The EvoT Project

This used to be my personal training blog, but that's going to change soon. Soon I am going to use this space as part of the EvoT project. The EvoT project is a pedagogical excursion aimed at helping people understand the principles of evolutionary theory and science through personal lifestyle changes. Our motto is "walk the walk to talk the talk" (of evolution). Seriously, what better way to get people to understand the details of evolutionary science then to show them how it can, here and now in 2010, affect their daily lives? To show them how things like the industrial revolution, with respect to food, has created a lot of the modern diseases we see? To show them how sedentary lifestyles (e.g. sitting at a desk all day and then in front of the television all evening) approximate nothing like what our ancestors face and also contributes to a plethora of modern disease, namely obesity. EvoT is charged with changing the behavior of people in order to help update and modify their cognition about evolutionary science. This is not a stop believing in your God blog. Rather, we feel that your belief system are perfectly in line with an evolutionary theory we back so keep on keeping on if you like. Rather, we simply want to utilize a prescription of small changes in your daily routine to educate you about how your body works. And make you aware of your body - inside and out - in a completely new educational endeavor. Interested? Hop on board!

USDA Releases new nutrition guidelines, but missed again....

Read my thoughts here....

Paleo Licking Good!

Note: I have not read every document in great detail, but plan to, this is just an initial reaction from a sampling of the documents that have been produced. Amazing that after 15years of thinking about this, the revision says virtually nothing different.... Are we haunted by bad nutrition ghosts...? LOL

McDonalds recalls the wrong thing!

Recently McDonald's in honor of the new shrek toy has released another form of of associatively based obesity conditioning ploy known as the Happy Meal Toy. This is how it works and you don't have to think too hard about Pavlov to get the idea here. Pair a fun toy (Pavlov's meat powder) with another stimulus, bad food ridden with toxins (bell) and voila you get kids who become associatively conditioned to realize that bad toxic food (that which is served at McDonald's) is associated with a toy (pleasure). It's quite clever actually and you'd expect nothing less from a giant like McDonald's to use such a clever ploy to get people to buy their product, you know because Americans are really staving off that sort of diet ;-) NOT! What's really clever about it is that it's an experiment almost opposite to trying to develop conditioned taste aversion to an alcoholic or addictive substance. The pleasure more or less over rides the aversive response and addicts keep drinking, snorting, smoking or whatever, even in lieu of the fact that they feel terrible, get ill, vomit profusely, etc. For this case, they are feeding what should make the average person ill (in fact, I know, from self-experimentation, if I were to drive up and order a fast food meal I would be ill very shortly after eating it because my bodies been more or less detoxified). However, in the well-conditioned (to the toxins not fitness that is) there is the development of a resistance. Like a vaccine or sorts.

At any rate, the latest toys are associated with the release of the new Shrek movie and they are plastic glasses. Doesn't sound like fun? You don't have your favorite glass, mug or cup? I do. So does my wife. And so does just about every kid I know. However, the new glasses/cups have a toxin cadmium in them and this has forced McDonald's to recall the glasses. For goodness sake, they would not want their patrons being poisoned from drinking their fructose loaded soda pop from a poisonous cup. They would not want their customers washing down that tasty (toxin loaded, non-organic, shit-fed beef) burger with toxic soda from a poisonous cup, would they? My word, they might lose a customer. In fact, the cadmium poisoning should be the last of their concern. Perhaps McDonald's should consider recalling their menu and serving something a bit healthy and organic and not sugar even their salads!

There is a big to do recently about the discovery of new genes that could regulate obesity. These genes are presumably associated with the regulation of everything from the brain's ability to modulate a person's perception and desire for certain high-fat foods to the bodies ability to differentially utilize and store saturated fats (and of course the old Cholesterol myth is embedded in that one). However, in none of the studies did I read mention (granted I only skimmed the articles) of hyerinsulinimia and silent inflammation. In none of these studies do they talk about the baseline healthy state - an ancestral state. This really gets me fired up.

Yesterday, I was having a conversation with a relative, we were discussing that some friends and relatives are going in for surgery - apparently elective and not critical life-saving procedures. Rather these were surgeries for things that crept up on the person. Stomach pains. Pelvic issues. Inflammation. The list goes on, but I will spare you. The person I was talking to, my mother, and I then went on to consider each person' baseline state of health, from an ancestral living standpoint. Turns out that every single person we were talking about has terrible eating habits and does no exercise whatsoever. When is the medical community and the research community going to put aside, at least momentarily the idea of the reductionist model of medicine and begin to take into account the ultimate causes of illness and bad health. I used this example to explain to my mother. If I am going to prescribe a bunch of meds and surgery to a patient who is knowingly not in a baseline, ancestral state of health and wellness I am essentially doing two things: 1) treating only symptoms, for which I know nothing of the true etiology and 2) possibly causing more harm then good. I made this parallel: Treating the non-baselined patient is like starting to paint a master piece, except your canvas already has some really bad art on it. So now you have to cover up all that bad art, which you can never completely do. Then you have to make your masterpiece shine through even though some of the bad art might still be visible in the right light, at the right angle. Or you might add a color, say blue to an area that you thought was covered adequately, although it was not and now your masterpiece, which had a touch of yellow that you failed to take notice of, shows as green. Well if this portion of your masterpiece was the sky, I've never seen a green sky (yellow & blue make green). The human body, as evolution has crafted it, is a masterpiece. What we've done through USDA "intervention on our behalf" and through poor eating habits (partly not our fault as the powers that be have hijacked deep evolutionary psychological processes to their advantage) is painted over our masterpiece and essentially fucked it up! Royally!

What to do? Clean the slate. Go back to the masterpiece. Unlike the painting, in most cases we can eradicate the "bad art" overlay and get back to a baseline condition. It takes hard work, dedication, good eating habits and exercise, but it's possible. Once at this stage, then if issues, problems, and disease persist, physicians, I would think, would be in a better position to treat the "real" disease.

I am not a medical doctor, but when in the hell are medical colleges going to start prescribing Darwinian Medicine and Health to their students? I just don't think anyone can be held responsible for our health except our selves. So, while I truly believe in Evolution and that genes determine a lot of things, in the cases reported above regarding obesity I think that we've missed the epigenetic train folks. We've not taken into account that our toxic environment might have altered gene expression in a way to survive. We've not discovered a possible new reason for obesity, we've discovered a new genetic expression of obesity. So what will happen now? We will try to develop (20-30 years of research) ways to treat the genes, the proteins the genes regulate, etc. And we will probably still fail to realize that it's all an evolutionary consequence to toxicity.

Shrek, go ahead, drink from the cadmium laced cup. It's probably no worse for you than what you are putting in it to drink.

Burden of Proof

Recently, on one of my new favorite sites, because it deals with my workout, there was a debate about the effectiveness of the program. The program is CrossFit. The question, posed in a most rude and upsetting manner was "What evidence?"

The question is a good one. What actually constitutes evidence? What makes a good evidence-based practice? Most of us who train, talk to others about training, and those of you who properly train others probably think the evidence is the comments, thoughts, accolades associated with your clients, friends and self, getting fitter. Truthfully speaking, yeah. That is damn good evidence, but it is not scientific. There are a few concepts that scientists try to follow and most exercise routines do not follow them closely, if at all.

Take for example the notion of peer-review. Most exercise routines are not published, that is most exercise routines you see trainers at the gym using, do routines on a DVD set you just ordered, or stick to the age-old traditional programming rampant in magazine like MH. I have never heard of a trainer publishing the results of his clients, but heck I'm new to this. There is a reason right? Each and every client is different and unique. So how do we utilize peer-review. Most of us don't. We use our results as evidence. I think this is just fine when it comes to this type of treatment program. That is, you are trying to make that client meet his/her goals, so their individual progress is the evidence.

Another example of a technique science uses is the burden of proof/falsifiability. That is, a scientist must state their ideas in a way that is inherently falsifiable and testable. And that leads to the other aspect of science that many of us rely on: replicability. Scientists need to be able to replicate methodology in precisely, or close to precisely, the way the original person executed it. When it comes to fitness this might be impossible. If you are training an overweight person and an underweight person the methods are drastically different, right? If you are training youngster versus a retiree: different, etc.

