Half an hour at the gym - is that enough?

13

Replies

  • viviennemayer
    viviennemayer Posts: 29
    I have to agree with most of the other posts. Twenty minutes of cardio a day is great and you may loose some weight but to be serious about your goals and not be discouraged you probably need some more gym time. If your following a good calorie nutrition plan, then 30 minutes of cardio and weight training 2 to 3 days a week is good. I had to really ramp up my exercise routine to get the results I was wanting though and not get behind. I do zumba at least 3 days a week which is an hour long. Sometimes at home due to weather or a busy schedule and then weight training 3 days a week for at least 30 to 60 minutes depending on my schedule. A lot of people I know do crossfit combining weight training with cardio and they're extremely successful. They're doing it 3 to 5 days a week for 30 to 60 minutes as well. Good luck on your goal!
  • Pixie_star1234
    Pixie_star1234 Posts: 55 Member
    Hello all! Trying to get back into the groove of things and thought I'd ask around to see if anyone can help me out.

    I plan on going to the gym 3 times a week - half an hour each week and I also plan to go for half an hour walks during my lunch break. Is this sufficient to lose weight and tone up or should I be investing more time? I go to the gym in the morning (from 6 am to 6:30am) because I'm usually too tired to do it at night and it's winter over here so I'd rather be rugged up at home.

    The 30 mins I spend at the gym will be 10 mins - cross trainer/cycling, 10 mins - rowing machine and 10 mins - core workouts/weights

    If you have a good diet, the exercise is just an added bonus and to tone you up.
  • frameloss
    frameloss Posts: 92 Member
    30 minutes is plenty a day if you are watching your calorie intake. I try to mix things up, especially as I get older. One day I will walk 30 minutes, next spin 30 -45 spin, next yoga, next weights and walk etc. It all adds up. I just find I try to fit in bits of exercise when I can. Good luck!!!!!!!
  • MonicaT1972
    MonicaT1972 Posts: 512
    Everyone's body is different. For me that would never be enough time to make a difference. I put in 2 hours a day one in the am and one in the pm so that I can get the results I want from my body!
  • glenr79
    glenr79 Posts: 283 Member
    That will definitley be enough if you do High intensity interval training. If you get on a particular piece of cardio and do one interval hard where you get your heart rate way up, then once it is up take it easy and go slow until you caught your breath, and then repeat... HIIT will speed up your metabolism for 48 hours following, and only takes 15-20 minutes.... So you do a 3 minute warm up, then 1 minute hard, 2 easy, and repeat.... then do a 3 minute cool down..... You burn 10X the fat as regular cardio in a quarter of the time. Also you get to keep your muscle when you do this, unlike regular cardio. Can be done on a treadmill, stairstepper, bike, elliptical, etc....
  • AthenaErr
    AthenaErr Posts: 278 Member
    I do 20 mins a day, at the moment still with a rest day once a week. I do either 30DS or 20 run/walk. I log each at under 150cals burnt and I am sedentary (desk job). I eat 1500 a day and I am losing about 1lb a week (despite mfp prediction of 0.3lbs a week ha!). I am also getting fitter and stronger.
  • mzhunnie
    mzhunnie Posts: 10
    I think something is better than nothing nad MFP, does tell you how many times a week and for how long, for example mines say workout 3 times a week for 30 minutes.. so I workout 5 times a week for 30 minutes at least sometimes I can only do 20 minutes , so i really try to balance it out. Hope this helps and good luck on your weight loss.
  • katmarly
    katmarly Posts: 1 Member
    I don't agree with these posts that say it is not. Unless you want a six pack it should be enough.
    Try going 30 minutes then stopping for a month of any exercise. Going back to 30 minutes will be like starting over.
    Besides you could be doing nothing and that's not good.
    I'm sure not everyone will agree with me.
  • mlk8604
    mlk8604 Posts: 56 Member
    It's not the time you put in, it's what you do with the time.

    An intense 30 minutes is better than a moderate hour or two.
    A moderate 30 minutes is better than a boring hour or two.
    A boring 30 minutes is better than nothing at all.

    Just my two cents.

    My thoughts exactly - I only work out for 30-40 minutes at a time, but it's INTENSE. I can be pushing hard on an elliptical sweating and panting while someone else walks on the treadmill next to me for 90 minutes. We can burn roughly the same number of calories. It's all what you're willing to put into it. I have a life outside of the gym and I'm not willing to spend my entire evening there.
  • lunamare
    lunamare Posts: 569 Member
    Thanks for all the advice guys. I think I've got to find a way to spend more time at the gym. Possibly spend more time on one machine each day and do it 5 times a week and find a sport to play over the weekend.

    While people are basically right, that your time seems a bit tight, I'd like to recommend that even if you know you can only go for 30 minutes that you GO for that 30 minutes instead of skipping it. True, you won't become a marathon runner, but, it's better than sitting on the couch and feeling sorry for yourself because you didn't have an extra 15 minutes that day.

    I tend to go and tell myself "I'm only doing a 30 minute run and then going home" and somehow end up being there an hour between the run and the stretching and then I feel like I should do weights because I'm there. It's a mind game sometimes.
  • jasperann
    jasperann Posts: 136 Member
    No one can answer your question without knowing what your diet looks like.

    This!!

    But something is ALWAYS better than nothing.
  • peprwpr
    peprwpr Posts: 56 Member
    I know my trainer said that 30mins of steady workout done correctly is enough. I train 3 days a week, 30mins sessions, and try to hit the gym another 2 days for 30-45mins of cardio and I am seeing results. But, I will say, I dont push myself as hard as he pushes me. He gets more into 30mins of workouts than most trainers do in an hour session. Hes tough, but it works.
  • waylessa
    waylessa Posts: 29 Member
    I think any amount of exercise is better than none.
  • Louise12
    Louise12 Posts: 389 Member
    I think that 30 mins 3 times a week is more than acceptable . whats the point in saying you will do 2 hours 6 days a week when its not going to be maintainable. Do what you can- I lost all my weight by watching my intake and running 20-30 mins a day ...

    Diet and weight loss is more about what your eating and drinking rather than exercise, Im really surprised alot of comments on here are about spending hours at the gym..

    each to there own i guess.
  • LorinaLynn
    LorinaLynn Posts: 13,247 Member
    There are times that I exercise up to two hours a day. If I did that every day, I'd have no time or energy to have any kind of life. Most of the time, I budget about 30-45 minutes to exercise a day.

    Because really, exercise is supposed to be something you do to make your life better. It shouldn't be ALL you do, unless you're a professional athlete or supermodel and your paycheck demands being in tip-top shape.
  • doubglass
    doubglass Posts: 314 Member
    Not really, but better than nothing. Try this: Since your gym time is limited , skip the aerobics at the gym, do heavy weights, walk an hour a day. If pressed for time, skip rope.
  • wolfi622
    wolfi622 Posts: 206
    There are times that I exercise up to two hours a day. If I did that every day, I'd have no time or energy to have any kind of life. Most of the time, I budget about 30-45 minutes to exercise a day.

    Because really, exercise is supposed to be something you do to make your life better. It shouldn't be ALL you do, unless you're a professional athlete or supermodel and your paycheck demands being in tip-top shape.

    Yes. I do a minimum of 1 hour in the gym each day but almost never more that 90 minutes. Weight loss has been good, strength gains have been good. I am active outside of workouts, but I am not, nor do I want to be an athlete.
  • 70davis
    70davis Posts: 348 Member
    bump
  • pamelak5
    pamelak5 Posts: 327 Member
    Don't worry right now about whether it's enough - just go as much as you can to start a habit. You don't have to get all your workouts at the gym - working out at home is a terrific time saving option. Could you do just weights at the gym a couple times a week, and a couple mornings do an intense cardio video? Or do something like The Firm for an hour at home? That's what i did when I was in school and super pressed for time - DVD, workout clothes and water were ready to go. I was working out within a few minutes of waking up.
  • ginique
    ginique Posts: 49 Member
    Some of you are ridiculous. It's stuff like this that discourages people from exercise altogether.

    OP, ANY amount of exercise you can do is better than nothing. If you're wanting to be full-on ripped, then yeah, you'll need more than what you currently have planned (and you can build up to that over time). But if weight loss is your objective, then as others have said, you don't need any exercise for that at all as long as you keep your calories in check. But again, any exercise beats NO exercise. Start with whatever you feel comfortable with and go from there.
  • wwk10
    wwk10 Posts: 244 Member
    I only read the first two pages but I think I am in the minority when I say 30 minutes is fine.
    I exerciesd for 5 minutes a day at first.
    I did pushups and that was it.
    Then I started also doing pullups.
    Then I started running 1 x / week
    I think you will increase time naturally as you become stronger and fitter.
    .
    Now I run 2 miles 2-3/week
    Play tennis 30-45 minutes 2/week
    Jump rope for 5 minutes 3x/week
    Do 100 pushups, 15 pullups and 30 dips.

    Even my new increased amount of exercise is not very many minutes, but I see results.
    I am toner and have little baby muscles.
  • jillica
    jillica Posts: 554 Member
    I say YES! As long as you are staying under calorie and seeing results, GO FOR IT!
  • iplayoutside19
    iplayoutside19 Posts: 2,304 Member
    Some of you are ridiculous. It's stuff like this that discourages people from exercise altogether.

    OP, ANY amount of exercise you can do is better than nothing. If you're wanting to be full-on ripped, then yeah, you'll need more than what you currently have planned (and you can build up to that over time). But if weight loss is your objective, then as others have said, you don't need any exercise for that at all as long as you keep your calories in check. But again, any exercise beats NO exercise. Start with whatever you feel comfortable with and go from there.

    I didn't read the through the entire post either. But I agree with this whole-heartedly. Before I changed my lifestyle part of the reason I didn't exercise was because I had this mental block that if I can't go for an hour, why waste my time. It was really flawed thinking.

    Now that it's summer and I don't have to help get the kids ready for school I can get to the weight room early and do what I'd "like" to do. However, before that I had a weekly plan that involved 20 minutes workouts in the weight room over my lunch hour 3 times a week. It was effective as I could "feel" the workout the rest of the day, and I like the longer term results.

    Is that how I want to work out? No, but it's doing something, and something is better than nothing.
  • contingencyplan
    contingencyplan Posts: 3,639 Member
    Spending a half hour at the gym focusing on lifting while supplementing it with some form of cardio you do at home is plenty. If you work out in splits you can hit all your muscle groups over the course of a week in 30 minutes of resistance training a day. You To see best results however you will need to supplement it with some form of cardio in non-gym time on top of it. Say, going for a 20-30 minute run or walk.
  • bga008
    bga008 Posts: 90
    I always say ...every little bit helps! And plus it's better than being at home sitting on you bottom.

    I even do little 3 minute workouts @ home....

    I have also read studies that the first 15 minutes of working out REALLY counts....

    so just keep moving!! even if it is only minutes or hours....doesn't matter as long as your moving your body!
  • scanners107
    scanners107 Posts: 33 Member
    I'm in the same situation i work 60 hours per week and have finally been allowed a lunch break. So i intend on running to the gym completing 30 minutes of weights and running back this totals about 50 minutes of exercise over dinner which should help.

    I plan on doing a 5 day split through the week and hopefully get an hour in Sunday morning by doing a full body or a circuit.
  • jr235
    jr235 Posts: 201 Member
    Alot of people have already commented, but I think you are fine with 30 minutes 3 times a week plus a walk on your lunch break. That is exactly the same as my older sister, she 37, 5ft tall, and very slender. She is, however, very careful with what she eats.

    I agree with whoever else has said try to make your gym workouts high intensity and/or weights.

    Also, there are quite a lot of videos on youtube. After you get started if you're really feeling the fitness you may want to add 20-30 minutes of videos another morning or two a week. I do this and have been losing inches and finally lost some weight too!
  • tmauck4472
    tmauck4472 Posts: 1,785 Member
    On the local news during their healthy life segment they said that longer is NOT always better. They found that between 30 minutes and an hour were the best for fat burning. And unless your training for a marathon running for more than an hour does not burn more fat. I don't know I'm not an expert, I'm just repeating what they said. Me personally I think that between 30 minutes and hour is enough time, but then again anything more than that for me is boring.
  • contingencyplan
    contingencyplan Posts: 3,639 Member
    On the local news during their healthy life segment they said that longer is NOT always better. They found that between 30 minutes and an hour were the best for fat burning. And unless your training for a marathon running for more than an hour does not burn more fat. I don't know I'm not an expert, I'm just repeating what they said. Me personally I think that between 30 minutes and hour is enough time, but then again anything more than that for me is boring.

    Beyond a certain point, there's no overall health benefit to going any further/longer. The only thing you're accomplishing is further increasing the amount of calories it takes to keep your body running properly. Yes you do see continued gains in terms of overall endurance, but it can come at a cost to other areas of fitness. At that point you're pigeonholing your body into only one aspect of fitness.
  • JaxDemon
    JaxDemon Posts: 403 Member
    30 mins is fine it's about the effort you put in. If I had 30 mins I would spend around 20 mins on weights and get 10 mins hiit in.after.

Categories