As A Middle Aged Dude, Myself – I Have to Agree!

Posted on May 14, 2013 by Sean

We get a lot of intelligent, interesting people wandering into our gym.  I am inspired by what I learn from many of these people.  I am very thankful for their insights; formed from their unique perspectives and experiences.  Many of the blogs I write are as a result of gaining these new insights.  Such was the case when a gentleman visited us the other day for a tour of the gym.

He spoke of an epiphany he recently experienced.  He had always enjoyed running, but was advised that this was actually the best way to lose fat and stay in shape, especially for a middle aged guy.  He had followed this advice over the previous few years and increased his running at the expense of other forms of exercise.  He even entered some 5k and eventually, 10k races.  He noticed a steady decrease in body fat, but also a marked decrease in muscle tissue.  Worse, his joints began to ache more and more as he increased his volume of running.  As he began to compete in the longer races, this joint pain reached agonizing new heights.

It was at the end of his last 10k race that he had the sudden realization.  Precisely, it was just past the finish line.  He had finished well – ahead of the pack and not far behind the winner.  Exhausted and joints aching, he took a moment after finishing the race.  He was leaning on his knees catching his breath in that oft seen position by many after a final push in such a competition.  Gasping for new air, he looked up for a second to catch a glimpse of the winners.  There they were in all of their glory.  The first place guy looked to be about 140 pounds of basically skin and bone.  These two elements seemed to define his physical composition entirely.  His limbs resembled what could best be described as uncooked spaghetti.  The 2nd place guy was a little heavier, probably 160 pounds, but with no visible muscle on his limbs and a sunken chest.  The strange part about this guy’s description was his very noticeable belly.

(Note:  This terrible predicament – a version of being “skinny fat” often occurs when muscle is not maintained.  Rather it is left to atrophy and diminish while cardio exercise volumes and intensities are increased.  The problem here is that the heart rate ends up too high to burn primarily body fat and so visible fat stubbornly remains)

Runner-1

runner-2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

runner-3 runner-4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“Yaaayyyy…We won!…I think?    ….uhmmm….maybe not!

Hey, why are those girls laughing?”

So this!….THIS, was what he could hope for?  These guys didn’t look like winners (except for the race).  From a purely physical standpoint, they looked more like losers.  He summarized:  “I’m going to do all this work, take all this time doing a repetitive, cyclic exercise and end up in THAT sorry physical state as my reward?”  At that point, he said he got a sick feeling in the pit of his stomach.  I nodded in complete agreement.

He suddenly realized that this was the physical end game he could hope for given his current strategy for physical improvement.  At this very moment he knew that physically, these guys and the many other advanced runners he had witnessed represented exactly what he DID NOT WANT!  This was aside from the increasing joint pain he endured.

I’ve got nothing against running longer distances.  If you love running – do it!  I highly respect any athlete and their success in their chosen sport.  BUT, as a MEANS of getting into what most guys generally consider to be “bad-ass” physical condition, I strongly submit that this is a really poor choice of physical activity.  This is most true if this type of exercise is used exclusively.

On the other hand, free weight resistance training using compound movements and with a strong emphasis on building strength and speed delivers the following (among many other) positive benefits:

  • Stronger bones, connective tissue and joints
  • Builds functional, fat burning muscle
  • Increases the production of anabolic hormones (like testosterone!)

 Training the way this gentleman had been, via running longer distances exclusively will do just the opposite.  But who really wants that?  If an individual is aware of these relative deleterious effects and accepts them to win a race I say “hats off” to you.  You deserve a medal for your sacrifice, fortitude and awesome competitiveness.  That is just NOT what this guy or most of the rest of us are after.  Not even close!  This cautionary little tale is a perfect example.

During our conversation, we both agreed that as we drift inexorably into middle age and beyond, we both wish to be the kind of guys that:

1.       “Other men fear” (okay, at least a little bit)

2.       “Women desire” (Somewhat at least.  Even if it’s just one of them)

Wander gracefully into the physical challenges of my middle years and beyond?  Surrender to the physical mediocrity and slowly spiraling function that comes with age?  Not on your life!  Bring em on….I’ve got a baseball bat and a samurai sword to greet them with.  One thing is for sure though; I am certainly NOT going to participate in time consuming exercise regimen that actually speeds up this ugly process.  No, on the contrary, I am going to do whatever slows down, stops or reverses this spiraling physical regression.

As a middle aged guy, I’ve got something I’d really like to express about “middle age”:

F&$K middle age!

……AND THAT GOES FOR ALL THE CREEPING, DELETERIOUS PHYSICAL EFFECTS OF EACH PASSING YEAR!

So, no offence, but as I drift into my older years I’d rather look and function like one of these guys:

Lifter-1 lifter-2

 

 

 

 

 

 

lifter-4

lifter-3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I’m happy to report that this gentleman joined our gym and is already putting on muscle.  He only spends a few hours in the gym, a few times a week.  He’s getting stronger, feeling great, looking better and his joint pain is dissipating fast.  Most importantly, all of these things are making him very, very happy.

Posted in Exercise, Lifestyle | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Under-Training vs. Over-Training

Posted on March 1, 2013 by Sean

For folks who have experienced it directly, successful strength training involves very little volume relative to the typical body building workouts to which we are commonly exposed. In fact, one of the biggest mistakes people make when first attempting this type of training is to apply body-building volumes to high intensity, low repetition strength workouts. These workouts include heavy compound exercises such as dead-lifts and squats.

