I’ve always wanted to help get women in the gym and restructure their concept of “optimal body image”. I’ve written an entire series titled “Getting Girls to Train” about it. At the same time, we all agreed in “The Fat Epidemic” that while we despise excuses that prevent someone from being healthy, we will also be supportive of folks who are battling back from inactivity and poor dietary choices.
Today my friend Shana Alverson of CrossFit East Decatur (who is a 5 time CrossFit Games competitor and quite strong) put up a link showing the progress of one of her clients. Myesha has been consistently working out at CFED since 2011. She has completely altered her diet and trains at CFED at least 4 times a week. She has lost 45 pounds, dropped from a 16 to 8 in pants sized, and has gotten much stronger.
Say what you will about CrossFit, but say it can be effective. Aside from hitting the gym, you may also consider taking protein powder to help you get in good shape.
You may also consider getting into carbon neutral sports venues. You may learn more about this by checking out CarbonClick.
My friend Jeremy, owner of CrossFit Annandale, was talking to a new client in June. The girl said, “Isn’t CrossFit like a cult or something?” Jeremy, who is primarily a lifter (and has a cool barbell club class), smiled and said, “But isn’t it a good cult? What’s wrong with a group of people who like to exercise and eat healthy?” The girl was back the next day. The same thing happens with Jacob Tsypkin of CrossFit Monterey, Ruth and Sean at CrossFit Intrepid, all the folks at Amarillo Strength and Conditioning, and countless other places. Of course CrossFit can get weird, but Jeremy, Shana, and these other owners keep it real at their facilities.
These gym owners end up proving their worth with their personality and results. But more importantly, they provide a gateway. Women go to these facilities intimidated, but willing to see what it’s all about. Jeremy’s smile and Shana’s personality assure them that they’ll have a good time, and they do! It gets folks in the gym.
I don’t know if Myesha has heard of this site or cares about lifting (though she deadlifts around 360), but joining CFED provided the opportunity to a) improve her health, b) challenge herself, and c) provide the potential for getting into cool things like strongman, highland games, Olympic weightlifting, or powerlifting. I know that Jeremy has taken many people, including women, to strongman meets. One of the strongman compeitors is named Mary, who is 48 and squats 300 pounds! It all started because a woman decided to make the jump from “interested” to “trainee”.
This isn’t a post to praise CrossFit, but an emphasis on doing what we can in the grand scheme of getting women to train. Whether it’s in a garage, a fitness facility, or a CrossFit gym, helping a woman start that process of training —not just working out, but training — is the first step. At the very least it could help her get healthy, but she could turn into an example of progress like Myesha or fierce competitors like all of the girls that post on this website (and yes, you’re still girls, so plbtttttt).
Lifters and serious performance trainees aren’t going to sprout out of the air. The seed must be planted, cultivated, and developed (this is not a metaphor for the horizontal rambas). Use the popularity of CrossFit, the Olympics, or professional sports. Help your female friends by providing a gateway into the gym. It will expose them to all of the fun stuff. And who knows? They might end up loving it more than you.
Women come in different types and heights, thick or slight. Yet the time for training is always right…
Two good things will come out of this post: a) the admission that I am a crappy poet and b) regardless of body type, a woman can always improve her lifting efficiency.
Generally speaking, people in their first few years of lifting will have muscular limitations that hold back their potential for progress. Despite the fact that I’ve been lifting for 12 years, it wasn’t until the last couple of years that my musculature distribution — and therefore balance of strength — was balanced. Athletes who have competed in sports their whole lives may exhibit good balance when they start training again, but it’s also the fact that their training history facilitates improvement better than those without an athletic history. In other words, a life-time athlete can address imbalances easier than someone who has recently started training for the first time.
This is especially true for women. Society kind of filters women out of athletics once they leave high school. Sure, I’ve known some tough gals that are in the military, regularly train, or still compete in recreation sports after their sport career ended, yet there is a higher percentage of girls who stopped physical activity once they received their high school diploma. A portion of them attended college and primarily studied, partied, or immersed themselves in social activities at school, and their body adapted to the lack of training stress. Women will have a harder time getting into and excelling in training because of this lack of activity along with the hormonal differences. This, of course, doesn’t apply to all women, but occurs enough even in “active” girls to the point that they need special focus to build certain musculature to avoid an imbalance.
