I am too frequently asked, “why should I work out?” and whether the question is in a rhetorical context, or a devils advocate context, or simply in an ignorant and stubborn context, the answer remains the same: because it’s good for you, and because i said so. Oh, and also, because why not?
Does this sound familiar? Your brain might be recognizing the striking similarity to the utterance of a mother to her child, attempting to convince that child that eating their veggies simply is good for them, and that should be enough.
It is that simple. The fact that working out is good for you, regardless of for what specific reason (particularly because there are a multitude of rational reasons for getting off one’s behind to be active in some form or another) should be enough.
Have you ever heard any reason NOT to work out? Because you might start feeling better than you have ever felt? No, that can’t be fit. Because you will strengthen your heart, lungs and bones? Nope, that most certainly can’t be it either. The only reason I can think of is risk of injury, which, is negligent when you are intelligent about beginning a new activity or fitness regimen.
Thus, is it not a simple cost-benefit analysis? Yes, I believe it is. And what does that mean? It means that because there are essentially no good substantial reasons not to be active or to work out, then the cost-benefit ratio is clearly in the favor of benefit.
So, please, ask me again, for old times sake, why you should work out. And I will tell you, with great conviction, several things – one, why not? Two, because it’s good for you. And three, because I said so.
Yes, it really is that simple.
So don’t question it. Just do it. Hm, did I just steal a Nike slogan? Let’s just say I borrowed it…