October 2025 - AMA On Strength & Health

For those of you who have been checking out our Knowledge Base the last AMA (Ask Me Anything) session was back in February. As we're barreling towards the end of the year, I think we'd all benefit from a look at strength, maintaining or building muscle mass and how that impacts health and longevity.

I will open this up on Friday 17th October and keep it going until Friday 31st (a full two weeks). I will answer most questions in detail and add links to studies where appropriate. No question is too dumb. Off-topic questions are OK as long as they're not wildly off-topic. Follow-up questions and requests for clarification are encouraged. I will acknowledge each question with a like and reply within 24 hours (usually). If I don't acknowledge a question it means I haven't seen it so please feel free to tag me and draw my attention to it.

I am looking forward to it.

 

[Damer]

The thread is now open. Looking forward to your questions fellow Bees.

 

[facuzayas]

Hi!
Thanks as allways to this AMA, you guys are great!

I have different questions that are not related (I think):

1-What is the best way to recover from an injury? For example, when you have an ankle sprain — is it okay to restart your training if it doesn’t hurt during certain movements but still hurts in others?
2- What’s the best way to increase the rep count of an exercise? Should I add more weight or difficulty, or just increase the volume (for example, doing the exercise every day)? I want to increase my number of pull-ups because I think it will benefit my bouldering skills and overall strength, but I’m not sure what the best strategy is.
3- How can I improve my focus, especially during difficult tasks? Are there methods to become a more focused person? Are there foods or vitamins that help, or is it mainly a matter of building habits?


Sorry about the soooooo different kind of question but I was waiting a lot for it haha. THANKS!!

 

[graoumia]

Thanks @Damer and team, i will think and come back

 

[Damer]

@facuzayas that's a mixed bag of questions to start this thread They reflect, I suspect, many of the things we all struggle with so it's a great way to begin.

Let's take things sequentially.

1. Recovering from an injury. Obviously some things I will cover here depend on the severity of the injury, however, the most cited protocol for dealing with injury is the easy to remember RICE (Rest, Ice, Compression, Elevation) coined by Dr Gabe Mirkin in the 1970s and since perpetuated in a gazillion websites across the internet. It is about as wrong as it possibly can be and the creator of that acronym, Dr Gabe Mirkin, himself revisited his research in the 21st century and overturned his own findings and published it on his website. Back in the 70s we knew very little of how the body actually works (except what we could externally observe). The improvement of our tools has led to deeper knowledge and better understanding. We know now, for instance, that ice, compression and elevation reduce blood flow to injured parts of the body and hold back inflammation and both a rich bloodflow and an adequate inflammatory response are required for healing.

To get back now to your original question using a sprained ankle as an example, it is OK to get back to training provided the load that the injured part of the body, in this case the ankle, will experience is carefully managed by being very specific and very controlled about the exercise that you will perform and the intensity you will perform it at. The risk of training when already injured is that we overlook the injury once we are warmed up and feel little pain and then push that injured part beyond its current tolerance limits and then make the injury worse, turning something that is annoying to something that is debilitating.

Provided that this controlled approach is applied then recovery becomes faster with movement. A study on endurance athletes highlighted the same thing.

2. There is no best way to increase the load in an exercise. It depends on what you want to achieve. Increase in reps for instance will deliver bigger muscles and greater endurance to muscular fatigue, increase in load has a direct strength and speed benefit and an increase in difficulty bears directly on the mind/body connection. All three are always in play, of course, but at different percentages so your choice of what to increase is key to what you will get as a result which is why you need to know specifically what you are looking for as an outcome. For bouldering you need strength so I would suggest you increase your pull-ups by doing one (or both) of the following. First, increase the load and do fewer pull ups. Wear a weighed vest if you have one or grab and hold a weight with your feet. Do fewer reps but use the weight and you will see an increase in strength. The other technique is to not use any extra weight in your pull ups but slow them down and do fewer instead. So, you're using your arms to slowly pull up and then slowly descend and that also will significantly increase your strength.

3. Focus is a cognitive skill and as such it is complex. For sure your internal health is important. If you are not balanced in your food, vitamin and minerals intake then you will find it harder to focus mentally because your body is not quite balanced. However, in most cases with adults it is the mental component of focus that is the issue not the physical. Focus is a component (partially) of motivation and motivation itself is comprised of three other components (you will find them listed here). If your motivation is clear to you then your focus will not be a problem. If it isn't then you will struggle from time to time. In practical terms a quiet room, drinking coffee or tea (controlled stimulants versus depressants), breathing deeply and evenly, positive self-talk and some kind of limit to the activity and a reward afterwards are all 'tricks' that we all employ from time to time to help us stay on track when we don't feel like it.

I hope all this helps and yes, I can see questions had been piling up. This was an excellent opportunity to tackle them. Anything else you may want me to add more clarity to just ask.

 

[TopNotch]

This question is more of a just-something-I've-been-wondering type. Nowadays (and for some previous decades), the V-taper is the generally desired shape, but in the late 1800s, body-builders had a decidedly blocky torso, ripped but rectangular. How come? What did they do back then that isn't done now? And why? Is it just fashion - this looks better than that - or is there another reason? Was this 'block' the result of more functional workouts or...?

 

[Damer]

@TopNotch you never disappoint mate! Such a seemingly simple question. I can honestly write a book on it. I will try and keep things streamlined here as I unpack what you said so we can better understand what you have so correctly perceived. And let's start with bodybuilding itself. As a sport it is about building the body (exactly what it says) instead of building strength or functionality. Now, obviously strength and functionality cannot be easily divorced from building the body up - if you increase muscle size you will get greater strength output per muscle group and if you have greater strength some functionality will improve. But bodybuilding is not about that, these are tangentials.

Bodybuilding, as a sport, started with Eugen Sandow in the 1890s. It was, then, about two very specific things which also reflected the aesthetic of the time which traced its roots back to Ancient Greece (and its famous statues): natural strength and symmetry. Sandow used a mix of calisthenics, isometrics and strict diets to reduce body fat. The blocky physique of body builders of the time is more reminiscent of gymnasts, wrestlers and powerlifters of today because of their training methods that promoted strength output of the body as a whole (as opposed to isolating body parts).

From the 1960s to the 1980s (Schwarnegger's era) the aesthetic shifted to mass and muscle symmetry. The training methods changed to focus specifically on the development of specific muscle groups and the V-shape you mention became a thing. The aesthetic also changed as a result of this. Narrow waists, massive lats and back were now the norm. This reflects not only the change in training methods but also the availability of performance-enhancing drugs which made it possible to target (with training) and grow specific muscle groups disproportionately to the amount of exercise required. This, naturally, led to the next evolution of the sport and its aesthetic.

From the 1980s onwards the focus of bodybuilding was on muscle size (symmetry was no longer as important). Bodybuilders like Dorian Yates and Ronnie Coleman became the new icons of this aesthetic presenting an extreme example of muscle growth. This also reflected a change in training methods with programs that isolated muscle groups and worked them in specific rotations. Again the V-look is present here though this may be less the result of symmetry and more because it is far easier to target and grow muscles across the body that are not part of the waist and core which have a certain limit to growth dictated by the size of the pelvic girdle.

This shows three distinct things that I think are essential to keep in mind:

• Strength training now is sports specific, and muscle strength is distinct from the body's strength output
• Drugs, diet and equipment have made it possible to train for very specific results (like size)
• The social perception of the aesthetic of strength (and fitness) has changed because of mass media

If we are to take anything away from your question (which is brilliant) is to remember that strength training is always sports-specific (or, at least, required outcome-specific) and that society's idea of what is aesthetic is fueled by popular culture and mass media and is fluid. I hope this answers what you asked.

 

[TopNotch]

Thanks for that, @Damer
And, of course, just to keep you happy, a couple of questions arise from your answer.
1) I'm a little confused about your mention of symmetry. Do you mean symmetry from a strength viewpoint or a visual viewpoint or both? If Sandow et al focused on "strength and symmetry" and the Schwarzenegger school leant toward "mass and symmetry", I mean.
2) The Ancient Greeks were totally ripped and quite blocky, which makes me wonder about their training regime. It seems that swimmers and gymnasts are among the blocky types - in short, athletes who use their whole bodies and require a deal of strength (cyclists and runners are a whole different breed) tend to be more rectangular than V-shaped. Is that because those types of activities work the core far more than, say, regularly bench-pressing or back-squatting?
3) (I know I said "a couple" but... This is the last one, I promise) Does the blocky physique result in better core strength and therefore back protection? If so, how can this be achieved?

 

[NightWolf714]

I'm sure this was asked previously, so my apologies on that. But is protein powder and bulking on on protein as important for muscle building as it's made out to be? Or is that more trying to move a product? I'm debating about getting protein powder to add to my coffee but not sure if it's worth the investment.

If it is a good idea, any suggestions on shopping for this?

Thanks!

 

[Damer]

Heh! @TopNotch excellent follow-up and I am really glad you came back with this. Let's take them in order. And to do so, let's define "symmetry" - which generally means "the quality of having parts that are balanced or matching, often seen as harmonious and beautiful." Is Michaelangelo's statue of David (heavily inspired by Greek and Roman statues) symmetrical and beautiful? Most people looking at it will say, "definitely". Does it project strength and power? For sure. This leads us to the answer to your first question.

1. The idea of strength and symmetry that Sandow aimed for owed a massive homage to ancient Greeks and Romans. So, from a purely aesthetic point of view the "symmetry" they were aiming for was more like a harmonious development of the body where the body managed to look both strong and lithe. Capable and beautiful. It also reflected to the training methods available to them at the time. By the time we got into the 80s and beyond, in bodybuilding "symmetry" had come to mean something else entirely. They wanted mass, and tiny waists, and equal-sized muscle groups on both sides of the body. From this we can surmise that the symmetry that Sandow et al had in mind was rooted in functional strength and the symmetry that bodybuilding aimed for in the period between 1980-2000 was rooted in individual muscle group size.

2. You pretty much answered your own question here. Functional strength requires strong quads, glutes, back and core. Swimmers, gymnasts, boxers and most active soldiers in today's military have that same blocky, powerful look. It's the result of good aerobic capability, calisthenic exercises and a focus on functional efficiency and functional strength output. What we see as a result of all that is of secondary importance.

3. The blocky physique results from a stronger core and lower back and, usually, greater functional strength output per pound weight. Functional training also delivers a very specific body composition as evidenced by a very recent study, here. The "look" is a byproduct of the training rather than the other way around. Farmer's carry, kettlebell exercises, calisthenics, martial arts, boxing, sprinting, are all activities that help the body generate a lot of strength and to do that it needs a strong core, quads, glutes and back. Add pull-ups and push-ups to the list of exercises, jump squats, kicks and punches and you begin to get both the results in terms of performance and the look.

As always, come back with anything that needs additional clarification.

 

[Damer]

@NightWolf714 excellent question. Now, in an ideal world, our food intake and its macronutrient values perfectly balance our energy needs and give us everything the body requires to break down tissue and build muscle. We sadly live in a far from perfect world. Stress, bad dietary habits, the ever-worsening quality of the food that is being produced and the body's own capability to absorb what it needs from food when the food is of sufficient quality, are all factors that impact just how much protein is available in our body to help build muscle.

Working on the premise that we tend to overestimate just how much protein we ingest and on the assumption that for most of us our body is not always capable of making full use of the macronutrients and micronutrients that we do ingest, having an extra protein supplement gives it a massive boost. Provided the protein is as clean as possible (no other additives). I am vegan so I always use plant-based protein powders (usually almond protein which I mix with water) and the the taste of which is manageable. If I weren't vegan I'd still go for a plant-based protein powder on account that I can best make sure there are no additives that are potentially harmful or disruptive. Which one you go for will depend on your budget and what you can find where you live. If the taste is too much to handle (always a consideration - pea protein for instance is a throat-grabber and pumpkin protein on its own should be outlawed on account of its taste ) you can always add some cocoa powder and a little honey or maple syrup.

There used to be the belief that the body needed only a certain percentage per pound of protein. A 2023 study showed that provided you're exercising the body will make full use of all protein you ingest. I hope this helps answer your question.

 

[NightWolf714]

This does! Thank you so much for the help.

 

[graoumia]

@Damer what is strength?

 

[Damer]

@graoumia such a simple question and yet the answer is not simple at all. At a clinical level, under a miscroscope, strength is the ability of individual muscle fibers to resist being stretched past their tolerance level. In most generic fitness contexts, strength is the maximum force a muscle or group of muscle can apply against a resistance in a push, pull or lift motion.

In all these situations we are focusing on the muscle only. And we examine that muscle (or that muscle group) in isolation.

Human beings, of course, don't work like that. We are a whole that works through all its parts. So we experience four different types of strength:

• Maximal - It is the maximum force a person can generate to overcome a resistance.
• Dynamic - The ability a person has to exert force through a range of motion.
• Static - The ability a person has to exert force or resistance in one particular position.
• Explosive - The ability a person has to exert maximum force in the shortest possible time.

These four types of strength also involve neuromuscular connections where the ability of the brain to send an adequately strong signal to make the muscle fibers contract, quickly, is key.

This is why strength is not easy to measure visually. It requires a lot of training, has only a small relation to muscle size and is only effectively measured within sports-specific or personal-fitness contexts that allow goals and targets to be set and progress to be measured.

I am sure more clarification is needed here so ask anything you think could use more explanation.

 

[Laura Rainbow Dragon]

If I weren't vegan I'd still go for a plant-based protein powder on account that I can best make sure there are no additives that are potentially harmful or disruptive.

I'm curious as to why you make this statement. Certainly here in Canada, and I assume in most other jurisdictions these days as well, all ingredients deliberately added to a product intended for human ingestion are required to be listed on the product's packaging. Makes no difference whether the product is plant-based or not. As for ingredients inadvertently added--stuff that ends up in our food because it's in our environment--these things end up in both plant-based and animal-based foods.

I'm thinking specifically of this recent analysis of protein powders that found lead and other heavy metals in most of the products they tested, and found higher levels of lead in the plant-based powders. (Nine times as much lead, on average, in the plant-based powders compared to the whey-based ones.)

(For the alarmed and/or curious, here is another link for some perspective. << This is a substack post written by a medical health professional--a registered dietician--who discusses the protein powder analysis from the perspective of food safety and environmental contaminants in our food in general.)

 

[facuzayas]

Thanks for your answers!!
As you may know, now I have more questions hahaha

1. Recovering from an injury. Obviously some things I will cover here depend on the severity of the injury, however, the most cited protocol for dealing with injury is the easy to remember RICE (Rest, Ice, Compression, Elevation) coined by Dr Gabe Mirkin in the 1970s and since perpetuated in a gazillion websites across the internet. It is about as wrong as it possibly can be and the creator of that acronym, Dr Gabe Mirkin, himself revisited his research in the 21st century and overturned his own findings and published it on his website. Back in the 70s we knew very little of how the body actually works (except what we could externally observe). The improvement of our tools has led to deeper knowledge and better understanding. We know now, for instance, that ice, compression and elevation reduce blood flow to injured parts of the body and hold back inflammation and both a rich bloodflow and an adequate inflammatory response are required for healing.

soo, are you telling that RICE is not the best way to recover right now?

2. There is no best way to increase the load in an exercise. It depends on what you want to achieve. Increase in reps for instance will deliver bigger muscles and greater endurance to muscular fatigue, increase in load has a direct strength and speed benefit and an increase in difficulty bears directly on the mind/body connection. All three are always in play, of course, but at different percentages so your choice of what to increase is key to what you will get as a result which is why you need to know specifically what you are looking for as an outcome. For bouldering you need strength so I would suggest you increase your pull-ups by doing one (or both) of the following. First, increase the load and do fewer pull ups. Wear a weighed vest if you have one or grab and hold a weight with your feet. Do fewer reps but use the weight and you will see an increase in strength. The other technique is to not use any extra weight in your pull ups but slow them down and do fewer instead. So, you're using your arms to slowly pull up and then slowly descend and that also will significantly increase your strength.

Nice! and now I have another type of trainning following the same example. explosive pull ups will not be another good option?

3. Focus is a cognitive skill and as such it is complex. For sure your internal health is important. If you are not balanced in your food, vitamin and minerals intake then you will find it harder to focus mentally because your body is not quite balanced. However, in most cases with adults it is the mental component of focus that is the issue not the physical. Focus is a component (partially) of motivation and motivation itself is comprised of three other components (you will find them listed here). If your motivation is clear to you then your focus will not be a problem. If it isn't then you will struggle from time to time. In practical terms a quiet room, drinking coffee or tea (controlled stimulants versus depressants), breathing deeply and evenly, positive self-talk and some kind of limit to the activity and a reward afterwards are all 'tricks' that we all employ from time to time to help us stay on track when we don't feel like it.

so, maybe I need to question WHY I need to focus instead of just HOW can I focus more?

Sorry but all of this conducted me to another questions that, maybe, are related:

4- I just moved to Berlin from my country (Argentina) where we have a lot of sunlight and not too much cold seasons... My question here is, to go thru this new weather, with not too much sunlight and a very colg season in winter. Do you have some tips like foods, habits, vitamins, etc? and also, are "kinds" of workouts that fuels more "vital energy" than others? Because I'm afraid of my mood and defences if I do not see the sun for too much time haha.

5- The "primal" movements, like bear crawl and things like theese.. are really primal? and more important, are really functional? what are the main points of this kind of trainnings?

Again, THANKS for all this knowledge

 

[Damer]

@Laura Rainbow Dragon thanks for the opportunity to address this a little deeper. I've seen the Consumer reports that came out and all of those brands reported, including the vegan ones contain a variety of other ingredients that range from Branched-Chain Amino Acids (BCCA) to complex carbs and flavors. My suggestion to @NightWolf714 was for "a plant-based protein powder" pea-protein, almond, pumpkin or anything similar. They are just that. Nothing else is added so the ingredients are only what's in the source. In addition plant-based protein powders is higher in fiber (western diets suffer a little in this regard) and low in cholesterol (which is an issue with protein powders that have eggs as one of the sources).

There are, as you say, animal-based pure protein powders like whey and even beef-based ones. And they're fine. The issue is that they're produced by companies that also handle other animal products. While cross-contamination with other animal products may be small it adds to the possibility of trace elements having an inflammatory reaction in the body (a response that is generally associated with animal-based protein). We exercise and watch our nutrition so we can specifically give our body the best chance possible and not taking this into account does not makes a lot of sense.

There are huge complexities when it comes to food sources and my usual admonition is to do what already works for a person. A 2024 study that looked at the effects of plant-based protein intake versus animal-based protein intake showed that the former were better at protecting the test subjects from muscle loss even though they were ingesting similar amounts. Part of the difference, I believe, is in the systemic inflammatory effect animal-based protein ingestion produces in at least some people which then reduces (or blocks) the benefits of the dietary protein intake. The study looked at dietary protein as opposed to powders however.

Having said that, again, there are studies which show that whey isolate and beef-protein isolate do not produce inflammation when ingested as supplements.

As far as labeling is concerned, indeed all manufacturers in the industrialized world, by law, are required to list all ingredients in food (and that includes protein powders) regardless of source. When the protein powder is an isolate, whether plant-based or animal-based it is much easier to check what is in it. When it's not an isolate however (just like the shakes in the Consumer report that found higher levels of lead) it is much harder to actually check. Ingredients can go by a number of identifying names and they are not all familiar so checking becomes complicated. I stressed plant-based protein for simplicity.

Regarding environmental contamination, that is inevitable in an ever-degrading environment which forces food growers to resort to the use of chemicals that are deemed safe but for which we have little long-term data, and food and supplement manufacturers to sometimes cut corners. Going organic is an answer but again it should be a personal choice dictated by circumstances and capabilities.

Does any of this make the choices we face easier? No. We hold these discussions to help each of us better understand some of the issues and formulate our own personal strategy on how to deal with them within the spectrum of our own capabilities and circumstances and it is an ever-evolving process. I hope this better helps you understand why I said what I said.

 

[astro_lizard]

I've started running again and have had an overload of information on the best ways to train. It has all turned my brain to mashed potatoes so this AMA is perfectly timed, thank you for holding it! I have a few questions regarding training for running.

I was wondering if I could get some insight to 'Zone 2' training and how it works/if it truly is the best way to be able to run longer distances. I've also heard that Zone 2 training doesn't work as well for women as it does for men, or that the benefits for women aren't as good.

Are there even better ways to train if longer and longer distances are the goal?

Can you train to run longer and faster at the same time effectively or should one or the other be focused on?

For running faster, I had moderate success in the past with interval running of short sprints followed by slow running repeated several times. Are there better ways?

Thanks again, sorry if any of the questions were confusing! also I hope it's not too off-topic!

 

[Damer]

@facuzayas great follow-up!

soo, are you telling that RICE is not the best way to recover right now?

Yep. Active rest where you still workout but at a reduced load so that the injured part of you can bear it, is the best way to recover.

Nice! and now I have another type of trainning following the same example. explosive pull ups will not be another good option?

Explosive pull-ups help with building explosive power. In my answer to @graoumia's question I detailed the four different types of strength. If you want maximal strength for bouldering then slow pull-ups are the way to go.

so, maybe I need to question WHY I need to focus instead of just HOW can I focus more?

We all need to understand our WHY. It will change over time and if we don't understand it in the first instance then we will never understand what has changed and what we can do about it.

4. I feel you! I moved from sunny Queensland to Manchester in the UK where the sun shines only when there are flying pigs in the sky. I had the same issues. Up your vitamin intake a little, particularly vitamins C and D. Make sure you exercise outside as much as you can when you can. Berlin is like Manchester. Most day we spend indoors. Get out even if it's raining. I used to start the day with a run no matter the weather (there were times when I would have to open and close my fingers for a full five minutes when I got back, so I could get my hands warm enough to turn the key in the lock and get back in my house - and yes, I did wear woolen gloves while running). Do any kind of training that appeals to you. The important thing is to train. But make sure you warm-up well beforehand.

5. The human body is a marvel of evolution. We have been bioengineered to stand, walk and run on two legs, with our body upright. So-called primal movements force the body to mimic animal movement patterns or, if you like, movement patterns we engage in when we're really young and don't yet know how to walk upright. They're energy inefficient movement patterns which means that they challenge our body and help strengthen tendons and ligaments we need for mobility. They're supremely useful in that regard and if used as such they deliver great results in terms of muscle and tendon control, body awareness and range of motion. A Grove City College study in a town near me, showed significant mobility benefits. Anything that improves range of motion and mobility also improves functional strength, further develops the mind/body connection and helps prevent injuries. You can get the same benefits from Yoga, martial arts, gymnastics but each of these disciplines is a universe of its own. Primal movements straddle all that and provide benefits with a lot less commitment.

I hope these help you fashion your own approach to what you're doing.

 

[TopNotch]

Thank you for your response, @Damer If I'm reading it correctly, calisthenics by its nature is more likely to result in a more rectangular physique given its focus on core whereas it takes specific weight training to achieve the V-taper. Generally speaking.

I'd like now to follow on the question of protein. We're all advised on how much protein we should optimally be ingesting daily - let's call that amount X. My diet could be as follows: on Monday I consume only 1/2X, on Tuesday I have X + 1/4X, on Wednesday I get exactly X, on Thursday I go all out and have a whopping 2X, on Friday I recover from that indulgence and consume only 3/4X, on Saturday I have a fast and consume 0X, and on Sunday I'm eating again and have X +1/2X. Now, looking at individual days, only one day did I consume the exact recommended amount. On three days of that week, I've had more but that's perfectly fine too. But three days I had less than recommended, and on one of those days I consumed no protein at all. Over the course of the entire week, however, my average daily protein intake is exactly X.
My questions:
1) does it really matter if some days we don't hit that goal? I mean, optimally speaking, for best results and all that, because I know we can survive on less protein. Is the body so particular that it'll get cranky if one day my intake is less than it 'should' be, or does it equal out over a (short) period of time?
2) What does this mean if I chose to do an alternate day fast (or a 5:2 fast, or other type of fast)? Would I have to double my protein consumption on the days I'm eating to make up for the days I am not?
3) On days when I'm not hitting my goal (for a predetermined reason, not by accident), should my training/exercise routine change?

 

[vulture1930]

Hi there,
Thanks for doing this. I truly appreciate it when people help others from the goodness of their heart. Not to get all sappy now, but people like yourself make the world a better place

*coughs* Anyhow, I don't have any specific fitness questions on my mind as I am pretty happy with how my "working out comeback" has been going and I'd rather not overthink it for now.

I have been thinking about reading about fitness/the body/health itself lately however. Do you happen to have any books that you would recommend?

 

[Damer]

@vulture1930 have you tried "Built To Last"?

 

[vulture1930]

@vulture1930 have you tried "Built To Last"?

I have not, but it looks like exactly the type of book I was looking for. I'll give it a read, thanks for sharing.

 

[Laura Rainbow Dragon]

Thanks Damer!

While cross-contamination with other animal products may be small it adds to the possibility of trace elements having an inflammatory reaction in the body (a response that is generally associated with animal-based protein).

Cross-contamination is an issue with plant products too.

(I'm thinking here of nut/soy/etc. allergies. I have a friend who is allergic to most sources of plant protein. He is fine with almonds and cashews, but is seriously allergic to other tree nuts. He's also highly allergic to peanuts and all legumes. I often use an almond/cashew blend nut "milk" with added pea protein when baking for myself. But I need to swap this out for a non-protein-enriched variety when baking for a dinner party! Even nuts still in the shell here come with warnings that they may contain traces of other tree nuts, peanuts, and soy!--Though my friend will all the allergies calls this the "please don't sue us disclaimer" and doesn't worry about it.)

There are huge complexities when it comes to food sources and my usual admonition is to do what already works for a person. A 2024 study that looked at the effects of plant-based protein intake versus animal-based protein intake showed that the former were better at protecting the test subjects from muscle loss even though they were ingesting similar amounts.

Thanks for that link. It's an interesting (and also rather niche) study! It actually found that higher levels of plant-based proteins were only beneficial for some of the participants studied. For others, higher levels of animal-based proteins had a more protective effect. Which highlights your point about the complexities of these issues, and the fact that what works for one person does indeed work for that person but may not be the best option for someone else.

This brings me to another question re: best practices specific to a particular group, in this case: strength training in post-menopausal women. Do you have any tips, case-study successes, etc. you can point me to re: best practices for building strength, and overcoming resistance to doing the necessary work, for those of us who must now deal perpetually with a hormone profile which places additional challenges on the strength-building (or even strength-maintaining) journey?

And finally, a question about my old frenemy, the push-up:

My question is this: why, in our age of functional fitness, does the almighty push-up still hold so much power? Why is the push-up the strength metric by which so many are tested when, for the majority of us, it's wildly out of touch with the rest of our lives?

Again, everyone is different, and different strokes for different folks. I can see why the armed forces might want its members to be able to do push-ups. But for myself: I never, ever, ever, ever, ever need to push anywhere even close to as much weight as I'm pushing in a full push-up in any other activity in my life. Not in my work, my sports, my other leisure activities, my life chores. None of it. (Yoga comes the closest, with sun salutations, but even here the ascent is normally a modified form which is significantly easier than a standard push-up ascent. And even the modified push-ups come as singles with other movements mixed in between them.) Never in my life (54 orbits around Sol thus far) have I had to push against anything like that much resistance in any other activity, and never have I had to do it repetitively, as is often the goal with push-ups. I know I'm not unique in this.

I've seen a lot of people struggle over the years with the pressure to push. I've seen the pressure to complete push-ups demotivate a lot of people from working out at all (including myself--and I'm a lifelong athlete who enjoys being physically active!) I'm wondering if it's perhaps time (or well past time) to retire the push-up as an ubiquitous test of strength and instead relegate it to a niche activity: awesome for some, but completely unnecessary for most of us.

 

[Damer]

@astro_lizard it is great you're getting back into running and it's really cool you're also approaching it from a better-informed point of view.

The best way to tackle it is to deconstruct the requirements of the discipline, take an overview and hen drill down.

Long distance running has four distinct components:

• Cardiovascular fitness
• Muscular fitness
• Running efficiency
• Mental grit

Cardiovascular fitness is determined by the amount of oxygen your body can utilize in a run. For that it needs:

• Lungs that are conditioned to absorb as much oxygen as possible from each breath, bind that oxygen to hemoglobin (in red blood cells) and then transport it to all the different parts of the body that do the work so it can be used to break down glucose stored in the muscles (and liver) which is then used for adenosine triphosphate (ATP) production which powers the muscles at a cellular level.
• A network of arteries, veins and capillaries that can deliver the hemoglobin to all the muscles that do the work of running in the proportion they need which will also take the byproducts of ATP production, away.
• A strong heart muscle that can pump blood through the network of arteries, veins and capillaries without becoming too tired.

Muscular fitness, in the case of running, also requires:

• Strong legs, glutes and tendons
• A strong core
• Muscular endurance (so the legs and core can work for a long time without tiring)

These two components (Cardiovascular fitness and Muscular fitness) are structural. Exercise, targeted training and a decent regime of recovery and adequate fueling (i.e. food) help build it.

The next two components are built on them. Running efficiency, for example is made up of factors like VO2 max (efficient absorption of oxygen with each breath) lactate threshold, running economy (how efficiently the body uses oxygen), biomechanics (form, stride, and technique), and muscular factors like strength and endurance. Mental grit is made up of
composure, concentration, confidence, coping with adversities/challenges of the run and cohesion (how well you integrate what you do with others around you and your own identity).

Some of these we will address here because they are fairly easy to understand and implement, other components you will need to work on yourself to better understand why you do what you do and how important it is to you.

Zone 2 training, for runners, is a conditioning run that aims at maintaining a heart rate between 60% and 70% of your maximum to build aerobic endurance, improve fat metabolism, and reduce the risk of overtraining and also avoid injuries by over-extending yourself. Its purpose is to improve mitochondrial density (the little 'engines' in each cell that help convert glucose into ATP and fat metabolism (where fat reserves are used in a process called lypolysis that powers ATP production which helps keep glucose in reserve for those moments when an increase in speed is necessary).

The argument is that the female body has been, by nature, optimized for carrying a fetus for nine months and women have better mitochondrial density and fat metabolism than men, naturally. The science is far from settled (and to our shame we know a lot less about the female body than the male body at the moment). Do women have a natural edge here? Most probably yes. Is that edge sufficient for reducing Zone 2 training and using that time to focus on other aspects of long distance running training? The answer is it depends on the individual, their neurobiological make-up, genetic inheritance, fitness history and the all-important mental components they bring to the table.

So, here, I will say this: Track everything you do. Meticulously. Log your distance and time. And experiment to see if changes in your training help improve or not your long-distance goals. That's the best way to see what works for you.

Since we are discussing training there are ways to improve your overall capacity for distance running that do not require Zone 2 training:

• Include higher-intensity runs with shorter distances,
• Try interval training,
• Add tempo runs where you simply run a comfortable pace for 60 - 90 minutes
• Add strength training
• Try on the spot high knees at different speeds (and time them to see your endurance)
• Do march steps and again time your endurance

You will need to put all this into a plan that fits with your lifestyle and other commitments.

To increase speed in long distance running you need to just improve all of the above (try also adding some plyometric training - jump squats, hops, jump knee tucks, etc).

Speed in shorter distances is a matter of force applied per step and requires a greater focus on strength, hip mobility and stride. While all of these are still part of long distance running they're not as prominent because so many other components go into it.

As your physical fitness improves you will naturally find yourself focusing on biomechanics (stride, technique and so on) - these basically provide energy efficiencies that allow you to do more with the energy you have, rather than providing you with more energy to do more with.

Finally there is that mental component. As you go through your training you will, inevitably, also train your brain/mind but how you think about yourself when you're not exercising is just as important. If you, for instance, don't see yourself as a runner in your mind, the training you do is then harder and, studies have shown, delivers slightly lower and slower results. This is a process and it will be an individual one for you as it is for everyone else.

I've written a lot here (and I apologize in advance) - it's a complex subject and once we get past the generic basics: run distance and run regularly, it becomes quite complicated. I hope all this helps. Feel, free, to ask me to further clarify anything that needs further clarification.

 

[astro_lizard]

@Damer Thank you so much for that wonderful and detailed answer, it was extremely helpful!

I bookmarked all of the workouts from the Workouts for Runners collection and will be adding them to my routine to help with building the strength needed. I'll be checking out the workouts for working on my VO2 max, and will be tracking my runs very closely. I'll definitely incorporate the high knees and march steps like you suggested, too. I'll find a place in my routine for everything that was suggested here.

I think on the mental side I am definitely more prepared than I have ever been (huge thanks to Darebee for that). I'll definitely be able to approach my training with more confidence with all of this information!

Thank you to you and to everyone on the Darebee team for everything you all do.

 

[BeeCommando]

Dear @Damer ,

I've been exercising fairly regularly for about a year now. I used to not be able to do a single pull-up, and now I can do three. I have a couple of questions I'd like to ask:

1. Effective training approach
How can I train more effectively? How do I know if I'm training correctly, or whether my workouts are too light or too heavy to produce results? Do I always need to train to muscle failure in order to progress?

2. Posture and desk work
I have a desk job where I sit at a computer for about 8 hours a day. My sedentary work routine has affected my posture – my shoulders are rounded forward and my head juts forward. I think I have a hunched posture. What can I do to improve this? Which exercises would you recommend? What type of activity would be most beneficial for me? I've found flexibility work quite beneficial – I wonder if there are additional yoga and stretching videos available on Darebee that I might explore?

Thank you very much for taking the time to help me. I really appreciate your guidance.

 

[graoumia]

Thanks @Damer so can you explain how (if possible) we can know we have enough strength ? Or is it a never ending quest ? And, to my opinion, strength and health are linked, but how ?

 

[Damer]

@TopNotch this is an excellent question and as you can surmise from my answers to @NightWolf714 and @Laura Rainbow Dragon this is quite a complex subject. At the start of this century I'd say follow the RDA and eat healthy and you'll be OK. We're past that and we know much more about how the body utilizes what it ingests and we still know so little about it.

Rule of thumb says that provided you get, on the whole, the amount of protein that your body needs for your particular lifestyle and biomechanical needs, you should be OK. But that is not the whole story.

While the total amount of ingested protein over a day or a week is important and missing out on a day here and there is no big deal, studies suggest that he body performs best when it comes to muscle synthesis (and repair) when its protein intake is consistent. Other studies show that in addition to an adequate protein intake, nutrition, rest and exercise are key to the obtaining a positive health outcome.

The reason for this is in the way the body prepares to handle change and apportion energy. Whether it's exercise or a meal the body engages in processes that help it make better use of what is about to happen. This is why we don't for instance start the day by consuming all of our calorie requirements for the day so we can save time. By the end of the day we are likely to end up hungry and with higher fat reserves than if we eat two-three meals a day at the timed intervals we normally do.

So, to answer your question directly; when you create a slightly chaotic schedule in your protein ingestion you are handicapping your muscle-building, maintenance and fitness goals. Is it catastrophic if it happens occasionally? No. But on the days when it does happen your protein ingestion and uptake are suboptimal.

There is one more consideration here I need to add. When you create this uncertainty in your body on its food intake it gets stressed. This stress further decreases food absorption and leads to even greater deficits in both macro and micro-nutrients and, to make matters worse, it leads to increased fat storage (because during times of stress, the body prioritizes that for survival).

Now if you're fasting on alternate days and this is part of your routine, that's fine. The body will acclimate to that and doubling your protein intake to make up for the fasting days is necessary only if on the days you fast you also exercise hard (I'm willing to bet you don't).

Finally, on the question of whether you can balance a lower protein intake some days with reduced physical activity the answer is I don't know. Logically yes, that balances out. But there are a lot of other factors that kick in: weather and environment (for stress from external factors), your wellbeing routine, your mental state of being, the intensity of your workouts when you do hit your protein intake marker.

Here, we're in the realm of personal experimentation and I would say you need to keep track of what you do and when and look at the results and if you're not moving towards your goals then you need to think about what you need to change. I hope this helps.

 

[Damer]

@Laura Rainbow Dragon the more we learn about perimenopause and its effects on the female body the more I want to scream "Unfair!". The female body, as a whole, has levels of complexity that the male doesn't and on top of this, perimenopause happens (and menopause in some cases may be years ahead). Post-menopause needs even more management. A University of Exeter article (that references a very recent study on the subject) tells us that strength training throughout the body with some emphasis on the pelvic girdle and legs produced good results without needing to go for high-intensity workouts.

Resistance training (and a little running) produce some of the best results because they directly affect the bones, increasing both muscle and bone density and bones affect the brain. Although none of this is new what is new is that consistent low-intensity workouts produced these results, rather than needing to go all-out in a session to see results. This tallies with our new and somewhat better understanding of how the body changes. Consistent signals for adaptation produce better results than once or twice a week at exhausting intensity. Basically you should be looking at exercising a lot but at a level that is well below your high-intensity threshold. This approach seems to deliver the best results.

I get 100% what you're saying about the push-up. Having been active in a sport where in an average training session we'd all end up doing a few hundred per night (regardless of age, sex and personal fitness goals) yeah it's a bit of an imposition.

It's hard because, depending on hand positioning and some other postural factors, at some point in the push-up you end up pushing anywhere between 64% - 75% of your body weight which, as you say, is unrealistic because unless you're doing Olympic Sledge racing you don't really need it. It's used as a metric of strength the same reason weight has been used as a measure of fitness: it's easy to apply, needs no special equipment and in principal everyone should be able to do it.

Just like grip strength (how long you can dead-hang) has been applied across the board as a measure it is an approximation and should be treated as such. Individual attributes very much come into play here. I have a friend who can do maybe ten push-ups at most at a time, yet he's fit, healthy and runs more than 50km a week. I am always adverse to being prescriptive. If something doesn't work for a person, I say find what does and go with that. And that is probably the best way to handle exercise and maintain good mental health.

 

[Damer]

@BeeCommando congratulations on taking your pull ups from zero to your current level. That is no mean feat!

Your first question is super-common. I will start backwards in my answer. You really need to train to muscle failure only if you're a bodybuilder looking to maximize muscle growth through hypertrophy exercises. This is not you, so the answer is no. Now, training without a purpose is difficult. As I mentioned in this post, recently, there are a lot of psychological and physical benefits that are derived from training with purpose. And when you train with purpose in mind you begin to prioritize what you focus on which means you have specific goals which then become a guideline for progress. Training to "just get fitter" is fine and definitely better than no training at all, but training to actually achieve something (and that something can be intensely personal - none of us need to try and break any records) gives us a clear sense of where we are going and the things we need to do to get there.

I know I have not given you a clear answer to your first question. But to do that I need to sit down and talk to you and try and help you understand what is important to you and why, and really that is a conversation you need to have with your self. On YouTube we have a Self-Care and Wellbeing section that covers, briefly, a whole lot of stuff that is about exercise but is not exercise specific and helps address some of the questions you have. I would suggest you browse through it and see what helps you move forward, internally.

Once you have clearer goals then you will have targets and even if what you are doing is initially wrong, you will soon find, through experimentation, what you need to do to help you move towards your goal. But you really need that starting point that comes from inside yourself to help you better change the outside part of you. Incidentally, there are a couple of chapters in Built To Last that also cover that and they have suggestions at the end on how you could go about becoming that better version of you that's psychologically and mentally stronger.

Your second question is a lot more practical. It is difficult to outdo eight hours of damage done while sitting with an hour's workout. Because no one has infinite energy or more hours in the day you will need to be smart here. You need to establish an exercise protocol that helps you change how your body reacts. For example you could, in addition to anything else you are going to do, also do each day 10-20 push ups at the start of the day (to activate abs and core and strengthen the neck), pick some office-friendly exercises from our Office Workouts that work back and upper shoulders and neck and then combine strength work for upper back in your daily workouts and stretching (which you are doing already). That combination, you will find will deliver the fastest results.

I hope this has helped a little but feel free to ask me to clarify anything that is not clear or add more information.

 

[facuzayas]

@facuzayas great follow-up!


Yep. Active rest where you still workout but at a reduced load so that the injured part of you can bear it, is the best way to recover.


Explosive pull-ups help with building explosive power. In my answer to @graoumia's question I detailed the four different types of strength. If you want maximal strength for bouldering then slow pull-ups are the way to go.


We all need to understand our WHY. It will change over time and if we don't understand it in the first instance then we will never understand what has changed and what we can do about it.

4. I feel you! I moved from sunny Queensland to Manchester in the UK where the sun shines only when there are flying pigs in the sky. I had the same issues. Up your vitamin intake a little, particularly vitamins C and D. Make sure you exercise outside as much as you can when you can. Berlin is like Manchester. Most day we spend indoors. Get out even if it's raining. I used to start the day with a run no matter the weather (there were times when I would have to open and close my fingers for a full five minutes when I got back, so I could get my hands warm enough to turn the key in the lock and get back in my house - and yes, I did wear woolen gloves while running). Do any kind of training that appeals to you. The important thing is to train. But make sure you warm-up well beforehand.

5. The human body is a marvel of evolution. We have been bioengineered to stand, walk and run on two legs, with our body upright. So-called primal movements force the body to mimic animal movement patterns or, if you like, movement patterns we engage in when we're really young and don't yet know how to walk upright. They're energy inefficient movement patterns which means that they challenge our body and help strengthen tendons and ligaments we need for mobility. They're supremely useful in that regard and if used as such they deliver great results in terms of muscle and tendon control, body awareness and range of motion. A Grove City College study in a town near me, showed significant mobility benefits. Anything that improves range of motion and mobility also improves functional strength, further develops the mind/body connection and helps prevent injuries. You can get the same benefits from Yoga, martial arts, gymnastics but each of these disciplines is a universe of its own. Primal movements straddle all that and provide benefits with a lot less commitment.

I hope these help you fashion your own approach to what you're doing.

OMG THANK YOU for the responses! And also sorry but I have a few more (if I can)hahah.

6- My brother is a padel instructor, he throws balls like 100's times per day and -obviously- he has a more developed side of his back, specially on his lower back, and it delivers in a bad posture and maybe in some pain, from this, his hips started to change and it also delivered into calves cramps. Do you have any recommendation of excercises/ routines/ type of trainning to compensate his other side of the back? or maybe another way of looking it? because he can't stop working and this sport is one-handed. To clarify this, he went to a lot of doctors and all of them said that he need to stop, and this is not an option (yet), and also he is on great form, has a lot of endurance and strenght to consider adding more trainning.

7- what is non-conventional trainning? how it changes our body and how we can implement it into our routines?

again, THANKS!

 

[Damer]

I am adding this here, to better illustrate how bone strength (a direct side effect of stronger muscles) contributes to a cascade of positive health outcomes for the brain and body.

 

[Damer]

@graoumia the post immediately above helps explain, visually, the connection between stronger muscles, a stronger, healthier brain and also better internal health. Your primary question however raises a deeply interesting point which touches upon so many of the questions that have been asked on this thread: How do we know when we're "good enough". Obviously, anyone who does any kind of sport knows. By definition the sport has parameters in its competitive format and basic performance standards. But if we don't do something like this (and many of us don't) how do we know?

Well, this is where introspection, self-analysis and deep, honesty with our self come in. We need to really understand what it is we want to achieve and why we want to achieve it. If there is clarity in that then the "how" is merely technical and the "how much" is also then, defined. So, the question really is: What do you want to be strong for? Doing the shopping, punching a heavy bag? Doing carpentry on your own? Lifting your child? Any of this defines a target, establishes some goals and then, working from the perspective of each individual, creates a cascade of actions that will help the goal come true.

I am not sure how much this answers what you had in mind, but I hope it helps a little and, of course, get back to me with any questions if it doesn't.

 

[Damer]

@facuzayas I am sorry I've taken so long to get back to you. End of the month bottleneck issues in my day job. Now let's get to your questions.

Any sport that demands narrow-range repetitive movements is going to create imbalances in muscle strength, size and control and these, in turn, over time will affect posture, gait and balance. The easiest way to harmonize all this is to add running in his routine. Middle-distance (approx 5 - 6 km at a time) and a 65% - 75% pace of what he can normally do. What this does is it forces the body to harmonize how the muscles work together and in order to do that it adjusts for size and strength of all the muscle groups in the kinetic chain. I am hugely over-simplifying the process here. It involves testosterone signalling pathways and Krebs-cycle efficiencies but really it's the end result that matters. If he does that he will find that most of the issues he faces because of his job, will go away.

Non-conventional training is any kind of training, really, that increases functional strength. Swinging hammers (and kettlebells), turning over huge tires, the Darebee weapons training workouts, jumping over garden gates, etc. What all these have in common is the recruitment of several different strength, mobility and speed modalities and the focus on the body's power output instead of the strength of any particular body part. If you manage to incorporate these into your training routines by performing them at least once or twice a week in your workouts, you will notice a marked improvement in overall performance.

Where I live there is a metal gate that's about 1.2 meters high. It safeguards a path so bikes don't go through it. To get through you need to unlatch it. I make a point of jumping over it one-handed, each time. In the course of the week I will probably end up doing that (depending on the route I take to get home) 10 - 12 times. This is just an example, but in my case it allows me to incorporate this in what I do naturally without too much thinking and over the course of a year it sort of adds up, especially with everything else I do.

It always requires a little creative thinking how to add functional training like this to your workouts when you don't have a lot of extra time. If time is not an issue then once a week or so just spend a whole hour doing things like that: play around with kettebells, jump over chairs or onto plyo boxes. Do power jumps like this one:

I hope this helps.

 

[Laura Rainbow Dragon]

Basically you should be looking at exercising a lot but at a level that is well below your high-intensity threshold. This approach seems to deliver the best results.

Well, that is time-consuming but conveniently what both my body and brain seem to enjoy the most.

 

[Damer]

Following up on @Laura Rainbow Dragon excellent question on menopause (and perimenopause) and strength training I am going to add to my answer (that focused on mostly exercises as an intervention) a study that looked at the effects of creatine (note, this is a different chemical compound to creatine monohydrate, that's been researched to death pretty much) and it appears that by adding it to your diet as a daily supplement you can obtain some very positive, health outcomes both physically and mentally. It is always worth keeping in mind that the perimenopausal and menopausal states, from a biochemical point of view, may require a little adjusting and some help, to balance.

 

[TopNotch]

I thought up a question this morning and for a moment here, thought I had forgotten it, but a bit of concentration and - it's back!

Concerning strength training vs hypertrophy training. My question isn't a how-to but rather a "exactly what happens inside that makes the difference?" Is there a greater brain-muscle connection with strength training - as in, does heavy weight with low rep affect the brain differently compared to lighter weight and higher rep? I understand that if you do something different, you'll get different results (I'm not that thick!), but in this case I wonder exactly why? Or should that perhaps be better as a how? In each case, muscle gets broken down and builds up again. I'm wondering exactly what mechanism causes things to build differently.

 

[graoumia]

@Damer thanks for all your answers and the time you give us. I have a more specific question, does cramps during working out means the muscles are not strong enough? i often have some in lower abs.

 

[Damer]

@TopNotch I have been looking at a lot of recent studies that examine how the body handles load and what happens and the more I look at them the more I realize that we don't exactly know with certainty and, as our methodology and equipment continue to improve the more we are likely to know over the next 10-15 years. Having said that here's what we do know that answers your question within our current understanding on how muscles under tension work.

To help visualize this better let's consider the elements involved in strength training (that focuses on the maximum amount of force a muscle can produce) and hypertrophy (that focuses on maximizing muscle size) and the mind/body connection (which is active in both cases but in a different way). Then I'll try and bring all the elements together to better answer your question.

Breaking it all down we have the following components:

1. Muscle group (muscle fibers, circulatory system that supplies it with nutrients and removes byproducts, satellite muscles that provide stability and tendons that anchor a muscle group to a bone and are usually part of a joint)
2. Tension (the load that is being applied, how long it is being applied for, the intensity that is applied, the speed of application which in most cases - but not always- is subject to the load itself, and the rest period between intervals of applied tension)
3. Mind/body connection (the parts of the brain that send a signal to parts of the body - and they will be different in each part of the time under tension vs load equation)

In every case where the body undergoes an adaptation the underlying mechanism is largely the same:

1. A signal is sent by the body to the brain that stress (i.e. load) has been detected
2. The brain decides that the signal is strong enough and persistent enough to warrant an adaptation to occur
3. At the site of the adaptation tissue (muscles, nerves and capillaries and arteries) inflammation takes place as tissue breaks down and is rebuilt to new specifications and tolerances

As you can see even in this generic analysis, there is considerable complexity creeping in some of which will be individual-dependent. A 2021 study that looked at the differences between a strength vs hypertrophy protocol concluded (with some caveats) that both strength training and hypertrophy can occur in a range of loads without having the traditional black & white view that strength requires high loads and few repetitions and hypertrophy requires moderate loads and lots of repetitions. The range itself is somewhat imprecise and, per the study, requires some subject-dependent experimentation. This feeds into results derived from an earlier, 2019 study that showed that ultimately it's the tension that delivers he results and the load being applied, each time, is a function of that.

The best way to visualize the changes taking place is to think of muscle as an engine being asked to be remade. The brain supplies the "OK" that kick-starts the process but it's the body that will carry out the changes and those changes will be a direct response to the load it experienced. So, if the load was large but brief (i.e. strength training) the body will adapt to make it easier on itself next time.

The overall guiding mechanism the body uses here is energy expenditure. If I ask you to lift one end of your car off the ground, today, and you give it your all; you might do it but it will be really, really hard and it will take everything you have. Do it one-twice a week for a couple of weeks, give some time for rest and rebuilding and the next time you do it, though it will still feel hard it won't be as hard but the primary difference here will that your body, performing this task will burn fewer calories than before.

The same exact guiding principle applies to hypertrophy. You lift moderate load to muscle failure, the body will adapt so you can then do the exact same load and the exact same number of reps at a lower energy cost (which is why your muscles will get bigger).

So, when you're looking for the why this change happens and the how, while the precise mechanism is still a little uncertain (because it is incredibly difficult to ethically study live human bodies) the guiding force is pure thermodynamics at work (which, incidentally, guide every physical process from how blades of grass grow to how stars are formed).

This helps to also explain the differences we see in the brain/body (or mind-muscle) connection when we train for strength and when we train for hypertrophy. In every case where the body moves it does so in direct response to a signal from the brain and it is the brain that will then 'agree' t allocate resources to help the body change. I mention the importance of this in Built To Last but, in addition, a 2016 study that looked at how mental focus changes the results derived from resistance training either for strength or hypertrophy highlighted how by mentally focusing on the exercise results improved without the need for extra load (by the 'simple' mechanism of actually mentally focusing on the action itself and thereby strengthening and prioritizing the signal the brain receives from the body).

A similar and somewhat differentiated, 2018 study, employed a protocol where those performing the exercise for strength or hypertrophy focused on how the muscle worked vs on the lift itself (a differentiation between internal focusing or interoception and external or proprioception) - the results showed that internal focusing delivered better results for both groups (strength and hypertrophy) than external focusing.

Again this, I suspect, comes down to how the body perceives the load and calculates the energy cost of the exercise. The thermodynamic principles of muscle contraction are a relatively novel way of looking at physical adaptations through exercise and I am going out on an informed limb here using my own science-training as a foundation. Given, however, how the body's entire survival strategy hinges on energy conservation and the evidence we have that shows that every adaptation that takes place (leaner muscles, greater strength etc) results, within certain boundaries, in reduced energy expenditure for the exact same load that triggered those adaptations, it seems reasonable to suggest that this is the hidden mechanism behind every adaptation which, however, though it provides the same outcome (i.e. less energy expended) it does so by triggering different and movement/load specific changes (i.e. adaptations).

I hope this helps you visualize it better. Please tell me, if not.

 

[TopNotch]

Thanks for that, @Damer That really seems to emphasise the need for conscious deliberate focus on each exercise, listening carefully to the body as it is moved. I guess this would promote the idea that slower training (which gives greater opportunity for solid focus) is to be preferred over rushing through the reps (which is never a good idea anyway).
And if I'm not using so many calories any more, I may as well stop lifting my car.

 

[facuzayas]

@facuzayas I am sorry I've taken so long to get back to you. End of the month bottleneck issues in my day job. Now let's get to your questions.

Any sport that demands narrow-range repetitive movements is going to create imbalances in muscle strength, size and control and these, in turn, over time will affect posture, gait and balance. The easiest way to harmonize all this is to add running in his routine. Middle-distance (approx 5 - 6 km at a time) and a 65% - 75% pace of what he can normally do. What this does is it forces the body to harmonize how the muscles work together and in order to do that it adjusts for size and strength of all the muscle groups in the kinetic chain. I am hugely over-simplifying the process here. It involves testosterone signalling pathways and Krebs-cycle efficiencies but really it's the end result that matters. If he does that he will find that most of the issues he faces because of his job, will go away.

Non-conventional training is any kind of training, really, that increases functional strength. Swinging hammers (and kettlebells), turning over huge tires, the Darebee weapons training workouts, jumping over garden gates, etc. What all these have in common is the recruitment of several different strength, mobility and speed modalities and the focus on the body's power output instead of the strength of any particular body part. If you manage to incorporate these into your training routines by performing them at least once or twice a week in your workouts, you will notice a marked improvement in overall performance.

Where I live there is a metal gate that's about 1.2 meters high. It safeguards a path so bikes don't go through it. To get through you need to unlatch it. I make a point of jumping over it one-handed, each time. In the course of the week I will probably end up doing that (depending on the route I take to get home) 10 - 12 times. This is just an example, but in my case it allows me to incorporate this in what I do naturally without too much thinking and over the course of a year it sort of adds up, especially with everything else I do.

It always requires a little creative thinking how to add functional training like this to your workouts when you don't have a lot of extra time. If time is not an issue then once a week or so just spend a whole hour doing things like that: play around with kettebells, jump over chairs or onto plyo boxes. Do power jumps like this one:

I hope this helps.

Every time I see your responses, I wonder how much time do you have in your day hahaha. Thanks!

I told my brother that he needs to start running and making it a habit, he started yesterday and (I hope) we'll see good results!

thanks for all, I will allways have more but I want to compile them for the next AMA so I canhave all of my guns charged with questions haha

 

[Damer]

@graoumia what an excellent note to close this thread on. A muscle cramp, always is the result of nervous system dysregulation, not muscle strength deficiency. These are some of the causes of it:

• muscle fatigue
• prolonged exercise
• high-intensity workouts
• extreme weather conditions (they affect volumetric pressure in the muscles and lymphic system)
• significant electrolyte depletion

That gives you an idea on how difficult it is to tell you what is causing your abs to cramp. But basically the signal that tells them to contract gets through as you move your body and then the signal that should tell them to relax, doesn't, so they keep on contracting.

If I were you I would make a note of when this happens. You want to try and understand what you were doing when it happened and how you felt. That should, normally, tell you what is actually going on and what you need to do about it.

I really hope this helps.

 

[Damer]

The last two weeks flew by! The questions this time went deeper than ever—clear proof of how much your understanding of the mechanics and chemistry of exercise has evolved. Every thoughtful question pushed the conversation further and made this AMA truly exceptional.


Thank you for showing up, digging in, and making this space as valuable as it is. I’ll be moving everything to our Knowledge Base shortly. When you’ve got a few spare minutes, dive back in—revisit the Q&As, explore the insights, and keep building on the knowledge you’ve helped shape. Every visit adds another layer to your growth.

 

[graoumia]

Thanks