Bringing the Pendulum back to center.
It is often said by futurists (those who study the past to predict the future) that there is an over-reaction to most new concepts in the short term, yet an under-reaction in the long term. We can all come up with countless examples of it �?? the high carb trend of a few years ago �?? which has become the zero carb trend recently. However, never has this concept been more apparent than in the strength and conditioning industry particularly in recent years.
- Aerobics
Over-reaction
Aerobic training has to be the single most over-reacted to, and thus overemphasized training modality in the history of our field. It started with Kenneth Cooper but I don�??t think even he meant aerobic training to receive the almost religious type treatment it has. The only reason aerobic work even requires extra oxygen is because of demand from the muscular system. It doesn�??t matter what activity you are involved in �?? aerobics or weight training �?? it is muscular demand that determines caloric burn. So you have to begin with that in mind.
Let�??s think about it logically (I know this is hard for the strength coaching field). For example, you can run a mile in ten minutes and can swim a mile in twenty minutes. After a year of swimming every day and not running �?? you can now swim a mile in 16 minutes. Without running �?? how much has your running improved? Very little.
Why? We only have ONE cardiovascular system �?? so why doesn�??t improving your swimming (and cardio system) automatically improve your running?
Because the ONLY reason your cardio system was involved in the first place was because of demand from your muscular system. So you adapted to the SPECIFIC MUSCULAR demands of swimming which by default then involves the cardiovascular system �?? it�??s not the other way around as most people think. The muscles don�??t move because of cardiovascular demand �?? the cardio system is elevated because of muscular demand. We need to program the body based on the movements it�??s going to perform �?? not based on the cardiovascular system. That�??s an upside down method of programming.
I think the over-reaction to aerobics peaked around 92. I can remember watching a weightlifter being interviewed at the 92 Barcelona Games (I�??m sure most lifters can relate) �?? when after watching the athlete perform a few sets, the interviewer asked �??What type of exercise do you do for your heart?�??
Under-reaction
The under-reaction to aerobic training has been fairly recent. Perhaps I�??m guilty of it also. The problem was that the emphasis on aerobic training had been so entrenched that in order to bring balance to the equation; coaches such as myself had to take a diametrically opposed position in order to even have a chance of being heard. The real message was that anaerobic interval training could provide all the benefits of aerobic training and then some.
However, it has swung too far the other way. The message heard was that aerobic training is �??the devil�?? �?? a fat storing injury promoting muscle catabolizing monster that has to be avoided at all costs. As a result athletes have avoided all energy system work.
My friend Jason Ferruggia answered a question recently about whether aerobic work should be performed when trying to gain weight. This is a combination of an over-reaction (that aerobic work is a massively effective weight loss tool) and an under-reaction (that going for a walk will cause you to lose incredible amounts of lean tissue).
Back to center:
Aerobic training is beneficial �?? it�??s healthy and it burns up calories. It won�??t eat up muscle tissue like Hannibal Lecter after making weight, and despite it not living up to its miracle fat burning claims �?? any calorie burning activity can help in a weight management program, and anything that gets the heart healthier is never a bad idea. I think some form of moderate cardiovascular activity can be helpful regardless of your personal goals.