That's why the European tradition of walking after a meal is best. On weekends I always walk to and from the restaurants I frequent, which results in a 30 minute walk each way (or more).

If we had a pill for that folks would definitely abuse it.

If memory serves...doesn't taking a shot of apple cider vinegar after a high carb/sugar meal do just that?

Diluted with some water, of course, to spare the esophagus.

Steve, you are so right!  we would be starting rehab services for such a pill!

interesting strategy.  bet the fitness purists would have other ideas about your exercise choice.  it got the job done though.

honestly, i have not been as physically active as i should be and i wonder if that is why my fasting glucose is not low.  it can be over 90 some mornings.  not outrageous but not low for someone habitually eating low carb.

That post makes me wonder what food choices should be for athletes?  Should they stick to a higher carb diet with the knowledge that they're going to burn it off with a few hours of intense exercise?

(I'm not an athlete, but I'm curious as to your answer).

Thank you, Dr Davis, I can now ask my wife to buy an Xbox and a stationary bike for my, ehrm, our, health.

L-carnosine, l-arginine, l-lysine don't have anti-glycation properties?. They might help after lunches.

I like to have, dare I say Pizza 2-3 times a year. It has been shown to have the biggest spike in my blood sugars, so I time it before a work out.

I eat my Pizza usually at lunch not dinner, then do something like pushups and running up and down the stairs.

The first time I tested after pizza, I was shocked. I started the pushups, then the stairs. Within 20 minutes of working those muscles blood sugar dropped more than 80 points.

My name is Maureen and I have been reading your blog since last fall and I have found it very interesting and informative.  I have not fully incorporated paleo diet but understand its merits.  I try to follow the Mediterranean diet with some "cheating" for the past year and a half.

I have had a weight isssue most of my life with a few times of successful dieting. I am happy to say that I have never regained all the weight  back and then some like you hear most people do. I currently want to lose 15lbs and for me the best way to do that is with structure, ie a specific diet plan that tells you what to eat and how much such as so many carbs, proteins and fats.

My question to you is if I were to follow this way of eating and I gain the weight  back would it be better than if I were to follow the Mediterranean  diet?

I would appreciate your feedback.

Is there such a thing as an emergency glucose lowering pill?

As background, I'm not diabetic, but I am glucose-impaired, as they say, and follow my blood sugars fairly often.  I don't know why I don't see this more often, but I've found that drinking wine (I drink red) can help keep blood sugars down on a questionable meal.  For instance, if I eat potatoes without wine, my sugars will go high.  If I drink wine with a meal with potatoes, my sugars behave themselves.  If I remember correctly from my reading, apparently alcohol prevents the liver from pushing out sugars into the bloodstream.

fyi, this is no magic pill but dietary fat is known to blunt blood glucose spikes.

Such a thing exists. It is called insulin. Just kidding of course. By the way, I used to love Indian food, great way to get a good low-carb meal, but now I worry that most indian places use lots of vegetable oil and I don't need the omega 6.

Berny3, my understanding is that alcohol simply gets in front of carbs, and is digested first.  But eventually your potato will get its turn to raise your sugar levels. So could it be just a matter of timing your glucose measurements to catch that delayed spike?

Anti-glucose pill = Pycnogenol.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_pwwi/is_200702/ai_n17168252/

You mentioned "a 'morning-after' pill, or actually a 'meal-after' pill, a supplement pill or liquid that blunts or eliminates the blood glucose rise after a meal".

Doesn't Alpha Lipoic Acid already do just that?

There isn't likely to be much (or any) cornstarch in Indian restaurant food. Do you tend to have problems with lentils, chickpeas, and/or dairy?

(Kenneth - I'm not anonymous for the sake of it, but because I can't remember the 500 passwords I need for all these sites)

There IS a pill for this. Acarbose. It's an alpha glucosidase inhibitor which prevents, or at least slows the hydrolysis of small to mid size sugars into glucose. It would be entirely possible to design even more potent inhibitors or ones that target multiple pathways on the route to carb absorption. However, there is no free ride. That undigested sugar isn't going to go away. It's going to ferment in the gut and cause gas and may act as an osmotic laxative.

GI complaints are quite common with acarbose, and anyone who is lactose intolerant knows firsthand the downside of carbohydrate malabsoption. Remember that lactose is half glucose. They can gorge themselves on dairy and not get a blood sugar spike, at least from the lactose - if they don't mind spending the rest of the day in the toilet.

@ Steve "If we had a pill for that folks would definitely abuse it" and @ anonymous "Is there such a thing as an emergency glucose lowering pill?"

Yes, it's called Repaglinide or Prandin - you take it just before your high carb meal and it makes your pancreas produce a bit more insulin to cover the carbs in that meal and that meal only. It works just for the meal so it's not like other oral hypoglycaemic meds. Not that that is a good thing - it could stress the pancreas and some would say it could lead to beta cell burnout, but if you only took it occasionally when you wanted an Indian buffet ?

Doesn't cinnamon taken with a meal lessen the spike?

LifeExtension's CinSulin may provide modest lowering of blood glucose:
http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2010/ss2010_Protect-Your-Body-from-a-Silent-Killer_01.htm

40 minutes on a stationary bike ?

Just place 4 - 5 all out sprints for 10 seconds each, spaced 2 minutes apart.
Done in less then 10 minutes, same result.

