What would you think of an author who redefined common, well-known terms to suit his own preference?

The usual definition
- Aerobic - with oxygen - metabolism yields 26-28 ATP per glucose molecule (depending on metabolization pathway)
- Anaerobic - without oxygen - metabolism yields 2 ATP per glucose molecule.
These are not loosey goosey terms. They have a specific meaning with lots of research behind them.

His redefinition:
- Aerobic - metabolization of fat
- Anaerobic - metabolization of sugar

Aerobic and Anaerobic are well known as referring to oxygen usage. But he wants to redefine them in to refer to the fuel source. His techniques might be useful, but his science is questionable. If every author redefined terms to suit his or her own preferences it would make a mess of communication. Shifting definitions that drastically also raises concern about the reliability of the rest of the book.

The chapters with information on specific hormones, and micronutrients were somewhat interesting, but tediously long. Experts give differing advice on such basic nutrients as: water, carbohydrate, fat, and salt. When “experts" differ radically on such basic nutrients, can we expect the advice on specific micronutrients that we may have never heard of to be accepted by other authorities?

My perception of this book has had it's ups and downs. I appreciated, and was interested in the author's background. Then the book began to drag, saying in a thousand words what could have been said much more succinctly.

He caught my interest with his emphasis on low heart rate training. That resonated with me because my best race times have been with slower training. Therefore that part rings true with me. So, I read with interest about his MAF test, which he uses to assess improvement. But then the chapter on MAF testing got tedious. It went on and on with only occasional specifics on how to do the test.

So, I will take from this book the great advice to change back to the slow training that worked so well in the past. But totally ignore what he says about food. My next race is in just under 2 weeks. Come to think of it, one of the great Australian coaches ([a:Arthur Lydiard|626138|Arthur Lydiard|https://s.gr-assets.com/assets/nophoto/user/u_50x66-632230dc9882b4352d753eedf9396530.png]) of years gone by had great success with long slow distances.

This book has an afterward by [a:Tim Noakes|64881|Tim Noakes|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1314714064p2/64881.jpg] which almost bumps it up to 4 stars. The last of the book did not seem to drag as much as earlier parts. Surprise, I enjoyed the last few chapters.

MAF test vs Running Race Pace (Page 92)
MAF PACE | 5K Race Pace | 5K Time
10:00 | 7:30 | 23:18
9:00 | 7:00 | 21:45
8:30 | 6:45 | 20:58
8:00 | 6:30 | 20:12
7:30 | 6:00 | 18:38
7:00 | 5:30 | 17:05
6:30 | 5:15 | 16:19
6:00 | 5:00 | 15:32
5:45 | 4:45 | 14:45
5:30 | 4:30 | 13:59
5:15 | 4:20 | 13:28
5:00 | 4:15 | 13:12
See http://philmaffetone.com/maftest.cfm for how to perform the test. ( )

Good stuff here on avoiding overtraining, but his insistence on a quite low max heart rate has me a bit uncertain. ( )