Something is Not Always Better Than Nothing

I recently posted a link on Facebook to Arthur De Vany’s Top Ten Reasons Not to Run Marathons, to which a friend who runs replied,

Everyone has their opinion. I run because I like to. Not because I want to run 26.2 miles every day or even 13.1 miles every day. I think it’s a stress reliever and I truly enjoy it. I’m sure this study was done on people who run extreme distances all the time. I’m sure you think your way of training is the best and I’m also sure it’s great for a lot of people. Exercise of any sort is better than sitting on the couch eating potato chips =)

Contrary to popular but uninformed opinion, something is not always better than nothing where physical activity and exercise are concerned. In fact, many activities people perform for exercise or health reasons do more harm than good.

The goal of exercise is to stimulate improvements in fitness, and should not undermine health in the process, as Dr. Doug McGuff stresses in Body by Science. However, activities like jogging, aerobic dance, plyometrics, and others exposing the body to high peak and impact forces are often recommended as exercise despite carrying a significant risk of injury or damaging health in some other way.

In the case of running, doing nothing would definitely be better. Since jogging is a very slow, very inefficient, very poor way of improving cardiovascular conditioning and burns few calories for the time invested, very little benefit would be lost by quitting, compared to the benefit of preventing long term damage to the feet, ankles, knees, hips and spine and associated degenerative joint conditions, not to mention the likely pulls, strains and tears.

If everybody in the world stopped doing what they consider to be exercise today, the net result would be an increase in average health over time and a decrease in traumatic injuries and joint problems, since what the majority consider to be exercise involves repetitive, high force or high impact movements, often done inattentively and with sloppy form.

A person’s enjoyment of an activity may justify performing it, but then they should call it what it is, recreation. While recreation is certainly a matter of opinion, exercise is not. Different people enjoy different activities, but the principles of exercise are the same for everyone, and I happen to know for a fact the principles my training is based on are the best. They produce improvements in all general factors of fitness equal to or better than any other method or activity, and they do so more efficiently and more safely.

Another popular but wrong opinion implied in her reply is people should base their exercise program on their recreational preferences. Exercise is the application of a physical stressor to stimulate an adaptive response, and should be performed in accordance with how the body handles and responds to stress and using movements based on muscle and joint function, and not in accordance with the conventions or movement patterns of some recreational activity. While a physical recreational activity may have an exercise effect, this is not the same as being effective exercise.

I suspect part of the reason for this is it allows people to tell themselves and others they’re doing something healthy, without actually having to engage in the extremely demanding physical and mental work characteristic of real exercise. Most people do not find real exercise to be fun. It is brutally hard work.

I am not saying people shouldn’t run, walk, cycle, or perform other activities they may enjoy just because they carry a risk of injury or are not relatively effective methods of exercise. I enjoy practicing various martial arts and doing parkour, both of which carry a significant risk of injury and neither of which I would consider exercise. Just don’t do something primarily for fun and pretend you’re exercising.

If you truly value some form of physical recreation, a separate, real exercise program will enhance your enjoyment of it by improving your performance and your resistance to injury. Exercise in accordance with proper training principles, then apply your improved fitness to the enjoyment of your chosen recreational activities, but don’t try to mix recreation and exercise – it takes the fun out of recreation and the effectiveness out of exercise.

Join the discussion or ask questions about this post in the HIT List forum

Like it? Share it!

Comments on this entry are closed.

  • Steven Turner Apr 14, 2009 @ 20:04

    Hi Drew,

    I couldn’t agree with you more on this topic Body By Science does a great job explaining the differences between “exercise” and “physical activities”

    Trying to explaining to people the differences between “exercise” and “physical recreation” is extremely difficult especially with all the fitness industry marketing fads and TV reality shows such as the “biggest loser”. Most of these “physical recreation/activities” are quick fix and only produce short term results.

