Exercise, Health and You: How much is Enough? (A response)

For those questions and discussions on the McDougall program that don’t seem to fit in any other forum.

Moderators: JeffN, f1jim, John McDougall, carolve, Heather McDougall

Re: Exercise, Health and You: How much is Enough? (A respons

Postby Golden Ghost » Thu Oct 29, 2015 2:10 pm

Skip wrote:
Golden Ghost wrote:Anyone who is interested in cardiovascular health needs to realize that the times they are changing. I'm not saying that aerobic training is not good for you but all the new research shows that hard fast intervals are far better. Do they have some downsides, yes. But the old long slow is not the only game in town.


The question isn't which is better, the question is how much of each type of training is optimal for what you want to train for. See this thread: viewtopic.php?f=17&t=46879



Skip, I think there is some confusion here. First lets go back to th OP. His post has nothing to do with endurance training that I can see. It has to do with the optimal training plan, not to high and not to low. However, I do not agree with a few items. The OP states the Maffetone optimal rate of 180 less your age which is about 70% max heart rate is ideal. I dont think this is ideal for optimal health, only optimal for endurance training. He also states that a few beats above this is anaerobic heart rate. This is far from accurate. So someone who is training the Pritikin method 70-80% is not training in the anaerobic range, not even close. They would have great aerobic health.
Your post refers to Matt Fitzgerald, which is a little different than Maffetone but still close. However, he is still talking about endurance training. So if you are talking about endurance training I agree with both Fitzgerald and Maffetone. However, my point is endurance training is not the optimal training someone should be during and you can spend far less time and be in better shape.
If I had to pick I would say 80/20 where 80% is anaerobic training achieved by hard intervals and 20% aerobic training achieved by slow running or biking.
Golden Ghost
 
Posts: 354
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 4:59 pm

Re: Exercise, Health and You: How much is Enough? (A respons

Postby vgpedlr » Thu Oct 29, 2015 6:51 pm

Maffetone defines the aerobic/anaerobic split differently than most. He uses fat burning rather than lactate accumulation.

The times are not changing. HIIT is nothing new. The potential benefits and risks are well known. What does change is fashion. The popularity of various training methodologies comes and goes. For myself, nothing will burn me out faster and get me sick or hurt than HIIT. So I stick to the Maffetone method so I can train consistently for the long haul.
User avatar
vgpedlr
 
Posts: 4502
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2009 4:17 pm
Location: NorCal

Re: Exercise, Health and You: How much is Enough? (A respons

Postby Gershon » Fri Oct 30, 2015 4:40 am

The thread is targeted at those who aren't into formal exercises or at least not mass doses of it. Their question is "How much exercise do I need to be healthy?" I agree with the CDC's answer for the most part. In Cooper's new book, "Start Strong, Finish Strong," he says a person only needs 15 aerobics points a week to get a 58% decrease in death rate. This is only a little more than the CDC recommendation. I think the difference in death rate from the 31% in other sources is Cooper may be comparing to a person who gets no exercise. Either way, it's a lot.

We see the world differently based on our individual past experiences. I'm biased towards Cooper's Aerobic Point System because it was what was popular when I was in my 20's and for about the next 10 or 15 years. I doubt if many actually kept track of their points, but it was a general guide to how much was enough. Naturally, it's going to be hard to change my mind, but that doesn't make me right. HIIT is not new. It's what many track coaches used to train for the mile before other methods became popular in the 60's. Wind sprints were popular for other sports, too.

I added the Maffetone method as a safety feature for two reasons. The stated one was to prevent overdoing it for those who have a tendency to do so. The second unstated reason was so people could see an hour of housework, gardening, washing a car, etc., is the equivalent of about 45 minutes of walking at 3-4 mph.

I was only concerned about the Pritikin method and other methods that recommend a high heart rate because many people start exercising too enthusiastically without getting their heart checked out.

Our bodies adapt amazingly well to what we do or don't do with them. For a person who does nothing, the body seems to sense an impending famine and puts on weight. It also conserves energy by losing muscle. Eventually, joints start to stiffen and they become like an overweight tin man who needs some oil. If a person does only HIIT, they are adapting to short spurts of activity, but they are unlikely to have the muscles to go for a long hike in the mountains. If a person walks only long distances, they may have trouble sprinting to catch a bus. Both people would probably get sore raking leaves in the fall.

Some of us are getting what many consider to be too much exercise. The Maffetone method may allow a person to dramatically increase the amount of exercise while avoiding injury and perhaps worse. Following it gives time for the many physiological changes that have to happen. These go down to the cellular level. The Maffetone Method forces a person to think in terms of years to achieving a lofty goal.

My goal is to continue feeling like I'm in my 20's inside. Of course I'm not as fast or strong, but I don't have any aches or pains, and I seldom run out of energy. I can still run 20 miles, but now it takes a couple days and my splits are slower.
User avatar
Gershon
 
Posts: 435
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 7:25 am
Location: Pueblo, Colorado

Re: Exercise, Health and You: How much is Enough? (A respons

Postby Golden Ghost » Fri Oct 30, 2015 7:28 am

Gershwin, that was a very good response. I would like to add a few things. If you would like to continue feeling like 20 you need to keep your fast twitch muscles and HIT will do that, long and slow will not. Also, Tabata was discovered in 1996 so this is new. It is not the interval training you talk about. That interval training was added to lots of long slow training to get some more speed in races.
True Tabata is only doing HIT and has proved it's as good or better than long slow training with minimum time. And it gets better. Now studies have been done on longer intervals at sub maximum heart rate and have also proven to be almost as good as Tabata. So you don't have to go all out and risk injury and burn out to get a great workout in a short time.
Also, the average person looses 1% muscle mass per year. So if you plan on living till 80 you will lose 40% of your mussels unless you do something, resistance training. Long slow training burns muscle so it's counter productive. Just look at most pictures of endurance runners. I don't want to look like them even if I'm in shape.
Golden Ghost
 
Posts: 354
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 4:59 pm

Re: Exercise, Health and You: How much is Enough? (A respons

Postby vgpedlr » Fri Oct 30, 2015 8:55 am

Tabatas are nothing new, only the research project, Fighters have doing similar workouts since time began.

Tabatas suck.

I'd rather bang my head against the wall for 20 s 10 s off.


There are other ways to maintain muscle mass, if one thinks that important.
User avatar
vgpedlr
 
Posts: 4502
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2009 4:17 pm
Location: NorCal

Re: Exercise, Health and You: How much is Enough? (A respons

Postby Gershon » Fri Oct 30, 2015 10:35 am

Golden Ghost wrote: Just look at most pictures of endurance runners. I don't want to look like them even if I'm in shape.


I think the body type a person desires does and should determine what sort of exercise a person does. There is another way to look at it by asking ourselves what we want to be able to do now and when we are in our 80's and 90's. It's not a permanent choice as it is possible to gradually change our body type.

Every choice to some extent negates the ability to make the opposite choice. The body will ruthlessly adapt to the type of activity we do long term, shedding unneeded muscles and building needed muscles. We have to be willing to reap the benefits as well as any of the hazards that come from whatever path we choose.

One thing we must realize is we won't get the body of a bricklayer by 15-minutes of HIIT a day. We won't get the body of an endurance runner by running a few miles a day. Within genetic limits, we will get the precisely body we develop for ourselves.

At 62, I am reaching the phase in life where strength training becomes important, but I don't plan to do any strength training. Instead, I'm doing things that take strength. It doesn't take much to get enough strength training. A few hours of active indoor and outdoor household chores a day should do the trick. The advantage to getting strength through doing something instead of through formal strength training is there is the satisfaction of completing a job.

I'm finding it does fill in the "spaces" left in the muscles by pure endurance training.

My method is based on observing other people and how they looked and stayed active when they aged.
User avatar
Gershon
 
Posts: 435
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 7:25 am
Location: Pueblo, Colorado

Re: Exercise, Health and You: How much is Enough? (A respons

Postby hazelrah » Fri Oct 30, 2015 10:42 am

In almost every athletic event I've ever attempted, interval training has improved my outcome, but the greater point for me is that the exercise works better as a measure of health than it does as a contributor to health. If you are trying to become a great athlete the advice you seek may not be available here. What I read from Jeff's comments are that health is attained not by the amount of movement you do, but by the quality of the environment you are exposed to, and your diet has far more affect on your environment than the amount and quality of the movement you make. As Lani used to say, you cannot exercise your way out of a bad diet, but the CRON studies seem to indicate that you can diet your way out of a poor exercise program. I'm not sure what the purpose of extending your life is if you are doing nothing with it, but diet seems to be that critical to your health. Exercise does not.

Mark
Last edited by hazelrah on Tue Nov 03, 2015 10:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
...the process that creates this boredom that we see in the world now may very well be a self-perpetuating, unconscious form of brainwashing, created by a world totalitarian government based on money, ... Wallace Shawn
http://www.anginamonologues.net
User avatar
hazelrah
 
Posts: 2000
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 9:04 pm
Location: Pacifica, CA

Re: Exercise, Health and You: How much is Enough? (A respons

Postby Skip » Fri Oct 30, 2015 10:20 pm

All physical activity is good and I don't think one type of activity is the best for health or well being. To be well rounded, I would think that a combination of aerobic, anerobic an resistance training is the best (and don't forget about yoga and stretching). What percentage of your time that you spend in each of these categories depends on your goals and your interests.

It's ridiculous to pit HIIT vs long slow endurance training, each has its place. It's like arguing what is better for your health, playing tennis or swimming? In my view, the best exercise is the exercise that you can continuously do over the long term that makes you feel good and you look forward to doing. :mrgreen: :!:
"The fundamental principle of ethics is reverence for life" Albert Schweitzer
User avatar
Skip
 
Posts: 2230
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 9:19 am

Re: Exercise, Health and You: How much is Enough? (A respons

Postby petero » Sat Oct 31, 2015 12:03 am

Golden Ghost wrote:Just look at most pictures of endurance runners. I don't want to look like them even if I'm in shape.

That's great news for me, because I enjoy raising my middle finger.
It's easy to be a naive idealist. It's easy to be a cynical realist. It's quite another thing to have no illusions and still hold the inner flame. -- Marie-Louise von Franz
User avatar
petero
 
Posts: 839
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 2:45 am
Location: Gatlinburg, TN

Re: Exercise, Health and You: How much is Enough? (A respons

Postby Golden Ghost » Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:52 am

Skip, I agree we need to do both types of exercise. If its 80/20 or 20/80 it probably does not mater that much. However, I don't think most people are doing any anaerobic training.
Lets take someone who is elderly and does no training at all. Someone who is just very mobil their entire life. Ask them to jog a mile or so and they could probably do it. Ask them to do some fast biking or running and they most likely cant. And it's not just that they can't go fast it's that their fast twitch muscles are gone. And what happens when those are gone? Well, just go out in public and watch the elderly shuffle. No gait, no agility whatsoever which means a high percentage of tripping or falling. Can they get around, sure but no spring in their legs and their balance suffers also.
Golden Ghost
 
Posts: 354
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 4:59 pm

Re: Exercise, Health and You: How much is Enough? (A respons

Postby Skip » Sat Oct 31, 2015 10:30 am

Golden Ghost wrote:Skip, I agree we need to do both types of exercise. If its 80/20 or 20/80 it probably does not mater that much. However, I don't think most people are doing any anaerobic training.
Lets take someone who is elderly and does no training at all. Someone who is just very mobil their entire life. Ask them to jog a mile or so and they could probably do it. Ask them to do some fast biking or running and they most likely cant. And it's not just that they can't go fast it's that their fast twitch muscles are gone. And what happens when those are gone? Well, just go out in public and watch the elderly shuffle. No gait, no agility whatsoever which means a high percentage of tripping or falling. Can they get around, sure but no spring in their legs and their balance suffers also.


As you get older (I'll define it as over 75, but that's just relative point---old to you might be 55), you slow down and you lose the ability to go as fast as you used to when you were younger. Doing HIIT might slow this loss of fast twitch muscles, but with HIIT, the elderly are much more likely to get injured and not continue it. That's why most elderly will walk as opposed to sprinting. And even in younger people, many have attempted to concentrate on HIIT and find themselves getting injured and not able to keep the HIIT up and mix in more aerobic, resistance, and yoga/stretching.

Image
"The fundamental principle of ethics is reverence for life" Albert Schweitzer
User avatar
Skip
 
Posts: 2230
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 9:19 am

Re: Exercise, Health and You: How much is Enough? (A respons

Postby Golden Ghost » Sat Oct 31, 2015 1:31 pm

Skip wrote:
Golden Ghost wrote:Skip, I agree we need to do both types of exercise. If its 80/20 or 20/80 it probably does not mater that much. However, I don't think most people are doing any anaerobic training.
Lets take someone who is elderly and does no training at all. Someone who is just very mobil their entire life. Ask them to jog a mile or so and they could probably do it. Ask them to do some fast biking or running and they most likely cant. And it's not just that they can't go fast it's that their fast twitch muscles are gone. And what happens when those are gone? Well, just go out in public and watch the elderly shuffle. No gait, no agility whatsoever which means a high percentage of tripping or falling. Can they get around, sure but no spring in their legs and their balance suffers also.


As you get older (I'll define it as over 75, but that's just relative point---old to you might be 55), you slow down and you lose the ability to go as fast as you used to when you were younger. Doing HIIT might slow this loss of fast twitch muscles, but with HIIT, the elderly are much more likely to get injured and not continue it. That's why most elderly will walk as opposed to sprinting. And even in younger people, many have attempted to concentrate on HIIT and find themselves getting injured and not able to keep the HIIT up and mix in more aerobic, resistance, and yoga/stretching.

Image


I agree the chance of injury doing HIT is higher as you age. That's why you need to start at a younger age. And there is a chance of injury even at a younger age but even over doing arobic exercise at a younger age can cause knee and other problems. It's a constant ballancing act.
Golden Ghost
 
Posts: 354
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 4:59 pm

Re: Exercise, Health and You: How much is Enough? (A respons

Postby Skip » Sun Nov 01, 2015 9:24 pm

Golden Ghost wrote:And there is a chance of injury even at a younger age but even over doing arobic exercise at a younger age can cause knee and other problems.


It's a matter of probabilities. How many people get knee problems from swimming aerobically?
If you were the guy in the following video (play the video), I'd say you don't have to much to worry about:

http://www.npr.org/2015/09/20/442015781 ... or-a-ninja
"The fundamental principle of ethics is reverence for life" Albert Schweitzer
User avatar
Skip
 
Posts: 2230
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 9:19 am

Re: Exercise, Health and You: How much is Enough? (A respons

Postby Gershon » Mon Nov 02, 2015 3:30 am

I'm not so sure why an endurance runner who can click off a series of 9 or 10 minute miles is somehow in worse shape than the HIIT person of the same age to whom a sprint is 100 yards at a 10 minute pace. I don't even know why one would have fast twitch and one would have slow twitch muscles.

People who participate in endurance sports aren't the tottering, shuffling old people we see. That's HIIT seller's propaganda just like "Skinny fat."

As for the body type, I've been looking at old pictures of steel workers and miners. Most of them are what people today would call skinny. Look at pictures of Asian people working in fields. Most of them are what people would call skinny. If you see a fat person in an old picture of workers, you can be pretty sure it's a foreman.

I've only seen one constant with the stereotypical old person. They are all different.
User avatar
Gershon
 
Posts: 435
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 7:25 am
Location: Pueblo, Colorado

Re: Exercise, Health and You: How much is Enough? (A respons

Postby vgpedlr » Mon Nov 02, 2015 9:53 am

Gershon wrote: I don't even know why one would have fast twitch and one would have slow twitch muscles.

All human skeletal muscle is a mix of the two general fiber types. (there's actually more variety) The proportion seems to be genetically determined, hence the old adage, "sprinters are born, not made." Slow twitch fibers are developed through training, and fast twitch fibers can with training become the fatigue resistant, aerobically powered, endurance oriented slow twitch fibers.

People who participate in endurance sports aren't the tottering, shuffling old people we see. That's HIIT seller's propaganda just like "Skinny fat."

The well developed slow twitch fibers of an endurance athlete are not visually dramatic, but they are the muscle fibers that support us throughout daily life.

As for the body type, I've been looking at old pictures of steel workers and miners. Most of them are what people today would call skinny. Look at pictures of Asian people working in fields. Most of them are what people would call skinny.

Those workers are well conditioned for the endurance of working all day. If they had to rely on their fast twitch fibers, they wouldn't last long enough to get a paycheck.

No one yet has given me an adequate explanation of why training fast twitch fines is important in aging. Plus, there are other ways to develop useful, functional strength without the risks of HIIT.
User avatar
vgpedlr
 
Posts: 4502
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2009 4:17 pm
Location: NorCal

PreviousNext

Return to The Lounge

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests



Welcome!

Sign up to receive our regular articles, recipes, and news about upcoming events.