Sprints, Cardio, or Weights for Fat Loss?

IronPlayground

There is no way around this not turning into a debate. My only hope would be that people would read the post with an open mind.

The basics of the article get into sustained, long-term fat loss and the method of exercise that would be most appropriate to achieve those results.

Obviously, this is going to depend on the type of exercise people enjoy.


Sprints, Cardio, or Weights for Fat Loss? Prioritize Sprints and Weights to Achieve Your Best Body:

http://www.charlespoliquin.com/ArticlesMultimedia/Articles/Article/1023/Sprints_Cardio_or_Weights_For_Fat_Loss__Prioritize.aspx

*References are bottom of article in the link.

Thinking of getting lean? Confused about how to get lean, build muscle, and look hot?

If you're a regular reader, you probably have the sprints-weights-aerobics for fat loss hierarchy all figured out. However, the scientists at Duke University are at it again, coming out with more research that generated news headlines pushing the mistaken notion that aerobic training is best for fat loss.

It was September 2011 when the Duke researchers published their first study saying aerobic exercise was the best way to lose belly fat—read about that here. Now, based on the same poor strength program design that used single-joint exercises on Cybex machines with long rest periods, the Duke scientists write that aerobic exercise is "the optimal mode of exercise for reducing fat mass."

It's a peculiar conclusion since previous studies show the following contradictory outcomes:

• A 2011 review in the Journal of Obesity showed that "the effect of regular aerobic exercise on body fat is negligible." High-intensity intermittent exercise, which is anaerobic rather than aerobic in nature, is much more effective.

• A 2006 study in the International Journal of Obesity found that of 12,568 regular runners, only those who significantly increased their weekly distance or running speed over the course of the 9-year study did not gain body fat. Runners who maintained or slightly increased mileage and intensity had larger waistlines at the end of the study.

• The purpose of aerobic exercise is to train the body to be as efficient as possible. The body adapts quickly to repetitive aerobic exercise with the goal of using the least amount of oxygen and energy to perform the greatest amount of work. Nothing about aerobic exercise supports long-term fat loss.

• Using the anaerobic energy system with sprints and weights allows you to generate significant physiological stress in a short time, requiring the body to burn a lot of energy. This also leads to lactic acid buildup, producing a favorable hormone response for fat loss.

A closer look at the Duke study and other research reveals the following points to guide you if you want to lose fat and build muscle:

#1: Aerobic training can help you lose fat if you are just starting to exercise. Although it is not the most effective type of exercise for fat loss, aerobic-style cardio can work if you are new to exercise.

The Duke study used sedentary, out of shape, overweight people. The aerobic training they did was fairly intense (80 percent of max heart rate), so it's no surprise that they lost body fat. Being overweight and out of shape, and then exercising at that intensity for 40 minutes 3 times a week for 8 months can clearly lead to fat loss.

#2: In the long run, aerobic training is useless for fat loss. In the Duke study the aerobic group only lost an average of 1.6 kg of fat (not much!) and they didn't build any muscle, which is where we see the fault in the plan. By decreasing body weight, the aerobic group lowered metabolism, while improving aerobic conditioning.

They were “in shape” and thinner, but no stronger, and they had decreased their resting energy expenditure. In order to maintain that fat loss, they would need to eat less, change their macronutrient proportions, or exercise longer and more intensely.

For example, in the 2006 study of runners, only the runners who tripled their weekly mileage from 16 km/week to 64 km/week did not gain fat over the 9-year study. That's a huge increase that would naturally triple the amount of training time required to prevent fat gain.

#3: Resistance training done right can produce greater sustainable fat loss. An unfortunate problem with research studies that test the effect of exercise modes on body composition is that they aren’t very practical:

• They are time limited, when in reality, exercise is a continuous endeavor.

• Training protocols tend to be poorly designed. For example, in the Duke study, the resistance protocol was set up to fail because the rest/set/rep scheme used is not very effective for fat loss.

• Training volume may not be equal or ideal. In the Duke study there were three groups, all with different volume and intensity, so the results can’t distinguish the “optimal” program. Instead, the results show that if you only have a little bit of time to train, you’re new to exercise, your only goal is fat loss, and it’s time limited (as in you are losing fat for a wedding and that’s it), then aerobic exercise is not a bad choice compared to isolation exercises on machines!

• Another pro of aerobic exercise would be that you really enjoy it. If so, that’s great, have at it, but if your goal is fat loss, consider adding some intervals and weights to get better results. Check it out…

#4: Doing smart anaerobic training, you can lose more fat quicker, while building muscle so that you raise your metabolism. For example, in a study of women that compared an anaerobic resistance training program with an aerobic protocol, the heavy load training group lost nearly 5 kg of body fat, gained about 3 kg of muscle, and had dramatic increases in strength. The women who did the high rep, aerobic-style lifting program had no change in body composition.

The benefit of building muscle is that your hard work lasts longer if you quit exercising: A study that tested what happens when subjects stopped exercising for 3 months after doing aerobic or resistance exercise found that a resistance training group maintained improvements in strength, muscle, and cardiovascular fitness longer than an endurance group.

The benefit of resistance training is even more pronounced for people who are in shape. In trained male athletes, a 6-week heavy load strength training program with multi-joint lifts (deadlift, squat, military press, chin-up, and bench press) allowed them to lose 1 percent body fat , while gaining 1.3 percent muscle mass for a dramatic improvement in body composition.

Compare that to the Duke study: The aerobic group also lost 1 percent body fat but gained no muscle, resulting in a less valuable body composition; the resistance group lost 0.65 percent body fat percent and gained 2 percent muscle; the concurrent group lost 2 percent body fat and gained 1.4 percent muscle mass.

The most favorable body composition was seen with the concurrent group, but it took double the time. When you consider the long-term effect of such a time-consuming, stressful program, it certainly is suboptimal.

#5: Prioritize anaerobic over aerobic training to avoid “interference” and overtraining. Over the long term, the body responds to aerobic training by losing muscle because it causes elevations in the stress hormone cortisol, which degrades tissue. Anaerobic training typically leads to gains in muscle and loss of fat due to elevations in favorable hormones such as growth hormone and testosterone.

The negative effect for aerobic exercise appears to be exponentially greater the more time you spend training. For instance, in long-term endurance athletes, hair cortisol levels were found to be much higher than in a sedentary control group.

Even in non-athletes we see evidence of this “overtraining” effect with greater volume: In a study that compared the effect of 13-weeks of aerobic training in overweight men, a group that did 30 minutes of training lost 4 kg of body fat, whereas a 60-minute training group lost only 3.8 kg of body fat. Doing double the amount of exercise resulted in slightly less fat loss.

“Interference” is similar to overtraining and occurs when two different types of training are performed concurrently. Simply, research shows that aerobic exercise "turns off" muscle building pathways, whereas anaerobic training with sprints and weights shifts them “on.”

#6: The bottom line is to do sprints and lift weights to improve your physique. Focus only on anaerobic training and give it all you’ve got.
Sprint training appears to be the most effective way to do this over the short-term. A popular 20-minute sprint cycling workout has been found to lead to 2 to 3 kg of fat loss in overweight, untrained men and women. Try this protocol that used 8-second sprints with 12 seconds rest.

More experienced trainees will benefit from running sprints on a track. A Canadian study found that trained individuals who did six 30-second all-out sprints with 4 minutes rest lost an impressive 12.4 percent body fat after spending less than .75 of an hour actually sprinting. An aerobic group only lost 5.8 percent body fat but they spent a whopping 13.5 hours training.

Suggestions for developing the best resistance program include the following points:

• Multi-joint lifts such as squats, deadlifts, lunges, split squats, step-ups, chin-ups, and chest presses in every training session.

• Train with a higher volume—work up to more than 4 sets per exercise. Shoot for 24 to 32 total sets per training session.

• Train with a higher intensity—include some training in the 70 to 85 percent of the 1RM range.

• Include short rest periods (30 to 60 seconds) and count tempo for every lift so that you apply a specific amount of tension to the muscles. In general, opt for longer (4 second) eccentric tempos and short or explosive concentric tempos.

• Shoot for 3 to 4 hours of total training time per week, which includes resistance training and a few short sprint sessions.

RGv2

Office pool lost.....

leannerae40

Frankly, with the amount of weight I have to lose, my trainer has asked me to do the following:

Weights
Interval aerobics
Any other exercises I would like to try (yoga, boxing, etc).

