You don`t need all that jazz.

So I am a bit ADHD, I lose interest in things or get distracted. Exercise is no exception to this, so every 4-6 weeks I change up my training program. Now it may be small changes, such as variations of the exercises I am doing. Sometimes I do a re think and change the whole thing. Now over the years I have acquired a fair bit of equipment and I will try to train different things. So for one block of training since I have kettlebells I do kettlebell training. I also have a weight set and for a block after that I might do a barbell block or use both pieces of equipment. To be honest, I have a bunch of equipment, but really the number one thing I have is my mind and my body. I don’t mean calisthenics necessarily either, I am talking about using my mind to lead my body. Recently I made some paralette bars out of pvc.

This piece of equipment is used to perform various gymnastic moves. I thought I would like to challenge myself and do something different. To be honest, I thought it would be easier to use these bars due to the helpful grip component and try out some moves. Turns out not so easy and to be honest, I kind of like that. It challenges me and it highlighted some areas I could improve. They were cheap to make too. I made them for $31 and about 30mins worth of time. That’s the thing I want to highlight in this article is that really it is your mind and your body that you are training and to be honest, if my equipment disappeared, I`d be upset but at the same token I don`t have to have equipment. You probably don`t either, seems when people make the choice to start exercising they have to get the latest gym wear and awesome shoes, etc. To be honest you don`t have to have all that kind of stuff. I was told that exercise cost too much. I suggested to this person 1. Could they afford to be unhealthy? 2. Exercise can be free or low cost. I built my paralette bars and many pieces of equipment many pieces are cheap or free. Really, it is about being creative if you have two buckets you could fill them with water and lift them up. You can use furniture or logs or a wheelbarrow or walk home from shopping and every time you stop do a different exercise move.

Exercise is about being creative and improving your health. It isn`t about the latest gym wear or shoes and we need to remember that when we put up barriers to exercise. Children are great exercisers and they are very creative many times using the world around them. Could you find ways to exercise using the world around you relatively cheap or free?

Kids will be kids.

                Recently within fitness there is a return to our roots so to speak. Things like MovNat and Primal Flow have become very popular. In general these methods go deeper than just exercise the philosophy it is about getting about to nature, to our roots.  Ido Portal to paraphrase once said that exercise is just a small part of movement. All of these have in common, movement the way the body was intended to move and often doing things we did as a child. 

                Do you remember what you used to do as a child? Though the answers will be different common themes emerge. Playing outside, climbing things in different ways, crawling, getting off the ground, throwing and catching, riding bikes and running around. What about cartwheels, rolling carrying friends and stuff. 

                There is no doubt we are largely movement opportunity deprived as adults. Movement is an opportunity, this mindset alone could change your life. Getting back to basics proved to be great for my programming and getting people back to a healthier body and mind. Things like get ups and crawling has really improved many peoples quality of life. Yes I have some client’s dislike it because crawling requires us to get a little bit uncomfortable and get ups requires people to get creative as I like them to try different methods to get off the ground. The best part is even those that at first don’t like it get the benefits. Having clients tell me I hated doing those but the other day I had to get down and pick up my phone from under the bed which in the past was hard makes it all worthwhile. 

                Getting up from the ground can be hard for those that don’t do it but what about kids? Easy? Seems like it but recently a school locally banned cartwheels and other potential activities that a child could be hurt. My theory is that if we can get kids and the elderly moving well and enjoying it those in the middle of those ages will follow suit. You see if our elders lead by example it is more likely others will follow. This could prove to be infectious for kids and if kids enjoy movement it may get adults involved. It is a cycle but in order for that cycle to grow opportunities need to be offered. Let me make this clear opportunities come with risk, yes a kid could hurt themselves doing a cartwheel or fall out of a tree and break a bone. If we have a narrowing amount of opportunities as adults to move and we limit kids movement opportunities what will their future outlook be? 

                The world is full of risks and rewards, movement is one of them and to be frank if we limit the kids of the world the future risks will be even greater then a broken bone or a scraped knee. The risk we take as the generations before them is that kids may not have the quality of life or lifespan for that matter when they get into our position. What would your life be like if you weren’t active as a child? Did you have someone older then you instil a passion to move into you? What would/is life like without movement as a child?

The doping crystal ball: A sporting performance future.

Not too long ago I was having a conversation with someone while we were doing some weightlifting. I was snatching that day and somehow we had come to the topic of drugs in sport. The person I was lifting with is an ironman and in the past I have worked with him to improve his nutrition and overall performance. As you may be aware performance enhancing substances are often linked with weightlifting and also since the outing of Lance (you know who I am talking about) the public is becoming aware of drugs in endurance based events. To be frank I don`t know of many sports where someone hasn`t tried something to get an advantage, golfers have had laser procedures to improve vision after all. During this conversation I told this person about the possible future of performance enhancement in sports and he seemed shocked. I told him I thought the future in performance enhancement is gene doping and about what potential things gene therapy could do. I thought it was worth sharing this information with all of you as well.

So first off what is gene doping? Gene doping is defined by the World Anti-Doping Agency as "the non-therapeutic use of cells, genes, genetic elements, or of the modulation of gene expression, having the capacity to improve athletic performance". Seems simple right? We also have to ask ourselves is it ethical and is it safe. I`ll leave these questions up to you to answer for yourself. 

So how do we detect and stop gene doping? Well I want to be clear about this the World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) and other agencies are trying to get ahead of the game here. It is well known that they had to play catch up with steroids and some other performance enhancing substances. Often I have heard through the sport grapevine that detecting for substances is done via changes in blood and urine and even now some drugs are hard to detect with current methods. Gene doping is introduced differently than these other enhancing methods.  Gene doping can be done in a number of ways these include direct injection of DNA into the muscle, insertion of genetically modified cells or utilising a virus to introduce the information. Right now you may be thinking that it sounds really far out. Gene therapy was created to help those with life threatening disease and I believe the future of medicine lies in stems cells and gene therapy. The problem exists for sporting agencies because these genes are from our genetic codes. In other words the changes that would appear seem like natural mutations in the body. For testing to be successful agencies will have to take a long term approach. Reference values may have to be established from the time an athlete starts competing. The reference values would have to take a far more comprehensive range of values and see if overall homeostasis is disturbed or altered in some shape or form.  That would include even lower levels of competition to track changes over time. This type of testing would also require tissue samples to test DNA which may have to be site specific.

It has been outlined in a basic fashion what gene doping is and how it can be administered, but how could it actually be used? Well gene doping started out in medicine to help save lives. The doping method is the same in both instances with only the outcome being different. The difference being that therapy is used for those that are very sick e.g. someone with severe anaemia requires more haemoglobin or red blood cells (RBC`s) to get oxygen around the body. In comparison a healthy athlete doesn`t require further RBC so when they dope they gain benefits which equates to an advantage i.e. getting extra capacity to carry more oxygen to muscles. There are drugs already in existence that can do something similar but they can easily be detected through testing. Another case that was brought to my attention was those born without the myostatin gene or receptors. Myostatin helps to regulate muscle growth. This happens in a number of species including humans resulting in large and powerful muscles. This is a natural mutation but since gene therapy came along for muscular dystrophy, people have turned their attention to using this for improving sporting performance.  Gene doping has even been hypothesised to be used in concert with these other changes to increase endorphins of the doping athlete to further the effects of the enhanced “abilities”.

Sounds great doesn`t it? How great would it be too be able to run all day and then lift a car and look like the Hulk. Well I want you to think about this saying  “there is no such thing as a free biological lunch” (I am not sure who said that version and if you do please tell me). Those that dope already have to weigh up the risk reward equation. Those that want to increase erythropoietin may be faced with thickening blood that may clot leading to a number of adverse outcomes. It may even come to a point that the heart may stop due to excess load. Athletes don`t seem to stop and think “what are some bigger muscle going to do to me?” There are repercussions for all doping, connective tissues such as tendons and ligaments face extra strain which may lead to sprains, strains and tearing of tendon insertions from the bone. There is also an increased metabolic cost the body having so much muscle.  These are by no means an extensive list but provide food for thought. The ultimate risk is not knowing what could happen to the rest of the body. Will those new genes affect other genes leading to a more complex adverse outcome? No one really knows the long term effects because all of this is relatively new. To me it seems crazy to even think of doing anything like this but in saying that I have always been against drugs in sport. 

So what does the future look like? Will there be hulking twelve year olds breaking weightlifting records or humans making ultra-marathons look like a walk on the beach? I can`t say. What I can say is the future is here and now. I am sure this is not the last of the discussion on gene doping and this will begin to be seen more in the public eye. Who knows maybe the future of sports will be dominated by the genetically doped and manufactured battling it out for our attention and money.  What do you think the future will look like? Post comments.

References:

                     Filipp, F. (2007). Is science killing sport? Gene therapy and its possible abuse in doping.                                             NEMBO reports, 8(5), 433.

             Scherling, P. (2001, November). Gene doping, ISM. In UCL Conference on Genes in     Sport.

          Unal, M., & Unal, D. O. (2004). Gene doping in sports. Sports Medicine, 34(6), 357-362.

Bodybuilding, Crossfit a love hate story

Crossfit V Bodybuilding who’s side are you on? Me personally it’s either both or neither depending on how you look at it. These days between the lovers and haters it seems everyone must choose a side. I want to make myself clear from the get go. I stand completely in the middle of these two methods. I live in what most people would call the grey area. As a result I often find myself in discussion with passionate lovers and haters. 

For those of you at home who haven’t yet found yourself in one of these discussions (just wait you will) there are really only two sides to this argument out there it seems. Lovers are those who see Crossfit as the be all and end all of fitness. The lovers are devotees of the WOD and mixing it up and just generally being prepared for anything. Haters are those that see Crossfit as unsafe and a fad and for whatever reason are often linked with bodybuilders.  

I would like to address both of these types of extremists because as far as I can see you both live in a different world to me. After all every fitness philosophy has perks and drawbacks and for two sides that seem to be locked in quite a headstrong battle, they share a few similarities. That’s right similarities I can hear my inbox filling up with emails already. 

Personally when I create my workouts I like to use a combination of scientific research and methods. I am also a big believer in experience being one of the greatest tools of all. Now in saying this I would like to add that I have five years of Exercise Science studying under my belt as well over ten years combined experience in Martial Arts, Olympic Weightlifting and general fitness. This combined experience fills me with confidence to draw my own conclusions over some of the methodology suggested by both Crossfit and Bodybuilding. After all why else would I pay thousands of dollars for student loans to the government if not for educated blogging? 

What specifically inspired me to write this post was a conversation held with a friend of mine. Like many people I know on both sides of the argument he is a personal trainer with decades of experience and numerous world class sporting achievements. This person in particular was a hater pure and simple. I was shocked by the remarks he was making in regards to Crossfit. Remarks such as “it`s a fad”, “it`s inefficient”, “it`s not long term”, “it`s just crap”. This seems to echo the hater community pure and simple. Other arguments are the programming has no rhyme or reason and the use of kipping is for idiots. The lovers also have a few opinions about bodybuilders. Some of the remarks include bodybuilders are not being functional and they are all about appearances. 

I would like to analyse some of these arguments. The first thing I would like to address is the common term of fad attached to Crossfit. How do you define a fad? The most common description is something that is popular for a short amount of time. Does Crossfit really fit this term? For one think Crossfit has been around for fourteen years give or take (Founded by Greg Glassman in 2000). 

Fourteen years seems like a long time for something to be a fad. So far I believe Crossfit is appearing like most things in the health in fitness industry. First every fitness philosophy starts small and then becomes more mainstream before contracting once again if not evolving into something new. This rule of expansion and contracting works for everything and does not point to Crossfit being a fad. The only things I have truly seen as fads are health and fitness gadgets sold on T.V. Honestly I can’t even tell you if Crossfit has even reached its maximum popularity yet. It could continue growing and evolving for years to come.

Another argument made against Crossfit is their high rep and high load training. Haters see it as downright dangerous pushing yourself so hard all of the time. In this instance I do agree. All research I have ever read on high rep high load Olympic lifting WODs says it will lead to technical breakdown. Technical breakdown basically means after doing the same lift over and over again it will lead to muscle fatigue which off course leads to poor technique and then potential injury. For example say you are doing high load dead lifts over and over eventually you will fatigue, your shoulders might drop and that could lead to a back injury to put it simply. These kind of WODs concern me because they have such a high risk/injury rate. Now I understand that Crossfit mantra of being prepared for anything even if it doesn’t make sense and I have nothing against it. But you can find other exercises that are physically demanding and create the same results without putting the exerciser at risk.

At first I wasn’t sure what the reasoning is behind the programming of WODs. Sometimes it seems to be done just to grind people into the ground. That was until I was attending university with a now Crossfit box owner. Instead of stacking his programming with injury inducing WODs his had a clear and intelligent design. He even ran an introductory course to WODs to ensure his clients are using proper technique. If you are willing to chat to the trainers at your local box you are likely to find other like-minded trainers writing there programs like this. 

It seems to me that Crossfit isn’t necessarily dangerous but has the same pitfalls of all competitive sports. Trainers that range from bad, good to great. I am often asked by beginners to martial arts “What’s the best style?” I reply “the teacher, master, coach is the most important thing, not the style”. I think it is no different in regards to programming be it Crossfit or any other sport or exercise endeavour. You need to find a box or gym that programs safely and makes you feel comfortable. If you are finding yourself getting injured a lot more than usual then it’s probably a sign to find a new trainer. If you are not sure what to expect then do some research of your own, the internet provides good and simple advice for free. I would like to emphasis once again this problem is found in all sports. Perhaps the only reason it seems higher in Crossfit is due to their high market saturation currently.

Now for some of the arguments surrounding Bodybuilders. I think the biggest complaint Crossfitters have against Bodybuilders is that they aren’t functional. I love this statement because every man and his dog are really behind functional training movements or exercise. It’s so strange because functional just means that it is designed to have a practical use. The problem with this is what is practical to you may not be for me. It all depends with what fitness goals you are trying to achieve or what sport you are competing in. I have had experience with writing programs for the elderly whose goals are to walk to their mailbox or climb a set of stairs. The programs I write for them are full of functional movements but as you could imagine they won’t apply to everyone equally.

So this belief that there are wrong and right functional movements really isn’t right. Just because exercises bodybuilders do don’t apply to Crossfit doesn’t make them wrong. It just makes them functional for bodybuilding. That being said a lot of these so called functional exercise are actually shared by the two sports. For example the humble squat is used by both Crossfitters and Bodybuilders alike. Yep serious a “functional” movement used by opposing groups. If you really compare the two you will find a lot more of these functional movements in common. For example, deadlifts, thrusters, chin-ups, pull ups and even lunges.

Another argument against Bodybuilding is that it’s all about appearance. Well first off let me say off course it is. During competition they are scored on appearance. Why wouldn’t you work at the very thing that gives you a higher score, after all every sport does it. For sports like Olympic Weightlifting, Martial Arts or Boxing there is a big emphasis on weight class and a lot of extra work goes into maximising you scoring potential for competition. Bodybuilders are doing the same thing by putting emphasis on their appearance. Even Crossfitters do it by utilising kipping to maximise the amount or reps they get during competition. Every athlete is looking for an edge during competitions and as far as I can see there is no reason why that is a bad thing. 

Really there is a deeper and a more complex argument going on here. Both sides seem to stereotype how the other trains even though in truth ultimately it is up to the individual not the whole. It’s hard looking past the hordes to get down to the real bare bones of any sports but until you make the effort to do so you can’t expect to understand why they do and what they do. Another key point both sides have seemed to neglect is the overarching principle of specificity. This principle is something it seems Crossfit has tried to beat but won`t as our own anatomy and physiology is the limiting factor. The idea that training with a specified set of “standards” and a few odd extra`s thrown in makes you the most fittest and prepared for anything person on the planet is limited. Bodybuilding is no different they train for appearances getting strong or fast is a side effect. Being that both are sports and yes Crossfit is now a sport it has rules like bodybuilding they are ultimately bound by the rule of specificity. If both sides laid done their ignorance and see they are just points on the continuum of movement and life they would set their differences aside and just get on with what they are doing. I would go as far to say that if there was some transfer in training both sides would benefit. Maybe it`s time they walk in each other’s shoes even if it is once a week.