-: So now that we went through those basic principles,
in terms of too much, too little
now I kind of wanted to walk through the thought process
of how we would look at making the decision between
choosing to focus on training and nutrition
in a little bit more detail.
We're in that situation where
it's a too much where it's too much stimulus to recovery.
A couple of things that we can look up,
one is just really simple looking at workout difficulty.
And that's not like technical difficulty.
That's literally just asking like the person,
"How hard was that workout?"
And if it's high, then maybe we need to
we should bias more towards like, all right.
If we think we're overstressing and underrecovering
maybe if their perception is the workout difficulty is high,
that we dropped that down.
If their perception is the workout, difficulty is low
then maybe we focus on the nutrition side of things.
And this can be a very important thing to ask because
your clients are gonna have a certain expectation.
And so sometimes it's better to include their observations
and their perceptions in this process.
Because with a lot of the physiology stuff
we're doing the best we can to guess.
But one thing that all the best physiology guess
can't help us with is
managing the client's expectations.
So if the client's expectation is,
"I wanna have this."
Say it
We're in this instance where
the perfect physiological answer would be
decrease the training, that's what it should be.
But the client's like, "Man, that workout was easy.
I wanna do more."
And you're like, "Yeah, but we actually need to do less."
If their perception is that the workout difficulty is low
you should possibly explore.
"Could I use more nutrition
and be able to accommodate for that
better meet the client's expectation
while still making this physiologically beneficial for them?
Is that then a win-win for everybody
both mentally and physically?"
That's why you have to know your subject
and you have to take the client and the physiology
all into play
because you could say like, "Well, based off of what I see
I think we actually need to do a bit less."
And then said client is like, "Well, screw this."
And then they go and find another trainer
that's just gonna smash them.
And they're gonna be like, "This is amazing."
And then like two months later
they're completely burnt out and whatnot.
Whereas it's like, you know what?
I could have pushed them a little bit harder
but I would have done it with the caveat of,
you got to all this food
versus they would have went to Trainer B
and they would be like,
"You wanna do a hard workout?
Cool, whatever.
But you wanna lose fat?"
Cool. No carbs.
And like, huge calorie deficit.
And now they're just in a terrible spot.
Whereas you might've had an option
to deliver what that client wanted
in a more we'll say ethical manner.
And a more productive manner.
You guys are coaches, you are not scientist.
These people are not in the lab.
You are coaching human beings that have desires,
have goals, have expectations, have emotions.
Don't underestimate how important that shit is
especially long-term and for your business.
Sorry.
Getting off the self-box, moving on.
Post-workout exhaustion.
After the workout, they're just absolutely floored
then maybe it's a sign that like,
if I'm gonna take from something, it should be training.
If after the workout's over,
five, 10 minutes has gone by
and they're running around high-fiving people
and doing backflips, okay, maybe, that's another sign.
Like, all right.
They could probably keep the training
and I just need to back off the calories
or the macros or whatnot so that we can focus on their,
or whatever we need to do to improve their recovery there.
The appetite going up or down.
That's another big one in terms of separating those.
But I put an asterix in there because it can lie.
So Cody turn off your mic.
When we're looking at appetite, basically
the main thing is looking at that deviation.
If it goes up or down, that may help you
but it's not going to be the most consistent variable.
So that's why you got to kind of look at
the whole picture here.
Never make a decision off of any one of these points,
one of these principles.
You're looking at like,
"What is the general pattern here?
And how could I go from there?"
Local fatigue bias versus global fatigue bias.
Obviously, if it's systemic
we're going for global fatigue bias.
If we're getting local fatigue,
that likely means that some of our super sets
or something like that are a little too hard,
a little too fatiguing.
So in that instance
what we wanna do is focus more on decreasing the training
and maybe increasing the nutrition.
If we're getting the global fatigue bias that we want
then we're not getting local soreness or whatnot
then likely workout's probably okay,
focus on nutrition.
Loss of, or poor strength-based performance.
That's gonna be training based.
Like I said, that's that example where basically
we're too neurologically fatigued.
So we're tolerating the volume
but we're basically performing crappy
across the whole sets or the whole workout
versus the other side,
which would be loss of or poor volume tolerance,
which would mean that like
we may be improving at the beginning of the workout
but we're actually getting worse
or not progressing towards the later portion of the workout
or the later sets of a circuit.
And then training history is gonna be important.
Volumes seems too high when we compare that
to prior programs versus volume seems too low.
If it's the first program
obviously you don't have that to work with
but you also have common sense.
Most of you guys, I don't think anybody on this call
is still looking for their first client ever.
So you gotta kind of use your trainer brain
and just look at it and be like,
"Does that seem like a lot?
That doesn't seem like a lot.
Maybe we should adjust the nutrition."
Or look at it like, "Yep.
I see what I did there.
That's a lot."
I mean probably 90% chance yeah, that's a lot.
I mean, sometimes it's that simple.
Just like train your brain, like common sense.
Common sense, man.
It is out of style, but men it still works
and then we'll have logistical things.
So what if their diet is already maxed out?
They don't wanna eat any more food.
You're at the wits of their appetite, their digestion,
whatever.
So if that constraint is on
you can't eat any more food, then you only have one option.
And that is, adjust the training.
If we're underrecovering, can't eat any more food,
won't take any more supplements
or do any more things that would get us
some sort of nutritional advantage,
then we have to take out training.
And then that works the other way.
What if the training is already at its essentially
the minimum threshold for the stimulus, like,
look, you're looking at the workout and be like,
"Man, if we do anything less than this,
I don't think we should.
Why are we even coming to the gym?
Why don't we just take the dogs for a walk?"
Then it's probably like, look
it's probably not training at that point in time.
Unless you just can't tell her to any training
it probably is a nutritional thing
and we really need to figure out what's going on with that
and work on the nutrition side of things.
Okay. Moving to the next one.
All right.
So now other side of the coin
we're getting too little stimuli to push us
out of that homeostatic drive to create that change.
So our options are, we either got to increase the stimulus
from the training side
or we have to increase the stimulus by making an adjustment
to the nutrition.
One of those two things has to move
so that we can get the body to change.
When it comes to the nutrition.
I don't say like increase your decrease because
depending on the goal, those would invert.
So you're gonna see some flip-flops here.
But keep in mind we've already had a decision making process
between are we over-stimulating or under-stimulating
that happens above this.
So once we've decided that like,
okay, we're under-stimulating.
Now we kind of go through
and you'll see some of the same things
that we saw on the other side.
So work out difficulty.
The amount of exertion that you feel post-workout.
So if both of those are low
definitely increase the training.
If those are relatively high,
but we're not seeing the progress
towards the adaptation we want
then we probably need to create a nutritional change.
Maybe we need a bigger change in terms of energy balance.
If it's fat loss, we need to cut more calories.
If it's hypertrophy, maybe we need to add more.
If appetite is fine, then increase training.
If appetite is the dysregulated,
then probably focus on like,
"All right, is there a nutritional component in here?"
Obviously if somebody is starving
and it's like, "All right," what's that mean?
Are they just a fat kid at heart?
Or, do they actually need more?
Like their body is begging for more nutrients
like we're creating this awesome stimulus
but it needs building blocks.
It needs fuel.
And we're not gonna see the changes
in body composition or performance unless we get that.
We're just gonna keep coming back to baseline
if we don't meet enough or meet the stimulus
with enough nutrition to fuel the adaptation.
And then same thing, workout history,
looking at, how does the volume compare to
what their prior programming was
or what your trainer brain says.
And then from a logistical or practical thing,
are there any sort of limitations and things like that?
A really good example here
you know, guys are working with real people
say you got one person
that they can only train X amount of times a week.
Well, if they can only do that
that's gonna cap where you can increase training from.
You've got another person that's like,
"Well, I train during my lunch break from work."
So they only have a certain amount of time
that they can train from.
Now, maybe you can still increase training,
but you have to increase training
within those time constraints.
And if that's not logistically or feasible possible,
then it may be that like, well, even though physiology says,
Luke should hit this other button
our only other choice is this is option B.
Luckily I'm an educated coach
and I can understand how to work both sides of this equation
to kind of get us going towards that goal
despite being in these constraints or limitations.
So, you can only get so much stimulus in an hour
and you can only get so much stimulus in a day.
So if you're limited on frequency
or you're limited on duration or workout
those are obstacles just like
when somebody doesn't have a given piece of equipment
or whatever, you find a different solution.
And from here, it's choosing between training and nutrition.
And since the majority of your guys' clients
are likely looking towards body composition,
that makes it easier because manipulating calorie balance
macronutrients, trying to get them to do things
to increase their neat,
whether that be getting more steps, standing at their desk
all of the things that you could do outside of the gym.
When it comes to hypertrophy,
that's where sometimes it gets tough
when you're constrained on training.
'Cause you need it.
You can't just eat more and get hypertrophy.
I wish that was the case
but I can guarantee you it is another case.
But so on that side then sometimes that's where like, okay
either you got to say like,
"Hey, this is just the rate of progress
that we're gonna be able to get at this point."
Or you have to have that serious conversation
of like, "Look, we can only get so much juice
out of this much squeeze."
We've gotta be able to find some more training
somewhere, somehow, some more stimulus
if we are going to pursue hypertrophy in here.
We can't just throw more food at the same amount of training
and expect to keep growing indefinitely.
And then the other option that we have
other than we're over-stimulating and stressing
to recovery versus under-stimulating is
we are incorrectly stimulating.
And so this is where this is kind of a repeat
of that one point that could be assigned
where we're increasing strength but not conditioning
because we should be getting improved conditioning
if we're doing a systemic thing.
It should be aerobically challenging.
It should be systemically energy system challenging.
And if we're not seeing improvement in those facets
but people are getting stronger,
then obviously our training variables
are not set in a way that's taxing them more systemically.
It doesn't mean they shouldn't make any improvements
in strength, but we should definitely see that
those are coming alongside
with the conditioning improvements.
Excessive local soreness.
So that could be a sign
that you're getting the incorrect stimulus
because this shouldn't be something
that's creating a lot of local soreness.
This should be very little
'cause it should be low volume per muscle tissue.
And you should be choosing exercises
that are biased towards being more metabolically dominant
rather than mechanically damaging.
So we shouldn't be using a lot of lengthened-based exercises
and what lengthened-based resistance profiles
we should be trying to find more short range of motion,
not short range of motion
but short overloaded exercises working the short position.
And there's also can be an imbalance of fatigue.
So when we're looking at fatigue,
we want fatigue to come systemically
you just like, you just get tired.
But if you're like,
"Man, this circuit is like really hard
for this one muscle group
and really easy for this other thing."
Likely means that at least a portion of your workout
should be adjusted in terms of variables
to get the right stimulus
because you should have like a fairly equal challenge
across the muscle tissue.
I mean, granted yeah.
Squats are always gonna be harder than bicep curls,
but it shouldn't be like,
"Man, my quads are fried
but my biceps could go all day."
You should be taking the individual muscles to closer
to the same degree of fatigue
but also understanding that yet exercises
aren't gonna feel the same.
All right.
And then extreme increase in appetite.
So because this promotes metabolic flexibility,
we shouldn't see like massive increases in appetite.
I mean, yeah, we are contracting a lot of tissue and whatnot
but we're also pushing a lot of metabolic efficiency
with these more conditioning-based workouts.
So even though they're glycolytically challenging
they're also working on improving those systems.
So likely if you're getting a huge increase in appetite,
then this workout may be a little too hypertrophy
if that makes sense.
Or just like, or it's just too much volume.
And so you're getting into like,
you're starting to get some of those
just like other stresses tacked on
just from the sheer volume of the workout.
So finishing up the lecture portion here
with just some tips and tricks.
So when we're looking at cardiovascular
and heart rate markers,
it's very important that you don't try and micromanage those
from day-to-day because they may go down
during consecutive training days.
They may go down more after like
if one day is a little bit more hard than others like,
you got squats on one day
and nothing near as hard on the other day,
you may see these things jump up and down
all over the place.
And if you try and look at
each one of those little jumps changes
you're gonna overanalyze things
and it's just gonna be a mess
in terms of your thought process and your assessment.
But what you should be looking for is trends over time.
You should be looking at whatever.
So say your training split is a five-day rotation.
Take the average of that five rotation
or take a weekly average.
I prefer, if you can average things on your training split
provided it's not just a two-day training split.
So if your training split is varied,
so say you just have like upper/lower day off
and then you repeat upper/lower,
I wouldn't do a three-day cycle.
I would do a six-day cycle and average that
so that you have basically five days or more of data
to kind of average.
But that's what kind of what you want to look at
is you want to look at the trends and changes
in that average
rather than focusing on the minute changes from day-to-day.
So that includes any heart rate measure
and any HRV measure that you would take.
And that includes the ones that you would do
in the workout as well.
Because if I do a hard workout today
and then I do a workout tomorrow,
from day-to-day because of two consecutive training days
that compounding stress may seem like
my cardiovascular markers are moving in the wrong direction,
but then I take a day off or two days off
and I come back and I do those same two.
And when I compare those two to the last two
that were in a row, it's a net positive in the direction.
But over the course of the two days it was a regression.
And so what you'll see is you'll see
progressing-regressing phases, if that makes sense
but you'll be progressing over time,
even though there may be short-term regressions
in the markers.
So especially with cardiovascular.
And to be honest,
if you apply that same mindset
to things like body fat and weight,
you'll start getting a lot better, a lot more,
we'll say good data by looking at kind of those averages.
And when I kind of get into some of those of modules
where we're looking at those,
we're looking specifically at the physiology
we'll kind of look at how
I look at averaging these things out and evaluating that.
And then the last one on here,
systemic stress it has the widest range of side effects
because it's very energy dysregulating
because it's a systemic stress.
I mean, it's challenging the whole body,
it's challenging your global energy systems,
your ability, like everything from respiration
to your heart output,
to your ability to deliver oxygen and dilate
and then your local...
And that's everything from an energy system.
And fuel delivery system is being challenged.
So you will see the widest range of possibilities of things
that could happen.
And that's why you've really got to look at a pattern
of what's going on because no single one variable is likely
a safe place to say, if this, then that.
It's really kind of like,
okay, if I have like three or four of these things
on the side that says, this is too much stress
and I only have one on underrecovery
then I'm gonna assume it's too much stress.
And then if the majority of those fit under add nutrition,
then I'm gonna add nutrition.
But it's not going to be like,
"Well, I got one thing on this side
and so that's just the way that I'm to go."
And you kind of have to balance that having a priority
but also not ignoring all the information.
So it's kind of like you're putting a gold star
on the things that correlate with your goal
but you're also then taking everything into account.
And it's like, man, that thing that really fits your goal,
isn't a really strong signal
that things need to go in this direction.
Then you may need to take the other stuff into account
a little bit more.
But if the thing that you're looking for
is giving you a very strong indicator
that it needs to go in this direction,
and you maybe have like a couple other things
that it could go either way,
then probably just follow what that main priority says.
I think that is my last slide there.
So I'm going to close this out
and then we will go through the questions in the chat.
All right.
I've got quite a few more people on here now,
again, apologies for the late start.
For some reason it just would not let us open the chat room.
All right.
Okay, cool.
So I'm not gonna cover any of the technical stuff,
Cody if you wanna answer any of those
via text or whatever you can,
then we'll just cover anything else
that needs to be said on that side and the email.
I will be little to no help.
All right.
So Job asks, "Are cold hands and feet
another symptom of metabolic inflexibility
that systemic stimulus could also help?"
So when we're looking at cold extremities
you got a lot of different factors that can go into that.
Everything from overall metabolism and thyroid level
to just I'm being in too aggressive of a calorie deficit,
or, poor vascular health.
You're just not very good at getting blood to those tissues.
So it's not necessarily a metabolic flexibility thing.