To answer your question, I believe the answer would be all of the above. With the amount of weight I have to lose, I would recommend anyone get a personal trainer, who will make sure that it's safe. I would also say the answer is ANYTHING is better than nothing.

JustJennie1

TL;DR

Sorry.

ETA: I do cardo and lift every day. Seems to work fine for me.

onedayatatime12

I do cardio 3x a week at most, and weights I'm planning to do 4-5x. It's worked for me before, so it shouldn't not work now.

IronPlayground

Frankly, with the amount of weight I have to lose, my trainer has asked me to do the following:

Weights
Interval aerobics
Any other exercises I would like to try (yoga, boxing, etc).

To answer your question, I believe the answer would be all of the above. With the amount of weight I have to lose, I would recommend anyone get a personal trainer, who will make sure that it's safe. I would also say the answer is ANYTHING is better than nothing.

Completely agree. I do believe the focus would need to shift once you are at or near an ideal body weight at lower body fat percentage.

toutmonpossible

Frankly, with the amount of weight I have to lose, my trainer has asked me to do the following:

Weights
Interval aerobics
Any other exercises I would like to try (yoga, boxing, etc).

To answer your question, I believe the answer would be all of the above. With the amount of weight I have to lose, I would recommend anyone get a personal trainer, who will make sure that it's safe. I would also say the answer is ANYTHING is better than nothing.

I agree, anything is better than nothing. I'm not scientific about it because I've never been overweight and have never had any elite athlete ambitions, but I like to do a combination of light-to-moderate strength training, interval and steady state cardio work. The diet is still the most important thing.

KatLifter

This is great, thanks for posting!
I didn't read it super carefully, but I will later. But it basically backs up what I've been doing.
Heavy weights with metabolic finishers (sprints) at the end.

luckynky

I don't have a lot of historical information that I'm sold on, so this makes fine sense to me. I'm very new to exercise and I'm doing cardio, which I am loving. I'm not planning on stopping cardio anytime soon, but I do want to add in strength training in the very near future.

What I don't like is all of the conflicting information out there coming from different studies. This is just how everything in life is. Once, the experts told parents to put babies on tummies to sleep. Then it was their sides. Now it is their backs. Eggs used to have so much bad cholesterol you weren't really supposed to eat them. Now they're fine to eat daily. I think it's really important to be tuned in with yourself and make smart choices (and adjustments) based on your own personal experiences.

Timshel_

HIIT is being heavily researched and showing much promise, but there are caveats to suggesting that everyone immediately switch. First and foremost, HIIT would only be acceptable for generally conditioned individuals and up. Research done working with sedentary and non-active particpants had a high rate of physical issues (imagine doing no exercise and being overwieght and being told to start doing 90% vo2 max sprint sets 3 x's a week). Most research suggests that some leve of core fitness be acieved and HIIT be worked in. Of course, I just read a study published last month or so that even cardiac rehab patients who have been the base of low impact/long duration aerobic exercise have shown promise in more intense, shorter sessions, so all that might changein the next few years. Also, there hasn't been a defined or optimal set interval yet, at least in what I have read. There have been studies that work anywhere from 15 seconds to 1 minute of 90% VO2 max with anywhere from 30 seconds to 3 minute recorvery times. I've also seen good results with fat burning tha occur closer to the aerobic/aneroic threshold, just working above the cross-over point as the optimal level instead of closer to max.

I swtiched to interval cardio training with less endurance cardio training and I love the results for performance in sports, but the weight loss has not changed for me. The benefit is the time I gained going from 45-60 minute runs to the same results in 25mins of interval strength and coditioning training.

I think if people can get similar reults with lest time needed, that will help. However, there is A LOT more exertion required so that might be a turn off.

leannerae40

Frankly, with the amount of weight I have to lose, my trainer has asked me to do the following:

Weights
Interval aerobics
Any other exercises I would like to try (yoga, boxing, etc).

To answer your question, I believe the answer would be all of the above. With the amount of weight I have to lose, I would recommend anyone get a personal trainer, who will make sure that it's safe. I would also say the answer is ANYTHING is better than nothing.

Completely agree. I do believe the focus would need to shift once you are at or near an ideal body weight at lower body fat percentage.

You said in your post EXACTLY what my trainer told me yesterday. Right now it's about weight loss, once I get close, and have a fitness level that can handle it, my priorities and technique will change.
Thanks for this post...appreciate it!