Weights or Cardio better to lose 150 lbs?

watkins1980

I have about 150 lbs to lose to reach my goal. I am confused as to which is better, weights via strength training, or cardio? I read doing weights will keep your body burning calories up to 36 hours after you're done with your workout, and cardio will only burn up until you stop your workout. I prefer weights, but am seeking to find the best path. Thanks!
Mike

flyingfur74

I am not much help but I would say do both. Strength training and cardio each have their own benefits.

malibu927

Calorie deficit for weight loss. Cardio for heart and lung health, though it can help with the deficit. Weights for strengthening and maintaining muscle mass.

kshama2001

Another vote for both. (But do ease into it so you don't hurt yourself.)

chelso0o

Do what you like best for now. Any activity is good activity, and when you're just starting out with an exercise regimen you don't have to go all-out. Try out different things- spinning, yoga, elliptical, racquetball, cycling, jumping rope, basketball, running, rollerblading, etc. The world is your oyster and exercise should be fun!

The point I'm trying to make is that exercise shouldn't be a means to an end or "so I can lose X amount of weight" sort of thing-- it should be something you do for life because you enjoy it.

victoria_1024

I'd say both too but if you really hate one or the other just start with the one you like. You can always add in other things later.

JenniferLynWhatx

malibu927 wrote: »

Calorie deficit for weight loss. Cardio for heart and lung health, though it can help with the deficit. Weights for strengthening and maintaining muscle mass.

I agree ^^

Azdak

watkins1980 wrote: »

I have about 150 lbs to lose to reach my goal. I am confused as to which is better, weights via strength training, or cardio? I read doing weights will keep your body burning calories up to 36 hours after you're done with your workout, and cardio will only burn up until you stop your workout. I prefer weights, but am seeking to find the best path. Thanks!
Mike

The "afterburn" claims for weight training are highly overstated -- it doesn't make a difference if you are "burning more calories for 36 hours" if that extra burn is only 2-3 calories per minute.

That being said, it is possible to lose weight doing primarily resistance training combined with a calorie deficit. There is no "best" way--the "best" way is the one that you are most likely to consistently follow. Choosing an exercise modality because someone says it's "the best" is usually a fool's errand. The commitment needs to be internal not external.

emmycantbemeeko

Uh, "2-3 calories per minute" for 36 hours would be 4,320-6,480 calories. That would make a HUGE difference for most people.

(I don't think it actually DOES that, mind you.)

becbo22

malibu927 wrote: »

Calorie deficit for weight loss. Cardio for heart and lung health, though it can help with the deficit. Weights for strengthening and maintaining muscle mass.

THIS

AnvilHead

malibu927 wrote: »

Calorie deficit for weight loss. Cardio for heart and lung health, though it can help with the deficit. Weights for strengthening and maintaining muscle mass.

^ Exactly this. As Azdak said, EPOC is highly overstated and worrying about it is majoring in the minors. Do whatever exercise you like best and will stick to.

lorrpb

Cardio AND weights or other resistance training, AND calorie deficit. That's all I've needed. Lost 130 so far, 21 to go.

codsterlaing95

Calorie deficit and weight lifting. Cardio is optional.

CoffeeNCardio

I prefer cardio to weight lifting, in fact I've found I really don't enjoy strength training at all. But I suffer through it because I don't just want to be thin, I want to be toned in all the right places and it's worth it to achieve that. So just my personal perspective. I actually enjoy cardio.