Wednesday 160608

Double Helen

1200 meter run
63 kettlebell swings (1.5 pood)
36 pull-ups
800 meter run
42 kettlebell swings
24 pull-ups
400 meters run
21 kettlebell swings
12 pull ups

30:00 time cap!

Wednesday 150107


Rowing “Helen” + 1

500m Row
21-KB Swings

From The New York Times

How Exercise Keeps Us Young

CreditGetty Images

Active older people resemble much younger people physiologically, according to a new study of the effects of exercise on aging. The findings suggest that many of our expectations about the inevitability of physical decline with advancing years may be incorrect and that how we age is, to a large degree, up to us.

Aging remains a surprisingly mysterious process. A wealth of past scientific research has shown that many bodily and cellular processes change in undesirable ways as we grow older. But science has not been able to establish definitively whether such changes result primarily from the passage of time — in which case they are inevitable for anyone with birthdays — or result at least in part from lifestyle, meaning that they are mutable.

This conundrum is particularly true in terms of inactivity. Older people tend to be quite sedentary nowadays, and being sedentary affects health, making it difficult to separate the effects of not moving from those of getting older.

In the new study, which was published this week in The Journal of Physiology, scientists at King’s College London and the University of Birmingham in England decided to use a different approach.

They removed inactivity as a factor in their study of aging by looking at the health of older people who move quite a bit.

“We wanted to understand what happens to the functioning of our bodies as we get older if we take the best-case scenario,” said Stephen Harridge, senior author of the study and director of the Centre of Human and Aerospace Physiological Sciences at King’s College London.

To accomplish that goal, the scientists recruited 85 men and 41 women aged between 55 and 79 who bicycle regularly. The volunteers were all serious recreational riders but not competitive athletes. The men had to be able to ride at least 62 miles in six and a half hours and the women 37 miles in five and a half hours, benchmarks typical of a high degree of fitness in older people.

The scientists then ran each volunteer through a large array of physical and cognitive tests. The scientists determined each cyclist’s endurance capacity, muscular mass and strength, pedaling power, metabolic health, balance, memory function, bone density and reflexes. They also had the volunteers complete the so-called Timed Up and Go test, during which someone stands up from a chair without using his or her arms, briskly walks about 10 feet, turns, walks back and sits down again.

The researchers compared the results of cyclists in the study against each other and also against standard benchmarks of supposedly normal aging. If a particular test’s numbers were similar among the cyclists of all ages, the researchers considered, then that measure would seem to be more dependent on activity than on age.

As it turned out, the cyclists did not show their age. On almost all measures, their physical functioning remained fairly stable across the decades and was much closer to that of young adults than of people their age. As a group, even the oldest cyclists had younger people’s levels of balance, reflexes, metabolic health and memory ability.

And their Timed Up and Go results were exemplary. Many older people require at least 7 seconds to complete the task, with those requiring 9 or 10 seconds considered to be on the cusp of frailty, Dr. Harridge said. But even the oldest cyclists in this study averaged barely 5 seconds for the walk, which is “well within the norm reported for healthy young adults,” the study authors write.

Some aspects of aging did, however, prove to be ineluctable. The oldest cyclists had less muscular power and mass than those in their 50s and early 60s and considerably lower overall aerobic capacities. Age does seem to reduce our endurance and strength to some extent, Dr. Harridge said, even if we exercise.

But even so, both of those measures were higher among the oldest cyclists than would be considered average among people aged 70 or above.

All in all, the numbers suggest that aging is simply different in the active.

“If you gave this dataset to a clinician and asked him to predict the age” of one of the cyclists based on his or her test results, Dr. Harridge said, “it would be impossible.” On paper, they all look young.

Of course, this study is based on a single snapshot of an unusual group of older adults, Dr. Harridge said. He and his colleagues plan to retest their volunteers in five and 10 years, which will provide better information about the ongoing effects of exercise on aging.

But even in advance of those results, said Dr. Harridge, himself almost 50 and an avid cyclist, this study shows that “being physically active makes your body function on the inside more like a young person’s.”

Thursday 140717


Hang Clean – Heavy Single.
Then take 80% of that heavy single and perform 4 sets of 5 FSquat Reps


If you hate Burpees like I do, this is an interesting read.  From the Spartan Race Blog


by Dr. Jeff Godin, Ph.D., CSCS, & Spartan Coach

Occasionally we slip up with our diets and sneak in some junk calories. When we do, we have to pay the price…In Burpees!  At Spartan Coaching HQ we have been conducting research to quantify energy expenditure during the Burpee exercise.  Here is what we found:


Calories (kcals)

burpees for 130lb individual

burpees for 180lb individual

1 large French Fries




1 IPA beer




1 Slice of Dominos Peperoni Pizza




1 8 ounce Ted’s Bison Cheesburger




1 scoop of Ben Jerry’s Cookie Dough ice cream




1 12” Roast beef sub from Subway




1 Cola soft drink




1 Fried Calamari Appetizer




1 Plain Bagel




1 Slice of Cheescake




1 Egg McMuffin Sandwich




1 Cadbury Creme Egg




 First we calculated the amount of work being performed during the Burpee. We calculated work as:

–  Work (w) = force (f) x distance (d)
–  f = weight of the individual in kilograms
–  d = distance from the floor to the maximal height of the head during the jump in meters.


Male Athlete A: Read more Thursday 140717

Tuesday 140520


1200m Run
60-KB Swings*

800m Run
40-KB Swings

400m Run
20-KB Swings

*1.5 pood for men and 1 pood  for women

From The New York Times

The problem is that this advice doesn’t work, at least not for most people over the long term. In other words, your New Year’s resolution to lose weight probably won’t last through the spring, let alone affect how you look in a swimsuit in July. More of us than ever are obese, despite an incessant focus on calorie balance by the government, nutrition organizations and the food industry.

But what if we’ve confused cause and effect? What if it’s not overeating that causes us to get fat, but the process of getting fatter that causes us to overeat?

The more calories we lock away in fat tissue, the fewer there are circulating in the bloodstream to satisfy the body’s requirements. If we look at it this way, it’s a distribution problem: We have an abundance of calories, but they’re in the wrong place. As a result, the body needs to increase its intake. We get hungrier because we’re getting fatter.

It’s like edema, a common medical condition in which fluid leaks from blood vessels into surrounding tissues. No matter how much water they drink, people with edema may experience unquenchable thirst because the fluid doesn’t stay in the blood, where it’s needed. Similarly, when fat cells suck up too much fuel, calories from food promote the growth of fat tissue instead of serving the energy needs of the body, provoking overeating in all but the most disciplined individuals.

We discuss this hypothesis in an article just published in JAMA, The Journal of the American Medical Association. According to this alternative view, factors in the environment have triggered fat cells in our bodies to take in and store excessive amounts of glucose and other calorie-rich compounds. Since fewer calories are available to fuel metabolism, the brain tells the body to increase calorie intake (we feel hungry) and save energy (our metabolism slows down). Eating more solves this problem temporarily but also accelerates weight gain. Cutting calories reverses the weight gain for a short while, making us think we have control over our body weight, but predictably increases hunger and slows metabolism even more.

Consider fever as another analogy. A cold bath will lower body temperature temporarily, but also set off biological responses — like shivering and constriction of blood vessels — that work to heat the body up again. In a sense, the conventional view of obesity as a problem of calorie balance is like conceptualizing fever as a problem of heat balance; technically not wrong, but not very helpful, because it ignores the apparent underlying biological driver of weight gain.

This is why diets that rely on consciously reducing calories don’t usually work. Only one in six overweight and obese adults in a nationwide survey reports ever having maintained a 10 percent weight loss for at least a year. (Even this relatively modest accomplishment may be exaggerated, because people tend to overestimate their successes in self-reported surveys.) In studies by Dr. Rudolph L. Leibel of Columbia and colleagues, when lean and obese research subjects were underfed in order to make them lose 10 to 20 percent of their weight, their hunger increased and metabolism plummeted. Conversely, overfeeding sped up metabolism.

For both over- and under-eating, these responses tend to push weight back to where it started — prompting some obesity researchers to think in terms of a body weight “set point” that seems to be predetermined by our genes.

But if basic biological responses push back against changes in body weight, and our set points are predetermined, then why have obesity rates — which, for adults, are almost three times what they were in the 1960s — increased so much? Most important, what can we do about it?

As it turns out Read more Tuesday 140520

Thursday 140410



400m Run
21 Thrusters
21 Kettlebell Swings
21 Pull Ups

400m Run
15 Thrusters
15 Kettlebell Swings
15 Pull Ups

400m Run
9 Thrusters
9 Kettlebell Swings
9 Pull Ups

From Vogue

CrossFit Phenom Annie Thorisdottir: The Fittest Woman on the Planet?

by Adam Green | photographed by Bruce Weber


For Annie Thorisdottir, the fittest woman on the planet, working out means pushing her body to the outer limits of performance—and crushing it.

If you were to search a collection of stock images for the words women and exercise, you’d end up staring at a lot of willowy young moms standing in tree pose and skinny aerobics instructors brandishing pastel-colored dumbbells. Earlier this year, though, Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg’s nonprofit LeanIn.Org foundation teamed with Getty Images to create a collection of photos that portray women in a more empowering light. The athletes it depicts have actual, visible muscles, which they can be seen putting to use in pictures with such descriptions as “Woman pressing barbell overhead in CrossFit gym,” “Woman climbing rope in CrossFit gym,” and “Smiling group of friends working out in CrossFit gym.”

CrossFit—the high-intensity workout that, depending on whom you ask, will either turn you into a superhuman or leave you in pieces—has clearly reached a tipping point as more and more women embrace its credo that, as one officially branded T-shirt puts it, “strength is beautiful.” But stock images are one thing. The face—and body—of that emerging paradigm belongs to Annie Thorisdottir, a 24-year-old Iceland native and two-time CrossFit Games champion who, after being sidelined by an injury last year, is returning to competition to try and reclaim her title as the fittest woman on Earth.

That last name translates as “Thor’s daughter,” and one look at her as she goes through her paces in front of a crowd of buff hipsters in a Brooklyn gym last spring makes the connection to the hammer-wielding Norse god clear: the long, strawberry-blonde hair; the ice-blue, almond-shaped eyes; and the complexion glowing with rude health, not to mention broad shoulders, powerful thighs, and take-no-prisoners abs. It’s a body built by (and for) hoisting barbells, flipping tractor tires, hauling sandbags, running, rowing, and, yes, swinging hammers.

Thorisdottir is currently dominating, with relentless efficiency, in a ten-minute contest of presses, dead lifts, and box jumps, against the American Lindsey Valenzuela (who will go on to finish second at the 2013 Games). “CrossFit is about living a healthy life and finding new ways to challenge myself,” Thorisdottir says, dressed for battle in a white tank top, tiny red shorts, and striped knee socks. “How can I push myself to find out what my body’s capable of? Where can it take me?”

So far, it’s helped make her (along with the three-time men’s champion Rich Froning, a former firefighter from Tennessee) CrossFit’s first real star, winning her endorsements from such brands as Reebok. The company has sent her around the world as an ambassador, added “Annie” sneakers and T-shirts to its line of apparel, and introduced her to a wider audience in a TV spot that shows her going head-to-head in the gym with former NFL wide receiver Chad Johnson.

The CrossFit recipe was first cooked up in the mid-nineties in a small gym in Santa Cruz, California, where an iconoclastic personal trainer named Greg Glassman tortured his clients with medieval workouts that combined weightlifting, gymnastics, and calisthenics. From the start, Glassman’s classes were equally divided between men and women—a ratio that’s held as CrossFit has exploded from a cultish regimen with a handful of affiliate gyms (known as boxes) to a global phenomenon with more than 9,000 boxes worldwide. Along the way, it’s evolved into a competitive sport with an annual gladiatorial contest, the CrossFit Games, which offers $275,000 to its champions along with those fittest-on-the-planet titles.

Though Thorisdottir now lives and trains in Reykjavík, she spent the first six years of her life in Vík í Mýrdal, a tiny coastal village two-and-a-half-hours southeast of the capital, and she learned how to navigate the world on its Viking-like terrain. She continues to be drawn to the outdoors (when it’s warm, she runs in the Esjan mountain range, which broods over Reykjavík from across the bay), particularly to spots where nature is at its most intense—Vík í Mýrdal’s wave-lashed black-sand beach, the breathtaking Gullfoss (Golden Falls). When the ice-capped volcano Eyjafjallajökull erupted in the spring of 2010, she and her family made a pilgrimage. “It’s insane how much power is in this earth, and you feel so close to it here,” she says. “It flows through you.”

When I visit Thorisdottir in Reykjavík just before Christmas, she invites me to her parents’ house for a dinner party that includes her two older brothers and their wives and kids. The decor is Scandinavian modern meets ski lodge, replete with a rack of reindeer antlers mounted on the wall—a trophy from one of her father’s hunting expeditions. It is a strapping, healthy-looking clan, and I’m not surprised to learn that the entire assembled throng is devoted to CrossFit.

By her family’s account, Thorisdottir showed signs of being a natural athlete when she was still in diapers, scudding across the floor on her backside instead of crawling. (“It was faster,” she explains.) Soon she was swinging from tabletops, climbing kitchen cabinets, and beating her brothers and cousins in pull-up competitions arranged by her grandfather, once receiving a prize of the Icelandic equivalent of $27—a dollar for each pull-up. “If there was a challenge, especially one with a reward, I had to win it,” Thorisdottir says.

Today she spends most of her time at the gym she co-owns, CrossFit Reykjavík, whose airplane hangar–size training floor is stocked with the tools of her trade—barbells, kettlebells, gymnastics rings, plyometric boxes, medicine balls, rowing ergometers. She trains for 90 minutes to two hours twice a day, five or six days a week, devoting morning sessions to metabolic conditioning and afternoons to strength, with a lot of mobility work and Instagram posts in between. (She also coaches three or four CrossFit classes a day.) Thorisdottir fuels all this activity with a Paleo-ish diet heavy on meat, chicken, fish, and vegetables (but free of rice, bread, pasta, potatoes, and sugar), along with a lot of non-Paleo dairy (she needs the calories). She drinks alcohol only two or three times a year but treats herself to a cheat night of ice cream and chocolate cake every Saturday.

Thorisdottir’s favorite training partner is her boyfriend, Frederik Aegidius, a 26-year-old biotechnology and business student from Denmark who also happens to be Europe’s top-ranked male CrossFit athlete. (They won their respective divisions at the Dubai Fitness Championship last fall, cementing their standing as CrossFit’s First Couple.) When I ask Aegidius how they met, he tells me that a female friend of his—as a joke—told him she’d found the perfect girl for him and then showed him a picture of Thorisdottir performing a dead lift at the 2009 Games.

Thorisdottir covers her eyes. “I was pulling on the bar, and it made me look like I had this insane six-pack,” she says. “And Frederik looked at it and said, ‘I don’t know. . . .’ ”

I point out that it probably didn’t help that the face one makes while hoisting a barbell loaded with a few hundred pounds is not one you’d put forward on, say, a dating profile.

“Annie never makes a face,” Aegidius says.

She also rarely wears anything but workout clothes. Thorisdottir swears she loves dressing up—and says that she’s come to learn what’s flattering to her body (sleeveless dresses that are clingy and low-cut) and what’s not (shirts too short to cover her midriff). And the Reebok Nanos on her feet notwithstanding, she’s got a thing for a different kind of high-performance shoe. “As a treat for winning the 2012 Games, I bought myself two pairs of heels—one Valentino and one Prada,” she says.

As a child, Thorisdottir practiced gymnastics and made the national team before quitting at age fifteen because, as she puts it, “I knew that I would never be the best in the world.” She took up ballet, studying at the Icelandic Ballet School until one day in class when she caught a glimpse of her broad shoulders in the mirror and realized, she says, “this wasn’t the body of a ballerina.” Next she tried pole vaulting and became the national champion for two years running, with an eye on the 2012 Olympics. In the end, though, she decided “it was too much of one thing, over and over.”

At a boot camp–style exercise class, she caught the eye of her instructor, Evert Víglundsson, a former soccer player and ballroom dancer who saw something in her immediately. “The efficiency of her movement was just amazing—nothing wasted, no struggle,” he recalls. Víglundsson, who had recently discovered CrossFit, encouraged her to enter the upcoming CrossFit regionals, where, he says, “she absolutely crushed it,” winning herself a spot at the 2009 Games in Aromas, California.