OK, so all this does not mean that there can never be an evidence-based fitness program and I think CrossFit is the new movement. Let me explain. First, peer-review is one of the worst aspects of scientific processes. It is an archaic, failing discipline in science as evidenced by the many journals that are opening up their pages to commentaries, using Web 2.0 technology to allow continual author-reviewer-scientific community correspondence. We are no longer in the times when a paper gets submitted, peer-reviewed, and then rejected or published. Rather, we are now in the age of a paper gets submitted, peer-reviewed, rejected or published, and if published opened up to a number of wonderful mechanisms for continual discussion about the research which includes, but is not limited to: blogging about the article (that is, blogging on the journal site for all to see), ability of readers to write commentaries and letters to the authors, editors, and reviewers, and so forth. As for the other aspects of scientific inquiry we cannot avoid them to be true to ourselves: burden of proof, falsifiability, and replicability. That is where CF steps in.

The entire CF process is transparent. The WODs are generated daily and people then post their scores, times, loads, reps. It is never peer-reviewed, but completely transparent. It is testable. They ask the question: can you make a better athlete than me? If you can, show us. And where there is evidence of other programs providing good outcomes, CF recruits their efforts. Take for example the recent combinations of West Side's conjugate methods and Pose running with CF programming.

Generally speaking, evidence-basis in fitness is very necessary. We've all kept a log of our progress at some point in our workout lifetime. That is we recorded that last time we bench pressed 225 10 times, this time I did an extra rep. Woo hoo. But there is more to it than this. It is not just about getting a big chest and pressing more weight. Fitness is defined as Health. So bench pressing 225, 315, or 500 lbs does not always equal "Health". In fact, for some of us, and in my opinion, that produces an individual that is far from healthy, or fit. Rather it produces a specialized athlete that can bench press a lot of fucking weight. They are not generally healthy. That is the measure that we need to use as our benchmark: are they generally healthy? Has our programming helped them to be more healthy or less healthy? If the latter, how can we adapt to change that? If the former, how can we target the things that are helping to increase their health/fitness? This means that while our programming needs to be regimented, structured and scientific, it also has to be adaptable. This is also a hallmark of good science. Good scientists are able to realize when an experiment is going awry, when unexpected results are either interesting or not and make decisions about taking a new path, or staying the course.

Of course I am so biased, but my impression of health/fitness comes from what our ancestors could have done or needed to do to survive. So I define health/fitness as being able to act like a caveman. When I just wrote that line, I was going to follow it up by saying, "Just teasing". But I am not teasing. Imagine your inner caveman and what s/he would have to do in her day. I can provide a few examples from my warped brain:

What my inner caveman had to do                       How to train for that (now)

Chase an animal                                                   Run, squat, snatch, jump

Drag an animal down                                            Pull, push, engage core

Swing from branch to branch                                Pull-up, core, balance

If our trainees, partners, friends and family, and colleagues can act like a caveman then that makes them a good candidate for my tribe. They can join my group. They will likely be the folks that can contribute to group success, engage in camaraderie, help others, produce! The proof is, as they say, in the pudding - or or us the health and fitness that our clients/trainees exhibit.

Another good idea for food/snack, in my mind...

So I usually drink my coffee black, but occasionally in the Summer hot black coffee, well doesn't do the trick. So, being paleo what is a guy to do? No milk, no cream, no whipped cream of cool whip! My goodness. I let the morning's coffee sit all day and cool. Then I pour it over ice, some almond milk (I have not tried the vanilla flavored for this yet, but bet it would be great), and a touch of agave nectar or honey if I have a really strong sweet tooth. Couple that with a paleo banana nut muffin, forget about it!

Nice Paleo dinner

So, I've been posting a few recipes lately and thought, what the hell, this isn't a recipe "proper" but it was a damn good dinner. 

Gilled Salmon topped with Mango Salsa

Side of grilled pineapple

Tomato-avocado salad

Broccoli-pine nut soup. 

For the samlon, just coat in some light olive oil and add a bit of fresh ground pepper to season. Depending on thickness of the piece of salmon, grill flesh side down for about 4-8 minutes. Then flip and grill for 2-3 times the length you chose for the flesh side. The Skin will basically grills off, but I like the skin. Once you flip it coat the top in mango salsa.

Place 3/4 inch slices of pineapple on the top shelf of the grill, flipping about half way through the cooking of the salmon.

For the salad just cut up avocado and tomatoes and add a tablespoon or so of light olive oil. You can also add balsamic vinegar, salt and pepper if you like, but if the avocado and tomato are fresh and ripe there is no need.

Broccoli-Pine nut soup: 

Broccoli and Pine-Nut Soup, My (paleo)ancestors Way.

1 large onion, diced
1/4 clove of smashed Garlic
2 tablespoons of chopped chives
1 tbs oil
3 cups broccoli
3 cups chicken or vegetable stock
¼ cup pine-nuts

Instructions
Fry onion in a large pan with oil on medium heat until slightly browned. Toss in the garlic and let it simmer a little more.

Add broccoli and stock and let it simmer for 10-15 minutes or until broccoli has softened. Make sure you keep a lid on!  Halfway through, at the chives (keep a little).

Cool slightly. Place in a food processor or use an electric blender to form a smooth texture. This will get it that lovely creamy feel!

Heat some more, serve in bowls and sprinkle with the leftover chopped chives & pine-nuts

Improvisational cooking: Caveman style!

So this morning I awoke to realize that haphazardly we froze all the remaining bananas for our nightly smoothie, thus leaving me without unfrozen bananas for my paleo pancakes. Initially my reaction was: F*ck! How could I go on without my regular breakfast. Actually, I was not that upset, I was just still pissed off from having to wake up to two crying dogs that had diarrhea in their sleep area. Oh Joy! Poor lil' fellas!  Anyhow, I digress, the dog situation had long passed and I was ready to make me some grub... but what to do, what to do without bananas....? I thought, well, I'll just microwave (really paleo eh) one of my paleo banana nut muffins, they are essentially the same recipe just cooked differently. So I started my eggs and opened the fridge only to find that right next to the muffins was a pre-cooked sweet potato. "Hmmmm", I thought. I wonder if I could make a sweet potato pancake. Add a little cinnamon, ok. It turns out this works just dandy! Sure, it's not nearly as sweet, in fact it's a bit savory, but it satisfied my warm breakfast, paleo craving! And it's quite filling! So, I thought I'd share the recipe and a few thoughts about my am experience. Firs the recipe:

1 small, or 1/2-3/4 medium/large pre-cooked sweet potato (it should be so cooked that it's mashable)
1 egg
1 egg white
a (small) handful of ground raw almonds
about a teaspoon to a tablespoon of coconut milk
cinnamon (as much as you like)


Grind almonds and place in mixing bowl
Add egg and egg white and stir around. It should be pasty, sort of.
Add coconut milk
Add sweet potato

Mix all ingredients together until it forms a batter. For my particular griddle pan the batter has to be very think, almost doughy, else the batter just runs out flat and I have one huge burnt unflippable pancake! Talk about a bad way to start your day :-(

Once batter is prepped, heat the griddle pan (I can't grease mine because the stove gets so hot it actually burns the grease off, but I have found that some butter flavored spray enhances the flavor just a touch, especially if you like the taste of butter. I go without greasing only because I have to).  Cook like any other pancake, until you start to see some bubbles come through the uncooked side at which time you should flip. Be careful, any paleo pancake is not going to have the stiff consistency of modern pancakes to use a big spatula so that you don't lift half your pancake and leave half on the griddle. I've done that several times and it's really F-ing annoying. In order to circumvent that issue either use large spatula or make smaller pancakes. I choose the latter and it makes a nice stack of pancakes that dupes your mind into thinking you are eating at IHOP or something.

OK, that's it. Cook and eat. I use honey to top these. You could probably get more creative with your topping, like pure maple syrup would probably be fantastic as it is on just about anything.

There you go, a decent new recipe to try for a morning variation. These sweet potato pancakes are not as sweet as banana pancakes and are probably high glycemic and not "true" paleo, but they satisfy the not eating artificial modern shit, for me anyhow.  Also, this event this morning got me thinking. Initially, I was really shocked to find that I had frozen all the bananas and left myself without a breakfast option. I was very upset, ok, just a little, but come on... So I improvised. I improvised like our ancestors would have had to do had they frozen all their bananas the night before ;-)  Seriously, though. Our ancestors survived probably in large part to their ability to improvise, to think on the spot, to be creative, to think "outside the box". No claws, no teeth, slow, weak, no camo, no fur, no spines, no poison, no exploding ass (see bombardier beetle), and no venom resistance (see honey badger) - we're left with one fantastic evolutionary adaptation: a frontal lobe that is disproportionately larger than it should be for our bodies. I love evolution, by the way! So this frontal lobe, our executive brain, leaves us with the capacity to solve problems, come up with new solution, and think outside the box. This is the evolutionary adaptation that 1) makes humans different from other animals and 2) drove the agricultural and industrial revolutions that our paleo lifestyle now is designed to combat. Strange how these things work right. Our frontal lobes, about 100,000-200,000 years ago started to expand with increased variability in diet. Then somewhere between 150,000 and 10,000 years ago Hominid ancestors started to cook stuff. They somehow learned to harness the power of fire, probably first for warmth and then for cooking. They also learned about underground cooking - that is burying meat and veg with hot coals. This was an evolutionary milestone that resulted in even larger increases in brain energy utilization and expansion. See cooking shit allows our bodies to extract way more nutrients from the food. It's less energetically demanding to breakdown and the energy is easily utilized because the proteins are degraded through cooking. So, simultaneously we reduce our bodies energy expenditure associated with digestion and increase the energetic extraction from the food. MMMM. This is why if you eat everything that you current eat now in raw form, you WILL lose weight. Yeah sure the USDA says raw has more calories, but you shit about half those calories out. Raw diets produce weight loss. There is no debate about that!

So here we have our caveman brethren having discovered, through creativity and ingenuity of the type we don't yet know about (no time machine), allowing or the generation of an industrial tool that increases energy utilization. Turns out our bodies capitalized on sending that energy to our brains: the human brain consumes more energy than any other organ system in the body, in fact relative to it's size it essentially hijacks a majority of the energy in the body. And I don't think any of us would argue with the fact that our brains, are, well, pretty important. But, take for example, neuronal firing (just one neural process) uses about 10% of the entire bodies energy potential. This shit is fucking demanding! So caveman brother finds a way to get more energy in the body by using a creative technique. Our brains were trying to grow but energetically limited. Cooking solved this problem. Then at about 10,000 (+/-) years ago, the modern estimate for agricultural (r)evolution we learned a new trick: farming. Farming allowed us to produce large quantities of energetically dense (read as loaded with sugar and protein) foods in one location (read as we did not have to forage, hunt, and gather). Another evolutionary milestone, the black stone in 2001: a Space odyssey. Right? And yet we now know, or many of us know, that this lifestyle, while hugely beneficial to our farming ancestors, was not good for our bodies. We've created a plethora of "modern diseases" as a result of agricultural evolution. OK, but we've also fed a lot of people, reproduced to almost planetary limits, and destroyed half the earth. Oh, wait, all bad too.... It's not bad though. This was a change in evolutionary history that further gave rise to expanding brain sizes. We know from the anthropological record (read as we think we know from fossilized skulls) that there were at least two distinct periods of hominid brain expansion that correlate very tightly with the discovery of fire pits remains and agricultural evolution. Neat, eh?  And yet, here I was, gutted in my kitchen that I had frozen all my freaking bananas and what was I to do. Well thank goodness for the ancestral fire pit and farmer - it's because of them that I have a modernized brain that allows me to improvise, think creatively, and survive (as if I would've died without my paleo pancakes! no seriously, I might have! LOL). I "foraged" (i.e. looked around purposefully) my "surroundings" (i.e. my kitchen, pantry and fridge [oh my!]). I discovered a food product - sweet potato - that is nothing like a banana, but somehow I knew (from experience) that it had similar properties, it was edible, and might suffice as a substitute. Then I engaged in an almost uniquely human behavior: I tried it! That's right, I went for broke, (whoa, I am really dramatizing this, aren't I? :-)  I experimented. Many organisms do not have the capacity for experimentation, tool use and creative thinking: they run on instinct. Humans (& crows, and domesticated dogs, and other primates) are among a few species that are able to do this. And, in closing, I must say, THANK GOODNESS, because I don't know what I might have done had I been woken up at 5:30 am to clean up dog diarhea and then not be able to eat my paleo breakfast >:-O

-------------
On last note about Paleo (or ZONE-ish) healthy eating. I've now been doing this again for at least a month, maybe a bit longer, and I have noticed performance gains that are just awesome. Now, part of this is mental, psychological. I went for Level 1 certification, and I've been following CrossFit for a while now, and I've tried to become part of the CF Community, so all those things are driving me to do work harder, faster, again and again. But, I do really think the diet has a combinatorial effect. I am not the first to suggest this, not by any means, in fact it's partially prescribed by CF, but I did want to comment on the personal, self-experimentation aspect of it. Take for example the fact that I max deadlifted more than I ever had, while eating paleo. Then just yesterday my wife, a few students and a professor from the college's new fitness club SPORT (Students Participating in Organized Running and Training) ran a 5K for Georgia Fallen Heroes (actually it was longer than 5K, 3.7 miles) and I ran it in a personal record time. I am convinced that this works.... It's hard at times, but the longer you do it, the more people you recruit as supporters and collaborators in this effort, the more like-minded people you surround yourself with - the easier it gets!

You should be able to talk while working out? Really!?

I used to hear that while you were working out you should be able to talk. The gist was that if you could still talk while you were working out then you were not over training. This always seemed strange to me, because as a competitive ice hockey player I could never talk, let along think about talking while clearing the net or skating at full throttle. And that was athletic fitness. Well today at the GLOBO I saw a trainer training a pair of clients. He trains them at least 3 days a week (read as they are paying big bucks to get a summer ready body!) I've noticed them, I've also noticed them noticing me doing CF, but I digress. So, I've often noticed them working out. He runs them through what appears to be a boot camp. The trainer has them lunge, sometimes swing a kettlebell (half ROM however, I guess the risk is too high to hold a KB over your head, LOL), pushups on stability device, etc. He usually trains them quite far (relatively speaking) from me, but not today. Today, while I was executing Tabata Something Else in the stretching, warm-up area he was also training his clients there. Whatever, they didn't bother me and I didn't bother them. But, as I was leaving, I walked past them. Today he was running a chipper of sorts: one of the two dudes had to do a minute of box steps (they are either not able or willing to do box jumps, but I've never seen them do box jumps) while the other did a sequence of push-ups and lunges. When I walked past the guy doing box steps and the trainer I was aghast to hear the two of them having a conversation about what they were doing this weekend. I even heard a chuckle! WTF!?! I realize it's Friday and sunny and ... WTF!?! These dudes are so getting ripped off. Not least because they've working out with this trainer for at least a month, but I think actually 3 months and as far as I can tell have made minimal, if any gains in fitness, but because the trainer is obviously not bringing any intensity to the game. I don't even know where to start with this: it would be one thing if they were talking about the workout. If the trainer was demonstrating or verbalizing proper execution of the movement, the ROM, or intensity. It would be one thing if the client was saying, I can't go on, and the trainer responded "yes you can!" However, it's a completely different thing to be talking about the evening's activities and laughing about it. Another GLOBO travesty. 

Unfortunately, these types of things, these bastardations of fitness, training, and simply good practice get me thinking and writing. At this point, since receiving and even before receiving my L1 Cert, I've noticed (heightened perceptions to such things) "travesties in trainings at the GLOBO!" 

