Month: August 2020

“Are you seriously want to lose weight? Trying to lose weight?” That was the subject line in an email I recently received. I suspected it was spam (you think?), so I didn’t open it. I am a bit curious, however, what this presumably overseas purveyor of snake oil was trying to sell—if indeed it was a legitimate advertisement and not some nefarious computer worm. I don’t even count anymore the quick success schemes that cross my computer screen. I am pretty quick to ignore, because I can smell bullsh** from a mile away.

Don’t be sucked in. If your “are seriously want to” lose weight, gain muscle mass, be healthy, etc. “Embrace the suck.” Don’t look for the shortcut or hack. Don’t expect there to be a miracle pill or powder. Don’t believe that the path to success is some secret that only an elite few with a credit card who watched a video know. Take the proven path—albeit the road less taken.

Success required simplicity, conviction, commitment, and consistency. Keep the plan simple and execute it. Even a poor plan well-executed is better than a great plan poorly executed. Anything is better than gimmicks.

Start with the goal. Plan. Take the first step. Most importantly, have a plan beyond reaching the goal. If, for example, the goal is to lose 20 pounds, have a plan to maintain the fat loss after the “diet” (i.e., hypocaloric cut phase) ends. Thinks long-term rather than short-term.

If you are serious about losing weight, be prepared to be in it for the long-haul. Don’t look for the quick fix. Look for the right fix. Trust me, it won’t come in a spam email. Seek knowledgeable help and support. Take the first step, and then the second, and…. Baby steps!

If you are serious about wanting to lose weight, take a very serious look at your lifestyle and know that you are going to have to make some serious and permanent changes. Fortunately, they will be a series of more subtle changes than grand changes (at least if you want to avoid relapse). Any change that cannot become permanent will not have a lasting effect. So, fad diets and quick-fixes should be off the table.

“Are you seriously want to lose weight?” Seek counsel in professionals who can ask the right grammatically-correct questions and develop a plan that is right for you. Seek the support of people who want to help you and not profit from you. Above all, let your serious desire lead to serious action.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

Most of us struggle with at least one specific exercise or have a weak body part. What do we tend to do about it? We ignore it and focus on our strengths.

The reality is that nobody other than ourselves cares what we can bench, deadlift, squat, etc. Nobody cares how many pushups, pull-ups, or chin-ups we can do. So, what the self-shaming? Why the avoidance? Do something about it.

If you are struggling to do a particular movement, doing one repetition in good form is an accomplishment. Acknowledge your success and progress. Can’t do pushups? Begin by doing one—modified (on the knees), if you have to—then try to add one more repetition tomorrow. Think about this: If you can only do one pushup, and you add one pushup a week for a year, a year from now you will be doing 52 pushups! If you don’t do any, a year from now, you will still not be able to do a pushup. Can’t do pull-ups? Try chin-ups. (They are use more biceps, which makes them “easier”, and are probably better for your joints.) Use assistance (e.g., bands or a partner) or progressions that will help you build toward doing one repetition in proper form, and build from there. Can’t squat? Unless limited physically, you can—if you can sit and stand. Again, progress from using assistance (to maintain proper form) to body weight to weighted variations.

One repetition at a time. One day at a time. One success at a time. We can amaze ourselves (and others) when we challenge ourselves to do the “impossible”. Progressive overload always has a starting point. When you see athletes perform, remember that they were once a beginner. The strongest (wo)man in the gym was once the weakest. The only keeping you from getting stronger (and more fit) is you.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

Most of us would agree—in principle, but usually not in practice—that “selfish” is wrong. I often write about (my own struggles in) trying to move from self-centered to other-centered. But, does this imply that we are to become selfless? I have been giving this much thought, and I would argue no.

I have been thinking about liberty lately. It is often—as we see so much presently in our society—that it is selfishness that demands liberty (i.e., self-liberty). Rarely does one completely deny self for others—and, if so, what would that really look like? Politically, we see this as a society that naively yields themselves to a powerful elite—and it never ends well.

