How does cardio cause muscle loss?
Replies
-
Who comes up with this stuff? Cardio develops flexible dense muscle.0
-
Hours of cardio can have a catabolic effect on muscle tissue, period. Ever seen a bulky distance runner? --- 7 Popular Cardio Myths = http://www.askmen.com/sports/bodybuilding_150/152_fitness_tip.html0
-
Hours of cardio can have a catabolic effect on muscle tissue, period. Ever seen a bulky distance runner? --- 7 Popular Cardio Myths = http://www.askmen.com/sports/bodybuilding_150/152_fitness_tip.html
I hate to tell you this but Ask Men isn't really a great source for anything -- not even fashion.-1 -
-
DoNotSpamMe73 wrote: »Who comes up with this stuff? Cardio develops flexible dense muscle.
Actually, depending on length and amount of fat burning your cardio does - it can actually cause deposits of fat to be put in the muscle area for easy access.
But your cardio system for the muscle you got needs to be maxed out before body feels the need to add more, then you got the same problem of adding muscle lifting in a deficit, except it takes even longer with cardio.
Flexible? What cardio are you doing that has such a great range of motion? Compared to what?0 -
He probably should have included the context of professional mainly, or even most age groupers.
Neither group usually wants to be carrying around extra weight that will not assist their primary goal - going as fast as possible.
I got more leg muscle than needed too compared to others I finish with. And that means could go faster if I lost some of it.
0 -
If you run to power up interval training is good and you gain also muscles, you got to eat a lot carbs to gain,
No cardio don't cause muscles loss helps only to have lean muscles.
0 -
NotGnarly, you're exactly correct. There are significant studies to support both sides of that issue, but the facts remain constant. Eat right, work out and include cardio. NOW, it is up to the individual to determine what and how much works for THEM and what doesn't. Every BODY is unique and requires it's own special program. Trial and error. But the one thing that is with out change for EVERYONE is persistence. Never quit. Keep going. As long as you are working toward a goal, you WILL achieve it. Once you stop. It's over.0
-
He probably should have included the context of professional mainly, or even most age groupers.
Neither group usually wants to be carrying around extra weight that will not assist their primary goal - going as fast as possible.
I got more leg muscle than needed too compared to others I finish with. And that means could go faster if I lost some of it.
The elites will always move towards the ideal of their sports and in running carrying a lot of extra weight just isn't ideal but a friend of mine used to bench 365 and run marathons in the 3:30 to 4hr range so they aren't mutually exclusive. Of course, anyone who has been to an actual marathon can attest that not everyone is fits the stereotype of a runner.0 -
Have to agree here. I did the same and had great results. Could have micro managed it more? Sure, but I was getting the results without having to do that.LoneWolfRunner wrote: »I think this thread got way too complicated and pointless. Too much science will totally ruin a perfectly good plan to eat well and train hard with great results. No one really really cares about wet muscles, dry muscles, blah blah blah. Go outside and run hard. Go to the gym and lift hard. Go home and eat right. (And yeah, you know what that means...it's common sense). Losing weight and getting in shape is not complicated. People make it hard because they want shortcuts and do not want to exercise self-discipline. 25 years ago I competed in some natural bodybuilding contests. My trainer and I just pounded the crap out of the weights, worked in some cardio and cut the crap out of my diet.... and it actually worked. In a relatively short period of time. And without measuring my food, without macros, without HRMs, or any of this other techie nonsense. We just worked hard, had fun and didn't over-think it.
IMO, inconsistency is why people don't get results. Whether it's in consumption or training.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »The elites will always move towards the ideal of their sports and in running carrying a lot of extra weight just isn't ideal but a friend of mine used to bench 365 and run marathons in the 3:30 to 4hr range so they aren't mutually exclusive. Of course, anyone who has been to an actual marathon can attest that not everyone is fits the stereotype of a runner.
Yes, I remember seeing many cross country runners who my daughter competed against in high school cross country meets throughout the state. Many of the typical "runner body" types were winning, but every now and then along came a girl carrying a heck of a lot more weight than your typical runner's body who was at the front of the pack. Ditto for amateur cycling competitions. Enough to shake your head and say "wait a minute, how can that be...?"
However, when you move to the professionals and elites where the power to weight ratio is key since the competition is so close at that level - you are not going to find anyone carrying a lot of extra muscle weight - especially upper body muscle weight.
When Lance Armstrong retired from his string of Tour de France wins and cycling, he announced a come back and had a mere 8 months to trim his upper body weight from this jacked state of his body...
...to his competitive power to weight ratio for riding against the best of the best again...
I remember reading about the delicate balance at the time of how they were going to get him back down to fighting weight, without sacrificing the training he needed to do to get there. Keep in mind, we are talking about an athlete who was cranking out 4-6 hours a day on the bike in training which easily accounted for 3 - 8K calorie burns per session which provided ample room to play with a deficit and guide him in 8 short months from jacked Lance to slim/trim/lean pro cyclist condition. (Drugs aside - the issue of power to weight ratio was still in 100% play for him to compete as no amount of doping would have hauled a too heavy cyclist up those mountains at the speeds they ride.)
Top professional marathon runners also allow their bodies to consume the upper body muscle to improve their power to weight ratio. Legs are powerful, lean fighting muscular machines though...
So yes, top athletes in their professional field want the cardio to consume the non-necessary muscles. They use a delicate balance to get there, but they also have an easy time running the deficit required burning thousands of calories per day in their training...
A
Professional ballerinas have a tough career...
I ride bikes a lot for amateur competition, and currently in my off season phase where I lift a lot of weights (compared to my one day a week maintenance lifting during the competitive season). I can confirm my body is gaining muscle weight at the moment (based on recent measurements), but I can also guarantee it will be consumed over the course of next season - especially when I enter the 10-14 hour weeks of cardio training when my body turns to what it can for a fuel source. I didn't manage that as well as I intended this year when I was dropping 20 pounds and ended up diminishing a lot of the support muscles I need for power on the bike. I go into next season not really needing to cut any weight, so I hope to manage it all a bit better.
0 -
SingingSingleTracker wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »The elites will always move towards the ideal of their sports and in running carrying a lot of extra weight just isn't ideal but a friend of mine used to bench 365 and run marathons in the 3:30 to 4hr range so they aren't mutually exclusive. Of course, anyone who has been to an actual marathon can attest that not everyone is fits the stereotype of a runner.
I ride bikes a lot for amateur competition, and currently in my off season phase where I lift a lot of weights (compared to my one day a week maintenance lifting during the competitive season). I can confirm my body is gaining muscle weight at the moment (based on recent measurements), but I can also guarantee it will be consumed over the course of next season - especially when I enter the 10-14 hour weeks of cardio training when my body turns to what it can for a fuel source. I didn't manage that as well as I intended this year when I was dropping 20 pounds and ended up diminishing a lot of the support muscles I need for power on the bike. I go into next season not really needing to cut any weight, so I hope to manage it all a bit better.
Good luck to you in the upcoming year. It's a tough sport and many say it's that cycling is about who can suffer the most.
Just a note of interest, that the "jacked Lance" ran marathons along with his friend Mathew Mcconaghey who was even more muscular. I've seen photos of them running, I think it was the NY Marathon, together. Not elites but certainly not your stereotypical runners.0 -
prdavies1949 wrote: »Its a load of rubbish promulgated by those who like to pick things up and put them down again. I have lost over 100lbs and believe me that was all fat. I now have more muscle than I have ever had and I haven't lifted anything. (Stands back and waits for flaming)
Hammer meat nail. Its pure rubbish. Cardio will burn fat, more than pretty much any other activity. I too have lost weight, and I do strength training and cardio, and Im pretty sure I have regained muscles I havent used in decades... Hopefully common sense takes hold and there is no flaming coming your way0 -
Is there a minimum of resistance/strength training that one needs per week in order to help maintain current muscle mass? I mean I know why I should do it, but I now prefer to run then lift weights. I was lifting 3 times a week months ago, but would 2 full body days be enough? Are body weight exercises enough when eating in a deficit?
