Introduction The term 'strength training' refers to a comprehensive program of exercise designed to improve the ability to produce muscular force and increase resistance to injury. Any system of such training which produces an objectively measurable increase in muscular strength can be considered productive.

Much has been said and speculated about high intensity training (HIT) since the emergence of the method in the 1970s, and there seem to be many varied schools of thought on the subject. Despite this, sports scientists and researchers have continued to study the benefits of such training methods. Having looked into the subject more thoroughly on the internet, I found that various websites and resources have some very conflicting views and though I was able to gain a fair overview, it was difficult to ascertain a more in-depth, general consensus on the subject.



What is H.I.T?
High Intensity Training is a form of strength training that gained its popularity during the 1970’s, popularised by Arthur Jones of Nautilus and Mike Mentzer. High Intensity training runs counter to much of the more traditional strength training that was popular at the time of its inception. Instead of overall volume and variety of exercises and rep/set schemes, HIT declares ‘intensity’ to be the most fundamental component in creating stimulus for new growth. The system was relatively simple to describe but contentious in its effectiveness.

HIT remains one of the most controversial and novel ideas in the training world, which is always ebbing and flowing from one perceived trend or method to another. Despite this, the full time application of HIT and it’s proposed benefits, appealed to me.

I decided to find out more by reading various publications containing compilations of more solid, empirical research, to see what they had to offer. Among these included ’Body By Science’ by Dr. Doug McGuff and John R. Little, and ‘High Intensity Training The Mike Mentzer Way’ by Mike Mentzer and John R. Little. It was in this book, I found a claim that instantly grabbed my attention:

In Mentzers view, with the correct training mentality and a dedicated adherence to the outlined HIT principles, a beginner can reach the upper limits of their genetic potential, in 12 months…

This is a bold statement. Though, if true, what could it mean to somebody who was willing to undertake the 12 months of HIT training in order to reach these ‘upper limits‘?

More to the point:

- What exactly would the ‘upper limits’ of my genetic potential be?

- What would the physical possibilities be if I got there?

- What effect would this have on my overall athletic performance?

- Could HIT only be applied to strength and muscular development, or are there other applications of the system which could further develop my physical capabilities?

HIIT High intensity interval training, also known as HIIT has become immensely popular in the last decade. High intensity interval training HIIT is a system of cardio training in which alternates short, very high intensity bursts of exercise, with slower, intermittent intervals of active recovery. This type of training has been noted in research to improve performance and benefit athletes and average users alike. HIIT training is noted as not only aiding performance but also improving the ability of the muscles to burn fat.

What is HIIT? The principles of HIIT were derived from the work of Dr. Tabata from the National Institute of Health & Nutrition in Tokyo, Japan. Dr. Tabata embarked on a mission to find the ideal aerobics protocol.

The basic principle of High Intensity Interval Training is to alternate short, very high intensity bursts of exercise, with slower, intermittent intervals of active recovery. The ideal HIIT cardio program is designed to stimulate your metabolism just enough so that you can burn fat all day and all night over the next 48 hours, yet it is not so long that it will cause muscle-wasting catabolism. This translates to a few minutes for warm up, then short periods of maximum-effort activity alternated with short periods of rest, and then concluded with a cool down period. This type of training has been noted in research to improve performance and benefit athletes and average users alike.

HIT Research Strength training has been shown to be an effective way of producing increases in muscular strength and size and decreasing body fat (Carpinelli and Otto 1998; Fleck and Kraemer 1997). Fleck and Kraemer (1997) reported that increases in lean body mass with concurrent decreases in body fat were shown in studies ranging from 6 to 24 weeks in duration. These studies represented a wide variety of training protocols. Fleck and Kraemer concluded that “Because of the variation in the numbers of sets, repetitions, exercises and relatively small body composition changes, it is impossible to reach concrete conclusions concerning which program is optimal for decreasing percent fat and increasing lean body mass”. Zatsiorsky (1995) also reported that a variety of methods are effective for increasing muscular strength.

It is universally accepted among experts in the field that a high degree of intensity of effort during strength training is required to generate increases in muscular strength (Durell 1999). Successful weight training programs are characterized by the inclusion of maximal voluntary muscular contractions at some point in the program (Fleck and Kraemer 1988). Utilizing a high level of intensity will overload a high percentage of muscle fibres; such an overload is paramount to increasing muscular strength (Kelso 1999). Carpinelli (1999) adds that recruitment of muscle fibre is primarily dependent on the intensity of exercise, not how much exercise is performed. This raises the question of how much – or more accurately, how little – exercise is required to produce results from a strength training program.

HIIT Research One of the earliest studies, done by researchers at Laval University (Ste-Foy, Quebec, Canada), kept it basic, using two groups in a months-long experiment. One group followed a 15-week program using HIIT while the other performed only steady-state cardio for 20 weeks. Proponents of steady-state training were pleased to hear that those subjects burned 15,000 calories more than their HIIT counterparts. Those who followed the HIIT program, however, lost significantly more body fat. A 2001 study from East Tennessee State University (Johnson City) demonstrated similar findings with subjects who followed an eight-week HIIT program. Again, HIIT proved to be the better fat-burner–subjects dropped 2% body fat over the course of the experiment. Meanwhile, those who plodded through the eight weeks on a steady-state program lost no body fat.

The most recent study, out of Australia, reported that a group of females who followed a 20-minute HIIT program consisting of eight-second sprints followed by 12 seconds of rest, lost six times more body fat than a group that followed a 40-minute cardio program performed at a constant intensity of 60% MHR.

Studies by Tabata, Tremblay and others have also explored the effectiveness of this method compared to traditional endurance training methods. A study by Gibala et al. demonstrated 2.5 hours of sprint interval training produced similar biochemical muscle changes to 10.5 hours of endurance training and similar endurance performance benefits.

High-intensity interval training has also been shown to improve athletic performance. For already well-trained athletes, improvements in performance become difficult to attain and increases in training volume can potentially yield no improvements. Previous research would suggest that, for athletes who are already trained, improvements in endurance performance can be achieved through high-intensity interval training. A recent study by Driller showed an 8.2 second improvement in 2000m rowing time following 4 weeks of HIIT in well-trained rowers. This equates to a significant 2% improvement after just 7 interval training sessions.

Application With the above research results apparently speaking volumes about the athletic and metabolic benefits of both HIT and HIIT methods in controlled environments, I considered how easy it would be for a layman to apply these training systems in the real world? The HIT/HIIT methods and training systems I had seen so far seemed, in my opinion, easy enough to implement by the many people who spend any given amount of time in the gym on a daily basis. And looking at the statistics, there’s plenty of them!

The UK health and fitness industry has maintained a total market value of £3.81 billion in total market value according to the 2011 FIA State of the UK Fitness Industry report. Since the start of the recession, in 2008, the fitness industry has grown its total market value by 4%, increased the member base by 2% whilst increasing the number of fitness facilities by a further 1.7%.

Furthermore, despite the struggling economy, the worldwide sales of sports nutritional supplements have also been skyrocketing. The industry now equates to over £3 billion, with the UK supplements industry buying up close to a third of that figure (around £70.2m in 2004, rising to £91m by 2009.) Online sales are also increasingly popular, accounting for more than a quarter of total supplements sales. Sports supplement companies market and sell a huge spectrum of products, claiming to serve various purposes, though for the most part, the theme seems to be muscle gain or fat loss. Some of these may be used to replace meals, enhance lean/muscular weight gain, promote fat loss or improve athletic performance.

In truth, the supporting evidence of the effectiveness of these products (whose propagandistic advertisements literally fill most health and fitness publications these days) lack any real scientific or physiological studies (not counting the few ‘studies’ carried out, which are incidentally funded by supplement companies themselves in order to ascertain the ‘effectiveness‘ of their product). This is with the exception of creatine, which has been the subject of extensive independent trials since hitting the market. Tests appear to show that creatine can improve performance in strength and power athletes. With noted increases in energy, strength, power, muscle mass, and recovery times. These performance increases are said to be minimal with endurance athletes.

With a combined excess of £3.9 billion spent yearly between these two industries, surely we’d expect an increasingly fit and healthy UK populous, with national obesity rates plummeting?…

Wrong.

During the past 20 years, there has been a dramatic increase in obesity in the Western world, more than one-third of U.S. adults (35.7%) are obese. Approximately 17% (or 12.5 million) of children and adolescents aged 2—19 years are obese.

England already has one of the highest rates of obesity in Europe and some of the highest rates in the developed world. In the UK, an estimated 60.8% of adults and 31.1% of children are overweight. According to figures from 2010, almost a quarter of adults (22% of men and 24% of women) in England were classified as obese, this is despite a government strategy to try and combat the growing obesity problem. The strategy calls for the food and drinks industry to extend and intensify their efforts to help people make healthier choices through the Responsibility Deal. There will also be a £14 million investment in the Change4Life programme to encourage people to eat healthily and increase levels of physical activity, working in a broad partnership with local authorities, businesses, charities, health professionals and individuals. The department of health also recommends that adults should be doing 150 minutes of exercise per week, and those under 18 years of age should be doing and hour of exercise a day (this is an increase on previous recommendations) and the exercise should include At least 150 minutes (2 hours and 30 minutes) of moderate intensity exercise such as cycling or fast walking every week, and muscle strengthening exercises on 2 or more days a week that work all major muscle groups (legs, hips, back, abdomen, chest, shoulders and arms).

Despite the combined £3.9 billion currently spent on both the health and fitness and sports nutrition industries yearly, and millions spent by the government in order to reinforce various strategies, obesity is still on the rise, along with other associated illnesses, such as heart disease and stroke, high blood pressure, diabetes, cancer, gallbladder disease, gallstones, osteoarthritis, gout and potential breathing problems. All costing the NHS £4.2 billion a year.

Obviously, the system has failed.

A great enterprise and industry has arisen on the grounds of exercise, filled with unscrupulous businesses that aren’t interested your ability to get stronger and healthier, but everything about your ability to pay your way and/or buy their products.

Application With the aforementioned research results apparently speaking volumes about the benefits of HIT/HIIT and statements claiming that beginners can achieve the upper levels of their genetic potential within 12 months, coupled with accelerated fat loss - in a fraction of the time most people spend in the gym, what effect could this potentially have across the board?

I decided to find out, while considering how realistic it would be for somebody of moderate fitness to follow the outlined program, for the full 12 months while bound to the normal everyday constraints most people have. For this, I thought I would be as good a candidate as anybody.

I turned 30 in December, this isn’t ‘old’ by any means. but old enough for my body to remind me now and then that I’m not 21 anymore. I have a full time job, averaging 40+ hours a week. I also have a wife and a 6 month old daughter, along with the associated family commitments. And, to top all this, I have only recently returned to training after being diagnosed with Ankylosing Spondylitis 15 months ago.

Ankylosing Spondylitis is a form of inflammatory arthritis (similar to rheumatoid arthritis) causing stiffness and inflammation in the sacroiliac joints, lower spine and back. Initial diagnosis for the condition was slow (and painful), treatment and recovery from the worst of the condition was even slower. Ironically, the condition can be kept in check by eating a good clean diet and maintained physical exercise with an emphasis on mobility and flexibility. During the recovery period, the exercise I could do was minimal at best, this caused a huge loss of any previous strength, speed and endurance.

Given these lifestyle constraints, work, family, injury, recovery, which are probably very similar to the constraints encountered by most gym going adults in the UK, I decided to find out how realistic it would be to pursue 12 months of HIT and HIIT training in order to find out exactly what the benefits would be for me, the kind of problems I could encounter, whether it would take me anywhere near my ‘upper limits’ and, if so, what these upper limits were?

Though I wouldn’t consider myself a ‘natural’ athlete, I previously maintained relatively good standards of strength and fitness. This said, at no point in the past have I achieved, what I would consider the upper levels of my genetic potential. In the past I have always felt I still had some way to go towards reaching my maximum physical potential. Just how far I had left to go in terms of natural genetic improvement, or, at least the possibility of finding out, was what intrigued me about Mentzers claim.

To give an idea of previous strength and fitness before the onset of AS in 2009, aged 27, at 6’ and 85kg and 12-13% body fat my weights and times were as follows:

- 1.5 mile - 8:57

- Max press-ups (2 minutes) - 80

- Max sit-ups (2 minutes) - 80

- Best Half Marathon - 1:39‘:55’’

- Deadlift 1RM - 190kg

- Bench Press 1RM - 120kg

- Squat 1RM - 120kg

The Experiment At the time, I felt I still had some way to go before reaching my maximum potential. One of the claims surrounding high intensity training is that I can achieve this in 12 months. How much further I have to go from that point (if any) and how long it will take me to get there from my current physical condition is one of the things I will be looking to record as part of my experiment. Along with any problems I, or anybody else, might encounter pursuing that claim. Ultimately, I want to find out, first hand, whether such a statement is realistic, achievable and what the system has the potential do to me over the next 12 months, in terms of physiology, body composition and performance.

The System In order to look at the potential benefits of HIT and HIIT across the board, I will be looking to apply the system in a number of ways.

Two forms of HIT will be used, both using standard HIT programs:

- Strength and explosive power, using compound and functional lifts with 75%-80% of 1RM.

Two sessions will consist of:

1. Squat / Bench Press / Deadlift / Dips

2. Dumbbell Rows / Standing Barbell Press / Cleans / Pull-Ups

The strength sessions will be carried out in the Tabata style, with 8 rounds of 20 seconds maximum effort/10 seconds rest per exercise. I simply find this to be the quickest and simplest method to achieve maximum intensity with any given exercise, and also the most adaptable.

 - Muscular endurance, using bodyweight and plyometric movements. Splits will alternate weekly using the following sequences:

Week 1:

Chest / Shoulders / Triceps / Core

Legs / Back / Biceps / Core

Week 2:

Chest / Back / Shoulders / Core

Legs / Arms (Bicep/Triceps) / Core

HIIT will be applied using standard HIIT programs for the following disciplines

- Swimming (swimming can be substituted with Concept Rower if necessary)

- Cycling

- Running

I have chosen these disciplines with good reason. Firstly, I have no particular talent in any of them. Of the three disciplines, running is probably the one in which I have the most experience. Though I have achieved a reasonable standard in the past, I am definitely not a naturally gifted runner and any previous improvements in my running performance were hard earned! Though for the most part, apart from the odd sprint or interval session the majority of my run training was steady state. This is the first time I will be applying HIIT on a full-time basis. Any previous emphasis on the other two disciplines are limited. My performance on a stationary bike is average at best, with no particular strengths in either the speed or endurance aspects of cycling. With regards to swimming, I manage to cut through the water with the prowess of a house brick. My swimming ability is completely unremarkable.

Though I consider triathletes who master these disciplines among the finest all-round athletes on earth, I’ve never considered myself anywhere near this calibre in any one of the three. I believe that any marked improvement in the above disciplines, in conjunction with a steady strength increase will deliver a measurable, well rounded increase in my athletic performance overall.

In an interesting article by former triathlon world champion Tim Don, outlining benchmark timings for various distances across the 3 disciplines. I felt I could use these to gauge any potential future improvements. They were as follows:

1500m Pool Swim

- Excellent 25min

- Good 30min

- Average 40min

40km Bike

- Excellent 1hr

- Good 1hr 10min

- Average 1hr 20min

10km Run

- Excellent 40min

- Good 45min

- Average 50min

The training sessions will be applied over 5 days, consisting of 2 HIT strength sessions, and 3 HIIT cardio sessions. Over the course of the 3 cardio sessions 1 session will be dedicated to each of the 3 disciplines.

Sessions:

1: HIIT - Running

2: HIT - Strength

3: HIIT - Swimming

4: HIT - Strength

5: HIIT - Cycling

The order of the above sessions may change. Strength sessions will work in 4 week cycles of the following:

4 weeks - HIT compound/power movements + HIIT cardio

1 week - active recovery

4 weeks - HIT muscular endurance + HIIT cardio

1 week - active recovery

Etc.

I have applied consistent change between the 2 systems in an effort to avoid plateu. The application of an active rest week after every 4 training weeks is due to symptoms of over training becoming far more common at the 4-5 week point.

The Rules Throughout the experiment, I will be adhering to the following rules in order to keep results measurable and try maintain a level playing field:

- I will initially be using a variation of the Paleo diet, which is generally favoured by CrossFit enthusiasts. The Paleo diet is basically a plant based diet including lean protein sources, such as lean beef, fish, poultry and a variety of fruits, vegetables and nuts. Foods to avoid include dairy products, sugars, refined carbohydrates, processed foods and starchy vegetables. Basically, if you can’t hunt it, fish it, grow it or pick it, you don’t eat it. I adopted this diet a while ago with the intention of eating a cleaner diet. I noticed more sustained energy levels, and improvements of general well being and concentration. This is purely a matter of personal choice, it just works for me. Any variation in diet herein will be documented. I will initially be aiming for a daily intake of 2500 calories, with 200-250gms protein.

- All calories and protein will be consumed as whole foods, with the exception of 1 serving of whey protein, taken immediately after training sessions to aid recovery. This is purely as a matter of convenience throughout the working day.

- Daily calorie/protein intakes will be recorded.

- The use of sports supplements will be kept to an absolute minimum. And are only used sparingly as a matter of convenience. The only supplements used will be a good multi-vitamin for immune system support, and whey protein. Usage will be declared, names/brands will not be mentioned. My aim here isn’t to advertise or sell supplements!

- All sessions, weights, times, reps, will be checked and recorded periodically in order to record progress, improvements or lack of either.

- My weights/reps/1RM’s/times will not be exaggerated. My goal is simply to determine the truth regarding the effectiveness of HIT/HIIT for myself, in a real time, real world environment and provide a means by which people can then apply the information to their own training and fitness objectives. Exaggerating would simply defeat the object of the experiment and render it a complete waste of time!

- All sessions we be kept to 20 minutes of physical HIT/HIIT training or less, this will not include warm-ups or stretching. Training/total session times will be recorded.

- I am not a sports scientist or an academic and, as such, will only be using references, research and articles available to me through the public domain in order to further my experiment. References will be provided where necessary.

My body composition or physical make-up isn’t something I’ve paid particular attention to in the past. Tomorrow will be the first session, of the first week, of a 12 month program. Over time various details may become apparent, a normal person has a 50/50% split between fast twitch and slow twitch muscle fibres. Some people can have a predominance of fast or slow twitch muscle fibres. It is quite common to have a slightly predominant muscle fibre type, that’s why professional athletes are good at what they do, long distance runners are predominantly slow twitch, bodybuilders are mostly fast twitch. But to find out the fibre type in a particular muscle takes time.

This is just one of the many things I will be trying to ascertain over the next 12 months with this experiment.