Liberty cannot survive without self. “Self”, however, does not mean “self-centered”. To the contrary. “Self” in the context of a free society is other-centered. Liberty does not deny self. It empowers self. It affords everyone the opportunity to “be your best today; be better tomorrow”. It emphasizes personal growth (self-growth) for the welfare of all.

A truly free society benefits from the expression of self. There is no growth—economically, technologically, artistically, etc.—without self-expression. One only look to Germany during the years that it was divided into East and West for an example.

Increasingly, our “free” society is divided—“us” v. “them”—as each demands his/her freedom at the expense of others. We have convinced ourselves that we are “free”, but increasingly we yield more of ourselves to government, corporations, and the like—an elite who have convinced us that that have our best interests in mind. Ultimately, these few control the Commons and all-the-while convincing us that someone else is trying to take our share. We become convinced of our own selflessness and the other’s selfishness, while losing more and more of our self. This is not freedom. This is not liberty.

Now is the time to reclaim our liberty. It is not the time to be selfish. It is not the time to be selfless. It is the time to fully express one’s self and one’s Purpose. It is the time to be truly other-centered by being oneself for others.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

Maintaining body composition can sometimes be harder than losing body fat in the first place. Well, not really, but it can feel like more of a struggle—especially if one is too focused on the scale. Weight will fluctuate. Prepare for it. What matters most is that one does not go back to the habits they caused them to have to lose weight (i.e., fat) in the first place.

In most cases, abrupt fluctuations are going to be water weight. Water follows carbohydrates. So, after a day of unusually high carbs (e.g., maybe you splurged and had pizza or dessert), it should not be alarming if the scale weight is up a few pounds. Don’t worry. Stay on track with the diet and the weight will return to your new normal quite quickly. What one wants to avoid is a gradual return of the lost body fat.

After a cut phase, plan to spend about two months at the end weight to establish this (fat) weight as the new setpoint. Over this time, think ‘reverse dieting’. Reverse dieting is where the caloric intake gradually increases without a change in body weight. This gradually adjusts the caloric balance over time such as elevate metabolism and remain eucaloric at a higher caloric intake. Too often, “dieters” end their cut and return immediately to a diet that proves to be hypercaloric, and, before they know it, they have gained back the weight they had lost (and often more).

It may be okay to see a small, gradual increase in body weight over the maintenance phase—if one is lifting weights for muscle hypertrophy. Understand, first that, for most, gains in muscle mass are extremely slow. Most can expect gains in the range of 1-2 lbs per month (usually less). So, other than water gains due to carbohydrates, gains of more than 2 lbs per month should be avoided. Don’t try to convince yourself that you are gaining muscle weight. Ideally, the mirror will set you straight. Ideally, one should be still losing some fat as any new muscle is being gained to offset changes on the scale. Just be honest with yourself and work to maintain this new body weight.

After a maintenance phase one is now in a better place to perform another cut phase to get closer to their more ideal (healthy) body composition or to do a massing phase to gain muscle. Massing phases will generally entail gaining some fat along with muscle, so be cautious of this unless you have already cut to a lean body composition. For most of us, a massing phase is unnecessary as only a very slight (or no) increase in caloric intake will be necessary to fuel muscle growth. Massing might require a slight increase in protein and carbohydrates, with a compensatory decrease in fat, to grow muscle, but, in general, we are still technically “hypercaloric” if our body fat is high. Increasing the volume of training will stimulate hypertrophy of muscle and a subsequent loss of body fat. This is often referred to as “recomposition” or “recomping”. It is less possible the leaner you become, but most of us over 40 or 50 know we can’t add muscle they way we could in our 20s. So, we can’t “mass” like we did in our 20s. Again, we want to be focused more on the changes we see in the mirror than on the scale.

For us older adults—over 50 years—our diet is more likely to follow alternating cycles of cutting and maintenance until we arrive at our desired body composition. Ideally, this will be a healthy lean (likely 14-20% for males, depending on the desired appearance and the degree to which we want to continue to enjoy food and beer). Remember, the priority goal is to be healthy.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

“’Die” with a ‘T’.” That is what many of us think when we hear the word “diet”. It is no surprise when we are bombarded with “quick-fix” promises and short-term weight-loss schemes. It is true that “diet” is a four-letter word, but it isn’t that kind of four-letter word. The problem with diets is that most ignore diet.

One does not “go on a diet”. One eats a diet. One’s diet is one’s overall eating habits.

I was quite pleased to see my wife recently refer to her “cut”. This was a sure sign that she had finally changed her outlook on dieting.

There is something painful about saying “I am going on a diet.” It implies: “For the next couple of months, I am going to be miserable, but, when it is over, I will be happy again.” Thinking that “diet” is a weight-loss scheme is a near-guarantee that in six months you will be considering yet another fad weight-loss program.

Diet is lifestyle. One may eat an American diet, a Mediterranean Diet, a Paleo diet, a Keto diet, a Clean diet, a Vegetarian diet, etc. None of these will determine one’s body composition. With regards to weight management, there are really only three diets (I prefer: approaches). One is eucaloric (calories in = calories out; maintaining weight), hypocaloric (calories in < calories out; losing weight), or hypercaloric (calories in > calories out). One’s weight is either stable or it is decreasing or it is increasing. Any diet can be effective in cutting weight, if calories are effectively restricted. Likewise, increase calories and you will gain weight. (I have a fifteen-year-old who is trying to gain weight. I am constantly asking him “What have you eaten?” Which is usually followed with, “Eat more!!”)

When referring to cutting weight, what we should be saying is “cutting fat”. Numbers on a scale are meaningless. Unless they are matched with a meaningful loss of body fat, weight lost could actually be detrimental (if muscle and/or bone mass). On the other hand, one can lose an appreciable amount of fat with very little change on the scale.

Eat what you enjoy. Just eat (your diet) in the appropriate quantities.

It is true that some diets may be healthier than others. If yours leans to the unhealthy side, clean it up accordingly. Try to eat an overall balanced, nutritious, and healthy diet at least 80% of the time. Don’t deny yourself that which you enjoy. Just don’t let it tip the scale to unhealthy. Eat to maintain/gain muscle mass while losing excess body fat. Change your outlook on diet.

The caloric composition of diet is a sliding scale. Foods composition doesn’t have to change as much as food quantity (i.e., portions). When you think about “changing” your diet, think about eating less crappy, junk food and more lean meats, fruits, and vegetables. Don’t think “high-carb v. low-carb”. Think healthy, nutrient-dense carbs v. sugary, non-nutritive carbs. Think more or less calories based on activity level and body composition.

Think of diet as managing body composition rather than weight. The scale will follow in appropriate fashion. Think: “cutting”, “maintenance”, or “massing” rather than “dieting”. Think long-term rather than short-term. Bring the joy back to eating. Get off the dieting seesaw. Focus on living healthy at a healthy body composition not simply weight.

When the diet is healthy, you only need on hand on the wheel. Adjust portions according to caloric needs rather than change the entire meal plan. Tweak the diet rather and changing the diet (especially rather than chasing the latest fad diet). Baby steps!

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!!

My wife tends to “wander” in the gym—to do whatever she felt like doing for that day. Her exercises and weights changed very little for years. Her programming was rarely ever balanced. Over time, I won her over to trying a simple, whole-body, progressive overload program like the StrongLifts 5×5. Its simplicity captured her focus and then her enthusiasm. Yesterday, she expressed interest in progress to something else. Every lifter should come to this point. (The very serious lifter must come to this point.) Part of programming is the concept of periodization—the cyclical modification of the program to meet a range of physiological needs in a way that in synergistic, e.g., cycling through periods of training for hypertrophy, strength, and power. Each cycle affects the capacity to perform subsequent cycles—progression.

Periodization can be as simple or as complex as one makes it. High-level sports programs depend on qualified strength and conditioning coaches because they have the experience and mastery of programming. Most average or recreational lifters are just looking for the basic benefits of exercise and are less interested in the complexities of programming. Fortunately, programming need not be complicated to be effective. Personally, I think it is too often overcomplicated for the sake of appearing effective. I prefer the K.I.S.S. principle when it comes to exercise. In weight-training, unless one is an Olympic weightlifter (i.e., training to compete in the snatch and clean, etc.) the ‘basic five’ (squat, deadlift, bench, row, and press) variations with some accessory exercises (e.g., arms, abdominals/core, neck, calves, etc.) thrown in for some extra spice are quite sufficient. For the beginner, simple 5×5 (e.g., StrongLifts) or 3×5 (e.g., Starting Strength) are a great foundation to learn technique and build foundational strength. These programs can, however, get boring over time. As well, because these are based on a linear progression (increasing only the weight from workout to workout), the exercise will plateau in relatively short time. Thus, some degree of regular periodization will become necessary.

So, when it comes time for a change, there are simple things that the recreational lifter can do to effectively change things up.

Repetition scheme. Instead of the 5×5 (or 3×5), increase (for hypertrophy) or decrease (for strength) the repetitions. The intensity will need to change accordingly. In other words, higher repetitions will require less weight and fewer repetitions will require more weight. There are numerous schemes that can be applied, depending on the goals. While 5 (4-7) repetitions is best for overall strength and hypertrophy, fewer (1-3) is best for strength/power and more ³8 (usually 8-15) is best for hypertrophy. In some situations, more repetitions may also be desired.

Volume. Volume is the product of the weight lifted times the repetitions performed times the number of sets. For example, the volume of squatting 200 lb in the 5×5 program is 5,000 lb. Simply adding sets will increase volume: 200 lb x 7 sets x 5 repetitions = 7,000 lb. Volume is generally associated with hypertrophy. Thus, adding sets can stimulate greater growth without adding intensity. Likewise, adding repetitions can have a similar effect: 200 lb x 5 sets x 7 repetitions = 7,000 lb. Varying the weight, sets, and/or repetitions from week-to-week or session-to-session adds dimension to a linear progression.

Exercise variation. Not every “squat” has to be a back squat. There are front squats, goblet squats, leg presses, Bulgarian split squats, lunges, etc. Likewise, the deadlift, bench, row, and press can be varied. Change the exercises from cycle to cycle to promote growth, as well as interest. (Don’t be too quick, though, to change exercises. Allow at least a full training cycle before changing.)

Periodize.  Program your exercise in 4- to 8-week cycles. Program increases in volume over the weeks and end with a deload (or start the subsequent cycle at a reduced volume). This may involve adding weight to the lift from week-to-week or session-to-session, adding repetitions (e.g., 200-lb squat: 3×8, 3×10, and 3×12 for weeks 1, 2, and 3, respectively), and/or adding sets (e.g., 200-lb squat: 3×10, 4×10, and 5×10 for weeks 1, 2, and 3, respectively). One might also choose undulating periodization (i.e., changing the workout parameters—e.g., strength v. hypertrophy—across the week or month). As such, one who is squatting 3 times a week might do 3×12-15 for muscle endurance in Workout A, 3×8-10 for hypertrophy in Workout B, and 5×3-5 for strength in Workout C. The key consideration is to vary volume and intensity (percentage of maximum) over time, remembering that as intensity goes up, volume generally goes down. For example, for a 300-lb squat 1-RM, 85% is 255 lb and 70% is 210 lb. The volume of a 3×8 workout at 210 lb is 5,040 lb. The volume of an 8×3 workout at 255 lb is 6,120 lb. Thus, the latter workout places a greater demand on recovery. To compensate, one might prefer a 5×3 scheme (volume = 3,825 lb).

Suppose, after a 5×5, one was squatting 255 lb (volume = 6,375 lb), one moves to a 3×10 program. Reducing the weight to 210 lbs, the volume is comparable at 6,300 lb. Adding 5 lb per week, at the end of a 4-week cycle, the lifter is now lifting 240 lb for his/her working sets (volume = 7,200 lb). In the next cycle, the lifter shifts from hypertrophy to strength. Starting at the same weight and volume, he/she changes to a 10×3 program (volume is still 7,200 lb). If the lifter adds 10 lb per week to the squat, after four weeks, he/she is now lifting 280 lb for 10×3 and a volume of 8,400 lb. The lifter is stronger and has likely added considerable muscle mass. (The math isn’t perfectly accurate, but…. Assuming the ending weight is 85% of the new 1-RM, the lifter has increased the 1-RM squat from 300 lb to 330 lb. Progress!

So, moving on from 5×5 and want to keep it simple? Pick a direction—strength or hypertrophy. The volume of the 5×5 is 25 (times the weight lifted). Take this volume and estimate the appropriate weight for the repetition scheme. For example, if one chooses to do 3 sets of 8-10 repetitions (volume = 24-30) a 200 lb squat with (for 5×5, volume = 5,000 lb) might become 165 lb for 3×10 (volume = 4,950 lb) for the start of the new cycle. Add 5-10 lbs per week/session as you are able over the cycle. At the end of the cycle, change the exercise, deload, or change the repetitions or sets. [For example, after a week at a reduced load, return to a weight that permits a similar volume at the increased number of sets.]

Programming need not be complicated, but it is necessary. Specificity shouldn’t be ignored. Focus on muscle endurance, hypertrophy, and strength. Vary your programs, but keep it simple. Progress.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

We Americans seem rather confused over what “liberty” means. One could easily run down the list of Constitutional Rights and see how individuals and groups claim those rights but deny them to their opposition. That is not liberty. That is not freedom. That is suppression.

I am not sure where we exited the path of freedom, but we are dangerously lost.

Liberty comes with consequences. It is the consequences that will ultimately drive our behaviors. Behavior cannot be effectively driven by legislation—that is control. Likewise, behavior cannot be changed by verbally or physically attacking an individual. We change behavior by example and by allowing consequences to have their effect.

The other day, my wife asked me what I would do to curb the obesity problem in the United States. Well, I wouldn’t attempt to legislate. That won’t work. I would do more to promote healthy lifestyles. I would return physical education to our schools. (I am not a fan of standardized testing, but I do believe in standards. Physical well-being is equally as important as academic performance.) I would work to educate people on healthy eating and a healthy lifestyle (this could begin with doctors being educated on diet and exercise so that these are prescribed before pharmaceuticals). I would eliminate “food deserts” and assure that all Americans had access to quality healthy foods. (This would include changes to current food subsidy practices—from how assistance is distributed to what is distributed. I am always bothered by the poor-quality goods that are distributed by food pantries to persons in need, e.g., cheap white bread. It seems we are only willing to donate that which we won’t eat. Everyone should be afforded the opportunity to prepare healthy foods. Therefore, provide them with whole grains, fresh fruits and vegetables, rice, beans, and the basic staples to put together inexpensive meals that are based on a healthy macro balance. I would better subsidize school lunch programs. I would demand cities rethink urban planning to facilitate movement and healthy lifestyles. I would allow for consequences for being unhealthy. I would allow healthcare to be more costly for those who (based on lifestyle choices) are a drain on the system. I would reward those who take a preventative approach to their health. I would reward communities and businesses that promote preventative health—technically, they would reward themselves by the positive outcomes this would bring. I would select an exercise scientist as Chair of the President’s Council on Sports, Fitness, and Nutrition—instead of a celebrity—and add some weight to the position. I would return the President’s Physical Fitness Award with some revision to the testing. I would promote fit communities.

Liberty isn’t a free-for-all, per se. It is access to the Commons (refer to Garrett Hardin’s “The Tragedy of the Commons”) with the right incentives to care for the Commons. Liberty is not the rights on one group over another. Liberty is “being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one’s way of life, behavior, or political views” (Oxford Dictionary). This freedom, however, does not permit the consequence of one’s way of life, behavior, or political views to impose a burden on others.

I desire a healthy community. I support health care that is affordable and accessible, but not a system that will enable poor health decisions because there is more profit to be made in the treatment of disease than the prevention of disease.

I desire a community that is free to make decisions—good or bad—but will make choices based on the overall welfare of the community. The right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness should not come at the cost of another’s right to the same.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

I was recently nominated by a friend to participate in a 25-day challenge to do 25 pushups each day to draw attention to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). I welcomed the opportunity, though I admit that I was a bit apprehensive as watched my friend nominate person after person before tagging me.

These challenges are difficult as you have to then determine who, in turn, you are going to nominate. I took the route of nominating my old high school wrestling teammates. I chose them, in part, because it was easy to decide who was next, but also because the pushups remind me of conditioning with the team and how much they and the sport have affected me over the years.

I made it through most of the teammates with whom I am connected on Facebook when I saw a post from a friend (not one of my old teammates) who commented that he appreciated the challenges but asked not to be nominated because he didn’t think he could do the pushups. I am sure the same thought went through the minds of countless friends for a variety of reasons. I have been uncomfortable nominating friends. (I was unable to tag a friend/teammate and feared he might have unfriended me. He didn’t, but I haven’t had the nerve to ask if he had changed his settings to block me, specifically, tagging him because of the challenge.) So, I decided to break the chain and stop nominating people. (I am reminded of the old chain letters—pre-email—that threatened bad luck if you didn’t send the letter to a dozen other people.)

I plan to continue the 25-day challenge. I committed to it, after all.

As I considered my friend’s post and the challenge, I thought about my ‘why’. I realized that, while I truly wanted to draw attention to PTSD and it’s affects among our veterans (e.g., and average of 22 suicides per day), I needed to move from “have” to “get” (per my friend, Coach Andy Lausier). I had been feeling that I had to do my pushups and I had to nominate friends. From the start, I determined to do one extra pushups for each day of the challenge (e.g., an extra 11 pushups on day 11). I thought about why I determined to do this. I think I determined to do this because, well, I could. I have to do 25 pushups a day, but I get to do the extra pushups. I get to honor the veterans. I don’t have to nominate my friends.

I hope that my friends will challenge themselves to simply do pushups—for themselves or to increase awareness of PTSD. Moreover, I just hope they find ways to challenge themselves. And, when they challenge themselves, they do it because they get to.

We need to find ways to challenge ourselves daily. We need to grow, because we can. We don’t have to challenge others, they will find challenges for themselves.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!!

Last night we had friends over for dinner. My wife asked what everyone’s favorite book they read in school. (Her favorite was Native Son by Richard Wright, which she read in a high school social studies class and also happens to be a favorite of mine as well—I read it in college. My favorite assigned reading, though, was The World According to Garp by John Irving.) Our friend, Clint, commented that he had little appreciation at the time for the books he read in school until he reread them in later years. This often seems to be the case with learning. We are often much more capable of understanding as our worldview grows. Ironically, that worldview is very much shaped by that early education. (I very often seen in my current views of the world the deep impression of “The Tragedy of the Commons”, a 1969 paper by Garrett Hardin, which I read in a college geography course.)

Recently, a friend commented: “I keep seeing posts about people not seeing color. The thing is to not judge people based on their skin color!” This statement was on my mind, for some reason, as we had our conversation last night. I have thought about the concept often—perhaps every time I have heard a person say “I don’t see color.” Frankly, if we don’t see color, we are denying a person the very essence of who they are. We are failing to allow the space needed for the soul to speak.

I read Native Son in an elective English course at West Virginia University circa 1983 or 1984, called “Black Literature in America”. (Interesting side note: My 15-year-old son, who was at the table with the adults, talked about reading 1984—something he is reading on his own.) The date isn’t so important other than it was a time when I was still quite ignorant of black culture—and to some extent history. Reading Richard Wright, Langston Hughes, et al. gave me a greater insight into the black experience—albeit from the pages of books and a professor who was very white. Nevertheless, it would have limited these works to have just labeled this as Literature and to have read these with a random collection of literary work. One cannot (nor should one attempt to) read this works without seeing color.

Color, race, ethnicity, gender, socioeconomics, family history, education, birthplace, etc. are all dimensions of who we are and why we are. They cannot be filtered out of our interactions. Instead, they should be sought. We are, as Shrek taught us, like onions with many layers (or, if you prefers Donkey’s view, parfaits). We cannot lose our sense of diversity for the sake of “diversity”. In other words, we can’t ignore the complexity of the individual for the sake of categorizing (or not categorizing) groups.

Dare to see and appreciate our many differences. Be grateful for the capacity to see color (etc.). As we acknowledge this and begin to step back to see the greater complexity of the individual, the more the differences will blend into oneness.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

There are countless opinions on exercise frequency and session volume. No opinion is necessarily right or wrong. Indeed, exercise programming is quite individual. Certainly, recoverability is the major concern. I have written before on the concept of “Maximal Recoverable Volume” (MRV; I would refer the reader to How Much Should I Train? By Drs. Mike Israetel and James Hoffman). Essentially recovery is one’s ability to exercise and return to complete the subsequent exercise session. Recovery (i.e., performance) includes the muscle (glycogen stores, fiber repair, etc.), but also the central nervous system. It depends on numerous factors, such as age, training state, nutrition, sleep, emotional state, and non-specific physical activity—among other genetic and individual factors.

So, one—especially the beginner or aging exerciser—has to ask him/herself: “How much?” Personally, I think it is more about personal preference than anything else, but the answer is still a bit nuanced.

In weight training, frequency (per body part) can range from one time per week to multiple times per day. The former prefers to “annihilate” a body part—think of those who curse the dreaded “leg day”. The latter emphasizes the need to “stimulate” growth. There are challenges with both. With the one-day-a-week (annihilate) approach, it is quite possible that the physiologically the muscle may be ready for additional stimulus after a few days, but the athlete is not recovered psychologically. As such, there may be some opportunity to stimulate growth waiting for the next training session. Likewise, the high-frequency “stimulate” approach is vulnerable to over-training (exceeding MRV). Athletes have demonstrated success with both approaches, so the better question to ask is: “How much is best for me?” For the average exerciser, it is probably somewhere in the middle. Unless one has accumulated strength and hypertrophy approaching one’s “genetic ceiling, more frequent training will have benefit. Most of us don’t have hours to spend at the gym each day. Two- to three-hour “annihilate” sessions 4 or 5 times a week is out of the question. On the other hand, 3 one-hour sessions are probably not quite sufficient. As such more effective volumes can be managed with shorter, more frequent, split sessions (e.g., push/pull days or upper-body/lower-body days). In effect, one does “less” per training session but accumulates “more” over the span of the week. Effectively, one recovers faster from the more frequent stimuli and thus increases the overall volume for greater growth.

With a “stimulate” approach the debilitating effects of a workout are minimized, and we average exerciser can go about our lives. Planned “annihilation” sessions can also have benefits—especially prior to a planned deload or extended recovery opportunity.

Begin with your willingness to commit to training. Be honest. Plan to be consistent. Block off as much daily exercise time as possible and plan how you will use it. An advantage of high-frequency scheduling is that they is room for life to happen—i.e., for sessions to be missed without significantly impacting progress. Thirty-minute sessions can be effective if frequent and well-planned. Personally, I schedule 11 sessions per week. Each session lasts between 30 minutes and an hour (or more), as time permits. (Not commuting during this pandemic has freed up quite a bit of time.) These include 6 weight-training sessions, 2-3 cardio sessions, and 2-3 HIIRT sessions per week. The weight-training sessions emphasize the ‘basic 5’ (squat, deadlift, bench, row, and press) variations and the HIIRT session allow for a bit more accessory emphasis (abdominals, calves, traps, arms, etc.—smaller ‘aesthetic’ muscles that can recover rather quickly). If I should miss a session or day, I can adjust accordingly. At 56 years, I recover more effectively this way than I do from annihilation of body parts. I also find this much more enjoyable, which is very important. We are more likely to be consistent with an exercise program we enjoy.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow. (How ever that works for you.)

Carpe momento!