Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
What are your unpopular opinions about health / fitness?
Options
Replies
-
amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »
I'll stick with my strong heart and plentiful food from weightlifting and HIIT. More bang for the buck.
Not in my experience. Can't sustain HIIT long enough to burn any meaningful amount of calories, and whatever I burn I eat back twofold or more because it increases my hunger substantially. Now don't get me wrong, no one has to do cardio (or weight lifting, or HIIT for that matter), but you can't call any form of exercise a waste of time because there are clear benefits to being active, health and otherwise.
Yes, sitting on your *kitten* is a much greater waste of time.
Since I don't like exercising in general, I'm going to spend the least amount of time possible to get the greatest benefit which means high intensity. I just want to get it over with so I can get back to thing I enjoy.
And that's totally alright! It's just, this sounds more like preference than opinion.
Nah, I still am not a fan of cardio(but it's better than nothing). I believe there are much greater benefits from high intensity exercise.
How do you know you don't burn as much calories doing HIIT? I believe that much shorter, high intensity exercise may not burn as much at the time, but the residual calorie burn from greater muscle stimulation lasts much longer resulting in more CO.
EPOC (Excess Post Exercise Oxygen Consunption) for HIIT is 14%, for Low Impact Steady State it's 7%. That's the % of residual burn of calories burned during. FWIW. HIIT can't be done for very long so the overall burn is not that big. If you could do 30 minutes of HIIT, your Butner with EPOCH would be about the same as 60 minutes of LISS but who can do 30 minutes of HIIT??
This would depend on the intensity of the HIIT. And as @GottaBurnEmAll stated not all "HIIT" is equal. To me, HIIT means the intervals are 100% all out.
That is the HIIT I'm talking about and in exercise physiology circle based on studies, that is the commonly accepted number. This was discussed in detail on the Lyle McDonald article sjomial linked to. It is also the number Dr. Brad Shoenfeld uses. It pretty objective and not really the subject of much speculation as to variance.
Less that 100% all out would not technically be HIIT but would be considered interval training. The EPOC would fall somewhere between LISS and HIIT depending on intensity. All HIIT is not equal because the Marketing woo machines call everything HIIT today. Things like 1 hours HIIT classes. If you can do it for 1 hour, it ain't HIIT!!
PS: The link sjomial gave is the 2nd in a series of in depth article about the subject and references a lot of the current research. If that is the link you are kind of dismissive of in one of your posts above, I suggest you didn't read it thoroughly. There are links to both the initial article in the series and the following ones at the bottom of the one posted.
I did read it, but I'll look at the references too. My main leaning to HIIT over cardio is that it is closer to weightlifting in it's muscle building potential... if I am not mistaken. However, I pretty much just lift and try to stay away from all that gross running stuff...
It's been said here already but...HIIT is cardio.0 -
Jancandoit7 wrote: »I hate this idea, and the encouragement I've seen so often stated on MFP... "so long as it fits into your daily calories you can eat anything you want." If one is willing to stick to a weight loss plan, why would they want to eat lots of empty calorie garbage foods? I don't think this should be encouraged- it's counterproductive to getting truly healthy. Shouldn't the goal be to get healthy and not just to become thin? This really bugs me....
This? Again? I know it's a long old 157 page thread but for the love of everything that's holy read at least some of it. I think we've flogged this horse so many times it's just a pile of mush.25 -
Jancandoit7 wrote: »I hate this idea, and the encouragement I've seen so often stated on MFP... "so long as it fits into your daily calories you can eat anything you want." If one is willing to stick to a weight loss plan, why would they want to eat lots of empty calorie garbage foods? I don't think this should be encouraged- it's counterproductive to getting truly healthy. Shouldn't the goal be to get healthy and not just to become thin? This really bugs me....
Why does "eat what you want" automatically equate to eating "lots of empty calorie garbage foods"?18 -
VintageFeline wrote: »
I always get a laugh out of it when people say something like they jogged to the park, did their 30-minute HIIT workout, then jogged back home. If what you did was actually HIIT, you wouldn't have been jogging back home afterward.I would rather walk for 2 hours than HIIT for 30 minutes.
IF, you could do HIIT for 30 minutes. Most can't, including me, and it's really recommended one doesn't. A typical program is 5 minute warm up, 5 intervals covering about 15 minutes, 5 minute cool down. If I did HIIT for 30 minutes, I'm sure I would be dead.
