You will lose your lean mass if you just do cardio
Replies
-
Thanks for posting.. interesting topic and great info. I want to save this for later to read in more detail
0 -
I would like to see some scientific proof that you'll lose lean mass or become "skinny fat" by just doing cardio. Honestly, I haven't lifted weights since my early 20's. I've run, done yoga, done martial arts for years... I had a DEXA scan done in 2004 at 29 years of age that showed I have 120 lbs of lean mass and I had one done a few weeks ago that showed the same 120 lbs of lean mass. I haven't lifted a single weight in that time and my diet has been all over the board, two pregnancies... not to mention 8 years have passed.
So... why is it that people are told not to do cardio only? If you already have a decent muscle base, why not just burn off the fat? I don't understand. It seems pretty hard to lose muscle... there was a time I wanted to.
two pregnancies - does that mean you have had small children around the house? that's weightlifting.
haha yep... I have a 6 year old and a 2 year old. I often have to squat to the ground while holding the 34lb 2 year old
0 -
BUMP0
-
Just to stick my ore in!! I was doing Lots of cardio and lost loads of muscle mass! Now I do both that loss has slowed and I am hoping on Friday to see it stop! And then it can start going up!! Woo hoo!!
Also I have to agree that you are not really doing just cardio with all your activities!! I would've lost more muscle mass if I hadn't been doing Yoga as well!!0 -
Personally, I don't want to be a big muscled body builder, but I greatly prefer my higher muscle mass (and higher body fat) look to that of a lower muscle mass that many runners seem to have.
I'm the one in yellow. I prefer my arms and legs over the arms and legs of the two girls ahead of me. I'd love to be as fast as they are, because they cream my *kitten* in races. We're all in the same age group (35-39). They're not skinny fat. They have low body fat, but also a lower muscle mass.
And I'm not all that muscular, as you can see when relaxed in normal clothes. But I'm not anywhere near a "runner's build."
I'm a runner who loves muscle mass My weight is around 127 but I wear a size 0-2 because of the muscle I've built from running and now cycling. I've also gotten used to the higher body fat numbers, seems to go with the territory when you have a great deal of muscle! We've got some guys in our local running groups that look like they have skin on top of bone and that's about it! I have nice toned arms and am told runners legs and love them. I do use weights a couple of times a week but my trainer has me on lower weights and higher reps. I think you look great by the way!
In regards to the original post, I personally believe Yoga is strength training. It isn't my thing, I perfer weights but everyone has to do what works for them. I run, bike, spin and strength train and it's all good :happy:
0 -
Sure, you can in certain situations. It will just depend on the factors I listed. Once you get extremely lean, cardio will not be enough in a significant deficit for most people. One will need a high tension muscle stimulus to optimally retain LBM (along with adequate protein intake and other requirements). Which is not to say certain amounts of cardio does not have it's benefits even in that situation - the two aren't mutually exclusive. But if hypothetically speaking, if you had to pick one, you would choose an adequate resistance program over cardio in that situation. (unless your goal happens to differ - i.e. you don't care about muscle loss or you are an endurance athlete)
Do you honestly think it's this simplistic? So people just lift weights for fun while in a deficit?The reason you see that so many posts on MFP telling us that we will lose muscle if we do cardio only is because there is a large MFP population that comes to these forums from bodybuilding.com and/or other body building sites. You can even see the same catch phrases in many of their posts.
Of course you can keep muscle with cardio only. Muscles that are being worked regularly do not whither away, no matter how you work them.
An hour of low intensity cardio won't usually cause problems, but let's take it to another extreme - three hours of high intensity cardio, done multiple times a week. As you go to a higher and higher states of intensities, you tend to recruit more type 2 muscle fibers while sending an "endurance signal" - this means the fibers need to adapt to the signal, which means becoming smaller. Combine that with a caloric deficit, and low protein intake, and this is bad news. Vaguely speaking, in that situation there is a higher likelihood of muscle loss, but even that will depend on various factors - to name some:
1. How overfat the individual is
2. Around workout nutrition and total daily caloric/macro intake
3. The rest of the training program (looking at frequency, volume, and intensity).
4. Genetics/gender
5. Other factors I'm overlooking at the moment
Of course, things get further complicated with the newbie effect. And when people are actually losing weight, even in the cases of muscle loss, the muscles hiding behind the fat become more apparent due to the accompanied fat loss, giving a more "toned" look, which adds on to the confusion. But none of this changes what I described above.
Yes, you can overdo cardio and eat a bad diet. You can also keep LBM with cardio only IF done properly and while eating a proper diet? Does that make it all better?0 -
In my younger years I could do cardio all the time, I was a cardio machine!!! And I still maintained muscle tone and strength. Now that I'm in my 50's...that does not work for me. Too much cardio now makes me look haggard, tired ...and flabby (yuck). Now I need strength training/ weight lifting to maintain muscle!!!
So what works in your youth does not always translate to your latter years.0 -
I would like to see some scientific proof that you'll lose lean mass or become "skinny fat" by just doing cardio. Honestly, I haven't lifted weights since my early 20's. I've run, done yoga, done martial arts for years... I had a DEXA scan done in 2004 at 29 years of age that showed I have 120 lbs of lean mass and I had one done a few weeks ago that showed the same 120 lbs of lean mass. I haven't lifted a single weight in that time and my diet has been all over the board, two pregnancies... not to mention 8 years have passed.
So... why is it that people are told not to do cardio only? If you already have a decent muscle base, why not just burn off the fat? I don't understand. It seems pretty hard to lose muscle... there was a time I wanted to.
You don't need scientific proof. All you need is common sense and a pair of eyes. Look at all the marathon runners and cyclists in the World. Not one of them is muscular, but all of them are quite skinny almost like toothpicks. The body get's rid of things it does not need. If you stay in a bed for 3 months all your muscles will have become smaller because muscles which are not stimulated from lifting eventually disappear because the body doesn't need them. Muscles need more energy than other tissue. If the body doesn't need muscle it get's rid of them which also causes your metabolism to slow down as well.
Finally, once glycogen levels in your muscles have dropped during intense exercise the body will use whatever it finds to "feed" itself. In this case, 75% of calories burned come from fat stored in your body, while 25% comes from muscle.
This is the reason bodybuilders eat every 2.5 - 3 hours because they do not want to lose muscle tissue which is very hard to gain.0 -
Did you actually read the study? If you did, you'd see how wrong that interpretation is.
Having read the study now, I don't see what you think is wrong about the site I quoted. The diet and endurance (cardio) group lost the most fat, 8% vs. 4.3% for the strength training group.
"Surprisingly, all dietary groups experienced similar reductions in body mass (−6.2, −6.8, and −7.0 kg for D, DE, and DES groups, respectively) and body composition (−5.8, −8.0, and −4.3% in D, DE, and DES groups, respectively),"
While the diet and endurance group gained lean body mass (+1.4 kg), the diet, exercise and strength training group lost fat-free mass (1.7kg or 3.7 lbs) just like the article I quoted said.
"whereas fat-free mass remained relatively constant (−0.1, +1.4, and −1.7 kg in D, DE, and DES groups, respectively) over the 12-wk period."
This study actually shows the opposite of what people citing it claim.0 -
In my younger years I could do cardio all the time, I was a cardio machine!!! And I still maintained muscle tone and strength. Now that I'm in my 50's...that does not work for me. Too much cardio now makes me look haggard, tired ...and flabby (yuck). Now I need strength training/ weight lifting to maintain muscle!!!
So what works in your youth does not always translate to your latter years.
This is because your body naturally produced more growth hormone when you were younger. This helps significantly with maintaining lean mass, regardless of the type of exercise. It is also significantly increased with strength training (at any age, though again...moreso when you're younger). Kenny and I have discussed this fact on her before.0 -
Did you actually read the study? If you did, you'd see how wrong that interpretation is.
Having read the study now, I don't see what you think is wrong about the site I quoted. The diet and endurance (cardio) group lost the most fat, 8% vs. 4.3% for the strength training group.
"Surprisingly, all dietary groups experienced similar reductions in body mass (−6.2, −6.8, and −7.0 kg for D, DE, and DES groups, respectively) and body composition (−5.8, −8.0, and −4.3% in D, DE, and DES groups, respectively),"
While the diet and endurance group gained lean body mass (+1.4 kg), the diet, exercise and strength training group lost fat-free mass (1.7kg or 3.7 lbs) just like the article I quoted said.
"whereas fat-free mass remained relatively constant (−0.1, +1.4, and −1.7 kg in D, DE, and DES groups, respectively) over the 12-wk period."
This study actually shows the opposite of what people citing it claim.
Read my previous post that I addressed to crissanderson of some of my comments on the study. Particularly note the fact about who the subjects were of the study. Also note that caloric intake/protein intake was not monitored. Also read my post shortly after that about how there are so many factors that can affect the results.
