Why do personal trainers have their clients do meme exercises?

>>39159481
Because of people thinking fitness is some mystery to unlock, not a simple concept that's difficult to execute. The stupid exercises convince them that they're doing something that all the dumb proles and meatheads are missing out on.

If their clients were smart enough to know they were doing stupid exercises, they wouldn't be using PTs

>>39159481
So they make linkted gains and they can milk their wallet. Also don't get taught much when doing the personal training course. You just learn basic 12 rep and pyramid set shit

>>39159511
/thread

>>39159481
Because most of them don't know barbell training and form

>>39159481
same reason magazines have a meme diet and a meme routine every week. the proven fundamentals that work are too simple to sell every week. they'd go out of business after 3 magazines.

>>39159511
I always thought something like that when I saw guys doing these exotic workouts or exercises, but could never put it in words as good as this.

>>39159511
fpbp

>>39159481
Nasm cpt here

We run a 4-8 week mesocycle of "meme" exercises to start, usually only for sedentary/weak people

These "meme" exercises are really just unstable variants of more standard exercises.
You use light weight to prevent injury
You get them in as unstable position as they can manage

Why?
This builds the stabilization muscles, which prevent joint injuries, and helps train movement patterns so they will have good form later on down the road

So for a typical sedentary fat nerd, 3-4 weeks on stabilization endurance training (endurance as in 10-15 reps)
Then a transitional week on stabilization strength (4-6 rep)

After that i cut out the "meme" exercises and have them train strength in a manner similar to greyskull without the amrap sets, but i do have them up the rep range on a deload

>>39159511
Wrong. Op pic seems like a meme but the duse could have wrist problems. Thata why a PT is for.

>>39159874
8 weeks of stabilization endurance and strength is generally only for super old, weak, sedentary, or otherwise injury prone people

>>39159874
>Hurr I have to build their stability
Why don't you just have them practice form with lighter weight in the conventional compound movements you fucking scam artist

>>39159481

Because people get bored doing the same exercises every day. So, PTs come up with ridiculous variations to mix things up, and keep them entertained.

>>39159885
For the same reason a dumbbell exercise targets stabilization muscles more than barbell exercises

The more unstability the better

For athletic and young people who arent injury prone, i skip the stabilization mesocycle(s) and throw them straight into barbell strength training.

But the 40 year old fat dad needs to focus more on preventing shoulder or knee injuries

>>39159911
>The more unstability [in the exercise] the better [as it requires more stabilization on your part]
Felt like clarifying a bit

>>39159911
Again, how is he going to get injured if you have him do really low weight you idiot

>>39159906
This

It's just bizarre exercises to make the clients think "wow this guy really knows some next level stuff"

>>39159934
I didn't say it would cause injury.
I said it would engage stabilization muscles nearly as much.

Old people get knee and shoulder injuries just from fucking existing
The more prehab the better
4 weeks of gains means nothing in the grand scheme of things.

If you think nobody has gotten hurt doing strength training you are delusional.
My job is literally to prevent that from ever happening to any of my clients ever

>>39159957
Wouldn't*

If i want to train stabilization musculature, i will do unstable exercises

If i want to train strength, i do strength exercises.

For most clients who aren't young punks, they want to strengthen their joints and stay healthy rather than get thise 4 extra weeks of strength gains

Also i explain mesocycles and their purpose to clients, so they can choose not to do stabilization exercises if they want (they never want)

>>39159874
>>39159911
Research shows that using unstable surfaces generally don't improve activation of the musculature that older or weaker people need.
In fact, they're worse for muscle hypertrophy and strengthening.
They do require more coordination and balance though.

>>39159997
It isn't about total strength or hypertrophy

Increasing instability totally increases stabilization engagement.
You are literally saying barbells engage stabilizers as much as dumbbells or bands which is blatantly and patently untrue.
Balance and coordination = increased neuromuscular efficiency = increased stabilization activation.

>>39159874
>you use light weight to prevent injury
>and maximize instability for maximum stabilizer gains
>>39159934
>hurr why not just use less weight?
Kys

>>39160033
Except for the cases where people have trouble with balance, it's always about strength and hypertrohpy.

>You are literally saying barbells engage stabilizers as much as dumbbells or bands
I said nothing of the kind.
Learn to read.

