11 ms·

Minimum effective dose

345 points by surprisetalk 2y ago

notcrazylol 2y ago
This goes back to the goals vs systems debate that Scott Adams talks about in one of his books. Over a long period of time, systems improve your life in compound.
- BJones12 2y ago
  The book is 'How to Fail at Almost Everything and Still Win Big'. I don't think that man is sane, but he is insightful. Maybe there's a Ballmer Peak [0] of crazy/profound that he stumbled on. [0] https://xkcd.com/323/ https://xkcd.com/323/
johnneville 2y ago
"240 minutes a month which is enough to finish 1-2 books" this number stands out to me ! maybe i am slow reader but .5-1 seems more realistic
- wccrawford 2y ago
  It depends on the books. I read a lot of fiction, and it's been a long time since I read a book that could be read in 2 hours. But I've had a few lately that came close.
- dgfitz 2y ago
  8 minutes a day is very specific and I struggle with that, maybe it’s an average? Do they have the exact same schedule all days of the week? How big are the books? Are they “junk food” books or dense? All subject matter or strictly sci-fi or whatever? I’m a big reader. Reading for 8 minutes at a time would either be a whole chapter or half a page depending on the book.
- stevenwoo 2y ago
  Judging by length of audiobooks, four hours is the length of the novella long essay A Room of One’s Own by Virginia Woolf, Terry Pratchett’s Discworld adaptations all come in around 9-10 hours and those are short books that require my full attention due to the wordplay and setup for jokes sometimes being longish. One would have to double the speed and sacrifice comprehension to meet this goal. I had to listen to first hour of some Greg Egan book and the glossary about ten times before I grokked it.
  - kristianp 2y ago
    That raises the question: how much faster can we read without speaking, than read aloud? I'm guessing its a number less than 2 times.
    - soperj 2y ago
      I can definitely read 4 times faster in my head than out loud. I've read books to my kid out loud that take like 30 minutes per chapter, and i doubt it would take more than an hour to read the whole book. I read on the faster side though, and don't have an internal monologue.
      - nicce 2y ago
        I can also read about the same speed but I don’t enjoy reading at that speed at all...
    - ta2112 2y ago
      For me it's 1:1. I read aloud in my head at the same pace that I speak. It seems slow, but little by little I get through what I need. Also, I don't know how to do it another way. So it goes.
    - stevenwoo 2y ago
      It depends upon the material for me. Sometimes with technical or historical books that are essentially reciting data points then conclusions I can read much faster than 2x because if one is paying attention one kind of knows where the writer(s) are going - though I might repeat or pause to write notes or do online research sometimes to memorize and understand new terminology, but for fiction I have to be in a very specific mindset to imagine all the things going on appropriately with movement and emotion and pondering character motivation and the setting, sometimes I just pause and think about what is being described in my minds eye before moving forward in the text.
- soupfordummies 2y ago
  Yeah a minute a page is a decent equivalence depending on the book and reading speed. 240 pages is still a rather short book. A book a month ain't bad though!
- o11c 2y ago
  I've tested myself several times and found I can usually read 1.5 to 3 pages per minute for a typical-size paperback, depending mostly on how "in the zone" I am (with a minor effect from complexity, but most published novels don't different much in reading level). Even down at 1 page per minute, there are plenty of 200-page books so 1 is a reasonable lower bound. Except, the article spreading it out to only 8 minutes per day means you'll never be reading long enough to get in the zone, so ... One notable observation: you need to aggressively prune away the possibility of reading anything with bad (or even inconsistent) grammar; exposure to it poisons your brain's ability to read and write correctly.
- asdf6969 2y ago
  Stands out to me too. I’m usually at 1-2 pages per minute when I’m focused and reading something easier but long non-fiction is more like 240 minutes for 10% of the book
comment_ran 2y ago
合抱之木，生于毫末；九层之台，起于累土；千里之行，始于足下。 [1] This is not secret, almost everyone knows it thousand years ago, but most of people won't do it. Minimum effective dose is another way to say be consistent on thing that you feel important. The 3rd chapter on Atomic Habit also give a very detailed explanation. And it is so easy to find real word examples: "Mental toughness and resilience fade if they aren't used consistently. I say it all the time: you are either getting better, or you're getting worse. You're not staying the same." [2] "That’s often all that’s necessary to get the snowball rolling, the action needed to inspire the motivation to keep going. You can become your own source of inspiration. You can become your own source of motivation. Action is always within reach. And with simply doing something as your only metric for success—well, then even failure pushes you forward." [3] In cycling training: - "I have always been a really consistent rider" [4] - "The biggest difference in my training in in 2018 to today is consistency" [5] - "My Top 5 Tips To Increase Cycling Power: Number one is consistency." [6] - Let's finish up with the five key points to how you can improve your FTP. Number one, be consistent. [7] - I have three kind of important specs in training, so the first one and arguably the very most important is consistency. [8] But if most people agree with this idea, why not everybody do this way? I think is lacking a clear goal, and a good way to measure it. I used to be competitive as cyclist, but as I getting older, I start lossing this part of motivition. Nowadays, I am not training for FTP anymore, but training for "I don't want to make this f*k run in this frozen winter". I want myself to become as hard as Goggins. Life is short, what would you like to be consistent with? [1] 道德经【第六十四章】 [2] Goggins, D. (2022). Never finished: unshackle your mind and win the war within. David Goggins. [3] Manson, M. (2016). The subtle art of not giving a f*ck: a counterintuitive approach to living a good life. New York: HarperOne. [4] 12 questions with Greg van Avermaet https://www.cyclingnews.com/features/12-questions-with-greg-van-avermaet/ [5] 300+ Watt Ramp Test, My 66 Watt Increase - Trainerroad, Zwift, Sufferfest https://youtu.be/HPQUgrd7zR0?t=292 [6] How I Increased My FTP By 140 Watts & My Top 5 Tips To Increase Cycling Power https://youtu.be/FVetgOjQxak?t=313 [7] How to Raise Your FTP || Workouts and Strategies to Boost Your FTP in 2021 https://youtu.be/ECpZ1KxUfyM?t=802 [8] How I´ve doubled my FTP in 3 years https://youtu.be/UJTHfK-hmYw?t=336
gopalv 2y ago
> Nobody says we have to be good at everything we do This is advice I have to push on my kids constantly, because they are obsessed with finding that one thing they are better than everyone else in the world. "Do some" is not advice I got as a kid, but my mom eventually figured it out and told me that when was in my mid 20s or something. Her words (from Malayalam) are best translated as "For whom a little is not enough, nothing is ever enough". I think that's true for everything from money to self-worth. Enough is too hard to have.
- notcrazylol 2y ago
  Ivide oru malayali ne kandu muttum ennu njan orikkalum pradishichittila. Nattil evida?
- monktastic1 2y ago
  Can you help me understand your comment? Being the best at one thing is very different from being good at everything, so it's unclear how that advice applies to your children. Also, what does "do some" mean?
  - neom 2y ago
    Not OP but I read it as: It's ok to just do some. People stress about their abandoned side projects, their career progression, being the best, this world has become hyper competitive, hyper "do" - this wasn't and isn't the default for a lot of people and a lot of history, there is a lot of joy to be found in just "do some" - but it's a dying art.
    - notnaut 2y ago
      To add to this, I think the stress of wanting to be great, or maybe profitable in a certain realm, can stop people from anything like practice on a regular, consistent basis. They’ll maybe read, watch tutorials, engage in social media, chat about doing a thing, but then never actually do it regularly enough (even poorly or briefly) to see what their improvement trajectory looks like. They’ll go a week or month between engaging in doing a thing (even if not specifically denoted “practice,”) and only do when bursts of excitement or inspiration hit. And because of the gaps between starting basically from scratch each time, they stay a beginner for years and years with no insight on their actual capabilities. Certainly guilty myself.
sedivy94 2y ago
“Minimum effective dose” is a concept I picked up from years of amateur bodybuilding. Seeing that same context in the beginning of the article was a treat! Minimum effective dose has been a pretty powerful concept for me over the years and has some overlap with “The 80/20 Rule”. It’s allowed my to make small investments in goals and snuff out insecurities that arise, such as the feeling of not trying hard enough.
- keyle 2y ago
  It 100% works. Totally agree with you.
robocat 2y ago
> even if I can only read 5 minutes before bed, I do it anyway I would worry about operant conditioning myself to associate reading with sleep. One friend put on movies to help them go to sleep. Later she struggled to watch movies without falling asleep. I overthink this concept, so I'm overly cautious about what activities I mix together because I fear the risk of training strange subconscious responses in myself.
- Semaphor 2y ago
  I’ve been reading in bed before sleeping since I was a kid. For years, I’ve almost exclusively read in bed (+ public transport, but that’s rather rare, less than 1/month). Yet when I am tired, or just don’t have the time to read 30–60 minutes, I have as much trouble skipping reading as I have going to bed early to get an extra hour of reading in, which is to say none at all. All this to say: YMMV ;)
kylecazar 2y ago
I like the philosophy and employ it myself. Regarding the gym, specifically lifting -- progressive overload ( thus muscle growth) can definitely be accomplished in a minimal amount of time. BUT, it requires a high to maximum amount of effort to be effective, so not sure if that counts.
- Mainsail 2y ago
  You can be in and out of the gym in 30-40 minutes using a PPL.
  - roganartu 2y ago
    Notoriously difficult to find one with a landing strip inside, however.
  - YZF 2y ago
    PPL = Push/Pull/Legs? A full body 40 minute routine using supersets will work great for most people. x3 a week (might be too much if you're just starting so ease into it) is going to also be great for most. I think the latest science favours full body workouts over splits. I find it easier and more enjoyable as well.
    - Mainsail 2y ago
      Correct. Absolutely agree and my intent was more that the majority of the proven routines can have you out of the gym pretty quickly. Full body, upper / lower split, PPL, etc. But yet - totally agree.
  - occz 2y ago
    5/3/1 has a bunch of variations that take about that amount of time and still gives you consistent progress, as well.
- wyre 2y ago
  It absolutely applies to lifting and progressive overload. A measure of progressive overload can be applied to amount of time spend lifting, also knows as time-under-tension, it can also apply inversely with shortened rest periods. Whether or not these methods align with your fitness goals, is a separate issue. Effort, or what the fitness industry calls Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE), is another lever to pull with progressive overload, and is necessary in programming for all experience levels. Beginners start their programs using minimal weights, slowly increasing the weight each week as their skill improves and through that process their strength and muscles grow. A more advanced lifter, will need a higher minimum effective dose due to what is needed to trigger adaptation, will manipulate RPE throughout their programming to manage fatigue accrued throughout the program. A great personal trainer is someone that will help their clients find their own personal mimimum dose of training that aligns with their fitness goals.
yowayb 2y ago
I spent most of college in the gym. I quickly hit my size limit. Strength seemed to improve slowly. Then I did a popular steroid cycle. Of course I got huge. 5 years later I did trenbolone so I got big AND strong. But the relevant bit is 5 years after that, I tried 1/4 the dosage, plus only 15 minutes in the gym every day (1 set of 3-rep max of each of the major lifts). I got just as big, and was actually stronger than I had ever been thru the full dose cycles. Outside of the gym, I regularly halve the dose of any prescriptions or suggested dose of recreational drugs. A friend even told me he saw a Buddhist monk take a tiny shot of liquor and sit and meditate on that single shot for hours. And finally, if I may take a sad turn, my father got trigeminal neuralgia but he's largely avoided all drugs all his life, so the standard dose hits him way too hard.
- aqueueaqueue 2y ago
  Is this literal muscle memory. The big dose earlier in life sets you up for needing a smaller dose later. Like riding a bike.
  - munificent 2y ago
    No, muscle memory refers to a different phenomenon where nerves outside of our brain can be trained and get better at skills. I think what you're seeing here is that when you initially build muscle, you are building new muscle cells. When you lose those gains, you still mostly have the same number of cells, but they muscle fibers in them reduce. When you go to regain it, it's easier to regain because you still have most of the celluar framework there. Or, at least, that's how it was explained to me. I probably have some details wrong.
    - sunshowers 2y ago
      There are two distinct but related phenomena, both called muscle memory: the motor learning you're talking about, and strength training: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle_memory_(strength_training) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle_memory_(strength_traini...
aqueueaqueue 2y ago
https://youtu.be/OTrTqs9FLq0 https://youtu.be/OTrTqs9FLq0 is relevant
efavdb 2y ago
Curious if this “just enough to remind the body you still need something” relates to the spaced repetition idea for learning / memorizing facts.
munificent 2y ago
> With the body it is almost always use it or lose it. It is wild how intense this effect is. Last year, I broke my ankle. I couldn't use that leg at all. Within two months, almost all of the muscle in that calf was gone. Just eight weeks and while one leg still looked normal and the other was a stick. Even the flesh that was still there was soft and spongy. When I got an X-ray later, the surgeon said I had the bones of an 80-year-old in that leg. All the bone density, just gone. It's crazy how rapidly a human body will cannibalize itself if you don't use something. From what I've heard, this is an evolutionary adaptation unique to humans. Most other animals just have the muscles they have regardless of use. But, perhaps because we went through a narrow population window during the Ice Age, we've evolved this ability to harvest our own resources to survive. Probably great for not starving to death, but a real bummer if you're trying to be fit.
- purple-leafy 2y ago
  Sorry to hear about your leg! When they said “80 year old bones” is that just due to the reduced usage from the broken ankle? Or something more? I feel like my bone density must’ve decreased over the years from arthritis (diagnosed at ~ 25) - less usage of the legs, less bone density. But getting back into it now, and have found a happy middle ground where I can still be pretty active and not in the pain. Cycling is the way to go, and many shorter walks more often
  - munificent 2y ago
    > When they said “80 year old bones” is that just due to the reduced usage from the broken ankle? Yes, just lowered bone density from not using it. Bone density increases in response to stress placed on the bone, especially impact stress. No stress on the bone and it basically hollows out. > Cycling is the way to go Yeah, I started biking to work a few years ago for my health. That's how I broke my ankle. :-/ Slipped in a puddle and landed really wrong. Trimalleolar fracture with dislocation and severe fracture blisters.
- SuperNinKenDo 2y ago
