P.S. If you have a story to share of how you’ve successfully
stayed in shape while being crazy busy, I’d love to hear it and
share it with everyone here.  Or, if you’ve been unsuccessful at
a fitness routine and want some advice, reply to this email and
tell me your story.  If I think that there’s value for others, I’ll
include your email (with just your first name) and my reply in an
upcoming newsletter.
 
P.P.S.  If you want us to work with you one-on-one at our
private training studio, we are accepting applications for a few
openings.  Go to www.myogenics.com and apply to be
considered now. 
———————————————————–
Disclaimer: All material provided herein is provided
for educational purposes only. Consult your own
physician regarding the applicability of any opinions
or recommendations with respect to your symptoms
or medical condition. Copyright 2008 Myogenics Fitness.
All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part
without permission is prohibited without express
written permission. www.myogenics.com
———————————————————–

“Hi Chad! …My curiosity led me to read through your website and I am intrigued… My questions are: 1) how long does the shaking and muscle fatigue last after a workout (I can’t be incapacitated with a toddler and no help), 2) does this method do anything for your cardiovascular health and flexibility, 3) do the muscles get bulky (for a woman, lean and long is the desired look), and 4) do you design a client’s diet (daily calories, protein/carb/fat percentages, specific foods, etc)?… ~Liane”
Excellent questions, Liane, and here are my answers to each:

1. Any momentarily “disabling” muscle fatigue (which typically only occurs with clients who are quite advanced) begins to noticeably improve within 2-10 minutes.  Even the most extreme on the intensity scale are fully functional within 30-45 minutes, though they may still notice some signs of fatigue.  As anything, individual effects may vary.  And we can adjust the workouts to accommodate.

2. The only way to get at your cardiovascular system is through working the skeletal muscles that support it (well, the only really safe way–stimulants can speed up your heart rate, but speeding up your heart rate like that can cause bad stuff…like death).  The evidence shows that skeletal muscle activity of any kind (vs. no activity at all) lowers risk of heart disease.  Then there is another question: what sort of activity, and how much, is best? 

Which is better?

-walking/jogging (low intensity, intermittent muscular work)

-sprinting (high-intensity, intermittent muscular work)

-conventional weight training (moderate-high intensity, intermittent muscular work)

-high-precision, high-intensity training like I do, myself (high-intensity, continuous muscular work)

I don’t think there is yet a proven answer.  However, current evidence points toward the idea that the greater the intensity of activity, the greater the benefit…and that this is true virtually independent of how long the workout lasts or how often the workout is performed.   There was an interesting 13 year (I think) Harvard study of around 45,000 men that showed improved cardiovascular health corresponded to the intensity of activity that a person did, and not the duration or how often it was done.  (people in the study who lifted weights once a week had a lower risk for heart disease than those who walked for at least 30 minutes every day)

There are also easy-to-demonstrate safety advantages to doing the fourth and final option above…both from the perspective of the ability to track appropriate muscle and joint function and minimize torque forces on one’s joints that cause wear and strain, and also from cardiovascular safety–there are studies and anecdotal evidence that shows that continuous muscle loading puts less bad strain on the heart and seems to be cardio-protective, even at high intensity levels, in a way that walking and jogging are not, even at lower intensity levels. 

There is the reason doctors give for people to do “aerobic” activity 3-5 days per week.  This reason is that studies have shown that such activity is healthier than being sedentary.  I agree with these studies, however, most of those studies have lacked inclusion of higher intensity level activities to compare to the walking/jogging.  In all the studies I’m aware of that do include higher intensity activities, the high intensity activities win, hands-down.

Then there is the convincing observation that people often make that seems to confirm the idea that “aerobic,” steady-state activities (such as walking or jogging) are good for the cardiovascular system:  when one does these activities, one improves over time, able to increase the distance and speed of travel, while getting less winded.  This seems to be an obvious, unquestionable sign of cardiovascular improvement, however sports studies that have shown that improvements in performance in one activity (such as running, swimming, or cycling) do not transfer to any other activities, and are not the result of an improvement in one’s cardiovascular system, but instead, seemingly a result of increased skill at that activity.  The only studies in this group that have shown a transference of benefit were when the intensity of a group of athletes was taken up to the point of muscle failure.  That seemed to cause a true cardiovascular improvement, as it created benefit that transferred across activities. 

Then there are the anecdotal results we see…when we train people: excellent improvements above and beyond all previous training, even in the case of cyclists and tennis players who have been sometimes training almost daily for “stamina.”  (remember, we’re only adding about 20 minutes a week to their routine, and sometimes also taking away hours per week of what they were doing before).

And there are the technical reasons that MDs and physiologists have shared with me as to why certain methods (which I incorporate into my workouts and those of my clients) might be superior in training for cardiovascular health.  I’ve gone on too long, but I have articles with research citations, and I’m happy to give copies to any of you who are clients of my gym.  Just ask, and I’ll make sure you get it at your next workout. 

2b.  Flexibility.  This is a tricky area.  First we need to define what we mean by flexibility and what constitutes an improvement in flexibility.

At first glance, it may seem obvious that more flexibility is better.  However, looked from another angle—say the angle of an aging Cirque de Soleil performer, it might seem obvious that attaining more flexibility could be detrimental to one’s health and quality of life. 

In my current edition of Guyton & Hall’s Medical Physiology textbook, there is no mention of anything called “flexibility.”  The tricky thing is that flexibility is not a single biological event that is either good or bad.  Flexibility  is the degree of rotation of a joint or series of joints—an event which involves muscle tissue, tendons, and ligaments.

Just as weight loss is bad if it is a result of loss of muscle tissue, organ tissue, or bone density, so an increase of flexibility is bad if it is a result of, say, over-stretched ligaments (which could lead to destabilized joints and injuries). 

To a large degree, one’s flexibility is determined by genetics and age (which control the joint structure and the elasticity of one’s tendons–largely a function of how your particular body makes collagen).

Properly performed, high-precision, very low-to-zero impact resistance training is beneficial to encourage the health of muscles, tendons, and ligaments. 

I’ll move away from “flexibility” for a moment to the more narrow issue of tight muscles.  What causes “tight” muscles is not entirely clear to me, as I’ve seen multiple explanations, including the explanation that no one knows for sure; however, when I personally get a tight muscle, I find that controlled moderate to high intensity exercise of that muscle provides the greatest and fastest relief from the tightness for me (more so than merely stretching that muscle).  This is especially with my neck–I have a neck machine in my gym that I *love* to load up with weight when my neck gets tight.  In many instances, I’ve seen chronically tight muscles improve over time through training with the same exercises that are effective for optimal strength improvements.  In this narrow (but, I believe healthy) sense, I’ve seen flexibility improve. 

I’ve also seen cases of unstable, problematic joints, likely do to over-stretched ligaments, become stabilized as the one’s muscles are strengthened.  In this narrow sense, as well, I believe I see improvements in flexibility (though, the improvement may be a *decrease* in flexibility).
 
3. As for whether the exercise methods I believe produce optimal health with the greatest efficiency make someone too bulky, I trained Sharon Stone for Basic Instinct 2 this way.  Watch it and let me know what you think! The short answer is that genetics determines whether your muscles look “bulky” or not, and the particular movements you make while training don’t change it either way, contrary to what some marketers would try to convince you.

4. To address diet, your nutritional intake is a major factor in your health–both as a source of controlling caloric intake (or restriction) and to provide the proper balance and timing of nutrients to allow for the optional functioning of your physical body, including your brain. Good nutrition interfaces with good exercise to maximize your quality of life. 

While the focus of my business is purely to provide the very best exercise training, as a personal side-interest, over the years, I’ve gotten good at finding the diet solutions that work for different people in different situations, and at sorting out what is evidence-based, effective nutritional advice, and what advice is fad advice that may merely sound scientific, but drops context in favor of simplicity…and is not to your greatest benefit.  We can give you as general or as specific advice as you are willing to follow, and I’m confident that if you’re willing to follow even the most general advice (which is not about depriving you of everything you love, by the way), then you’ll achieve rapid, consistent, long-term results.  In fact, here’s my most general advice: eat no more than 400 calories per meal or snack, eat something at least 5 times per day, evenly spaced, try to eat foods that are as minimally processed and as close to their natural state as possible, and have a significant portion of each meal or snack from both protein and fat.  For an example of someone who was willing to follow our most specific advice, without deviation, take a look at Jerry’s before-and-after photos at http://www.myogenics.com/. 

Cheers,
Chad

The study was a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial.

See more details here: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/550051  (free registration required)

From the article: “[Long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids] are critical in the development of normal neuronal and visual development of the fetus. Current studies have demonstrated that DHA improved attention and mental processing in children whose mothers received supplementation in pregnancy. “

The subjects were given 3.3 grams per day of combined EPA and DHA (from fish oil).  That is equivilent to between 5 and 6 capsules of Barry Sears’ OmegaRX oil that I recommend and is the most highly purified pharmicutical grade oil on the market that I’m currently aware of.   

Low-carb, higher fat diets did not increase risk of heart disease over the long term. 

Low-carb diets with more fats from vegetable sources loweredrisk of heart disease. (I presume this is due to unsaturated fats in most vegetable sources vs. the saturated fats from most animal sources)

Lowered glycemic load of the diet directly lowered risk for heart disease.  (learn about glycemic load at www.glycemicindex.com and at www.drsears.com/understandingcarbs.page)

A how-to book that focuses on all these items: moderating carbs, increasing healthy unsaturated fats, and lowering glycemic load is A Week in the Zone by Barry Sears.  I recommend it to all my clients, and have seen excellent results.  It is available at book stores, or at amazon.com here. 

To read more about the above study, click here: www.medscape.com/viewarticle/547506 (free registration may be required)

N Engl J Med. 2006;355:1991-2002  Low-Carbohydrate-Diet Score and the Risk of Coronary Heart Disease in Women  Halton T. L., Willett W. C., Liu S., Manson J. E., Albert C. M., Rexrode K., Hu F. B.

 Here are three ways to lower insulin levels:

1. Regular exercise.  The higher the intensity, the more effect it has on lowering insulin.  (shameless plug for working out at Myogenics Fitness here)

2. Diet. Food consumption leads to insulin production.  Specifically, glucose (from food) entering the bloodstream requires insulin production to deal with it.  The amount of glucose released into the bloodstream over a given period of time (as a result of a meal) is known as the “glycemic load” of a meal.  The glycemic load can be reduced by eating smaller amounts more often, by consuming lower quantities of carbohydrate, and by consuming carbohydrates that convert to glucose more slowly.  All carbohydrates (except fiber) convert to glucose, and the glycemic index measures of how rapidly this happens with different carbohydrates.  You can view and search this index of foods here: www.glycemicindex.com

3. Lower body fat percentage (through a combination of good exercise and dietary habits).  Higher body fat percentage corresponds to greater insulin resistance, and therefore greater insulin production.  Lower your body fat percentage, and insulin production tends to go down.

The reality is that one can improve workout performance and results by cooling sufficiently to prevent sweating.

SWEATING IS UNHELPFUL

Sweat is water…not fat.  Sweating does not promote or assist fat loss; and weight loss from sweating returns upon re-hydrating.  When I used to run track, I’d lose about 7 pounds after every 45 minute practice.  If I hadn’t gained that back each time, I would have gone completely out of existence in less than a month.

Consider the populations of Louisiana and Mississippi. I once stayed in Louisiana for a week during August…brutal.  Due to the heat and humidity, it’s like being in a 24/7 sauna or heated-room yoga class.  Yet, according to the CDC, people there are the fattest in the country.  Sweating doesn’t seem to be helping them (despite the people there being the friendliest I’ve ever met!).

OVERHEATING REDUCES PERFORMANCE

One of the greatest impediments to athletic performance is overheating.  When you’ve begun sweating, you have reached the point of overheating, and your muscles have become too warm to work maximally.  This will lessen your workout performance, as most athletes will attest to.  Lowered workout performance due to overheating will almost certainly reduce benefits from the workout, meaning less results.

My best running times as a high school student in Iowa were always when we had miserable weather: almost freezing temperatures, wind, and rain or snow.  I would get angry at my coach for not letting the team wear more then the almost non-existent uniform of skimpy track shorts and tank tops in that weather.  I thought he was just being mean, and I still think that.  But whether he knew it or not, I now know that he was probably getting us to perform better than if we’d been wearing enough to keep comfortably warm.

A couple of Stanford University biology research scientists have been developing a technology to cool people more rapidly and effectively than previously possible.  The benefits to performance and training seem to be profound.  I am currently working to bring this to our gym to test in the very near future.  You can see more details here: Stanford Magazine

SWEATING HAS DANGERS

Sweating can cause dehydration–which can be dangerous.  Several years ago I ran in the Bix 7, a 7-mile road race in a humid climate next to the Mississippi River, and I saw one of the top female runners in the world collapse from dehydration/heat exhaustion while she was running.  She nearly died.

SWEATING COSTS MONEY

Showering after a workout costs you time.  A couple hours a week wasted could be worth $60 a week or more.  Time is money in some ways, and incalculably more valuable in others.

INCREASED WARMTH REDUCES CALORIE BURNING

The same amount of work in a given routine will burn the same amount of calories and generate the same amount of heat.  If that heat is not allowed to dissipate, but is built up within your body, then your body will bring its caloric expenditures to a screeching halt to prevent further heat build-up and maintain the narrow temperature range required for you to live.

To the extent your body warms above normal, your body will start restricting the amount of work you can do (performance drops), and other metabolic events which produce heat as a byproduct (the same ones that expend calories) will stop.  If you get warm enough, you will pass out and go into a coma–with very little metabolic activity. To the extent that your body is warmed above normal, your metabolism will effectively slow down.  (In contrast, a cold person must burn more calories in order to heat up.)

(As a side note, the medical literature considers that these reductions in metabolic events are results of excessive heat, rather than means of regulating it, but the effect is the same.) 

If you do this same routine as above, but rapidly remove all of the increased heat from your body as it is generated, you would not feel warm, in spite of burning the same number of calories. You would not incur metabolic slow-down, and you would preserve the ability to function and do more work following the workout. This likely includes the ability to do more metabolic work immediately following a workout–meaning faster and better recovery, which would generate faster and greater results as well as more calories burned.  This may account for the steroid-like improvements sometimes seen with the use of the cooling device in the article linked to above.

Further, rapidly removing all excess heat during and after exercise dramatically reduces or eliminates soreness. To me, this suggests investigating whether the unexplained phenomenon of muscle soreness has anything to do with the inability of the body to do certain metabolic work within heated muscles, that when not performed leads to soreness after muscle exertion.

What to Do:

Keep your workout environment cool enough (and dehumidified) to not break a sweat by the end of your workout, dress to allow your body to dissipate heat rapidly, and finish your workout quickly.  Your workout will be more intense and you’ll get better results–while lowering any risk of dehydration or heat exhaustion.

Resist the temptation to wear layers to keep comfortably warm during your first one or two exercises, and you’ll be rewarded with a more productive workout.  Sweatpants and long sleeve shirts trap heat, reducing performance and results, while shorts and tank tops will allow you to get more out of your workouts.

Remember that while muscular work can cause both fat loss and heat production, heating up and sweating are just byproducts of inefficient heat dissipation–they do not cause fat loss. You’ll improve results by increasing the intensity of muscular work while rapidly dissipating all heat produced and minimizing sweating.

At our facility, we keep the temperature at 64 degrees or below, we keep the humidity low, and we direct a fan at people who would still get too warm otherwise.  We complete an intense, full-body workout in under 20-30 minutes.  Training this way, I don’t break a sweat, and don’t need to shower afterwards.  Yet I perform better and get more results than I have when spending an hour-plus sweating out a more conventional workout.

-Chad  

The answer: neither, actually.  There is a more precise measure of exercise performance, and it means you can stop counting reps.  

[Just to clarify, a “rep” (repetition) is raising, then lowering, a weight—ending in the same position from which you began.  A “set” is a series of reps, done back-to-back.  A set of ten reps means moving a weight up and then down ten times.] 

Like most people who train with weights, I used to focus on how many reps I did. I’d congratulate myself when I completed one or two reps more than in my previous workout.  However, by keeping ever more detailed workout records, I discovered that in trying to do more reps, I often unconsciously moved faster and ended up spending equal or less total time doing the set…even when I had completed more reps.  

While counting reps is a convenient way to judge exercise performance, the total duration of time the muscles are tensed and under load is more important.  This is called “time under load,” or TUL.

Time Under Load (TUL) and Physiological Considerations… 

Research suggests that the optimal TUL for best results is in a window of 1.5 to 3 minutes. This may be partially due to the rates at which different muscle fiber types are used and fatigue within a muscle.

Also relevant is the quality of muscular involvement during that TUL (constant or intermittent; concentric, eccentric, or static; degree of intensity).

-Ideally, muscular tension is continuous—with no stopping, pausing, or resting in any way.

-Ideally, exercise includes both concentric and eccentric effort—contracting (to lift a weight), and elongating (lowering a weight) while tensing against a resistance.

-Ideally, the intensity is such that the targeted muscle(s) becomes completely exhausted.  Then, the TUL reveals the time it took to fatigue the muscle until it was physically unable move the weight, regardless of the mental will to do so.

Activities such as running engage muscles intermittently.  This does not produce the same strength or metabolic benefits as continually engaging a muscle against constant resistance.  Further, running, cycling, hiking, etc. have no eccentric component—which has time and again shown to be the most beneficial component of exercise.  This is why we work with weights: they allow precision in exercising muscles the ways that generate maximum results.

When weight training, the average “set of 10” reps that people perform in gyms lasts 15-30 seconds—far below the ideal TUL.  Also, much of that time is usually spent with the muscles not under constant tension due to pausing, letting momentum move the weight, and resting muscles by allowing the weight to basically fall while lowering it. Further, the acceleration involved in moving faster places greater forces on one’s joints, making an exercise potentially more dangerous.

A solution to all the above is to lift weights slowly and deliberately, making an effort to exhaust the targeted muscle(s), rather than being concerned with the number of repetitions completed.

While studies show that there are important differences between a 20-second, 90-second, and 300-second TUL, the exact number of reps performed during that time has not been shown to matter.

Note: it is sometimes appropriate to perform no reps at all (no movement: isometric) and engage a muscle against an immovable resistance for the desired TUL.  This is often advisable for people who are starting off severely weak or recovering from an injury.

Weight Selection…

When we select weights for clients, we work to select the appropriate resistance for their strength level, whether they are 80 years old and out of shape and recovering from an injury, or a professional athlete.  We select weights that one’s muscles can perform in a controlled manner for at least 90-180 seconds (using isometric exercises where appropriate).

The weight selection criterion is neither “heavy” nor “light.”  The criterion is appropriateness for a given strength and ability level.  As someone’s strength and skill increases, we adjust the resistance so that it continues to be appropriate.

Psychological Issues with Counting Reps…

From a psychological standpoint, counting reps becomes distracting and discouraging. The process of counting reps directs focus toward the external movement of weights, while taking focus away from what the muscles are doing, internally.

However, the real goal of exercise is not to move a weight up and down; it is to challenge a muscle to work it in a manner that results in the most positive physical change. The movement of a weight only matters in how well it aids the quality of muscular work.

The ideal point of focus is internal, on what is happening within the targeted muscle(s).  The movement of weights is a means to this end.

Similarly, when driving a car, turning the steering wheel is the means to successfully navigating the streets.  But if you were to focus exclusively on the steering wheel, your driving will not be as good or as safe (to put it mildly) as by focusing, instead, on the road ahead.  In driving, observe the effect of your steering, rather than observing the steering itself.  In exercising, observe the effect of the movements on your muscles, rather than the movement itself.  Notice what is happening within your muscles if you slow or speed your movement.

When people think in terms of reps, and focus on the movement of the weights…

–they speed up to complete more reps—creating momentum that allows the targeted muscle some moments of rest

–they pause to rest the targeted muscle at the upper and/or lower turnarounds of a movement

–they start adjusting their body position and form, allowing other muscles to help out, so that the targeted muscles work less, and there is a larger tally of reps at the end of their set

As muscles fatigue, they steadily lose strength until they cannot physically complete a full rep; but it still may be possible to begin one.  As someone nears this point, if the focus is on completing reps, it creates a sense of frustration, inadequacy, and failure at not being able to accomplish the goal of completing the rep. As a result, most people either give up and stop challenging their muscles (right where the exercise is most beneficial), or they sacrifice their technique and properly working the muscle to make the weight move.

When people focus on trying to exhaust their muscles, they experience satisfaction and success at accomplishing their goal as the exercise becomes tougher.

It can take vigilance to remind yourself that the exercise is not a battle with the weights to see how many reps you can perform, but, rather, a challenge in working with the weights to help you exhaust your muscles as much as you can—and in as little time (with as much efficiency) as possible.

How To Use This…

Here’s my current approach: instead of counting reps, get a stopwatch or clock (and ideally someone else to monitor it for you, so you can focus exclusively on exercising).  Focus on challenging your muscles as much as possible by maintaining slow, smooth movement right up to the end of your set (when your muscles are physically incapable of moving the weight).  Keep trying to engage the targeted muscles for a good 10 seconds after the weight will no longer move.  Then look at the time you just spent.  Any time spent without the muscle loaded–without proper form–does not count.

If your time exceeded the ideal of 1.5 to 3 minutes, then make the weights heavier for your next workout…so you’re not able to go as long.  If your time fell short of the ideal TUL, lighten the weights for your next workout.Keep adjusting as necessary.  As you begin to get it just right, you’ll feel a difference in the effectiveness of the exercise that must be experienced to be believed.

Of course, you’re always welcome to schedule a one-on-one workout at our private facility, www.myogenics.com, where one of our excellent trainers will be happy to guide you through everything discussed here (plus much more), give you feedback, keep you motivated, and take care of all the details of selecting and setting up the weights, so you can basically just show up.

Otherwise, go get a stopwatch, and start enjoying a more effective workout and a healthier, better looking body.

 -Chad