I was involved (mostly listening) to a discussion between two colleagues regarding their exercise routines. One was of the opinion that formal workout routines were the only way to maintain fitness. Any other physical tasks were merely supplemental. The other does nothing other than outdoor work at his hunting land/hobby farm. No additional weights, calisthenics, nothing. Number two is a bit older, but is in better physical condition. Obviously, a number of factors are in play, but it would seem that there is some merit to what he is doing.

What's your opinion? Assuming both modalities are equally available, is there an advantage to structured exercise routines vs useful physical labor? Does your heart really know if you did 50 squats or picked up 50 pieces of firewood?

My opinion is that "formal" workout is not necessary, if you work manual labor all day long. Take the airport worker, for example, who does nothing but baggage handling the entire day. It's harder than any "formal" workout, as far as I'm concerned.

I would think the biggest difference is the potential to work different muscles during exercise vs repetitive task type manual labor. But if the labor routine
is varied enough I wouldn't think there was a big difference.

The women at the local Costco who retrieve shopping carts all day long get a good leg and backside workout.

Does that count?

Depends.

If you are looking to achieve aerobic fitness, then just lifting heavy stuff at work all day will not get the job done.

And if you're going to rely on your manual-labor job for the strength/hypertrophy portion of your regimen, then your job will have to adequately hit all of your major muscle groups.

I've never seen a fat working farmer.

Working out at a gym can be better as you can work all muscles on various machines. Some manual work jobs only work certain muscles of the body. Others work all or enough of them, it just depends.....

Books have been written about this so it's complicated.

But in general - it boils down to 'Specificity' or in other words: 'What is the work to be done?'.

A farm worker is never going to win a 400M dash vs a track athlete. An average baggage handler will never be able to bench press 300lbs.

But both of the workers - 'generalists' - are likely able to toil dawn to dusk that might be beyond the daily capacity of the 'specialists'.

So - back to the question - what are you trying to achieve? Once you identify that - the 'training' pathway is more clear.

----------------------------------------------

A farm worker, actively lifting, digging, chopping, bucking bails etc for 8 or more hours a day will surely burn more calories than someone at the gym for 1 - 3 hours and if the farm worker is doing repetitive motions for extended time, this will strengthen the muscles used. However, as already pointed out, the gym guy can work a plan that concentrates on particular muscle groups, and allow for sufficient rest to recover properly. The farm worker may not have the luxury. He needs to do the work at hand, when it needs to be done.

I get it that a farm worker, tired from a hard day's work, will likely not be motivated to work out at the gym. Both groups are probably more healthy then the average office worker.

BTW, I've seen plenty of overweight farm workers, as well as overweight (fit but fat) gym guys.

I'll suggest working out the way that will best benefit your lifestyle. And do something you enjoy.

Their is "functional strength" vs "gym strength". In the 40 years I have been working out, there is only one time I actually had to use "gym strength" when a customers garage door wouldn't go up. So I had to Bench Press it open.

So keep it fun, and do what you want to do. I don't have routine, not much cardio, wear a 20lb weight vest for a lot of basic exercises, and I enjoy it. Doesn't help that I walk about 100 miles a week, and run 1/2 marathons. KEEP IT FUN!!!

When I was a young man I was a Peace Corps volunteer in the desert country of Mauritania, which then and still today has slavery. The blacks did all the physical labor, and the Moors (who would likely kill you if you insulted them by calling them black) sit around and drink tea.
The black laborers on our dam-building project looked like bodybuilders, though they had never even seen or heard of a "gym". One of them picked up a heavy sledgehammer by the end of the handle and held it out straight in front of him. They could have killed those Moors any time they turned their backs.

I get a fair workout working on cars. Lots of walking, climbing, kneeling, twisting, bending, pushing and lifting. But there are some wheels/tires still too heavy for me to lift and I doubt I could run very far or fast. Never a runner (the last running I did was in high school and only then because I was forced for PE), I am actually afraid to now with my old Achilles tendon injury ... which, BTW, I got from pushing a car.

"Better" for what?

The answer to that question will make the answer to the first self-evident (and it can go either way depending on the "what.")

quote:

Originally posted by jimmy123x:
I've never seen a fat working farmer.

I heard someone say that a 76 year old guy still eats 3 eggs, gravy and biscuits, and bacon every morning for breakfast. And this guy was tall and slim. Guy explained he's a farmer and still farms.

So I'm in this camp. Not that I do it myself, I'm just a believer.

One time I visited a farm as a young sailor. Was asked to help lift some bales of hay. It was only hay. Heck, I think I only did one or, at best, two. If you do that for some time regularly, you can't help but be fit.

With regards to 50 squats or 50 pieces of firewood, I think there's the idea of constantly confusing your body with exercise. I think the idea is the body learns to be efficient when it's doing repetitive work. Working at a farm does that in terms of different things having to be done.

My son plays baseball and swims, he had workouts that as his age were sit ups, pull ups, push ups, burpies etc...

Late this summer I taught him to split wood with a sledge hammer. I took a 6 lb hammer with a long handle, and cut down to 30" about his bat length. After a few months his fastball velocity jumped and his times swimming dropped. In fact he just turned 11 and made his first swimming finals against mostly 12 year olds.

A friend that just turned 70 is a concrete contractor. He works from sunup to sundown six days a week for nine months out of the year. If I'm ever in a bar fight, I want him on my side. He'd clean most 20 year olds clocks.

It really depends on what you're looking for. A firefighter, a bricklayer, and a painter may all be physically fit, but in different ways. If you want to be cut and be a ghay poster boy, lift weights. If you want to be a skinny minnie in tights, run or bike. If you want to be healthy, eat, drink and exercise in moderation. Personally, I want to look like Arnie at his peak. I have been able to achieve the Ben Stein look, however.

No question in my mind that those lean hard farm boys & ranch hands were far tougher than the buff gym rats. Proved it time after time at local bar rooms & dance halls.

Gym rats exercising 3-4 times a week 4+ hours against outdoor labor exercising all muscles all day long.

There is a question here?

Agree that the farmers may be tougher, harder workers and in some cases stronger in man strength. However, someone who trains certain muscles or cardio will undoubtedly be stronger or aesthetically in better shape than someone who is not focused in the same manner. I think it comes down to what are the goals of the two different people. Both goals are probably being achieved, but the goals are different.

The biggest factor is that an exerciser can control the frequency intensity rest cyles etc.
A laborer can usually control none of that giving rise to overuse injuries excessive fatigue and simply wasted time.

quote:

Originally posted by Crom:
The biggest factor is that an exerciser can control the frequency intensity rest cyles etc.
A laborer can usually control none of that giving rise to overuse injuries excessive fatigue and simply wasted time.

This is nonsense.

"a laborer" means what exactly? What exactly leads to potential "overuse" and "wasted time" is much too vague.

It boils down this way, no matter what:

Calories in, calories out.

The cardiovascular health will be in line, with a healthy balance of calories in and calories out. Beyond that, the work at hand will determine whether a higher strength or endurance is needed.

"a laborer" can actually control anything that affects their health and ability to work, because it's 2017. You can't just work people to death building pyramids or railroads.

The question, or argument, is actually poorly framed.

Can you achieve fitness with voluntary exercise? Yes. Can you achieve fitness through work? Yes.

Are they equal? No, because both the work and the exercise vary widely.

Doing something for a living, is going to provide motivation not present at a gym. Frankly, if you think you're fit, then spend a day with a mason, or a roofer, or a plaster/wallboarder, or a welder, or any number of trades.

How often do you go to the gym, versus how often does someone do their job?

A good way to think about it, is that people are built like what they work with. A mason works with stone, etc.

Again though, fitness is simpler. Calories in, calories out. Cardio is great, but you need to not take in more calories than you expend.