Cardio

laranas23

Is hiit cardio better than my fat burning zone steady state cardio for weight loss?.

dewd2

That graphic is a bit misleading. Sure HIIT (assuming done correctly, not what many do calling it HIIT) burns more calories while you are doing it, but if it is done correctly you're only doing it for a few minutes. There's no way I can burn as many calories with HIIT as I can when I run. I can run forever.

OP - Fat burning zone is a marketing term used to sell equipment. While there is some truth to which fuel you burn in different zones, it matter little to the overall fat loss. It is best to ignore the nonsense. My second point is pay attention to your diet more than exercise if you want to lose weight. It matters much more how much you put in then how much you burn (since it is hard to burn many calories).

sijomial

If you really want to use exercise to create a calorie deficit (which probably is not a good choice) then neither low intensity cardio or HIIT are the right choice.
Long duration moderate intensity cardio is potentially the biggest burn without a load of fatigue if you have the time, inclination and fitness to do a high volume.

Infographic posted isn't actually very good - HIIT typically isn't done with a barbell as it's cardio at maximal or near to maximal effort for very short bursts with recovery periods and no it's not an efficent way to burn calories at all let alone a big calorie burner. You would be unlikely to do genuine HIIT for more than 20 mins and could burn an awful lot more at a sustainable high effort instead of bursts of unsustainable very high effort and low burn intervals.

Worrying yourself about what fuel you use during your exercise is pointless if your only goal is weighloss - simply doesn't matter.