Drop calories or do cardio? Which would you prefer?

Options
123578

Replies

  • mtvstaff
    mtvstaff Posts: 57 Member
    Options

    Thank yi
    Mr_Knight wrote: »
    mtvstaff wrote: »
    Can y
    Mr_Knight wrote: »
    BILLBRYTAN wrote: »
    mtvstaff wrote: »
    I guess what I'm trying to say is you can use your own BMR as a weapon for fat loss/Weight control. Vs Doing Cardio. You can still meet your daily Calorie intake but use in a shorter period like you would in IF (Intermittent fasting) etc. And if that makes it easier for people to lose weight or control it thats a good thing. :D

    It makes no difference when you eat your calories. If you eat your calories in an hour, or spread them over 24, you will get the same results.

    COMPLETELY WRONG!! I eat an average of 2500 calories per day in the space of 4 hours and I don't eat for 20. I have been doing this all of 2015 so far and have achieved amazing results. Similar stories appear all over the internet if you take the time to research them.

    What you describe is 100% consistent with the posting you're declaring to be "COMPLETELY WRONG".

    Can you tell us your suggestions for the most time efficient way to hold muscle and maintain single digit bodyfat not lose strength while without feeling miserable year round with relative ease and not worrying a greal deal about food or cardio. You seem to know. :) real keen to learn what your approach to these things are.

    What does that have to do with the topic of the thread?

    IF is awesome sauce. Love it, do it.

    But that doesn't change the fact that for the vast majority of people**, a small eating window will make no noticeable difference compared to eating the same calories in some other pattern.

    Nor does it change the fact that you strongly disagreed with a post that was actually consistent with what you yourself were claiming. :smile:



    ** Nice attempt at backtracking with the addition of the "single digit body fat" qualification. :drinker: :smiley:

    Yes thank you for confirming my presumptions :)
  • mtvstaff
    mtvstaff Posts: 57 Member
    Options
    Is that not
    mtvstaff wrote: »
    If you burn 400 and eat 400 your back at square one. That's with your BMR as it was.

    No, you're at square negative BMR.

    What not just what i said :)
  • Charliegottheruns
    Charliegottheruns Posts: 287 Member
    edited April 2015
    Options
    Could you explain what your BMR consist of, that uses 1983 calories in 24 hours ? Excuse my earlier comment as I did NOT understand what you saying.
  • rontafoya
    rontafoya Posts: 365 Member
    Options
    100% drop calories. Why waste energy on "cardio" when you can pump iron instead? I'm 46 and dropped 40 lbs and 8 inches off my waste in 18 months by lifting heavy compound movements 4 days a week, NO CARDIO AT ALL, and just eating at a slight caloric deficit, with plenty of fat and protein. I think cardio is woefully overrated, unless you are just using it for basic conditioning or specifically for a sport. But for body composition? It sucks. Lift weights and eat a bit less.
  • Hornsby
    Hornsby Posts: 10,322 Member
    edited April 2015
    Options
    rontafoya wrote: »
    100% drop calories. Why waste energy on "cardio" when you can pump iron instead? I'm 46 and dropped 40 lbs and 8 inches off my waste in 18 months by lifting heavy compound movements 4 days a week, NO CARDIO AT ALL, and just eating at a slight caloric deficit, with plenty of fat and protein. I think cardio is woefully overrated, unless you are just using it for basic conditioning or specifically for a sport. But for body composition? It sucks. Lift weights and eat a bit less.

    I lost 80 in 8 months doing nothing but cardio. And in the 10 months since (equally your 18 months) I have lifted heavy and did cardio to get to a 6' tall, 180lb, and 10-12% bf, dropped 11" from my waist all while eating 3500 cals a day. I'd say my body composition is pretty solid and only getting better. Just sayin'.
  • Charliegottheruns
    Charliegottheruns Posts: 287 Member
    Options
    mtvstaff wrote: »

    I understand what calculator you used, can you explain what is in the calculation of 1983 calories ?
  • mtvstaff
    mtvstaff Posts: 57 Member
    Options
    mtvstaff wrote: »

    I understand what calculator you used, can you explain what is in the calculation of 1983 calories ?

    That's what I burn sedentary based on no movement. Doing nothing this is what my body burns.
  • mtvstaff
    mtvstaff Posts: 57 Member
    Options
    999tigger wrote: »

    Exercise calories are an addition-too, not a replacement for your BMR !

    You do realise Charlieruns is 100% correct above and your understanding is fundamentally flawed. How can you be so confused about such a simple concept?


    Oh and my answer was, its a balance of both and will depend on the day whether I have enough energy and willpower to do more exercise (subject to an overtraining excess) or whether I want to eat less or sacrifice some of my deficit.

    The only one confused is you . :)
  • 999tigger
    999tigger Posts: 5,235 Member
    Options
    peter56765 wrote: »
    For me, a healthy heart muscle is more important than shapely delts. However, since I mix up cardio and strength training, I'm getting to be smoking hot on the inside and out.

    This. As I get older, looking ripped is less and less important to me, but a strong heart muscle is something I still want.

    This absolutely. Id rather be fit including having a good cv system and lowering the risk of heart disease or a weak heart. I do both, but quite a bit of cardio. Why on earth wouldnt you want a good cv system?
  • mtvstaff
    mtvstaff Posts: 57 Member
    Options
    999tigger wrote: »
    peter56765 wrote: »
    For me, a healthy heart muscle is more important than shapely delts. However, since I mix up cardio and strength training, I'm getting to be smoking hot on the inside and out.

    This. As I get older, looking ripped is less and less important to me, but a strong heart muscle is something I still want.

    This absolutely. Id rather be fit including having a good cv system and lowering the risk of heart disease or a weak heart. I do both, but quite a bit of cardio. Why on earth wouldnt you want a good cv system?

    How's says that I don't? And where did I say I didn't? :)
  • Mezzie1024
    Mezzie1024 Posts: 380 Member
    Options
    Cardio makes me happy, as does eating, so I'd opt for exercise + more food most days. That said, some days are crazy and others are lazy (especially when I've got a good book to read), so focusing entirely on calories has its place as well.

    Thank goodness I don't have to choose one or the other forever.
  • 999tigger
    999tigger Posts: 5,235 Member
    Options
    mtvstaff wrote: »
    999tigger wrote: »
    peter56765 wrote: »
    For me, a healthy heart muscle is more important than shapely delts. However, since I mix up cardio and strength training, I'm getting to be smoking hot on the inside and out.

    This. As I get older, looking ripped is less and less important to me, but a strong heart muscle is something I still want.

    This absolutely. Id rather be fit including having a good cv system and lowering the risk of heart disease or a weak heart. I do both, but quite a bit of cardio. Why on earth wouldnt you want a good cv system?

    How's says that I don't? And where did I say I didn't? :)

    Dude it wasnt addressed to you. U was expressing agreement with those 2 posters.
  • mtvstaff
    mtvstaff Posts: 57 Member
    Options
    Mezzie1024 wrote: »
    Cardio makes me happy, as does eating, so I'd opt for exercise + more food most days. That said, some days are crazy and others are lazy (especially when I've got a good book to read), so focusing entirely on calories has its place as well.

    Thank goodness I don't have to choose one or the other forever.

    Agree 100 % find what works and maintain it. Make life easy :)

  • mtvstaff
    mtvstaff Posts: 57 Member
    Options
    999tigger wrote: »
    mtvstaff wrote: »
    999tigger wrote: »
    peter56765 wrote: »
    For me, a healthy heart muscle is more important than shapely delts. However, since I mix up cardio and strength training, I'm getting to be smoking hot on the inside and out.

    This. As I get older, looking ripped is less and less important to me, but a strong heart muscle is something I still want.

    This absolutely. Id rather be fit including having a good cv system and lowering the risk of heart disease or a weak heart. I do both, but quite a bit of cardio. Why on earth wouldnt you want a good cv system?

    How's says that I don't? And where did I say I didn't? :)

    Dude it wasnt addressed to you. U was expressing agreement with those 2 posters.

    Oops my bad :)
  • BrandonRTatum
    BrandonRTatum Posts: 1 Member
    Options
    Definitely do more cardio! I find the more exercise I do, the less inclined I am to binge on bad foods!

  • Charliegottheruns
    Charliegottheruns Posts: 287 Member
    Options
    mtvstaff wrote: »
    mtvstaff wrote: »

    I understand what calculator you used, can you explain what is in the calculation of 1983 calories ?

    That's what I burn sedentary based on no movement. Doing nothing this is what my body burns.

    mtvstaff wrote: »
    What does not eating for 3 or 5 hours have to do with anything? = Based on your BMR you could burn equivalent calories per hour instead of jogging or doing cardio. :D

    Basal Metabolic Rate is measured under the following conditions:
    The person is lying at rest.
    The person has just awoken from a normal overnight sleep.
    Ten to 12 hours have elapsed since the person's last meal
    No physical activity has taken place - usually for 12-18 hours.

    Your calculator does not represent the basic physiological functions such as breathing and blood circulation.
    BMR cannot be measured correctly with an on-line calculator.

    BMR and RMR are often used interchangeably, but differ slightly, RMR is measured three to four hours after a person eats or does significant physical work. RMR tends to be somewhat higher than BMR and is more practical for measuring.

    RMR is tipically 60-75% of your energy expenditure. 10% thermic effect of food and 15-30% Physical activity.

    Things that can increase RMR are: higher total body weight, gender, ambient temperature, caffeine, smoking, increased lean body mass, pregnancy, hyperthyroidism, some medications, genetics.

    Things that can decrease RMR are: aging, gender, fasting / starvation, hypothyroidism, sleep, some medications, and genetics.

    Which brings me to my problem with your statement, " Based on your BMR you could burn equivalent calories per hour instead of jogging or doing cardio. :D " An average 80 KG (175 lb) person burns approximately 95 calories per hour sleeping or doing absolutely nothing. The same person burns 1273 calories per hour running @ 10 miles per hour.

    Lets use your Quote:

    My BMR being Sedentary is 1983 Calories per day. So if you divide that by 24 hours (1 Day) 1983 divided by 24 = 82.625 Calories per hour being burnt over a 24hour period (And use I know we sleep and metab etc but keeping things simple) So lets say if I don't eat 3 hours i would burn 3x 82.625 = 247.875 Calories. Or say I don't eat for 5 hours thats 413 Calories! Now how long would i have to walk or jog on the treadmill to gain the same calorie loss?

    To answer your question. Your 5 hours is equivalent to, "about 20 Minutes of my running" @ 1273 per hour / 60 minutes X 20 minutes = 424 calories which leaves me with 11 more calories. PLUS the next 4 hours and 40 minutes of calories being burned, which is higher than your RMR because of, " EPOC, " Excess, Post-Exercise, Oxygen, Consumption: a state where the body is burning more calories following exercise than BEFORE the exercise was initiated: Following exercise, the body must utilize increased amounts of oxygen to replenish energy supplies, lower tissue temperature, and return the body to a resting state, all of which requires calories to do.

    I'm sorry it had to end this way, I hope I entertained you but your statement is incorrect. I'm glad to here that what ever it is, its working for you, but it would never work for me and I commend you for defending it all day. Well done !
  • mtvstaff
    mtvstaff Posts: 57 Member
    Options

    BILLBRYTAN wrote: »


    But that doesn't change the fact that for the vast majority of people**, a small eating window will make no noticeable difference compared to eating the same calories in some other pattern.

    I used to believe this until I researched intermittent fasting and actually tried it.




    Agree with you there Bill :D

  • mwyvr
    mwyvr Posts: 1,883 Member
    Options
    Cardio.

    I lost 22kg without counting calories, without significantly changing my diet, and without a single scale check other than the first last summer and then again ten days ago when I finally bought a scale for the house.

    I've dropped four belt notches, two+ pant sizes, my resting heart rate is 50, I've got more energy, more drive, sleep better, and I'm super motivated.

    I knew that I could drop weight, and improve fitness, with running. Fitness is as important to me as weight or how I look and feel in my skin.

    Could i have arrived at this point faster by counting calories in as well as cardio calories out? Yes, absolutely, but early on I doubt I was ready to take on both. With success in hand, it's easy(er). :smile: 18kg to go.