READY, WILLING, AND ABLE – The psyche and the Soma

Part C-THE PRACTICAL APPLICATION OF PHYSICAL EFFORT-Intension of the Goal

Knowing how much effort an unfamiliar task requires is certainly useful because it can help us to determine how to manage and allocate strength and energy. However, there are many instances where we either prevail in spite of our ignorance (causing a delayed onset of harm), or postpone the achievement and spare the effort (and our well-being) for another moment.

Personal Trainers are taught an ability defining strategy known as the “Rate of Perceived Exertion” in an attempt to plan for a safe and successful outcome. One of these strategies, called a “talk test”, is used as a convenient method to determine a cardio-pulmonary standard i.e. a “heart rate zone” for their clients to maintain as they perform/train. There are other more elaborate means to determine this “zone”, like the Karvonen Formula, but they all require time, and unrelated (wasted) effort, for that matter.

The advantage of the Talk Test is that it can be elicited while the recipient is performing the goal specific exercise. Rather than calculating formulas, drawing blood, or running on a tread mill, plugged in to electrodes and breathing into a tube, this is a simple “field test” that compares effort to ability by observing if or how the challenge disrupts conversation.   

A demanding challenge will increase respirations beyond the ability to speak, and as breathing increases, so does the demand on the heart and its vascularity. Since the effort is based on the heart rate, a reasonable baseline of ability to participate can be established, depending on the nature of the person’s goal i.e. a long or short term encounter.   

Another use of perceived exertion is like rating the perception of pain during or after a medical procedure, and there are also other predetermined standards specifically for strength, power, and muscle hypertrophy, that involve rep to resistance ratios, where the required effort is determined by achieving particular repetition values.

In any case, these simple strategies make it is possible to ascertain and associate a level of strain with an achievement, but, are they effective indicators of preparation to perform? For an individual who is willing to take a chance, do they truly construe one’s ability? Do they indicate the readiness to “Just Do It?

The problem is, this kind of rationale only accounts for half of the physics i.e. the “external”/resistance half, and only accounts for it in a most superficial manner. Most significantly, the other half of the physics, as described in Part A, represents a person’s distinct ability to contract against the half that the Fitness Industry (although superficially) acknowledges. (Refer to part A.)

TORQUE OF RESISTANCE

Torque is not only a factor of the muscular force required to rotate a bone around the axis of a joint (the determinant of effort described in Part A). When an external force or accelerant of mass like gravity contacts a person, it also becomes torque against the persons’ structure, and, as it is the ubiquitous nemesis of our efforts to perform any kind of task, it is referred to as “Resistance”.

Our consideration for the external half of this inexorable conflict is typically “superficial” because we are consumed only by the instinct to accelerate against the amount of the resistance, without regard for its direction and moment of application, both of which have an enormous effect on us, because they determine the leverage of the resistance and therefore how it will effect or impose upon the torque our efforts.

Furthermore, the amount of acceleration determines the effects of inertia i.e. how much of the external force (against us) is actually resistance vs how much of our physical effort transforms the resistance into assistance (like rotational inertia), which in turn alters the leverage of the conflict. Ultimately, it’s always our lever system against the resistances’, and if and when we leverage ourselves adequately enough, we prevail.

The only accurate way to know how much work is required (and appropriate to encounter) to fulfill the task is to know how much leverage the resistance imposes compared to how much we can produce to overcome it. It is the persistent conflict we encounter between the physics inside vs outside of the body that gradually and inconspicuously wears us out, especially if we are not cognizant of the “internal” half!

The problem with succeeding is in the price we pay to get the job done. The less we are prepared, the more it costs in orthopedic capital i.e. the greater the risk of joint wear and skeletal deformity.

EXERCISE IS SUPPOSED TO BE (or contain) THE MEDICINE

Ultimately, regardless of the personal interests, intentions/goals, the purpose of training is either (1) to improve the current functional state of a person’s body or (2) for a person to use the body in its current state to perform more “work” than usual for an incidental reward. The incidental reward is the completion of the aforementioned task/“performance”.

The former of these options involves exercising to increase the forcefulness of muscle contractions and to better tolerate the stresses of the torque from resistance, which reduces orthopedic risk, regardless of the encounter, because muscles that contract better spare stress on ligaments and cartilage and keep joints healthy, even in extraordinarily demanding circumstances.

On the contrary, the latter involves training for an event of any kind a.k.a. Performance Training, or utilizing the Performance Training protocols of those events, to win or achieve a “personal best”, at all costs, i.e. without contractile preparation. (Without preparing for the torque of the resistance.) This creates a dependence on ligaments and cartilage to maintain joint positions, resulting in a more hazardous effort. The price is joint erosion. (Short term gain for long term pain.)

Most people, from the afflicted to highly skilled competitive athletes, who choose to “exercise”, are compelled by the short sighted attraction to use the body in its current state and make it work harder, and, most Trainers choose to serve their constituents in the same manner.

There are many sociological and psychological reasons for this (see almost any other article/essay I have written), but for the sake of brevity, suffice to state that most people need a reason other than self-improvement to make a binding commitment, and find that if they persist, even if the performance exceeds their physical ability, they can fulfill their short term desires, which, unfortunately, is a recipe for the aforementioned long term harm.

If the goal is to lose “weight”, the person akin to running will begin to train like a Marathon Athlete, The person who wants to look more muscular will begin to train like a Bodybuilder. The person who wants to get strong will train like a Powerlifter, and the person who simply wants to function better will make “Activities of Daily Living” more difficult by (1) adding resistance to the ordinary task and/or (2) imposing instability to challenge balance and/or perform a combination of unrelated multi-joint movements simultaneously, etc.

This cannot be overstated. Nothing happens without taking a chance, so there is always a consideration for the cost of the risk compared to the value of the reward. Sports and Athletic Performance magnify orthopedic risk tremendously, to the point of broken bones and third grade tissue strains, but at least there is the chance of a substantial reward.

On the contrary, most of the people who participate in Fitness Performance are not athletes, and, in fact, many enter Fitness Performance with existing orthopedic disturbances. However, they train, or are taught to train, in the same reckless (Performance) manner, without the slightest notion of the orthopedic risk.

The payout to the athlete is notoriety, financial gratification i.e. a chance for fame and/or fortune. While that may be a worthy gamble for them, the reward for a Fitness Participant is simply to be more fit! And the Fitness Industry clearly states what that means, which is, to push and pull more, i.e. to challenge a body more than it is accustomed to tolerating in its current state which, incidentally, increases cardiac and pulmonary functions and can, in some cases, provide physique enhancement.

The same Fitness Industry that pledges to “protect the public from harm” would argue that “making a body work harder than normal” provides health benefits like obesity, diabetes, cancer, cardiac disease, asthma, etc., and those claims have merit. The huge problem with this is that the Industry is totally unaware that there is a second half of that sentence in quotations.

The all-important part of the statement that is missing, and the part that validates the Fitness Performance effort required to attain those benefits is, “in its current functional state of physics” which means, because they are ignoring this crucial condition, the “Industry” is encouraging the public to take an orthopedic risk to acquire medical health rewards; not a very good way to “protect the public from harm”.

Performance of any kind is only as hazardous as the “performer” is unprepared to tolerate the incoming torque imposed by the resistance of the challenge. Unfortunately, preparation does not occur simply by increasing body temperature or by arbitrarily attempting to “loosen up”, “get a good stretch” i.e. lengthen muscle tissue by attempting to impose excessive eccentric joint motions, as Fitness experts claim, so in most cases, the chance of hazard is relatively common (and likely) during the performance of any kind.

Effective preparation is like a vaccine. A medical vaccine protects society from disease. The vaccine for performance is protection from orthopedic harm, but only when the ingredients of its formulary include the properties of physics that are negotiated in doses of demand to form this shield.

At the same time, this micro-progressive? process reveals ability. Avail-ability? regarding how much effort the recipient is willing, able and ready, to provide, and Prevail-ability (Eric Glickstein), regarding how much the task requires.

Progressive preparation is a moment of ordinary, easy to control resistance torque followed by successive increases that gradually match the optimal torque of the person’s muscular contractions until ultimately, a prevailing influence of effort to perform can be released, inconsequentially, against the resistance.

Muscles that contract better i.e. more forcefully, produce more relevant force i.e. tension. More tension (related to the task) increases the torque of effort and therefore more leverage ability a.k.a. strength, to mobilize the bones of relevant joints around their axes. (“Lever-ability”) However, there are other factors to consider with regard to the leverage of ability.

Effort is a peculiar aspect of function. It is precariously disturbed or disrupted by many other influences, and can therefore be (or become) unpredictably variable and unreliable. The way to fulfill a task is to know what it takes to succeed, and then to make sure there is enough of it available.

However, there is more to it than the ability to produce a sufficient amount of torque to transcend the resistance. Conscience is involved as well; the mental or conscious effort, which starts with the combination of a thought/idea/goal/desire, and volition; the choice to start doing something i.e. to take a chance, which leads to the physical effort of the performance.

Another aspect of the conscious effort involves on what we focus i.e. how much mobility is required, on what path, with how much inertial influence, etc.? However, “doing” takes energy, so fatigue soon becomes a factor.

Energy expenditure changes everything. As we tire, we lose leverage and with that, we eventually lose mobility. The “eventuality” becomes the contention, and emphasis of the effort shifts successively from mental and physical to psychological.

In short, it gradually becomes more a factor of will i.e. determination and resolve to fulfill the task/performance. So, it’s not just about starting to perform, or how it is being executed. Eventually, the success of it becomes a factor of determining if we are “willing” to tolerate the discomfort of the strain to prevail.

And it isn’t even enough to have the determination. That’s enough to keep us going, but to really attain the adaptation, we need the resolve; enough will to reach the end. We can be willing, but unable, or able but unwilling, and that’s actually the peculiarity of it all.

If the purpose of exercise is to take a body is its existing functional state of physics and simply make it work harder than ordinary work, ability is sacrificed for will, and resolve is ordained for success. “Just Do It” (Nike). “The Only Way is Through” (Under Armor). The process is all about motivation i.e. accelerating through the magnitude of the torque imposed by the resistance of the challenge. Readiness, is the missing link.

However, exercise can be used to fill that void and enable a person to be just as ready as willing and able, by improving the leverage of muscle contractions to better tolerate ordinary and extraordinary demands. The “better tolerate” part comes from the preparation. The “improving the leverage of muscle contractions” part comes from the medicinal value of exercise, and the medicinal value comes from the (matching) physics, inside and outside of the body.

The peculiarity is caused (in part) by the complexity of the process, and in the variability of the recipient, because, to provide this most important benefit (more tolerance to perform work a.k.a. readiness), it is mandatory to not only acknowledge the effort requirements vs the existing ability per individual, but to modify and mediate them with the recipient’s volition, determination, and resolve.  

The medicinal ingredients (of exercise) are the torque of resistance and inertia, which must be imposed in doses that induce optimal tension production and maximal muscle torque, especially at the extremities of the joints’ range, and all of this is “peculiarly”, counter-intuitive.