We are pleased to announce that on March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor will be introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the upcoming changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!
Short, High Intensity Debunked
carolyn000000
Posts: 179 Member
This guy goes so far as to ridicule those who do short, high intensity workouts vs long, slow in his opening paragraph. I think you need both types in an effective workout program to improve performance, especially if you are an athlete.
https://tonic.vice.com/en_us/article/new9e8/your-seven-minute-workout-sucks
0
Replies
-
Brad Schoenfeld said all I've always said on this topic:Just do whatever form of exercise you'll do most often," Shoenfeld says. "Because adherence is the most important part of any program."
Everything else is just noise. I have all the time in the world and no desire to do HIIT. LISS for lyfe!26 -
Key take away from the article:
"When the scientists matched the methods for how much energy each burned—for example, a 30-minute, slower bike ride that burned 500 calories compared to 15 minutes of bike intervals that also burned 500 calories—they discovered that participants lost equivalent amounts of fat.
"I thought that intervals may confer a slight advantage, but it wasn't terribly shocking they didn't," says Brad Schoenfeld, an exercise researcher at Lehman College. "The basis of weight loss is calories in, calories out. So if you're expending a similar amount of energy in an exercise session, you'd figure there would be roughly equal effects on fat loss.""
Calories in vs calories out when looking at fat loss. HIIT or low intensity isn't something to be ridiculed.
Depending on one's personal goals outside of burning calories one may have benefits over the other. Studies have shown that people, especially those new to exercise will adhere better to lower intensity exercise, so HIIT may not be the best thing for beginners. Long slow exercise, especially the same motion repeated over and over may result in repetitive use injuries if not careful.
For general fitness, a mix of both would be appropriate for most people.7 -
I don't get the ridicule, actually. HIIT may not benefit some people, but that does not mean it benefits no one. I totally get why some people hate HIIT, and I also get why people do it. I do it. On my daily 4 mile route, I switched from running to walking with 8 sprint intervals alternate days in order to reduce my total number of running steps but maintain some challenge. It has helped me manage pressure on my knees even though the calories burned are the same.
I agree with everyone saying the best exercise is the one you will actually do!12 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Brad Schoenfeld said all I've always said on this topic:Just do whatever form of exercise you'll do most often," Shoenfeld says. "Because adherence is the most important part of any program."
Everything else is just noise. I have all the time in the world and no desire to do HIIT. LISS for lyfe!
This. I'm the opposite as well. I love a hike but outside of that I'm HIIT all the way for cardio. Short, sharp, brutal, done.5 -
HIIT (just like every other training protocol) is for fitness/performance improvements not for some mythical fat burning regime.
It should be considered in context of exercise/sporting goals, personal capabilities, restrictions (including time) and yes - even enjoyment.
Personally I never do HIIT but do what other might consider brutal interval training over a much longer duration - because it matches my goals, sport and capabilities.
If someone wants to burn a lot of calories (not my personal goal) then there's no substitute for long duration.
PS
IMHO the idea of someone badly overweight, unfit and not conditioned to exercise being advised to do (real) HIIT I find appalling.17 -
HIIT (just like every other training protocol) is for fitness/performance improvements not for some mythical fat burning regime.
It should be considered in context of exercise/sporting goals, personal capabilities, restrictions (including time) and yes - even enjoyment.
Personally I never do HIIT but do what other might consider brutal interval training over a much longer duration - because it matches my goals, sport and capabilities.
If someone wants to burn a lot of calories (not my personal goal) then there's no substitute for long duration.
PS
IMHO the idea of someone badly overweight, unfit and not conditioned to exercise being advised to do (real) HIIT I find appalling.
As do I. And yet this is done by "trainers" hundreds of times a day.
3 -
HIIT (just like every other training protocol) is for fitness/performance improvements not for some mythical fat burning regime.
It should be considered in context of exercise/sporting goals, personal capabilities, restrictions (including time) and yes - even enjoyment.
Personally I never do HIIT but do what other might consider brutal interval training over a much longer duration - because it matches my goals, sport and capabilities.
If someone wants to burn a lot of calories (not my personal goal) then there's no substitute for long duration.
PS
IMHO the idea of someone badly overweight, unfit and not conditioned to exercise being advised to do (real) HIIT I find appalling.
As do I. And yet this is done by "trainers" hundreds of times a day.
No it isn't. Most trainers don't seem to know what HIIT actually is, and even less have the equipment capable of performing it.4 -
PS
IMHO the idea of someone badly overweight, unfit and not conditioned to exercise being advised to do (real) HIIT I find appalling.
So much this. I decided to do some Tabata IE1 on the elliptical just to see how bad it really was, and commented that it probably shouldn't have been done without talking to my doctor. I had been stress tested on a treadmill for heart conditions (maxed the treadmill!), had a fairly solid cardio base, was working out on a regular basis, and had plenty of HR, power, etc data. And I'm still sure my doctor would have been shaking his head asking why I did it. The HR lift alone is something to consider, and for those unfit the doctor would probably be more in question.
That said, I do think that the trend of "my crazy short workout helps!" has gone a bit overboard. I would never do true HIIT for calorie burn vs lesser intensity stuff, but it can have it's place for some. I don't think I train to a level that the VO2max increases and such are much (if any) better than lesser intensity intervals. But more than anything I just like to mix it up some. Doing some HIIT here and there makes me appreciate the LISS days more, and I usually hate them otherwise. And I never felt like I might get thrown off a machine doing LISS either, so that's a plus.
1 -
robertw486 wrote: »PS
IMHO the idea of someone badly overweight, unfit and not conditioned to exercise being advised to do (real) HIIT I find appalling.
So much this. I decided to do some Tabata IE1 on the elliptical just to see how bad it really was, and commented that it probably shouldn't have been done without talking to my doctor. I had been stress tested on a treadmill for heart conditions (maxed the treadmill!), had a fairly solid cardio base, was working out on a regular basis, and had plenty of HR, power, etc data. And I'm still sure my doctor would have been shaking his head asking why I did it. The HR lift alone is something to consider, and for those unfit the doctor would probably be more in question.
That said, I do think that the trend of "my crazy short workout helps!" has gone a bit overboard. I would never do true HIIT for calorie burn vs lesser intensity stuff, but it can have it's place for some. I don't think I train to a level that the VO2max increases and such are much (if any) better than lesser intensity intervals. But more than anything I just like to mix it up some. Doing some HIIT here and there makes me appreciate the LISS days more, and I usually hate them otherwise. And I never felt like I might get thrown off a machine doing LISS either, so that's a plus.
Curious as to what, "Maxed the treadmill!" means?0 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »robertw486 wrote: »PS
IMHO the idea of someone badly overweight, unfit and not conditioned to exercise being advised to do (real) HIIT I find appalling.
So much this. I decided to do some Tabata IE1 on the elliptical just to see how bad it really was, and commented that it probably shouldn't have been done without talking to my doctor. I had been stress tested on a treadmill for heart conditions (maxed the treadmill!), had a fairly solid cardio base, was working out on a regular basis, and had plenty of HR, power, etc data. And I'm still sure my doctor would have been shaking his head asking why I did it. The HR lift alone is something to consider, and for those unfit the doctor would probably be more in question.
That said, I do think that the trend of "my crazy short workout helps!" has gone a bit overboard. I would never do true HIIT for calorie burn vs lesser intensity stuff, but it can have it's place for some. I don't think I train to a level that the VO2max increases and such are much (if any) better than lesser intensity intervals. But more than anything I just like to mix it up some. Doing some HIIT here and there makes me appreciate the LISS days more, and I usually hate them otherwise. And I never felt like I might get thrown off a machine doing LISS either, so that's a plus.
Curious as to what, "Maxed the treadmill!" means?
I'm guessing it means he has really long legs and is one of those outlier types.
0 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »robertw486 wrote: »PS
IMHO the idea of someone badly overweight, unfit and not conditioned to exercise being advised to do (real) HIIT I find appalling.
So much this. I decided to do some Tabata IE1 on the elliptical just to see how bad it really was, and commented that it probably shouldn't have been done without talking to my doctor. I had been stress tested on a treadmill for heart conditions (maxed the treadmill!), had a fairly solid cardio base, was working out on a regular basis, and had plenty of HR, power, etc data. And I'm still sure my doctor would have been shaking his head asking why I did it. The HR lift alone is something to consider, and for those unfit the doctor would probably be more in question.
That said, I do think that the trend of "my crazy short workout helps!" has gone a bit overboard. I would never do true HIIT for calorie burn vs lesser intensity stuff, but it can have it's place for some. I don't think I train to a level that the VO2max increases and such are much (if any) better than lesser intensity intervals. But more than anything I just like to mix it up some. Doing some HIIT here and there makes me appreciate the LISS days more, and I usually hate them otherwise. And I never felt like I might get thrown off a machine doing LISS either, so that's a plus.
Curious as to what, "Maxed the treadmill!" means?cmriverside wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »robertw486 wrote: »PS
IMHO the idea of someone badly overweight, unfit and not conditioned to exercise being advised to do (real) HIIT I find appalling.
So much this. I decided to do some Tabata IE1 on the elliptical just to see how bad it really was, and commented that it probably shouldn't have been done without talking to my doctor. I had been stress tested on a treadmill for heart conditions (maxed the treadmill!), had a fairly solid cardio base, was working out on a regular basis, and had plenty of HR, power, etc data. And I'm still sure my doctor would have been shaking his head asking why I did it. The HR lift alone is something to consider, and for those unfit the doctor would probably be more in question.
That said, I do think that the trend of "my crazy short workout helps!" has gone a bit overboard. I would never do true HIIT for calorie burn vs lesser intensity stuff, but it can have it's place for some. I don't think I train to a level that the VO2max increases and such are much (if any) better than lesser intensity intervals. But more than anything I just like to mix it up some. Doing some HIIT here and there makes me appreciate the LISS days more, and I usually hate them otherwise. And I never felt like I might get thrown off a machine doing LISS either, so that's a plus.
Curious as to what, "Maxed the treadmill!" means?
I'm guessing it means he has really long legs and is one of those outlier types.
A few years back I had a scare and a suspected minor heart attack. It turned out to be isolated major acid reflux (boy did I feel stupid, but healthy at least) but when I was admitted it was under the assumption of a heart attack and the full ER treatment and panel of tests that followed.
The treadmill I maxed out was not a high speed unit, but a very large machine designed only to allow very fast walking, with the only result that I know of being a mininum (125-130 BPM) heart rate to allow the various tests to be done. They didn't want anyone running due to all the various monitor wires hooked up all over me, as well as an IV.
The reason it is well remembered by me was primarily the doctor. There were three nurses hooking me up to all the sensors and crap, and all were trying to be upbeat and positive, etc... trying to keep me in a comfort zone. The doctor came in and was the mood quickly changed, more the quiet and serious type of guy. So anyway, every 45 seconds to a minute, the treadmill would speed up, and the idea was that when I hit the intended heart rate zone the tests would take place. I was assured the entire process would likely only take 3 or 4 minutes.
After about 5 minutes my heart rate was still below 100. I asked if the machine would go much faster and mentioned that from my home equipment and other workouts, that I thought it would take a lot more effort to get to the 125-130 range. Dr Serious assured me that my HR would be in range within a minute or two max.
I think it was close to 5 minutes later that he instructed one of the nurses to hit me with the IV, which was for some type of artificial adrenaline to spike the HR up to the levels needed for the test. I have no idea how fast the machine went, but taking strides that long without breaking into a jog wasn't easy. No feat of speed, but the nurses seemed to get a kick out of the doctor ignoring my comments on my heart rate and what it would take to get it there.1 -
I've had one of those tests done, as well. They are primarily used for seniors with cardiac issues and that's why it doesn't go too fast. All they need is an oldster like me falling and breaking a hip, too!
4 -
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »HIIT (just like every other training protocol) is for fitness/performance improvements not for some mythical fat burning regime.
It should be considered in context of exercise/sporting goals, personal capabilities, restrictions (including time) and yes - even enjoyment.
Personally I never do HIIT but do what other might consider brutal interval training over a much longer duration - because it matches my goals, sport and capabilities.
If someone wants to burn a lot of calories (not my personal goal) then there's no substitute for long duration.
PS
IMHO the idea of someone badly overweight, unfit and not conditioned to exercise being advised to do (real) HIIT I find appalling.
As do I. And yet this is done by "trainers" hundreds of times a day.
