PDA

View Full Version : Cutting vs Cutting with Cardio



Warrior10
03-22-2007, 11:24 AM
1. Cutting = heavy lifting with a caloric deficit

2. Cutting with cardio (for me) = 15-20 mins of running in the morning, caloric deficit diet and heavy lifting


I realized that I am lazy and hate cardio. I do. I've accepted it.

I'd like to lose 8-10 pounds of bodyfat and of course preserve muscle mass. Warm T-shirt weather's approaching.

I know I'm gonna dump the cardio and stick with my heavy lifting in a caloric deficit, but now I feel a bit guilty for droppin the cardio. Some encouragement and personal insight would be appreciated.

Thanks WBB

Mik
03-22-2007, 11:30 AM
I hate cardio. I never use cardio to cut. My last cut saw me just under 10% AND some of my lifts went up. I never felt guilty! :)

Built
03-22-2007, 07:17 PM
Have you read How to do Cardio if you must? (http://www.wannabebig.com/article.php?articleid=292) I hate it too. This is my minimalist approach.

the doc
03-22-2007, 11:12 PM
i like cardio, its a nice change of pace and i use this
http://www.nordictrack.com/wcsstore/NordicTrack/images/catalog/NTXC8018-large.jpg

but if you hate well then dont do it. it just makes one hate cutting that much more

Bupp
03-22-2007, 11:27 PM
From Men's health this month:

Ball State University research study

- overweight men on 1500 calorie/day diet.

Group 1 - No exercise ~21 pounds weight lost 69% of it fat
Group 2 - Cardio 3 times per week ~21 pounds weight lost 78% of it fat
Group 3 - Cardio+Weights 3 times per week ~21 pounds weight lost 97% of it fat.

xlerate9
03-23-2007, 07:17 AM
From Men's health this month:

Ball State University research study

- overweight men on 1500 calorie/day diet.

Group 1 - No exercise ~21 pounds weight lost 69% of it fat
Group 2 - Cardio 3 times per week ~21 pounds weight lost 78% of it fat
Group 3 - Cardio+Weights 3 times per week ~21 pounds weight lost 97% of it fat.


Nice.

I actually like cardio... maybe I'm weird? I used to HATE running... now I'm addicted. I've started running 5k's and I'm doing a sprint triathlon at the end of may. Once you get through the initial torture phase... and start getting good at it... it becomes fun.

I'm not built to be a runner either. I'm 5'11, 200 lbs. Somewhere around a 46" chest, and I wear 34x32 pants. I was 230 lbs. when I decided to start running.

greekboy80
03-23-2007, 07:23 AM
^ BUPP - a telling statistic!

All this talk about muscle loss during a cut is crap. I think its an excuse for peopel to get out of doing the cardio.

I've never noticed this loss of muscle. Yeah, my strength has gone down while cutting but I relate that to the lack of calories = less energy, stamina, strength.

Just my $.02

Tsuki No Neko
03-23-2007, 10:09 AM
I'd like to see that same statistic for women, because I'm sure the results would vary a little.

ArchAngel777
03-23-2007, 11:16 AM
^ BUPP - a telling statistic!

All this talk about muscle loss during a cut is crap. I think its an excuse for peopel to get out of doing the cardio.

I've never noticed this loss of muscle. Yeah, my strength has gone down while cutting but I relate that to the lack of calories = less energy, stamina, strength.

Just my $.02

You might be on to something here... Actually, I question it as well. However, I do know for a fact that muscle loss can occour if one is not careful. Remember, the calories have to come from somewhere and if you are on a low calorie diet and are burning tons of energy, it is innevetable that the body will break down muscle at some point. I just do not see any way around it... With that said, I do think muscle loss is way overstated. I all depends.

I personally love cardio, because I can eat much more food. 1 Hour of cardio provies me with about 500 calories of diety flexibility. That means, provided I do enough exercise, I can eat at near maintenace and lose weight. It is a lot of work, but it is nice being able to eat a decent sized meal.

I think people need to avoid the whole 2 hours of cardio per day... I think 30 - 45 minutes of hardcore cardio 5 times per week is about right. Keeps the body in shape, healthy and allows a little bit more dietary flexability.

Bupp
03-23-2007, 11:24 AM
It didn't say, but my guess is that the study involved people who did not have any training experience. Also it would be interesting to see how a group that lifted only would do compared to the other groups.

But I don't think people need to worry about their muscle magically disappearing just because they go for 3 or 4 runs a week.

Beast
03-23-2007, 11:27 AM
I go through phases... One month I'll do a lot of cardio, then I get sick of it for about 6 months. It's just so... boring.



i like cardio, its a nice change of pace and i use this
NordicTrack! That's old school.

greekboy80
03-23-2007, 12:07 PM
You might be on to something here... Actually, I question it as well. However, I do know for a fact that muscle loss can occour if one is not careful. Remember, the calories have to come from somewhere and if you are on a low calorie diet and are burning tons of energy, it is innevetable that the body will break down muscle at some point. I just do not see any way around it... With that said, I do think muscle loss is way overstated. I all depends.

I personally love cardio, because I can eat much more food. 1 Hour of cardio provies me with about 500 calories of diety flexibility. That means, provided I do enough exercise, I can eat at near maintenace and lose weight. It is a lot of work, but it is nice being able to eat a decent sized meal.

I think people need to avoid the whole 2 hours of cardio per day... I think 30 - 45 minutes of hardcore cardio 5 times per week is about right. Keeps the body in shape, healthy and allows a little bit more dietary flexability.

Oh I totally agree. It can certainly happen, and it probably happens a lot. But if you try to limit muscle loss by weight lifting, and eating enough protein and not going too low in cals, most people will be fine.

I'm on a low carb/velosity type diet right now and whenever I do and intense cardio i.e. HIIT I always preform it in the afternoon rather than morning fasted, and have some protein(about a scoop,1/2 casein 1/2 Whey) before hand to limit the bodys need for protein. My method of thought is that if the body needs it and its in the blood stream, hopefully it will use that first to limit catabolism.

My morning fasted state cardio is always walking and not intense. I dont think there's much worry about muscle loss while walking(even in fasted state) So, I dont have any protein in the morning. I'm not worried about walking and muscle catabolism.

I never do any steady state cardio(i.e. jogging) for fat loss or for long periods of time. I DO think if you do this too often in a reduced calorie state, you are at risk of losing some muscle. But still, its nominal if you train with weights and are dieting properly(protein).

Who really knows? do it, and track you own results...Thats the only way to really know.

Bupp
03-23-2007, 12:16 PM
Greekboy: Wouldn't it make more sense for you to eat some carbs instead of protein before the workout? The reason your body is breaking down protein from the muscles is because it isn't getting enough energy from it's glycogen stores/fat stores.

rk77
03-23-2007, 12:27 PM
Bupp, if he eats carbs before a cardio session then he might have a little more energy, but his body would be burning the carbs. If he eats protien, The body would turn to burning more fat.

Mr. D
03-23-2007, 12:37 PM
Have you read How to do Cardio if you must? (http://www.wannabebig.com/article.php?articleid=292) I hate it too. This is my minimalist approach.

HIIT should be treated as a weightlifting session and not a tradition session. Meaning pre and post nutrition should be in order. SS cardio does not require anything either way.

ArchAngel777
03-23-2007, 12:39 PM
Either would work if it was in small enough quanities. The calories come from somewhere... How, when and why doesn't make a huge difference at the end of the day. If he ingests some fast acting whey, his body wouldn't need to break down muscle tissue during the exercise. If he eats 10-15 grams of fast acting glucose, his body wouldn't need the protein he eats before. I think it is a matter of personal preference. Either works fine at the end of the day... The important part is to keep protein levels up to sufficient levels.

greekboy80
03-23-2007, 01:27 PM
Greekboy: Wouldn't it make more sense for you to eat some carbs instead of protein before the workout? The reason your body is breaking down protein from the muscles is because it isn't getting enough energy from it's glycogen stores/fat stores.


I agree with what Archangel77 said, but to add somthing...By eating the protein I can be more sure that muscle is being spared. With carbs, your body could still be breaking down muscle if it needs protein.

I guess the question would be which is optimal? A little of both? Depending on the intensity and type of cardio(steady state, walking, HIIT) I think that depending on which types and how the systems operate and what to ingest before the session, is the real quetion.

the doc
03-23-2007, 01:41 PM
I go through phases... One month I'll do a lot of cardio, then I get sick of it for about 6 months. It's just so... boring.



NordicTrack! That's old school.

beast, I got the nordic track from my old man... i think he bought that back in the late 1980s. the beauty of the nordic track is that the componets are simple and well built. It still works as good as when he bought it!

also, it is much more efficient at burning cals than walking or biking due to the involvement of the upper body in addition to the lower body... roughly 1000cals/hr vs walking/biking (~ 200-600 cals/hr)

ArchAngel777
03-23-2007, 02:44 PM
beast, I got the nordic track from my old man... i think he bought that back in the late 1980s. the beauty of the nordic track is that the componets are simple and well built. It still works as good as when he bought it!

also, it is much more efficient at burning cals than walking or biking due to the involvement of the upper body in addition to the lower body... roughly 1000cals/hr vs walking/biking (~ 200-600 cals/hr)

I personally hated it, but I agree with you, it is one calorie burning monster. One hour of nordic track a day and you could still keep a relatively loose diet and end up in top shape... That SOB is a calorie burning machine! Probably why I hate it, so much effort...

Bupp
03-23-2007, 04:51 PM
My understanding is the only reason your body would breakdown the protein is if it doesnt have enough carbs for fuel.

If the body is taking the protein from your muscles for energy isnt it just changing it into carbs and then crapping out the nitrogen?

I understand that there are lots of reasons for eating protein, but I would think pre-aerobic exercise you would get more benefit out of carbs.

Warrior10
03-23-2007, 10:31 PM
Thanks for the article Built. It was an engrossing read. I have to read it over a couple times to fully absorb it.

I'm feeling the HIIT regimen you described. Although at 180 pounds I feel I could stand to gain more mass, I think cutting's more of a priority now.

I still feel no love for cardio. I was thinking of cutting (only heavy lifting and diet) for about 2-3 weeks and seeing how it goes, and if I'm not satisfied, add in the HIIT...

...because the end of the day, I want to lose the BF as soon as I can.

Built
03-23-2007, 10:35 PM
Hey, thank you, I'm glad you found it helpful!

Honestly, I hate cardio too. But HIIT is the only thing that seems to help lean out the leggies - an exceptionally stubborn area for me.

Warrior10
03-23-2007, 11:16 PM
Makes sense. From your own personal experience Built, does HIIT help lean out your upper body better as well, instead of only heavy lifting and diet?

Noxon
05-26-2007, 07:55 AM
Sorry for resurrecting a dead thread, first of all, but I have a specific question about HIIT that is relevant to the topic discussed.

My situation is this: A fairly recent knee injury prevents me from engaging in sprint and hill (Especially hill, on the descent) exercises without serious risk of re-injury, but I want to begin HIIT training again. All the articles I've read talk exclusively about sprints and hills. What is my best low-impact alternative for true HIIT-style exercise that can be done without a gym pass?

Biking is most convenient, but would swimming be a better choice since it is full-body? The lakes around here are almost warm enough to swim in. I've been trying to convince myself that swimming will be a million times better than biking, but I have hated swimming for years because up until recently I was a SMOKER (agh) and swimming put me so out of breath that I would constantly feel like I was in danger of drowning. Well, now I'm not a smoker and I'm thinking it's time to suck it up and get in the damn water.

I just realized that this is one of those stupid posts where the poster already knows what the answer should be and just wants somebody to say "Yeah, go suck it up and ________ even if you don't want to." Where _______ can be count calories, do x,y,z form of cardio, stop masturbating to lingerie catalogs, or any other number of things that are typically viewed as hurdles or sacrifices. I'm going to post it anyway. #*($&#$

So have at it. Tell me intense swimming is better cardio than intense biking. Sigh.

Edit: If you're wondering why I bothered to post... At least publicly acknowledging that I should conquer my fear/loathing of swimming makes it harder for my inner-monologue to stay in denial!

BigDreamz
05-26-2007, 11:24 AM
Yeah for efficient and quick fat loss, nothing beats cardio. High intensity, short duration cardio preserves muscle and sheds fat quickly.

Built
05-26-2007, 11:32 AM
Noxon, try what I've been doing lately: recumbent bicycle. Set it at a speed you COULD do for say, an hour. Warm up for a few minutes, then do your sprints at the same level - just pedal as fast as you can. Then recover for twice as long.

Make sure to cool down afterward to burn off the FFAs and put your heart back inside your ribcage.