20RM BSquat (try 65% + 5lbs)
20RM BSquat (try 65% + 5lbs)
Rack Jerk – Heavy Single
20 KB Sqings
50 Double Unders (or try Double Unders for 2:00)
20 KB Swings
FSquats (5 sec/10 sec) – 1RM
Then 80% x3 x3
200m Prolwer Push
25 Air Squats
5 rounds for time of:
20 wall-ball shots, 20-lb. ball to 10-ft. target
75-lb. sumo deadlift high pulls, 20 reps (KB Swings 70/53)
20-inch box jumps, 20 reps
Push presses, 20 reps (75/55)
Row 20 calories
Rest 1 minute
New research shows that males with higher ‘reproductive potential’ are better distance runners. This may have been used by females as a reliable signal of high male genetic quality during our hunter-gatherer past, as good runners are more likely to have other traits of good hunters and providers, such as intelligence and generosity.
Persistence hunting may have been one of the most efficient forms of hunting, and as a consequence may have shaped human evolution
Pre-birth exposure to high levels of the male sex hormone testosterone has already been shown to confer evolutionary advantages for men: strength of sex drive, sperm count, cardiovascular efficiency and spatial awareness, for example.
Now, latest research on marathon runners using finger length as a marker for hormone exposure shows that people who experienced higher testosterone in the womb are also better at distance running – a correlation particularly strong in men, although also present in women.
Researchers say the finding that males with greater “reproductive potential” from an evolutionary standpoint are better distance runners suggests females may have selected for such athletic endurance when mating during our hunter-gatherer past, perhaps because ‘persistence hunting’ – exhausting prey by tirelessly tracking it – was a vital way to get food.
Distance running may also have acted as a positive ‘signal’ for females of desirable male genetics more generally, say researchers: good runners were likely to be better persistence hunters and consequently better providers. This increases the likelihood they would have other key traits of good providers such as intelligence and generosity.
The study was conducted by researchers at the University of Cambridge’s Division of Biological Anthropology and is published today in the journal PLOS ONE.
“The observation that endurance running ability is connected to reproductive potential in men suggests that women in our hunter-gatherer past were able to observe running as a signal for a good breeding partner,” said the study’s lead author Dr Danny Longman.
“It was thought that a better hunter would have got more meat, and had a healthier – and larger – family as a consequence of providing more meat for his family. But hunter-gatherers may have used egalitarian systems with equal meat distribution as we see in remaining tribes today. In which case more meat is not a factor, but the ability to get meat would signal underlying traits of athletic endurance, as well as intelligence – to track and outwit prey – and generosity – to contribute to tribal society. All traits you want passed on to your children,” he said.
Using the largest sample of marathon runners of any study of its kind, Longman and colleagues tested for specific finger lengths known as the 2D:4D digit ratio. Previous studies have showed that those exposed to more prenatal testosterone have a longer ring finger (4th digit) in comparison to their index finger (2nd digit).
This digit ratio is the most accurate known way to tell if an adult was exposed to higher levels of testosterone as a foetus – a proven predictor of the “potential for reproductive success” in men, say researchers.
The team analysed 542 runners (439 men; 103 women) at the Robin Hood half marathon in Nottingham by photocopying hands and taking run times and other key details just after runners crossed the line.
They found that the 10% of men with the most masculine digit ratios were, on average, 24 minutes and 33 seconds faster than the 10% of men with the least masculine digit ratios.
The correlation was also found in women, but was much more pronounced in men, suggesting a stronger evolutionary selection in men for running ability. The 10% of women with the most masculine digit ratios were, on average, 11 minutes and 59 seconds faster than the 10% with the least masculine.
Longman points out that prenatal testosterone exposure is a very small influence on running ability that doesn’t compete with training and muscle strength when it comes to performance, but their unprecedentedly large sample size of over 500 people enabled the team to gather conclusive evidence.
“Humans are hopeless sprinters. Rabbits, for example, are much faster sprinters, despite being fat and round. But humans are fantastically efficient long-distance runners, comparable to wolves and wild coyotes,” said Longman.
“We sweat when most animals would overheat; our tendons and posture are designed to propel our next strides – there was likely a selective pressure for all these benefits during our evolution.”
Persistence hunting is thought to have been one of the earliest forms of human hunting, evolving approximately two million years ago, said Longman.
“You can still see examples of persistence hunting in parts of Africa and Mexico today. Hunters will deliberately choose the hottest time of day to hunt, and chase and track an antelope or gnu over 30 to 40 kilometres for four or five hours. The animal recovers less and less from its running until it collapses exhausted and is easy to kill,” Longman said.
“This may sound crazy, but when a hunter is relatively fit the amount of energy they expend is actually tiny compared to the energy benefits of an antelope-sized animal, for example. Before the domestication of dogs, persistence hunting may have been one of the most efficient forms of hunting, and as a consequence may have shaped human evolution.”
20 rounds or 20 minutes of:
5-Power Cleans (95/65)
Snatch – Work to a heavy single.
Back off to 75% of that heavy single and complete 7 singles. Make em look good!
Snatch Grip Push Press – use the same weight and get 5 sets of 5.
3 rounds, each for time, of:
20 chest-to-bar pull-ups
30 wall-ball shots, 20-lb. ball
Rest 3 minutes between each round.
Only have time for 1 of the above, pick the Strength WOD
From Breaking Muscle
Clean – Heavy Single
To hit your 1500 KB Swing total for the month, you need to be close to 700…how are you doing? Maybe today will help.
Use your Strict Press max for the weight. Complete 4 sets of AMRAP Bench Press
10 rounds of:
15 KB Swings
You never hear anyone say, “I shouldn’t have eaten all those Skittles, they’re totally going straight to my endocrine system.” But based on new evidence from the researchers behind SugarScience.org, sugar might be more of a health risk than more people realize.
Scientists from University of California, San Francisco; University of California, Davis; and Emory University reviewed a combined 8,000 clinical research studies on sugar’s role in the metabolic system, then compiled all their unbiased findings in a user-friendly website, which describes itself as “the unsweetened truth.”
The site’s focus? The areas where the researchers say the medical data is strongest: diabetes, liver disease, and heart disease.
The scientists are no longer simply focusing on the relationship between sugar and obesity—a concept espoused so often that we’ve become numb to its meaning. They’re trying to explicitly tell people that this is a matter of life and death. If you consistently overconsume sugar, your risk of chronic dietary disease will increase significantly.
The rotating infographics that dominate the home page display simple but poignant messages set against cartoon backgrounds. “Added sugar is hiding in 74 percent of our packaged food.” “Too much fructose can damage your liver, just like too much alcohol.” “The average American consumes 66 pounds of added sugar per year.”
If you dig deeper into the site you can find the extensive methodologies used to put together the data, but it’s clear that the site is more concerned with informing people than espousing scientific jargon. It also offers a SugarScience resource kit that contains easily shareable information, a SugarScience Alerts System that sends you pertinent new data, and an invitation to Ask a Sugar Scientist any question that hasn’t been answered on the site.
This is really an extension of the war on sugar that was spearheaded by SugarScience founder Robert Lustig, a professor of endocrinology at UCSF School of Medicine, back in 2009. He published a 90-minute lecture on YouTube called “Sugar: The Bitter Truth” that has more than five million views to date in which he argues that sugar’s effect on the endocrine system should legally classify it as a toxin.
SugarScience’s launch was strategically timed with the end of the midterm elections. Since many of the researchers are employees of public universities, they had to seem impartial toward Berkeley’s and San Francisco’s proposed excise taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages.
But now that Berkeley’s one-cent-per-ounce tax has passed, making it the first tax of its kind in the U.S., SugarScience seems to be in a perfect position to capitalize on that sweet, sweet, anti-sugar momentum.
We were to squat today. It is too nice not to run. so…
Run 400 meters
Run 400 meters
Run 400 meters
Run 400 meters
From The Atlantic
Math has never been my strong suit. I opted out of it at every turn, particularly in college, where I enrolled in linguistics to fulfill my quantitative reasoning requirement. I even tried to overcome my aversion by taking a second whack at Algebra in my forties, but sadly, I still hand restaurant bills to my husband when it’s time to calculate the tip, and have long since given up on helping my teenage son with his Algebra II homework. Despite my negative feelings about math, I am a huge fan of Steven Strogatz, author, columnist, and Professor of Applied Mathematics at Cornell University.
I follow Steve Strogatz on Twitter, and while I don’t always understand his tweets (“Would you like Bayesian or frequentist statistics with that?”), I do find them fascinating. When Steve tweeted that he’d be teaching an introductory math course for non-math majors at Cornell University (#old_dog#new_tricks#excited), I emailed and asked him to tell me more. Why would a veteran professor of higher math choose to spend a semester in the company of undergraduates, many of whom would rather visit the dentist than spend two hours a week exploring mathematical concepts?
The short answer is that Strogatz has discovered a certain thrill in rectifying the crimes and misdemeanors of math education. Strogatz asks his students, more than half of them seniors, to provide a “mathematical biography.” Their stories reveal unpleasant experiences with math along the way. Rather than question the quality of the teaching they received, they blamed math itself—or worse, their own intelligence or lack of innate talent. Strogatz loves the challenge, “There’s something remarkable about working with a group of students who think they hate math or find it boring, and then turning them around, even just a little bit.”
Strogatz believes the key to this turnaround lies not in the material, or the inherent talent of the student, but in changing the way math is taught to liberal arts majors. The curriculum he teaches is called Discovering the Art of Mathematics: Mathematical Inquiry in the Liberal Arts (DAoM); it was developed at Westfield State University byJulian Fleron and three colleagues and funded by a grant by the National Science Foundation. The DAoM approach, which is publicly available through a free collection of books and workshops, is rooted in inquiry-based learning: It focuses on student-led investigations into problems, experiments, and prompts. The typical mathematics for liberal arts class on the other hand, is typically presented in lecture format, usually by non-tenure track instructors, and only serves to further disenfranchise students, Fleron claims.
Twelve years of compulsory education in mathematics leaves us with a populace that is proud to announce they cannot balance their checkbook, when they would never share that they were illiterate. What we are doing—and the way we are doing it—results in an enormous Read more Monday 141027