I’ve been seeing a commercial for a new “get fit never” device advertised on TV that offers a benefit – getting fit – for “minimal effortless resistance”. In return for effortlessness this device promises a tighter core, better fitness, more energy… Just about everything, short of peace on Earth. With “effortless minimal resistance”. I wish I were kidding, this is from the website: “The sitNcycle is a fun and convenient way to stay in motion effortlessly and get in the best shape of your life.” The commercial is even better (or that would technically be worse).
The reality is you can’t have those three words together like that and expect anything good. The problem is the “effortless” part of course.
Folks, the reality is this: That ass won’t lose itself.
For this reason I have a serious problem with minimum requirements and claims that minimal efforts will get results. For instance, the government recommends a minimum of a 30 minute walk, six days a week as “exercise”. There are studies out there that show you’d have to walk 100 days to get the benefit of one of my daily short training rides (1 hour). That’s right, it’s about a 50:1 ratio. Now, will that minimum effortless workout help? Well it won’t hurt but jeez, look at it another way: You’d have to walk a half-hour a day for 50 years to realize the benefits it took me one year to get.
That should put that “minimal effortless resistance” into context.