Tag Archives: exercise

15 Swing Set Exercises

As a father, I wanted to write this blog for the parents. It’s so hard to find time to workout in the summer. For most, fitness just takes a back seat during this time. Let’s be honest, you want to be outside. It’s the season of bar-b-que, beer, family vacations, and soaking up the sun. Your kids want and need to be outside too. For these reasons, attendance at health clubs declines significantly over the spring and summer months. So, how does one get a total body workout outside of the gym? Easy, head to the playground, jump on the swing set and try these 15 exercises.

  1. Pistol Squat: Stand with your feet shoulder-width apart and pointing forward. Hold arms straight out and grasp the swing for stability. Raise the right leg and lower the body while bending the left knee. Drop to a level of chair height, then return to standing. Repeat for the desired number of reps, then switch to perform on the opposite leg. Progression: Perform with the leg up on the swing’s seat. Pistol squat

Continue reading

12 Booty Exercises to Improve the Back Side

 The glutes (not counting the core) are the single most important muscle group for athletic performance and injury prevention. 

Booty

I prefer a booty that has a functional purpose.

I am an ass man. Not in a sexual context, but in a functional movement context.  I do not care if you are fat, skinny, or look great in a pair of yoga pants. If your glutes function at an optimal level you will have better athletic performance and prevent injury. Over the years, I have worked with a variety of clients and the glutes are a focus for all of my clients. It does not matter what your current fitness level is; if you want to prevent injury, boost performance, or become more fitter, the butt is key.

Ask any client I have trained, and they will tell you that I will destroy your glutes – in a good way. Over time, I have developed some favorite booty-popping exercises.  In clinical research, there isn’t any published data that truly says these exercises are best. What you have here is based on my clinical experience and what I have found to work best. These exercises are designed to give you optimal gluteal function and they might even make you look good in a pair of jeans.

Continue reading

Kids and Distance Running

By now, some, if not most, have read the article of the 6-year-old girl who became the youngest ever to complete a half-Half marathonmarathon. Not only did she become the youngest ever, she finished 5th out of 10 in a group of competitors aged 14 and under – she was the only competitor under 12 years old. Race announcer said “she seemed to be barely even breathing hard at the finish line.” So the question being asked – is this safe and appropriate? The question I ask: is this a real concern or more of an excuse? Continue reading

Postpartum Weight Loss

€~

One of the most common inquires I get is from new moms looking to lose that postpartum belly. How is it possible that celebrities like Heidi Klum can drop 30-40 pounds in just 4 months?  Anna Paquin goes from twins to 6-pack abs in 5 months. For new moms, that is frustrating, when you work so hard to lose stubborn body weight. What do they do that you don’t? Trust me, there is no super-secret information or magic formula that only they are privy to. You have the same physiology and weight loss capabilities as Hollywood superstars.

Normal weight gain during pregnancy is 30-35 pounds. Roughly 10 pounds is lost immediately after birth – seven pounds for the baby, plus two-three for blood, amniotic fluid and other. Through the first week your body will flush another 5 pounds of reserved water weight.  Optimal weight loss should be 1-2 pounds per week. If you do the math, you will find that Anna Paquin and Heidi Klum lost about 2 pounds per week.  Suddenly, Heidi and Anna’s weight loss isn’t so dramatic, does it? A loss of 1-2 pounds per week is easily attainable if you are diet compliant and dedicated to exercise. Continue reading

Core Before or Core After?

I was recently asked by a colleague: Why does NASM recommend performing core exercises prior to SAQ and resistance exercises when most other organizations state to perform core at the end? It is a long-winded, highly-debatable question, so I decided to write a short blog on the topic providing my thoughts.

The theory of performing core exercise at the end of training is very valid and certainly has utility.The primary theory to performing core exercise after resistance training is fatigue. Resistance, reactive and SAQ training targets our prime movers which are predominately made of Fast Gylcolytic (FG) and Fast Oxidative Glycolytic (FOG) muscle fibers. These fibers are easily fatigued due to their avascular properties. Core musculature is rich in Slow Oxidative (SO) muscle fibers. High vascularity makes SO fibers resistant to fatigue secondary to the accessibility to oxygen.