No it isn't. Most trainers don't seem to know what HIIT actually is, and even less have the equipment capable of performing it.
You mean like the ground? Sprints for HIIT4 -
I reckon that most everyone has a clinical paper, an opinion or an agenda (sometimes all three).
How 'bout this?
Eat Clean
Run Fast
Lift Heavy
Sleep Well
Manage Stress
.... did I mention: Eat Clean?7 -
Article's written as if calorie burn is the main goal of exercise - practically the only goal.
Different people have different goals. In my view, calorie burn is just a side bonus. Both fun and performance improvement are more important, not to mention health, and avoiding the permanent move to assisted living facilities for as long as possible. (Jeesh, I'm already 61.) HIIT, as part of the mix, advances some of those goals.
Silly article.8 -
If we're talking about "fat burning" then just doing cardio isn't the answer either. While it may help with a calorie deficit, it's how much one consumes that predicates a calorie deficit more. I see it all the time in the gym. Members working out an hour or more and complaining of no fat loss or weight loss.carolyn000000 wrote: »This guy goes so far as to ridicule those who do short, high intensity workouts vs long, slow in his opening paragraph. I think you need both types in an effective workout program to improve performance, especially if you are an athlete.
https://tonic.vice.com/en_us/article/new9e8/your-seven-minute-workout-sucks
And burning "stored" fat doesn't even really happen at all during exercise. Stored fat usage happens at rest.
The misconceptions from the fitness world have so many confused on how physiology actually works because they are always trying to SELL an idea or product.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
3 -
I can squat about 1.5 times my body weight, but a 75-lb prowler for 40 yards every minute had be close to losing my lunch in less than ten minutes.
HIIT is good for efficiency in burning calories; it's not the be-all-to-end-all for everyone's fitness goals, and tuning HIIT and conditioning workouts to a specific person is an art form.0 -
I've never bought into HIIT personally because like @GottaBurnEmAll I have a lot of time and 0 desire to be miserable for 20 minutes at a time. I walk everywhere I go and raise neat quite gloriously by getting on average 15K steps a day. I lose on 1800 easily simply because i walk and text and listen to music
4 -
If we're talking about "fat burning" then just doing cardio isn't the answer either. While it may help with a calorie deficit, it's how much one consumes that predicates a calorie deficit more. I see it all the time in the gym. Members working out an hour or more and complaining of no fat loss or weight loss.carolyn000000 wrote: »This guy goes so far as to ridicule those who do short, high intensity workouts vs long, slow in his opening paragraph. I think you need both types in an effective workout program to improve performance, especially if you are an athlete.
https://tonic.vice.com/en_us/article/new9e8/your-seven-minute-workout-sucks
And burning "stored" fat doesn't even really happen at all during exercise. Stored fat usage happens at rest.
The misconceptions from the fitness world have so many confused on how physiology actually works because they are always trying to SELL an idea or product.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Stored fat is always being used up when you are catabolic unless your body is in the first 15-45 seconds of activity or at a near maximal heart rate.
Generally the lower your heart rate the more fat burning taking place. Not sure how you can say that not much fat burning is taking place during exercise. I can go on an hour run, at 220 pounds and burn 1200-1500 calories depending on intensity and burn about half those calories from fat based on my heart rate and my Metabolic assessment.
Literally you're just spreading false information13 -
RAD_Fitness wrote: »
If we're talking about "fat burning" then just doing cardio isn't the answer either. While it may help with a calorie deficit, it's how much one consumes that predicates a calorie deficit more. I see it all the time in the gym. Members working out an hour or more and complaining of no fat loss or weight loss.carolyn000000 wrote: »This guy goes so far as to ridicule those who do short, high intensity workouts vs long, slow in his opening paragraph. I think you need both types in an effective workout program to improve performance, especially if you are an athlete.
https://tonic.vice.com/en_us/article/new9e8/your-seven-minute-workout-sucks
And burning "stored" fat doesn't even really happen at all during exercise. Stored fat usage happens at rest.
The misconceptions from the fitness world have so many confused on how physiology actually works because they are always trying to SELL an idea or product.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Stored fat is always being used up when you are catabolic unless your body is in the first 15-45 seconds of activity or at a near maximal heart rate.
Generally the lower your heart rate the more fat burning taking place. Not sure how you can say that not much fat burning is taking place during exercise. I can go on an hour run, at 220 pounds and burn 1200-1500 calories depending on intensity and burn about half those calories from fat based on my heart rate and my Metabolic assessment.
Literally you're just spreading false information
An hour run that still has you burning 50% of your calories from fat is not going to burn 1200-1500 calories.7 -
mrsnattybulking wrote: »I've never bought into HIIT personally because like @GottaBurnEmAll I have a lot of time and 0 desire to be miserable for 20 minutes at a time. I walk everywhere I go and raise neat quite gloriously by getting on average 15K steps a day. I lose on 1800 easily simply because i walk and text and listen to music
I am such a fan of raising NEAT by any and all means possible. Kettle on the boil? Walk around and play games on my phone. Waiting for onions to soften in the pan? Do some body weight squats in front of the stove. I never sit down while I'm on a phone call.6 -
RAD_Fitness wrote: »
If we're talking about "fat burning" then just doing cardio isn't the answer either. While it may help with a calorie deficit, it's how much one consumes that predicates a calorie deficit more. I see it all the time in the gym. Members working out an hour or more and complaining of no fat loss or weight loss.carolyn000000 wrote: »This guy goes so far as to ridicule those who do short, high intensity workouts vs long, slow in his opening paragraph. I think you need both types in an effective workout program to improve performance, especially if you are an athlete.
https://tonic.vice.com/en_us/article/new9e8/your-seven-minute-workout-sucks
And burning "stored" fat doesn't even really happen at all during exercise. Stored fat usage happens at rest.
The misconceptions from the fitness world have so many confused on how physiology actually works because they are always trying to SELL an idea or product.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Stored fat is always being used up when you are catabolic unless your body is in the first 15-45 seconds of activity or at a near maximal heart rate.
Generally the lower your heart rate the more fat burning taking place. Not sure how you can say that not much fat burning is taking place during exercise. I can go on an hour run, at 220 pounds and burn 1200-1500 calories depending on intensity and burn about half those calories from fat based on my heart rate and my Metabolic assessment.
Literally you're just spreading false information
The bolded above in Ninerbuff's post seems to apply to your statements. As does your own final line.3 -
RAD_Fitness wrote: »
If we're talking about "fat burning" then just doing cardio isn't the answer either. While it may help with a calorie deficit, it's how much one consumes that predicates a calorie deficit more. I see it all the time in the gym. Members working out an hour or more and complaining of no fat loss or weight loss.carolyn000000 wrote: »This guy goes so far as to ridicule those who do short, high intensity workouts vs long, slow in his opening paragraph. I think you need both types in an effective workout program to improve performance, especially if you are an athlete.
https://tonic.vice.com/en_us/article/new9e8/your-seven-minute-workout-sucks
And burning "stored" fat doesn't even really happen at all during exercise. Stored fat usage happens at rest.
The misconceptions from the fitness world have so many confused on how physiology actually works because they are always trying to SELL an idea or product.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Stored fat is always being used up when you are catabolic unless your body is in the first 15-45 seconds of activity or at a near maximal heart rate.
Generally the lower your heart rate the more fat burning taking place. Not sure how you can say that not much fat burning is taking place during exercise. I can go on an hour run, at 220 pounds and burn 1200-1500 calories depending on intensity and burn about half those calories from fat based on my heart rate and my Metabolic assessment.
Literally you're just spreading false information
You're saying other people are spreading false information and then claim to be burning 1200-1500 calories with half those calories coming from fat?
:insert Jennifer Lawrence gif:8 -
Incorrect. Physical activity uses glycogen first and foremost even in a catabolic state.RAD_Fitness wrote: »
If we're talking about "fat burning" then just doing cardio isn't the answer either. While it may help with a calorie deficit, it's how much one consumes that predicates a calorie deficit more. I see it all the time in the gym. Members working out an hour or more and complaining of no fat loss or weight loss.carolyn000000 wrote: »This guy goes so far as to ridicule those who do short, high intensity workouts vs long, slow in his opening paragraph. I think you need both types in an effective workout program to improve performance, especially if you are an athlete.
https://tonic.vice.com/en_us/article/new9e8/your-seven-minute-workout-sucks
And burning "stored" fat doesn't even really happen at all during exercise. Stored fat usage happens at rest.
The misconceptions from the fitness world have so many confused on how physiology actually works because they are always trying to SELL an idea or product.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Stored fat is always being used up when you are catabolic unless your body is in the first 15-45 seconds of activity or at a near maximal heart rate.
Read again. Stored bodyfat. DIETARY body fat (intake) is used before stored body fat. This is basic physiology 101.Generally the lower your heart rate the more fat burning taking place. Not sure how you can say that not much fat burning is taking place during exercise. I can go on an hour run, at 220 pounds and burn 1200-1500 calories depending on intensity and burn about half those calories from fat based on my heart rate and my Metabolic assessment.
Literally you're just spreading false information
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
12 -
I just got back from my morning run. In 1:02:36 I expended 1,169 Kcals according to Strava and my HRM.
That is a reasonably useful thing to know, for me, as I play with my personal energy balance.
Knowing exactly where my body got those calories from is not at all useful in my opinion as there is absolutely nothing I can do to change it.
Whether my body is burning glycogen, body fat or last nights beer is not something I can influence. I'm not sure why people get so hung up and it?
4 -
Because there's some misguided notion that using body fat as a fuel source means better body fat losses weight/composition wise. Which is nonsense.7
-
I really hate the fact that I can't go back and edit the really annoying spelling error
0 -
VintageFeline wrote: »Because there's some misguided notion that using body fat as a fuel source means better body fat losses weight/composition wise. Which is nonsense.
This.0 -
robertw486 wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »robertw486 wrote: »PS
IMHO the idea of someone badly overweight, unfit and not conditioned to exercise being advised to do (real) HIIT I find appalling.
So much this. I decided to do some Tabata IE1 on the elliptical just to see how bad it really was, and commented that it probably shouldn't have been done without talking to my doctor. I had been stress tested on a treadmill for heart conditions (maxed the treadmill!), had a fairly solid cardio base, was working out on a regular basis, and had plenty of HR, power, etc data. And I'm still sure my doctor would have been shaking his head asking why I did it. The HR lift alone is something to consider, and for those unfit the doctor would probably be more in question.
That said, I do think that the trend of "my crazy short workout helps!" has gone a bit overboard. I would never do true HIIT for calorie burn vs lesser intensity stuff, but it can have it's place for some. I don't think I train to a level that the VO2max increases and such are much (if any) better than lesser intensity intervals. But more than anything I just like to mix it up some. Doing some HIIT here and there makes me appreciate the LISS days more, and I usually hate them otherwise. And I never felt like I might get thrown off a machine doing LISS either, so that's a plus.
Curious as to what, "Maxed the treadmill!" means?cmriverside wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »robertw486 wrote: »PS
IMHO the idea of someone badly overweight, unfit and not conditioned to exercise being advised to do (real) HIIT I find appalling.
So much this. I decided to do some Tabata IE1 on the elliptical just to see how bad it really was, and commented that it probably shouldn't have been done without talking to my doctor. I had been stress tested on a treadmill for heart conditions (maxed the treadmill!), had a fairly solid cardio base, was working out on a regular basis, and had plenty of HR, power, etc data. And I'm still sure my doctor would have been shaking his head asking why I did it. The HR lift alone is something to consider, and for those unfit the doctor would probably be more in question.
That said, I do think that the trend of "my crazy short workout helps!" has gone a bit overboard. I would never do true HIIT for calorie burn vs lesser intensity stuff, but it can have it's place for some. I don't think I train to a level that the VO2max increases and such are much (if any) better than lesser intensity intervals. But more than anything I just like to mix it up some. Doing some HIIT here and there makes me appreciate the LISS days more, and I usually hate them otherwise. And I never felt like I might get thrown off a machine doing LISS either, so that's a plus.
Curious as to what, "Maxed the treadmill!" means?
I'm guessing it means he has really long legs and is one of those outlier types.
A few years back I had a scare and a suspected minor heart attack. It turned out to be isolated major acid reflux (boy did I feel stupid, but healthy at least) but when I was admitted it was under the assumption of a heart attack and the full ER treatment and panel of tests that followed.
The treadmill I maxed out was not a high speed unit, but a very large machine designed only to allow very fast walking, with the only result that I know of being a mininum (125-130 BPM) heart rate to allow the various tests to be done. They didn't want anyone running due to all the various monitor wires hooked up all over me, as well as an IV.
The reason it is well remembered by me was primarily the doctor. There were three nurses hooking me up to all the sensors and crap, and all were trying to be upbeat and positive, etc... trying to keep me in a comfort zone. The doctor came in and was the mood quickly changed, more the quiet and serious type of guy. So anyway, every 45 seconds to a minute, the treadmill would speed up, and the idea was that when I hit the intended heart rate zone the tests would take place. I was assured the entire process would likely only take 3 or 4 minutes.
After about 5 minutes my heart rate was still below 100. I asked if the machine would go much faster and mentioned that from my home equipment and other workouts, that I thought it would take a lot more effort to get to the 125-130 range. Dr Serious assured me that my HR would be in range within a minute or two max.
I think it was close to 5 minutes later that he instructed one of the nurses to hit me with the IV, which was for some type of artificial adrenaline to spike the HR up to the levels needed for the test. I have no idea how fast the machine went, but taking strides that long without breaking into a jog wasn't easy. No feat of speed, but the nurses seemed to get a kick out of the doctor ignoring my comments on my heart rate and what it would take to get it there.
Unfortunately, most medical offices have replaced exercise physiologists with techs or nurses. The result is that, including the doctor, there is usually not anyone who knows how to properly conduct a graded exercise test. In your case they used an inappropriate protocol (sounds like an original Balke protocol), and very likely had you hold on to the handrails.
If done properly, 90+% of the population should max out within 9-10 minutes. I have seen tests where a reasonably fit person went 20+ minutes on a Bruce protocol, which is impossible for anyone but an elite endurance athlete. They were holding on so hard, they couldn't get a readable ECG because of the muscle tension in the arms and chest.4 -
RAD_Fitness wrote: »
If we're talking about "fat burning" then just doing cardio isn't the answer either. While it may help with a calorie deficit, it's how much one consumes that predicates a calorie deficit more. I see it all the time in the gym. Members working out an hour or more and complaining of no fat loss or weight loss.carolyn000000 wrote: »This guy goes so far as to ridicule those who do short, high intensity workouts vs long, slow in his opening paragraph. I think you need both types in an effective workout program to improve performance, especially if you are an athlete.
https://tonic.vice.com/en_us/article/new9e8/your-seven-minute-workout-sucks
And burning "stored" fat doesn't even really happen at all during exercise. Stored fat usage happens at rest.
The misconceptions from the fitness world have so many confused on how physiology actually works because they are always trying to SELL an idea or product.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Stored fat is always being used up when you are catabolic unless your body is in the first 15-45 seconds of activity or at a near maximal heart rate.
Generally the lower your heart rate the more fat burning taking place. Not sure how you can say that not much fat burning is taking place during exercise. I can go on an hour run, at 220 pounds and burn 1200-1500 calories depending on intensity and burn about half those calories from fat based on my heart rate and my Metabolic assessment.
Literally you're just spreading false information
Two things (ignoring the fact that your calorie counts are inflated, and that, when running at an effort needed to burn 1000+ calories in an hour, your % of calories burned from fat will be closer to 25%):
1. The fat burned during exercise has no appreciable effect on stored body fat. Body fat is stored and lost based on the long-term balance between calories in and calories out. If one does burn more fat during exercise, they will burn less the rest of the day--and vice versa--so that at the end of 24 hours, total fat oxidation is the same. This has been shown in a number of research studies. One of the biggest mistakes people make is to try to look at the acute responses to a workout out of context of what happens in the body during the other 23 hours of the day.
2. Even if we accepted the "fat burning idea" -- an intellectual exercise, since it doesn't exist--the total amount of fat burned during a workout like you described would be 2+ ounces. And if you consider the fact that one would still burn fat during a higher-intensity workout, the NET difference in actual fat burned is less than an ounce.
12
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394.3K Introduce Yourself
- 44K Getting Started
- 260.4K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.1K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.7K Fitness and Exercise
- 440 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.7K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions