This week Vicki and I ran our first Perfect Fit Kids exercise class for both parents and children. It was amazing. I'm not sure I've ever had so much fun as a trainer. Both kids and adults were smiling and laughing while they ran, jumped, crawled, acted like gorillas or popped like popcorn. No one there was thinking they were part of an 'exercise class'. The kids, most of all, I'm sure would have looked perplexed if you told them they were doing something other than playing yet they were going through all the basic movement patterns that ought to be included in any well-rounded fitness class.
It made me realise how annoyed I've become with the 'fitness industry'.
For starters, I'm sick of being told that one type of exercise is better for me – or my clients – than another. That 'too much' running is bad for you, or 'too much' cycling, jumping, lifting, squatting, moving, resting… (well, of course it is - just define 'too much' before you jump on your Reebok Step soapbox or I'm not listening).
For main course, the other thing that's caught my capra is the rush to copyright exercise. Beachbody, P90x, CrossFit, MetaFit, Jump-yourself-into-a-size-ten-bikini-in-28-days-fit… They all want you to believe that their 'system' of exercise is the only way to lose weight, safely, quickly, sustainably, or the only way to fully realise your physical potential (CrossFitters actually believe their 'athletes' are the 'fittest people on the planet'... I think I need to take a deep breath and save that for another blog post).
I really don't want to start an-depth attack here, on anyone. I actually think that – beyond their bluff and bluster – all these exercise programs are great. Join a CrossFit gym and as well as being several hundred pounds poorer each month you will be several pounds lighter; you will get strong; you will, with dedication, turn yourself into a fine human specimen. But have you ever looked at what any of these branded fitness programs involve? The same basic exercises that people have been doing for decades, centuries, maybe even millennia. There might be slight variations (CrossFitters seem to have some kind of mental breakdown when it comes to the pull up for instance) and there might be different names (I hold my own hand up here – I love coming up with new names for old exercises... Iron Semaphores anyone?) but the movement patterns remain the same. There are only so many ways the body can move after all.
'But we use the latest research into interval training to blah, blah, blah...'
Congratulations; so you've moved away from doing Tabatas (20s work/10s rest, 8x over if you didn't know) to a more 'optimally fat burning' 30s work/15 rest, 6x over. Not only that, you've copyrighted your 'new' exercise program as FastFatBurn30. Not only that, you're inviting other personal trainers and bootcamp owners to buy into your system for a mere £100 (half-price for the first 100 FitPros to sign up). As they say in Thailand: 'Same same, but different…'
Exercise shouldn't be 'owned' by anyone. Exercise shouldn't be reduced to systems, programs, methods... Exercise should be fun. It should keep you guessing. It should creep up on you by surprise and it should put you on the floor in a gasping, sweating heap of smiles.
You need to get back to your childhood. You need to rediscover the simple joy of movement. Any kind of movement. Running, jumping, lifting things, throwing them, climbing, crawling... just because. Because it's more fun than sitting on the sofa wondering why your trousers are feeling so tight.
You will lose weight and you will get fitter if you dedicate yourself to movements that make you smile. If you like to run, go for a run. If you like swimming, go swimming. If you like lifting heavy things, go to the weights room. If you like to boogie badly, join a Zumba class. If you're looking for friendship, a nickname and early mornings, join a bootcamp. If you like pink, join a ballet class. It really doesn't matter. All movement is good for you; just don't fall into the trap of thinking that whatever you choose to do makes you fitter, faster, stronger, tougher, thinner or is in any way 'better' than what someone else chooses.
If you do something you enjoy, the hard work may hurt but it won't feel like suffering. As a result, you'll keep at it and get results.
Personally, I like to run and I like to punch and kick things (quite often real people, but they don't mind, they're usually punching and kicking me too...). And, even though I'm not so brilliant at all of them, I also like to push, pull, jump, crawl and lift. But I don't make the mistake of thinking that my clients do, or even should, do. Whether you're a PT client of mine or attend one of my classes, I like to find out what makes you tick, why you want to lose weight, why you want to get fit. If I'm fussy about the way you squat, press, run or lift, it's because I want you to master the movement patterns that will keep your body strong and functioning so you can fulfil the why. So you can play 'it' with your children. So you can run that 5k. So you can throw your 5-year old son on the bed and watch him scream with laughter and shout 'Again! Again!'… and be able to do it again without worrying you'll put your back out. So you can stand at the ocean's edge and race the rising tide. So you can get out of your chair or go to the toilet without asking for help. So you can climb a tree, go for a walk, carry the shopping… if you are strong and capable of basic human movements, you will be able to do the things that bring you joy. And joy through movement is the only way to lose weight and get fit; the only way to keep the weight off and stay fit.
I don't want to copyright movement. On the contrary, I want movement to be open access, free for all to develop in a way that makes you happy.
On the other hand, I don't care if you hate burpees, they're good for you... now give me ten!
For more info on what I do, and for news of more kids classes, visit www.perfectfitpt.co.uk
PS. I know that it's easier to offend a CrossFit evangelist than a Muslim fundamentalist (or Christian fundamentalist come to that), but I'm really not having a go. Not really. CrossFit is great, but it'd be even better if it didn't feel like organised religion...
PPS. Caught my capra = got my goat
Sunday, 28 July 2013
Monday, 8 July 2013
Why what you're told about dehydration is wrong - this post could save your life!
So, it's been a while since I last posted, but the hot weather has got me thinking about the subject of hydration. I would usually pop something up on Facebook, but this subject requires a little more depth than your average FB post. What's more, reading this blog post could save your life!
Considering hydration is just about the most basic requirement of human life, it's amazing that there should be so much confusion and complexity surrounding it.
I'm not going to try and tackle the oft-cited recommendations that everyone should be drinking 2 litres of water a day (water taken straight from holy wells, filtered through non-oxidative gold mesh and run over the thighs of a virgin princess - £10.99 a half-litre from your local health food store). But I will say this: your body needs approximately 3-4 litres of fluid everyday, but this fluid is ingested through all foodstuffs as well as 'drinks'. And drinks include coffee - it's not a diuretic (although you still don't want to overdo the caffeine.... note to self).
I'm going to concentrate on the hydration myths surrounding exercise. The two most common are:
1. 'Even a 2% drop in hydration can lead to a decline in performance of 10%–20%'.
2. 'Drink even if you're not thirsty; if you wait until you're thirsty it's too late, you're already dehydrated.'
These myths abound. They're repeated in running magazines, race guides, by personal trainers and 'nutritionists' – I've even heard doctors say it, reinforcing the idea that we are all capable of hearing something that sounds reasonable and accepting it without question.
The trouble is, if you stop and think about either of these statements for even a moment, neither sounds particularly reasonable.
Let's take the first. Where does this myth come from? Well, Gatorade actually. Gatorade was the first ever 'sports' drink. It was developed in the mid-Sixties through research with the Florida Gators NFL team - hence the name. The theory back then was that players were losing significant bodyweight during training/games due to fluid and electrolyte loss. They were also low on blood sugars – Gatorade replaced fluid, electrolytes and sugar, and the Gators became an incredibly successful team. Important to remember here that the drink contained sugar - that is, refined carbohydrates that your body can quickly convert to energy. And those carbs were combined in an easily digestible drink, mixed with water and salts to a level designed to optimise digestion across the gut - in other words, they were isotonic.
But let's forget the sugars for now, because that's what Gatorade seemed to do. Since then they've funded incredible amounts of research into sports drinks. One of their findings was the 2% / 10% rule. I'm not going to pick through the faults of Gatorade's research – suffice to say, much of their research looks fantastic on paper but is conducted in laboratories on running machines, which often bears little resemblance to the practise of going outside and actually running, with cooling air flow, the ability to speed up, or slow down etc etc. It's not necessary to find such faults anyway, because there's what philosophers call a 'black swan' in the room, beating it's wings and threatening to break arms.
(For more on the 'black swan problem', see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability#Inductive_categorical_inference)
The black swan in question is the fact that elite runners never consume the amount of fluids they're 'supposed' to. I would go so far to say that they wouldn't even if they were sponsored by Gatorade. In fact, research shows that runners who finish marathons in the quickest times are also those who have lost most body weight during the event. Elite runners often lose up to 3kg of fluids while running (around 5% of bodyweight). Yet they don't show a drop in performance as the race nears the end; in fact many will run negative splits (a faster second half of a race than the first).
So 'dehydration' clearly isn't a significant influence on performance; what about health? Most athletes finish long distance races in what would be called a 'severely dehydrated' state, but most never see the inside of a medical tent - and it's almost impossible to find documented cases of dehydration-related deaths in marathons. Research shows no difference in body-weight changes between those needing medical care at the end of races and those who get in their cars and head off for a pasta feast.
We are often warned that not drinking enough can also lead to heat stroke. Again, the evidence simply doesn't stand up. Research shows that the prime reason for dangerously high core temperatures is metabolic rate - basically, how hard we are working. Fluid has a small effect (through sweat, of course) but not as much as you'd think; certainly not enough that we need to replace all our fluid losses.
So how much do we need to drink? That leads us to myth 2.
Gatorade - and other drinks companies - would have us believe that we are physiologically impaired. Apparently our natural biological systems for alerting us to the need for water don't work. Isn't is a miracle the human race has survived so many millennia?
If we accept the drinks companies argument that overral fluid loss - represented by a change in body weight - is the most important thing for keeping us at peak health and performance, then it is a miracle. When we exercise hard, we actually 'voluntarily dehydrate'. That is, even given free and open access to water, we don't drink enough to replace all fluids lost in sweat. But evolution can't be wrong - we wouldn't be around to artificially correct it. So it can't be total fluid loss that's the important factor - and it's not, it's fluid balance. Our bodies naturally defend the concentration and balance of bodily fluids by various methods including inhibiting our urine production and, amazingly, creating a thirst reflex. This thirst reflex has kept the human race alive and evolving since before it was technically 'human'. Trying to second guess it by drinking more than we thirst for, or to some formula created by a 'nutritionist' is asking for trouble.
This is the bit of the post that could save your life... I know, it's taken a while to get here...
I mentioned that it's near-impossible to find any dehydration-related deaths in the history of endurance sports. It's actually fairly simple to find cases of both serious illness and death from 'over-hydration'. It's called hyponatremia.
When you sweat you lose a tiny amount of sodium. But not much in relation to the water loss, so the sodium levels in your blood actually increase in relative terms. This increase triggers the thirst mechanism. If you drink more than you thirst for, you actually dilute your blood's sodium levels. You will likely get a headache at first and feel nauseous; just as if you were dehydrated in fact, which often causes sufferers to drink even more.... But there will also likely be bloating - your watch may feel tight, or your rings. And if you are vomiting, you are not dehydrated, your are suffering the early stages of hyponatremia. DO NOT DRINK any more fluids. If you suspect someone you know may have over-hydrated, watch for them acting strangely - if they don't know where they are, who you are, what they are doing etc, then they are at immediate risk of suffering a seizure, falling into a coma or worse.
So, there it is... When exercising in heat, as long as you follow your own thirst mechanism, you are not at risk from dehydration. Ignore your thirst mechanism though, and you are more at risk of hyponatremia.
And if you want to know more about this, can I suggest 'The Runner's Body' by Ross Tucker and Jonathan Dugas published by Rodale. It really is one of the most clearly written and unbiased look at just about everything concerned with running - from hydration, nutrition and cramp through to stretching, running technique and training.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Runners-Body-Exercise-Science-Stronger/dp/1605298611/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1373322860&sr=1-1&keywords=the+runner%27s+body
Considering hydration is just about the most basic requirement of human life, it's amazing that there should be so much confusion and complexity surrounding it.
I'm not going to try and tackle the oft-cited recommendations that everyone should be drinking 2 litres of water a day (water taken straight from holy wells, filtered through non-oxidative gold mesh and run over the thighs of a virgin princess - £10.99 a half-litre from your local health food store). But I will say this: your body needs approximately 3-4 litres of fluid everyday, but this fluid is ingested through all foodstuffs as well as 'drinks'. And drinks include coffee - it's not a diuretic (although you still don't want to overdo the caffeine.... note to self).
I'm going to concentrate on the hydration myths surrounding exercise. The two most common are:
1. 'Even a 2% drop in hydration can lead to a decline in performance of 10%–20%'.
2. 'Drink even if you're not thirsty; if you wait until you're thirsty it's too late, you're already dehydrated.'
These myths abound. They're repeated in running magazines, race guides, by personal trainers and 'nutritionists' – I've even heard doctors say it, reinforcing the idea that we are all capable of hearing something that sounds reasonable and accepting it without question.
The trouble is, if you stop and think about either of these statements for even a moment, neither sounds particularly reasonable.
Let's take the first. Where does this myth come from? Well, Gatorade actually. Gatorade was the first ever 'sports' drink. It was developed in the mid-Sixties through research with the Florida Gators NFL team - hence the name. The theory back then was that players were losing significant bodyweight during training/games due to fluid and electrolyte loss. They were also low on blood sugars – Gatorade replaced fluid, electrolytes and sugar, and the Gators became an incredibly successful team. Important to remember here that the drink contained sugar - that is, refined carbohydrates that your body can quickly convert to energy. And those carbs were combined in an easily digestible drink, mixed with water and salts to a level designed to optimise digestion across the gut - in other words, they were isotonic.
But let's forget the sugars for now, because that's what Gatorade seemed to do. Since then they've funded incredible amounts of research into sports drinks. One of their findings was the 2% / 10% rule. I'm not going to pick through the faults of Gatorade's research – suffice to say, much of their research looks fantastic on paper but is conducted in laboratories on running machines, which often bears little resemblance to the practise of going outside and actually running, with cooling air flow, the ability to speed up, or slow down etc etc. It's not necessary to find such faults anyway, because there's what philosophers call a 'black swan' in the room, beating it's wings and threatening to break arms.
(For more on the 'black swan problem', see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability#Inductive_categorical_inference)
The black swan in question is the fact that elite runners never consume the amount of fluids they're 'supposed' to. I would go so far to say that they wouldn't even if they were sponsored by Gatorade. In fact, research shows that runners who finish marathons in the quickest times are also those who have lost most body weight during the event. Elite runners often lose up to 3kg of fluids while running (around 5% of bodyweight). Yet they don't show a drop in performance as the race nears the end; in fact many will run negative splits (a faster second half of a race than the first).
So 'dehydration' clearly isn't a significant influence on performance; what about health? Most athletes finish long distance races in what would be called a 'severely dehydrated' state, but most never see the inside of a medical tent - and it's almost impossible to find documented cases of dehydration-related deaths in marathons. Research shows no difference in body-weight changes between those needing medical care at the end of races and those who get in their cars and head off for a pasta feast.
We are often warned that not drinking enough can also lead to heat stroke. Again, the evidence simply doesn't stand up. Research shows that the prime reason for dangerously high core temperatures is metabolic rate - basically, how hard we are working. Fluid has a small effect (through sweat, of course) but not as much as you'd think; certainly not enough that we need to replace all our fluid losses.
So how much do we need to drink? That leads us to myth 2.
Gatorade - and other drinks companies - would have us believe that we are physiologically impaired. Apparently our natural biological systems for alerting us to the need for water don't work. Isn't is a miracle the human race has survived so many millennia?
If we accept the drinks companies argument that overral fluid loss - represented by a change in body weight - is the most important thing for keeping us at peak health and performance, then it is a miracle. When we exercise hard, we actually 'voluntarily dehydrate'. That is, even given free and open access to water, we don't drink enough to replace all fluids lost in sweat. But evolution can't be wrong - we wouldn't be around to artificially correct it. So it can't be total fluid loss that's the important factor - and it's not, it's fluid balance. Our bodies naturally defend the concentration and balance of bodily fluids by various methods including inhibiting our urine production and, amazingly, creating a thirst reflex. This thirst reflex has kept the human race alive and evolving since before it was technically 'human'. Trying to second guess it by drinking more than we thirst for, or to some formula created by a 'nutritionist' is asking for trouble.
This is the bit of the post that could save your life... I know, it's taken a while to get here...
I mentioned that it's near-impossible to find any dehydration-related deaths in the history of endurance sports. It's actually fairly simple to find cases of both serious illness and death from 'over-hydration'. It's called hyponatremia.
When you sweat you lose a tiny amount of sodium. But not much in relation to the water loss, so the sodium levels in your blood actually increase in relative terms. This increase triggers the thirst mechanism. If you drink more than you thirst for, you actually dilute your blood's sodium levels. You will likely get a headache at first and feel nauseous; just as if you were dehydrated in fact, which often causes sufferers to drink even more.... But there will also likely be bloating - your watch may feel tight, or your rings. And if you are vomiting, you are not dehydrated, your are suffering the early stages of hyponatremia. DO NOT DRINK any more fluids. If you suspect someone you know may have over-hydrated, watch for them acting strangely - if they don't know where they are, who you are, what they are doing etc, then they are at immediate risk of suffering a seizure, falling into a coma or worse.
So, there it is... When exercising in heat, as long as you follow your own thirst mechanism, you are not at risk from dehydration. Ignore your thirst mechanism though, and you are more at risk of hyponatremia.
And if you want to know more about this, can I suggest 'The Runner's Body' by Ross Tucker and Jonathan Dugas published by Rodale. It really is one of the most clearly written and unbiased look at just about everything concerned with running - from hydration, nutrition and cramp through to stretching, running technique and training.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Runners-Body-Exercise-Science-Stronger/dp/1605298611/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1373322860&sr=1-1&keywords=the+runner%27s+body
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)