Feedback Requested

[krj]

My observation is that LEO's place a lot of emphasis on "bulking up" when they work out - focusing primarily on increasing muscular strength and muscular hypertrophy (ie. increased muscle size in response to resistance training - "getting bigger"). Other aspects of fitness (muscular endurance, cardiovascular endurance, flexibility etc.) are usually much further down the list in terms of fitness priorities.

Suggestions as to why this might be the case:

1. Provides LEO's with the muscular strength to deal effectively with physical confrontations

2. LE is a predominantly male oriented profession, and "pumping iron" is part of that male-culture

3. Provides LEO's with the physical size and presence to deter physical confrontations

A cop I know also made the observation, "the bigger you are, the bigger the target you are"

Please give me your feedback re: this.

Thanks and stay safe

[JRT6]

Originally posted by krj
My observation is that LEO's place a lot of emphasis on "bulking up" when they work out - focusing primarily on increasing muscular strength and muscular hypertrophy (ie. increased muscle size in response to resistance training - "getting bigger"). Other aspects of fitness (muscular endurance, cardiovascular endurance, flexibility etc.) are usually much further down the list in terms of fitness priorities.

Suggestions as to why this might be the case:

1. Provides LEO's with the muscular strength to deal effectively with physical confrontations

2. LE is a predominantly male oriented profession, and "pumping iron" is part of that male-culture

3. Provides LEO's with the physical size and presence to deter physical confrontations

A cop I know also made the observation, "the bigger you are, the bigger the target you are"

Please give me your feedback re: this.

Thanks and stay safe

1. Ok I'll buy that.

2. So is being fat. It's just as important for female cops to at elast be as strong as the average male that they may fight some day. I work in a 38 person agency and I'm the only one there who works out hard.

3. Yes and no. big cops scare some guys off and attract other guys like a magnent(Little Man Syndrome)

4. "the bigger your are..." Maybe in paintball but not fighting. Ted Weiamnn wrote a book about power and speed in fighting called "Warrior Speed" and in it he details how big guys who are fast are more effective than a small guy at the same speed. Punching is all about power. Power equals speed times mass divided by time. In other words a guy who puts speed behind his mass really puts more engery in his pucnch than soemone smaller. Ergo the weight divisions in boxing. Big slow guys or guys who muscle their punches only push the target of their pucnch and transfer little energy. Fat guys are only at an advantage if they fall on you.:p

[J.DIXON]

We have a guy that messed himself up pretty good taking a lot of supplements. He was in shape,and had strength as well as endurance. He decides that he wants to bulk up and starts taking about $1000 a month in supplements. Met-rx,Twinlabs,you name it. Well he bulks up rather nicely,then gets into a long footchase with a perp. All the extra mass screwed him up and he was almost hospitialized with a severe dehydration problem. In a 5-7 minute footchase,the mass and supplements wiped him out. That has been a year ago and he still says he hasn't been the same since.

[JRT6]

Originally posted by J.DIXON
We have a guy that messed himself up pretty good taking a lot of supplements. He was in shape,and had strength as well as endurance. He decides that he wants to bulk up and starts taking about $1000 a month in supplements. Met-rx,Twinlabs,you name it. Well he bulks up rather nicely,then gets into a long footchase with a perp. All the extra mass screwed him up and he was almost hospitialized with a severe dehydration problem. In a 5-7 minute footchase,the mass and supplements wiped him out. That has been a year ago and he still says he hasn't been the same since.

Was he dehydrated from taking supplements or was he dehydrated from not drinking enough water?

Who the hell pays $1,000 a month on supplments? Roids are cheaper than that.

[J.DIXON]

In his case it was probably a little of both. I know that I was feeling down and tired all last summer. Couldn't ever figure out what it was. Finally,one day on duty I was sitting in my unit and became very dizzy. I made it to the ER and found out that I was dehydrated. Down here (south GA) the summers are brutal. Add the vest and it gets alomst unbearable. Now I try to drink plenty of fluids (water,juice,Gatorade) and stay away from carbonated drinks. Even doing that there are still some days I get home and have to re-hydrate cause I'm so drained. Also I have found that some of the energy drinks out now help alot. The best advice I can give for someone working a hot environment is to drink plenty of Gatorade,juice,and water. Each has their own share of nutrients that your body needs,but none of them are perfect. To all you guys who drink nothing but water,you need to add something else to it. If you drink to much water you can flush the electrolytes out of your body. Gatorade replaces the electrolytes. And water replaces the things that Gatorade doesn't.