    In the 1970’s Arthur Jones tried to warn us that “too much running would eventually wreck our knees”. From my thirty years of running experiences many of my running friends are now forced to “sit on the couch” with permanent disabilities.

    “An analogy for many people going to the hotel for drinks can be fun/strees reliever but it doesn’t mean it is good for you”.

    How is the book going.

    Thanks
    Steven
    Thanks

    • Drew Baye Apr 15, 2009 @ 9:13

      Exercise versus recreation is one of the most important concepts in exercise, but also one that most people are ignorant of, including many so-called fitness professionals. The best article on this topic is probably Ken Hutchins’s Exercise Versus Recreation.

  • Jeff Apr 14, 2009 @ 20:15

    Hey Drew,

    Great post. I am starting to get this now and am changing over to HIT 1-2 times per week and doing “activities”, not “exercise” on the remaining days. I will keep up 2x/week so long as I keep progressing in TUL and/or weight. Otherwise I will drop to 1x/week. My old approach would have been to workout more(with less intensity than HIT), not less. I see now how that is flawed.

    Keep up the great posts. This one is a gem.

    jeff

    • Drew Baye Apr 15, 2009 @ 9:07

      Thanks Jeff,

      Unfortunately, the posts might drop off for a few weeks while I try to finish the book, but as soon as it’s done I should have more time to write, since if it does well I plan to cut back my personal training schedule to a more reasonable 40 hours per week.

  • Les Apr 15, 2009 @ 6:12

    I used to believe this too, but I found that I was more fit when I was capable to run 5km in 21 minutes than now when I can squat 350 lbs.And I felt much more alive and healthy then. Art devany and the other guys in this scene, for example that pompous Mark Sisson, are advocating their opinion with so much arrogance that I can’t take it. Endurance is cool! The problem starts when somebody loses the balance. Too much cardio without any strength or power training.

    • Drew Baye Apr 15, 2009 @ 8:36

      Depending on how you strength train, you can produce better improvements in general endurance – as opposed to specific endurance performance in which skill is a major factor – than with traditional endurance training, and you can do so more safely and more efficiently. Nautilus inventor Arthur Jones one said,

      “…the lifting of weights is so much superior for the purpose of improving the cardiovascular condition of a human being that whatever is in second place is not even in the running, no pun intended. That is to say, running is a very poor, a very dangerous, a very slow, a very inefficient, a very nonproductive method for eventually producing a very limited, low order of cardiovascular benefit. Any, ANY, result that can be produced by any amount of running can be duplicated and surpassed by the proper use of weight lifting for cardiovascular benefits. Now I realize that there are hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of people in this country who don’t understand that, who don’t believe that, who will not admit that. Now these people are simply uninformed. Certainly, it’s possible to run with no benefit, it’s possible to lift weights with no benefit. I’m talking about the proper use of weight lifting; and properly applied, weight lifting will improve your cardiovascular benefit to a degree that is impossible to attain with any amount of running.”

      Arthur was right. This was conclusively demonstrated at Project Total Conditioning at the West Point Military Academy, and has been the experience of many endurance athletes I and other personal trainers I know have trained using high intensity strength training and SuperSlow.

  • Al Coleman Apr 15, 2009 @ 7:29

    Good post Drew. It drives me batty when people state that they run because they enjoy it. Really? Would any of our ancestors have “enjoyed” running? They would have enjoyed that the running prevented them from not getting mauled by some wild beast, but I seriously doubt they ever got up in the morning thinking, “What a nice day, I think I’ll go for a run.”

    I think the issue is complicated but stems from the need that we have created to always entertain ourselves. Why do people have such a tough time being bored? We want to fill the boring moments of our life up things to do, but when we are on our death beds we would beg for just one more of those ‘borning’ moments to come back.

    Sorry for the rant. I’ve been ruminating on this quite a bit lately.

