
The Scientific 7-Minute Workout - danso
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/projects/workouts/
======
jamesaguilar
I tried the seven minute workout for a little while and saw no improvement in
any dimension. This[1], on the other hand, has gotten me some significant
results so far, five months in.

[1] [http://stronglifts.com/](http://stronglifts.com/)

~~~
melling
I find it hard to believe that you can do squats more than one day a week. It
takes a while for large muscles to recover, especially when you're doing heavy
weight.

~~~
brandonmenc
Just about every powerlifting or strength/mass program, from novice to expert,
has multiple squat days a week.

The theory is that because the large areas (ex: leg, back) are actually
composed of many muscles, you can hit them more frequently with slight
variations (working different parts/ranges/etc.) and still recover.

~~~
jamesaguilar
I have never heard of that. To my understanding, the important elements are:

    
    
        - Recovery doesn't take seven days.
        - Squats target the biggest muscles.
        - The biggest muscles produce the most testosterone, enabling you to make gains in other muscle groups more easily.
    

Given those and the constraints of safety and putting up the most weight you
can for a decent amount of volume, you want to squat as often as possible. Not
just for your legs, but because it enables you to do more elsewhere.

~~~
kyberias
Molecular biology student here. I've never heard muscles producing
(synthesizing) testosterone. It's synthesized in male testicles and adrenal
gland. Care to elaborate what do you mean?

~~~
jamesaguilar
Maybe its just bro science, but most natty lifters talk about the importance
of squats in terms of the additional testosterone released by growing the
largest muscle group.

Ex. [http://breakingmuscle.com/strength-conditioning/new-study-
pi...](http://breakingmuscle.com/strength-conditioning/new-study-pits-barbell-
squats-against-leg-press-machine). The muscle may not produce the
testosterone, but it is produced by working the muscle.

That's all I know.

------
cwilson
The 7 minute workout is for people who want to feel like they are working out
with minimal effort. It's kind of ridiculous. I tried this for a few weeks 4
times a week and saw/felt almost no benefit. Then I upped it to a 30 minute
workout using the same set of exercises and saw quite a bit of progress.

That's really the difference. You need your heart-rate pumping for 30 minutes
to really see benefits from this, not for 7 minutes. I doubt any "scientific"
claims that 7 minutes a few times a week is all the exercise someone needs.

At the very least double it. Do 14 minutes. I remember trying this while out
of shape (hadn't done any intense exercise in months) and with 7 minutes I
barely broke a sweat. Unless you're morbidly obese you need to do more than
this.

If you really want a god exercise buy some weights or go to the gym. Moving
around really heavy objects for 30 - 45 minutes is the best bang for your buck
workout you can get.

~~~
bitL
Try to do the same intensity I do during 7-minute workout if you can't break a
sweat ;-)

\- 56 push ups \- 44 abdominal crunches \- 36 chair steps up \- 35 squats \-
56 triceps dips on chair \- 30 lunges \- 20 push ups with rotation

(all in 30 seconds)

I thought the point of this exercise was to slowly allow you to raise your
intensity to have a real interval training, all while being constrained by
time.

~~~
gnuvince
56 pushups in 30 seconds? It seems to me the only way to do that is to either
a) do them with extremely bad form, b) not go down completely, c) both of
those. People like eshlow (author of "Overcoming Gravity") at
/r/bodyweightfitness recommend a tempo of 10x1: lowering yourself for one
second, staying 0 seconds at the bottom, pushing up as hard and fast as
possible (x = explode), and holding for one second at the top. Using this
tempo, you can do a max of 15 per 30 seconds.

~~~
bitL
Yes, it's a different form than you described. I go all the way down and
basically go extremely quickly up and down without slowing down the fall
phase. My muscles are explosive, I am a good natural fit for tennis, squash,
basketball, ice hockey, alpine skiing, sprints, etc. not for endurance (this
needs a lot of work). Moreover, I have a very good skeletal maneuverability
that doesn't inhibit my movements as is the case with many other muscular
people. Also, it took me ~6 months to get to this level. YMMV

------
webwielder
Nothing beats working out to the 7 Minute Workout musical:
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LezARmLDu6U](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LezARmLDu6U)

~~~
vlaube
I prefer my 7 Minute Workout Bash-Script: [https://github.com/vlaube-de/7min-
workout](https://github.com/vlaube-de/7min-workout)

------
jordanpg
My reaction to this is similar to this one:
[http://norvig.com/21-days.html](http://norvig.com/21-days.html) (Teach
Yourself Programming in Ten Years)

I've been exercising regularly for a long time and know pretty well what my
"equilibrium" exercise time is, and it's about 5 - 6 times longer than 7
minutes. If I thought it could be shorter, then I would make it shorter
because my #1 goal is to minimize the number of minutes of my life I spend on
exercise.

All I can say about this is that 7 minutes strains credulity and sounds like
marketing nonsense to me. At a very minimum, I need to sustain an elevated
heart rate for a few minutes to feel good.

~~~
pingswept
If it makes you feel better, each hour you spend exercising extends your life
by around 3.5 hours (net 2.5 after the hour you spent) on average. These are
just rough numbers, backed up by the Framingham heart study and an analysis of
the Framingham data by Jonker, et al.:
[http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/29/1/38.full.pdf](http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/29/1/38.full.pdf)
They say 2.5 hours per week over a 75 year lifetime makes you live 3.5 years
longer, and 2.5 hours per week over 75 years is around 1 year.

(Of course, you might get hit by a bus tomorrow, but that's true whether you
exercise or not. I guess you should avoid exercising near traffic.)

~~~
barrkel
Question is, would you rather have an hour in your prime, or 2.5 hours in
retirement.

~~~
Ysx
This is also why I smoke, I'd rather lose the shitty years at the end.

That's how it works, right?

~~~
barrkel
My parents were heavy smokers. Their day to day lives were filled with a lot
of coughing, even in their 30s.

Myself, I'm not overweight - I weigh about 60kg, and am 1.75m tall - but I
don't exercise. I don't see that it's worth the amount of time it takes out of
my day.

My perspective may change if I find myself physically challenged in anything I
do. But that seems to be some way off just yet.

------
l33tbro
I'm building a site like this at the moment and things like this made me happy
we chose video and real humans - instead of vector images. Showing people how
to exercise in 7 minutes is easy - but motivating them to exercise is a
totally different thing.

I get that this is probably for people on the go, but at least having a voice
telling you what you're doing and giving you tips would make this so much
better.

Also, don't just say "science". Tell us what kind of "science" and link us to
specific research that maybe we want to know about.

~~~
Gracana
This is just the page for the exercise, the article (with link to the science)
is here: [http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/](http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/)

------
gnah
I should be able to do better than this. Presenting The Broscientific 7-Minute
Workout:

A: 5x Back Squat 5x Weighted Chin-up or Barbell Row B: 5x Deadlift 5x Olympic
Press

Repeat alternating. Do as many warm up singles as you can fit (max 5)
ascending in weight before each heavy set. Increase weight on every exercise
as often and as much as possible. Get or make some micro plates to extend
linear progress when you can no longer sustain 5lb jumps. If you have a few
minutes extra, throw in an extra set of as many reps as you can comfortably do
with 70% of the working weight on each exercise. If you can't do these
movements spend 7 minutes a day learning form and improving mobility until you
can.

~~~
glibgil
Your workout costs money. The other workout is free.

~~~
KobaQ
True, but the other has no effect for people with an average fitness level. It
lacks intensity.

~~~
judk
People who work out less than 6 minutes per day are all below average fitness
level.

~~~
gnah
Consider the audience. For an overweight person who only walks to their car
and back the routine in the article could get them to a meager level of
fitness. For someone who walks or bicycles for any of their transportation or
for pleasure it won't have any effect. As a European this is most people I
know.

~~~
ghshephard
The nyt article is pretty high intensity - walking alone (i speak as one who
walks everywhere) doesn't get your heart rate racing unless you really put
some effort into it, and certainly doesn't stress any muscle groups. Your
average sedentary individual would not be able to complete the 7 minute
workout. If they were signicantly overweight they would likely collapse 2
minutes into it.

The goal of this type of training is to yield the greatest amount of impact
with the least amount of effort in the shortest amount of time.

Anybody who did the nyt 7 minute exercise at max intensity for a couple months
is going to be in good shape. Do it everyday for 6 months and they will be in
the 90th percentile of physical fitness in the United States for their age
group.

Which I think is a pretty good return for 7 minutes out if your day with no
equipment other than a chair.

------
hunvreus
To anybody trying to get back in shape, I can't recommend Nerd Fitness
([http://www.nerdfitness.com/](http://www.nerdfitness.com/)) enough. I used it
to get back in shape 2 or 3 years ago, it's very approachable even with no
real fitness knowledge. I am not affiliated.

Bottom line though:

\- Fix your diet (whatever works for you, for me it was getting rid of carbs),

\- Make time for this and build up the routine (I get most of my workouts done
in under 35 minutes all included, I do this at least 3 times a week),

\- You don't need a gym; you can get dumbbells for cheap, but even without it
there is a lot you can do (I haven't lifted anything in a year, doing mostly
bodyweight).

------
mparramon
I tried this about a year ago and blogged my results:

[http://www.developingandstuff.com/2013/09/50-days-of-
scienti...](http://www.developingandstuff.com/2013/09/50-days-of-
scientific-7-minute-workout.html)

~~~
wdewind
Are you still doing it? No offense but it doesn't seem to have had a
tremendous effect besides making you feel better, which in and of itself may
be totally worth it for 7 minutes of work anyway. Regardless, the only reason
I say this is because I don't think that this is a good program, and I think
the science around it is short sighted and not very well carried out.

The major problem is that the studies are not nearly long enough. The human
body can adapt really well, and these exercises don't really provide any
meaningful level of progression (besides just doing them more). As a user of
this program continues, they will have to keep adding cycles, and eventually
they'll just be doing it an hour every morning.

As a way to trick yourself into the habit of exercise I think that's great.
But the concept that 7 minutes a day can really make you healthy is kind of
absurd. There is no question it's better than nothing ( _especially_ for
people who are already significantly overweight), but it's too bad it's not
being sold as an intro to exercise program, rather than The Only Thing You
Ever Have to Do Ever.

~~~
dwg
True, but I think you should consider another perspective.

For most, the problem is getting started and forming a habit. By the time 7
minutes a day gives you diminishing returns, you've probably got a good
routine going. Once you have a good routine is very easy to increase the
duration or intensity. So, in a sense, it doesn't make people healthy but it
does get them on the right track.

You seem to get this, because you said you wouldn't mind so much if it was
being sold as "an intro" instead of a "silver bullet." While it's technically
true, it would probably do more harm than good. Seven minutes is something
that just about everyone, including very unhealthy people, feel like they can
achieve. Which do you think is more likely to get people interested?

* Get healthy with just 7-minutes exercise a day!

* Get healthy by increasing durations of exercise starting at 7-minutes a day!

Both have the same result in the end, but my guess is the first will attract
more. So, all I'm saying is, I would rather get more people started and then
let them figure it out once they've got a routine.

~~~
wdewind
> You seem to get this, because you said you wouldn't mind so much if it was
> being sold as "an intro" instead of a "silver bullet." While it's
> technically true, it would probably do more harm than good. Seven minutes is
> something that just about everyone, including very unhealthy people, feel
> like they can achieve. Which do you think is more likely to get people
> interested?

I heavily disagree with this. People run these programs and do them as written
and don't dig any deeper. They don't achieve results, and that leads them to
develop (completely warranted) distrust for the fitness industry. This makes
them feel like exercise only works for some people, and they must not be one
of those people. People feel like their weight is genuinely uncontrollable.

On the other hand, a realistic approach gives them the tools they need when
they are ready by starting out easy and gradually progressing.

------
Iftheshoefits
"Sorry, Well Workouts requires iOS 7 or greater, the Android Chrome browser,
or Internet Explorer 11."

So Android Firefox users aren't supposed to view their website?

------
maerF0x0
A neat website, but where are the links to the "Science" ?

~~~
gilgoomesh
My thoughts exactly. There is zero science here.

------
TrainedMonkey
Science is that if you work out all major groups of muscles with maximum
intensity you use up all of the stored ATP energy and trigger anaerobic energy
delivery mechanism which builds up lactic acid [0].

Do this for all major muscle groups and you get significantly raised
metabolism throughout the day as your body deals with replenishing ATP,
cleaning up lactic acid, and repairing small amount muscle micro tears.

[0]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_systems](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_systems)

------
adwf
12 exercises in 7 minutes seems a little rapid. I usually manage 4-5 in 30-45
minutes...

I guess if you're beginning from a very sedentary level, this is probably a
great starting point. It exercises most major muscle groups and will at least
activate them far more than just sitting in an office chair.

------
Opossum
Link to the original research article from ACSM:
[http://journals.lww.com/acsm-
healthfitness/Fulltext/2013/050...](http://journals.lww.com/acsm-
healthfitness/Fulltext/2013/05000/HIGH_INTENSITY_CIRCUIT_TRAINING_USING_BODY_WEIGHT_.5.aspx)

------
danieltillett
I managed to develop a 5 minute workout that performs remarkable well for the
time involved (it is not a pleasant 5 minutes though). The basis routine is 30
seconds absolutely flat out on an exercise bike cranked right up, then 30
seconds slow recovery. I do this first thing in the morning (before having a
shower) and after fasting for at least 12 hours. I then don’t eat for 3 hours
afterwards.

It works remarkable well to keep me fitish (basically fit enough to do all the
other physical activities I want to do) and at keeping my weight down. I find
that this intense exercise makes me feel sick afterwards. This takes away my
hunger until a few hours later so it is not too difficult to avoid eating for
the 3 hours.

~~~
mattfrommars
Do you fast 12 hour straight or do you break every 3 hours? I'm thinking of
fasting too to keep my weight down but don't know what routine to follow

~~~
danieltillett
Well the 12 hour fast is basically from dinner the night before until morning
the next day. This fasting is easy as most of the time I am asleep :)

The 3 hour fast afterwards is remarkably easy. I start to get hungry around
9.30am to 10.00am (around 2.5 hours in), but as I am usually hard at work at
this time it is not too hard to resist eating until 10.30am. Other than this I
eat whatever I like when I like.

One of the good things of this program is I only need one shower and I can
cool down under warm water saving even more time. Most short exercise programs
are much longer once you add in all the ancillary activities like changing
clothes and showering - mine really is 5 minutes only.

~~~
mattfrommars
So I should do the 7 minute exercise before dinner or after dinner?

------
patrickg_zill
The old Canadian RAF exercise program 5BX worked reasonably well for me when I
did it. I got as far as the highest level, "A" on Chart 5 I think. Chart 6 is
marked as "only champion athletes can do this" and I couldn't even finish the
lowest level on that chart no matter how hard I tried.

The most famous adherent is/was probably the writer Tom Clancy.

------
parkaboy
Since we're all tossing our favorite regimens into the ring, I've been using
bodyweight training site [http://fitloop.co](http://fitloop.co) (free site
made by one of the members of r/bodyweightfitness) for 5 months now, and the
progress has been pretty amazing. A good diet is important too, of course.

------
yabatopia
If I remember correctly from a BBC documentary it's important to have a warm
up session first before you do an intense workout like this, especially when
you're just starting out. You don't want to risk injuries. Be nice to your
muscles, tensons and joints: damage can be permanent, I know from experience.

~~~
droopyEyelids
Part of the genius of this workout is that it's not throwing you into a
position to injure yourself, all the vigorous motions are aerobic and the
strenuous exercises are isometric.

------
MisterMashable
I wonder, what is the ratio of exercise programs articles vs. people who
actually follow them?

------
speedyapoc
Note that this "workout" isn't going to put on much (if any) muscle mass nor
will it help you lose significant weight. Resistance training and diet is
required for the former and diet is absolutely everything for the latter.

------
throwawayme
Whole lotta "I'm fit and this did nothing after 3 days. All I had to do was go
to a gym and workout for an hour every day, and then I saw gains"

You're dubasses, all of you.

------
kolev
The true scientific one is called Body by Science [1]. If you have 100
minutes, invest watching this [2] from God himself (Doug McGuff M.D.).

P.S. The next The 21 Convention will be in January 2015 [3].

[1] [http://www.bodybyscience.net/](http://www.bodybyscience.net/) [2]
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PdJFbjWHEU](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PdJFbjWHEU)
[3] [http://www.the21convention.com/](http://www.the21convention.com/)

------
conception
Please note you are supposed to do the 7 minute workout 2-3 times.

~~~
danso
Really? The original piece (which apparently was popular enough to get the NYT
devs to make an app) pushed the premise that 7 minutes could produce
"molecular changes within muscles comparable to those of several hours of
running or bike riding"

[http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/09/the-
scientific-7-mi...](http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/09/the-
scientific-7-minute-workout/)

> _The exercises should be performed in rapid succession, allowing 30 seconds
> for each, while, throughout, the intensity hovers at about an 8 on a
> discomfort scale of 1 to 10, Mr. Jordan says. Those seven minutes should be,
> in a word, unpleasant. The upside is, after seven minutes, you’re done._

The article was updated today (which is where I saw the app link)
([http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/10/24/the-
advanced-7-minu...](http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/10/24/the-
advanced-7-minute-workout/))...it talks about how the 7-minute workout is "not
meant to be your sole exercise"...but that's out of concern that it "will
become monotonous and demotivating"

~~~
tootie
The original study said the 7 minute routine should be repeated 2 to 3 times.
It also listed a sample regimen which most people took too literally. You're
supposed to vary the exercises and there are dozens of options. Johnson and
Johnson have a really good app with lots of options.

------
lingben
what?! unless you're really in top shape and have done a lot of leg
conditioning and weight lifting there is NO WAY that you can do a wall sit for
30 seconds straight!

most people, even in good shape (not overweight or obese) can only do 10-15
seconds before their quads burn into a cinder

try it! its a good exercise but 30 seconds? c'mon!

also, another reason why this suggested 30 seconds duration is bad is that it
will mean that most people who do try to meet the unrealistic 30 second
duration will collapse down as their legs give out and this is NOT what you
want to happen because risk of injury from this exercise is greatly increased
if you don't get out of the position by standing up

~~~
MichaelDickens
I could do a wall sit for about 45 seconds before I ever did any leg work.

~~~
nkozyra
Yeah I have to concur here, this should be totally feasible for a beginner.

