An Introduction to Progressive Exercise

[Carlos 0]

I just want to say thank you very much for sharing this information Ray:

it has been VERY enlightening.

[dondigitalia 0]

I have many times in my past heard statements similar to Dave's from his last post.  I have also asked the question, why am I slightly bigger, but not stronger and usually weaker when I have trained more often.

←

The gains I'm talking about are strength gains. I do not monitor my size (well, maybe my waist size ); I monitor the amount of weight I am able to lift before reaching failure.

[RayK 0]

Carlos,

You are welcome and I am glad that it was helpful.

Dave,

My misunderstanding on your remarks.

I would state in a different context that your body cannot tell what weight you are lifting, but the demand that one puts upon it. Or, when you work out the primary is the demand that is on the body not the weight lifted. The weight will obviously have to be heavy enough to cause failure within a limited amount of time. My clients are fully exhausted when they finish their exercise session. They could not and do not want to lift another weight, and the final exercise's weights are reduced compared to lifting them individually, this doesn't matter. This is why I recommend that there be a reduction in total exercises, NO ONE can withstand this type of work out for long. I do not care how mentally or physically tough someone is, the resources to work out intensely run out quickly.

Mercury,

As I mentioned earlier, there is no physical need to do more than one set. If you have worked out intensely enough, you have already stimulated the muscle and your system to grow. Every set after stimulation just re-stimulates and takes more of your resources to recuperate.

I will try and explain in a slightly different way. Lets talk economics which I will define as conservation of resources. I think a rational person would not spend their money to buy a product for a $100 if they could purchase the same product for $10. Even if you were getting the same results, which I doubt, the shorter training program is the most economically efficient one.

In Dr. Hans Selye's work he defined a term that he called "adaptive energy". Unlike metabolic energy which we can constantly replenish, this energy source can never be replenished. My understanding of his term is that we only have one longevity bank account which can never be enhanced or added to. The more stress one takes on in their life-time the quicker we will go through this account and die. I am not saying that we should be doing nothing, just be rational. There must be a reason or value for taking the actions that one takes. To spend your resources on activities that cost you more than you need to pay is irrational.

If you were a rational businessman you would constantly seek ways to be more productive for less cost. You would not hire more people than was needed to accomplish your stated goals. So do not become the irrational businessman that decides not to enhance his business with more productive equipment and waste his resources. Once stimulated, get out of the gym and use your resources in or on another value/goal.

[Guest ASelameab]

Hi -

I began this summer by setting several goals, one of which was to "buff up". I set a schedule for myself of alternating days at the YMCA, one day being lifting and the other running. On lifting days my rule of thumb was life until I got tired and I couldn't work any more muscles. This usually lasted about an hour. On running days I usually ran about 6 miles, gradually lowering my times. In addition, I ate a protein rich diet, eggs, meat, milk, etc. My workout regime lasted about 2 months, after which I lost interest. I can say I gained about 10-15 pounds (I am at 165-170 right now). I really enjoyed the feeling of getting stronger and noticing physical changes, in addition to the experience of going to the gym everyday.

[PhilO 0]

In Dr. Hans Selye's work he defined a term that he called "adaptive energy".  Unlike metabolic energy which we can constantly replenish, this energy source can never be replenished.  My understanding of his term is that we only have one longevity bank account which can never be enhanced or added to.  The more stress one takes on in their life-time the quicker we will go through this account and die.

←

I am extremely skeptical of this view, at least as stated. Does he have any scientific evidence for it?

[Joss Delage 0]

This is an interesting thread, thanks to all the contributors.

I have noticed that people tend to gravitate towards one of 3 body types: muscled, skinny, or fat. Is that the case? Or am I seeing patterns where there are none?

As for me, I have a highly efficient body, i.e., I get fat really easily. I suspect that the fact that I like eating also has something to do with it... Is it true that to gain muscle means automatically that the body consumes more calories? It seems logical, but I'd love to hear more on that.

Finally, I am interested in hearing about the difference between muscle mass and strength. Are those really 2 different things? If my goal is to become stronger, should I train differently than if it is to become beefier?

Thanks,

JD

[RayK 0]

I am extremely skeptical of this view, at least as stated. Does he have any scientific evidence for it?

←

How is over 50 years worth of research. Starting in 1925 and going on for over 50 years Dr. Hans Selye was, I think, a pioneer in medicine. He was a Professor and Director of the Institute of Experimental Medicine and Surgery at the University of Montreal, he also authored 32 books and more than 1500 technical articles. Where would you like to begin?

I apply his theory with my insight of it to my clients and myself every day with positive effects.

[RayK 0]

This is an interesting thread, thanks to all the contributors.

I have noticed that people tend to gravitate towards one of 3 body types: muscled, skinny, or fat.  Is that the case?  Or am I seeing patterns where there are none?

As for me, I have a highly efficient body, i.e., I get fat really easily.  I suspect that the fact that I like eating also has something to do with it...    Is it true that to gain muscle means automatically that the body consumes more calories?  It seems logical, but I'd love to hear more on that.

Finally, I am interested in hearing about the difference between muscle mass and strength.  Are those really 2 different things?  If my goal is to become stronger, should I train differently than if it is to become beefier?

Thanks,

JD

←

Joss,

You are correct, there are three primary body-types.

Muscle and other lean body tissue is the only thing that can enhance your metabolism for the better. Fat also increases one's metabolism but only around 2-4 extra calories per day, per pound.

As I stated before the body is efficient. So efficient that it will not put on muscle or other lean body tissue, which actually makes your body less efficient, lifting the same weights that are within your capacity already. So becoming stronger is the precursor of muscle gain. Why would the muscle increase in size and put a negative cost on the body without a larger demand or need? If one wants to become larger, first one must become stronger, within ones genetic capacity.

[Mercury 0]

Mercury, [...]

←

Thanks again for the advice, Ray. I'll give it a try.

[RickWilmes 0]

Hello,

I have just finished reading this thread and am interested in adding this weight program into my exerise program. I currently participate in two sports, Cycling during the summer and snowboarding during the winter. I am currently using the Carmichael Training System for my cycling training. In two weeks(Sept. 25) I will be doing a 100-mile ride and than I will start my transition into the snowboarding season. This will be the perfect time to start a strength training routine.

I understand the idea behind having proper rest after a high intensity workout. How do I adjust my cycling workouts and snowboarding to allow for proper recovery after having a very intense strength workout? Can I ride my bike on the same day as the strength workout or should I wait to the next day or several days after the strength workout? One aspect I did not see covered in the discussion was stressing the aerobic system verses the anerobic system. I realize this probably does not apply to weight lifting but it is important when cycling. My cycling workouts are geared around my maximum heart rate. Currently my resting heart rate is 60.

I can see how this lifting routine will have a positive effect on my heart rate and my cycling in general. I want to add the strength so that I have more power when

going of jumps or riding the half-pipe in snowboarding. Any comments on my particular situation will be much appreciated.

[RayK 0]

Rick,

A proper training program will enhance your whole system, this includes your cardiovascular. If you train following the ideas that I prescribed in earlier post your cardiovascular will be enhanced without any so called "aerobics".

Aerobic and Anaerobic are metabolic pathways, tied to the totality of metabolism. There is no way to dissect them or any other part of the metabolic pathway from the total. An activity might use more of one pathway than another but they are in constant flow within the totality of metabolism. The truth of the matter is that the most aerobic thing that a person can do is sleep. Once a person starts to have movement, they will move away from a primarily aerobic pathway towards another.

When people run or do steady state activity, they are still primarily training their muscles, although in a very inefficient way. The cardiovascular system is a sub-system of the muscle, stress the muscle and it will in turn stress all the sub-systems. This was proven long ago but people still want to believe different. Cardiovascular endurance is 95.9% genetically given, so you will either have the capacity to be a Lance Armstrong or you will not. With that said, one can still enhance themselves to that capacity with proper training.

If you want to enhance your other activities become as strong as you can. This will allow you to have the physical strength and force to accomplish your task. I would recommend doing your training on the same day so that you can enhance your recuperation. If you have to workout twice a week, do the second one in the middle of the week. If you find that with the extra demands of your outside activities that you are not making progress, cut your weight training to the first three exercises.

I hope this answers your questions.

[abanger 0]

Yes, the facts are sufficient to prove HST. Haycock criticizes HIT for the same reason Rand criticizes false philosophies. Think about it.

Haycock never claims that the findings of many are more valid than one. It's a simple question of division of labor. Think about it.

abanger,

Why do you think Bryan Hancock feels the need to mention HIT at all? Wouldn't the (positive) facts be enough to prove his system?

Secondly, how are the findings of "dozens of independent researchers" more valid than the findings of one man? How did all those independent reasearchers come to a conclusion? Truth by consensus?

[abanger 0]

bmcgreggor,

Are there any books or studies or resources available on "HST?"

←

Read my 1st post on the 1st page.

[RayK 0]

Yes, the facts are sufficient to prove HST.  Haycock criticizes HIT for the same reason Rand criticizes false philosophies.  Think about it.

←

I have had a woman who was five feet two inches tall and 20 years old go from 128 pounds to 102 pounds.

I had another woman who was five feet four inches tall and 37 years old go from 130 to 112. While also losing almost four inches off of her waist and gaining an inch on each arm.

I had a male of 21 years of age at six feet tall go from 135 pounds to 168 pounds. He did this while also reducing his body-fat from 12 to 7%.

I had another male of 44 years of age at six feet three inches and 500 pounds lose close to 300 pounds. This male could not get off the ground by himself, had constant low back pain and was a diabetic. In November he will be diabetic free for two years.

I had another woman who was 74 years old, who asked me not to take her measurements. She could only lift ten pounds on my Nautilus leg-press machine when she started. She moved away after just five months of training but before she did I had gotten her up to 215 pounds on the leg-press. She also owned a lodge in Brians Head, Utah and for the first time in years went to visit it and had the strength to climb the surrounding mountains.

I had another woman who was 36 years old at five feet eight inches tall go from 158 to 121 pounds. She has gotten so strong and so lean that you can see striation when ever she moves. She has been with me for over two years and because of her strength only does two exercises for the last four months.

The woman from above husband comes also. He was 34 years old at five feet eleven inches and 231 pounds. He now weighs in at 165 pounds, the "leanest he has been since high school". He also has gotten so strong that he has been doing only two exercises for close to six months.

The woman from above daughter comes also. She was 12 when she started and weighed 127 pounds. Now over two years later and close to 7 inches in growth she weighs 118 pounds and leg-presses 335 pounds in a very slow manner.

I hope people can now see that I could go on and on, but I think that I have made my point. Progressive Exercise is about enhancing the body so that it can enhance ones life. It works because it is true.

[abanger 0]

Likewise, I could go on and on:

http://www.hypertrophy-specific.com/cgi-bi...ct=ST;f=14;t=21

But in both our cases, this is all anecdotal evidence, which cannot sufficiently prove either. The scientific method is used for a reason. HST is fully backed by scientific research - the same cannot be said of HIT.

I hope people can now see that I could go on and on, but I think that I have made my point.  Progressive Exercise is about enhancing the body so that it can enhance ones life.  It works because it is true.

←

[Carlos 0]

I would like to counter Abanger by saying that a friend and I have started what I call "our Second- Renaissance" in weight-lifting.

We have started a HIT workout plan and are already seeing great results, and are VERY enthusiastic about the results to come.

[Burgess Laughlin 0]

But in both our cases, this is all anecdotal evidence, which cannot sufficiently prove either.  The scientific method is used for a reason.  HST is fully backed by scientific research - the same cannot be said of HIT.

←

Since the topic of this thread is progressive exercise, as a solution to various physical problems, I assume that the issue now is whether this particular program (1) works and (2) is the best (most effective and efficient) solution to being physically fit enough to achieve one's goals in life.

Abanger, if you agree that the above is the main issue, then I would like to ask you and Ray to help me solve my next issue: What constitutes the best evidence for deciding about a particular program?

If the best evidence is "scientific evidence," then what does that consist of? Demographic surveys, tests on animals, clinical studies with full controls, or all of these?

Should other kinds of evidence -- such as one's own experiences or the testimony of trusted others -- be dismissed in the presence of "scientific evidence"? Or should one -- as I suspect -- try to integrate all the evidence available? I assume the best approach is the latter, but I don't know what, for a layman, the most efficient way of do that would be. Suggestions?

[RayK 0]

Likewise, I could go on and on:

http://www.hypertrophy-specific.com/cgi-bi...ct=ST;f=14;t=21

But in both our cases, this is all anecdotal evidence, which cannot sufficiently prove either.  The scientific method is used for a reason.  HST is fully backed by scientific research - the same cannot be said of HIT.

←

I have not seen any evidence from you directly. I have also not seen any case studies that you have observed yourself and tried to work out conclusions for.

Let us define science, scientific method and research;

a. science - 1) an area of knowledge that is an object of study 2) knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through the scientific method

b. scientific method - the rules and methods for the pursuit of knowledge involving the finding and stating of a problem, the collection of facts through observation and experiment, and the making and testing of ideas that need to be proven right or wrong

c. research - 1) careful or diligent search 2) studious and critical inquiry and examination aimed at the discovery and interpretation of new knowledge 3) the collecting of information about a particular subject

I do not remember a university or a research corporation being the only places to conduct scientific studies using a scientific method and research. Charles Darwin, Gregor Mendel and Thomas Edison all did their own research and came to their own conclusions, and I am attempting to do the same. I have spent the last 23 years pursuing knowledge in this field while observing and collecting facts from my own experiments. If this does not qualify as science, as defined above, then I do not know what does. I have also read hundreds and hundreds of studies and applied them to myself and my clients.

I use real people in a real life scenarios, that being living a life not just spending time in the gym. How much more tied to reality could my research be?

[RayK 0]

Burgess,

I have attempted to do the latter. I have read many studies that put forth a theory that does not work out in reality. So I read all that I can, then either discard it as being illogical or integrate it into the totality of that which I already have.

An example in todays exercise culture is that a person has to exercise at least 3-6 days a week to get and stay in shape. Lets look at reality to see if this is true. Man is an evolutionary animal by his very nature. Man has also gotten to the point that he is at now by adapting over 3.5 billion years from a species that we are all traceable back to through DNA and RNA. Over that large time scale every species that is still around has had to become more efficient or die off. This leads to the question, could man be the only living species to slip through natures cracks and make it to this point while being an inefficient animal? My answer to this question is a resounding, NO!

We have gotten to this point by being an extremely efficient species. If our nature was to lose everything that we gained within a day or a week we would have never made it to this point. Can man change his genetic make-up through weight training? No. Man can enhance himself to his genetic capacity through proper weight training. This is what man should be doing, because part of his nature is to decline after maturation. The body needs to sense a stressor that stimulates it to gain or maintain new muscle mass and other lean body tissue. Once this is done though it does not take a daily workout to keep it. Because we are so efficient it does require a large/intense stimulate but not a daily stimulate.

When I integrate this with all that I have learned in reality it makes perfect sense. The nature of exercise is to enhance the body, but only within mans limitations, so that he can enhance his life. Once man has accomplished this goal or at least the stimulation, get out of the gym and use that enhanced body for enjoying life.

If this is not what you were looking for, I will try again another way.

[Joss Delage 0]

But certainly, other methods do work. The "body for life" method works, and I've found that daily exercize works too. So the difficulty is to identify the *best* method, which isn't easy to do, I think.

[RayK 0]

Joss,

I agree that it is not easy to figure out whats best. That is why I have spent 23 years doing research to try and figure it out. I now sell my knowledge to the person that wants to have and use those years worth of knowledge and save a large amount of time.

[RickWilmes 0]

I have been thinking about Progressive Exercise for the last few days and here are the conclusions I have reached.

I agree with the three principles Ray lists as requirements for exercise. They are frequency, duration and intensity. How are these principles measured? Frequency is measured by number. An example is 5 times per week. Duration is measured in time. An example would be 1 hr. So an exercise program can consist of a routine for 1hr. 5 times a week.

How is intensity measured? I can think of two ways. One is by measuring the amount of weight lifted. Another is by monitoring heart rate during exercise. With weight lifting the intensity is increased by adding weight. When using the heart rate monitor the intensity is increased when the heart rate increases. When intensity is increased the time between efforts most also increase to allow for proper recuperation. Measuring intensity by heart rate has a limit. Currently my maximum heart rate is 187 and will decrease as I get older. The fact is if I continue to measure my intensity using this method my overall intensity will decrease over time. In order to maintain my current health or improve, I must look at the other variables frequency and duration.

Assuming I keep my intensity level constant, I can increase my frequency and duration. Frequency can be increased to 7 days a week. For a short period of time football players will exercise 2 times a day so they can increase their frequency to 10 to 14 times a week. Assuming that the maximum frequency in a week can be 7, my only other option is to increase the duration.

If it were possible, I could increase the duration of my exercise to where the maximum would be 1 workout lasting 7 days or 1 workout lasting 168 hrs. In reality this is not feasible. With my present situation, I am at my maximum in terms of frequency and duration. 5 days a week/ 1 to 2 hrs. a day. My only option to maintain my present condition or to improve is to increase my intensity.

But when I increase the intensity, the time between efforts must also decrease. As Ray has correctly pointed out this is a very inefficient method.

I have concluded that Ray is correct. A program that requires maximum intensity in the shortest time to allow time for maximum recuperation between efforts is the most efficient form of exercise. I started the program yesterday.

One final point. I pointed out the limitations of measuring intensity using the heart rate monitor. Within the sport of cycling, these limitations are recognized. The latest trend is to train with power. Devices have been designed to measure the power a cyclist delivers to his pedals when pedaling. Currently, these devices cost around $2100 and there are questions about their accuracy and reliability.

When I see a ten pound weight, I am pretty confident that its weight is correct.

Plus there is no limit to the amount of weight available. The only limit is my present strength. Thank you, Ray for the excellent article and taking the time to explain it. I will keep you posted on my progress.

[RayK 0]

Rick,

You are welcome, and I think that you will be happily surprised with your returns.

[Carlos 0]

Ray, if you don't mind I have a quick question.

I weigh every day I lift weights (before I lift of course) and currently always fall in a range between 196-198lbs. This last Friday night however I got food-poisoning from a stupid Chinese food restaurant and ate and drank virtually nothing for two days. Then, to my horror, I weighed in today before lifting at 189lbs (literally, I was horrified)

Is the weight loss from a few-day fast going to mainly just be in dehydration and the physical lack of food in your stomach, or can one actually lose some amount of muscle during a period like that?

Thanks,

a concerned Carlos

PS: since starting a new workout program based on your advice this fall I have made (up to getting sick) significant gains in strength and have felt the difference in my sparring in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu. The improved leg and back strength has boosted my performance quite noticeably, so thank you

[RayK 0]

Carlos,

With the information that you have given I think that the weight difference is primarily water from a lack of hydration. Give yourself a few days and I think you will be back up to your regular weight. Although one can lose muscle by shifting from the fed state into starvation state.

The average adult male requires 2100-2200 calories a day to maintain their weight. A pound of fat has 3500 calories and a pound of muscle has 600 calories. In starvation state one could possibly burn three pounds of muscle in a day. But, as you can see their is no way to burn 10 pounds of fat in a week. This would require 35,000 calories to be burned when only around 15,000 are needed. Also, muscle is around 70% water, not protein. While you are in a state of dehydration your body can use the water in your muscle to keep itself functioning.

On a different note dealing with your training and progress. First off congratulations on your progress already. Second, do not lose sight of intensity as the primary principle. Your intensity should be as high as you can possibly give at that point. Many clients that I have or have had begin to lose sight of this and let their intensity drop around this time frame, don't. Pushing yourself to new levels is what will allow you to keep making progress, beyond where you are. As I have mentioned before I have gained around 10 pounds of lean body tissue this year by pushing to levels that I have never been to before. This weight gain might not seem like much. But, for someone that has been exercising with weights for 23 years, I am very happy. What is the cause? The intensity is the primary thing of difference, not that I was not lifting intensely before, just more so now. The weights are so demanding now that the burn begins within seconds of starting the 1st rep. By the time I reach failure my pulse goes from around 48 to around 190-200 beats per minute, and that is just from the leg-press. You will shake and shiver while your muscles become gorged with blood and you will not be able to walk. Within context this is what you are reaching for. Do not fear moving into this area as the rewards will be worth every second of discomfort. I actually love the mental and physical battle (challenge), that I go through every time I exercise.

Again, I hope this is helpful.