Shoot, 4 minutes of legit HIIT is enough to make your heart and lungs explode. 30 minutes of "HIIT" is a joke...
So here is a question...wouldn't the High part of this training be defined by the individual ability of the person doing it and your version of High intensity might differ from other peoples?
Similar to "lifting heavy"...my heavy might not be heavy to you or might be too heavy...
According to this https://www.acsm.org/docs/brochures/high-intensity-interval-training.pdf HIIT can last from anywhere from 20-60 mins...
Intensity will of course be different per an individual's fitness level. But the premise remains, it should be intense FOR YOU. Athlete or beginner, you should be spent within 15 minutes.
I used to run stairs for about 30 min. on my lunch at work. I would consider this HIIT. 100% effort took 45sec. to get to the top and a 90 sec walk down. By the end of the 30 min. My 45 sec. Interval was nowhere near the top and I was practically crawling but I was still pushing 100% and breathing way harder than when I started. I felt like the mom going up the stairs in What's Eating Gilbert Grape.
Agreed. Longer rest periods will make for a longer HIIT workout...
What is a typical ratio? I was under the impression that a 1:2 ratio @ 100%:60% was standard. Ex. 1min @ 100% followed by 2 min @ 60%. That sort of mirrors my lifting. Each set takes roughly 1 min and I rest 2 min between sets. I monitor my heartrate which drops to about 60% between sets.0 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »
I'll stick with my strong heart and plentiful food from weightlifting and HIIT. More bang for the buck.
Not in my experience. Can't sustain HIIT long enough to burn any meaningful amount of calories, and whatever I burn I eat back twofold or more because it increases my hunger substantially. Now don't get me wrong, no one has to do cardio (or weight lifting, or HIIT for that matter), but you can't call any form of exercise a waste of time because there are clear benefits to being active, health and otherwise.
Yes, sitting on your *kitten* is a much greater waste of time.
Since I don't like exercising in general, I'm going to spend the least amount of time possible to get the greatest benefit which means high intensity. I just want to get it over with so I can get back to thing I enjoy.
And that's totally alright! It's just, this sounds more like preference than opinion.
Nah, I still am not a fan of cardio(but it's better than nothing). I believe there are much greater benefits from high intensity exercise.
How do you know you don't burn as much calories doing HIIT? I believe that much shorter, high intensity exercise may not burn as much at the time, but the residual calorie burn from greater muscle stimulation lasts much longer resulting in more CO.
EPOC (Excess Post Exercise Oxygen Consunption) for HIIT is 14%, for Low Impact Steady State it's 7%. That's the % of residual burn of calories burned during. FWIW. HIIT can't be done for very long so the overall burn is not that big. If you could do 30 minutes of HIIT, your Butner with EPOCH would be about the same as 60 minutes of LISS but who can do 30 minutes of HIIT??
This would depend on the intensity of the HIIT. And as @GottaBurnEmAll stated not all "HIIT" is equal. To me, HIIT means the intervals are 100% all out.
That is the HIIT I'm talking about and in exercise physiology circle based on studies, that is the commonly accepted number. This was discussed in detail on the Lyle McDonald article sjomial linked to. It is also the number Dr. Brad Shoenfeld uses. It pretty objective and not really the subject of much speculation as to variance.
Less that 100% all out would not technically be HIIT but would be considered interval training. The EPOC would fall somewhere between LISS and HIIT depending on intensity. All HIIT is not equal because the Marketing woo machines call everything HIIT today. Things like 1 hours HIIT classes. If you can do it for 1 hour, it ain't HIIT!!
PS: The link sjomial gave is the 2nd in a series of in depth article about the subject and references a lot of the current research. If that is the link you are kind of dismissive of in one of your posts above, I suggest you didn't read it thoroughly. There are links to both the initial article in the series and the following ones at the bottom of the one posted.
I did read it, but I'll look at the references too. My main leaning to HIIT over cardio is that it is closer to weightlifting in it's muscle building potential... if I am not mistaken. However, I pretty much just lift and try to stay away from all that gross running stuff...
It's been said here already but...HIIT is cardio.
Then so is weightlifting....
