"Metabolic" Training Gone Bad

The most popular post I've ever made to this blog, without question, covered metabolic resistance training for fat loss. Since I first made that post, the whole "metabolic movement" has exploded onto the fitness scene. I still love metabolic circuits (although, I should point out, ANY type of training is "metabolic"), but, my thoughts on-and use of-this type of training has changed since I first made that post. Allow me to explain...

If you are trying to OPTIMIZE and not just IMPROVE strength and/or muscle gains, I think performing metabolic circuits, metabolic resistance training, HIIT, etc. on the days you do not strength train is a bad idea. Doing body weight circuits, band circuits, med ball circuits, HIIT training on an airdyne bike or rower, complexes, "tabata's", countdowns, kettlebell circuits, TRX circuits, sledge hammer work, sled/prowler work etc...or combing all of this stuff together into one big circuit...on the days you do not strength train (off days) will interfere with your recovery and slow progress.

If your primary goals are to optimize strength and/or lean muscle gains, I would limit the amount of metabolic work you do. Ideally, this stuff should be used at the end of your normal strength training workouts and should not exceed 10 minutes total. This is more than enough to improve and/or maintain your conditioning while focusing on strength and lean mass gains, and this is exactly what I do with my private clients who are interested in optimizing strength. Doing more of it as a stand alone "cardio" workout on the days you don't strength train is going to interfere with recovery. Some will say it won't because the loads you are using when performing metabolic circuits are typically only 25-50% of max strength (or often times just body weight), but I call bullshit. Sure, this isn't very heavy...but it's heavy enough to screw up your recovery and make your next workout a real grinder.

If you are trying to optimize strength and mass gains, I'd rather see you do foam rolling/mobility/activation/stretching circuits on your off days, and, in addition, maybe do a 30 minute walk or do some very light steady state cardio for 20-30 minutes. All I hear about is how low intensity cardio saps strength gains and causes you to lose muscle. Again, I call bullshit. Where is the research on this? I think this is more "fitness industry and gym myth" than anything else. If anything, it's the exact opposite: the overuse and improper application of "metabolic" work, HIIT etc. is what is TRULY slowing down peoples progress in terms of strength and mass gains.

Look, I'm not saying "don't do metabolic work" if you are trying to optimize (again, not just improve) strength and/or lean mass, but just apply it properly-at the end of your normal workouts (and don't go overboard). I think, even if you are trying to optimize strength and mass, you still should be in good condition and have good work capacity and power endurance. BUT, you can achieve these goals with a limited amount of "metabolic" training once or twice weekly for 5-10 minutes at the end of your normal workouts. Here is what a sample weekly scheduled might look like for someone who is primarily interested in optimizing strength and/or lean mass gains, wants to get the conditioning benefits of metabolic work (and enjoys it), but doesn't want it to interfere with recovery:

Monday: Upper Body Strength Work w/ a 5-10 minute metabolic circuit thrown in at the end (upper body focused metabolic work)

Tuesday: Lower Body Strength Work w/ a 5-10 minute metabolic circuit thrown in at the end (lower body focused metabolic work)

Wednesday: 30 minute walk OR 20 minutes of steady state cardio and/or a mobility/activation/foam rolling/stretching circuit (maybe 20 minutes total on this)

Thursday: Same as Monday

Friday: Same as Tuesday

Saturday: Same as Wednesday

Sunday: Total and complete rest

Santa Clarita, CA based trainer Alwyn Cosgrove has stated that, within the fitness industry, there is typically a cycle of both under and over reaction to any "trend". Well, right now, there is severe over reacation to "metabolic training". I think the popularity of CrossFit and "MMA style" training (although the top MMA strength coaches actually take a more traditional approach when dealing with these athletes) has fueled this fire. This is all fine and good, but, it's all goal dependent. I get emails from well intentioned guys who are trying to get substantially stronger and wonder why their progress has slowed since they added an "MMA conditioning class" or CrossFit Session on the days they don't strength train. The answer is this little thing called recovery and super compensation.

While I'm ranting a bit, let me also address the "anti steady state cardio" movement as well. Now no one is allowed to do steady state cardio. It's off limits. You are not "in the know" if you are still doing it. If it's not short and intense and not an interval it's a waste of time. You are "so 1990" if you are doing steady state, moderate intensity cardio. Well, the funny thing is, the same people who subscribe to this "movement" are also the ones who bitch about not being able to get stronger or larger. Sorry, but the most heavily muscled athletes on the planet (arguably)-competitive body builders-have been doing steady state cardio for years...I don't see them shrinking up. You won't find many body builders doing hybrid kettlebell/TRX/Prowler circuits. This isn't to say these athletes couldn't benefit from some of this type of stuff (again, properly scheduled and applied), but they know, intuitively, that steady state work is not as taxing on their recovery abilities.

Bottom line: I don't like absolute fitness rules, trends, movements, or cults. I think metabolic training is fun, productive and beneficial...but it is also goal dependent and has to be applied properly. In my next two posts, I'll continue with this topic, focusing on two other populations of fitness enthusiasts who have different goals than those trying to optimize strength and/or size gains: fat loss focused folks and the general fitness crowd. As you might guess, the application of "metabolic" work for these populations is different...but you'll have to wait until next week.

Yours in Strength, Fitness & Health,

PJ Striet


http://www.personaltrainerscincinnati.com

How to Look Better than 90% of the Male Population

I received the following question from a blog reader, and, once again, I thought it-and my answer-would make for a good post.

PJ:


I'm 22 and just getting started with weight training, cardio and trying to get in shape. Boy am I confused!! I don't know if I should train like a body builder, a power lifter, an endurance athlete, a football player or what. There is so much information out there and so many opinions from guys like you that I don't really know what to do and I'm kind of paralyzed.


Really, I just want to look good with my shirt off, but, I also want to be strong and be in good shape...I guess I kind of want everything :) What do you recommend? Are there any general goals or bench marks for me to shoot for which would allow me meet my objectives? I really don't want to turn this into rocket science, but, the more I read, the more I feel like I might have to. I'd appreciate your advice.


Jordan (Nashville, TN)

Jordan:

You don't have to turn this stuff into rocket science. Most beginners, like yourself, do become paralyzed by all of the information-most of which seems contradictory-out there on training, fat loss and fitness. I totally understand why you are confused, so let me shed some light on this and point you in the right direction.

If you want to look better than 90% of the male population (that's probably a low estimate by the way), try to work towards hitting most or all of the following goals:

Upper Body Horizontal Pressing
Bench Press: 1.5 times your body weight for a single rep or 6 rep max equivalent (about 80-85 of your goal)

Upper Body Vertical Pressing
Standing Barbell Overhead Press: 1 times your body weight for a single rep or 6 rep max equivalent

Upper Body Vertical Pulling
Chin-ups (palms facing you): 1.5 times your body weight for a single rep (you'll have to add weight using a weighted vest, chains or a chin/dip belt) or 6 rep max equivalent
*another good goal is 15-20 full range body weight chin-ups

Upper Body Horizontal Pulling
Inverted Row: 15 full range reps with an overhand grip (your chest much touch the bar and you must go all the way down until your elbows are straight)

Lower Body Hip Dominant Pulling
Conventional Barbell Deadlift: 2.5 times your body weight for a single rep or a 6 rep max equivalent

Lower Body Knee Dominant Squatting
Conventional Barbell Back Squat to a 14-16 in. box: 2 times your body weight for a single rep or a 6 rep max equivalent

Power & Performance Goals
>=30 in. Vertical Jump
<=4.8 sec. 40 yd. dash

Conditioning Goals
<=6:00 mile
<=13:00 5 mile ride on the Schwynn AirDyne Bike
<=1:30 500 meter row on the Concept 2 Rowing Machine

All of the above goals, in my opinion, are quite achievable within about 2 years of proper training. The best thing about these goals is that they don't require any "fancy" programming or "advanced super secret" set and rep schemes. Just take a straight forward, progressive approach, be consistent, and don't miss workouts. Try to add reps or load, while performing the exercises with great technique, whenever possible. Be focused and train hard...have the right mindset. Don't cop out. Go after these goals. I'd suggest trying out some of the set/rep/loading protocols I outlined in THIS post.

Notice I didn't give absolute numbers to shoot for on the strength training exercises (300 lb. bench press, 500 lb. deadlift, etc). I'd rather have people focus on relative strength (how much you can lift relative to your body weight). Why? Well, as you noted, most guys want to not only be strong but also want to look good. If you can hit all or most of the bench marks/goals I outlined above on the strength movements, you can almost be assured you are going to be pretty lean and look "athletic". In fact, it would almost be impossible not to look pretty good-better than 90% of guys walking around-if you could hit those goals. For Example...

200 lb. Guy

Bench Press 300 lb. one rep max or 240 for 6-8 reps
Overhead Press 200 lbs. or 160 for 6-8 reps
Chin-ups 300 lb. one reps max (body weight + 100 lbs. of added weight) or 240 (body weight + 40 lbs.) for 6-8 reps
Barbell Deadlift: 500 lbs. or 400 lbs. for 6-8 reps
Barbell Squat (touching 14-16 inch. box): 400 lbs. or 320 lbs. for 6-8 reps

Again, if you saw the sample the guy above with his shirt off, he'd look like he lifts weights, would be fairly lean (maybe a visible "4 pack"), and have development in all of the large muscular structures of his body (not just "pecs and guns"). Would he look like a competitive bodybuilder? Not even close. Would he have the thickness of a competitive power lifter? Nope. Would he be as lean as a top flight track and field athlete or NFL wide receiver or line backer? Not likely.

BUT, would he have other guys asking him about what type of workout he was doing? Yep. Would his female co-workers privately gossip about him having a "nice body"? Yep. Could he go to the beach, take his shirt off and be confident?? Maybe turn a few heads?? Sure thing.

Also, getting your relative strength up will carry over pretty well to hitting the power and performance goals (vertical jump and 40 yd. dash). If you can hit the strength goals, I can almost guarantee you'll be able to achieve the performance goals as well (especially if you can hit deadlift and squat numbers). As for the conditioning, you just have to be consistent with it and take a straight forward progressive approach with this stuff as well. Start fairly moderate and just try to cut time off over many weeks and months.

Bottom line: focus on improving performance and your appearance will improve. Most beginners don't focus on performance and instead worry about how many sets they should be doing per body part (an archaic way to train BTW), what split they should be on, and the quantity of conditioning work (as opposed to intensity and improving actual conditioning and work capacity). These are all big mistakes.

Finally, beginners also try to use training principles and methods they are no where near ready for. They try to mimic what elite guys who are squatting 1000, deadlifting 800, and benching 600 are doing...BIG mistake. You can't try any of this stuff until you reach a high intermediate stage. Just be consistent and progressive over time. Don't get caught up in quantity of training or what "the biggest guy at the gym is doing"...focus on quality of training and progression and don't jump around trying every routine in existence. Hope this helps.



http://www.personaltrainerscincinnati.com

Alternatives to the Olympic Lifts for Power Development

I received the question below from a reader and I thought it-and my answer-would make for a good post.

PJ:

I really enjoy your blog and I have a question for you. I know you deal mostly with people who are trying to enhance their general fitness and lose body fat, but, I also believe you train some elite athletes as well and I thought you might be able to help me. My son is 13 years old and is an excellent basketball player. I'm sending him to a local strength coach/sports performance trainer in our area with the hopes of keeping him injury free and also improving his performance on the court.

The trainer I have him working with has him doing exercises such as power cleans and jerks. He says this will help him improve his power and vertical jump. I understand the rationale, but, my son has complained to me that his wrists and shoulders sometimes hurt after performing these types of exercises. What are your thoughts on using exercises like cleans for improving power in young athletes? Are there any other exercises which can accomplish the same objective but without exposing his shoulders and wrists to "wear and tear"? Thanks in advance for your feedback.

Paul in Austin, TX

Paul:

First of all, you (and the coach who is working with your son for that matter) have to understand that Olympic weight lifting is a sport in and of itself. Performing the Olympic lifts and variations of these lifts takes a great deal of precise technique and repetitive perfect practice to master. Personally, I don't think MOST (not all) athletes have any business performing these types of exercises unless they are actually competing in weight lifting meets. Furthermore, as you mentioned, these exercises subject the shoulders, wrists and low back to extreme forces during the catch phase and open up the door for injuries to occur.

With all of the above being said, power development is a crucial and necessary part of a sports performance training program. However, you can train power (force X distance / Time) and teach an athlete to produce force rapidly WITHOUT having them perform Olympic lifts and variations of the Olympic lifts. There are many safer and less technical exercises which can easily be implemented into an athlete's program which will allow them to improve their power output. Also, many strength coaches have their athletes perform the Olympic lifts because of the "triple extension": the explosive and simultaneous extension of the ankle, knee and hip joints. However, if you watch the typical athlete perform snatches, cleans, etc., there is very little triple extension going on. I'm all for training this quality, but, again, this can be done in a much safer and more efficient manner using other exercises.

So, here are some of my favorite exercises for developing power in athletes (and a lot of my adult fitness clients do these as well):

1. Weighted Jumps (barbell/dumbbell jump squats and split jump squats, trap bar jump squats, X vest jump squats, etc)
2. Body weight or weighted jumps onto boxes of varying heights
3. Broad Jumps
4. Body weight of weighted jumps over hurdles of varying heights
5. Kettlebell Swings
6. Various medicine ball throws and slams
7. Explosive rotational cable row
8. Explosive cable lift
9. Explosive cable push/pull (*one of my very favorites for improving total body power...see below)

There are many others which can be used besides what I have listed above, but, these are the ones I use the most and are easily taught to most anyone. If the coach/trainer working with your son insists on continuing to use Olympic lifts and their variants, you might suggest (you are paying him after all) that he use ONLY the single arm dumbbell hang snatch and/or the clean grip barbell hang snatch (do a google video search for "Mike Boyle snatch" to see demos of these 2 exercises). Both of these variations are a lot less technical and, IMO, safer as well. I use both of these with SOME of my athletes, but only after they've had a steady diet of the exercises I listed above and do not have any injury concerns. In most cases, even if my athletes do not have any injury concerns, the risk/reward of doing the these 2 snatch variations, especially if they are overhead throwing athletes, does not make any sense and we'll stay away from them.

As for sets/reps/loading on power exercises, I prefer 3-5 sets of 3-5 reps with a longer rest period (2 minutes or so). The focus should be on speed and developing force rapidly and not so much on load. If the speed of the movement is compromised, and the repetitions slow down significantly throughout the set, it defeats the purpose. Load progression should be very gradual, and, once again, if the reps start to slow down, load should be regressed. 

One final thing. You said your son is 13 years old. In my opinion, if your son just simply continues to get progressively stronger in all his major muscle groups, power development will improve regardless. The power equation is forceXdistance/time. The "forceXdistance" part of that equation is STRENGTH! If he gets stronger, he'll improve power regardless if he is performing "power" exercises. I think after 2 or 3 years of focused strength training, then he could start to incorporate some of the exercises I talked about above, but, again, this is just my opinion. Hope this helps!


http://www.personaltrainerscincinnati.com

"Eating Clean and Healthy" vs. Eating for Weight Loss and Fat Loss

As a trainer, coach, and gym owner who primarily deals with an adult clientele interested in losing weight and body fat (as opposed to performance enhancement), I regularly meet with prospective clients who  struggle-often times for years-with weight/fat loss and/or maintenance of weight/fat loss...and their struggles are what ultimately led them to seek out my help.

When meeting with these folks for the first time to do an evaluation and assessment, I often hear the same story. Many of these people tell me they are "eating clean" or are "trying to eat healthy", but still have not had much success in regards to weight loss and fat loss. These people often tell me how they eat "organic this" and "natural that", and how they have their freezers stocked with free range chicken, grass fed beef, and their refrigerators stocked with organic produce from the local farmers market.

When I ask them if they make any attempt to quantify all of this "clean and healthy" food they are eating, if they have any idea how many calories they need to be taking in to induce weight loss, or if they have any idea how many calories they take in on a daily basis, all of them look at me like I have grass fed cows coming out of my eyes. Somewhere along the line, people started to confuse "eating clean and healthy"-improving the nutritional quality of their diet-with eating for weight and fat loss. Somewhere along the line, most people started to believe that calories don't count.

Improving the nutritional quality of your diet-more whole grains, lean sources of protein, and fruits/vegetables-is clearly a positive and a step in the right direction. In fact, initially, improving the nutritional quality of your diet can create a calorie deficit and result in weight loss for a couple of weeks. However, over time, if you don't start to quantify the food you are eating, this weight loss will come to a halt, leaving you disappointed.

Trust me, it is very possible (I see it daily) to eat very "clean" and still over shoot your fat loss calorie requirements. Eating more organic food doesn't magically result in significant weight loss. In fact, I find, often times, those who are eating very nutritious foodstuffs end up eating even more calories than they were before because they are under the incorrect assumption that it is impossible to eat too much "healthy food". They think eating healthy food gives them a license to eat as much as they want.

Look, if you have struggled or continue to struggle with weight and fat loss, or keep losing and regaining the same 10-20 pounds over and over again, I've got news for you: IF YOU DON'T WARM UP TO THE IDEA OF COUNTING CALORIES, YOU ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO STRUGGLE.

Weight loss and fat loss primarily comes down to a matter of input vs. output. Your input (the calories you consume...even the "healthy calories") must be less than your output in order to lose weight. There is absolutely no way around this. You cannot refute the laws of thermodynamics...although their is a segment of the population out there who will tell you, incorrectly, that the laws of thermodynamics are flawed. If you don't know (1) how many calories you need to be taking in to induce weight loss and (2) what your actual daily input is, how can you expect to achieve your goals?

With all of the above being said, it seems as though everyone I give this advice to has an excuse. "Counting calories is not practical." "I'm too busy to be that precise." "There has to be an easier way." "Can't I just eat low carb and not worry about the calories?" When I hear these types of statements and questions from people, what they are really telling me is that they don't want to work very hard to meet their weight loss goals. They are "wishers and wanters" and not "doers".

Look, I really do wish their was an easier way...but boat loads of scientific evidence tell us otherwise. While principle based nutrition modification and improving the quality of your diet are certainly steps in the right direction, unfortunately, I don't think these strategies are going to result in large scale or sustainable changes in weight loss and fat loss. Improving the nutritional quality of your diet has much more to do with providing your body with high quality fuel and much less to do with weight loss and fat loss. Bottom line: if you are struggling with weight loss, despite "eating clean", start to count calories. Yeah, I know it's tedious, but, after a couple of weeks, you'll find it's not that big of a deal. If you can stay at or below your weight/fat loss calorie requirements 80-90% of the time, and you are engaging in a consistent exercise program, you'll find your results will be significantly better.


http://www.personaltrainerscincinnati.com

Preventing Over Training and Injuries in Distance Runners

Received the following comments and questions from a blog reader and I thought my answers and follow up comments would make for a good post.

PJ:


I regularly read your blog and really enjoy it...keep up the great work. I'm a fitness enthusiast and I also compete in 5k's, 10k's and half marathons. I read an article in the Wall St. Journal and I wanted to get your thoughts on it. I can relate to a lot of what the article had to say as I've battled injuries and over training due to running in the past. Can you offer me any other tips for preventing over training and injuries due to running? Thanks!


John from Sarasota

While I do not enjoy distance running and do not receive or chase the "runner's high" so many people seem to need and seek, I will concede many people, for whatever reason (maybe it was those scenes in the Rocky movies), enjoy running, and, despite my objections, are going to engage in the activity no matter what. Furthermore, I deal with both recreational and competitive runners on a regular basis at my training facility whom I'm trying to keep injury free (or at least minimize the wear and tear), so I have some experience in dealing with this population.

With the above being said, I read through the WSJ article, and I agree with most everything in the article. I've told my "runner clients" for years that if they absolutely feel they have to run-and enjoy it-the best way to avoid or minimize the risk of injury is to do all of the following:

1. STAY AT OR BELOW DOUBLE DIGIT MILEAGE WEEKLY

If someone wants to do two 4 miles runs, four 2 mile runs, three 3 mile runs, etc., on non-consecutive days, I suppose that's fine. I don't have any real scientific evidence (although the general theme is backed up in the WSJ article) to support this recommendation, but, over the years, on a purely anecdotal level, I've noticed those who exceed double digit mileage on a weekly basis seem to have the most problems with injuries (for obvious reasons).

Those who exceed double digit mileage are likely running more often and for longer periods of time. If you combine this with the assumption (and it's a good one), that most non-elite runners have terrible running mechanics, the likelihood of becoming injured goes up. For most non-elite runners, repetitive low amplitude (not a lot of hip flexion) movement in the sagittal plane, combined with the impact of the activity (and the horrendous footwear most people run in), is a recipe for disaster.

Finally, those who are running more often and logging more miles are not going to be able to devote adequate time to "cross training" (and, sorry, I don't think yoga and pilates are effective forms of cross training for runners as noted in the WSJ article). More on this below.

2. STRENGTH TRAIN AT LEAST 2 DAYS PER WEEK

As noted above, runners who are logging dozens and dozens of miles each week don't have enough time to devote to other forms of training-namely strength training-because these other forms of training become competing demands. Furthermore, runners, and other endurance athletes, have preconceived (and incorrect) assumptions about strength training. They feel strength work will "bulk" and stiffen them up. This could not be further from the truth, and, on the contrary, the ridiculous number of low amplitude miles they are running week in and week out will stiffen up their hips and low backs faster than a 4 minute mile.

Runners, and other endurance athletes, absolutely need to strength train 2 days per week in order to prevent injury, improve running efficiency, and improve force production. As long as runners are performing full range of motion strength exercises (not on machines), they absolutely will not lose flexibility or mobility and will actually improve both. For more on the benefits of strength training for runners, check out this article by Eric Cressey...he does a much more thorough job of explaining this than I can.

3. GET OUT OF THE SAGITTAL PLANE

I'm all for specificity of training, and, if you are going to compete or just want to finish a 5K, 10K, etc., what's more "sports specific" than running itself, right? Well, yes...and no.

In my opinion, true sports specific training, from an injury prevention standpoint (and that's the focus of this blog), should basically have the athlete do the exact opposite of what they are doing in their activity specific training, which, in this case, is running.

Running is performed in the sagittal plane. Runners are doing plenty of sagittal plane work. Doing more sagittal plane work is not necessary and is going to contribute to over use injuries, muscle imbalances, and muscular dysfunction. Runners need to do more FRONTAL and TRANSVERSE PLANE work: core rotation and anti-rotation, lateral lunges, rotational lunges, cross over step-ups, slide board work, etc. All of these exercises and activities recruit the "lateral sub-system": think glutes, hip internal and external rotators, piriformis, glute med, etc. These muscles are woefully underdeveloped in most runners (and most any athlete for that matter). Shoring up these weak links is a great way to prevent imbalances and overuse injuries.

4. DEVOTE PLENTY OF TIME TO SOFT TISSUE WORK AND DYNAMIC WARM-UPS

I have a lot of clients who get up first thing in the morning at 5:30 a.m., put on their shoes, walk out the door, do a few toe touches, "air hanky" (blow snot out of each nostril), and then go run. Bad idea.

If you are going to run (and I'm not going to get into the myriad of reasons why you shouldn't...I'm not going to "hate"), at least take the time to foam roll (or some other form of soft tissue work) the glutes, quads, adductors, calves, anterior tibs and peroneals, etc. If you don't know how to do this, get on over to Mike Roberston's site and sign up to his newsletter...subscribers receive a very comprehensive soft tissue work guide.

Foam rolling should be followed up with a dynamic warm-up which mobilizes and activates the joints and muscular structures most involved in running. Runners should mobilize their ankles, hips and thoracic spines and also do some glute activation work as part of their dynamic warm-ups. This need not take more than 5-8 minutes.

After the dynamic warm-up, I'd recommend static stretching the Achilles tendons, calves, the hamstrings and hip flexors for about 20-30 sec. each.

This entire warm-up-foam roll, dynamic drills and stretching-should take about 12-15 minutes. Yeah, I know, that's taking time away from your "running workout", but you'll thank me when you don't get hurt and can actually make it to the starting line on race day.

Ok, I can't help myself...I need to end this post with a little rant about running for fat loss and general fitness. Like I said earlier, I understand some individuals desire to run, especially if you enjoy competing in road races...you have to do it in order to prepare optimally.

However, those who feel they "have to" run for general fitness and fat loss purposes, as a superior alternative to other forms of activity, are completely missing the boat. Despite what many believe (and I have to diffuse and refute these beliefs almost daily), there is nothing special about running for general fitness. Yes, it is an activity. Yes, it burns calories at an accelerated rate. Yes, for most, even light running will increase one's heart rate substantially. HOWEVER, there are a whole host of activities which do the exact same things, WITH A MUCH LOWER RISK OF INJURY.

It has been said one needs to be fit to run but should not run to get fit. I agree. For most out of shape beginners who decide to "take up" running, the metabolic demand of even light running (5-6 miles per hour) is going to be entirely too much to sustain. This population is going to be miserable because they just can't handle the demand. If we also acknowledge that the typical out of shape beginner is weak, has serious muscular dysfunction, poor movement quality, sits at a desk 9 hours a day, has awful running mechanics and wears concrete blocks (most modern footwear), the entire situation becomes exponentially worse.

Bottom line: if you "must run", or if you want to complete or compete in road races, then fine...RUN! Just make sure you follow the tips and advice in this article. You'll likely experience fewer injuries due to running (although I can't guarantee you'll stay completely injury free due to the nature of the activity itself). For those of you who are running simply for general fitness and/or fat loss, you might strongly consider other, safer activities, like lifting heavy stuff (but I'm biased).

http://www.personaltrainerscincinnati.com