This is not as much of an attack, but a call to reason…
One thing I am seeing commonly on social media is coaches talking about hormones and their ability to influence them with the confidence of a doctor or endocrinologist.
This is reasonable when adding speculation or talking about better practices in terms of general health but when talking about specifics or with certainty, this is troublesome to me – especially when no blood panels have been interpreted or doctors consulted…
The longer I am coaching, it never ceases to amaze me how much variance there is in each individual, driven by the infinite amounts of factors and combinations that have gone into creating the person that stands in front of me.
Narrowing things down can be useful initially to create a start point so as not to be overwhelmed (small world model) but that start point is constantly moving and evolving. To become married to that initial spot is to lose sight of the woods for the trees so to speak, and even become a victim of one’s own biases.
As part of my own formative background, I lived and trained in Brisbane 17 years ago. While there I was fortunate to train under some excellent coaches who had a positive influence on me to this day. I also attended some courses and seminars, one of them that stuck with me – and not for the right reasons, was a BioSig seminar with Charles Poliquin.
The whole premise of this seminar was that different hormone levels lead to specific fat deposition around the body. By taking various body fat calliper readings, one could predict pending disease states or discern whether and individual was deficient in or producing too much of a certain hormone. After that assessment, exercise, lifestyle and mainly supplement protocols would be administered.
For example if a male had high skinfold readings at the pec and tricep sites, they were automatically branded high in oestrogen / low in testosterone. In contrast, another coach that I had the pleasure of working under told a story that one of his clients was taking testosterone and it made zero difference to these sites.
Cynically we were also told to take a cheek and chin skinfold reading as this would be where clients lose weight quickest and it would help with buy in to the protocol.
Back then the seminar was five days, I believe it is two now. Anyway, out of the five days, I left after one.
Funnily enough and to my surprise, I received the certification in the post a while later…
My short experience of the BioSig seminar consisted of Poliquin talking about how he sued someone into the ground for stealing his IP and then providing a list of supplements that his company sold in order to treat the various hormonal readings we would be providing to our clients.
From there he went on to make claims like ‘avocados from the Dominican Republic are the most potent testosterone boosting foods in the world’ and ‘if women get navel piercings, it will raise their oestrogen levels’.
By mid-afternoon I had amassed enough notes in my journal that almost induced a panic attack in my sceptical being. This was an unease beyond knowing how much I do not know. Something told me not to go back and just enjoy the tourist attractions around Sydney for the rest of the week.
Maybe it was imposter syndrome back then but something inside of me feels beyond disingenuous looking someone in the eyes and telling them their cortisol, testosterone or oestrogen levels are off just because of a calliper site reading (that I may not have taken correctly). I attended the ISAK calliper course since and the level of detail there was not present in the BioSig course when it came to taking measurements of skinfold sites.
Claiming being able to easily control and predict hormonal outcomes is an enticing sales pitch. But it is also deceitful to the point of arrogance, and opportunistic when it is aimed at folks that are desperate for a solution.
Another common strategy is demonising cortisol – not only for stress but weight gain around the stomach.
Now if we take a step back, is it the hormone cortisol causing this specific weight gain? What about if someone is stressed, what is their relationship with food? Were they brought up in a house where food was a display of comfort or a reward? Have they binded comfort eating to stressful situations? Is it because they are a certain age that they are producing more cortisol or is it because they now have small kids, a higher profile job with more responsibilities – or the inverse, they don’t have a family that they want, they are maybe looking after a sick relative, their job is barely paying them enough to pay the bills?
There are physiological, psychological, environmental, social inputs and pressures and they are always in flux. Humans are complex and cannot be reduced to a one size fits all solution. The hubris in thinking that is the case is mind blowing to me.
So it is not as clear as definitively saying ‘x’ hormone is high or because it is high it is causing ‘z’. It is a faux certainty that is comforting to both orator and the vulnerable listener but it is just speculation.
Humans are complicated and constantly changing and it doesn’t help anyone to brand them or make absolute statements that they can become attached to and limited by.
Equally it can be difficult for a coach to say things like ‘it depends’ – ambiguity can give off a scent of incompetence. In an age where everyone has a platform, there is pressure to make bold statements.
Talking in absolutes gives the illusion of expertise.
The sign of a good coach is one that listens, asks the right questions that encourage the individual look into their own behaviours and help them to build autonomy and ownership around them over time.