Why weight training is better for your waistline than running
Options
Replies
-
The headline doesn't match the content of article very well....
"Combining weight training with aerobic exercise led to even better results, the study found."
"To maintain a healthy weight and waistline, it is critical to incorporate weight training with aerobic exercise."
Why can't we have both?
Pretty much this...both are important and I think most people who've had not only success losing weight, but the composition they're looking for do both.
I will say that there are a lot of people who say they want X body though...but don't want to do the resistance training to get it. Ultimately, resistance work is pretty important to getting the body that many people claim they want...you don't get all "toned" crash dieting and spending endless hour on cardio equipment. Gotta pump the iron...0 -
The study was also only on men.0
-
Nobody in this thread said anything negative about resistance training.
0 -
The OP seems to have gone quiet, busy talking to all the most successful MFP lifters no doubt.0
-
Actually a lot of people are saying do both rather than saying weight training won't benefit your heart.It appears so many people are not giving weight/resistance training the respect it deserves when it comes to improving cardiac output and strengthening of the heart itself including the effectiveness of its chambers.
The OP has a silly bias not supported by the article referenced which isn't a great way to start a debate.
Also success needs to be defined by each individual's needs and goals not one person's view of "very successful people on MFP", whatever that means.
Both you and I have had success according to our own goals but because they are different our training is different.
0 -
No reason you can't do both moderately well, no matter what anyone will try to tell you. Will you be a champion marathon runner and a champion power lifter? Well, no. But let's face it - you probably weren't going to be either of those things anyway.
I've been getting into shape for two years now. This year I ran a 6:30 mile, rode a half century, completed an Olympic distance triathlon, and just this morning hit a 365lb deadlift (2.25x body weight). This weekend I hope to bench 1.25x bw, and squat 1.5x bw.
Now these aren't mind blowing numbers, but I'll wager I'm healthier overall than someone who has only focused solely on either conditioning or resistance out of some bizarre belief that one is better than the other overall.0 -
NoelFigart1 wrote: »
Zombies may not be able to swim, but I don't think the can drown either!
Good god, none of us are safe...0 -
They can swim and try to eat sharkspincushion14 wrote: »NoelFigart1 wrote: »
Zombies may not be able to swim, but I don't think the can drown either!
Good god, none of us are safe...
0 -
-
The best exercise is the one you do. I don't care for weight training, so I don't do as much of it. So, if I relied on weight training alone, I wouldn't lose much weight.0
-
They can swim and try to eat sharkspincushion14 wrote: »NoelFigart1 wrote: »
Zombies may not be able to swim, but I don't think the can drown either!
Good god, none of us are safe...
Well, that's a buzzkill...0 -
Nothing in there about resistance training changing body composition resulting in a 'win'This is from a post a friend made on a different site:
Cardio vs weights for heart health (if you had to pick just one)
The big four risk areas for cardiovascular health are:
- Fat loss: As we all know it's about calories. Resistance training is at least as effective in the short term, and given it's ability to change body composition as well, resistance training wins. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12439085
"CONCLUSION: In men, resistance exercise has a similar effect on 24-h EE and macronutrient oxidation as a comparable bout of aerobic exercise. Neither exercise produced an increase in 24-h fat oxidation above that observed on a nonexercise control day"
That's not quite what the article says:- Blood lipids: Low or moderadate cardio does pretty much nothing. Resistance training reduces bad cholesterol, high intensity cardio improves good cholesterol. No clear winner, both are beneficial. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18974201
"High-intensity aerobic training results in improvement in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. For resistance and combined exercise, the results are inconsistent. The heterogeneity between the types of exercise did not allow reliable comparisons."
The article looked only at resistance training and was inconclusive.- Blood pressure: Cardio generally has a bit of an edge here, but resistance training shows benefits as well. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15662209
"Our results suggest that moderate intensity resistance training is not contraindicated and could become part of the non-pharmacological intervention strategy to prevent and combat high blood pressure. However, additional studies are needed, especially in the hypertensive population."
Again, the article does not support your conclusion as to a 'clear winner.'- Glucose metabolism: Resistance training is a clear winner over cardio for glucose control (the single biggest factor IMO): http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/29/11/2518.full
"All forms of exercise training produce small benefits in the main measure of glucose control: A1C. The effects are similar to those of dietary, drug, and insulin treatments. The clinical importance of combining these treatments needs further research.
...
Of the 14 studies in the meta-analysis of Boulé et al. (6), 12 used aerobic training and 2 used resistance training. Some physiological adaptations to resistance training differ from those of aerobic training, so their effects on glucose control may differ (7). Boulé et al. (6) found little difference between effects of aerobic and resistance training, but there were insufficient studies of resistance training for this finding to be anything more than tentative. "
0 -
Personally, I do both, as they both serve a purpose for me.0
-
-
TimothyFish wrote: »The best exercise is the one you do. I don't care for weight training, so I don't do as much of it. So, if I relied on weight training alone, I wouldn't lose much weight.
This! I hate lifting. I still do it but I'd rather do dishes, frankly, so it's probably not doing me that much good because there's no way I'm lifting weights for 30 minutes. I don't mind doing cardio every day for 30 to 60 minutes (running, well before I busted my foot doing that, elliptical, spinning, walking at an incline). At least I'm doing SOMETHING.
0 -
grantwashere wrote: »"Why weight training is better for your waistline than running" <
Most of the very successful people on MFP have been saying this for a long time. Here's the link to this article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/active/11310141/Why-weight-training-is-better-for-your-waistline-than-running.html
Wow..
1. Study was done on men only.
2. Diet or Caloric intake was never mentioned.
Sounds like a pretty comprehensive study..
Do both. Each has their own benefit.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 402 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 998 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions