Does strength training actually work?

MB_Positif

Yes. Here's my best personal example. The first year I was here I lost 50 pounds eating at a calorie deficit, doing cardio and a little strength training. The second year, I focused on strength training. I lost 2 pounds but went from a size 10 to a size 6.

geebusuk

For an equivalent period resistance training would burn between three and four hundred calories.

How did you work out the relative calories burnt?
Is this a period continually resistance training, as you would be continually running?
(1000 is a fair bit for just over an hour's running, even including BMR, but does depend on weight etc, of course.)

nosebag1212

caloric deficit is most important

6ftamazon

Definitely works. I strength train 3-4 days a week and I've noticed a drastic shape change. Plus I have more energy and I get to eat more lol

albayin

I have been weight lifting for over a year now I didn't lose inches nor weight, but people comment on my muscle tone...it's very obvious...and it changes the way I move too. It gets noticed...

I still wish more tangible changes..but guess that's how it is for now...

evileen99

Because I never get tired of posting it....

Same woman in all three pics. On the left, at her goal weight. On the right, after a heavy lifting program. Even though she weighs less on the left, she looks better on the right.

MeanderingMammal

For an equivalent period resistance training would burn between three and four hundred calories.

How did you work out the relative calories burnt?
Is this a period continually resistance training, as you would be continually running?

I figured that in the context of the point that was challenged an assessment based on elapsed time would be most appropriate, recognising that in an hours worth of resistance training there is reasonable proportion of reduced intensity when reconfiguring equipment and resting between sets.

I got the range on resistance training from injecting my own metrics into four different exercise trackers, and it seemed reasonably consistent with many of the discussions here.

(1000 is a fair bit for just over an hour's running, even including BMR, but does depend on weight etc, of course.)

It was a hilly offroad session on the Salisbury Plain Training Area, so probably a little overcooked, but again loading the file into the same four trackers gave me a range with 1000 being most conservative, although MFP reduced it a little on import. I was in one of the forestry areas on the plain this morning for 13k and the count was even higher, although I was anaerobic for a reasonable amount of that, given how steep some of the terrain is. It's probably about 150 to 200 higher than a flat road session, like South Bank of the Thames.

Notwithstanding all of that my original point remains the same, CV and resistance are complementary, they have different outcomes. There was discussion the other day that likened it to a range of effect, which struck me as quite a useful way describe it. Stuff like light weights with lots of fast paced reps give a predominantly CV effect with minimal resistance effect. Similarly grinding a bike up a steep climb goes anaerobic and has much less CV effect but a fair resistance effect, whereas 30kph on a flat road is predominantly CV with minimal resistance effect.

geebusuk

To be fair, just looked back and endomondo gave a similar calorie burn for that sort of distance for me on a run which involved some VERY steep stuff on moors in West Yorks. (Endomondo incluides BMR, however.)

My point about weight training is that it's nigh-on impossible to get a decent figure.

A lot of people seem to think that the 'EPOC' (after burn) is over-rated, but I believe some studies have shown it as high as in the 700 calorie region. This was fairly recently too - I've noted that my calorie burn according to the HRM has gone down as I've got fitter. I'm presuming from your avatar, running isn't too unusual for you either!

While it's more 'cardio' rather than strength, I'd suggest something like 'body pump' is going to be the closest to running for comparison. Suppose that's not unreasonable for calories burnt at the time as the arm work using small weights over smallish ranges won't do much.

But yes, I would agree; it's a sliding scale.

From doing 5RMs one one side to a 16 hour walk/jog/cycle on the other.

albayin

for that "post burn" thing, I havent found reliable sources on affirmative studies and data..but guess my reseach skill may not be as competent...

Anyway, I recently got a bodymedia fit armband. I was wondering if this thing could help me track if post burn exists and what pattern it might be following...just a thought...

geebusuk

Anyway, I recently got a bodymedia fit armband. I was wondering if this thing could help me track if post burn exists and what pattern it might be following...just a thought...

Not in the slightest, I'm afraid.

As it goes, I DO Have a product that could give you an idea of it - a metabolic testing unit.

Not something you can really use that usefully as you have to breath through a mask and so on.

MeanderingMammal

To be fair, just looked back and endomondo gave a similar calorie burn for that sort of distance for me on a run which involved some VERY steep stuff on moors in West Yorks. (Endomondo incluides BMR, however.)

I generally find Endomondo higher, although today it was on the lower end.

A lot of people seem to think that the 'EPOC' (after burn) is over-rated, but I believe some studies have shown it as high as in the 700 calorie region.

The snag with the EPOC comparison is that many of the "cardio" benchmarks appear to be against a 60% MHR figure, but there doesn't seem to be any consistency around conclusions, with everything from single figure upwards. I haven't seen reporting as high as that, but in the right circumstances it might be reasonable.

This was fairly recently too - I've noted that my calorie burn according to the HRM has gone down as I've got fitter. I'm presuming from your avatar, running isn't too unusual for you either!

I'd agree, as I've got fitter it's harder work to raise my HR, although that's translated into a speed increase, I've knocked a reasonable amount off my 5K and 10k times. I generally do five runs per week, two at recovery pace and three tempo/ interval sessions, along with two bodyweight sessions. I've dropped my resting heart rate a lot as a result of training more consciously.

I was reflecting on military training earlier, lots of CV and bodyweight with very little overt weight training. Along with the diet many candidates kick out at the end with a significantly changed body shape.

geebusuk

I've read endomondo is higher generally - should note I use it with a HRM - however for me it seems reasonably consistent with others when you account for it including BMR.
I would trust figures significantly less without a HRM. Wish they would release a phone app which worked as well as the motoactv - on that, some phone apps as with the motoactv can also take a VO2 max figure I believe, to make it even more accurate.

In the end, milatry training tends to be trying to be 'functional training'. While it may not be ideal for body composition, as can be seen by the people that do purely a body weight circuit style routine - give it enough time and you will get body composition changes. Just maybe not as quick as focusing on ideal ranges for muscle growth.

Francl27

I don't think you can expect miracle while losing weight, honestly. I have no idea what I would look like if I hadn't done it obviously... I still have fat on my hips (and my belly maybe, but it's hard to tell if it's loose skin or fat at this point), I'm still pudgy even though I'm 14 lbs under the 'overweight' mark... My arms and shoulders look more muscular than I'd like though... my legs look fine but they've always looked pretty good... it's all my midsection.

I think it's mostly genetics, frankly...

hesn92

be patient. If you are not trying to lose any more weight then you should probably up your calories to maintenance. I don't spend much time lifting weights. I'm in the gym for maybe 30 minutes and I do really basic things, like squats, deadlifts, bench press, etc. And honestly it makes a difference in how my body looks very quickly. Maybe a month into it and I can already see my stomach start to shrink and get harder...

madiao

Click on my profile and check my blog.

Yes it works. You need to make sure you have a good program. I would recommend Starting Strength by Mark Rippletoe as a good starting point. You could be on that program for years.

Make sure that your diet has high protein. approx 0.7-0.8g of protein per lb you weigh. so if you weigh 160lb then eat around 130g.

Make sure you are weighing cooked food BEFORE it is cooked.

Also note that belly fat is one of the last places to go (yes it does come off with other body fat, but that "stubborn" fat is around teh back and belly) This is due to poor blood circulation around these areas.

Is eating that much protein really necessary? What does it do exactly for strength training/inch loss/weight loss?
Sorry if that's a stupid question!

Yes it does.
I eat around maintainance, lift 3 times a week (plus some cardio inbetween)
I have gained some pounds, but my measurements have gone down. My stomach is a lot flatter now, and my legs and butt look amazing now

I'm 5'11" and weigh around 165 lbs. Currently eating 2500-2700 a day, maintaining weight. Current goal is getting 10k steps a day on Fitbit, and building more muscle and strength.

How quickly did you start to notice your stomach getting g flatter?

Thanks for everyone's help, you guys are awesome

fushigi1988

How quickly did you start to notice your stomach getting g flatter?

It took a few months before I really saw anything in the mirror, but I noticed it in my clothing a bit sooner.
I make sure to get at least 100 grams of protein per day, for the rest I eat what I want, including cookies and ice cream a couple times a week.

geebusuk

That sort of protein level is a good target. 1g/lb of lean body mass (not fat) is better, but can be quite hard to work out.

When at a calorie deficit your body looks for other sources of fuel as well as carbs (and fat) you eat. One of these is the energy stored in your muscles.
By having protein levels high it means your body will hopefully go for protein from your diet over that from your muscles.

So it helps ensure that this comes from food rather than muscle.
Protein is also used in building new muscle, however at a deficit that is likely to be very limited for most people.

If you're "bulking", you actually need LESS protein - because you have enough calories/carbs the body isn't trying to use protein as a fuel, so it can put what you have to building muscle. Not sure about maintenance, but certainly your body should have more chance to make use of the protein you have.
Excess protein rarely causes issues, so can often make sense to have a bit more.

Also a note on the 'cooked food' - some foods on here are listed cooked, so should be recorded appropriately. I suspect when I get one of the rather dry cooked end-of-day-offer cooked chickens, it's actually likely more protein/caloires than listed.

madiao

Wow thabks for all the help, you guys really are awsome! And so knowledgable!

Does it make much of a difference to record cooked vs uncooked meat? Some of the items don't specify?

I often make things like stirfry or curry which has smaller pieces of meat, but it makes four servings, I usually serve my partner up more than myself, but what would be the best way to measure the meat accurately?

Sorry if this is a dumb question!

fushigi1988

Wow thabks for all the help, you guys really are awsome! And so knowledgable!

Does it make much of a difference to record cooked vs uncooked meat? Some of the items don't specify?

I often make things like stirfry or curry which has smaller pieces of meat, but it makes four servings, I usually serve my partner up more than myself, but what would be the best way to measure the meat accurately?

Sorry if this is a dumb question!

I make recipes for that. I put in the totals of everything I put in, and I just weigh the portion I put on my plate. Works pretty good

geebusuk

You can lose a fair bit of weight when cooking meat, so best to make sure you match when you weigh it with the food you've got in MFP.