[krj]

I would really urge EXTREME CAUTION when it comes to the supplements you choose to use. Some of the reasons why:

LACK OF REGULATION
Until 1994 dietary supplements were subjected to the same strict regulatory requirements as all other foods.

In 1994 the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA)was signed into law - meaning the companies themselves (as opposed to external oversight bodies) were made responsible for determining that the supplements they made and sold were safe, and that any claims they made were not misleading.

This means that dietary supplements are not regulated by the Food and Drug Administration and don't have to be approved by the FDA before they can be marketed to the consuming public (evidence of claims do not have to be provided to the FDA - either claims of safety, or claims of effectiveness).

Manufacturers and distributers of supplements are also not required by law to record, investigate or forward to the FDA any reports they receive of injuries or illnesses incurred as a result of use of their products. Also under DSHEA, once the product is marketed, the burden of proof falls to the FDA to show that a dietary supplement is unsafe before it can take action to restrict the products' use (or take it off the market).

LONG TERM EFFECTS
Supplement use by general consumers has really exploded only in the past decade. The relative "newness" of large-scale public consumption of these substances, and the lack of federal regulation means that in most cases there is little-to-no scientific information regarding the effects of these substances to the body over the long term. Questions:

1. What are the effects to the human body of taking a nutritional supplement over the long term?

2. What are the effects to the human body of taking a variety of nutritional supplements in concert with each other?

3. How do these supplements interact with over-the-counter medications that people take for minor illnesses?

4. How do these supplements affect those individuals who have undiagnosed high blood pressure, high cholesterol, coronary artery disease, diabetes?

5. How do these supplements affect those individuals who are taking prescribed medications for high blood pressure, high cholesterol, CAD, depression, and a host of other conditions we currently medicate for?

The answer to these, and other health related questions is - nobody knows.

One observation - IF a nutritional supplement is strong enough and effective enough to really have benefits, it is probably strong enough to have side effects also. But manufacturers again, are not required to warn consumers of possible side effects and are not required to inform government agencies of side effects.

One other observation - because so little is known about the side effects of these substances, when you take these supplements for long periods of time YOU, in effect, are taking part in an informal, uncontrolled toxicity study. The FDA calls them "Adverse Events" when a consumer reports a serious reaction to a drug - but each adverse event is a person.

MANUFACTURERS CLAIMS
A previously mentioned, manufacturers and distributers of supplements do not have to prove their benefit-claims to either general consumers or to any federal agency.

Manufacturers consequently, make claims that play to the needs and hopes of consumers. So you see terms like "ultimate fat burning - raw power - ultimate muscle producing - turns your body into a fat-burning furnace etc. etc. etc." We want to be lean, we want to be muscled, we want to be strong, we want to be powerful - manufacturers know this and use superlatives in their text, and choose names that deliberately play to the desires of consumers (a product for female strength development wouldn't be called "Ripped Fuel" because Ripped Fuel plays to the needs and wants of male consumers). Manufacturers and distributers know this, and market accordingly.

One other thought re: those supplements that focus on "fat burning". Overweight and obesity is a major health crisis in this country because of the serious diseases associated with these conditions. If there really and truly was a product out there that worked to help control obesity as well as some of these products say they do, it would be all over the mainstream media.

POSITION STANDS
The American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM), The National YMCA, and the American Council on Exercise (ACE)are all highly respected national fitness training bodies, that are supported by multiple and highly credentialed professionals in the health, fitness and wellness fields.

Each one of these organizations (and there are others) have presented positions stands against the use of supplementation as an aid in athletic performance enhancement.

THIS FORUM
I felt compelled to respond to many of the posts I have read in this thread (and the supplement thread) - because what I have been reading is just all kinds of wrong.

"Plain old Creatine, the occasional evil Ephedra pill, T-bomb - a testosterone boosting supplement, $1000 a month, dehydrated, moody/horny/****z/lost weight".

Please go back and re-read the posts we have on this forum re: this issue. Only a very few individuals have responded so far, but the number and seriousness of the side-effects mentioned are just staggering to me. Now imagine those side effects over the course of millions of people, and not just the few that have responded to these 2 posts on this forum.

Very quickly re: a couple of supplements mentioned:

Creatine
The most studied of all supplents - can produce short-term bursts of power. Some studies have shown increase in lean muscle mass and a reduction in energy waste products.

A normal liver makes about 2grams of creatine each day, and is also readily available from meat in your diet. Creatine levels are easily maintained and muscles can store creatine. The kidneys remove excess levels of the the supplement (which raises doubts about whether creatine supplements are of any value to someone who already has a high muscle creatine content). Research currently is very mixed in terms of whether or not increased consumption of Creatine actually translates into increased performance, strength, endurance, or lean body mass.

Concerns re: long-term use and possible side effects:
Whether the kidneys can process that much creatine for a number of years or whether long-term use will lead to serious kidney related complications. It also draws water away from muscle cells (which can lead to dehydration).

Because Creatine is not approved by the FDA there are concerns (as there are with other supplements) about the purity of the contents in the container you purchase. Studies have shown that there is a huge variation in the quality of products on the market - both active and inactive ingredients. In the case of Creatine how much actual Creatine are you getting in each serving, and how much of the inactive ingredients - there is no regulation re: any of these issues.

Dosages recommended by manufacturers are far greater than you would be able to ingest via food sources, but no one knows how much is too much.

Ephedra
Re: the "occasional evil Ephedra pill". This is one of those cases where the FDA's position is very clear. There have been warnings issued by the FDA very recently cautioning against the use of ephedra-containing products, especially under conditions of strenuous exercise and in combination with other stimulants, including caffeine.

Side effects of Ephedra use, that have been documented and researched by the FDA include: mild-moderate heart palpitations, psychiatric effects, upper gastrointestinal problems, tremors, irritability, memory loss and insomnia - to name only a few.

After reviewing 16,000 "Adverse Event Reports" they also uncovered 2 deaths, 4 heart attacks, 9 strokes, 1 seizure, and 5 psychiatric cases directly involving and related to ephedra use.

Any Testosterone-Boosting Substance
I am not familiar with T-Bomb specifically. Andro is another example of a testosterone-boosting supplement that has been mentioned in recent years (especially after Mark McGwire's successes on the field in '98, and his subsequent admission to Andro and Creatine use), which is also considered to be a testosterone booster.

Again, long-term studies have not been, but need to be, conducted to learn of effects of these supplements. Most likely, any substance that boosts testosterone will ultimately be found to have the same adverse effects that have been associated with anabolic steroid use - hypertension, liver tumors, psychosis, increased levels of aggression.

A BETTER WAY
So, what is a person to do who wants to be healthier, thinner, stronger, faster? Honestly - the same old boring crap you probably have been hearing for years - a safe, well-structured combination of fuel, hydration, activity and rest:

1. Eat well - from all food groups (and if you are physically active, make it high in complex carbohydrates and low in fat)

2. Take a multi-vitamin (consider it a "cover your bases insurance plan" - so you get the vitamins and minerals you need - particularly if you miss some of the nutrients in your diet)

3. Stay hydrated - drink throughout the day. Check your urine - if it is dark you are not drinking enough. If it is pale and clear you're probably drinking OK

4. Exercise efficiently during your workout periods, to achieve your individual health and fitness goals

5. Get enough rest in between workouts to allow your muscles/bones/connective tissues adequate time to build and repair

6. Get enough sleep - 7-8 hours a night

7. Don't smoke - and limit alcohol consumption

Final thought - these substances are called supplements by the manufacturers for the same reason that we are told that prescription drugs are not habit-forming, and the gambling organizations call it gaming. "Performance enhancing substances", "addictive" and "gambling" are all terms that have negative connotations in the mainstream - it's all about marketing and perception and promises.

There is just no easy way to get the body and the physical performance we want for ourselves. Please rethink what you take. And please take the time to find out more.

Thanks, and stay safe.

[JRT6]

If the FDA starts regulating supplements get ready to have to have doctors perscription to take mutiple vitamins. The FDA don't know **** about supplements but that sure wouldn't stop them from banning most of them. You said creatine was ok but if the FDA had it's way back when doctors were trashing a product they had just heard about let alone knowing what it was, creatine would have been banned.

There is nothing wrong with ephedra. The people who had problems with it had pre-existing health problems, took more than the recommended dose(abused) or a combination of both. If your goona ban things that are bad for you if abused, you'd have to ban everyhting including water.

I couldn't disagree more on this. The last thing I want is some fat chain smoking bureaucrat telling me what's good for me and controlling my life. Same goes for some so-called fitness groups. I went to one for certification that was taught by an overweight fat *** who didn't have a clue about sports performance in the 90's let alone 2003.

"A better way" That's right there is "A" way not "THE" way.

[JRT6]

Originally posted by krj


"Plain old Creatine, the occasional evil Ephedra pill, T-bomb - a testosterone boosting supplement, $1000 a month, dehydrated, moody/horny/****z/lost weight".

Please go back and re-read the posts we have on this forum re: this issue. Only a very few individuals have responded so far, but the number and seriousness of the side-effects mentioned are just staggering to me. Now imagine those side effects over the course of millions of people, and not just the few that have responded to these 2 posts on this forum.


You actually had some valid points but your messeage got lost in the delivery. The two quoted paragraphs are a prime example.

You need to re-read the pior posts and quit reading into them what you want. Nowhere was is said or implied from the posters, me included, that supplements were anything but that: supplements. No one said they were taking all kinds of crap or and trying to replace good training. The antidoctal stories don't count for squat.

I re-read your post and saw a LOT of supposition and honestly I shouldn't have bothered replying to them.

Allow me to clarify some things:

"Plain ole Creatine" meant that a quality brand devoid of extra additives was fine.
Worried about the so called dehydration? Drink more water.

"Andro" stuff don't work and I really dought any so-called testosterone boosters are really strong enough to cause roid rage and the other side effects you guessed might happen.

Andro is the perfect example of the market controling what works. People tried it, it didn't work, no one buys it anymore. The FDA's job is too keep real and proven dangeous stuff off the market not stuff it simply can't tax and make money off of.

I strongly suspect your original post to start this thread was nothing but a set up for your agenda and bias. You should have been up front about it.


By the way the "horny" side effect you mentioned: how do I get that?
:D

[krj]

To answer a couple of points made by JRT6

CREATINE USE
I did not say that Creatine was OK. What I said was that evidence (and this is still very early in the game for this supplement) is mixed re: the benefits of Creatine use. Some studies have shown that Creatine use is beneficial for short bursts of energy (eg. 1RM in lifting, or sprints)and increasing lean body mass. Other studies have not found these same results. It's too early in the game to have come to a single consensus on benefits of Creatine.

What is not in dispute however, is that no studies have been conducted to this point that have established effects on the body of long-term use of Creatine. The biggest concern is how Creatine impacts the kidneys over time. Nobody knows. And until they do, and it's from reputable sources that I know and respect, I will not recommend its use to anyone.

EPHEDRA
The FDA's current position is not based on pre-existing conditions or product abuse - it is based on the most current research and an analysis of Adverse Event Reports. Ephedra is an adrenaline-like stimulant that the FDA believes can have potentially dangerous effects on the nervous system and heart.

The words "believes" and "potentially" obviously means that the jury is still out on this issue. But between the current research results available and the AER's, the Food and Drug Administration issued very strong statements to Americans to not take this supplement.

CHAIN SMOKING BUREAUCRATS ETC.
One of the reasons that I keep saying read more, get informed, get educated is because there is mountains of information out there about any and all issues related to health.

Some of it is crap. Some of it well-researched and solid. And all of it - good and bad - is readily available to anyone who cares enough to search it out.

Ultimately people will chose their own sources. And believe whatever it is they chose to believe.

Stay safe.

[krj]

JRT6

Honestly, my original post was not a setup for a post on supplements. The topic of supplements comes up often enough without having to devise a setup for it. What I asked originally was a legitimate question that I was hoping to gain insight into.

Frankly - I DO have a bias - it's against what I see as an emphasis on strength training and "bulking up" at the expense of cardio. I think it is a mistake. I honestly wanted to find out where that emphasis comes from - and if there is something that I am not seeing.

It's been real

:)

[JRT6]

Originally posted by krj
To answer a couple of points made by JRT6

CREATINE USE
I did not say that Creatine was OK. What I said was that evidence (and this is still very early in the game for this supplement) is mixed re: the benefits of Creatine use. Some studies have shown that Creatine use is beneficial for short bursts of energy (eg. 1RM in lifting, or sprints)and increasing lean body mass. Other studies have not found these same results. It's too early in the game to have come to a single consensus on benefits of Creatine.

What is not in dispute however, is that no studies have been conducted to this point that have established effects on the body of long-term use of Creatine. The biggest concern is how Creatine impacts the kidneys over time. Nobody knows. And until they do, and it's from reputable sources that I know and respect, I will not recommend its use to anyone.

EPHEDRA
The FDA's current position is not based on pre-existing conditions or product abuse - it is based on the most current research and an analysis of Adverse Event Reports. Ephedra is an adrenaline-like stimulant that the FDA believes can have potentially dangerous effects on the nervous system and heart.

The words "believes" and "potentially" obviously means that the jury is still out on this issue. But between the current research results available and the AER's, the Food and Drug Administration issued very strong statements to Americans to not take this supplement.


Creatine new? I've been taking that stuff since 1993 and it is without a doubt the most studied supplement of all time. By far the most studies have found it to harmless and effective in healthy adults taking the recomended dosages with an effective workout. MY doctor takes it along with Glucosomine which some people will insist doesn't work. If your waiting for every study to say creatine is fine befoer taking it you'll be waiting forever. If in fact your looking for studies that are negative by whatever motivation then you'll foever be happy camper. I mean there are people out who still think the worlds flat.

How long have you been working for the FDA?

I'm currently certified as a fitness specialist by two diferent organizations(FitForce and OPOTA) and have been training and reading all the litature I could get my hands on for years. I also network with medical doctors in the sports medicine field. The FDA isn't the only or definative source of information out there. I take the facts first into consideration; anctidotes, supposition, and conjecture are a distant second.

[krj]

Damn - we both obviously have too much time on our hands this afternoon! :)

Obviously Creatine is not a new supplement, and yes, it has been studied to a far greater extent than most. However, that does not change the fact that formal, scientific studies on the long-term effects of Creatine use have not been conducted. Your standards of proof are obviously different from mine. OK - let's agree to disagree on that.

I don't work for the FDA (not sure if that was meant to be a joke or not??) - my background is listed in the Introductions thread.

The American College of Sports Medicine, YMCA, American Council on Exercise, the Food and Drug Administration, the Mayo Clinic, and the National Center for Policy Research add up to a bit more than supposition and conjecture.

[JRT6]

Originally posted by krj
Damn - However, that does not change the fact that formal, scientific studies on the long-term effects of Creatine use have not been conducted.

Not true. I've seen several in the periodicals recently. Creatine has been out in Europe for over twenty years and the laboratory of life has tested it through and through.

You are right we have different standards; the organizations you listed are anything but on the cut on the cutting edge of sports science.

Don't like supplements? Don't take them but don't sit and tell everyone else how "wrong" we are for having a mind of our own and the ability to draw our conclusions. Threads like that will go over like a turd in the punch bowl here.

I'm done on this dead topic.

[ProWriter]

As far as this thread goes, I've noticed that many (though admittedly, not all) people who strongly promote cardio over what they call "bulking up" are quite often frustrated bodybuilders themselves, who secretly harbor some jealousy that they're not able to carry (or build) bigger muscles than they have, and that they came to cardio type stuff after failing at more bodybuilding oriented training. I've also noticed that guys really into strength training and being big don't usually appreciate skinny guys telling them they're focused on the "wrong" type of training. :rolleyes:

If you neglect your cardio it will be apparent anytime you're called on to perform in that regard. An under-cardio-trained big guy with vascular 19" guns might LOOK more ridiculous huffing and puffing after a 50yd run than a thinner guy does, but if he's that outta shape it's because he neglects his cardio, not BECAUSE he's all pumped up. I've known 260lb guys who were outta breath walking up one flight to the weight room...and I've known guys that size who wear OUT the belts on the cardio machines. Still, I'd bother innactive thin couch potatoes who don't even know where the local gym IS about doing some cardio before I'd bother someone who trains four hours a day but with somewhat different fitness interests. I admit that I definitely don't MISS training six days a week rain or shine, bulk eating, squatting under 500lbs and deadlifting, now that I train and eat to look "lean and mean" or whatever you want to call it...but I remember how short a fuse I'd have had back in those days if someone primarily into cardio started telling me that I was "too into bulking up". :eek::mad::eek:

Besides the fact that LE is a so-called "macho" field where intimidating size can sometimes help perform and also help get respect from other alpha males, there's another simpler connection: LE likely ATTRACTS many of the same types who'd be interested in presenting an intimidating presence whether they were on the job or not. Same goes for iron workers, firefighters, etc.

...so-called fitness groups. I went to one for certification that was taught by an overweight fat *** who didn't have a clue about sports performance in the 90's let alone 2003.

NO $HIT. Fitness is one of the only industries that is TOTALLY unregulated by any official or governmentally sanctioned regulatory agency whatsoever that promotes itself as having high "quality assurance standards". That doesn't mean someone devoted to fitness for a lifetime isn't qualified just because he's ALSO "certified", but certification in this field, in general is a joke. In my opinion, it should be illegal to ever establish any kind of "cerification agencies" for NON regulated (officially regulated, that is) industries. The only thing worse than a totally unregulated field like fitness is a totally unregulated field like fitness that presents the APPEARANCE of regulations that dupe unsuspecting innocent consumers into believing they're consulting "credentialed professionals".

Personal trainers refer to themselves as being "licensed", but in fact, the field is not regulated by any state or governmental licensing agency at all. Truck drivers get licenses, hair cutters get licenses, beauticians get licenses, stockbrokers get licenses, and LEO's get legally certified by governmentally sanctioned programs with strict standards. Personal trainers get "certified" on a strictly voluntary basis by one of several private organizations like "ACE", "ACSM",

[krj]

JRT6

I am not trying to tell people what to do, what to think, or how to act, and that was never my intention. My post urged caution - and that is a reasonable and responsible thing to tell people when so little is known about these predominantly untested and unregulated substances. I then went on to give some of the reasons why I think caution is warranted.

I made my case to those who read this forum, and I barely scratched the surface. Ultimately, people will decide for themselves what they believe - but mostly I hope that they have learned enough to at least take a second look at this issue.


ProWriter

Just so you know - I'm not a skinny guy, or a frustrated body builder.:)

I consider the muscular strength and endurance component an integral part of a fitness program, and SHOULD be worked regularly by all LEO's.

Having said that, I also think that in LE there is too great an emphasis on S&E and that cardio gets lost along the way. This has nothing to do with my personal preferences. Rather, I look at this from 3 perspectives:

1. Job performance ie. being able to chase the BG for 5 blocks

2. Overall health ie. that ailments that are common to the general adult population are also common the the LE population. Regular cardiovascular exercise can help to eliminate (or at least modify) overweight/obesity, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, coronary artery disease etc.

3. Costs to the department ie. that a high proportion of the deaths on and off the job, early retirements, limited duties, workers compensation, etc. can be directly attributed to the lifestyle choices that officers make - and can be modified by regular cardio activity

I would be interested in hearing your thoughts on this.

[ProWriter]

That's why I qualified my statement with "most, though admittedly not all"...it's just been my experience with cardio monsters in gyms over the years, KRJ. Actually, I've been in agreement with much (maybe) most of your input on fitness topics so far.

I don't really think LE overemphasizes strength training, necessarily; I think the type who goes into LE (and ironwork, football, etc) is more likely to to gravitate toward training for an imposing presence than cardio conditioning.

JRT just explained that he's the only one out of 38 officers in his department who trains at ALL. While 1/38 is probably lower than average in LE generally, I'd bet there are significantly more LEO's who completely neglect ANY fitness training than guys like JRT who train religiously, even if they focus more on size/strength than on aerobic conditioning. I'd worry more about all those guys who haven't SEEN a gym (or a treadmill) since the academy way before guys who train like bodybuilders or powerlifters.

I know aerobic training has to be sustained for 30 minutes or so to get optimal benefit, and I know there are more components to it than merely resting (and recuperative) pulse rates, but I'm sure you're familiar with studies demonstrating that athletes who train exclusively for strength and physique goals maintain much better cardiovascular conditioning than people who don't workout at all, just by virtue of the intermittent aerobic aspect to higher rep sets and the indirect circulatory benefits of exertion during weight training. There was a time when the closest I got to a "cardio" workout was multiple 20+ rep sets of squats with 225 or 275lbs, and my resting pulse was always under 50bpm without any cardio, and I never got "winded" very easily when I had to run (or skate) all out for a while, either.

I guess I'm just saying I'd be much more concerned with all the sedentary LEO's who actually fit all the "doughnut eating" stereotype jokes and don't do ANY kind of training than with guys busting it out in the gym, but not really concentrating equally on their cardio...especially, if there are way more sedentary types than "one dimensional" strength training types, that's all.

[krj]

ProWriter:

I caught that you had qualified your statement "most, though admittedly, not all...." - appreciated it, and that was the reason for the goofy smiley face :) (yes, that one!) in my last reply.

Your points are all well taken, and I greatly appreciate the honest feedback.

Stay safe.

[JRT6]

I'm cool on this. Sometimes though tone can be a touchy thing.

krj,
I actually agree with you as I believe that 90% of supplements are a waste of money and some are potentialy dangerous(Andro, DHEA) but to me I always look at reviews by organizations whose primary purpose is not fitness with a critical eye.

I just read on university study that said glucosomine could screw with insulin response if not cycled. Another group read that report and tore the methodology of the study apart and rightly so. It was wacked. Who do we believe? I go with whats out from all sources and make a judgement.

[krj]

JRT6:

You're right, tone CAN be a touchy thing.

After you wrote that I went back and re-read some of my posts and I don't see a "tone" - but you don't know me, and I can understand how things can get lost in the translation in cyberspace.

Just so you know - when I am writing actual INFORMATION I have a strong tendancy to communicate in a very straight forward manner. That's because I have points that I want to make, and I don't want that message to get lost along the way.

When I am joking around (which I have also had the chance to do), I don't pay as much attention to being succinct. 'Cause I'm just goofing :cool:

Your last post DOES raise a really interesting point though:

Obviously individuals in this forum who have professional training do not agree on all issues related to health and fitness (which is fine). But if WE don't always agree, what is someone reading this forum (who has no training, but wants to learn more about issues related to health and fitness) supposed to do? What information are they supposed to believe, and from what sources?

Here's my take on it (and this is ONLY my opinion):

1. My professional training, my experience working with people from many different backgrounds, and my personal/intellectual makeup all tell me to do this: to be skeptical, to be cautious, to research any potential for bias in information, and to verify information from multiple sources that I trust

2. My background also tells me to put RESULTS second, and SAFETY first. Doctors have a creed of "First Do No Harm". Trainers aren't doctors but we DO (literally and/or figuratively) put our hands on people, so I think the creed fits us trainer-types too.

I'm not perfect in my lifestyle habits or exercise habits - I don't warmup enough, I don't cooldown enough, I don't work the flexibility component of fitness enough, sometimes I eat the wrong things, sometimes I work through injuries/push too hard/increase training volume too fast, I drink too much caffeine etc. etc.

I do all these things because I know I can. I know what my body is capable of doing, and how far and how hard I can push it without causing damage. I don't truly know that about anyone else.

So when I'm training people I go by the book always - for a couple of reasons.

a) I've seen my share of people who have injured themselves because of something a trainer told them to do. And I've had to try and clean up the mess

b) Keeping it cautious and conservative let's me sleep at night - knowing that I tried to do the best I could for someone, based on the best information I could find

3. If I am researching on the 'net I have a strong tendancy to look to the following first:

a) sites that end in .gov (government sources)

Examples are: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, US Surgeon Generals Office, US Food and Drug Administration :), National Heart Lung and Blood Institute, Presidents Council on Physical Fitness and Sports, National Cancer Institute, Department of Health and Human Services etc.

b) sites that end in .org (non-profit sources)

Examples are: American College of Sports Medicine, American Heart Association, American Lung Association, American Cancer Society, American Diabetes Association, Healthy People 2010, Office for Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Wellness Councils of America, any of the large teaching hospitals, National Center for Policy Research etc.

c) sites that end in .edu (educational institutions)

Any of the large universities across the country that have a strong research background

d) sites that end in .com (for profit organizations)

I usually look to these last. I have found some really good information put out on .com websites, but sometimes it can take a lot of wading through sales pitches to find the info you're looking for.

How do you identify bias in information? Some possible cues:

a) Research they quote was conducted by their own company, by one of their sponsors' companies, or by doctors/professionals who either own the company or are on the company's board of directors

b) Be skeptical of unnamed studies and/or unverifiable experts. Credible sites identify information sources, and draw information from well-respected researchers/organizations/peer reviewed journals

c) Be skeptical of testimonials and anecdotes - supporters of products are often more vocal than detractors, health related sites often allow anyone with a computer to log on and share personal experiences, testimonials don't necessarily make the information legitimate

d) Ideology - different groups with specific agendas may overemphasize information to support their position (eg, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals - eating meat leads to diabetes, arthritis, heart disease etc. National Cattlemen's Beef Association - beef can help reduce risk of heart disease, and some cuts of beef have less fat than chicken)

4. Whenever I find a piece of information (I do this most often, but even more particularly if it is something new - or a hot-button topic) I will go to a number of sources of information to see how what I found from one source jibes with what the second reports.

EG: something interesting quoted in the newspaper re: the latest JAMA research. OK - go to the Journal of American Medical Association and read the findings. Interesting. If it's about fitness does the ACSM have anything on it? What about the National Strength and Conditioning Association? Or ACE or whoever???

Even a publication as respected as JAMA - if it's new information that has just come out and is not widely recognized by other organizations that I go to - then I sit on it for a while until it's more widely recognized.

I guess I could ramble more (God - I have got to get a life) - we can talk more about this if you want or we can move on to other topics (right now, I'm thinking "lunch").

Again, all this is my opinion, and I am not asking or expecting anyone else to goose-step in formation with me. This works for ME.

Stay safe.

[Sam 3]

At my station, there are probably about 3 guys other than myself who exercise on a regular basis. They train with free weights exclusively..no cardio. They explain that in a brawl it's the strongest guy who will win, not necessarily the fittest, and they frankly don't like cardio..it's boring. I have my own theory though....they get their routines from muscle magazines which usually feature what???????? right......free weight routines more suited to bodybuilding. Yes, there ARE exceptions to this rule..but these guys aren't reading those magazines.

I myself use dumbbells and perform "kettlebell" exercises which have really improved my endurance AND appearance. They look kinda funny, but they have worked for me.

S3

[J.DIXON]

In a brawl the strongest guy wins? BS. Those guys need to re-think their attitudes. It doesn't matter if you can bench press a dumptruck. Endurance is the key, Yes,strength has a little to do with it,but if you tire after 30 seconds of fighting,you're useless. There needs to be a combination strength/endurance training. If it takes a few minutes to get back up there,you have to have the abillity to fend for yourself in the long run. Not hope you can muscle a guy down in a few seconds. Remember,there is always someone bigger and badder than you out there,no matter what you think.

[Planetkillr]

This is a Post to placed under the title: Strength...I think it really applies here( along with the discussion to combat & strength.


Here are my thoughts on strength. Especially how it effects a police officers ability to defend himself or others durning physical confrontations.

I have been involved in powerlifting competetions and MMA competetions( Mixed Martial Arts events on a semi-pro level; similar to Ultimate fighting championship type events ). I have seen alot of different types of strength. What I believe most officers think of, when they think of strength, is "Power" durning physical confrontations. In Powerlifting you concentrate on how heavy a object is and your ability to move it with proper form. In fighting, this type strength may not always equal to their ability to use that same amount of "Power" durning a combat situation. Thats not to say that if you are fairly strong( example: bench press over 450lbs, squat over 650lbs, deadlift over 500lbs ) that you will not be strong on combat, because you will. But, don't be surprised if the same stregth in the weight room is'nt easy to re-create in the streets. I'm not going to go on about this topic; I could probrobly wite a book that would bore you to tears. But, here are some thoughts about officer training for combat type situations.

For overall fitness and strength, that will help you in situations like chasing a suspect or long physical confrontations with a suspect, run or jog. There are many exrecises that will also build up your cardiovascular endurance as well as leg strength.For overall stregth lift weights. For real upper body power you may wanna try something like Russian Kettlebells or even japanese push-ups; these will give to strength in akward positions, compared to traditional weight lifting. Then for actual fighting( Please remember these are only my personal view and I do not wish to insult anyone or any martial art style ) try a combination of several different martial arts-Hybrid Fighting styles. I persoanlly have studied several: Danzan-Ryu Hawaiian Jiu-Jitsu, Submission Wrestling, Combat Hapkido, Krav Maga and Close Quarter knife and stick combatives. Also, do not think of fighting as being about who is the toughest. Its not!! Its alot of things;Knowledge, balanace, strength, muscle endurance, remember to breath, relaxation and many more. Training is'nt about getting to be the best in the world. Its about getting a little better today, than yesterday.