Cardio For Fat Loss

AnvilHead
AnvilHead Posts: 18,343 Member
edited November 24 in Health and Weight Loss
Since this is a question which comes up semi-regularly, I thought it was worth sharing a good Facebook post from Szotak Andrei (a coach/trainer) about the subject:

3blhhn4orldh.png

SHOULD YOU DO CARDIO TO HELP YOU LOSE FAT?

Here are a couple considerations to take into account when deciding if you should do cardio or not when trying to lose fat.

First and foremost, you have to realize that your diet is going to be your number 1 weapon to aid fat loss, and it should be the first on the list of priorities to take care of.

Second, even though cardio is not necessary for fat loss, it’s still very important for overall health and as such, it should be incorporated in some shape or form in everyone’s training program, regardless of goals.

Third, if you are going to use cardio to help you lose fat, make sure to pick a type (low, medium, high intensity) and modality (treadmill, bike, stepper, stairmaster etc) that you actually enjoy and you’re going to stick to, instead of opting for one that you think it’s “optimal”, even though you don’t see yourself doing it as often as you should.

Fourth and final consideration is to make sure the cardio you do doesn’t tire you out so much that you unconsciously start moving less the rest of the day. It’s no use to do 200 kcal worth of cardio if you’re just going to lay in bed the rest of the day and burn 300 kcal less.

Tracking your steps is a good way to ensure your overall activity is still up once you start introducing some structured cardio into your workouts.
«1

Replies

  • MSFab08
    MSFab08 Posts: 19 Member
    This is very helpful, thank you Anvil.
  • missh1967
    missh1967 Posts: 661 Member
    I've been dealing with an injury since November, and I'm in such a funk and feeling agitated, aggravated, depressed, and hopeless about my physical activity, which has led to some stress eating. I don't know when or if I'll get back to where I was with my physical activity, but I appreciate this post because it reminds me that diet (caloric intake) is king for weight management.
  • Frankie_Fan
    Frankie_Fan Posts: 562 Member
    Thank you for posting. Learn something new everyday.
  • yvonnedrobert
    yvonnedrobert Posts: 3 Member
    I've been active in the gym weightlifting for over 30yrs. Have been slowly gaining weight the last 10yrs (I'm 53 150lbs) although I crosstrain, I'm wondering if I should stop lifting and just do cardio. I've never been on a diet and eat quite healthy dose falls are weekend wine and munchies
  • tulips_and_tea
    tulips_and_tea Posts: 5,741 Member
    yvonnedrobert wrote: »
    I've been active in the gym weightlifting for over 30yrs. Have been slowly gaining weight the last 10yrs (I'm 53 150lbs) although I crosstrain, I'm wondering if I should stop lifting and just do cardio. I've never been on a diet and eat quite healthy dose falls are weekend wine and munchies

    I would not recommend this at all. Keep lifting. Maybe add in some cardio, but the main focus should be on the number of calories you're eating. "Healthy" foods still have calories and they can add up. Start tracking your intake here and go from there. Just my $0.02.
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,343 Member
    edited February 2018
    yvonnedrobert wrote: »
    I've been active in the gym weightlifting for over 30yrs. Have been slowly gaining weight the last 10yrs (I'm 53 150lbs) although I crosstrain, I'm wondering if I should stop lifting and just do cardio. I've never been on a diet and eat quite healthy dose falls are weekend wine and munchies

    The second sentence in the article above is where you should look to first:
    First and foremost, you have to realize that your diet is going to be your number 1 weapon to aid fat loss, and it should be the first on the list of priorities to take care of.

    If you're very slowly gaining weight, a slight cut in your calories should take care of it for you. Eating "healthy" can still result in weight gain if your calorie intake exceeds your expenditure on an ongoing basis.
  • BoxerBrawler
    BoxerBrawler Posts: 2,032 Member
    I know some people who say they do a bunch of cardio so they can eat whatever they want. But then they complain when they don't lose weight... silly. It depends on where you want to get too. Do a lot of cardio, eat at a deficit and lose weight. Or don't, eat at a deficit and still lose weight. It's about the food for sure!
  • GottaBurnEmAll
    GottaBurnEmAll Posts: 7,722 Member
    Great sensible advice, and it's advice I've inadvertently followed in maintaining a very active daily pattern. I find the morning cardio I do important, but I also find my throughout the day movement just as important. Balancing the two is key. Of course, controlling my intake comes first, but I thought that went without saying.
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,343 Member
    edited February 2018
    Tacklewasher wrote: »
    I know not all agree, but I like doing cardio (running) partly so I can eat more. It's still the biggest burn of calories for the time spent, and as long as I'm good about not over-eating them, those calories are my treat foods.

    Nothing wrong with that, especially since you take the bolded into consideration.

    The problem comes when people do a 1-mile run or a 30-minute Zumba class or whatever and think they "earned" a reward, so they go eat a 600-calorie ice cream sundae or some such. Heck, you could do a 5-mile run and wipe that extra deficit out (plus some!) in less than 5 minutes by stopping off at McDonalds for a Big Mac and fries on the way home.

    Andrei doesn't really dive into it much in the article above other than to mention diet, but there are a lot of people who believe their calorie burns during cardio are a lot higher than they actually are. How many threads have we seen claiming something like an 1100 calorie burn from a 60 minute cardio class, or that they're burning 2000 calories a day in exercise? Yeah, not unless you just happened to do an Ironman length triathlon today. Hence, the frequently seen MFP advice to eat back a portion of your exercise calories rather than all of them, and adjust as necessary.
  • Tacklewasher
    Tacklewasher Posts: 7,122 Member
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    Tacklewasher wrote: »
    I know not all agree, but I like doing cardio (running) partly so I can eat more. It's still the biggest burn of calories for the time spent, and as long as I'm good about not over-eating them, those calories are my treat foods.

    Nothing wrong with that, especially since you take the bolded into consideration.

    The problem comes when people do a 1-mile run or a 30-minute Zumba class or whatever and think they "earned" a reward, so they go eat a 600-calorie ice cream sundae or some such. Heck, you could do a 5-mile run and wipe that extra deficit out (plus some!) in less than 5 minutes by stopping off at McDonalds for a Big Mac and fries on the way home.

    I look at it this way. If my "normal" lunch is 500 calories, and I run 5K for ~400 calories(1), I've got 900 calories for lunch and I can do a Big Mac and medium fries (870 cals(2) before ketchup) with a diet coke and still be at my goal.

    Either that or I eat a normal lunch and add 400 cals of wine for dinner.


    (1) I'm 210 lbs, so 210 * (5*.621) * .63 = 411 calories
    (2) https://www.mcdonalds.com/ca/en-ca/about-our-food/nutrition-calculator.html
  • quiksylver296
    quiksylver296 Posts: 28,439 Member
    pinuplove wrote: »
    Tacklewasher wrote: »
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    Tacklewasher wrote: »
    I know not all agree, but I like doing cardio (running) partly so I can eat more. It's still the biggest burn of calories for the time spent, and as long as I'm good about not over-eating them, those calories are my treat foods.

    Nothing wrong with that, especially since you take the bolded into consideration.

    The problem comes when people do a 1-mile run or a 30-minute Zumba class or whatever and think they "earned" a reward, so they go eat a 600-calorie ice cream sundae or some such. Heck, you could do a 5-mile run and wipe that extra deficit out (plus some!) in less than 5 minutes by stopping off at McDonalds for a Big Mac and fries on the way home.

    I look at it this way. If my "normal" lunch is 500 calories, and I run 5K for ~400 calories(1), I've got 900 calories for lunch and I can do a Big Mac and medium fries (870 cals(2) before ketchup) with a diet coke and still be at my goal.

    Either that or I eat a normal lunch and add 400 cals of wine for dinner.


    (1) I'm 210 lbs, so 210 * (5*.621) * .63 = 411 calories
    (2) https://www.mcdonalds.com/ca/en-ca/about-our-food/nutrition-calculator.html

    Wine > McDonald's. Just sayin.

    I'd add that those extra calories earned can be particularly precious to those of us who are shorter, female, and nearing goal, as calorie levels required for weight loss at that point can be rather...depressing if not supplemented with activity.

    But sometimes you just NEED a cheeseburger. (But not a Big Mac. Yuck.)
  • pinuplove
    pinuplove Posts: 12,871 Member
    quiksylver296 wrote: »
    pinuplove wrote: »
    Tacklewasher wrote: »
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    Tacklewasher wrote: »
    I know not all agree, but I like doing cardio (running) partly so I can eat more. It's still the biggest burn of calories for the time spent, and as long as I'm good about not over-eating them, those calories are my treat foods.

    Nothing wrong with that, especially since you take the bolded into consideration.

    The problem comes when people do a 1-mile run or a 30-minute Zumba class or whatever and think they "earned" a reward, so they go eat a 600-calorie ice cream sundae or some such. Heck, you could do a 5-mile run and wipe that extra deficit out (plus some!) in less than 5 minutes by stopping off at McDonalds for a Big Mac and fries on the way home.

    I look at it this way. If my "normal" lunch is 500 calories, and I run 5K for ~400 calories(1), I've got 900 calories for lunch and I can do a Big Mac and medium fries (870 cals(2) before ketchup) with a diet coke and still be at my goal.

    Either that or I eat a normal lunch and add 400 cals of wine for dinner.


    (1) I'm 210 lbs, so 210 * (5*.621) * .63 = 411 calories
    (2) https://www.mcdonalds.com/ca/en-ca/about-our-food/nutrition-calculator.html

    Wine > McDonald's. Just sayin.

    I'd add that those extra calories earned can be particularly precious to those of us who are shorter, female, and nearing goal, as calorie levels required for weight loss at that point can be rather...depressing if not supplemented with activity.

    But sometimes you just NEED a cheeseburger. (But not a Big Mac. Yuck.)

    That's why I have a husband with a grill, duh! :wink:
  • Tacklewasher
    Tacklewasher Posts: 7,122 Member
    pinuplove wrote: »
    quiksylver296 wrote: »
    pinuplove wrote: »
    Tacklewasher wrote: »
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    Tacklewasher wrote: »
    I know not all agree, but I like doing cardio (running) partly so I can eat more. It's still the biggest burn of calories for the time spent, and as long as I'm good about not over-eating them, those calories are my treat foods.

    Nothing wrong with that, especially since you take the bolded into consideration.

    The problem comes when people do a 1-mile run or a 30-minute Zumba class or whatever and think they "earned" a reward, so they go eat a 600-calorie ice cream sundae or some such. Heck, you could do a 5-mile run and wipe that extra deficit out (plus some!) in less than 5 minutes by stopping off at McDonalds for a Big Mac and fries on the way home.

    I look at it this way. If my "normal" lunch is 500 calories, and I run 5K for ~400 calories(1), I've got 900 calories for lunch and I can do a Big Mac and medium fries (870 cals(2) before ketchup) with a diet coke and still be at my goal.

    Either that or I eat a normal lunch and add 400 cals of wine for dinner.


    (1) I'm 210 lbs, so 210 * (5*.621) * .63 = 411 calories
    (2) https://www.mcdonalds.com/ca/en-ca/about-our-food/nutrition-calculator.html

    Wine > McDonald's. Just sayin.

    I'd add that those extra calories earned can be particularly precious to those of us who are shorter, female, and nearing goal, as calorie levels required for weight loss at that point can be rather...depressing if not supplemented with activity.

    But sometimes you just NEED a cheeseburger. (But not a Big Mac. Yuck.)

    That's why I have a husband with a grill, duh! :wink:

    I'll admit to a Big Mac being kinda a comfort food for me. Loved them as a kid.
  • sandy_taylor13
    sandy_taylor13 Posts: 194 Member
    Your food intake is totally key. While training for a marathon we had a lot of people who were very heavy and remained heavy throughout the training (and we were all running over 30 miles a week). Problem was that many would just head on over to IHOP after our runs, totally negating all the calories they just burned. And when we finished the race, many wondered why they had gained weight. CICO ;)
  • evileen99
    evileen99 Posts: 1,564 Member
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    Tacklewasher wrote: »
    I know not all agree, but I like doing cardio (running) partly so I can eat more. It's still the biggest burn of calories for the time spent, and as long as I'm good about not over-eating them, those calories are my treat foods.



    Andrei doesn't really dive into it much in the article above other than to mention diet, but there are a lot of people who believe their calorie burns during cardio are a lot higher than they actually are. How many threads have we seen claiming something like an 1100 calorie burn from a 60 minute cardio class, or that they're burning 2000 calories a day in exercise? Yeah, not unless you just happened to do an Ironman length triathlon today. Hence, the frequently seen MFP advice to eat back a portion of your exercise calories rather than all of them, and adjust as necessary.

    So true. I used to have a BodyMedia Fit (still mad at Jawbone for screwing that up) and could see that I burned a whopping 2 calories going up a flight of stairs at work. Some of the women I worked with were sure that they burned "25-50" calories because going up stairs was hard. So they'd take the stairs a few times, figured they'd burned enough to have some cookies, and then wonder why they were gaining weight when they did all that stair climbing. They must have slow metabolisms!
  • mwillder1
    mwillder1 Posts: 24 Member
    sandy_taylor13 wrote: »
    Your food intake is totally key.

    This is so true. I did a full Ironman some years back and lost, over the 6-8 months I trained for it, about 9lbs. That was with training 2x/day, with 3 workouts on Saturdays, up to 20 hours total per week. The problem was that I was burning so many calories that I was hungry all the time and definitely NOT eating properly. It was volume over quality. So, I did the Ironman at 184lbs.

    I'm now 170lbs after 5 months of watching what I eat, logging everything, focusing on drastically lowering my carbs and eating plenty of healthy oils and protein. It's crazy how this has "clicked" now that I've focused first on what I eat. I've been walking maybe 30 mins 3-4x/week; that's it for exercise. I'm kind of living proof that it's mostly about the food (though I will start cycling and running again once it warms up here...).

    So, yeah, agree with what many have said on this post.
  • HoneyBadger302
    HoneyBadger302 Posts: 2,073 Member
    If I'm eating "heathier" foods and cooking at home, AND I have an active job, and I'm working out as I like, historically I could pretty much maintain my weight within 5 pounds of my goal. Getting a desk job completely threw that out the window. Even then, however, if I wanted to lose those few pounds I'd have to tighten up my eating a bit.

    Finding that balance between eating enough to fuel your workouts and still lose some fat is the balancing act I'm trying to go through right now (basically, a recomp). It's slow, and progress is measured in weeks not days, but it's coming along and I'm reaching my goals.
  • WillingtoLose1001984
    WillingtoLose1001984 Posts: 240 Member
    edited February 2018
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    Since this is a question which comes up semi-regularly, I thought it was worth sharing a good Facebook post from Szotak Andrei (a coach/trainer) about the subject:

    3blhhn4orldh.png

    SHOULD YOU DO CARDIO TO HELP YOU LOSE FAT?

    Here are a couple considerations to take into account when deciding if you should do cardio or not when trying to lose fat.

    First and foremost, you have to realize that your diet is going to be your number 1 weapon to aid fat loss, and it should be the first on the list of priorities to take care of.

    Second, even though cardio is not necessary for fat loss, it’s still very important for overall health and as such, it should be incorporated in some shape or form in everyone’s training program, regardless of goals.

    Third, if you are going to use cardio to help you lose fat, make sure to pick a type (low, medium, high intensity) and modality (treadmill, bike, stepper, stairmaster etc) that you actually enjoy and you’re going to stick to, instead of opting for one that you think it’s “optimal”, even though you don’t see yourself doing it as often as you should.

    Fourth and final consideration is to make sure the cardio you do doesn’t tire you out so much that you unconsciously start moving less the rest of the day. It’s no use to do 200 kcal worth of cardio if you’re just going to lay in bed the rest of the day and burn 300 kcal less.

    Tracking your steps is a good way to ensure your overall activity is still up once you start introducing some structured cardio into your workouts.

    To me exercise and high intensity cardio makes losing weight sustainable. It makes a huge difference with what you can eat if you eat pretty healthy. I can't stand eating just 1600 calories a day without exercise. I like to eat more often. With a hour and a half of exercise i can eat another small meal or a little snack not using all the calories and still lose 2 lbs a week. I've been able to keep this up since October. Bodies are made to move and studies dont say more exercise and cardio is bad for your health. I think more people could eat more of the things they want and not feel deprived with an active job and\or cardio.
  • WillingtoLose1001984
    WillingtoLose1001984 Posts: 240 Member
    edited February 2018
    sandy_taylor13 wrote: »
    Your food intake is totally key. While training for a marathon we had a lot of people who were very heavy and remained heavy throughout the training (and we were all running over 30 miles a week). Problem was that many would just head on over to IHOP after our runs, totally negating all the calories they just burned. And when we finished the race, many wondered why they had gained weight. CICO ;)

    But what if they went to IHOP and ate half their plate and tracked their calories. It makes losing weight more sustainable to be active. They would have been less likely to be able to go out at all or only had a very small portion if they had done nothing.
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,343 Member
    WillingtoLose1001984 wrote: »
    To me exercise and high intensity cardio makes losing weight sustainable. It makes a huge difference with what you can eat if you eat pretty healthy. I can't stand eating just 1600 calories a day without exercise. I like to eat more often with a hour and a half of exercise i can eat another small meal or a little snack not using all the calories and still lose 2 lbs a week. I've been able to keep this up since October. Bodies are made to move and studies dont say more exercise and cardio is bad for your health. I think more people could eat more of the things they want and not feel deprived with an active job and\or cardio.

    The conversation evolved in that direction as the thread progressed. Yes, there's nothing wrong with using exercise to create "room" for some extra food, as long as one is being realistic about how many calories they're burning in their workouts. I think the point of Andrei's article was to address the people who start exercising while still eating 3,500 calories per day and can't understand why they're not losing weight. Too many people hold the mistaken idea that as long as you exercise, you'll lose weight no matter how bad your diet is.

    You even see threads from people saying "I'm eating healthy and exercising, but not losing weight". It doesn't matter how "healthy" you eat if your calories aren't in check. Which is why Andrei says that the first order of business is to get your diet straight. It goes back to the saying "You can't out-train a bad diet" or "You can't outrun your fork". No matter what, it still comes down to CI<CO.
  • WillingtoLose1001984
    WillingtoLose1001984 Posts: 240 Member
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    Tacklewasher wrote: »
    I know not all agree, but I like doing cardio (running) partly so I can eat more. It's still the biggest burn of calories for the time spent, and as long as I'm good about not over-eating them, those calories are my treat foods.

    Nothing wrong with that, especially since you take the bolded into consideration.

    The problem comes when people do a 1-mile run or a 30-minute Zumba class or whatever and think they "earned" a reward, so they go eat a 600-calorie ice cream sundae or some such. Heck, you could do a 5-mile run and wipe that extra deficit out (plus some!) in less than 5 minutes by stopping off at McDonalds for a Big Mac and fries on the way home.

    Andrei doesn't really dive into it much in the article above other than to mention diet, but there are a lot of people who believe their calorie burns during cardio are a lot higher than they actually are. How many threads have we seen claiming something like an 1100 calorie burn from a 60 minute cardio class, or that they're burning 2000 calories a day in exercise? Yeah, not unless you just happened to do an Ironman length triathlon today. Hence, the frequently seen MFP advice to eat back a portion of your exercise calories rather than all of them, and adjust as necessary.

    But you can burn 1000 calories in 90 minutes doing a hard workout. That makes a huge difference to what you can eat even if you just eat half.
  • WillingtoLose1001984
    WillingtoLose1001984 Posts: 240 Member
    Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »
    WillingtoLose1001984 wrote: »
    sandy_taylor13 wrote: »
    Your food intake is totally key. While training for a marathon we had a lot of people who were very heavy and remained heavy throughout the training (and we were all running over 30 miles a week). Problem was that many would just head on over to IHOP after our runs, totally negating all the calories they just burned. And when we finished the race, many wondered why they had gained weight. CICO ;)

    But what if they went to IHOP and ate half their plate and tracked their calories. It makes losing weight more sustainable to be active. They wouldnt have been able to go out at all or only had a very small portion of they had done nothing.

    On the flip side, sometimes injuries sideline people and their intake will need to be reduced. For some, it is hard to make that switch. Ask me, I know.
    True. It is hard in that case.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories