When Jamie was in the beginning stages of writing Knowledge & Nonsense, I encouraged him to cover as many misunderstood & uninvestigated topics as possible. What resulted was an amazing brainstorm of ideas that could barely be contained within a manuscript more lengthy than many college texts. Read More...
Torque Athletic
For all your equipment needs
Welcome to Max Condition
Everything and everyone has fitness or nutrition advice to offer these days-websites, television, newspapers, your best friend, college professors, barbers, mechanics, personal trainers, dietitians, and so on. The debate rages on between low carbohydrate and high carbohydrate fanatics. Advocates of high reps or low reps swear by their methods. I could go on forever citing examples of the various arguments running rampant in the fitness industry. All of this conflicting information makes it difficult for people to figure out what's right or wrong.
This website takes the work out of figuring out what's right and what's wrong by combining "in the trenches" knowledge (28 years of experience) with scientific data. Some will be surprised to learn that what they've believed about nutrition and exercise all of these years has been dead wrong. A statement isn't necessarily correct just because your fitness coach, college professor, or favorite magazine said it. How many times have you heard "well they say" or "everybody says"?
When someone tells you something or everybody says something, you accept it is as gospel without any question, especially when it came from someone with a highly respected degree or certificate, a reputation for always being right, or any other trusted source. I highly recommend that you change your way of thinking. If you're worried about offending people or possibly upsetting some of your heroes, you should probably stick to a robotic style of thinking and accept that you most likely will never find the truth. Like everyone else, I once assumed that certain statements were correct without really scratching the surface. When writing Knowledge and Nonsense: the science of nutrition and exercise, my views changed on many topics. Once you read the material on this site and in that book, I'm sure yours will too.
A question on a popular fitness forum recently caught my eye. The question was, "What makes an expert?" There were numerous replies to the topic. Some of the fitness gurus (as they and others like to call them) were highly offended and vowed to no longer post on the forum because their guru status was questioned. Have you ever wondered why the fitness industry seems to have more gurus and experts than any other industry? I don't think you need me to answer for you, but in case you need some help, the answer is because there is a potential to make big money if you're an expert in a world full of people who are looking for an easy way to get fit. Ask yourself, what makes an expert? My answer is that there are no true experts. There are too many different topics related to fitness and nutrition (no one can know it all or possibly look at all of the research). The other way to answer this question is by realizing that everything is relative. A person may be an expert on exercise relative to someone who has minimal interest or little knowledge. You might be a protein expert according to the fitness magazine that you write for, but compared to KD Tipton, you are probably ignorant on the subject. Expert status changes as the people you are discussing a topic with changes. Do I consider myself an expert? I don't consider myself a true expert because I don't believe there are any true experts. I do consider myself a person with a fair amount of experience and a substantial amount of knowledge (relative to most people I have came in contact with in the industry- read more about me). I can back up my statements with analytical reasoning and/or references to scientific data. I'm not one of those people who like to use the "so and so said," "I have a degree in," or "I have always done it that way" arguments. Those statements are ways to disguise the fact that they have no clue of what they are talking about. At the same time, I learn new things on a daily basis. I also speak with people from time to time that have fitness and nutrition knowledge far more extensive than mine. Those are the people that make me feel like I need to study and experiment more. Those are the people that motivate me to educate myself further.
This website is not a collection of my opinions. Rather, a compilation of thousands of hours of investigating, and analyzing Scientific Research and over two decades of real world experience. This site covers many uninvestigated and misunderstood topics. This site is a great educational tool for anyone interested in nutrition, exercise and critical thinking. The site also features information on outdoor skills, and the science of wilderness survival. But don't take everything said on this site (or any other site or source for that matter) with blind faith learn to be critical. Investigate all claims.
Note: Maxcondition has a NO-REFUND POLICY. ALL SALES ARE FINAL.
The information below is an excerpt from Dr. Dipasquale's newsletter- Dr. D’s Elite Performance Newsletter Volume One, Issue Three, August, 2010 You can sign up for the free newsletter www.ElitePerformanceNewsletter.com
"The abstracts below show that static stretching can be counter productive and that dynamic stretching and warm-ups, whether in lifting or track, can have performance benefits.
Pediatr Exerc Sci. 2010 May;22(2):266-77. Influence of recovery time on warm-up effects in male adolescent athletes. Faigenbaum AD, McFarland JE, Kelly NA, Ratamess NA, Kang J, Hoffman JR.
Abstract The purpose of this study was to examine the influence of recovery time following a dynamic warm-up (DY) and a static stretch warm-up (SS) on power performance in adolescent athletes. Following baseline measures, 19 males (16.5 +/- 1.1 yrs) performed the vertical jump (VJ) and seated medicine ball toss (MB) at the following time points after DY and SS: 2, 6, 10, 14, 18, 22 min. Analysis of variance revealed that VJ was significantly greater following DY than SS at 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18 min. Main effects indicated a significant increase in VJ from baseline at 2 and 6 min following DY (2.6-3.9%) and a significant decrease in VJ from baseline at 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18 min following SS (-3.2% to -7.0%). No significant interaction effects between DY and SS were observed for MB. These findings indicate that lower body power performance in male adolescent athletes can be enhanced following DY as compared with SS during the first 18 min of the post warm-up period.
J Strength Cond Res. 2010 Jul 30. [Epub ahead of print] The Acute Effects of Static Stretching on the Sprint Performance of Collegiate Men in the 60- and 100-m Dash After a Dynamic Warm-Up. Kistler BM, Walsh MS, Horn TS, Cox RH.
Abstract The acute effects of static stretching on the sprint performance of collegiate men in the 60- and 100-m dash after a dynamic warm-up. J Strength Cond Res 24(X): 000-000, 2010-Previous research has shown that static stretching has an inhibitory effect on sprinting performances up to 50 m. The purpose of this study was to see what would happen to these effects at longer distances such as those seen in competition. This study used a within-subjects design to investigate the effects of passive static stretching vs. no stretching on the 60- and 100-m sprint performance of college track athletes after a dynamic warm-up. Eighteen male subjects completed both the static stretching and the no stretching conditions in counterbalanced order across 2 days of testing. On each day, all subjects first completed a generalized dynamic warm-up routine that included a self-paced 800-m run, followed by a series of dynamic movements, sprint, and hurdle drills. At the end of this generalized warm-up, athletes were assigned to either a static stretching or a no-stretching condition. They then immediately performed 2 100-m trials with timing gates set up at 20, 40, 60, and 100 m. Results revealed a significant slowing in performance with static stretching (p <0.039) in the second 20 (20-40) m of the sprint trials. After the first 40 m, static stretching exhibited no additional inhibition of performance in a 100-m sprint. However, although there was no additional time loss, athletes never gained back the time that was originally lost in the first portion of the trials. Therefore, in strict terms of performance, it seems harmful to include static stretching in the warm-up protocol of collegiate male sprinters in distances up to 100 m."
There is no need to perform static stretching pre-dynamic competition or pre-dynamic workout. However, from my observations, the practice of static stretching pre-event is prevalent in most sports. I cover the topic extensively in MaxCondition (book).
How much water should athletes drink? They should drink as much as they can tolerate, right? Is there any evidence to support that claim? Is drinking excessive amounts of water unsafe?
In a 2006 interview conducted by Louise M. Burke, Noakes explained his findings on fluid intake during sport and exercise. Below are some excerpts from the interview:
“Louise Burke: Over the past two decades, professor Tim Noakes has championed the case for a change in the way we educate athletes about fluid intake during sport and exercise. In particular, readers are directed to a recent publication: Noakes TD and D.B Speedy, 2006. Case proven—exercise associated hyponatraemia is due to overdrinking. So why did it take 20 years before the original evidence was accepted? (British Journal of Sports Medicine 40:567–572) In this interview, I ask professor Noakes to further develop some of the themes that have convinced us to refine fluid intake guidelines and to explain some of his more controversial beliefs or statements.
Tim Noakes: When athletes were advised not to drink during exercise, as was the case when I began running in 1969, there were no cases of overdrinking during exercise. Whether or not this advice produced its own problems is open to debate. But the point is athletes were told that they must ignore those biological cues that normally regulate drinking behavior. So perhaps it was to be expected that the new guidelines that became popular in the early 1980’s continued to advise athletes that they must still ignore their intrinsic physiological cues. So they must stay ‘ahead of thirst’ since by the time they become thirsty they are already ‘dehydrated’ and at risk of all sorts of dire medical consequences. Athletes were also encouraged to ‘drink as much as tolerable’ without being warned that over drinking could be fatal. It seems to me that the advice to ‘stay ahead of thirst’ or ‘up size’ is a symptom of the same problem—the influence of consumerism that is focused on profit, not on human health. What athletes need to be told is that they would be better advised to listen to their bodies than to the marketing spin generated by Madison Avenue.
Louise Burke: It might make sense in a marathon to tell a runner not to over drink or to only drink from the aid station if they are thirsty. In this circumstance, the runner can be pretty sure that if they make such a decision at one aid station, there will be another aid station within a reasonable distance, which will provide them with another opportunity to revise their actions.
However, in other sports, opportunities to drink and access to fluid are limited or sporadic. If a soccer player knows that they will not be able to drink during the 45-minute halves of a game in hot weather, perhaps it makes sense for them to have a drink just before the start of the game even if they aren’t thirsty. A literal reading of your fluid guidelines would say that the soccer player shouldn’t do this, even if it makes them feel better or helps them to reduce the accrued dehydration.
Tim Noakes: Ideally, soccer players all involved in team sports played in the heat should have access to fluid every 15 to 20 minutes. The problem here is not the guideline that athletes should drink only in response to thirst. Rather the problem is that fluid should be made available to soccer players whenever they are thirsty and would like to drink.
Louise Burke: Can I give you another example where your proposed fluid guidelines cater for marathon runners (and perhaps) at the expense of the greater number of other situations of sport that are practiced around the world every day. Recently I did some fluid balance monitoring of elite cricket players, and I took along a freshly prepared education sheet on ‘fluid facts for cricket’ which I planned to hand out in conjunction with the individual results. In good faith, I wrote a statement in bold at the bottom of the sheet, which I had intended to make a generic statement on all of our fluid information for athletes: ‘You should not drink more than you sweat during exercise so that you gain weight over the session.’
I agree this can be a concern in marathon runners, especially if they have been hydrating over the days leading up to the race and are already overhydrated when they take the starting line. But when these cricket players came to their morning training session—a 2.5 hour session undertaken in hot weather—we found that nearly half of the group was dehydrated (based on the specific gravity of their urine). Many had trained hard or played in a match the previous day. There are several other reports in the literature that show that many team athletes in daily training carry dehydration from one session to the next. In my cricket situation, one player who reported with a very high urinary specific gravity did a skill-based session and was found to have quite a modest sweat rate. His fluid intake over the session was also quite modest but was slightly higher than sweat rates so that he gained about half a kilogram over the session.
Although my handout strongly criticized what had just happened, in retrospect, it was probably a sensible strategy that helped him to maintain his fluid balance from day to day. So while we need to safeguard the health of a subgroup of athlete—the slow runners at the back of a marathon—do you think we have forgotten about the needs or scenarios faced by the majority of sportspeople?
Tim Noakes: Human physiology is not specific exclusively to one group of athletes. Either thirst is the biological control that all creatures in the known universe evolved optimally to regulate their body water content or it is not. What we now know is drinking ‘as much as tolerable’ is the worst possible advice that can be given to anyone involved in exercise that lasts more than about 4 hours (and not just slow marathon runners). For the reality is that once the exercise lasts more than about 4 to 6 hours, the exercise intensity becomes sufficiently low that it becomes possible to drink too much.
Your completely valid question is whether athletes involved in exercise of shorter duration and higher intensity might be at a disadvantage if they drink only according to thirst. The natural assumption is that this must be so since that is exactly what the drinking guidelines of many influential organizations tell us, as do the advertisements sponsored by the sports drink industry. To answer this question, I reviewed all the published studies in which exercise performance was measured in well-controlled trials in which athletes drank either according to their thirst (‘ad libitum’) or according to a drinking schedule that insured they drank more, usually ’to replace all the fluid lost as sweat during exercise.’ Some studies also included a trial in which athletes drank less than ‘ad libitum.’
The conclusions were absolutely clear—when athletes drank less than ‘ad libitum’ they were likely to under perform compared to ‘ad libitum’ drinking. But there was no study in which drinking more ‘ad libitum’ improved performance more than the ‘ad libitum’ condition. Thus, if we are to be entirely evidence-based in the advice we give athletes, at this moment, we have to say that drinking ‘ad libitum’ produces the optimum performance.”
