Is 50 Squats Enough?

 As one who was diagnosed as having childhood arthritis — with the prognosis that it would inevitably get worse until I was crippled in adulthood —at which point they could “operate,” I found that doing light weight lifting exercises improved the circulation to the point that it ameliorated much of the back pain to the point that I could live a normal active life. But just in doing these most therapeutic and rehabilitative exercises, people told me I had transformed into an impressive and imposing athlete — just as how many early bodybuilders had gotten involved. That was the typical profile of bodybuilders in the 50s and 60s — mainly youngsters taking it up to overcome childhood arthritis, asthma, a woefully underdeveloped body — and within a year, people were suggesting they ought to enter a physique contest — and they surprisingly won or placed highly. Then they “got into” it — unlike the many novices who now desire to win the Mr. Olympia before even embarking on an exercise program of any sort. That is definitely putting the cart before the horse.

Now as a person in my 70s still with that genetic predisposition that I now know how to overcome, I sleep on a firm mat on the floor and the first thing I do is roll onto the floor and sit in a squat — and let those tendons and ligaments that are problematical for most older people, stretch until they are quite loose, lubricated, and ready to move. Once I’ve done what I have to do for morning hygiene, I get back to doing 50 squat-push-ups as the best bang for the buck — if I don’t get around to doing anything else — but because of that movement, I usually feel I can go easily for another 30 minutes of other movements — and in that manner, I can fulfill my exercise requirements for the day, while just “warming up” for normal daily movements throughout the day. At that point, I already feel like I’m ahead of the game — because I can move without pain or restrictions — and if I fall or take a blow, my muscles will absorb most of the trauma — and I can recover as though from a more intensive once a week gym workout.

Obviously, that already makes an immediate difference — over those who cannot jumpstart their day in similar manner and effectiveness — and grow increasingly incapacitated — including the many who just never feel comfortable “squatting” — which actually means to hang out in that low position — rather than bounce out of it as quickly as they can, or never achieve that full possibility of position and movement. Thus you see so many bodybuilders with impressive biceps but always wear sweat pants so as not to reveal deficient leg development. And even among the older competitive bodybuilders, they have impressive biceps but woeful leg development, and walk as though they may fall over from that imbalance.

As even most doctors will tell you, if you do nothing to maintain your health, it should be to optimize the circulation to your legs — over the biceps, or upper body, and why they recommend walking — let alone squatting — which for most people over 70, is simply out of the question henceforth. If one removes that essential component of the circulatory system then increasing immobility is predictable and inevitable — along with its health consequences and complications.

But rather than making the squat harder to do — by adding a weight to one’s back or holding one’s arms out in front, the better, more practical version is to use one’s hands on one’s thighs to stabilize that movement — just as a thoughtful instructor would advise for a weak, elderly person to rise from the floor — rather than insisting that they do so in the hardest, most difficult and contrived manner that these “exercise physiologists” can think of as predictive of greater health. And that is the problem of all these YouTube videos advising older people on how to get up off the floor once they have fallen and don’t know “how” to get up. The results speak for themselves.

The computer people used to make operating a computer as difficult as possible — until somebody came up with the genius idea to make computers as easy as possible — and even “foolproof” as much as possible. Many “teachers” still teach that way — to make their subject matter as difficult as possible so maybe one person can understand who would have anyway — rather than make the difficult as simple as possible so it is accessible and productive to virtually everyone — rather than prohibitive and problematical as it seems to be.

Results come from that better understanding — and not more effort at what doesn’t make sense.

The Most Important Consideration

 The presumption most people make in considering “bodyweight” exercises is to think that it means “zero” weight — rather than in most cases, being way too much weight for them to do a movement properly and productively. The best example is the chinning exercise — which is impossible for most beginning exercisers to do. To make that movement possible, one should go to a pulley machine and take a much lighter weight to make that motion possible — from full relaxation to full contraction — which most people have no idea what that entails, because they are so obsessed with handling as much weight as possible. So in fact, what they do is keep their muscle virtually fully contracted throughout their short range of movement for a few repetitions before quitting.

For that reason, the Nautilus training machines were invaluable in teaching what it means to contract a single muscle through the full range of its contraction to relaxation — and back. So much so that Arthur Jones claimed his machines were fool-proof — but only if the proper attention was paid to the fullest range of movement — which implies change of contractile states, rather than weight handled. It was not meant to be a weight-lifting device — but rather the opposite — so as to eliminate the mechanical advantage.

That would actually make the muscle work harder — at any weight. Because his movements and machines were actually used improperly, to prove his point, he then insisted that each trainee had to be supervised for each repetition to ensure that they did not perform it in a style to override the design’s original intent — which was to design a machine so perfect for exercising that it was “foolproof” — rather than spawning the need for personal trainers to supervise every repetition done to “guarantee” results.

And still they got it wrong because they thought the important thing was to override the designed disadvantage that made the muscle work harder so that it would fatigue and ultimately fail — even with a light weight. A muscle moving through full contraction and full relaxation will fatigue and fail — quite naturally around 50 repetitions — because by then, the muscles will be so engorged with blood (pumped), that the muscle can no longer contract hard enough to move the blood out of that muscle (momentarily) — and so one is done for that bodypart, and not as people who have no idea what they are talking about, do 10 sets to “failure.” You’re just done — and might require up to a week to fully recover from that workout.

So these were absolute requirements and not choices people arbitrarily made about whether they should workout for 2–3 hours every day, or only 3 times a week. Once a week was all they could stand. But each week when they returned for their next workout, they were obviously dramatically changed — and could sustain that rate of improvement for about six weeks — whereupon if they did not take a break, they would get sick or injured because their recovery ability was exhausted by then. Not coincidentally, most studies done to prove the effectiveness of this “High intensity” training usually lasted six weeks — rather than being able to be sustained indefinitely, or over a lifetime.

However, of much greater importance in considering lifelong exercise, is the pace and manner of training that can be sustained up to the day one dies — by judiciously metering out one’s time, energy and resources for a vibrant life as long as possible — and that is the great challenge of these times. It is no longer enough to be “One and done,” or for that matter, reminiscing about one’s glory days 50 years ago while presently confined to a bed or wheelchair because of those disabilities caused by their final attempts.

Then the problem and its solutions are something else entirely — and all those considerations usually thought important, are really irrelevancies — because what matters, is whether one understands how to effect a full muscular contraction, and a full muscular relaxation — and the primitive notions that any activity and movement does, misses the point. It doesn’t require apparatus at all but the understanding of what produces muscular contraction and muscular relaxation — and how that alternation, effects the blood flow. Then one can design the movements of their choice to trigger those changes in muscular states and effects — because it is the changes in states that produce the magic of health, functioning, and growth — and not simply the mindless expenditure of energy.

Then the body takes on that manifestation of intelligence — which is pleasing to the sensibilities in the many ways we perceive as robust, vibrant and healthy. It is not just bodyparts pasted together but constitute an aesthetic whole — and that was the ideal they were hoping to embody in their artwork, statues, and ultimately in their own bodies. That was what the original bodybuilders emulated — that has been lost in the quest for monstrosity — at any cost and price! And so, many now feel that it is justified for their moment of glory and fame — and even their lives at a young age.

It is important to consider how muscles contract — and the importance of that design. The insertion of the muscle always moves toward the origin of that muscle — and never vice-versa. Therefore, the important axis of rotation is at the furthest extremity to have meaningful expression and functionality — because that firing, causes all the supporting muscles back to the center to be fired as well in that same interconnecting pattern. So when that integrated contraction occurs, the health of the body is maintained — particularly at the extremities, where most human bodies fail because of the poor circulation caused by the lack of activation from those extremities.

The practical demonstration of this integration and synergy is to do a light weight dumbbell wrist curl to initiate a shoulder shrug — rather than the usual manner of performance of keeping the wrist immobile so one can handle a much heavier weight. Because there is no movement initiated at the wrist, the movement is confined only to the trapezius back to the origin of the musculature at the sternum. That is not a great distance from the heart — as it would be if the impulse of contraction began at the wrist. And what that contraction is doing, is compressing the fluids back towards the center of the body — from the extremities, that die from that lack of circulatory engagement — particularly in people as they age. We know it as cognitive decline, weakness of grip strength, and lack of foot strength to maintain balance. But rather than requiring weights to effect, the movement itself causes the contraction and relaxation.

That I propose, would be how one ensures optimal health and functioning of those parts that seem to go wrong prematurely — and wreaks havoc on everything else. That is to say, that once the head, hands, and feet are no longer functioning properly because of poor (lack of) circulation and health it causes, it doesn’t much matter how long they live for the rest of society to have to take care of them. Then the solution becomes a problem.

So the issue is the understanding of movement — and its effect on the musculature, and how that produces health — and not how much weight one is using — whether bodyweight, dumbbells, barbells, apparatus. The understanding is the critical element.