  It really is wild. I don't know how your recovery is going, but for anyone worried about this kind of thibg, I will say, that the body does seem to have some kind of memory for prior use snd development generally. For those of us who have worked out moderately to intensely only to suffer an injury or life getting in the way of maintaining consistent practice at the same level, you will find that when you return to working out, you tend to return to fairly close to your prior peak in far less time than it took to get there. Similar to how muscle memory can lead to very quick progression back to your prior level of skill in something that you haven't done in years. You won't be back to your prior peak, but you'll close 70-90% of the gap shockingly quick. EDIT: One thing to look out for in situations like GP though, in which development becomes lopsided, is your body will develop lopsided compensation for the disaprity. A lot of physiotherapy often involves learning to force your body to not engage in these compensatory measures so that the diminished or injured part of your body can rebuild its strength and stability correctly.
purple-leafy 2y ago
This is a good thought process. I’m hauling my ass to the gym 7 days a week, just to build consistency and make it part of my life. Does that mean I push hard 7 days? No! I do intense weights 3 times a week, accessories 2 times a week, and cardio and Pilates 2 times a week. The other day I was borked from work, so I just did a very light 30 minute bike ride. It was enough to feel good and feel on track. Just a side note: there is a lot of time in a day, once you reduce social media usage and information gathering, you have loads of time, especially if you’re young and single and childless. Make the most of it :)
ziofill 2y ago
So true! May I add that timing and context matters too. When I was living in Paris I used to read on the subway to and from work, which added up to 30 minutes a day. I went through lots of books that I would otherwise not have the mental strength to bring myself to read when I’m at home and I have my laptop as an alternative…
xhrpost 2y ago
I've done a lot of broad research on exercise in recent years. While there is certainly a dose dependent relationship with results, it's amazing how little you can do to get "some" results. A few stats from studies or articles I've seen in the past: - Just twelve minutes of exercise is correlated with positive health improvements - As little as two minutes of walking after eating has a positive improvement in blood sugar
sedatk 2y ago
This reminds me of the concept of "no zero days": To build up a habit or a skill, do at least the minimum required to acquire that habit or skill. If it's push-ups, do just one push-up, just to keep the streak of no zero days. If it's writing code, write one line of code. The magic is that, the greatest friction comes from the resistance to doing anything at all instead of doing it all the way.
- YZF 2y ago
  With many types of skills putting in some time every day can be very beneficial. Keep in mind though that with things like strength your body also needs recovery time (in fact your gains happen during recovery, not during the workout).
- occz 2y ago
  Exercise does however explicitly require some zero days, a lesson I've learned the hard way. You need time to recover, and that involves doing nothing.
  - skrebbel 2y ago
    To my experience this is only true if you totally max yourself out when exercising. An alternative is to do light (ish) exercise every day. Makes getting totally ripped pretty much impossible, but it makes staying fit easy, because it's easy to build a habit around and it's easy to make fun.
    - makeitdouble 2y ago
      I'd see it as covering for sick days, busier days etc. Some people purposefully break their streaks and habits to make sure they give themselves mental room to have 0 days whenever needed. (Ultimately it comes down to what's harder for you, to start or to stop. Some need strong boosters to start, others need reminders to stop)
      - skrebbel 2y ago
EZ-E 2y ago
Can relate with the whole "It may come as a surprise how little time we truly need at the gym to gain strength and muscle. I think it is all about sending our bodies the right signals" thing. Just jumping in the pool to swim 20 minutes 2 or 3 times a week dropped my resting heart rate significantly week over week, as measured by my watch, although it's a low amount of exercise... I wake up to notifications for sub 40 BPM whereas I did not before.
- YZF 2y ago
  One set a week per muscle group of weight training can already give you some gains. You'll max out your gains at a lot higher (10-20 maybe). When you start working out a lot of your strength comes not from your muscles getting stronger but your body learning to use them properly. I.e. your nervous system. Are you doing interval training in your swimming? I think how you train can have a big impact on your VO2MAX improvement vs. time invested. That said long distance running does require a lot of time investment. I'm not sure if you can get to run a marathon by running an hour a week but I expect that answer is no.
  - EZ-E 2y ago
    > Are you doing interval training in your swimming? I think how you train can have a big impact on your VO2MAX improvement vs. time invested. That said long distance running does require a lot of time investment. I'm not sure if you can get to run a marathon by running an hour a week but I expect that answer is no. What had the biggest impact on RHR was when I was just swimming 1km per session at normal pace (it took me about 25 mins, I'm a beginner). RHR dropped week over week down to 42. When I got a coach he had me do mostly interval training and interestingly my RHR crept higher although I did improve in terms of speed. Past month I've been lazier and training again to swim continuously and I see my RHR decreasing again. Unsure about the science of it and whether it applies to others. I don't think RHR is necessarily a marker for fitness but I thought it was interesting that pretty significant change was happening although I was maybe swimming 30 mins a couple of times a week.
- lrem 2y ago
  You're lucky. I've clocked in almost 3000km and over 20'000m of elevation gain cycling last year. I also swim and hike. My resting heart rate dropped by about 1BPM and it's nowhere near as low as yours.
netcan 2y ago
There was/is a trend of "science gyms" that do 20 minute per week personal training. The meticulous PT format and exercise selection allows them to achieve more muscle gain in 20 minutes per week than median trainees achieve in 2-3 hours. The short sessions make personal training economically viable. That said... optimizing that heavily tends to eliminate all unmeasured benefits. The habit forming. Mentality/personality changes that would occur from more typical exercise approaches. Cardio. Etc. But... it does demonstrate the principle. Minimum effective doses are powerful. But, they require precision. Also... you need to consider the candidate. If your body is adapted to almost no exercise... it is also highly sensitive to seemingly small doses of it. What is or is not "exercise" is mostly determined by proximity to your day to day. If you never exercise, never speak to other people, or never eat any fresh food... a little goes a very long way.
- FinnLobsien 2y ago
  > Minimum effective doses are powerful. But, they require precision. And it's also important to think about the fact that an MED doesn't get you the biggest effect size. It's the minimum to get a desired effect, but that doesn't mean you get the most of that effect. You may get more fit in 20 minutes per week than if you did zero, but you certainly can't match someone who works out 5 times a week. An MED is great for something necessary you want to get out of the way. But this kind of thinking takes the joy out of doing things you thoroughly enjoy and perfecting minute details nobody else will ever care about, just because you care so much about the craft.
- rd11235 2y ago
  > The meticulous PT format and exercise selection allows them to achieve more muscle gain in 20 minutes per week than median trainees achieve in 2-3 hours. This is a strong statement that is presented without evidence, and which conflicts with scientific consensus. Studies show again and again that the most important factors are consistency and training volume. If the program is more effective, which is questionable in itself, then the reasons are likely 1. reduction of burnout and/or 2. much more intense training. Not PT format or exercise selection.
xlii 2y ago
It’s a great read and a great advice. There’s something I’ve noticed lately. The only thing that differentiates bad from great is time, and IMO talent is often mistaken with preference. E.g. it’s not like great engineers become great by work and talent. The best I know love reading, talking, experimenting and exploring. In the evenings, over weekends. It’s time, but time over the preference. I liked to ask people during job interviews what they find fun in computing and (anecdotally of course) even deep introverts have that spark in their eyes when they’re fascinated. Edit: I also remembered that Tiny Habits by BJ Fogg talks about that topic. Good read and strategies there worked for me.
nicbou 2y ago
The first step to becoming anything - an artist, a programmer, a fit dude - is falling in love with the process, or at least developing the discipline to practice regularly. I heard from gym people that just being at the gym free regularly without even doing anything there is a better first step than going all out once then never going again. In a similar vein there is a wonderful video essay called The Toolbox Fallacy. It's about how people fancy themselves artists and keep delaying the things that would make them an artist. They wait for the right degree, the right tools, the right breakthrough. In the end, painting is what makes a painter, not collecting paintbrushes. I could only apply this advice when I accepted that the output of my work would suck for a while. I went to sketching sessions and sketched wildly deformed bodies. But damn it I was drawing. Same with blogging, and with talking to strangers. In the words of a cartoon dog, "sucking at something is the first step towards being sorta good at something". While most wisdom is gained as you age, this one is progressively lost. We lose the ability to play, and the willingness to fail.
- z3t4 2y ago
  We also enjoy doing things that we are good at. So you need a lot of discipline and patience if you want to become good at something you're bad at. There's usually beginner "gains" meaning that something might seem impossible at the beginning, only to become easy within a few weeks, so you best wait until you have got the "beginner gains" before you decide to quit.
  - nicbou 2y ago
    Anyway, here's Wonderwall
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
aucisson_masque 2y ago
Counterpoint. When you go to gym to make muscle, one of the first thing you learn is that you need the right intensity to force your body to increase its muscle. Even if you give 70% intensity everyday during a year, it won't be enough to make the slightest change. It got to be all in aka very close to failure to start seeing improvement otherwise the body rebuild the muscle but doesn't grow it.
- coolThingsFirst 2y ago
  You have absolutely not set foot in the gym. The average person will build muscle with zero discomfort in the gym.
  - aucisson_masque 2y ago
    Lol, you are kidding right ? I spend enough years when being teenager at the gym to know a thing or two, i saw lots of people doing half ass job and still being skinny twat months later. The big ones were always pushing the limit.
- authorfly 2y ago
  I agree with this though it's only relevant beyond newbie periods. PTs won't talk about it since it's not motivating, which makes sense. During a stressed part of life, I slid into staying with the same routine, doing 70% intensity (cutting a set or two off each workout, or rushing them), and stopped going up in strength and muscle size. You could say I have bad genetics but I've had some sport talent and been considered "fit" by a few people so I think I'm average/lucky on muscle genetics. I basically maintained the muscle but I threw away that time. I kept going into the gym 4-5 days a week like I had when putting on gains, but I could have maintained the muscle (as I have since) on 2-3 days a week. All the difference was in that 70% --> 85% intensity difference. Once I did that, without changing programme, gains came back. I think that this "hidden plateau" is secretly why so many people bail on the gym.
coolThingsFirst 2y ago
[flagged]
_1tem 2y ago
Another area where this is effective is in learning a language. Just 5-10 minutes of Anki practice a day is a lot better than nothing but hopes and dreams. And flashcard apps work in such a way that even if you get lazy for months, you'll be surprised at how quickly you are able to remember and catch up.
Rickasaurus 2y ago
I've been trying to find a minimum effective dose for spoken mandarin practice, but without much luck. Any ideas?
- mcho421 2y ago
  There's a technique called "Shadowing" that only takes 15 minutes a day which worked for known polyglot Alexander Arguelles to learn and maintain the many languages he knows. https://youtu.be/MqR3K1alUio https://youtu.be/MqR3K1alUio
catigula 2y ago
I'm really surprised people didn't know this. I recall Rippetoe & Kilgore speculating in Practical Programming for Strength Training that 70-80% of all muscular gains occur in the first set. I had OpenAI's deep research look into this and its sources concluded that "One-set routines can achieve roughly 60–70% of the muscle growth that higher-volume (3–5 set) routines produce". You can do one set of various exercises and be out of the gym in minutes. Of course, this sounds ridiculous, but appears to be true.
- ImHereToVote 2y ago
  I also understand the stretched muscle pose is where the biggest gains are coming from. So one could theoretically cheese, by doing only a quarter of the exercise. (Don't do this, you will damage yourself).
- sentimentscan 2y ago
  >"One-set routines can achieve roughly 60–70% of the muscle growth that higher-volume (3–5 set) routines produce". Do you have any source for that? I know Mike Mentzer and heavy duty programs, but the devil is in the details.
  - catigula 2y ago
    This is what GPT-4 summarized from deep research. Krieger, J. W. (2010). Single versus multiple sets of resistance exercise: A meta-regression. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 24(4), 1150-1159. This meta-analysis found that multiple sets lead to ~40% more muscle growth compared to a single set. Schoenfeld, B. J., Ogborn, D., & Krieger, J. W. (2017). Dose-response relationship between weekly resistance training volume and muscle growth: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Sports Sciences, 35(11), 1073-1082. Concluded that higher training volumes (≥10 weekly sets per muscle group) produce greater hypertrophy. Ralston, G. W., Kilgore, L., Wyatt, F. B., & Baker, J. S. (2017). The effect of weekly set volume on strength gain: A meta-analysis. Sports Medicine, 47(12), 2585-2601. Found that strength and hypertrophy improve as volume increases up to a certain point. Schoenfeld, B. J. (2016). Science and development of muscle hypertrophy. Human Kinetics. Discusses the mechanisms of hypertrophy and the role of training volume. American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) Position Stand (2009). Progression models in resistance training for healthy adults. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 41(3), 687-708. Provides guidelines for resistance training and muscle growth. Haun, C. T., Vann, C. G., Osburn, S. C., et al. (2018). A 6-week resistance training study on the minimum effective training dose for muscle hypertrophy in trained men. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 118(3), 593-605. Found that low-volume training still leads to substantial hypertrophy but not maximal growth. Heaselgrave, S. R., Blacker, S. D., et al. (2019). Effects of resistance training frequency on hypertrophy and strength: A systematic review. Sports Medicine, 49(12), 1935-1947. Concludes that training a muscle 2–3 times per week is more effective than once per week for hypertrophy.
D-Coder 2y ago
The only exercise that counts is the exercise that you do. If you start with a five-minute walk around the block, that's better than a three-mile run that you never actually do. And you can gradually increase the length of the walk when you feel comfortable with the current level.

345 points by surprisetalk 2y ago

This goes back to the goals vs systems debate that Scott Adams talks about in one of his books. Over a long period of time, systems improve your life in compound.

BJones12 2y ago
The book is 'How to Fail at Almost Everything and Still Win Big'. I don't think that man is sane, but he is insightful. Maybe there's a Ballmer Peak [0] of crazy/profound that he stumbled on. [0] https://xkcd.com/323/ https://xkcd.com/323/

johnneville 2y ago

"240 minutes a month which is enough to finish 1-2 books" this number stands out to me ! maybe i am slow reader but .5-1 seems more realistic

wccrawford 2y ago
It depends on the books. I read a lot of fiction, and it's been a long time since I read a book that could be read in 2 hours. But I've had a few lately that came close.
dgfitz 2y ago
8 minutes a day is very specific and I struggle with that, maybe it’s an average? Do they have the exact same schedule all days of the week? How big are the books? Are they “junk food” books or dense? All subject matter or strictly sci-fi or whatever? I’m a big reader. Reading for 8 minutes at a time would either be a whole chapter or half a page depending on the book.
stevenwoo 2y ago
Judging by length of audiobooks, four hours is the length of the novella long essay A Room of One’s Own by Virginia Woolf, Terry Pratchett’s Discworld adaptations all come in around 9-10 hours and those are short books that require my full attention due to the wordplay and setup for jokes sometimes being longish. One would have to double the speed and sacrifice comprehension to meet this goal. I had to listen to first hour of some Greg Egan book and the glossary about ten times before I grokked it.
- kristianp 2y ago
  That raises the question: how much faster can we read without speaking, than read aloud? I'm guessing its a number less than 2 times.
  - soperj 2y ago
    I can definitely read 4 times faster in my head than out loud. I've read books to my kid out loud that take like 30 minutes per chapter, and i doubt it would take more than an hour to read the whole book. I read on the faster side though, and don't have an internal monologue.
    - nicce 2y ago
      I can also read about the same speed but I don’t enjoy reading at that speed at all...
  - ta2112 2y ago
    For me it's 1:1. I read aloud in my head at the same pace that I speak. It seems slow, but little by little I get through what I need. Also, I don't know how to do it another way. So it goes.
  - stevenwoo 2y ago
    It depends upon the material for me. Sometimes with technical or historical books that are essentially reciting data points then conclusions I can read much faster than 2x because if one is paying attention one kind of knows where the writer(s) are going - though I might repeat or pause to write notes or do online research sometimes to memorize and understand new terminology, but for fiction I have to be in a very specific mindset to imagine all the things going on appropriately with movement and emotion and pondering character motivation and the setting, sometimes I just pause and think about what is being described in my minds eye before moving forward in the text.
soupfordummies 2y ago
Yeah a minute a page is a decent equivalence depending on the book and reading speed. 240 pages is still a rather short book. A book a month ain't bad though!
o11c 2y ago
I've tested myself several times and found I can usually read 1.5 to 3 pages per minute for a typical-size paperback, depending mostly on how "in the zone" I am (with a minor effect from complexity, but most published novels don't different much in reading level). Even down at 1 page per minute, there are plenty of 200-page books so 1 is a reasonable lower bound. Except, the article spreading it out to only 8 minutes per day means you'll never be reading long enough to get in the zone, so ... One notable observation: you need to aggressively prune away the possibility of reading anything with bad (or even inconsistent) grammar; exposure to it poisons your brain's ability to read and write correctly.
asdf6969 2y ago
Stands out to me too. I’m usually at 1-2 pages per minute when I’m focused and reading something easier but long non-fiction is more like 240 minutes for 10% of the book

comment_ran 2y ago

合抱之木，生于毫末；九层之台，起于累土；千里之行，始于足下。 [1] This is not secret, almost everyone knows it thousand years ago, but most of people won't do it. Minimum effective dose is another way to say be consistent on thing that you feel important. The 3rd chapter on Atomic Habit also give a very detailed explanation. And it is so easy to find real word examples: "Mental toughness and resilience fade if they aren't used consistently. I say it all the time: you are either getting better, or you're getting worse. You're not staying the same." [2] "That’s often all that’s necessary to get the snowball rolling, the action needed to inspire the motivation to keep going. You can become your own source of inspiration. You can become your own source of motivation. Action is always within reach. And with simply doing something as your only metric for success—well, then even failure pushes you forward." [3] In cycling training: - "I have always been a really consistent rider" [4] - "The biggest difference in my training in in 2018 to today is consistency" [5] - "My Top 5 Tips To Increase Cycling Power: Number one is consistency." [6] - Let's finish up with the five key points to how you can improve your FTP. Number one, be consistent. [7] - I have three kind of important specs in training, so the first one and arguably the very most important is consistency. [8] But if most people agree with this idea, why not everybody do this way? I think is lacking a clear goal, and a good way to measure it. I used to be competitive as cyclist, but as I getting older, I start lossing this part of motivition. Nowadays, I am not training for FTP anymore, but training for "I don't want to make this f*k run in this frozen winter". I want myself to become as hard as Goggins. Life is short, what would you like to be consistent with? [1] 道德经【第六十四章】 [2] Goggins, D. (2022). Never finished: unshackle your mind and win the war within. David Goggins. [3] Manson, M. (2016). The subtle art of not giving a f*ck: a counterintuitive approach to living a good life. New York: HarperOne. [4] 12 questions with Greg van Avermaet https://www.cyclingnews.com/features/12-questions-with-greg-van-avermaet/ [5] 300+ Watt Ramp Test, My 66 Watt Increase - Trainerroad, Zwift, Sufferfest https://youtu.be/HPQUgrd7zR0?t=292 [6] How I Increased My FTP By 140 Watts & My Top 5 Tips To Increase Cycling Power https://youtu.be/FVetgOjQxak?t=313 [7] How to Raise Your FTP || Workouts and Strategies to Boost Your FTP in 2021 https://youtu.be/ECpZ1KxUfyM?t=802 [8] How I´ve doubled my FTP in 3 years https://youtu.be/UJTHfK-hmYw?t=336

gopalv 2y ago

> Nobody says we have to be good at everything we do This is advice I have to push on my kids constantly, because they are obsessed with finding that one thing they are better than everyone else in the world. "Do some" is not advice I got as a kid, but my mom eventually figured it out and told me that when was in my mid 20s or something. Her words (from Malayalam) are best translated as "For whom a little is not enough, nothing is ever enough". I think that's true for everything from money to self-worth. Enough is too hard to have.

notcrazylol 2y ago
Ivide oru malayali ne kandu muttum ennu njan orikkalum pradishichittila. Nattil evida?
monktastic1 2y ago
Can you help me understand your comment? Being the best at one thing is very different from being good at everything, so it's unclear how that advice applies to your children. Also, what does "do some" mean?
- neom 2y ago
  Not OP but I read it as: It's ok to just do some. People stress about their abandoned side projects, their career progression, being the best, this world has become hyper competitive, hyper "do" - this wasn't and isn't the default for a lot of people and a lot of history, there is a lot of joy to be found in just "do some" - but it's a dying art.
  - notnaut 2y ago
    To add to this, I think the stress of wanting to be great, or maybe profitable in a certain realm, can stop people from anything like practice on a regular, consistent basis. They’ll maybe read, watch tutorials, engage in social media, chat about doing a thing, but then never actually do it regularly enough (even poorly or briefly) to see what their improvement trajectory looks like. They’ll go a week or month between engaging in doing a thing (even if not specifically denoted “practice,”) and only do when bursts of excitement or inspiration hit. And because of the gaps between starting basically from scratch each time, they stay a beginner for years and years with no insight on their actual capabilities. Certainly guilty myself.

sedivy94 2y ago

“Minimum effective dose” is a concept I picked up from years of amateur bodybuilding. Seeing that same context in the beginning of the article was a treat! Minimum effective dose has been a pretty powerful concept for me over the years and has some overlap with “The 80/20 Rule”. It’s allowed my to make small investments in goals and snuff out insecurities that arise, such as the feeling of not trying hard enough.

keyle 2y ago
It 100% works. Totally agree with you.

robocat 2y ago

> even if I can only read 5 minutes before bed, I do it anyway I would worry about operant conditioning myself to associate reading with sleep. One friend put on movies to help them go to sleep. Later she struggled to watch movies without falling asleep. I overthink this concept, so I'm overly cautious about what activities I mix together because I fear the risk of training strange subconscious responses in myself.

Semaphor 2y ago
I’ve been reading in bed before sleeping since I was a kid. For years, I’ve almost exclusively read in bed (+ public transport, but that’s rather rare, less than 1/month). Yet when I am tired, or just don’t have the time to read 30–60 minutes, I have as much trouble skipping reading as I have going to bed early to get an extra hour of reading in, which is to say none at all. All this to say: YMMV ;)

kylecazar 2y ago

I like the philosophy and employ it myself. Regarding the gym, specifically lifting -- progressive overload ( thus muscle growth) can definitely be accomplished in a minimal amount of time. BUT, it requires a high to maximum amount of effort to be effective, so not sure if that counts.

Mainsail 2y ago
You can be in and out of the gym in 30-40 minutes using a PPL.
- roganartu 2y ago
  Notoriously difficult to find one with a landing strip inside, however.
- YZF 2y ago
  PPL = Push/Pull/Legs? A full body 40 minute routine using supersets will work great for most people. x3 a week (might be too much if you're just starting so ease into it) is going to also be great for most. I think the latest science favours full body workouts over splits. I find it easier and more enjoyable as well.
  - Mainsail 2y ago
    Correct. Absolutely agree and my intent was more that the majority of the proven routines can have you out of the gym pretty quickly. Full body, upper / lower split, PPL, etc. But yet - totally agree.
- occz 2y ago
  5/3/1 has a bunch of variations that take about that amount of time and still gives you consistent progress, as well.
wyre 2y ago
It absolutely applies to lifting and progressive overload. A measure of progressive overload can be applied to amount of time spend lifting, also knows as time-under-tension, it can also apply inversely with shortened rest periods. Whether or not these methods align with your fitness goals, is a separate issue. Effort, or what the fitness industry calls Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE), is another lever to pull with progressive overload, and is necessary in programming for all experience levels. Beginners start their programs using minimal weights, slowly increasing the weight each week as their skill improves and through that process their strength and muscles grow. A more advanced lifter, will need a higher minimum effective dose due to what is needed to trigger adaptation, will manipulate RPE throughout their programming to manage fatigue accrued throughout the program. A great personal trainer is someone that will help their clients find their own personal mimimum dose of training that aligns with their fitness goals.

yowayb 2y ago

I spent most of college in the gym. I quickly hit my size limit. Strength seemed to improve slowly. Then I did a popular steroid cycle. Of course I got huge. 5 years later I did trenbolone so I got big AND strong. But the relevant bit is 5 years after that, I tried 1/4 the dosage, plus only 15 minutes in the gym every day (1 set of 3-rep max of each of the major lifts). I got just as big, and was actually stronger than I had ever been thru the full dose cycles. Outside of the gym, I regularly halve the dose of any prescriptions or suggested dose of recreational drugs. A friend even told me he saw a Buddhist monk take a tiny shot of liquor and sit and meditate on that single shot for hours. And finally, if I may take a sad turn, my father got trigeminal neuralgia but he's largely avoided all drugs all his life, so the standard dose hits him way too hard.

aqueueaqueue 2y ago
Is this literal muscle memory. The big dose earlier in life sets you up for needing a smaller dose later. Like riding a bike.
- munificent 2y ago
  No, muscle memory refers to a different phenomenon where nerves outside of our brain can be trained and get better at skills. I think what you're seeing here is that when you initially build muscle, you are building new muscle cells. When you lose those gains, you still mostly have the same number of cells, but they muscle fibers in them reduce. When you go to regain it, it's easier to regain because you still have most of the celluar framework there. Or, at least, that's how it was explained to me. I probably have some details wrong.
  - sunshowers 2y ago
    There are two distinct but related phenomena, both called muscle memory: the motor learning you're talking about, and strength training: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle_memory_(strength_training) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle_memory_(strength_traini...

aqueueaqueue 2y ago

https://youtu.be/OTrTqs9FLq0 https://youtu.be/OTrTqs9FLq0 is relevant

efavdb 2y ago

Curious if this “just enough to remind the body you still need something” relates to the spaced repetition idea for learning / memorizing facts.

munificent 2y ago

> With the body it is almost always use it or lose it. It is wild how intense this effect is. Last year, I broke my ankle. I couldn't use that leg at all. Within two months, almost all of the muscle in that calf was gone. Just eight weeks and while one leg still looked normal and the other was a stick. Even the flesh that was still there was soft and spongy. When I got an X-ray later, the surgeon said I had the bones of an 80-year-old in that leg. All the bone density, just gone. It's crazy how rapidly a human body will cannibalize itself if you don't use something. From what I've heard, this is an evolutionary adaptation unique to humans. Most other animals just have the muscles they have regardless of use. But, perhaps because we went through a narrow population window during the Ice Age, we've evolved this ability to harvest our own resources to survive. Probably great for not starving to death, but a real bummer if you're trying to be fit.

purple-leafy 2y ago
Sorry to hear about your leg! When they said “80 year old bones” is that just due to the reduced usage from the broken ankle? Or something more? I feel like my bone density must’ve decreased over the years from arthritis (diagnosed at ~ 25) - less usage of the legs, less bone density. But getting back into it now, and have found a happy middle ground where I can still be pretty active and not in the pain. Cycling is the way to go, and many shorter walks more often
- munificent 2y ago
  > When they said “80 year old bones” is that just due to the reduced usage from the broken ankle? Yes, just lowered bone density from not using it. Bone density increases in response to stress placed on the bone, especially impact stress. No stress on the bone and it basically hollows out. > Cycling is the way to go Yeah, I started biking to work a few years ago for my health. That's how I broke my ankle. :-/ Slipped in a puddle and landed really wrong. Trimalleolar fracture with dislocation and severe fracture blisters.
SuperNinKenDo 2y ago
It really is wild. I don't know how your recovery is going, but for anyone worried about this kind of thibg, I will say, that the body does seem to have some kind of memory for prior use snd development generally. For those of us who have worked out moderately to intensely only to suffer an injury or life getting in the way of maintaining consistent practice at the same level, you will find that when you return to working out, you tend to return to fairly close to your prior peak in far less time than it took to get there. Similar to how muscle memory can lead to very quick progression back to your prior level of skill in something that you haven't done in years. You won't be back to your prior peak, but you'll close 70-90% of the gap shockingly quick. EDIT: One thing to look out for in situations like GP though, in which development becomes lopsided, is your body will develop lopsided compensation for the disaprity. A lot of physiotherapy often involves learning to force your body to not engage in these compensatory measures so that the diminished or injured part of your body can rebuild its strength and stability correctly.

purple-leafy 2y ago

This is a good thought process. I’m hauling my ass to the gym 7 days a week, just to build consistency and make it part of my life. Does that mean I push hard 7 days? No! I do intense weights 3 times a week, accessories 2 times a week, and cardio and Pilates 2 times a week. The other day I was borked from work, so I just did a very light 30 minute bike ride. It was enough to feel good and feel on track. Just a side note: there is a lot of time in a day, once you reduce social media usage and information gathering, you have loads of time, especially if you’re young and single and childless. Make the most of it :)

ziofill 2y ago

So true! May I add that timing and context matters too. When I was living in Paris I used to read on the subway to and from work, which added up to 30 minutes a day. I went through lots of books that I would otherwise not have the mental strength to bring myself to read when I’m at home and I have my laptop as an alternative…

xhrpost 2y ago

I've done a lot of broad research on exercise in recent years. While there is certainly a dose dependent relationship with results, it's amazing how little you can do to get "some" results. A few stats from studies or articles I've seen in the past: - Just twelve minutes of exercise is correlated with positive health improvements - As little as two minutes of walking after eating has a positive improvement in blood sugar

sedatk 2y ago

This reminds me of the concept of "no zero days": To build up a habit or a skill, do at least the minimum required to acquire that habit or skill. If it's push-ups, do just one push-up, just to keep the streak of no zero days. If it's writing code, write one line of code. The magic is that, the greatest friction comes from the resistance to doing anything at all instead of doing it all the way.

YZF 2y ago
With many types of skills putting in some time every day can be very beneficial. Keep in mind though that with things like strength your body also needs recovery time (in fact your gains happen during recovery, not during the workout).
occz 2y ago
Exercise does however explicitly require some zero days, a lesson I've learned the hard way. You need time to recover, and that involves doing nothing.
- skrebbel 2y ago
  To my experience this is only true if you totally max yourself out when exercising. An alternative is to do light (ish) exercise every day. Makes getting totally ripped pretty much impossible, but it makes staying fit easy, because it's easy to build a habit around and it's easy to make fun.
  - makeitdouble 2y ago
    I'd see it as covering for sick days, busier days etc. Some people purposefully break their streaks and habits to make sure they give themselves mental room to have 0 days whenever needed. (Ultimately it comes down to what's harder for you, to start or to stop. Some need strong boosters to start, others need reminders to stop)
    - skrebbel 2y ago

EZ-E 2y ago

Can relate with the whole "It may come as a surprise how little time we truly need at the gym to gain strength and muscle. I think it is all about sending our bodies the right signals" thing. Just jumping in the pool to swim 20 minutes 2 or 3 times a week dropped my resting heart rate significantly week over week, as measured by my watch, although it's a low amount of exercise... I wake up to notifications for sub 40 BPM whereas I did not before.

YZF 2y ago
One set a week per muscle group of weight training can already give you some gains. You'll max out your gains at a lot higher (10-20 maybe). When you start working out a lot of your strength comes not from your muscles getting stronger but your body learning to use them properly. I.e. your nervous system. Are you doing interval training in your swimming? I think how you train can have a big impact on your VO2MAX improvement vs. time invested. That said long distance running does require a lot of time investment. I'm not sure if you can get to run a marathon by running an hour a week but I expect that answer is no.
- EZ-E 2y ago
  > Are you doing interval training in your swimming? I think how you train can have a big impact on your VO2MAX improvement vs. time invested. That said long distance running does require a lot of time investment. I'm not sure if you can get to run a marathon by running an hour a week but I expect that answer is no. What had the biggest impact on RHR was when I was just swimming 1km per session at normal pace (it took me about 25 mins, I'm a beginner). RHR dropped week over week down to 42. When I got a coach he had me do mostly interval training and interestingly my RHR crept higher although I did improve in terms of speed. Past month I've been lazier and training again to swim continuously and I see my RHR decreasing again. Unsure about the science of it and whether it applies to others. I don't think RHR is necessarily a marker for fitness but I thought it was interesting that pretty significant change was happening although I was maybe swimming 30 mins a couple of times a week.
lrem 2y ago
You're lucky. I've clocked in almost 3000km and over 20'000m of elevation gain cycling last year. I also swim and hike. My resting heart rate dropped by about 1BPM and it's nowhere near as low as yours.

netcan 2y ago

There was/is a trend of "science gyms" that do 20 minute per week personal training. The meticulous PT format and exercise selection allows them to achieve more muscle gain in 20 minutes per week than median trainees achieve in 2-3 hours. The short sessions make personal training economically viable. That said... optimizing that heavily tends to eliminate all unmeasured benefits. The habit forming. Mentality/personality changes that would occur from more typical exercise approaches. Cardio. Etc. But... it does demonstrate the principle. Minimum effective doses are powerful. But, they require precision. Also... you need to consider the candidate. If your body is adapted to almost no exercise... it is also highly sensitive to seemingly small doses of it. What is or is not "exercise" is mostly determined by proximity to your day to day. If you never exercise, never speak to other people, or never eat any fresh food... a little goes a very long way.

FinnLobsien 2y ago
> Minimum effective doses are powerful. But, they require precision. And it's also important to think about the fact that an MED doesn't get you the biggest effect size. It's the minimum to get a desired effect, but that doesn't mean you get the most of that effect. You may get more fit in 20 minutes per week than if you did zero, but you certainly can't match someone who works out 5 times a week. An MED is great for something necessary you want to get out of the way. But this kind of thinking takes the joy out of doing things you thoroughly enjoy and perfecting minute details nobody else will ever care about, just because you care so much about the craft.
rd11235 2y ago
> The meticulous PT format and exercise selection allows them to achieve more muscle gain in 20 minutes per week than median trainees achieve in 2-3 hours. This is a strong statement that is presented without evidence, and which conflicts with scientific consensus. Studies show again and again that the most important factors are consistency and training volume. If the program is more effective, which is questionable in itself, then the reasons are likely 1. reduction of burnout and/or 2. much more intense training. Not PT format or exercise selection.

xlii 2y ago

It’s a great read and a great advice. There’s something I’ve noticed lately. The only thing that differentiates bad from great is time, and IMO talent is often mistaken with preference. E.g. it’s not like great engineers become great by work and talent. The best I know love reading, talking, experimenting and exploring. In the evenings, over weekends. It’s time, but time over the preference. I liked to ask people during job interviews what they find fun in computing and (anecdotally of course) even deep introverts have that spark in their eyes when they’re fascinated. Edit: I also remembered that Tiny Habits by BJ Fogg talks about that topic. Good read and strategies there worked for me.

nicbou 2y ago

The first step to becoming anything - an artist, a programmer, a fit dude - is falling in love with the process, or at least developing the discipline to practice regularly. I heard from gym people that just being at the gym free regularly without even doing anything there is a better first step than going all out once then never going again. In a similar vein there is a wonderful video essay called The Toolbox Fallacy. It's about how people fancy themselves artists and keep delaying the things that would make them an artist. They wait for the right degree, the right tools, the right breakthrough. In the end, painting is what makes a painter, not collecting paintbrushes. I could only apply this advice when I accepted that the output of my work would suck for a while. I went to sketching sessions and sketched wildly deformed bodies. But damn it I was drawing. Same with blogging, and with talking to strangers. In the words of a cartoon dog, "sucking at something is the first step towards being sorta good at something". While most wisdom is gained as you age, this one is progressively lost. We lose the ability to play, and the willingness to fail.

z3t4 2y ago
We also enjoy doing things that we are good at. So you need a lot of discipline and patience if you want to become good at something you're bad at. There's usually beginner "gains" meaning that something might seem impossible at the beginning, only to become easy within a few weeks, so you best wait until you have got the "beginner gains" before you decide to quit.
- nicbou 2y ago
  Anyway, here's Wonderwall

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

aucisson_masque 2y ago

Counterpoint. When you go to gym to make muscle, one of the first thing you learn is that you need the right intensity to force your body to increase its muscle. Even if you give 70% intensity everyday during a year, it won't be enough to make the slightest change. It got to be all in aka very close to failure to start seeing improvement otherwise the body rebuild the muscle but doesn't grow it.

coolThingsFirst 2y ago
You have absolutely not set foot in the gym. The average person will build muscle with zero discomfort in the gym.
- aucisson_masque 2y ago
  Lol, you are kidding right ? I spend enough years when being teenager at the gym to know a thing or two, i saw lots of people doing half ass job and still being skinny twat months later. The big ones were always pushing the limit.
authorfly 2y ago
I agree with this though it's only relevant beyond newbie periods. PTs won't talk about it since it's not motivating, which makes sense. During a stressed part of life, I slid into staying with the same routine, doing 70% intensity (cutting a set or two off each workout, or rushing them), and stopped going up in strength and muscle size. You could say I have bad genetics but I've had some sport talent and been considered "fit" by a few people so I think I'm average/lucky on muscle genetics. I basically maintained the muscle but I threw away that time. I kept going into the gym 4-5 days a week like I had when putting on gains, but I could have maintained the muscle (as I have since) on 2-3 days a week. All the difference was in that 70% --> 85% intensity difference. Once I did that, without changing programme, gains came back. I think that this "hidden plateau" is secretly why so many people bail on the gym.

coolThingsFirst 2y ago

[flagged]

_1tem 2y ago

Another area where this is effective is in learning a language. Just 5-10 minutes of Anki practice a day is a lot better than nothing but hopes and dreams. And flashcard apps work in such a way that even if you get lazy for months, you'll be surprised at how quickly you are able to remember and catch up.

Rickasaurus 2y ago

I've been trying to find a minimum effective dose for spoken mandarin practice, but without much luck. Any ideas?

mcho421 2y ago
There's a technique called "Shadowing" that only takes 15 minutes a day which worked for known polyglot Alexander Arguelles to learn and maintain the many languages he knows. https://youtu.be/MqR3K1alUio https://youtu.be/MqR3K1alUio

catigula 2y ago

I'm really surprised people didn't know this. I recall Rippetoe & Kilgore speculating in Practical Programming for Strength Training that 70-80% of all muscular gains occur in the first set. I had OpenAI's deep research look into this and its sources concluded that "One-set routines can achieve roughly 60–70% of the muscle growth that higher-volume (3–5 set) routines produce". You can do one set of various exercises and be out of the gym in minutes. Of course, this sounds ridiculous, but appears to be true.

ImHereToVote 2y ago
I also understand the stretched muscle pose is where the biggest gains are coming from. So one could theoretically cheese, by doing only a quarter of the exercise. (Don't do this, you will damage yourself).
sentimentscan 2y ago
>"One-set routines can achieve roughly 60–70% of the muscle growth that higher-volume (3–5 set) routines produce". Do you have any source for that? I know Mike Mentzer and heavy duty programs, but the devil is in the details.
- catigula 2y ago
  This is what GPT-4 summarized from deep research. Krieger, J. W. (2010). Single versus multiple sets of resistance exercise: A meta-regression. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 24(4), 1150-1159. This meta-analysis found that multiple sets lead to ~40% more muscle growth compared to a single set. Schoenfeld, B. J., Ogborn, D., & Krieger, J. W. (2017). Dose-response relationship between weekly resistance training volume and muscle growth: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Sports Sciences, 35(11), 1073-1082. Concluded that higher training volumes (≥10 weekly sets per muscle group) produce greater hypertrophy. Ralston, G. W., Kilgore, L., Wyatt, F. B., & Baker, J. S. (2017). The effect of weekly set volume on strength gain: A meta-analysis. Sports Medicine, 47(12), 2585-2601. Found that strength and hypertrophy improve as volume increases up to a certain point. Schoenfeld, B. J. (2016). Science and development of muscle hypertrophy. Human Kinetics. Discusses the mechanisms of hypertrophy and the role of training volume. American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) Position Stand (2009). Progression models in resistance training for healthy adults. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 41(3), 687-708. Provides guidelines for resistance training and muscle growth. Haun, C. T., Vann, C. G., Osburn, S. C., et al. (2018). A 6-week resistance training study on the minimum effective training dose for muscle hypertrophy in trained men. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 118(3), 593-605. Found that low-volume training still leads to substantial hypertrophy but not maximal growth. Heaselgrave, S. R., Blacker, S. D., et al. (2019). Effects of resistance training frequency on hypertrophy and strength: A systematic review. Sports Medicine, 49(12), 1935-1947. Concludes that training a muscle 2–3 times per week is more effective than once per week for hypertrophy.

D-Coder 2y ago

The only exercise that counts is the exercise that you do. If you start with a five-minute walk around the block, that's better than a three-mile run that you never actually do. And you can gradually increase the length of the walk when you feel comfortable with the current level.