LISS vs HIIT

Options
irejb
irejb Posts: 64 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
I previously posted about how my body was physically 'rejecting' high intensity cardio or HIIT, and some have suggested to limit HIIT to once a week and do low intensity cardio or LISS, along with a variety of other exercises, such as weight lifting, for the rest of the week .

I always thought that high intensity cardio quickly helped weight loss (of course assuming that one's diet is healthy and there is a calorie deficit).

I'm curious to hear other people's thoughts or weight loss experiences with LISS. Thanks.

Replies

  • aokoye
    aokoye Posts: 3,495 Member
    Options
    irejb wrote: »
    I previously posted about how my body was physically 'rejecting' high intensity cardio or HIIT, and some have suggested to limit HIIT to once a week and do low intensity cardio or LISS, along with a variety of other exercises, such as weight lifting, for the rest of the week .

    I always thought that high intensity cardio quickly helped weight loss (of course assuming that one's diet is healthy and there is a calorie deficit).

    I'm curious to hear other people's thoughts or weight loss experiences with LISS.     Thanks.
    Weight loss is about calories in vs calories out. It doesn't matter how you create the deficit as long as it's sustainable. It's also not one or the other with regards to HIIT vs LISS. Steady state doesn't have to be low intensity for it to be steady state. The steady state workout I did earlier this week was by no means low intensity. I only really do a LISS sort of workout if I want to workout but know that I need to take it easy. For instance, I might ride my bike inside tonight/later this afternoon. The key word here is "might" because I'm currently in the mood for a nap, rowed this morning for an hour and a half, and am planning on working out tomorrow as well. My reasons for feeling the need to do needing to do a low intensity workout will likely be different than yours and that's fine and to be expected. We're all individuals with different needs and experiences.

    Most of my workouts are neither HIIT (in the true sense of the phrase) nor LISS. Note too that not all interval workouts are HIIT. I did a 55 min interval workout yesterday morning. It was not at all HIIT because well, there's no way that one could do HIIT for 55 minutes.

    All that said, my suggestion to you would be find a form of exercise that you enjoy and to start building up both time and intensity gradually. Additionally, don't have all of your workouts be high intensity (interval or otherwise). It's not a smart way of training/working out despite what popular culture may want you to believe.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,970 Member
    Options
    I did 11 hours of moderate intensity cardio yesterday. My watch's calorie estimate is obscene.
  • pierinifitness
    pierinifitness Posts: 2,231 Member
    Options
    NorthCascades wrote: »
    I did 11 hours of moderate intensity cardio yesterday. My watch's calorie estimate is obscene.

    Share?
  • Djproulx
    Djproulx Posts: 3,084 Member
    Options
    irejb wrote: »
    I previously posted about how my body was physically 'rejecting' high intensity cardio or HIIT, and some have suggested to limit HIIT to once a week and do low intensity cardio or LISS, along with a variety of other exercises, such as weight lifting, for the rest of the week .

    I always thought that high intensity cardio quickly helped weight loss (of course assuming that one's diet is healthy and there is a calorie deficit).

    I'm curious to hear other people's thoughts or weight loss experiences with LISS. Thanks.

    OP, the bolded comments describe a common approach among many athletes who are trying to build endurance in a manner that is both effective as well as carrying a lower risk of injury. Think marathoners, triathletes, long distance cyclists, etc as examples. Not to say that this exercise regimen won't be effective for weight loss, but when I think of it, I am thinking of endurance benefits first. I have followed a similar approach on a number of occasions, but my weight loss trends were driven by my adherence (or lack thereof) to an eating plan that produced a modest deficit over the time period.

    I think @sijomial made some great suggestions around picking a program that matches your fitness goals(which you haven't shared) and is something you'd enjoy doing for a long time. Exercise burns calories, but is not a quick fix for weight loss.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,970 Member
    Options
    pierinifitness wrote: »
    NorthCascades wrote: »
    I did 11 hours of moderate intensity cardio yesterday. My watch's calorie estimate is obscene.

    Share?

    https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/3866173895
  • pierinifitness
    pierinifitness Posts: 2,231 Member
    Options
    NorthCascades wrote: »
    pierinifitness wrote: »
    NorthCascades wrote: »
    I did 11 hours of moderate intensity cardio yesterday. My watch's calorie estimate is obscene.

    Share?

    https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/3866173895

    Got a network connection error message. I’m a Garmin user too.

    Thanks for your sharing effort.
  • staticsplit
    staticsplit Posts: 538 Member
    Options
    I like to do a mix of various things to keep myself interested. I get bored easy.

    LISS

    I do a lot of LISS just because I live in a European city (well...until Brexit...) and walk everywhere frequently. I think nothing of walking an hour and fifteen minutes home if the weather is nice because I'm just listening to music and zoning out and I find it meditative and restorative but gives me a good fitness base for the other stuff I do.

    I have an excercise bike desk, so I ride that very slowly while doing general browsing or whatever. It's slow, I don't break a sweat, but it helps me posture and stops me from falling asleep on the sofa. Win.

    My other lower intensity exercise is yoga. I like stretching, again it has lots of mental benefits for me (I have anxiety). One of my classes is quite intense though--I'll break a sweat and do headstands and stuff.

    Moderate - 2-3 times a week.

    My moderate exercise is running. Usually like 5k, sometimes up to 8k. This is nice to know I'm working my heart. I also do ballet once a week, often in place of one of the runs. Very active, lots of squatting, but it's so fun that I don't notice how hard I'm working.

    HIIT - 2 times a week

    My higher intensity stuff is circuit training, HIIT. It varies--usually maybe twice a week.

    I mix and match, have at least one rest day a week. This week it was two because I was still sore from Thursday's weights session and didn't want to push it.
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 32,049 Member
    Options
    NorthCascades wrote: »
    pierinifitness wrote: »
    NorthCascades wrote: »
    I did 11 hours of moderate intensity cardio yesterday. My watch's calorie estimate is obscene.

    Share?

    https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/3866173895

    Nice work. (I just came from a thread where someone suggested that for weight loss, no more than 30 minutes of exercise daily was a good plan. I think I now have whiplash. ;) ). Also: 11 hours? 7:32 moving! ;););)

    Back on topic:

    OP, I'm with sijomial, as is so often the case. Moderate intensity most of the time is my preference, and I mix in moderately intense intervals for variety. I don't race much anymore (maybe not at all ;) ), so HIIT is just occasional, for fun (!?).

    For most people, for whom weight loss is the overridingly predominant goal, I think the best results come from deciding how much time one would enjoy devoting to exercise, then splitting up the "cardio" (hate that term) portion** of that time into a warm-up, the body of the exercise, and a short cool-down. The body of the exercise would be at the maximum intensity one can sustain for the full time period, while feeling energized (not exhausted) after the workout. That would be "steady state" exercise . . . whether that's LISS or MISS or whatever, is kind of academic.

    Exhaustion from exercise can lead to fatigue, so lead to less daily-life activity, potentially wiping out some of the exercise calorie benefit. So, being energized after exercise (other than maybe a few minutes of "whew!" right after the workout) is the sweet spot.

    Over time, as fitness increases, the intensity of the workout can increase, and still be "steady state" for the same duration of activity.

    Long bouts of steady state can be tedious, unless you love your workout. If so, it's fine to mix exercise modes (run, bike, kayak, whatever) to keep it interesting, or mix in some regular intervals (not necessarily HIIT) for variety if fitness level is up to doing more intervals. There may be some sacrifice of maximum calorie burn with some variations, but keeping it fun and interesting is part of sustainability. Exercise we don't stick to is going to burn zero calories, so fun/interesting is good.

    In theory, there's a short exercise-duration time-window in which the small purported excess post-exercise oxygen consumption (EPOC, a.k.a. afterburn) could possibly make HIIT+EPOC burn more calories than SS+EPOC, but the HIIT is likely to be more fatiguing, and some of the things now called HIIT don't match the modalities for which increased EPOC was observed under research conditions, so it's a crapshoot. (Supposedly HITT has something like 14% EPOC, and SS something like 7% . . . so, for 100 calories worth of exercise, the estimated EPOC difference would be a whopping 7 calories. Whoop-ti-doo. HIIT may burn more calories per minute, but by definition it's short, and potentially more fatiguing, so the real-world trade-offs aren't likely that dramatic in practice.)

    If you have fitness goals, not just weight-management goals, your "best" choices might be different, but that would depend on the fitness goals, about which you've said nothing. Depending on the fitness goals, and your current fitness level, some LISS (vs. MISS) might be very beneficial, occasional HIIT might be useful, etc. I say that hardly anyone does exactly consistent exercise pacing all the time for the sake of their fitness goals.

    ** I say "cardio portion" because some strength training is a really good plan if body composition/health/appearance are important to you, and I started this line of thought by saying you should figure out how much time you'd enjoy devoting to exercise. So, I'm implying that you'd subtract the strength-training time from your total time available, then use the rest for cardio. But you might want some other stuff in there, too - flexibility, explosiveness, whatever - if you have fitness goals, not just weight-loss goals.

    Just my opinion, obviously. :)
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,970 Member
    Options
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    NorthCascades wrote: »
    pierinifitness wrote: »
    NorthCascades wrote: »
    I did 11 hours of moderate intensity cardio yesterday. My watch's calorie estimate is obscene.

    Share?

    https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/3866173895

    Nice work. (I just came from a thread where someone suggested that for weight loss, no more than 30 minutes of exercise daily was a good plan. I think I now have whiplash. ;) ). Also: 11 hours? 7:32 moving! ;););)

    Said for the digression. I don't think that can be right. I mean I checked and that's what it says, but I think it's got to be something to do with GPS reception in the woods, I only ever stopped for pictures, to find the way, or to get pebbles out of my shoes. I really wanted to take a break on the way down, the sun set right about when I got to the car. I was starting to get paranoid about car prowlers breaking in and stealing my water bottle. I was really looking forward to cold water.

    I didn't see that thread, but I've seen so many about how too much cardio is bad for you in so many ways. But I'm able to enjoy a lot of stuff to the point that exercise and calories are the icing on the cake.

    Anyway, getting back on topic, lot and moderate intensity cardio can be done longer than HIIT. When you do the math, that always burns more calories. It's great for building endurance. It's generally less prone to injury. And beginners should use lower intensities to get used to exercise and build a fitness base.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Options
    NorthCascades wrote: »
    pierinifitness wrote: »
    NorthCascades wrote: »
    I did 11 hours of moderate intensity cardio yesterday. My watch's calorie estimate is obscene.

    Share?

    https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/3866173895

    Incredible place it appears, love that topo map view. Ohhh, cave nearby.

    But at 477 cal/hr, and considering perhaps 70 of those are BMR anyway, you don't think outdoor hiking could have done 400 net/hr?

    Or you mean obscene as in overall quantity but likely accurate?
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Options
    irejb wrote: »
    I previously posted about how my body was physically 'rejecting' high intensity cardio or HIIT, and some have suggested to limit HIIT to once a week and do low intensity cardio or LISS, along with a variety of other exercises, such as weight lifting, for the rest of the week .

    I always thought that high intensity cardio quickly helped weight loss (of course assuming that one's diet is healthy and there is a calorie deficit).

    I'm curious to hear other people's thoughts or weight loss experiences with LISS. Thanks.

    When the LISS was done within my time constraints at a level of intensity that was max but still allowed for recovery that night so that I could do it again the next day - that burned the most calories to allow me to eat more.

    The longer training workouts at lower intensity may have burned more overall, but really required a rest day just because of the longer time damage.

    If goal is purely to burn the most to be able to eat as some reasonable level, and limited on time - it can take some experimenting to discover that max level that allows recovery.

    Or you can treat your days like an interval session - one day is short and intense, next day is longer and easier.
  • Chieflrg
    Chieflrg Posts: 9,097 Member
    Options
    I utilize LISS as a my cardio as a powerlifter. It allows me to build up my work capacity and recover from my training.

    My templates that I write for people I train, the cardio might involve them doing strictly HIIT, LISS, or both. It is tailored to their goals and time/days available to train.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,970 Member
    Options
    heybales wrote: »
    NorthCascades wrote: »
    pierinifitness wrote: »
    NorthCascades wrote: »
    I did 11 hours of moderate intensity cardio yesterday. My watch's calorie estimate is obscene.

    Share?

    https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/3866173895

    Incredible place it appears, love that topo map view. Ohhh, cave nearby.

    But at 477 cal/hr, and considering perhaps 70 of those are BMR anyway, you don't think outdoor hiking could have done 400 net/hr?

    Or you mean obscene as in overall quantity but likely accurate?

    Definitely obscene in the sense that it's 4.5 days of food for many people on MFP. 🤯

    You seem to think the number is plausible. I think you know more than I do about how to estimate walking calories. I've seen you help people figure them out, and you go into a lot of depth. I would trust your opinion over mine.

    I know that I should be burning ~100 kCal per mile on a flat sidewalk, body plus pack weight. I don't know how to adjust for elevation change. I'm convinced walking downhill is more energy than on flat ground, you have to work to resist gravity, prolonged downhill makes sore knees. I also don't know how to adjust for terrain.

    I think knowing actual bike calories might be line wearing blinders. It's very rare for me to burn 2,000 on the bike and takes a lot to accomplish. I can't help comparing, and they're not really comparable.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Options
    Purely by distance I'd agree badly inflated - 16 miles @ 336 c/mile. Depending on weight with clothes/pack, but inflated to some degree. Just didn't think obscene perhaps depending on those factors.
    But compared to some normal diet levels, oh yes.

    This had the info on incline/decline walking/running - not too many studies on it that I could find years ago.
    https://www.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/japplphysiol.01177.2001

    Basically, the formula for incline walking leads to decline being 55% of that burn if pace is kept the same.
    Normally that would be a tad less than same pace level walking.
    Thing is though, downhill is usually done faster than the matching uphill, so you don't burn 55% as much as the up, even though it took less time.
    So you went up in 406 min, down in 207, then again distance up 8.77, down 7.19 - so some inaccuracy like your other topic is looking at.

    Years ago the formula I got from that I used in a spreadsheet for calories is (pace in meter/min):
    if(gender="W",(0.1 * pace + 1.8 * pace * %grade / 100 + 3.5) / 3.5 * RMR / 1440, if(gender="M",(0.2 * pace + 0.9 * pace * %grade / 100 + 3.5) / 3.5 * RMR / 1440)) (if decline %grade, then * 0.55)

    So your 5118 ft downhill segment of 8.77 m (to match the up) in 207 min at my RMR (no extra weight) = 1115
    Uphill segment in 406 min = 2214
    For comparison if same downhill time/distance but level = 1477

    This formula though doesn't react as well to carrying the extra weight as normal cal/lb/mile does, since it's using METS and RMR, no really easy way to translate.

    But for a good elevation formula based just on weight, the down would likely still be that same 55% of whatever the up is at similar pace.
  • amusedmonkey
    amusedmonkey Posts: 10,330 Member
    Options
    I don't do HIIT at all because it makes me extremely hungry. I mostly do low intensity (walking) and moderate intensity (running). I don't even think HIIT is the best option for calorie burn because of the (generally) short duration, the low burn rest intervals, and the long recovery. I don't know why many seem to think it's the best exercise for weight loss. It has its place if you're trying to increase your VO2 max or if you prefer it to other kinds, but since weight loss is about calorie balance, there are plenty of other types of cardio that burn better calories sustainably, so they support weight loss better than HIIT.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Options
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    I don't do HIIT at all because it makes me extremely hungry. I mostly do low intensity (walking) and moderate intensity (running). I don't even think HIIT is the best option for calorie burn because of the (generally) short duration, the low burn rest intervals, and the long recovery. I don't know why many seem to think it's the best exercise for weight loss. It has its place if you're trying to increase your VO2 max or if you prefer it to other kinds, but since weight loss is about calorie balance, there are plenty of other types of cardio that burn better calories sustainably, so they support weight loss better than HIIT.

    Exactly - it's not a good calorie burner compared to moderate intensity cardio for same time. If that's the sole purpose.

    And the studies are about it's aerobic improvements in less time than LISS would require. So if crunched for time and purpose is aerobic improvements - perhaps good idea once a base fitness is gained - or being very careful about injury.

    The other benefit though is a few studies that did find more fat loss. But I haven't reviewed the studies in awhile and forgot why I didn't trust the setup, and not merely as easy as just doing HIIT.

    https://exrx.net/FatLoss/HIITvsET

    But obviously that benefit could easily be wiped out if it made you hungry and munchies caused overeating or maintenance level eating.
  • pierinifitness
    pierinifitness Posts: 2,231 Member
    Options
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    I don't do HIIT at all because it makes me extremely hungry. I mostly do low intensity (walking) and moderate intensity (running). I don't even think HIIT is the best option for calorie burn because of the (generally) short duration, the low burn rest intervals, and the long recovery. I don't know why many seem to think it's the best exercise for weight loss. It has its place if you're trying to increase your VO2 max or if you prefer it to other kinds, but since weight loss is about calorie balance, there are plenty of other types of cardio that burn better calories sustainably, so they support weight loss better than HIIT.

    Interesting and the opposite of my experience. LISS makes me hungry as a bear and I've said that the cardio pony builds a stallion appetite. I said that in a LISS context. HIIT dampens my appetite. We're all different.

Categories