Running vs HIIT Training

SarahStarr86

Hey everyone! I have been doing Insanity Max 30 for over a year now and I absolutely love it. However, my sister has just taken up running and she looks amazing! She's toned and just looks flat out awesome and what's shocking is that she only runs 3-4 days a week. I, on the other hand, work my butt off to near death (lol) 6 days a week doing IM30. I started doing some research and I read that the benefit of HIIT over running is that you'll get an afterburn effect that will cause you to burn more calories even when you're not exercising. I would love to only workout for 4 days a week vs the 6 days that I've been doing but I'm afraid that it'll be subpar to current routine. Does anyone have any advise or knowledge about running for weight loss and if it's just as effective as HIIT training. After I've gotten closer to goal (still have 35 lbs left to lose) I was thinking I could restart IM30 then to tone because the jumping, lunges, and squats are just terrible on my knees at this weight. Any help would be awesome! Thanks everyone

TimothyFish

I've heard that running is better for weight loss than what HIIT is. HIIT is better for improving certain elements of athletic performance. It may be a case where a person who is overweight will reach the point of exhaustion quickly in a HIIT session and so won't burn as many calories as they would just going for a run. However, if a person is a runner, doing HIIT sessions can improve their athletic performance so that when they run they will run more efficiently. As for running not giving you an afterburn effect, I don't think that is true.

ladyreva78

Honestly, the best exercise is the one you can do consistently. If you enjoy IM30, then do that, maybe incorporate a few extra breaks for your knees or modify exercises that you know are currently hard on them. If you think you'll enjoy running, then by all means, go running.

The most important aspect of losing weight and looking 'toned' is managing your calorie budget appropriately while at the same time providing your body with sufficient fuel for what you're asking it to do.

pinksparklefairy

I see the running group at the gym sometimes. It always strikes me how slim they all are. The people in spinning, kickboxing, circuit and aqua aerobics classes do not have the same body shape (instructors included).

So if you want to be slimmer, maybe a switch to running is worth a try.

Joanna2012B

Running is wonderful for weight loss. However, for myself cross training is equally important. I cross train with Spin, HIIT and weight training. Agree with @ladyreva78 the best exercise is the one that you will keep doing. Find what you love!

rybo

Exercise of any sort is limited in its effectiveness for weight loss because the controlling factor is how much you eat. With the proper diet and eating habits you can lose weight regardless of how you choose to exercise. There is no "best", find what you like, but don't be afraid to try new things too.

trigden1991

The "afterburn" from HIIT is grossly overstated. Ultimately your fat loss will come down to calorie balance (CICO) so how you create that is up to you. If you are experincing knee pain from exercises and running then walking is great.

Walking is the only form of cardio that I do and I know a few other people on here rack up the miles walking.

SarahStarr86

Wow! Thank you everyone for all of your suggestions! Everyone was such a big help

Azdak

There is no "best" way to exercise, but different modalities have their pluses and minuses.

It's also important that when people talk about calorie burn, they make the distinction between "rate" of burn (kcal/min) and total calories burned for the workout. A higher-intensity workout may burn more calories per minute, but often cannot be sustained for an extended period. So, at times a more moderate intensity workout that can be sustained for a longer period of time can generate a much higher total calorie burn for the workout. Again, that is not to say one is "good" or "bad"--they are different tools that should be used for different purposes.

When gauging intensity of an activity, there are two important factors--one is workload intensity. That means how much oxygen is consumed (and thus calories burned) per minute? Another is perceived exertion--how hard does one "feel" they are working--breathing, fatigue, etc.

One reason why running helps with weight loss is that, compared to most other exercise modalities, running is a relatively high-intensity activity with a relatively lower rate of perceived exertion. In other words, if one chooses workout intensity based on perceived exertion, one will often burn more calories running because one will work at a higher intensity compared to, say, cycling or swimming. Even running at a 12 minute mile, I suspect many people are burning 15-20% more calories than they would with another exercise modality. And, if you are doing a continuous run, the rate of calorie burn is much more consistent throughout the workout, so you are likely burning more calories overall.

In many classes, even HIIT based ones, intensity is limited by one's ability and localized muscle fatigue. So while it may feel really hard, the intensity (oxygen uptake) is lower than expected. (Example: studies have shown that continuous kettlebell swings--e.g. 12 min--elicit a HR response of 82%-89% of maximum, yet avg oxygen uptake is only 62%-65% of max. An equivalent heart rate during running would reflect an oxygen uptake of around 70%-75% of max). In addition, the intensity of a class will also be greatly affected by the class structure/choreography, etc.

Again, none of this is meant to denigrate any form of exercise or promote running. It is a response to the OP's question about why it seemed like her relative saw such improvement when starting up a running program. For disussion purposes, there are some physiological reasons (as described) why running can be effective for weight loss.

It must also be pointed out that runners can get into the same rut as other exercisers and thus lessen the benefits of the workout, so it is NOT a given that runners will do better than others.

I have found that people who show the greatest improvement are those who have gotten a bit stale with their workouts and switch to something more challenging--either because the activity itself is more challenging or because it motivates them to push themselves harder. I have seen plenty of runners who have "jump started" both their routines and their calorie burn by switching from steady-state running to HIIT classes and vice versa.

SarahStarr86

Azdak wrote: »

There is no "best" way to exercise, but different modalities have their pluses and minuses.

It's also important that when people talk about calorie burn, they make the distinction between "rate" of burn (kcal/min) and total calories burned for the workout. A higher-intensity workout may burn more calories per minute, but often cannot be sustained for an extended period. So, at times a more moderate intensity workout that can be sustained for a longer period of time can generate a much higher total calorie burn for the workout. Again, that is not to say one is "good" or "bad"--they are different tools that should be used for different purposes.

When gauging intensity of an activity, there are two important factors--one is workload intensity. That means how much oxygen is consumed (and thus calories burned) per minute? Another is perceived exertion--how hard does one "feel" they are working--breathing, fatigue, etc.

One reason why running helps with weight loss is that, compared to most other exercise modalities, running is a relatively high-intensity activity with a relatively lower rate of perceived exertion. In other words, if one chooses workout intensity based on perceived exertion, one will often burn more calories running because one will work at a higher intensity compared to, say, cycling or swimming. Even running at a 12 minute mile, I suspect many people are burning 15-20% more calories than they would with another exercise modality. And, if you are doing a continuous run, the rate of calorie burn is much more consistent throughout the workout, so you are likely burning more calories overall.

In many classes, even HIIT based ones, intensity is limited by one's ability and localized muscle fatigue. So while it may feel really hard, the intensity (oxygen uptake) is lower than expected. (Example: studies have shown that continuous kettlebell swings--e.g. 12 min--elicit a HR response of 82%-89% of maximum, yet avg oxygen uptake is only 62%-65% of max. An equivalent heart rate during running would reflect an oxygen uptake of around 70%-75% of max). In addition, the intensity of a class will also be greatly affected by the class structure/choreography, etc.

Again, none of this is meant to denigrate any form of exercise or promote running. It is a response to the OP's question about why it seemed like her relative saw such improvement when starting up a running program. For disussion purposes, there are some physiological reasons (as described) why running can be effective for weight loss.

It must also be pointed out that runners can get into the same rut as other exercisers and thus lessen the benefits of the workout, so it is NOT a given that runners will do better than others.

I have found that people who show the greatest improvement are those who have gotten a bit stale with their workouts and switch to something more challenging--either because the activity itself is more challenging or because it motivates them to push themselves harder. I have seen plenty of runners who have "jump started" both their routines and their calorie burn by switching from steady-state running to HIIT classes and vice versa.

Such great and useful information! You hit everything right on the head.

TimothyFish

To reiterate what was said about calories in/calories out: My preferred exercise is cycling. Burning over 1,000 calories at a time isn't uncommon and there are days that I get back home and Garmin is telling me that I burned 3,000 calories. But even with that, you don't have to look far to find guys riding around with belly fat stretching their Lycra to its breaking point. It doesn't matter how many calories you burn if you keep replacing them with what you eat.

TavistockToad

as others have said, i'd hazard a guess that its 99.99999% to do with what people are eating as opposed to their exercise of choice.

Running_and_Coffee

I am a runner and I started doing Orangetheory 2x a week a few years ago--it has been amazing for my speed, ability to push myself to go faster and further, and my arms and abs look better, too. And knock on wood--not a single knee, foot, shin etc injury since I started.

That being said, I love running...it's my therapy and a part of who I am. It's not just exercise to me. It's a chance to be better than I was the day before, and the only quiet/introspection time I seem to find with 3 kids and a busy job!!

I would agree that "it's all good" in terms of weight loss, though. running and OTF both have had physical benefits (I look so much leaner than I did at the same weight 10 years ago when I wasn't as active)...but for me, it's what I eat that matters the most on the scale.

Shanel0916

As stated previously CICO is most important for weight loss, if you are wanting to look more "toned" or as I would say muscular then distance running would not be a great option, in my opinion and past experience. HIIT would be best, running for long periods of time may leave you looking flat and flabby, everyone's body is different though maybe that's why your sister looks great. Why not incorporate a couple days of HIIT with Insanity Max 30?