Should I say ""aerobic exercise " to be specific?3 -
I have done tabata HIIT intervals. 20 seconds max effort followed by 10 seconds rest (that's 1 round) for 8 rounds (4 minutes). I've also done 1 minute max effort followed by as much as 3 minutes easy pace (that's one rounds) for 10 rounds... (40 min).1
-
Carlos_421 wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »
I'll stick with my strong heart and plentiful food from weightlifting and HIIT. More bang for the buck.
Not in my experience. Can't sustain HIIT long enough to burn any meaningful amount of calories, and whatever I burn I eat back twofold or more because it increases my hunger substantially. Now don't get me wrong, no one has to do cardio (or weight lifting, or HIIT for that matter), but you can't call any form of exercise a waste of time because there are clear benefits to being active, health and otherwise.
Yes, sitting on your *kitten* is a much greater waste of time.
Since I don't like exercising in general, I'm going to spend the least amount of time possible to get the greatest benefit which means high intensity. I just want to get it over with so I can get back to thing I enjoy.
And that's totally alright! It's just, this sounds more like preference than opinion.
Nah, I still am not a fan of cardio(but it's better than nothing). I believe there are much greater benefits from high intensity exercise.
How do you know you don't burn as much calories doing HIIT? I believe that much shorter, high intensity exercise may not burn as much at the time, but the residual calorie burn from greater muscle stimulation lasts much longer resulting in more CO.
EPOC (Excess Post Exercise Oxygen Consunption) for HIIT is 14%, for Low Impact Steady State it's 7%. That's the % of residual burn of calories burned during. FWIW. HIIT can't be done for very long so the overall burn is not that big. If you could do 30 minutes of HIIT, your Butner with EPOCH would be about the same as 60 minutes of LISS but who can do 30 minutes of HIIT??
This would depend on the intensity of the HIIT. And as @GottaBurnEmAll stated not all "HIIT" is equal. To me, HIIT means the intervals are 100% all out.
That is the HIIT I'm talking about and in exercise physiology circle based on studies, that is the commonly accepted number. This was discussed in detail on the Lyle McDonald article sjomial linked to. It is also the number Dr. Brad Shoenfeld uses. It pretty objective and not really the subject of much speculation as to variance.
Less that 100% all out would not technically be HIIT but would be considered interval training. The EPOC would fall somewhere between LISS and HIIT depending on intensity. All HIIT is not equal because the Marketing woo machines call everything HIIT today. Things like 1 hours HIIT classes. If you can do it for 1 hour, it ain't HIIT!!
PS: The link sjomial gave is the 2nd in a series of in depth article about the subject and references a lot of the current research. If that is the link you are kind of dismissive of in one of your posts above, I suggest you didn't read it thoroughly. There are links to both the initial article in the series and the following ones at the bottom of the one posted.
I did read it, but I'll look at the references too. My main leaning to HIIT over cardio is that it is closer to weightlifting in it's muscle building potential... if I am not mistaken. However, I pretty much just lift and try to stay away from all that gross running stuff...
It's been said here already but...HIIT is cardio.
Then so is weightlifting....
Weight lifting IMO can absolutely train the cardiovascular system if done properly with minimal rest. Just depends what you're training for...2 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »
I'll stick with my strong heart and plentiful food from weightlifting and HIIT. More bang for the buck.
Not in my experience. Can't sustain HIIT long enough to burn any meaningful amount of calories, and whatever I burn I eat back twofold or more because it increases my hunger substantially. Now don't get me wrong, no one has to do cardio (or weight lifting, or HIIT for that matter), but you can't call any form of exercise a waste of time because there are clear benefits to being active, health and otherwise.
Yes, sitting on your *kitten* is a much greater waste of time.
Since I don't like exercising in general, I'm going to spend the least amount of time possible to get the greatest benefit which means high intensity. I just want to get it over with so I can get back to thing I enjoy.
And that's totally alright! It's just, this sounds more like preference than opinion.
Nah, I still am not a fan of cardio(but it's better than nothing). I believe there are much greater benefits from high intensity exercise.
How do you know you don't burn as much calories doing HIIT? I believe that much shorter, high intensity exercise may not burn as much at the time, but the residual calorie burn from greater muscle stimulation lasts much longer resulting in more CO.
EPOC (Excess Post Exercise Oxygen Consunption) for HIIT is 14%, for Low Impact Steady State it's 7%. That's the % of residual burn of calories burned during. FWIW. HIIT can't be done for very long so the overall burn is not that big. If you could do 30 minutes of HIIT, your Butner with EPOCH would be about the same as 60 minutes of LISS but who can do 30 minutes of HIIT??
This would depend on the intensity of the HIIT. And as @GottaBurnEmAll stated not all "HIIT" is equal. To me, HIIT means the intervals are 100% all out.
That is the HIIT I'm talking about and in exercise physiology circle based on studies, that is the commonly accepted number. This was discussed in detail on the Lyle McDonald article sjomial linked to. It is also the number Dr. Brad Shoenfeld uses. It pretty objective and not really the subject of much speculation as to variance.
Less that 100% all out would not technically be HIIT but would be considered interval training. The EPOC would fall somewhere between LISS and HIIT depending on intensity. All HIIT is not equal because the Marketing woo machines call everything HIIT today. Things like 1 hours HIIT classes. If you can do it for 1 hour, it ain't HIIT!!
PS: The link sjomial gave is the 2nd in a series of in depth article about the subject and references a lot of the current research. If that is the link you are kind of dismissive of in one of your posts above, I suggest you didn't read it thoroughly. There are links to both the initial article in the series and the following ones at the bottom of the one posted.
I did read it, but I'll look at the references too. My main leaning to HIIT over cardio is that it is closer to weightlifting in it's muscle building potential... if I am not mistaken. However, I pretty much just lift and try to stay away from all that gross running stuff...
It's been said here already but...HIIT is cardio.
Then so is weightlifting....
Should I say ""aerobic exercise " to be specific?
I would say, "I choose HIIT over steady state cardio for conditioning..."4 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »
I'll stick with my strong heart and plentiful food from weightlifting and HIIT. More bang for the buck.
Not in my experience. Can't sustain HIIT long enough to burn any meaningful amount of calories, and whatever I burn I eat back twofold or more because it increases my hunger substantially. Now don't get me wrong, no one has to do cardio (or weight lifting, or HIIT for that matter), but you can't call any form of exercise a waste of time because there are clear benefits to being active, health and otherwise.
Yes, sitting on your *kitten* is a much greater waste of time.
Since I don't like exercising in general, I'm going to spend the least amount of time possible to get the greatest benefit which means high intensity. I just want to get it over with so I can get back to thing I enjoy.
And that's totally alright! It's just, this sounds more like preference than opinion.
Nah, I still am not a fan of cardio(but it's better than nothing). I believe there are much greater benefits from high intensity exercise.
How do you know you don't burn as much calories doing HIIT? I believe that much shorter, high intensity exercise may not burn as much at the time, but the residual calorie burn from greater muscle stimulation lasts much longer resulting in more CO.
EPOC (Excess Post Exercise Oxygen Consunption) for HIIT is 14%, for Low Impact Steady State it's 7%. That's the % of residual burn of calories burned during. FWIW. HIIT can't be done for very long so the overall burn is not that big. If you could do 30 minutes of HIIT, your Butner with EPOCH would be about the same as 60 minutes of LISS but who can do 30 minutes of HIIT??
This would depend on the intensity of the HIIT. And as @GottaBurnEmAll stated not all "HIIT" is equal. To me, HIIT means the intervals are 100% all out.
That is the HIIT I'm talking about and in exercise physiology circle based on studies, that is the commonly accepted number. This was discussed in detail on the Lyle McDonald article sjomial linked to. It is also the number Dr. Brad Shoenfeld uses. It pretty objective and not really the subject of much speculation as to variance.
Less that 100% all out would not technically be HIIT but would be considered interval training. The EPOC would fall somewhere between LISS and HIIT depending on intensity. All HIIT is not equal because the Marketing woo machines call everything HIIT today. Things like 1 hours HIIT classes. If you can do it for 1 hour, it ain't HIIT!!
PS: The link sjomial gave is the 2nd in a series of in depth article about the subject and references a lot of the current research. If that is the link you are kind of dismissive of in one of your posts above, I suggest you didn't read it thoroughly. There are links to both the initial article in the series and the following ones at the bottom of the one posted.
I did read it, but I'll look at the references too. My main leaning to HIIT over cardio is that it is closer to weightlifting in it's muscle building potential... if I am not mistaken. However, I pretty much just lift and try to stay away from all that gross running stuff...
It's been said here already but...HIIT is cardio.
Then so is weightlifting....
