[You can follow me on Twitter @creatorvilla.] Today I want to share the results of a study conducted several decades ago that has forever changed the way we view the relationship between sunlight, testosterone, and athletic performance. In the study, Doctors Abraham Myerson and Rudolph Neustadt exposed men to UV light and measured the excretion of various sex hormones. The study revealed that exposure to UV light triggered huge increases in testosterone levels which did not return to baseline levels for over a week. This increase was dependent on the location of the body and the amount of skin exposed to the UV light. The researchers found that men’s baseline testosterone increased by 120% (more than double!) when the participants’ chest and back were exposed to UV light. However, the biggest increase in testosterone came when the participants’ testicles were exposed to UV light. The latter resulted in a massive 200% increase (triple) in baseline testosterone levels. This study has enormous implications for guys attempting to optimize testosterone levels and for athletes who want to maximize performance naturally and legally. It is a wonder why the sporting and fitness industries haven’t gone mainstream with this knowledge. Then again, there is little money to be made by advising people to get more sunlight. Companies would rather sell you expensive supplements. Athletes who have this knowledge may also wish to maintain a competitive advantage over their rivals.

The main takeaway of the study is that exposure to UV light anywhere on the body drives a huge increase in testosterone levels. I, however, wanted to test out the particulars of the study. Bluntly put, I wanted to see what would happen when I directly exposed the balls to UV light. I did this through an open window during the heat of day when the UV Index was high. I noticed they immediately began to grow upon first exposure. I knew this is the area where the body produces the vast majority of testosterone, so it made sense that local exposure to sunlight would trigger a disproportionate increase. The physical changes I observed coupled with the increases in energy and motivation to work out convinced me not only that the study was accurate, but that it was a major game-changer for the sports and fitness industries.

Exposing one’s nether parts to sunlight is neither practical nor desirable for obvious reasons. This has led some guys aware of the benefits to use UV red light therapy to achieve the same outcome in the privacy of their own home (link). I don’t doubt this works, but since it’s not something I’ve personally experimented with, I won’t say much about it. What I do know is that red light technology can be quiet pricey. However, I did discover a cheap and natural method that arguably worked even better for me than expensive alternatives.

Disclaimer: Don’t try this at home. You should consult your doctor about Vitamin D and testosterone optimization given that they are very powerful hormones and a lot could go wrong.

Vitamin D is known as the sunshine vitamin for good reason. The human body has a Vitamin D receptor in nearly ever cell of the body and is highly evolved to generate Vitamin D upon exposure to the sun. After I first read the study a few years ago, I wondered whether the increase in testosterone was triggered by the local production of Vitamin D directly on the skin in response to the UV light exposure. That in mind, I experimented with different doses of Vitamin D topical applied directly to the balls. Lo and behold, I noticed the same enlarging effect as when I had gotten direct UV light exposure. In this process of trial and error, I came to the conclusion that less is more. When the skin is exposed to UV light, it naturally generates Vitamin D in a uniform fashion. Small exposed areas of skin naturally produce small amounts of Vitamin D, and applying to much Vitamin D to any one region can interfere with its natural synthesis by the body. I found that less than 1,000 IU was enough for me to achieve the desired effect and that higher doses were wholly ineffective. Whenever I apply Vitamin D anywhere directly to my skin I prefer to crack open the Vitamin D softgels rather than purchase a topical product. My method is cheaper and it enables me to control the dosing better than prepared formulations. I would apply about half of a 1000 IU softgel every few days and could notice a major difference within a few hours.

Today I make sure I get adequate sun exposure as part of a healthy lifestyle, but I have not experimented with UV light or Vitamin D in this fashion in years. Currently, I have no reason to maintain peak testosterone levels. However, if I ever found myself training for an athletic competition or was experiencing symptoms of low testosterone, the power of the sun would be my first recourse. Nowadays people are quick to take supplements, inject steroids, or go on testosterone replacement therapy, giving up on their body’s natural ability to produce what they need. Meanwhile, nature offers a cheaper (if not free) solution that is arguably more effective than artificial alternatives.

See my article on the The Most Natural Way To Optimize Vitamin D Levels for more pro tips on harnessing the power of the sun.

Strength isn’t having the last word. It’s being free in a situation from the need to be understood.

Never depend on the admiration of others. There is no strength in it. Personal merit cannot be derived from an external source.

Forgiveness is the restoration of power.

When you can’t control what’s happening, challenge yourself to control the way you respond to what’s happening. That’s where your power is.

I’m a strong believer that exercise is a vital part of a healthy lifestyle, especially for those of us who live sedentary lives. Exercise gets blood flowing, releases happy chemicals, enhances emotional processing, conveys a sense of achievement, and makes us feel better about life. I haven’t always been a big fan of cardio. I played soccer in high school but running isn’t something I do for fun. I also prefer a muscular physique, so most of my time in the gym is spent lifting weights. However, I also know from experience and research that cardio is healthy for the mind and body. As a result, I incorporated a simple, intense exercise into my routine that let’s me have my cake and eat it too. I’ve termed it the gorilla walk. The gorilla walk is both aerobic (cardio) and anaerobic/anabolic (muscle-building)–the perfect marriage of cardio and resistance exercise.

Disclaimer: The gorilla walk is potentially dangerous, especially if you do it on a treadmill. Do not try this at home.

What I need for the gorilla walk is a space to walk fast/jog lightly, a backpack, and weights (plates and dumbbells). Inside, I like to use a treadmill and an old sturdy backpack. I started out with a 25 LB plate in the backpack and two 2-3 LB dumbbells in each hand. With a dumbbell in each hand, I like to jog as usual, with my hands moving up and down rhythmically. I want the backpack and dumbbells to be heavy enough that I can move 4-4.5 MPH for no more than 10-20 minutes. More weight=greater intensity=bigger gains. I can experiment by going up and down in weight and altering hand positions. For example, I sometimes take a break from the backpack, increase the weight of the dumbbells, and place them overhead or in a curling position. The goal is to get my whole body moving and building muscle at the same time.

The genius of the gorilla walk lies in its ability to activate the entire body. The backpack builds up the lats and shoulders, and the dumbbells work on arms, chest, and overall upper body definition depending on where you hold them. The legs and core work hard moving and balancing the weight. The gorilla walk is a cross-fit style work-out. It’s extremely stress-relieving and mindfulness-promoting, and efficiently consolidates many exercises into one. It can be good for losing weight, putting on muscle, and experiencing the therapeutic benefits of exercise.

Below are links to the treadmill and adjustable dumbbells I use, and a weighted military-style vest that’s perfect for this exercise. With a proper vest, I can do the gorilla walk with more weight than a backpack and look a little less ridiculous in a public gym.

Are you a fan of the gorilla walk? You can’t knock it it until you try it.

Treadmill: https://amzn.to/2PQTFtZ

Weighted Military-Style Vest: https://amzn.to/2PTn6vy

Adjustable Dumbbells: https://amzn.to/2N1yenA

25-LB Plate: https://amzn.to/2PQL5LI

Today’s athletes are far better than yesterday’s athletes–you hear it all the time. It’s a common argument used in generational legacy debates (Maradona versus Messi, Lebron versus Jordan, Woods versus Nicklaus). In fact, many people today believe that we’ve made progress in every area as a society, and athletic performance is the rule not the exception. After all, aren’t athletic records broken every year? The picture, however, is slightly more nuanced than a first glance would let on.

Journalist and Colombia-graduate David Epstein has spent the great part of his professional life studying athletic performance. He is author of The Sports Gene: Inside the Science of Extraordinary Athletic Performance and Range: How Generalists Triumph in a Specialized World. Epstein gave a Ted Talk in which he addressed the very question posed in the previous paragraph. Epstein concludes that humans couldn’t possibly have genetically evolved in such a short period of time. Epstein attributes advances in athletic performance today to changing technology, changing genes, and changing mindsets.

