1 Minute of All-Out Exercise May Have Benefits of 45 Minutes of Moderate Exertion

13»

Replies

  • nicolemarie999
    nicolemarie999 Posts: 91 Member
    edited April 2016
    stealthq wrote: »
    jimmmer wrote: »
    jimmmer wrote: »
    jofjltncb6 wrote: »
    jimmmer wrote: »
    I'm personally of the opinion that taking untrained people and making them do maximum effort with movements they are unskilled with is a recipe for disaster.

    I'd build a beginner up with a strength, cardio and skill base and then, later, layer on more power/explosive/hard interval type work.

    Getting someone who moves badly to start with to move badly, but much quicker is an approach I'm not a fan of. Leave highly ballistic stuff for more intermediate trainees...

    No worries.

    I'm sure they signed a waiver.

    Sure.

    But it's the out of shape person who throws themselves into Insanity. Or doing tabata. Or sprinting.

    And they have no base. No strength. No c-v capacity. No movement skills. Ouch.

    It's the whole this vs that nonsense that you see here and on the internet generally. What's best is what's going to produce the desired training effect and keep the trainee injury-free so they can keep training regularly and for longer. More productive sessions a week is better than one all-out effort and then 3-4 days of doing nothing because everything hurts, the old ankle is flaring up, etc.

    Common sense isn't sexy though. People want results. And they want them now dammit!

    But that's just the point, these researchers are tyring to determine if you may BE able to have the results in 30 mins a week instead of 135 mins a week. For me, a full time working mom of young children, I no longer have an hour or two a day to workout, I may only have 20-30 mins on a good day. If I can get the same fitness and health benefits in WAAAY less time working out wouldn't that be a great thing? It's certainly something that a lot of time strapped people could benefit from knowing.

    If someone had said to me in school, hey I have a method you could follow that would allow you to study 75% less and end up with basically the same grade, wouldn't that be a great thing??

    FYI - I'm not saying you don't need endurance work in a well rounded program or for athletic performance or that more research isn't needed

    FYI - Sorry for typos, on my phone, while walking the baby.......

    Sure.

    There's lots of ways to skin the cat.

    And yes, they did cycle. How many beginners will read beyond that headline and implement a non impact version, too?

    Let's not all forget that tabata did his intervals on bikes. How has that been transmuted/butchered by mainstream fitness?

    Basically people would do better exercising according to their fitness level, is all I'm saying. Then you use the tools and time you have available to you within that bound and start to make progress by slowly expanding that boundary.

    Best way to lose fat is to get a handle on your diet anyway, so it's basically a null point....

    We tend to forget on this site, but there are people who exercise solely for the health benefits and not to lose weight. Some are already well within healthy weight parameters when they begin.

    And before you say it, yes, I'm sure they're a minority.

    And I do absolutely agree with your point that beginners will look at the headline and do something completely different and possibly dangerous thinking they're doing the right thing.

    Totally agree. It's not always about calorie burn. So if you only have only a little time to work out, might as well get the most bang for your buck.

    Also an FYI, the endurance group and the sprint group in this study both had the exact same changes in body composition. So for all the extra time the endurance group put in they didn't end up with any more benfit in terms of fat loss ( no diet changes were made to either group and neither group was trying to lose weight).


  • robertw486
    robertw486 Posts: 2,344 Member
    Interesting, but they are comparing a 400%+ lift in output, so really not all that surprising. It sounds like they are simply allowing enough off pace time to replenish some, then hitting it hard again. For people out of shape 500W is probably fairly tough. I wish they would have stated where they were in relation to VO2Max or other stated metrics. It looks like their VO2Max was decent to state with, but then again they were fairly young.


    Wish I had a good Velotron or something to play with. I'd like to know that an "average Joe" like me could output for 20 seconds at a time. Not to mention that a good biking ergometer is something you can really push like crazy on with little or no risk of getting messed up.


    As for calorie burn/fat loss... once again over a 400% lift. Calories per minute would be proportional to power increases, then when you factor for the warm up and cool down, the calorie burns could equal out. But the reality is that anyone that trains some is going to burn a lot more calories with sustained workouts, just not as many on a per minute basis.