Mon 22 Dec 2014
I did my WOW this past Friday, and my previous WOW was on the Saturday before that. Wendy worked out Sunday 12/21 after I got off work and met her at UE.
Doug 12/13-Chin, MedX Chest Press, Nautilus Pullover with SS retrofits, MedX Row with SS cam, MedX Leg Press, Neck Flex/Ext on SS Systems Neck
Doug 12/19- Rear Delt Fly, MedX Overhead Press, EZ barbell curl, Triceps Press on SS Systems Pulldown, EZ reverse curl, Formulator Flex/Ext, MedX Leg Press.
Wend 12/21-Chin, MedX Overhead Press, MedX Row with SS cam, MedX Chest Press, MedX Leg Press, TSC Neck Flex/Ext
This week I want to provide a direct link to James Steele’s most recent publication as it makes a major assertion of BBS principles: that intense effort that maximally stimulates anaerobic pathways also maximally stimulates the aerobic pathways. Acknowledging that the aerobic metabolic system receives its substrate from anaerobic glycolysis shows that the best way to entrain aerobic adaptations is to perform the kind of intense work that delivers substrate at a maximal level. Once you appreciate this physiologic fact, you have destroyed the artificial dichotomy between aerobic and anaerobic conditioning that has existed in the field of exercise physiology for decades.
This doesn’t just upset the apple cart of the marathon-running physiology professor, it somewhat upsets us HIT geeks that feel we have found a holy grail in a particular protocol or type of equipment. What our argument for high intensity training establishes is that perceived effort is the real physiologic common denominator that we have been looking for. This is born out in studies where interval cycling done to failure produced maximal metabolic improvements as well as significant hypertrophy. This is not to say that we should be protocol egalitarians. Some things are definitely more efficient and safer than others. However, we cannot pretend that a single optimized protocol will produce results superior to all other protocols. Nor will a given piece of equipment (remember when Arthur told us the pullover would produce lats wider than our shoulders?…didn’t happen) provide results that can’t be obtained with standard technology.
What I have found in my own training is that there is a continuum of intensity/volume/frequency that entrains meaningful results. What you can see in my WOW postings over the course of months/years is that I slide up and down this continuum as a means of accounting for recovery issues brought on by other aspects of my life, as well as a way to dupe adaptation and staleness. Very minimal changes within a protocol that obey the needs of efficiency and safety seem to be perceived as relatively drastic perturbations to the adaptive mechanism. This is why I feel the posting of everyone’s workouts are useful. It shows the significant variations that can exist within an approach that focuses on high quality effort that produces safe and efficient adaptations. Seeing how someone does it with the equipment and lifestyle they have at hand may be very useful for someone trying to find their way. When you see someone’s workout that seems to fit, you may have saved years of trial and error. When you want to alter your program, you may find a variation you want to try.
I just finished a phone consult with someone who lives in Seattle. Even though this person has an established gym to work out at, and he travels frequently, I still recommended he go over to Ideal Exercise and have some supervised workouts. Even if he does not end up training there on a full-time basis, he will have the invaluable experience of getting a benchmark for what his workouts should be like. Once you have such a benchmark, then you will develop an internal “pop-up timer” that you can use as a barometer of the appropriate level of perceived exertion that you can bring to any workout conducted in any environment.
With this in mind, I offer the link to James’ article. Also, I want to give you a link to Bill DeSimone’s new blog.
Post your WOW’s and your thoughts