A common fault with core training technique is allowing the prime movers – saturated with FG / FOG fibers – to dominate the SO dominant muscle fibers of the core. Subsequently, we are not properly working the core muscles, we are just training our prime movers to act as core stabilizers. During higher intensity exercise like SAQ, reactive, and resistance training the FG and FOG muscle fibers become fatigued. Thus, when we transition to core exercises, the fatigued prime movers are less likely to become dominant and will allow for the core musculature and SO dominant muscles to do there job. So the organizations that support this method are certainly not wrong.

Conversely, NASM has a completely different outlook on when to perform core exercises. By performing core exercise after flexibility and prior to SAQ, plyometric, or resistance exercise serves as a functional warm-up to stimulate the neuromuscular system and enhance neuromuscular efficiency during more intense exercise. By doing so, our neuromuscular system is prepared and ready for higher intensity exercise and can prevent unwanted motion of joints and prevent injury.

The thought process behind this is the increased neurological stimulation that occurs when performing core exercise. This increased neural stimulation is much like the neural response that occurs with post-activation potentiation (PAP). PAP operates on the principle that heavy muscle loading creates increased stimulation of the central nervous system, resulting in greater motor unit recruitment and subsequently force production (1, 2).

There are two theories behind PAP. The first states that maximal muscle contraction yields an increased phosphorylation of myosin. The increased phosphorylation causes actin and myosin binding to be more responsive to calcium ions released from the sarcoplasmic reticulum (3).  This enhances force muscle production at the structural level of muscle (4).  As a result, faster contraction rates develop (1).

The second theory behind PAP involves the Hoffmann Reflex (4). The Hoffman reflex is excitation of muscle spindle nerve fibers. Physiologically, PAP increases speed of H-reflex, thus increasing the firing rate to muscle (5). It is this rate coding, and the aforementioned  phosphorylation of myosin that the NASM model suggests occurs during and following core exercise.

By stimulating the core musculature, the core will be active during the core exercise and also be activated during higher intensity exercise. Subsequently, the core is working longer and it is helping prevent injury by enhancing neuromuscular efficiency during higher intensity exercise.

What do you think? Which method do you prefer? Personally, through research and exercise experience, I favor the NASM version, but that could easily be attributed to my work experience at NASM. Nonetheless, the question remains and I think it would be a great research study comparing the two variables. Any doctoral students looking for a project?

References:

  1. Chiu, L.Z., Fry, A.C., Weiss, L.W., Schilling, B.K., Brown, L.E., & Smith, S.L. (2003). Postactivation potentiation response in athletic and recreationally trained individuals. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 17(4), 671-677.
  2. Rixon, K.P., Lamont, H.S., & Bemden, M.G. (2007). Influence of type of muscle contraction, gender, and lifting experience on postactivation potentiation performance. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 21(2), 500-505.
  3. Kravitz
  4. Hamada, T., Sale, D.G., MacDougall, J.D., & Tarnopolsky, M.A. (2000a). Postactivation potentiation, muscle fiber type, and twitch contraction time in human knee extensor muscles. Journal of Applied Physiology, 88, 2131-2137.
  5. Hodgson, M., Docherty, D., & Robbins, D. (2005). Post-activation potentiation underlying physiology and implications for motor performance. Sports Medicine, 25 (7), 385-395.

ENOUGH! Weight Loss is NOT Rocket Science

This blog should more appropriately be titled my rant of the month:

How many diet fads come out every year? Atkins, Zone, Paleo, Low-fat, South Beach, Intermittent Fasting are some of the most popular, but there are hundreds more pumped out every year. Why do we have new diets every year? Because there is not, nor will there ever be, a diet that can guarantee weight loss. Researchers keep making weight loss a scientific endeavor. The researchers then publish the findings, sell books, get rich and then the diet fades. Enough already, weight loss is not rocket science. It’s simple: balance energy by eating better and getting off of your ass. To prove my point let’s compare the data on a controversial issue: high-protein, low-carbohydrate vs. low-fat diets.

In 2002 a study done from Duke University researchers comparing a high protein low carb diet versus a traditional low-fat diet. The results of this study became much publicized and launched the Atkins Diet revolution. It hit mainstream media with a left and right hook. The diet quickly became one of the best-selling diet plans of all-time. But pundits refuted the data stating unreliable and invalid data. Today, there is valid points of discussion made by both sides.

Like most research and controversial issue, the data is for and against the high-protein diet is equivocal. In 2003, the New England Journal of Medicine published two studies which compared a low-carbohydrate diet to a calorie-restricted, low-fat diet in obese adults (1, 2). After six months both studies showed that low-carbohydrate subjects lost more weight and had significant reductions in markers for cardiovascular disease. This includes decreased triglyceride levels. However, after one year of performing the diets, weight loss and triglyceride levels were similar. But like many diets, compliance is an issue and in both studies there was a high dropout rate – thus data is unreliable.

As I had mentioned, pundits refuted the data. Most stated, that carbohydrate restriction was not the reason for weight loss, rather it was attributed to calorie deficit. This is similar to the systematic literature review done by Bravata, et al concluded that participant weight loss on low-carbohydrate diets was a result of caloric restriction, but carbohydrate restriction (3).

So Atkins, does yield weight loss, but why? Can I really eat a bacon cheeseburger (with no bun) and lose weight? Physiologically, carbohydrates are the body’s primary fuel source. When we eat carbohydrates the food is broken down and stored in skeletal muscle tissue and liver as glycogen, an easy to use energy source. When we eliminate carbohydrates from our diet we also eliminate glycogen stores.  Without glycogen, our body must use fat as energy. Subsequently, our body enters a state of ketosis – a state where ketone bodies are produced when fatty acids are broken down for energy. The loss of glycogen stores – and associated water loss – coupled with increased fat metabolism creates weight loss. In addition, the breakdown of fat is much more difficult than breaking down glycogen. Thus, our body must expend more energy to convert fat to energy (4) – burn energy to create energy.

But there are risks to eating a high-protein, low carbohydrate diet, right? The answer is yes and no. Many have stated a high-protein diet causes kidney and liver issues as well as abnormal insulin metabolism. Levine et al performed a research review  on low-carbohydrate diets and found little data to say a high-protein, low-carbohydrate diet causes health concerns (5). However, many studies have found that the diet does cause common side effects such as constipation, nausea, weakness, dehydration, and fatigue.

Is there a winning diet method? Simply put – the answer is no. While South Beach, the Zone, Atkins and others have all remained the most popular, there is not winner. If there were some magical remedy we would never again have new diet fads. After reviewing all of the data there is one constant: all weight loss is associated with negative energy balance. Meaning, you are burning more calories than you are consuming.

Remember Super-Size Me? The guy who ate McDonald’s everyday and gained weight. Well have you heard of Doug Logeais? He ate McDonald’s everyday for 30 days and lost weight! How, he exercised. He trained most days of the week at a high intensity – he burned more calories than he consumed.  Has anyone seen Michael Phelps’ diet? Big Mac, Pizza, soda, ice cream, 10,000 calories per day in food, but nobody says he has a weight problem. He is a long, lean and the greatest Olympic athlete of all time. Does he need to change his diet? Can you honestly say that he is doing something wrong? He is fit because his exercise off-sets calorie consumption.

My final opinion: regular physical activity combined with a well-balanced diet is paramount.  Weight maintenance requires permanent changes to eating habits and increased physical activity. The specific strategies for making those changes, and making them permanent, will vary from person to person. So, instead of a walking through the local book store of the best-selling diet book, save your money. Take a walk through your neighborhood. Instead of cheeseburger and fries – order a turkey burger and side salad. This is not rocket science – quit trying to make it more difficult than it is.

References: 

1      Samaha FF, Iqbal N, Seshadri P, et al. A low-carbohydrate as compared with a low-fat diet in severe obesity. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:2074–2081.

2      Foster GD, Wyatt HR, Hill JO, et al. A randomized trial of a low-carbohydrate diet for obesity. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:2082–2090.

3      Bravata DM, Sanders L, Huang J, et al. Efficacy and safety of low-carbohydrate diets: a systematic review. JAMA. 2003;289(14):1837–1850.

4      Buchholz AC, Schoeller DA. Is a calorie a calorie? Am J Clin Nutr. 2004;79(suppl):899S–906S.

5      Levine MJ, Jones JM, Lineback DR. Low-carbohydrate diets: assessing the science and knowledge gaps, summary of an ILSI North America workshop. J Am Diet Assoc. 2006;106:2086–2094.