Cold water immersion (a.k.a., “ice baths”) has become a popular method amongst exercise enthusiasts and athletes to enhance recovery after an intense training bout. The strategy involves exposing either the trained limb or the whole body to very cold liquid temperatures. According to p...
Brad Schoenfeld, Ph.D, C.S.C.S., is an internationally renowned fitness expert and widely regarded as one of the leading authorities on body composition training (muscle development and fat loss). He is a lifetime drug-free bodybuilder, and has won numerous natural bodybuilding titles.
Here is an interview I did for CUNY TV about my recent SCJ article on the upright row as well as other exercise-related topics. Hopefully the message resonates!
Here’s a link to an excellent post written by my friend and colleague Bret Contreras titled, Ten Minutes a Day Keeps the Doctor Away: A 5-Set Full Body Program. Resistance training is without question the most important activity you can do for your overall health and wellness. Bret does a great job highlighting the research and showing how with a minimal time commitment (10 minutes!) you can get in a workout that will provide a wealth of benefits. Sure, it’s not the type of routine that going to help you win any bodybuilding contests, but for those who simply want to better their physical and mental state, it’s all you need to do the job.
The one thing that I would emphasize here is that you should make sure to structure the routine so that you train in all planes of movement. Thus, include both horizontal upper body pressing movements (i.e. bench press) and vertical upper body pressing movements (i.e. shoulder press) over the course of your workouts. So if you do a vertical press one day, do a horizontal press the next. Moreover, vary the exercise selection to include both close grip upper body pulling movements (i.e. one arm dumbbell row) and wide grip movements (i.e. wide grip row). It also would be good to include a frontal plane lower body movement (i.e. lateral lunge) from time to time. Ultimately, taking a multi-planar approach will ensure you achieve balance between the musculature that carry out movement, facilitating optimal functional and health-related benefits.
As a professor and educator in exercise science, I am inundated with texts on exercise and nutrition to use in my courses. Most of the books are quite good; some not so much. A few stand out above the rest. Accordingly, what follows is a list of my “Top 10” texts that every fitness professional should read. Don’t just borrow a friend’s copy or take one out on library loan. These books should be on your shelf as essential sources of reference. Reread them periodically so the information remains embedded in your long-term memory.
Note that I’m only covering scientifically-based texts here. There are plenty of good consumer fitness books out there, but they are a different breed altogether from the books mentioned in this post. Feel free to chime in with your own favorites!
Essentials of Strength and Conditioning (Baechle and Earle)–This book serves as the basis of the CSCS exam for strength and conditioning professionals. It covers all the relevant underlying science of the subject, including basic bioenergetics, biomechanics, physiological responses to exercises, and many others. There also are applied chapters on exercise testing, exercise technique, and program design, amongst others. In short, just about everything you need to know on the subject is touched upon. The fact that the book is so comprehensive, however, prevents exploration of the various topics in great detail. So consider this an excellent primer and fill in your knowledge gaps with the other texts mentioned herein. For a good text on training the non-athletic population, consider it’s sister publication, “The Essentials of Personal Training.”
Supertraining (Siff and Verkhoshansky)–The late Mel Siff was one of my mentors. I learned a great deal from him. He died far too young. Fortunately, this book serves as his legacy to the fitness world. Packed with cutting-edge, evidence-based training information, it’s a must-read for every person interested in optimizing their fitness potential. After finishing this book, you may want to check out Dr. Siff’s, “Facts and Fallacies of Fitness,” which dispels some of the more prominent myths that perpetrate the fitness field.
The Science and Practice of Strength Training (Zatsiorsky and Kraemer)–You can’t go wrong when two of the world’s leading exercise scientists team up to write a book. In this excellent text, Dr. Vladimir Zatsiorsky and Dr. William Kraemer share their extensive knowledge on strength and conditioning. My only qualm is that at a rather paltry 264 pages, the book should have covered more info. That said, it’s still a great read.
Joint Structure and Function: A Comprehensive Analysis (Levangie and Norkin)–As the name implies, this book discusses the human skeletal structure in great detail, covering the structure and function of the muscles and connective tissues about each joint. Some find it a bit overly technical, but you won’t find a more comprehensive text on the subject. Well worth the effort.