But what is a musculature imbalance? Does it mean their glutes aren’t firing? Barring some kind of abnormal pathology, no. An imbalance means that a muscle, or area of muscles, are under-developed to the point that other muscles have assumed more responsibility in a given movement. An extreme example is the classic experiment with rats; their gastrocnemius (the superficial calf muscle that looks like a “hoof”) was severed, and their soleus (the deep muscle that sits under the gastroc) grew to compensate for the lack of plantar flexion in the ankle. However, in humans, our muscles aren’t normally cut out, and all of the muscles are certainly being activated. It’s just that some muscles may not be contributing to a given movement like they should.
This can be due to many variables. One is that the trainee lifts weights with inefficient mechanics that don’t distribute the force application across the muscles. Another is that the trainee lacks the mobility to achieve proper positioning, therefore not having efficient technique. Poor posture and mechanics can lead to poor mobility, and vice versa. A previous or existing injury can alter mechanics over time or acutely, and create inefficient technique. All of these variables are linked to each other in that they can be the result or cause of one another. This is also why mobility is so important in order to train properly. Even if mobility and mechanics are decent, it can be difficult to perform a movement and use the correct musculature. For example, a pull-up can be done with an emphasis on pulling with the back or the arms. The former is correct and uses larger back muscles associated with shoulder extension while the latter is incorrect and over emphasizes the elbow flexors.
What are common imbalances in women? Typically girls don’t have poor mobility, other than the standard “sitting down for hours each day” hip issues. Instead, they have weaknesses. The most common weaknesses in women are: upper back, lower back, and hamstrings. Interestingly enough, these are the same weaknesses with males too.
When trying to improve the strength and musculature in a lesser advanced trainee, large compound (i.e. multi-joint) exercises that can be loaded are optimal. Pull-ups, rows, and chin-ups are the stock solution for building the upper back strength and musculature. However, many girls aren’t able to do a pull-up, and this inhibits the area’s development. They need to regularly work towards achieving a chin-up, and then later a pull-up. “Developing A Pull-up” and “Programming Pull-ups” show how to do this.
All women can do some sort of rowing to help this musculature. While barbell rows (AKA “pendlay rows”) are effective, I wouldn’t mind if they used a chest supported machine row, like the Hammer strength kind, for 3 to 5 sets of 8 to 10 reps. Egads! Machines!?! Yes, they can facilitate proper muscle activation. Drop them in as regular assistance, drop sets, or even part of the active rest in a high intensity conditioning workout. They’re more effective at helping the area than jumping pull-ups. Note that I would prefer to not worry about single arm rowing — it’ll just take more training time and reduce the load on the structures. Avoid allowing lots of “English”, or body movement during these rows. That kind of stuff is permissible for stronger trainees to allow heavier loads, but it doesn’t apply to someone who has deficient musculature that needs to be worked through a full range of motion.
Don’t be afraid to use the lat pull-down machine with an underhand (chin-up) or overhand (pull-up) grip. 3 to 5 sets of 5 to 10 reps can help progress towards that first chin-up. Vary between heavier loads with fewer reps and lighter loads with reps. It doesn’t really matter; it’s more so the fact that the area is receiving regular, accumulating work. If a woman trains her upper back twice a week for six months, it’s more important than if she did it once a week with an anal approach to the set/rep scheme.
Building the upper back is important because it plays a role in shoulder stabilization and external rotation during any press, bench, or overhead movement. The area also plays an isometric role during pulling, especially the deadlift. For example, if the upper back rounds when the bar comes off the floor, then the shoulder position shifts, which results in the bar creeping forward. When the bar moves forward from the body’s balance point, the lower back will typically round to compensate for the inefficient lever arm. Therefore, you could say that the upper back helps keep the lower back in place during deadlifts.
Extreme hamstrings
Anybody who has read the site regularly knows that I’m a huge proponent of RDLs to build the hamstrings in non-advanced trainees. They are simple to do, don’t require any special equipment, and are crazy effective at building the hip extension component of the hamstrings. Other exercises to use are Good Mornings, glute ham raises (GHR), and banded good mornings. As with all assistance exercises, they can be done for 3 to 5 sets of 5 to 10 reps. I would hit the weak or under-developed areas frequently. The only programming note is that if something like RDLs make the girl too sore to deadlift or squat in her next session (and she’s eating enough protein), then use a lighter stress movement, like banded good mornings, in the preceding session.
As for the lower back, standard lifts like the squat and deadlift will strengthen it over time, but thinner girls will benefit from some direct work. Simple weighted back extensions for 3 to 5 sets of 10 work very well. If the gym has a reverse hyper machine, you probably go to a cool gym, so use that too. The RDLs and Good Mornings from the previous paragraph will also apply some back work too.
Programming these assistance exercises may seem overwhelming at first, but don’t stress it. For lesser advanced trainees, full body sessions work best because they apply a solid systemic stress (whereas the “one lift a day” programs don’t apply good systemic stresses in lesser advanced trainees). A given session can include a main lift (like squat or deadlift), a press, a posterior chain exercise, and an upper back exercise. Technically the two assistance exercises could be done in a circuit if time was an issue. And this type of session would still allow time for a quick 10 minute high intensity conditioning workout at the end of it. There’s not reason a session should be over 75 minutes, and the lifting could really be done in 60 minutes easily (e.g. 20 minutes for the first two lifts, 10 to 15 for the assistance, followed by 10 to 15 for the conditioning).
If a girl had weaknesses or muscular imbalances, following a basic plan like this consistently will turn into progress. Other weaknesses and imbalances can occur, yet these are the most common. Remember that when dealing with assistance work, it’s not about how much weight is used, it’s about how much quality work the muscle receives. Whipping the torso back during lat pull-downs or rows won’t effectively work the shoulder extensors and upper back. At the same time, the main lifts (squat, bench/press, deadlift) shouldn’t be allowed to progress with mechanics that highlight specific weaknesses. Letting a woman deadlift as heavy as she can without any hamstring tension and completely rounded back is standard ego lifting and irresponsible. Get quality reps consistently over time with good technique, and these imbalances will fade away.
In “Peculiarities of Female Training” I talked about how females respond to training differently than males. Specifically I looked at how women tend to more efficiently grow muscle with higher reps or volume and how they can lift a greater percentage of their max for reps.
The following statement was made in the last post: Women can lift more reps with higher percentages than men because they aren’t as neuromuscularly efficient asmen. It left some people scratching their heads. If women are less efficient, why can they do more? These terms are relative.
You don’t have to fully understand the physiology behind “neuromuscular efficiency”. The concept of it is a gauge for how efficiently the nervous system innervates muscles to contract to apply force. When it’s genetically efficient, the process is an orchestra that results in fast, powerful, and strong athletes. When it’s genetically inefficient, it results in people who can’t jump well or gain strength slowly. Despite genetic predisposition, this physical attribute can be influenced through training. A person with poor neuromuscular efficiency may not ever have a 40 inch vertical, yet they can still improve their vertical jump several inches.
Neuromuscular efficiency also has to do with the fluidity and skill of movement. When someone hasn’t played sports throughout their life, they lack the motor programs to execute gross movement patterns. Squats or power cleans will usually be “herky jerky” and awkward, but after accumulating experience in training (i.e. practice), they become more efficient. Lastly, neuromuscular efficiency is relative to recent training adaptation. If someone is sedentary for years, they won’t have a symphony of muscle contraction during a squat.
All of that being said, females have a lower neuromuscular efficiency than males. This is a result of the hormonal differences between males and females. It doesn’t mean that females need special training programs, it just means that their program may need to be modified to achieve their goals.
When a female is less neuromuscularly efficient, it means that her nervous system cannot innervate muscles properly to achieve her true 1 rep max (1RM). True max is what she could do if she had the hormone profile of a male. Actual max is what she can do as a result of not having the hormone profile and neuromuscular efficiency of a male. Note that this inefficiency primarily affects maximal force production or power, because it is under these circumstances in which the body will try to maximize the utilization of motor units (nerves and their associated muscle fibers). In other words, the limitation due to neuromuscular efficiency is seen when a female is trying to complete a 1RM. This causes the actual 1RM max to be lower, so when she performs a 5RM, the weight is closer to her actual 1RM than a man’s. Observe the figure below.
1. A female’s actual max is lower than what her true max is. The true max is theoretically what she could lift if she had a male’s hormonal profile and neuromuscular efficiency.
2. Therefore, a female’s 5RM is a greater percentage of her actual max compared to the percentage of a man’s 5RM and his max.
This is why we conclude, “Women can lift more reps with higher percentages than men because they aren’t as neuromuscularly efficient as men.” For example, if a guy’s 5RM is 87%, then a female’s 5RM might be 92%. No, this can’t be altered through training because it’s a result of a female’s biochemistry. Experts from detox in Los Angeles has stated that this quality could probably be effected by hormonal steroids, but I would still assume a female on drugs could not emulate the hormonal profile of a man.
In “Peculiarities of Female Training” I noted how this would affect a female when they are going for 1RMs, especially in a meet. The above explains why a ten pound jump is the difference in a smooth rep and a miss at a meet — there’s a small window between what a female can lift for reps and a 1RM. It also explains why females would need to use higher percentages on volume work. I alluded to how a female’s Volume Day on the Texas Method would approach 90% of her Intensity Day (not her 1RM) whereas a male wouldn’t typically go over 85%.
Yet this also makes sense as to why higher reps or volume is necessary for a female to grow muscle. The observation of females gaining muscle from lots of reps with sub-maximal loads is also result of the disparity in neuromuscular efficiency (e.g. doing CrossFit makes women muscular). In order to receive the same relative amount of work as a guy to grow muscle, she will either need to use more reps or more sets because she is handling a lower percentage of her true max than a male. Sub-maximal training isn’t affected by neuromuscular efficiency like maximal force or power production is.
If the female’s goal is to get stronger, she will either need more volume or more intensity (heavier weights) on her volume work. The same is probably true for power development. If the female’s goal is to gain muscle, then she will need sets with higher reps and/or more volume compared to a male. These are important points to understand regarding female strength and conditioning program.
Hopefully this post clarifies the confusion on this issue. If you have any questions, please drop them in the comments below.
Women are complicated. If the hormone function of a male is complex, then the function of a female is worse than quantum physics. This isn’t a dig on women; it’s just that biochemistry and endocrinology are incredibly dense and not fully understood, and the nature of the female gender makes it even more opaque. Despite all the things we know about life and the human body, there is a still a lot of unknown.
Biochemistry of the Human Cell: Schematic diagram shows its biochemical/metabolic pathways. Yikes.
Prescribing drugs and medications has become the norm in modern “health”. A drug may have an effect on one thing, but undoubtedly fiddles with other biochemistry to produce ill side effects. Drugs can work on neurotransmitters, hormones, or hundreds of other functions like enzymatic processes. When going on or off drugs, it can take several months for the body to normalize into a new ‘concept’ of homeostasis. Remember that the “stress/adaptation” process is constantly occurring, and an adaptive stress is basically “the sub-lethal dose, or lack thereof, of something that is different than the currently adapted homeostasis”.
I trained a kid who had hyperthyroid syndrome. He was prescribed propylthiouracil (PTU) to stop the thyroid from making it’s hormone. It’s pretty toxic to the liver, so his dosage was always being modified by his doctor. When it significantly blunted his thyroid, his strength and body weight gains were impressive. When his dosage went down, his strength and weight suffered. However, it took about six weeks or so for the changes to occur after his dosage was changed; the effect wasn’t immediate. This is an extreme example of the body undergoing a significant change, yet taking time to actually have a response.
This same concept can be applied to female trainees and their prescriptions. The most common drug will be some kind of hormonal birth control AKA “the pill”. There are different types of drugs, but they essentially inhibit ovulation and fertilization. These pills usually consist of estrogen and progestin, which are female hormones. In practice, hormonal birth control seems to have a negative effect on training.
I’m not going to pretend to know a lot about the exact performance change from a fluctuation of female hormones . In sooth, nobody really does. Yet it’s generally accepted with practitioners that too much estrogen is a bad thing for training females. And when you think about it in simple terms, it makes sense: The female body has adapted to have a certain hormonal fluctuation throughout a month. When that is significantly altered, things will, at the very least, not be as efficient. Gals who take birth control seem to carry more body fat, especially in the hips and legs, aren’t as lean, and seem to make strength gains slower (sleeping problems may be common enough to include here).
Instead of trying to make a definitive statement about birth control and estrogen, I want to do two things. First, here are some resources I found on the internet about this topic.
a) Robb Wolf podcast with Brad Davidson. I listened to this a couple of months ago and Brad works with females, especially figure competitors and helps them clear excessive estrogen out of their system to help them lean out for their shows. Since he trains them in the gym, it has an effect on their gains. I’m simplifying, so listen to the podcast to hear what he has to say about it. There seems to be more than one source talking about a) reducing exposure to estrogens and b) clearing them from the system.
b) Mark’s Daily Apple: Estrogen. Mark’s website is easily my favorite nutrition site. He is a good writer, mixes logic with available research, and is an intelligent hombre. I’m not a perfect writer, but I really appreciate the “good writing” part. I also think Mark is interesting and if I ever chatted with him I’d make fun of his reading choices because JESUS CHRIST THEY ARE BORING. Then we’d do some push-ups on the beach and talk about living until we’re 150 years old (Mark undoubtedly will; I’ll probably get shot before then). Here’s the opening paragraph of this estrogen post:
The human endocrine system exists in a state of delicate balance. None of its constituents function in a vacuum, and trying to explain every hormonal interrelationship would take volumes, but one statement is fairly safe to make: one hormone affects another. Secreting one often inhibits the next, which in turn sets off an entirely different chain reaction of hormonal secretions, inhibitions, and syntheses. I almost feel like trying to micromanage your entire endocrine system is tedious and counterproductive (and probably impossible to do effectively). I much prefer to simply eat right, exercise smart, get good sleep, normalize stress, and take advantage of simple lifestyle hacks. Still, it doesn’t hurt to understand some of the major hormonal players, especially one as widely maligned by the strength and fitness community as estrogen.
I really don’t need to say anything else; this is exactly what I was going to write for my conclusion.
c) Charles Poloquin on reducing estrogen. Poloquin talks a lot about this topic and he is referenced in the above Robb Wolf podcast episode. The interesting thing in this article is the mention of phytoestrogens. I’ve seen stuff go back and forth on these — saying they are harmful or helpful — but you can see Poloquin’s take on them.
I think it’s kind of hard to get a gauge on phytoestrogens and estrogen supplementation since some sources talk about the benefits (on estrogen) and drawbacks (on phytoestrogens). And then there’s the issue of birth control itself. In actuality, I agree with Mark above: a low inflammatory diet, low stress, good sleep, and exercising regularly are the keys to creating a healthy and optimal homeostasis regardless of gender.
The second thing I want to do is ask all of the female readers if you or anyone you know takes hormonal birth control and how do you think it affects your training.
Note that some women take birth control because their menstruation periods are incredibly awful and painful. Also note that these same women may be unhealthy, do not exercise, sleep poorly, are constantly stressed, and won’t eat a low inflammatory diet that is high in nutrients and protein. I’d be curious to see if this is what you guys see.
Invite your friends to comment on this interesting issue. Please comment on a) strength training gains, b) conditioning gains, c) body composition, and d) any other life factors like sleep or stress. Also note how long it took for you to see a change in your body or body functioning when going on or off the drugs. Maybe we can come to a conclusion that will influence how females structure their training or lifestyle.
Today my friend Shana Alverson of CrossFit East Decatur (who is a 5 time CrossFit Games competitor and quite strong) put up a link showing the progress of one of her clients. Myesha has been consistently working out at CFED since 2011. She has completely altered her diet and trains at CFED at least 4 times a week. She has lost 45 pounds, dropped from a 16 to 8 in pants sized, and has gotten much stronger.
