Author Topic: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?  (Read 24888 times)

Jamesqf

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4047
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #50 on: March 01, 2014, 10:56:01 AM »
Firstly I would say if we are looking to define a standard it should be a STANDARD, no whining like 'oh but I am a weight lifter so I get out of the running part' a standard is a standard.  I would advocate a universal standard for men under say 40 and slightly different numbers for women under 40.  Then above that pull things back a bit.

Been done: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Marine_Corps_Physical_Fitness_Test 

Quote
Also I might remove the biking and almost definitely the swimming as these are not 100% testing fitness but are in large part testing if you have trained to bike or trained to swim in past.

True, just as you use different muscles for cross-country skiing, so I'm always a bit sore the first few weeks of winter.  Then there's the appropriateness: I've no idea what my max bench press would be, 'cause I've never tried.  But I can load a pickup full of 8' logs...

AlanStache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1890
  • Age: 40
  • Location: South East Virginia
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #51 on: March 01, 2014, 11:11:11 AM »
Worked with a guy that left to join the Marines, he has maintained perfect 300 scores on that test. 

At first I pegged him as just some lifter that never looked twice at a treadmill but a about three weeks after starting in the office him he mentioned doing like a 40 min 10k over the weekend.

He is fit. 

Albert

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1254
  • Location: Switzerland
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #52 on: March 01, 2014, 11:14:50 AM »
If you are a "fitness freak" go for it, but otherwise I think what the original poster suggested is asking for way too much… I could bike 50 km without problems (have done) and probably more (haven't), but there is no chance I could swim a mile or do 100 pushups in 2 min.

Nords

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3199
  • Age: 59
  • Location: Oahu
    • Military Retirement & Financial Independence blog
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #53 on: March 01, 2014, 05:06:49 PM »
I finally dragged up that oft-repeated Heinlein quote:

Proof that you haven't been reading the whole thread.  I posted the quote yesterday :-)

or you're not just on my ignore list ;-)
Heh.

TomTX

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3598
  • Location: Texas
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #54 on: March 01, 2014, 07:10:02 PM »
Okay, we need a little clarification on the bench press thing.

Are you saying, "Bench press your bodyweight, 5 reps" or "Bench press 5x your bodyweight"?

Because it is reading like the latter, which is just unreasonable. If it's the former - it's in the right range, for a guy in his 20s-40s.

Baseline for lifting standards from Rippetoe's* book:

http://www.crossfit.com/cf-journal/WLSTANDARDS.pdf

"Novice" should be about the target for these lifts... which is roughly 1x bodyweight for men in benchpress, more like 0.65% bodyweight for women.

*Pretty good authority on barbell lifting, especially for new lifters.

sheepstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2424
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #55 on: March 01, 2014, 07:33:35 PM »

Firstly I would say if we are looking to define a standard it should be a STANDARD, no whining like 'oh but I am a weight lifter so I get out of the running part' a standard is a standard.  I would advocate a universal standard for men under say 40 and slightly different numbers for women under 40.  Then above that pull things back a bit. 

Also I might remove the biking and almost definitely the swimming as these are not 100% testing fitness but are in large part testing if you have trained to bike or trained to swim in past.

[ . . . ]

I have known strong runners (with ok marathon times) that were dead after five miles the first time on a bike, uses totally different muscles and unless you have put in the miles you just wont have those muscles.


I feel like that sort of speaks to the benefit of the "picking and choosing" option though.  If you've got extreme accomplishment in some area, that benefits you somewhat in other areas.  The marathon runner is no doubt still better at biking than the average couch potato.

I guess it comes back to the question of whether the list is something to aim for, as in, something you would practice as the OP suggested, vs. something you just pick up and do because of your general fitness, as Jacob suggested.
Personally I'd like to see a list where everyday practical exertion creates the baseline and then you do deliberate activities to round it out.  Put another way, if you have to be putting a ton of training into it, then maybe your everyday activity level is too low. 

Jamesqf

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4047
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #56 on: March 01, 2014, 09:09:47 PM »
Okay, we need a little clarification on the bench press thing.

Are you saying, "Bench press your bodyweight, 5 reps" or "Bench press 5x your bodyweight"?

Because it is reading like the latter, which is just unreasonable. If it's the former - it's in the right range, for a guy in his 20s-40s.

So why would you only want to do 5 reps?  I think of 10 reps per set as a minimum for any exercise - if I can't manage that, I need to drop the weight down.  If I can do more than 20, it's time to up the weight. 

And with free weights, I wouldn't even want to try really heavy lifts without a spotter...

horsepoor

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3178
  • Location: At the Barn
  • Horses: for sanity & poverty!
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #57 on: March 01, 2014, 10:00:38 PM »
Nah, 5-8 reps is good.  High reps aren't generally all that beneficial.  When I get close to my deadlift max, I do more like 3 reps/set.

I was thinking about this thread during the last couple miles of my 10-mile run today.  While an athlete can of course focus on and excel in a certain sport or type of exercise, they're all very intertwined, and skill has a lot to do with completing tasks that at first glance seem to only require brute strength/fitness.  For example, today was my first 10-mile run since I ran a half marathon in early November.  I've basically not run more than 5.5 miles for almost 4 months, and I have only been running 2-3 days a week.  Yet I was able to do an 8-miler last week, and the 10 miles today were no problem.  In fact, I was running at about a 9:30 pace when my long-run training pace last year was more like 10:30.  So, my running has benefited from my crosstraining, and the fact that I've increased my deadlift from about 125 to 185# over the winter.  My core and legs are way stronger, so each step takes less effort.  I don't think I could have achieved the same type of improvement if I'd continued to run 25 miles per week all winter, but yet my running has benefited.

Also, having the experience to know how to pace a 10 mile run is really important, and someone with that knowledge will be much more successful than an equally fit person who doesn't know how to pace for that distance. 

And for whatever else it's worth, I agree on the cycling thing.  I was trained up and ran a 30K (18.6 miles) last fall, but 5 minutes on a recumbent bike and my quads were screaming bloody murder.

Drew

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 18
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #58 on: March 02, 2014, 07:24:53 AM »
Nah, 5-8 reps is good.  High reps aren't generally all that beneficial.  When I get close to my deadlift max, I do more like 3 reps/set.

I was thinking about this thread during the last couple miles of my 10-mile run today.  While an athlete can of course focus on and excel in a certain sport or type of exercise, they're all very intertwined, and skill has a lot to do with completing tasks that at first glance seem to only require brute strength/fitness.  For example, today was my first 10-mile run since I ran a half marathon in early November.  I've basically not run more than 5.5 miles for almost 4 months, and I have only been running 2-3 days a week.  Yet I was able to do an 8-miler last week, and the 10 miles today were no problem.  In fact, I was running at about a 9:30 pace when my long-run training pace last year was more like 10:30.  So, my running has benefited from my crosstraining, and the fact that I've increased my deadlift from about 125 to 185# over the winter.  My core and legs are way stronger, so each step takes less effort.  I don't think I could have achieved the same type of improvement if I'd continued to run 25 miles per week all winter, but yet my running has benefited.

Also, having the experience to know how to pace a 10 mile run is really important, and someone with that knowledge will be much more successful than an equally fit person who doesn't know how to pace for that distance. 

And for whatever else it's worth, I agree on the cycling thing.  I was trained up and ran a 30K (18.6 miles) last fall, but 5 minutes on a recumbent bike and my quads were screaming bloody murder.

...
« Last Edit: July 09, 2014, 08:08:17 AM by Drew »

TomTX

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3598
  • Location: Texas
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #59 on: March 02, 2014, 08:00:03 AM »
Bodybuilding tends to run to higher reps.

Strength training tends to be fewer reps. The Starting Strength "formula" is 3 sets of 5 reps for each exercise, except for deadlift (1 set, 5 reps). Other starting formulas are similar, 3x5, or 5x5 (though some "5x5" count warmup sets at less than working weights, and only have 3 full-weight sets) for most lifts.

Oh, and if we're talking "bench press" - I'm talking actual barbell, strict "touch the chest, up to lockout" presses, not "move the weight stack 3cm via cable" or "team bench" where the "spotter" is assisting the lift.

AlanStache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1890
  • Age: 40
  • Location: South East Virginia
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #60 on: March 02, 2014, 08:15:22 AM »
I have had good results with going from 10 rep sets to 5 rep sets, the strength gets put on noticeably faster.  Where that fifth rep you are near failure. 

Runners definitely should lift.  But I am not going to put hours into mastering the overhead squatting, cost benefit just is not there.

never heard the term team bench before-beutiful.  five times body weight: wow, not sure but a hand full of men have ever done that, that is really heavy.

I have been thinking of the list not as something specific to train for but a general measure of fitness.

DougStache

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 97
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #61 on: March 02, 2014, 09:13:43 AM »
This has really generated a great discussion, thanks again all who are contributing.

I see a confusion between healthy and fit here. My grandparents and their friends can be used as examples:
bike for very long distances 20 kilometers or so
Turn a potato field (back yard kind) in a day and plant it the next
Bend down and pick something up from the floor without sitting down or loosing balance.
Swim across the lake in the summer because thats what they did very summer.

To me thats healthy, the rest is merely icing on the (fitness) cake!

"have the ability to make love for as long as you like without ever having to think about if you can handle it fitness wise." this would be a life long goal.
This is exactly the type of healthy I am trying to define.  The problem, really, is that many of us have jobs that require us to sit the majority of the day and doing physical work all day isn't really an option unless we switch jobs (delaying FI), or until we actually FIRE.  Because of that, I believe we need a supplemental benchmark.

I am curious if I asked a slightly different question, if the end result of this discussion would be different.  Most of us are answering this question within the context of our current life (which is natural) and within our modern society.  We're factoring in the other problems in our specific life, our desk jobs, our driving addictions, etc.  What if instead the question was:

What should a healthy native american have been capable of?  (Or perhaps going further back, the idea is to move it to a more primitive society)

Interestingly, most of our metrics are still applicable (the exceptions being biking and bench press), but I'm curious if we would change where the bar is set if we weren't thinking inside the box of our own lives.  Thoughts?

Jamesqf

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4047
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #62 on: March 02, 2014, 11:55:02 AM »
Nah, 5-8 reps is good.  High reps aren't generally all that beneficial.  When I get close to my deadlift max, I do more like 3 reps/set.

I don't agree, though of course it depends on what you're aiming for.  If your goal is more endurance than brute strength (as mine is), then I don't think high weigh/low reps helps all that much.  It's sort of like saying that because you're really good at running a 100 yard dash, you could do a marathon.

And of course there's the whole safety thing.  Since I work out at home, I try not to do weights that'd get me in trouble without a spotter.

griffin

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 152
  • Location: Portland, OR
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #63 on: March 02, 2014, 12:17:39 PM »
Quote
Run 5 miles in 45 minutes
Walk 15 miles
Bike 25 miles
Swim 1 mile
Complete 50 pushups within five minutes
Hold a plank for 2 minutes (I'm advocating planks over sit ups; sit ups destroy your back)
Perform 10 pull ups (no kipping!)
Bench Press Bodyweight x5
Looks pretty good to me. http://www.strstd.com/ puts a 5 rep bench of your weight at slightly above the intermediate level. Assuming you'd like the rest of your body to be in equal shape, you should be squatting 1.4x your body weight, deadlifting about 1.66x your body weight and pressing .65x your body weight. If you ask me, deadlifts and squats are a much better indicator of general physical fitness :)
IMO, these goals seem a bit harder than, say, a 2 minute plank or 5 9 minute miles, assuming proper form on everything (i.e. hitting parallel on your squat). I like the idea of this list!

Drew

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 18
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #64 on: March 02, 2014, 12:40:48 PM »
Bodybuilding tends to run to higher reps.

Strength training tends to be fewer reps. The Starting Strength "formula" is 3 sets of 5 reps for each exercise, except for deadlift (1 set, 5 reps). Other starting formulas are similar, 3x5, or 5x5 (though some "5x5" count warmup sets at less than working weights, and only have 3 full-weight sets) for most lifts.

Oh, and if we're talking "bench press" - I'm talking actual barbell, strict "touch the chest, up to lockout" presses, not "move the weight stack 3cm via cable" or "team bench" where the "spotter" is assisting the lift.

True, but they tend to overlap as well.  Powerlifts also train with higher reps sometimes and bodybuilders train with low reps sometimes.  In my experience it really doesn't make much difference as long as you are consistently lifting heavy.  By heavy I mean the heaviest weights you can handle with good form for whatever rep range you are lifting in.  I agree about benching, that's the same definition I'm using.

horsepoor

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3178
  • Location: At the Barn
  • Horses: for sanity & poverty!
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #65 on: March 02, 2014, 02:00:20 PM »
Nah, 5-8 reps is good.  High reps aren't generally all that beneficial.  When I get close to my deadlift max, I do more like 3 reps/set.

I don't agree, though of course it depends on what you're aiming for.  If your goal is more endurance than brute strength (as mine is), then I don't think high weigh/low reps helps all that much.  It's sort of like saying that because you're really good at running a 100 yard dash, you could do a marathon.

And of course there's the whole safety thing.  Since I work out at home, I try not to do weights that'd get me in trouble without a spotter.

I will let my legs know that since they didn't get the memo and are taking me farther, faster than ever after a winter of 8-rep max squatting and deadlifting.

No Name Guy

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 450
  • Location: Western Washington
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #66 on: March 02, 2014, 02:20:08 PM »
Just wondering who here has actually walked 30 miles (fairly) continuously recently?

I once hiked all day.  Can't remember how many actual miles.  But yes, it hurt.  The blisters more than the muscles.

There's a section of the Appalachian Trail called the "Quad State." You start in VA, go through WV, MD, and end in PA. The challenge is to be in 4 states in a 24 hour period. It's not particularly challenging terrain, but it is ~45 miles in 24 hours.

I tried it once. I got ~35 miles in ~16 hours, and I was DONE. And I am reasonably healthy. 30 miles, while doable, is an "Extreme" challenge, not "Normal Activity."

I was going to offer the Appalachian trail as my context of reference too.  Many people I met considered 20 to be a good day.  If you did 20 milers for three days, you were considered to be hauling pretty well and could be understandably pooped each night.  However, that is with a fully loaded pack and rough terrain.  With someone else carrying your water and snacks and on level terrain, 30 seems more reasonable.

Actually, the AT is, IMO, a poor choice for a reference trail.  The east coast trails are meant to be "chest beaters", that is, they were made so people could prove their manliness.  One of the first built east coast trails went straight up a mountain to the top by way of example.  The AT does this as well - few to no switchbacks, lots of hand over hand pulling on roots climbs, goes over every hill it can find, etc.  This ISN'T a trail made to "go places".

Western trails on the other hand were made to get a person from here to there - usually on horseback - they are (or used to be) transportation arteries.  As a result, they're graded differently - typically 10% is a maximum, switch backs are used to lessen the grade, they contour when practical, etc. 

More to the point of "is 30 miles a reasonable standard":  I'd actually say, yes, it is.  Many years before the thru hike, I was having my epiphany moments on hiking and fitness.  I used to think 10 miles a day was "big" when I was out of shape and carried too much crap in the pack - then I had a "forced" 15 mile day at the end of a hike, and realized more was in fact possible.  After that, I started running a bit to get in shape and the next summer, set out to push my hiking envelope.  I picked a flat trail (the Suiattle River Trail) and did a 20 mile out and back day.  The following weekend, I took an over night kit with me (to guard against not being able to make the distance) then did the out and back to Image Lake (with a grand view of Glacier Peak, one of the Washington volcano's), 32 miles.  It had ~4,000 feet of elevation gain total - a 1000 feet over the first 10 miles, then 3000 feet over the next 6.  I think the hiking time was on the order of 12 hours or so.

To put an upper bound on the walking thing - Heather "Anish" Anderson did the PCT in 60 days and change - over 44 miles a day, all self resupplied.  Josh Garret finished the day after her in 59 days and change (although he was supported - supply team meeting him at road crossings).  These are the current unsupported and supported records.

AlanStache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1890
  • Age: 40
  • Location: South East Virginia
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #67 on: March 02, 2014, 02:38:27 PM »
Quote
I don't agree, though of course it depends on what you're aiming for.  If your goal is more endurance than brute strength (as mine is), then I don't think high weigh/low reps helps all that much.  It's sort of like saying that because you're really good at running a 100 yard dash, you could do a marathon.

Everything in moderation but yes even endurance geeks will benefit from some heavy training.  It seems to have helped my running and maybe kept me injury free.  100 yards - marathon this is a bit of a straw man.  I dont know your set up but deadlifts and OH presses can very easily be done heavy w/o a spotter, rubber weights are nice if you have to drop it.  Dropping the bar off you back during a squat is probably a skill you want to be comfortable doing no matter the weight.

jba302

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 623
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #68 on: March 02, 2014, 04:45:43 PM »

Everything in moderation but yes even endurance geeks will benefit from some heavy training.  It seems to have helped my running and maybe kept me injury free.  100 yards - marathon this is a bit of a straw man.

Even marathoners benefit from strength training. The misunderstanding seems to come when people think strength training expressly leads to weight gain and flexibility loss.

dragoncar

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8770
  • Registered member
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #69 on: March 03, 2014, 12:31:40 AM »
Just wondering who here has actually walked 30 miles (fairly) continuously recently?

I once hiked all day.  Can't remember how many actual miles.  But yes, it hurt.  The blisters more than the muscles.

There's a section of the Appalachian Trail called the "Quad State." You start in VA, go through WV, MD, and end in PA. The challenge is to be in 4 states in a 24 hour period. It's not particularly challenging terrain, but it is ~45 miles in 24 hours.

I tried it once. I got ~35 miles in ~16 hours, and I was DONE. And I am reasonably healthy. 30 miles, while doable, is an "Extreme" challenge, not "Normal Activity."

Wow.  When I said "day," I literally meant while the sun was shining.  Not 24 hours of straight hiking.  Yikes!

fallstoclimb

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1084
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #70 on: March 03, 2014, 07:13:00 AM »
I'm annoyed at how male oriented these strength benchmarks are. I trained my bench press all winter and didn't get to half my bodyweight, and while I do have a life goal of being able to complete ONE pull up, it seems that all but the most petite of women have real trouble with this.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2014, 07:17:01 AM by fallstoclimb »

AlanStache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1890
  • Age: 40
  • Location: South East Virginia
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #71 on: March 03, 2014, 07:31:42 AM »
I have mixed opinions on CF but..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlPPfS1KpBc

Basically if you want to do pullups you have to train doing pullups (with bands).  Machine pulldowns only sort of transfer.

Yes this thread has been somewhat male centric, please comment on how you would adjust the standards discussed above for the other half of the population.

re your bench press: Some lifts are harder for some people that others, my deadlifts are strong, but am well below average in the squat.  Am working it but will probably always be below average.

galliver

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1891
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #72 on: March 03, 2014, 07:42:25 AM »
More to the point of "is 30 miles a reasonable standard":  I'd actually say, yes, it is.  Many years before the thru hike, I was having my epiphany moments on hiking and fitness.  I used to think 10 miles a day was "big" when I was out of shape and carried too much crap in the pack - then I had a "forced" 15 mile day at the end of a hike, and realized more was in fact possible.  After that, I started running a bit to get in shape and the next summer, set out to push my hiking envelope.  I picked a flat trail (the Suiattle River Trail) and did a 20 mile out and back day.  The following weekend, I took an over night kit with me (to guard against not being able to make the distance) then did the out and back to Image Lake (with a grand view of Glacier Peak, one of the Washington volcano's), 32 miles.  It had ~4,000 feet of elevation gain total - a 1000 feet over the first 10 miles, then 3000 feet over the next 6.  I think the hiking time was on the order of 12 hours or so.

I think you've made a point that it's *unreasonable* actually. It sounds like you couldn't do it until you started training for it specifically. I'm not saying it's not humanly possible--clearly it is, and I know people who have done pretty strenuous 20ish mile hikes in one day (and had time for a soak in the hot springs halfway). I'm just saying it's not necessarily something any reasonably healthy person can just pick up and do, which is how I've been interpreting this thread.

Firstly I would say if we are looking to define a standard it should be a STANDARD, no whining like 'oh but I am a weight lifter so I get out of the running part' a standard is a standard.  I would advocate a universal standard for men under say 40 and slightly different numbers for women under 40.  Then above that pull things back a bit.

Been done: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Marine_Corps_Physical_Fitness_Test 

I, personally, would hope the armed forces are *more* fit than simply healthy. I have heard that astronauts are tested for general health/fitness, but not particularly strenuous standards. I haven't been able to find their testing, though.

Simple Abundant Living

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 580
    • Simple Abundant Living
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #73 on: March 03, 2014, 08:27:45 AM »

Yes this thread has been somewhat male centric, please comment on how you would adjust the standards discussed above for the other half of the population.


Well, to start, I would say...

-Be able to push 6-10 lbs of baby out of a small orifice without anesthesia.
-Be able to lift rapidly growing infant (in carseat), groceries, and stroller.
-Be able to sprint and chase down your speed demon toddler before he reaches the busy road.
-Be able to do all this with minimal and interrupted sleep.

mom2_3Hs

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 58
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #74 on: March 03, 2014, 08:50:12 AM »
I would say your pace time should be 10 minute miles, not 9 minute miles.  Not wanting to pull the gender thing, but that is a good pace and requires training to maintain.  I could do 10 pull ups in high school, but can't do a single one now...but can carry a 42 lb 5 yr old on a hike for a couple of hours :)

No Name Guy

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 450
  • Location: Western Washington
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #75 on: March 03, 2014, 01:34:36 PM »
More to the point of "is 30 miles a reasonable standard":  I'd actually say, yes, it is.  Many years before the thru hike, I was having my epiphany moments on hiking and fitness.  I used to think 10 miles a day was "big" when I was out of shape and carried too much crap in the pack - then I had a "forced" 15 mile day at the end of a hike, and realized more was in fact possible.  After that, I started running a bit to get in shape and the next summer, set out to push my hiking envelope.  I picked a flat trail (the Suiattle River Trail) and did a 20 mile out and back day.  The following weekend, I took an over night kit with me (to guard against not being able to make the distance) then did the out and back to Image Lake (with a grand view of Glacier Peak, one of the Washington volcano's), 32 miles.  It had ~4,000 feet of elevation gain total - a 1000 feet over the first 10 miles, then 3000 feet over the next 6.  I think the hiking time was on the order of 12 hours or so.

I think you've made a point that it's *unreasonable* actually. It sounds like you couldn't do it until you started training for it specifically. I'm not saying it's not humanly possible--clearly it is, and I know people who have done pretty strenuous 20ish mile hikes in one day (and had time for a soak in the hot springs halfway). I'm just saying it's not necessarily something any reasonably healthy person can just pick up and do, which is how I've been interpreting this thread.


Actually Galliver - you misunderstand.  Prior to the mentioned training, I hadn't done ANY physical training - I was flat ass out of shape.  I managed the mentioned 15 mile day "off the couch".  With only mild running training (never more than 5 miles at a time, usually only 2-3 miles, 3x week) and smart packing, doing a 30 mile day hike became entirely possible.

fallstoclimb

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1084
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #76 on: March 03, 2014, 01:59:44 PM »
I have mixed opinions on CF but..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlPPfS1KpBc

Basically if you want to do pullups you have to train doing pullups (with bands).  Machine pulldowns only sort of transfer.

Yes this thread has been somewhat male centric, please comment on how you would adjust the standards discussed above for the other half of the population.

re your bench press: Some lifts are harder for some people that others, my deadlifts are strong, but am well below average in the squat.  Am working it but will probably always be below average.

I didn't say women can't do pull-ups.  I said it seems all but petite women have trouble with them (and I definitely saw some kipping pull-ups there!). 

The problem is you can't pose the question, 'what should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?' and then include activities that plenty of extremely fit women cannot do.  Many women with decent upper body strength, even after consistent training, will still not be able to bench press their bodyweight 5 times.  I'm not sure there are any women who can get under a bar for a first time and knock out her bodyweight.  Isn't this thread about what someone can do untrained? 

I'm interpreting this list as activities you could knock out today if your life literally depended on it.  You probably need to break this out by age and gender groups to determine standards for a healthy person, but if you insist on one list than I propose the following revisions:

Run 5 miles in 50 minutes (nothing wrong with a 10mm pace, that's pretty honest for an untrained runner)
Swim 1 mile  (lI agree with the previous commenter that this depends too heavily on skill)
Complete 50 10 pushups within five one minute. (The average untrained fit woman will not be able to complete 50 pushups if she carries any weight in her hips.  10, probably, although we are really limited by our weight placement here and shouldn't be considered unhealthy homo sapiens because of it!) 
Perform 10 pull ups (no kipping!)  (I know too many women with life goals of WORKING UP TO ONE pull up.  Most female marines couldn't even train up to 3!)
Bench Press Bodyweight x5  Not only is this an unreasonable expectation for most untrained fit women, I'm not sure what the functional purpose of this is really.  When are you ever on your back required to press a weight above you?  If we are going to include a barbell lift I think squat or deadlift would be the more functional ones to include.

I like the ones I didn't revise above, especially the functional-based ones (moving belongings, walking, touch your toes).

jba302

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 623
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #77 on: March 03, 2014, 02:03:13 PM »
Isn't this thread about what someone can do untrained? 

As a serious question, is this an important question?

rocksinmyhead

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1491
  • Location: Oklahoma
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #78 on: March 03, 2014, 02:04:49 PM »
The pullup # is scary.  For every one of us that can do 20 pullups there are 20 people who can't do one?  And for everyone who can do 10, there are 10 more people who can't do one?

It takes a lot to bring the average down to just 1.

I can't do a pullup. but I can run 31 miles in 5.5 hours... (edited: okay, okay, I probably couldn't do this right now since I only did it once a year and a half ago. I could definitely cover 31 miles right now, but there would be more walk breaks :))

this is an interesting conversation, though :) and what do we mean by "untrained"?

I think things like this list are half of whats wrong with the idea of fitness in America.   We're either grossly obese or obsessed with ridiculously extreme events.    We should strive for something in between.   Aim to be able to carry moderately heavy objects from your house to the car, to be able to walk a reasonable distance, say three miles.   And strive to live an injury free lifestyle.   

+1

I just want to be healthy and not feel held back in my daily life by being unfit (like your examples... be able to carry heavy objects when needed, bike reasonable distances for transportation, etc.). above and beyond this I do run more than I need to because it's good for my mental health, but I am not one of those people who feels a constant need to push their own personal envelope. I set some goals, but man, being injured and unable to run really sucks... just don't want to go there.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2014, 02:12:26 PM by oscarsmom »

fallstoclimb

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1084
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #79 on: March 03, 2014, 02:14:29 PM »
Re: the untrained issue, I guess I'm not sure.  I see now the original caveat that rather than the activities being done without preparation, they would be part of a constant state of fitness, not a peak - so, not someone's PR after training for a year.  There's a lot of vagueness here. 

For example, I suppose there is a chance that with consistent training I could probably get my bench press up to my bodyweight....eventually.  I expect it would take over a year of specifically training that, however.  (And, honestly, I'm really not sure I could ever get there). 

So, is the question about what a healthy homo sapien should be able to do with X amount of training?  Or is it what a healthy homo sapien should be able to do with no warning?  If we're going to keep the standards high enough to require training for many people, does that imply you cannot be a healthy homo sapien without training specific functional movements? 

AlanStache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1890
  • Age: 40
  • Location: South East Virginia
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #80 on: March 03, 2014, 02:35:30 PM »
@fallstoclimb:  I have not been reading this as what an "untrained" ie couch potato can do but rather what someone who regularly exercises should be able to do to consider them-self well rounded and over all fit; I have read the 'untrained' part here to mean that you dont train for this test but train and have general fitness.  That is you might bust out 6.2 miles in 35minutes but you cant do three pushups you are not a "fit" over all person but if you can do 5miles in 45 minutes but bench your body weight five times you are well rounded and fit.  (numbers age and gender scaled.)

I think most of the posts have acknowledged the need for different standards for age and gender.

Just speculating but I would think that if you have a BMI that you were able to do 9 min/miles you would be close to being light enough to do some pullups with training.

Quote
Most female marines couldn't even train up to 3!
Not sure what the marines are putting in the soup but you go into a CF box and you will see plenty of women doing strict pullups and many of them are not twigs or She-Arnolds.  Is all about what you train for, but yes CF does put a good bit of emphasis on pullups.  A-doing a pullup is f-ing cool B-they are a good simple & generic bicep/back exercise.

jba302

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 623
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #81 on: March 03, 2014, 02:54:48 PM »
If we're going to keep the standards high enough to require training for many people, does that imply you cannot be a healthy homo sapien without training specific functional movements?

I see you are on another forum I frequent, you'll recognize this point (and I'll consolidate from my extremely long-winded mega fitness thread posts):  The general adaptation of strength with a simple routine (SS) would cover most of these discussion points. Maybe not the pullups for women, but that is also trainable if focused. You don't need specialization training unless you are looking at high skill movements, like doing a backflip or clearly hurdles in full stride.

Clearly not the cardio so much when heading into medium state work (like the marathon points), but if you can squat over your BW you should be able to handle a pretty decent hiking pace. Adding in some sprint work would cover the low hanging fruit cardio requirements.

plantingourpennies

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 441
  • None.
    • Money, Kittens, Happiness
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #82 on: March 04, 2014, 07:08:16 AM »
This is Mrs PoP, so coming from a woman's perspective.  I think this thread is missing a lot in terms of flexibility and balance.

For men and women, I think these basic flexibility tests are a good starting point:
http://www.sport-fitness-advisor.com/flexibilitytests.html

What's not addressed there, though, is flexibility of your back, so I would think at a minimum a nice looking bridge pose with fingers interlaced or even better a full wheel to maintain the openness of your shoulders and chest (especially to balance out all of those bench presses you're doing) is a great aim for the weekend warrior.

Balance is also key, especially as you age.  So I'd think that a few sets of squats with a lowish weight on an inverted bosu ball (your feet on the flat part) would be a good test of balance while in motion, with poses like a basic tree or warrior III being being good tests of static balance with tree being a minimum and a solid warrior III being a very good static balance. 

prodarwin

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 302
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #83 on: March 04, 2014, 07:53:59 AM »
Quote
Most female marines couldn't even train up to 3!
Not sure what the marines are putting in the soup but you go into a CF box and you will see plenty of women doing strict pullups and many of them are not twigs or She-Arnolds.  Is all about what you train for, but yes CF does put a good bit of emphasis on pullups.  A-doing a pullup is f-ing cool B-they are a good simple & generic bicep/back exercise.

I've been to many CF gyms and I think the # of women I've seen do a strict pullup (unassisted, no kipping) I could count on one hand and have several fingers leftover.  Its certainly possible, but it isn't common at all.


Re:  Balance and flexiblity above...  I am ofter surprised doing CF that there are many people who can't do a full squat.  I.E. a squat down until your butt touches your ankles/back of calf.  Especially "third world" style (legs together, knees touching).

arebelspy

  • Administrator
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *****
  • Posts: 28023
  • Age: -999
  • Location: Seattle, WA
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #84 on: March 04, 2014, 08:58:47 AM »
I agree with the people that said the benchmark for a "healthy homo sapien" should be based on what a fit person could do without training.

That said, I consider myself healthy, but not fit.  I don't exercise, besides walking a lot.

Last week I decided to do the 50 pushups in 5 minutes one, and was able to, but it was about my limit (did 25 in the first minute, rested, did 15, rested, did the final 10, ended with a minute to spare). I was sore for several days afterwards (especially my triceps and the part right in front of my armpit).

Okay, check mark for that one.

Today I decided to try to try the planking for two minutes one.  I did it, though my abs were slightly quivering at the end (not too much), but holy fuck did my back start to hurt during the second minute!

I thought that was interesting when the OP specifically says "(I'm advocating planks over sit ups; sit ups destroy your back)".

I could maybe make 3 minutes planking, but probably not, because the back pain was getting pretty bad.

No way I could swim a mile, I'd drown.  I don't float, I sink, so there would be no way to rest if needed.

I couldn't do 10 pullups, I could maybe do a couple (I had to google "kipping").  Might test this one later.

Not sure I could run a 9 minute mile for 5 miles.  Maybe if I really forced myself via willpower.  I could probably do a 5k (3.1 mile) at that pace, but not 5 miles.

Bike 25 miles?  Like, on flat ground?  And I set the gears?  I guess I'm not understanding this, as couldn't you just make it easy and sit there for 4 hours barely pedaling and do it?  Shouldn't this have a time limit, like the push ups or running ones?

Walk 15 miles, again, with no time limit this seems quite easy. 

I can't touch my toes without bending my knees.  Not flexible at all.

Can't bench press my body weight.  I have no idea how much I can bench press, but I'm pretty sure I can't.

Overall the benchmarks in the OP seem fairly reasonable (aside from maybe the swim one? IDK enough about swimming to tell if that's reasonable), as I think I can hit half of them or so (being a fairly healthy, but unfit person) without ever exercising at all, so someone who is fit should be able to do those (gender and age issues needing to tweak it aside).
We are two former teachers who accumulated a bunch of real estate, retired at 29, spent some time traveling the world full time and are now settled with two kids.
If you want to know more about us, or how we did that, or see lots of pictures, this Business Insider profile tells our story pretty well.
We (rarely) blog at AdventuringAlong.com. Check out our Now page to see what we're up to currently.

DougStache

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 97
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #85 on: March 04, 2014, 10:12:17 AM »
Today I decided to try to try the planking for two minutes one.  I did it, though my abs were slightly quivering at the end (not too much), but holy fuck did my back start to hurt during the second minute!

I thought that was interesting when the OP specifically says "(I'm advocating planks over sit ups; sit ups destroy your back)".
I'm excited that you went through the list to see what you could do, arebelspy.

Regarding sit ups vs planks:  sit ups generally contort your spine in an unnatural way and can cause issues with your spine; planks definitely work your back, but it is muscles that (should) hurt rather than your spine.  I also get pain in my back muscles on planks if I do them for the first few times after a break.

I agree with many of your points (and the points others have been making):

- Swimming does have a skill component and may not apply to this post
- Biking should have a time limit on it; however this varies a lot on terrain and the type of bike you ride.
- Ditto for walking.  Maybe a 20 minute mile?
- The running speed should be changed to 10 minute miles, my marathoning background skewed reality here

AlanStache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1890
  • Age: 40
  • Location: South East Virginia
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #86 on: March 04, 2014, 10:15:09 AM »
Not being a woman I cant speak to the relative difficulty for sure but maybe the pullup standard would have to include a band and (clearly) a reduced number of pullups.  I would say that most all men under 40 would have difficulty with 10 pullups-this part is not easy.  Sorry if my past posts were read as advocating a standard of women doing 10 strict pullups, that was not really my intent, I was trying to convey that I have seen plenty of 'normal' (but generally fit) women doing strict pullups and that a woman doing a some single digit number of them is not a herculean feat.

I like the idea of including more flexibility and balance elements but hesitate if a 'style' judge would be needed.  The standard for a proper squat or bench is painfully clear and easy to apply; hip crease below knee or bar touches chest - full lock out at the top (slightly simplified). 

arebelspy

  • Administrator
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *****
  • Posts: 28023
  • Age: -999
  • Location: Seattle, WA
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #87 on: March 04, 2014, 10:19:39 AM »
Today I decided to try to try the planking for two minutes one.  I did it, though my abs were slightly quivering at the end (not too much), but holy fuck did my back start to hurt during the second minute!

I thought that was interesting when the OP specifically says "(I'm advocating planks over sit ups; sit ups destroy your back)".
Regarding sit ups vs planks:  sit ups generally contort your spine in an unnatural way and can cause issues with your spine; planks definitely work your back, but it is muscles that (should) hurt rather than your spine.  I also get pain in my back muscles on planks if I do them for the first few times after a break.

It wasn't a sore/tiring out thing, like the muscles were being worked (like with my triceps when doing the pushups). It was just straight pain.

As soon as I stopped, the pain stopped, and my back isn't tired at all.

- Swimming does have a skill component and may not apply to this post
- Biking should have a time limit on it; however this varies a lot on terrain and the type of bike you ride.
- Ditto for walking.  Maybe a 20 minute mile?
- The running speed should be changed to 10 minute miles, my marathoning background skewed reality here

Agree with all 4 of those.
We are two former teachers who accumulated a bunch of real estate, retired at 29, spent some time traveling the world full time and are now settled with two kids.
If you want to know more about us, or how we did that, or see lots of pictures, this Business Insider profile tells our story pretty well.
We (rarely) blog at AdventuringAlong.com. Check out our Now page to see what we're up to currently.

Russ

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2213
  • Age: 28
  • Location: Boulder, CO
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #88 on: March 04, 2014, 10:28:20 AM »
I still disagree with the premise of the thread, but for those discussing minimum running pace:
running by definition requires both feet to be off the ground at the same time, and at some point going slower actually makes this harder. So I suggest just leaving the running requirement without a time limit, as running itself kind of takes care of that for you.

prodarwin

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 302
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #89 on: March 04, 2014, 10:42:12 AM »
I still disagree with the premise of the thread, but for those discussing minimum running pace:
running by definition requires both feet to be off the ground at the same time, and at some point going slower actually makes this harder. So I suggest just leaving the running requirement without a time limit, as running itself kind of takes care of that for you.

I agree with this.

arebelspy

  • Administrator
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *****
  • Posts: 28023
  • Age: -999
  • Location: Seattle, WA
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #90 on: March 04, 2014, 10:54:33 AM »
I still disagree with the premise of the thread, but for those discussing minimum running pace:
running by definition requires both feet to be off the ground at the same time, and at some point going slower actually makes this harder. So I suggest just leaving the running requirement without a time limit, as running itself kind of takes care of that for you.

Fair enough, and I still agree with your disagreement, but I'll also point out that the time benchmark gives a solid number for the question of "was I running"?  If you have to slow down for part of it, and you don't do a time limit, just distance, then you may not be sure of the vague "both feet off the ground," but timing it you can be sure you did it in an 8 minute mile, or 10 minute mile, or whatever.

Now if that even matters is obviously debatable, but it does give a demarcation line that "both feet off the ground" doesn't necessarily.
We are two former teachers who accumulated a bunch of real estate, retired at 29, spent some time traveling the world full time and are now settled with two kids.
If you want to know more about us, or how we did that, or see lots of pictures, this Business Insider profile tells our story pretty well.
We (rarely) blog at AdventuringAlong.com. Check out our Now page to see what we're up to currently.

Jamesqf

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4047
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #91 on: March 04, 2014, 03:16:32 PM »
Everything in moderation but yes even endurance geeks will benefit from some heavy training.  It seems to have helped my running and maybe kept me injury free.  100 yards - marathon this is a bit of a straw man.

Even marathoners benefit from strength training. The misunderstanding seems to come when people think strength training expressly leads to weight gain and flexibility loss.

The 100 yards vs marathon analogy was the best I could come up with on the spur of the moment.  Sorry if it doesn't work for you :-) 

To expand, I think it's really about the purpose of your training.  Do you want to be able to lift one very heavy thing one time, or lift a bunch of moderately heavy things for a long time - as for instance when shifting hay bales or loading firewood logs into the pickup.  I aim for the latter ('cause I actually do such things now & then), so I think that training with higher reps works better.

As for the max lift thing, I've found that if you know how to use leverage & balance, you can move things that are much heavier than you could ever do in a straight lift.  That in turn plays into flexibility: I can e.g. bend and place my palms flat on the ground behind my heels.

momo5

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 74
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #92 on: March 04, 2014, 05:59:11 PM »
homo sapiens is the the way to write it. There is no such word as sapien.

I was told by a professor that everyone should, in their lifetime, build a wall, write a book, raise a child. YMMV.

I like your list better, lol.
I can birth babies no sweat, but I cannot do even one pullup.

jba302

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 623
Re: What should a healthy homo sapien be capable of?
« Reply #93 on: March 05, 2014, 07:51:45 AM »

The 100 yards vs marathon analogy was the best I could come up with on the spur of the moment.  Sorry if it doesn't work for you :-) 

To expand, I think it's really about the purpose of your training.  Do you want to be able to lift one very heavy thing one time, or lift a bunch of moderately heavy things for a long time - as for instance when shifting hay bales or loading firewood logs into the pickup.  I aim for the latter ('cause I actually do such things now & then), so I think that training with higher reps works better.


That's fine, I get the purpose of your position and wasn't looking to set my position against a single statement. My overall point is twofold:

1. Strength helps downward more than cardio helps upward for all but very high cardio specific activity, and there's some good support for this in cases other than the very big outliers (the Tom Platz vs Dr. Squat comes to mind, where Dr. Squat's 1RM squat was over 100 lbs higher than Platz, but Platz squatted 540x23 and Dr. Squat did 540x13). So in your example, I would pick a 700 pound deadlifter over someone that can rep 100 pounds for 20 reps when looking to move hay bales, because in practice the 700 pound deadlifter can also rep 100 x 20, and will certainly have more left in the tank because the weight being moved is an exceedingly low intensity.

2. Strength activity still helps high cardio activity for various reasons.

Your point about movement specificity relates to the skill of the movement, but I'm not going to argue movement efficiencies because I agree :).