On top of that, the following conclusion is emphasized multiple times throughout the study by the authors:
"No significant changes were observed in fat-free mass over the 12 wk in any of the groups (Fig. 1 D). There were no differences in the magnitude of changes in body mass, percent body fat, fat mass, and fat-free mass among groups."
So why was this not mentioned in the website you linked?
Given all this information, do you think these small fluctuations are significant enough to support any of the conclusions of the analysis you linked (which even the AUTHORS of the study directly contradict multiple times in their conclusions)?0 -
bump0
-
Read my previous post that I addressed to crissanderson of some of my comments on the study. Particularly note the fact about who the subjects were of the study. Also note that caloric intake/protein intake was not monitored. Also read my post shortly after that about how there are so many factors that can affect the results.
On top of that, the following conclusion is emphasized multiple times throughout the study by the authors:
"No significant changes were observed in fat-free mass over the 12 wk in any of the groups (Fig. 1 D). There were no differences in the magnitude of changes in body mass, percent body fat, fat mass, and fat-free mass among groups."
So why was this not mentioned in the website you linked?
Given all this information, do you think these small fluctuations are significant enough to support any of the conclusions of the analysis you linked (which even the AUTHORS of the study directly contradict multiple times in their conclusions)?
There was no difference in the MAGNITUDE of the changes. That doesn't mean there were no changes, or that the changes didn't favor cardio over lifting, just that the changes all in all weren't enormously different.
As far as other factors ... yeah, so? There is no study out there that's not going to be influenced by some variables.
Besides that, AUTHORS aren't necessarily free of bias. They even state that they were surprised at some of the results and don't understand what's going on entirely.
Which is still beside the point I was making, and discussion of the website I quoted is really a pointless distraction. This study has been pointed to on this forum and others to show that you have to lift to retain muscle mass. In-fact the study clearly does not show that. In my opinion it shows the opposite.0 -
I would like to see some scientific proof that you'll lose lean mass or become "skinny fat" by just doing cardio. Honestly, I haven't lifted weights since my early 20's. I've run, done yoga, done martial arts for years... I had a DEXA scan done in 2004 at 29 years of age that showed I have 120 lbs of lean mass and I had one done a few weeks ago that showed the same 120 lbs of lean mass. I haven't lifted a single weight in that time and my diet has been all over the board, two pregnancies... not to mention 8 years have passed.
So... why is it that people are told not to do cardio only? If you already have a decent muscle base, why not just burn off the fat? I don't understand. It seems pretty hard to lose muscle... there was a time I wanted to.
You don't need scientific proof. All you need is common sense and a pair of eyes. Look at all the marathon runners and cyclists in the World. Not one of them is muscular, but all of them are quite skinny almost like toothpicks. The body get's rid of things it does not need. If you stay in a bed for 3 months all your muscles will have become smaller because muscles which are not stimulated from lifting eventually disappear because the body doesn't need them. Muscles need more energy than other tissue. If the body doesn't need muscle it get's rid of them which also causes your metabolism to slow down as well.
Finally, once glycogen levels in your muscles have dropped during intense exercise the body will use whatever it finds to "feed" itself. In this case, 75% of calories burned come from fat stored in your body, while 25% comes from muscle.
This is the reason bodybuilders eat every 2.5 - 3 hours because they do not want to lose muscle tissue which is very hard to gain.
Alright then. I'll just keep running until I look a little less like me and a little more like a real marathon runner. I'm happy with my current amount of muscle though... and could stand even to lose a little if it comes off. Guess I just don't worry about it. I just want to run farther and faster.0 -
You've just stated that you do yoga (static strength resistance training), martial arts (involves explosive strikes and kicks which is anaerobic and considered resistance training). So you JUST haven't been doing cardio only.I would like to see some scientific proof that you'll lose lean mass or become "skinny fat" by just doing cardio. Honestly, I haven't lifted weights since my early 20's. I've run, done yoga, done martial arts for years... I had a DEXA scan done in 2004 at 29 years of age that showed I have 120 lbs of lean mass and I had one done a few weeks ago that showed the same 120 lbs of lean mass. I haven't lifted a single weight in that time and my diet has been all over the board, two pregnancies... not to mention 8 years have passed.
So... why is it that people are told not to do cardio only? If you already have a decent muscle base, why not just burn off the fat? I don't understand. It seems pretty hard to lose muscle... there was a time I wanted to.
And lean mass doesn't ALWAYS mean muscle. You can get higher density in your bones, organs can gain mass etc.
But there have been studies done that show if protein balance is insufficient, muscle breakdown occurs.
Not much of a problem for the average runner of course - a jog around the block or even a 5k is not the same as a distance runner in training who does a half-marathon every day, and sprinters probably come under the strength training header since they're doing brief spurts of anaerobic activity.
Cyclists however can easily wind up with elevated protein breakdown - good thing you guys tend to drink lots of sugar water (sports drink). Insulin inhibits the breakdown of muscle protein...
And you do want to replace the glycogen stores pretty much immediately for optimal sports performance(Sports Med; 21(1), 7-17, 1996.) - it does make a difference for both us lifters and you endurance guys.
Plus, if glycogen stores remain remain low, muscle protein breakdown can result and lead to loss of muscle mass (Journal of Applied Physiology; 48, 624-629, 1980) - again not neccesarily a concern for the once-around-the-block amateur, but for the long distance/long duration crowd who spend hours on the elliptical, definitely.
A.C.E. Certified Personal Trainer/Group Fitness Instructor
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
EXCELLENT ANSWER. THIS IS TOTALLY TRUE. I AM IN THE PROCESS OF STUDYING TO BECOME A PERSONAL TRAINER AND STUDIED THE IMPORTANCE OF RESISTANCE TRAINING JUST THE OTHER DAY. AWESOME ANSWER.0 -
You've just stated that you do yoga (static strength resistance training), martial arts (involves explosive strikes and kicks which is anaerobic and considered resistance training). So you JUST haven't been doing cardio only.I would like to see some scientific proof that you'll lose lean mass or become "skinny fat" by just doing cardio. Honestly, I haven't lifted weights since my early 20's. I've run, done yoga, done martial arts for years... I had a DEXA scan done in 2004 at 29 years of age that showed I have 120 lbs of lean mass and I had one done a few weeks ago that showed the same 120 lbs of lean mass. I haven't lifted a single weight in that time and my diet has been all over the board, two pregnancies... not to mention 8 years have passed.
So... why is it that people are told not to do cardio only? If you already have a decent muscle base, why not just burn off the fat? I don't understand. It seems pretty hard to lose muscle... there was a time I wanted to.
And lean mass doesn't ALWAYS mean muscle. You can get higher density in your bones, organs can gain mass etc.
But there have been studies done that show if protein balance is insufficient, muscle breakdown occurs.
Not much of a problem for the average runner of course - a jog around the block or even a 5k is not the same as a distance runner in training who does a half-marathon every day, and sprinters probably come under the strength training header since they're doing brief spurts of anaerobic activity.
Cyclists however can easily wind up with elevated protein breakdown - good thing you guys tend to drink lots of sugar water (sports drink). Insulin inhibits the breakdown of muscle protein...
And you do want to replace the glycogen stores pretty much immediately for optimal sports performance(Sports Med; 21(1), 7-17, 1996.) - it does make a difference for both us lifters and you endurance guys.
Plus, if glycogen stores remain remain low, muscle protein breakdown can result and lead to loss of muscle mass (Journal of Applied Physiology; 48, 624-629, 1980) - again not neccesarily a concern for the once-around-the-block amateur, but for the long distance/long duration crowd who spend hours on the elliptical, definitely.
A.C.E. Certified Personal Trainer/Group Fitness Instructor
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
EXCELLENT ANSWER. THIS IS TOTALLY TRUE. I AM IN THE PROCESS OF STUDYING TO BECOME A PERSONAL TRAINER AND STUDIED THE IMPORTANCE OF RESISTANCE TRAINING JUST THE OTHER DAY. AWESOME ANSWER.
Okay so, in all seriousness, when I go on long or hard runs I replace glycogen immediately upon my return (fruit/carb snacks) and usually a full protein-rich meal within about 1-1.5 hours. I'm averaging about 85-90g protein a day (120 lbs lean mass) and am aiming to increase that to 100g+ daily)... I run about 45km/week and do two Insanity workouts each week. After race season I will likely back off my running to 2x/week and go back to HIIT classes with dumb bells, medicine balls etc.
That should work to keep my muscles right?0 -
I never claimed there were no changes. Of course there's going to be changes when you are in a deficit. Also note that the strength training group had a lower RER (respiratory exchange ratio). Lower RER is an indicator of a higher rate of fat oxidation.There was no difference in the MAGNITUDE of the changes. That doesn't mean there were no changes, or that the changes didn't favor cardio over lifting, just that the changes all in all weren't enormously different.
I should also add that the same folks (Kraemer et al) conducted an identical study with males a couple years later, and the results were that the diet-only group lost 3kg lean mass, the diet+endurance group lost 2kg lean mass, while the diet+endurance+strength training group lost 0.33kg lean mass. Also, the diet only group lost 6.68kg fat, diet+endurance lost 7kg fat, and diet+endurance+strength training lost 10kg fat.
Why the lack of consistency with the results between the two studies? To summarize Alan Aragon's analysis
1. lack of control in protein intake/calories. Dietary intake was also self-reported, which is a realistic limitation, but a limitation nonetheless.
2. gender differences
3. Another critical difference was that the lab used certified personal trainers for administrating the exercise programs of the men. Direct supervision of resistance training has been shown in studies to increase strength performance.
It would have been interesting to have both of the studies include a diet+solely strength training group.As far as other factors ... yeah, so? There is no study out there that's not going to be influenced by some variables.
Yes, for the most part, there is a lack of adequate dietary control in the research so far when directly comparing strength vs endurance training effects on body composition.
But this still doesn't change the fact that what the grand majority of studies show, and what the real world shows - and what bodybuilders figured out a long time ago - is that strength training has a LBM-preserving effect in a deficit, while endurance training does not. This also makes logical sense when you consider the fact that hypertrophy (muscle gain) occurs to a much greater degree in fast-twitch muscle fibers that are stimulated by strength training rather than endurance training. Logically, you could argue that the same mechanism which causes hypertrophy in a surplus will optimally retain LBM in a deficit.
Which is not to say that you should do zero cardio.
Also, it's not as simple as "weights vs cardio" - even though people will put them into these categories for simplicity (understandably). The lines get blurred with circuit training, varying rest periods, etc. Read about the strength-endurance continuum if you're interested.
Lastly - genetics play a huge role in all this (calorie partitioning - how much muscle loss occurs in a deficit compared to fat loss and how much fat gain occurs in a surplus compared to muscle gain) - something called the P-ratio plays a huge role. Rather than explain it, I will just link you here. http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/calorie-partitioning-part-1.html
I'll stop there since I already typed way too much.0 -
Me too. I keep my body guessing by changing my routines...plus I have the attention span of a humming bird. If I want to be consistently active, I have to change my work out regimens whether that is with yoga, running, swimming, boot camp or interval training.It feels like balance has been thrown out the window now with fitness - it always seems people are extreme-cardio, or extreme-weight lifting.
I prefer doing both.0 -
ok you're dumb. sorry, but yoga and martial arts is strength training. running is strength training too if you run on hills. use your brain and think about what you're saying before you post something that isn't true. you are contributing to the ignorance.0
-
ok you're dumb. sorry, but yoga and martial arts is strength training. running is strength training too if you run on hills. use your brain and think about what you're saying before you post something that isn't true. you are contributing to the ignorance.
Who is dumb?
Honestly, I don't consider those things strength training, I consider them endurance training. I do consider them better than traditional steady state cardio, by a million miles. I also concede that there are wonderful benefits to these things. I just don't believe, through my own experience and the experience of others I know, that they provide the same benefits to LBM retention as true strength training (lifting things and returning them to where they started, at such a weight where you can only complete 5-7 reps in a set without failure). The studies on this subject are a mish mash of uncontrolled variables, because no one performing the studies is interested in finding out specifically what we are...which is kind of odd to me.Also, it's not as simple as "weights vs cardio" - even though people will put them into these categories for simplicity (understandably). The lines get blurred with circuit training, varying rest periods, etc. Read about the strength-endurance continuum if you're interested.
Again, I agree completely. I perform my heavy strength training (again, 5 sets of 5 reps at a weight I can't maintain form with for more than 7 reps on the first set), in a circuit training format...with usually around 30 seconds between sets, and rarely more than a minute to two minutes between exercises. I feel this gives me all the hormonal and fat burning/LBM retention benefits of strength training (while sacrificing some of the actual gained strength), with a good portion of the benefits of high intensity cardio (my heart rate rarely falls below 130bpm, for the entire hour I'm lifting).0 -
ok you're dumb. sorry, but yoga and martial arts is strength training. running is strength training too if you run on hills. use your brain and think about what you're saying before you post something that isn't true. you are contributing to the ignorance.
Wow. Thanks for participating in this discussion with such thoughtfulness.
I posted the topic name I did to draw people in. Many people talk about "just cardio"... and mean things like endurance running. So if we're on the topic, let's define strength training. I'm pretty sure the standard definition of strength training is somewhat limited to lifting weights in repetition and, perhaps, calisthenics to some degree. Most classes, however, Insanity, Body Pump and the like... are considered cardio to "most" people. I would simply argue that one does not "have" to perform standard strength training routines to maintain lean body mass during weight loss. That's it.
I will completely disagree with you that yoga and martial arts and running are strength training too. Yes, I run hills, and I run speed repeats and I run long endurance runs too. I posted this topic for the discussion's sake and I think the discussion has been had.
I'm very pleased with the responses here; I already know what works for me. I'd say there's only one comment on this entire thread that makes anyone appear "dumb", as you put it... or, shall I say merely simple.0 -
martial arts is also strength training, it's more isometric but it's still strength training.
you can't tell me that doing something like au batido or queda de reins doesnt require an extreme amount of strength relative to your body weight. these are capoeira names but these are moves that are pretty much common in most forms of martial arts.0 -
martial arts is also strength training, it's more isometric but it's still strength training.
you can't tell me that doing something like au batido or queda de reins doesnt require an extreme amount of strength relative to your body weight. these are capoeira names but these are moves that are pretty much common in most forms of martial arts.
No one is saying these things won't build strength (or even a lot of strength over a long period of time...try telling Bruce Lee he wasn't 'strong'), just like running will build strength in your legs.
But no, martial arts are not 'strength training' perse.0 -
martial arts is also strength training, it's more isometric but it's still strength training.
you can't tell me that doing something like au batido or queda de reins doesnt require an extreme amount of strength relative to your body weight. these are capoeira names but these are moves that are pretty much common in most forms of martial arts.
There is a difference between something that builds strength and actual 'strength training'. Stength training is training specifically to increase strength, its pretty obvious. Swimming would also (to a degree) build strength, but its obviously not strength training.
People just get too evangelical about their relative preferred exercises which in turn makes people defensive. It's not productive.0 -
martial arts is also strength training, it's more isometric but it's still strength training.
you can't tell me that doing something like au batido or queda de reins doesnt require an extreme amount of strength relative to your body weight. these are capoeira names but these are moves that are pretty much common in most forms of martial arts.
There is a difference between something that builds strength and actual 'strength training'. Stength training is training specifically to increase strength, its pretty obvious. Swimming would also (to a degree) build strength, but its obviously not strength training.
People just get too evangelical about their relative preferred exercises which in turn makes people defensive. It's not productive.
Amen! If the discussion gets a little too technical than I believe people will be more tuned out to what is being said. Keep it simple. Strength training is good for the body and has proven for myself to not only make me stronger but also make me a better and faster runner. I run, bike, use the Arc and I strength train; my body never knows what I'm going to throw at it from one day to the next 0 -
In my younger years I could do cardio all the time, I was a cardio machine!!! And I still maintained muscle tone and strength. Now that I'm in my 50's...that does not work for me. Too much cardio now makes me look haggard, tired ...and flabby (yuck). Now I need strength training/ weight lifting to maintain muscle!!!
So what works in your youth does not always translate to your latter years.
This sort of true for me too. I don't look haggard or tired from cardio, quite the opposite, but doing cardio only now that I'm in my 50's will leave me flabby. That was not true in my youth. *sigh* I am still a cardio machine at heart and do it most days, but now I have had to also add strength training. I don't "lift heavy", but I do try to get at least 3 strength training sessions in a week.
But it is not the cardio that makes me lose my lean mass and look flabby now. It's that friggin' a-hole Father Time. Even if I did no cardio at all, I'd still be flabby without some strength exercises.0 -
Personally, I don't want to be a big muscled body builder, but I greatly prefer my higher muscle mass (and higher body fat) look to that of a lower muscle mass that many runners seem to have.
I'm the one in yellow. I prefer my arms and legs over the arms and legs of the two girls ahead of me. I'd love to be as fast as they are, because they cream my *kitten* in races. We're all in the same age group (35-39). They're not skinny fat. They have low body fat, but also a lower muscle mass.
And I'm not all that muscular, as you can see when relaxed in normal clothes. But I'm not anywhere near a "runner's build."
I'd love to have a body like yours! Way better than those women in front of you 0 -
bump0
-
bump0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions