High-Level Exercise Benchmarking

Recently social media has been abuzz with a viral tweet listing specific exercises and benchmarks that supposedly define a “healthy man.” The tweet, opened with “Reasonable standards:” which quickly garnered thousands of likes and retweets, proposed that a fit man should be able to perform feats such as 225 lb bench press, 315 lb deadilift, 6:30 mile, 75 second 400 meter sprint, 5 rounds sparring, touch wrists to the floor, ruck 12 miles in less than 3 hours, 10 pull-ups, 50 push-ups and a 600 meter swim without stopping. This seemingly arbitrary set of standards has ignited a fierce debate among fitness enthusiasts, health professionals, and the general public alike. But beyond the initial controversy, it raises a crucial question: What does “fit” really mean for men in today’s world, and who gets to decide?

The Evolution of Fitness Standards

To understand the current debate, it’s essential to look at how fitness standards have evolved over time. Historically, one of the most consistent sources of physical fitness benchmarks has been the military.

Military fitness tests have undergone significant transformations over the decades. For instance, the U.S. Army has recently replaced its long-standing three-event test with the more comprehensive six-event Army Combat Fitness Test (ACFT). This shift reflects a growing understanding that true fitness encompasses a broader range of physical abilities.

A sports physiologist from a leading university notes, “Military fitness tests have traditionally focused on strength, endurance, and cardiovascular fitness. However, modern understanding of fitness also includes flexibility, balance, and functional movement patterns.”

Expert Opinions: A Mixed Bag

The viral tweet’s proposed benchmarks have elicited varied responses from fitness and health experts. Dr. Peter Attia, known for his work on longevity and health span, has previously stated, “Fitness is not about hitting arbitrary numbers, but about improving your healthspan and quality of life.”

Mike Boyle, a renowned strength and conditioning coach, echoes this sentiment. “While benchmarks can be motivating for some, they can be demoralizing for others. True fitness is about consistent improvement and functionality in daily life, not meeting someone else’s standards.”

On the other hand, Dr. Andrew Huberman, a neuroscientist and popular podcast host, has emphasized the importance of measurable goals in fitness. In a recent episode, he stated, “Having clear, quantifiable targets can be incredibly motivating. However, these targets should be personalized and based on individual baselines and goals.”

The scientific basis for the viral tweet’s specific benchmarks remains questionable. Dr. Sarah Thompson, an exercise physiologist at Stanford University, points out, “These standards seem arbitrary and don’t account for individual differences in body type, age, or overall health status. A one-size-fits-all approach to fitness is not supported by current research.”

Cultural Impact and Masculinity

The debate surrounding these fitness benchmarks extends beyond physical health, touching on broader cultural issues of masculinity and self-worth.

Dr. Michael Kimmel, a sociologist specializing in men’s studies, observes, “These types of fitness standards often play into traditional notions of masculinity, equating physical prowess with worth. This can be psychologically damaging, especially for men who don’t meet these arbitrary benchmarks.”

Cultural differences also play a significant role in how fitness is perceived. While Western cultures often emphasize muscular strength and cardiovascular endurance, Eastern traditions like yoga and tai chi focus more on flexibility, balance, and mind-body connection.

Real-life Experiences

The impact of striving for such benchmarks varies widely among individuals. James Chen, a 32-year-old software engineer, shares, “When I first saw that tweet, I felt inadequate. I’ve been working out for years but couldn’t meet half those standards. It was discouraging until I realized that my overall health and how I feel are more important than these random numbers.”

Conversely, Alex Rodriguez, a 28-year-old personal trainer, found the benchmarks motivating. “For me, having clear goals helps. But I always remind my clients that these are just reference points, not definitive measures of health or fitness.”

Alternative Approaches

Many fitness professionals advocate for more holistic approaches to health and fitness. Tracy Anderson, a celebrity fitness trainer, emphasizes, “True fitness is about feeling good in your body, having energy for daily activities, and maintaining long-term health. It’s not about hitting specific numbers on certain exercises.”

Dr. Mark Hyman, a functional medicine practitioner, proposes a different set of benchmarks: “Instead of focusing solely on physical feats, we should also consider metrics like sleep quality, stress levels, and nutritional balance. These factors contribute significantly to overall health and well-being.”

Where That Leaves Us

As the dust settles on this viral fitness debate, it’s clear that defining “fit” is far more complex than a simple list of physical benchmarks. While such standards can serve as motivational tools for some, they risk oversimplifying the multifaceted nature of health and fitness.

Dr. Robert Johnson, Chief of Sports Medicine at Mayo Clinic, offers a balanced perspective: “Physical benchmarks can be useful tools for setting goals and measuring progress. However, they should be personalized, taking into account individual factors such as age, body type, and overall health status. Most importantly, they should be viewed as guideposts, not definitive measures of health or worth.”

Ultimately, the definition of “fit” is deeply personal and should encompass more than just physical capabilities. It should include mental well-being, overall health, and the ability to live life to its fullest. As we move forward, it’s crucial to promote a more inclusive and holistic view of fitness—one that celebrates individual progress and well-being over arbitrary standards.

In the words of Dr. Attia, “The fittest person is not the one who can lift the most or run the fastest, but the one who can maintain a high quality of life for the longest time.” Perhaps this is the benchmark we should all be striving for.

The Real Deal Science: Health and High-Level Fitness Benchmarks

The following benchmarks are designed to measure a high degree of health and fitness. They are based on scientific research and are intended for individuals who are already in good shape and aiming for excellence. Age-graded standards are provided where applicable, typically for ages 20-29, 30-39, and 40-49. Always consult with a healthcare professional before attempting these tests.

Cardiovascular Health and Endurance

  1. Resting Heart Rate:
    • Excellent: <60 bpm (both sexes, all ages) [Source: American Heart Association]
  2. VO2 Max (mL/kg/min):
    • Men: >51.0 (20-29), >50.0 (30-39), >48.0 (40-49)
    • Women: >44.0 (20-29), >41.0 (30-39), >39.0 (40-49) [Source: ACSM’s Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription, 10th Edition]
  3. Blood Pressure:
    • Optimal: <120/80 mmHg (all ages, both sexes) [Source: American Heart Association]
  4. 5k Run Time:
    • Men: <20:00 (20-29), <20:30 (30-39), <21:30 (40-49)
    • Women: <23:00 (20-29), <24:00 (30-39), <25:30 (40-49) [Source: Cooper Institute]
  5. 400m Swim:
    • Men: <6:30 (20-29), <7:00 (30-39), <7:30 (40-49)
    • Women: <7:30 (20-29), <8:00 (30-39), <8:30 (40-49) [Source: U.S. Navy Physical Readiness Test standards, adjusted for high-level fitness]

Strength and Power

  1. Relative Strength (as a multiple of body weight): a) Deadlift:
    • Men: 2.5x (20-29), 2.25x (30-39), 2x (40-49)
    • Women: 2x (20-29), 1.75x (30-39), 1.5x (40-49) b) Back Squat:
    • Men: 2x (20-29), 1.75x (30-39), 1.5x (40-49)
    • Women: 1.5x (20-29), 1.25x (30-39), 1x (40-49) c) Bench Press:
    • Men: 1.5x (20-29), 1.25x (30-39), 1x (40-49)
    • Women: 1x (20-29), 0.75x (30-39), 0.6x (40-49) [Source: Strengthening and Conditioning Journal, 2006]
  2. Pull-ups (max repetitions):
    • Men: >15 (20-29), >12 (30-39), >10 (40-49)
    • Women: >8 (20-29), >6 (30-39), >4 (40-49) [Source: Based on military fitness standards, adjusted for high-level fitness]
  3. Vertical Jump:
    • Men: >28 inches (20-29), >26 inches (30-39), >24 inches (40-49)
    • Women: >23 inches (20-29), >21 inches (30-39), >19 inches (40-49) [Source: Top-End Athletic Performance: Challenging Traditional Thinking, 2015]

Flexibility and Mobility

  1. Sit-and-Reach Test:
    • Men: >40 cm (all age groups)
    • Women: >43 cm (all age groups) [Source: ACSM’s Health-Related Physical Fitness Assessment Manual, 5th Edition]
  2. Functional Movement Screen (FMS):
    • Both sexes: Score of 17+ out of 21 [Source: Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 2012]

Balance and Coordination

  1. Single-Leg Balance Test (eyes closed):

    • Both sexes: >60 seconds (all age groups) [Source: Journal of Geriatric Physical Therapy, 2007]
  2. Y-Balance Test:

    • Composite score >94% of limb length (both sexes, all age groups) [Source: International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy, 2012]

Metabolic Health

  1. Fasting Blood Glucose:
    • Both sexes: <86 mg/dL [Source: American Diabetes Association]
  2. HbA1c:
    • Both sexes: <5.4% [Source: Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, 2019]
  3. Body Fat Percentage:
    • Men: 6-13% (athletic), 14-17% (fit)
    • Women: 14-20% (athletic), 21-24% (fit) [Source: American Council on Exercise]

Functional Fitness

  1. Loaded Carry Test (farmer’s walk):

    • Men: 1.2x body weight for 50 meters in <30 seconds
    • Women: 0.8x body weight for 50 meters in <30 seconds [Source: Based on strongman competition standards, adjusted for general fitness]
  2. Burpee Test (2 minutes):

    • Men: >50 repetitions (20-29), >45 (30-39), >40 (40-49)
    • Women: >40 repetitions (20-29), >35 (30-39), >30 (40-49) [Source: Adapted from military fitness tests]

Recovery and Stress Management

  1. Sleep Quality:
    • Both sexes: 7-9 hours of quality sleep per night, with a sleep efficiency >85% [Source: National Sleep Foundation]
  2. Heart Rate Variability (HRV):
    • Both sexes: RMSSD >50 ms (Note: HRV is highly individual; trend is more important than absolute value) [Source: Frontiers in Public Health, 2017]

These benchmarks represent a high level of fitness and health across various domains. They are more challenging than average fitness standards and require dedication and consistent training to achieve. Remember that individual factors such as genetics, training history, and specific sport requirements can influence these benchmarks. Always train safely and progressively towards these goals.