New Study: Aerobic exercise best for fat loss
gmallan
Posts: 2,099 Member
Any thought on this - it is just focusing on fat loss, so I'm not going to quit lifting heavy anytime soon as I have the goal of being strong. But for those just focusing on fat loss and especially those with limited time it may be relevant.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/12/121215151506.htm
Dec. 15, 2012 — Aerobic training is the best mode of exercise for burning fat, according to Duke researchers who compared aerobic training, resistance training, and a combination of the two.
The study, which appears Dec. 15, 2012, in the Journal of Applied Physiology, is the largest randomized trial to analyze changes in body composition from the three modes of exercise in overweight or obese adults without diabetes.
Aerobic exercise -- including walking, running, and swimming -- has been proven to be an effective way to lose weight. However, recent guidelines have suggested that resistance training, which includes weight lifting to build and maintain muscle mass, may also help with weight loss by increasing a person's resting metabolic rate. Research has demonstrated health benefits for resistance training, such as improving glucose control, but studies on the effects of resistance training on fat mass have been inconclusive.
"Given that approximately two-thirds of adults in the United States are overweight due to excess body fat, we want to offer clear, evidence-based exercise recommendations that will truly help people lose weight and body fat," said Leslie H. Willis, MS, an exercise physiologist at Duke Medicine and the study's lead author.
Researchers enrolled 234 overweight or obese adults in the study. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three exercise training groups: resistance training (three days per week of weight lifting, three sets per day, 8-12 repetitions per set), aerobic training (approximately 12 miles per week), or aerobic plus resistance training (three days a week, three set per day, 8-12 repetitions per set for resistance training, plus approximately 12 miles per week of aerobic exercise).
The exercise sessions were supervised in order to accurately measure adherence among participants. Data from 119 people who completed the study and had complete body composition data were analyzed to determine the effectiveness of each exercise regimen.
The groups assigned to aerobic training and aerobic plus resistance training lost more weight than those who did just resistance training. The resistance training group actually gained weight due to an increase in lean body mass.
Aerobic exercise was also a more efficient method of exercise for losing body fat. The aerobic exercise group spent an average of 133 minutes a week training and lost weight, while the resistance training group spent approximately 180 minutes exercising a week without shedding pounds.
The combination exercise group, while requiring double the time commitment, provided a mixed result. The regimen helped participants lose weight and fat mass, but did not significantly reduce body mass nor fat mass over aerobic training alone. This group did notice the largest decrease in waist circumference, which may be attributed to the amount of time participants spent exercising.
Resting metabolic rate, which determines how many calories are burned while at rest, was not directly measured in this study. While theories suggest that resistance training can improve resting metabolic rates and therefore aid in weight loss, in this study, resistance training did not significantly decrease fat mass nor body weight irrespective of any change in resting metabolic rate that might have occurred.
"No one type of exercise will be best for every health benefit," Willis added. "However, it might be time to reconsider the conventional wisdom that resistance training alone can induce changes in body mass or fat mass due to an increase in metabolism, as our study found no change."
Duke researchers added that exercise recommendations are age-specific. For older adults experiencing muscle atrophy, studies have found resistance training to be beneficial. However, younger, healthy adults or those looking to lose weight would see better results doing aerobic training.
"Balancing time commitments against health benefits, our study suggests that aerobic exercise is the best option for reducing fat mass and body mass," said Cris A. Slentz, PhD, a Duke exercise physiologist and study co-author. "It's not that resistance training isn't good for you; it's just not very good at burning fat."
In addition to Willis and Slentz, Duke study authors include Lori A. Bateman, Lucy W. Piner, Connie W. Bales, and William E. Kraus. East Carolina University study authors include A. Tamlyn Shields and Joseph A. Houmard.
The study was funded with a grant from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health (2R01-HL057354).
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/12/121215151506.htm
Dec. 15, 2012 — Aerobic training is the best mode of exercise for burning fat, according to Duke researchers who compared aerobic training, resistance training, and a combination of the two.
The study, which appears Dec. 15, 2012, in the Journal of Applied Physiology, is the largest randomized trial to analyze changes in body composition from the three modes of exercise in overweight or obese adults without diabetes.
Aerobic exercise -- including walking, running, and swimming -- has been proven to be an effective way to lose weight. However, recent guidelines have suggested that resistance training, which includes weight lifting to build and maintain muscle mass, may also help with weight loss by increasing a person's resting metabolic rate. Research has demonstrated health benefits for resistance training, such as improving glucose control, but studies on the effects of resistance training on fat mass have been inconclusive.
"Given that approximately two-thirds of adults in the United States are overweight due to excess body fat, we want to offer clear, evidence-based exercise recommendations that will truly help people lose weight and body fat," said Leslie H. Willis, MS, an exercise physiologist at Duke Medicine and the study's lead author.
Researchers enrolled 234 overweight or obese adults in the study. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three exercise training groups: resistance training (three days per week of weight lifting, three sets per day, 8-12 repetitions per set), aerobic training (approximately 12 miles per week), or aerobic plus resistance training (three days a week, three set per day, 8-12 repetitions per set for resistance training, plus approximately 12 miles per week of aerobic exercise).
The exercise sessions were supervised in order to accurately measure adherence among participants. Data from 119 people who completed the study and had complete body composition data were analyzed to determine the effectiveness of each exercise regimen.
The groups assigned to aerobic training and aerobic plus resistance training lost more weight than those who did just resistance training. The resistance training group actually gained weight due to an increase in lean body mass.
Aerobic exercise was also a more efficient method of exercise for losing body fat. The aerobic exercise group spent an average of 133 minutes a week training and lost weight, while the resistance training group spent approximately 180 minutes exercising a week without shedding pounds.
The combination exercise group, while requiring double the time commitment, provided a mixed result. The regimen helped participants lose weight and fat mass, but did not significantly reduce body mass nor fat mass over aerobic training alone. This group did notice the largest decrease in waist circumference, which may be attributed to the amount of time participants spent exercising.
Resting metabolic rate, which determines how many calories are burned while at rest, was not directly measured in this study. While theories suggest that resistance training can improve resting metabolic rates and therefore aid in weight loss, in this study, resistance training did not significantly decrease fat mass nor body weight irrespective of any change in resting metabolic rate that might have occurred.
"No one type of exercise will be best for every health benefit," Willis added. "However, it might be time to reconsider the conventional wisdom that resistance training alone can induce changes in body mass or fat mass due to an increase in metabolism, as our study found no change."
Duke researchers added that exercise recommendations are age-specific. For older adults experiencing muscle atrophy, studies have found resistance training to be beneficial. However, younger, healthy adults or those looking to lose weight would see better results doing aerobic training.
"Balancing time commitments against health benefits, our study suggests that aerobic exercise is the best option for reducing fat mass and body mass," said Cris A. Slentz, PhD, a Duke exercise physiologist and study co-author. "It's not that resistance training isn't good for you; it's just not very good at burning fat."
In addition to Willis and Slentz, Duke study authors include Lori A. Bateman, Lucy W. Piner, Connie W. Bales, and William E. Kraus. East Carolina University study authors include A. Tamlyn Shields and Joseph A. Houmard.
The study was funded with a grant from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health (2R01-HL057354).
0
Replies
-
When I was younger I would go to the gym and do weights and minimal cardio. I never really lost much weight. Then I started running and lost a bunch so there may be something to it but like you, I want to be strong so I am sticking with weights. I also think that bodies that do weight lifting look better than those that don't. It's not just about being thin it's about being fit and healthy and for that I think you need both.0
-
An hour of cardio at 85% mhr compared to an hour of lifting at 85% of 1RM for exercises will burn more calories for any individual. This isn't disputed. But fat loss comes down to calorie deficit regardless of what you do.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition0 -
I think there was a thread about this yesterday and lots of good comments were made. Many people were quite critical of the methodology used, in particular the fact that the "resistance training" methods used were pretty crap... I'll see if I can find it...0
-
Great info thanks for sharing ! I love lifting and my walk/run I guess I'll try and double up I found that worked best for me .0
-
This was the thread yesterday...
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/820940-running-not-weights-burns-fat0 -
An hour of cardio at 85% mhr compared to an hour of lifting at 85% of 1RM for exercises will burn more calories for any individual. This isn't disputed. But fat loss comes down to calorie deficit regardless of what you do.
This. I think their study is absolute ****. Why measure workouts when you don't measure food. Personally I am ravenous after I work out, my body is repairing!
**** scientists. So tired of them. Or rather, the sensationalist journalist that only writes the headline grabbing nonsense of the study.0 -
An hour of cardio at 85% mhr compared to an hour of lifting at 85% of 1RM for exercises will burn more calories for any individual. This isn't disputed. But fat loss comes down to calorie deficit regardless of what you do.
This. I think their study is absolute ****. Why measure workouts when you don't measure food. Personally I am ravenous after I work out, my body is repairing!
**** scientists. So tired of them. Or rather, the sensationalist journalist that only writes the headline grabbing nonsense of the study.
Actually science is what moves society forward thank you very much...
Anyway, not measuring food? Of course it isn't measured! what are you trying to say? You NEED to eat more? What a load of croc!
A study is based on variables that can be controlled! If you cannot and will not control your own hunger, that is your problem, it is not a part of the equation! All things equal, that is what it is about, not you personally.
As let us be honest, you personally, are not the be all end all of civilisation and human evolution. This study is meant to be with controls. If you cannot adhere to the same pattern, then sure, it wont affect you.
Then again, there is also a study that shows it is possible to live off only certain foods such as chips or bacon or whatever. They are proof we CAN live without what society thinks is possible! It is actual verifiable PROOF!
Point is, you may be ravenous, and you may be hungry, but all things equal, the study is correct. Actually more so in your case as I am going to go out on a limb here and say your doing weights correct? Usually you feel a lot hungrier after a heavy weight session than cardio. Even with all things equal, you likely eat more than you would doing all cardio making it biased even further.
I run a lot, and sometimes the last thing the LAST thing on my mind is food... When you run 40km + you are not hungry... you want to relax and you want to drink energy drinks or water... you cannot even stomach food really...0 -
so pretty much the study discovers that cardio is good for fat loss. Who knew?0
-
-_- I changed it to say screw the sensationalist journalist that writes 1 da mn line from a study and ignores all the modifiers.
My point was, They wanted to see which exercise routine was the best at losing weight, but they didn't measure caloric intake. Their study was *kitten*. Don't defend it.
Cardio IS good for weight loss, But they did NOT talk about FAT loss, nor did they talk about lean muscle loss while doing cardio, nor did they measure how many calories were consumed.
I'd bet that cardio isn't as effective over weight loss as weight training if the caloric intake is about the same. I bet You only see a ten or 20% improvement in fat loss when you talk cardio vs strength.. And I bet that you see more lean muscle lost with only cardio at the same calorie levels.
Brains.0 -
An hour of cardio at 85% mhr compared to an hour of lifting at 85% of 1RM for exercises will burn more calories for any individual. This isn't disputed. But fat loss comes down to calorie deficit regardless of what you do.
This. I think their study is absolute ****. Why measure workouts when you don't measure food. Personally I am ravenous after I work out, my body is repairing!
**** scientists. So tired of them. Or rather, the sensationalist journalist that only writes the headline grabbing nonsense of the study.
Why are you so angry? A post on a message board doesn't mean you have to change what you're doing.
0 -
-_- I changed it to say screw the sensationalist journalist that writes 1 da mn line from a study and ignores all the modifiers.
My point was, They wanted to see which exercise routine was the best at losing weight, but they didn't measure caloric intake. Their study was *kitten*. Don't defend it.
Cardio IS good for weight loss, But they did NOT talk about FAT loss, nor did they talk about lean muscle loss while doing cardio, nor did they measure how many calories were consumed.
I'd bet that cardio isn't as effective over weight loss as weight training if the caloric intake is about the same. I bet You only see a ten or 20% improvement in fat loss when you talk cardio vs strength.. And I bet that you see more lean muscle lost with only cardio at the same calorie levels.
Brains.
Train and run 60km + a week... , can still do pullups with ease...
It is down to nutrition for LBM... that a fact... I'm not training to be an olympic long distance runner, but I do plan to run a few 250km + races.... To maintain muscle mass is down to nutrition to an exact art for that... Sure I did not read that study because I will admit, I have read enough to know what should be vs what could be.
I've gone through graphs, diagrams, study material, journals etc... I look and keep looking through data. The proof is there... Reason why easier with weight training in your mind? Increase in muscle mass = increased muscle vs fat in body as well as a change in how the body metabolises fat and also the speed of metabolism vs cardio changing metabolism speed and also LBM but not to the same extent as weight lifting, although the burn after can equal if not better weight training depending on intensity levels.0 -
The issue with them not controlling energy balance is that we're really looking at who loses more weight on a given exercise program using ad libitum intake.
I would conclude that aerobic exercise allows people to create a larger energy deficit. I would not conclude that it is best for fat loss.0 -
-_- I changed it to say screw the sensationalist journalist that writes 1 da mn line from a study and ignores all the modifiers.
My point was, They wanted to see which exercise routine was the best at losing weight, but they didn't measure caloric intake. Their study was *kitten*. Don't defend it.
Cardio IS good for weight loss, But they did NOT talk about FAT loss, nor did they talk about lean muscle loss while doing cardio, nor did they measure how many calories were consumed.
I'd bet that cardio isn't as effective over weight loss as weight training if the caloric intake is about the same. I bet You only see a ten or 20% improvement in fat loss when you talk cardio vs strength.. And I bet that you see more lean muscle lost with only cardio at the same calorie levels.
Brains.
Train and run 60km + a week... , can still do pullups with ease...
It is down to nutrition for LBM... that a fact... I'm not training to be an olympic long distance runner, but I do plan to run a few 250km + races.... To maintain muscle mass is down to nutrition to an exact art for that... Sure I did not read that study because I will admit, I have read enough to know what should be vs what could be.
I've gone through graphs, diagrams, study material, journals etc... I look and keep looking through data. The proof is there... Reason why easier with weight training in your mind? Increase in muscle mass = increased muscle vs fat in body as well as a change in how the body metabolises fat and also the speed of metabolism vs cardio changing metabolism speed and also LBM but not to the same extent as weight lifting, although the burn after can equal if not better weight training depending on intensity levels.
I think the reason weight training tends to result in better fat loss is not as much about metabolic adaptations (muscle is metabolicaly more active but not nearly as much as it's often quoted, and people aren't typically picking up weights and putting on 50lbs of LBM -- minor changes in skeletal muscle aren't going to result in tons of additional thermogenesis) --- it's simply due to better retention of LBM. Comparitively, percentage of weight lost from fat will be higher in the presence of resistance training.0 -
hi Joe, (this is for Ninerbuff)
I read your response and recently have gotten into kickboxing. I tried it a few years ago and had to give it up after a badly broken ankle which resulted in a plate and two screws. I just reached my goal weight with MFP and have been exercising every day for about 6 mos now. I just got back into kickboxing (been doing on demand videos at home) and I took a class yesterday at LA boxing. I found it to be a bit boring but that could be just the instructor. Anyway, your credentials interested me and I was wondering if you could suggest some dvd's or something for me. I have a hard time getting to a gym now as I am working and caring for a parent with Alzheimers. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Jeannine0 -
When I felt the best and looked the best is when I walked for 45 minutes, a day, and did weights. Soooo, who knows. Maybe it just depends on each individual and what works best for them.0
-
You should not even be thinking about the 'fat burning' capability of strength training - it is for LBM preservation/gain - i.e. body composition so the whole thing is a straw man argument anyway.0
-
These arguments make me want to pluck out my eyelashes.0
-
Why are you so angry? A post on a message board doesn't mean you have to change what you're doing.
Oh I'm not angry, not in the least, I am still deliciously sore from my last work out and kind of in an apathetic state right now. But in general lately, I am tired of reading headlines that are so grotesquely wrong that they border on being downright ignorant.
Cardio is best for weight loss and strength training will make you gain - Is going to be taken by editorials like shape magazine, women's fitness, and every other sleaze bag magazine out there and CONTINUE to caution women against lifting. Which is one of the greatest crimes of fitness in my humble opinion.
