The world’s premier network for those seeking to share and discuss high-impact,high results, super practical information for the developmentof superiorphysical performance.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13
  1. #1
    HUNTER1313 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    389

    Default Ori's CFT training

    Quite simply, yay or nay? Is it worth while or just stay the course with Pavel's work?

  2. #2
    Spikeman1444 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    582
    Blog Entries
    14

    Default

    I personally would stay course with Pavel's work. Ori's exercise philosophy isn't so much different at it's core. Ori is a nutrition guy not an exercise IMO.

  3. #3
    fdnyceguy is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    102

    Default

    HUNTER:

    Sorry for the delayed response.

    The truth is, a more appropriate answer, and a typical answer for 99% of the questions here, is "it depends!"

    Ori's CFT, like his nutritional advice, is quite different from most exercise strategies, including Pavel's (Sorry, Spikeman). According to Mr. Hofmekler, survival would probably be the primary focus of CFT. This is reflected by the protocols used. As indicated by his new venture, strength would be the primary focus according to Pavel and his protocols.

    Hopefully, this assists you in your decision.

  4. #4
    postandspread is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    647

    Default

    Ori spoils the great copy on the CFT site by insisting on absolutely the correct post-workout nutrition. He says: "feed your muscle right after training with quality fast assimilating protein to block the catabolic effect of exercise, and initiate recovery and growth." So, what did these warrior studs and marauder dudes do? Start chugging "whey protein, and plant based multi-vitamins and antioxidant supplements" or equivalents (which are?) immediately after a battle?

    I did try some CFT after a fashion a year or so ago for 2-3 weeks. So obviously I can't say anything for or against, but it didn't do any harm. Don't know but I might give it another go.

  5. #5
    Wolfeye is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    943

    Default

    Well, for one, that may have been the pattern after exercise, not battle. Also, the food back then would have been all those things. Keep in mind: the food was fresh & unscrewed around with. Even the preserved food was made of things that were better absorbed by the body. This, I guess, depends a bit on the culture in reference (eating off of pewter wasn't something everyone did, same with the whole "no bathing" thing). I'd imagine after a battle may or may not have been a hard time to have a meal, but after training- that would have been a different story.

  6. #6
    postandspread is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    647

    Default

    Ori's big selling point is essentially the historical warrior's professional lifestyle, and apparently it's imperative for modern-day recreational PT to elicit its effects. Thus, his rousing references to Romans, Spartans, Mongols, Vikings (also, I think). Added to which is the ridiculous, paranoid marketing line that They Are Hiding The Facts From You.

    I suspect when many fitness writers use "research" to support their claims, it's probably the one or two research papers per topic they may have browsed through or perhaps they only read what supports their opinions however these opinions might have been formed in the first place. Questionable logic doesn't help either. Tim Ferriss in his Four-Hour Body, writes: "If your ancestors were from Europe, for example, how much fruit did they eat in the winter 500 years ago? Think they had Florida oranges in December? Not a chance. But you’re still here, so the lineage somehow survived... The only exceptions to the no-fruit rule are tomatoes and avocadoes ... Otherwise, just say no to fruit." Well, neither did they have half the food products he himself seems to eat. And since the lineage survived, why tinker at all with their original diet? [Enter the Paleo Diet from stage left!]

    Anyway, concerning the point I raised, in their article "Nutrition for Strength Training" (in Strength and Conditioning, (eds.) Cardinale et al, 2011), Shaw & Upton write:

    "Recently, the timing of amino acid and protein intake has been examined and determined to markedly influence the response of NMPB [net muscle protein balance]... Whereas it is clear that the timing of nutrient ingestion will influence the response of muscle anabolism, the optimal timing of ingestion is not clear
    and likely depends on the protein type, EAA [essential amino acids] content, and other nutrients ingested concurrently ... A commonly held belief has developed that a ‘metabolic window’ of opportunity exists where proteins need to be
    ingested within a short period after exercise in order to maximize elevations in protein synthesis following exercise ... There are suggestions that this window may
    last for as little as 45 minutes...

    A recent study demonstrated that the exercise-induced rise in muscle protein synthesis when resistance exercise is performed two hours following a meal
    (Witard et al., 2009) is similar to that observed when amino acids are provided following exercise (Phillips et al., 2002). Finally, since the impact of resistance exercise on muscle protein synthesis lasts for 36 - 72 hours, there is no reason to believe that the additive response of exercise and protein/amino acid intake will not occur beyond the first hour or so following exercise. That is, exercise results in a prolonged sensitivity of the muscle to the anabolic stimulus of protein ingestion. These results support the notion that the muscle is responsive to nutrients well past the purported metabolic window.

    The lack of support for the strict necessity of ingesting protein within the first few minutes following exercise should not be interpreted as an argument that this practice is to be avoided. On the contrary, ingestion of some sort of protein soon
    after exercise is often convenient for many athletes and is certainly not likely to be harmful." [My emphases]

    General and military nutrition in ancient times appears to be a much more complex topic than most of us realise (myself included). We cannot assume that the ancients were necessarily eating more and/or better quality food than us, though obviously the levels of inorganic chemical contamination in the food sources would have probably been close to zero.

    In medieval times, the lower social orders who probably largely contributed to the soldiery, were legally circumscribed in what they could eat! Melitta Adamson in Food in Medieval Times (2004), says: "By the Middle Ages, cooked food was already the norm in all segments of society, but what foodstuffs went into a dish, and how it was prepared and eaten, depended to a large degree on one’s station in life. More than today, food served as a status symbol then, and dietary transgressions were not just frowned upon, they were punishable by law. In often exact detail, so-called sumptuary laws spelled out what people of a certain class and income level were allowed to consume ... To stay healthy peasants simply had to eat the coarse, rough food that just happened to be of the lowest price and social prestige, while the more delicate, rare, and costly foods were ideal for the dainty stomachs of the rich."

    In Roman Society, Roman Life, the author writes: "Apart from at the banquets of the rich, meat was rarely a part of the Roman diet. The diet of the Roman army, shows us much about the Roman ideas of nutrition. The Roman word for wheat is frumentum. And it was the same word which eventually came to describe army rations itself. Generally the army ration consisted of little else than wheat. The soldiers themselves then ground the grain they were given and made it into things such as porridge or bread. Whenever possible the monotonous army diet was naturally supplemented with whatever came to hand. Pork, fish, chicken, cheese, fruit or vegetables. But the basic ration of frumentum always formed the basis of the diet. So much so, that if in times of supply difficulties the grain would fail to reach the troops and instead other foodstuffs (even meat!) were handed out, there would be discontent among the ranks."

    Finally, the diet of women who probably bore the brunt of any sort of restrictive or deprivational dietary practices in these societies esp. among the peasants and the poor, is yet another issue and might very well have had an impact on the strength/fitness/health levels of their male offspring in adulthood.
    Last edited by postandspread; 12-17-2012 at 01:01 AM.

  7. #7
    Wolfeye is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    943

    Default

    So it's paranoind to think "they are hiding the facts from you?" So there's no such thing as medical quackery, then? What about scams, omitted information, false impressions, or "favourable facts" (that's when the marketing department comes up with information)? There's plenty of manipulated information, dispensed by all kinds of people. Doctors do lie, having various motivations for doing so. That applies to other people, as well. Sometimes the payoff isn't the point, but that can be the whole reason or an added one. They used to believe the shape of a person's head would signify if they were going to be a criminal or not, that lead pipes & asbestos were safe, that quicksilver (also known as mercury) was a good treatment for pain, the list goes on and on. That's a point, in itself (that there is so much of it).

    How do all these weight loss trends that don't actually work come to be? There was a vibrating belt that people would strap themselves into to lose weight. I've heard at least two different things about eggs, coffee, carbs, fat, and meat (both red & in general). You could get into quite a lengthy discussion about food additives, pesticides, prescription medications, vaccines, and radiation- singly or all together, and the effects of these things in combination with each other. Either these people do know how something is going to work & suggest/do it anyway, or they don't know, but give the impression that they do & scam people that way. Outright incompetence is a point, as well- especially if someone's too arrogant to catch their own mistakes. How many of these experts have a massive amount of ego & an "I don't need to hear it from you" kind of attitude? A lot of the "shot-callers" in the business world have that style, as well. Ancient world or not, if the expertise someone has is low-quality, their input is going to be questionable. A long post, I know, but there's a lot of points that apply to a bunch of different situations. How they apply, specifically, depends on the subject, but it's a running pattern.
    Last edited by Wolfeye; 12-17-2012 at 03:56 PM.

  8. #8
    postandspread is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    647

    Default

    In today's world it IS paranoid to think that the "truth" (whatever that might be) is being hidden by a nefarious cabal of manipulators in the fitness industry (which is what I'm confining my comments to). If Ori doesn't think so, all he has to do is to infiltrate academia and publish the dazzling "truth" in the peer-reviewed research journals or he can try to induce bonafide researchers to investigate his claims. In the meantime, I'll settle for multiple instances of tangible, independently-verifiable achievements by his methods as is available with those of say, Pavel or Barry Ross or ... or ...

    IMO the truth is much simpler. The body seems to be a far more complex system than we fully understand. There are at least three invalid responses to this complexity:

    --- Some fitness pros succumb to the temptation to draw quick conclusions based on improperly analysed anecdotal and empirical evidence. These folks are often contemptuous of the academicians though they aren't averse to quoting them if it suits their purpose.

    --- a more superior kind of fitness pro claims to base his/her conclusions on published research. He/she is probably incapable of personally judging the merits of the research papers, jumps to the Conclusions section for the essential lowdown, and cherry-picks whatever sounds good, comprehensible or marketable.

    --- some academic researchers succumb to the temptation to draw quick conclusions based on simplistic models.

    But a conspiracy? I think not. Btw, I'm far from claiming that all fitness pros and academicians fall into one of the categories above.

  9. #9
    Wolfeye is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    943

    Default

    No, it's NOT paranoid. What?- "Today's world" makes lying impossible? All the damn time, there's something that comes out that doesn't work, but is held to work. If Ori did "infiltrate academia" anything he said would be seen as nonsense, by your own reasoning that things like that don't happen. Doesn't mean it doesn't. These peer-reviewers & researchers can always put forth untrue information, themselves- the same as you're accusing other people of doing. You're saying "scams are impossible," but also that, "a scam is taking place in this situation."

    The fitness industry is not strictly limited to the people that build workout equipment & write books on the subject, either. Medical input tends to be added in on the subject (full squats are unsafe, sit-ups are unsafe, leg raises don't work the abdominals, etc...), and is used to verify whatever claims- potentially with a financial incentive attached to it (as medicine, itself, gets incentivized). Unless these aren't real doctors & it's a scam. Schools tend to distribute the same information.

    The things you were saying about the fitness pros doing is exactly what can happen with all the other "deducers" (doctors, peer reviewers, researchers, whatever the people that do quality control are called, etc...). Doesn't have to be a conspiracy for there to be a similar trait, either. If these people are in a similar situation (getting an incentive, for instance) or have a similar style to them (personality traits, baseline information, etc...) then they'll probably come to the same conclusions & exhibit the same behavior. They're the same way, so they happen to do the same things without any kind of planning.

  10. #10
    postandspread is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wolfeye View Post
    No, it's NOT paranoid. What?- "Today's world" makes lying impossible? All the damn time, there's something that comes out that doesn't work, but is held to work. If Ori did "infiltrate academia" anything he said would be seen as nonsense, by your own reasoning that things like that don't happen. Doesn't mean it doesn't. These peer-reviewers & researchers can always put forth untrue information, themselves- the same as you're accusing other people of doing. You're saying "scams are impossible," but also that, "a scam is taking place in this situation."
    If I were really saying any of the above, I would have to be even more whacked out than any paranoiac. So, unethical people and groups exist? Man, who would have thought it possible? One can't screw around with the peer review system for long without the author(s), the referees, the journal's editors or the journal(s) losing all credibility and becoming pariah. Academicians do try their best to maintain standards. That's why the system of "disclosure" was introduced when it was found that some authors were misusing the honour system. Abuses can, do and will happen nonetheless.

    The fitness industry is not strictly limited to the people that build workout equipment & write books on the subject, either. Medical input tends to be added in on the subject (full squats are unsafe, sit-ups are unsafe, leg raises don't work the abdominals, etc...), and is used to verify whatever claims- potentially with a financial incentive attached to it (as medicine, itself, gets incentivized). Unless these aren't real doctors & it's a scam. Schools tend to distribute the same information.
    What's the point here? That there are differing opinions, right opinions, wrong opinions, half-baked opinions, contradictory opinions, mercenary opinions, parroted opinions? If so, that's a very good reason why there's no need to posit a SPECTRE in the fitness world plotting to screw the rest of us.

    The things you were saying about the fitness pros doing is exactly what can happen with all the other "deducers" (doctors, peer reviewers, researchers, whatever the people that do quality control are called, etc...). Doesn't have to be a conspiracy for there to be a similar trait, either. If these people are in a similar situation (getting an incentive, for instance) or have a similar style to them (personality traits, baseline information, etc...) then they'll probably come to the same conclusions & exhibit the same behavior. They're the same way, so they happen to do the same things without any kind of planning.
    In the present context I'm less interested in your understanding of unethicality in the fitness industry than in Ori's. Here's the exact quote from his website: "Your chance to reach your peak physical potential is slim to nothing - no matter how hard you train – and it’s NOT because you didn’t follow the rules. The fitness industry does not want you to know that ..." To me this statement sounds remarkably like claiming a conspiracy rather than describing some sort of unpremeditated emergent coordinated (or "self-organised") behaviour.
    Last edited by postandspread; 12-19-2012 at 06:44 AM.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Free Course
Close