It's more of a metabolic rate or blood flow thing.
So you'll see, when people contest prep or whatnot,
they get to a point where then they're cold.
And the first place that they're gonna be cold
is hands and feet, right?
And energy conservation thing is to hold more blood
in the core where you can kind of maintain
a more stable body temperature.
So it can literally just be too low calories.
And you're kind of getting it to that point where
either your calories are drastically low
or your calories have been low for long enough
that you're actually starting to see
some of those hormonal and metabolic adaptations occur
that are kind of decreasing your overall metabolic rate.
And that's why you're getting the cold hands and feet.
And then also there can be circulatory issues as well.
Especially for people that are pre-diabetic
and stuff like that,
have had a lot of weight or whatnot that may have issues
with vascular flow.
Another one from Job.
"Is there a heart rate range
or percent of heart rate max where you'd like to be
on the total workout or a week average?
How would you apply heart rate recovery test
as an assessment in a workout?"
I don't like to use most of the stereotypical ranges.
There's several different ways that you can look
to calculate the heart rate
and we'll get more into this in the actual cardiac module.
But I prefer to use individual norms
rather than I do the standardized or average norms.
So I like to look at what a person's waking heart rate is.
I like to look at what a person's resting heart rate is.
If we're getting to the gym or whatever,
and they have their heart rate monitor on or whatever.
And you're just kinda like
you're walking around
talking for the first five minutes or whatever of like,
what's gonna go on, et cetera.
Getting your equipment set up, all that.
And looking at where that's kind of setting,
it won't be super accurate,
but it'll give you a baseline.
If somebody comes in,
it shouldn't be like 20 points off or whatever,
it might be like five,
might have a fluctuation of five maybe 10 max
in terms of what that moving around average activity
would be if that's fairly the same.
But looking at that and then looking at,
what is the peak that we get for that individual?
And what is the average that we get from that individual
under a certain stress?
And then looking at how that changes.
Because you're gonna have a lot of fluctuations
in somebody's local to systemic tolerance
to load intensity and stuff like that.
For example, you have somebody that's very strong
or has a lot of muscle mass,
they don't necessarily have to work at a high rate
of local exertion to create a cardiovascular challenge
whereas just somebody that's
smaller muscles or weaker,
they may have to work a lot harder locally
to get their heart rate,
their cardiovascular system to actually be challenged.
But then you throw in all sorts of factors in there
that would fluctuate either those two people.
And then all of a sudden it's like,
"Man, there's so many things going on."
How do you decide what to expect?
And so in these instances, what I try and look for is like
getting a baseline and then working from that baseline.
So what I try and look at is,
what was our average and peak heart rate during
the first time we did the systemic workout?
And I'm also tracking the loads and stuff
and the variables that we use.
And so now what I'm looking for is either those come down
or our performance goes up greater
and proportionate to that.
So you have to look at too, is like
as you add volume,
that will affect your peak and average too because
say you add a set,
you're adding to the end of the workout.
So at the beginning of the workout
it takes a little bit for your heart rate to get up.
So your average will go up quite a bit as you add volume.
So make sure you keep that in context
if you're adding like a whole other set or whatnot.
But then you can kind of look at
if you're doing real time
you can look and see like,
you look at the trend.
Does it look like we trend about the same over the workout?
And then we just had this extra at the end,
but if we would have stopped right there,
we would have been about where we wanna be
or would have had an improvement.
So it's kind of looking at from that baseline
are we getting a higher percentage
or a higher ratio of performance to cardiac demand
or cardiac load.
That's what I'm kind of looking for.
I'm not looking for like,
"Okay, cool.
I'm gonna average the 75% heart rate max
based off of like the old 220 minus their age
equation or anything like that,
as much as I am looking at moving
where they are from baseline.
Because there's a lot of people who like
if you go off their norms,
you would just totally screw up their program
if you went off the norms.
All right.
Cool.
Any more questions in here, guys?
Let's see here.
"Can metabolic flexibility be measured
or are we looking at a set of symptoms?"
So you can in a lab setting, Jonathan.
You can look at things like a metabolic car
and stuff like that,
where they're actually measuring gas exchange
to kind of see what fuels you're predominantly using.
So that is something that you could get tested.
There's obviously some scrutiny
to some of the things in there.
And obviously, there's a difference
when you're testing it at rest
versus when you're testing it at an activity.
And that activity usually it's always like a biker,
a treadmill, it's never actually weight training.
But it can give you an idea
but you'd have to compare the two tests to each other.
What I wouldn't say is like, "You just go, you do it."
And you'd be like,
"Okay, this person is using this or that."
'Cause we're not necessarily looking to get to like,
"You're good at this 'cause the test said so."
So we're looking at,
are we pushing you in the right direction?
So if you wanted to use something like that
then you would look at getting a test before
and then after.
The problem is, is that those are time-consuming
and expensive, but they're cool.
So from a symptoms perspective
what we're looking at is like,
yeah, you get hungry less
you tend to be satiated or feel like you have energy
on a more broader spectrum of macros,
but obviously, there's digestion
and other factors in there too.
So there's really not a perfect way for that.
What you tend to see is that
I think the biggest thing is that you see decreased mood
and craving fluctuations between meals.
The best measures that we can have in terms of symptom
is like, if two hours go by and you're like,
"Man, I need to eat."
Either you're in a really big calorie deficit
or you're very metabolically inflexible.
So it's interesting to me how many people
they're focusing on hypertrophy,
they're in a calorie surplus that they can't,
they have trouble within the space between meals.
Like they need eat really often.
So that's a sign that like,
even though there's a surplus if you're available
they're not very good at making the fuel on demand.
It's like, "Man, I need fuel from like,
it's gotta be coming from my digestive tract
for me to be happy about it."
I think it's the best one that we have to go off of
in terms of what's feasible for everybody to do
is kind of just looking at how well somebody does
between meals in terms of mood, energy, cravings, et cetera.
All right.
"Do I always match my shirts to my soundproofing panels?"
Well, I thought that would kind of be cool
but I'm kind of clashing today.
So I think I'll stick with the gray
the majority of the time,
but they're in the dryer right now,
if you wanted all that information.
'Cause I had a couple other calls this week.
"I'd like to know if you ever use BIA InBody or Skulpt
for percentage fat assessment and progress,
or do you like it for your clients?"
So BIA is,
it sucks.
I mean, I really, really wish it worked better.
To be honest, I actually have just 10 feet away from me,
the new InBody at-home scale.
I was like, "Okay, it's their newest one.
It still does the hands and feet thing.
It doesn't cost a million dollars.
I'll give it a try.
See if it's better than the other ones
that I've used in the past."
And man, I tell you what,
it's not at all accurate on the body fat.
So what I'm gonna try and do
is see if I use a variety of other measures,
if I can at least see if it trends in the right direction.
But it's not accurate for measuring muscle mass or body fat
at all.
And it really hates short people.
Like if you're short, you're gonna be a fat bastard on BIA,
just letting you know that.
And that's gonna affect you mentally.
If you're short, do not get a BIA.
If you're really tall and like, then go ahead and get it.
It's gonna be like, "Man you're amazing and super ripped."
And you may just be skinny fat.
So the algorithm is definitely not designed
for athletic individuals.
So in terms of accuracy of body fat, not good.
Whether or not they can be somewhat consistent
on the body fat with the new technology,
maybe debatable, I'm gonna play around with that.
I invested in this because I was really curious
'cause I was hoping that like,
man, if they actually have one of these things
it's like $350 or whatnot,
that would be feasible for a lot of clients and trainers
to be able to invest in
and have a a great tool for tracking.
So far, I've just wasted $350.
That's what I've learned so far.
Now in terms of the Skulpt,
I do also have that one of those for testing.
Yeah.
This guy here.
I had the old one.
It was cool.
Again, accuracy issues
but I have not actually played around with the new one,
so I am gonna play around with that
to see if that would be a feasible option.
But man, calipers, circumferences, weight, and photos,
those are the tried and true methods that man,
they just seem to always be the most reliable things.
So, get good at looking at photos,
get consistent with calipers,
get consistent with circumferences,
those are things that online people can do on their own.
'Cause I mean, even something like the Skulpt,
it's got the same limitation as calipers.
Meaning like you need to be able to put it
in the same spot every time.
And it's obviously gonna
have its own issues with variability between measurements
and stuff like that.
So honestly, when you're looking at these things,
you wanna make sure that the device accuracy
does not have a negative impact.
So if it's something that's going to fluctuate a lot
that's where it's like,
man, knowing your subject is really important.
'Cause if that's going to mentally stress somebody
like their scale, fluctuates a little bit
based of hydration and stuff
or their InBody thing or whatnot.
And it's like, okay, one, maybe you don't use that tool
or two maybe you don't use those tools as frequently
because there's such a chance for error.
You wanna make sure that you only measure it intervals
where there's for sure gonna be a positive change
in that direction.
'Cause if it's like, man, we've made a 2% change
but the error rate in the thing is like 5 1/2%,
you could have made progress
but the thing actually says you didn't
or actually regressed because that's within its error range.
So I will give you guys my feedback on these things
as I play around with them a little bit more.
I literally bought them, the new versions
just so that I could try them out for you guys
because I know that we would be getting questions on that.
But I mean skinfolds, circumferences, photos,
weighing under the same conditions,
pictures under the same light.
Those are really, really valuable tools.
I mean, if you can just get clients taking their weight
and their photos at the same time of the day
and at the same lighting and hydration conditions,
you can learn really well to be able to make decisions
and kind of judge how body fat and stuff is moving.
You don't need to be a human Dexter
but you can basically become one pretty easily
if you just pay attention.
Louise asked,
"If the client is getting super hungry between meals.
Systemic may be a good option to fix that
by improving metabolic flexibility."
Yes. Systemic could be a good option.
AMPK could also be a good option with a calorie deficit,
but still providing enough carbohydrates
or AMPK intermittent
with strength training in a calorie deficit
for somebody that doesn't tolerate the systemic.
So those are basically three ways
that you could attack metabolic flexibility.
Metabolic flexibility if we're looking at,
obviously working on delivers aspect of energy production
and improving overall energy efficiency,
attacking that directly with the systemic program
is the best way to go.
If we wanna improve more local energy efficiency and maybe,
so that's like decreasing the energy demand
by making the local tissue
a little bit more able to run off of fat,
then AMPK is gonna be your bet.
And obviously just going into a calorie deficit
when you're not metabolically flexible, it's sucks.
It is kind of the thing that you need to do
to force your body to become metabolically flexible.
So a lot of times you'll have those guys where
man, they get hungry every two hours
when they're in a calorie surplus.
And you'll notice that they also are having
a really hard time putting on weight.
And a lot of times the thing that they need to do
to be able to put on more load
is actually to spend a little bit of a period
either focusing on these metabolic goals
or going in a calorie deficit or a combination of both.
And then they're actually able to then start making progress
on less food and you know,
be more comfortable with that diet, right?
Like they can go three hours
without having to snap into a Slim Jim.
All right.
It looks like that is all of the questions for today.
Thank you guys very much.
We will get this uploaded as soon as possible.
And then I will see you next week.
Hopefully, no issues again.
And a couple of quick things really quick.
One, make sure you check your email
or log onto the site and click on the unit for this.
And that will have a place for more questions
on systemic training and adjustments because
Coach Adam and Coach Cody are going to kind of walk through
some specific scenarios of
adjusting volume versus training variables
versus calories in different scenarios.
Walk through some avatar/case study examples
of manipulating this stuff based off of
what you guys would see under the assessment.
So the link for that for you guys
to be able to submit questions is already up on the unit.
The video won't be there until we download it
and do all the things to it before it can get uploaded.
But you will be able to go
and submit those questions right away.
And that'll just give those guys more time
to prepare for those.
Cool.
All right.
I think that's it for everybody.
Enjoy the rest of your week and we will see you later.