It's all about hype these days and not at ALL about truth or reality.0 -
One thing to note is that aerobic exercise can increase Peptide YY which actually suppresses appetite. Something to consider as the calories were not controlled in the study..........as they are when you log you food on a site like...say, this one.0
-
I think there was a thread about this yesterday and lots of good comments were made. Many people were quite critical of the methodology used, in particular the fact that the "resistance training" methods used were pretty crap... I'll see if I can find it...
I don't think anyone can evaluate the "resistance methods" since I don't think anyone has read the study--except for the abstract.
Perhaps someone here subscribes to the Journal of Applied Physiology. I don't, and, unfortunately my e-medical library at work doesn't either. Call me selfish, but I wasn't willing to spend $20 to see the details. 0 -
Strength training with a calorie deficit is the best way to look good naked.0
-
One thing to note is that aerobic exercise can increase Peptide YY which actually suppresses appetite. Something to consider as the calories were not controlled in the study..........as they are when you log you food on a site like...say, this one.
I don't see that happening long term. When you're ACTUALLY doing cardio, your appetite gets suppressed, but a few hours later? No.
Care to tell us where you got that information from?
Here is one to support my assertion if you care to do a bit of research:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12954742
"Caloric intake during a buffet lunch offered two hours after the infusion of PYY was decreased by 30 percent in the obese subjects (P<0.001) and 31 percent in the lean subjects (P<0.001). PYY infusion also caused a significant decrease in the cumulative 24-hour caloric intake in both obese and lean subjects. PYY infusion reduced plasma levels of the appetite-stimulatory hormone ghrelin."0 -
The resistance methods have also been posted and it was all machines and didn't sound all that impressive, even to a non-lifter like me.
To carry out an experiment you should be changing a limited number of variables and controlling the others. For calories in to not have been controlled makes a complete mockery of this study, no matter the truth of cardio v. strength training for weight loss.
Also, to suggest that you should only try to build muscle in old age in downright criminal! I would much rather improve my strength now so that I have fewer problems in old age, when muscles are harder to build and maintain.
Basically, who paid for this study and will gain from it, because I can't imagine it having any honest intentions...0 -
Participants were randomly assigned to one of three exercise training groups: resistance training (three days per week of weight lifting, three sets per day, 8-12 repetitions per set), aerobic training (approximately 12 miles per week), or aerobic plus resistance training (three days a week, three set per day, 8-12 repetitions per set for resistance training, plus approximately 12 miles per week of aerobic exercise).
Wow. Three whole sets of 8-12 reps? Three days a week? What a ball-buster. No wonder they didn't see much in the way of significant results. I don't dispute that aerobic exercise burns more calories than weight lifting, all things being equal.
But it would have helped if they'd actually, you know, lifted some damn weights during their weight training sessions.0 -
At age 60 I will continue to do both weight training and cardio. I want my bone density to remain strong and don't want a hip replacement and I want a strong heart with a resting pulse in the 50's and a Vo2max to remain in the 40's. I will control my weight by eating at or below my TDEE. Arguing one method over the other is a waste of time. Both are important.0
-
so pretty much the study discovers that cardio is good for fat loss. Who knew?
LOL!! I thought this was common knowledge. Guess not....0 -
This isn't really news.... everyone knows cardio is ideal for fat loss. Strength training is just as important though, to get that lean look. I've also found once you hit a certain BF% strength training is invaluable to losing more fat.0
-
Also notice, nothing is said about bodyfat %. This isn't a good study, no offense OP.
Definitely not offended. I was only putting it out there to stimulate discussion and see what people' s opinions may be. I don't train for fat loss I train for stregth and fitness (I play Australian Rules Football). Just thought it was an interesting read and thought others may be interested. I tried to get access to the full text through my uni library site but couldn't so unfortunately aren't really in a good position to evaluate the study methodology. I woudl be curious to know whether calories were controlled or taken into account what specific strength training and cardio was used.0 -
Also the discussion of lean body mass seems to indicate that body fat % would have been taken into account. In order to know your lean body mass you need to know how much fat you are carrying. Lean body mass =Total body mass - Total mass fat if I'm not mistaken0
-
bump0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 427 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions