logo
Boredom, injuries and ‘weird guru vibes': seven signs it's time to change your workout

Boredom, injuries and ‘weird guru vibes': seven signs it's time to change your workout

The Guardian19-05-2025

It's an uncomfortable feeling: you walk out of your fitness class and know the vibe was off but can't say exactly why. The coach was perfectly polite and the workout itself was fine, but you're sure you won't go back. How come?
The Guardian's journalism is independent. We will earn a commission if you buy something through an affiliate link. Learn more.
I have a few hunches because I've spent a lot of time in gyms. I played three sports in high school, was on the swim team in college, started CrossFit in 2016 and have been a CrossFit coach and personal trainer for the past four years. I've written for Men's Health for almost a decade, and dropped into at least 50 gyms, from luxury boutiques to basement sweat boxes.
I've seen a lot of bad coaching, but even worse, I've noticed that members don't know what to look for or what's reasonable to expect. As a result, they assume they're the problem: the reason they can't do the workouts as written, keep getting injured or don't see progress.
Below are seven red flags to look out for while working out – and what to do if you spot them.
'Boredom in training isn't always a red flag,' says Leanna Carr, a strength coach, owner of Rain City Fit in Seattle and director of Pride Deadlift Party. 'But, if you're bored and unsure why you're doing what you're doing, that's probably worth questioning. Repeating exercises without any progression, challenge, or explanation may signal lazy programming or disengaged coaching.'
Solution: Fitness can be so much more than a 3K run, the same push-pull-legs routine or another YouTube HIIT class. Instead of focusing just on strength or endurance, embrace the other components to fitness, including flexibility (touching your toes or learning the middle splits), power (Olympic lifting) and coordination (such as dancing).
Do something you enjoy, such as walking, water aerobics, tumbling, boogie boarding, cycling or tai chi. Companies such as ClassPass are a great way to try new activities without having to commit to a full membership. Ultimately, fitness that you enjoy (or, at the very least, don't dread) will be more 'effective' than grinding through something you hate, only to quit a few months later.
As a coach, I know it's satisfying to see people learn new skills or hit personal bests – but only if that's what they want. 'Pushing goals like weight loss, muscle gain or competition prep without asking reflects a top-down coaching approach,' says Carr. 'That can make clients feel unheard, disempowered or even pressured into chasing outcomes that they don't really care about.'
Solution: Come into the gym with a specific goal in mind, perhaps one related to what your body can do, not just how it looks. For example, you could learn a skill (a headstand) or a movement (like a clean and jerk), lift a certain weight (80kg squat) or train for an event (a half marathon). 'Having the strength to play football with your friends or chase your grandkids around is a healthier goal than an arbitrary weight or size,' says Alyssa Royse, co-owner of Rocket Community Fitness.
To state the obvious: coaches should coach, which is much more than reading the workout off the whiteboard, demonstrating the movements and encouraging everyone to 'go all out'. It means offering specific, personalised feedback to everyone in the studio (and yes, that feedback can be positive!). Even at boutiques where a single class costs $45, I've seen coaches never once interact with the attendees. At that point, you might be better off doing a workout video from YouTube instead.
'Without clear instruction and feedback, you could be repeating poor movement patterns, increasing injury risk or spinning your wheels on ineffective exercises,' says Carr.
Solution: When I first started CrossFit, I would wait and hope the coach would watch one of my lifts. Then I realised I could ask them directly (when they had a free moment) and tell them what, specifically, I was trying to improve. Coaches should be proactive, but they aren't mind readers, so be the squeaky wheel and give them as much information as possible to help you succeed.
'I think a good coach might tell you to add weight or pick up the pace, but they'd do it with a question, not a command,' says Royse. Carr agrees: 'When the default cue is to increase intensity without checking your form, asking how you're feeling or explaining the purpose, it's a sign that a coach might be chasing effort over progress.'
Solution: You should be the one who decides how much weight and at what intensity. That's easier said than done, especially with a pushy coach and a roomful of athletes who may be more experienced, so feel free to deflect. 'Thanks, but the shoulder's a bit wonky today,' you can say. Or, 'I barely slept last night, but next week I'll give it a try for sure.'
Though many people go to the gym to lose weight, a coach should never assume that's your goal or push you in that direction – especially when they rarely have the credentials or the depth of knowledge to offer that kind of advice. 'Unless you understand what's going on with a person metabolically and emotionally, coaches have absolutely no business talking about diet and lifestyle with people,' says Royse.
Solution: It may be time to look for a new studio or coach. 'Diet advice is way outside the scope of practice,' says Royse. 'If a coach can't respect boundaries there, I'd question their ability to respect any boundary.'
You should understand a workout as a suggestion that can be modified based on factors such as how much you've slept, how much energy you've got to burn, your technique and confidence, and any lingering or recurring injuries. For example, if you're at a yoga class and can't do sarvangasana (shoulder stand) because of back pain, perhaps you could try legs up the wall instead.
If an instructor never offers adjustments, or insists you do exactly what's written, it's likely a red flag. However, if they're open to accommodating you but don't know exactly how, that can be a green flag, says Carr. 'A coach who knows their limits and outsources to a specialist or someone more qualified is showing professionalism, not failure.'
Solution: Identify any potential movements that may be a problem then discuss these with the coach before class starts.
This may be partly on your instructor – especially if they never correct your form – but it's likely on you as well. 'Without proper recovery, nutrition and stress management, fatigue can outweigh fitness, leading to burnout or injury,' says Carr.
Solution: Take enough time to recover, and if you're consistently injured in the same place, you likely need to change your movement pattern or do more mobility, prehab and rehab.
If you exclusively work out at home, it may be worth visiting a studio or a gym where someone can evaluate your form. Personal training is expensive but ultimately worth it if you go into the session with a specific purpose, such as asking for three ways you can improve deadlifts, squats and bench presses.
Similarly, physiotherapy isn't cheap, but the earlier potentially serious issues are spotted, the less it may cost in the long term.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Popular morning snack and dinner staple found to contain alarming levels of autism-linked chemicals
Popular morning snack and dinner staple found to contain alarming levels of autism-linked chemicals

Daily Mail​

time41 minutes ago

  • Daily Mail​

Popular morning snack and dinner staple found to contain alarming levels of autism-linked chemicals

People vying to be healthy may want to think twice before reaching for two popular nutritious staples. The Environmental Working Group, a health advocacy organization, recently released its 'Dirty Dozen 2025' list - where it ranked the fruits and vegetables covered in the most toxic chemicals. After analyzing the Department of Agriculture's data on levels of pesticide contamination in different fruits and vegetables, the group ranked 47 of them based on their toxicity levels. Of these, they found the top 12 fruits and vegetables covered in pesticides. While usual suspects such as spinach, strawberries and kale took the top three spots, researchers noted that blackberries were a new addition to the list. Over 80 percent of samples of the popular berry, which is usually priced at $6 for 12oz, were found to be covered in two or more pesticides, placing it 10th on the list. The agency noted the most common pesticide they found on blackberries was cypermethrin - a toxic synthetic insecticide linked to autism. Also new on the list, landing in 12th place, were potatoes - the most commonly eaten vegetable in the US. The researchers found nearly all of the 1,000 samples of potatoes had high concentrations of chlorpropham, a plant growth regulator banned in the European Union due to its hormone-disrupting and cancer-causing properties. Alexis Temkin, EWG's Vice President of Science told CNN: 'The guide is there to help consumers eat a lot of fruits and vegetables while trying to reduce pesticide exposure. 'One of the things that a lot of peer-reviewed studies have shown over and over again (is) that when people switch to an organic diet from a conventional diet, you can really see measurable levels in the reduction of pesticide levels in the urine.' Organic produce is grown without synthetic pesticides, with farmers opting for more natural options that are less persistent in the environment. She noted that her team found 50 different pesticides across a variety of fruits and vegetables that made the Dirty Dozen list. Coming in fourth were grapes, fifth were peaches and sixth were cherries. These fruits were followed by nectarines, pears and apples at seventh, eighth and ninth place, respectively. The EWG ranked blueberries in 11th place. The agency noted blackberries had never made it on the list before as they hadn't been tested prior to 2023. However, both the EWG and Department of Agriculture examined 294 non-organic blackberry samples from July through December 2023 and found at least one pesticide in 93 percent of them. Most notably, they discovered the presence of cypermethrin, which is banned in the EU to due to its dangers to human health. While cypermethrin has proven beneficial in killing harmful insects in berries, certain studies have shown that consumption by pregnant woman may increase the risk of autism. A 2019 BMJ study found that a baby had a higher risk of developing autism if its mother had been exposed to cypermethrin within 6,500 feet of their home during her pregnancy. Cypermethrin has also been found to disrupt thyroid hormones, which are critical to brain development. At times, direct exposure to the insecticide may also cause irritation to the skin and eyes, numbness, tingling, itching, a burning sensation, loss of bladder control, incoordination, seizures and in severe cases, death. Since fruits such as blackberries are promoted for being rich in antioxidants and vitamins, they are often included in recommended healthy diets for children and pregnant women to help improve their nutrition levels. However, this may put them at a higher risk of being exposed to the insecticide. While insecticides are added into blackberry fruits as they grow, potatoes are covered in pesticides after they are harvested and ready to eat. Temkin said: 'It's applied after harvest to essentially prevent potatoes from sprouting while they're in storage or in transit. 'Because it's applied so late after harvest and so close to when consumers might be exposed or eating potatoes, that's partially what leads to some of these really high concentrations.' Between 2022 to 2023, the Department of Agriculture collected and tested more than 1,000 samples of potatoes for pesticides after washing and scrubbing each piece. They found that over 90 percent of samples contained twice the acceptable levels of chlorpropham allowed by the Environmental Protection Agency even after washing and scrubbing. The toxic pesticide has been linked to causing changes in blood cells and harm to the thyroid by reducing the production of certain hormones such as thyroxine - which is responsible to maintain the growth of cells. Low levels of thyroxine can cause DNA mutations and excessive growth of cells across the body - which may pave the way for cancer development. Similarly to cypermethrin, a 2024 Medicina study also found that prenatal exposure to chlorpropham has been found to increase a baby's risk of developing autism. Chlorpropham was banned in the EU in 2019 after officials found that people, particularly children, were being exposed to more than acceptable levels of chlorpropham through non-organic potatoes. Despite the results, Temkin noted the annual report is not meant to discourage consumers from eating fruits and vegetables but instead to encourage people to buy organic food. Multiple studies have shown that those who consume organic food have lower exposure to synthetic pesticides as organic farming prohibits the use of such chemicals. The EWG recommends buying organic whenever accessible because food residues are a main source of pesticide exposures for many people. For people looking to eat cleaner fruits and vegetables, the EWG found pineapple to be the least contaminated produce tested, followed by sweet corn (fresh and frozen), avocados, papaya, onions, frozen sweet peas, asparagus, cabbage, watermelon, cauliflower, bananas, mangos, carrots, mushrooms and kiwi. If you do opt for a dirty dozen, be sure to wash it with water or solutions of baking soda or vinegar.

EPA says power plant carbon emissions aren't dangerous. We asked 30 scientists: Here's what they say
EPA says power plant carbon emissions aren't dangerous. We asked 30 scientists: Here's what they say

The Independent

time4 hours ago

  • The Independent

EPA says power plant carbon emissions aren't dangerous. We asked 30 scientists: Here's what they say

The Trump administration's Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday proposed a new ruling that heat-trapping carbon gas "emissions from fossil fuel-fired power plants do not contribute significantly to dangerous air pollution.'' The Associated Press asked 30 different scientists, experts in climate, health and economics, about the scientific reality behind this proposal. Nineteen of them responded, all saying that the proposal was scientifically wrong and many of them called it disinformation. Here's what eight of them said. 'This is the scientific equivalent to saying that smoking doesn't cause lung cancer,' said climate scientist Zeke Hausfather of the tech firm Stripe and the temperature monitoring group Berkeley Earth. 'The relationship between CO2 emissions and global temperatures has been well established since the late 1800s, and coal burning is the single biggest driver of global CO2 emissions, followed by oil and gas. It is utterly nonsensical to say that carbon emissions from power plants do not contribute significantly to climate change.' "It's about as valid as saying that arsenic is not a dangerous substance to consume," said University of Pennsylvania climate scientist Michael Mann. "The world is round, the sun rises in the east, coal-and gas-fired power plants contribute significantly to climate change, and climate change increases the risk of heat waves, catastrophic storms, infectious diseases, and many other health threats. These are indisputable facts," said Dr. Howard Frumkin, former director of the National Center for Environmental Health and a retired public health professor at the University of Washington. Climate economist R. Daniel Bressler of Columbia University, said: 'We can use tools from climate economics, including the mortality cost of carbon and the social cost of carbon, to estimate the climate impacts of these emissions. For instance, in my past work, I found that adding just one year's worth of emissions from an average-sized coal-fired plant in the U.S. causes 904 expected temperature-related deaths and over $1 billion in total climate damages.' University of Arizona climate scientist Kathy Jacobs said: "Their statement is in direct conflict with evidence that has been presented by thousands of scientists from almost 200 countries for decades. 'It's basic chemistry that burning coal and natural gas releases carbon dioxide and it's basic physics that CO2 warms the planet. We've known these simple facts since the mid-19th century,' said Oregon State's Phil Mote. Andrew Weaver, a professor at the University of Victoria and former member of parliament in British Columbia, said: 'President Trump is setting himself up for international court charges against him for crimes against humanity. To proclaim you don't want to deal with climate change is one thing, but denying the basic science can only be taken as a wanton betrayal of future generations for which there should be consequences.' Stanford climate scientist Chris Field, who coordinated an international report linking climate change to increasingly deadly extreme weather, summed it up this way: "It is hard to imagine a decision dumber than putting the short-term interests of oil and gas companies ahead of the long-term inters of our children and grandchildren." ___ Matthew Daly and Michael Phillis contributed from Washington. The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at

Women's supplements brand O Positiv explores sale, sources say
Women's supplements brand O Positiv explores sale, sources say

Reuters

time5 hours ago

  • Reuters

Women's supplements brand O Positiv explores sale, sources say

NEW YORK, June 11 (Reuters) - O Positiv Health is exploring a sale that could value the women's health supplements company at around $1 billion, according to three people familiar with the matter. The founder-owned business is working with investment bank Jefferies on the sale effort, said the sources, who added that O Positiv is projecting $275 million of revenue this year after generating around $225 million in 2024. The sources cautioned that no deal was guaranteed, and spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss private information. Jefferies declined to comment. O Positiv did not respond to a comment request. Siblings Bobby and Brianna Bitton launched O Positiv in 2018. The company makes vitamins and probiotics that address a variety of health concerns, from PMS and menopause symptoms to vaginal and gut health. The products are sold on the company's website, as well as through retailers including Walmart (WMT.N), opens new tab, Target (TGT.N), opens new tab and Amazon (AMZN.O), opens new tab. Consumer health companies and private equity firms alike have put more emphasis on investing in the women's health space in recent years, which has created a significant pool of buyers for brands founded by entrepreneurs. Such deals include Pharmavite buying Bonafide in November 2023 and L Catterton, in partnership with actress Naomi Watts, acquiring Stripes Beauty last year.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store