|
Back in 2012, I proposed the "Ultimate Health and Fitness Program,"
which was designed to go all the way
from wherever your starting point is, to a natural state of optimal
health and fitness, over a six-month period. I did it myself. The
program consists of:
1) a Raw Vegan diet.
2) a daily exercise program
3) an herbal cleansing program
June
3, 2012: The New World Economics Guide To Outrageous Health and Fitness
July
29, 2012: The Omnivore's Dilemma
December
2, 2012: Outrageous Health and Fitness 2: Forever
December
9, 2012: Outrageous Health and Fitness 3: Make a Plan
In 2013, I wrote up this program in a lot more detail, in the form of a
blog.
Click Here for the NWE
Six-Month Ultimate Health and Fitness Program
We also updated it a bit last year:
June
4, 2014: Health and Fitness 2014: The Rest of Your Life
Another year has passed, and we have had the usual endless flood of
diet and fitness books, many of which are now wholly contradictory.
Many now promote a diet high in meat and fats (The Big Fat Surprise: Why Butter, Meat and
Cheese Belong in an Healthy Diet). Others are "high carb," but
other carbs (The Starch Solution).
Where does that leave us, with our raw vegan strategy?
After looking at many such options, I still conclude that the raw vegan
approach is the ultimate -- at least for a six-month training period,
not necessarily for the long term. However, there are many long-term
raw vegans now, and they are generally very, very healthy!
I just assumed that a raw vegan diet meant natural foods, in mostly
their natural state. In practice, this means a lot of fruit, because
nonsweet vegetables (leafy greens, celery, cucumbers, tomatoes,
radishes, onions, etc.) simply don't have many calories in them. The
ones that do, such as potatoes or squash, are not so easy to eat raw.
However, it turns out that "raw cooking" is a lot more popular than I
thought. And, a lot of this "raw cooking" is very fatty. In the
vegetable world, fats come mostly from nuts and seeds, along with
associated nut butters and oils, and a few oddball fatty fruits
including olives, avocadoes, and coconut meat. Since fats are very
calorie dense, you don't need a lot of fats and oils before fats become
the primary energy source. And, if you are getting more and more of
your calories from fats, that means by default that you are getting
less and less from fruit. A lot of "raw cooking" involves processing
nuts and nut butters into various shapes and textures, to imitate foods
made from dairy and white flour. A lot of salad dressings contain a ton
of oils, such as olive oil. It turns out that a lot of "raw vegans" who
eat this sort of "raw cooking" are getting 50%-70% of their calories
from fats, even though in terms of volume they might think they are
eating a whole lot of spinach and cucumber. The spinach and cucumber
have almost no calories. (One tablespoon of olive oil has the same
calories as two pounds of cucumber.)
They are basically nut-arians.
This is somewhat unnatural, and doesn't allow for the full benefits of
a raw vegan diet in my opinion. I'm not the only one to think so:
Douglas Graham is something of the expert in these matters, and
proposes the "80:10:10" raw vegan diet, which is: 80% of calories from
carbohydrates; 10% from protein; and 10% from fats. This means a lot of
fruit. Beans are about the only thing in the vegetable world (except
the algaes like chlorella and spirulina) with substantial amounts of
protein, and it's pretty hard to eat raw beans. Thus, a raw vegan diet
is naturally low in protein. The 10% fats means back off the nut
butters and oils, but enjoy some avocadoes and whole olives, and whole
nuts, in moderation.
I agree with this in broad scope, so you can read Graham's books on the
topics, or his recipe books. In practice, I have stopped using oils
altogether (when eating raw vegan), although I still eat enough fatty
fruits and nuts to bring my overall fats to perhaps 20% of total
calories.
So, let's update the raw vegan part of the Ultimate Health and Fitness
Plan to include Graham's "lotsa fruit, not so many nuts and oils"
approach. You don't necessarily have to do a low 10% of calories from
fats, but definitely don't go the "raw gourmet" path with 50%+ or more
of calories from fats. Fruit, fruit, fruit.
The more audiovisually inclined can try the videos from "Freelee the
Banana Girl" and her partner "Durianrider" on YouTube. They use a
high-fruit raw vegan approach (no calorie restriction), and cite
Graham's influence directly.
What about those people who say that you should eat a lot of meat and
fats, and avoid carbohydrates? Isn't that the complete opposite of a
"high carb" raw fruits and vegetables approach?
Actually, I don't think it is so much different at all. These
strategies do work, and they work for much the same reason as the raw
vegan approach works. It's not because "meat makes you healthy," and
bananas and mangoes don't, or vice versa. It's what you're not eating.
If you take a "lotsa meat and nonsweet vegetables" approach, here's
what you're not eating:
1) All processed foods, including all junk foods, soda, etc.
2) Foods made from the "white food" white flour, dairy, white sugar
complex
3) All the GMO foods, including things made from corn and soy
4) Anything with nasty additives like MSG or artificial sweeteners
5) Possibly little or no dairy, depending on your diet strategy
("paleo")
6) Maybe less booze and coffee.
7) Probably a lot less salt, most of which is in processed foods.
And, if you eat that way -- let's say a lot of big grilled steak or
fish, with some sauteed spinach, roasted peppers and so forth -- and
especially if you pay attention to getting high-quality grass-fed,
pasture raised beef, you will be getting a far better diet than most
Americans, and will enjoy gigantic health benefits as a result.
But, is that the ultimate?
I don't think so. The raw vegan diet is the ultimate.
Graham has an interesting little thought exercise. It goes something
like this:
All the animals eat raw food. No animal in nature cooks its food.
What is humans' natural food?
We know that some animals are carnivores. They eat almost entirely
meat. These animals enjoy the taste of raw meat intensely, even
entering a "blood frenzy" during the hunt. They eat the entire animal,
internal organs and all. They do not shy away from the sight of blood
and gore, indeed they revel in it.
Humans are not like that. We turn away from the sight of animal
slaughter. We do not eat the whole animal, but only select bits, the
muscle tissue. We even give this meat a different name, "beef" instead
of cow, "pork" instead of pig. We generally do not enjoy the taste of
raw meat, but always cook it (raw fish is a minor exception). Indeed,
we can't even properly eat raw pork and chicken at all, as this has
considerable health risks besides being somewhat disgusting. Many major
religious traditions recommend restricting meat consumption, or
eliminating it altogether.
Even the omnivores, like raccoons or black bears, relish the taste of
raw animal flesh in a manner that humans do not.
Humans are not natural meat-eaters.
Some animals eat grasses and leaves, such as bison or deer. Humans
cannot digest cellulose, so this cannot be a major food source for
humans. Also, humans simply do not like the taste of raw grass or
leaves -- even the raw vegans use some kind of salad dressing.
Some animals eats nuts, seeds and grains, such as squirrels or birds.
These animals usually have some special digestive adaptations to
process the hard seeds, or break open the nut or acorn shells. Ever try
to open a chestnut with your bare hands and teeth? The major grains --
rice, wheat, and corn -- have formed the basis of human civilization
for millennia, but they cannot be eaten in their natural state. They
have to be processed and cooked.
What can humans eat, in its natural uncooked, unprocessed state, and
really enjoy? Fruit, of course. Humans can eat melons and pineapples
and apples and peaches, right off the tree, and they taste fantastic.
Humans are obviously natural fruit-eaters. This is no surprise, because
the primates that are humans' closest animal relatives -- chimpanzees,
gorillas, ourangutans, etc. -- are also fruit eaters, and yes they get
a diet of about 80:10:10 just as Graham suggests.
Nevertheless, the idea of eating a lot of fruit is uncomfortable for
most Americans, and probably for most everyone, including Europeans and
Asians, living in the temperate climates. There's a simple reason for
this: fresh fruit is extremely seasonal outside the tropics, and it
doesn't store well. All the major civilizations have had diets based on
grains, and, to a great or lesser degree, domesticated animals whether
in the form of milk or meat. Fruit has never been a major portion of
the American diet, except perhaps in the form of alcoholic drinks made
from apples. (There was apparently a raw vegan boom in the 1890s,
however, as emerging long-distance transport made fruits more available
year-round. Bananas!)
If you give an American a basket of peaches, they make a peach pie,
which is 90% white flour, butter and white sugar. If you give them
zucchini, they make zucchini bread, which is 90% white flour, sugar and
oils. If you give them strawberries, they make strawberry jam, which is
90% white sugar, and which is then spread on white bread toast. If you
give them lemons, they make lemonade, which is 95% white sugar. Give
them bananas, and they mix their bananas with yogurt
(milk and white sugar), granola (oats, sugar, oils/butter), or
breakfast cereal (wheat/corn, white sugar and milk). Americans mostly
use fruit as a flavoring for white flour and white sugar. (When you
then say: don't eat white flour and white sugar, Americans have no idea
how to eat fruit at all, and are totally stumped. Then they grill up a
nice big 20oz. steak.)
When Americans want to change what they eat, they generally try to
change as little as possible. This tends to produce two outcomes: 1)
create "imitation foods" using different ingredients, such as the soy
burger or "raw spaghetti"; 2) to select an alternative from within the
context of the Traditional American diet. So, if you were to say "no
more white bread and ice cream," then people tend to select something
else that is already a part of the Traditional American diet to focus
on, like lots of meat. To take another example, there have been a lot
of people going "gluten free" these days, for good reason. But, we have
not generally seen a big adoption of rice in the U.S. among the
gluten-free (no wheat) eaters -- or even some of the other major grains
such as oats or barley. No, we tend to get "gluten free" baked goods --
imitation foods -- or the embrace of dishes that are already part of
the Traditional American diet, such as potatoes, dairy and, of course,
meat. Lots of meat.
Along with this, we get a giant helping of various scientific-seeming
justifications to allow people to do what they wanted to do anyway.
Thus, even with the raw-fooders, we get the "gourmet raw" approach,
which tends to have a lot of nuts and oils atop nonsweet vegetables to
batter raw food into some kind of imitation of existing Traditional
American dishes. Or, a thousand and one reasons why you should
definitely eat big beef and not a mango. Anything but fruit. This is
ultimately just a mental weakness common today, and I suggest just
ignoring it.
There is definitely something wrong with various grains today,
especially wheat. The "gluten-free" movement certainly has some basis,
as explored in books like Wheat Belly
and Grain Brain.
We have seen, from hundreds and thousands of examples, that eliminating
wheat from people's diets can have a tremendous positive effect, and
eliminate all kinds of chronic disorders ranging from various forms of
celiac disease to arthritis to skin inflammations. However, it is hard
to identify exactly what is producing the problem. It is generally
recognized that these problems did not exist in the past, pre-1940,
before the many genetic modifications to wheat and other grains during
the Green Revolution period beginning in the mid-1950s.
"Wheat" was pretty much unchanged
until about 1950. Wheat yields per acre began to rise after 1950 due to
modifications to the wheat plant, aka the "Green Revolution." Wheat
today is not what it was in the past.
The
same for corn.
In the case of wheat, one problem might simply be contamination by
herbicides. It is now common to douse wheat with the hideously toxic
herbicide Roundup (glyphosate) before harvest. This kills the wheat,
which allows it to dry in the field before harvest, thus eliminating
the process of drying after harvest. So, if you are going to eat wheat,
eat organic wheat that hasn't been doused in glyphosate.
Although the presence of the complex protein gluten in wheat makes that
grain somewhat more problematic, the genetic alterations of the Green
Revolution period were also applied to rice. And, who knows if
glyphosate is also applied to rise these days.
For me personally, I only use organic grains, and no wheat. Rice is the
primary grain for us.
The Ultimate Health and Fitness Program also includes planning for your
longer-term eating patterns after your six months (or more) on a Raw
Vegan diet is over. You can continue with a Raw Vegan strategy, and
that would be a good approach. But, I think most people would not want
to do this, so you have to think about how you will decide to do things.
Another decent framework for your eating strategy is the No Sugar No
Grains approach of "America's Angriest Trainer" Vinnie Tortorich.
(VinnieTortorich.com). I like this because it is simple. Four words! No
concentrated sugars, including white sugar, maple syrup, molasses,
agave or raw honey. No grains.
This eliminates a lot of things, including all processed foods, and
also the "white foods" baked goods complex of white flour, white sugar,
and dairy. Also, although I don't think grains are inherently so bad in
their pre-1940 form, I accept that the grains we have today (GMO corn,
dubious wheat, and the possibility of glyphosate or other contamination
of all non-organic grains) is problematic enough that it is perhaps
best to just avoid them altogether. Anyway, it is a nice easy format,
which doesn't require too much thinking, while also allowing for a lot
of things that people like to eat.
The main thing is really to eliminate the processed foods. Or, as
Michael Pollan suggests: Real Food. Mostly Plants. Not Too Much. You
can certainly go beyond that, as far as you want to.
Another issue is the question of calorie restriction. Calorie
restriction was a major component of the Ultimate Health and Fitness
program as described in 2012 and 2013. Today, I think you can get
excellent results with the Raw Vegan, fruit-centric approach without
calorie restriction. Maybe better results, as some argue calorie
restriction can be quite hard on the body. Yes, eat as much as you
want! Don't eat when you
aren't hungry. Just eat until your hunger is satisfied. I personally
had great results with the no-calorie-restriction Raw Vegan approach in
the past, losing 20 lbs in one month while eating as much as I like. In
practice, if you eat a Raw Vegan diet without calorie
restriction, over an extended period like six months, you will
naturally attain your "equilibrium weight." Alas, as people get older,
they tend to carry more body fat. This "raw vegan equilibrium weight"
(actually body composition not weight) can be quite slim for someone in
their twenties, but it tends to rise for people in their forties or
later. I think it is best just to accept this, as the only way to go
below the "equilibruim weight" is to eat less than you want to, i.e.
feel hungry all the time. This can be sustained for a short period, for
bodybuilders before a show or competitive athletes at their season
peak, or even for six months, but it is very taxing to maintain
permanently.
Typical
healthy bodyfat ratios per age, from research by Jackson and Pollock.
"Body fat" (actually a lot of it is water stored in the fat tissues) is
affected by all kinds of things, including the amount of salt, alcohol,
caffeine and other toxins in the diet. The body needs water to purge
these toxins, so if you consume this regularly, the body naturally
stores more water so that it has enough on hand. Douglas Graham says
that he finds that long-term raw vegans generally have bodyfat well
below these levels, even as people get older.
Thus, to summarize:
The Raw Vegan diet is still the most important component of the
Ultimate Health and Fitness plan. I often say that the results you get
will be 70% due to diet. Eat a lot of fresh fruit, and de-emphasize
nuts and oils, in line with Doug Graham's 80:10:10 framework although
you
don't necessarily have to go that low-fat if you don't want to. Calorie
restriction is no longer expected. Eat comfortably, but don't overeat.
For the longer term, after your six-month Ultimate Health and Fitness
program is complete, go ahead and eat meat if you want to. Do the No
Sugar No Grains strategy if you like, but at the very least eliminate
all processed foods. Real Food only. This means eliminating things that
seem like "real food" but really aren't, such as ketchup that is full
of high fructose corn syrup or yogurt that is sweetened with sucralose.
No no no. It pretty much means cooking food at home from basic
ingredients, of as high quality (organic, grass-fed etc.) as possible.
Exercise:
Exercise is flexible. You can really do most anything that excites you,
although for the Ultimate Health and Fitness Program it does have to be
fairly demanding, with a large cardio component. It is not really about
"this move or that move," just do something with your body that you
enjoy, six days a week. It could be nordic skiing, or beach volleyball,
or kiteboarding, or weightlifting (combined with at least three cardio
days per week), or a DVD workout program.
I am now doing an interesting sort of cardio training program, the
Maffetone method. This has been around since the 1980s, but oddly
enough, despite many successes, it is still largely ignored.
For this year, I looked through a bunch of recent training guides by
Chris Carmichael (Lance Armstrong's trainer), Joe Friel, Don Fink and
others. I wanted to get an idea of what the conventional wisdom is
these days regarding cardio training programs, for running, cycling and
triathlon. (Last year I did the Hanson's Method for marathon, which I
now think has some flaws.)
All of these training programs have the same basic core. It is some
combination of high intensity and lower intensity "recovery." The high
intensity is typically done at heart rates of 80% or higher of the
measured maximum heart rate, commonly 85%, 90% or higher. Then, there
is some lower intensity cruising.
In the past, the 1970s for example, competitive athletes had more of a
"go hard all the time" approach. However, what people found is that you
quickly wear down and burn out, physically and mentally. Your "hard
days" were not really so hard anymore, because you just can't keep that
up day after day, and your physical burnout is matched by mental
burnout as your body tells you "time to take a break!" Today, people
have more of a "dumbbell" approach, of some hard days (or at least a
high-intensity part of the workout) which are really hard, and then
some easy "recovery" days, which allow you to recover enough to hit it
hard again.
Maffetone (philmaffetone.com) has a completely different approach. He
noticed something odd. People who did a lot of high-intensity training
(everyone) tended to have somewhat atrophied aerobic systems.
Maffetone says that the body has two basic metabolic systems, the
"aerobic" system which burns fat and uses slow-twitch muscles, and the
"anaerobic" system which burns blood glycogen and uses fast-twitch
muscles. Both systems are active at all times, but the anaerobic system
is dominant at heart rates of 80% of max and higher. This is also the
"fight or flight" range of high intensity cardio effort. People in
nature avoid this kind of high intensity, unless it is some kind of
emergency situation. Thus, to maintain these kinds of high intensities
activates the adrenal system. Pushing your adrenal system day after day
also induces burnout, which can accumulate over years.
The funny thing is, all of these high-intensity workouts do not develop
the aerobic system. They only develop the anaerobic system, while the
aerobic system atrophies.
Thus, Maffetone says to focus on developing your aerobic system. This
is done by doing all workouts at a moderate but carefully controlled
pace, at the upper end of the "aerobic" range before the adrenal system
is engaged. In practice, it is about 75% of maximum heart rate,
although it is not based on MaxHR. Rather, Maffetone did a number of
studies of athletes in the laboratory to find where their bodies where
transitioning from aerobic fat-burning to anaerobic sugar-burning. He
then found that his lab results could be approxmated quite accurately
with a simple formula of 180-age.
So, the "Maximum Aerobic Heart Rate" for a 30-year-old person would be
150bpm, regardless of measured MaxHR. All workouts are done in a range
between this figure and ten beats per minute lower, or 140 in this
case. These are instantaneous values, not averages. So, a runner or
cyclist would do all workouts in the range of 140-150bpm. Workouts vary
in terms of length -- there are still easy days and hard days -- but
not intensity.
The intended result is that people get faster and faster at the same
moderate heart rate, using the fat-burning aerobic energy system. And
no adrenal burnout. This allows people to maintain the same pace for
long periods of time.
The "aerobic threshold" is where
lactate production (a product of anaerobic metabolism) begins to
increase.
The sugar-burning anaerobic system is always present, but is used
increasingly at higher levels of effort.
Six-time Ironman world champion Mark Allen is a major devotee of
Maffetone. Here's Allen talking about the Maffetone system in 2009:
During my 15 years of racing in the
sport of triathlons I searched for those few golden tools that would
allow me to maximize my training time and come up with the race results
I envisioned. At the top of that list was heart rate training. It was
and still is the single most potent tool an endurance athlete can use
to set the intensity levels of workouts in a way that will allow for
long-term athletic performance. Yes, there are other options like
lactate testing, power output and pace, but all of these have certain
shortcomings that make them less universally applicable than heart rate.
In our sport there are three key areas of fitness that you will be
developing. These are speed, strength and endurance. Strength is fairly
straightforward to do. Two days per week in the gym focusing on an
overall body- strengthening program is what will do the trick. More
time for a triathlete usually ends up giving diminished returns on any
additional strength workout. These two key days are the ones that will
give you the strength in your races to push a high power output on the
bike, to accelerate when needed on the run and to sustain a high speed
in the water.
Next are the focused workouts that will give you raw speed. This is
perhaps the most well known part to anyone’s training. These are your
interval or speed sessions where you focus on a approaching a maximal
output or your top speed at some point in each of these key sessions.
But again, developing speed in and of itself is a fairly simple
process. It just requires putting the pain sensors in neutral and going
for it for short periods of time. A total of 15-20 minutes each week in
each sport of high intensity work is all it takes.
Now for the tougher part…the endurance. This is where heart rate
training becomes king. Endurance is THE most important piece of a
triathlete’s fitness. Why is it tough to develop? Simply put, it is
challenging because it usually means an athlete will have to slow
things down from their normal group training pace to effectively
develop their aerobic engine and being guided by what is going on with
your heart rate rather than your will to the champion of the daily
training sessions with your training partners! It means swimming,
cycling and running with the ego checked at the door. But for those
patient enough to do just that, once the aerobic engine is built the
speedwork will have a profound positive effect their fitness and allow
for a longer-lasting improvement in performance than for those who
blast away from the first day of training each year.
What is the solution to maximizing your endurance engine? It’s called a
heart rate monitor.
Whether your goal is to win a race or just live a long healthy life,
using a heart rate monitor is the single most valuable tool you can
have in your training equipment arsenal. And using one in the way I am
going to describe will not only help you shed those last few pounds,
but will enable you to do it without either killing yourself in
training or starving yourself at the dinner table.
I came from a swimming background, which in the 70’s and 80’s when I
competed was a sport that lived by the “No Pain, No Gain” motto. My
coach would give us workouts that were designed to push us to our limit
every single day. I would go home dead, sleep as much as I could, then
come back the next day for another round of punishing interval sets.
It was all I knew. So, when I entered the sport of triathlon in the
early 1980’s, my mentality was to go as hard as I could at some point
in every single workout I did. And to gauge how fast that might have to
be, I looked at how fast the best triathletes were running at the end
of the short distance races. Guys like Dave Scott, Scott Tinley and
Scott Molina were able to hold close to 5 minute miles for their 10ks
after swimming and biking!
So that’s what I did. Every run, even the slow ones, for at least one
mile, I would try to get close to 5 minute pace. And it worked…sort of.
I had some good races the first year or two, but I also suffered from
minor injuries and was always feeling one run away from being too
burned out to want to continue with my training.
Then came the heart rate monitor. A man named Phil Maffetone, who had
done a lot of research with the monitors, contacted me. He had me try
one out according to a very specific protocol. Phil said that I was
doing too much anaerobic training, too much speed work, too many high
end/high heart rate sessions. I was forcing my body into a chemistry
that only burns carbohydrates for fuel by elevating my heart rate so
high each time I went out and ran.
So he told me to go to the track, strap on the heart rate monitor, and
keep my heart rate below 155 beats per minute. Maffetone told me that
below this number that my body would be able to take in enough oxygen
to burn fat as the main source of fuel for my muscle to move. I was
going to develop my aerobic/fat burning system. What I discovered was a
shock.
To keep my heart rate below 155 beats/minute, I had to slow my pace
down to an 8:15 mile. That’s three minutes/mile SLOWER than I had been
trying to hit in every single workout I did! My body just couldn’t
utilize fat for fuel.
So, for the next four months, I did exclusively aerobic training
keeping my heart rate at or below my maximum aerobic heart rate, using
the monitor every single workout. And at the end of that period, my
pace at the same heart rate of 155 beats/minute had improved by over a
minute. And after nearly a year of doing mostly aerobic training, which
by the way was much more comfortable and less taxing than the anaerobic
style that I was used to, my pace at 155 beats/minute had improved to a
blistering 5:20 mile.
That means that I was now able to burn fat for fuel efficiently enough
to hold a pace that a year before was redlining my effort at a maximum
heart rate of about 190. I had become an aerobic machine! On top of the
speed benefit at lower heart rates, I was no longer feeling like I was
ready for an injury the next run I went on, and I was feeling fresh
after my workouts instead of being totally wasted from them.
So let’s figure out what heart rate will give you this kind of benefit
and improvement. There is a formula that will determine your Maximum
Aerobic Heart Rate, which is the maximum heart rate you can go and
still burn fat as the main source of energy in your muscles. It is the
heart rate that will enable you to recover day to day from your
training. It’s the maximum heart rate that will help you burn those
last few pounds of fat. It is the heart that will build the size of
your internal engine so that you have more power to give when you do
want to maximize your heart rate in a race situation.
Here is the formula:
1. Take 180
2. Subtract your age
3. Take this number and correct it by the following:
-If you do not workout, subtract another 5 beats.
-If you workout only 1-2 days a week, only subtract 2 or 3 beats.
-If you workout 3-4 times a week keep the number where it is.
-If you workout 5-6 times a week keep the number where it is.
-If you workout 7 or more times a week and have done so for over a
year, add 5 beats to the number.
-If you are over about 55 years old or younger than about 25 years old,
add another 5 beats to whatever number you now have.
-If you are about 20 years old or younger, add an additional 5 beats to
the corrected number you now have.
You now have your maximum aerobic heart rate, which again is the
maximum heart rate that you can workout at and still burn mostly fat
for fuel. Now go out and do ALL of your cardiovascular training at or
below this heart rate and see how your pace improves. After just a few
weeks you should start to see a dramatic improvement in the speed you
can go at these lower heart rates.
Over time, however, you will get the maximum benefit possible from
doing just aerobic training. At that point, after several months of
seeing your pace get faster at your maximum aerobic heart rate, you
will begin to slow down. This is the sign that if you want to continue
to improve on your speed, it is time to go back to the high end
interval anaerobic training one or two days/week. So, you will have to
go back to the “NO Pain, NO Gain” credo once again. But this time your
body will be able to handle it. Keep at the intervals and you will see
your pace improve once again for a period. But just like the aerobic
training, there is a limit to the benefit you will receive from
anaerobic/carbohydrate training. At that point, you will see your speed
start to slow down again. And that is the signal that it is time to
switch back to a strict diet of aerobic/fat burning training.
At the point of the year you are in right now, probably most of you are
ready for this phase of speed work. Keep your interval sessions to
around 15-30 minutes of hard high heart rate effort total. This means
that if you are going to the track to do intervals do about 5k worth of
speed during the entire workout. Less than that and the physiological
effect is not as great. More than that and you just can’t maintain a
high enough effort during the workout to maximize our benefit. You want
to push your intervals, making each one a higher level of intensity and
effort than the previous one. If you reach a point where you cannot
maintain your form any longer, back off the effort or even call it a
day. That is all your body has to give.
This is what I did to keep improving for nearly 15 years as a
triathlete and it is the basis for the coaching methodology at my
coaching web site markallenonline.com where since 2001 Luis Vargas and
I have coached hundred of triathletes to great results. It is certainly
a challenging methodology for many but the rewards are huge. I invite
you to become one of our athletes. Luis and I will personally answer
any questions you may have about this methodology and how to overcome
many of its challenges. See you at the races.
Mark Allen
6 Time Ironman World Champion
Here’s a story from Mike Pigg, a major triathlete in the mid-1990s.
EXCERPT: From "The Big Book of
Endurance Training and Racing" by Dr. Philip Maffetone
My Perspective by Mike Pigg
Train slower to go faster? Is this guy a crazy or what? Phil Maffetone
is not a crazy and I feel very fortunate to have met him when I did. I
have been a professional triathlete since 1984. When I started my
career, I just picked up the triathlon magazine to see what the top
pros were doing and then just tried to emulated them. The one guy who
was a star at the time was Scott Molina. He was doing mega miles in all
three sports, plus doing speed workouts for each of the disciplines as
if he was just a runner, cyclist or swimmer only. It looked like a good
way to be the best, especially if you had the time to just eat, sleep,
swim, bike and run. Things went well for me during the first three
years. In 1988, I was able to work my way up to the top rank. I thought
I was invincible. That is when the bumpy road started. I had no control
over my progression. I was also starting to lose my love for the sport.
It got so bad that I was about to quit and move on. The training became
too hard and my results weren't there to justify the pain. That's about
the time I ran into Phil.
We sat down and had a long talk. At first it was hard for me to swallow
what Phil had to say. What helped me is that I have spent a lot of time
training with Mark Allen. What I learned from Mark is that his heart
rate was always lower than mine during long rides by 10 to 15 beats.
During our long rides our pace would be even the first 65 miles than I
would start a slow death out on the plains of Boulder, CO. I was like
the hummingbird who needed fuel all the time and Mark was like a steam
engine that you throw on the coals and cruise for hours and hours.
Also, I was impressed by how consistent Mark's career was going with
very few flaws year after year. Then the topper of it all was that Mark
had been following Phil's plan already for many years.
So I listened to Phil with both ears wide open. After our conversation,
Phil gave me one of his books. It was an easy reading book that had a
lot of common sense about how to train and eat properly. So, I decided
to follow the "180 Formula" and over a little time have become a firm
believer in this aerobic heart rate training program.
The training seemed slow at first at my designated heart rate of 155.
There were times when I had to walk up hills during the run and zig zag
on the bike just to stay in my aerobic range. In a little time, things
started to change and I became stronger at the same heart rate which
became quite exciting. After 5 months of loyal training, I got my first
big sign that the program was working.
Now, I have two stories of my own experience of following Phil's
program for the last three years starting in 1993. Before going on the
program, I would ride to my parents' summer place which is 65 miles
with three good climbs in it. My previous record was set with a good
friend of mine. We had the total grudge match all the way to find who
was king of the bike. He would attack on the hills and I was holding a
heart rate between 165 and 182 to establish a record of 3 hours and 15
minutes. When we arrived at the cabin I would achieve a total bonk. The
best I could do for the rest of the day was eat, sleep and eat and even
that was difficult. Three years later and 5 months on the aerobic
program, I attempted the same course again. This time solo and never
went above 155 even on the long climb. The results were interesting; I
went 3:09 and felt good enough to go for a 10 mile run straight after.
Slowly, I was becoming convinced that the theory was working.
My other story comes from the first race of the season while following
Phil's plan. It is amazing how I was seeing good aerobic results in my
workouts but still had doubts about my performance level. You see, I
still needed my hammer sessions to prove to me or build my confidence
that I was ready to race at a professional level. The season opener was
in Australia at Surfers Paradise International Triathlon. My confidence
was so blown that I didn't even want to get on the plane. But a swift
kick from my wife and I was off. The whole week prior to the race, I
was fighting myself, saying that I wasn't going to do well because of a
lack of speed training. Finally, I told myself to shut up and go have a
good time. To my surprise I did have a good time and won. For some
reason the speed was there and my endurance definitely there. Plus a
bonus, I was able to beat Mark Allen at his own game.
Now I am hooked. I am in love with my profession and staying healthy at
the same time. Dr. Maffetone's guidelines are easy. All you need is a
heart rate monitor to listen to your ticker and a little patience. And
yes you can do it just by slowing down and letting your body catch up
with your mind.
Best wishes,
Mike Pigg
So, for you cardioheads, there's a little alternative to the
conventional wisdom common today. One common effect of avoiding the
high-intensity, adrenal-engaging workouts is, oddly enough, less body
fat, as the body apparently tends to store fat if it is constantly put
into "emergency fight-or-flight" mode.
Cleansing:
A little project for this year is a "heavy metal detox" cleansing plan,
which I've been kicking around for a long time. Actually, it is not
just heavy metals, but also light metals such as aluminum (lots of
aluminum in the air, soil and water these days). I was eyeing the Ejuva
heavy metal detox plan, but then I decided that I could just do much
the same thing with stuff out of the supermarket.
The basic strategy is a combination of cilantro and chlorella. The
Ejuva plan uses this too, but in a concentrated liquid form. It is
rather expensive, so I figured I'd just buy cilantro from the
supermarket. The chlorella is in the form of tablets from rawpower.com.
Plus, some garlic and lemon, which also have detox properties, and can
be made into a nice dressing for the cilantro-containing salad.
Here's a nice article (with links to further studies and detailed
procedures) showing that a combo of chlorella and cilantro can remove
an average of 87% of lead, 91% of mercury and 74% of aluminum from the
body in 42 days.
http://naturalsociety.com/proper-heavy-metal-...ntro-chlorella/
For this year, I'm doing two months of raw vegan eating, the first
since 2012. (I've been eating 50%+ raw since then.) I've decided to be
fairly Catholic about it, although not so much as Graham who even says
no vinegar. For me this time: no coffee (I tended to cheat with black
coffee in the past since it has no calories), no booze (including wine,
which is raw), and minimal use of salty condiments such as soy sauce.
Mostly fruit, of course. No calorie restriction -- I just eat when I'm
hungry. I'd like to see where my body ends up after all this,
particularly regarding body fat. Like most people, I carry more body
fat today, when eating without calorie restriction, than would have
been the case when younger. But, I'm wondering how things would
normalize when I eliminate caffeine, alcohol, and almost all salt -- in
other words, my real raw vegan body.
| |