So, today's "travesty in training at the GLOBO" = the trainer allowing his clients to talk while working out. What exactly are the fitness faux pas with this? There are several: 

1) if you are talking, if you are able to talk, then your intensity cannot be at a level conducive to production of good fitness outcomes and results. 

2) if your trainer is holding a conversation with you that does not revolve around discussion of your movement, your ROM, or your intensity, then s/he is not doing their job and you should ask for your money back. If your trainer is talking to you then s/he does not have your best fitness interest in mind. You are simply a paycheck a $ and you should, quite frankly, be insulted that they are insulting your intelligence and want of good training.

3) if you are talking while being trained, able to talk during a WOD/exercise then you are probably not being trained well. If the trainer allows you to perform things at such a low level of intensity then your results are probably not his/her highest priority. Rather, again, you are probably just a $

Take these 3 points as evidence that the GLOBO has one thing in mind: MAKING $$$. They do not have your fitness in mind. Rather, they design programs, they design and sculpt trainers, to be sales people and not trainers of fitness. They treat their clients as bodies and in most cases I think the GLOBO Gym would prefer their clients don't even come to the gym. The GLOBO stand to make a lot more money by selling memberships and hoping their members do not show up. That way they can bill your account every month, but if you don't show up then you are not producing any wear and tear on their expensive machines (expensive to buy and maintain!) But if you are one of those rare (I don't actually know the statistics, but would love to) that actually show up at the GLOBO, then they try to sell you personal training. Here they walk you through a series of over priced programs "designed to make you reach/attain your fitness goals." But it's a sham, isn't it? Because I have only seen one client trained by a GLOBO trainer that has shown any improvement in fitness. I've even heard the trainers talking, in the locker room about how this client or that client is not really into the training so they just take them through the motions. TRAVESTY! Why are you a trainer if your goal is to not make people healthy and fit. If you don't care about that, then why'd you become a trainer and get your certification? If you are happy with substandard "taking people through motions" you should go flip burgers! Your clients are not burgers! They come to you for help! They NEED your help! They trust your help! They trust that what you tell them to do is correct. They trust that your advice, training, and "expertise" is utilized to its fullest potential to help them, as an individual, reach their fitness and/or health goals. To not know that, to not treat them like a superstar, to ignore what your discipline is designed to do, and to take for granted the fact that you somehow have people's respect without ever having to gain it is a chronic travesty! I would disabuse the clients about this, but I've already been threatened that I can't even train my own wife. I can only imagine what would happen (my membership would probably be revoked) if I started telling clients that they are not getting their money's worth! Ha!

THIS is my sport!

Today at the GLOBO I saw a new friend of mine - Todd is his name. He's been trying CrossFit main site WOD's for a few days now and loving it. And he's killing it! He is super fit and in no time will look like a perfect CF specimen, I am sure. At any rate, in addition to the WODs he's been actively perusing the main site for materials, demos, etc. He mentioned to me today that he saw somewhere on the site where it said something to the effect (paraphrasing here) that people use CrossFit to train for "their" sports (e.g., MMA, football, baseball, hockey, volleyball, gymnastics, etc). He says to me, "THIS, CrossFit is my sport; I want THIS to be my sport!" Fucking awesome! I knew he and I would get along. 

This got me thinking about the "sport of fitness". That's what Coach Glassman refers to CrossFit as, the sport of fitness. I totally agree with this contention. Each WOD is a personal journey, sometimes in pleasure, often in pain, and in competition with yourself (either your last time for that WOD or just kicking ass at the current WOD). It's a sport and sometimes you've only got one participating athlete. For Today's WOD (3 rounds of 275# deadlifts, 10 reps + 50 double unders) I could've used a little help from my friend(s). I was killing it, but slipping on some of the double unders reps, which got m frustrated and made me make more mistakes. I needed a teammate, a virtual slap in the ass to say, come on SP, you can do it! No rest for the wicked, dude! KILL IT!

THIS is my sport! I will continue to kill it, as best I can, until I no longer can participate, I will work hard. My benefits are not trophy, medal, money, but personal gratification at surpassing a previously unknown ability and fitness. What more could you ask for from a program in fitness: Fun, personal satisfaction that transcends the gym, and fitness? I love my sport!

A sense of community at the GLOBO...?

Today I experience something new, strange, and yet wonderful at the same time at my local GLOBO Gym. A sense of community. Now, this was not your typical meathead community where we exchanged weightgainer recipes and flexes of our biceps in the mirror. Rather this was a community that I felt was CrossFit like. Well it happens that it was... Let me explain. I've been doing CrossFit at my local GLOBO now for a a few months, 9 or so, I'd say. People know it because I'm not shy about letting them know, or letting them know that "No, I am not done with that pull-up bar just because I go running across the gym to the squat rack to do some thrusters (ah, Fran!). Many people are, well for lack of a better word, frightened by what I do: handstands, and the push-ups! My goodness... what are you crazy, I would hear. But today was different. A few days ago, I mentioned in another post on intensity, that a fella asked me about my workout. He actually asked if I was training for an Ironman Competition and I disabused him about that and informed him about CrossFit and their website. So today I walk into the gym and I see him in the basketball court trying to do a HSPU. He comes over to me and says he's been perusing (my words) the main page and is trying to WOD. It included HSPUs and he could not do it. He was discouraged and ready to quit. I stopped my warm-up and I told him NO! This stuff is infinitely scalable so let's see what you can do. Turns out he can do a modified HSPU with his legs on a bench or box. So he did them. His pull-ups are weak, and his kip is ugly, but we worked that a little too. I of course was not trying to "train" him, proper. I'd been reprimanded for doing that with my wife just a few days earlier - d baggerston trainer told me I could not even train my old lady - I mean WTF!? Right? But after I warmed (him and I) up, we ran through the wod together. It was great fun. He was a little nervous, but held his own and he had no choice because I was cheering him on, loudly mind you, and I was not going to let him give up! Turns out that was contagious because near my max, he started cheering me on "Come on you got this!" Others were taking notice and the one trainer, we'll just refer to him as Douche Baggerston, was not happy. I could tell. Odd looks from him weren't what I noticed, but it was the onlooking from his clients, veering attention away from him and onto us that I did notice. I kind of wanted to tick my tongue out at him, and would have if it hadn't already been hanging out panting. The workout was great, he loved it and wants to do more together or on his own! I am stoked! I feel like I made a difference. 

It gets better. As I am walking out I see the spinning instructor - bad ass older lady that has more endurance capacity then a fucking camel! Well she's been doing CF at a BOX a few towns over and knows that I do it at the GLOBO. So she starts talking to me. I leaned through her that another gym had actually closed down because the trainers had defected to a CF model. So this GLOBO does not like CF. I can only assume that it is a huge slap in the face to think that 1) they spent all this money on all this shitty equipment that sucks (read my post about machines) and 2) that this new model-free system produces results. That is, they'd rather see their clients use the machines, get personal training from their trainers (which apparently is where the $ are) and not get any fitter, but yet still take their money, membership fees. Fucking unconscionable! They are selling a bogus product, a fraudulent claim. And people are fucking paying for it! I am ashamed for them, but that is their business. In fact, I reckon they make more money off people who join (e.g., new years resolution-ers) and never show up. At any rate, as disgustingly dishonest and fucked up as that is, the smalle community of 3-4 that I've started to get to know have been wonderful. They've even expressed interest in training with me outside the GLOBO, under my supervision, at my garage (i dont have any equipment yet) or at a park. This is freaking crazy - by being honest, hard-working, and having a shred of integrity about what I do, plus revealing my secret (CF main site) these people want me to train them! I love this stuff and had left the gym with a fantastic feeling about what I am doing and how CF has changed my life. 

Cheers, to more community everywhere....

... more to come on this over the weekend....

Intensity evokes remarks

OK, so I've written about these two ideas before: the need for intensity and compliments, or remarks. Yesterday it happened again. I really brought it to the house for my WOD: Murph - run 1 mile, 100 pull-ups, 200 push-ups, 300 squats, then run 1 mile, again! Poor time of 54:57 because I attacked it all wrong, but now know for next time how to do it.

At any rate, I was rolling in my workout, wrapping up the brutal second 1 mile run, sweating, breathing, working! Afterward, I cooled down and did some NF and isolation stretching to make sure I was able to walk to my classes. While I was stretching a guy at the gym who I've come to befriend simply by seeing him on a daily basis, approached me and asked, "Can I ask you a question?" I immediately got a little defensive and thought great another person is going to ask me why I don't do the typical weights routine, etc blah blah ... But no, this fella asks me, "Are you training for an Ironman or strongman competition?" Holy cow, I was flabbergasted to say the least and highly appreciative. Not because I care to do an Ironman or Stronman Comp, but rather because this guy was giving me a really nice compliment. Really made my day.

 

Gave me something to think (& write) about as well. This guy obviously saw me working, hard, noticed the intensity I brought yesterday, everyday to the gym. Any of us can go into the gym/fitness center and walk around and see a lot of people just standing around. I've always sort of been puzzled by this, you come here to workout, right, so why just stand around. OR why talk on your damned cell phone. The whole idea that you should be able to talk while working out (with exception of a few conditions, like cardiac or pregnancy) seems ridiculous. If you can talk while you are working out, then it's my wholehearted conviction that you are not really working out. Rather you are just moving it: that is, going through the motions. Now there are times when talking is capable, in between 1RM's, etc, but for the most part the gym should be a place where you push yourself. Spend one hour at high intensity work capacity instead of talking on the phone for 33% of the time you are there, looking at girls asses for another 20%, talking to your "workout" buddy, etc. I mean come on. They don't call it working out for nothing. You are supposed to be working. Else they might call socializing out, cell phone talking out, douching out! Just sayin'

Another thing I've noticed is that intensity, my intensity is what I've noticed, either worries people or upsets them. People are often put off by my rather frantic fast paced walking between stations, sometimes running between stations, or constant monitoring of my stopwatch. Sometimes they approach me and try to talk to me, and I get the distinct feeling that some of them are trying to bring my heart rate down. They do that strange long pause between words and phrases and talk about nothing of real importance at the time. I must seem like a rude dick (like I normally do) when I look down at my watch and say, "excuse me" as I walk past to my next station, start a new set, etc. I am not trying to be rude, rather I feel they are being rude by interrupting my work.

At any rate, this post is not about what I don't like about when people talk to me during a workout, it's about the nice and courteous folks that do talk to me, but have the where with all to know to wait until the end of my workout, to talk me up during my stretching and cool down. To notice that I am using a stop watch and that interruption will probably mess up whatever I am doing. It's quite a nice compliment to know, or observe, or be told, that someone has noticed that you are doing these things. It suggests to me that the intensity that you bring to the gym is observable, socially observable to those that have social skills. It certainly makes people feel uncomfortable because it's not what they are used too. They've never worked out, with or without, a trainer, and been told to watch their time. Rather, often they are coached into a rest period between sets. Rest between sets has it's place, but not everyday. Bring the intensity, or as so eloquently put by one of my favorite raps songs: BRING THE PAIN. It doesn't last that long. So thanks to those people who notice my intensity. It really surpasses just about any compliment, verbal compliment, that I could ever receive. It demonstrates to me that you value intensity. People who value intensity in fitness are probably the same people that value intensity in other walks of life: their occupation, their love life, their family life, their hobbies, etc. I can respect a person like that. I like a person like that!

I think this is interesting: I wonder if people who bring the intensity to the gym/fitness center, also bring the intensity to other domains of life. In my experience this is the case. With people I know, this is the case, I wonder what others' thoughts are.

Really? I can't train my wife?!

What a joke! I was in the gym the other day, the gym I pay for a membership for my wife and I, helping my wife workout. I hesitate to use the word "train" at all, because really she just needs a little motivation (13 weeks prego will do require that) and some ideas about new workouts and exercises. So I was running her through a workout, at this stage a warm-up - some Samson stretches, jumping jacks, squat thrusts, etc. The workout was not even that strange - sumo deadlift high-pulls, push-ups, and lunges. 20 minute AMRAP. However, one of the trainers says to me quite pointedly, quite intentionally, obviously with meaning, "are you working out too, Steve?" I said, "No. I am just showing Austen a new workout." He says, "be careful, they don't allow independent trainers doing work in here." Ok, if it were a warning, then I totally appreciate it, and actually at the time, I was very thankful and just threw in a few sets of push-ups and burpees here and there to make it look like I was working out too, not just training her. But, damn. This really got me thinking and a little ticked off as the thought percolated. I am like, really dude, it's my wife. She's not paying me, she's not a "client" - WTF!?

I am now not sure if the fella was trying to help me or be a tool bag. 

Turns out, that for the past month or two this guy's good pal, also a trainer at this gym, was trying to get my wife to pay for some training in Kettlebell workouts. Well, a few problems with this. 1) why would she pay someone else to show her how to swing a kettlebell when I can do it for free? 2) Why would she pay to have someone show her how to use a kettlebell when the gym does not even make the kettlebells available. No, they are locked away in the secret personal trainer room where the average member cannot access that equipment. And finally, 3) why would she pay for training from a man who is obviously out of shape. The dude is fat. Fine, he can throw around a kettlebell, but what about looking the part?

I tend to think about shopping for personal training, not that I shop for that, like shopping for anything else. If a horse farmer started telling you all about "horse power" would you buy an engine from him? Would you buy health food products from this guy (LOL) or Kirsty Alley? Would you buy a cat from a puppy mill? Would you buy a fancy rat from a pet store that specialized in reptile sales? No! Hell NO! So why in the world do some trainers think that clients will sign up to pay (a lot) of money for personal training with an individual that looks ostensibly out of shape, or at the very least in worse shape then the people they are trying to gain as clients. How do these folks sleep at night? I've written about this before here. But thought I'd update it a little here, because of this past incident. Now the guy who "warned me" and I am greatful, because I'd hate to have lost my gym membership or something, is fit as a fiddle. Ripped, strong, muscular, etc. But he is one of 2, maybe 3 trainers that are in what I would refer to as "good shape". The other 3-4 are, well, turds. And as far as I can tell they aren't even gold plated! LOL. 

So, this got me thinking a bit. What's the strategy here? There must be some marketing scheme behind all this "mess" right? I think there is. Let me expound my hypothesis and see what you think. 

If I am a gym, and I want to get business from the largest possible most disbursed clientele around in order to rake in the $$ then I need to cater to people who are "serious" about working out and those that are what I've heard referred to as "fair weather worker outers" or "resolution lifters". I'll start by describing the first type of individual: The serious worker outer. These individuals have been dedicated to fitness for a while now. They are already generally fit, some very fit. They come in a variety of shapes, sizes, and colors: from marathoner to body builder to ex-collegiate athlete to the mom/dad who is just trying to keep up with his kids. They most likely do not need personal training. They've gotten this far on some good coaching, reading magazines like Men's Health, by watching and talking to others in the gym, or by simply having a "knack" for understanding their own kinesthetic sense of awareness and how musculature and exercise work. These are what we might call "naturals", right?   The second type of gym goer is not that fit. They might have joined, bought a membership as a new years resolution claiming, "This is going to be the year I knock off these 20 pesky pounds!" They might be the person who, one day looks in the mirror and then looks down at her plane tickets to Cancun and thinks, what am I going to look like in that bikini? They join for a completely different, acute (or short-lived) reason. They may not even appear to be in bad shape, although many do in my opinion. 

Knowing this, I think that the gyms target their clients with personal training - because to be honest that's where the real money is. Personal training is like the drinks at a restaurant and the membership fees are simply the meal. In case you did not know, most places make the majority of their profits off of drink orders and meals are designed to make people thirsty so that they can make more money off of drink orders. Cool, well sort of.  SO the membership just gets them in the door. Then they are approached, targeted, I would say by PT. It does not take Einstein to see where my thinking is here: if someone comes in and is reasonably fit, then approaching them with a fatty PT is stupid, moronic. This is what happened to my wife. My wife can back squat her body weight, bench press 3/4 - 2/3 her body weight, clean and jerk, snatch, and she can max overhead squat over 100 lbs. Oh and did I mention she's 13 weeks prego? Wrong approach strategy here. Rather folks who are already fit are generally approached (and I must admit that there is probably a reasonable rate of error based on some sort of signal detection theory, think loose clothing, prego belly, etc) by one of the two really fit trainers. One just looks like a great athlete and the other is a competitive body builder. "Yeah they look good, many people would want to 'look' like that!" Hell yeah! On the other hand, there are those folks - the resolutioners or fair weather fitters - that need attention too. Approaching them with someone who is obviously a real athlete could be very intimidating, right. That kind of mental discrepancy wreaks havoc with our minds. Let me give you an example where it often pops in and we loathe it. The car dealership. You walk in wanting to buy an updated model of your, say Toyota Corolla. The salesperson is not happy with that because the commission is low on that car. So they try to sell you the Sequoia or the Land Cruiser. Yeah, mucho dinero there. Your Bullshit detector goes bonkers and you head for another dealership. 

It's a clever little scheme (and I mean scheme in it's proper definitional sense, not the Dr. Evil sense) to target the ends of the fitness spectrum. An additional added benefit of this strategy by gyms is that those individuals in the middle 68% of the distribution will usually fall in one of three categories (in my experience and humble opinion): 1) they will be happy with where they are and their $25 / month gym membership and not care to do any personal training; 2) be impressed by the ever present fit personal trainer and desire to look like or be as strong as them which results in them seeking training by someone better than them; and 3) be intimidated by the super fit trainers and default to the turd trainer with the idea that once they get a little fitter then they will feel more comfortable training with the fit trainer. Ingenious, not ever sure it's been planned, scheme, IMHO. 

At the end of the day, I feel really honoured that my wife would even want me to train her - not sure what end of the spectrum I fall in from the above discussion, but I do feel like I've become fitter and am pleased she trusts me and respects me to train her. And the fact that the folks at the gym think it's bogus for me to do so, is well just upsetting. Sorry, turd, she'd rather train with her old (and by old I mean aged) man then you....

Paleo Pasta Dinner

OK, Paleo - that is NO PROCESSED CARBS - Pasta dinner, how's that possible? I know, I know, I didn't think it was possible either or at the very least possible, but would taste like shit. It didn't, Austen, my food guinea pig, confirmed it!

So here's how you do it, easy peezy! Go buy a Spaghetti Squash. It's like a butternut squash, but more yellow. Then split it with a knife, that's the hardest part of this recipe. Seriously. De-seed it. Place face down in a slightly greased or sprayed baking sheet. Bake in a 375 preheated oven for about 30 minutes. Then take it out and allow it to cool, because you need to pick it up and it'll be pretty hot. I did not wait, because I was hungry. I just used a few paper towels to attenuate the heat. OK, so now take a fork and run it along the inside of the squash, it will peel away and look a lot like spaghetti (see image). OK, so now you could pour your favorite sauce over it. You could lather it in butter and salt, or garlic. I made a homemade sauce by sauteing bacon, onion, and garlic. Then I mixed in two chopped tomatoes and some chopped basil. I seasoned it all with a tiny bit of salt, dried red pepper flakes, fresh ground back pepper... I also added about a 1/2 cup of pine nuts.  I put that over the top of the squash like I would put sauce on Spaghetti. I served it with a side of oven baked asparagus. Yummy!

Paleo Ice Cream, No Seriously

Paleo Ice Cream recipe

No seriously, this is not ice cream, because it's completely free of dairy. Nonetheless, if you are on Paleo and have not had "real" ice cream in a while this should satisfy you.

And it's so damn easy to make.


I use a Magic Bullet blender and do this:

1/2 frozen banana
some ice (amount depends on how think you like it, milkshake-ish should use less, ice cream-ish should use slightly more)
1/4-1/2 almond milk
I add a dash or two of cinnamon, because I like it, you could however add carob chips, fruit, raisins, etc

Blend thoroughly. Eat.
Enjoy!

Why machines are stupid, as if we did not already know!

The other day, about three days ago, I observed a trainer at Gold's Gym show someone how to use a leg machine, like a hacksquat machine or something. At any rate, it took the trainer a good 5 minutes to show him how to use the machine. Now, don't under estimate the power of 5 whole minutes. Try this: start a stop watch and read the title of this post, "Why machines are stupid, as if we did not already know!" until the 5 minutes are up. How many times did you say the title? A lot a bet. I hope that impresses upon you the length that 5 minutes actually is. OK, so when it comes to explaining a lift 5 minutes is a good amount of time to describe the essence of the lift. For example, the other day I was training someone and I was teaching her how to squat. It took well over 5 minutes because squatting is not easy, intuitive, and often executed wholly incorrectly.  While giving this explanation of "how to squat" I discussed foot placement, hip extension and flexion, full extension, hand position, lumbar curve, core stability, heels, heels, & more heels. But not once did I say "push that lever, or pull that dial". This is what got me the other day at Gold's. The trainer started off the session like he was selling a used sports car, discussing all of the intricate details of the machine. "Here, see, you have the pin, which goes inside the plates to vary how heavy the lift is. (he didn't use lift, that was my paraphrasing)". "And here is the platform that you stand on." "Now, this is very important", he says. "This lever right here can save your life!" Actually that's the statement that caught my attention. I was sort of eavesdropping prior to that, but that statement captured a full on head turn and gawk. You'd of thought that Vida Guerra had just strutted by me. So I am watching this trainer, and first of all I cannot get over the fact that this trainer does not at all look the part. He is sort of pear shaped, sure he had pretty big arms, but generally I would not have classified him as a "fit" man had I seen him walking through the Kroger. Trainer boy goes on to tell the client (poor sole) which lever to pull, what thing to push, etc, etc. The guy, obvously new to working out, obvious from his rotund physique, looked a little more then befuddled. Imagine holding an intense workout and all of a sudden having to fail and remember what switch to flick to save your life, legs, or  just yourself from sheer embarrassment? I would find that absolutely impossible. Or at the very least absolutely impossible while maintaining any sort of intensity during your lift. 

Let me see if I can relate this to a topic of interest for me. You guessed it CrossFit. Kilgore and his colleagues developed a model a while back called the Fish model (Issue 69 of the CrossFit Journal). It was essentially a means with which to plot progress in multi-mode training. The two essential curves for this discussion are the performance improvement and need for complexity of training. In Kilgore's model you can see that they are inversely related. That is as performance starts to asymptote, the need for complexity in training increases proportionally. This is to challenge the athlete ever more to be able to continue making gains in their performance. The Kilgore model is brilliant, however, it aims to describe changes across broad time and modal domain. Good thing, right. Hell yeah! But let's assume for a minute that we are also interested in plotting performance within a single slice in time; within a single workout, within a single lift. A slice of Kilgore's Fish! And let's also assume that we are interested in two facets that contribute to the complexity of training: physical and psychological. The psychological - and that includes the way that the brain controls motor unit execution (i.e. neurological) - factors of lifting, or any sport for that matter, should never be underestimated. In sports we often "quiet the mind" in order to perform optimally. In fact, one might argue that leaders in any sport are able to quell the distractions of the mind & brain in order to perform optimally under stressful, or psychologically challenging conditions. In the scientific psychological world this process if called attention, or more accurately divided attention. That is, it's your capacity for spreading your attentional attunement between 2 or more things that are going on. When we do this, when the environment forces us to focus on multiple things each of those individual processes loses something; they lose their capacity to perform at optimum levels. Think of it this way. A water tank can provide x pounds for square foot water pressure to a single hose. However, if we split that hose in to two, three, or four outlets, the water tank has to increase power in order to maintain the same pounds per square foot pressure delivered to each hose independently. Well the brain can't simply increase it's power output; there are limits on that because it's a biological organ. So when our brains are multiply tapped to do various things at once, each task tends to suffer decreases in performance. 

What's this got to do with sports and fitness. A whole heckuva lot! If you are thinking about what lever to pull, push, dial to spin, etc then you are not focusing on the lift mechanics itself. Or at the very least you are not thinking about those essential mechanics in a way that would optimize both your performance and safety. Eventually, after training and practice, the mechanics become second nature. This is a fairly simple process, but to really simplify the neuroscience it happens like this. When we need to actively think about something (e.g., how to place your feet for a squat, focus on lumbar curve, tight core, etc) you recruit an area of the brain called the prefrontal cortex; it's located right behind and above your forehead and eyes. There are regions of this area of the brain that are involved in myriad cool functions: self-awareness, social cognition, personality, and attention. So when we need to pay attention to something we call this part of the brain into action. If we are calling this part of the brain into action it means that energy is being drawn from other processes. Other brain areas. Through practice we can change this effect. Through practice what happens is your brain learns the movement, exercise, or whatever you are doing, at the level of the prefrontal cortex and then after you have started to master it you no longer have to pay attention to the mechanics, it becomes automatic. At that point it gets processed or executed via a subcortical system called the striatum. (Mind you, I am simplifying this greatly here). The striatum is intricately involved in Parkison's disease so hopefully you can see how it's related to motor function execution. Additionally, the striatum is a very efficient processor; because you no longer have to pay attention to the movement you don't need to utilize as much energy. Cool eh?  

OK, enough neuroscience right? Back to lifting. In the heat of a lift, psychological attention to the mechanics is going to draw from the automaticity of execution of the movement. This is what happens in beginners, like myself. I focus and practice on form so that it becomes automatic. Why? So that when I go to increase load, speed, power, that form comes through loud and clear helping me to achieve new personal records! (I can only hope). However, what happens when we increase loads, time, and power? Our form often goes to shit! The reason is partly do to the musculature mechanics being unsure about the execution and that is partly related to frontal cortex attention to the movement and the corresponding load, speed, or task. Coach Greg Glassman recently did a CrossFit Journal on a topic related to this called threshold training.   He explains that threshold training entails an athlete (or driver, or typer, etc) to do something intensely. They typically do poorly. But if forced to maintain that level of intensity and change one thing - performance, then they learn to effectively execute their task at the higher level of intensity. Then you up the intensity again, and repeat. This is how elite athleticism is built. Let me provide another personal example. The other day I was doing 3 rep max shoulder presses. The first three rounds were executed will sheer brilliance of technique (probably not, but bear with me). However, as the weight increased, what happened. In order to move the load my brain had to do more stuff. It was faced with a new challenge and had to rapidly adapt and try to overcome. When I hit the fail place my brain was at full attention: DO SOMETHING SO YOU DON'T DROP 155# ON YOUR HEAD MORON!!!!! Thank goodness my brain does this, right!? Thank goodness your brain does this! What happens when you hit the fail spot - energy is transferred (neurologically) from representing the efficient, efficacious, and proficient movements to energy dedicated to living. You drop the weight. In CrossFit and O -ifting the answer is an easy fix: Drop the weight and do it fast. 

When else do we lose our automaticity of movement execution. Under high intensity. When you are doing Fran, you are killing yourself. And as your METCON increases rapidly, again your brain's attentional systems turn to self-preservation attention mechanisms. You might drop the weight, bend over and catch your breath, meet pukie, or any various combination of outcomes that draw your attention from the task at hand: moving a weight from low to high, and pulling yourself up, as fast as you can without dying.

Back to why machines suck. How can you maintain focus on exercise mechanics and intensity when paying attention to what lever to pull, push or dial to turn? Especially when it means saving your life! It's nearly impossible. And this is why I think machines suck at creating fitness (& there are probably a plethora of other reasons as well). It is virtually impossible to transfer neurological processing from attentional systems to automaticity, which begets intensity, which produces results! One might argue that you could learn to be automatic on a machine - very easily learn what buttons to press, pull, or turn in a flash in order to save your life. But that's just not true. Through evolution our bodies have been designed to move large loads in ways very similar to O-lifting. These are gross body movements over long distances utilizing mutli-motor and joint units. The interaction of gross motor movements and fine motor movements, such as initiating a complex sequence of finger movements to turn your wrist are diametrically opposed, in my humble opinion. Try this. Send me an email, while trying to front squat. Diverted attention at the level of neurocognitive energy (because you'd be thinking about what to write me) and at the level of motor unit integration (you are not supposed to be worrying about utilizing fingers during a front squat except to the extent that they are used to keep the bar from rolling off you. What's interesting, is that fingers take up A LOT of brain space. They are essentially how we find out about the world. We pick stuff up, feel it, roll it around in our hands, etc. We don't experience the world through our quads, hips, glutes, at least not in the tactile sense. So when we activate fine motor units during otherwise large motor unit lifts, we actually draw a lot of neural energy to parts of the brain not involved in the lifting. We are detracting unconscious motor attention from the task at hand to something that is irrelevant. 

The take home message: distraction is part of any lifting, fitness, and sport program. We tend to call it training and practice. However, anything that enters this equation that is not directly related to the lift at hand would amount to an an drastic decrease in work capacity because of misdirected neural energy. 

This can be modeled mathematically, sort of (I'm not a mathematician!). If we input arbitrary values into the Power equation (F * D / T = P) and divide that by arbitrary units associated with practice, training, and other distractions we can get a modest estimate of the effects each of these have on optimizing work capacity. So let's assume for sake of argument and ease of calculation that each of these three - training, practice, and other distraction - can be placed on a range from 0-1. Where a score of 0.0 means that you no longer are impacted by that variable and a score of 1.0 means that it consumes a lot of your energy, if not all of it. So a score somewhere in between, say 0.5 training, would indicate that about half of your cognitive energy reserves still need to be dedicated to training (e.g., movement mechanics), and so forth. With this in mind we can generate a few plots to show the effects. So the  Power equation gets slightly modified to include an additive denominator term that accounts for training and practice (these two I vary simultaneously because I do feel that they are intricately and intimately linked and co-vary), other distractor (e.g., having to know what dials to press), and a constant of 1. 

Formula 1: 

Where in the numerator F = force, D = distance, T= time; and in the denominator Tr = training, P = practice, O = other distraction, and k is our constant. 

If we enter arbitrary numbers in to our equation we generate a plot of performance. Let's say our Power equation is 45*3/5 (remember these are arbitrary number for purposes of demonstration) then our maximum power output, or work capacity would be 27. (indicated by the purple circle below). However, if we add the variables of training, practice, distraction, and our constant we can generate a plot that looks like: 

 

Here, the purple dot at the top indicates our reference point for maximum work capacity. (27) The three lines represent varying different aspects of the model. The red line represents keeping the need for training (Tr) and practice (P) high (1.0) and systematically decreasing other distraction by 0.1 (going from 1, .9, .8, and so on). The blue line is similar, except in this instance we maintain O at a constant of 1 and systematically decrease Tr & P. You can see that this slightly, but only marginally increases work capacity in this model simulation. The green line represents keeping O at a low constant (here I used 0.1) and then decreasing Tr & P systematically and what you can see is that if other distractions are kept at a minimum then increases in work capacity would come as a consequence of decreasing the demands for cognitive resources/energy being directed toward attention to training and practice. That is, you are getting better!

Now, realistically, I think the detrimental effects of other distraction (O) are greater than that of either Training or Practice. So we can modify the model in several ways to account for this. I provide two examples below. In the model below what I show is the equation when doubling the effect of O and the corresponding plot: 

  

  

Here, it's important to note that by simply doubling the effect of O on work capacity you make it equal to the combined effects of training and practice. Below I show the simulated model/equation when we triple the power of O and the corresponding plot: 

  

  

Here, it's important to note that tripling the effect of O actually results in decreases of work performance above and beyond that associated with the effects of training and practice. 

Thus, I think that the other distractions associated with many machine workouts draw significantly from our ability to increase work capacity and inhibit our quest for health and fitness.  With this in mind an athlete should be prepared to be affected by training and practice, because that is part of the "game". The athlete has little control over this. However, the athlete has great control over the power of other distractions by choosing an effective and efficacious fitness program, and by purposefully and consciously decreasing extraneous distractions.

OK, just my 2¢. Any thoughts?

Fitness(2) and Sport

What do these terms mean to the regular worker-outer? Are the seriously considered?

Dictionary.com
Fitness: Health

Sport: physical prowess in a particular, or several activites: swimming, running, football, baseball, fishing, hunting, etc.

Fitness (2): reproductive representation in subsequent generations (offspring, kin's offspring, offspring's offspring, etc). (i.e. Darwinian Fitness)

Do these terms mean anything to you with respect to (WRT) your exercise regimen? I will try to provide some ideas, examples, and such.

Clearly most people workout to be healthy, or to have fitness, right? Ummmm, I don't think so. Unfortunately, I think most people workout for reasons of vanity: I wanna have a 6 pack, big arms, sexy butt, etc. So why do we care, or do we care at all about Fitness=health. Turns out that this is directly related to the two other terms listed above: Sport and Fitness (or Darwinian Fitness). Here goes. Sport is essentially demonstrating or gaining or practicing to be the best at some activity or activities (see examples listed). There is no end for sporting abilities to stop growing; that is, you can alway improve and get better, faster, bigger, stronger (if you're doing it right). However, sport as we know is a recent evolutionary phenom. There is no good archeaological evidence that our distant ancestors (australopithicines, ardipithicus, etc) engaged in competitive sport. Much to the chagrin of many English blokes they do not stem from a long (evolutionary) history of footballers. Sorry mates! Not "playing" sport is one thing, but they were certainly engaged in a sport. The sport of survival. For our ancestors every turn of a new day (think sands through the hourglass LOL) was a new game. They had to hunt, gather, fight, mate, fend off predators, etc. That is we were sporting animals from the start: we had to be else we would not have survived. So sport begets fitness. We do not engage in fitness to be sporting types, we were made to be sporting types and that is how we get our fitness.

Furthermore, if you can accept (sort of) the rationale that we sport to get fitness (health) then check this out. Health, or being healthy is sexy. Or, put in other terms, what we find sexy is healthy. Let me provide a few examples. On average men prefer women with a 0.7 waist-to-hip ratio (WHR). This is pretty much a cross-cultural thing, with few exceptions being discovered. So, what's special about .7, or optimal WHR? A freaking lot! First off, optimal WHR predicts whether a woman is going to have complications getting pregnant, during pregnancy, and childbirth. Optimal design lessens the risk in all occasions. Optimal WHR also predicts a woman likelihood of developing physiological (coronary) and psychiatric illnesses; again optimality lessens the chances of developing both. Lastly, optimal WHR predicts the IQ potential of her offspring. So you might ask: Why do men find curvaceous female bodies sexy? No, it's not because the media say so, because what the media throws at us is a complete misrepresentation of what MEN want and like. Rather, it's because finding those shapes sexy in our evolutionary history often led to mating attempts. All other things being equal (which they aren't, I know that) mating with an optimally designed female led to better chances of passing on your genes (Darwinian Fitness). And here's the kicker, when you select a shape to mate with , you pass on the psychological and neurological characteristics that led you to select that shape. Pretty simple and neat, eh? There are several other examples: women find men with more money and resources sexy, but they also prefer masculinized sporty looking males. Specifically they pay attention to the Shoulder-to-hip ratio (SHR); or what we know as the V-shaped male. Well, you should not be surprised to learn that SHR predicts health (mental and physical) and reproductive viability in males. So women like men "see" what is sexy because it is healthy and it is healthy because of sport.

So without belaboring another point, ask your self this the next time you walk into your gym to do a workout: Why am I really here?

Designed to be fit!

I realized/remembered recently that this blog is named evolutionary training and yet I almost never talk about evolutionary theory. One might think: What the hell does evolutionary science have to do with this CrossFit wannabe blog? Well turns out the stuff that progressive non-repeating body weight, gymnastics workouts do is emulate our natural history. Not to mention that working out is science, an experiment on yourself and evolutionary science is the best of all sciences! Let me expound upon my thoughts.

The Natural History of a Workout Program

Our ancestors, at least our recent ancestors (circa 10,000 - 250,000 years ago) were likely some sort of hunter gatherer or farmer or combo of both practices (although recent human evolution in the last 10,000 years has exploded us into vastly different evolutionary landscapes). In both cases they had to work their asses off. Imagine the skills, strength, musculature, and endurance necessary to be a hunter, gatherer, or first generation farmer with out power tools.... Or, simply look to nature for examples of what we once were. You rarely see overweight, obese, out of shape animals. You know why? They get eaten. They fail to acquire enough resources to sustain bodily functions. They die in hibernation because they did not have the fitness to properly fatten up. They don't get selected as mating partners. The list goes on, but you'd be hard-pressed to find an out of shape (defined by species specific traits) wild-type (i.e. wild living) animal. They tend to get selected against, or as we might say weeded out!

The Hunter:

In order to be an efficient hunter you need a number of skills, not the least of which are navigation, shooting skills, tracking abilities, etc., but these are not the topics I wish to discuss here. Here I wish to discuss the fitness aspects of a hunter. In order to hunt, in an ancestral way you would have had to track animals for miles. If you found a pack of some ungulate you might want to eat, you would most likely have to construct a blind by carrying logs, and branches from far away. You'd have to have control over your body so that you could lay still in wait for hours. You might even have to climb a tree for an angle. If you get close enough to make the kill shot you'd likely have to heave a spear at the animal(s). So what fitness skills might be involved in these needed abilities?  Tracking prey for hours, or even days, over long distances would require a high level of metabolic conditioning. A hunter has to be able to move past the pain of lactate build-up in his muscles in order to keep on going. Bodily control while sitting and waiting. Not making a move or sound might require a strong core. Think plank! Climbing = pull-ups. Enough said. Spearing again would require core strength to toss the spear with accuracy and power enough to pierce the flesh of the prey animal.

The Gatherer:

You might think gathering would require less fitness abilities than hunting because inherently gathering is a proximal behavior; i.e. you do it close to where you live. However, gathering requires a number of behaviors that would tap your fitness. Gathering itself requires a bit of local movement. You need to move around in order to discover the ripest of items to gather. Digging and pulling would be required to get up tubors and other ground based veggies and you might also have to reach and pull a fruit or nut from a tree. Think axe movement: up and down and up and down with resistance at both ends. Finally, carrying the collected items (which would likely have some weight, imagine a bail of potatoes) back to your home. This could be several meters. Think carrying or running with a sandbag; this could occur via carrying in front of your body, on your head, on a backpack-ish device, etc. All good means of carrying stuff and adding weight to your transit. Like wearing a weight vest.

The Farmer:

OK, I am not going to belabor this point, but farmers too have a lot of fitness advantages. They have to man-handle livestock. They have to move bails of hay, feed, etc. A farmer has to perform many of the same behaviors discussed for gatherers as well, but only the distance of gathering would be localized to the, well the farm.

So, our ancestors who were able to conduct these behaviors, our ancestors who possessed the random genetic mutations that lent them to success at these behaviors, were those ancestors that left descendants (us!). We have been designed to be fit and the number one reason we have an obesity epidemic is because of this one single true fact. We are NOT designed to eat loads of sugar, sit in front of TV, sit around and order pizzas, eat drive-thru and take out, and so forth. Our bodies are revolting! I am not the first to say this, in fact this is a pretty well-known idea. In evolutionary psychology would generally refer to this as a mismatch between current industrialized conditions (modern day) and the type of environment we were "designed" to live in. Now that's not to say that everything we have, all our industry is not part of our evolutionary history. In fact it is. Those of us who are better equipped to deal with industrialized "stuff" are going to leave more descendants that have the "deal with technology better" genes. It's just plain simple science. The main issue is that the speed of technological change is extremely rapid, exponentially faster than biological change. And one final thought: the direction of technological change is random. That is, technology emerges from memetic evolution that has no basis in genetics and the phenotypes those genes create. So get your ass to the gym! The only thing you can do is maintain your fitness so you can deal with the rapid directionless change that awaits us all...