New Study: Aerobic exercise best for fat loss

n0ob

Strength training with a calorie deficit is the best way to look good naked.

Sarauk2sf

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."

Oishii

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...

millerll

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.

Gapwedge01

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.

slepygrl

so pretty much the study discovers that cardio is good for fat loss. Who knew?

LOL!! I thought this was common knowledge. Guess not....

thelovelyLIZ

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.

gmallan

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.

gmallan

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 mistaken

yancymichele

bump

grim_traveller

Bump

Azdak

I'll save myself the trouble and just reprint my comments from the last thread on this study:

Based on the comments after the article, I'm sure this study is going to pee in a lot of people's holy water. (NOTE: Based on the current comments, I was 100% on the mark on this one -- as I knew I would be. There are some VERY insecure people on this website).

Before jumping to any conclusions, there are several things to keep in mind. One is that the details are important. The kind of weight program, the dietary controls, the type of cardio, etc. this is a good study because of the large sample size, so it is wrong to attack the messenger. (NOTE: The institution doing the study is an excellent one as well). However, the applicability of the study depends on the details. You can't just draw conclusions about "weight lifting" in general.

It is also important to remember that a research study can only look at select variables. So it is rare that any one a study can provide a definitive answer. You have to take each chunk of new data and plug it into the overall picture--like one piece of a 1000 piece puzzle.

What a study like this DOES indicate, however, is that caution must be exercise before making absolutist claims about any type of exercise or before denigrating any type or workout (eg "mindless cardio").

Azdak

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."

Just because there is a study, it doesn't mean it's a good one.

True--OTOH one must also be qualified to evaluate a study and not just dismiss it out of hand because the results interfere with one's ideological outlook.

In many cases, the problem is not with the study itself, but the interpretive remarks that are made in the story about the study.

Azdak

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.

Three sets of each exercise. Probably 8 - 10 exercises in all. Surely that is a pittance to a manly man like yourself, but it does fit within the commonly accepted guidelines for resistance exercise.

Sarauk2sf

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."

Just because there is a study, it doesn't mean it's a good one. Studies are like term papers. The average grade is a C. I am not sure if you saw the study posted not to long about about how cardio is better for weight loss than resistance training. Would you believe that to be true? It's conditional. That study is on infusion of PYY. How much was infused? Also, how much is produced from exercise? Doesn't say.

I know you already know there are many studies out there that you don't find to be true. A few that come to mind is fat is bad, low carb is better for fat loss, things of that sort.

Remember there are 2 parts to success, 1 part is education the other part is experience. I am speaking directly from experience and common sense. If you ran a marathon(cardio) according to this PYY theory you wouldn't be hungry the next day, which obviously isn't true. I know from experience if I am hungry and I go do cardio, i won't be hungry anymore for a little while. After some time passes the appetite picks back up higher than normal.

How about rather than dismissing it out of hand you actually come up with something that supports your original statement, or come up with something that gives more insight as to why it is not a good one to use as an example of refuting your statement.

ETA: you actually just contradicted your own statement with your last two sentences. You know that right?

Sarauk2sf

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."

Just because there is a study, it doesn't mean it's a good one. Studies are like term papers. The average grade is a C. I am not sure if you saw the study posted not to long about about how cardio is better for weight loss than resistance training. Would you believe that to be true? It's conditional. That study is on infusion of PYY. How much was infused? Also, how much is produced from exercise? Doesn't say.

I know you already know there are many studies out there that you don't find to be true. A few that come to mind is fat is bad, low carb is better for fat loss, things of that sort.

Remember there are 2 parts to success, 1 part is education the other part is experience. I am speaking directly from experience and common sense. If you ran a marathon(cardio) according to this PYY theory you wouldn't be hungry the next day, which obviously isn't true. I know from experience if I am hungry and I go do cardio, i won't be hungry anymore for a little while. After some time passes the appetite picks back up higher than normal.

How about rather than dismissing it out of hand you actually come up with something that supports your original statement, or come up with something that gives more insight as to why it is not a good one to use as an example of refuting your statement.

I did, go run your *kitten* and then tell me you're not hungry. Experience.

Why your study isn't good to use as an example? Because that study wasn't tested on exercise.

Nice deflection and reasoning...as usual.

ETA: as anecdotal samples of n=1 are so important. On the very rare occasions I do cardio - my appetite is suppressed and according to you, that is evidence that your statement is wrong. I am not sure however if what I do is 'running my *kitten*' as I am not sure what that is!

Acg67

http://www.myosynthesis.com/effects-of-aerobic-andor-resistance-training-on-body-mass-and-fat-mass-in-overweight-or-obese-adults

Sarauk2sf

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."

Just because there is a study, it doesn't mean it's a good one. Studies are like term papers. The average grade is a C. I am not sure if you saw the study posted not to long about about how cardio is better for weight loss than resistance training. Would you believe that to be true? It's conditional. That study is on infusion of PYY. How much was infused? Also, how much is produced from exercise? Doesn't say.

I know you already know there are many studies out there that you don't find to be true. A few that come to mind is fat is bad, low carb is better for fat loss, things of that sort.

Remember there are 2 parts to success, 1 part is education the other part is experience. I am speaking directly from experience and common sense. If you ran a marathon(cardio) according to this PYY theory you wouldn't be hungry the next day, which obviously isn't true. I know from experience if I am hungry and I go do cardio, i won't be hungry anymore for a little while. After some time passes the appetite picks back up higher than normal.

How about rather than dismissing it out of hand you actually come up with something that supports your original statement, or come up with something that gives more insight as to why it is not a good one to use as an example of refuting your statement.

I did, go run your *kitten* and then tell me you're not hungry. Experience.

Why your study isn't good to use as an example? Because that study wasn't tested on exercise.

Nice deflection and reasoning...as usual.

ETA: as anecdotal samples of n=1 are so important. On the very rare occasions I do cardio - my appetite is suppressed and according to you, that is evidence that your statement is wrong. I am not sure however if what I do is 'running my *kitten*' as I am not sure what that is!

No, I originally said, "When you're ACTUALLY doing cardio, your appetite gets suppressed, but a few hours later? No."

You want to discuss why the study isn't valid?

1. We're talking about the effects of cardio on PYY. That study isn't testing that. It's about PPY infusion and appetite.
2. Did the PPY decrease hunger, or was it the effects of PPY on other hormones? According to the study it effected gherlin.
3. What did the diet consist of? Was it mostly simple carbs or lean protein? (makes a difference on appetite)
4. How much is gherlin reduced from exercise compared to PPY infusion? (if the infusion had a 50% decrease of gherlin compared to straight exercise, this doesn't tell us much.)
5. What reputable study would use BMI?

I know what you said - and your assertion contradicted it. You say it is not a factor, but then say it does suppress it for a certain time period. So, it is a factor.

And what s gherlin? You mean ghrelin?

Ok, you don't like that study, here is another one (which has a small sample I agree and does not take the conclusions further but tbh I cannot be bothered to look for more)

http://ajpregu.physiology.org/content/296/1/R29

"These findings suggest ghrelin and PYY may regulate appetite during and after exercise, but further research is required to establish whether exercise-induced changes in ghrelin and PYY influence subsequent food intake."


You can pick apart these studies as much as you want. But you have shown absolutely nothing apart from anecdotal evidence (yourself) which my anecdotal evidence (myself) disagrees with.

This debate is rather ridiculous to be honest - I just made the point that on a non-calorie restricted study it was a relevant consideration.

millerll

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.

Three sets of each exercise. Probably 8 - 10 exercises in all. Surely that is a pittance to a manly man like yourself, but it does fit within the commonly accepted guidelines for resistance exercise.

I must have missed the part about 8-10 exercises in all. I only saw three sets total per day, so apologies if I misinterpreted that. Eight to ten exercises would, indeed, be a much better routine. :flowerforyou:

As for "manly man", I just have to chuckle......and, thanks for the compliment!

mgobluetx12

Sorry, buddy. Sara wins.