cardio question, this is a puzzle i cannot figure out

G

genius

0
I have been lifting for 7 years now. I would like to think I have the resistance training portion of my physical fitness routine down. There is one thing that totally puzzles me though when it comes to cardiovascular exersize. I have done sprints, and I have done distance. I have heard theories that claim HIIT is the ONLY way to go. I have never heard anything negative about HIIT except the fact that it does not give your heart the same benefits of a long distance run. In theory, HIIT uses short bursts of energy (sprints) of up to 8 seconds in duration, followed by a resting period of around 45-60 seconds, followed by another burst of energy (sprints). I've heard that this is suppose to burn fat very fast, while preserving the muscle. On the other hand, I've heard that distance running burns fat for only the first few seconds, and from that point on muscle tissue and fat are both consumed. I have done both. I would just like to hear some opinions (I would prefer someone with a lot of knowledge on the topic...at least more than I have). Which is best for fat burn? Is HIIT just some theory some trainer-gone-mad thought up, or is it the real deal? Is distance running really not good for fat burn, and does it really hamper muscle growth as some claim? Any scientific research and backing would look even better with a response, but opinions would be helpful too. Thanks for the time and the thought...this is a topic in which I have found both sides to be equally strong, it is pretty difficult to choose when each way seems so just. I simply want to know what is the best for burning fat while preserving muscle? Thanks a million,
scott
 
Ok, Ill start by saying that Im not a professional. I played professional soccer for 5 years though, and worked with some of the best trainers around on running for optimum performance results.
Every single one had the same drill, and all swear by it. Most people call it "running lines", or "gut busters". The trainers I knew called them "progressives".
We would run around a soccer field with six conesmarking different spots around the perimeter; one on each corner, and one on each side of the center of field mark. We would start by jogging once around the field, when we reached our starting point we would sprint to the nearest cone, then resume a jog till we reached the original starting point again. Then we would sprint to the second cone. So "progressively" we reached the point where we would end with an all out sprint around the entire field. Bear in mind that the jog is not a rigorous jog, its actually the resting portion of the drill, just slow and constant. Very important to keep the same pace throughout the drill.
Im getting sore just thinking about it, I used to dread those things.
 
My question was totally different than the answer you gave me, thanks anyways though but I already know about these exersizes. This is a form of HIIT, as I stated in my post, SPRINTS. This does not answer my question about fat loss and which form of cardio is supreme for preventing muscle loss. I did not ask for exersizes.
scott
 
i can only speak from experience that HIIT (high intensity interval training) is great. the most time i'll spend is 15 to 20 minutes tops and i feel it, big time.

i really hate cardio so the shorter the time spent doing it the better for me.
 
Well genius you were pretty much right in your first post. Long distance running does chew up muscle as a source of energy not as soon as a couple of minutes, but it does happen relatively quickly. And HIIT training is the best for fat loss and muscle gains. In the Men’s health book the Testosterone Advantage Plan (or TAP) they have a pretty good example, it went something like this, a friend currently borrowing the book so this wont a an exact quote.

“Let’s take a look at two Olympic athletes, one looks like what you would think an Olympic athlete would look like. He’s lean, muscular, and looks like he could have sex 5 times before lunch! The other guy is the exact opposite of the first. He’s rail thin, pale, almost malnourished looking, you want to give him a sandwich but your not sure he could keep it down. What’s the difference between these two athletes? The first guy is a sprinter, the second guy is a marathon runner. Which one do you want to look like?”

Seriously though people seem to have a one track mind when it comes to “cardio” training. They think it means treadmills, or elliptical, or stair machines. Or just about any other hamster like “it looks like I’m moving but I’m not” activity. Cardiovascular training literally means getting your heart rate and breathing up to make your heart and lungs stronger and more efficient. There are a ton of other things a person could do that do that but also improve your athleticism, things like old school calisthenics, jumping jacks, push ups, jump rope, etc. do a search for GPP it means general physical preparedness. You’ll find a ton of things you can do with little or no equipment. And you’ll probably have more fun too.
 
Hmmm, interesting. I already knew as much as you posted in the reply though. Yes, long distance running burns fat and muscle, but HIIT also gives your body an anaerobic workout. Also, does HIIT give you a good tan? That is what I picked up from your "article". Also, is having sex 5 times before lunch really a good thing? I do not know if I want to be a minute man. You have to watch your credibility if you want to sound intelligent in your replies.
scott
 
Dr Barry Franklin Ph.D., director of cardiac rehabilitation, and exercxise laboratories at William Beaumont hospital in Michegan did a study which found that of the three variables that affect the results of a workout (frequency, intensity, and duration), intensity had the greatest effect.

walking slowly for 2 mins, then up a steep hill for 3 mins burned more calories and fat than walking at a steady brisk pace for 5 minutes.

This research shows that HIIT is better for fat burning, as well as overall health.

[Find your real fat-burning zone, Oct 2003, Heaner, Martica K.]
 
Also, HIIT was found to increase speeds of competition cyclists. Sprint training raises the activity of one or more of the muscle glyco(geno)lytic or related enzymes and enhances sarcolemmal lactate transport capacity (lactate release during recovery from exercise).

HIIT was found to help id done at around the intensity of the event you are training for, and if you have sufficient time to recover before the event.

[Training Techniques to Improve
Endurance Exercise Performances, Zuko N. Kubukeli, Timothy D. Noakes and Steven C. Dennis,Sports Med 2002; 32 (8): 489-509]
 
This research shows that HIIT is better for fat burning, as well as overall health
Click to expand...


Eh, sorry, that statement is completely false. Just because you can burn fat in less time does not exactly mean HIIT is BETTER than long distance, light to moderate intensity cardio. HIIT has also shown to give the body an anaerobic workout, which means the muscles are getting a workout. (Eg. After doing sprints your lower body, and many muscle groups of the upper body get a workout and may be sore the next day). This may not be bad, but you will need an extra day of rest after doing the sprints so that you will be able to lift to your potential in your resistance training. Sometimes if you are short on time HIIT could be the way to go, but for the most part I prefer to get my anaerobic workout in the weight room, not on the track.

As for the "better for overall health statement", I do not agree with this either. HIIT does not give your heart the same benefits that steady cardio gives.

Many like to think that muscle is burned during distance cardio, so do not do it. Yes, muscle can be burned, but this does not mean you should not do steadily paced cardio!! The key is moderation, consuming the correct forms of calories, and protecting the muscle with protein. Sure if you go out and run around 6-7 miles every morning right after waking up you WILL LOSE MUSCLE!

With all of the debate going around of which form of cardio is ideal for burning fat, I have to take both sides. I believe both forms of cardio are efficient for burning fat. It is all about your preference and what you have access too, what your body feels like and can handle, and so forth.
scott
 
explain HIIT in a treadmill. what are the speeds to switch from./
lets say I start at speed 5.0 for a start run then switch to 6.0 for the next speed and so on....untill I hit 9.0 for a full on sprint Is that how it goes????
 
genius said:
Eh, sorry, that statement is completely false. .............
Click to expand...

if you read my post carefully, you will see that I am not expressing my opinions, just stating the facts of what scientific studies have found, which are that interval training burned more fat calories than steady training for the same period but with no intensity intervals.

You asked for research with refernces, I produced it, you complained.

oh well.
 
genius said:
Eh, sorry, that statement is completely false. Just because you can burn fat in less time does not exactly mean HIIT is BETTER than long distance, light to moderate intensity cardio. HIIT has also shown to give the body an anaerobic workout, which means the muscles are getting a workout. (Eg. After doing sprints your lower body, and many muscle groups of the upper body get a workout and may be sore the next day). This may not be bad, but you will need an extra day of rest after doing the sprints so that you will be able to lift to your potential in your resistance training. Sometimes if you are short on time HIIT could be the way to go, but for the most part I prefer to get my anaerobic workout in the weight room, not on the track.

As for the "better for overall health statement", I do not agree with this either. HIIT does not give your heart the same benefits that steady cardio gives.

Many like to think that muscle is burned during distance cardio, so do not do it. Yes, muscle can be burned, but this does not mean you should not do steadily paced cardio!! The key is moderation, consuming the correct forms of calories, and protecting the muscle with protein. Sure if you go out and run around 6-7 miles every morning right after waking up you WILL LOSE MUSCLE!

With all of the debate going around of which form of cardio is ideal for burning fat, I have to take both sides. I believe both forms of cardio are efficient for burning fat. It is all about your preference and what you have access too, what your body feels like and can handle, and so forth.
scott
Click to expand...

Also, I didnt even mention sprinting or weight lifting, i just provided a synopsis of about 3 sports journals I read.

you say that you disagree with HIIT being better for overall health, but you are using long distance running as a comparison, whereas my study clearly used "walking at ba steady brisk pace for 5 minutes"

You then go on to answer your own original question.

If you already know the answer, and are not prepared to accept any other view points, why post the question in the first place?
 
specialk12 said:
explain HIIT in a treadmill. what are the speeds to switch from./
lets say I start at speed 5.0 for a start run then switch to 6.0 for the next speed and so on....untill I hit 9.0 for a full on sprint Is that how it goes????
Click to expand...

This exercise is best done outside, and not on a treadmill (because the treadmill is too cumbersome to alternate speeds when desired).

The US navy seals fitness guide states that it takes an average runner 6 seconds to reach their maximal speed, in which time they will cover about 55-60 metres.

So they recommend alternately sprinting for 45-50 metres, then jogging for 55-60 metres while covering a distance of about 3 miles.

This may be very difficult to a beginner, so you could try Fartlek training. 'Fartlek' means 'speed play' in Swedish. It is simialr to HIIT, except it does not have specific exercise and rest periods, you would simply jog for as long as you like, then sprint an arbitrary distance, then go back to jogging again. In other words, it is a speed workout without structure.
 
Xander, how old are you? The way you write out your posts and present your information gives me the idea you are no older than 16. You STATED "HIIT is better for overall health". NO, HIIT IS NOT BETTER FOR OVERALL HEALTH. You took information and scientific studies that have been done and attempted to make your own statement about them, however, you mislead many into thinking that steadily paced cardiovascular workouts are not beneficial for "OVERALL HEALTH", when indeed they are greatly useful. Next time if you are going to explain an article, why not just post the article? I am not objecting to the article, I am objecting to you. You said that you were not comparing, but why did you use the word "better"? The word better is used to compare, and I know you were comparing HIIT to steadily paced cardio, unless there is some other form of cardio you have discovered that none of us others know of? Also, the main advocaters of HIIT workouts are bodybuilders. They do not care about getting aerobic benefits equal to that of what steadily paced cardio gives. All they care of is burning fat as quickly as possible. However, just because HIIT cardio burns fat at a quicker pace does not mean it is "better". I have read through some of your other posts, you know very little about physical fitness and how the human body works. Please, do not post on urban legends or what you hear from gym rats during your workouts any longer.
scott

If you need me to bust out my articles and totally smash everything you stated I will.
 
genius [/i]how old are you? The way you write out your posts and present your information gives me the idea you are no older than 16[/quote] That is irrelevant and ageist said:
You STATED "HIIT is better for overall health".
Click to expand...


<SIGH> Once again, no I did not state that. That was a quote from a journal which I clearly referenced.

You took information and scientific studies that have been done and attempted to make your own statement about them
Click to expand...

No, I did not, none of what I posted was my opinion, just quotes from scientiofic studies.

You mislead many into thinking that steadily paced cardiovascular workouts are not beneficial for "OVERALL HEALTH"
Click to expand...

I hope nobody on this forum would take a quote saying that HIIT is beneficial to overall health, to mean that steadilly paced cardiovascular workouts are not beneficial. That is not what the quote implied.

why did you use the word "better"? The word better is used to compare, and I know you were comparing HIIT to steadily paced cardio, unless there is some other form of cardio you have discovered that none of us others know of?
Click to expand...

No, I did not. That was a quote. Someone else said that not me. I clearly refernced who it was who said it. Your sarcasm is not appreciated, neither it seems are my contributions to your questions, to which you seem to know the answers already. I won't bother next time.

I have read through some of your other posts, you know very little about physical fitness and how the human body works. Please, do not post on urban legends or what you hear from gym rats during your workouts any longer.
Click to expand...

Please give links to the specific posts which show that I "know very little about physical fitness and how the human body works". I will review them and if they contain my opinions, and those opinions are grossly misleading then I apologise.

I know a fair bit about physical fitness, but have never claimed to be qualified or something that im not, like everyone else here, i am just trying to help.

thanks

Alex
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top