Thorisdottir, who would soon become known on the circuit as the indomitable “Iceland Annie,” worked her way up to winning first place in the 2011 Games, and did it again in 2012. But a few months later she severely injured herself lifting weights. She had just set a personal record of nearly 285 pounds for her back squat and, as she puts it, “got greedy,” moving on to dead lifts without an adequate warm-up. “I could feel something moving in my back, and right away I knew that this was bad,” she says. When she collapsed to the floor and couldn’t move her legs, she started to panic. The pain was so intense that it took paramedics more than an hour to get her into an ambulance. An MRI revealed that she had a bulging disc in her back, and she spent the next week in bed on painkillers, crying.

Within six weeks, though, she started rehab and returned to the gym; two months after that, she was competing in the CrossFit Open. But then she reinjured her back, this time causing nerve damage that rendered her left leg numb for months, forcing her to sit out the Games. While recovering, Thorisdottir found a pair of physical therapists in London who taught her a series of exercises designed to help nerves work more freely. Under the supervision of her coaches, she slowly returned to lifting light weights, focusing on proper form and incorporating exercises to strengthen the attachment of her core muscles to her spine. By the time I see her work out in Reykjavík, she is executing heavy snatches and thrusters with a well-oiled precision, power, and grace that she makes look effortless. Now, with little more than three months until the July Games in Carson, California, Thorisdottir can clean-and-jerk 210 pounds and is back to heavy dead lifts. “My legs are getting stronger really fast,” she says.

“She doesn’t relax,” says Carl Paoli, Thorisdottir’s current gymnastics guru. “She thrives under pressure. When you take her to the edge where she’s about to break, she will turn around, look at you, and say, ‘Watch me do this.’ And she gets it done.”

If Thorisdottir manages to get it done at this summer’s Games, it will mean another big payday, along with bragging rights as the first three-time women’s champ. The renewed exposure will also give her the leverage to expand her roster of sponsorships beyond the realm of protein powders, knee braces, and CrossFit gear. That’s not what’s driving her, though. Looking back on the first days after her injury, she remembers how vulnerable and helpless she felt, scared that she might never walk, much less compete, again. “Of course I want to win the Games, but I want to do it to show people that if there’s something you want, no matter what happens, you can find a way to do it—if there’s an obstacle in your way, you have to figure out how to get over it.”

She also wants to inspire women, especially young girls, to focus more on what their bodies can do than on how they look. “I’m not preaching that everyone should try to become a CrossFit champion,” she says. “But I want to show them that training can give them more confidence—and that being strong is beautiful.”

Monday 140407

For all of our UK fans (no not you Doug)…Go Wildcats!


Texas Squats Day 2 Week 1

65% of your FSquat 1RM x 7 FSquats and 13 BSquats


“Helen” – Lets go Heavy (2 pood M/44 lbs F)

From Gallup

Boulder, Colo., Residents Still Least Likely to Be Obese

Nearly two in five are obese in Huntington-Ashland, the highest rate in the nation

by Rebecca Riffkin

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Boulder, Colo., continues to have the lowest obesity rate in the nation, at 12.4%. Boulder has had the lowest obesity rate nearly every year since Gallup and Healthways began measuring in 2008, with the exception of 2009. Residents of Huntington-Ashland, W.Va.-Ky.-Ohio, were the most likely to be obese in 2012-2013, at 39.5%.

Least Obese U.S. Communities Most Obese U.S. Communities

Adult obesity rates are above 15% in all but one of the 189 metro areas that Gallup and Healthways surveyed in 2012 and 2013. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Healthy People 2010 program had a goal of reducing obesity to 15% in each state. No state and only one U.S. metro area has achieved this goal.

Huntington-Ashland has been among the 10 most obese communities every year since 2008. The obesity rate for the most obese metro area in 2008 — Binghamton, N.Y., at 34.6% — is lower than the obesity rates found in five most obese cities from 2012-2013.

These data reflect the state level results for 2013, which found that Mississippi and West Virginia were the most obese states and Montana and Colorado were the least. Three areas in Colorado — Boulder, Fort Collins-Loveland, and Denver-Aurora — were among the communities with the 10 lowest obesity rates.

Nationwide, the U.S. obesity rate increased to 27.1% in 2013, the highest Gallup and Healthways have recorded since tracking began in 2008. Obesity rates have increased in many communities since 2011, including a 3.5-percentage-point uptick in Huntington-Ashland.

Gallup and Healthways track U.S. obesity levels as part of the Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index, using Americans’ self-reported height and weight to calculate Body Mass Index (BMI) scores. BMI scores of 30 or higher are considered obese.

Gallup interviewed at least 300 adults aged 18 and older in each of 189 MSAs. Each MSA sample is weighted to match the demographic characteristics of that area. Gallup categorizes U.S. metro areas according to the U.S. Office of Management and Budget’s definitions for Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs)

Memphis Is Most Obese Large Community

Among large communities with populations above 1 million, Memphis, Tenn.-Miss.-Ark., had the highest obesity rate, at 31.9%, while Denver-Aurora and San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, Calif., tied for the lowest at 19.3%.

The average obesity rate for all large communities was 25.7%, almost two points below the national average. None of the large communities designated as having the highest obesity rates ranked among the communities of all sizes with the 10 highest obesity rates. These findings suggest that residents in smaller communities are more likely to be obese than those living in larger communities.

Least Obese Major Communities Most Obese Major U.S. Communities

Compare obesity rates across large, medium, and small metro areas.


Not only is Colorado the state with the second-lowest obesity rate in the nation, but three of its metro areas — Boulder, Fort Collins-Loveland, and Denver-Aurora — are listed among the 10 communities with the lowest obesity rates. This may be because Colorado is known for its outdoor spaces and activities, which attracts active residents and encourages residents to live healthy lifestyles. Colorado has ranked among the top 10 states for frequent exercise every year since Gallup began tracking.

In two U.S. communities, Huntington-Ashland and McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, Texas, nearly two in five residents are obese. Nationally, obesity rates may be rising because of healthy eating habits worsening in 2013. Obesity is linked to lower worker productivity, which could negatively affect local and national economies

“Rising obesity rates have significant health consequences for both individuals and communities of all sizes. Numerous social, environmental, economic, and individual factors may all contribute to physical inactivity and consumption of less healthy foods, two lifestyle behaviors linked to obesity,” says Janna Lacatell, Healthways Lifestyle Solutions Director. “In order to combat the trend and encourage individuals to make healthier choices, community-based policy and environmental approaches can, and should, be used.”

Programs focused on making healthy eating habits and active lifestyles the easy choice for residents could do a lot to help lower obesity rates in communities across the country. With the national obesity rate at an all-time high, a focus on lowering obesity rates at the local level could be an effective way to reduce the obesity rate and its negative effects on the economy and individuals.

Explore and compare obesity data by metro area using Gallup’s U.S. Community Well-Being Tracking Interactive.

Survey Methods

Results are based on telephone interviews conducted as part of the Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index survey Jan. 2-Dec. 29, 2012, and Jan. 2-Dec. 30, 2013, with a random sample of 531,630 adults, aged 18 and older, living in metropolitan areas in the 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia, selected using random-digit-dial sampling. Two years of data were aggregated together to enable the same number of reportable cities as in prior years, when the overall annual data collection exceeded 350,000 interviews per year compared to 178,072 interviews conducted in 2013. At least 300 cases are required per metro area for reporting.

The metro areas referenced in this article are based on the Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) as defined by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget. In many cases, more than one city is included in the same MSA. The San Jose, Calif., metropolitan statistical area, for example, also includes the smaller nearby cities of Sunnyvale and Santa Clara in addition to San Jose itself. Each respondent is attributed to his or her MSA based on the self-report of his or her ZIP code, and all metro areas had at least 300 completed surveys in the 2012-2013 data collection period.

Maximum expected error ranges for the Well-Being Index and the sub-index scores vary according to MSA size, ranging from less than 1 point for the largest cities represented to ±1.5 points for the smallest cities.

Interviews are conducted with respondents on landline telephones and cellular phones, with interviews conducted in Spanish for respondents who are primarily Spanish-speaking. Each sample of national adults includes a minimum quota of 50% cellphone respondents and 50% landline respondents, with additional minimum quotas by time zone within region. Landline and cellular telephone numbers are selected using random-digit-dial methods. Landline respondents are chosen at random within each household on the basis of which member had the most recent birthday.

Samples are weighted to correct for unequal selection probability, nonresponse, and double coverage of landline and cell users in the two sampling frames. They are also weighted to match the national demographics of gender, age, race, Hispanic ethnicity, education, region, population density, and phone status (cellphone only/landline only/both, and cellphone mostly). Demographic weighting targets are based on the most recent Current Population Survey figures for the aged 18 and older U.S. population. Phone status targets are based on the most recent National Health Interview Survey. Population density targets are based on the most recent U.S. census. All reported margins of sampling error include the computed design effects for weighting.

In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.

For more details on Gallup’s polling methodology, visit

Saturday 140315

Beware the Ides of March!


Snatch – Heavy Single

Then take 80% of that heavy single x2 x5


“Helen” (push ups replaces pull-ups)

From PJ Media

The Deadlift: 3 Reasons Why Just Picking Up Heavy Things Replaces Most of Your Gym

The easy-to-learn movement that strengthens everyone’s everything.

MARK RIPPETOE – March 13, 2014 – 10:00 am

Seatlle Starting Strength Seminar

The deadlift may be the simplest and easiest exercise to learn in all of barbell training. You pick up a loaded barbell and set it back down, keeping the bar in contact with your legs the whole way. There are a few subtle complications — the bar should move up and down the legs in a vertical line over the middle of the foot, the bar should start from a position directly over the mid-foot, and you should keep your back flat when you pull. But that’s really about all there is to it. The deadlift is one of the basic movements of which strength training is composed.

Pulling things off the ground is a part of your human heritage, and bending down to pick them up is what your knees and hips are for. With the bar in your hands and your feet against the floor, your whole body is completely involved in the exercise, which means the deadlift makes the whole body strong. It would be very difficult to invent a more natural exercise for the body than picking up a progressively heavier barbell.

“Kinetic chain” is an exercise term that refers to the musculoskeletal components (the “links”) of an exercise between the load (the barbell) and the base of support (your feet against the floor). The kinetic chain in the deadlift is essentially the entire body, and everything between hands and floor is doing its anatomically-determined proportion of the work of moving the bar. This means that your legs, hips, back, lats, arms, and grip contribute the fraction of the lifting that their individual positions on the skeleton and their relationships to each other permit.

Here’s the best part about barbell training: if you use good technique, your anatomy sorts out each bodypart’s contribution so that you don’t have to.

These large exercises — essentially normal human movement patterns loaded with a barbell to make them progressively heavier — eliminate the need for dozens of smaller exercises, and the strength you obtain is directly applicable to your job of being an active human.

Deadlifts are important, and you should be doing them. Here’s 3 reasons why…


1. The deadlift is one of the contested events in the sport of powerlifting.

If you look it up on YouTube, you will see large hairy men yelling loudly as they pull enormous weights from the floor. The current record in the deadlift is in excess of 1,000 pounds, the women’s record is over 600, and both lifters walked safely and proudly away from the platform. So, calm yourself. Be not afraid. The same movement you see at the powerlifting contest can be safely used by anyone to develop a stronger back and legs. You just have to start with a lighter weight.

The barbell deadlift is safer than picking up a three-year-old kid, because the bar can be placed directly over the middle of the feet, the body’s center of balance. The ability to keep the barbell balanced directly over the mid-foot as you pull it from the floor up to the lockout position enables very heavy weights to be safely handled. And heavy weight is what makes people strong.

A barbell is 1.25 inches in diameter, is engraved with a knurled pattern, and the weight plates slide onto sleeves on the ends of its seven-foot length. It therefore fits nicely in the grip, and can be centered directly above the middle of your foot, the natural balance point against the floor. Kept in this position during the movement, the load exerts no net leverage on your balance while the bar travels up and down. The deadlift is therefore a mechanically efficient, safe way to lift a weight.

A correct deadlift is performed with the back in “extension” — the normal anatomical position of the spine, which looks “flat” from the side during a deadlift. It is held rigid in extension by the back muscles, the abdominals, and all the smaller muscles that lay between the ribcage and the pelvis that form what is essentially a cylinder of muscular support around the spine. These muscles get so much work during the deadlift that most people have no real reason to do situps or any other back exercises.harperdeadliftc

2. The muscles that extend your knees and hips operate the knee and hip joints, which in turn apply the force to the bones of your legs that overcomes the load on the bar and moves it up.

Your back, Read more Saturday 140315