Changing technologies as in synthetic track surfaces and more aerodynamic bicycles. Changing genes as in better selecting for sports based on body types (e.g. taller builds in basketball and bigger builds for football). And changing mindsets as in more people attempting great athletic feats like matching Roger Bannister’s famous 4-minute mile. I would personally add a fourth explanation: changing performance-enhancing drugs. Reality is that athletes today are not genetically superior, but modern technology and scientific methods may be partially responsible for advances in athletic performance.

I have reposted the fascinating talk with permission from Ted.

Transcript:

The Olympic motto is “Citius, Altius, Fortius.” Faster, Higher, Stronger. And athletes have fulfilled that motto rapidly. The winner of the 2012 Olympic marathon ran two hours and eight minutes. Had he been racing against the winner of the 1904 Olympic marathon, he would have won by nearly an hour and a half. Now we all have this feeling that we’re somehow just getting better as a human race, inexorably progressing, but it’s not like we’ve evolved into a new species in a century. So what’s going on here? I want to take a look at what’s really behind this march of athletic progress.

In 1936, Jesse Owens held the world record in the 100 meters. Had Jesse Owens been racing last year in the world championships of the 100 meters, when Jamaican sprinter Usain Bolt finished, Owens would have still had 14 feet to go. That’s a lot in sprinter land. To give you a sense of how much it is, I want to share with you a demonstration conceived by sports scientist Ross Tucker. Now picture the stadium last year at the world championships of the 100 meters: thousands of fans waiting with baited breath to see Usain Bolt, the fastest man in history; flashbulbs popping as the nine fastest men in the world coil themselves into their blocks. And I want you to pretend that Jesse Owens is in that race. Now close your eyes for a second and picture the race. Bang! The gun goes off. An American sprinter jumps out to the front. Usain Bolt starts to catch him. Usain Bolt passes him, and as the runners come to the finish, you’ll hear a beep as each man crosses the line. (Beeps) That’s the entire finish of the race. You can open your eyes now. That first beep was Usain Bolt. That last beep was Jesse Owens. Listen to it again. (Beeps immediately after) When you think of it like that, it’s not that big a difference, is it? And then consider that Usain Bolt started by propelling himself out of blocks down a specially fabricated carpet designed to allow him to travel as fast as humanly possible. Jesse Owens, on the other hand, ran on cinders, the ash from burnt wood, and that soft surface stole far more energy from his legs as he ran. Rather than blocks, Jesse Owens had a gardening trowel that he had to use to dig holes in the cinders to start from. Biomechanical analysis of the speed of Owens’ joints shows that had been running on the same surface as Bolt, he wouldn’t have been 14 feet behind, he would have been within one stride. Rather than the last beep, Owens would have been the second beep. Listen to it again. (Beeps) That’s the difference track surface technology has made, and it’s done it throughout the running world.

Consider a longer event. In 1954, Sir Roger Bannister became the first man to run under four minutes in the mile. Nowadays, college kids do that every year. On rare occasions, a high school kid does it. As of the end of last year, 1,314 men had run under four minutes in the mile, but like Jesse Owens, Sir Roger Bannister ran on soft cinders that stole far more energy from his legs than the synthetic tracks of today. So I consulted biomechanics experts to find out how much slower it is to run on cinders than synthetic tracks, and their consensus that it’s one and a half percent slower. So if you apply a one and a half percent slowdown conversion to every man who ran his sub-four mile on a synthetic track, this is what happens. Only 530 are left. If you look at it from that perspective, fewer than ten new men per [year] have joined the sub-four mile club since Sir Roger Bannister. Now, 530 is a lot more than one, and that’s partly because there are many more people training today and they’re training more intelligently. Even college kids are professional in their training compared to Sir Roger Bannister, who trained for 45 minutes at a time while he ditched gynecology lectures in med school. And that guy who won the 1904 Olympic marathon in three in a half hours, that guy was drinking rat poison and brandy while he ran along the course. That was his idea of a performance-enhancing drug. (Laughter)

Clearly, athletes have gotten more savvy about performance-enhancing drugs as well, and that’s made a difference in some sports at some times, but technology has made a difference in all sports, from faster skis to lighter shoes. Take a look at the record for the 100-meter freestyle swim. The record is always trending downward, but it’s punctuated by these steep cliffs. This first cliff, in 1956, is the introduction of the flip turn. Rather than stopping and turning around, athletes could somersault under the water and get going right away in the opposite direction. This second cliff, the introduction of gutters on the side of the pool that allows water to splash off, rather than becoming turbulence that impedes the swimmers as they race. This final cliff, the introduction of full-body and low-friction swimsuits.

Throughout sports, technology has changed the face of performance. In 1972, Eddy Merckx set the record for the longest distance cycled in one hour at 30 miles, 3,774 feet. Now that record improved and improved as bicycles improved and became more aerodynamic all the way until 1996, when it was set at 35 miles, 1,531 feet, nearly five miles farther than Eddy Merckx cycled in 1972. But then in 2000, the International Cycling Union decreed that anyone who wanted to hold that record had to do so with essentially the same equipment that Eddy Merckx used in 1972. Where does the record stand today? 30 miles, 4,657 feet, a grand total of 883 feet farther than Eddy Merckx cycled more than four decades ago. Essentially the entire improvement in this record was due to technology.

Still, technology isn’t the only thing pushing athletes forward. While indeed we haven’t evolved into a new species in a century, the gene pool within competitive sports most certainly has changed. In the early half of the 20th century, physical education instructors and coaches had the idea that the average body type was the best for all athletic endeavors: medium height, medium weight, no matter the sport. And this showed in athletes’ bodies. In the 1920s, the average elite high-jumper and average elite shot-putter were the same exact size. But as that idea started to fade away, as sports scientists and coaches realized that rather than the average body type, you want highly specialized bodies that fit into certain athletic niches, a form of artificial selection took place, a self-sorting for bodies that fit certain sports, and athletes’ bodies became more different from one another. Today, rather than the same size as the average elite high jumper, the average elite shot-putter is two and a half inches taller and 130 pounds heavier. And this happened throughout the sports world.

In fact, if you plot on a height versus mass graph one data point for each of two dozen sports in the first half of the 20th century, it looks like this. There’s some dispersal, but it’s kind of grouped around that average body type. Then that idea started to go away, and at the same time, digital technology — first radio, then television and the Internet — gave millions, or in some cases billions, of people a ticket to consume elite sports performance. The financial incentives and fame and glory afforded elite athletes skyrocketed, and it tipped toward the tiny upper echelon of performance. It accelerated the artificial selection for specialized bodies. And if you plot a data point for these same two dozen sports today, it looks like this. The athletes’ bodies have gotten much more different from one another. And because this chart looks like the charts that show the expanding universe, with the galaxies flying away from one another, the scientists who discovered it call it “The Big Bang of Body Types.”

In sports where height is prized, like basketball, the tall athletes got taller. In 1983, the National Basketball Association signed a groundbreaking agreement making players partners in the league, entitled to shares of ticket revenues and television contracts. Suddenly, anybody who could be an NBA player wanted to be, and teams started scouring the globe for the bodies that could help them win championships. Almost overnight, the proportion of men in the NBA who are at least seven feet tall doubled to 10 percent. Today, one in 10 men in the NBA is at least seven feet tall, but a seven-foot-tall man is incredibly rare in the general population — so rare that if you know an American man between the ages of 20 and 40 who is at least seven feet tall, there’s a 17 percent chance he’s in the NBA right now. (Laughter) That is, find six honest seven footers, one is in the NBA right now. And that’s not the only way that NBA players’ bodies are unique. This is Leonardo da Vinci’s “Vitruvian Man,” the ideal proportions, with arm span equal to height. My arm span is exactly equal to my height. Yours is probably very nearly so. But not the average NBA player. The average NBA player is a shade under 6’7″, with arms that are seven feet long. Not only are NBA players ridiculously tall, they are ludicrously long. Had Leonardo wanted to draw the Vitruvian NBA Player, he would have needed a rectangle and an ellipse, not a circle and a square.

So in sports where large size is prized, the large athletes have gotten larger. Conversely, in sports where diminutive stature is an advantage, the small athletes got smaller. The average elite female gymnast shrunk from 5’3″ to 4’9″ on average over the last 30 years, all the better for their power-to-weight ratio and for spinning in the air. And while the large got larger and the small got smaller, the weird got weirder. The average length of the forearm of a water polo player in relation to their total arm got longer, all the better for a forceful throwing whip. And as the large got larger, small got smaller, and the weird weirder. In swimming, the ideal body type is a long torso and short legs. It’s like the long hull of a canoe for speed over the water. And the opposite is advantageous in running. You want long legs and a short torso. And this shows in athletes’ bodies today. Here you see Michael Phelps, the greatest swimmer in history, standing next to Hicham El Guerrouj, the world record holder in the mile. These men are seven inches different in height, but because of the body types advantaged in their sports, they wear the same length pants. Seven inches difference in height, these men have the same length legs.

Now in some cases, the search for bodies that could push athletic performance forward ended up introducing into the competitive world populations of people that weren’t previously competing at all, like Kenyan distance runners. We think of Kenyans as being great marathoners. Kenyans think of the Kalenjin tribe as being great marathoners. The Kalenjin make up just 12 percent of the Kenyan population but the vast majority of elite runners. And they happen, on average, to have a certain unique physiology: legs that are very long and very thin at their extremity, and this is because they have their ancestry at very low latitude in a very hot and dry climate, and an evolutionary adaptation to that is limbs that are very long and very thin at the extremity for cooling purposes. It’s the same reason that a radiator has long coils, to increase surface area compared to volume to let heat out, and because the leg is like a pendulum, the longer and thinner it is at the extremity, the more energy-efficient it is to swing. To put Kalenjin running success in perspective, consider that 17 American men in history have run faster than two hours and 10 minutes in the marathon. That’s a four-minute-and-58-second-per-mile pace. Thirty-two Kalenjin men did that last October. (Laughter) That’s from a source population the size of metropolitan Atlanta.

Still, even changing technology and the changing gene pool in sports don’t account for all of the changes in performance. Athletes have a different mindset than they once did. Have you ever seen in a movie when someone gets an electrical shock and they’re thrown across a room? There’s no explosion there. What’s happening when that happens is that the electrical impulse is causing all their muscle fibers to twitch at once, and they’re throwing themselves across the room. They’re essentially jumping. That’s the power that’s contained in the human body. But normally we can’t access nearly all of it. Our brain acts as a limiter, preventing us from accessing all of our physical resources, because we might hurt ourselves, tearing tendons or ligaments. But the more we learn about how that limiter functions, the more we learn how we can push it back just a bit, in some cases by convincing the brain that the body won’t be in mortal danger by pushing harder. Endurance and ultra-endurance sports serve as a great example. Ultra-endurance was once thought to be harmful to human health, but now we realize that we have all these traits that are perfect for ultra-endurance: no body fur and a glut of sweat glands that keep us cool while running; narrow waists and long legs compared to our frames; large surface area of joints for shock absorption. We have an arch in our foot that acts like a spring, short toes that are better for pushing off than for grasping tree limbs, and when we run, we can turn our torso and our shoulders like this while keeping our heads straight. Our primate cousins can’t do that. They have to run like this. And we have big old butt muscles that keep us upright while running. Have you ever looked at an ape’s butt? They have no buns because they don’t run upright. And as athletes have realized that we’re perfectly suited for ultra-endurance, they’ve taken on feats that would have been unthinkable before, athletes like Spanish endurance racer Kílian Jornet. Here’s Kílian running up the Matterhorn. (Laughter) With a sweatshirt there tied around his waist. It’s so steep he can’t even run here. He’s pulling up on a rope. This is a vertical ascent of more than 8,000 feet, and Kílian went up and down in under three hours. Amazing. And talented though he is, Kílian is not a physiological freak. Now that he has done this, other athletes will follow, just as other athletes followed after Sir Roger Bannister ran under four minutes in the mile.

Changing technology, changing genes, and a changing mindset. Innovation in sports, whether that’s new track surfaces or new swimming techniques, the democratization of sport, the spread to new bodies and to new populations around the world, and imagination in sport, an understanding of what the human body is truly capable of, have conspired to make athletes stronger, faster, bolder, and better than ever.

Thank you very much.

(Applause)

Stress kills. You’ve probably heard it 100 times. It’s a fact that stress affects people’s health, happiness, and hormones. Stress is a huge contributing factor to America’s chronic illness epidemic. Today society is more technologically advanced than ever but people are increasingly unhappy because of the pressure we collectively put on ourselves. The pressure to buy a bigger house or car, pay for a better education, get a better job, have a thick bank account for rainy days, and be successful–whatever that means. All of these things are good in and of themselves but I’ve seen how much their obsessive pursuit can rob us of happiness in the present moment. Remember, it’s about the journey as much as it is the destination. And you and I can only enjoy the journey if we take sensible measures to reduce stress. However, there’s another way of looking at stress and that is in terms of personal growth. Moderate amounts of stress can make us stronger and better equipped to handle future life challenges.

A few weeks ago, I featured Abraham Twerski on the true meaning of love. Today I’ve transcribed another short clip of his in which he talks about the constructive role that stress can play in our lives, building on an analogy of lobsters. And you know how much I love nature analogies. The message is simple—today’s stress can be tomorrow’s strength.

Transcript:

There’s something I want to tell you about stress and how we have to look at stress. And I think it’s an important thing because many people have told me from my lecture [this is] the one thing they remember. I was sitting in a dentist’s office and looked at an article that said “How do lobsters grow?” Well, I don’t care how lobsters grow, but I was interested, and it points out that a lobster is a soft, mushy animal that lives inside of a rigid shell. That rigid shell does not expand. Well, how can a lobster grow? As the lobster grows, that shell becomes very confining. The lobster feels itself under pressure and uncomfortable. It goes under a rock formation to protect itself from predatory fish, casts off the shell, and produces a new one. Eventually that shell becomes very uncomfortable as it grows, back under the rocks, and the lobster repeats this numerous times. The stimulus for the lobster to be able to grow is that it feels uncomfortable. Now if lobsters had doctors, they would never grow because as soon as the lobster feels uncomfortable, it goes to the doctor, gets Valium, gets a Percocet, feels fine. Never casts off its shell. So I think that we have to realize that times of stress are also times that are signals for growth. And if we use adversity properly, we can grow through adversity.

The Fire Must Never Go Out

Everybody wants to be a warrior, but nobody in the 21st century really knows what that means. Toughness, as I’ve talked about in another article on this blog, is the essence of the warrior archetype. Toughness will look different in the domain of school than in the domains of sports, family, and work, but the basic concept remains the same. Toughness can be developed with various disciplines, three of which feature large on this blog–fitness, fasting, and meditation.

Another key to improve toughness is love. In fact, I would argue that every discipline seeks to increase love in one form or another, whether that be love of self, love of others, or love of the Creator. Love makes us tougher because it gives us something to fight for. How many parents are driven by a desire to give their children the best life possible? How many people refuse to give up because of their friends, family members, or significant other?

This observation is why I can appreciate the wisdom of the Lakota tribe on how to become a true warrior. At the core of their definition lies love for other people. Here is the transcript I created of a short video in which a Lakota elder articulates what it means to be a true warrior. You can find the video on YouTube embedded below.

Transcript: Being a warrior isn’t about taking lives. Being a warrior isn’t about showing strength. Being is a warrior is not showing how much knowledge you have. Being a warrior is learning how to cry. Learning how to cry because when a man learns how to cry, he’s learning understanding. He’s learning how to understand. Because when a man cries, compassion starts to grow. Being compassionate, loving all children, respecting everybody, and protecting your family.