Thanks for sharing this—from my understanding of exercise response it seems like an excellent program for building fairly significant improvements in strength, muscle mass and thereby weight loss. I’ll endorse almost any program that advocates:
Several multiple muscle group exercises distributed such that most key muscle groups get to play in at least one of them.
Keeps the sets moderate (3 is about perfect) and reps moderate to low.
Does not include an excessive number of exercises (ie. No overtraining specific musclegroups by doing 5 different bicep exercises, etc.)
Recommends no more than 2-3 weekly weight training days per week.
Some of the net negative response you have received so far may be because you set up expectations that your program would be something else entirely. This is decidedly not the “minimum viable workout routine”. It isn’t even close to the minimal viable workout routine on any of:
Time spent—Off by an order of magnitude. Three days doing three different high intensity weight bearing activities isn’t the best overall workout program but it is certainly viable and far more minimal. It would give acceptable (but less) muscle growth and far better cardio improvements.
Efficiency—This is a good, moderate workout program, but not minimal effort for maximal results.
Difficulty—None of those exercises are particularly simple for beginners and require more than average amount of practice to get form right in order to be safe.
The justification for (but not necessarily the conclusion of) “don’t do cardio” as well your “just calories in calories out” emphasis really distract from your actual program. We become tempted to write off your advice as uninformed based on your somewhat eager defense of those two side-notes. Yet once I force myself to look past the extra crap and actually look at the workout program the weightlifting advice seems sound.
I’ve never actually used the trap bar. You’ve prompted me to try it out. Back squats annoy me and I’m not a huge fan of deadlifts. The reduced back-strain potential for this exercise may make it worthwhile. The main downside may be the strain on the wrists—my right wrist is my weak point so I avoid too many exercises that rely on plain tension at the wrist.
What is your opinion about 5BX? (Some people say the sit-ups are dangerous, but they could be replaced with something else, keeping the basic idea of this exercise -- 11 minutes daily, no tools necessary, gradually increasing difficulty.)
I would argue that 2 days a week of full body work IS the minimum viable to gain longevity benefits. Anything less than that does not reliably produce an adaptation.
People can do all the cardio and ignoring of calories they like, I wish them luck in their fitness goals :p
I would argue that 2 days a week of full body work IS the minimum viable to gain longevity benefits. Anything less than that does not reliably produce an adaptation.
If this was supposed to be minimum for longevity rather for general well-being my disagreement is even stronger. The high intensity work would be far superior for that particular purpose.
Do you have a specific recommendation for what the minimum for longevity actually is?
Three days doing three different high intensity weight bearing activities isn’t the best overall workout program but it is certainly viable and far more minimal. It would give acceptable (but less) muscle growth and far better cardio improvements.
Comes pretty close, but still leaves a little room for guesswork.
Thanks for sharing this—from my understanding of exercise response it seems like an excellent program for building fairly significant improvements in strength, muscle mass and thereby weight loss. I’ll endorse almost any program that advocates:
Several multiple muscle group exercises distributed such that most key muscle groups get to play in at least one of them.
Keeps the sets moderate (3 is about perfect) and reps moderate to low.
Does not include an excessive number of exercises (ie. No overtraining specific musclegroups by doing 5 different bicep exercises, etc.)
Recommends no more than 2-3 weekly weight training days per week.
Some of the net negative response you have received so far may be because you set up expectations that your program would be something else entirely. This is decidedly not the “minimum viable workout routine”. It isn’t even close to the minimal viable workout routine on any of:
Time spent—Off by an order of magnitude. Three days doing three different high intensity weight bearing activities isn’t the best overall workout program but it is certainly viable and far more minimal. It would give acceptable (but less) muscle growth and far better cardio improvements.
Efficiency—This is a good, moderate workout program, but not minimal effort for maximal results.
Difficulty—None of those exercises are particularly simple for beginners and require more than average amount of practice to get form right in order to be safe.
The justification for (but not necessarily the conclusion of) “don’t do cardio” as well your “just calories in calories out” emphasis really distract from your actual program. We become tempted to write off your advice as uninformed based on your somewhat eager defense of those two side-notes. Yet once I force myself to look past the extra crap and actually look at the workout program the weightlifting advice seems sound.
I’ve never actually used the trap bar. You’ve prompted me to try it out. Back squats annoy me and I’m not a huge fan of deadlifts. The reduced back-strain potential for this exercise may make it worthwhile. The main downside may be the strain on the wrists—my right wrist is my weak point so I avoid too many exercises that rely on plain tension at the wrist.
What is your opinion about 5BX? (Some people say the sit-ups are dangerous, but they could be replaced with something else, keeping the basic idea of this exercise -- 11 minutes daily, no tools necessary, gradually increasing difficulty.)
I’d recommend Romeo’s program over that. Save the 5BX for when your military commander literally orders you to follow it.
I guess it could be worse if you have no equipment at all.
I would argue that 2 days a week of full body work IS the minimum viable to gain longevity benefits. Anything less than that does not reliably produce an adaptation.
People can do all the cardio and ignoring of calories they like, I wish them luck in their fitness goals :p
If this was supposed to be minimum for longevity rather for general well-being my disagreement is even stronger. The high intensity work would be far superior for that particular purpose.
Do you have a specific recommendation for what the minimum for longevity actually is?
Comes pretty close, but still leaves a little room for guesswork.
Have you actually tried doing something like this once per week?
No, my assertion is based on the results of other people on 1 day a week programs.