But this is the caveat, the sprints must be all out/as fast as you possibly can sprint.

Your muscles are like a giant glucose sink when they are empty.
The most efficient way to get them to  empty quickly is by explosive complete all body movements.

Kenneth again. The more I think about it, I suspect that none of the pharmacological strategies proposed would do much good in terms of truly offsetting a high-carb lifestyle or heavy binge. I already mentioned the problems inherent to blocking absorption.

Raising insulin directly or indirectly will drive down the glucose spike, but to what end? For non-diabetics, the glucose bump is temporary and likely doesn't do much direct damage - maybe some extra glycation. The real problem for the purposes of this blog is atherogenic problems - fat storage and triglyceride formation and all of the bad things that happen with lipoproteins as a result. Using insulin will lower the glucose spike by ramming it into those processes faster. Lots of diabetics who have decent control still have awful lipid panels, especially those following the standard diet.

Maybe supplements which enhance insulin sensitivity might help. Or metformin, which lowers liver production of glucose and helps sensitivity somewhat. But at the end of the day, the only solution is probably not to abuse carbs in the first place and to stay active.

In response to several commenters:

Apple cider vinegar, cinnamon, acarbose, fats/proteins can indeed blunt postprandial glucose rises, as can a number of other strategies.

However, I believe that lipoic acid and l-carnosine are better blockers of glycation than of glucose excursions, a bit different.

Also, I did not mean to suggest that riding a stationary bike while playing Xbox was somehow superior to, say, jogging or dancing. It just happened to be what I felt like doing that day.

Anya is right on the money!

Flavia--

Excellent point.

Don't you love when traditional or intuitive practices seem to provide real benefit?

Hi, Ari--

I am not a believer in "carb loading." I believe that most athletes overdo carbs and pay the health price for it down the road.

Most people who engage in serious exercise may need to ingest carbs during exercise, particularly during extreme efforts. But I believe the notion of carb loading is overblown, particularly if you are already on a low-carbohydrate restriction.

The closest thing I can think of to a magic pill would be Ortho Glucose from AOR..

http://www.aorhealth.com/html/products.php?id=204

and Mito Charger

http://www.aorhealth.com/html/products.php?id=194

I don't trust any restaurants anymore. A lot of "ethnic" restaurants think Americans want food sweet and salty and amend traditional recipes appropriately.

I ate in an Indian restaurant that adds potatoes to their raita, which is supposed to be just yogurt and cucumbers and spices.

So I always ask about ingredients.

Question: How long would it have taken you to come down from 170 or so *without* the bike? Sometimes a spike from carbs comes down quickly if you don't eat a lot of fat.

GUAR GUM CAPS BEFORE, pectin would probably work also.  I've taken 6 guar gum caps before and lowered the measured peak glucose after e.g. oatmeal.

Dr Mirkin says that you will improve your athletic performance by eating high carb/high sugar at the beginning or during an intense endurance race....but he adds, not to eat that way when not exercising.

Here's an compromise between Anya's all out effort sprints and 40 minutes on the stationary bicycle. Try some deep knee bends. Once you get the rhythm down (squat down, rising on your toes and placing your hands behind your heels to stabilize you, then stand up, lowering your heels back to the ground and raising your arms straight out in front of your chest), these comfortable, but very effective at getting your heart rate up and opening the muscles to take up glucose. Also, you can perform deep knee bends anywhere and while wearing any sort of clothing.

The real problem, I suspect, is not being lean (body fat over 15% for a man). All it takes is being a few pounds overweight and metabolism changes dramatically for the worse.

Wow!  After YEARS of studying the effects of carbohydrates on the body in an effort to prevent diabetes, I never knew that simply exercising after a meal would lower your blood sugar.  This is news to me!  I have NEVER heard this, not even from my doctor.  I have heard exercise is good of course, and I have heard that walking can lower your blood sugar overall, but not so directly as you say.  I will definitely not be getting diabetes now.  My mom got it at age 30, but I'm 43 and still have kept blood sugar low.  I guess its now about to get lower.  Thanks.

Also, laptop on treadmill is fun too, and has a way of keeping me walking for up to 4 miles.

The danger is in fructose which is converted directly to fat, because the body has no mechanism with which to use fructose.

Fructose comes from starch, bread, pasta - anything made from grains and leads to increased fatty acids in the blood.

A healthy diet means you don't need to worry about eating too much!

I always eat a high carb/sugar meal before I run, and since I've been training for a half marathon, I can use the extra energy from glucose spikes.

My main criticism of this article is: why are you not playing Black Ops!!!!!1

C'mon, Dr. Davis! When was the last time the pharmaceutical industry invented a new drug then chose NOT to sell it? But if they did come up with a pill to reverse the blood sugar spike from eating hi-carb foods, would it be able to reverse glycation, inflammation & all the other damage that sugar does to to our bodies?

Too many Americans would definitely abuse a pill like that unless it was prohibitively expensive. But the side effects from the pill would prolly be worse than the damage from the sugar.

My suggestion: Do what the French & the Italians have always done: Have a glass or 2 of wine with your high-carb meals. I've been a low-carber for more than a decade now & it's a lifestyle (not a 'diet') that I swear by. But I have yet to find a medical professional who can explain how the French can eat baguettes & croissants every day, how the Italians can have pasta at practically every meal, yet they remain thin & gorgeous & Syndrome X is practically unknown in those countries.

Maybe there's some truth to that Blood Type Diet business, but I say it's gotta be the wine.

If memory serves, there are test strips you can dip in sauces or soups ahead of time to detest the presence of sugars (presumably starches as well?)

In the January 2011 issue of LEF magazine they address this matter.
They talk about Glucose...the Silent Killer.
They also recommend/sell two supplements for this very subject.
One is for Glucose Absorption Control.
The other is a Calorie Control Weight Management Formula.

@RC:  Wine won't necessarily correct a starch centered diet in the long-run.  Obesity is not unheard of in Italy -- quite the opposite -- about half the men and over a third of the women. Huge amounts of obesity in Southern Italy and even in places where my father's relatives hail from -- Rome -- kids start out slender but decades of  pasta result in the common pot belly (pregnant looking men) and plump women by middle age and beyond.  Sicily -- another pasta and wine loving country has plenty of obese adults as well as children.  Even if pasta doesn't result in fat -- it does its damage in other ways such as the type 2 diabetes my thin father had. The benefits to the diet there is that pasta is merely a course of many courses and can be skipped.  Also, this is changing now but families used to cook meals at home -- no junk food meals.  Fresh veggies and meats, cheeses, plus of course the pasta and bread etc.  Modern times have made junk/convenience foods invade Italy -- McDonalds, fast-foods, packaged frankenfoods...ugh.

Yes, I wish that there was such a pill. Better yet, I wish that there was a pill that one could take that would provide for world peace and tranquility ...

It is disappointing to watch this once informative blog descend to its current level of mediocrity.

Count me as another reader that is finished with this blog.

Going back to my item about using red wine at dinner to keep blood sugars down, one of the Anonymous people said that the "alcohol simply gets in front of carbs, and is digested first. But eventually your potato will get its turn to raise your sugar levels."  Well, last night I didn't have potatoes, but I did have quite a bit more carbs than I normally would think wise, and had approximately 2 glasses of wine.  I then took my blood sugars three times at one hour intervals (I had to go to sleep, you see).  The first reading was 97, an hour later it was 92, an hour later it was 90.  I got up out of bed 2 hours later and it was down to 86.  Now, I'm the type where when I eat something that has too many carbs, my sugars go way up in the first 45 minutes to an hour.  By the second hour, the sugars come down into a decent range.  So I'm wondering – does the alcohol really go first, with the carbs waiting in the wings, or does the wine work to slow things down — allowing some carbs to be processed and delaying others?  If I had taken my blood sugar again 2 or 3 hours later, would I see the spike then?

Hey "Anonymous" know exactly how you feel about the blog. Its sad.

Red wine does indeed reduce blood sugar, though the effect I've seen tends to be no more than 5-10 mg/dl.

I was thinking more along the lines of, say, American ginseng. Several gram doses have the potential to reduce postprandial blood sugar by 20-40 mg/dl. However, I am uncertain of the long-term safety of such a practice due to effects on the pancreas.

A mediocre thought to keep this
on life support without the irreplaceable infusion from the blogosphere tribe of Annonymous. If they'd gone back just one entry of Doc's they'd have been able to read 2 comments of mine related to some of the science behind Doc's obsession with blood sugar.

As a disclaimer, I personally don't just say no to carbs - even though my old knees won't cooperate on wind sprints or deep bends to bail me out.

Circadian rhythm is widely known, and erroneously construed merely relate to wakefulness. There are also distinct circadian cycles involved in the liver, heart and lungs.

Not having the time now to detail the relevant liver circadian dynamic I'll just highlight some. In short,
blood glucose and insulin, et. al. is not always a linear reaction; a spike is not always just another bad spike for everyone everytime of day.

O.K., for you researchers, in circadian involvement of liver up/down regulation phases
here are some leads(in no particular order): impact on glucose and lipid balance; transcription of insulin metabolism phases; mitochondrial fat burning; gluconeogenesis; gluco-corticoid receptors; triglycerides; glucose phosphate isomerase and 6-phosphofructokinase-2; HmGCoA lysase and reductase; S-transferase theta-2 and more.

Sounds like chronic cardio to me.

I take 500 mg metfomin each night
I am not diabetic
It's my "glucose lower pill"

I think that cinnamon capsules, GTF chormium or CLA / omega-3's would do the same thing.  It all depends on if these nutrients would cause a hypoglycemic response in some people.

Serious question: what would a shot of vodka do in a scenario like this? (i.e., after carbs have been accidentally consumed, and after blood sugar has consequently risen).

Oops I see the same question about alcohol was already raised vis a vis red wine. Though I'm still not 100% clear on the answer!

Supposedly, pine bark extract taken with a meal supposedly keeps blood sugar from spiking. Then again, the conclusive evidence was only found in animal studies:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15925302

As a glucose intolerant, I have tried all kinds of things to keep my blood sugar under control. My biggest disappointment was vinegar before meal. It did nothing for me. I am of Indian origin and used to be a vegetarian. Tried Basmati rice which some claim has a more favorable glucose response. Again no effect on me. Tried fermented Indian dishes (dosa and idly) which also didn't help. I have now given up eating rice/wheat entirely and eat a lot of eggs and fish. It may just be that I am not meant to consume carbs.

BTW, potato in Raita is quite common in India. To me, Indian cooking in the US is characterized by a very limited set of dishes with blunted flavors. But, I do wonder what was in Dr Davis' soups and vegetables. Some Indian dishes use sugar or jaggery (cane juice boiled into unrefined sugar) but the dish would be detectably sweet. Another possibility is indiscrimate use of tomato sauce or ketchup added as shortcut to flavor sauces which of course contains HFCS!

Playing Modern Warfare while pedaling away on the bike?  Your stock just went way up in my book good sir.

You people are right about the vegetable oil. Its really deplorable - our ancestors in India all used Ghee (clarified butter) heavily. Then the cholestrol propaganda from the West started a few decades ago and now everyone cooks with one or other vegetable oil.
Original Indian dishes made with ghee are much more delicious, especially non-vegetarian ones.

-Fructose comes from starch, bread, pasta - anything made from grains and leads to increased fatty acids in the blood.-

I pity those who are in care of this ignorant british MD. Starch breaks down to a glucose in the body - never a fructose. Also fructose increases liver fat more than fatty acids in the blood.

I think the key will be if you continue to see good results over a period of a year or so.  Changes in your workout approach, whether it is more volume, less volume, slower, more explosive etc. tend to produce good initial gains because you are doing something new and different, it's always good to mix it up once in a while.

"I think the key will be if you continue to see good results over a period of a year or so. Changes in your workout approach, whether it is more volume, less volume, slower, more explosive etc. tend to produce good initial gains because you are doing something new and different, it's always good to mix it up once in a while."

I beg to differ on this. When something works, it works. There is no reason to "mix it up" if results are what you are after. If exercise is something you are using for entertainment then yes you'll need a variety of things to keep you interested.

If you allow for recovery, sleep and eat healthfully, eventually strength gains slow to a crawl no matter what technique you use. In fact, once you see your strength gains slow and halt, you know you are on the RIGHT track. Sometimes it will take multiple attempts with the same weight load before progress resumes. Stay the course. Don't jump ship because you are not making the same gains you did early on in your training program - so long as your training is sound.

Here's a good paper discussing in part the non need for "mixing it up."

http://bit.ly/dIexZi

I had good results with slow burn after reading Fred's book. After a while, my strength gains stalled. Fred then recommended adding more fat to my diet and 'microloading'.  I got some 1.25 pound magnets and used those to more gradually increase the weight at each workout.  It worked very well and I lost another 10 pounds of fat and added another 30% of resistance across the board.

Doug McGuff's book Body by Science also has a lot of good information.

After many years of training to stay in shape, I think mixing it up is good for the mental part of it all, the "mo".
No doubt slow burn works and is very practical compared to the 90 minutes done 5 days or more a week of P90X which is quite popular right now.
In my teens I did a Bob Hoffman work out from Strength & Health Magazine, that consisted of very heavy weights, with low reps done slowly & breathing deeply. I gained a lot of muscle doing that, and could hardly walk after the squats.

I've been doing Fred's Slow Burn for over three and a half years now after a recommendation from  Dr Mike Eades and I love it. Also read Doug McGuff's book Body by Science a while back and it's a really useful addition. I follow a low carb Paleo diet. I have a diagnosis of osteoporosis and this was the initial reason I took up Slow Burn but it has improved my overall health no end. I used to do it at home but now at a gym so I can lift heavier weights. I must look strange - a middle aged woman doing her weight lifting in slow motion but I don't mind

I haven't tried Slow Burn, but I've had good results with Body by Science (which was my first introduction to HIT). I was impressed with how quickly it made my arms look more athletic (I'm female) and I was pretty surprised to get the metabolic training effect out of something so slow.

As far as "mixing it up" goes, as I understand it the concept of periodization came about to allow athletes to focus on strength, explosiveness, metabolic conditioning, etc. at different times so as to improve in multiple ways over the longer term without overtraining
(patterns like Westside Barbell training try to address the same problem a different way). If your goal is to maintain muscle mass for health and appearance, as Fred says you really don't need to worry about it even though your progress will eventually slow.

I've been doing a slightly modified version of 'Slow Burn' (modified to suit my own interests and physical needs), with great success.  I agree with Mr. Hahn that if one is following a properly designed routine, there is absolutely no need to "mix it up" every now and then, as the P90X ("muscle confusion) infomercials would maintain; there's simply no scientifically derived evidence to support the point.  That said, Dr. Davis, if you would be willing, I'd love to see a few of the specifics of your workout routine (e.g., exercises, exercise order, etc.).  Thanks for the blog.  Will.

Wow. After 15 years, you just caught up with it? Now you know why exercise science in college is terrible. No difference than nutrition. Most of information are from USSR or its surrounding area way back in time. Ever wonder why they used to dominate Olympic games? They were way way way ahead of USA in exercise science despite inferior genetics. After the break up of USSR, USA started to get all the information over exercise science but not everyone caught on quickly.

Anyway, it's good to mix things up mainly to beat boredom. It's different for everybody so go with whatever you want.

Slow burn will never work for athletes though. The movements demand quick sudden movement so it's good idea to mix things up, not solely on slow movement. It doesn't work in REAL LIFE. Basically, you're being taught to move slowly.... Not really a good idea.

I want to add one example of how learning USSR's exercise science and others will get you very far...

http://www.defrancostraining.com/index.php


VERY GOOD trainer for athletes.

I bought Mr. Hahn's book and was very interested in the assertion that slow burn is the only (or perhaps best way) to train fast twitch muscles. My cross-fit instructor is skeptical. Other than this book, does anyone know of additional research that supports this?

I tried "Slow Burn" at home, and frankly, it was too hard for me to keep doing. It is intense! Next I tried the children's versian, still couldn't make my self do it, even though I could tell it was working.
Finally, I asked Fred Hahn for a recommendation for a person trainer in this method in the Seattle area, and he gave me Greg Anderson's, Serious Strength gym. I've been training there since April and am very happy to go in and work out with personal attention and encouragement for about 10 minutes a week, and with the results.     Jeanne

"Basically, you're being taught to move slowly.... Not really a good idea."

I don't buy this notion. I use slow-burn to build strength, and it's the only formal exercise I do. I'm 54 yrs old and I indulge in two sports that require both stamina and speed-surfing and skiing, and I have plenty of both.

"Slow burn will never work for athletes though. The movements demand quick sudden movement so it's good idea to mix things up, not solely on slow movement. It doesn't work in REAL LIFE. Basically, you're being taught to move slowly.... Not really a good idea."

Slow Burn is a method of resistance training designed to build muscle and thus strength and endurance. Any athlete who becomes stronger than he is already will experience a benefit in her chosen sport.

A stronger athlete is a better athlete IOW.

The two requirements for improvements in a sport skill is the exact practice of that skill and improvements of the body (being stronger, leaner, etc.)

Training fast with weights does not make one faster on the field. Slow and fast twitch muscle fibers are both recruited towards the end of an intense set of an exercise. These terms slow twitch and fast twitch refer to the fibers fatigue characteristics not their ability to move the body slowly or quickly. Many coaches and trainers misunderstand this.

It's been said that the best program is the one you can stick with.  There is no single optimum system IMHO.  If one tries this system and enjoys it, it is a good system for that person.    Also, there is much written about the benefits of slow movement training, as related to central nervous system training.  The safety factor would also be attractive to middle-aged people to whom injury prevention is a priority. For serious athletes (probably 0% of commenters) training crossover is probably exaggerated. If you want to get good at football, play football.  If you want to get good at lifting weights slowly, lift weights slowly.

I get a lot of strange looks when I'm doing the slow burn at the gym.  I do an upper body workout one day and lower body/core two days later.  Three days I week I do Mercola 8's HIIT on a treadmill.  I'm already seeing improvements in my running but nothing new in the mirrors yet.

kevin

"The two requirements for improvements in a sport skill is the exact practice of that skill and improvements of the body"

I agree with this and I don't see the relation between "strength" training and other sports specific training. Strength is strength no matter how you get it.  To train "athletically" then you need to train as close as possible to that end which fits into other parts of a complete regimen. There are ways to train weights sports specific which would bring it closer to, and work more toward your chosen endeavor but then you would still need separate strength training. Or at least can benefit from it.  So when training for strength, what difference does it make how fast or how slow you lift (as it applies to your sport)?  None IMO. It only matters as far as "weight training" results are concerned.  And getting stronger and more fit never hurt any part of sport (IMO).

Kevin you said:

"I get a lot of strange looks when I'm doing the slow burn at the gym. I do an upper body workout one day and lower body/core two days later. Three days I week I do Mercola 8's HIIT on a treadmill. I'm already seeing improvements in my running but nothing new in the mirrors yet."

I really suggest that you consider ditching the HIIT stuff. You're hindering your ability to build muscle with that stuff.

As for looking leaner, that is diet. What is your diet like?

About the comment that slow burn teaches to move slowly. So what? That's how we learn motions. We learn motions independently of speed. As we repeat the motion, we become more proficient. As our proficiency increases, we can do the motion faster. But we learn the motion at slow speed first.

We don't learn to move slowly. We learn the motions slowly, then we can increase speed at will.

Once we've learned a motion, it's difficult to learn a similar but different motion at full speed. That's because the previous motion takes over as an automatism. Something like the golf swing for example. It's difficult to learn to swing a certain way when we've been swinging a different way for years. But it's possible, if we do the motions slowly first.

However, Slow Burn is not about learning the motions slowly, then increasing speed at will. Yet there is nothing preventing us from doing the same motions at full speed outside of the Slow Burn workout. If anything, since we've "practiced" the motions during the workout, we are now more proficient in these same motions and can execute them with more precision at higher speeds.

About the comment that slow burn teaches to move slowly I remember reading that chi kung standing meditation is suppost to be one of the most effective exercises to build speed. Not too fun to stand still for an hour a day though.
For me 2 workouts a week sound like too little, I don't doubt they're effective, I'm just sure I'd miss the activity the other 5 days of the week. Would probably feel lazy and tired. As a computer worker one of the reasons I enjoy working out is the high energy feeling it provides.
Is there a complementary activity that is suggested? I see in a previous comment that HIIT isn't.

The inevitable comments about a slow-movement workout making you slow always leave me puzzled. The slow movement makes your muscles work harder and prevents you from relying on momentum to move the weights. Your muscle memory of faster movements aren't erased.

My previous workout plan (Body for Life) consisted of more, faster reps. If the argument that slow workouts make you slow were true, my dancing would have gotten slower. It hasn't. I've built up strength with no joint pain and fewer workouts.

As for two workouts per week versus five being a problem--now I've heard everything. Go out and have some fun!

Muscle stem cells (in skeletal muscles) promotes a muscle transcription factor. With under use and age fast twitch fibers undergo more stem cell loss relative to the rate which slow twitch lose their % of stem cells.

Exerting the muscle to endure being used constantly over a time period increases the number of muscle stem cells. This applies to men and women. For both, fat and fibrosity infiltrated into muscle down regulates stem cells.

The anabolic effects of sex hormones show that endurance use at moderate intensity raises testosterone and the amount of muscle stem cells. Men lose +/- 1.6% testosterone annually after their very late 30's.

Women lose 90% of their estrogen at menopause, so their muscle loss pattern differs. Endurance training done by women to maximize anabolic bonus for stem cells is less simple. However, straining exertion at an incline triggers estrogen receptors and these instigate stem cell boost.

In both sexes the loss of non-postural fast twitch muscles is more rapid than the loss of slow twitch fibers. Yet not all human muscles lose stem cells at the same rate. These myogenic stem cells are called "satellite cells".

"anonymous'..... the Soviets excelled for years because their athletes were 'roided to the gills. C'mon, man, some of their women looked like Mad Dog Vachon, for cryin' out loud!

I'd like to give Slow Burn a try, but the Ken Hutchins-style workout places are usually located in tony 'hoods like Lake Forest, IL, out of reach for the majority of us. I'm also .... curious....I've hear that both the joints and nervous system can get fried over time with this method due to 'going to failure' all the time. Comments please.....

"I've hear that both the joints and nervous system can get fried over time with this method due to 'going to failure' all the time. Comments please....."

Nonsense. Utter nonsense.

"As for two workouts per week versus five being a problem--now I've heard everything. "

Really? Never heard that before? ok then, go tell any of this kids he can exercise only 30 minutes per week. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1malgZpYKn8

I enjoy the fact that I only need to do this once a week.
The rest of the week I figure skate and horseback ride, and enjoy the fact that I have a lot of energy and strength for my very physical job.
I don't want to spend my whole life in a gym.

Jeanne

Bingo Jeanne.

"Really? Never heard that before? ok then, go tell any of this kids he can exercise only 30 minutes per week. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1malgZpYKn8"

We're talking about resistance training for 30 minutes a week not sports play. And these kids do not need ANY amount of exercise for sports play other than for skill practice of soccer.

Fred Hahn said...
Kevin you said:

. I'm already seeing improvements in my running but nothing new in the mirrors yet."

I really suggest that you consider ditching the HIIT stuff. You're hindering your ability to build muscle with that stuff.

As for looking leaner, that is diet. What is your diet like?


Fred, Thanks for the reply.  At my age--54--I have to reconcile myself to the inevitable slow physical decline.  Slow Burn keeps me from overdoing the weights and self-injury.  HIIT does the same for my cardio.  Dr Mercola wrote that his HIIT protocal stimulates over 500% increase in Growth Hormone.  

In part because of this website I've quit most all meat and dairy.  I admit to over-indulging in cookies and cakes this time of year.  In the past it didn't matter because running 50-80 miles every week kept my weight under control.  I've had to stop that due to a torn achilles;  Vibram Five-Finger Shoes were the cause.

A checkup and treadmill stress test last year showed I was at 20% body fat but a better stress-test number than 90% of men my age.  

My comment about nothing new in the mirrors yet was a joke but the point is I'm not seeing any new muscles yet from the Slow Burn.  But my resting heart rate has slowed since being on the Mercola 8's.  

Again, thanks for the note.

kevin

"Fred, Thanks for the reply. At my age--54--I have to reconcile myself to the inevitable slow physical decline. Slow Burn keeps me from overdoing the weights and self-injury. HIIT does the same for my cardio. Dr Mercola wrote that his HIIT protocal stimulates over 500% increase in Growth Hormone."

I don't believe that for a second. He would need to provide proof of this and you know he won't.

"In part because of this website I've quit most all meat and dairy."


WHAT? ALL meat?! That is an enormous mistake. Grass fed meats and wild caught fish are essential to your health. The dairy is fine.

"I admit to over-indulging in cookies and cakes this time of year. In the past it didn't matter because running 50-80 miles every week kept my weight under control. I've had to stop that due to a torn achilles; Vibram Five-Finger Shoes were the cause."

All I can say is running like that is terrible for your health hormonally and orthopedically.

"My comment about nothing new in the mirrors yet was a joke but the point is I'm not seeing any new muscles yet from the Slow Burn."

Your not eating any meat! How can you get benefits from any strength training program if you are not ingesting the necessary nutrients?

"But my resting heart rate has slowed since being on the Mercola 8's."

This doesn't mean a thing. I for one do not believe that a low RHR means improved health. In fact, I think quite the opposite.

I just tried doing push ups and body squats very slowly.  Although the body squats didn't seem very hard at all, after doing quite a few reps, I was sore.  I will continue this and see how it goes.

Fred Hahn said..  

I've quit most all meat and dairy."


WHAT? ALL meat?! That is an enormous mistake. Grass fed meats and wild caught fish are essential to your health. The dairy is fine.

"I admit to over-indulging in cookies and cakes this time of year. In the past it didn't matter because running 50-80 miles every week kept my weight under control. I've had to stop that due to a torn achilles; Vibram Five-Finger Shoes were the cause."

All I can say is running like that is terrible for your health hormonally and orthopedically.

"My comment about nothing new in the mirrors yet was a joke but the point is I'm not seeing any new muscles yet from the Slow Burn."

Your not eating any meat! How can you get benefits from any strength training program if you are not ingesting the necessary nutrients?

"But my resting heart rate has slowed since being on the Mercola 8's."

This doesn't mean a thing. I for one do not believe that a low RHR means improved health. In fact, I think quite the opposite.
  
Hi again Fred,

I'm sorry to argue but I could
cite plenty of studies showing the value of a lower resting heart rate.  That's basically the goal of all endurance athletes.  At high heart rates you're burning just glycogen.  At low heart rates you're burning mainly fats.  Trained marathon runners have such a low heart rate that they're burning mostly fat at speeds that have the rest of us still burning glycogen.  

I eat hi-protein veggies and supplement with B12 injections.  I'll have scrambled eggs once a week.  I'n not a tree-hugging vegan nutcase.  Like Clinton, I'm  trying to make up for a lifetime of poor eating habits.  For me that means no dairy,  no soy, very little sat fats, and once the silly season is over, no wheat products.  

kevin

"I'm sorry to argue but I could
cite plenty of studies showing the value of a lower resting heart rate."

Please do cite some.

"That's basically the goal of all endurance athletes. At high heart rates you're burning just glycogen. At low heart rates you're burning mainly fats. Trained marathon runners have such a low heart rate that they're burning mostly fat at speeds that have the rest of us still burning glycogen."

Please can you cite some full text papers that support this claim. Thanks.

Guys I've enjoyed the mental pingpong but it's lunch time and  the sun is shining for first time in weeks.  So I'm changing into my running shorts and going out to make some Vitamin D.  I just wish it wasn't 15 degrees but that's Wyoming.

kevin

Kevin - I don't think you're going to be able to make any vitamin D this time of year and at your latitude !

Anne, I got a 90 minute run, my face and legs are mildly sunburned.  At 7000ft altitude with no clouds or shade anywhere on the track I'm hoping for a lot of VitD.  But I wouldn't argue the point.  I run for other reasons and supplement with Vit D oil caps.

kevin

"@Anonymous said...
'As for two workouts per week versus five being a problem--now I've heard everything'.

Really? Never heard that before? ok then, go tell any of this kids he can exercise only 30 minutes per week. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1malgZpYKn8"

Never heard of it--I guess I don't hang around a gym enough.

The little kids playing soccer is an example of what I meant when I said "go out and have some fun." Workout = strength training. Fun in this case = dance, soccer, skating, or whatever makes you enjoy working up a sweat.

I'm the only person at my gym doing slow, controlled lifts with my iPod tuned to a metronome. I get a lot of funny looks, which makes me chuckle to myself.

I'm happy with the results I've been getting in the two months I've been doing Fred's workout style, especially considering how little time it takes out of my week.

My one complaint is that it takes a lot of mental energy to be that focused for the duration of my workout. It was much easier to get to the gym when I knew I'd be doing a bunch of mindless reps and resting between sets while listening to music on my headphones. I'm also noticing how unfocused other people at the gym are, and the cardio people on the treadmills are suddenly driving me nuts.

I guess that's not really a complaint, just an observation. It makes me wonder what the atmosphere is like at Fred's gym. Too bad I don't live in New York.

Dr. Bill, I didn't know you were a Jersey boy. Gosh, we were practically neighbors back when you were young.

I've also been doing Fred's Slow Burn method for the last few months - only once a week, and I've only been doing it about 20 minutes. No changes on the scale (and I need changes, sob) but my jeans seem to get looser every day - and when I'm out going for birdwalks I find I have far more stamina than I have had in a long time.

Hi Kevin,

I'm sure the experts will correct me if I'm wrong, but the sun's ray's need to strike your skin at a particular angle for you to be able to make vitamin D, and that angle is not acute enough at northern latitudes in winter. Even though you can get sunburn in winter that is not the same part of the sun's rays which make vitamin D.

Hmm,  During the summer I run midday.  The sun is directly overhead and the tan is darkest on my shoulders and the tops of my feet;  I run in VFF sandals.  If an imaginary line directly overhead is zero degrees and the horizon is 90 degrees, this time of year the sun is never higher than about 45 degrees.  When running midday now the sun is hitting my face and legs at an angle similar to what it does during Summer.  I know I can have my Vit D levels tested.  I may do that soon.  

kevin

Appropriate to this Slow Burn thread, I'm a veterinarian practicing since 1984.

I was at the gym just finishing my SlowBurn arms and shoulders workout when the clinic called to say there was an emergency.  The workout involves using eight different machines.  When it's done I can barely lift my arms.  

I got to the clinic and found a patient I'd spayed two days ago had chewed out her stitches, all three layers and her intestines were hanging from the six inch long open wound.  The owner had come home for lunch and found her like that and rushed her to the clinic.

I took her right to surgery.  The owner stayed to watch.  Having just finished a Slow Burn workout I didn't have much control over my arms.  They shook like St Vitus Dance.  It took an effort of will it control my surgical tools as I debrided the raw wound, cleaned the exposed bowels and replaced them.  

As I worked I overheard the owner murmer to the nurse, "He really cares, doesn't he."

This morning, patient doing well.

I've done slow burn workouts - I've become convinced that the key is the amount of time that the muscle is working and to stimulate growth you need to work it until if is starting to fail.

If you do 10 quick reps you end up spending more of you time between reps rather than working out.

I do a mix these days - 8 quick reps followed by two ultra slow reps - until the muscle collapses.

Most of the folks in the gym are embarrassed to push to collapse - but that seems to be what stimulates growth.

Hi Fred:

I'm not familiar with your book but I plan on changing that.

I started resistance training for the first time 18 months ago.  I'm 54.  I apply the Body by Science concepts, however I've evolved my program to where I do one body part a week.  On a 6 week cycle I do lat pulldown, overhead press, leg press, seated row, chest press and leg press.  

I continue to see gains in TUL or load every workout.  

This with a paleo diet, has improved my overall fitness by an amazing degree.

Sifter said: I'd like to give Slow Burn a try, but the Ken Hutchins-style workout places are usually located in tony 'hoods like Lake Forest, IL, out of reach for the majority of us.

Exercise Coach has facilities in Lake Zurich, Buffalo Grove, and Arlington Heights IL, and features Super Slow style workouts.

I work out at a 24hr Fitness.  If there's an opposite to 'tony' that's probably it.

Fred,
How can 'slow burn' exercise benefit someone who is pre-diabetic, HAS NEVER BEEN OVERWEIGHT (and does not want to lose weight) but uses a combination of aerobic/resistance exercises along with low-carb eating to control blood sugar? Exercising only once or twice a week doesn't seem enough to do the job. I have never tried this type of exercise only read about it.

acanthusbk - I live in the the UK where there are no Slow Burn or Super Slow gym facilities. I just used Fred's book and asked him questions over the net, he was so helpful. When I went to a gym I found out how to use the machines correctly from a trainer there and then simply used the Slow Burn technique.

rmarie - in addition to other health problems I am atypical type 2 diabetic, thin, never been overweight, who eats very low carb Paleo diet. I do Slow Burn/Superslow twice a week and walk three or four miles a day. My blood glucose control is excellent.

Ann, thank you for your very helpful and informative answers! Maybe Fred has something to add as well.

"How can 'slow burn' exercise benefit someone who is pre-diabetic, HAS NEVER BEEN OVERWEIGHT (and does not want to lose weight) but uses a combination of aerobic/resistance exercises along with low-carb eating to control blood sugar?"

Well it helps the way any resistance training program helps. IMHO, SB is a better way to perform your resistance training program. I also strongly believe from years of experience that high intensity resistance training produces better results than high volume, low intensity training.

"Exercising only once or twice a week doesn't seem enough to do the job. I have never tried this type of exercise only read about it."

Twice a week, not once, is best. If you have never done it then how do you know it won't do the trick? And yes you should stay active too.

Now when you say low carb, how low carb are you? If you are pre-diabetic, I wouldn't go above 30-60 grams of carbs a day all from nonstarchy veggies.

45 year old Bernard Hopkin's bulky (but undefined) body boxed against the sculpted 18 year younger light heavy weight division champion in Canada Sat. night.

Many don't like boxing and have their reasons. The muscle response involved is very impressive though.

Maybe someone can tell me if any
of the boxers' important training steps would be akin to slow burns.

"45 year old Bernard Hopkin's bulky (but undefined) body boxed against the sculpted 18 year younger light heavy weight division champion in Canada Sat. night.

Many don't like boxing and have their reasons. The muscle response involved is very impressive though.

Maybe someone can tell me if any
of the boxers' important training "steps would be akin to slow burns.

Not sure what you mean by this Mito.

Slow Burn is a way to lift weights. Boxing is boxing.

I think this was addressed in the edition of Slow Burn that I have.  Weight lifters can become as large as NFL linemen but the weight lifters don't have the explosive power of those linemen.  The lineman are training those fast twitch fibers while weight lifters aren't.   Slow Burn works all muscle fibers.  I could be wrong.  I don't have the book handy.

I think this was addressed in the edition of Slow Burn that I have.  Weight lifters can become as large as NFL linemen but the weight lifters don't have the explosive power of those linemen.  The lineman are training those fast twitch fibers while weight lifters aren't.   Slow Burn works all muscle fibers.  I could be wrong.  I don't have the book handy.

Supposedly all boxers move weights around in some way sometimes in their training regimen. I've seen promotional shots of guys on their backs slowly pushing oversize tires up with their legs.

Explosive ability is a good description of a special capability they'd want to develop. A counter punch is often a fight changer. I'd like to hear if slow burn method might improve any aptitude over another weight technique.

If this is too far off topic or doen't merit discussion there is no need to respond. I don't box, but often see physique disparities in contenders in a match.

((I always think of lifting weights as a solution to our contemporary lifestyle - it meets a need and serves individual goals. Nobody considered it where I worked as a longshoreman; we man handled each sack and box in jumbles using giant rope nets inside and outside fetid holds of ships.))

You play Xbox?