Why is the US government even involved in these studies? What gives the federal government the right to even spend money on this... not the Constitution!

24" on center studs? 2x4s? For a wall of that height? I hope I'm seeing things wrong.

24" on center? I think it's more like 26", 19.5", 17", 22". I'm not a structural engineer, but I'm sure it's going to hold the standard 175# Crossfitter. It might make the 200+# guys worry, but hey, they probably need to lose some weight anyway. Kidding. :)

i dont have anywhere to do back extentions, is there a good alternatives?

#4

I would suggest good mornings as a sub for back extension.

Like the Scottish flag.

#5, #6 - Could you please describe the Good Morning and the Scottish Flag?

I made some sort of a contraption for Back Extension but after 40 my hamstrings started to fail. Was it a weak spot, or I did something wrong?

Thank you,
Rafael

thank goodness for a rest day

Comment #1: "What gives the federal government the right to even spend money on this... not the Constitution!"

Sounds like someone needs to read the Constitution. Congress has the power to provide for the general welfare of the United States:

Article I. Section 8 - Powers of Congress

The Congress shall have Power To .....provide for the general Welfare of the United States

the constitution means nothing. why even bring it up? they're talking about fat and carbohydrates. i don't see anything in the consitution about them. why even bring it up?

Thats a nice big Scottish Saltire in the picture

www.crossfitcs.com

I am totally American, but an old roomy was heir to the Black Watch. Funny how I immediately recognized the Flag of Scotland.

Good article, thanks Coach.

#4 & #5, The "good morning" is a lower back work out that is done either with no or really light weight- you'll hurt your back if you're not carefull w/ this one. Standing straight, with a light bar or broom-handle over your shoulders, bend at the waist until your torso is almost parallel to the ground; then return to the starting position.

Would recommend "supermans" as a better alternative - explained on yesterday's comments.

#5, I believe he ment the flag of Scotland that is in today's picture- not an actual workout. Good luck

Nice article - I had bacon for breakfast today! (need to go grocery shopping)

#2
The climbing wall looks fine, I've seen a few of them built, and then seen my boyfriend at 210# pulling hard on routes. My boyfriend is a contractor (and rock climber), and he's currently building a rock gym in New Jersey, and the walls look about the same.

All of this is old news. Read the postlude to "The Jungle" by Sinclaire Lewis. The fattening up of cattle with high processed carb diets in the early 1900's raised the saturated fat in the meat. High processed carb diets in humans does the same. Eat the stuff that God made. Whole foods.

Over the years I have gradually realized that it is often unwise to simply accept any/all written studies at face value. This includes dietary recommendations. However, for some reason I do still carry around the idea that ALL saturated fat is bad, so perhaps it is time I re-examine that issue. Does anyone have any other good reading regarding this subject? My recollection is that even The Paleo Diet and The Zone Diet don't get into much detail but suggest moderating saturated fat intake, without breaking the saturated fats down further. I sense a good learning moment ahead. Where can I start?

An edit to my last comment (#15) - The walls don't look about the same. The architect made them double and triple re-enforce everything, but most of the other climbing walls I've seen look like the one in the picture.

This article seems kindof tame compared to the usual rest day fare. Coach's political articles usually irk me, but at least they get me out researching the topic so I better understand it and know what I'm talking about.

#7 Rafael
I believe #6 was referring to the Scottish flag in the picture, and saying "I like the Scottish flag" rather than suggesting that good mornings are an exercise similar to the Scottish flag. (Although "Scottish Flag" would be a cool name for an exercise)

The good morning is a posterior chain (primarily lower back and hams) exercise. Place a bar on your shoulders as if you were going to do a back squat. With your legs straight but not locked, bend forward at the waist/hips until your back is roughly parallel to the floor. Keep your back arched throughout and repeat for the rx'd reps.

You know its funny. Being a slightly overweight male (I played college ball at 250#. 4 yrs after college i still weight 250, but only make it to the gym 3 hr a wk. you do the math) i read a lot about nutrition and i've come to one conclusion:

EVERYTHING IN MODERATION.

