author aknowledges that for some reason, in obese people a low carbohydrate diet does help at first, but as the individual gets leaner the macronutrient content does not matter as much (it still has to be done with less calories coming in than going out). He says further research needs to be done (I agree).

Clarence Bass and Dr. Ellington Darden both have been consistent with their message over the last 20 to 30 years that a high carbohydrate/high fiber diet works well for fat loss and muscle building. On a personal note, I have noticed that I do better with more carbs and a little less protein because I need the fuel from carbs for hard workouts.

The main point is that you should not focus on carbs as your method for fat los: you should focus on calories in vs calories out over the long haul.

Here is the article. It is written by Stephan Guyenet. He studies the neurobiology of fat regulation. Pretty heady stuff, but also very useful.      

I wrote another article. This one discusses how many sets you really need for strength gains. I examine the science and physiology behind the body's response to strength training. By doing so, one can make a clearer decision on exercise volume.

Here is the article.

Read and feel free to comment.

As of August 2nd, I have gotten much leaner. My abs clearly show, even my lower abs. Sharon and I have been on the road a lot (riding a motorcycle) and that actually burned more calories. Still been doing the peak 8 program twice a week, and keeping my calories down. I did eat more when we were out on the bike, but I got back on the program as soon as I got home. I still have a soda on occasion, just not as often.

What is intertesting is that I have not lost any strength, nor do I feel overtrained. My muscles still look full too. I seem to be right on track. I still have body fat on my lower back that I would like to see gone by the time of the shoot, and I think I can get there.

I will take photos the day before the shoot to show eveybody my progress.

Stay tuned.

Coming back to strength training from a layoff is a challenging prospect. Often times you can be over enthusiastic and train too hard, or dread the workout so much you are afraid to even start. I remember years ago when I went on vacation for a week and came back. I was way over the top. I trained just as hard as when I left. I got 3/4 of the way through the workout and threw up...ooops!

Here is what I learned over the years.  

You do lose a little strength and muscle from time off (it takes about one week to notice that), but not much. The big difference is your body's tolerence to the workout. The lactic acid buffer/anerobic system is out of tune, and you will feel nauseated more easily. In other words, what I call "the conditioning effect" of intense workouts will have diminished. You need to break yourself back in.

This is what I do for myself and my clients:

1st workout: Use about 70% of your normal weights and do between 8 to 12 reps. Make sure you don't go anywhere near failure.

2nd workout: Increase the load to about 85% of your normal weights and go deeper into fatigue, but not full bore.

3rd workout: Use your normal weight loads and train as hard as you feel you can without feeling nauseaus.

4th workout: Go 100%

I did that with Tim after his layoff and it has been a smooth transistion back into his workouts...no loss of strength and his muscles are looking full again.

When you take time off, enjoy it and have a prudent plan to get back into your workouts. This is a good strategy to stick to your exercise program for life.    

I have just updated four of my case studies. My son, Dylan, Tim, Susan, and Kat. My son gained a lot of muscle but maintained the same level of body fat. He is now one of the strongest players on his football team. We will change his diet the next go around. Tim gained abnout 9 pounds of muscle from when we first started working together. Great progress! Susan has lost fat, about 8 pounds. She is showing that you can lose fat and reshape your body even after menopause. Kat stayed about the same. We did some tweaking to her program to get her back on track.

You can see all the case studies here.

We all want to be lean and fit. That also means body fat levels of around 8 to 10% for men, and 17 to 20% for women. I wil tell you, even when you dedicate your life to health and fitness as I have, it is still difficult to always stay lean. My latest example: I am now around 11 to 12% body fat. My clothes are fitting tighter around the waist, and I have no sign of a six pack. How did this happen? Over the last 4 months, I simply have not paid attention to my portion sizes. I consumed more soda than usual...and more recently, I went on vacation with family, and I ate well. A bit too well. My muscles do not show much definition either. My wife scheduled a photo shoot for us in late August as well!

What to do? here is my plan:

I want to be leaner this time than the last 2 times I sat for the shoot. I had full muscles then, but I want more cuts to my muscles and a trimmer waist this time. I am going to do something I haven't done in years...I will add some cardio to my program. I am going to do the peak 8 program by Dr. Mercola twice a week, along with my normanl three times a week workouts. I will also cut my portion sizes 10% across the board, and cut out my soda along with less overall alcohol consumption. Because I am adding some cardio along with cutting back calories, I fully expext my strength to be 10 to 15% less than usual. I may even be slightly overtrained by the time of the shoot.

I want to do this because I want a different look to my body. I want to see what it looks like leaner, and most likely with less muscle. Stay tuned. I will put up the photos when we get them.

People that have been following my blog know that I believe that the best thing for maintaining a youthful body is strength training. I also understand the limititations of exercise and nutrition as well. The human body still ages, and eventually dies. Scientists have been working on the "fountain of youth" for as long as anyone can remember, and it seems that they are close to making big strides in life extension. Research is finding that the mechanism of telomere shortening is the main reason for ageing. If they can reverse that natural process, the theory goes, they can extend life as we know it. Preliminary research seems to be proving this hypothesis right.

Here is a snippet about the research from an article written for The daily Reckoning. It is a financial web site I read from time to time. For these guys, this research has investment implications in the future. For me, it is interesting to see where science is going:

An aging world population has fueled interest in regenerative remedies that may stem declining organ function and maintain fitness. Unanswered is whether elimination of intrinsic instigators driving age-associated degeneration can reverse, as opposed to simply arrest, various afflictions of the aged.

To find out if these dramatic effects are reversible, Dr. Ronald DePinho's team engineered mice with the telomerase inactivated in such a way that it could be turned back on by feeding them the chemical 4- OHT. The researchers allowed the mice to grow to old age without the enzyme, and then reactivated it for a month.

Nature News reports the following: "What really caught us by surprise was the dramatic reversal of the effects we saw in these animals," says DePinho. He describes the outcome as "a near 'Ponce de Leon' effect" - a reference to the Spanish explorer Juan Ponce de Leon, who went in search of the mythical Fountain of Youth. Shriveled testes grew back to normal and the animals regained their fertility. Other organs, such as the spleen, liver and intestines, recuperated from their degenerated state.

The one-month pulse of telomerase also reversed effects of ageing in the brain. Mice with restored telomerase activity had noticeably larger brains than animals still lacking the enzyme, and neural progenitor cells, which produce new neurons and supporting brain cells, started working again.

"It gives us a sense that there's a point of return for age-associated disorders," says DePinho. "Drugs that ramp up telomerase activity are worth pursuing as a potential treatment for rare disorders characterized by premature ageing," he says, "and perhaps even for more common age-related conditions."

    Time will tell if telomerase lenghtening will lead to life extension capabilities. There were so many other remedies brought forth so far that did not pan out... but who knows? Sooner or later they will get it. This might be the one.

Here is the link to the whole article. Read it and feel free to respond. 

I just published part 2 of core training.

Here is the link to the article. Enjoy. 

Many of my clients ask me if he/she should cut out carbs to lose weight. They read that carbs make you fat, and that protein does not. They also hear that carbs turn into sugar. The message my clients get from many outside sources is that you need to have more of your calories from certain foods, and less from others...mainly carbs. A good friend just gave me a recent article about this very topic.

According to this article, certain foods do make a difference in fat loss. I do not have enough space to give all the details of this report, but I will give you an overview and my opinion about it. The full article is in The Denver Post, Thursday, June 23rd, 2011 issue.

Here are the points:

• It is not just a matter of calories in, calories out that adds to fat gain.
• Some foods clearly cause more calorie gain than other foods due to their chemical makeup.
• By picking the wrong combinations and portions of foods, along with making unhealthy lifestyle choices leads to gradual fat gains over time.

Here are some of their conclusions:

• Over 20 years, every order of french fries added 3.35 pounds of fat.
• Every order of boiled, baked, or mashed potato added a little more than a half pound of fat. 
• And without question, soda, sweets, and alcohol gained fat as well.

The message that the article wanted to make was that even "good" carbs gain fat, probably because they stimulate the insulin response which leads to fat storage. I have read the article 3 times now to decipher what it says to be able to comment on it. Every time I do, I find more flaws with the whole argument. First of all, the article states that it is still a calorie issue first and foremost. It also lumps in portion sizes, and other lifestyle habits such as exercise, sleep, and stress levels. Here is that exact quote: The data collected over 20 years from more than 120,000 U.S. men and women found sharp differences in how foods and drinks-as well as exercise, sleep patterns, and other lifestyle factors-affect whether people gradually get fatter (italics are mine). Later on in the article it also says portion sizes play an important role as well.

Personally, I think this study is inconclusive. It has too many uncontrolled variables to isolate whether calories from certain foods have more of an impact than calories from other foods for fat gain. There is no question that if you eat mostly simple carbs (soda, candy, fruit, etc...) without complex carbs, protein and fat, you will tend to eat more overall calories because you don't get all the nutrition the body needs, therefore it will keep craving more foods, but to say that eating potatoes with your meal will make you fat? That is a big leap.

Let's make this simple. The definition of a calories is:  A unit of energy equal to the amount of heat needed to raise the temperature of one gram of water by one degree Celsius. Source: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/calorie. In other words, calories equal energy. If you have 5 pounds of fat you want to lose, that equals to 17,500 (5 pounds times 3500 calories-which equal 1 pound of fat) calories of energy you need to burn off. And guess what? It does not matter if it was from protein, carbs, or fat...it is still 17,500 units of energy that you need to burn off. In other words, it means a commitment to an exercise and nutrition program that increases daily calorie expenditure and lowers calorie intake consistently over a reasonable period of time. Folks, it is the only sane way.  

I want to emphasize that to be healthy, lean, and fit for life you have to make a sustainable exercise and eating program. If you focus on the little things (just cutting carbs, for instance and nothing else), you will not be successful. Here are my recommendations:

• Eat whole foods, cook at home, and combine a protein and carb every meal.
• Eat smaller protions.
• Shoot for 1500 to 1700 calories day for women, 1800 to 2200 calories a day for men. 
• Do a focused strength training program 2 or 3 days a week.
• Go for leisurely walks often.
• Do aerobic exercise for pleasure, not because you have to. If you don't want to do it, don't.
• Be consistent. Give it time. Your body will change, and you will be healthy.

Most importantly, you can maintain this for life.

be strong..be healthy..be hot!

During the 1980's, the Bulgarian weight lifting team dominated the Olympics. It was in large part due to a coach by the name of Ivan Abadjev. His style is a radical deaprture from the western training style. He recommends to do maximum lifts all the time, lift everyday, and to workout up to six hours a day. He does not believe that overtraining is an issue. He believes that the body can adapt to any level of stress if pushed gradually and consistently. The rationale behind his thinking is that injury is less likely when adrenaline is coursing through the body from the workouts. He believes that the training program is so good, you do not need to eat a healthy diet. You can eat candy and drink soda. Wow!!

I have heard of this training program when I first started lifting seriously. I heard of the remarkable gains from this program, but I never tried it. For most people, family and career takes up too much time to make this program even doable. Personaly, I used to do a split routine spending 4 to 6 hours a week in the gym with little or no results. I finally made progress when I practiced the high intensity style of training advocated by Ellington Darden. I did shorter and harder workouts. In short, I went the other way (and saw consistent progress). Arthur Jones and Ellington Darden feel strongly that overtraining is the biggest impediment to progress, and more rest between workouts allow for better recovery. At one point, even though I made progress for a few years, I wanted to see better gains, so I decided to try a split routine with high intensity. It lasted a week. By the end of the week, I was so sick and overtrained that I developed canker sores and I was laid up in bed for 4 days. It was a week before I coud do a light workout, and another week after that before I coud do a hard workout again. This episode set me back at least 2 weeks. I learned... You can overtrain!

I have to admit, in spite of my experience, I was still fascinated with this approach. Could it really be that much better if properly applied? The only thing I could figure was that these guys used performance enhancing drugs just like the top bodybuilders and athletes do. These drugs speed up the recovery ability allowing trainees to do more total volume and make gains. Well, low and behold, the article in the Wall Street Journal does explain that the coach was known for violating the olympic drug policies, meaning his trainees did use drugs to perform better. I know from my experience that I simply cannot train that frequently and be healthy. My joints and connective tissues would scream at me. Which leads to my main point: even if his program is superior for amazing gains, I guarantee you his trainees could not train that way into their 50's and 60's and have a good looking, healthy body. When you read about training styles like this, you need to ask yourself, honestly, what are your goals? If you want to compete in any way on a professional level, you will have to sacrifice you future health for glory now. If you want to be strong and fit when you are older as well as now, then you need to put intensity, rest, and recovery into proper ratios. Remember, there is no free lunch. There is always a price to pay.

For reference, the article is in the Personal Journal section of the Wall Street Journal; Tuesday, June 21, 2011 edition.                  

Bodybuilders insist that you need at least one gram of protein per pound of bodyweight per day for optimal muscle growth (some even insist that you need 2 to 3 grams). They believe that anything less than that will not give the muscles enough protein to grow after a hard workout. As an example, if the person weighs 180 pounds, then he needs to take in about 180 grams of protein a day. I tried this advice for years. I found it difficult to stick to (it is a lot of protein to eat). I stopped that practice and decided to simply eat healthy, whole foods throughout the day and not worry about total protein intake. Surprisingly, my strength gains did not suffer. It is a lot easier to stick to, and it is an approach I recommend to my clients.

Clarence Bass wrote an article about this topic too. He learned of a study to find out how much protein we really need. The research found that we do need good, high quality protein, but not as much as we have been told. It actually confirms my approach to eating.

Here is the article.

Feel free to leave any comments. 

Have you ever looked through a bodybuilding magazine? Did you notice those guys looking huge, sweating, and lifing an unbelievable amount of weight? I used to read those magazines a lot, but have not payed attention to them lately. Every now and then I do just for kicks, and I got to admit that when I do look at them, I find it very hard to believe that they lift the weights that it seems to be. Turns out I was right. Instead of weight plates made of iron, they use aluminum, which weighs a lot less. These guys also use steroids (we knew that) along with implants to make their muscles look the way they do.

Dr. Ellington Darden has written about this practice in the body building world. His main point is that these guys do a volume approach and really don't work as hard as they should for optimal gains. He also states these gimmicks are used to make it look like they do. I must put a caviet here. To put on the size that they do, they do have to work hard, but I absolutely agree with Ellington Darden that they can work harder. If they did, they could not do a split routine and they would make better progress, or simply spend less time training with the same result. They also simply would not be able to recover.   

In this blog, Dr. Ellington Darden gives good advice. Read it here. It is the blog stream of the new hit revolution. He goes on about other things related to bodybuilding. Read it all. You will find it fascinating.

By the way, Dr. Ellington Darden worked with Arthur Jones at nautilus, and has trained athletes and bodybuilders over the last 40 or so years. I am referring you to his web site.

As mentioned before, I have a client that is a friend of mine back in the day. He has bad knees from skiing and he was hoping an exercise program could give him some relief. I had him ice his knees as often as he could, while we slowly built his leg strength. For the longest time it didn't seem to help. However, over the last month he has not needed to ice his knees, and they are feeling better. He also had a bad hamstring cramp that seems to be getting better. He is now doing leg presses with 450 pounds. My guess is that his leg strength was so weak that he wasn't getting any real support from his leg muscles until he got up to over 400 pounds on the leg press. Now he is looking more stable. He also lost all of his winter weight, which means it is new territory for him from here on out.

His knees are still bad, but they feel better because of the support from his muscles now. It goes to show that strength training done right can alleviate joint pain.

Way to go!       

Long commutes for work are very stressful. There is no question it lowers the quality of life. It is also a player in creating obesity, neck pain, and loneliness in an individual's life. Here is a study that finds many negative results from daily commuting.

I have purposely chosen not to pursue a career in the corporate world. One reason was the time commitment and lack of flexibilty in one's schedule working "9 to 5". I knew trhat I would most likely not make as much money with a small business, and that I would still have to work hard, but I would have more control over my schedule and not have to deal with rush hour. I am glad I made that decision. I would encourage every body to examine the trade offs in their lives in regard to working a distance from home.  

Read this article and give it some thought.

Just took measurements of my wife yesterday. She is down to 15% bodyfat, and she look fantastic! She has the coveted "hour glass" shape that women want. She just got back from visiting her daughter, and I am just amazed at how good she looks.

Congrats, Sharon. You are an inspiration to me!   

I know that calorie counting for weight loss is tedious and boring. It is also the most effective method I know of to aid in fat loss. But truth be told, the body has internal mechanisms to regulate caloric needs. I have read of the body having what is known as an "appestat", whereby when the body has enough nutrition it sends a signal to the brain of being full, regardless of calories. This was discussed in the book Fit for Life by Harvey and Marylin Diamond written in the 1980,s. According to this theory, when you have all the nutrients you need, you will feel full, and if you eat whole unprocessed foods, you take in a lot less calories before you reach this point. This limits your total caloric intake as compared to processed foods, and by doing so it is much easier to stay lean without counting calories. The Diamonds made the point (which I agree with) that the food industry knew about the appestat and purposely took out the nutrients and fiber in their food along with adding fat and sugar all in the effort to override the appetsat. The goal of these practices was to get the consumer to buy even more of the processed food. Here we are in 2011, and it looks to me like they were incredibly successful. For comparison's sake, when I first started as a trainer (1991), 40% of the population was overweight. In 2011, 60% of the population is overweight! As mentioned in earlier in my blogs and anything I write about nutrition, diet is the most confusing topic my clients struggle with. I digress. I want to get back to the point of appetite mechanisms. I have been back to Clarence Bass's website, and I read an article that goes a little more into detail about how the mechanisms work. It seems that the "appestat" mechanism lies in the hypothalamus. The hypothalamus integrates signals it gets from thoughout the body. Among the signals the hypothalamus get are:

• Hormones. Particularly insulin and leptin. If there is an impairment in receiving these signals, the appestat does not kick on. It is exactly this mechanism that the food industry overrides by using fat and sugar in the foods.
• The "gut" response. According to the article, the gut does have a mind of it's own to send the signals of fullnes, which in and of itself includes three mechanisms as well. 
  • Stomach stretching. Food filling the stomach sends a signal to the hypothalamus that it is geting full...Stop eating! By taking out fiber in foods, the food industry overrides this mechanism.
  • Peptide release. These are released when there is high quality protein. (chicken and fish are good sources for releasing peptides).
  • Illeal brake. This is released from the lower intestine, when there is enough fat consumed. This shows that it is actually a good idea to have some fat with every meal.

One other point, which is very important: The study shows that exercise also helps regulate these mechanisms (the appestat) to perform better.

I know that you can stay lean without having to count a single calorie. I have not counted calories for myself in over 15 years, and I stay lean. The only thing I do is when I want to be a little leaner, I cut out my soda and cut back on portion sizes about 5%. Other than that, I eat what I want. My succes is due to eating mainly a high fiber, low processed food diet and a proper exercise routine.

As a trainer, my goal is to help everybody who wants to be fit reach the point where they would not have to count calories to stay lean and in shape. But until then, calorie counting and diet modification along with exercise are the best way to get there.

For more information, here is the article.   

It is a given that as we get older, we lose both muscle mass and testosterone production (an important hormone for "youthfulness"). It is assumed that the loss is due to age, for all the research is done on the general population. I have always wondered if it is just as true for people that engage in vigorus exercise their whole lives. I do think that we all will see a decrease over time, but not nearly to the degree that is happening if people exercised intensely and properly. More research needs to be done, and more people need to be willing to try to train hard as they get older. I am an ongoing experiment as well as my wife. Clarence Bass is also a good example. He has an article talking about these very points. Here it is.     

This is a video clip of me doing a barbell squat with 405 pounds. I did it in a rest/pause fashion, meaning I did as many reps as I can, rested 2 minutes, did another one, rested 2 mins, and did it again. This clip captures the first series. 

Here it is. HYSTRENGTH(sm).

      I have been training my son, Dylan for football consistently for about 2 months now. He has made steady progress in his strength and foot speed/control. He is doing a 730lb leg press and he will attempt a 225 pound squat on his workout tonight (I think he will get 9 to 10 reps clean). We have added agility and foot speed training with his strength training a la Hystrength(sm). 

Here is the video of his workout. You will notice that after 7 sets he had to stop (he got woozy). He went on to finish the rest of the workout. Pay attention to the intensity and focus he displays.

Here it is.   

  Low carb diets are very popular with bodybuilders and a large portion of the population that wants to lose weight fast. I have never been a fan of the low carb diet approach. It does not build the energy reserves needed for intense workouts (a critical piece for permanent fat loss), is too low in important nutrients and fiber, and can set the stage for heart disease.

   What makes a low carb diet work (in the short term, mind you), is the fact that when you cut out carbs, you cut out about 60% of what you eat on a daily basis, which also equates to 60% less calories a day. In other words, it is a calorie reduction diet in disguise. You also lose water weight and hard to maintain muscle as well. In short, it is very difficult to continue with this diet, and the weight loss is surely temporary.

  Weight belts. Bodybuilders and power lifters swear by them. They use weight belts to protect the lower back from injury on heavy lifts. I have long believed that this thinking is flawed. To me, it makes sense that if you use weight lifting belts, the core region has external support so that they will not strengthen in porportion the strength gains of the prime movers (legs and glutes). By doing so, the body has muscle imbalances, and that would lead to injury outside the gym. Even though I have 2 degenerative disks, I have not used a weight belt for over 20 years. My back is strong, and I hardly have problems because of it.

    I am not the only one who feels the same way. Clarence Bass talks about both of these points in the article below. He brings his insights to the table, along with some research.

      Here is the article.

      Feel free to comment.  

     In this video clip Sharon is doing a low ab exercise with a medicine ball. She is extending her legs while balancing the ball on her shins, all the while keeping her lower back as flush to the floor as she can. When the legs are extended, you can really feel the lower abs working hard.

      Here is the clip.

     People who work with me know how important I think proper rest with exercise is for long term health. I believe that overtraining can age the body as much as undertraining does (especially sitting on your butt most of the time). In a letter to Clarence Bass, a man described the experience he had at the doctors office. After getting his test results back, the doctor wanted to talk to this man asap. This man had high levels of CPK in his blood, meaning he was showing a high level of muscle breakdown. He told the doctor that he just did a 2 day split routine and that was probably the reason. He realized that maybe he should cut back on his frequency. He was smart to learn from this info and make adjustments.

Take heed. Do the same thing, and live well.

Here is the article.

       We have been told for years that we should use sunscreen to protect ourselves from skin cancer due to the ultra violet rays from the sun. I have followed this advice well, and my skin seems to be the better for it. However, Dr. Mercola disagrees with this advice. He says that the main types of sunscreen has harmful chemicals that actually increase skin cancer risk, and once absorbed into the skin, can wreak havoc on our hormones. He further stresses that sunscreen inhibits the formation of vitamin D that we get from the sun. He also says that vitamin D from the sun is the best source to get. He recommends that people should use less sunscreen, and allow the skin to absorb some sun. He does suggest a certain type of sunscreen, one that has zinc for it's main ingredient. You can read the article HERE. 

       Read the article and figure out what makes the most sense for you. Personally, I will allow more open sun exposure, but not much. My skin so far has been in good condition, so what I am doing seems to be working. I will also look into the types of sunscreen he recommends. It does seem to be good advice. 

Since I have embraced the HIT(High Intensity Training) approach to exercise, I read everything I could about the style and at some point practiced all of the recommendations. One such approach was to slow down the repetition speed...really slow. To the point of 10 seconds to lift the weight, and 4 seconds to lower it. The rationale was that by slowing down the rep speed, momentum was vastly decreased and the targeted muscle had to work harder, thus making the exercise harder and more productive.

Then there are other trainers that say by moving slow, you teach the body to move slow, therefore to better prepare for sports, the repetitions need to be faster and more explosive to have better carryover.

Which one is right? That is still up for debate, and I believe it would never be fully answered (it is difficult to control all variables in a clinical research study to prove any one way conlusively).

But, I have some insight from my years of training and experimentation.

Going slow does fatigue the muscles faster, and I have seen strength gains using it. However, I did hit strength plateaus that I could not break until I used a faster rep speed (I think it was because I started handling heavier weights, and my body adjusted to it). Once I did, I started making good gains again. I also burned out on slow training because it is so slow. 

Explosive reps can allow one to use heavier weights, and it may have a carryover effect to sports, but there is no question that you increase injury potential from the excessive forces generated by sudden movements (I noticed that in my knees after only 2 leg press sessions using explosive movements, and whenever I use plyometric training protocols).

I also notice that when people do faster rep training, they fire out of the bottom and rest at the top during the set. This leads to less overall overload than a continous tension portocol (and increased injury potential).  

At this juncture, I believe that a controlled, continous tension repetition (do not fire out of the bottom or lock at the top) taken close to or to failure, is the best, safest way to train. You can still get the same overload and intensity as the slower rep protocol (so you would still need only one set as compared to many sets), have a better carryover to sports, and keep potential injuries to a minimum. By the way, the rep speed itself would be about a two second positive, 2 second negative tempo.

As always, you need to decide what works for you. Once again, I refer you to an article written by Clarence Bass for more information. Here it is.

Please feel free to comment.     

In this videp clip I am doing a barbell squat/spider walk with 335lbs. It is a great way to work on both the prime movers (quads, glutes, and hams), but also the stabilizer muscles along the hips and thighs. It is a killer exercise. Try it and see what you think.

HYSTRENGTH(sm).

In strength training and bodybuilding circles, there is a big controversy as to how many sets one must do to achieve high levels of muscular development and fitness. Virtually all of the lifters and bodybuilders I talked to (and watched in the gym) subscribe to a multiple set protocol. They just can't believe one set is enough. On the other hand, there are bodybuilding coaches and strength trainers that do advocate a single set approach. Which is right? And why?

For years that question was not truly addressed in objective acedemic research (Arhtur Jones did a lot of research, but many people did not give it much credibility because he didn't do it through a University...he concluded one set, properly performed, is enough), but lately there seems to be more research on the subject. One issue I had with most research is that they were short duration (6 weeks), and done with novice trainees. So to apply the research in the real world setting left a bit to be desired.      

Revisiting Clarnece Bass's website, I find he has found more research on the subject, and with more experienced trainees for subjects.

The article is here.  

The conclusion? Both multiple set training and single set training produce about the same amount of strength and muscular size increases. One study showed the hormonal effects (IGF stimulation-it promotes bone, joint, connective tissue, and muscular growth) to be the same in a single set as well as a multiple set approach. Another study showed the same effects, but with the multiple set approach, there tended to be a shift in the cortisol/testosterone ratios, which is a sign of overtraining.

The bottom line. Both styles of training can work, but be careful of overdoing it on the multiple training approach.

Here is my take. I used to do the multiple set approach, but I never saw much as far as improving my physique. That happened when I switched to a low volume/high intensity approach. In hindsight I realize it was because as I increased my volume, I lowered the intensity thus negating any extra work done (most trainees make this very mistake). With a low volume approach. it is easier on focusing to simply attempt to do a little more weight, or one more rep than the last workout, which guarantees gains over time.

I prefer the low volume approach for 3 main reasons:

1. The time factor. If I can do in 30 minutes what takes most trainees 3 hours to do, I would rather do 30 minutes. After all, I have a life.

2. A better way of avoiding overtraining. Too much exercise tears the body down, both inside and out, which can age you. Why push that envelope?

3. The conditioning effect. Doing hard sets and keeing the rest intervals to a minimum really challenges the aerobic and anerobic energy systems and can elicit the same results as cardio training for health. As noted in an earlier blog, my blood pressure and heart rate are in the athletic range, and I have not done an aerobic training program in over ten years (I could not do this on a multiple set training program).  

How does a multiple approach work? You have to be in control of many variables. For example, you need to control rest intervals between sets (most trainees increase rest intervals as they attempt to increase weight..without even realizing it), tempo, the number of sets, and the weight, among other things. If you change one or two without realizing it, you most likely will negate any overload. Most trainees just don't do this.

I will write an article soon on how to use a multiple set approach. In the meantime, read this research, focus your training, and feel free to contact me with any questions.  

My good friend commented to me about the blog I wrote. It is about how I feel strength training is the best exercise for rehab work. He said it was inspirational, and that strength training is good for prevention as well. His example is the car accident he got into on vacation to Disney. He rolled his car but was able to walk away from the accident. The doctor said that if he didn't strength train, he would have been laid up in the hospital. 

He is darn glad that he works out! For more than just looks or feeling good. It goes to show how important it is to be in shape.  

I am often asked what kinds of supplements I use and recommend for better performance. I have tried many supplements at first, but over time I have simply stopped using them. Sharon and I just started using a protein powder after the workouts, not because we think it is better than a homemade shake, but because it is more cost effective and lower calorie (she needs to start getting leaner for a contest). I stopped using supplements because they simply didn't work and cost a lot of money. Eating healthy whole foods work just fine. I just read an article by Clarence Bass stating the same thing. The man is older and has more personal history about exercise and diet than me, so I will link you to the article. You will find it enlightening. Enjoy!

Clarence Bass talks about diet. 

Just checked my blood pressure today. It is 109/67, with a resting heart rate of 59 beats a min. If I checked it earlier, my heart rate would most likely be 55 to 57 beats a min. That puts me at a very healthy, athletic range.

Here is the kicker: I haven't done an aerobic training program in over 10 years. This is strictly from doing the HYSTRENGTH(sm) training program all this time. I am 47 years old, and in good shape...Yea!!!