Off-label: Oxymetholone

       Oxymetholone - commonly known as Anadrol, Anapolon, A-bombs, and a few other names - is widely considered one of the big guns in the world of AAS. It was one of the early anabolics used widely in medicine  and caught on in the sporting world quickly for one reason: the stuff works like magic. If you are familiar with doping in sports you are familiar with the classic description of 'drol as a powerful and fast acting strength and size booster that comes with alot of water weight and side effects. And minus a few misconceptions, the popular idea of the drug is fairly accurate. But there is an element of mystery behind oxymetholone also. Partly this is because of the almost mythic status it has obtained as strength and physique athletes sing the Ballad of the Gainz, but in part it's also due to the misconceptions being cultivated and maintained in the pupular dialogue. In this short post I want to list and address a few things that contribute to the confusion. Some of these are flat-out myths, while others are areas we don't fully understand yet. As a reminder let's keep in mind this is for educational purposes and is not meant as a guide or as advocacy for the use of illicit ergogenics. My aim is to educate only, and as this is a topic of frequent debate both in the world of atheltics and the world of physiology research it fits in nicely here.

1. Oxymetholone converts rapidly to estrogen. False. So false. In fact oxymetholone cannot interact with the aromatase enzyme at all, and thus it cannot be converted into estrogen in any amount or at any pace.

 

2. Oxymetholone is not suppressive to the HPTA. Another myth. It clearly disrupts the HPTA heavily, as evidenced by the numerous studies in which it does precisely that.

 

3. Oxymetholone is a xenoestrogen. It's been noted that oxymethelone bears some structural similarity to estradiol and therefore hypothesized that it may possess inherent estrogenic qualities by stimulating the estrogen receptor itself instead of by converting to estrogen via aromatization. While this would seem to explain some reports of side-effects and treatment of them with selective estrogen receptor modulators literature on the topic is conspicuously absent. To date no substantial evidence has surfaced that indicates oxymetholone has any binding affinity for the estrogen receptor, although studies examining metabolites have not examined this in depth and further study is needed to rule out the possibility of estrogenic metabolites of the parent drug.

 

4.  Oxymetholone is a progestin. Another hypothesis lacking evidence at this point. There are no examples in the literature that I could find showing clear evidence for progestagenic activity.

 

       So how do we explain the side effects and the case reports and the popular folklore? The short answer is that right now we don't. Explanations range from a rumor-driven placebo effect in the doping community to alterations of glucose metabolism to metabolites with novel actions. We need to keep studying to find out.

 

      

 

      

 

 



Take It On Faith

       Hi everyone. There has been a recent lack of material as I've been fairly busy. But I'm going to be writing this weekend and busting my ass (which I built without a dozen glute accessory lifts by the way) to get quality material up here to satisfy your science jones. For now, here is a quick diatribe on a thought that has been occuring to me lately:

       Evidence and observation are meaningless when in opposition to a position based soley on faith. Read that a few more times so you can marinate in how depressing that is. Nothing you say in a situation like that matters unless you agree with the faith-based position and there is no point in even trying to have dialogue. It's analogous to playing chess with a pigeon. You can play however you want but the bird will knock the pieces over, shit all over the board, and strut around like a champion regardless. It is my opinion - based on evidence and observation (see what I did there?) - that it's better to refrain from dialogue in almost every case unless you know the other party or parties have a willingness to truly examine the topic. Your conversations with the gym bros, the gurus, the soccer moms on the juice diet, and the athletes doing things the way they did them a hundred years ago are likely not going anywhere and you would save time and frustration to simply do your thing and leave others to theirs. Let me explain.

       If someone doesn't value logic then what use is employing logic to persuade them? If they don't value evidence then what evidence could possibly be meaningful to them? If they cannot or are not willing to offer a tenable defense of their position or entertain yours then what position could you expect to take which would sway them? 

       This was one of the first lecture topics I sat through when getting my graduate education in physiology. I had heard various permutations of this quote many times, but my professor felt strongly about it and made us listen for 90 minutes as he laid out the way things are for us. He told us that while we might value logic, evidence, and common sense this sentiment is hardly universal. As a scientist with a background in both lab sciences and field work, it is easy and tempting for me to assume that observation and evidence are the norm and that people typically form beliefs based on reason. But that simply isn't always the case.

       Especially in the realm of health and human performance there is still a strong element of faith for some. You can't out-logic faith or provide evidence from the field/lab strong enough to counteract devotion to dogma when someone has already decided what they'll believe no matter what. Data won't matter. Results won't matter. Your experience won't matter. Unless they support the faith. The point is there must be an openness before there can be a dialogue.

       Understanding this and that it isn't your life's purpose to convince every single person, is freeing. You can't and don't have to save everyone - particularly if they don't want to be saved. I'll leave you with a quote from Mike Kidd, my early coach and mentor: "What someone else thinks doesn't hurt YOUR total."

Some Pep in Your Step: Are Peptide Drugs the Future of Doping?

       If you watched the Winter Olympics this year you probably sat through dozens of TV segments detailing the nightmare that is doping. The fact that this nightmare is a fantasy having very little to do with actual doping is laughable, but we won't be discussing it today. Instead we'll take a look at one of the monsters from the current doping nightmare model being spoon fed to the public: peptides.

       During the Olympics peptide drugs were both lamented and praised as the "next big thing" in doping, and following the games Average Joe Juicehead has decided he must have this new toy. Forum discussions are overflowing with references to poorly written articles by drug dealers seeking to cash in on the trend. Bros the world over see this and begin clamoring for this undetectable drug that is supposedly going to change the game, and they are pumping their misunderstandings back into the discourse as quickly as their gurus can come up with new sermons. But the discourse isn't limited to the inevitable herd of idiots. The serious doping community - comprised of elite athletes, coaches, physicians, and scientists - is paying attention as well. And while the discussion among these folks is evidence-based and the science is applied by professionals the rest of the scientific and sporting communities are left largely in the dark, preferring to avoid the ethical pitfalls of getting involved with such a taboo.  The result is the normal mixture of guruism, confusion, broscience, and nuggets of good data so familiar to those seeking to study such matters informally. The consensus is that peptide drugs are the future of doping. But are they? Yes. Definitely yes. But not in the way you imagine.

       You see, peptide drugs aren't new. They've been around longer than you have, and they've been in the drug stacks of athletes since their inception. A peptide is simply a group of amino acids bound together to produce a chain. For the science-minded note that the carboxyl group of one amino acid will bind covalently with the amine group of the next amino acid in the chain. The resulting polymer can take on many roles. Some act as hormones, and these are the ones that interest us today. Notable peptide drugs include insulin, IGF-1, growth hormone, and the various growth hormone releasing peptides. As you see, peptide drugs have been around. Insulin and GH transformed bodybuilding in the 1980s and 1990s but both were in use before that. GHRP was discovered in 1976, and was immediately noted for its ergogenic effects. It's difficult to call something the future when it's been making waves since the era of free love. At the same time, understanding has improved, accessibility is exponentially greater, and the information age has made doping secrets into reality TV. So while peptide drugs are long-established their popular use is relatively recent. Let's take a look at the big names in peptide doping, and summarize each.

• Growth Hormone: Just about everyone is aware of GH. Arnold and his contemporaries were harvesting it from cadavers and synthetic GH was responsible for many of the conditioning changes bodybuilding underwent in the 80s. Outside of physique sports, it has gained a following as an anti-aging medicine, rehab aid, and fat loss aid. While its anabolic effects are debatable and its benefits as an ergogen are exagerrated GH remains popular and will continue to have a place in doping because of its other effects. This link does a good job explaining things. http://bjsportmed.com/content/37/2/100.full
• Insulin: There is a lot of debate on how insulin acts as an anabolic, but it clearly does. One one side, it is claimed that the anabolic effect is due to inhibition of proteolysis (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16705065) while the other camp promotes the idea that protein synthesis is stimulated by insulin when sufficient levels of amino acids are supplied(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC295560/). Insulin is also the most dangerous peptide drug, and it has the distinction of being the only hormonal PED that can kill you via a direct action of the drug. Too much insulin can result in insulin shock, potentially driving glucose levels down low enough for you to lose consciousness and incur brain damage. I'm not trying to be alarmist here. I am generally fairly pro-doping. But danger is danger, and risk from insulin use absolutely must be acknowledged. Oddly, however, this drug is available over the counter in every state in the USA and in most other developed countries. In fact all the drugs below are completely legal to buy, possess, and use in most countries.
• Insulin-like Growth Factor 1: IGF-1, so named for its similarity to insulin and its ability to interact with the insulin receptor, is a major driving force in growth and development and mediates the growth effects of GH by stimulating proliferation and differentiation of satellite cells. GH stimulates its production in the liver and other tissues secrete specific types as well. There are multiple variants, and the functions are simply too many to list in a concise summary. http://mp.bmjjournals.com/content/54/5/311.full
• Mechano Growth Factor: MGF is a synthetic variant of IGF-1 which mimics (or nearly so) the action of IGF-1 Ec, the variant produced by exercising or severely stressed muscle tissue. It acts in a regenerative and growth-promoting capacity in local tissues. This is the peptide grabbing the headlines, as it's been revealed that many athletes in the recent Olympic Games were using it both as an ergogen leading up to the events and as a rehabilitative aid for injuries sustained during competition. I will avoid dropping names, but I can tell you that some very prominent athletes are practically marinating in MGF. http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/39/11/787.full
• Growth Hormone Releasing Hormone: GHRH is pretty straightforward. It interacts with the anterior pituitary to signal release of GH. (http://www.clinchem.org/content/36/3/415.full.pdf+html) The synthetic analog CJC 1295, also called Mod GRF 1-29, is modified via a process known as bioconjugation to extend active life. It is an effective GH releaser on its own (http://press.endocrine.org/doi/abs/10.1210/jc.2005-1536) but works synergistically with Growth Hormone Releasing Peptides (discussed below) to produce GH pulses of greater magnitude than is possible with either alone.  http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/8421084
• Growth Hormone Releasing Peptides: GHRPs are growth hormone secretagogues acting separately from Growth Hormone Releasing Hormone on the pituitary gland and hypothalamus to initiate secretion of GH. For decades, the mechanism of action was unclear, but we now know these drugs mimic the action of ghrelin, most well-known for it's regulation of hunger. The most common growth hormone secretagogues taking peptdide form are GHRP-2, GHRP-6, ipamorelin, and hexarelin. Each has unique aspects.  http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4612-2396-2_11

       As evidenced by the linked literature peptides are well-established in both the scientific community and the doping community, with a long history of use as ergogens in both clinical and sporting settings. Their actions do not rely on androgens, making them valuable additions or alternatives to androgen-derived steroid drugs in circles where use  of ergogenic aids is common. Many of the side effects associated with steroids can be avoided with peptides, many peptides are legal, and increasing connectivity via the internet makes access increasingly easy for would-be users. Concurrently, advances in our understanding and technological ability will lead to continous improvements in both quality and use of these drugs. All these factors make peptides the force they are today, and will continue to contribute to their popularity in the future.

Estrogen and the Male Athlete

       Estrogen is always a popular topic in the sports and fitness crowd. As usual I see mostly misinformation when I read about this topic in the media or see it discussed. People know it as the primary female sex hormone, but seem not to know much about what else it does. They don't seem to know quite what to make of it and what difference it makes to a male anyway. That's a shame because this hormone does a lot of interesting things.  Before we start, let's note that this isn't the final word on estrogen. Endocrinology is a massive and constantly evolving field. We know much more this year than we did last year, and next year we'll know even more, but we have just scratched the surface. There is much more we don't know, aren't sure of, or can't prove. Yet. Always remember science is fluid. So let's talk about estrogen and what effect it has on you as a male athlete.

       There are three primary types of estrogen - which is a steroid hormone just like it's counterpart testosterone - in production in the human body. Estrone is the most prevalent form in aged women, who are in or have experienced menopause. Estriol, the weakest form in terms of potency, plays a major role in pregnancy (as does a fourth estrogen, estetrol, which is only produced during pregnancy). Estradiol, the beta form of estrogen, is both the strongest estrogen in terms of potency and the dominant form for the bulk of a woman's reproductive years. It is this form that concerns us today, as this is the dominant form in men as well.

       First, we'll briefly summarize why you need estradiol. In addition to it's role as a sex hormone, there are many roles of estradiol in the male system as well. It exerts effects on the development of brain, lung, reproductive, and vascular tissues; supports immune function; regulates mood and libido; interacts with other anabolic processes to regulate tissue accretion (fat, muscle, wound healing); and confers some protective benifits to the cardiovasular system. Note that physiologically normal amounts of estrogen are being discussed here. In normal men, normal levels of estrogen carry on the functions above. Problems arise when levels are outside the accepted normal range of ten to forty picograms per millileter of blood.

       Significant elevations of estradiol are known to be risk factors in a variety of conditions. Rather than explain each condition and how estradiol is involved I'll make a simple list of conditions with proven links to estradiol elevations. For further reading I can provide interested parties with references.

• Stroke: Data suggest increases in stroke risk with elevated estradiol levels. In elderly men risk can double. (Abbott RD, Launer LJ, Rodriguez BL, et al. "Serum Estradiol and Risk of Stroke in Elderly Men." Neurology. Feb 2007)
• Heart Attack and Coronary Artery Disease: Data going all the way back to the 1970's indicate elevations in serum estrogen are risk factors for heart attack in men. Subsequent studies have confirmed this countless times. If you search for "estradiol and myocardial infarction" in any database, you'll get page after page of nearly identical studies. This is among the most replicated results in literature that I'm aware of. (Phillips, "Evidence for Hyperestrogenemia as a Risk Factor for Myocardial Infarction in Men." The Lancet. July 1976; Mohammad et al. "Serum Levels of Sex Hormones in Men with Acute Myocardial Infarction." Neuroendocrinology Letters. 2007; etc) Estradiol is also seen as a risk factor for vascular throboses, or blood clots. (Philips, Pinkernell, and Jing. "The Association of Hyperestrogenemia with Coronary Throbosis in Men." Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology.)
• Atherosclerosis: Estrone has been implicated here as well. (Dunajska K, Milewicz A, Szymczak J, et al. "Evaluation of Sex Hormone Levels and Some Metabolic Factors in Men with Coronary Atherosclerosis." Aging Male. Sept 2004) Estradiol remains a risk factor in the data as well though. At this point it's effect isn't clear, and we can't say for sure estradiol is a direct influence or an indirect one, affecting atherosclerotic processes via lipid changes. But high estradiol correlates with risk certainly. And more needs to be done to elucidate its role.
•  Peripheral Artery Disease: High circulating levels of estradiol are associated with increased instance of PAD as men age. (Tivesten A, Mellstrom D, Jutberger H, et al. "Low Serum Testosterone and High Serum Estradiol Associate with Lower Extremity Peripheral Arterial Disease in elderly men." Journal of the American College of Cardiology. Sep 2007) 
• Chronic Inflammatory Issues: there are alot of these, and high estradiol shows up regularly in the blood work for male autoimmune patients and those with other inflammatory diseases. Rheumatoid arthritis springs to mind, as does Crohn's disease. Here is one example: "estradiol correlated strongly and positively with all measured indices of inflammation." (Tengstrand et al. "Abnormal Levels of Serum DHEA, Estrone, and Estradiol in Men with Rheumatoid Arthritis: High Correlation Between Serum Estradiol and Current Degree of Inflammation." Journal of Rheumatology. 2003)
• Prostate Cancer: Estradiol is emerging more and more as a risk factor here. See my post about Testosterone for more reading in this area.
• Psychological/Neural/Mental Issues: as estrogen affects the brain and is strongly involved in mood, libido, and spatial reasoning, elevations can have a variety of effects in these areas. Mood swings, altered tolerance to stress, suppressed libido, and difficulty with spatial reasoning have all been noted in the literature or reported in case studies. One of the more studied effects is depression. This just about sums it up: "Depression in men is accompanied by a high production of estradiol..." (Vogel et al. "Roles of the Gonadal Steroid Hormones in Psychiatric Depression in Men and Women." Progress in Neuropsychopharmacology, Issue 4, Volume 2. 1978.)
• Metabolic Syndrome: This is pretty well known. Elevated estradiol correlates strongly with obesity, and can modify fat accretion rates and patterns. Obesity itself correlates strongly with increases in aromatase and thus even more estradiol production. Nifty little vicious cycle huh? While most data indicates little or no direct effect of estradiol on insulin sensitivity, this cyclic action has been described in numerous instances as an adipose promoting chain of events. Insulin action can be indirectly affected in this way. There is still much to learn in this area, but it is crucial that we recognize estradiol and it's relationship to other hormones as a part of the increasingly complex foundation of metabolic syndrome. (Cohen. "Obesity in Men: The Hypogonadal-estrogen Receptor Relationship and its Effect on Glucose Metabolism." Medical Hypotheses, Volume 70, Issue 2. 2008.)
• Gynecomastia: This is another one most people are already familiar with. Elevations in estradiol can lead to growth of breast tissue in men, as the hormone interacts strongly with receptors in the mammary glands.
• Hypogonadism: The last one on the list is yet another commonly discussed issue. Estrogen is highly suppressive to the Hypothalamic Testicular Pituitary Axis, and elevations can lead to decreases in the production of testicular hormones. In men using hormone drugs, suppression is already an issue, but estradiol elevations make it worse, and may contribute to difficulties in recovering when ceasing use of the drugs.  

       Considering that, many men who look into estrogen-related issues, especially those concerned about increases due to steroid use, become somewhat obsessed with estrogen. It is common to find individuals in these groups who are actively trying to eliminate estrogen or reduce it as much as possible. This is not a solution. Low estradiol carries its own set of problems. Remember it is needed for normal processes to carry on. Bear in mind also that physiologically appropriate levels correlate with increased health in many ways, including neuroprotection (up to and including Alzheimer's patients) and enhanced bone regeneration. It should go without saying that eliminating or heavily suppressing a hormone with such important tasks can cause all kind of issues. Here is a list of the more commonly reported issues related to low estradiol. I won't go into the studies as much here, as symptoms vary strongly, and the data is mostly case-studies.

• Low libido
• Aching joints
• Bone mineral loss
• Low immunity
• Itching and increases in allergy activity
• Altered mood
• Altered sleep patterns
• Short-term memory difficulty and general "brain fog"

        Since both elevations and dramatic decreases in estradiol are problematic, the logical solution is to maintain appropriate levels within the physiological range. If you use hormone drugs for performance enhancement purposes or for hormone replacement therapy, it is important to keep an eye on your bloodwork to ensure everything is ok. Always communicate with your healthcare providers to ensure an understanding of needs and risks exists. And always be aware of how your lifestyle and related factors may be affecting your body. Stay safe everyone.

      
      

Gains are fun! Training isn't always.

       Today I don't have any hard science for you. That's coming soon, so check back regularly if you are waiting on an explanation of the controversial Thoracolumbar Sling (it's not controversial to biomechanists and strength coaches - just to the internet and its crew of pseudo-intellectual semiscientists - but we'll get into that later). Today we're talking about work and fun.

     A thread in a facebook group I'm in got me thinking about the need to base training on performance needs rather than how enjoyable the training is. There is an idea held dear in some circles that everyone who works out should be having fun first and foremost and that discipline and results should take a back seat to enjoyment. This has bled heavily into the field of nutrition as well as dietary flexibility has become the cause du jour. But it's the wrong attitude if you expect success in sports.

     Don't take this as an attempt at machismo or stoicism. I'm not against fun at all. In fact, I love what I do. I love my sport and my job and can't think of a better way to grind through life than by hanging out with fantastic athletes and lifting heavy things over and over. But I'm flabbergasted by the idea that if your training isn't always fun it's missing something. Articles abound extolling the benefits of this or that exercise, imploring you to add more and more variety to your ever-expanding exercise selection. This, supposedly, will keep things fun and fresh while covering all your needs more effectively than a less varied routine can. After all, seeing how many movements you can gain proficiency in and constantly changing training elements is more exciting than slogging through another session of heavy competition drills. If you exercise for general health and have no specific goals then this may be for you. As far as non-athletes are concerned there is something to be said for covering the work with a bit of light fun. Moving and exercising is the end goal rather than the performance adaptation being held paramount. Simply going to the gym and doing some work is beneficial to health, and enjoying it might make casual exercisers more likely to stay with it.

     But I'll be very clear to the athletes in the audience. If you try this as a way to stay sport-ready, you will fail. Not a little bit. Miserably. You will get crushed into oblivion by a competitor who wants nothing more than to beat you. This individual would rather succeed than get an "epic training sesh, bruh." Fun in training hasn't been considered. It's all about the present competition and whether preparation has been adequately undertaken. Athletes who can't achieve this mindset don't tend to fare well. As my coach and mentor is fond of saying, "step up or get stepped on."

     The fact is that searching for variety and requiring fun, regardless of the intent, are great ways to avoid the hard and repetitive training that actually makes you better. You can get wrapped up enough in recreation that you become lax in the overall discipline and specificity of your training. It's the job of your coach to call you out on this bullshit and make sure the work you do has purpose. Let me know when they add lateral raise dropsets with band tension and a 20 degree lateral lean to the powerlifting total. And we can do all the circuits you want when they add a CrossFit round to pre-judging at bodybuilding shows. Until then, you're better off spending your time and effort on things that are relevant, even if they don't leave you ecstatic. Let's forget the nonsense. We came to the gym to get better. If that means a workout is difficult and unpleasant, so be it. If that means additions or subtractions to training, make it happen. If it means training more or less, do it. If it means selecting different movements to train with... you get it.

     Those of you who read my training logs know how mind-numbingly boring some of my workouts are. I do what's needed and no more. I follow this rule for all my athletes. Training doesn't have to be exciting. It has to lead to improvement. There's nothing wrong with training in a recreational fashion if if meets your needs and wants but if you have any serious athletic aspirations you need to divorce yourself from the idea that it's just for fun. It's a tool. A means to an end. A way to achieve a goal. And sometimes it isn't fun. But you know what is fun? Setting a personal record, achieving the best shape of your life, placing or winning at a competition, losing the weight, fixing the health issues, or getting the girl/guy. Have fun - yes have fun! - but remember what you're in the gym for and do what you need to do to make it happen. I can guarantee the way forward lies in the work and discipline shown by the successful competitors -not in the fun you'll have in a workout you won't even remember next week.

HMG: a primer

     Much has been and will continue to be said about hCG, or human chorionic gonadotropin. This pregnancy hormone produced in the placenta has been used in fertility treatments, anti-aging medicine, testosterone replacement regimens, doping, and weight loss scams. Its many off-label uses have lead to perfusion into a wide array of areas, and if you are involved in a strength or physique sport, or any elite sport you've likely at least heard of it being used to prevent testicular disruption from anabolic androgenic steroids. But you probably aren't as familiar with hMG, which is a similar hormone (actually a set of hormones) that, for the purpose of fertility and testicular health, has some interesting aspects that many consider superior to hCG.

     Human Menopausal Gonadotropin, or hMG, is a mixture of gonadotropins secreted by menopausal and post-menopausal women. This life stage tends to include hypergonadism and thus lends itself to the creation of a virtual biological gonadotropin factory. The primary gonadotropins in vertebrates are luteinizing hormone (LH) and Follicle Stimulating Hormone (FSH) and both are present in large amounts in HMG. HCG may be in the mixture as well in some cases.

     At this point, if you are familiar with male enocrinology, you'll understand why hMG is so valuable for men with secondary hypogonadism (testes can function but brain isn't sending the signal)or who use endocrine-suppressing steroid drugs. LH stimulates the production of androgens in the testes and FSH stimulates sperm production. While hCG mimics LH and doesn't directly stimulate sperm production, hMG is the real thing. It exerts a direct impact on both androgen production and sperm production, making it an effective fertility drug in most cases and providing an excellent tool for men wanting to maintain not only testicular function but fertility while using steroid drugs.

     As with hCG, though, there are concerns for sensitivity with administration in large regular doses.  Too much for too long will have a deleterious effect, desensitizing target tissues to the gonadotropins and reinforcing the negative feedback loop creating the suppression in the first place. Men seeking to use this as a fertility aid or as a replacement for hCG need to consider the other classic hCG issue with hMG as well: aromatase. Aromatase production will spike in response to the pulses of gonadotropins, adding elevated aromatase levels to the mixture of potential problems.

     In summary, what is hMG? It's a stronger gonadal stimulant than hCG, enhancing both testosterone and sperm production. It has the same uses and carries the same potential risks. Please take it upon yourself if you choose to use illicit PEDs to educate yourself so that risk can be minimized and health optimized. It's not just your performance at stake. You have to live with your health forever, so treat it accordingly.

An Example of Meet Week Prep

       I've been asked quite a bit what my final week before a meet looks like. So as the opening competition of my 2014 season approaches, I want to take the opportunity to put up a basic outline of the things I do during the final week of prep, at the end of training or even after training is over. This is my final prep timeline for this year's WABDL North American Championships, where I'm cutting weight to hit the 125 kilogram class. There will be a 24 hour weigh-in.

1. Monday: hit BP opener for a single, squat (light) to keep the lower body from tightening up into an unusable coiled mass, and do a little barbell rowing; water consumption increased by 50%.

2. Tuesday: PNF and soft tissue work on biceps, triceps, shoulder girdle, and T-spine.
   
     *Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation

3. Wednesday: depletion training to begin my weight cut

4. Thursday: depletion day 2; cals at maintenance, carbs at 150 g. Recovery walk in PM.

5. Thursday at dinner, reduce fluid intake to sipping on water; afterward suck on ice chips and sip herbal tea.

6.  Sleep if possible. Probably not though because I'll be essentially camping in the bathroom epitomizing the concept of the over-active bladder.

7. Weigh at 5 AM, 6 hours out from checking in at the meet. Hit the steam room and take a walk if needed. Monitor weight every half hour until target is hit, sucking on ice chips to keep from over-dehydrating. Continue to monitor until I check in.

8. Check in at 11 AM after vacating the bladder and bowels.

9. As close to 11 AM as possible, start drinking gatorade and eat an easy to digest breakfast; over the course of the day I'll have a gallon of gatorade, a gallon of water, and as much food as I can eat for the rest of the day.

10. See chiropractor and neuromuscular therapist. Adjustment, soft tissue work, and mechanical analysis.

11. Bed early.

The Cardio Boogeyman Exposed

       At this point everyone seriously involved in lifting weights has probably heard the refrain, "cardio limits gains and causes fibers to switch." It's well known that excessive endurance training can impact strength training negatively, and it's well-established in the literature that the two types of training don't always jive well. Additionally, it's been demonstrated that strength training and endurance training don't carry over well to performance in the respective alternate field.

       But be that as it may, the reality for many athletes is that the health benefits or performance improvements from endurance training can help them in their endeavors, and training in both areas is needed for a competitor to excel in many sports. Mechanisms for training adaptations are understood to be specific to context, so we know that performance increases of the type that would be significant to the athlete's game require training that matches the demands. A rugby player certainly needs to be strong, but he also needs to be able to run a 5k during a game while hitting other players, jumping, throwing, falling, and getting crushed by a pile of similarly stressed individuals. A trail runner needs to be in fantastic condition, but if he's got weak legs he'll get crushed by a dude who does his squats regularly when an 800 meter hill comes up. For lifters and bodybuilders, while cardio may present some hindrances, you also don't need to be a sloppy fat-ass with no work capacity and horrible circulation, so you may find yourself in a situation where a little cardio will make you healthier, and thereby better able to train and perform adequately.

       So, having established that there are times where you'd conceivably want to address both endurance and strength, we need to establish the extent of the potential hindrances to performance with concurrent training. Once we understand these and understand the context of the adaptations, we can plan these different training stresses and adaptations to be minimally incompatible or compatible completely in the best case. Let's look at some literature first.

http://www.jappl.org/content/56/4/831.short

http://www.portalsaudebrasil.com/artigospsb/ativfis150.pdf

http://jap.physiology.org/content/59/6/1716.short

       Endurance training induces changes to skeletal muscle. This includes metabolic as well as fiber-type adaptations. Duh. But since some of the cardio extremists insist on harping about how endurance training is too low-threshold to affect muscular development, we'll put these links up there. You'll adapt to endurance training just as you'll adapt to any training. We get better at what we practice. If you are still with me after the remedial assertion that the training you do has a physiological effect, good. You are now ready for freshman health class. If not, I don't know how you found this blog but it's beyond your current level of understanding. Please stick around, but do some major studying too.

http://sriechman.tamu.edu/629/2012/Nader%202006.pdf

       Another concept that should be simple to grasp but still eludes some is that too much endurance training can hinder both hypertrophy and strength development. This is not a problem confined to endurance training. Too much of any training that doesn't carry over to your sport directly will carry risk of hindering progress, for various reasons.

       There should be no debate about whether excessive endurance training can hinder strength and muscular growth. Many of the adaptations caused by endurance training run counter to many       
caused by strength training and bodybuilding. Many have said cardio has no or limited benefit in populations seeking strength and size.

       But looking at the issue in a black-and-white fashion completely ignores how things work in the real world: Energy systems do not function in isolation. All systems are working to keep you alive and functioning. Low aerobic capacity will affect your health and performance in major ways. Adaptation is a way to cope with a changing environment; much of it is transient. And lastly, the biggest thing the no-cardio-ever crowd forgets: a little bit of cardio isn't going to cause the same adaptations as intensive endurance training.

       Clearly, there is a time and a place where endurance work is appropriate. Considering that, it behooves us to look more deeply into how the resulting adaptations occur, especially when combined with strength training. Luckily, the good folks in the military-industrial complex have already figured it out:

http://allasamsonova.ru/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2013/12/1995_Kraemer-W.J.-at-all.pdf

       This study examines in depth the interaction of endurance and strength training, noting that the two seem to be incompatible. But what is more interesting to us at this moment is the hypotheses about why this is the case and how we might manage it. "Thus, incompatibility of training may be attributed to a large extent to the extreme stress of adrenal activation due to the total amount of high intensity exercise. Whether successful adaptations can occur remains dependent on the ability of various anabolic compensatory mechanisms (e.g. testosterone, IGF-1, and GH) to eventually override a catabolic environment." Later, the author states, "...such data and previous studies have indicated that total work stress may be a potentially significant factor in the development of incompatibility of exercise training. This concept is now supported from an endocrine perspective."

       While attenuation of adaptations was occurring in this study, it's important to note that strength, size, and endurance all increased significantly in groups training concurrently. It's hypothesized that, as discussed above, the limiting factor for the compatibility of the two training types could be determined more by the ability of the athlete to recover from training stresses than by an inherent attenuation. The author goes on to say that rest, periodization, and control of outside stressors contributed to continued improvements even with the attenuation, and suggests controlling these factors may decrease incompatibility of the two training types.

       We also need to note that fiber type conversions took 12 weeks to become apparent, and that other markers of endurance adaptations took a while as well.

       If you want a sound-bite answer to the question of whether cardio is okay here it is: it's not cardio
that kills gains. It's excessive cardio. Controlling training volumes and intensities and making sure the bulk of your work is specific to your goals continues to be the best way to train. Adding some cardio is not going to immediately impact your strength training in any negative way unless you go whole-hog into intensive and specialized endurance work. Appropriate modes of endurance training in appropriate volumes will aid you rather than hindering you.

       The question now is only, "what is appropriate?" If you've learned anything from me so far then you already know the answer. It depends.

The way I do it.

       Since some programs I've used to train for competition were well received upon my recent posting of them on some facebook groups, I've been in several conversations that set off huge waves of requests for my current training methodology. I've discussed alot of training programs and methods I use with clients in detail in various outlets, but it's been pointed out that I haven't really explained the way I train myself. The following is the basic template I set my training up on, and is the result of my experiences as a lifter and my education/study. It took me a long time to work up to this so don't expect it to treat you nicely if you decide to jump in without prior experience with this type of training.

Off-season



 

       I train relatively infrequently in the off-season, which for me is typically 3 months. It's very simple during this time, with low volume. The focus is on full recovery, abbreviated training, and hypertrophy. This template is pretty standard in the HIT crowd, and was heavily influenced by the work of Ellington Darden.

 

       Every 3rd day: 6-8 exercises encompassing the major muscle groups. One set to failure of 6-15 reps after adequate warm-up. Sometimes I break these up into A and B sessions, with squats or DLs in the beginning of session A for a heavy set of 1-5 and bench presses in the beginning of session B. The two are then alternated, so that each main lift is hit roughly every 9 days for a single heavy set.

 

 

In-season

 

       During the season, I swing all the way in the other direction. Training is high volume, high intensity, and high frequency. Training load and volume are purely autoregulated. Targets for average load, total volume, and fatigue level are decided on weekly but are subject to change. The goal is to increase average weekly workload, average weekly volume, and total tonnage throughout the season, with minimal accumulated fatigue and absolutely no over-reaching. I only ever take weights I know I can hit and I err on the side of too light or too few lifts instead of letting fatigue and injury limit me. The daily and even the weekly performance doesn't matter. Daily capacities change. What matters is the trend should always be toward heavier loads and more work. After all, the strongest man is the one who lifts the most weight the most often. This one is less a template and more a set of guidelines.

 

1. Every lift every day.

2. 4-6 times a week.

3. Do singles with a load exceeding 70% in every session.

4. 80/20: 80 percent of my work is squatting, benching, and pulling; the remainder is essential support work.

 

       At present, this takes the shape of:

 

Monday: 

     SQ and BP: heavy triple, then repeated down-sets until fatigue reaches goal

     Sumo DL:single, then a single down-set for 3+ reps

     Row: one top set to failure and a second set either at less weight or using rest-pause reps

 

Tuesday:

     SQ and BP variation (pause squat, close grip, etc): heavy single

     Hip hinge movement (RDL, GM, etc; occasionally GHR, despite it not being a hinge): 6RM

     Upper arm accessories: one set for bis, one for tris, both to failure

 

Wednesday:

     SQ and BP: 80% of Monday's top weight, either for 3 triples or a single set of reps

     Olympic lift variation: work up to a daily max and follow with down-sets of 3

     Upper back/ rear delt: varied depending on the movement chosen

 

Thursday:

     SQ and BP variation: heavy single

     DL from varying positions: heavy single

          *mid shin, knee, and 1-2 inch deficit are the ones that carry over for me

     Upper arm accessories

Friday:
    SQ and BP volume work: see Monday
    Conventional DL: heavy single, then a down-set
    Chins: 2 working sets, typically with negatives on the second, or a reduction in load

Saturday:
     Active recovery: during the warm parts of the year, I hike at least an hour on this day; other times I do LISS cardio, a circuit, yoga, or whatever I want that isn't powerlifting.

     There you have it. I think I'll call it "Boring and Hard."

Just work hard damnit!

       It's humorous how often people warn me that the way I train (very basic without much accessory work) will lead me to sub-par performance on the platform and a huge set of injuries. It's impossible, they tell me, to adequately train and prepare the muscular system for athletic exertion without a massive list of special exercises and corrective drills, and without isolating motor patterns around joints, I'll be hurting myself regularly.

       The fact is, as I've transitioned over the years to a low-variety system based on specificity, many nagging injuries have cleared up. I've PR'ed in 2 weight classes in powerlifting and expanded the number of federations I hold titles and records in by over 100% with no new major injuries. I've attained my largest size yet at a leanness I haven't matched in years.

       My hiking performance has benefitted too. It's the other sport I participate in with serious interest. Times and recovery intervals have decreased while my capacity for long hikes and hard trail runs in a given time span has gone up. I'll add that I sustained no hiking-specific injuries last season either.

       My hamstrings haven't exploded because of a lack of knee flexion in my program. In fact, both hamstrings have old injuries that have improved since removing the fluff from my training to go harder on what works.My pec tendons haven't shortened into unmoveable cords because I don't do deep dumbbell presses and my bench lockout hasn't gone to hell over a lack of triceps extensions. My back requires me to let the seams out on my shirts, even though I haven't done anything for it besides chins and rows since I moved to Portland. Neither ankle has been devastated by the rampaging injuries supposedly common to those who don't train calves, and my calves push on the legs of my pants hard enough to rub all the hair off. And, oh yeah, doing absolutely zero cardio training hasn't affected my conditioning. At all. (Clearly hiking is endurance training and this specificity has been enough to prepare me for the rigors of the sport.) My training is a lifting template so boring you'd have to be in love with powerlifting just to do it and as many hikes in a week as I can fit when the season to hike approaches.

       You'd be surprised how much of an impact proper, basic strength training will have on every single aspect of your athleticism if you give it a chance. Clearly, there is more than one way to train. I'm all for individualizing programming to meet specific needs and I'm all for doing the corrective work and special training that carries over to your athletic endeavors. But I often ask people to look critically at their training and ask what the purpose and result of every lift they do is. If you can't identify a purpose, and the movement doesn't result in a measurable performance or rehabilitative improvement then why are you doing it? Isn't it a waste of time? Many times, athletes are shocked to learn that a large portion of their training falls into the category of lifts without clear purpose or effect. If this describes you, consider going back to basics. It's okay not to be fancy, especially if it allows you to finally train as hard as you always should have been.
     

Testosterone and Your Heart

       Testosterone receives much more than its fair share of bad press. A few seconds on a search engine reveals it will shrink your penis, make you permanently sterile, cause multiple forms of cancer, destroy your heart, weaken your connective tissues, and make you go insane. But what does the data say? If you've looked, you'll know that testosterone has classically been considered a major cardiac risk but that attitudes are changing as we learn more about the pathologies of various cardiac issues and diseases.

       Recently, the media is piling on accusations of extreme cardiac risk associated with testosterone following the publication of a recent study and article. It's too bad for these sensationalists that the study was one of the worst designed ever and was roundly dismissed by most authorities. I won't link it here, but you can find it easily if you want it. Instead, lets look at studies designed to look at the issue in more detail.
    
       Fair warning: This post, in its entirety, is going to be a thick read. Skip it or skim it if you have not yet delved into the murky world of PED research. It's essentially a collection of hard data that I've been working through for a research project for my work. I'm not going to go into heavy detail on most since the papers themselves are satisfactory to explain the data. For the more research-minded among you I strongly urge at least a cursory skimming of the provided literature to get up to date on the current understanding of risk. For those of you just looking for broad summaries and interpretation, stick to the synopsis sections.

http://cardiovascres.oxfordjournals.org/content/57/2/370.short

Not much more to say here: "We found no evidence for cardiac toxicity of T administration despite a 10-fold increase in T levels after testosterone undecanoate administration compared to placebo administration. Neither infarct size nor procedure-related mortality was influenced by T status. In contrast, there was a tendency to an improved hemodynamic outcome..."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12800107

Visceral Abdominal Fat is a major risk factor for myocardial infarction, linking and perhaps superceding other risk factors and "linking" them for a larger effect. Estradiol is emerging as a major risk factor for myocardial infarction in men as well. This study concluded: "(1) VAT in men may largely explain the correlations of sex hormones, insulin, and obesity with the risk factors for MI measured, (2) VAT may be the principal factor in men, independently of other measures of adiposity, that links risk factors for MI to form the constellation, and (3) estradiol may play a more important role in the sex hormone-insulin relationship in men than has generally been considered."

http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/102/16/1906.short


Again, pretty clear: "Low-dose supplemental testosterone treatment in men with chronic stable angina reduces exercise-induced myocardial ischemia."


http://www.pnas.org/content/74/4/1729.short


Glucose metabolism dysfunction and estrogen elevations continue to be seen as primary cardiac risk factors. "The hypothesis is presented (i) that in men who have had a myocardial infarction, an abnormality in glucose tolerance and insulin response and elevation in serum cholesterol and triglyceride concentrations are all part of the same defect (glucose-insulin-lipid defect), (ii) that this glucose-insulin-lipid defect when glucose intolerance is present is the "mild diabetes" commonly associated with myocardial infarction but is based on a mechanism different from that of classical diabetes, (iii) that this glucose-insulin-lipid defect is secondary to an elevation in E/T, and (iv) that an alteration in the sex hormone milieu is the major predisposing factor for myocardial infarction."


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3573299


http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673676929688


Both of the two links above show estrogen elevations, with the second of these two having this to say:


"These results suggest that the hyperœstrogenæmia preceded the myocardial infarction and that hyperœstrogenæmia may be an important risk factor for myocardial infarction in men."


http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=601660


More about estrogen as a risk factor.


http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/99/13/1666.short


Reduction in exercise-induced ischemia with supplemental testosterone.


http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/100/16/1690.short


Testosterone induces coronary dilation and is shown to improve bloodflow in men with coronary artery disease.


http://cardiovascres.oxfordjournals.org/content/57/2/370.short


Reduced stress on the cardiac wall with testosterone doses sufficient to cause anabolism in diseased populations.


http://atvb.ahajournals.org/content/14/5/701.short


Low T hypothesized to be a risk factor for coronary atherosclerosis.


http://biomedgerontology.oxfordjournals.org/content/60/11/1451.short


Notable for it's conclusion that T did not significantly affect likelihood of cardiac events.


http://journals.lww.com/co-endocrinology/Abstract/2010/06000/Testosterone_and_heart_failure.14.asp


"Anabolic deficiency is a major component of the CHF syndrome and testosterone replacement therapy has been subject to recent trials."


There can never be enough research. We need much more to assemble a proper understanding of testosterone and associated cardiac risk. But here is a summary of what we know about it:


1. Obesity and metabolic syndrome are considered over-arching risk factors.


2. Elevated estrogen levels are beginning to be seen as primary instigators of cardiac issues in men, despite physiologic doses exerting positive effects.


3.Testosterone is being studied for its potential therapeutic uses in cardiac patients.


        There is and should be concern for health if you use PED's. These drugs carry risk and that should not be ignored. But when we look at the data, it’s easy to see that much of the fear mongering about testosterone and cardiac risk is just that. While some studies do highlight risk, it’s important to note that methodology and design alters the appearance of the data in many cases. The pieces above, and many more, support the idea that testosterone is not as dangerous to cardiac tissues, in most cases, as is often claimed. In fact, lifestyle factors such as metabolic syndrome and other hormones, estrogen and insulin chief among them, carry much more risk and affect cardiac tissue much more negatively. Until a full picture is assembled, continue to focus e on staying healthy via exercise and diet to maintain cardiac health, and be aware of how estrogen levels might affect your heart. It appears at this point that cardiac risk from testosterone has been overstated. The American Heart Association says TRT improves quality of life and carries minimal cardiac risk. Enough said.

Basic Shoulder Rehabilitation

       The stabilizers of the shoulder are the mid-level executives of the strength training world. With reasonable oversight and training they do their job well, but they are utterly hopeless when the boss (the larger shoulder structures and ultimately, you) does something stupid that renders their efforts useless or, at the very least, diminished. Just as with the mid-level executives in the corporate world, when the boss wants someone to demean for failure, the shoulder stabilizers bear an inordinately large share of the blame. It is common to see an athlete assuming every single issue with the shoulders stems from the much-discussed  but little-understood rotator cuff, or some specific muscular imbalance which must be corrected painstakingly with some ghetto-ized version of a physical therapy modality they saw on YouTube. This is even more prevalent in the well-educated, who often overthink any ache or pain they experience and skip the simple interventions to go right to band distracted PNF with pressure-augmented reflex modulation, or some such tool that sounds equally fancy but likely isn't warranted.

       In this post, I want to discuss simple interventions for misbehaving shoulders. If you are spending 30 minutes on rehab work and special warm-ups you are either too hurt to train or, more likely, you are just using the splatter approach - throwing everything you can think of at it in hopes something will work. But it need not be that complicated and with a little attention to detail you can prevent issues while fixing the ones you have.

       The first thing we need to get out of the way here is proper mechanics while lifting. If your form is atrocious you don't need rehab. You need to learn how to move. This must be the first step when dealing with shoulder problems: ensure you are moving correctly, with proper posture. Fixing your bullshit form will fix 90% (just a guesstimate to represent how staggering the number is) of the problems you face with the shoulder.

       Secondly, once proficiency is established, consideration needs to be made for muscular balance. All of your time spent pressing with no pulling will inevitably lead you to pain and problems. This again is not a rehab issue. You simply need to train correctly. Of the minority of issues not related to mechanics during movement, the majority are due to simple imbalances. Complicated variations of movements and dedicated rehab work is a waste of time here. Fix your structure by allocating training efforts.

       If neither of these is the issue, you are one out of a hundred, or maybe less.Once we have extablished a true stabilizing issue in the shoulder girdle we need to set out to find what the problem is. And here it gets tricky. Most likely, you cannot do this on your own, even if you are trained to do so. You need an outside view from a qualified diagnostician. The 18 year old PT at the gym is not one of these, and neither is the guy who slings test in the locker room or that really hot Zumba instructor. Seek out a physiologist or coach who specializes in rehab, an athletic trainer, a sports medicine physician, or a manual therapist of some sort (NMT, DPT, DC, ART). Once the problem is identified a specific rehabilitative approach will be recommended to address the specific issues you have.

       Many athletes of a more advanced sort, who have their training nailed down and their movements perfected, are looking for a basic set of movements to do as an adjunct to ensure weakness or movement restriction does not develop in the stabilizers. These include the rotator cuff (supraspinatus, infraspinatus, subscapularis, and teres minor) as well as other muscles acting on the shoulder girdle, depending on the movement in question. This article, while being a little on the academic side and thus boring as hell, provides a good synopsis of the basic movements we use to affect stability in the absence of special situations. These should be done when instability has been noted and the issue is not being solved by regular training, but may not be appropriate if you are injured.

       http://www.pitt.edu/~neurolab/publications/1992-1996/BorsaPA_1994_JSportRehab_Functional%20assessment%20and%20rehabilitation%20of%20shoulder%20proprioception%20for%20glenohumeral%20instability.pdf

       It's worth noting though, that in most cases, going as far as all that is simply time taken away from more important aspects of training. The following is the basic preventive toolbox I use to manage and prevent shoulder issues. It addresses joint position and mechanics, imbalances, and stability deficits while taking literally minutes.

       1. Muscle Snatches: These force stabilization of the shoulder girdle in myriad ways, in both dynamic and static positions; recruit the rotators, traps, and thoracic muscles involved in shoulder mechanics; and force activation of high threshold motor units that are often missed in traditional rehab movements.
     
       2. Face pulls. Superior to pull-aparts in my opinion, face pulls involve horizontal abduction of the shoulder, depression and rotation of the scapula, and external rotation of the humerus. EMG data even indicates it is a sufficient stimulus to cause a training effect in the medial deltoid.

       3. Pushups: These can be added as a warm-up drill or used as a stand-alone. The light load allows focus on shoulder position and mechanics and testing multiple positions can help identify issues. This link includes some more detail and offers examples of modifications. http://articles.elitefts.com/training-articles/what-you-don%E2%80%99t-know-about-the-push-up/

       That's it. I use these drills regularly, sometimes as a separate session and sometimes added into existing programming, as a basic way to ensure proper function, stability, and mechanics. If you are looking for a preventive strategy, this is simple and quick, and if you are looking to start rehabbing, this will allow you to make some corrections to the issues on your own. As always, evaluate the need, match the training stress to the need, and modify as needed based on result. Don't over-complicate, don't over-work, and don't look so intently at the details you forget the big picture. With proper training, you will not need real rehab in your training. Now that you aren't wasting time with a  bunch of irrelevant corrective work picked arbitrarily, you have more time to put weight over head, so do it.

      
      

      

Think Inside the Box

       In the last post, I discussed hamstring training. You may recall mention of knee flexion and hip extension being superior to squatting for specific hamstring stimulus. This caused a bit of a stir, so I want to go into more detail on that and offer another movement useful for training the posterior chain that allows you to squat while focusing the effort more on the hamstrings. That would be the box squat. On the surface this variation may not seem much different from conventional squats, but the two movements should in fact be considered totally different exercises, and cannot be used completely interchangeably (unless you squat in equipment, but that's another topic).

       What is it?

       Simply put, in a box squat, there is a box or some other surface placed behind and under the lifter's hips. The lift is performed in two parts. The lifter squats back and then down, pushing purposely out of the squatting groove (this backward accentuation is important) until gently coming to rest on the box. The knees should be behind the feet slightly, and the athlete should be seated in a position not possible to achieve while squatting without the box, braced and tight as always. When contact is made, the hips are momentarily relaxed to completely stop the movement. 

       The concentric portion of the lift starts here. Louie Simmons, of  Westside Barbell fame, has always advocated initiating the lift with knee flexion and explosive drive from the hips. In his (recognized as the primary) style of box squat, the hips are driven forward very hard while this occurs, pushing the athlete forward and up off the box and thereby placing the vast majority of the stress of the lift onto the posterior chain, and activating the hamstrings much more thoroughly than conventional squats. For more information on the execution of the lift, see westside-barbell.com or any of the videos by Dave Tate on the subject.

What makes it special?

       In addition to matching the groove of equipped squats more closely than traditional raw squats, the box squat also develops starting strength very well. Instead of the braking and reversal occurring in the transition between the eccentric and concentric, the movement is broken in two, requiring an athlete to overcome the static load to stand back up. Without going into too much depth, we can summarize the action by saying that rate of force production and power must improve for one to become proficient at the box squat. This is helpful to both the squat and the deadlift, as well as translating well to field sports, where rate of force production is often more important than absolute strength. The nature of the movement requires care to execute it safely, and the increased effort required to maintain position can be helpful for athletes who rush through the lift and often miss because of it. Lastly, as I mentioned earlier, the added stress on the hip extensors and knee flexors makes this a valuable tool in your arsenal.

  Programming

       The answer to questions regarding programming is, more often than not, "it depends." Whether you should add this variation or emphasize it over other movements should be determined by analysis of the movements and demands of your sport, or for physique athletes, by analysis of physique needs and experimentation with how this variation affects development. In general, it makes for an excellent adjunct to squatting for more focused posterior chain development or as a tool for improving bar speed and position. It may be useful as a supplement to deadlift training as well if you struggle in the bottom of the lift.And for athletes needing to focus on starting strength, rate of force development, and hamstring development, the box squat may be a more appropriate tool than the traditional squat for the bulk of the training. As always, analyze your needs, match training to competition, and modify as needed. No general list can match your needs as well as careful observation can.

Hamstrings: A straightforward look at what they do and how to make them better at it.

     The posterior chain, and the hamstrings in particular, are hot topics lately. Powerlifters talk about sitting back in the squat and driving the knees out to activate this area more effectively for producing maximal force. Weightlifters debate various timing and positioning strategies to improve rate of force development in the region. Strongman competitors know they need to train this area both for strength and for preventing injury in the various events they face. And bodybuilders in big shows get slaughtered without a good pile of striated meat on the posterior thigh. Athletes are often confused about how to train the hamstrings and how they work, and as a result  they often end up taking advice from people who mean well but are misinformed. You see, while the hamstrings may appear at first to be a fairly simple muscle group with fairly simple functions, the truth is a bit messy. To figure out what we should do to train them adequately for whichever activities we are preparing for, we need to start by understanding the structure and function of the hamstrings.

Anatomy and Function of the Hamstrings

     Three muscles (or four depending on your brand of semantics) comprise the muscle group we call the hamstrings: the biceps femoris (with a long and short head), the semitendinosus, and the semimembranosus. The semitendinosus and semimembranosus are biarticular. This means that they cross more than one joint, in this case the hip and the knee. They typically act on both joints, and they can produce both hip extension and knee flexion. Additionally, they contribute strongly to stability of the trunk and legs during application of force to the ground or other external elements by anchoring a joint or holding an advantageous position. 

     The biceps femoris isn’t straightforward however. It is innervated by two branches of the same nerve which serve the short and long heads respectively. Motor patterns involving one typically result in at least some activation of the other due to overlapping structural elements but the two heads have some differences, so the short head (the most functionally limited of the group) is often separated for ease of discussion in study and in training. The long head is biarticular like the other aspects of the hamstring, and as such it contributes primarily to both extension of the hip and flexion of the knee just as they do. But the short head only crosses the knee, making in monoarticular. Its primary function is knee flexion, as it has no self-contained structural attachment to the hip. It can only directly influence the knee joint. But it is quite active as a knee stabilizer even during action where it isn't a prime mover, and its position and line of pull make it adept at this purpose in situations where force is applied dynamically.

     As an example, consider the actions of braking while running and changing direction. These motor patterns mainly involve the hamstrings as eccentric (muscle lengthening) work to absorb and redirect force acting on the hip. While this is not the domain of the short head of the biceps femoris, it acts as a stabilizer on the knee by anchoring the joint to allow stability and on the hip by increasing tension in the supportive connective tissue. Similarly, in a deadlift, primarily a hip extension movement, the muscle contracts to stabilize the knee while maintaining proper position and tension in the lower extremity. So, even when this monoarticular muscle is not performing its primary anatomical function, it is still often active in more complex movements. For more on that, and for a discussion of how the hip and knee are inextricably linked, see this article, http://jap.physiology.org/content/99/3/1093.full , which concluded that, “the variability of hip joint torque during isometric knee joint torque exertion virtually affects the activity of the knee joint muscles including monoarticular muscles that span only the knee joint.”

     Training the Hamstrings

      As you might know, hip extension and knee flexion are the main movements having a training effect on the hamstrings. Deadlifts of all types, goodmornings, bridges, reverse hyperextensions, glute-ham raises, and even the scoffed-at leg curl are all effective for developing the hamstrings. Much has been said about variations of the deadlift. This study examines the two primary versions, the sumo deadlift and conventional deadlift, and discusses differences in effect: http://www.setantacollege.com/wp-content/uploads/Journal_db/An%20electromyographic%20analysis%20of%20sumo%20and.pdf . Also consider this piece, which examined several other common lifts used to focus training on the hamstrings: http://iconperformancenetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/EMG-Hamstring-Study.pdf . The study found, not surprisingly, that hip extension and knee flexion are superior to the back squat for hamstring training, and that both can be used to develop the muscle group.

       The primary exercises in popular use for focusing on the hamstrings are the stiff-legged deadlift (hip extension) and the leg curl (knee flexion). The sumo and conventional deadlift, as primarily a hip extension movement, also has a strong effect on the hamstrings and typically results in higher loading and greater similarity to actions performed in athletic situations. Squats involve the hamstrings heavily as well, but hip extension is not emphasized over other aspects of the lift and the resulting training effect is more general, involving many other muscles more strongly than the hamstrings.

      So how should you train to improve the hamstrings? Well, it depends. The study above suggests, "Since there was no significant difference between the LC (leg curl) and SLDL (stiff-legged deadlift) for either integrated EMG or peak EMG, it is concluded that both of these exercises similarly involve the hamstrings. The choice of exercise for training would be dependent on which exercise is most sport specific for the athlete." For most, this means selecting movements and training strategies that load the spine and require hip extension. 
 
     Hip extension is among the most common movements we make regularly, and in sports this movement is often undertaken under load or with the intent of producing a large amount of force. This makes it the ideal way to train the hamstrings in most cases. Loading and motor unit activation are to be emphasized, as this ensures greater total stimulus. Similarity to competition must be considered as well. Knee flexion in a prone or seated position as in the leg curl is dissimilar to most athletic actions. Thus, except in limited and specific situations, the greatest load and most sport specific motor recruitment possible comes from the heavy basics like deadlift variations. These focus on high loading on the hip extension motor pattern. There are cases where isolation movements may be of use, such as in correcting an imbalance or rehabilitating an injury, but for the most part and for most lifters, this isn’t the most effective way to train. Work for knee flexion should be added only when warranted by a specific circumstance, since performing the movement when there is no clear benefit over more sport specific exercises is a waste of effort. By tracking performance and physique development, it will be evident if there is greater need for isolation. Everything in your training should have a purpose and a measurable effect. If you are adding movements for their own sake or not pursuing progression, then the movement is likely not doing you any good. It is important to identify and eliminate wasted work to better focus on what has tangible benefit. This is the basic way I approach the training: analyze the demands, match training to demand as much as possible, and minimize unnecessary effort. It falls to the individual to determine what is appropriate, as situations will be fluid and varied. What’s important is that you identify a training strategy that is effective for your goals and make changes when the effect isn’t matching the goal. Work, analyze, modify. Three habits of highly successful athletes. Happy training!