I posted the other day, comparing religious views of salvation ("the path I follow is the one true path which all should follow") to health regimens. Every fitness instructor has his/her own theory of how to get truly healthy, and this usually involves comically contradictory dogmas and doctrines -- just like what you see in religion, right?
I spent two years at 24 Hour Fitness in Long Beach, where the spin class instructors preached that you should never cycle with low resistance, as it's bad for your knees. But the Gold's instructors have been hammering us to go ever faster with ever less resistance for extended stints.
Some trainers have forced me to sprint up the steps in between weight training, to keep my heart rate high; other trainers say that keeping my heart rate that high withers my muscles.
The head trainer at the LA Gold's was stunned to find I had a "high" 20% fat ratio. He told me this was muscle atrophy, and insisted that I need to build up muscle by eating 6 protein meals a day, which I need to make at home and take to the office. He told me this was serious business. I had no interest in paying $1,500 for training, but I realized the stakes were high.
Then the actual trainer to which he assigned me said my fat rate is actually 18%, which is my "target rate," and that I just need to lean out and tone up slightly. Oh well.
Every expert has a different opinion; some preach stretching and flexibility, some don't, some love cardio, some don't.
Today, my trainer told me that lemon water will reduce salt bloating, so I bought some lemons on the way home. The Internet had wonderful articles about how lemons will work weight miracles and make my skin shiny and new.
But then other articles said that lemon water will also wash away more valuable minerals, including calcium.
And yet... still other articles said lemon helps retain calcium.
Some articles said lemon water has an alkili effect. Others said it's pure acid.
What do do...?
I think the reason so many people are dogmatic about religion, or about their health approach, is precisely because it's so confusing, and so contradictory, and so many paths go in so many different directions. No, not all paths lead to Mt. Olympus, but no two people can seem to agree on how to get to the gawdang mountain.
If a few of them realize they do agree, they form a tight community that invites everyone to share their own "absolute truth" and ridicules anyone who resists their truth. They, as Eric Hoffer observed, need to expand their flock in order to suppress their own doubts about whether they're on the right path.
Yet once they've been together for a while, they inevitably realize they don't agree on many things (including their individual interpretrations of their overarching philosophies), and the majority deems the minority a heretic, and the whole process starts again.
I don't think I'd ultimately say that "there are many ways to be healthy," but I would say that there are many ways to different aspects of health.
But I would not say that one guru or group has all the answers. There appear to be trade-offs between each school of thought.
One kind of person will get cynical, lay on the couch with some Lays, and get obese. Another one makes a decision on one way, then puts on blinders and shouts about how his way is the best way.
The best approach, I think, involves using some intellectual and moral independence in making those trade-offs and choosing a path without feeling an overpowering need to assert that "every knee shall squat and every ab shall crunch to the glory of my gym's way."
Recent Comments