Should I say ""aerobic exercise " to be specific?
In general, the cardiovascular benefits of weightlifting are secondary to muscle/strength building (there can be exceptions depending on the program).
The same can't be said for HIIT.
In general, the muscle/strength benefits of HIIT are secondary to the cardiovascular benefits.3 -
Jancandoit7 wrote: »I hate this idea, and the encouragement I've seen so often stated on MFP... "so long as it fits into your daily calories you can eat anything you want." If one is willing to stick to a weight loss plan, why would they want to eat lots of empty calorie garbage foods? I don't think this should be encouraged- it's counterproductive to getting truly healthy. Shouldn't the goal be to get healthy and not just to become thin? This really bugs me....
1. This has been discussed repeatedly in this thread, and many others.
2. Why is there an assumption that "eat anything you want" means only eating empty calorie garbage food? I want to eat a varied diet of lots of things - last night that was stir fry with chicken, snap peas and brown rice in a soy ginger orange sauce. But I also ate a burger with avocado and pepper jack cheese for lunch, and for breakfast - nutella stuffed pancakes for my son's birthday. If I asked, "can I still eat pancakes with nutella and lose weight" and people said "yes, you can eat anything you want and if it fits in your calories you will still lose weight" why would you assume that I wanted to eat nothing but pancakes with nutella? For the record, I wasn't within my calories for the day yesterday, but I had been banking them all week, and so I'm at maintenance for the week which is right where I needed to be...
3. Please point to a thread where someone asks that question and the general consensus is NOT that calories are what matter for weight loss but satiety and nutrition are extremely important for overall health and success. If you've seen it stated so often on MFP, it shouldn't be hard to find a few examples.
What really bugs me is when people either ignore the larger context of the advice given, or they willfully misinterpret it to create a strawman argument like you've proposed here.21 -
Jancandoit7 wrote: »I hate this idea, and the encouragement I've seen so often stated on MFP... "so long as it fits into your daily calories you can eat anything you want." If one is willing to stick to a weight loss plan, why would they want to eat lots of empty calorie garbage foods? I don't think this should be encouraged- it's counterproductive to getting truly healthy. Shouldn't the goal be to get healthy and not just to become thin? This really bugs me....
Why does "eat what you want" automatically equate to eating "lots of empty calorie garbage foods"?
Projection.17 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »
I'll stick with my strong heart and plentiful food from weightlifting and HIIT. More bang for the buck.
Not in my experience. Can't sustain HIIT long enough to burn any meaningful amount of calories, and whatever I burn I eat back twofold or more because it increases my hunger substantially. Now don't get me wrong, no one has to do cardio (or weight lifting, or HIIT for that matter), but you can't call any form of exercise a waste of time because there are clear benefits to being active, health and otherwise.
Yes, sitting on your *kitten* is a much greater waste of time.
Since I don't like exercising in general, I'm going to spend the least amount of time possible to get the greatest benefit which means high intensity. I just want to get it over with so I can get back to thing I enjoy.
And that's totally alright! It's just, this sounds more like preference than opinion.
Nah, I still am not a fan of cardio(but it's better than nothing). I believe there are much greater benefits from high intensity exercise.
How do you know you don't burn as much calories doing HIIT? I believe that much shorter, high intensity exercise may not burn as much at the time, but the residual calorie burn from greater muscle stimulation lasts much longer resulting in more CO.
EPOC (Excess Post Exercise Oxygen Consunption) for HIIT is 14%, for Low Impact Steady State it's 7%. That's the % of residual burn of calories burned during. FWIW. HIIT can't be done for very long so the overall burn is not that big. If you could do 30 minutes of HIIT, your Butner with EPOCH would be about the same as 60 minutes of LISS but who can do 30 minutes of HIIT??
This would depend on the intensity of the HIIT. And as @GottaBurnEmAll stated not all "HIIT" is equal. To me, HIIT means the intervals are 100% all out.
That is the HIIT I'm talking about and in exercise physiology circle based on studies, that is the commonly accepted number. This was discussed in detail on the Lyle McDonald article sjomial linked to. It is also the number Dr. Brad Shoenfeld uses. It pretty objective and not really the subject of much speculation as to variance.
Less that 100% all out would not technically be HIIT but would be considered interval training. The EPOC would fall somewhere between LISS and HIIT depending on intensity. All HIIT is not equal because the Marketing woo machines call everything HIIT today. Things like 1 hours HIIT classes. If you can do it for 1 hour, it ain't HIIT!!
PS: The link sjomial gave is the 2nd in a series of in depth article about the subject and references a lot of the current research. If that is the link you are kind of dismissive of in one of your posts above, I suggest you didn't read it thoroughly. There are links to both the initial article in the series and the following ones at the bottom of the one posted.
I did read it, but I'll look at the references too. My main leaning to HIIT over cardio is that it is closer to weightlifting in it's muscle building potential... if I am not mistaken. However, I pretty much just lift and try to stay away from all that gross running stuff...
The studies that showed muscle building improvements were done with untrained subjects. In someone like you are me doing weight training that has not been demonstrated. In a trained individual, the benefit is primarily increase in VO2 max. HIIT in trained subjects provides cardio benefit.
If you read the series of articles, he covers all of this.3 -
Bry_Lander wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »vegaslounge wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »@vegaslounge I must admit, I would be annoyed if a coworker constantly brought in treats while i was trying my best to lose weight. My willpower is only so strong before i cave, i don't need added temptation placed in front of me at my place of work.
I do not, under any circumstances, dismiss this. Hell, it's taken years of conscious effort on my part to build up willpower in regards to foods I like. But, IMO, the onus is not on the treat-bearer for you to resist their treats. I just feel it's a weirdly self-centered view of the world that people are out to derail you by bringing in something for the office to enjoy. If it's an office of two people and you've told your sole workmate, "please don't bring in treats" and they keep doing it– yeah, that's could be a little weird. But I think in a larger setting, to quote a preeminent scientist and space explorer, "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few".
Adding a third cent, the workplace sabotage mindset is, IMO, the same as the "I've completely changed the household's diet without their input or consent because of my personal decisions, and they aren't supporting my changes! Help me tell them they're wrong!" I lived through that– Mom put us on Atkins when I was young and by week three I was literally ready to shank my best friend for her hunk of soggy cafeteria baguette. I myself became a strict vegetarian at 15 (I'm 32 now) and guess what? My parents still ate meat and cooked the way they always did, it was up to me to work out how to eat around that. None of my boyfriends have been vegetarian, few of my friends are, and aside from some joshing from my older brothers (which is what older brothers just DO), I can't say I've ever encountered any personal problems from this. Hell, I went to a BBQ last year and the only thing I could eat was a potato. I ate my potato, enjoyed the company, and the sun rose the next morning on schedule.
I guess I just don't get the idea that my weight loss/etc is anyone else's concern or responsibility but mine. The vast majority of people couldn't give a figgy pudding about what you do in your personal life, just as you probably don't know or particularly care about what they do.
Exactly. I work in an office with 45-ish staff. Lots of people bring treats in, including me, and it's simply not about me.
Can I ask why people bring in food for other people? Genuinely curious question. I've never worked at a place where people bring food in to feed their coworkers.
I can't do the potluck thing. I don't know what ingredients people are using, how fresh the food is, if it is cooked properly, or what standards of cleanliness they have at home. The lady who comes into work with cat hair all over her clothes most likely has a cat that regularly walks across kitchen surfaces shortly after rooting around in its litter box.
Come on man. That grit from the litterbox acts like a fiber supplement.12 -
WinoGelato wrote: »What really bugs me is when people either ignore the larger context of the advice given, or they willfully misinterpret it to create a strawman argument like you've proposed here.
^^^For the win...12 -
Packerjohn wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »vegaslounge wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »@vegaslounge I must admit, I would be annoyed if a coworker constantly brought in treats while i was trying my best to lose weight. My willpower is only so strong before i cave, i don't need added temptation placed in front of me at my place of work.
I do not, under any circumstances, dismiss this. Hell, it's taken years of conscious effort on my part to build up willpower in regards to foods I like. But, IMO, the onus is not on the treat-bearer for you to resist their treats. I just feel it's a weirdly self-centered view of the world that people are out to derail you by bringing in something for the office to enjoy. If it's an office of two people and you've told your sole workmate, "please don't bring in treats" and they keep doing it– yeah, that's could be a little weird. But I think in a larger setting, to quote a preeminent scientist and space explorer, "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few".