It has been my experience that to keep the amazing results rolling right along, the volume needs to be kept in check and raised very slowly over time, especially with beginners. This has been reinforced by all of the analysis and research regarding those who have had great success with this form of athletic training. Crossing the line into overtraining = failure and burn-out. My strong suggestion is to always err on the side of “under-training”, especially given the surprisingly low volumes that provide optimal progress for beginners.

One of the best things about practicing elite athletic strength methodologies and principles is experiencing the relationship between training intensity, volume, and rest. As intensity goes up, generally volume will go down. Even better, as intensity goes up, rest and general restoration must also increase accordingly. Strength training is heavy on intensity. That means short workouts and lots of rest. This is new for most of us who have been reading the latest hypertrophy driven routine from a famous bodybuilder. Rather, with this type of training “Less is More.” Summarizing these relationships graphically:

Training Volume

red-Up-small                                                          green-down-sm                                               blue up arrow-sm

Intensity                                                                                                         Rest/Restoration

This is exactly why we will be spending much less time in the gym compared to many of the common lower intensity methods. It is also why these more common, fitness-culture and circuit training routines with their non-stop pace and high volume can seem so long and arduous. When training for intense strength and power, in a 1 hour training session, the actual time under a load will often be a mere 3 minutes or even less. Plenty of rest between the heaviest sets (up to 5 minutes or even more) is absolutely necessary.

For many of us, it’s hard to get our heads around the idea that relaxed stretching, massages and sitting in a Jacuzzi are required and necessary parts of your “training” if you want to maximize your results. Active rest which would include activities like leisurely walks outdoors, dancing, playing Frisbee or any type of fun physical activity or sport will highly improve your training. If you are lifting intensely, it is vital for you to be employing lots of active rest and relaxation on an ongoing basis, in-between breaking your records at the gym. Summarizing:

If you do not properly address active rest and restoration –
rest and restoration will address you!

Colds, the flu, and other illnesses can result regularly from a weakened immune system. Injuries will be far more likely and every few months you will hit a “wall” where gains will either stop or your strength will suddenly decreases sharply.

Likely because of the visual appeal, most people trying to get into shape tend to aspire to the body-builders and fitness models so prevalent in the fitness industry. Yet, when one is enlightened to the best strength training methods and principles, one of the most pleasant surprises is that with increased intensity comes increased, rest and restoration. So, not only do your results suddenly start going “through the roof” but you MUST spend much less time in the gym, relative to other less intense but often monotonous, time consuming exercise routines.

We have a natural tendency to correlate things in a directly linear way. If something is good for us, we then do more of it. If it is harmful or deleterious, we do less of it. Nature doesn’t work that way. That is precisely why practicing advanced athletic strength methodologies turns this relationship on its head – in the best way! Please err on the side of doing less; then over time do just little bit more. If results begin to decrease, wind back the volume until physical results in strength and performance return. Remember – rest and restoration and nutrition (EATING) are JUST AS NECESSARY as the training.

These guidelines are strongly supported by a tremendous body of documented research and experience. Following this advice will help to ensure steady progress, keep the program enjoyable and exhilarating and avoid injury and overtraining. In this respect, these active periods of rest are just as vital to progress as the actual training days. Enjoy this wonderful part of advanced training – rest and relaxation.

Posted in Exercise, Lifestyle | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

…..But I Really Liked “The China Study”

Posted on February 5, 2013 by Sean

Man!……If you are a practitioner and advocate of Paleolithic eating, this book will just keep coming back at you like a bad habit:

The Most Comprehensive Study of Nutrition Ever Conducted
The China Study
Startling Implications for Diet, Weight Loss and Long Term Health
T. Colin Campbell. PhD and Thomas M. Campbell

If you are expressive about the benefits of eating an evolutionary diet (like many of us tend to be); the veracity of this diet may be questioned by people who often use this book as a reference. I find this happens quite often.

If you have never read this book, I strongly suggest you get a copy. I have had a copy for years. I recommend it all the time. Great work! The message this book asserts is that if you want to remain in optimal health and avoid many chronic diseases, including cancer, then…

DO NOT EAT MEAT!…or any animal foods for that matter!

Believe it or not, I use this book primarily to promote a Paleolithic diet to help ensure optimal, permanent fat loss and exceedingly good health. But…the Paleolithic diet strongly suggests eating as much meat as you like, or any animal food for that matter!

Contradictory you say! On the surface only I rebut!

This book actually provides great research which strongly reinforces the veracity of eating Paleolithic era foods for optimal good health. Now, let me state from the outset that compared to all these great Phd’s and clinical experts who write books like this, I’m just a dumbass. I am though, a humble follower of evolutionary science in relation to anthropology and diet. I can read. I can also connect really big dots. I strongly contend this book is, on the surface, highly misrepresentative.

Nonetheless, just beneath its superficial message, one can find fantastic evidence supporting our human evolutionary diet for optimal health and well being. Ironically, this evidence also contradicts the book’s own superficial message, which is patronizingly repeated throughout its pages. With the facts revealed, that misrepresentation is exposed as sophomoric and perhaps mischievous at best. If you are aware of the truth, and take a more critical view, this book’s apparent message may be recognized as insulting to your intelligence. Either way, it is exposed as simply untrue.

One needs only to pay careful attention to a few spindly, barely mentioned little details or obvious omissions that unfortunately support the weak but grand facade that this book creates. As soon as these weak points are identified and removed, that facade quickly falls into a pile of rubble. What remains though, is of great value. When uncompromised by ideology, the research and findings of this book elegantly match those of evolutionary science.

Most critics of this book attack it directly. The most common criticism I have read states: “Observational studies, no matter how long or comprehensive do not prove cause” or “Correlation is not cause”. I think they miss the point – that is, the research in this book actually supports eating evolutionary foods – it just purposely obfuscates which ones.

I believe this was done because of the author’s strong philosophical and ideological beliefs. The opinions of the author are of course not science, yet they are strongly immersed and intermingled with the facts of the study.

Here is one of the most important little details that you need to be aware of regarding the massive study undertaken in this book:

(Pg 59, Paragraph 3)
“Controlling cancer through nutrition was, and still is, a radical idea. But as if this weren’t enough, one more issue would yield explosive information: did it make any difference what type of protein was used in these experiments? For all of these experiments we were using casein, which makes up 87% of cow’s milk protein.”

Now, is casein present in naturally raised animal foods, wild game, or any other Paleolithic era foods?

NOPE!

The plot thickens though, because casein is commonly added too, and found in the following foods:

• Processed meats – deli/lunch meats, sausages, hot dogs, etc.
• Processed foods
• Fast foods
• Baked goods

I can say with certainty that these foods ARE NOT on the Paleolithic “eat this” list! Cow’s milk and similar dairy products are most definitely NOT on the list of foods that humans consumed over approximately 6 million years of evolution.

Milk and dairy foods are of course where “milk protein” – that would be…uhmmm, CASEIN – is found.

Now, on to the fact that naturally raised meats have a different nutritional constituency than milk and processed or modern/industrially raised meats. This would represent a pesky little issue for the author in delivering his dire conclusions regarding the consumption of animal foods.

This difference though, is manifest scientifically in a large and growing-larger body of evidence; experimental, observational and practical. This evidence strongly suggests that the former (naturally raised/pastured animal foods) will deliver robust health and the latter (highly processed, industrially raised animal foods) will cause disease and ill-health. These are the sparse few words the authors use to discreetly dispense (erroneously) with this serious difference.

(Pg. 236, Paragraph 4)

“In practical terms, you aren’t doing yourself much good by eating organic beef instead of conventional beef that’s been pumped full of chemicals. The organic beef might be marginally healthier, but I would never say that it was a safe choice. Both types of beef have a similar nutrient profile”

This is sort of like saying that Hitler and Mother Theresa are essentially the same because they are both humans. The unmistakable inference here is that ANY animal foods, organic, industrially raised or otherwise are equally bad.

The reckless audacity here is the idea that the proven difference between these two types of animal food may be neatly dismissed with these few little sentences. I am still trying to figure out how such a smart guy, a tenured PhD can make these absurd links where food and deleterious health effects are concerned:

              Industrially raised              Pastured or
Milk = meat and processed        = otherwise naturally
             animal foods                           raised meat

This seems beyond a fallacy or error in deductive reasoning. Logically, it’s as disappointing as “guilt by association.”

Interestingly, thanks to most “big organic”, large scale animal food producers, these animals are not naturally raised whatsoever. These confined animals are simply fed “organic” grains like corn and other “organic” feed that are not at all a part of their natural diets. So, ironically, his use of the word “organic” in most modern instances will denote mediocre, sub-standard animal food (falling demonstrably into the “industrially raised” category).

This is completely wrong though if the inference holds that “pastured” or otherwise naturally raised animal foods are a part of this misleading, bizarre, and INCORRECT “chain of equality”. In dramatic writing, I believe this lack of any true transition is termed “melodrama.”

On to likely the most condescending statement in this book:

(Pg 110, Paragraph 3)
“As you go through each chapter, you will begin to see the breadth and depth of the astonishing scientific argument favoring a whole foods, plant based diet. For me, the consistency of evidence regarding such a disparate group of diseases has been the most convincing aspect of this argument.

When a whole foods, plant based diet is demonstrably beneficial for such a wide variety of diseases, is it possible that humans were meant to consume any other diet? I say no, and I think you’ll agree.”

Right!….To hell with Darwin! To hell with evolution and the sanctity, beauty and perfection of all natural processes and their infinitely sophisticated interactions over time.
The author’s statement here is patently absurd for too many reasons to list. His stated submission is perhaps the most cursory, unscientific, flippant contradiction to evolution I have ever read.

This author obviously has a better idea. This amounts to a doctor telling the human species (us!) that we are really NOT what we in fact absolutely, unequivocally are: OMNIVOROUS! This is like communicating to all dogs (or dog owners) that dogs should no longer be eating any meats, whatsoever – utterly ridiculous.

I’ve seen ambitious before. But in the annals of human anthropology, this was new. Bold isn’t the word. Correct isn’t the word either. It makes one wonder what would make even such a really smart guy think he could suggest, beyond the confines or reason, science, logic and all things natural, what is clearly wrong.

Now the author is known to follow a Vegan diet. I really respect Vegans. I have quite a few vegetarian and Vegan friends. They sacrifice what is part of their rightful evolutionary diet for something greater.

I find this to be a higher, more spiritual choice. I also highly respect their love and respect of all animal life. I consider myself below these people in regard to their empathy for other species. They transcend a purely zoological outlook with a higher philosophy. Regardless, that has nothing to do with what scientifically represents the healthiest diet for the human species to follow.

Mixing your spiritual beliefs with observational research and statistics in some kind of a bizarre literary cocktail in this instance does nothing for human health. It does create massive confusion. This is especially true because the misinformation is so well presented by such an intelligent doctor with such remarkable credentials. He should write another book on the apparent vulnerability of humans to contradict science and nature for the sake of one’s own personal opinions and ideology.

He would be the perfect test subject.
Is the book more than a little patronizing? Absolutely….at least that’s my humble opinion. But I value it immensely because the research is summarizes, inherently suggests that…

MILK AND MODERN, PROCESSED MEAT PRODUCTS ARE REALLY, REALLY BAD FOR US!
…and THAT…. is very useful information

Posted in Lifestyle, Modern Diet | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

I Hear This Story A Lot!

Posted on January 28, 2013 by Sean

At our gym, we get a lot of people visiting who have spent years training at other gyms. They often tell us, politely “No! I don’t need a tour! I really know my way around the gym”. This is usually true; they are very familiar with every inch of a typical gym. Many of these nice folks have spent years and years – countless hours working out at a variety of popular bodybuilding or fitness gyms. They know the equipment and the accessories inside-out.

Some of the most interesting folks have actual experience competing in bodybuilding or figure contests. These contests represent serious dedication and long, long hours of training. They also represent extreme denial and discipline especially with respect to dieting. Then there is the tanning, practicing a “routine”, the stress, juggling work and family, etc.

What is amazing is that pretty much every one of these folks who had a contest a few years ago is visibly out of shape. They know it. They almost always mention this. “I have put on an extra 30 pounds since then, but man was I in shape for that contest”. A few show me very impressive pictures taken at their competition a few years back.
Experiencing these visits over and over again, I am always excited to introduce advanced strength methods and equipment to these folks. There’s a great reason for that. On this decidedly more functional side of the training spectrum, these wide aesthetic vacillations or visible “swings” in and out of shape generally do not occur.
We always end up walking around the gym and chatting anyways, even though they didn’t want a formal tour. Questions invariably follow about some of our equipment. The rows of over-sized metal chains, the large numbers of big metal racks and platforms, unusual bars, a reverse hyper machine, weighted sled, belt squat platform; one or more of these things usually arouses their curiosity. Sometimes it’s the obvious omission of equipment like a preacher’s curl, leg extension, “Pec-deck”, or other muscle isolating machines they became very familiar with at other gyms.
The fact is, all of the folks I know on the athletic side of resistance training are always in fantastic aesthetic shape or very, very close. Unless they are super-heavy weights or play sports (football linemen, super-heavy weight divisions) where added body weight is an advantage, this is generally the norm. They just don’t seem to have the same body fat or fitness “hills and valleys”.
As far as I can tell, this is because athletic strength training does not require the same high volumes of discipline, time, and dieting that the purely aesthetic or bodybuilding form or training demands. The intensity is generally much higher and so there is much less time in the gym. Active rest and restoration are a required part of the training. Combined with a responsible diet – consistently exceptional results both functional AND aesthetic are a foregone conclusion.

Posted in Exercise | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

How We Are Set Up to Fail by The Gym Industry….. The Plot Thickens!

Posted on January 22, 2013 by Sean
Here are a few interesting statistics courtesy of the broader gym industry:
 
“Up to 45 percent of fitness-club members quit going in any given year” 
(International Health, Racquet & Sports Club Association)
 
“It’s a statistical fact that 93% of people quit going to the gym or quit using their home equipment in the first 90 days” 
(quickgymcs.com)
 
“Nine out of ten people stop using the gym after just 3 months” 
(Dr. Stuart Farrimond)
 
“…most people who make those resolutions trip up in the first 90 days.”  
(Alan Marlatt, the director of the Addictive Behaviors Research Center at the University of Washington)  
 
I wrote a blog a few months back that included 16 reasons why our gym does not have a predominance of isolating fitness machines.  Rather, we have racks, platforms, specialty bars, chains, bands, plyo-boxes, etc.  I originally wrote these reasons down and posted them in the gym as an explanation for visitors and newcomers.  This saves us a lot of talking when new folks ask “where are all the machines?”  
 
This type of equipment obviously dominates the floor space of many typical gyms.  The idea is that these isolating machines allow a person to individually work all of the major muscles, one at a time in a full body circuit and then go home.  Regarding our intentional omission of this type of equipment, there is a 17th reason which is perhaps more important than the first 16.  This reason really sheds light on why so many of us just quit going to the gym, as the statistics and references noted above strongly reinforce.
 
There is an abundance of evidence both statistical and anecdotal showing a sharp drop off in gym attendance from February to the end of March each year.  This correlates almost perfectly with all of the great research and experience I have read on the topic of advanced human performance regarding “neuro-muscular fatigue” and “accommodation” (lack of new adaptation) from the ongoing use of typical movement-isolating gym machines.  These are just clinical terms for the rather simple idea that your mind and body “get sick and tired” of doing the same exercise.  This predicament is manifest via plateaus or decreases in strength and performance of the exercises.  The physical results that use of this equipment is supposed to create – creation of attractive new muscle, etc – will then also stop.  In many cases, even though we continue to “do our work” at the gym, these results can even diminish.
 
Allow me to cite some scientific conclusions on this proven phenomenon.  Please consider the words of a few of the most highly regarded and respected scientists and trainers on this topic.    These venerated experts are responsible for the most proven work on the production of optimal human physical performance.  This work has, and continues to produce the fastest, strongest athletes on the planet.
 
Training means:  an exercise, a complex motor action with a defined motor structure (Yuri Verkhoshansky)
 
Training “methods” then, involve the way the exercise (means) is executed.  
 
“When the training means ceases in assuring the increase in the corresponding parameters of the special work capacity (ie. Its training potential has already been realized/depleted), this means must be gradually substituted by a new means having higher training potential.”  
(Yuri Verkhoshansky & Natalia Verkhoshansky, Special Strength Training Manual for Coaches, 2011)
 
“When I plan an athlete’s training, I incorporate a change in the means employed every 3 weeks; not waiting until the interest in them has waned.  At the present time, specialists are inclined to believe that one should employ the same means for no more than 3 months”  “There are a number who recommend that one periodically change the methods; since they lose their effectiveness after approximately one month” 
(A.S. Medvedyev, A System of Multi-Year Training in Weightlifting, 1986)
 
“If a greater number of strength exercises is distributed, even if the athlete does a great amount of work, the effort will be better tolerated.  If, on the contrary, only classical exercises are planned during training, then fatigue will appear faster, even if the general amount of work is more reduced” 
(Weightlifting – Fitness For All Sports, Dr. Tamas Ajan, Prof. Lazar Baroga, 1988)
 
It should be emphasized that the long-term use of the same means, even if the volume is increased, not only will not increase one’s level of special fitness, but will also decrease the existing level of speed-strength and especially, maximum strength.”  (Supertraining, Mel C Siff PhD, 2004)
 
The same message is repeated in all of the best, most highly regarded canons of research on human physical performance, again and again.  These great minds and others like them have achieved general consensus on this subject.  They are all saying the same thing.  Regarding the training “means” – Change it up, or your body will adapt and you’ll see little to no results, you may even go backwards.  This occurs generally in a period of 3 months or even less.  
 
Worse still, these revered experts are not even directly referring to the hyper-restrictive machines most of us are exposed to at bigger commercial gyms.  Unfortunately for the unenlightened, these machines even control aspects of the “method”.  That is, the way we may change the actual use of the “means” (exercise) – type of muscular contraction, speed of movement, slight changes in the actual movement, etc.  Thus, other than changing the amount of resistance (the weight stack), the “method” of using this type of equipment is also greatly restricted.  
 
Thus, the message from these experts is even more damning in regard to these machines and their relative lack of effectiveness.  Their conclusions help to expose the real reason “why” people so commonly “quit” going to the gym and working out all-together – a distinctly apparent lack of progress despite their work, time and effort.    
 
The powers that be in the fitness industry tend to know this.  This keeps a very small percentage (often only 3%) of paying gym members actually attending the gym more than a few times a week.  This in turn allows gym owners to add more members.  Why not?  Most of them won’t show up anyways.  Next time you are in a large, glitzy, corporate gym ask how many members they have.  The average is generally 3,000 – 5,000 but can be much higher.  I wonder what would happen if even one quarter of those folks all showed up on the same night?  Those shiny machines sure look great though, and they certainly do the trick on the initial tour to get prospective members to sign up.  These people are usually sold membership contracts for 1 or 2 years without knowing they are being set up to fail, right from the start via the cool-looking but highly ineffective equipment they will be using.  
 
Where athletes are concerned, this situation cannot afford to exist!  More reason for the public to train like our best athletes.  So the next time you go to a big gym and see a floor dominated by all forms of isolating gym machine, you will recognize it for what it is…a room literally set up to help ensure your failure.  If, after about 3 months of motivated efforts the results are simply not forthcoming, who WOULD continue?  The really terrible part of all this is that we blame ourselves when this happens.  “I must have just lost my will-power.” “I guess I just got lazy” “I can’t believe I’m paying for something I’m too lazy to use”.  In reality, the very room in which you are working out and the equipment that fills it are helping to ensure your failure.  
Posted in Exercise | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Once Mighty

Posted on January 15, 2013 by Sean

In the United States, in a legal sense corporations can be treated similarly to “people.” That being the case, the gigantic, agro-industrial corporations responsible for the vast majority of our over-processed foods may be referred to as proper Ass#$%!s. To all these nasty “people” I can utter one truly ominous word in regard to their perhaps less than rosy futures…..

“HOSTESS”

Crippling labor disputes aside, Karma’s a bitch! Where healthy food is concerned, for the enlightened the names “Wonder” bread, “Twinkies”, “Ho-Hos”, “Sno-Balls”, and “Ring Dings” are indeed – mud. For us, they are lower than worthless. They represent toxic “faux-foods” of the worst kind.

Yes, it’s true that some other processed food company may buy the rights to these awful names. While the sales of these once popular processed food items have dwindled, unfortunately there are still some poor unenlightened souls who will continue to suffer the long term consequences of eating this garbage.

So, like processed food “brand Zombies”, these awful chemical creations of the food industry may continue to cause untold harm. Hopefully, the value of these brands will reflect the truth.

That would be that their true values are less than zero. We can only pray.
May Hostess Brands, among the others that will inevitably join them rest not in peace. That is, may they not be remembered fondly, but rather with disgust and disdain. More importantly, may they remain dead!

Posted in Modern Diet | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

“Red Meat Consumption and Mortality” – Thank You Harvard!…..(I think?)

Posted on January 4, 2013 by Sean

It’s been months since the conclusions of a Harvard study in epidemiology first hit the mainstream media on March 12, 2012. I believe most of the dust has settled resulting from the controversy this work created. It was conducted by members of the Harvard School of Public Health and published in the Archives of Internal Medicine:

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/press-releases/2012-releases/red-meat-cardiovascular-cancer-mortality.html

The purpose of this study was to discover the relationship between red meat consumption and mortality. Basically, it observed the diets of approximately 140,000 men and women for up to 28 years. Summarizing, the results were as follows:

“Red meat consumption is associated with an increased risk of total Cardio-vascular disease and cancer mortality. Substitution of other healthy protein sources for red meat is associated with a lower mortality risk”

Now, in this study all of the red meat consumed was either qualified as unprocessed – beef, pork, or lamb or processed, which included: bacon, hot dogs, sausage, salami, bologna, and other processed meats. Specifically:

 “In these two large prospective cohorts of US men and women, we found that a higher intake of red meat was associated with a significantly elevated risk of total, cardiovascular disease and cancer mortality, and this association was observed for unprocessed and processed red meat, with a relatively greater risk for processed red meat.”

 As one would expect, the fine folks at Harvard took into account all of the covariates, such as age, body mass index, smoking, physical activity, congenital or family history of disease, illnesses, etc. They also provided the expected, requisite explanation of all the statistics and other data.

This study caused an uproar with high protein diet advocates and experts. Much of the vitriolic criticism directed at this study came from the “Atkins” and ketogenic dietary camps. Some of it came from those who respect and follow a Paleolithic or human evolutionary dietary philosophy. Being a dedicated practitioner of Paleolithic eating, I fully understood this dissention. I have since read many of the stormy, critical comments from very intelligent, scientific people.

What surprised me the most about the harsh critiques of this study was that they primarily dwelled on the following points of contention:

  •  This was an “observational” study, and as such was inherently flawed. That is, a hypothesis may not be tested scientifically through observation alone.
  • The subjects in the study likely did not answer their questions honestly all of the time.
  • It would be very unlikely that the subjects of the study could accurately remember all of the food they had consumed when recording this at a later time.
  • Scientific studies are often misrepresented by the researchers who conduct them.
  • The red meat definition included both processed and unprocessed versions, and the unprocessed versions are likely far worse; misrepresenting the accuracy of the final conclusion.
  • Meat eating could be a marker for those adopting other less healthy lifestyle habits which would also likely increase chances of mortality.
  • Correlation is not cause.

Alright, that stuff all makes sense – great critical commentary. Hooray for our side!

Wait a minute….. Something about the results of this study still gnaws at me. The idea that these findings are “wrong” just doesn’t sit right. Somehow, I just know that if you regularly eat lots and lots of “slim-jims”, hot dogs, steaks, ground beef, bologna and pork from the grocery store – you’ll be far more likely to get heart disease or cancer, than if you didn’t eat those foods. I’ve been to places like Ruth’s Chris Steak house and the processed meats section of the grocery store. I see the obvious, anecdotal test subjects regularly consuming these foods. I think we all do!

I have used our Paleolithic era diet as my dietary compass with smashing success for over 20 years. I eat as much red meat as I want – and I eat a lot of it. My blood work and that of all the Paleo-diet people I know comes back scoring in the highest percentiles indicating good health. So how can the diet and health of true Paleo-diet practitioners and the findings of this Harvard study be so contradictory? I submit to you that they are not. In fact, they absolutely support each other.

A vital tenet of successfully following a Paleolithic diet is ensuring that the animal foods consumed are PASTURED, NATURALLY RAISED, OR OTHERWISE AS CLOSE TO WILD AS POSSIBLE.

 The difference between the meats used in this study and the meats true Paleo practitioners consume is like NIGHT VS. DAY.

 Surprisingly, this fact was but a mere footnote mentioned at the end (if at all) in the many dissenting commentaries I have read that criticized this Harvard study.

I contacted The Harvard School of Public Health directly just to make sure I wasn’t missing anything here. I wanted to be sure that there was a very high likelihood the subjects in this study were eating the modern, industrially raised red meats most commonly consumed in our society. My email was returned by one of the Doctors who conducted the study.

 “We did not have the information on whether the red meats were from grain-fed or grass-fed animals, and I am not aware of any other cohort studies that have this kind of data. But since the cohort was run from 1980s towards now, I assume that most of the red meats in the markets were grain-fed meats.”

In the comments part of this study, there in an attempt to address “why?” they discovered a correlation between eating modern red meat and increased mortality. Specifically, the study identifies the likely causal elements in red meat, high consumption of which are strongly associated with disease; including:

  • Saturated fat
  • Cholesterol levels
  • Sodium
  • Nitrates

This helped to confirm the high likelihood that the “unprocessed” meats especially from this study were not from “pastured, naturally raised” cows, pigs, or lambs. Specifically, addressing this list of suspected causal agents, for modern vs. pastured red meat, it reads almost like two arrows pointing in opposite directions. With respect to these factors, one type of meat (mass consumed, industrially-farmed) points to ill-health and disease, with the other (pastured, naturally raised meat) directing the other way, toward good health.

This is what actually unifies the findings of this study with the truth. You see, this study might be observational, but the health ramifications of eating our modern, confined-animal feeding operation foods, vs. those which are truly naturally raised are indeed profound. Thanks to the great scientific minds at the forefront of evolutionary science and anthropology these differences are well understood. The evidence continues to stack up. Here are a few of the highlights:

Technological developments of the industrial revolution allowed for the practice of feeding grains (primarily corn) to cattle in feedlots. In the USA, prior to 1850 virtually all cattle were free range or pasture fed and were typically slaughtered at 4-5 years. Modern feedlots hold over 100,000 cattle that are characteristically obese (>30% body fat) and a 545 kg steer can be brought to slaughter in 14 months. “Marbled” meat results from excessive triacylglycerol accumulation in muscle interfascicular adipocytes. Animals in the wild, pasture fed or free range rarely exhibit this trait. 99% of all beef consumed in the USA is now produced from grain fed, feed lot cattle. Such meat has a much higher proportion of (omega) N-6 fatty acids to (omega) N-3 and a much higher SFA (saturated fatty acid) content.

 Research strongly suggests that absolute amount of dietary fat is less important than type of fat. Most SFA’s (saturated fatty acids) and trans- fatty acids are detrimental when consumed in excessive quantities. Further, the balance between (omega)n-3 and (omega) n-6 PUFA’s (poly unsaturated fatty acids) is integral in preventing chronic disease and promoting health. High intakes of SFA’s and trans-fatty acids increase the risk of CVD by elevating blood concentrations of total and LDL (low-density lipoproteins) (cholesterol). Higher intakes of (omega)n-3 PUFA’s (poly unsaturated fatty acids) may reduce CVD (cardiovascular disease) risk via reducing ventricular arrhythmias, blood clotting, serum triacylglycerol concentrations, growth of atherosclerotic plaques and blood pressure. They are also highly therapeutic in preventing or minimizing many inflammatory and autoimmune diseases.

The 6 major sources of SFA’s (saturated fatty acids) in the United States are:

1 Fatty meats
2 Baked goods
3 Cheese
4 Milk
5 Margarine
6 Butter

 This trend was exacerbated as meat from grain fed cattle and livestock became the norm in the US diet. The current ratio in the USA of (omega)n-6 to (omega)n-3 PUFA’s (poly unsaturated fatty acids) has risen to 10:1 whereas the ratio in hunter-gatherer diets predominant in wild animal foods was 2:1 or 3:1.

(Origins and Evolution of the Western Diet: Health Implications for the 21st Century-Loren Cordain, Boyd Eaton)

The ostensible, large body of evidence regarding the positive health effects of eating naturally raised animals as part of a healthy diet is beyond compelling. Granted, there is a difference between typical pastured cows and the lean wild game meats that our ancestors consumed (and that many Paleo-diet people increasingly consume). No doubt, over 2000 years of animal husbandry has made our most commonly consumed meats less lean than they would have been, had they remained wild. Nonetheless, the differences are still vast when we compare these same animals, raised in a truly organic, natural way vs. their highly industrial counterparts. Pease consider this classic use of hypothetical “twins” in contemplating the lives of two newborn cows:

 Twin #1
From birth, this cow will get nursed by its mother. It will then naturally begin to eat grass from the pasture wherein it roams. It will drink only clean water. Finally, it will live socially within a herd of other cows, roaming around in an expansive, natural pasture as these animals would in the wild.

 Twin #2
This cow will be taken from its mother prematurely. It will not be allowed to move around. It will be raised indoors in a confined space barely larger than the animal itself. It will be force fed low grade corn, and other dead animals rendered into its feed as cheap protein. It will also be fed antibiotics to keep it alive since its unnatural diet will cause severe ill-health. This cow will also be administered growth hormone and or/steroids to make it as large as possible and speed up its growth before it is inhumanely slaughtered.

Which cow would you prefer to consume, especially knowing their parents were raised the same way? Which one do you think would be healthier one to eat? We already know the answer to this question. Now, the vast majority of the “unprocessed” cuts of meat for the Harvard study – that is, “New York and T-bone” steaks, and the really crappy hot dogs, sausages, deli meats, etc – would have all been from cows like “Twin #2”. Thus, this Harvard study only reinforces what our great minds in the world of evolutionary science have already discovered and dispensed to the rest of us. Yup, red meats from mass produced, industrially raised, grain fed (among other horribly unnatural things) animals, whether processed or unprocessed…..

 ARE FREAKING BAD FOR YOU AND ARE LIKELY TO INCREASE YOUR CHANCES OF DYING

 THANK YOU HARVARD!

 This study just tells most Paleo-diet folks what they already knew. Modern meat, processed or unprocessed can be dangerous to your health, especially relative to its naturally raised/pastured counterpart. The processed or un-processed makes little difference to us. Hell, to us IT’S ALL PROCESSED because the poor animals are not allowed to live out their lives in their natural habitats consuming ONLY WHAT NATURE AND EVOLUTION INTENDED THEM TO CONSUME. Regardless as to whether the animal ends up in a hot dog, ground beef, or a rib-eye steak – modern industrially raised meats are inherently unhealthy.

Regardless of any congruencies of this study to the truths being exposed by evolutionary science, what is tragic about this study is the confusion it creates regarding red meat consumption. It you take the time to discover the truth, the vast nutritional difference between foods from naturally raised vs. industrially raised animals will become quite apparent. It’s important for people to know this before being confronted with the results of such studies.

For the public who may not be aware of the differences outlined above, the confusing dietary “snakes and ladders” game just continues. That is partially because strong advocates against meat consumption will use studies like this to push their respective agendas. This will be supported by the idea (incorrect or not) that red meat is really bad for you and can actually kill you. Yet, this simply isn’t true.

There is an obvious and natural corollary from this study. The useful conclusion to apply is this:

 If you are going to eat food from any animal, to optimize your health and protect yourself from disease:

make sure it was naturally raised!

 

Posted in Modern Diet | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

How to Best Reduce the Diabetes Epidemic….You’re Kidding, Right?

Posted on November 25, 2012 by Sean

I heard a doctor being interviewed on the radio the other morning. He was an expert from a diabetes organization talking about the alarming rates of increase for that disease. He had some truly frightening information. In 2001 the number of people with type II diabetes was approximately 11 million. At that time, the estimated rate of increase for diabetes in America was projected to be 30 million by the year 2050. The disturbing news was that we had already hit that number back in 2011. He spoke of grave concern over the lack of awareness of this information among the public in general.

Probably the scariest part of his message was regarding fixing this problem. He kept repeating it over and over again “people must get fit! They must start exercising and getting into shape” What? So, this guy is a doctor and an expert on the subject and this?!?! This is his answer??? Wait a second. What seems to cause type II diabetes? Well, we know that the greatest co-factor to this disease is being overweight or obese. Aside from having excess body fat, we know that a very high percentage of people with this disease DON’T follow a healthy diet. This correlates perfectly with the overweight co-factor. Regarding this note on lifestyle, most people who DO follow a healthy diet simply avoid this form of diabetes. Regarding this disease, a healthy diet would be generally defined as one high in fiber, with a high polyunsaturated to saturated fat ratio, and a lower mean glycemic index (less sugar resulting in less blood glucose). This would lead any rational, reasonable person to address this problem directly by consuming much less sugar and fewer calories in order to lose body fat.

Note: our evolutionary diet delivers the general parameters of this “healthy diet” to the fullest. Yet, it goes much further by providing an exceptionally low glycemic index, even more quality fiber and mostly healthy fats relative to other dietary plans that include many of our modern foods and food groups. Even better, research has shown that the health effects of this diet on those suffering from type II diabetes have been extremely positive. To those people and populations to which this diet has been a way of life, this disease is practically non-existent.

Intuitively then, the first solution then would be to change one’s DIET. To concentrate on exercise would miss the mark entirely. Further, it has been proven that exercise does not work against modern food to considerably lower body fat (just see the lousy results from the CDC diabetes prevention program). Even the non-clinical host of the show added with a quizzical tone in his voice….”and consume less sugar?” as he openly questioned the doctor’s advice.

Answers like this seem to be relentlessly propagated by the media as we torture and deny overweight people in television shows like “The Biggest Loser”. All the while, corporate interests sponsoring such shows, as an example, sell low-grade, fast food sandwiches full of low nutrient, industrially processed ingredients. The doctor on this radio show seemed to echo the same advice that is generally provided to the public regarding this disease. It could be said that he also represented the general lack of good information regarding how to best fight this terrible disease.

Unfortunately, the best known educational and medical institutions we rely on for diet and disease information seem to consider the true causes of this epidemic disease – branded, processed, high-fat and high-sugar foods – as “verboten”. This is a strange, obvious and outright refusal to deal with the truth head-on and actually do something materially effective about preventing and treating this awful disease.

No doubt, this course of action is likely attributable to the fact that most of these organizations, their doctors and experts are funded and sponsored by the same food companies that create those highly processed and over-sweetened food products.

Posted in Exercise, Lifestyle, Modern Diet | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

My Friend Greg

Posted on November 19, 2012 by Sean
A friend of mine, Greg Carver is an accomplished trainer and gym owner. His quote the other day on Twitter speaks volumes:

“I dunno?  I eat more paleo foods, I work out, and my blood work just keeps getting better”

Enough said!

Posted in Exercise, Lifestyle, Modern Diet | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

A Funny Thing Happens…

Posted on November 10, 2012 by Sean
I am 47 years old.  I have had the pleasure of coming to know other fine folks my age and older at the gym over the last few years.  Like me, these folks are trying their hardest to get into better physical shape.  Within this group specifically, I have noticed a really interesting phenomenon.  

A funny thing happens when you apply physical training principles reserved mostly for elite athletes of a much younger age, to folks our age.  You would think that most of us would resist such a seemingly crazy notion.  Quite the contrary, I see folks our age seize the opportunity.  

I have personally seen many people; middle aged like me, or years older who tenaciously embrace the training means and methods of elite athletes.  

I have seen them change physically before my very eyes.  Months quickly pass and as they do bellies disappear, shoulders grow, and arms and legs become defined with new muscle.  Body fat disappears quickly as shapely muscle becomes apparent and burns it off continually. 

 Training progressions aren’t approached tepidly, rather they are attacked.  A solid low-bar back squat progresses to running with the prowler, with a few plates, than a stack.   Basic bench pressing advances to pressing off pins with supra-maximal weights and heavy chains.  Plyometrics, body weight exercises with added weight and chains, isometrics, they tackle them all as their strength and physical prowess improves.  

A confident clap of the hands fills the air with chalk dust just before they set yet another new 1RM record.  This is complete with involuntary, guttural expression signifying extreme effort and the loud clanging of a heavy weight into the rack that confirms a new level of physical strength and speed has just been attained.  
Real results fuel more intense workouts, exercises and more advanced progressions.  

These things in-turn create even better, never-imagined results.  Youthful or even higher levels of physical performance are back – with a fury!  People my age and older just need the opportunity.  We just need to be given the chance.  

This revelation of intestinal fortitude always seems more evident with folks my age or older than with younger people.  Maybe it’s the desperation caused by passing years that causes us to ferociously fight back.  These folks tend to train like fighters preparing for a championship bout. 

 They were never lazy or less functional due to creeping years alone.  Rather, their true physical ability was hidden, left unused.  Generally, in the fitness industry many folks our age are left in “physical fitness limbo” just because of our age.  

It pleases me to no end to see my age group and older people free to truly express themselves to the limits of their physical abilities and beyond.  

Many folks our age are sent out to the “fitness pasture” by most of the fitness industry.  Much of this patronizing treatment is for insurance and liability reasons.  That may be optimal for most big gym chains, but it most certainly isn’t optimal for us.  At our strength gym this is never allowed to happen. 

 Herding folks into low impact aerobics classes and slow, controlled movements in the comfortable gym machines cannot and will not happen.  Our programs involve squats, dead-lifts, bench pressing, Olympic lifts and all of their variations, speeds and applications.  

Advanced progressions are all there for the taking.  There should never be any limits, regardless of age or gender.  At our gym, there never will be.

My Pal Greg

A friend of mine, Greg Carver is an accomplished trainer and gym owner. His quote the other day on Twitter speaks volumes:

“I dunno?  I eat more paleo foods, I work out, and my blood work just keeps getting better”

Enough said!

Posted in Exercise, Modern Diet | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment