PDA

View Full Version : Cardio intensity and duration



DaCypher
10-16-2002, 12:21 PM
I know this has been discussed several times. However, I searched and couldn't find any good info.

Anyways, what I'm curious about is what you guys think the most effective style for doing cardio is for optimal fatloss. I have heard varrying opinions on this. Some say its better to do a lower intensity for a longer period of time and some say the opposite. Even others say you should do interval (essentially a mix between the two). I have heard from several doctors that there is an "optimal" heart rate depending on your age and whether you want to train for cardiovascular health or for fatloss. Maybe there is some type of optimal intensity to duration ratio that should be met to achieve your goals? Maybe this is all BS and you just need to get your heart pumping faster than it normall does?

Can anyone make any sense of this? Am I looking way too hard at this and I should just do some cardio the old fashioned way?

Fuel
10-16-2002, 12:51 PM
if fatloss is your only goal (which i know you said, but it isn't trust me) then you would just run as long as you could.

since you care about muscle, things are different. your answer depends SOLELY on how much muscle you want to preserve. if you are like me and NEVER want to lose an ounce of muscle for any reason, then you should do moderate, long term risen heart rate..... example, walking for an hour straight at like 4.3 mph, and do this once or even twice a day, while losing only a pound or two a week. this will assure minimal muscle loss, because you will be "nickel-and-diming" your bodyfat do death, and before your body realizes it, you will have lost 10 pounds of fat, with hardly any muscle loss. (keep in mind the type of energy used while walking as opposed to running....... walking is predominantly fat burned, running uses a whole lot more glycogen/muscle....... which kind of energy do you want to use and which kind do you want to save???)

if you could bare to lose some muscle, then jog.

basically, it's the individuals muscle loss aversity that will dictate type of cardio. some will choose no cardio, some will choose very intense..... i suggest you do some trial and error to see how much muscle you lose given a certain intesity, leaving all other variables constant.

AJ_11
10-16-2002, 01:29 PM
There is alot of info out there and it is hard to know which way is your. I think that there is no right and wrong way to do things when it comes to cardio and fatloss. The fact that you are doing something is an improvent.

You don't lose fat when your doing any sort of aerobic excerce. You burn calories; and when your total calories for the day is less than you used then you will lose weight (Also there is always going to be some muscle lost -- the key is to lose more fat than muscle, that can be solved with an adquate nutritional program.)

I actually think that it is the opposite the longer you do cardio the more likely you are going to lose more muscle -- becasue of a hormone called cortisal which cause muscle breakdown.

Another thing that you shouldn't worry about is how much calories you lose in the gym. In the 24 hours after a workout i what is key. If you train harder and shorter than you will burn more overall calories than someone doing alot of cardio.

With all that said before you go and do cardio ask yourself this.

Would I rather spend 20min at the gym and get an awesome workout or spend 2 hrs and barely break a sweat.

Also check out H.I.I.T Training.

Fuel
10-16-2002, 03:51 PM
Originally posted by AJ_11
There is alot of info out there and it is hard to know which way is your. I think that there is no right and wrong way to do things when it comes to cardio and fatloss. The fact that you are doing something is an improvent.

You don't lose fat when your doing any sort of aerobic excerce. You burn calories; and when your total calories for the day is less than you used then you will lose weight (Also there is always going to be some muscle lost -- the key is to lose more fat than muscle, that can be solved with an adquate nutritional program.)

I actually think that it is the opposite the longer you do cardio the more likely you are going to lose more muscle -- becasue of a hormone called cortisal which cause muscle breakdown.

Another thing that you shouldn't worry about is how much calories you lose in the gym. In the 24 hours after a workout i what is key. If you train harder and shorter than you will burn more overall calories than someone doing alot of cardio.

With all that said before you go and do cardio ask yourself this.

Would I rather spend 20min at the gym and get an awesome workout or spend 2 hrs and barely break a sweat.

Also check out H.I.I.T Training.

you don't lose fat when doing aerobic exercise??? so when you walk, you don't use fat? simply put, that's wrong.

walking does not create catabolic state in your body, or at least cortisol is not running rampant like when you jog, irregardless of the amount of time spent, unless you walk 4 hours straight, then it's just a matter of eating enough to counter the catabolism. walking is not "cardio".

that last rhetorical question was nothing but emotion, no logic or facts at all in that statement = worthless typing.

however, your focus on diet and fat burning outside the gym is good advice. but i think you were a little off with some of your statements, specifically 2nd and 3rd paragraphs.

entrrt
10-16-2002, 09:12 PM
whichever will raise your resting metabolic rate would be best. why not try one method(low-intensity, high duration) for a month and see how much wt. yo lose. then try a hgh-intensity/low duration method for a month and compare the #'s.