>Balance and coordination = increased neuromuscular efficiency
Not in a way that's helpful for older people.

>Balance and coordination = [...] = increased stabilization activation
No, not necessarily.
Just doing unilateral exercises is often enough to reach the threshold of stabilization activiation.
Using an unstable surface doesn't increase muscular activation further.

There are studies on this, freely available on pubmed.
Look them up.

Or continue shilling money from old people.

>>39160078
>Using an unstable surface doesn't increase muscular activation further.
I never claimed that
Though it *can*

When i talk about adding instability i am referring almost entirely to changes in body position. I never mentioned bosu balls or similar memes

Unilateral variants are a great way to increase instability

I never had this experience with my PT

Probably wouldn't have gotten one if I read the sticky earlier.

However it was basically just a PPL routine with barbells and other random lifts. It was quite effective for gains.

>>39159874
>usually only for sedentary/weak people
Felt this bears re-iteration

>>39160110
Okay, that's better.

>The more unstability the better
Still, this isn't true.

>a dumbbell exercise targets stabilization muscles more than barbell exercises
This is an oversimplification of a complex situation.
Even if you were to properly define exactly what stabilization muscles are, the relative intensities with which the non-stabilization muscles get worked also determine effectiveness for injury prevention.
And besides that, many times just getting the general area stronger is enough to get the wanted effect.
Sedentary/weak/older people don't necessarily have strength imbalances, but they are weak.

>>39159957
Oh my bad I thought you worked at a gym not the old folks home

>>39160192
But his point that dumbells target stabilising muscles more effectively than barbell exercises is true.

>>39160192
Getting stronger is very useful

Hence me having them do strength training after i feel their joints can handle it

>Still, this isn't true
Outside of your semantic pedantry, it is a good rule of thumb.
>This is an oversimplification of a complex situation
Not an oversimplification, a simplification.
>Even if you were to properly define exactly what stabilization muscles are
Well that is silly.
A bicep is a prime mover in the curl, but a stabilizer in the bench.
The teres is a secondary mover in the pull up/pulldown, but a stabilizer in the bench.

These things are dynamic and definition is dependent on context

>many times just getting the general area stronger is enough to get the wanted effect.
See
>>39160133

>>39160217
Young people are too poor and dumb to afford or listen to professional advice

Because half you fucks just jump into "aesthetic" training then get injured months later

>>39160226
this is 4chan.
You are never right if shitposters are willing to engage in pedantry and semantics

>>39160246
>after i feel their joints can handle it
Joints are passive structures.
Don't tell me you think you need to strengthen the tendons and ligaments with unstable exercises, to somehow prepare them for stabe exercises.

>it is a good rule of thumb.
Enjoy your single legged bosu ball balerina exercises.

>These things are dynamic and definition is dependent on context
Exactly my point, dude.
Just saying "muh stabilization" doesn't mean much.

>>39160256
kek finally conviced my neckbeard friend to come with me. He is so insecure in the amount he lifts because people are benching more than he can squat etc. I convinced him to get 3-4 PT sessions just to help him master his form as he literally spends all fucking day on his pc and his hip flexors are tighter than a loli.

Some other new guy has been there for about 2 months, had a quick chat with him once and he said he was doing madcow. Shame he didn't have any friends to teach him restraint he fucked his back doing deads last week and hasn't been seen since.

>>39159511
fpbp

>>39160273
By joints i meant stabilization strength.

I don't really use bosu balls with rare exception
>Just saying "muh stabilization" doesn't mean much.
Right.
Which is why people hire educated professionals like me who understand context and significance

None of what you said diminishes the value of having a mesocycle to focus on stabilization strength and endurance.

The only points of yours that have been valid
>stabilization muscles change depending on exercise context
Have been wholly non-sequiturial

You have offered naught but misleading semantics, and still offer no meaningful disagreement

People dont pay me to say "muh stabilization"
People pay me to strengthen their stabilizers (and then their everything else)

>>39160317
>Which is why people hire educated professionals like me who understand context and significance
Hahaha, "educated professional".
There are so many idiots working in this field, so good luck with that.

>None of what you said diminishes the value of having a mesocycle to focus on stabilization strength and endurance.
I never said or implied that.

>The only points of yours that have been valid [...]
No, you explicitly said "The more unstability the better", which is a load of shit.

>People dont pay me to say "muh stabilization"
>People pay me to strengthen their stabilizers (and then their everything else)
Getting paid to do something doesn't mean you're not full of shit.

Anyway, if we were to meet irl, not on 4chan, we'd probably both be a lot nicer and we'd probably be in agreement mostly, semantics aside.

Alas, this is the web.

>>39160367
For targeting stabilizers, the more instability they can handle the better, as there is no detriment and only possible benefit

I agree 99% of cpts are uneducated dudebros, though

>>39159481
They are certified professionals. You are the one doing the meme exercises my man.

>>39160410
Nasm cpt bro here
80% of /fit/ has better exercise selection and routine programming knowledge than 80% of cpts

>>39160392
So then what kind of instability do you refer to?
I assume you mean unilateral over bilateral exercises, and dumbell over barbell.
But where would cable work fit in, and what other kinds of instability do you mean?

From what I've seen in research, using instable surfaces like a bosuball or a plane on a cylinder doesn't increase any muscular activity, but does increase the time for people to progress on them.
So do you consider those as "good" instability too?

File: 1476206997343.png (373KB, 736x442px) Image search: [Google]

373KB, 736x442px

>>39160317
>educated professionals

>>39160429
I find it hard to generalize, so let me give a specific example

Laying perpendicular across bench with your Lumbar back on the bench, and shoulders in the air doing single arm dumbbell flyes to focus on teres and core stabilization

>>39160461
Feel free to peruse nasm's material
I would eat my hat if you know more than 1% of it

Granted knowing the difference between a synovial and non-synovial joint has no bearing on your ability to make gains, if you learn the material you are supposed to, instead of just what is on the test, you will have some decent education compared to 99.9% of lifters

>>39159911
>>39159928
Do you mean INstability?

This guy is a PT.

Far the fuck out.

>>39160489
>>39160489
I got confused because unstable is a word and instable isn't
Also english isn't my native tongue so fuck off (I do live in america now so no excuse, but still your guys' language is retarded)

>>39160464
Okay, I see what you mean.

Although for this particular example, I don't really see how that would be effective for teres development.

>>39160480
Not him, but I'm pretty sure I'd know a lot more than 1%.

The main problem from what I've seen is that people "educated" in the field, take what they've learnt as the be-all, end-all.
That they stop learning, and flat out ignore any more recent research.
Some of them come to more or less the same findings through experience, which is why an experienced physical therapist is often better than an inexperienced one.
But only the few ones who are open to learning new things, and have the experience, I would call "educated professionals".
Not the rest.

>>39160652
>I don't really see how that would be effective for teres development.
Well not for teres strength or teres hypertrophy (because duh, wide grip pull ups do that)
But for increasing teres stabilization in bench press and similar movements.

Everything you said i agree with, though.

>>39160033
Are you seriously suggesting that a person whose squat goes up from 100lbs to 275lbs hasn't experienced an increase in their ability to balance or remain stable? If so, how?

Also you keep using the word 'stabilisers.' Please explain which muscle groups you are referring to, and their precise role in 'stabilising' and why they are trained more effectively with unilateral exercises rather than bilateral exercises that have an inherent balancing component.

>>39159881
>kettlebell pushups
>wrist problems
really, nigger?

>>39160509
You have to go back.

>>39160905
not the pt bro, but i can give an example.
Squats use the hip stabilizers: the gluteus medius, minimus, some fibers of the maximus, tensor fasciae latae.
But unilateral leg exercises use them to a significantly higher degree.

>>39159874
>>39159911
>>39159957
>>39160033
>>39160110
Reminder this is what you get when you pay for a personal trainer at a normie gym.

>>39160685
Please explain how you can increase the 'stabilisation' ability of a muscle without also increasing the contractile force that this muscle can produce (bearing in mind that the only thing a muscle can do is contract in one way or another.)

Please also explain why making the teres stronger in the context of the stabilising function it plays in movements like the deadlift is less effective than using the exercise you described.

>>39160905
No, i am saying for someone really weak or injury prone i will strengthen their stabilizers for 3-4 weeks before having them progress linearly on the squat.

if you are even reasonably athletic, i will have you source all of your stabilization development from strength training
>>39160133

>>39160963
Actually for most of /fit/ you guys are young enough to where i would have you skip the stabilization mesocycle and throw you right into a linear progression strength program similar to greyskull

>>39160990
Why? Are they incapable of squatting the bar?

>>39161013
They will die if they don't do unstabilization work with bands and dumbbells.

>>39160989
You can increase muscular endurance without increasing strength
You can increase neuromuscular efficiency without increasing strength


Deadlift is better for teres stabilization.
Which is why when my clients are able to deadlift, they no longer are doing babbyweight stabilization exercises

>>39160944
The question isn't whether or not the exercises USE the muscles, it's whether or not they give a worthwhile training effect. A person who ups their squat for six weeks is going to have much better balance and 'stabilisation' than someone who does unilateral exercises for the same amount of time. And they'll also be a lot stronger everywhere else too.

>>39161025
>>39161013
If you are going to use babbyweight to develop stabilization, you might as well do it as effectively as possible

>>39160133
>>39160044

>>39159481
That's a good way to break a wrist when one of those tips over

>>39160989
not pt bro, but learning how to control certain muscles, especially in coordination with other musculature, is more important sometimes.

for example, I had shoulder issues which stemmed partially from my inability to control my shoulders and upper back.
so when I did scapular depression exercises, I had the strength, but I either contracted way too hard or I let go completely, which leads to issues when you merely need the traps to stabilize during pressing exercises.

>>39161043
No, that doesn't apply to everyone.
Some people get hip issues if they only do squats, they need other exercises that targets the hip abductors more.
I've experienced this personally.
Ofcourse I didn't just drop squats altogether, I just added some exercises that strengthened the hip abductors,

(note that I said "some people", there are also people who get by fine by doing only the big compound movements, and I envy them)

>>39161076
No man, 4 weeks of stabilization development will ruin your lifetime of gains

>>39159481
They have to keep them from making it because once they do they're out 1 source of income. Simple economics bro

>>39161034
Are you saying you can isolate sarcoplasmic and myofibril hypertrophy in a complete novice (the only category person who would be weak enough to bother with any of this)?

You can take a complete novice and deliberately make their muscles more durable, but not any stronger?

If so: that's a pretty big achievement. Also, why the hell would you even want to do this?

>>39161089
Nobody said it'll ruin it, they said it'll just be a complete waste of your time and money.

>>39161076
So squatting correctly at an appropriate weight doesn't make the hip abductors stronger? Cool story bro.

>>39161154
Learn to read.

>>39161108
No.
Not what i am saying.
Was just saying that increasing total strength is not the goal of stabilization training

>>39161195
what is "increased neuromuscular efficiency" if it's not greater strength? what is increased in this situation?

>>39160255
>professional advice
You're really lowering the bar for being a professional if you consider a PT "professional advice."

>>39161238
>it is literally my profession
>i am not a professional
Kek

>>39161108
Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy doesn't exist.

>>39161195
So what exactly is the goal?

And why bother to do it if making the muscles in question stronger with barbell exercises will achieve the same long term effect?

File: 1476835724184.png (216KB, 432x413px) Image search: [Google]

216KB, 432x413px

>>39161247
You must consider the cooks at McDonald's professional chefs because it's literally their profession.

>>39161247
it costs like 600 and 3 hours to become a "professional", nigger.

>>39161265
To increase stabilization
If you aren't too injury prone to risk jumping into barbell strength training, there is no benefit
>>39160133

>>39161263
Proof?

>>39161267
You don't know the difference between a line cook and a chef??!?
They are professional line cooks.. not even professional cooks

>>39161247
Totally bro, I took some online courses on HTML and spent 100 dollars on a certification test and now I'm a professional programmer.

>>39161302
You don't realize that you're a fucking line cook?

>>39161305
If you get paid to program and that is your profession... then yes

>>39161316
you're delusional. your advice is standard fare for typical PT-trash. go away.

>>39161315
Never claimed to be a chef, only professional >>39161322

>>39159511
fpbp

>>39161316
God, what a fucking moron. No wonder you're a PT. I've yet to meet a single PT that wasn't a mouth breather.

>>39161324
>being this fucking dense
Protip: you're not a professional.

>>39161322
You think stabilization training don't real, and yet you call ME delusional lmao

>>39161288
A doctor in muscle biology.
http://andersnedergaard.dk/en/kropblog/sarcoplasmic-hypertrophy/

>>39161344
Except that this is my profession...
So by definition I am

>>39161352
Oh, I've read that already.
Give this a read:
http://strengtheory.com/sarcoplasmic-vs-myofibrillar-hypertrophy/

>>39161330
>hurr you are a moron because you train stabilizer muscles in injury prone clients
Lmao kys

>>39161368
>>39161346
unstabilization training for 4 weeks doesn't do anything

>>39161287
Exactly how many people are so prone to injury they can't safely squat/press the bar? Or a training bar?

How many people are there out there who can't safely deadlift the same?

Where is the injury risk involved in simply teaching them the cornerstone lifts using an appropriate starting weight and letting the 'stabilisers' do the things they're meant to do /in context/ as the weight gets heavier?

How many cases can you cite of people badly injuring themselves learning how to deadlift because their teres weren't providing sufficient stabilisation?

>>39161377
Why, because rippledtits didnt say to do it in ss?
How many injury prone clients have you safely trained?

>>39161395
>How many injury prone clients have you safely trained?
At least 8, 9 including my own mother, which I did not charge. All 8 had previous injuries from sports.

>>39161383
All elderly people and most middle aged people should strengthen stabilizers before building prime mover strength.

Injuries are super common amongst older barbell trainees
This prevents virtually all injury

>>39159481

Personal Trainer/Non-Retard here.

My favorite strength tools are the barbell, the dumbbell, and the kettlebell. If I could, I'd start everybody with these. The problem is usually in preparing clients to utilize these tools without fucking their shit up.

Before I train anyone, I run them through Gray Cook's Functional Movement Screen. This lets me understand where they're at from a mobility, stability, and movement pattern standpoint.

If they score well across the board, I'll throw them right into loaded barbell work, heavy training, etc.

But if they can't touch their toes, and I have them doing ATG Barbell Squats with absurd levels of buttwink, deadlifts with rounded Lumbar spines, and all kinds of assorted fuckery, I'm going to injure my client, and then I suck at my job.

That being said, many trainers are simply terrible, and just do fancy looking shit to mystify/entertain their clients. (Who, to be fair, often don't really want to do hard work, and just want something fresh in their workout routine.) Hey, it's a way to keep business good. I can't fault them there.

I prefer to get my clients fast, decisive results, and that means that occasionally, I have to throw in correctives in order to get them ready to do some good old fashioned Barbell Squats without getting hurt.

>>39161404
>rehabbing an athlete
Not the same.
I use barbell compounds for athletic rehab

Athletes =\= sedentary old fucks

Also I don't even believe you have trained anyone ever

Speaking as a resident trainer:
You guys realize that most people who start at a gym are full normie mode and couldnt tell their left arm from their right leg if their life depended on it.

You basically have to assume that people are completely incompetent when it comes to moving their own body unless proven otherwise.

Just throwing that out there because /fit seems to think that everyone is an athlete with good motor skills when most people struggle to keep form on basic machines for the first couple of weeks, sometimes months

Inb4 some autist is triggered by the mention if machines, they are good to get normies started

>>39161424
>Athletes =\= sedentary old fucks
They weren't athletes, they just had injuries from sports in their life that they never treated.

>Also I don't even believe you have trained anyone ever
And I don't believe you're a professional.

>>39161410
According to whom exactly? Because Kerr et al (2010) and Hamill (1994) would appear to suggest that barbell training is actually one of the safest forms of physical activity one can participate in.

File: IMG_4121.jpg (104KB, 629x904px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 629x904px

>>39161437

>>39161368
No champ, you're a moron who a joke of a certification to teach morons meme exercises while parading around pretending your a professional and your advice caries any weight or validity. You're a Crossfit trainer before Crossfit was a thing. A prostitute is more of a professional than you because at least a whore gets results.

>>39161451
Don't come to my country and assume you understand the colloquial context of "professional" by using the dictionary and also unironically say 'words' like 'unstabilization' in regards to be a PT.

>>39161451
>qualified in a profession
So there we have it. You're not a professional.

>>39161457
Aside from the first mesocycle which I don't even do for half my clients, i run fullbody linear progression barbell strength programs, you fagtard

>>39161468
>certified to be a pt
>not qualified to be a pt
Brilliant stuff

>>39161483
Being certified does not mean being qualified.

>>39161483
>certified to be a pt
>being a professional
Fixed that for you.
Cert != profesional, expert, or really anything. Nice try nigger.

Pt bro going to bed
Y'all retards are now free to circle jerk about how totally wrong i am and how stabilization training is absolutely useless in all situations

>>39161423
Also, starting people off with instability to build stabilizers is a meme, and it's horse-shit. In getting somebody good at something, you want to go in the following order:

Unloaded Assisted
Unloaded Unassisted
Loaded Assisted
Loaded Unassisted

Getting someone to deadlift correctly might look like:

1. Unloaded Assisted - Placing a PVC Pipe on their back and having them practice reaching their butt back to the wall while maintaining 3 points of contact to groove a hip hinge pattern with a stable back position.

2. Unloaded Unassisted - With the newly engrained hip hinge pattern, they reach down to touch a box at the end range of their current level of hip/hamstring mobility.

3. Loaded Assisted - Placing a Trap Bar on Blocks and Having them practice a loaded hinge with a reduced range of motion.

4. Unloaded Unassisted - Any deadlift variation.

Something like this, with changes allowed for any sort of difference from client to client.

>>39161517
I'm actually going to jerk it to how hard you were BTFO today, and hopefully you stop taking up place in the gym you go to.

>>39161529
The only person who actually provided an "argument" ended up agreeing with me
>>39160367
>>39160652

Ok bed now for real

>>39161525
Here's how I teached deadlifts to my little brother:
put on big 10kg plates, 40kg total.
told him to bend at the hips, and knees a bit.
told him to keep his chest up.
told him to lift the weight.

tada.
no need for a fucking 4 phase system.

>>39161560
>my ego is so fragile that to get a peaceful sleep I have to cherry-pick examples of 'being right' on the Fitness board of 4chan

A PTs job isn't to get you into shape, it's to create the illusion of working out whilst making sure you don't hurt your dumb ass and don't sue the gym for random shit.

The female PT from gym atleast has them squatting, in the smithmachine with very light weight, can't blame her though. The average person is so out of shape they'd get herniated disks from picking up a kg of sugar worngly.

She's sexy as shit though

>>39161581
I'm glad you teached them to your little brother so simply. I was just providing an example of how I might approach deadlifts with a client.

Most of my clients are older people with shit mobility, terrible habits, and lucrative desk jobs. It's how they can afford to train with me.

If I was teaching them to a much younger client, I might be able to do it very easily with a few quick cues, same as you did for your brother.

>>39161610
Oh, okay, it's fine then.

>>39160917
I could not place my hands flat on the ground due to a cyst in my wrist. "Perfect Pushup" handles and kettlebell pushups allowed me to actually do them without pain (Cyst is gone now though so I don't need to continue with those).

>>39159481
>be skinny 160 weakling
>book 3 sessions with a personal trainer because I want to get stronger and add mass
>tell him I want to learn mainly the 3 big lifts
>on my first session, he has me to Lund with a 20lb bag super setted with over head Sauats, supersetted with military presses. Then bench press, supersetted with one arm DB presses, supersetted with Squats.

I was ripped off $120 but at least I learned how to do the main lifts. I never went back to that gym, got a membership to a new gym and started SS.

I was 185lb skinnyfat normie when I got my personal trainer. Dude was jacked and no nonsense. After gauging my base ability and stamina (which were zero to shit) he started me on the big three lifts and pushed my ass hard every training session. The guy pretty much saved my life. Sometimes you get trainers that care and are personally experienced. Sometimes you don't.

>>39160963
yep, i thought it was bait but it isn't, wtf?

>>39161590
Show post of him "getting BTFO"

Seems like he was sensible desu

>>39161643
Did you need a pt to tell you that?

>>39164277
No. I got the grips on my own. Other people might actually need to be told though.

>>39164250
>Show post of him "getting BTFO"
this entire thread?

>>39164459
...like where??

>>39164515
Any of the numerous times the PT resorted to spouting stupid shit that made no sense and he was corrected.

I invite you to read the thread.

>>39164533
I have and desu he seemed smart.
Nothing he said seemed to be wrong or corrected... hence me asking for an example

>>39164589
Go away PT-guy. Glad you got enough sleep to come back and feed your small ego again.

>>39164605
>no single example
>samefag accusation

>>39159881
Personal trainer, not physical therapist lel