Kettlebell Pavel's article - "The best all-around training method ever"

[Ege]

Increased mitochondrial density (quantitative) and qualitative increase in capacity have been consistently observed as an outcome of HIIT for many years.

Of the range of adaptive responses, this is actually THE most closely associated with high intensity intervals (and is in fact part of the operant mechanism of Q&D). If any expert is suggesting otherwise, they’d need to not only cite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, but also explain the research flaws in the previous studies.
I’ll leave it at that…

Thanks, I don’t prefer to post the link of the video to discussion. I have no opinion on the credibility of Peter Attia. I see he is famous of some sort but can’t asses if he is legit or not… This is not an area I have followed for some time.

 

[Training for Life]

Increased mitochondrial density (quantitative) and qualitative increase in capacity have been consistently observed as an outcome of HIIT for many years.

Of the range of adaptive responses, this is actually THE most closely associated with high intensity intervals (and is in fact part of the operant mechanism of Q&D). If any expert is suggesting otherwise, they’d need to not only cite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, but also explain the research flaws in the previous studies.
I’ll leave it at that…

Based on your experience and research, can HIIT work as a long-term, sustainable training modality? I’ve always taken it as a good short-term booster for peaking.

 

[Pete L]

Thanks, I don’t prefer to post the link of the video to discussion. I have no opinion on the credibility of Peter Attia. I see he is famous of some sort but can’t asses if he is legit or not… This is not an area I have followed for some time.

I'd recommend reading The Quick and The Dead.

 

[silveraw]

The study protocol is very different.
The 30 seconds work used in the study is glycolytic. Akin to a HIIT circuit.
Whereas the LCCJ protocol of 5 to 20 seconds of work with the objective of avoiding excessive glycolysis.
The short rounds of every 30 seconds is much closer to steady state work than the study's every 90 second protocol.
It's like comparing apples with watermelons.

Yeah, it was more “Northern Europe study that looks at intervals and aerobic fitness” and that’s what came up.

I was not expecting a study looking at rehab protocols to ruffle feathers lol.

 

[Eyetic]

He made a podcast with a Phd, seemingly an expert, named Inigo San Milan,

Sorry but seemingly is not a good term to define that person.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Inigo-San-Millan

He is also is part ( Director of Performance) of the UAE Cycling team and he is working with top performance athletes like Pogacar (two times Tour the france winner at 25yo), so much of his research goes directly applied into these guys and thats the interesting part.

Lactate clearance is one of the key points of his arguments when he talks about Z2 training and is a big part of these top athletes programs.

cit. "Zone 2 (Z2) has shown to be the training zone eliciting the best results to improve lactate clearance capacity.”

In the context of Pogacar (obviously they can't release his actual training program) he states:

• several days a week train in zone 2
• several days a week either train the glycolytic capacity or build glycolytic training into a zone 2 session

And also f you check Harald Motz training and he's HR graphs (posted in this forum) you will notice that he spends a massive amount between what "polar" considers Zone 2 and Zone 3.

 

[Deleted 20758]

As posted in another thread. An easy guide.

Pavel Tsatsouline Explains How to Build Endurance the Right Way | BOXROX

 

[TobyC]

A lot of recent research is now pointing to spending more time training below Lactate threshold 1 to improve endurance improvements, following a polarized training method. That training zone elicits angiogenesis, mitochondrial biogenesis and more efficient substrate utilization. Higher intensity work tends to be mostly over the second lactate threshold, with less training between the two. Training that way has better results than training with intensity in more of a pyramid distribution. Stephen Seiler and John Hollosozy both have a lot of research in the area.

 

[Ege]

Based on your experience and research, can HIIT work as a long-term, sustainable training modality? I’ve always taken it as a good short-term booster for peaking.

I did not mean to be disrespectful. I will refer to him appropriately in the future.

Thanks for the resources!

 

[John K]

That is why a blanket “is not improving strength of shoulders” is far away from being a scientific definition to me.

They explain how they assessed shoulder strength in the methods section:

Using a standardized procedure, the examiner measured the participants muscle strength of the low back, trunk, and shoulders (18). Participants performed maximal voluntary contractions (MVC) during static trunk flexion, back extension, and shoulder elevation. For the shoulder measurement, the participant was sitting upright in a height-adjustable chair, and for the other measurements the participant was standing upright. We used Boforsdynamometers (Bofors Elektronik, Karlskoga, Sweden) to measure force, which was converted to torque by multiplying the force with the individual lever arm length. The examiner instructed the participant to gradually build up the force over 5 seconds, then to keep the maximal force for 2–3 seconds, and, finally, slowly to lower the force to zero.

While something like this is far from "real world," it does help control a lot of the variables. When they say it does not improve strength, they are referring to this specifically, and are not making a blanket statement, which they state in the discussion here:

The training protocol did not significantly improve aerobic fitness or strength of the shoulders and trunk flexors.

They are comparing pre and post intervention results, as that is what they assessed. They are not stating there was no improvements in military press as they did not look at that. They are not stating there were no improvements in anything else - only that there was no improvements in shoulder strength as assessed by the dynamometer. It is also important to note - which they do at the end for a close reading - that they specifically say "our study protocol." They are, again, explicitly not making a blanket statement.

Folks can argue whether or not a dynamometer has any bearing to real world strength. I'm not going to wade into that, just like I'm not going to argue that the swing improves shoulder strength.

If they train a certain pattern of any kind, they have to measure the strength of that pattern.


Otherwise one can train dips and conclude dips is not improving your strength. If they happen to measure the strength with a press move.

I don't think this is actually the case, as you introduce a lot of variables as far as studying - such as - is the increase strength-specific or technique-specific or a blend. For most people in the real world it might not matter, but for a scientific study, it may be important to suss out the differences - and this is why a lot of times you see things like max iso holds or dynamometers, regardless of training method. They are assessing force output and whether it increased or not. And in the context of this particular study, that removes the need from instructing and assessing yet another movement. Folks can argue this too, but there is a reason behind the methodology.

 

[David Smit]

Hi everyone

I have a question regarding Pavel's article titled "The best all-around training method ever" at:

The Best All-Around Training Method EVER | StrongFirst

This method, while it does not maximize the development of any of the above qualities—only a highly specialized method, not a general physical preparation one, could do that—it develops them to levels high enough to successfully compete in amateur sports, excel at physically demanding...

www.strongfirst.com

In it he states that "According to other Swedish research, the particular loading pattern—brief periods of work and brief periods of rest—result in heart rate dynamics similar to moderate intensity steady state running: the gold standard for heart development."

Does anyone know what the particular research referred to is? I am in no way questioning what is being said - I am merely interested and would like to read the research itself.

Thanks
Dean

It’s very generalized. Much of this can be found in Komi’s book , strength and power in sport. The Swedes, as well were very ex physiol research based. All of the above is going to be GPP. I don’t know your background but in research you need to start by questioning simple things such as ‘training method’.

But Pavel’s work I have followed for 20 years and he provides for a solid foundation in his teachings you could apply to most sports.


Google scholar, and research gate are where I go to look at any reviews or evb research.

 

[David Smit]

Increased mitochondrial density (quantitative) and qualitative increase in capacity have been consistently observed as an outcome of HIIT for many years.

Of the range of adaptive responses, this is actually THE most closely associated with high intensity intervals (and is in fact part of the operant mechanism of Q&D). If any expert is suggesting otherwise, they’d need to not only cite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, but also explain the research flaws in the previous studies.
I’ll leave it at that

Attia is a doctor not an exercise physiologist or a coach. Zone 2 should not be trained in all the time. It is another cult bandwagon following.

It is nothing new. It is essentially polarized training if you wish to get more specific. It’s what the Norwegians and the best endurance athletes have been doing for decades

Cheerw

 

[Deleted 20758]

A lot of recent research is now pointing to spending more time training below Lactate threshold 1 to improve endurance improvements, following a polarized training method. That training zone elicits angiogenesis, mitochondrial biogenesis and more efficient substrate utilization. Higher intensity work tends to be mostly over the second lactate threshold, with less training between the two. Training that way has better results than training with intensity in more of a pyramid distribution. Stephen Seiler and John Hollosozy both have a lot of research in the area.

I know that some people try to ‘sell’ it as new. But nothing new in what you write.

 

[Bauer]

A summary of polarized training according to Stephen Seiler:

Polarized Training And Stephen Seiler - PezCycling News

Polarized training has proven great benefits for athletes in many sports, which very simply focuses training plans built on an 80/20 time spent between going very easy most of the time, and very hard some of the time - Stephen Seiler is considered a leading authority on this subject.

pezcyclingnews.com

Here is some info on zones and their relationship to breathing according to Inigo San Millan

Other/Mixed - Aerobic Deficiency Syndrome

@offwidth I have heard exactly the same. Seems like the skill of nasal breathing can "outrace" the talk test so to speak I think that folks that are adept at various ‘breathing practices’ would probably be a good case study here.

www.strongfirst.com

That being said, there is also the apporach of Easy Interval Training by Klaas Lok, which follows principles similar to StrongEndurance principles, namely training at the desired intensity in short repeats, preventing the buildup of unwanted byproducts, and recovering aerobically between repeats.

EDIT: Posted in the wrong thread.
Am also interested in the research, which is probably referenced in the StrongEndurance manual.

 

[Bauer]

EDIT: Posted in the wrong thread.
Am also interested in the research, which is probably referenced in the StrongEndurance manual.

 

[David Smit]

I know that some people try to ‘sell’ it as new. But nothing new in what you write.

Not new at all. Seiler and others have discussed and researched it for years. Norwegian xc skiers dominate using polarized training. Now the Norwegian triathletes - not new just more accessible with todays endless amount of social media. Remember Peter Attia charges each patient 120k for full services……

 

[watchnerd]

According to other Swedish research,

 

[watchnerd]

I am surprised, after hearing Zone 2 workout here in this forum, I found Peter Attia youtube channel. He made a podcast with a Phd, seemingly an expert, named Inigo San Milan, and they said interval training does not create mitochondria adaptation. They say you have to constantly be in Zone 2 not going up and down….

Well, I might find my self in a fight of different camps in this manner as well )

Well, I might hold my horses on this topic. And happily add a walking routine in my exercise regime. I walk around quite a bit but need to up the volume a bit and allocate specific times to my self.

I am a total beginner in cardio, I am lucky ) I will walk 30 minutes a few times a week and improve and maybe in the mean time, more will be resolved. I will be closely watching those threads.

There are also some high stakes in this “fights” as usual, people create businesses, careers, fame, and I am not referring to fake gurus. Honest people honestly invest a lot and they are emotionally attached. Sometimes the truth might lie in sth in between to honest and competent people.

Not trying to be a fan boy, but Pavel’s talks on cardio could be all I need …

Increased mitochondrial density (quantitative) and qualitative increase in capacity have been consistently observed as an outcome of HIIT for many years.

Of the range of adaptive responses, this is actually THE most closely associated with high intensity intervals (and is in fact part of the operant mechanism of Q&D). If any expert is suggesting otherwise, they’d need to not only cite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, but also explain the research flaws in the previous studies.
I’ll leave it at that…

I've watched that podcast.

It's been a while, but I thought recall Inigo saying that capillary adaptations (not mitochondrial) required higher duration Zone 2.

 

[North Coast Miller]

Based on your experience and research, can HIIT work as a long-term, sustainable training modality? I’ve always taken it as a good short-term booster for peaking.

Absolutely.
Again, I’m not going to claim it is better etc than zone 2 in any way except the following:
- time efficient
- body comp

With the exception of about 12 weeks total over the last 3 years I’ve essentially used only HIIT 2-3 times per week. I’d say its comparable to 3or 4 x per week 40 minute runs in terms of basic aerobic fitness plus very good recovery from higher intensity effort. More than good enough for long term GPP and health.

Ideally one would do both LISS and HIIT 80/20. But if one is avoiding HIIT because of belief it is either ineffective for aerobic and mitochondrial health or possibly even harmful, one has been misinformed.

 

[Tom Watson]

Increased mitochondrial density (quantitative) and qualitative increase in capacity have been consistently observed as an outcome of HIIT for many years.

Of the range of adaptive responses, this is actually THE most closely associated with high intensity intervals (and is in fact part of the operant mechanism of Q&D). If any expert is suggesting otherwise, they’d need to not only cite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, but also explain the research flaws in the previous studies.
I’ll leave it at that…

Yea, I just sped listened to two different podcasts of Iñigo and Attia and I don’t recall them saying anything about intervals don’t build mitochondrial density. They mention spending majority of training in zone 2 and 1-2 times a week in zone 5. Which to me sounds like everything I’ve heard Pavel say. Maybe I missed it.

 

[North Coast Miller]

I've watched that podcast.

It's been a while, but I thought recall Inigo saying that capillary adaptations (not mitochondrial) required higher duration Zone 2.

Zone 2 is an absolute necessity for the best / highest possible capillary density increases, esp packed into type 1 fibers.

But, HIIT absolutely increases capillary density, more heavily adjacent to type 2 fibers. The overall magnitude of effect is less than zone 2 (of sufficient volume!) but the effect around type 2 fibers is more pronounced.

I’m in a position where circumstances demand of me if I want good cardio health it has to be HIIT. My knees, feet will not tolerate rowing or jogging for durations that would be healthful. Sort of like Kenny being pushed into Keto diet for metabolic reasons and making the best of it.