Adding a third cent, the workplace sabotage mindset is, IMO, the same as the "I've completely changed the household's diet without their input or consent because of my personal decisions, and they aren't supporting my changes! Help me tell them they're wrong!" I lived through that– Mom put us on Atkins when I was young and by week three I was literally ready to shank my best friend for her hunk of soggy cafeteria baguette. I myself became a strict vegetarian at 15 (I'm 32 now) and guess what? My parents still ate meat and cooked the way they always did, it was up to me to work out how to eat around that. None of my boyfriends have been vegetarian, few of my friends are, and aside from some joshing from my older brothers (which is what older brothers just DO), I can't say I've ever encountered any personal problems from this. Hell, I went to a BBQ last year and the only thing I could eat was a potato. I ate my potato, enjoyed the company, and the sun rose the next morning on schedule.
I guess I just don't get the idea that my weight loss/etc is anyone else's concern or responsibility but mine. The vast majority of people couldn't give a figgy pudding about what you do in your personal life, just as you probably don't know or particularly care about what they do.
Exactly. I work in an office with 45-ish staff. Lots of people bring treats in, including me, and it's simply not about me.
Can I ask why people bring in food for other people? Genuinely curious question. I've never worked at a place where people bring food in to feed their coworkers.
I can't do the potluck thing. I don't know what ingredients people are using, how fresh the food is, if it is cooked properly, or what standards of cleanliness they have at home. The lady who comes into work with cat hair all over her clothes most likely has a cat that regularly walks across kitchen surfaces shortly after rooting around in its litter box.
Come on man. That grit from the litterbox acts like a fiber supplement.
Gives me dry mouth.2 -
VintageFeline wrote: »
I always get a laugh out of it when people say something like they jogged to the park, did their 30-minute HIIT workout, then jogged back home. If what you did was actually HIIT, you wouldn't have been jogging back home afterward.I would rather walk for 2 hours than HIIT for 30 minutes.
IF, you could do HIIT for 30 minutes. Most can't, including me, and it's really recommended one doesn't. A typical program is 5 minute warm up, 5 intervals covering about 15 minutes, 5 minute cool down. If I did HIIT for 30 minutes, I'm sure I would be dead.
Shoot, 4 minutes of legit HIIT is enough to make your heart and lungs explode. 30 minutes of "HIIT" is a joke...
So here is a question...wouldn't the High part of this training be defined by the individual ability of the person doing it and your version of High intensity might differ from other peoples?
Similar to "lifting heavy"...my heavy might not be heavy to you or might be too heavy...
According to this https://www.acsm.org/docs/brochures/high-intensity-interval-training.pdf HIIT can last from anywhere from 20-60 mins...
Intensity will of course be different per an individual's fitness level. But the premise remains, it should be intense FOR YOU. Athlete or beginner, you should be spent within 15 minutes.
I used to run stairs for about 30 min. on my lunch at work. I would consider this HIIT. 100% effort took 45sec. to get to the top and a 90 sec walk down. By the end of the 30 min. My 45 sec. Interval was nowhere near the top and I was practically crawling but I was still pushing 100% and breathing way harder than when I started. I felt like the mom going up the stairs in What's Eating Gilbert Grape.
Agreed. Longer rest periods will make for a longer HIIT workout...
What is a typical ratio? I was under the impression that a 1:2 ratio @ 100%:60% was standard. Ex. 1min @ 100% followed by 2 min @ 60%. That sort of mirrors my lifting. Each set takes roughly 1 min and I rest 2 min between sets. I monitor my heartrate which drops to about 60% between sets.
I've seen it referenced both ways. Either by time or when HR returns to 50 or 60% of max IIRC.0 -
Jancandoit7 wrote: »I hate this idea, and the encouragement I've seen so often stated on MFP... "so long as it fits into your daily calories you can eat anything you want." If one is willing to stick to a weight loss plan, why would they want to eat lots of empty calorie garbage foods? I don't think this should be encouraged- it's counterproductive to getting truly healthy. Shouldn't the goal be to get healthy and not just to become thin? This really bugs me....
As noted above "eat what you want" and "eat only empty calorie garbage foods" are not the same things. Honestly, who wants to eat only garbage??
