Making the commitment to start an exercise program is an exciting first step in improving your life through increased physical and mental health. After all, what better investment can you make than in yourself? If you’ve struggled with not having enough time, money, energy or motivation to work out, push them aside and remember that you’re worth it. No excuses!
I've been strength training for over 15 years now. In college, between martial arts and four months of lifting weights for 6 hours per week I gave myself overuse injuries in my shoulders and knee. I've tried everything, including Mike Mentzer's books, Arnold Schwarzennegger's Bodybuilding Bible, Stuart McRobert's Beyond Brawn, Sisco and Little's Power Factor Training, routines from Men's Health, Flex, and Muscle & Fitness magazines - you name it. Super Slow (and its cousins Slow Burn and Power of 10) are the ONLY form of exercise I can handle for more than two months without having those pains flare up with a vengeance and force me to quit. I've done Super Slow for years without the slightest ache except for normal muscle soreness.
Exercise duration, HRmax and [La]max are presented in fig 2A, B, and C. Visual inspection of the data led to the conclusion that there is no difference in exercise duration and HRmax between the OTS and the NFO patients. For [La]max, a much lower value was found for the OTS patients in combination with a larger reduction from the first to the second test compared with the NFO patients. However, parametric analysis did not indicate significant differences. The main effect of group gave an F ratio of 2.9 for [La]max and an F ratio <1 for exercise duration and HRmax, showing that almost three times as much variance is explained by the group membership (ie, OTS vs NFO) compared with random factors. In addition, sensitivity for OTS detection with [La]max was high (table 2). With a cutoff of 8 mmol l%#x2212;1, four out of the five OTS patients would have been diagnosed correctly from the first exercise test and four out of the four OTS patients from the second exercise test. Sensitivity for NFO diagnosis was lower, however (table 2). From the first exercise test, a correct diagnostic ratio of two out of four was found, for the second test, two out of three.
* If you're looking to control your weight, exercise is the least efficient way to do it. You'd have to run for hours to keep the cookies you ate from adding to your waistline. It's far more effective to not eat the cookies. Making fruits and vegetables a larger part of your diet will help crowd out the foods that don't offer much in the way of nutrition, and which add pounds that shouldn't be there. Also, as you build lean muscle tissue, your body will lessen its fatty tissue, and your shape will change. If you're overweight, you're not trying to lose weight, you're trying to lose fat. If your goal is to look and feel great, strength building exercise will accomplish this while making you fit in the process. Doing only aerobics will not.
It is well known that exercise in the older population may prevent several diseases [1–4]. Reduced physical activity impairs the quality of life in elderly people with Alzheimer's Disease [4], Parkinson's Disease [5], and Depressive Disorders [6]. Moreover, musculoskeletal, cardiopulmonary, and cerebrovascular decline are associated with poor physical fitness because of the cumulative effects of illness, multiple drug intake, fatigue, and bed rest [7, 8]. The effects of physical activity and exercise programs on fitness and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in elderly adults have been widely studied by several authors [9–11]. De Vries et al. [11] conducted a meta-analysis focusing on elderly patients with mobility problems and/or multimorbidity. Eighteen articles describing a wide variety of actions were analyzed. Most used a multicomponent training program focusing on the combination of strength, balance, and endurance training. In 9 of the 18 studies included, interventions were supervised by a physical therapist. Intensity of the intervention was not reported and the duration of the intervention varied from 5 weeks to 18 months. This meta-analysis concluded that, considering quality of life, the exercise versus no-exercise studies found no significant effects. High-intensity exercise appears to be somewhat more effective in improving physical functioning than low-intensity exercise. These positive effects are of great value in the patient population but the most effective type of intervention remains unclear. Brovold et al. [7] recently examined the effects of high-intensity training versus home-based exercise programs using the Norwegian Ullevaal Model [12] on a group of over-65-year-olds after discharge from hospital. These authors based their study on the Swedish Friskis-Svettis model [13] which was designed by Johan Holmsater for patients with coronaropathy to promote their return to work and everyday activities and improve their prognoses. This model includes three intervals of high intensity and two intervals of moderate intensity, each one lasting for 5 to 10 minutes. Included in each is coordination. Exercises consist of simple aerobic dance movements and involve the use of both upper and lower extremities to challenge postural control [13]. Exercise intensity was adjusted using the Borg Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE) Scale. Moderate intensity was set between 11 and 13, and high intensity was set between 15 and 17 on the Borg Scale.