I would strongly suggest anyone looking at this and saying they don't have the time to invest in this to also consider the mental benefits that exercise brings.
I don't feel I have time (which I know is wrong) and I particularly do not like gyms, but I cycle to work (2 miles) and on the way home I'll take a detour and add an extra 5-10 miles to my trip home. It clears the cobwebs. Cycling can be very meditative as well.
I am extremely lucky to be living in a place that allows me to do this on car free routes (Bath->Bristol cycle path and the Two Tunnels Circuit).
If you live within 12 miles (and potentially up to 20 miles) of where you work (about an hour of easy riding), you should consider 'building' exercise into your commute. Even if it's twice a week to begin with. Be crazy and park your car 5 miles from work and cycle in from there and build it up.
FYI before starting this I weighed about 310lb and have got myself down to 275lb within a year without focusing too much on what I eat.
If anybody needs to optimize exercise time, also consider high-intensity interval training (HIIT) and bodyweight or dumbbell exercises. These can both be done at home, and they consistently have more effect on my overall fitness than long, medium-intensity cardio.
HIIT is an old, popular technique; it's basically intervals of intense cardio separated by rest. For an introduction, see Couch-to-5K or the Zombies Run training app. Bodyweight exercises can be done anywhere. One reasonable introduction is You are Your Own Gym, but there are others.
If you raise your exercise intensity high enough to force your body to adapt, you can do a lot in 20 to 30 minutes several times a week without a health club membership. I'm not saying this is optimal-I'm not at all an expert—but it's certainly better than nothing, and I generally see far better gains doing this than when I do long, lower-intensity exercise.
C25K was like an epiphany for me. I've always hated running and have never been very good at it. But working up incrementally and hitting goals has allowed me to really enjoy running. Great way to bootstrap an exercise routine IMO.
I love Tabata! I usually use the "Tabata This" workout from Crossfit (one of the few workouts I use from that methodology). I break it up like this: Squats, Pushups, Pullups, Jump rope, situps. So the total routine is about 20 minutes including the 1 minute rests in between each round.
I have started people off on a single round of Tabata which is only 4 minutes (minus the warmup/cool down periods) and it leaves them laying flat on the floor if they push themselves to their limits.
HIIT also works with strength training, not just cardio-oriented stuff. 30 min workout per day, 3 sets of the heaviest weight you can handle, highest exertion you can muster, with a couple different exercises.
Our bodies respond well to extreme variation in exertion, and HIIT strength training is another way of accomplishing that besides HIIT cardio.
Indeed. I completely understand feeling like there isn't enough time to do it.
Other than my 8-10 hour days at work, I have a teenage daughter, a wife and two dogs I have to attend to. I practice guitar daily, practice martial arts weekly, kayak regularly, read/study daily for my job, started learning more about F.A.C.S and Body Language and like to get in some gaming every now and then with the daughter.
I've found that I have at least 30 minutes I can spare even with that load. It's not much, but it's better than nothing sometimes. It's awesome you can find the time with your cycling! Keep it up!
Reminds me of something I read from Arnold Swazenegger:
"While on maneuvers, Schwarzenegger and his fellow soldiers would use the hot spots (areas of metal over the tank’s engine) as a makeshift cooking stove, grilling up steaks and frying eggs. The eventual Mr. Universe continued his bodybuilding training even while off base, having stowed his workout equipment (plate weights, barbells, and a collapsible bench) in the tank’s tool storage areas."
In his book he talks about getting up an hour earlier than everyone else so he could get a training session in during his military service. Talk about "making time" for something.
I've had a couple of trainers -- the kind with degrees in sports-medicine, not the kind that were selling cell-phones in the mall last week -- say that Arnie was the single worst thing to happen to modern fitness.
Their complaint was that his genetics are exceptionally rare. That very few people, like 1 out of 10,000, could ever hope to come anywhere close to achieving the same physique. That by becoming a sort of fitness idol he set up everybody else up for disappointment and often giving up because it is literally impossible for the rest of us to do what he did.
As an aside, if you ever watch his first movie, a documentary of sorts called Pumping Iron, he says that smoking pot was a part of his regimen. He even lights up on camera.
That's more than unfair. Arnie sparked a massive fitness craze that benefited many people. If you get disappointed, that is ultimately your fault. Arnie (as well as every other bodybuilder since the mid 60's) were on varying degrees of steroids. This is well known. They have to deny it, but ask anyone in the sport. Arnie's body is an ideal, a loooong term goal that is probably never going to be achieved naturally. But that great physique is what made a ton of people get off their butts and at least try.
If you want an achievable natty physique look up "Zyzz" on youtube. Dude teched as a shortcut, but his physique is easily attainable in 3-5 years, if you do it right. Like Arnie, he has inspired many people. And then to say that the people that are too weak-willed to follow through on workouts deserve to blame these men? That's just silly.
Arnie doesn't deny he was on steroids either. He "just" says he only used them while they were still legal. Whether that is true or not... Well.
But the impressive part of Arnie's physique from a modern standpoint is the symmetry and attention to detail, not really size. We have steroid-driven monsters like Ronnie Coleman that makes Arnie seem like a starving child these days...
I think the bigger problem with bodybuilders as an ideal is that most people don't understand that Arnie didn't look like what he looks like in most of his published photos for more than a few minutes on stage every year. E.g. at his peak shape, yet cut as much as possible, dehydrated, pumped, oiled, artificially tanned, and flexing to the max.
That's not what Arnie level bodybuilders look like if you meet the on the street, or in the gym...
I like to point people to Conan, as in the actual movie rather than the posters. That was Arnie in the kind of shape that let him win Mr Olympia in 1980, yet if you look at the movie rather than the posters and pictures most people are used to seeing of Arnie, his seems big but his shape doesn't seem all that unachievable - that's the difference that competition prep makes...
People also misjudge size of bodybuilders in pictures massively, I think, and seem to believe they're huge giants mountains of muscle. Consider that Arnie at his peak was roughly 105kg, at 6', and with a 34" waist. There's tons of untrained guys larger than that - bodybuilders like Arnie just looks massive because of their shape and low body fat.
Of course most people still won't achieve Arnie's physique, especially not without steroids, but you can get "close enough" to his day to day appearance much easier than most people think.
Zyzz had crazy genetics too AND he roided. I wouldn't call looking like that "easily attainable".
In fact that's one thing I find quite annoying about fitness these days, everyone tries to play down exactly how much work is involved in getting fit, especially if you start from a really bad position (massively over/under weight).
It's hard hard work and saying it's not devalues everyone who has made it.
“Everybody wants to be a bodybuilder, but don’t nobody wanna lift no heavy ass weight.” – Ronnie Coleman
Dont think Zyzz is a great example and shouldnt be mentioned in the same text as Arnie. Look at his youtube videos and meet a giant douche with mantras like "disregard females" and stuff like that. Sure, he motivated people, but he also died at 22 years old because steroids worsened his inherent heart problems.
Other great examples are the bodybuilders of the 50s like Steve Reeves, when aesthetic standards were a bit different (broad shoulders / thin waist, eg. look for the 'vacuum pose'.)
Frank Zane is also a really weird bodybuilder from the 70s. He won Mr Olympia 3 times I think. He's very "philosophical" about his workouts, brining in some kind of Zen philosophy to it. I like his physique the most of all bodybuilders, perfect V taper and king of the vacuum pose.
He seems very despondent about modern bodybuilding and the obsession of getting as BIG as possible without regard to the aesthetics (HGH/roid gut). He said they should make the vacuum pose a mandatory pose in all pro bodybuilding competitions to weed out this kind of crap.
In my opinion the physiques of the pro Bodybuilder in the 50 to 70ies really looked awesome. Personally still way too much for something i would want but still looking impressive. While todays pro Bodybuilders are just abominations caused by massive steroid consumption.
Meh this is kind of an irrelevant complaint in my opinion. It's not like everyone is out to look like Arnold in his prime - 99% of people would be thrilled to look 1/10 as good as he did (and they would look good).
Isn't physique, like, orthogonal to fitness? Bodybuilding may be a way to get fit, but working out in general does not require it at all. I think the lesson we all can take from Arnold is the mental effort, strength of will and so on, not necessarily the specific exercises he used to perform.
> If "physique" means "photogenic," then yes -- they're pretty much unrelated.
Where do you get your information? They couldn't be more related. I GUARANTEE you that any physique model you see on stage or in a magazine is far more "fit" than someone who sits around all day. No, having a great physique doesn't mean that you could run a 4 minute mile, but saying that they aren't related is just ignorant.
>Very true, and if people thought they had to build up muscle and look like Arnold, it would set the fitness movement back.
So, people trying to get in shape and look good at the same time is bad for the fitness/health movement? Are you trolling?
> > If "physique" means "photogenic," then yes -- they're pretty much unrelated.
> Where do you get your information?
You misunderstood me. I didn't mean that physical fitness can't lead to a photogenic appearance, only that they're not strongly correlated to a dispassionate third party, over all cases in the population. For example, there are any number of very highly paid, photogenic models who are not only unfit, but who suffer from anorexia and other ailments, and there are any number of people who benefit from a modest fitness regimen but who do not look any better because of it.
> So, people trying to get in shape and look good at the same time is bad for the fitness/health movement?
Ah, I just got it. You misunderstood me on purpose.
> Are you trolling?
I just demonstrated who's trolling. Being physically fit, and being photogenic, are unrelated, i.e. not correlated. That doesn't mean that one won't lead to the other, only that the absence of a photogenic appearance doesn't demonstrate a lack of fitness.
I can see you're not a deep thinker, so let me explain this more precisely. Let's call engaging in a fitness program X, and a photogenic appearance Y. The fact that X can lead to Y (and it certainly can) doesn't assure that outcome in all cases or even a majority, because the absence of Y by no means implies an absence of X.
I have to concur with the exercise-as-commute routine. I also cycle to/from work. My ride home, where I keep a brisk pace with some sprints mixed in, is actually my real workout. It is quite satisfying to arrive home having already worked out, effectively. Not to mention, it is faster than taking the bus in my case.
A few catches: it does help strengthen your core, to an extent, but you aren't working your arms and upper body much. Also, I'm in Canada, and riding during most of the winter isn't possible here on a road bike.
I have a pretty short commute(5km) and live in Halifax but with some good thermal underwear, gloves, jacket I was able to ride all winter except for about 20 days. On 23 mm slicks too but I'm getting something better this winter.
Ottawa-Gatineau area, in my case. The downtown areas can often be clear of snow/ice, but not if you're on the outskirts. In this case it isn't the gear so much as the tire width.
Hah.. I live in Toronto, and I used to cycle year round, but I don't anymore.. I think "too lousy to cycle" is a very subjective thing..
When I was working for a startup I could show up sweaty and grimy (or looking like a Mad Max extra in the winter).
Now I'm in a management position in a larger company, so while I still cycle to work as much as I can, I usually have to bring a change of clothes with me (dress shoes, shirt, etc) so weather (heavy rain or just generally cold/snowy) affects my choice much more now..
I wish I lived somewhere that was a steady 23 degrees year-round. ;-)
Trucks are easily the most dangerous threat for cyclists in a city (more than cabs I would argue).
When they turn right, they often can't see what is next to them, and they are deceptive because they appear to be going straight but then suddenly veer right, and can easily knock an unsuspecting cyclist down under their back wheels.
If you are a cyclist you should _never_ be next to a truck while crossing an intersection. Even if they are slow off the line, always follow behind, it's just not worth it to try to pass them..
I grew up in Southern Ontario and when I was in high school I biked year round. I agree it's pretty rare that it's impossible to bike in the winter, and a good mountain bike should get you through pretty much any weather. The tires are the important part of the equipment.
But it can be downright unpleasant. Dressing right is the hardest part. If you don't do it right, your core will overheat at the same time you get frostbite on your hands. I had to wear ridiculous getups sometimes like touque, tube, heavy gloves, winter boots... and a t-shirt.
I'm close to Ottawa. You can get by if you are riding mostly downtown, but if you're riding a road bike, it gets treacherous elsewhere very quickly. Fatter tires surely help.
If we're trading exercise experiences, I'll vouch for regular tennis. It's easy enough to learn as an adult, you do not have to coordinate a full team to play a match, the aerobic load is entirely dependent on the level of your sparring partner and, for me, it has the social aspect that guarantees I keep practising. Even when I don't feel like going, there is someone calling and challenging for a match.
The usual warnings apply: It is asymmetrical and, for God's sake, buy a good racket or you will get tennis elbow (good dampening of vibrations virtually eliminated tennis elbow, but only the good material does it right)
I cycle to and from work, but my route essentially just goes from one side to the other of the city center, which means some narrow streets, some cobbled streets, and a lot of cars.
On the contrary to my previous job where the route was mostly car-free, my current cycling doesn't clear anything and adds to stress instead of relieving it. Walking is fine, but feels so... slow, and inefficient.
I'm either a 20 minute walk or a 6 minute bike ride to work. I used to walk because I figured it meant 40 minutes of walking five days a week, but I found it wasn't enough exercise to avoid becoming overweight. Now I cycle to work and go on a hard 45-minute bike ride during my lunch hour.
That's a good problem to have. I think waist size is a better measurement than bodyweight. If you get stronger, gain weight, and lose a few inches off the waist, you're doing fine. If you lose weight, but get larger in the middle and weaker, it's bad.
Will look into it. I've avoided trying to eat less. I've just started a low carb diet as wheat seems to play havoc with me, but this I try not to calorie count. If I'm hungry I eat.
Good for you, hope it works. I did the same thing. Some advice: measure your waist with a flexible tape measure, and get your blood lipids checked. I wish I did that before I started wheat belly / LCHF, to have an accurate before number. Even my wii scale was slightly inaccurate (5-8lbs) on carpet vs hardwood floor, I've later learned.
But yeah, since I kicked wheat and starch (kicking sugar alone did not help), I've lost two inches off my waist, with no exercise. I just wish I would have taken some more scientific before numbers.
edit: google william banting if you haven't heard of him before, for some low carb inspiration.
I did the same thing, I started riding into work instead of taking the train from the suburbs to Central London. Door-to-door by train and underground was around 1 hr, but bike it was 1hr 10mins, approx 18 miles. Wasted time became exercise time and I felt much better for it. I remember my brother saying he would work with people who would work crazy hours (doctors mainly) and in order to train for marathons and triathlons you utilise every bit of time you can to exercise.
Through the Two Tunnels out to Midford and back along the canal path to Bath. I work in Locksbrook, live in Bear flat so it's an awesome if slightly bumpy ride (canal path). Although I recently bought a cyclocross bike and that has made a world of difference compared to a road bike.
At the moment I'm heading out to Saltford, then back Up to Midford (and sometimes Wellow). It's a really good burn.
If I want to hurt myself I'll pop over to Radstock although that one is a little bit lumpy for my liking and some of those lanes don't give you a lot of room should you meet a car coming the other way.
I don't feel I have time (which I know is wrong) and I particularly do not like gyms, but I cycle to work (2 miles) and on the way home I'll take a detour and add an extra 5-10 miles to my trip home. It clears the cobwebs. Cycling can be very meditative as well.
I am extremely lucky to be living in a place that allows me to do this on car free routes (Bath->Bristol cycle path and the Two Tunnels Circuit).
If you live within 12 miles (and potentially up to 20 miles) of where you work (about an hour of easy riding), you should consider 'building' exercise into your commute. Even if it's twice a week to begin with. Be crazy and park your car 5 miles from work and cycle in from there and build it up.
FYI before starting this I weighed about 310lb and have got myself down to 275lb within a year without focusing too much on what I eat.