I must admit to being somewhat skeptical anytime I hear people tout “Get fit fast” systems.  Seems I am always reminded of Ben Stiller’s interaction with the hitchhiker in “There’s Something About Mary” when the topic comes up.  How low can you go?  Can’t get abs in 6 minutes, has to be 7 minutes.  7minute abs.  Thus I chuckled out loud last week when I saw the latest issue of the American College of Sports Medicine’s Health and Fitness Journal.  Front and center, the 7 minute workout.  I followed the conversation on Twitter and read Gretchen Reynold’s piece in the New York Times’ Magazine this past weekend.  Maybe they’re onto something.

Let me give you some background.  When the ACSM says something, I tend to listen.  Having been a member for over 20 years, this organization is the gold standard in fitness and exercise.  As a group they don’t cry wolf.  At last year’s national conference there were several symposia on this high idea of short, intense workouts.  They made me think.  However, my habits refused to let me change my own routine.  How could shorter workouts replace my longer ones.  No way.  What fun is it to say that I worked out for 20 minutes today?

We’ve known for years that to improve aerobic fitness one must engage in interval training, that is, short, intense bouts interspersed with more moderate bouts.   Think repeats during a track workout.  (Something I never do).  However, the latest data shows that high intensity interval training (HIIT) is not only beneficial for fitness, but has been shown to help with weight control, appetite, blood flow to the heart, and even cardiac arrhythmias.

What last week’s article in the ACSM Health and Fitness Journal demonstrates is something called high intensity circuit training (HICT), in this case using only bodyweight, a chair, and a wall.  Through 12 exercises lasting 30 seconds each, interspersed with 10 seconds of rest between, the researchers have demonstrated “many of the fitness benefits of prolonged endurance training but in much less time.”  The authors state that the intense nature of the activity causes changes at the molecular level of the muscle that mimic those seen in activity of longer duration.

Always being willing to try something before I completely rule it out, I asked my early morning workout buddy if he’d like to give it whirl.  So this morning we wrapped up our cardio session and began.  However, I had to do some pullups before starting, because I like to do pullups.  Routine.  Over the course of 7 minutes we did jumping jacks (first time in years for me), ran in place, did some push ups, step ups, lunges, and planks.  The wall sits made us wince.  Then it was done.  We were both a bit tired, but in some way, refreshed.  My friend said it was the right amount, not too much, not too little.  I enjoyed it as well.

There may have been a pulled hamstring or two along the way, but that’s just age reminding us of our limitations.  Will I stop doing my longer bouts of exercise?  Not yet.  Habits are too hard to break and for years I have been told to engage in 60 minutes per day.  I am still skeptical of how these workouts will impact my bodyweight, but nonetheless, it was something new and I enjoyed it.  I’ll think more about challenging my habits, my routines.

The other thing I don’t understand is that if there are 12 exercises, 30 seconds each, with 10 seconds of rest in between, how do they get 7 minutes?  Seems more like 8 to me.  Nobody said physiologists were good at math.  But we should be.

The best and most fascinating studies for me are the simple ones.  I don’t want to know the genome of the brain, someone does, but not me.  I want to know why I eat and why I exercise.  More practical and applicable to my daily life than know the DNA of my left parietal lobe.  If indeed I have one of those.

Last week in Boston the annual Experimental Biology Conference took place.  This annual event gathers leaders from a diverse set of fields, including nutrition, to discuss the cutting edges of their disciplines.  I was thrilled that the study entitled, “Menu labels displaying amount of exercise needed to burn calories show benefits” was one that the New York Times chose to highlight earlier this week.  Out of all the amazing research presented, why we eat the way we do and ways to stop it grabbed the headlines.  Progress.

A small provision of the Affordable Health Care Act states that restaurant chains of more than 20 outlets must display the calorie content of their foods.  This is welcome news, however, how many of us know what that number means or even care? Calories in a McDonalds Double Quarter Pounder with Cheese?  750 big ones.  ”Wow, that seems to be quite a few,” we think immediately before taking off a bite.  The issue with calorie counts and nutritional content is that the information is not salient to us, it is not meaningful.  Most know that high calories may want to be avoided, but even that is relative.  Enter the present study.

Researchers at Texas Christian University tracked what people ordered and what they actually consumed as a result of ordering from three different menu options.  The food items listed on the menus were identical with one exception:  one menu simply listed the food, another listed calories next to the food, and the third listed how long one would have to briskly walk if they ordered and consumed each food.  Now we’re talking.  Threaten people with exercise and watch them change their behavior.

When ordering from menus that listed how much brisk walking would be needed to burn off the consumed calories individuals ordered and ate significantly less calories when compared to the other two conditions.  There was no difference in calories ordered or consumed when comparing menus with and without calorie counts.

This isn’t to say that menus with calories listed are meaningless.  To some this information is useful, to others it is simply a moment for pause.  However, exercise is salient, people can relate to walking.  When you see a sirloin steak you want and next to it reads “You will have to walk briskly for 60 minutes” in order to burn those consumed calories behavior seems to change.

Take home message:  if we want to get people to change their behavior around food and exercise, the information we share with them must be relevant.  This information cannot be abstract, like calorie counts.  That Double Quarter Pounder with Cheese?  Go walk for two hours and get back to me.

How long will did I have to walk after I consumed last weekend’s birthday desserts?  Way too long.  And that means something to me.

How would you respond if I asked, “Why do you exercise?”  Would you pause and ponder?  Would you say “because it feels good”?  Or would it be something along the lines of “I exercise to extend my life”?  Most of the responses I have been given over the years fall into two general categories, those of “Because I am training for something” and “I want to lose weight.”  Rarely do people respond that they exercise to extend their lives.  This may be a thought in the back of their minds, especially if, for example, a family member has been diagnosed with heart disease and their is a strong family history of this condition.

This thought of heard disease lurks in the back of my mind as both maternal grandparents died due to heart disease and my mother has a few heart issues over the years.  I also think about the Alzheimer’s my father battles.  Will my exercise help stave off both?  In the far reaches of my mind, I hope so.  However, if I am honest with myself, this is not what drives me to exercise.  My drive comes from a lifelong battle with weight.  This battle is what most likely led me to my profession and my interest in why we eat.  Yet more on the surface, this battle is the force behind my exercise patterns.  Exercise does make me feel good, I get down without it.  I like to practice what I preach and it is easier to encourage others when you actively take part.

These were my thoughts as I saw the question posed to Gretchen Reynolds this week in the New York Times:  If I do 30 minutes of cardio exercise six days a week, would increasing it to 60 minutes a day be twice as good for me?  Her response intrigued me.  The answer all depends on the definition of “good.”

In her response, Ms. Reynolds, whom I enjoy reading and have high respect for, focused on lifespan as the definition of good.  Studies are cited that state those exercising moderately live just as long as those who exercise obsessively.  Bump your workout from 15 minutes a day to 30 minutes a day and you only see a 4% increase in lifespan.  So it would seem doubling your workout time doesn’t give you much bang for you buck.

However, is there another way to look at it?  Double your workout time from 30 to 60 minutes and you will burn more calories, perhaps leading to more meaningful weight loss provided you don’t eat more (we will present work out of our lab next month at the American College of Sports Medicine Meeting that shows when people exercise vigorously, they overestimate their calorie expenditure by nearly 20%, thus the idea of eating too much when you exercise more).  You’ll also simply move more and sit less.  And we know how important moving, even just standing, is.

So it all depends on the definition of “good.”  Why do I exercise?  So I can eat more and maintain an edge in my battle with weight.  Why do most people exercise?  Weight related responses reign supreme.  Perhaps by taking an active role in our health and moving as much as we can, we gain something more that immeasurable increases in lifespan.

Perhaps it’s my great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great grandparents fault that at times I am not motivated to exercise.  Perhaps it is my ancestor’s gift that I battle that amotivation and continue to exercise.  Why some people choose to be active and others choose not be is the never-ending question in my discipline.  One can be given a fantastic exercise program to follow, can even hire someone to guide you through it.  Yet, if we are unmotivated and choose not to do it, the program is no good.

Gretchen Reynolds, early this week in the New York Times, highlighted a fun study on motivation and exercise.  Albeit it rats a telling story is told.  Rats were put in a cage with a wheel and their activity was tracked for one week.  The most active females and males were bred together, as were the most inactive varieties.  This was repeated through ten generations.  The end product were a set of rats that loved to exercise and a set that loved to sit.  The exercising rats ran ten times as much as the couch potatoes.

Then the dissection began.

Surprisingly, the two groups of rats did not differ much in body composition (muscle and fat) and the lazy rats were only a touch heavier.  The differences lay in the genes:

“The scientists compared the activity of thousands of genes in a specific portion of the brain that controls reward behavior, or the motivation to do things because they’re enjoyable.  They found dozens of genes that differed between the two groups.  The rats’ decision to run or not to run, in other words, was being driven, at least in part, by the genetics of motivation.”

Wow.  Thanks great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great grandpa, you gave me the will to succeed.  Or at least the will to fight.

Those that came before us impact us.  In a powerful way.  We know this.  This can be a blessing and a curse.  We shouldn’t look backwards and say it’s their fault we don’t exercise, although tempting.  Rather, in our unmotivated moments, we should challenge them and say, “Here we go!”

The genetics of motivation.  Fascinating stuff.

Happy Friday.

 

Earlier this week the Centers for Disease Control released a news brief detailing a surprising decline in calories consumed by our children.  For boys calorie intake dropped 7% to an average of 2,100 calories per day and for girls, a 4% drop to 1,755 calories per day.  I am not an expert in pediatric nutrition but those calories counts still seemed rather high.

I checked into the CDC data base for Stature-for-age and Weight-for-age percentiles.  You can do the same here:

CDC Stature and Weight for Age Tables

I found the 50th percentile of height and weight for an 8 year old boy.  This yields a 55 lb boy who is about 4’2 in height.  From this data I then tried to determine how  many calories are recommended.  There are numerous sites out there that give calorie data for kids, however, I wanted a reputable one and settled on the Baylor College of Medicine Healthy Eating Calculator.  Baylor is well known for its Children’s Nutrition Research Center.

Entering my 4’2, 55 lb, 8 year old version of myself I was then asked to pick an activity level.  (For a moment I reveled in the idea of being 55 lbs when I was 8.  As far as I can tell, the last time I was 55 lbs was birth.)  I chose a moderate activity level, defined as about 1 hour of activity per day.  At this level of activity, and given the above stats, my 8 year old self was told to consume 1,899 calories per day. Not too far off from the CDC reported average of 2,100 calories per day.  However, the catch is that activity level.  Our kids today are not active.  By choosing less than 1 hour of activity per day, my allotted calories dropped to 1,663 per day, and when I chose not active at all, a mere 1,427 calories was given to me.  Children tend to be more active around the age of 8, however, by the time they are 15 the average child gets 49 minutes of moderate to vigorous activity per day, and only 35 minutes on the weekends.

Let’s assume that moderate activity level and take our roughly 1,900 calories.  On average, my 8 year olds self is consuming 2,100 calories.  This represents and imbalance and over time can lead to weight gain.  Habits start young.  We need to help our children make good food choices and encourage them to be active.  Eat less, move more.

My thoughts are with Boston, the running community, and all those impacted by yesterday’s tragic events.  As a friend shared yesterday, “Running is such an innocent sport.”  Her words stick with me this morning.  Why do we run?  We run for health.  We run for quiet.  We run for the solitude and the social.  We run fast.  We run slow.  We run for the silent calm it brings us as our heart and breath pound.  There is something peaceful about running.  Why do we run?  We run for the joy.

That joy was put on hold yesterday as we wrap our minds around the events unfolding at the Boston Marathon.  We will find that joy again.

Yesterday proved challenging indeed. The food stared, I ignored. The food screamed, I ignored. The food throw a tantrum, I ate. For the most part I was successful in meeting my challenge of not overeating during my meeting, however, there were moments. In laying out my challenge here yesterday I definitely felt the pressure of not eating so as to avoid having to take a picture and be held accountable. Maybe that is what I should do each day: take pictures of all food consumed. Ignoring the food was a challenge as it literally talks to me. At times it was hard to focus and when others grabbed a snack I wanted to and sometimes did. The power of the environment. So, as promised here is my day in photos (with apologies to size and formatting):

Walking into the conference room I had to giggle, here is the sign on the door:

20130330-081353.jpg

Have to love a group of exercise professionals that ignore rules from the get go.

Onward, here is the table as it started its day:

20130330-081525.jpg

Noting terribly daunting other than the fact it was simply there.

Onto snack #1, where one of the meeting organizers passed out chocolate covered espresso beans:

20130330-081718.jpg

A couple of cups of nuts. Come on, it’s a strength and conditioning meeting, I had to keep up with my colleagues on the protein front:

20130330-081813.jpg

20130330-081835.jpg

Went for a higher healthiness score, banana:

20130330-081947.jpg

This brought me to noon, and the table went on steroids. Panera was brought in and laid out before us. Sandwiches, salads, and cookies, galore. I found myself think big, “I’ve been pretty good all morning, therefore I can splurge at lunch. Need to figure out how to combat the thoughts of being good = later binge:

20130330-082212.jpg

And my lunch:

20130330-082240.jpg

With an extra cook

20130330-082308.jpg

The afternoon proved successful with only an apple creeping in to get me. Easy to rationalize that one:

20130330-082402.jpg

So there you have it, my meeting food in pictures. The day proved interesting as I felt pretty good about my choices (save the extra cookie at lunch), yet I did find the conversations in my head instructive. By suggesting to myself I met the challenge of ignoring most of the food, I found myself being consumed by thoughts of my rewards. Pun intended.

Happy Saturday. Ten more hours of staring at the table for me.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 133 other followers

%d bloggers like this: