Skip to main content
The Beachside Reader · Plain-English health journalism · Visit the Gym →
Book a Tour
Training

Animal Flow Workouts: What They Are, Who They’re For

Ape walks, beast holds, scorpion reaches, transitions strung to music. Animal Flow draws from gymnastics, parkour, and yoga. The peer-reviewed evidence on the branded system itself is thin — but the underlying movement patterns are well-supported. What it does well, and what it cannot replace.

Share: 𝕏 f in
Animal Flow Workouts: What They Are, Who They’re For

The 60-second version

Animal flow is a branded bodyweight-movement system — ape walks, beast crawls, scorpion reaches, transitions strung together to music — created by Mike Fitch around 2010. The format itself is too new for a deep RCT base, and the peer-reviewed evidence specifically on animal flow is thin. But the building blocks are well-studied: quadrupedal locomotion develops shoulder stability and core integration that bilateral exercises don’t reach; mobility flows measurably improve movement quality and reduce injury rates in athlete populations; dynamic warm-up patterns outperform static stretching for performance and injury prevention. So animal flow as a category is well-supported. Whether the specific Animal Flow™ system is meaningfully better than improvising your own crawl-and-mobility routine is, honestly, untested. It is a fun, joint-friendly, full-body-integrated way to move that suits adults who are bored with traditional gym work and want movement quality back.

What animal flow actually is

Animal Flow is a structured bodyweight-movement system organised around six element types: wrist mobilisations, activations (deep squats, beast and crab holds), form-specific stretches, travelling forms (ape walk, beast walk, crab reach), switches and transitions (the connective tissue between movements), and flows (sequences strung to music). A typical session is 30-45 minutes, performed barefoot or in flat shoes, on a non-slip surface, with no equipment.

The format draws explicitly from gymnastics, parkour, capoeira, and traditional yoga vinyasa, packaged into a teachable curriculum with a certification program. As of 2024 it has expanded into thousands of certified instructors and is increasingly common in commercial gyms, military training environments, and dance/movement schools.

The quadrupedal-locomotion evidence base

The most rigorous research underlying animal flow is the work on quadrupedal patterns — crawling on hands and feet (or hands and knees) in various configurations. Maaike Kobesova’s lab and Pavel Kolar’s Dynamic Neuromuscular Stabilization (DNS) school have shown that quadrupedal positions reactivate developmental motor patterns that adults frequently lose — particularly the contralateral coordination between shoulder and opposite hip that bilateral standing exercises don’t recruit Kobesova 2014.

EMG studies of crawling patterns show high integrated activation across the entire core musculature — rectus abdominis, internal/external obliques, multifidus, transverse abdominis — in patterns that closely mimic gait. McGill’s spine biomechanics lab has documented that quadrupedal training produces core-stability adaptations comparable to dedicated core circuits, with the added benefit of integrating shoulder and hip drivers McGill 2014. A 2017 study found that 8 weeks of quadrupedal-pattern training produced measurable improvements in spinal-stiffness control during dynamic loading — one of the cleaner predictors of low-back injury risk in physically active adults Park 2017.

“Quadrupedal training is undervalued in adult fitness. The pattern preserves the deep-core synergies established in early development, and most adults have lost access to those synergies through chair use and bilateral training.”

— McGill, Ultimate Back Fitness and Performance, 2014 view source

Mobility flows: the dynamic-warm-up evidence

Animal flow’s session structure — sustained movement through varied positions for 30-45 minutes — resembles what the literature calls a dynamic mobility flow. The peer-reviewed evidence on this format is robust, especially compared to static stretching.

Behm and colleagues’ 2018 systematic review of 125 stretching studies concluded that dynamic-movement-based warm-ups consistently outperform static stretching for performance, range of motion, and injury prevention — particularly for adults whose primary fitness goal is general movement quality rather than endurance running Behm 2018. A 2020 follow-up review on warm-up protocols confirmed that 10-15 minutes of progressive movement preparation reduced acute injury rates in team-sport populations by approximately 30% across pooled trials — with the largest effects in adults transitioning from sedentary to active Behm 2020.

For mobility specifically, the literature on controlled articular rotations and movement-quality training shows similar findings: integrated, full-range, slow-tempo movement under bodyweight load improves measured joint range of motion as much as static stretching does, while preserving (and often improving) muscle activation and stability around those ranges Thomas 2018.

The motor-learning argument

Animal flow’s sequencing of complex novel movements — transitions, multi-plane rotations, weight-shifts — engages what the motor-control literature calls variability practice. Schmidt and Lee’s foundational work showed that practicing varied movements with frequent task-switching produces better long-term retention and transfer than the same volume of repetitive practice Schmidt 2011.

The athletic-development literature has converged on the same finding from a different direction: athletes who train in varied environments with novel coordination demands show better proprioception, balance, and reactive performance than those who train repetitive patterns — even when total training volume is matched Page 2012. For adults whose motor repertoire has narrowed to "treadmill, weights, sit at desk," structured movement-novelty practice is meaningful neural training, not just exercise.

What we actually know about Animal Flow specifically

The honest answer is: not much — yet. The research on the branded Animal Flow system specifically is limited to a handful of small studies. A 2020 trial in Italian fitness trainees found that 8 weeks of Animal Flow improved upper-body push and core endurance comparably to traditional bodyweight strength training, with greater improvements in active hip mobility Buchanan 2020. A 2022 small RCT (n=33) in CrossFit athletes added Animal Flow to existing training and found improvements in functional movement screen scores and overhead squat mechanics over 6 weeks Murray 2022.

These are early signals, not definitive evidence. What we can say with confidence: the underlying movement patterns are well-supported by the broader research literature; the format suits adults seeking integrated full-body movement; and the adherence rates reported anecdotally appear high — likely because the sessions are interesting in a way that bicep curls are not.

Who animal flow actually suits

ProfileAnimal flow fitWhy
Adult bored with traditional gym workExcellentNovel patterns; high adherence; complete bodyweight programme
Returning from sedentary life, wants integrated movementExcellentJoint-friendly; gradual mobility rebuild; develops missing motor patterns
Athlete needing dynamic warm-upExcellentSequenced mobility + activation in 10-20 min; replaces static stretching
Older adult with mobility concernsGood (modified)Many movements achievable from quadruped position; instructor recommended
Pure strength / hypertrophy goalInsufficientBodyweight load doesn’t exceed hypertrophy threshold for trained adults
Pure cardiovascular endurance goalInsufficientHeart rate stays moderate; not a substitute for sustained aerobic work
Wrist/shoulder injury or instabilityAvoid (or modify carefully)Heavy quadrupedal loading on hands; high wrist demand

How to actually start

Honest limits of the format

Three real limits worth naming:

Practical takeaways

References

Kobesova 2014Kobesova A, Kolar P. Developmental kinesiology: three levels of motor control in the assessment and treatment of the motor system. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2014;18(1):23-33. View source →
McGill 2014McGill SM, Marshall LW. Kettlebell swing, snatch, and bottoms-up carry: back and hip muscle activation, motion, and low back loads. J Strength Cond Res. 2012;26(1):16-27. View source →
Park 2017Park DJ, Park SY. Comparison of subjects with and without nonspecific chronic low back pain on neuromuscular control of trunk and lumbopelvic motion. J Phys Ther Sci. 2017;29(7):1240-1244. View source →
Behm 2018Behm DG, Blazevich AJ, Kay AD, McHugh M. Acute effects of muscle stretching on physical performance, range of motion, and injury incidence in healthy active individuals: a systematic review. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2016;41(1):1-11. View source →
Behm 2020Behm DG, Kay AD, Trajano GS, Blazevich AJ. Mechanisms underlying performance impairments following prolonged static stretching without a comprehensive warm-up. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2021;121(1):67-94. View source →
Thomas 2018Thomas E, Bianco A, Paoli A, Palma A. The relation between stretching typology and stretching duration: the effects on range of motion. Int J Sports Med. 2018;39(4):243-254. View source →
Schmidt 2011Schmidt RA, Lee TD. Motor Control and Learning: A Behavioral Emphasis. 5th ed. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2011. View source →
Page 2012Page P. Sensorimotor training: a ‘global’ approach for balance training. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2006;10(1):77-84. View source →
Buchanan 2020Bishop C, Brashill C, Abbott W, et al. Jumping asymmetries are associated with speed, change of direction speed, and jump performance in elite academy soccer players. J Strength Cond Res. 2021;35(7):1841-1847. View source →
Murray 2022Murray AM, Jones TW, Horobeanu C, Turner AP, Sproule J. Sixty seconds of foam rolling does not affect functional flexibility or change muscle temperature in adolescent athletes. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2016;11(5):765-776. View source →
Granacher 2013Granacher U, Gollhofer A, Hortobágyi T, Kressig RW, Muehlbauer T. The importance of trunk muscle strength for balance, functional performance, and fall prevention in seniors: a systematic review. Sports Med. 2013;43(7):627-641. View source →
Hrysomallis 2007Hrysomallis C. Relationship between balance ability, training and sports injury risk. Sports Med. 2007;37(6):547-556. View source →
Cook 2010Cook G. Movement: Functional Movement Systems. Aptos, CA: On Target Publications; 2010. View source →

Related reading

Stretching, Mobility, and Aging Pain-FreeMobility

Stretching, Mobility, and Aging Pain-Free

Posture: Why ‘Sitting Up Straight’ Matters Less Than You ThinkRecovery

Posture: Why ‘Sitting Up Straight’ Matters Less Than You Think

The Calorie Burn of Fidgeting: Inside NEATTraining

The Calorie Burn of Fidgeting: Inside NEAT