Running develops muscle. Lean and toned muscle. If you prefer running you should stay with it, and if you want to supplement your fitness with lifting weights, I myself would look at what muscles are used in running the most, and concentrate on them, i.e. quads, hamstrings, arms and core ... You can always use body weight exercises, because... ( here it comes.. ) for the most part they are the most effective.0 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »Good luck to you in the upcoming year. It's a tough sport and many say it's that cycling is about who can suffer the most.
Just a note of interest, that the "jacked Lance" ran marathons along with his friend Mathew Mcconaghey who was even more muscular. I've seen photos of them running, I think it was the NY Marathon, together. Not elites but certainly not your stereotypical runners.
Thanks, Wheelhouse. Yes - it usually does come down to who is willing to suffer the most. Not only in the training, but also in an event when many times the podium spots comes down to a battle of "who wants it the most" which is my translation of "who can suffer the most" that day to get a podium spot. My final race of this year had me riding in a bunch of three riding for the 2nd and 3rd podium spots when I hooked my handlebar on a tree and crashed. I had nothing to lose at that point, so did my best to catch back up to them for the final miles confronting as much "suffering" that I could endure. In the end, I was 18 seconds short, but learned a lot about how much pain I could take on.
True that Lance and Matthew were not your typical endurance runners.
Lance Armstrong, 2006 (2:59:36) and 2007 (2:46:43) New York City Marathon
After he finished the New York City Marathon in 2006, Lance Armstrong called the marathon "without a doubt the hardest physical thing I have ever done." But it didn't stop the seven-time Tour de France champion from attempting the race again the following year. He trained a little better in 2007, which resulted in a better time and less pain.
Not bad times at all for Lance. 867 finished ahead of him in 2006, and only 231 beat him in 2007. I wonder what his time would have been with a light and lean runner's physique more like his pro cycling body composition?
The one and only time I ran the NYC Marathon over 25 years ago, I finished in 4:38:30 which included walking about 2 miles of it thanks to cramps and not the best training regime. I even got dusted by 68 year old Tony Randall at the line...0 -
Hours of cardio can have a catabolic effect on muscle tissue, period. Ever seen a bulky distance runner? --- 7 Popular Cardio Myths = http://www.askmen.com/sports/bodybuilding_150/152_fitness_tip.html
The article was every bit as stupid as I expected.
0 -
This has been mentioned in a couple of other posts, but what makes this topic so frustrating is people throw around terms, sports, etc at random and so you are rarely comparing apples to apples (or even to other fruit).
You cannot use elite athletes as examples of the inherent effects of a training style, esp without taking into account the specific demands of the sport and the specific goals of the training. And you absolutely cannot compare elites with non-elites participating in the same sport or activity.
Elite marathoners look emaciated because that is what is necessary to win races, not because the cardio training is "burning their muscles". It's not like they are franticallly lifting weights and saying "OMG, no matter what I do, I just keep wasting away!!!!". The same with stage-race elite cyclists. Tyler Hamilton said that, given the choice between 3 fewer pounds and 3 extra points on hematocrit, a cyclist would take the 3 pound loss every time. A cyclist doesn't want 1 more extra muscle cell than is necessary to get him to the top of that mountain climb.
Rather that the stupid "marathoner vs sprinter" comparison, more instructive would be to look at a triathlete. These guys do a LOT more cardio training than marathoners, but are able to maintain the muscle mass they need. As long as protein intake is adequate, cardio training does NOT have to result in substantial losses in muscle mass.
UNLESS: your goal is to maximize muscle mass. Because cardio will absolutely inhibit your ability to gain large amounts of muscle mass. But, once again, we are talking about a specialized training goal at the far end of one continuum. It is wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong to use a bodybuilder or an elite marathoner as examples of the effect of cardio on muscle.0 -
jonathanwgreene wrote: »prdavies1949 wrote: »Its a load of rubbish promulgated by those who like to pick things up and put them down again. I have lost over 100lbs and believe me that was all fat. I now have more muscle than I have ever had and I haven't lifted anything. (Stands back and waits for flaming)
Hammer meat nail. Its pure rubbish. Cardio will burn fat, more than pretty much any other activity. I too have lost weight, and I do strength training and cardio, and Im pretty sure I have regained muscles I havent used in decades... Hopefully common sense takes hold and there is no flaming coming your way
Substituting "common sense" for "exercise physiology" rarely ends well.
0 -
You cannot use elite athletes as examples of the inherent effects of a training style, esp without taking into account the specific demands of the sport and the specific goals of the training. And you absolutely cannot compare elites with non-elites participating in the same sport or activity.
The body responds to training stress in kind, no matter if one is elite or non-elite. In other words, racking up enough hours of training stress per week will - at some point - result in the body recomposition taking place to adapt to the sport it is being trained to produce. So a non-elite can get just as mean and lean (within their body type) as an elite, even though they may not have the genetics to ride, run, or swim as fast as those gifted with better genetics.Elite marathoners look emaciated because that is what is necessary to win races, not because the cardio training is "burning their muscles". It's not like they are franticallly lifting weights and saying "OMG, no matter what I do, I just keep wasting away!!!!". The same with stage-race elite cyclists. Tyler Hamilton said that, given the choice between 3 fewer pounds and 3 extra points on hematocrit, a cyclist would take the 3 pound loss every time. A cyclist doesn't want 1 more extra muscle cell than is necessary to get him to the top of that mountain climb.
We agree there. Cyclists do, however, spend a lot of time working on their core to support their position on the bike. Plenty of elite cyclists (depending on their discipline) use weight training as part of their regime as well. Upper body strength in the arms is less important for runners for the obvious reasons.Rather that the stupid "marathoner vs sprinter" comparison, more instructive would be to look at a triathlete. These guys do a LOT more cardio training than marathoners, but are able to maintain the muscle mass they need. As long as protein intake is adequate, cardio training does NOT have to result in substantial losses in muscle mass.
Rather than say they do "a lot more cardio" (which is incorrect), let's correct that and say they spread their weekly cardio training sessions throughout three disciplines: the water, the wheels, and the run. Marathoners and cyclists - specializing in just one discipline - get just as many hours of cardio in per week as a triathlete. It's just in their one discipline, instead of three. No matter what the sport, everyone is limited with how much training can be done per week, and per training cycle phase.
Triathletes are still pretty lean and mean within the ranks of Elites that win...
UNLESS: your goal is to maximize muscle mass. Because cardio will absolutely inhibit your ability to gain large amounts of muscle mass. But, once again, we are talking about a specialized training goal at the far end of one continuum. It is wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong to use a bodybuilder or an elite marathoner as examples of the effect of cardio on muscle.
Not really wrong within the context of saying how one's body would respond to the training stress of 10 - 18+ hours a week of cardio per week. It doesn't matter if one is amateur, semi-pro, or pro - the body will respond in kind to the training stress provided one is not eating in surplus. The body will burn through the fat and use whatever fuel it can get.0 -
jonathanwgreene wrote: »Is there a minimum of resistance/strength training that one needs per week in order to help maintain current muscle mass? I mean I know why I should do it, but I now prefer to run then lift weights. I was lifting 3 times a week months ago, but would 2 full body days be enough? Are body weight exercises enough when eating in a deficit?
Running develops muscle. Lean and toned muscle. If you prefer running you should stay with it, and if you want to supplement your fitness with lifting weights, I myself would look at what muscles are used in running the most, and concentrate on them, i.e. quads, hamstrings, arms and core ... You can always use body weight exercises, because... ( here it comes.. ) for the most part they are the most effective.
ALL muscles are lean. As for "toned," that's a matter of body fat percentage and has nothing to do with running. Running develops cardiovascular efficiency, it doesn't devolop muscle (beyond a minimal amount.)0 -
I'm more amused at the "work the muscles that are already getting work- and ignore the muscle that aren't getting work even more"tigersword wrote: »jonathanwgreene wrote: »Is there a minimum of resistance/strength training that one needs per week in order to help maintain current muscle mass? I mean I know why I should do it, but I now prefer to run then lift weights. I was lifting 3 times a week months ago, but would 2 full body days be enough? Are body weight exercises enough when eating in a deficit?
Running develops muscle. Lean and toned muscle. If you prefer running you should stay with it, and if you want to supplement your fitness with lifting weights, I myself would look at what muscles are used in running the most, and concentrate on them, i.e. quads, hamstrings, arms and core ... You can always use body weight exercises, because... ( here it comes.. ) for the most part they are the most effective.
ALL muscles are lean. As for "toned," that's a matter of body fat percentage and has nothing to do with running. Running develops cardiovascular efficiency, it doesn't devolop muscle (beyond a minimal amount.)
like that's helpful.
I agree to a point about not over thinking it. Just pick a plan- get your diet right and go for it. And stick with it.
But at some point- when your goals get detailed- you're going to want to understand why things work and how to get every ounce of benefit from your training and diet.
Most people never need it- some people do.
But that doesn't invalidate the information in and of itself. It's all good information and useful to discuss.0 -
I can attest to the fact that you DO lose muscle. I have been working with a personal trainer twice per week, dating back to August 7, 2014. Over time, I have lost 49.8 total pounds. I have lost 20 pounds of muscle and 30 pounds of fat.0
-
DP0
-
tigersword wrote: »jonathanwgreene wrote: »Is there a minimum of resistance/strength training that one needs per week in order to help maintain current muscle mass? I mean I know why I should do it, but I now prefer to run then lift weights. I was lifting 3 times a week months ago, but would 2 full body days be enough? Are body weight exercises enough when eating in a deficit?
Running develops muscle. Lean and toned muscle. If you prefer running you should stay with it, and if you want to supplement your fitness with lifting weights, I myself would look at what muscles are used in running the most, and concentrate on them, i.e. quads, hamstrings, arms and core ... You can always use body weight exercises, because... ( here it comes.. ) for the most part they are the most effective.
ALL muscles are lean. As for "toned," that's a matter of body fat percentage and has nothing to do with running. Running develops cardiovascular efficiency, it doesn't devolop muscle (beyond a minimal amount.)
I'm more amused at the "work the muscles that are already getting work- and ignore the muscle that aren't getting work even more"
like that's helpful.
I agree to a point about not over thinking it. Just pick a plan- get your diet right and go for it. And stick with it.
But at some point- when your goals get detailed- you're going to want to understand why things work and how to get every ounce of benefit from your training and diet.
Most people never need it- some people do.
But that doesn't invalidate the information in and of itself. It's all good information and useful to discuss.
Does someone have the inverse of the 'friends don't let friends skip leg day' gif?
ETA: trying to fix boogered up quotes ...0 -
I lost some muscle once. But I found it again lying under a pile of weights at the gym. Once I kept picking up all that iron, my muscle seemed quite content to come back to me. It doesn't even complain on those days when I run far away.0
-
How many bulky muscle-bound medium-to-long distance runners do you see in serious comps?????0
-
_SandShoveller_ wrote: »How many bulky muscle-bound medium-to-long distance runners do you see in serious comps?????
Is that an intentional result of their training, or a side effect?0 -
_SandShoveller_ wrote: »How many bulky muscle-bound medium-to-long distance runners do you see in serious comps?????
In the Clydesdale class....
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions