Cardio make you fat???

Azdak

Two word review: Total. Crap. :-)

I do not typically see very overweight runners. I do see many overweight guys at my gym who are really strong, although you can't see their muscle (although they obviously have lots of it) because of their excess body fat.

There's an expression which I think is really true "Six pack abs aren't made in the gym, they're made in the kitchen." In other words, if you want to control your weight and body fat so people can see your muscle definition, you need to do that through diet.

While cardio without weights won't make you fat, adding some weight lifting to your routine is a really great idea. It's too bad your trainer doesn't have a more balanced approach!

Deflict diet + cardio + weight training = fat loss and no muscle loss

^^^^This x2.

Sorry, but you always lose some muscle any time you reduce weight .
I hate this, but ever pound lost is part fat and part muscle unless the subject is juicing roids.
It's part of the reason I am disconnected about further weight loss.
I feel I am losing strength.

It depends on where you are in the process. If you have done resistance training and developed a high percentage of your genetic potential, then, yes, rapid and significant weight loss can result in some decreases in muscle strength.

However, for the average person, there is no reason why "strength" has to decrease while you are losing weight. If that is happening, I would question that person's training program.

I work primarily with people who are probably like 90% of the folks on this website. Unless someone was a serious athlete trained at their peak, I have never seen anyone lose strength after losing weight--quite the opposite.

Is someone going to lose some muscle mass? Possibly. But, once again, for the average recreational exercise trying to lose weight, the change will be fairly modest.

A key thing left out of all of these discussions is a common reference point. There are a lot of different kinds of bodies and they can respond differently.

IMO, quality lifting makes many of these issues moot.

Azdak

Have any of you actually read the articles that have been linked? :huh:

Which ones? Research studies are research studies. The problem is usually not with the study per se, but how the results are interpreted.

If you are referring to the popular press articles, I have read them and, to be polite, they are not very good.

I don't think this is the answer you were looking for with your rhetorical question.

DFWTT

For what it's worth, and by no means a controlled study, I keep track of mass percentages using bio-impedance. I do quite a bit of resistance training based on a 4 day split and lose on average of 3 pounds of fat to one pound of muscle. No need to go into the specifics and math but it has been fairly consistent. During the last couple of months, as my half marathon miles began to creep up, I needed to cut back on the resistance training to accommodate. I saw an approximate change in loss down to a 2lb fat to 1lb muscle ratio. In my case, I was still burning more fat but saw a significant decrease in lean mass as well. ~2lb overall. I did lose more weight though and lean% reduced to 11. Mostly, I was forced to lay off the quads and lower body in general, or lighten as much as possible. I did not quit resistance training. Will be taking note of how quickly I get back to the ~3/1 ratio.

Azdak

I'm not suggesting that cardio makes you fat, by the way, just that if truly being "fit", rather than "skinny" is your goal, doing only cardio and no strength training is NOT the way to go. To the OP, I think that may have been the point your trainer was trying to make. Take a look at these photos and decide which body you want to strive for yourself:

Stick woman:


Fit woman:

For reasons I discussed earlier and have gone into in great detail numerous times before (and have no time to do so right now) this is a false comparison/intellectually dishonest argument.

And when did fake boobs become evidence of "fitness"?

Bobby_Clerici

Two word review: Total. Crap. :-)

I do not typically see very overweight runners. I do see many overweight guys at my gym who are really strong, although you can't see their muscle (although they obviously have lots of it) because of their excess body fat.

There's an expression which I think is really true "Six pack abs aren't made in the gym, they're made in the kitchen." In other words, if you want to control your weight and body fat so people can see your muscle definition, you need to do that through diet.

While cardio without weights won't make you fat, adding some weight lifting to your routine is a really great idea. It's too bad your trainer doesn't have a more balanced approach!

Deflict diet + cardio + weight training = fat loss and no muscle loss

^^^^This x2.

Sorry, but you always lose some muscle any time you reduce weight .
I hate this, but ever pound lost is part fat and part muscle unless the subject is juicing roids.
It's part of the reason I am disconnected about further weight loss.
I feel I am losing strength.

It depends on where you are in the process. If you have done resistance training and developed a high percentage of your genetic potential, then, yes, rapid and significant weight loss can result in some decreases in muscle strength.

However, for the average person, there is no reason why "strength" has to decrease while you are losing weight. If that is happening, I would question that person's training program.

I work primarily with people who are probably like 90% of the folks on this website. Unless someone was a serious athlete trained at their peak, I have never seen anyone lose strength after losing weight--quite the opposite.

Is someone going to lose some muscle mass? Possibly. But, once again, for the average recreational exercise trying to lose weight, the change will be fairly modest.

A key thing left out of all of these discussions is a common reference point. There are a lot of different kinds of bodies and they can respond differently.

IMO, quality lifting makes many of these issues moot.

I was that fat guy in the weight room with the leather belt cinched around my belly...lol
I lost a ton of strength, and nothing would prevent that.
It's part of the sacrifice I made to get healthy, and health is the sacrifice some make to get super strong.
Check out those fat guys competing in those mega-strongman events.
Strong - not healthy. That was me.
And my blood test numbers were horrible, and I used a CPAP to sleep.
No, there comes a time when we need to reassess what's important.
I did not want to die young, strong and fat.
The continuing disconnect is where does it stop? I think it mainly ego with me. I just don't want to be a little guy.

scottb81

I didn't realize you looked down your nose at people that train to look good. It may be beneath you, but yeah, I do hope to look good. I'm gonna pass on your suggestion of lipo and implants though. I thoroughly enjoy working to get mine and won't be taking any shortcuts.

No one is denying that different goals require different training. Just the opposite. If you want to be a runner, then go run. But if you want to look like a fitness model, then train like a fitness model. We're just trying to help people understand that a ton of cardio does indeed make it difficult to build muscle and strength. And cardio isn't the best way for people that are going for a certain type of muscular/fit/toned look to get there.

I don't look down my nose at anybody except maybe the lazy people. I'm not the one constantly posting pictures. That would be the gym rats constantly posting pictures and ragging on runners. So if you want to criticize my post then clean your own house up first.

cubizzle

Two types of people here. First are those training to excell at sport and second are those training to admire themselves in the mirror.

We don't speak the same language.

WIN WIN WIN WIN WIN WIN

Azdak

Two word review: Total. Crap. :-)

I do not typically see very overweight runners. I do see many overweight guys at my gym who are really strong, although you can't see their muscle (although they obviously have lots of it) because of their excess body fat.

There's an expression which I think is really true "Six pack abs aren't made in the gym, they're made in the kitchen." In other words, if you want to control your weight and body fat so people can see your muscle definition, you need to do that through diet.

While cardio without weights won't make you fat, adding some weight lifting to your routine is a really great idea. It's too bad your trainer doesn't have a more balanced approach!

Deflict diet + cardio + weight training = fat loss and no muscle loss

^^^^This x2.

Sorry, but you always lose some muscle any time you reduce weight .
I hate this, but ever pound lost is part fat and part muscle unless the subject is juicing roids.
It's part of the reason I am disconnected about further weight loss.
I feel I am losing strength.

It depends on where you are in the process. If you have done resistance training and developed a high percentage of your genetic potential, then, yes, rapid and significant weight loss can result in some decreases in muscle strength.

However, for the average person, there is no reason why "strength" has to decrease while you are losing weight. If that is happening, I would question that person's training program.

I work primarily with people who are probably like 90% of the folks on this website. Unless someone was a serious athlete trained at their peak, I have never seen anyone lose strength after losing weight--quite the opposite.

Is someone going to lose some muscle mass? Possibly. But, once again, for the average recreational exercise trying to lose weight, the change will be fairly modest.

A key thing left out of all of these discussions is a common reference point. There are a lot of different kinds of bodies and they can respond differently.

IMO, quality lifting makes many of these issues moot.

I was that fat guy in the weight room with the leather belt cinched around my belly...lol
I lost a ton of strength, and nothing would prevent that.
It's part of the sacrifice I made to get healthy, and health is the sacrifice some make to get super strong.
Check out those fat guys competing in those mega-strongman events.
Strong - not healthy. That was me.
And my blood test numbers were horrible, and I used a CPAP to sleep.
No, there comes a time when we need to reassess what's important.
I did not want to die young, strong and fat.
The continuing disconnect is where does it stop? I think it mainly ego with me. I just don't want to be a little guy.

It's easy to look at the studies that show decreases in BMR and some decreases in mass that occur with strict dieting and weight loss and think "wow, that's really bad--we must avoid that at all cost". However, in some cases -- and I am not referring specifically to you, just people I work with in general--the long-term benefit has to outweigh a shorter-term effect.

I guess, again, it gets back to things like goals, body image, etc. I see and work with a lot of people that have lost a ton of weight and they get smaller and leaner--but they also can push some respectable iron and look pretty good to boot. In Chicago, the guys from the 1985 super bowl team are still pretty visible-several of the linemen transformed themselves from big hulking football guys to normal, athletic-looking reasonably muscular guys. I don't think anyone would think of them as "little", even though they seem only about 1/2 the size they were during their playing days.

I don't know your details or where you are on your journey, but I can't see why long-term you can't eventually build yourself back up, in a more healthy way.

Rinkermann

this actually happened to me years ago. i was trying to lose weight, but didn't really understand nutrition very well. i mean, im not expert now, but back then i knew nothing. i was on a low calorie diet, and running every day. i lost a lot of weight, but most of it muscle. when i reached my goal weight, i was weak, scrawny and basically still fat.

the logic as i understand it is that if you are not using various muscles, your body may decide to burn them instead of fat when you are doing cardio. i think the body can also prioritise burning muscle before fat if you're not eating enough calories. so your body will think, "hmm, im not getting much fat coming in so i'll hold on to what i've got and burn some muscle instead".

so for example, lets say you weigh 100lbs. lets say 50lbs is muscle and 50lbs is fat.

now lets say you go on the treadmill a lot and lose 30lbs. after losing 30lbs you now weigh 70lbs. if all of the 30 lbs you've lost is pure fat, then you are still 50lbs muscle, and now only 20lbs fat. in other words, you're one lean, fit person.

however, if that 30lbs you lost was actually muscle, your 70lbs bodyweight is now made up of only 20lbs muscle but the same 50lbs of fat. in this situation, you've lost 30lbs but you're actually in a much worse physical condition because the fat is still there and you're a lot less lean.

so, thats it as i understand it. i just make sure i eat enough calories and enough fat, and i do cardio sessions involving weights as opposed to just running. when i do run, i tend to keep it to high intensity stuff where muscle loss is supposedly less common.

cubizzle

I'm not suggesting that cardio makes you fat, by the way, just that if truly being "fit", rather than "skinny" is your goal, doing only cardio and no strength training is NOT the way to go. To the OP, I think that may have been the point your trainer was trying to make. Take a look at these photos and decide which body you want to strive for yourself:

Stick woman:


Fit woman:

For reasons I discussed earlier and have gone into in great detail numerous times before (and have no time to do so right now) this is a false comparison/intellectually dishonest argument.

And when did fake boobs become evidence of "fitness"?

one of these people model in order to perpetuate the profiting off of body image issues some people have..... which one I wonder?

tappae

I'm not suggesting that cardio makes you fat, by the way, just that if truly being "fit", rather than "skinny" is your goal, doing only cardio and no strength training is NOT the way to go. To the OP, I think that may have been the point your trainer was trying to make. Take a look at these photos and decide which body you want to strive for yourself:

Stick woman:


Fit woman:

I don't think you can consider the woman on the bottom to be more fit without seriously redefining the word "fit." According to Wikipedia, physical fitness "comprises two related concepts: general fitness (a state of health and well-being), and specific fitness (a task-oriented definition based on the ability to perform specific aspects of sports or occupations)." Not knowing more about them, we can't really compare the first definition. Based on the second definition, though, the runner would have to be more fit since her goals are functional, not appearance-related. I'm not dissing the hard work and dedication that it takes to change the shape of your body in very specific ways, I just think it's not the same thing as being "fit." Maybe "shapely" would be a better description.

I use a couple of military physical fitness tests that I found online to measure my progress. They involve running, chin-ups, sit-ups and push-ups. I'm pretty sure that this Ilsa chick could totally outperform me on these tests and I'm confident that she would have no trouble passing them. Therefore, she is "fit."

On the original thread question, though: according to my HRM I burned a couple of thousand calories on my trail run yesterday. Then, I very likely overcompensated at the Mellow Mushroom. If so, it's not the cardio that will make me fat. It's the pizza and beer.

doubglass

A trainer at the gym told me that doing lots of cardio without any weights can make you put weight on around the middle. Something to do with endorphins that your body releases when doing cardio and stress on the body....

Get an informed trainer. Has he been training all those chubby marathoners or what?

hesn92

Yeah... I don't think so. I mean sure you can get fat by doing a lot of cardio if you are also eating 3 pounds of cake every day. But if you are doing cardio and eating at a deficit, why would you gain fat? Where would it come from?

Skirotica

Have you ever seen an addicted runner with a FAT midsection? Pfffft.. Soooo not true!

The problem is that as your body becomes more efficient at running, you really don't work that hard. The calorie burn can actually be a lot less than you might think. So you can run long distances, but if that's all you do, it's not that hard to have a gut too.

Quoted for truth. The oft dreaded "plateau." You'll find references to this in any fitness publication - be it weight lifting or cardio.

CarsonRuns

Have you ever seen an addicted runner with a FAT midsection? Pfffft.. Soooo not true!

The problem is that as your body becomes more efficient at running, you really don't work that hard. The calorie burn can actually be a lot less than you might think. So you can run long distances, but if that's all you do, it's not that hard to have a gut too.

Quoted for truth. The oft dreaded "plateau." You'll find references to this in any fitness publication - be it weight lifting or cardio.

So you run more or you run faster. Problem solved.

nick1109

People always confuse 'health' and 'fitness'. Fitness is the ability to efficiently perform a particular activity. Health is the absence of disease. One can be healthy without fitness and vice versa.

In my opinion performing stupid amounts of cardio is counter productive to producing an aesthetically pleasing physique (the look I want anyway). As an example if I took up marathon running I would loose most of the muscles I've spent years building and my body fat levels would be no lower than they are now (fairly low). Also I'd risk over use injuries and likely decrease my quality of life in my latter years from the impact on my knees and hips.

That being said one should, in my opinion, look to use a system whereby you use resistant training infrequently based in progression without chopping and changing about whilst paying strict attention to diet and macros

If only looks are your goal then the above is the way to go I feel. However if you want to be a runner or cyclist then obviously you have no choice but to run and cycle alot.

CarsonRuns

...likely decrease my quality of life in my latter years from the impact on my knees and hips.

This is a myth that has been dispelled. Running can actually strengthen the joints and connective tissue, not destroy it.

nick1109

There are scientific studies to support both for and against running, and also I'd rather run than be a slob but for me progressive controlled safe lifting with a spot on diet works perfectly. There is also the argument of injuries.

When I was running at a reasonable level (34:00 10k and 1:20 Half marathon) I was forever picking up giggling injuries, picked up more illnesses and required much more time away from my training than I do now.

tappae

There are scientific studies to support both for and against running, and also I'd rather run than be a slob but for me progressive controlled safe lifting with a spot on diet works perfectly. There is also the argument of injuries.

When I was running at a reasonable level (34:00 10k and 1:20 Half marathon) I was forever picking up giggling injuries, picked up more illnesses and required much more time away from my training than I do now.

I'm not going to argue against lifting and diet being essential tools for body recomposition. I am going to argue that those running time are not "reasonable." They're frickin amazing.

nick1109

They were 8 years ago now and I'd never get as fast as I was again though! lol