Is 60+ mins of exercise too much?

shayjgordon

I recently watched an episode of Steven & Chris and their fitness expert said that you should do 30-60 mins of exercise per day. Great, that's do-able! She also said not to go over 60 mins per day, and that it's not good for your body.

I know you need to listen to your body, and if it needs a break, take a break. But if you can push through a 2 hour workout, then why not, right? Is there such a thing as too much exercise? If you're not in pain and feel comfortable to keep going, isn't that a good thing? I do 45-70 mins of cardio then 25-30 mins of strength all from home, should I cut back? Maybe do 30 mins of cardio but go harder, keeping my heart rate higher, so I can still burn the calories, then 30 mins of strength?

Thanks!

macnotes

I personally don't think 60+ minutes of exercise is too much. There must be some qualification behind the statement made. Perhaps for people that aren't conditioned to work out longer?

scott091501

I'm up a creek if true.

lporter229

I think that some people put too much emphasis on the quantity of exercise and not the quality. Some people can work out for 20 minutes and get results that take others hours because of the difference in intensity. Look at the results people have gotten just by doing 30DS. I think your body will let you know if you are working out too much (too hard). I don't think the amount of time you work out makes much difference.

yogsvr4

I personally don't think 60+ minutes of exercise is too much. There must be some qualification behind the statement made. Perhaps for people that aren't conditioned to work out longer?

Yeah, I'm thinking there was more context to that then a simple claim of more then 60 is a bad thing.

If true, then every marathon runner must be in terrible shape :laugh:

jasperann

That doesn't seem true. I did a 100 min bootcamp last night and 104 min bike ride today... (after mowing the lawn). Although I have tons of available calories today. I won't be eating them all, not sure I could unless I went to McDonald's and ate a couple big macs and a huge fry. lol

terri0527

If true... stick a fork in me, I'm done :laugh:

scott091501

If this "expert" can call and tell me how I'm supposed to complete an Ironman in under 10 hours on 30 to 60 minutes of training a day I'd be pleased because it sure would save me a lot of grief from the wife about how much time I spend training.

shayjgordon

Yeah, I totally agree that quality is the most important. I'm sure she meant on a regular basis, people aren't running marathons daily lol. Thanks for your input...I'm just going to do keep doing what I have been doing!

temp666777

Exercise has no bearing on fat loss.

All that matters is (1) slash carbohydrate intake and (2) daily calorie deficit.

Adding exercise does not change your calorie defecit. Adding exercise simply means, YOU CAN EAT MORE, IF YOU WANT TO. THat is the one and only benefit of exercise, for fat loss.

If your aim is literally to LOSE FAT, then, just EAT LESS and forget about exercise.

Say you need 2000 calories a day (just for example). If you do 400 calories of exercise, you will need 2400 calories a day.

In the first case: if you eat 1700 calories, you will have a 300 calorie deficit. Makes sense?

In the SECOND case, if you eat 2100 calories .. you will have the identical 300 calorie deficit. There's no difference.

Exercise just makes you want to eat more.

if you happen to want to exercise, that's fine. But THE ONE AND ONLY THING THAT MATTERS is the calorie deficit.

joejccva71

60+ minutes is not too much as long you take rest days.

If you're in the gym and you're strength training for 2 hours a day , 6 days a week....THAT is too much.

Longer training isn't smarter training. Your CNS will thank you later.

joejccva71

Exercise has no bearing on fat loss.

All that matters is (1) slash carbohydrate intake and (2) daily calorie deficit.

Adding exercise does not change your calorie defecit. Adding exercise simply means, YOU CAN EAT MORE, IF YOU WANT TO. THat is the one and only benefit of exercise, for fat loss.

If your aim is literally to LOSE FAT, then, just EAT LESS and forget about exercise.

Say you need 2000 calories a day (just for example). If you do 400 calories of exercise, you will need 2400 calories a day.

In the first case: if you eat 1700 calories, you will have a 300 calorie deficit. Makes sense?

In the SECOND case, if you eat 2100 calories .. you will have the identical 300 calorie deficit. There's no difference.

Exercise just makes you want to eat more.

if you happen to want to exercise, that's fine. But THE ONE AND ONLY THING THAT MATTERS is the calorie deficit.

You're half right.

I don't need to slash carbs to lose weight. Just the calorie deficit.

Low carb and/or Ketogenic diets have no metabolic advantage.

Edit: I also failed to mention that if you want good body composition and retain LBM, then yes resistance training exercise matters.

onedayillbeamilf

Exercise has no bearing on fat loss.

All that matters is (1) slash carbohydrate intake and (2) daily calorie deficit.

Adding exercise does not change your calorie defecit. Adding exercise simply means, YOU CAN EAT MORE, IF YOU WANT TO. THat is the one and only benefit of exercise, for fat loss.

If your aim is literally to LOSE FAT, then, just EAT LESS and forget about exercise.

Say you need 2000 calories a day (just for example). If you do 400 calories of exercise, you will need 2400 calories a day.

In the first case: if you eat 1700 calories, you will have a 300 calorie deficit. Makes sense?

In the SECOND case, if you eat 2100 calories .. you will have the identical 300 calorie deficit. There's no difference.

Exercise just makes you want to eat more.

if you happen to want to exercise, that's fine. But THE ONE AND ONLY THING THAT MATTERS is the calorie deficit.

Why do I have a feeling I need an umbrella for the *kitten* storm that's about to blow through here?

dolldreams

When I lost my first 48 lbs prior to MFP I worked out at least 2 hours a day. I never felt better and I'm trying to work back up to that level.

Some people work jobs for 8 hours a day harder than some of us exercise so I don't think it's harmful at all.

dolldreams

Exercise has no bearing on fat loss.

All that matters is (1) slash carbohydrate intake and (2) daily calorie deficit.

Adding exercise does not change your calorie defecit. Adding exercise simply means, YOU CAN EAT MORE, IF YOU WANT TO. THat is the one and only benefit of exercise, for fat loss.

If your aim is literally to LOSE FAT, then, just EAT LESS and forget about exercise.

Say you need 2000 calories a day (just for example). If you do 400 calories of exercise, you will need 2400 calories a day.

In the first case: if you eat 1700 calories, you will have a 300 calorie deficit. Makes sense?

In the SECOND case, if you eat 2100 calories .. you will have the identical 300 calorie deficit. There's no difference.

Exercise just makes you want to eat more.

if you happen to want to exercise, that's fine. But THE ONE AND ONLY THING THAT MATTERS is the calorie deficit.

Why do I have a feeling I need an umbrella for the *kitten* storm that's about to blow through here?

:laugh:

runnercheryl

60+ minutes of anything intense would be too much for me. I'd never be able to eat that many calories back.

katkins3

I'm up a creek if true.

Me too!
I do that as a minimum daily and often twice that and more, and I'm 61 years old! I Jazzercise everyday, often doing back to back classes. also strength training and walk and hour a couple times a week. :noway:

Thomasm198

Exercise has no bearing on fat loss.

All that matters is (1) slash carbohydrate intake and (2) daily calorie deficit.

Adding exercise does not change your calorie defecit. Adding exercise simply means, YOU CAN EAT MORE, IF YOU WANT TO. THat is the one and only benefit of exercise, for fat loss.

If your aim is literally to LOSE FAT, then, just EAT LESS and forget about exercise.

Say you need 2000 calories a day (just for example). If you do 400 calories of exercise, you will need 2400 calories a day.

In the first case: if you eat 1700 calories, you will have a 300 calorie deficit. Makes sense?

In the SECOND case, if you eat 2100 calories .. you will have the identical 300 calorie deficit. There's no difference.

Exercise just makes you want to eat more.

if you happen to want to exercise, that's fine. But THE ONE AND ONLY THING THAT MATTERS is the calorie deficit.

HonkyTonks

I have heard of over training, but I think 60+ minutes is fine, just need to make sure you have rest days and stuff.

LENAhall

i think if you balance cardio, weight training and some quality stretching/yoga, then the more the merrier!! i try to do the tri-fecta at the gym on tues, thurs and sat of spin (50 min), group power(55min) (barbell class) and basic yoga (50 min). i feel like a million bucks after that!!

LENAhall

When I lost my first 48 lbs prior to MFP I worked out at least 2 hours a day. I never felt better and I'm trying to work back up to that level.

Some people work jobs for 8 hours a day harder than some of us exercise so I don't think it's harmful at all.

for realz!!! i think that is what has gotten america into this rotund shape! people used to "work" at work... all day working and moving and now we sit at a desk, drive all day, etc then worry if X number of minutes is too much. i log a lot of gym minutes and my work is pretty intense.... i feel like a warrior!!