Butter is bad for you; eat margarine. No, wait...turns out margarine has chemicals your body can't break down...switch back to butter! Same with wine, and now same with red meat. Everything in moderation, my crossfitting friends, including time in the gym, will lead you to a happy life. (IMHO)

Hi all,
AL WEIGHT IN KILOS
Lisa PCJ 35x2, 45x2, 50x1, 55x1, (60x1x10; 8:50).
Bdw. 60.
Jon {Ride (Airdyne) 2 miles- 5:19 (HR 160 at completion); 15:00 respite and PCJ (barbell lowered in control) 50x1x4, 65x1x2, 75x1x2, 85x1 (5:25), 90x1x15 (11:00)- total time for all sets 16:25; and 3:30 respite and ride 2 miles- 5:15 (HR 170 at completion)}.
Rest...
Bdw. 81.

Ran 5km race in Porter Oklahoma.
6th overall
1st in age 30-34
Time: 18:50

#10 I bring up this point because an office, the U.S. Surgeon General, established by the federal government sanctioned the study, hence my question/statement. I think scientific inquiry into nutrition is great but I do not believe it should be bankrolled by the federal government.

#9 quickly points out that the federal government is able to undertake such a study because of the "general welfare clause". Unfortunately, this clause might be the most abused clause of the Constitution as it is rolled out to explain the government's funding of studies into the effects of bovine flatulence to "art" that includes crucifixes submerged in urine and artists who paint with feces, but I digress.

As I read the Anti-Federalist's, it becomes very clear that, in a nutshell, they feared the federal government would become too big because of indefinite statements such the general welfare clause (e.g. Essay V by Brutus). In actuality, both the Federalists and Anti-Federalists agreed that the local government should primarily govern the people (think State's rights). However, the parties disagree on points of language in the Constitution. The Federalists believed that at first writing the language was sufficient to protect the freedom of US citizens.

As time has progressed, as the Anti-Federalists feared, the invocation of the general welfare clause has actually decreased the freedoms of US citizens since its ratification. One is able to quickly see the abuse of our liberties as the exorbitant amount of taxes we are required to pay and the failure of most government programs, which these taxes support.

Rod #17: http://www.westonaprice.org/knowyourfats/skinny.html
Also that same site has many many articles on the myth of cholesterol.

Erica #18: But everyone's always asking him to post health-related articles. Ya can't win!! ;)

Awesome article. I've read that saturated fat is absolutely necessary for omega-3 fatty acids to be utilized correctly, to get into fat burning mode (growth hormone) instead of just carb-burning (insulin resistance) mode. This isn't an opinion but a biochemical fact that seems to be conveniently overlooked by the grain cartel.

I was disappointed when I compared Zone recommendations (30% fat) with the Anthropological Codex (which is a compilation and analysis of the nutritional info/macronutrient composition of hunger-gatherer diets). The fat percentage in the AC was between 28-58% (with protein between 19-35% and carbs between 22-40). This is actually lower than the Weston Price recommendations, but I'll stick with it.

Too much protein turns to sugar and most of us know the problem with too much carbs, so fat is a good way to get extra calories.

According to writing by Ron Rosedale, lower carbs and more good oils normalize elevated trigylcerides and move blood lipids toward normal.

Also, here's some info on Syndrome X which was mentioned in the article:
http://medherb.com/Syndrome_X.htm

I guess this reveals my (slightly liberal) bias in that I'm much less concerned about the media funding studies as I am about the AHA recommendations, knowing that AHA gets such huge donations from pharmaceuticals. Though I will say I was disturbed when I stopped tracking my food on fitday.com and switched to My Food Pyramid (MyPyramid.gov) where the analysis always told me my dairy was too low, even when I was getting all the proper nutrients from other foods. I guess I'm much more likely to blame the dairy industry and their lobbyists than I am to blame the gov'mint... yes, my own bias which I'm becoming more aware of.

In any case, we are free to make our own dietary choices! And to do our own research amidst the confusing and contradictory articles and studies.

Btw, the article mentioned that pasta al dente causes a slower rise in blood sugar, but I have to wonder about the phytic acid...

I pay close attention to this because when I was following a low-fat diet, eating mostly fish and chicken, and only at lunch, my iron and protein were way too low to be healthy. So less grain, presoaking it when possible, and more red meat helped me a lot!

Again, great article. Thanks Coach!

Comment #23 : "In actuality, both the Federalists and Anti-Federalists agreed that the local government should primarily govern the people (think State's rights)"

Now it's time to point you towards the 14th Amendment. We limited state's rights after the Civil War by amending the Constitution.

Comment #25 "Too much protein turns to sugar and most of us know the problem with too much carbs, so fat is a good way to get extra calories."

What you are suggesting is that protein will be converted to sugar and then it will be converted to fat. You have to eat a hell of a lot of protein before that is going to happen given the time it takes to convert the protein to sugar and then convert the sugar to fat.

You can store carbs as glycogen which will be burned off when you exercise intensely. 300-500 grams depending on your level of fitness. Excess fat gets stored as fat. Your ability to use fat as energy depends on your level of fitness. Fat does not provide a significant source of energy for intense exercise such as Crossfit's WODs.

You can excrete sugar and protein in your urine. You can't excrete fat in your urine. It has to be burned (producing energy or heat) or stored.

Including the omega 3s, your body needs about 50-60 grams of fat a day. After that it is a junk calorie that serves no other purpose but to make you fat.

Moderation is the key to proper diet. Eat a good mix of foods. I make it a point to only eat a portion of meat (beef, chicken, pork, etc) the size of my palm at any one meal. That seems to work well. My cholesterol level is below 150. And I eat eggs throughout the week.

I'm with the group that prefers less government sponsored studies. We have enough universities that have sufficient funding to handle those type of studies. I don't believe in the dairy/meat/tofu/etc funded studies. Seems like a conflict to me.

Jesse 26,
Actually I didn't say that protein will be converted to sugar and then to fat. I said protein will be converted to sugar if you have too much protein. In addition, too much protein puts you at a higher risk for bone loss and kidney failure (Int. Journal of Clinical Practice page 540-548, Oct-Nov '99, Nutritional Factors in Osteoporosis by Swaminathan R., Current Opinion in Nephrology and Hypertension pg 523-531, July '01, Evolving strategies for Renoprotection: non-diabetic chronological renal disease).

Too much carbs makes blood levels soar (Brand-Miller, J.C., Holt, S.H. et all, Glycemic index and obesity, American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, pg 281S-285S, 2002, July '02)

I'm interested in where you are getting your information that excess fat is stored as fat.

You can store carbs as glycogen which will be burned off when you exercise intensely. 300-500 grams depending on your level of fitness. Excess fat gets stored as fat. Hunter-gatherers seem pretty thin, and got 28-58% fat. In fact I would argue that high quality fats have been eaten quite liberally for ages by native cultures that did not suffer from obesity or heart disease.

Sorry, those first two sentences of last paragraph I meant to delete.

P.S. Restricting carbs helps lower insulin levels, which helps your body burn excess fat.

far too sunny for rest at crossfit denver!

did "5-4-3-2-1" for time

run 500m 75 push-ups
run 400m 75 sit-ups
run 300m 40 45 lb dumbell swings
run 200m 50 bw squats
run 100m 30 pull-ups

randy 15:51
ron 20:10

I love rest day!

Hey all; totally random and off topic. I was wondering if it is bad to basically sub in girls with just pullup/pushup/situp routines for pretty much every WOD? I havn't been able to do every WOD, only about 3x a week and off schedule, but since I'm recovering from a broken leg, I can pretty much only do upper body stuff. I've been improving in the 3 areas, but is only doing these (along side physical therapy for my lower body) possibly a bad thing. It's been about 3 weeks of this routine.

Has anyone else noticed how it's been a long time since we have done snatches? If i'm not mistaken, isn't the snatch the first and most fundamental of the OLy lifts? Doesn't Coach B teach the snatch extensively to beginners? If I remember correctly, a lot of people complained last time we did them that they were too difficult or that they couldn't complete any. I hope these posts don't influence the decision of the WODs. Any thoughts?

# 33 Paul

I'm new here, but it seems an important part of Crossfit is not adapting to a specific workout - That's why the WOD varies so much. That said, keep on doing whatever you can until you can use your leg - You'll get stronger at your pullups, pushups, and situps. Try the message board, you might get better answers there.

No rest day here...need to make up for all the beer I'm going to drink tonight.

Row 1500m
75 shoulder presses w/ 20lb barbells
Row 1000m
75 bw squats
Row 500m
75 pushups

Time: 19:30

#33

i am pretty new too but i agree with post #35; additionally, pullup pushup situp are part of the crossfit warm up so i would try and throw some other stuff in there, however that may be hard seeing that the majority of quality exercises are done while standing and are generally explosive thus involving your legs; if you could even go lighter on the weight so that for example your leg could handle a kettlebell swing, that could work also

good luck

Rest day fun:
44# kb walking swing x50 yds
60# forward sled drag x50 yds
60# backward sled drag x50 yds
25# chest flye drag x 25 yds /25# curl drag x 25 yds
25# chest flye drag x 25 yds /25# curl drag x 25 yds
60# sandbag carry:
---100 yds on rt shoulder
---100 yds on left shoulder
---400 yds on back

Didn't time this one

Coach, thanks for posting this. Yesterday I ran across a reference to Taubes work in Daniel Dennett's latest book (Breaking the Spell) and (shamefully) realized I had not read any of his articles.

For anyone iterested in Taubes piece "What if it's all been a Big Fat Lie" it can be found here:

http://www.mercola.com/2002/jul/24/carbs1.htm

Instead:

10 rounds, continuous but untimed:
5 KTE
10 ring pushups
15 OHS w/ PVC

Done outside at 1500 EST. 91°F, 95% humidity. Squats to 10" target. Love Baltimore in the summer. Shout out to Tom Brose, welcome back.

bwt - 150
age - 33

25# DB Thrusters (neutral grip) and Pullups (tried 35#, next 30#)
10 DBT / 1 PU
9 DBT / 2 PU
.
.
2 DBT / 9 PU
1 DBT / 10 PU

12:40

dbones (#1 & #23):

We can all argue until the cows come home whether the "general welfare" clause or the "necessary and proper" clause (below) actually permits the federal government to create institutions like the National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or any other government-funded organizations (like the National Endowment for the Arts that you alluded to).

In my mind, the interpretation of these clauses so as to allow the creation and funding of these bodies has been long assumed and established -- much like common law. Debating it at this point, on the basis of the constitution and what has been written by the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists, and by constitutional scholars since the founding, seems pointless, since their meaning is so open to interpretation.

Rather than argue about an interpretation of the consititution, I believe a better argument would be about what government is for in the first place. For example, whether government is strictly for common defense, or also for achieving broader purposes that individuals or small communities cannot achieve on their own.

In my mind, it is only on the basis of such an argument can you then seek to change the constitution to restrict the powers that you don't believe Congress should have, if that is your desire.

On a different topic, I take issue with the Glassman's tag line to this article: "The Corruption of Science by Politics". As Taubman says himself in the essay:

"Indeed, the history of the national conviction that dietary fat is deadly, and its evolution from hypothesis to dogma, is one in which politicians, bureaucrats, the media, and the public have played as large a role as the scientists and the science. It's a story of what can happen when the demands of public health policy--and the demands of the public for simple advice--run up against the confusing ambiguity of real science."

That's not just politics trumping science: it's a complicated mess of things all contributing to a very bad outcome. The same thing happened in France in first attempt to the build the Panama Canal -- though all the engineering evidence suggested that a sea level canal would be virtually impossible, preconceived notions, concepts of national honor (and accomplishing the "impossible"), politics, money and personal ego all combined to end in disaster for the French.

As for fat...I'm with the other xFitters who argue that moderation in all things (including moderatio) is the only magic bullet. Unless you're already unhealthy or downright sick, a good balance is the key.

Holy cow...somebody shut me up. I'm gonna go do yesterday's WOD now.

The "necessary and proper" clause:
"To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."

So when is there going to be a Constitutional amendment for a CrossFit WOD?
Wouldn't that serve the "general welfare" best?

Long live Dan Duchaine, thats all that i have to say!

Yesterday's WOD

Warmup: 1/2 mile easy jog; CFWU x 3 (less situps, back extensions); 1/4 mile easy jog

Run 800m: 2:57
100 situps ("Army style", anchored): 7:34
100 back extension ("supermans"): 4:41
Run 800m: 3:01

Total: 18:13

I read this article 5 months ago and it inspired me to begin a thorough review of nutrition. I've read three books since then, the best of which, by far was McArdle, Katch & Katch: "Sports and Exercise Nutrion" Lippincott, Williams & Williams, 2005

The Zone Diet isn't promoted as a diet for exercise in McArdle's book but he presents data that supports the 30% protein, 30% Fat, 40% carb diet. However, there are also exceptions. I don't think McArdle would recommend the Zone Diet per se.

I have really struggled with Barry Sear's "Mastering the Zone." One of his suggested snacks (p 72): 1 ounce Turkey, 1/2 orange, 3 almonds. Who can eat just 3 almonds? The complexity of the recipes makes them impractical for me

I think coach Glassman's montra: meat,vegetables, nuts, seeds, little fruit, some starch and no sugar is practical. And do your best to keep the proportions right.

Team Emerald Coast

Did yesterdays WOD today
800m
100s/u
100b/e
800m

Anabel: 16:37

Joey: 13:05

Everything old is new again:

Splendid Specimens:
The History of Nutrition in Bodybuilding
By Randy Roach
The sport called bodybuilding demands the ex-treme in body presentation. No other athletic endeavor requires such high levels of regimentation for muscle development and body fat reduction. To outsiders, such efforts may appear vain and self-centered, even looming out there on the lunatic fringe. Nevertheless, the sport has had considerable influence on other fields of athletics, not to mention the general public.
We must remember that the men (and women) who sweat it out in the gym year after year were using the low-carbohydrate diet long before Dr. Atkins made it popular. Many other dietary strategies of today such as all-raw diets, protein supplementation, eating multiple small meals a day, carbohydrate loading, meal replacement packages and macro-nutrient balancing all derived their initial popularity from the bodybuilding field.

Rest of article:

http://www.westonaprice.org/men/splendidspecimens.html

Sunday 060716
"Fran"

Three rounds, 21-15- and 9 reps, for time of:
95 pound Thruster
Pull-ups

Post time to comments.

10:26 5 seconds faster than last time.

Did 75# thru all rounds, last time I had to switch to 65# after 1st round.
Did pull ups on rings had to break them up . They seemed more difficult to do than on bar.

Hiked Mt. Whitney on Thursday and I may not have been completely recovered from the trek of a lifetime. 14,495' baby!

Couple comments:

We see in many of these debates accusations of some version "corruption by association". For example, people who didn't drink the low fat Kool-Aid, were accused of being in bed with the "meat and fat" industries, generically. This sort of accusation amounts to an unsupportable ad hominem, as it is simply guilt by presumed association. If someone disagrees with you, you don't have to attack their science, you just develop a vague conspiracy theory that "feels" right to you core constituency, and that's sufficient.

Yet, it occurred to me reading this that there are always multiple "thems" in play. Yes, the "Meat and Fat" industries probably squeaked when the Government, based on flimsy science, told the public to buy less of their products. Yet, new business interests arose quickly--and MAY WELL HAVE BEEN IN PLAY BACK THEN--which benefitted financially from the new recommendations, and which even today have incentives to maintain the status quo.

Consider this quote: "The food industry has little incentive to advertise nonproprietary items: broccoli, for instance."

If we compare the fitness and nutrition industries, are there not substantial financial forces invested in the status quo? Over long periods of time, the corporate world can usually be expected to respond to the consumption demands of the public, but if you've spent "x" dollars on a low fat something, you want to get them out of your warehouse.

Thus, you've got private lobbying interests on ALL sides of most issues, not just one, and they are not just lobbying congresspeople, they are lobbying the policy makers themselves, directly or indirectly.

26 YOA, 168.8lbs, 13.5bf%

95# thrusters/jumping pull-ups
21-15-9: 21:04.2

Thrusters were harder than I thought.

Reference last post: wrong day, sorry.

On `The corruption of science by politics`

Check out `TIME TO SEPARATE STATE AND SCIENCE` By David Rasnick Ph.D
found here:http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/data/drstate.htm

Still working out of the 'fitness center' this day.

did some weighted pull ups with their dbs:

45lbx5
50lbx4
55lbx3
65lbx2
75lbx1
85lbx1
85lbx1
95lbx1
100lbx1
100lbx1
100lbx1

(50 lbs was the the highest weight they had and my ankles got pretty tore up from the knurling on holding two at once).

Followed up with 21 thrusters with the 50lb dbs. I had to break it up into two sets: 11 and 10.

Hose tower 8 stories high.
Joe - 8 rounds of one trip up/down and 15 clean/push-press from the floor with 110 lbs - 45 minutes
Joy Beth - 15 trips up/down hose tower

Missed Linda a few days back, so I did it today.

Only had one bar, so lots of time spent transitioning. I switched to dumbell bench press halfway through to speed everything up.

Deadlifts: 95#
Bench: 65#
Cleans (all squat cleans): 45#

31:50

The sets with 7+ reps were broken for DL and cleans.