24 Jul 2011 20:42
As a continuance of my assault on the misleading ideas about "natural" food, this is yet another follow-up to a series of blog posts where I discuss chemicals in foods and the concept of natural. In the last one I talked about the difference between chemicals as nutrients and chemicals as pharmacologic agents. I explained that some chemicals in food do have a physiological affect beyond their basic biological functions. Others, such as compounds in herbals used for medicinal purposes simply have no function as a "nutrient." All of these, though, have one thing in common and that is summed up by saying that "The poison OR the remedy is in the DOSE." This is important in helping us recognize the difference between nutrition information and alternative medicine information.
06 Jul 2011 23:16
My post on rest periods for strength training makes fun of that old bodybuilding forum question "what's your stats?" You know the one when you ask any question and you always get the same response asking you your weight and how much you can squat, deadlift, and bench press? The idea is that the respondent is doing some quick and dirty calculations based on your "stats" and this will lead them to the correct answer to your particular question. In reality they don't know what the hell they are doing and are just trying to sound like they are about to give you 'individualized' answers.
Misconceptions About Food Nutrients, Toxic Plant Compounds, and Nutrition Information Versus Alternative Medicine
06 Jul 2011 03:20
In my post Homeopathy Is Not a Drug and Other Babbles I had quite a rant, albeit a very informative one, about some idiotic things a NaturalHealth.com article said about homeopathy and about homeopathy quackery in general. If you read that you will be more in flow with what is to follow. Cuz I'm not done!
Much of that post concerned chemicals. The food faddist or the homeopathic zealot, when he hears the word chemical, cries "POISON!" Yet, chemicals are what our food is made of and the term toxic chemical, taken by itself, is meaningless.
26 Jun 2011 04:12
Bench press, bench press, bench press. I'm amazed at how many bench press warriors I come across. No, I'm not talking about the guys who just love to bench press and like to see those numbers go up, but they try to keep their training balanced. I'm talking about people who only train upper body and actually consider bench press (and curls) to be a good measure of "strength".
22 Jun 2011 19:15
The front squat exercise is beginning to get more and more love. It's really about time. True, the back squat is still called the King by many but the front squat is coming into its own. It's a daunting thing to master. Uncomfortable at first and just so downright weird for those used to the back squat. Heck, throw the overhead squat into the mix and it's like a whole new world.
The front squat is just as good as the back squat as a mass builder. In fact, though I cannot prove it, I tend to think it is better. Well, lest you shout sacrilege let me remind you that mass is not my "specialty."
03 Jun 2011 16:26
I see this all the time. Should I just call this blog the "false dichotomy" blog? However, if there is one thing I hate more than people always preaching one of two extremes in strength training it's people teaching the deadlift that don't know what they are doing.
Verbal cues become mental cues. Mental cues slowly morph into mental imagery. Mental imagery becomes a visual mental schema of the lift. What am I saying in plain language here? I am saying that the words people use will eventually affect the way you "look" at an exercise with your mind's eye. It will 'become' that word. If I say "wet" to you then you visualize water. You don't think about the concept of "wetness" in some abstract way. Well, the same thing goes for most everything, whether you wish it or not.
21 May 2011 21:32
There is a myth out there in webernet land: You must be balanced and consider all opinions and arguments. You must weigh them all equally. If you don't you are not thinking "critically".
I deal with this all the time. "Is this program any good?," I am asked. "No," I say, "It's crap."
"Why?" They say. "Why don't you ask me why can't dogs fly?" I reply.