76 – Training Frequency, High Intensity Training, And Training Protocols Over A Lifetime – Andy Galpin PhD

Comments

1. Kamen Stranchevski says

   September 1, 2017 at 7:42 am

   Hi Lawrence, Big thanks to You, again for your great job and effort to bring fair, sensible and useful information and discussion on all topics and aspects of exercise an science!
   Listening at the last several podcasts, I’d like to share some of my conclusions both theoretical and practical application changes from my personal perspective and my personal way of training.
   My current routine (1 workout 7-10 days/ 1 STF/ 5-6 exercises per session):
   Week one:
   1. Shoulder front press (machine/dumbells);
   2. Row;
   3. Chest press;
   4. Machine leg curls;
   5. Calves presses on a leg press;
   Week two:
   1. Chin ups (weighted);
   2. Dips (weighted);
   3. Quads – Leg-press/Leg extention/Super slow bodyweight squats (any cominations for superset);
   4. Hyperextentions;
   6. Crunch.
   According to my experience so far and some key points from the recent interviews, my notes are:
   1. It is not necessary to do each exercise for each muscle group every workout. Important is to do all the necessary planes of loading (say chest and back) at some point, needed are exercises for all major muscle groups at least, but it is not necessary every time you do back for example do both chins, rows, ext’s etc.
   2. Brief/ultra brief sessions have their Biggest merits in keeping overall system fatigue in check and Saving your time;
   3. Quality of exercise is Far more important than quantity;
   4. In terms of Investment/Return value, and Safety, HIT has no real competition, when exercise is concerned (not sports or specific practice)

   So for My program listed above, what may be changed and deliver a Meaningful effect according to my understanding will be:
   1. Do regular changes in used exercise for muscle group (say chest press – flat, incline, push ups…dumbells…), exercise order/ supersetting and/or rest pause(again purely for change of demand)…
   2. May be usefull to split weekly volume (even very modest already) in order to do two sessions and to “push the gas” more frequently system-wise for all possible benefits as protein syntesis, system adaptation…bla bla bla. So for example program may be modified like:
   Week one/Day one:
   1. Shoulder front press (machine/dumbells);
   2. Row;
   Week one/Day two:
   3. Chest press;
   4. Machine leg curls;
   5. Calves presses on a leg press;
   Same goes for week 2 and so on….

   All the Best: Kamen

   Reply

2. Kamen Stranchevski says

   September 1, 2017 at 8:14 am

   And, just to add, that with this type of esercise routine, I do not expect to be fast runner or marathon runner, or weightlifter or good tennis player… I do expect to look and feel good, to have time for my family and friends and life outside the gyms, to be productive and energetic at work… Even thogh this summer I gave a good lesson to some much younger crossfit guys form my local gym, making comments on my brief exercise sessions, with regards to my overall fitness. Being an ex swimmer untill end of highschool, this summer I cought them at a swimming pool and left them deeply troubled by the fact, that a much older person, who had not been swimming for the last 20 years, who even smokes cigartes form time to time, kicks their but in a “cardio activity” very very badly :))))

   Reply

3. Kamen Stranchevski says

   September 1, 2017 at 9:17 am

   Thanks, Lawrence,
   I forgot to answer what are are the downsides of HIT in my opinion. I can think of two major ones…
   1. Acc. to me, one has to be very concentrated and knowledgeable in order to make best use of HIT OR to have a trainer/parthner to guide/supervise him during sessions. After so many years of training I still need to remind myself almost everytime when entering the gym, what is the real objective of exercise, what is good form and what is necessary effort. Fact is, that HIT is very hard to be practiced by majority of people on their own, as far as form and effort is concerned. So in other words less is more BUT only if understood and done right.
   2. Another “downside” with regards to publicity of HIT seems to be the lack of a big number of super outstanding, popular (I mean huge bodybuilder eye catching) physiques among the HIT trainees. As I see it, HIT is being practiced mostly by naturals and this is part of this situation. Funny how may be even Mike Mentzer got it this way, as he reportedly(in a recent podcast this got mentioned), was buying some substances in a parking lot in order to get in extremely good shape and to be a better advertisement of HIT himself. Or as Jay Vincent recently mentioned in his podcast, he did not sell the great physique idea to potential customers, but as a matter of a fact he got most clicks on his website, once he posted picture of himself dowing a pulldowns, showing muscle :)))
   And of course it makes little sense, to use pure HIT if you’re juiced anyway. So this discrepancy kind of falls in the “downsides”cathegory of the HIT method, at least as public eye is concerned.

   Reply

   • Thomas says

     September 2, 2017 at 4:15 am

     BBS style HIT and serious bodybuilding are two very different things and shouldn’t be conflated imo. In the first you do the minimum necessary to grow. The latter requires doing the most possible while still recovering.

     Kamen, your first point is a huge limitation in that it virtually requires having a trainer for most people, and most people will not get a trainer. For those training without a trainer, using a somewhat higher volume and frequency with less intensity might be a better approach.

     Reply

     • Kamen Stranchevski says

       September 2, 2017 at 9:09 am

       Hi Thomas, I hope that I am understood correctly. What I mean as point one, is actually valid for all training programs or protocols. The effort put in the exercises, keeping best form etc. requires serious mental focus. It is hard to be consistent, at least for majority of people. My experience shows this 100%. It is always better if you have being supported or supervised by a knowedgeable partner or trainer. I meant that if you train alone, it only makes it much more challenging to stay focused on your real objectives. I’ve trained many peple myself and almost every time workout with me is by FAR better, compared to their sessions alone.
       Regarding HIT in particular, for many folks it seems that one set will do instead of 5 end of story. But that obviously is not the case. And in this sense, there is constant trend in my opinion to adapt to something (exercise, routine etc.), even on subconscious level. For example if you are constantly looking for improvement of TUL/Weight, you are setting yourself up for failing your main objective – to train with max effort, but in best possible form, without deloading muscle, sand bagging …so forth. And this often happens unnoticed by the trainee, despite best intentions. That’s why I keep repeating myself some advise, I’ve got from experts on this podcast – Let the increase of TUL/Weight be a side effect, rather than persuated outcome of an execise (Dr. Mc Guff); Be honest with yourself (David Landau); Do various exercises (perfect form and full effort), so you will not have to bother each time about improving the weight/tul performance on a given exercise (Brian Johnston interview) and still get a great workout.

       Reply

       • Thomas says

         September 2, 2017 at 1:49 pm

         Kamen, modern HIT dogma has taken the importance of rep performance to new heights (and thus the most extreme modern iterations of “the real objective”) making having a trainer with special equipment almost a necessity. The rules are therefore written and tend to be defended by referring back to those rules, not evidence. Minus certain circumstances, the hyper-focus on rep performance is overkill imo.

         Reply

         • Kamen Stranchevski says

           September 2, 2017 at 5:41 pm

           Thomas, never meant to sound dogmatic, emphasis is not on trainer,neither on special equipment… Fact is though, that most people are largely ignorant about rep technique, muscle strenght curves, range of motion, joint and muscle function and exercise selection, recovery… I train alone 99% of the time, I have been training with weights for over 20 years and am not a trainer, but I recognise how things get sloppy very fast and that everybody can use some good explanation, advise, supervision. To learn and understand, to be able to and to actually practice something are three different things.

           Reply

4. Richard Chartrand says

   September 1, 2017 at 10:09 am

   Kind of lost me with stating bbs wouldn’t train power or speed. But the more frequency but less intensity is food for thought. I get calluses from playing guitar frequently. And I tan from frequent sun. (Remember Mentzer analogy for calluses or sunburns). Volume, frequency and intensity. HIT emphasizes intensity while deemphasizing the other two. Perhaps varying means changing that up. In investing, a parralel might be potential return vs volatility vs liquidity. In both case you can’t have all 3, so you choose what to emphasize based on your goals and or just to mix it up.

   Reply

5. Rob H says

   September 1, 2017 at 4:05 pm

   Hi Andy/ Lawrence, Great interview – some really useful practical points raised. Just curious on one point though: you called out Brad Schoenfeld for being ‘short-sighted’ for not stating that nutrient timing is most certainly crucial after fasting – but from the discussion section from his paper which you link to, Brad and Alan write: “Despite claims that immediate post-exercise nutritional intake is essential to maximize hypertrophic gains, evidence-based support for such an “anabolic window of opportunity” is far from definitive. The hypothesis is based largely on the pre-supposition that training is carried out in a fasted state. During fasted exercise, a concomitant increase in muscle protein breakdown causes the pre-exercise net negative amino acid balance to persist in the post-exercise period despite training-induced increases in muscle protein synthesis [36]. Thus, in the case of resistance training after an overnight fast, it would make sense to provide immediate nutritional intervention–ideally in the form of a combination of protein and carbohydrate–for the purposes of promoting muscle protein synthesis and reducing proteolysis, thereby switching a net catabolic state into an anabolic one. Over a chronic period, this tactic could conceivably lead cumulatively to an increased rate of gains in muscle mass.” To be honest, it is a bit difficult to miss that, so I was wondering why you made the point stating the opposite?

   Reply

6. Scott says

   September 1, 2017 at 8:10 pm

   Lawrence,
   Have you heard of the Boise experiment. Its basically two guys following Mike Mentzer’s latest book for 60 days. Results were pretty impressive and they documented each day.

   Reply

7. Thomas says

   September 2, 2017 at 3:55 am

   Nice job, LN, with this interview. I haven’t listened to all of your interviews (especially lately, there’s so many) but Dr. Galpin might have been the most antagonistic sounding interview you’ve done. Having said that, great interview with some very good info. It’s great to get someone else in there to break down some of the HIT dogma. With that, I am positive that most people do HIT because it is very doable for the average person, not because it delivers the absolute best results. Essentially, it’s good enough for most/reasonable return on investment.

   Reply

8. Tom Church says

   September 3, 2017 at 6:18 pm

   Great episode. It’s nice to hear different opinion raising issues not thought of before such as foot speed!

   Reply