Periodization: Theory and Methodology of Trainingng (Bompa and Haff)–Periodization is widely accepted as an important technique for optimizing fitness. This book is the definitive text on the topic. The book delves into every aspect of periodization and does a great job discussing its application to a wide variety of sports. Well-referenced and well-organized, you’ll come away with a thorough understanding of how to structure a periodized routine for virtually any fitness goal.
ACSM’s Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription–Before you work with any client, it’s essential to know their abilities and limitations. This book is the gold standard on testing and prescription, detailing everything you need to know on the subject. Nuff said.
Neuromechanics of Human Movement (Enoka)–I was first introduced to this text in the mid-90’s and it quickly became my favorite book on biomechanics. Now in its 4th edition and completely updated, this continues to be a definitive text on the subject. Roger Enoka is one of the most respected biomechanists in the field, and here he covers all the relevant aspects of kinetics and kinematics. If you want to learn about the subject, you can’t go wrong with this one
Anatomy of Movement (Calais-Germain)–Understanding muscular anatomy and its application to human movement is an essential component of exercise program design. This is amongst the best texts that I’ve come across on the topic. Free from fluff, it’s easy to read and relatively inexpensive (at least as far as textbooks go). A solid reference for your library.
Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (Creswell)–I know some of you would rather be waterboarded than read research. That’s okay. Still, you should at least have an understanding of what goes into conducting a research study so that you can properly interpret and apply information about fitness. This book is as thorough a text as it gets on the subject. Although its not specifically written for exercise research, all the info is applicable to the various quantitative and qualitative studies that you’ll encounter. The writing is concise and easy to read. At the very least, you’ll come away with a new appreciation for the importance of evidence-based practice.
Advanced Nutrition and Human Metabolism (Gropper and Smith)–Low fat? Low carb? 40-30-30? Forget all the hype. Nutrition is an essential component of any fitness program and it’s important that you know the facts. This book delves into the science of the topic, exploring how nutrients affect the human body with respect to body composition and health.
Recently, Phillip Snell conducted an excellent interview with spinal biomechanist Dr. Michael Adams about the implications of his research on core training. Dr. Adams is one of the preeminent researchers on spinal health in the world. No one knows more on the subject. Here is a link to the interview:
For those who want the cliff notes, here are the most salient points as I see them with respect to exercise in healthy individuals:
1) Provided that volume and intensity are appropriate for the individual, there is no harm in performing spinal flexion exercise (i.e. crunches) in those with healthy spines. And, in fact, these exercises may actually confer benefits to spinal health.
2) Contrary to what some have claimed, the discs do in fact remodel when subjected to load. This is consistent with Wolf’s Law.
3) There is convincing evidence that spinal flexion improves nutrient delivery, particularly the annulus fibrosus and end plates.
Rather than focus on one topic for this post, I thought I’d take time to update you on some random thoughts and musings. So here they are in no particular order…
I’m happy to report that I’m about 1/3 through my PhD work. Sadly, of the 15 students who began the program, 5 have already dropped out. It is a lot of work, particularly for those of us who have full-time jobs. That said, it’s been a great experience so far for me. I’m learning a great deal and already applying the knowledge to my work.
I recently co-authored an article with my buddy Bret Contreras for the NSCA Performance Training Journal titled, Strategies for Optimal Core Training Program Design. The article details cutting-edge advice on how to design an individualized core training routine. It expands on the findings of our previous review paper, To Crunch or Not Crunch providing practical applications for a safe and effective workout. Highly recommended reading for those who want to optimize core function and aesthetics.
The new edition of the NSCA’s Essentials of Personal Training has just been released. I wrote the instructor guide to the book, so I had to become intimately familiar with the material. I can say without hesitation that it’s a truly excellent book, covering all aspects relevant to fitness professionals. If you’re a personal trainer, I’d say it’s a must-read. And if you’re simply a fitness enthusiast, you’ll learn a ton about the science of exercise.
My friend and colleague, Joe Dowdell, recently came out with an extensive DVD set filmed during his Peak Fitness Summit that covers a vast array of fitness topics. Joe is an astute fitness pro and one of the top trainers around. The product comes with an instruction manual and is eligible for continuing education credits. If you’re interested in the science and practice of strength training and sports nutrition, I urge you to check it out.
Finally, here is an interesting Youtube clip that someone forwarded to me. I am not familiar with the person in the video, but he does a good job providing practical application of my article, Does Cardio After an Overnight fast Maximize fat loss.
First off, I want to apologize for my lack of recent posts to the blog. I’ve been swamped with projects as well as a seemingly endless sea of papers associated with my Ph.D. studies. Hopefully my workload will ease a bit in the coming weeks and I’ll have more time to provide ongoing content.
In the meantime, I wanted to take this opportunity to comment on the reaction by a select few fitness professionals to the review paper that Bret Contreras and I wrote titled, To Crunch or Not to Crunch. A small but vocal portion of the strength and conditioning community seems to feel that it’s heresy to challenge their dogged position that crunches are inherently evil. One strength coach has gone so far as to claim that we were “deliberately trying to be controversial” by stating that spinal flexion exercise is not necessarily a one way ticket to back surgery. Amazing! I’m of the belief that it’s controversial to claim the crunch — an exercise that has seemingly been around since the dawn of man — has no place in a person’s training routine. Go figure…
Here are the facts: Bret and I are not only practitioners, but scientists as well. When we wrote the article, our sole intention was to seek the truth. We reviewed hundreds of peer-reviewed articles on the subject — pretty much every study that was in any way related to spinal flexion — and took an unbiased view in our reporting of what we found. Based on the body of literature, there simply is not sufficient evidence to support the contention that healthy individuals should abstain from performing crunches. Moreover, there is even some research to suggest that it may have a positive effect on spinal health. Should evidence come out in the future that refutes these findings, we’ll be the first to acknowledge it and rethink our position. But as evidence-based practitioners, the recommendations we made in our paper are solidly in line with current research, personal experience, and the needs of the individual. This is the essence of evidence-based practice.
Are crunches for everyone? Certainly not. We clearly state in the article that they should be avoided by those with existing spinal issues such as disc herniation, disc prolapse, and/or flexion intolerance. But understand that the same is true for any exercise. Squats, presses and rows are all terrific exercises, but they may be contraindicated for a given individual depending on his/her goals, abilities, and injury status. As Stuart McGill has been aptly quoted as saying subsequent to publication of our article, “Crunches are neither bad nor good. The most important thing is the assessment to determine what’s right thing for the person in front of you. The next most important thing is to respect the load/posture/repetition variables in your algebra, i.e. don’t overwork the tissue beyond the ability to adapt or beyond its tolerance to failure.” I couldn’t agree more.
Unfortunately, there are those who choose to take a cult-like stance with respect to fitness. Rather than embracing new information, they instead cling to their rigidly-held beliefs and flame against anyone who poses a threat to their stance. This kind of attitude is not only unscientific, it’s unprofessional and can only set back exercise science and have a negative effect on the fitness industry as a whole. Ultimately everyone loses, including the general public who are caught in the crossfire.
Here’s an interesting anecdote. Back in the early 1960’s, a professor from the University of Texas named Karl Klein railed against the performance of deep squats. Klein conducted studies showing that weight lifters who frequently performed deep squats displayed an increased incidence of laxity in the collateral and anterior cruciate ligaments compared to a control group that did not, leading him to conclude that squatting below parallel had a detrimental effect on ligamentous stability. “Anything below a half knee bend,” he was quoted as saying in a 1962 Sports Illustrated article, “is useless and ruinous.” (Side note: The SI article was ironically titled “The Knee is Not for Bending.” Sound familiar? The similarities are eerie).
Now Klein was a distinguished researcher at the time and, as you may imagine, his claims had far reaching implications: The US Army subsequently removed squat jumps from their training protocols; the New York State school system banned deep knee bends from gym class; and the American Medical Association came out with a position statement cautioning against the performance of deep knee exercises because of their potential for severe injury to the internal and supporting structures of the knee joint. The upshot: For years, deep squats were widely considered passe. In fact, due to one man’s crusade, the negative view of deep squats is still being felt 50 years later as some continue to admonish the exercise as inherently dangerous.
Fast forward to today. Research has ultimately refuted Klein’s findings. No correlation has been found between deep squatting and ligamentous stability, including results from studies that attempted to replicate Klein’s methods. In fact, the prevailing body of evidence shows that ACL and PCL forces actually diminish at higher knee flexion angles. I covered this subject extensively in my NSCA Hot Topic article, The Biomechanics of Squat Depth. If you haven’t already given it a read, you may well find it enlightening, especially in the context of the current controversy over spinal flexion exercise. Could there be any parallels between the two topics? As they say, time will tell.
Bottom line is that it’s fine to have an opinion on a subject provided you’re open to other viewpoints. With respect to spinal flexion, I encourage you to read the research and draw your own conclusions rather than being swayed by some opinionated “fitness guru.” With a firm understanding of the available evidence, we can then debate the topic logically, rationally, and civilly to facilitate a better understanding of the issues. We shouldn’t care who is right or wrong, just that we ultimately get it right. Only through an open exchange of ideas can science move forward. This way, everyone wins.
Several recent bloggers have weighed in on the review article I co-wrote with Bret Contreras about the potential risks and rewards of spinal flexion exercises. First, the Cooper Institute wrote a post titled Controversy Over Crunches, the Cooper team does a good job summarizing the basic info on the topic. Similarly, my colleague Jonathan Ross wrote an article for the American Council on Exercise titled When Pigs Crunch that also summarized the issue nicely. I encourage you to read both posts.
It’s nice to see that our article stirred up debate on the subject, and that the pendulum has now swung back to center. If you still haven’t read our original article To Crunch or Not to Crunch, you can do so at the link below. Due to the publicity that the article generated, the NSCA has made the article free to view:
In case you still aren’t convinced that there’s no such thing as an easy way to get fit, check out exhibit Numero Uno: Reebok to Pay Settlement Over Health Claims. Yep, those ads promising a firmer butt and defined legs ultimately cost Reebok $25 million in false claim damages related to their EasyTone sneakers. A couple of years ago I wrote about this very topic in a previous post, citing the lack of research and common sense in claims that simply wearing a pair of sneakers will provide a good workout. It’s an enticing concept that unfortunately doesn’t have any credence.
Bottom line: Don’t fall for promises of an easy road to a better body. Exercise doesn’t come in a pill, a pair of sneakers, or any other shortcut approach. Getting fit requires hard work and dedication. There’s simply no way around it. Skip the toning shoes and get yourself a gym membership. Put in the effort and you’ll ultimately reap the rewards.
I’ve said it time and again: with rare exception, there is no such thing as a “bad” exercise, only improper performance or application of a given movement. The upright row is yet another example of this reality. You’ll hear a lot of trainers say that the upright row is a one-way ticket to shoulder issues. They’ll put it at the top of their “do not perform” list. Fact is, though, the upright row can be a terrific shoulder-builder provided you employ proper technique.
Here is a link to an interview I did with the New York Times on the subject titled A Safer Shoulder Workout. As I noted in the article, the key to safe performance of the upright row is pull the bar only to a point where your shoulders are just below parallel with the floor; any higher and you increase the potential for impingement. To ensure that deltoids are maximally activated, lead with your elbows, not your wrists. Notice in the photo how the humerus (i.e. upper arm bone) remains elevated above the hands. This should be the case throughout the move.
It’s important to note that, as with any exercise, individual genetics and injury history will come into play. If the movement doesn’t feel right, don’t do it. Moreover, if you have an existing shoulder injury, it may be contraindicated. Train smart and you’ll achieve optimal results while staying injury free.
My friend and colleague Mike Bates, owner of one of Canada’s top fitness studios, recently wrote a follow-up to my post Long and Lean? Mike’s article, titled “Muscles have set length” appeared in the current issue of the Windsor Star Newspaper. Give it a read at the following link:
Entries (RSS)