    Al

    • Drew Baye Apr 15, 2009 @ 7:59

      Al,

      No need to apologize for ranting – good observations. I used to run years ago, before starting HIT, and while I did enjoy it occasionally, for the most part it was a boring waste of time. While I would imagine there are people who enjoy running, I think most who do don’t enjoy the effort so much as the opportunity to get outside and take in their surroundings for a while. They accomplish the same by going for a walk and spare their joints, however.

  • Al Coleman Apr 15, 2009 @ 9:30

    Hey Drew,

    Thanks for understanding. I agree 100% that endurance performance is mainly a skill. I KNOW this through experience. It just so happens that the motor learning literature jives with what I’ve been through.

    I played baseball my whole life; through college and one year semi pro. I had a coach my freshman year of school who while an old man, was ahead of his time with regards to keeping current with science. It helped that he taught a course in motor learning. He versed us well on positive versus negative tranfer. His “theory” was that you only needed enough conditioning to support your ability to maintain your skills throughout the length of the ballgame. Any more would just hamper your ability to recover between outings(I was a starting pitcher). He stressed that most of your conditioning should be developed through game like situations. Most of our conditioning amounted to throwing bullpen rounds with pitch counts that would average what we do in an inning of work. With drill work we were told that distributed practice was superior to trying to fit it all in at once and if we were serious we do a few reps here and there all day long. If we did do exta running, it was interval sprints with durations that would train the energy systems required for pitching. I did excellent that year and learned more than I had through my entire career. He retired the next year and I transfered schools. The other school(which was a division 1A program) had terrible coaches. There idea of conditioning was having us run 7 miles a day. I felt like shit and ran out of gas half way through the season with “dead arm”.

    It seems to me that most in the field of exercise and sports “science” are interested in over conditioning subjects to prepare them for some ultra endurance event that will never happen. They fail to forget that the whole purpose is provide a mixture of appropriate stimulation with adequate recovery.

    Extra endurance work always made me feel lethargic and crappy. I think that the “feeling” of ftiness that Les described above has more to do with lifestyle and diet. Most “endurance” athletes probably consume foods that arer more rapidly absorbed thus leading to a feeling of “lightness” and “fitness”. I don’t know about you, but most cock strong guys I’ve met eat everything including the kitchen sink.

    Al

  • Stuart Buck Apr 15, 2009 @ 12:19

    What’s the real evidence that long-term running is bad for the joints? I recall a recent study from Stanford finding the exact opposite. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-08/sumc-rst080708.php

    • Drew Baye Apr 15, 2009 @ 13:20

      This study and most like it make the mistake of confusing cause and effect – are these older people healthy because they run, or are they still running because they are healthy enough to do so? If you took a random sample of the population, rather than selecting already elderly people who are still running (introducing a strong survivorship bias) you would find many would have to drop out over time due to injury or joint problems caused or worsened by the running. Chances are, the study population, having self-selected themselves by still being runners (survivorship bias), are not representative of the majority of people.

      If you have any doubts, I challenge you to find one issue of any running magazine that doesn’t have an article or advertise a product related to avoiding, treating or otherwise coping with running injuries. This isn’t a coincidence.

  • Chris Apr 15, 2009 @ 17:42

    Drew

    A great post which I took the liberty to point to on my blog. As I get older I am starting to regret some of the training I did 20 years ago and the back, shoulder and ankle injuries that come from that. I am now settling on one HIT session a week plus lots of play – hiking, krav maga, some sprints.

    Do you want to jump in any of the discussion here:

    http://conditioningresearch.blogspot.com/2009/04/more-on-functional-training.html

    • Drew Baye Apr 16, 2009 @ 8:03

      Hey Chris, thanks for the link. I will try to jump in the discussion when I get a break between clients.

  • Jeff Apr 15, 2009 @ 21:07

    Any advice on how to get started with Parkour?

    • Drew Baye Jun 8, 2009 @ 9:49

      Hey Jeff,

      I suggest looking for a Parkour group in your area to practice with. I found one locally through meetup.com which I started training with recently.

  • Andy Apr 15, 2009 @ 23:49

    Drew, good post. I find myself in a mixed camp. I do enjoy running, the endorphin high and the relaxing feeling that follows it. I’ve been running since high school and it may be more habitual or ingrained. However, I have shifted my running routine to predominantly interval sprints with the occassional steady state slow run thrown in every once in a while. But I’ve also digested a bunch of DeVaney and am halfway through McGuff’s book. Personally, I feel that their protocols force me to increase the intensity of my exercise with weights. I’m guilty of not amping things up enough (weight wise) in the past and that may be the reason why the general opinion is that weight training does not provide any cardiovascular benefit. Now I can see the benefit for based on several metrics. Namely that after a McGuff Body by Fitness workout, I am spent and understand why he keeps his gym at 60F. Also after doing predominantly interval sprints for 3 months, my 5k time has not worsened – actually it got better compared to last year before I did any intervals.

    • Drew Baye Apr 16, 2009 @ 8:03

      Most people would be surprised how much they can improve their running with high intensity strength training. The Nautilus-trained group in Project Total Conditioning at West Point Military Academy reduced their two-mile run time by an average of over 80 seconds with just strength training. During college, my brother Will took a phys ed class where the students were required to run on a regular basis. He opted out, explaining to the instructor he was already following a regular exercise program and didn’t want to overtrain. What he didn’t tell them was, his program consisted of just one SuperSlow high intensity strength training workout per week. At the end of the semester when the class was tested on the two-mile run, he finished second, just after a student who was there on a cross-country scholarship, and far ahead of the rest of the class who had been running the whole semester.

  • Doug McGuff, MD Apr 16, 2009 @ 9:41

    Stuart,

    Check out the lengthy analysis of the Stanford study at http://www.bodybyscience.net/home.html/?p=141.

    Doug McGuff

  • Chris Apr 16, 2009 @ 15:17

    Thanks Drew – that was really helpful

    • Drew Baye Apr 16, 2009 @ 17:00

      Hey Chris, you’re welcome.

  • Jon Apr 30, 2009 @ 20:38

    This comes down to the leisure/recreational time view vs. the proper exercise view that Doug McGuff has given us (as well as others, Ken Hutchins also comes to mind). I have jogged in the past. My recent effort, 3 years ago, (which I have discussed elsewhere) saw me increase my jogging ability to 7-8 miles a jog, but in 6-8 months netted me a 12 pound weight loss. This also included deep joint pain in my hips, knees, and lower back pain. Also during this time, the jogging didn’t translate to better stamina while downhill skiing.

    I spent this winter playing full court basketball 3 days a week, 3 hours a week. No weight loss.

    A month and a half ago I started a high intensity workout using 5 exercises and 10/10 reps. I have seen a 10+ pound weight loss, but also a significant decrease in my waist. All my clothes fit much better now. This is from working out 15-20 minutes a week on Saturday morning and eating a low sugar diet.

    So, I would also have to add: something is not better than nothing.

  • Jon Apr 30, 2009 @ 20:41

    @Al Coleman
    Al makes a good point here. In a recent “Runner’s World” issue they lauded a 51 year old woman who is running again after double hip replacement surgery. Her quote was, “I’ll keep running until they replace them again…” I see no enjoyment in that. She is meeting a psychological need, not a physical need.

  • Steven Turner May 1, 2009 @ 20:23

    Hi Drew,

    I took the liberty to discuss this post with my fitness students most of the typical responses were raised for example, “if exercise is not fun than I won’t do it” which is what I expected with all the “fitness industry fads and marketing strategies”.

    The point that I was trying to make to my students and I think that this is the point that your making is that the fitness professional “chooses” the exercises program. With recreation the individual “chooses” the recreation activities, as the examples that you provided “martial arts and parkour.

    My other concern that I would like to share is in relation to “insurance premiums” – all these boot style training programs, boxing and kicking programs – “high force or high impact” high risk physical activites are forcing huge increases in the price of insurance premiums.

    Arthur Jones pointed out his concerns that if the medical community ever turns on the fitness community that “proper exercise” could be put back a hundred years. Drew by the comments that you have made I think that you are also greatly concerned for the future of “proper exercise” the same concerns that Arthur Jones made many years ago.

    Thanks
    Steven

    • Drew Baye May 2, 2009 @ 21:51

      Exercise isn’t supposed to be performed for fun, it is supposed to be performed to stimulate improvements in or maintain some level of fitness. To not exercise because it isn’t fun is about as stupid and lazy as not brushing and flossing one’s teeth or not getting regular physical evaluations because it isn’t fun. They are all necessary if one values their health.

      The subject of boot camps, so-called kickboxing classes, etc. deserves more in depth discussion than I have time for at the moment, and will be addressed when I’m done with the book.

  • Brendan Jul 9, 2009 @ 11:38

    Pretending running isn’t exercise is rediculous, sure it can do damage to a very unfit person who has never run before, but relatively fit people that run tend to just increase their fitness, people run because they enjoy what it does to their bodies, same reason people lift. Doesn’t matter how you raise your heart rate as long as you do it safely, and you can easily do it safely running as long as you avoid overtraining

    • Drew Baye Jul 9, 2009 @ 17:46

      Brendan,

      Running does not just injure unfit people. There is a reason nearly every issue of every running magazine contains an article on treating running-related injuries. Compared to high intensity strength training it is a poor, inefficient, and ineffective way to eventually produce a low level of cardiovascular conditioning, at the expense of other aspects of fitness and health. Nautilus inventor Arthur Jones put it best in an interview with Stephen Langer, MD,

      “…the lifting of weights is so much superior for the purpose of improving the cardiovascular condition of a human being that whatever is in second place is not even in the running, no pun intended. That is to say, running is a very poor, a very dangerous, a very slow, a very inefficient, a very nonproductive method for eventually producing a very limited, low order of cardiovascular benefit. Any, ANY, result that can be produced by any amount of running can be duplicated and surpassed by the proper use of weight lifting for cardiovascular benefits. Now I realize that there are hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of people in this country who don’t understand that, who don’t believe that, who will not admit that. Now these people are simply uninformed. Certainly, it’s possible to run with no benefit, it’s possible to weight train with no benefit. I’m talking about the proper use of weights; and properly applied, weight training will improve your cardiovascular benefit to a degree that is impossible to attain with any amount of running.”

      If a person is only interested in improving fitness, there is no good reason to choose running over strength training. The choice to run instead of lift weights would either be irrational or uninformed, or influenced by emotional factors such as enjoyment of running or fear of the kind of truly hard work high intensity strength training involves.

  • Chad T Oct 5, 2009 @ 16:27

    I don’t think the inventor of Nautilus is an unbiased or fair authority on the topic of running vs weight lifting for cardiovascular fitness.
    I think a balance of both aerobic and anaerobic exercise is key to optimal fitness.

    I agree there are too many running injuries. I don’t think it makes running bad, but many people are going about it the wrong way. Too much too soon.

    Great book. Born To Run, by Chris McDougal.

    http://www.amazon.com/Born-Run-Hidden-Superathletes-Greatest/dp/0307266303

    Yes people ACTUALLY did wake up and say lets go for a run. To hunt, to travel, to get water.
    And people still do this in the Copper Canyons of Mexico. The Tarahumara Tribe.

    • Drew Baye Oct 6, 2009 @ 14:44

      Chad,

      While Arthur may not be unbiased, he is absolutely correct, and research has backed this up. There is no need for aerobics or running for cardiovascular conditioning, fat loss, or any other aspect of health or fitness. High intensity strength training can provide greater cardiovascular benefits more quickly, with less time invested, and more safely, and is far more effective for improving body composition.

      In an interview with Stephen Langer MD on a TV show in the 1980’s Arthur Jones said,

      “…the lifting of weights is so much superior for the purpose of improving the cardiovascular condition of a human being that whatever is in second place is not even in the running, no pun intended. That is to say, running is a very poor, a very dangerous, a very slow, a very inefficient, a very nonproductive method for eventually producing a very limited, low order of cardiovascular benefit. Any, ANY, result that can be produced by any amount of running can be duplicated and surpassed by the proper use of weight lifting for cardiovascular benefits. Now I realize that there are hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of people in this country who don’t understand that, who don’t believe that, who will not admit that. Now these people are simply uninformed. Certainly, it’s possible to run with no benefit, it’s possible to lift weights with no benefit. I’m talking about the proper use of weight lifting; and properly applied, weight lifting will improve your cardiovascular benefit to a degree that is impossible to attain with any amount of running.”

      He was absolutely correct.

  • Bill Dec 13, 2009 @ 19:09

    I’m one of those runners who didn’t “survive”. I developed a hip issue a few years ago and will probably need a replacement in the future as a result of all of my “fun” recreational running. I wish I knew at 35 what I know now at 45, maybe I would have saved myself before it became too late.

    Nah, it took the hip pain to remove my blinders.

    Bill

  • Gregory Jul 7, 2012 @ 14:19

    Drew, I just watched both you and Dr McGuff’s 21convention videos, and I was amazed by the science behind it all. I recently purchased your HIT workout ebook, and began eating paleo roughly 5 days ago, already yielding fatloss results without exercising whatsoever,. I have in fact worked out for roughly 5 years, and have gone from 145 to 200 pounds quite lean. However, most of my gains have came from some variety of HIT. However, ignoring “less is more” principle, I have come to find myself with long workouts again. Determined to change, I am looking forward to my pure H.I.T. workout tomorrow. However, I am curious as to how I should incorporate a sprint workout into an upper/lower body HIT split. I train MMA during the week, and am in the hiring process for the police academy. I am wondering how I can continue to build size and strength, while still having awesome cardio?

    • Drew Baye Jul 9, 2012 @ 7:43

      Gregory,

      There is no need to add sprinting to your program for cardiovascular conditioning. If you are performing your HIT workouts with a high enough level of effort and little or no rest between exercises it is just as effective and safer for the joints. I recommend switching from a split to full body workouts and moving from exercise to exercise with as little time between as possible.

  • Nick Nov 16, 2012 @ 8:31

    Hi Drew,

    just starting to look into HIT and have found your site a great resource for learning more about it. Thx! 🙂

    In this post i see you mention practicing martial arts and parkour, and in connection with this im curious to hear your thoughts on how to combine HIT as exercise with such skill practices that involve high physical demands.

    Besides having recreational motives for performing such and similar activities i think that having the ability to fight, escape, swim, climb, trekk etc to a certain standard is part of fitness – in the meaning of being capable of handling an emergency.

    And even if HIT only may safely produce a good level of ablility in such relatively simple things as a run up to a few miles, the skill component of more complex tasks, such as ones ability to defend oneself or quickly negotiate an obstacle, will no doubt be greater.

    Also part of such skill training will have to be performed at high/max intensity. Specificity so dictates, since this is indeed the intensity that the target activity will be performed at.

    And this leads us to the problem of combining such activities with HIT as a basic fitness protocol. If youd care to explain a bit about this id much appreciate it, since i cant find much material online adressing this issue.

    All the best!

    /Nick

    • Drew Baye Nov 26, 2012 @ 12:17

      Thanks Nick,

      I believe everybody should learn basic life skills like swimming and self defense and encourage people to invest time and effort in these. The point of the article is to differentiate between what is and isn’t worthwhile for exercise, however, and many of the things people believe are worthwhile for exercise are a waste of time at best and often counterproductive or harmful.