Are you serious about your health, fitness, and longevity?

U2U2U2 · Posted: Sat Dec 07, 2013 12:07 pm Post subject:

original thinking by some here.

same page, same book, same library

in contrast to the tunnel vision exhibited by others that have no ability to think outside the envelope

GURGLETROUSERS · Joined: 30 Dec 2009 Posts: 2643

The perfect reposte Boardsurf.

Athletes can now safely continue with their long standing and proven training methods (an ounce of practice, and all that) safe in the knowledge that new fangled wonder methods are ten a penny, and soon sink without trace when put to the test.

As for those of us who are mere fallible mortals who don't know (and often don't care) what is good for us, we'll muddle through, guided by our experience.

Handsome is as handsome does .... and aint life FUN!!!

mac · Posted: Sat Dec 07, 2013 12:43 pm Post subject:

Missed this one for a while. Hysterical. Mike Fick as doctor, researcher, nutritionist, debunker of myth, and hero in his own mind.

I've been an athlete and done weight training for 50 years. Many of the things that we "knew" to be true in the early 1960's--like my football coach refusing to let us drink water--were wrong.

Some truths posted by Iso, some wild nonsense. All done politely of course, and in the interest of stimulating constructive discussion?

Unending source of irony. Unintended, of course.

mrgybe · Joined: 01 Jul 2008 Posts: 5180

Stretching appears to work for Michael Phelps:

"On race days, Phelps arrived at the pool in time to begin stretching two hours before each event. Phelps began his routine by stretching his arms, then worked his way down his body until he reached his ankles. After 30 minutes, Phelps entered the pool for 45 minutes of warm-up swimming. His warm-up included swims of 800, 600, 400 and 200 meters, a swim-kick-pull drill, then a few 25-meter sprints. He then changed from his warm-up outfit to his skintight racing swimsuit -- a task that took 20 minutes."

http://www.livestrong.com/article/1002130-michael-phelps-before-race/

Perhaps it works for him and not for others. While it's certainly worthwhile to consider other viewpoints, the notion that stretching, core exercises and endurance training do not have value as part of a conditioning program simply doesn't coincide with my own experience.

swchandler · Joined: 08 Nov 1993 Posts: 10588

"And that game is ...?"

Given boardsurfr's latest post, he did an excellent job of making my original point (sorry boardsurfr, it was me and not techno900). However, I will add that you fully intend to keep coming back through the life of this thread with everything you've got. How many posts have you made already under this thread? No doubt, a lot already. Hopefully this thread will not morph into becoming a "locked" one. Like I've pointed out in the past, folks can often appreciate your thoughts and input if you can keep things in-bounds, clean and upbeat. The choice is yours.

isobars · Joined: 12 Dec 1999 Posts: 20935

Boardsurfr, how is using the words “anonymous internet dudes” to distinguish “males typing on the ARPAnet under assumed fake names” from professional exercise physiology experts “dissing” anyone, especially when I so often apply the “internet dude” part to myself? Your “diss” accusation is just one of the false personal attacks iW has promised to delete and it is irrelevant to the topic. I don’t understand why people feel compelled to use deceit and false ad hominem to subvert others’ attempts and desire to learn rather than using exercise physiology counterarguments to ADD TO or correct specific misinformation.

“Bibliophobes” is intended not as an attack, but as an educated assessment based on such posts as mac’s extensive criticism of global warming books he finally admitted he had not and WOULD not read and his and many others’ use of The Huffington Post, Soros’ websites, eHow.MOM, et.al. to rebut facts and opinions presented by career researchers.

Your education is commendable, but does not necessarily exceed mine in the field of statistics. My statistics handwaving here is due to choice, brevity, and overkill in this venue, not to ignorance. Besides, PubMed research by professional medical statisticians reveals that many, if not most, published medical study authors and principles do not understand the statistics they use so inconsistently and incorrectly. I do my best to see through that, including in some cases analyzing the Bayesian statistics they often bluff us with.

Tell us what stretching has to do with crushing a knee by landing a giant jump with that knee locked out (the most common cause of ruptured ACLs)? Even if we could preemptively and effectively stretch ligaments, menisci, and bones, the results would probably be disastrous. And while you’re at it, please explain why career professionals on biomechanics including stretching are wrong about it and you’re right? Attacking the messenger certainly doesn’t achieve that, but it does suggest a lack of relevant topical counterargument.

PACE is but one of MANY interval training books, based on over half a century of research and track and field victories; the fact that that particular book’s author is not a physician doesn’t bother me in the least, considering the body of knowledge behind it. I recommend that book so highly because of its superior practicality, versatility, and presentation compared to the many other books and research I’ve read on HIIT. My appreciation of the BBS/Superslow® approach is based on MANY practical factors and personal success too numerous to type and the lack of any legitimate PubMed contradiction. I consider HIIT proven science, but have never made that claim about BBS/Superslow® despite my extensive very detailed logs of every last lifting set for years proving it works for me … with 100% fewer gym injuries.

You advise to “let others be their own judge”, yet try to discourage that by undermining me, Reynolds, and our sources based on one narrow aspect of one of some 50 highly condensed findings rather than offering specific, relevant, scientific, published, expert conclusions proving this book’s original sources and many others substantively wrong. How scientific is that?

You even claim I said something resembling this paraphrase: "everything I say is correct and cannot be doubted because it is based on peer-reviewed research". (Never mind that Chandler says quotation marks may denote ONLY verbatim quotes, that they are a lie if applied to paraphrased remarks.) In fact, I’ve said in various ways that my one-liner condensations of the research findings discussed in this book are as close as I can get to its presentations of research findings, causal discussions, experts’ quotes, very extensive and very persuasive additional reading, a variety of global competition confirmations, and much more. I’ve added many times that I do NOT have the expertise or expertise to personally confirm or deny these or any other such claims, that I’m merely parroting potentially useful tips of icebergs as pointers for interested and motivated parties’ additional reading, and especially that any and every one should do their own homework before making big or expensive choices based on my pointers. The only excuses I can fathom for the nasty off-topic ad hominem that approach so often triggers include insecurity, running out of facts, stubbornness, post count envy, etc.

Please explain how we should discern “fads promoted by gym owners”, including Chinese whispers, from valid and useful exercise guidelines. I use research filtered by hard work and education; your undefined better selection criteria may save me a LOT of time. My medical decision to reject six oncologists’ strong advice to undergo radiation treatment, for example, took many intense weeks condensing 300 PubMed journal-published salvage radiation studies into a “mere” 100+ pages of discrete, meaty, medical jargon and statistics especially relevant to my own unique cancer scenario (no two are identical). The only oncologists I failed to convince were two of the three who have a radiation machine and staff to pay for.

Can you support your accusation that Reynolds and the experts she quotes and cites are biased, or does that just mean you’re fresh out of data? I’d hate to think that reams of HIIT research and results were wrong, considering how much it has benefited tens of thousands of advocates including myself and my wife, how directly applicable it is to WSing, and the truly uncomfortable sprints it entails. (Ever done "a Tabata" properly?)

Yes, many of those listed guidelines and principles apply mainly to the gym. I train -- i.e., “work out” -- in the gym and PLAY on the water. Some of them, however, apply directly to everything from house and yard work to sitting here typing. Many apply to all venues. Every medical provider and coach with whom I’ve discussed my knee injury is certain my conditioning, including gym and shred time and nutrition, saved my knee from greater destruction and FAR greater pain and disability. (Walking on that leg the day after the injury with almost no pain stunned them.) Gym time and play time are highly synergistic.

Speaking of prolonged sitting, evidence shows I just took a few minutes off my life.