Cardio > Strength training

GiddyupTim

Actually, long term, it is.


Increased muscle mass = higher metabolic burn = more calories burned sitting on your butt.

Cardio burns more calories in the short term, but not in the long term.



That being said, I enjoy both, so don't get all cardio ninja on me.

Excuse me if I am wrong, but from the I have read, the amount of extra calorie burn that occurs after weight training, due to increased metabolism, is actually almost negligible.
I think it is funny. Many of the same people who point to the build of sprinters (thick and muscular) versus distance runners (stick thin) as evidence that distance running doesn't build a body, are the same ones who claim lifting gives a greater calorie burn than running.
If that were true, why are many of the powerlifters, who work really hard and long at their sport, beefy and thick (perhaps almost over weight), while all the serious runners, who work long and hard at their sport, rail thin?
It is because running long distances you burn so many calories it is hard -- well nigh impossible, actually -- to keep up.
But, the poster quoted above is right. Each helps. Each can work. Each probably has somewhat different health benefits.

AnabolicKyle

maybe you could indulge us a little more on how you lost the weight the second time and why you stopped at 128lbs the first time. or anything else relevant

I stopped at 128 pounds, but not on purpose. It was the summer of 2008 and I had a lot of things going on in my life including trying to leave an abusive stalker type boyfriend who broke into my house...and because of the life stresses hitting me upside my head, I stopped working out and stopped watching my diet so I gained weight again to get back up to 150 pounds. I didn't start buckling down and trying to lose body fat until early in 2009 which was when I started a new job, finally rid myself of my ex-@$$hole, etc.

I lost the weight the second time by doing 4 weight training workouts per week and 2 cardio workouts on my "off" days. I still keep to the same type of schedule today. I weight train Mon/Tues and Thurs/Fri. I do cardio on Wednesday and Saturday and completely rest on Sunday. The cardio was a mix of whatever I wanted to do, sometimes it was kickboxing, sometimes dancing, sometimes running, etc...but it was basically done just because on the days that I don't do any kind of exercise, my diet tends to slip. Because I used to weigh-in on Sunday mornings, this used to be a real problem in the past since that is rest day, but that is not an issue anymore due to the fact that I weigh-in Monday mornings now which gives me more incentive to not over-indulge on Sundays any longer.

By doing mostly weight training with some, but not very much, cardio, I am now wearing the exact same sizes that I was wearing when I first lost the weight and got down to 128 pounds. The difference is that I am now 140 pounds and I am currently sitting at 23% body fat which is 7% less than back in 2008. I do not have the same muffin top I used to back then. I can do things I never could before like pull-ups and greater-than-bodyweight on the barbell squats. Even things at the doctor are looking better. My cholesterol has dropped to 169. It was 201 when I weighed 128 pounds with my 30% body fat.

All in all, I feel that a good program incorporates both cardio and weight training, but it was really the weight training that made the biggest difference in my physique and overall health as evidenced by the fact that I have lost weight doing both and that my body fat % and lab results are much better when I did the weight training in my program.

thanks for the input!

sorry dont really have to much to say but has your diet changed significantly from your 128lb days to now?

anyways awesome job and keep up the resistant training!

Sarauk2sf

No - read the whole statement together.

i think iam still missing what youre trying to say (honestly)

but


i think with basically agree with each other

What I am saying, which I think you are not disagreeing with is that a caloric deficit can be created by either cardio or strength training or just eating less, but to lose weight, you need to be in a deficit. Cardio may well create that more than strength training (depends on intensity, and ignoring long-term increase in TDEE from higher mucscle mass from RT). To ensure that the weight loss that comes from that deficit = fat loss (i.e. no muscle loss), RT is necessary.

anicapauline

I've heard that doing strength training will help cardio burn more calories. Whatever the case may be I think a combination of both is best.

collingmommy

I'm with the strength training and weights all day. Sorry. To each their own.

Lyadeia

maybe you could indulge us a little more on how you lost the weight the second time and why you stopped at 128lbs the first time. or anything else relevant

I stopped at 128 pounds, but not on purpose. It was the summer of 2008 and I had a lot of things going on in my life including trying to leave an abusive stalker type boyfriend who broke into my house...and because of the life stresses hitting me upside my head, I stopped working out and stopped watching my diet so I gained weight again to get back up to 150 pounds. I didn't start buckling down and trying to lose body fat until early in 2009 which was when I started a new job, finally rid myself of my ex-@$$hole, etc.

I lost the weight the second time by doing 4 weight training workouts per week and 2 cardio workouts on my "off" days. I still keep to the same type of schedule today. I weight train Mon/Tues and Thurs/Fri. I do cardio on Wednesday and Saturday and completely rest on Sunday. The cardio was a mix of whatever I wanted to do, sometimes it was kickboxing, sometimes dancing, sometimes running, etc...but it was basically done just because on the days that I don't do any kind of exercise, my diet tends to slip. Because I used to weigh-in on Sunday mornings, this used to be a real problem in the past since that is rest day, but that is not an issue anymore due to the fact that I weigh-in Monday mornings now which gives me more incentive to not over-indulge on Sundays any longer.

By doing mostly weight training with some, but not very much, cardio, I am now wearing the exact same sizes that I was wearing when I first lost the weight and got down to 128 pounds. The difference is that I am now 140 pounds and I am currently sitting at 23% body fat which is 7% less than back in 2008. I do not have the same muffin top I used to back then. I can do things I never could before like pull-ups and greater-than-bodyweight on the barbell squats. Even things at the doctor are looking better. My cholesterol has dropped to 169. It was 201 when I weighed 128 pounds with my 30% body fat.

All in all, I feel that a good program incorporates both cardio and weight training, but it was really the weight training that made the biggest difference in my physique and overall health as evidenced by the fact that I have lost weight doing both and that my body fat % and lab results are much better when I did the weight training in my program.

thanks for the input!

sorry dont really have to much to say but has your diet changed significantly from your 128lb days to now?

anyways awesome job and keep up the resistant training!

I don't believe my diet has changed much at all. Before I used MFP to track my calories, I kept a notebook that did the same thing (only it was insanely tedious as I had to add everything myself which is why I thank God for MFP for making the calculations for me!). I still have the old pages from that notebook, and many of my recipes are the same as well. I periodically change the recipes to update changes in the brands that I use and such, but mostly things are the same with similar macro ratios.

I think the only "major" change was back in late 2007 and up to March 2008 when I was trying to do the P90X diet. That really screwed me up because the diet changed once a month! Once I started just aiming for a certain calorie goal and certain macro goals, that has pretty much stayed constant since summer 2008. It changed slightly with every 10 pound weight difference, but the ratios remained the same (if that makes sense to you? It sounds OK in my head).

3foldchord

"balancing time commitments against health benefits, it appears that aerobic training is the optimal mode of exercise for reducing fat mass and body mass, while a program including resistance training is needed for increasing lean mass in middle-aged, overweight".

It says aerobic is better for reducing body mass and uses that term separately from "fat mass". Does "body mass" mean "muscle mass"... "bone mass" .. "Water weight mass"? Water weight doesn't seem part of body mass in my mind, though. Maybe it is.

CoderGal

I've heard that doing strength training will help cardio burn more calories. Whatever the case may be I think a combination of both is best.

Sort of. Muscle mass helps you burn more calories. Just look into the equations for figuring out your basil metabolic rate. The more muscle you have, the higher it well be.

For Example:
If I was 30% fat my Basil would be 1263, giving me a sedentary TDEE of 1516.
If I was 15% fat my Basil would be 1460, giving me a sedentary TDEE of 1752.

Strength training helps you retain muscle mass on a calorie deficit. Therefore whatever you do you'll burn more because you'll have more muscle mass then you would have without it.

shinkalork

all depends...it's been proven that both will shred fat faster.
Cardio burns fat but adding weights will build muscles and those muscles will burn fat (all the time)...

The best thing in my opinion at first to lose major fat is to do lots of cardio and some strength (weights) workouts.

After.... Go strength and add some cardio...To tone everything up.

Works fine for me.

SarahBeth0625

I enjoy both. I think a healthy mix brings desired results. That said, I don't call myself an elliptical queen for nothing! It gives me an exercise high.

Sarauk2sf

"balancing time commitments against health benefits, it appears that aerobic training is the optimal mode of exercise for reducing fat mass and body mass, while a program including resistance training is needed for increasing lean mass in middle-aged, overweight".

It says aerobic is better for reducing body mass and uses that term separately from "fat mass". Does "body mass" mean "muscle mass"... "bone mass" .. "Water weight mass"? Water weight doesn't seem part of body mass in my mind, though. Maybe it is.

Body mass = total weight

Liftnlove

Mixing up ">" and "<" is a common error. Don't sweat it.

hehehe

Cardio doesn't come CLOSE to changing your body the way weight training does...not even CLOSE. And cardio is completely unnecessary to lose weight...you can just eat less food if you choose to.

Anyway, I do both, but lifting is my priority and always will be. To each their own...all exercise is good.

SarahBeth0625

Also, "they" say that EVERYONE should have 30 minutes a day of cardio... and I do 31 on the elliptical. It's about overall health for me, not just losing weight (in fact, that's no longer on my goals; toning up is -- which is why I love the strength training too). But I do feel I'd be doing my body a disservice, from a health standpoint, if I cut the cardio out.

redheaddee

I enjoy both. I think a healthy mix brings desired results. That said, I don't call myself an elliptical queen for nothing! It gives me an exercise high.

Mine is divine, and with the right tempo music, I 'run' like the wind and love it!

AnabolicKyle

What I am saying, which I think you are not disagreeing with is that a caloric deficit can be created by either cardio or strength training or just eating less, but to lose weight, you need to be in a deficit. Cardio may well create that more than strength training (depends on intensity, and ignoring long-term increase in TDEE from higher mucscle mass from RT). To ensure that the weight loss that comes from that deficit = fat loss (i.e. no muscle loss), RT is necessary.

more or less i agree, do you have an studies on long term RT/AT?

IMHO i think with increased LBM a persons appetite would natural increase to maintain current muscle and fat

i think what you're suggesting is with an increased LBM an increased metabolic rate would help to increase and promote even more fat loss

which makes sense but Iam not sure if its true

SarahBeth0625

I enjoy both. I think a healthy mix brings desired results. That said, I don't call myself an elliptical queen for nothing! It gives me an exercise high.

Mine is divine, and with the right tempo music, I 'run' like the wind and love it!

High five!! YES!! :flowerforyou:

AnabolicKyle

I don't believe my diet has changed much at all. Before I used MFP to track my calories, I kept a notebook that did the same thing (only it was insanely tedious as I had to add everything myself which is why I thank God for MFP for making the calculations for me!). I still have the old pages from that notebook, and many of my recipes are the same as well. I periodically change the recipes to update changes in the brands that I use and such, but mostly things are the same with similar macro ratios.

I think the only "major" change was back in late 2007 and up to March 2008 when I was trying to do the P90X diet. That really screwed me up because the diet changed once a month! Once I started just aiming for a certain calorie goal and certain macro goals, that has pretty much stayed constant since summer 2008. It changed slightly with every 10 pound weight difference, but the ratios remained the same (if that makes sense to you? It sounds OK in my head).

Yeah i follow you!

SideSteel

What I am saying, which I think you are not disagreeing with is that a caloric deficit can be created by either cardio or strength training or just eating less, but to lose weight, you need to be in a deficit. Cardio may well create that more than strength training (depends on intensity, and ignoring long-term increase in TDEE from higher mucscle mass from RT). To ensure that the weight loss that comes from that deficit = fat loss (i.e. no muscle loss), RT is necessary.

more or less i agree, do you have an studies on long term RT/AT?

IMHO i think with increased LBM a persons appetite would natural increase to maintain current muscle and fat

i think what you're suggesting is with an increased LBM an increased metabolic rate would help to increase and promote even more fat loss

which makes sense but Iam not sure if its true

It's true but not to the extent that most people make it out to be. Last I heard I believe something on the order of 6kcals/lb LBM. Considering that it takes a long time to gain say, 15 lbs of muscle, that's a whole 90 kcals added to your TDEE.

That doesn't make it negligible as it certainly adds up, but I think people often over-state it.


Regarding the study you linked, since energy expenditure wasn't tightly controlled and food intake was done using recall at various periods, I don't think I'd put a ton of stock into this.

I DO think that the study shows that larger energy deficits were created in the cardio only group. That seems intuitive to me as I would assume that your average cardio session probably burns more calories (this does not necessarily make it the optimal choice for fat burning as energy intake is a variable that can be used to create a deficit).

But energy expenditure is not the primary reason for advocating resistance training. The energy expense is a bonus feature, IMO.

jenilla1

I both. I've gotten my best results when alternating the two activities throughout the week. My favorite thing about strength training (heavy) is the way it has improved my running pace and strengthened my muscles, thereby helping me avoid running injuries.

:flowerforyou:

Just my little anecdote: I've done both alone and both together. It's easy for me to get skinny quickly on cardio alone (as OP suggests) but it's so much better for my performance and my appearance to do it with strength training. Didn't ever lose much weight on strength training alone, because it's hard to get a big burn and I can't seem to build enough mass to raise my metabolism high enough to compete with the burn from running. For me, personally, with my body type, I've felt more benefits doing strength training as a maintenance activity. I really enjoy it. I've been in maintenance for a long time now, so I don't do either to lose weight, I do them to feel strong and look good, so that's ok. (Obviously calorie deficit is key for either.)

geebusuk

Anyone got the full report?

Anecdotally, compound movements at heavy weights do a better job of using up calories than lighter weights with isolation movements.

I did find a bit more detail, which says:
>>(three days per week of weight lifting, three sets per day, 8-12 repetitions per set), <<
That doesn't like that much and sounds like the weight may be too light for best results.