But an obese person is likely to become healthier by getting to a healthy weight eating lots of junk food than by remaining fat. Excessive fat increases risk of disease even if you are eating only nutrient rich foods.7 -
Jancandoit7 wrote: »I hate this idea, and the encouragement I've seen so often stated on MFP... "so long as it fits into your daily calories you can eat anything you want." If one is willing to stick to a weight loss plan, why would they want to eat lots of empty calorie garbage foods? I don't think this should be encouraged- it's counterproductive to getting truly healthy. Shouldn't the goal be to get healthy and not just to become thin? This really bugs me....
I'm not sure what you define as an "empty calorie garbage food" (all the foods I eat contain macronutrients, so they're not empty calories to me), but one can be healthy and still sometimes consume many foods that are currently demonized by food purists.7 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Jancandoit7 wrote: »I hate this idea, and the encouragement I've seen so often stated on MFP... "so long as it fits into your daily calories you can eat anything you want." If one is willing to stick to a weight loss plan, why would they want to eat lots of empty calorie garbage foods? I don't think this should be encouraged- it's counterproductive to getting truly healthy. Shouldn't the goal be to get healthy and not just to become thin? This really bugs me....
I'm not sure what you define as an "empty calorie garbage food" (all the foods I eat contain macronutrients, so they're not empty calories to me), but one can be healthy and still sometimes consume many foods that are currently demonized by food purists.
Purists of any kind have always annoyed me...food purists, hunting purists, coffee purists, exercise purists...8 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »
I'll stick with my strong heart and plentiful food from weightlifting and HIIT. More bang for the buck.
Not in my experience. Can't sustain HIIT long enough to burn any meaningful amount of calories, and whatever I burn I eat back twofold or more because it increases my hunger substantially. Now don't get me wrong, no one has to do cardio (or weight lifting, or HIIT for that matter), but you can't call any form of exercise a waste of time because there are clear benefits to being active, health and otherwise.
Yes, sitting on your *kitten* is a much greater waste of time.
Since I don't like exercising in general, I'm going to spend the least amount of time possible to get the greatest benefit which means high intensity. I just want to get it over with so I can get back to thing I enjoy.
And that's totally alright! It's just, this sounds more like preference than opinion.
Nah, I still am not a fan of cardio(but it's better than nothing). I believe there are much greater benefits from high intensity exercise.
How do you know you don't burn as much calories doing HIIT? I believe that much shorter, high intensity exercise may not burn as much at the time, but the residual calorie burn from greater muscle stimulation lasts much longer resulting in more CO.
EPOC (Excess Post Exercise Oxygen Consunption) for HIIT is 14%, for Low Impact Steady State it's 7%. That's the % of residual burn of calories burned during. FWIW. HIIT can't be done for very long so the overall burn is not that big. If you could do 30 minutes of HIIT, your Butner with EPOCH would be about the same as 60 minutes of LISS but who can do 30 minutes of HIIT??
This would depend on the intensity of the HIIT. And as @GottaBurnEmAll stated not all "HIIT" is equal. To me, HIIT means the intervals are 100% all out.
That is the HIIT I'm talking about and in exercise physiology circle based on studies, that is the commonly accepted number. This was discussed in detail on the Lyle McDonald article sjomial linked to. It is also the number Dr. Brad Shoenfeld uses. It pretty objective and not really the subject of much speculation as to variance.
Less that 100% all out would not technically be HIIT but would be considered interval training. The EPOC would fall somewhere between LISS and HIIT depending on intensity. All HIIT is not equal because the Marketing woo machines call everything HIIT today. Things like 1 hours HIIT classes. If you can do it for 1 hour, it ain't HIIT!!
PS: The link sjomial gave is the 2nd in a series of in depth article about the subject and references a lot of the current research. If that is the link you are kind of dismissive of in one of your posts above, I suggest you didn't read it thoroughly. There are links to both the initial article in the series and the following ones at the bottom of the one posted.
I did read it, but I'll look at the references too. My main leaning to HIIT over cardio is that it is closer to weightlifting in it's muscle building potential... if I am not mistaken. However, I pretty much just lift and try to stay away from all that gross running stuff...
The studies that showed muscle building improvements were done with untrained subjects. In someone like you are me doing weight training that has not been demonstrated. In a trained individual, the benefit is primarily increase in VO2 max. HIIT in trained subjects provides cardio benefit.
If you read the series of articles, he covers all of this.
Ah..
So, I understand how HIIT would not improve muscle building in someone who lifts. But wouldn't it build muscle in someone who typically only does cardio (steady state)?0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 914 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions