Weight loss during cycling season

Just a quick post to sort of wonder aloud whether this year will be like last year in terms of weight loss. Last summer, when we were doing a lot of biking, my weight actually went down to a bit below 200 lbs.; maybe to as low as 197? I suspect that's because of the intense and lengthy energy expenditure I get when we cycle outdoors on the road.

At my last weigh-in (this past Saturday), I was at 208 lbs.--so I've gained a bit over the winter. I do think I've gained a bit of upper-body muscle mass from our strength training, but I seriously doubt it amounts to anywhere near 8 lbs. Then again, according to reading I've done on the subject, I'm likely to have some extra water retention from the creatine I've been taking regularly for about the last 3.5 months. So I'm guessing that plays a role in the weight increase I now see.

But with this post I just want to wonder aloud--and also give myself a reminder to check--about whether I'll get down to around 200 lbs. or little less once we start putting in serious miles on the bike (i.e., 30 plus miles) in the coming weeks. Stay tuned for further reports in that in the coming months.

Arm Toner overview, review

Yes, I'm still here. And yes, we're still exercising.

We managed to put in an 8.25 mile day outside on the tandem a little over week ago, then we got in a ca. 15 mile day a few days later so, with the nicer weather, we're getting fired up to do some serious outdoor riding. Hoping to get in at least one 100 mile day this year, but that's quite a ways off (mid-summer, maybe?).

And we're still doing our upper-body strength training. We just did our Arm Toner routine a couple of days ago (on Fri.), as scheduled. Which reminds me that I still need to provide an overview and review--which is the main topic of this current entry. Without further ado, then, on to the overview/review.

First let me just reiterate how glad I am that we found this Arm Toner routine. It really is very much what I'd been looking for for some time, i.e., and upper-body strengthening/toning routine that would be fairly short and less intense than the P90X routines we were doing about a year ago.

I'm a firm believer in taking it easy--"holding back," if you will--at certain points during the fitness year. This routine has provided us with the means for doing just that.

As I've observed earlier, the Arm Toner routine is one of five routines that make up the Power Half Hour fitness series. I haven't looked at any of the other routines and do not intend to--this one provides the only things I want from that regimen. And I don't know whether there are any dietary guidelines associated with the Power Half Hour regimen, as there are with P90X. Since we've had our diet pretty much under control for some time now, I'm not interested in learning or writing about any of those aspects of this regimen. No, my sole interest is in the particular segment that we're using--Arm Toner.

So, what is the Arm Toner routine? Put simply it's a fast-paced series of exercise sets for the upper body that are interspersed with a number of short stretching sessions. The exercise sets involve some calisthenics and some use of dumbbells (latex bands can be substituted for dumbbells). So, equipment-wise, there are minimal requirements, making it possible to do the routine in just about any location.

The whole routine is only a half hour long, though an off-the-clock, one-minute cool-down gets tacked onto the end--making it actually 31 minutes total. The video shows Tony Horton leading two participants in executing the routine. The exercise sets and stretch periods are of very brief duration, the longest being only one minute and the shortest being only sixteen seconds. There are seven stretch periods interspersed among sets of seventeen different exercises--some of which exercises get repeated (i.e., two sets are done).

Thus the important difference between this routine and others put out by the same company that I've used and reviewed here that is that there's almost no counting of repetitions; rather, almost all exercises are done according to the clock, i.e., for a brief specified interval. I find this approach of not counting repetitions but rather performing each exercise for a set time, refreshing and very effective for helping me reduce intensity.

Timing-wise the layout of this routine is a little confusing. The average duration of a set is only about 30 seconds, though some are quite a bit longer (fifty seconds) while others are quite a bit shorter (sixteen seconds). But if you're following along with the DVD you don't really notice that and just switch to the next set when instructed to do so. Below is a table that lists all the exercise sets and stretch periods along with their durations:

push-ups	20 seconds
lawn mower right	20 seconds
lawn mower left	20 seconds
push-ups	20 seconds
lawn mower right	22 seconds
lawn mower left	25 seconds
stretch	20 seconds
incline push-ups	25 seconds
hyperextensions	26 seconds
incline push-ups	30 seconds
stretch	30 seconds
diamond push-ups	16 seconds
back flys	25 seconds
stretch	30 seconds
heavy pants	22 seconds
stretch	23 seconds
military press	42 seconds
basic curls	31 seconds
military press	30 seconds
basic curls	26 seconds
stretch	30 seconds
swimmer's press	32 seconds
open-arm curls	33 seconds
swimmer's press	35 seconds
open-arm curls	33 seconds
stretch	35 seconds
21's (curls)	50 seconds
stretch	30 seconds
shoulder flys	30 seconds
1-arm tricep kick-back (right)	34 seconds
1-arm tricep kick-backs (left)	32 seconds
shoulder flys	32 seconds
1-arm tricep kick-back (right)	30 seconds
1-arm tricep kick-back (left)	32 seconds
stretch	26 seconds
upright rows	33 seconds
chair dips	32 seconds
upright rows	31 seconds
chair dips	37 seconds
stretch	40 seconds
triple whammy	62 seconds

I need to add that there is a 2:09 warm-up session at the beginning which is figured into the thirty-minute total for this routine. The ca. one-minute warm-down at the end--which I mentioned above--is not figured into the thirty minutes. See some snippets from this routine in the youtube video I've embedded below.

Also relevant in the way of general remarks are the names of certain of the exercises--names whose actual referent might not be readily apparent. "Hyperextension" may not, for example, be readily understandable as what is sometimes called the "superman": this is where you lay on the floor on your stomach and then raise your arms and legs off the floor and hold them there for a number of seconds. Yet more obscure will probably be the "triple whammy," which is a combination of three exercises also found separately in this routine: bicep curl, leading into swimmer's press which then transitions into tricep kickbacks (using both arms).

One of the first things the more mathematically-minded might note when looking over this table is that the times I've listed do not add up to thirty minutes. That's because several seconds always tick by between every set when no exercise is taking place: these seconds are taken up with Tony's bantering and/or equipment adjustment (two of the participants in the DVD are using adjustable dumbbells).

To summarize, I just want to reiterate how satisfied I am with this routine. It complements very well our exercise regimen in a number of ways: it focuses on upper-body strengthening/toning; it's short; it provides a decent aerobic workout; sets are done according to the clock rather than by counting repetitions; and for these reasons it provides a great alternative workout to use during periods when we want to lower the intensity level of our workouts. For these reasons, I highly recommend it--but do be aware that, if your fitness regimen differs significantly from mine, you may not find it so suitable. I should also mention in this routine's favor the cost factor: I paid just a few dollars on Amazon (shipping included) for my copy of Arm Toner.

On other notes, we begin another week off from fitness this week. It's the last week of lent, so we need to turn our focus to spiritual things. We will try to do a bit more walking this week, but we'll be off the bikes and not doing strength training for a few days.

Future plans: we will probably reinstitute our modified P90X phase soon--though we'll be making some further modifications. I'll write more about that later, but the basic idea is to switch from Arm Toner back to modified P90X, but to do the modified P90X only once a week instead of twice a week. Anyway, more on that soon.

More on the poll, part 1 of ?

Looks like fitbomb noticed my poll and is sending over some voting traffic. Waiting to see how many more votes come in. Meantime, some further observations about the poll along with a preliminary consideration of the results so far.

I'd like to begin by offering a big thank you to everyone who's participated in the poll. Thanks for visiting my blog and for showing your support for fitness and for fellow exercise enthusiasts. Now, on to preliminary considerations.

Thus far no one has slected the "3 more days" option listed in the poll--not surprisingly. That was meant to add a little levity and really can't be taken too seriously.

A few have predicted 6 more months for fitbomb, while yet more give him another year (my vote is among those). The least amount of votes so far give fitbomb 5 more years, while the most votes so far have him doing his fitness thing for the rest of his life (I suspect fitbomb himself cast the first vote in this category). What can we say about the results so far?

First, the way I've phrased the question is a bit vague. Having taught courses in which I offered multiple choice examinations I've learned that you have to be pretty precise in the way you formulate a multiple choice question: if you are not precise enough, more than one of the options could be considered correct. When that happens, you either have to eliminate the question from consideration when you grade, or you have to allow for two possible correct answers to the same question.

Similarly, it may not be clear what is the crux of my poll question. The question mentions fitbomb's "exercise craze," but what does that mean? Well, if you read my entry explaining the poll, you should be aware that in using the word "craze," I'm asking about the intensity of fitbomb's routine--which, as I observed, seems to me a bit manic.

Please note that I'm not alone in asking or wondering about the intensity level of his regime. Fitbomb himself posted an entry wherein he noted a similar reaction from a relative to whom he was describing his fitness pursuits. Fitbomb doesn't tell us whether this relative himself engages in any fitness activities but I thought it was interesting that I, as someone who's pretty serious about fitness, found myself similarly wondering about fitbomb's pursuits.

Unlike the relative, who may have been a corporate executive or something, and whose question may have been not just "What's the point? What are you looking to get out of this?" but additionally (the following words which I will conjecturally put into his mouth) "couldn't you be using that time to do something productive, like augmenting your income?," my question would have been something like "why do so much more than you need to do to maintain good health?"

And fitbomb does provide an answer in that very entry: he wants to test himself and he wants something extreme that will provide a contrast to his boring day job (side note: it's hard to feel sympathy for lawyers, but fitbomb has definitely tugged on my heartstrings with that remark :)--deepest sympathies, brotha). I certainly consider that a legitimate answer. But that answer doesn't tell us anything about the question I've asked in the poll: how long will his extreme regime last?

Speaking of which, back to the poll. What I intended to ask about in the poll was not how long fitbomb will try to stay fit. I could probably have phrased the question more carefully--as an experienced multiple-choice exam-giver should do--so that it could be construed only as addressing fitbomb's fitness extremism, rather than his desire to stay fit. But hey, this isn't an examination and participants won't be assigned any grades. This is a blog, the idea behind which is to generate discussion and provoke thought. So even responses that are wide of the intended question can be of interest and are worthy of further consideration.

My guess is that those who are voting for the fourth option, i.e., "the rest of his life," are expressing hopefulness about fitbomb's fitness endeavors. In other words, their responses, if they could be put in the form of discourse rather than simply clicks on a radio button, might go something like the following: "I hope fitbomb maintains fitness, and I encourage him to do so, for the rest of his life." And for anyone who may be wondering, I heartily concur with this sentiment and say "fitbomb, I wish the happiest and healthiest life for you and your family. You rock, my friend."

So that's one response to one of the ways in which my question could be construed. But what if we look at the other way my question could be construed, and at the implications attending that question? That is, what if we focus on the key word "craze," and identify that with fitbomb's own admitted "extremism?" In short, what if the question is not how long fitbomb can keep doing fitness and stay healthy, but rather how long can he sustain the fitness extremes in which he is now engaging? And furthermore--and a more interesting question in my view--can fitness be overdone?

Can someone do too much fitness? Is there a point at which health deteriorates owing to physical over-exertion? And, furthermore, what is the minimum amount of fitness activity one should engage in so as to maintain good health?

As I've admitted, I do not have an answers to those questions. I have some relevant data and experience. But I consider these open questions. And observing what fitbomb does--which is extreme by his own admission and in my own and his relative's judgment--raises those questions in a real way. I'm seeking at least tentative answers and hope others who read this blog may be interested in asking those questions and finding answers as well.

I've mentioned psychological burn-out as one possible effect of overdoing fitness. This is what I experienced in my bicycle racing days. Essentially I would burn myself out early in the racing season by pushing too hard and would lose interest in training later in the season. I didn't know how to go easy: for me, getting on the bike was synonymous with going all out. I think I could have done better and been more consistent by moderating my output and deliberately taking it easy at certain points--especially early--in the training season. Though I stopped racing bicycles over 25 years ago, I'm now trying to put into practice, in my current fitness regimen, what I learned from those experiences.

That's data I can offer from personal experience. As far as data that's generally available, we could look at examples of those who do physical fitness as a profession--namely, professional athletes. Are there any examples we can cite from the pool of professional athletes that might indicate that fitness can be overdone?

I hope the answer to that is obvious. Who can follow any sport and be unaware of one or another player who might have to sit out some or all of a season because of some injury? Isn't this scenario simply part and parcel of professional sports? Sure, some of those injuries are caused by legal or illegal physical contact, but others are stress injuries incurred during the activities or training that typify the sport. And some can be career-ending: to date myself a bit, think of Dick Butkus' early retirement from football.

These examples all provide some evidence that fitness can, in fact, be overdone. It is possible to engage in training to the extent of causing physical debilitation. But I refer mainly here to the more popular American sports that all involve some contact of one degree or another. It can be difficult in these cases to separate damage or injury resulting from contact from damage or injury resulting from training.

And you can injure yourself in training, with no contact, as I proved to myself early on in my current fitness regime. That was not an injury that resulted from over-training though, but rather from perhaps using improper form.

I want also to consider briefly another class of professional athlete: the personal trainer. These are folks who, while not being paid to play some sport, are instead paid to train people in fitness. Thus, fitness is their livelihood or vocation and is something they must do with regularity--whether as they help their clients or as a means to maintain their professional image. Tony Horton certainly qualifies as this type of professional athlete. And fitbomb, in the intensity and quantity of fitness he does, seems to aim to place himself within this class of professional athlete.

So, what sort of injuries do personal trainers incur? We don't hear much about that--probably because such information would be considered damaging to the vocation. But I'm sure those who do personal training for a living will have plenty of stories about stress injuries they or their fellow trainers have incurred. Tony Horton doubtless has quite a store of them himself. But the rate at which personal trainers get stress injuries from exercise is information to which I'm not privvy.

One need not, of course, be a personal trainer to get stress injuries from exercising. Injuries much more serious than the shoulder problem I had are, of course, possible. As someone who, like fitbomb, has become interested in what kettlebells offer, I'd encourage reading this thread for an example of how fitness can result in injury--though again over-training may not be in play here. But it does stand to reason that if you risk injury from training, and you do an increased amount of training, you thereby heighten your overall risk of injury.

Doing no training at all--as we all know--on the other hand, carries its own risks. I think the matter comes down really to what some call "the human predicament." There are trade-offs, risks involved in both and a corresponding need to balance those risks. Which gets back to the crux of this entry and to my poll: how do we draw the line or chart the appropriate middle way between too much and too little?

I'm still working on that. I've charted a course--a middle way, if you will--that seems appropriate to me. But it's a tentative one. I'm keeping an eye on fitbomb to see how his endeavors play out and in hopes that I might learn something. And I do sincerely wish for him and his a long and healthy life.

ADDENDUM ON PERSPECTIVE: it's occured to me that my assessment of fitbomb's fitness regime might be a matter of perspective--age-related perspective, to be precise. As someone a little over 50, I get exhausted just thinking about all the exercise he does on a typical day. Maybe if I were his age (I peg him at about 32 years old) I'd view it more as a challenge and would be trying to do the same amount he does?

Similarly, I think many my age might hear about what I do (summarized briefly in this entry) and think that I'm overdoing it. Actually, just reading that might not do it; they might have to see me on the bike and watch how I try to chase down anyone who has the audactiy to pass me, to see how manic I can be about riding. So, is the right amount of fitness really a matter of perspective?

Differing exercise requirements for aging women

A recent study (appropriated from here) underlines something we've discovered to be true over the last few years: that women's exercise requirements actually increase with age. Or their dietary intake needs to decrease. Or a combination of the two.

In our experience, exercise and a popular diet (South Beach) were not enough to bring my 50-year-old-plus wife's weight down. She followed that diet pretty scrupulously and we were fairly active--much more so in the summer than in winter, since this dates to before we started strength training and riding stationary bikes over the winter. But we still did quite a bit of walking during the colder months. After an initial weight loss of a few pounds on that diet and intermittent exercise regime, her weight would start to go back up. It was obvious something wasn't working.

What finally brought the weight down and kept it there (she was up to about 170 and is at 125 now--and no, I don't want her to lose any more) was cutting the South Beach diet portions down and increasing exercise. She replaced one of the daily meals in the South Beach plan with one of their recommended snacks, to be specific. And we began our current, year-round exercise regime.

So she eats two South Beach meals per day and the third meal is replaced by a South Beach recommended snack (e.g., apple with peanut butter or small shrimp cocktail), and in addition she has the other two snacks the diet advises (one between breakfast and lunch and one between lunch and dinner). That eating plan in combination with our new exercise regime, has allowed her to lose about 45 pounds and keep it off (fingers crossed!). She's been at the target weight for close to 6 months now, incidentally. I'm very happy with that and so is she.

In any case, the study I mentioned seems to offer an explanation for why it was so difficult for her to steadily lose, then keep off, the weight. The article follows.

Women Need 60 Minutes Daily Exercise To Prevent Weight Gain -Study
By Jennifer Corbett Dooren
Dow Jones Newswires

WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- A new study shows women need 60 minutes of moderate daily exercise to prevent weight gain as they age if they consume a normal diet.

The findings suggest women need more exercise than the current guidelines of 150 minutes a week, or 30 minutes five days a week, of moderate-to-intense activity. The study is being published in the March 24/31 edition of the Journal of the American Medical Association.

"I don't want people to throw up their hands and say I can't do it," said I. Min Lee, the study's lead researcher and a doctor and associate professor at Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston.

She says women who consume a normal diet and are already at a normal weight can beat middle-age weight gain by working out intensely for 30 minutes a day by running, cycling, swimming laps or working out at a gym.

"If you are willing to sweat it out you can do less," Lee said. Weight-gain can also be prevented with 60 minutes of moderate activity like walking, a leisurely bike ride or playing catch, for example.

Federal exercise guidelines of 150 minutes a week of moderate-to-intense activity are designed to prevent disease and obtain other health benefits. However, a 2002 report by the Institute of Medicine suggested 60 minutes a day, or 420 minutes a week is needed to prevent weight gain.

Lee explained that the basis of IOM's findings have been questioned so she and other researchers decided to look at the issue again with a group of women participating in the federal Women's Health Study. She also said the goal of the study was to look at women who weren't dieting and were consuming a normal diet to see what impact physical activity has on weight.

The study looked at 34,079 healthy U.S. women who consumed a usual diet from 1992-2007. The women in the study were all age 45 and older at the start. The average age of women in the study was 54.

The women were given a questionnaire about the amount of exercise or activity they engaged in per week at the study start and then at three-year intervals. Women's exercise activity was tracked for an average of 13 years while weight changes were tracked over a three-year period.

Overall women gained an average of 5.7 pounds in the study. However, women who were normal weight, or those with body-mass index of less than 25, maintained their weight if they exercised for 60 minutes a day. Women who exercised less generally gained weight.

Lee said that for overweight or obese women that 60 minutes a day of exercise wasn't enough to maintain weight, suggesting calories also need to be cut.

"These data suggest that the 2008 federal recommendation for 150 minutes per week, while clearly sufficient to lower the risks of chronic diseases, is insufficient for weight gain prevention absent caloric restriction," the study author's wrote.

As I've written earlier, at certain times of the year (mostly in winter) we might exercise as little as 140 minutes a week--a bit less than what the current guidelines suggest for women. When the weather allows cycling outdoors, however, we exercise far more than that. Heck, any typical Saturday or Sunday when the weather is nice sees us doing a minimum of 150 minutes on the bike at one time, and we might even do twice that or more.

How insomnia can hinder physical fitness

Today I have a good example to share of how insomnia can hinder physical fitness. It might seem counter intuitive that a lack of sleep or troubled sleep could affect one's fitness life. But it can.

I suppose the most evident way insomnia could hinder fitness would be in the feeling of exhaustion that can accomnpany insomnia, and the hindrance that could cause in exertion: if you're already feeling physically drained owing to sleep deficit, are you going to be able to push yourself less hard than you would were you well rested? The common-sense answer to that question appears to be affirmative; yes, you should be less capable, having not rested properly, of pushing yourself.

But the hindrance I want to write about today is of a somewhat different character. It's actually more simplistic, involving scheduling.

As my readers will be aware, I suffer from insomnia. Last night, for example, while not by any means a really bad night, was a pretty restless one. I slept a little less than one hour before I awoke. After that I was unable to get back to sleep. I finally decided to get up and walk/sit to see if that would calm down some intestinal discomfort that seemed to be interfering with sleep.

I didn't want to be up for very long because I have to leave town briefly today, so I laid back down at around 2 A.M. I had already begun to doubt at that point whether I'd be in a condition to get up at 6 A.M.: you see, since I would be missing my stationary bike session this evening owing to the trip I'm taking, I had hoped I might get up early and do that session in the morning.

Well, I was not in a condition to arise at 6 A.M., so I missed doing the stationary bike session I had planned. Now, fortunately in this case, I had a little extra time later in the morning before my departure. So, though I overslept the session I had planned for today, I was able to work it in a little later after I'd gotten up.

But had my schedule been tighter, I might have lost my opportunity to exercise today owing to the insomnia problem. So, there's a concrete example of how insomnia can hinder fitness.

Super shake update

Just wanted to do another short entry on super shakes and how they've really made a big difference on strength-training days (for my purposes, strength training mean upper-body strengthening exercises). I posted earlier about retching problems I'd had when we do our strength training, and about how I hoped drinking a super shake on workout day might address that problem.

Drinking the shake on strength-training day did, in fact, help to alleviate the problem. And in this entry I just want to reiterate that and to recommend to anyone who may have this sort of retching problem when they work out that they should consider a super shake lunch/afternoon snack on workout days as a potential solution.

To be more concise, here's how the shake diet has helped me on strength-training days. We usually work out in the evening--around 6 or 7 P.M. I will eat a solid breakfast on those days and often have a mid-morning snack as well (yogurt, perhaps some fresh vegetables and/or some corn chips). But after about 11 A.M. I switch to what is essentially a liquid diet until supper (after the workout). So, most of a large supershake for lunch, then the rest later in the afternoon. This diet has made a big difference with respect to the retch factor.

Granted, you may not have such acute digestive issues as I have (I suspect a hiatal hernia). But using these shakes on workout days may nonetheless bring you some relief if you have the retch sensation during your workout.

Now, the urge to retch is not limited to strength-training for me, though it is more pronounced (owing, usually, to supine or prone positions you assume when doing certain exercises). So the question I now face is, should I consider--now that the cycling season impends--doing super shakes on hard cycling days as well?

I've definitely given it some thought. I'll be providing updates on that.

BTW, the backs of my legs are a bit sore today--hamstrings, calves, behind the knees. I'm guessing that's from yesterday's ride and owes largely to the fact that I ride an upright bike for off-season, stationary-bike training, while during cycling season I ride a recumbent on the road. Slightly differing muscle groups are involved in each of the two configurations.

Cycling season officially opens! (or: Two-thirds of a geriatric triathlon?)

We officially opened the 2010 cycling season today by hitting the road for the first time this year. Was it ideal weather for it? No, far from it. It was pretty cool (a little over 40) and the roads were still a bit damp from the rain/drizzle we've been getting all week.

No, I'd like to cast this as a valiant attempt to inaugurate the season, but the realist in me won't let me get away with that. Truth is, we had an errand to run. And the errand needed to be done on the bike. And today was finally a clear enough day and we had enough time to actually do it.

What was the errand? Well, we've finally decided--after five years of ownership--to take the bike into the shop for a full tune-up. And since we ride a recumbent tandem, we can't just throw it in a car or something and take it there. It would take a truck or van to do that. Or simply riding it in to the shop, which is what we did. The shop's only about a 5 mile ride from us.

Which brings me to the geriatric triathlon part of this entry. We actually need to leave the bike with them for about a week. We ride it there and drop it off . . . so, how do we get back?

Some might take the bus. Others might ask a friend for a ride. But us? We walked. We took a slightly shorter route to get home, so it ended up being a little over 4 miles. There's our two-thirds geriatric triathlon for you: 5.25 mile bike ride and 4 mile walk.

Joking aside, it felt great. I'm glad we did it--both the riding and the walking. I look forward to doing it again when we pick up the bike, probably next weekend.

And we are really, really glad, in all seriousness, that we've been able to kick off the 2010 cycling season so early--even if it's with a paltry 5.25 mile ride. We'll be putting in many, many more miles over the upcoming months, God willing, so lots more miles are to be added to this modest beginning.

More walking, shoulder update

Did some more walking today, though probably only about 3 miles or so. So when we got home we did a few minutes of intervals on the stationary bikes as well (half of our usualy 20-minute session). Itching to get out on the road now that the snow is melting apace.

I haven't written about my shoulder problems for a few months now. That's actually a good sign: it means it's not been bothering me much. I think it's now about as good as it's gonna get. What that means is that it will probably always bother me to some extent--if it remains like it is now, it will be mostly just a bit stiff.

I think I have an idea about what exercise was causing me difficulty: a sort of lat pull-down movement I was doing back in Soloflex days. Now that most of our upper-body strength training involves calisthenics and use of some dumbbells, the problem has pretty much been resolved.

I do feel a little stiffness in the other shoulder (left) these past few days, though. But this time it's actually behind my shoulder--like maybe in a muscle that goes between the upper part of the tricep over by the shoulder blade. We'll see whether that goes away.

About the poll I added

I added a poll to my blog yesterday. It's set to last for about 2 months--yeah, so this is a low-traffic blog and I need to add extra time in hopes of attracting more participants. So, what's the poll about?

Well, it relates to a fitness blog I check on with some regularity, located here. This guy does an insane amount of fitness activity. Reading about his regime and thinking about my own comparatively modest endeavors I get to thinking . . . how long will this guy last?

I don't ask that with any malice. He seems nice enough and writes engagingly. But in my view he's going way, way beyond what is necessary for his health.

Will it hurt him to do so much more than the minimum necessary for maintaining good health? Who knows? He might end up with some sort of stress injury, which could have a greater or lesser impact on his health. Or he may not. But the real question at stake here is whether you can exercise too much. And I don't profess to have an answer to that question--certainly not with respect to the physical component of fitness.

I can, though, attest to the psychological aspect of overdoing fitness. I know from my own experience that it is possible to burn yourself out by doing too much: I learned some lessons about that back in my bike racing days. When that happens, it becomes drudgery, something you have to force yourself to do. Which is one step along the way to ceasing to do it altogether.

There are ways to deal with that, one of which is to introduce variety. That's what I'm doing in my own routine and it seems to be something fitbomb (the guy has never revealed to me his personal identity, so I'll just refer to him by the name of his blog) may be doing as well--though I'm not sure he's adopted it as a strategy: he may just be trying out all the latest fitness fads.

Which brings me to another possible motivation for him: perhaps he's doing what he does, in part, because it's popular? He's got a ready-made community of fellow exercisers that buy and perform the same sets of commercialized fitness regimes he does. Because of the promotion the creators of the routines engage in, the products are popular and glamorous. I don't discount this as a possible motivating factor for him.

But there's a flip side to the popularity aspect: what happens when, as happens with all fads, fitness wanes in popularity? Would he be doing what he does if most people held that fitness pursuits were a waste of time? Would he be able to sustain what he now does with the rise of this sort of attitude?

Aside: you might detect from these remarks that I am not a believer in progress. I do not hold that humanity has evolved to a point where the importance of fitness has permanently impressed itself on the collective consciousness and will remain with our kind in perpetuity. No, being a keen student of history I see those kinds of assumptions as naive and ill-advised. The time will come again in our history--provided our race survives long enough--when fitness will seem like a waste of time, mark my words.

Enough philosophizing . . .

All this being said, I do suspect fitbomb may be doing what he does for reasons that differ from the reasons I'm doing fitness. He seems fairly young--maybe early thirties? So he's doubtless still got a pretty good energy level. He seems not to have been in really bad shape before he started his current exercise craze, though he does admit to not being terribly athletic earlier in his life.

Me, on the other hand, I've turned to fitness to try and address some serious health issues. Not that I've been terribly unfit at any point in my life either. But I'm probably quite a bit older than this guy and my body--as is typical of bodies starting at around my age--is starting to deteriorate. Thus, I see fitness as mandatory for me if I expect to lead a decent life in the years ahead. In short, I should be maintaining at least my current level of fitness for the rest of my life.

I'm not sure these sorts of thoughts have entered fitbomb's mind because he may not yet have faced his mortality in such an urgent way as I have. Perhaps for him fitness will end up being some sort of fad, a phase he goes through during a certain brief portion of his life? Hard to tell.

But what I do sense is that he's overdoing things a bit, which can lead to burn-out. Now, granted, I do not know this guy. He might be a sort of manic personality, someone who was a hyperactive kid, and so may be capable of maintaining such an intense level of fitness for a very long time.

Whatever the case, the poll is designed to address some of these questions. How long do you think he'll be able to keep this up? My own feeling is that it won't last too much longer--maybe another year. I'm really guessing here and, if I knew this guy personally, I might have an entirely different opinion, knowing his personality. But not having that sort of information, I would have to guess that it won't last very much longer.

Find the poll at the top of the right hand column of this page and weigh in with your vote (I've included a screenshot of the poll in this entry: find the real, interactive poll at the top of the right column of this blog).

4.5 mile walk in place of cycling

Today was one of the days when we decided to replace our cycling with walking. It was such a nice spring day out and we had some errands to run. So we decided to get our exercise and do errands at the same time.

We could have actually made this about an 8-mile walk. But that seemed to me a little too large an increase in mileage. We currently walk in the range of 1-3 miles on some days and increasing that amount by more than twice so suddenly seemed unwise to me. So we drove a bit of the way toward our destination and walked the rest. In retrospect I think we could have done 6 miles without causing ourselves too much distress--mainly joint pain, at our age. But hindisght is always 20/20, as they say.

Of course the walking was nowhere near as intense as the cycling we would have done today. But that's fine: we don't need to be intense every time we do activity, we just need to remain active. I'm not trying to set any records. I'm shooting more for the sort of slow-and-steady-wins-the race philosophy

I've created a new poll on this blog but I'll wait until tomorrow to explain further about that.

Laxness in breathing exercises heightening blood pressure?

I kind of got out of my rythm of breathing exercises a couple of weeks ago when I made a trip out of town. I've had a hard time getting back to that rythm (twice a day, morning and evening is what I'd been aiming for). Today I had a higher reading than I've seen in a while (150/87): is it related to laxness in performing my breathing exercises?

Other factors could be at play. I had kind of a rough night last night for one. Then, I really rushed over for my blood pressure appointment today since I got a late start. Then, since today was strength-training day I didn't take hydrochlorothiazide.

Tough to say how much role laxness in performing breathing exercises played. What's certain is that I need to get more regular and frequent about it in order to see if it comes down at the next appointment.

To interval, or not to interval?

Somehow I only recently began to wonder to myself "is it really necessary to do intervals on every day we do our stationary bike riding?" Simple question and a simple answer occurred to me promptly: "no, it's not necessary."

According to my by-gosh by-golly technical reckoning, we should get benefits from intervals even if we do them on only 2 of our four cycling days. We're not training for the olympics here, after all, folks.

I decided to implement the new policy pronto. So from here on out we'll be doing intervals on 2 to 3 of our 4 weekly stationary-bike days. On the other days we'll do our usual ca. 30 minutes of spinning.

Anxious to see what will be the effects of the intervals--if they're noticable at all--when we'll hit the road a little later this spring. Stay tuned.

I'm still here

Was out of town for a few days so I missed a couple of cycling sessions last week. But I made up for that to some extent by doing some fairly vigorous snow shoveling. We're still here and still exercising--just tonight we did our usual strength training. And tomorrow intervals. Once I get fully settled in again I'll be posting some more substantial entries.