Ballistics Lunge Activates Muscle to the Same Extent as 34% Lighter Standardlift, Elastic Band & DBs Target Different Muscles. Plus: 10 Arguments for Explosives & Plyometrics

Lunge with resistant bands as it was done in the study (Jakobsen. 2013)

The paper the Danish researchers Jakobsen, Sundstrup, C.H. Andersen, Aagaard and L. Andersen are about to publish in one of the forthcoming issues of Human Movement Science is not the first certainly won't be the last study on explosive training (more) and plyometrics (more) you have and still will read about, here at the SuppVersity. And while I am not sure whether you would say that it is the most exciting one, I am pretty convinced that you will be inclined to hear how different rep-speeds (ballistic=explosive vs. normal) effected the EMG activity during a full-body exercise like lunges with different loads and equipment (dumbbells vs. resistant band).

Before we start, just a brief reminder for all of you who have not read the SuppVersity EMG series as of now. If you want to know the "best" exercises to target specific muscle groups, I'd suggest you make a detour to all or just those body parts you are interested in by clicking on the respective image in the "navigation" below:

Chest	Biceps	Back	Core	Legs	Triceps	Shoulders
Navigate the SuppVersity EMG Series - Click on the desired body part to see the optimal exercises.

Apropos, lunges were (unfortunately) not among the exercises the researches tested in the study the EMG series is based on. I personally consider them extraordinary valuable for whole leg development, and have to caution you that comparing squats to lunges on EMG basis is somewhat like comparing different types of red using black and white photos, because one of the main and in my humble opinion probably the most important argument against the significance of EMG measurements is that they tend to increase with the degree of weight you can move - this puts lunges in as much into a somewhat disadvantaged position as flys as a chest exercise and could lead to the misunderstanding that it would be better to perform 10 sets of squats than 5 sets of 5 for squats and 4 sets 10 for lunges as a legworkout. Especially if your goal is skeletal muscle hypertrophy, the latter is usually (you know there are no black-and-white solutions) the far superior choice.

Same activation with less load = training economy

That being said, the results of the Jakobsen study do still have their merit. After all, they clearly show that doing explosive or ballistic movements can provide diversion and new growth stimuli especially on those "auxilliary" exercises like lunges. In that, the lower overall weight can even come very handy as it should effectively reduce the risk of injury, which is - let's be honest - a very good argument not to do max. squats in a ballistic fashion, at all.

Figure 2: Normalized EMG activity during lunges with elastic bands and dumbbells (Jakobsen. 2013)

In fact, the EMG measurements, the scientists took while their subjects, 42 subjects (18 men, 24 women; age 41/45 years, BMI 24/25m²/kg, respectively), performed unilateral lunges with their dominant / preferred leg using either elastic bands or dumbbells (see image at the top of this article) to adjust the resistance, do actually confirm that training explosively, i.e. performing the lunge movement as fast as possible (ballistic contractions) does provide an increased contractive stimulus (Desmedt. 1977; Frost. 2008; Sakamoto. 2013), which will allow you to ellicit almost identical EMG activity as during controlled reps at a rep-speed of ~3s per rep with 34% less weight. Or as Jakobsen et al. have it:

"[...] ballistic lunges performed with high speed at medium loadings showed broadly similar EMG amplitudes as that seen during slower controlled speeds with high loading." (Jakobsen. 2013)

Furthermore, the "high-speed lunges" obviously took less time and reduced the effective workout time by 23%. Now, while this could be an advantage on days where you have only a very limited time-window to train the researchers argue that this will lead to an overall reduction in time under tension and thus training volume and should - depending on your training goals (my addition) - be compensated by increasing the training volume during power training by ~23 "to  achieve the same accumulated time under tension" (e.g. doing 10 instead of just 8 reps per set).

"Wait, there is something else: What about those hilarious resistance bands?"

Actually, the benefits of explosive/ballistic training are yet only one out of two interesting findings of the study at hand, after all it's likewise interesting to see how the use of those often derided resistance bands effected the EMG activity and other training parameters. So let's see, compared to lunges done with isoinertial loading (=dumbbells)...

• lunges with elastic bands showed an overall higher EMG activity, which also resulted in a slightly but significantly higher level of perceived loading on the Borg CR10 scale
• training with resistance bands elicited higher EMG activity in knee and hip extensor muscles (vastus lateralis, vastus medialis, rectus femoris, gluteus maximus) and during the more flexed knee joint positions (i.e., in the reversal phase)
• performing lunges with resistance bands added an non-linear element to the actual resistance, with the "training load" increasing exponentially as the trainees approached the extended knee joint position 
• doing lungs with elastic resistance resulted in higher levels of erector spinae and gluteus activity and was more posterior kinetic chain-dominant, which means that they were characterized by higher levels of hamstring, gluteus and erector spinae activity 

The reasons for these differences are actually of biomechanical nature and the outcomes will probably change, if you used the bands differently. So, yes, wrapping the bands around your back / posterior shoulders will be necessary; and yes, only if you use bands similar to the close loop elastic 41 inch bands  (Iron Woody, MT, USA) the scientists used in the study will allow for identical effects (this obviously doesn't mean that you cannot do it with whatever other band you have grabbing them with your hands, but specifically the posterior kinetic chan-dominance is probably not going to be that pronounced if you do that. Why? Because you will miss the anterior pull from the distal attachment of the band below the leading foot, from where it runs to the contralateral shoulder - a pull of which Jakobsen and his colleagues argue that it ...

"[...] creates the need for generating a high net hip extensor moment. In result [...] gluteus, erector spinae and hamstring muscle activity seemed to be elevated in lunges using elastic resistance indicating an effective targeting of the hip and spinal extensor muscles throughout the range of motion." (Jakobsen. 2013)

Done the "right" way, lunges with appropriately selected elastic exercise bands (not the ones you get bundled with Kellog's Special K, or whatever ;-) can therefore be a very effective tool for thigh, hip and back development, and can - with more flexible bands - used as "an ideal exercise modality for the rehabilitation and prophylactic prevention of musculoskeletal disorders" (Jakobson. 2013).

10 scientific pieces of evidence to built a case for explosive training

If the Jakobsen study ain't enough to convince you to spend at least a couple of minutes thinking about whether or not explosive training or plyometrics (which is basically explosive training with body weight exercises) could make a valuable adjunct to your current training regimen the following 10 studies may put you in the right way:

• How can you easily implement explosive training into your current routine? There are obviously a million of ways you can implement plyometrics and explosive exercises, but if you simply wanted to incorporate them on a strength training day, as an additional, different training stimulus, the protocol the researchers in the PGC-1 α-4 study (see The IGF-1 up- & myostatin down - regulator) looks actually as if it was worth copying. This would mean that you start out with a ballistic movement (B), head into a strength part (S) and then finish up with a hypertrophy exercise (H).
  
  For leg day this could look like this: (B) 3 sets of ballistic lunges - 10-12 reps, use 66% of 10RM; (S) 5 sets of 5 reps on the leg press or in the squat rack (I suggest the leg press because it's less injury prone with really high weights), stop 1 rep away from failure; (H) 4 sets of 10 reps of deep barbell squats a 10RM + regular calf training.
  
  Obviously, this is just one way and not the way: You can also do a plyometrics only circle training or do a couple of sets of plyos + a LISS session on a separate day, etc.
  
  Be creative! Test your ideas and see how you feel, but don't simply add them on top of an already overcrowded workout!
  You can safely combine classic resistance training with explosive lifting without hampering the performance in one or another (Brandenburg. 2005)
• The addition of explosive training and high-resistance interval training to the programs of already well-trained cyclists improve exercise efficiency and anaerobic threshold and thus produce major gains in sprint and endurance performance (Paton. 2005)
• If you want to improve your 1-RM max, doing a low volume (2 reps) set of explosive push ups, or  2 medicine-ball (3 to 5 kg) chest passes 30s before the actual lift can help (Wilcox. 2006)
• Complex training, i.e. combination of heavy lifting and explosives yields higher performance gains than heavy lifting and plyometrics, alone, across all age groups (20, 40, 60y; cf. Dodd. 2007)
• Explosive resistance training is safe and well tolerated in healthy women even in the eighth decade of life and elicits adaptive neuromuscular changes in selected physiological variables that are commonly associated with the risk of falls and disability in aged individuals (Caserotti. 2008)
• Explosive plyometrics sessions comprising maximal unilateral countermovement jumps (CMJs), calf and squat plyometric jumps, and short sprints are as effective as shuttle runs in improving maximal running speed in young elite soccer players (Buchheit. 2010)
• Pimping a regular soccer training with two plyometrics session per week makes it more effective in building general athletic performance (Chelly. 2010)
• Plyometrics are safe for young children (5-14y) and beginning at 50-60 jumps a session and increasing exercise load weekly results in the largest changes in running and jumping performance (Johnson. 2011)
• Explosive isometric contractions induce neural and mechanical adaptations leading to large increases in maximum voluntary force production esp. during the early phase of a movement (50ms, +54%; cf. Tillin. 2013)
• When adjusted to absolute force production, the evoked capacity of the knee extensors for explosive force production and the ability to utilize that capacity during explosive voluntary contractions is similar for males and females (Hannah. 2013)

Bottom line: I guess with the concluding review that obviously raises no claim to completeness it should be clear that the complementation of, yet not (necessarily) the replacement of classic strength & hypertrophy training with plyometrics or explosive lifting with relatively low weight constitutes an effective means to increase the neuronal activation and thus exponentiate subsequent strength and muscle gains.

The Jack-of-All-Traits Leg Workout from the Sáez de Villarreal study I discussed on July 15, 2013, would also be something you may want to look into if you need some inspiration for your own routine.

You should be aware, though that despite the fact that plyometrics and light load explosive lifting do not put a similar strain on your body as the standard high intensity high volume BB routines and will thus probably require less time to recuperate, their incorporation into your routine will make it necessary to cut back on the overall volume of the rest of the exercises (I assume you will up your reps on the plyos anyway, so the total time under tension wouldn't be an issue). Whether you decide to replace a HIIT or regular cardio workout with a longer full body plyometric workout, or doing one exercise less during a hypertrophy specific strength workout in order to make room for additional plyometrics (see example workout to learn how that could look like) is up to you and depends on your current goals and training status.


References:

• Buchheit M, Mendez-Villanueva A, Delhomel G, Brughelli M, Ahmaidi S. Improving repeated sprint ability in young elite soccer players: repeated shuttle sprints vs. explosive strength training. J Strength Cond Res. 2010 Oct;24(10):2715-22.
• Brandenburg JP. The acute effects of prior dynamic resistance exercise using different loads on subsequent upper-body explosive performance in resistance-trained men. J Strength Cond Res. 2005 May;19(2):427-32.
• Caserotti P, Aagaard P, Larsen JB, Puggaard L. Explosive heavy-resistance training in old and very old adults: changes in rapid muscle force, strength and power. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2008 Dec;18(6):773-82.
• Chelly MS, Ghenem MA, Abid K, Hermassi S, Tabka Z, Shephard RJ. Effects of in-season short-term plyometric training program on leg power, jump- and sprint performance of soccer players. J Strength Cond Res. 2010 Oct;24(10):2670-6. 
• Desmedt JE, Godaux E. Ballistic contractions in man: Desmedt JE, Godaux E. Ballistic contractions in man: characteristic recruitment pattern of single motor units of the tibialis anterior muscle. J Physiol. 1977 Jan;264(3):673-93.
• Dodd DJ, Alvar BA. Analysis of acute explosive training modalities to improve lower-body power in baseball players. J Strength Cond Res. 2007 Nov;21(4):1177-82. 
• Frost DM, Cronin JB, Newton RU. A comparison of the kinematics, kinetics and muscle activity between pneumatic and free weight resistance. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2008 Dec;104(6):937-56.
• Hannah R, Minshull C, Buckthorpe MW, Folland JP. Explosive neuromuscular performance of males versus females. Exp Physiol. 2013 May;97(5):618-29. 
• Jakobsen MD, Sundstrup E, Andersen CH, Aagaard P, Andersen LL. Muscle activity during leg strengthening exercise using free weights and elastic resistance: Effects of ballistic vs controlled contractions. Hum Mov Sci. 2013 Dec 8.
• Johnson BA, Salzberg CL, Stevenson DA. A systematic review: plyometric training programs for young children. J Strength Cond Res. 2011 Sep;25(9):2623-33.
• Paton CD, Hopkins WG. Combining explosive and high-resistance training improves performance in competitive cyclists. J Strength Cond Res. 2005 Nov;19(4):826-30. 
• Sakamoto A, Sinclair PJ. Muscle activations under varying lifting speeds and intensities during bench press. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2013 Mar;112(3):1015-25.
• Tillin NA, Pain MT, Folland JP. Short-term training for explosive strength causes neural and mechanical adaptations. Exp Physiol. 2013 May;97(5):630-41.
• Wilcox J, Larson R, Brochu KM, Faigenbaum AD. Acute explosive-force movements enhance bench-press performance in athletic men. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2006 Sep;1(3):261-9.

Science Round-Up Seconds: Vitamin E Succinate, How It's Extracted from Barley Leaves, Kills Cancer, Ramps up Growth Hormone & Spikes Prolactin. Plus: Testostosterone & Thyroid Hormone Decline Due To Plyometrics & HIIT

Regardless of all the hypocritical hoopla around his persona, Lance Armstrong has always been able to push himself like no one else. No wonder that intense plyometrics were part of his regimen.

If the SuppVersity Science Round Up was a meal, I guess you could say that Carl Lanore and I were sort of gluttonous, yesterday (click here to download the podcast, if you have not already done so). We almost raced from one topic to another and therefore all the good stuff from the list is gone already and I am a bit pressed on time to get some "private life" in, so that I am not psyched about the idea of writing about auxiliary stuff.

Against that background and in view of the fact that I felt that the pace of yesterday's show did not really leave enough room for some important details, I will stick to rehashing and expanding on the stories about Vitamin E succcinate and the detrimental effects of beating the crap out of yourself doing plyometrics or crazy HIIT workouts (too regularly), in today's installment of the SuppVersity Science Round-Up Seconds.

Let's see. Why don't we start at the end of yesterday's show?

• Vitamin E succinate the most potent anti-cancer tocopherol known to man. As you have heard on the show, vitamin E succinate attaches directly to a protein that's preferentially expressed in carcinogenic or pre-carcinogenic cells. It goes by the name α-Tocopherol-associated protein (TAP) and was found to be one of the major α-tocopherol binding proteins in serum, liver, brain and prostate. What has as of yet not been so clear, though, is that the expression of this protein increases with the malignancy of (breast) cancer (Tam. 2013). 
  
  

  

  Figure 1: Effects of alpha tocoperyl succinate alone (TOS), doxorubicin alone (DOX) or both (DOX + TOS) on cell viability in human MB231 breast cancer cells (my edits, original from Tam. 2013) - note: The effect was less pronounced in other cancer cells, so that it is reasonable to assume that the efficacy of the therapy will depend on the exact genotype of the cancer (for those tested in the study it was MB231 > SKBR3 > MCF 10A)

  When alpha tocopherol succinate binds to the protein on the cancer cells, this will either alone, or in combination with chemotherapy trigger apoptosis and cell death. It is as of yet not fully elucidated why vitamin E succinate is highly cancer-specific and leaves the healthy cells intact, but this could be related to the high metabolic rate and exuberant ROS production of cancer cells. There is however some research that would suggest that the cancer cells literally suffocate in their own radical oxygen specimen (ROS), which can no longer be cleared from the cell, due to the alpha-tocopheryl succinate induced displacement of ubiquinone from CII and the subsequent blockade of succinate dehydrogenase (SDH) activity (Dong. 2013).  If this hypothesis holds true it would therefore appear that long-term chronic supplementation with vitamin E succinate cannot be recommended until future studies on its general safety have been undertaken. As an adjuvant to chemotherapy, on the other hand, it could drastically reduce the dosage requirements during chemotherapy in specific types of cancer (see figure 1) and thus minimize side effects.
  
  You see, there is more to it than you can say in two minutes on the radio and this is why I will make sure we don't rush through the items that fast, in the next show. Ah,... of course the dietary source. I had almost forgotten about that one. As mentioned on the show, alpha tocopheryl succinate was originally extracted from Barley leaves. An while this may not be the first paper dealing with this "natural vitamin E analog", the one by Badamchian et al. is probably the one you will be most interested in.
  
  Published in the Journal of Nutritional Biochemistry the paper does not only describe the isolation of vitamin E succinate from green barley leaf extract (BLE)...
  

  "BLE [barley leaf extract] powder (50 mg/mL) was suspended in water and stirred for 1 hr at room temperature. The mixture was then centrifuged at 3000g for 30 minutes using a bench-top centrifuge. The pellet was discarded and the supernatant was pre-filtered through a Millipore DEPTH filter. The filtrate was then filtered through 0.45 I.tM mem- brane and stored at -20 ° C for HPLC or biological assays." (Badamchian. 1999)

  ... it does also shine another spotlight on its potential biological effects, as far as it's ability to increase growth hormone, but (unfortunately?) also prolactin in isolated anterior pituitary cells from female rodents:
  

  

  Figure 2: Prolactin and growth hormone release in anterior pituitary cells of female rodents after incubation with different amounts of green barley extract in which vitamin E succinate had been deterimed as the main ingredient before (based on Badamchian. 1999)

  It's really hard to estimate whether or not one of these effects would translate from a rodent cell in the petri dish to you or me popping a cap with vitamin E succinate everyday. That's particularly true in view of the fact that the underlying mechanism of the increase in GH and the imho more concerning increase in prolactin is neither mediated by increases in intracellular C-AMP, as it would be the case for GRF (old acronym for growth hormone releasing hormone), nor is it induced by the hydrolysis of polyhoshpoinositide, which is the underlying mechanism of the stimulative effect of TRH (thyrotropin releasing hormone). So basically we neither know how it works, nor do we know, whether the oral ingestion of vitamin E-succinate would be sufficient to produce serum concentrations in the pituitary that would be high enough concentrations to make any difference at all (note: the scientists excluded the influence of other components of the extract by testing alpha tocopherol succinate on its own in a separate trial)
  
  Bottom line: Based on roughly one dozen of in-vitro studies there is simply still to little evidence to decide who, outside of people with a history of cancer or someone who is just undergoing chemotherapy would benefit. Therefore, I suggest you wait before you add vitamin E succinate to your list of 'must have' supplements. Is it promising? Sure! Is it exciting, yeah! Is it save for a healthy being to be taken chronically??? I can't tell.
• The detrimental hormonal effects of pushing yourself beyond the tolerable threshold - Hardcore plyometrics and heavy HIIT and their impact on testosterone, cortisol, thyroid hormone and co: I guess you did already get the main message when you listened to the show, but just to give you an idea about the actual quantities, I thought it would be nice to provide you with two graphs as a reference.
  

  

  Figure 3: Comparison of the hormonal responses measured in the plyometrics (left) and the HIIT vs. LISS (right) study (based on Ozen. 2013 and Hackney. 2013)

  If you focus mainly on the differential cortisol responses in the two studies, it would appear likely that we are dealing with two very different forms of 'overtraining' here. While the HIIT protocol (90s at 100-110%, 90s active recovery at 40% matched for workload with steady state jogging at 60-65% of the VO2 max) probably wouldn't be a problem, if the athletes would get adequate rest and nutrition in the days after the session, the 6-weeks of plyometrics (15 session, increasing density, 90-195 reps per session) were enough to send the participants right into the vicious circle of the Athlete's Triad (if you have not done so already, I suggest you read up on that in the eponymous SuppVersity series).
  
  And you know what? Despite, or I should probably rather say due to their compromised hormone levels the guys in the plyometrics study did not lose a single gram of body weight. Good for their muscle, bad for the fat which was likewise preserved by the hormonal shut down, which affected both cortisol and testosterone in a similar way. So is that good or bad news? Well, let me say it this way:. Usually I see people training for a purpose and while the outcome often is stagnation and chronic fatigue, I would suspect that only few of you will have that on their mind, when they are hitting the gym, right?

Apropos viscous circle, and overtraining in order to avoid "overblogging" I will call it a day for today. Come back tomorrow for a couple of wholly new studies from the realms of exercise and nutrition sciences and in case you are planning to drink this evening, I highly suggest you check out the SuppVersity Facebook newspost on the effects of green tea extract on the uptake of alcohol. It may well be that those old fatburner caps of yours can be put to a way better use ;-)

References:

• Badamchian M, Spangelo BL, Bao Y et al. Isolation of a vitamin E analog from green barley leaf extract that stimulates the release of prolactin and growth hormone from rat anterior pituitary cells in vitro. Journal of Nutritional Biochemestry. 1994; 5: 145-150.
• Dong LF, Low P, Dyason JC, Wang XF, Prochazka L, Witting PK, Freeman R, Swettenham E, Valis K, Liu J, Zobalova R, Turanek J, Spitz DR, Domann FE, Scheffler IE, Ralph SJ, Neuzil J. Alpha-tocopheryl succinate induces apoptosis by targeting ubiquinone-binding sites in mitochondrial respiratory complex II. Oncogene. 2008 Jul 17;27(31):4324-35. Epub 2008 Mar 31.
• Hackney AC, Kallman A, Hosick KP, Rubin DA, Battaglini CL. Thyroid hormonal responses to intensive interval versus steady-state endurance exercise sessions. Hormones (Athens). 2013 Jan-Mar;11(1):54-60.
• Ozen, SV. Reproductive hormones and cortisol responses to plyometric training in males. Biol Sport.2013; 29 (3).
• Tam KW, Ho CT, Lee WJ, Tu SH, Huang CS, Chen CS, Lee CH, Wu CH, Ho YS. Alteration of α-tocopherol-associated protein (TAP) expression in human breast epithelial cells during breast cancer development. Food Chemistry. 2013 [ahead of print]

Jump Squats 80% Type-II Fiber Activity, Cold Thermogenesis Better Fasted, Tuned Swiss Ball Crunch, 5-HTP vs. Asthma, HIIT Before Strength & High vs. Low GI Meal Pre Workout

Image 1: Few of the things the average trainee does in places that call themselves "fitness studios" has little to do have will actually promote fitness, as in being athletic. "Mr. check out my biceps", for example would be similarly lost ding this as the sedentary computer nerd "Mr. biceps" loves to laugh about.

I know from time to time I am not 100% in time when it comes to delivering promised articles, but after an exhaustingly hot day, I am pretty much in-time with the 2nd installment of "On Short Notice" for today and the third for this weekend. Since I felt that it looked awkward to have three posts with the "On Short Notice" in front posted one after the other, I did however decide to ditch that (at least for today) and get straight down to ... well, "business" with posts on the revealing type II fiber specific muscle-damage from jump squats, the reason why you better sit in your ice-tub fasted if you want to practice cold thermogenesis, the superiority of Swiss Ball Crunches with resistance bands over the classic ab machine, the surprising anti-asthmatic effects of super high doses of 5-HTP, the way women benefit equally from a progressive strength training regimen with or without HIIT or steady state cardio before the strength workout, and, lastly, the futility of fretting about the acute effects of high vs. low GI meals before a workout and how that relates to childhood obesity. And while I do, believe it or not, have material for at least another episode, I am not going to bore you with even more short news pieces for this weekend. Don't worry ;-)

• Plyometrics for type II muscle fiber(-damage) It probably depends on your individual take on the usefulness of muscle damage, if the headline to this "On Short Notice" got you excited about plyometric training or not. When I am now telling you that the participants in the recently conducted trial by Macaluso et al. were previously untrained (N=8; age = 22 ± 1 years, height = 179.2 ± 6.4 cm, weight = 78.9 ± 5.9 kg) and the creatine kinase levels (a marker of muscle damage and the subsequent leakage of the creatine kinase enzyme into the blood) peaked at only 529.0 ± 317.8 U/L (that's high, but way below the 1,000er range you often see in untrained subjects after nothing but a couple of eccentric biceps curls being performed to failure) after the exercise intervention, I'd guess that most of you will appreciate that the researchers observed significantly more severely damaged type II than type I fibers (on average 85% vs. 27% of the respective fiber type).

  

  Image 2: The effect of plyomtetrics on your fitness & physique is still  underrated by the most fitness enthusiasts; and that despite the facts that plyos are the bread and butter of many athletes whose physical feats they are admiring.

  If we now make the reasonable assumption that the ~60% higher rate of muscle damage in both the glycolytic and oxidative subtypes of the type II fibers was indicative of the fact that they were the ones which shouldered the main workload of the 10 x 10 jump squat regimen the young men had to perform, this is unquestionable good news for everyone trying to get big and buffed. After all, these fibers, which are also known as type IIa (86% severely damaged) and type IIx fibers (84.% severely damaged vs. just 27% of type I fibers), are the ones that allow bodybuilders to get lean and muscular - not just one or the other... if that got you intrigued about what plyometrics are and if there is more research on it, I suggest you take a(nother) look at my previous posts on "ploys", such as "Building the Jack-of-All-Traits Legs Workout With Squats, Jump Squats and Body Weight Plyometrics?" or even the "Turbo-Fire vs. Insanity ShootOut" from one of the previous installments of "On Short Notice".
• Cold thermogenesis is not for everyone, but if it works for you, better do it fasted! That the amount and in many cases even the presence of the metabolically active brown adipose tissue and with it the thermogenic response to cold exposure is a very individual thing, is something you, as a diligent SuppVersity student will be aware of after all you have already read my previous post of the matter (cf. "Cold Thermogenesis vs. Ephedra").

  

  Figure 1: Cold thermogenesis in postprandial (PP) vs. fasted state (FF); dark areas indicate high 18F-FDG uptake (=high metabolic activity; Vrieze. 2013)

  Since there are still way too many people who actually seem to believe that sitting in a cold bathtub for a couple of minutes everyday would be all it takes to get you ripped and jacked, I thought it prudent to give them the chance to make it actually work and advice them to do it fasted! According to a recently published study from the Department of Internal Medicine at the Academic Medical Center in Amsterdam, in the Netherlands (Vrieze. 2013), the metabolic activity of the brown fat in all 6/10 of the 10 healthy, lean male volunteers (18-32 y; body mass index, 20-24 kg/m²) who participated in the study was about twice as high when they sat in a room which was cooled down to 16-18°C for 2h fasted (13.1 g/mL glucose uptake) vs. in the postprandial state (6.8 g/mL).
  Aside from the usual non-responders (40%) and the huge heterogenity with respect to the thermogenic response (6.1 - 27.6g/L), which are typical for these experiments there is a similarly large intra-individual difference with respect to the increase in BAT activity in the fasted state with the highest responder going from 11g/L in the post-prandial to 27.6g/L in the fasted state and the "fasting non responder" with a statistically non-existent (the term "non-significant" would not be bold enough ;-) "increase" in cold induced thermogenesis from 5g/L to 6g/L.

• 

  Video 1 (askthetrainer.com): The Swiss ball crunch with resistance bands takes some "tweaking" to be done correctly. After all you usually don't have the equipment set up in the way you would need it at your gym (click image to watch).

  Swiss ball crunch with resistance bands effective and saver than ab machine While I am not sure how "effective" the ab-machine in the study by Sundstrup et al. actually was, I can tell you that done with resistance bands the allegedly hilariously looking swiss ball crunch is not just at least as effective in recruiting the musculature of the rectus abdominus (104±3.8 vs 84±3.8% nEMG, respectively) as one of those machines, where your legs are locked in a way that the rectus femoris will do take do way too much of the work (2x more activity than in the swiss ball crunch with resistance bands) and you thus set yourself up for future lower back (=lumbar pain).
  Against that background and in view of the fact that Sundstrup et al. found that "both men and women, younger and elderly, and individuals with and without pain benefitted equally from the exercises" (Sundstrup. 2013), it is probably well worth taking the 2-3 min to get the equipment in position and do 3-4 sets of this unquestionably unconventional exercise (check out the SuppVersity EMG Series and my post on "Integrated Core Exercises For 6-Pack Abs" for additional ab exercises).
• 

  A couple of statistics on the current asthma rates in the US
  

  • asthmatic adults: 18.7 million (8.2%)
  • asthmatic children: 7.0 million (9.4%)

  In 2010, most U.S. children aged 17 years and under had excellent or very good health (82%). However, 8% of children had no health insurance coverage, and 5% of children had no usual place of health care. Seven percent of children had unmet dental need because their families could not afford dental care. Fourteen percent of children had ever been diagnosed with asthma. An estimated 8% of children aged 3–17 years had a learning disability, and an estimated 8% of children had ADHD. (Bloom. 2011; based on data from 2010)
  5-HTP switches allergic asthma off No good news for the average Olympian athlete who would then lose his script for his beta-agonists (clenbuterol & co, see also SuppVersity Facebook news from Aug 01, 2013), but probably something those of you who suffer from allergic rhinitis or full-blown asthma will appreciate: The administration of 5-hydroxy-tryptophan an orally available precursor to serotonin over the course of  led to a profound reduction (70-90%!) reduction in allergic lung inflammation in a rodent model (Abdala-Valencia. 2013). While the supplement left all sorts of side-effect related parameters unchanged and did not lead to weight gain, which is an often touted side effect of SSRIs - mostly unjustly, by the way! - the hilariously high dosage of 5mg 5-HTP per kg body weight the rodents received did reduce the allergen-induced transglutaminase 2 (TG2) expression, the migration of immune cells into the lung tissue, the local synthesis of serotonin and the subsequent serotonylation of proteins (serotonin conjugation of proteins) which is a key feature of allergic asthma.
  Regardless of the fact that Abdala-Valencia explicitly point out that these effects "occured without systemic increases in serotonin" (Abdala-Valencia. 2013), which could have led to vasoconstriction and other negative side-effects, I strongly caution against the ingestion of a whole bottle of 5-HTP tabs per day... when the researchers from the Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine publish a follow up study on humans, I'll let you know, though - in view of the ever-increasing asthma (see infobox on the right) research in this area could not just offer a valuable new treatment strategy, but also insights into the underlying reasons of this epidemic.
• Young women can combine strength training with either steady state or HIIT and still make progress - Somewhat related to my post earlier this week on doing cardio before instead of after your strength workout are the results of a recent study by Silva et al. who found that young women (age ~23y) make identical strength gains, regardless of whether and which type (HIIT sprinting or steady state cardio on the cycle ergometer or classic jogging) they perform before with their twice a week full-body training (Silva. 2013). Just as in the Di Blasio study, the "cardio" sessions, which were performed in a 1 min all-out vs. 1 min active recovery (HIIT) or 95% of the ventilatory threshold (SST) fashion for 20-30min (progressing from 20-30 over the course of the 11 weeks), were performed before the weight training (note: changes in body composition were not evaluated in detail, but I would be very surprised, if the concomitant training regimen, and in that specifically the HIIT protocol, did not outperform the resistance training only protocol in this respect).

  

  Image 3 (rippedfitness.com): You will certainly remember Wednesday's news on doing cardio before weights, well, here you have more evidence that even doing 20-30 min of HIIT won't hamper the gains of fit female beginners on a twice a week full-body regimen with built-in progression regimen - neither will steady state cardio "in the zone", by the way.

  If you are a young, fit woman (or man) without years of competitive athletics under your belt and don't train all too often (~2-3 times per week), it does thus obviously not harm your strength gains on a classic strength training program with built in linear progression from 15-18RM to 8-10RM, if you concomitantly work on your conditioning - whether the results would be identical if the subjects were not just fit and healthy but had been training for years and were working out 5x instead of 2x a week, is yet questionable. On the other hand, it is very unlikely that seasoned athletes (and this goes out to the gentlemen, in particular) will lose muscle and ruin their strength gains, whenever they move further than the bench to the squat rack - it's all a matter of total volume and running out of puff due to bad conditioning can just as well keep you from pulling those additional 10kg off the floor as the exhaustion from doing too much cardio.
  This, by the way, brings me back to the notion of "fitness" vs. "being fit", I alluded to in the caption of image 1, already: If you want to exploit the 100 year credit your genes have granted you (see "Exercise for Life Extension" in today's first installment of "On Short Notice"), you better focus on "being fit". Try different things and don't get stuck in a rut.
• High GI, low GI, ... f*** GI! When you, a healthy, more or less well-conditioned individual are about to engage in a high intensity exercise protocol that simulates a football match (bouts of walking (31-39 s), jogging (41-46 s), cruising (41-45 s), sprinting (16-21 s) and standing), it make absolutely no difference whether you ingest a high (=80) or low (=44) pre-workout meal (total energy=377 kcal; CHO=79 g; Fat=3 g; Protein=13 g) 3.5h before your workout (Hulton. 2013).

  

  Image 4: Add Lucozade + Akash rice for high GI (80) or apple juice and basmati for low GI (44) and you have two isocaloric test pre-workout meals

  That's at least what the results of a recent study by Hulton et al. which did not find any differences in blood glucose, fatty acids (FA), glycerol, β-hydroxybutyrate, lactate and insulin (assessed before, during, and after the exercise bout), rates of CHO and fat oxidation (determined at 4 time points during the protocol) or 1 km time trial performance. It should be mentioned, though, that this was not a liquid meal, but consisted of either Lucozade + akash rice (high GI) or apple juice + basmati rice (low GI) with an identical chicken breast + tomato sauce "base" and identical macro-nutrient and calorie content.
  That the long-term consequences on your body composition may still be different is a different cattle of fish though and how "beneficial" liquid sugar, ah... I mean energy drinks, such as Lucozade are is something at least those of you who read my "Fat Content Per Energy Drink 0g, Body Fat Gain Per Energy Drink 18g!" post from June 30, 2013. Whether apple juice is much better is still debatable, though. Wojcicki & Heyman, for example, argue (finally, as I would like to add) in their latest paper that "excessive fruit juice consumption is associated with increased risk for obesity" and the ingestion of "sucrose [...]without the corresponding fiber, as is commonly present in fruit juice, is associated with the metabolic syndrome, liver injury, and obesity". Reason enough for the two pediatrics from the University of California to recommend that the "US Department of Agriculture's Child and Adult Food Care Program, which manages the meal patterns in childcare centers such as Head Start, promote the elimination of fruit juice in favor of whole fruit for children." (Wojcicki. 2013)

Before I eventually call it a week, I would like to remind everyone of the daily mini-news on the SuppVersity Facebook wall. Only few of them will also make it into the "On Short Notice" column (actually the "Exercise for Life Extension" in today's first installment was an exception), so that even the few of you who don't suffer acute short news withdrawal symptoms, may want to stop by from time to time ;-)

References

• Abdala-Valencia H, Berdnikovs S, McCary CA, Urick D, Mahadevia R, Marchese ME, Swartz K, Wright L, Mutlu GM, Cook-Mills JM. Inhibition of Allergic Inflammation  by Supplementation with 5-hydroxytryptophan. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol. 2013 Jul 27.  
• Bloom B, Cohen RA, Freeman G. Division of Health Interview Statistics Summary Health Statistics for U.S. Children: National Health Interview Survey, 2010. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Center for Health Statistics. Hyattsville, Maryland December 2011. DHHS Publication No. (PHS) 2013–1578.
• Hulton AT, Gregson W, Maclaren D, Doran DA. Effects of GI Meals on Intermittent Exercise. Int J Sports Med. 2013 Jun 15.
• Macaluso F, Isaacs AW, Myburgh KH. Preferential Type II Muscle Fiber Damage From Plyometric Exercise. J Athl Train. 2013;47(4):414-20.
• Silva RF, Cadore EL, Kothe G, Guedes M, Alberton CL, Pinto SS, Pinto RS, Trindade G, Kruel LF. Concurrent training with different aerobic exercises. Int J Sports Med. 2013 Aug;33(8):627-34. Epub 2013 May 4.
• Sundstrup E, Jakobsen MD, Andersen CH, Jay K, Andersen LL. Swiss ball abdominal crunch with added elastic resistance is an effective alternative to training machines. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2013 Aug;7(4):372-80.
• Vrieze A, Schopman JE, Admiraal WM, Soeters MR, Nieuwdorp M, Verberne HJ, Holleman F. Fasting and Postprandial Activity of Brown Adipose Tissue in Healthy Men. J Nucl Med. 2013 Jul 31. 
• Wojcicki JM, Heyman MB. Reducing childhood obesity by eliminating 100% fruit juice. Am J Public Health. 2013 Sep;102(9):1630-3. Epub 2013 Jul 19.

Building the Jack-of-All-Traits Legs Workout With Squats, Jump Squats and Body Weight Plyometrics? At Least for Physical Education Students that Seems to Work.

Image 1 (musclemag.com): You don't have to restrict your plyometrics to leg exercises - plyometric push ups, for example can help you to build a bigger chest and a bigger bench.

"How many sets, how many reps, which exercises...?" These are the standard topics people are chatting about at the gym. Things like ROM (range of motion), explosive training or plyometrics, on the other hand, are almost as rarely talked about as they are done.

What about you? When was the last time you counted the seconds it took you to compile the concentric phase of a squat? What about "plyos" (=plyometric exercises) do you have some in your current routine? No? According to the results of a recently published study by Eduardo Sáez de Villarreal and his Spanish co-workers, this may be a mistake - at least if your goal is not solely to maximize muscle size, but also muscle function.

Plateau busting plyometrics and power building explosives - more than just hilarious bogus?

In a randomized trial, 60 active male physical education students (78.3kg body weight; 12.7% body fat; 20.4y mean age) were randomly assigned to one out of five training groups. For the subsequent 7 weeks the students performed one of the following exercise regimen (see A-E in table 1) three times per week for a total of 21 sessions (participants were instructed to avoid any strenuous physical activity and to maintain their usual dietary habits for the duration of the study).

Table 1: Training program for all the groups, participants were randomized to groups and trained 3x/week for 7 consecutive weeks; velocities are given in m/s for the concentric phases of the full squat equaling 1 m/s = 60% 1RM, 0.9 m/s = 67%, 0.8 m/s = 74%, 0.7 m/s = 80%, 0.6 m/s = 86%; full-squat means thighs to the ground, while squats are done until 60°;
plyometric jumps are done with body weight only (based on Sáez de Villarreal. 2013)

While the subjects in group A performed all types of training within one session, the other three groups served as what you may call a "control" the former "crockpot" regimen was compared to. Thus the researchers expected to be able to decide

Video 1 (click to watch): Loaded countermove- ment jumps (CMJLoaded)

1. whether the combination training (A) would elicit similar performance increases as a specialized training routine and
2. which of the specialized training routines (B-E) would elicit the greatest effects on the two outcome variables of the study.

The latter, i.e. total strength and explosiveness, as well as the 30m sprint performance of all participants were assessed in individual tests at baseline and at the end of the 7-week period and the results did in fact partially confirm what conventional wisdom would tell us: Training for speed will make you faster, training for strength will make you stronger *surprise!*

30m sprint improvements: C > A > B > D > E - but all below 1% and not significantly different

And despite the fact that none of the improvements did result in significantly improved 30m sprint times  (A: 0.23%; B: 0.13%; C: 0.33%; D: −0.68%; E −0.91%), there were statistical significant differences in the dynamic strength / power (measured via 1-RM full squats), as well as the maximal velocity of displacement during the full squat (a measure of the explosiveness), between the five study arms that may give us some clues in terms of what type of training could promote your individual training goals best.

Figure 1: Relative changes in full squat 1RM and full squat velocity (left) and ratio of power (1RM) and explosiveness (velocity) improvements (right) after 7 weeks on the 5 different protocols (based on Sáez de Villarreal. 2013)

So what exactly are the implications for your training regimen, then? Well, lets start with the most obvious things first - so, let's assume that you ...

• want to become more explosive; in that case, you would perform regimen C, because despite the fact that regimen E may be similarly specific (see figure 1, right), the overall increase in full squat velocity with C was 33% greater than with regimen E (25% vs. 16%). 
• want to improve your overall power; in that case you would perform regimen A, because neither the classic power protocol B nor the surprisingly power-specific CMJloaded protocol D (see video 1) elicit similarly pronounced gains in 1-RM squat performance as the combined protocol.

And what if you want to do both - get stronger and faster? Well the answer should be easy: Protocol A! After all, it did not just produce the most pronounced strength gains, it is also a very close second (+22% vs. +25%) as far as the improvements in explosiveness are concerned.

But that's unfair - the volume was much higher!  

Image 2 (muscle-fitness-tips.net): Plyos make an excellent addition to every routine, no matter if you want to gain muscle, build strength or agility or just don't want to do the same boring workout all the time. If you need some inspiration on which ones you could simply add to your current routine, check out the exrx.net list and pick your favorites.

Yeah, that's right... and that's not even all you would have to consider before you draw otherwise foregone conclusions based on the results of the study at hand. Despite the fact that the study participants were trained individuals, for example, their 1RM squat performance at the beginning of the study was (only) roughly their body weight, so that there was still more than enough room for improvements (what's your squat?). The testing procedure, the 1-RM full squat, as another example, is - at least in my humble opinion  - not the very best method to test "real" strength gains as it requires a decent amount of proficiency to be performed correctly. If you are a power lifter and squatting is part of your competition, fine - otherwise, testing leg-strength / power with 1-RM squats always reminds me of telling Mr Average Joe to sprint 100m as fast as he can, while dribbling a soccer ball... nonsensical? Well, so is the 1-RM squat performance test.

I could probably come up with a dozen of other "confounding factors" and "things to consider", but in the end we have to cope with what we have and based on the data from this study it does not appear to be too far-fetched that you could also benefit from incorporating some explosive CMJs (or jump squats) and plyometrics into your regimen - even if it was for nothing else than a speed and agility building, fat burning body weight based HIIT protocol you can perform at the end of your regular workout sessions and even when you are traveling!

Additional resources:

Chest	Biceps	Back	Core	Legs	Triceps	Shoulders
In case you are looking for the best classic exercises click on the body part above to see the most effective ones

References:

1. ExRx.net. Plyometrics and Power Exercises: Instruction and Movement Analysis. < http://www.exrx.net/Lists/PowerExercises.html > retrieved July 15, 2013.
2. Sáez de Villarreal E, et al. Enhancing sprint and strength performance: Combined versus maximal power, traditional heavy-resistance and plyometric training. J Sci Med Sport. 2013.
3. SportStrong.uk. Loaded Countermovement Jump. YouTube Video < youtube.com/?v=f69faqO1tto > retrieved July 15, 2013.

From 16% to 8% Body Fat in 10 Weeks: Crossfit Workout Gets The Leanest Shredded - But Only the Fittest Survive

Crossfit doesn't fit well with everyone. In  fact you have to be pretty fit already if you intend to benefit - specifically if you don't have someone who tailors the workouts to your specific needs. If you don't or are still miles apart from being fit, don't be bamboozled by the results of people who have been training for years.

This certainly sounds a little sadistic, but I hope you've been missing the Science Round-Up last Thursday. If that's the case, you will be happy to hear that Carl and I are back on track, and ready to talk about topics ranging from magnesium supplementation over the potentially fatal combination of NSAIDs and exercise and what's that got to do with gut health / integrity, how light therapy won't make you lighter, but help you cut body fat, how intense workouts compromise your sleep, and how intense sweeteners make you fat - at least if you add them on top of a Western diet. If we will have time, we will also take a look at how much protein it actually takes to preserve lean mass on a diet and how protein supplementation is not necessary and in a recently published study not even conducive to building muscle. And while these were only 50% of the news I've on my list of potential topics, I won't give away more... just tune in live at 1PM EST on the Super Human Radio Network.

For the time that remains and for those of you who are just arriving here after having listened to the live-stream, I still have a special goodie... have you ever pondered over the following question:

How much can you achieve within 10 weeks of training?

Even if you have already decided on a certain type of training, for example HIIT, you will have to adjust your routine to "Make HIIT a HIT" read Part I and Part II of the eponymous series and learn how to turn a HIIT workout into your HIIT workout to avoid overtraining and maximize its efficacy (learn more)

There is obviously no definite answer to this question. I mean, it goes without saying that we would first have to define, whether we are talking about muscle growth, overall conditioning, fat loss, etc. - what people often overlook, however it also depends on where you are coming from. Sometimes I feel like I am the only one who dares telling someone who's been "running" - in most cases this is rather sitting and driving - around at 2x his/her normal weight for years, is past his early 20s and has a life beyond working out and dieting is very unlikely to ever achieve a cover model physique. On the other hand, we've got the average trainee, who's been training for years has a high degree of leanness and is just about to see his sixpack shine through, who will necessarily make much smaller improvements within a given time-frame than his obese colleague who's just about to start working out for the first time of his/her life.

The previous paragraph should have made it quite clear, compared to the (overweight) beginner, an advanced trainee must invest much more thought into his/her diet and exercise regimen. That real intermittent fasting would probably be a better alternative for him/her than the "buffered every other day fat" has already been mentioned in yesterday's SuppVersity Article, but what about the exercise regimen?

Working out for fat loss and conditioning - Crossfit rules!

Fast paced high intensity workouts are gathering more and more momentum even outside of Crossfit gyms. Some of them may look somewhat "Jane Fonda", but as a previous review of the workout DVDs Insanity vs. TurboFire revealed, even hopping around in front of your TV set is more productive than the fat burning zone on the treadmill in next to your sofa (learn more)

Let's say he or she is working out primarily to increase his/her conditioning and drop a (if by any means possible) a significant amount of body fat? What would be the best way to train, then?

According to the results of a soon-to-be-published study from the  Ohio State University Health & Exercise Science in Columbus, Ohio (Smith. 2013), there is no question that this would be a Crossfit-esque workout - or, as the scientists refer to it, a crossfit-based high intensity power training (HIPT) program, they describe as follows:

"[...] a crossfit-based HIPT program using basic gymnastic skills (hand- stands, ring, and bar exercises) and traditional multiple-joint, functional, resistance exercises (squat, press, deadlift, Olympic lifts) performed as quickly as possible at a high intensity (low repetition, high percentage of 1-RM)." (Smith. 2013; my italics)

The 10-week program was varied so that some exercises were performed for a best time, and others were performed in the “as many rounds as possible” style (AMRAP; for a little more versatility check out Adelfo's EDT-CrossOver training) within anything from 10 to 20 minutes.

While there were no prescribe recovery times during the strength/skill portion of the exercise session, the WOD portion of the session did not allow for any real "rest" between the sets, as all the exercises were to be performed as quickly as possible.

Wow, who survived that? - Good question, indeed!

Only the fittest survive: Please do me a favor - If you are the aformentioned overweight person who's still carrying around another guy/gal's weight as body fat, don't even think of crossfitting, if you don't want to end up like 9 of the 11 dropouts (the study started with 54 participants), who retired willingly due to overuse or injuries, ok?

I guess you won't be surprised to hear that the 23 men and 20 women who survived and of whom the scientists state that they were "spanning all levels of aerobic fitness and body composition" were actually the typical already reaonably fit Crossfit clientele of whom Smith et al. somwhat awkwardly point out that they "had already been following a 'Paleolithic' type diet prior to and following completion of the training protocol." In other words the "levels of aerobic fitness" the participants spanned ranged from the untrained yet 100% healthy male with a VO2max of ~35 ml/kg/min to the hardcore crossfitter with a starting VOMax of >50ml/kg/min - the aforementioned heavily overweight and thus by now average (see "Obese is Going About to Become the New Normal") Westerner was yet not part of the study population.

Still, the presence of subject spanning the divide between "just healthy" and ripped and well-conditioned is in fact what attracts me as the author of a webpage that's dedicated to anyone ranging from those who just want to be / get / remain healthy and look not all-too shabby in front of the mirror to those who are looking to max out on their own physical performance and appearance. Long story short: The data you see in figure 1 is relevant for all of you. Even if you are still a couple of inches away from matching at least the initially criteria, you will sooner or later arrive at a point, where you'll find a representative counterpart of yours among the subjects of the study at hand.

Figure 1: Body fat percentage (left) and VO2Max (right) before and after the intervention (Smith. 2013)

I guess the data in figure 1 do actually speak for themselves: There is actually pretty much you can achieve within just 10-weeks of serious training: A significant (P<0.05) improvement of VO2max of 2.64% if you are a man and 11.78% if you are a women and (probably much sexier in the eyes of most of you) a 4% respectively 3% decreaes in body fat!

"To our knowledge no research on the aerobic benefits of HIPT has been conducted. HIPT focuses on high intensity resistance training usingmultiple joint exercises, with little to no focus on traditional aerobic activities. In spite of this, our results show that this type of training also provides aerobic and body composition benefits. Theincreased aerobic capacity of the subjects in our HIPT study were similar to those found in past research (Tremblay. 1994; Burgomaster. 2005). Based on the results presented here, individuals of all fitness levels and either gender can realize body composition and aerobic benefits from HIPT. Given that our subjects were following a Paleolithic diet, we cannot relate all of the observed weight loss to HIPT training. However, HIPT and Paleolithic diet in combination could be used to promote positive changes in body composition."

Now, all the scientists write is unquestionably true (also the part on the "paleo diet", as long as it is not very low carb paleo, cf. "Carbohydrate Shortage in Paleoland") and still, for me there are two things Smith et al. don't mention in the paragraph cited about and these are (A) the sex differences in terms of the VO2Max gains (maybe a result of the fact that women are not the ones who would otherwise do HIIT-esque workouts (=aerobic training at high intensities), so that the new stimulus will yield a greater results and (B) the fact that Crossfit is a workout regimen, from which even those benefit who are already fit and lean (keep in mind that the 16% in the lean group are for men and women, so that is lean!).

---

Bottom line: Crossfit appears to be the high intensity workout regimen which can help experienced trainees to make the transition from lean to ripped!

Want to do some more aerobics but also stick your classic weight lifting routine and just add cardio in? Now you are asking yourself, when this would make sense? Before, after or in between? Is that's you, go back in the SuppVersity archives and learn more.

As exciting as this may seem, a brief glance at the data in figure 1 will yet also tell you that those who are not up to the intensity and athletic demands of crossfitting don't just risk getting injured (please read the red box further up in the article, as well), they are also wasting their time with a workout that's not designed for their fitness level an will thus yield suboptimal results. This may not necessarily be the case in absolute terms - after all -4% body fat reduction certainly is not bad, but that's -4% from a pretty chubby baseline of 33% and actually could be achieved with basically any well-planned nutrition + exercise regimen. The latter obviously cannot be said of the -50% relative reduction in body fat percentage in the lean subjects on the other side of the "body fat divide". These men and women are most likely people who have been working out for all their lives in one way or another.

The "gifted ones" are in fact rather the ones who are often literally accused of being "genetically gifted" by accusers who simply don't take into consideration that it is above all the epigenetic priming of years of high school, college and other sports that renders them ostensibly resistant to the "obesity virus".

If you are still infected with the obsisty virus and have just found your way to physical culture you hardly qualify as one of those individuals by whom the original Crossfit workouts were created and are therefore certainly not among those people for whom these metabolically and technically demanding workouts were and still are designed. 

If you do "qualify", however (and that is nothing you have to be born wirth, I myself once believed that I just did not have the genes to see my abs), cross fitting could fit in particularly well in your "beach-ready" plan, of which I'd hope you are already thinking about... I mean, spring is less than 3 weeks away (click here to learn more about setting up a workout routine)!

Addendum: Since I got several people asking for the lean mass changes, I thought I'd mention that there was a +1kg increase in lean mass in men and women. Unfortunately the scientists don't provide differential information for lean and heavier subjects, but if your body fat percentage decreases you do at least have  to lose much more fat than lean mass and since there was no dieting involved, I bet the lean guys and girls did not lose any muscle..

References:

• Burgomaster KA, Hughes SC, Heigenhauser GJ, Bradwell SN, Gibala MJ. Six sessions of sprint interval training increases muscle oxidative potential and cycle endurance capacity in humans. J Appl Physiol. 2005 Jun;98(6):1985-90.
• Smith MM, Sommer AJ, Starkoff BE, Devor ST. Crossfit-based high intensity power training improves maximal aerobic fitness and body composition. J Strength Cond Res. 2013 Feb 22. 
• Tremblay A, Simoneau JA, Bouchard C. Impact of exercise intensity on body fatness and skeletal muscle metabolism. Metabolism. 1994 Jul;43(7):814-8.