So, I started working out this week, after a year of fitness neglect. I’m using the Bidasha Twins’ Bellydance: Fitness for Beginners DVD’s. The workouts are about 30 minutes long, and are very easy on the body. Right now, I’m doing the wussy “Basic Moves” workout until I’ve built up some strength and stamina and can move on to the more intensive workouts. There’s one for arms and abs, one for hips, buns and thighs. There’s also a pretty intensive cardio workout, but I stay away from that one because it’s too rough on my lower back. Besides, I walk at least a mile a day, five days a week, so I’ve got the cardio covered there.
I’m getting back into the workout because I suffer chronic back pain and want to strengthen the muscles that support my back and take some of the pressure off of a degenerating disc in my lumbar spine.
I used this same program before and got spectacular results. I had considerable pain reduction within a week, and after about two months, I had dropped several pounds, my waist was much more slender, my abs and obliques were nice and firm, and at 5’2" and 140 lbs, I looked good in a midriff-baring outfit. In other words, I accomplished my fitness goal.
So, why do people I know who work out tell me I’m not doing myself any good with this program? Conventinal wisdom (and isn’t that an oxymoron) has it that I should be doing 45 minutes of full-tilt boogie aerobics four days a week. I’ll be doing my nice, friendly, sweat-free low-impact workout probably six days a week, if not seven. Seems to me, in my case, less is more. A heavy, high-impact workout with a degenerating disc would be counterproductive. Also, any exercise you do is going to burn calories, and, combined with a healthy diet, will result in weight loss.
So, if I feel good, am free of pain, and like what I see in the mirror, and generally getting the desired results, why should anyone presume to tell me how, and how often, I should work out?