Stop the steady state cardio today! Trust me...

Options
123457

Replies

  • snowbike
    snowbike Posts: 153 Member
    Options
    is running for 20 sec and walking for 40sec for about 20 minutes considered HIIT?

    sprinting as fast as you possibly can go for 20 secs then jogging for 40 secs is HIIT.

    I tend to imagine the zombies from 28 days later chasing me. :D
  • geebusuk
    geebusuk Posts: 3,348 Member
    Options
    Cheers msf74 - got the ideal road too, about seven minutes run away and pretty deserted so I can safely have the dog off-leash there.

    As for the rest - one of the links someone posted repeatedly talked about using HIIT for 'burning belly fat' or whatever - immediately sets alarm bells ringing as to the non-scientific and populist nature of the information!
  • mkanak
    mkanak Posts: 38 Member
    Options
    I mix all styles, one day I do steady, one day hitt, one day intervals etc. just for the change.
  • myofibril
    myofibril Posts: 4,500 Member
    Options
    As for the rest - one of the links someone posted repeatedly talked about using HIIT for 'burning belly fat' or whatever - immediately sets alarm bells ringing as to the non-scientific and populist nature of the information!

    I'd bet my bottom dollar that particular nugget of wisdom is due to a dodgy extrapolation of the Tremblay study which showed reduction in skinfold measurements for a HIIT group across 6 sites in comparison to a low intensity group.

    What people fail to mention is a) the measurements were taken by calipers which are prone to user error b) the abdominal measurements were the same between the two groups and c) there was not a consistent reduction across all sites which brings into question the accuracy of measurements....
  • Chadomaniac
    Chadomaniac Posts: 1,785 Member
    Options
    what iv never understood is that u burn say 200cals doing 15min hiit , but u burn 400cals doin 45min steady pace ... ?? isnt it obvious which is better? and u keep your heart rate in the fat burning zone (mines 120-140 bpm) ... i know the afterburn but cant see it burning THAT many calories
  • ahamm002
    ahamm002 Posts: 1,690 Member
    Options
    As for the rest - one of the links someone posted repeatedly talked about using HIIT for 'burning belly fat' or whatever - immediately sets alarm bells ringing as to the non-scientific and populist nature of the information!

    I'd bet my bottom dollar that particular nugget of wisdom is due to a dodgy extrapolation of the Tremblay study which showed reduction in skinfold measurements for a HIIT group across 6 sites in comparison to a low intensity group.

    What people fail to mention is a) the measurements were taken by calipers which are prone to user error b) the abdominal measurements were the same between the two groups and c) there was not a consistent reduction across all sites which brings into question the accuracy of measurements....

    Tremblay's study is not the only one that showed HIIT is usually superior to LISS from purely a body composition stand point. And calipers are a very accepted method for measuring body composition in clinical trials.
  • samanthawarren
    samanthawarren Posts: 120
    Options
    Thanks for the info Martoch. Up until I was in my early 30's I was a work out nut. (when I was in good shape). I used to do interval training in the morning when my time was limited to 20 minutes of my lunch break and then come back to the gym in the evening to do 60 minutes of cardio (or play bb, swim, whatever)

    Now that I have a ton of weight to lose I have been doing mostly cardio and while I do enjoy it, this thread reminded me about interval training. At first I didn't know what HIIT was. I don't know if we called it that way back when. Anyway, thanks for the reminder definitely something to consider when my time is limited.
  • myofibril
    myofibril Posts: 4,500 Member
    Options
    Tremblay's study is not the only one that showed HIIT is usually superior to LISS from purely a body composition stand point. And calipers are a very accepted method for measuring body composition in clinical trials.

    You're right that it isn't the only study but none of the ones I have seen at least shows what I could consider to be a significant benefit in body composition, particularly taking out confounding factors (mainly the lack of keeping calories constant between groups).

    Calipers may well be an accepted method but that does not mean they are fully accurate, especially compared to say DEXA scans. In the Tremblay study the steady state group's skinfold measurements either stayed the same or decreased except for two sites where they actually increased. Now, unless there is some kind of voodoo going on here the discrepancy is probably going to be explained by measurement error.
  • Yogi_Carl
    Yogi_Carl Posts: 1,906 Member
    Options
    I don't know if this is a general observation or just my personal experience, but on Monday this week I tried a HIIT run - 2 mins warm up followed by 8 rounds of 30 second sprint and 90 seconds slow run and 2 minutes cool down jog. When I got back to work I just about fell through my lunch and was hungry for the rest of the day, but I did eat all my calories for the day.

    On Tuesday evening I ate eight rounds of thickly spread wholemeal bread and finished off my feeding frenzy with two apples because I was feeling guilty about the bread and marg! Now nobody stood over me and made me eat like crazy, but I think it was something to do with that sprint run 24 hours earlier that put me into a feeding frenzy? Or just a poor excuse for returning to my old ways?

    Either way, when I go out for a steady state run of 30 - 45 minutes, I come back relaxed, tired, but not over hungry and certainly not feeling sore and ravenous 24 hours later. So I would rather opt for steady state and accept the 400 or so calorie burn than risk the higher metabolic rate from an after burn that can see me putting those calories right back on hours after.

    I'd be interested to hear whether others have experienced the same?
  • busycitystreets
    busycitystreets Posts: 64 Member
    Options
    LOVE HIIT! Makes running so much less boring (on a treadmill) and the time FLIES by. However, HIIT isn't going to help me reach one of my life goals of running a marathon. I good mix of both, I think is best.
  • schondell
    schondell Posts: 556 Member
    Options
    I tried that beginner's link you posted and I was sweating in no time! It actually works and because of the breaks and short time span I feel like I can actually do it. Going to look more into it, thanks!
  • Tubbytucka
    Tubbytucka Posts: 83 Member
    Options
    I think there is still something to be said for steady rate cardio - I recently (August) strained my knee cycling, and after a few days off I got back on the bike, but concentrated on keeping my heart rate below 130bpm. I made sure I was always starting off in a low gear as well to reduce the strain as well, and spent an hour or so most days cycling to or from work.

    After about 6 weeks my knee was feeling better, so I did a few rides where I would ride as fast as I could, and pretty much every time I did that I would set a new personal best (Strava & Sportstrackerlive) and I could keep going at a higher HR for longer.
    For example, before, I would be gasping when I was up at 168-170 or so and only manage it for 20-30 seconds; after the long slow training I could spend a few minutes at 170-173 (I'm 47y.o.) and feel ok after it, rather than wanting to puke.

    I still do HIIT as well, I ride in hilly areas and use hills as the HI bit,, the downhills and flat are my rest periods.

    TL;DR - Google Heart rate zone 2 training.
  • Martoch
    Martoch Posts: 166
    Options
    I tried that beginner's link you posted and I was sweating in no time! It actually works and because of the breaks and short time span I feel like I can actually do it. Going to look more into it, thanks!

    Awesome to hear...great for you!!!
    :happy:
  • DanaDark
    DanaDark Posts: 2,187 Member
    Options
    It all really depends on the intensity that you actually perform.

    In HIIT it is not the sheer act of variation in intensity that is good, it is the fact there are points of high intensity. During the high intensity period, you burn more calories than when running at a moderate intensity. However, during the low intensity periods of HIIT, you burn less than in moderate intensity.

    The goal is to manage your time in HIIT to make it where the calories burned during high intensity out weight the fewer calories burned during low intensity. Key is to ensure your high intensity portions are actually high intensity and not just your moderate intensity.

    As for the "fat burning zone", all that is completely misunderstood. Anyone suggesting you need to stay in it is simply ill informed with numbers.

    Lets say fat burning zone will burn 70% of calories from fat while a higher intensity may burn only 50% calories from fat.
    In the fat burning zone you may burn about 100 calories, so 70% of 100 is 70 calories of fat. However, in the higher intensity zone you only burn 50% of calories from fat, but you burn more calories. So say you burn 150 calories in higher intensity, 50% of 150 is 75 calories. This means MORE overall fat was burned.

    These numbers are not the actual numbers used, I am just too lazy to go fish them all up and give a completely solid reply at the moment.

    Overall, HIIT vs steady state cardio... it ALL depends on the intensity that you do. Improved cardiovascular health will ultimately make it where your steady state cardio is VASTLY superior to any HIIT cardio you do.
  • ixap
    ixap Posts: 675 Member
    Options
    I've started lifting SL5x5 and am seeing awesome results. Now it's a balancing act to try and lift and run at the same time while improving on both. Not sure if that's possible... we'll see.
    It's possible! :bigsmile:
    You'll probably get slower progress lifting than if it was your only focus, but you can definitely progress at both at the same time- maybe 75% instead of 100% if either one was the only goal.
    YES!! :)
    I have run for 15 years and added lifting 2 years ago.
    This year I PR'd in the 5K while adding huge amounts to all my lifts.
    It does take some juggling and compromise, but totally worth it. I look and feel way better than if I were doing only 1.
  • ixap
    ixap Posts: 675 Member
    Options
    Tremblay's study is not the only one that showed HIIT is usually superior to LISS from purely a body composition stand point. And calipers are a very accepted method for measuring body composition in clinical trials.

    You're right that it isn't the only study but none of the ones I have seen at least shows what I could consider to be a significant benefit in body composition, particularly taking out confounding factors (mainly the lack of keeping calories constant between groups).
    Not only that, there are some studies showing the opposite.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20195181
    "Intense interval running for 12 wk is an effective training stimulus for improvement of cardiorespiratory fitness and glucose tolerance, but in relation to the treatment of hyperlipidemia and obesity, it is less effective than prolonged running."
  • marieautumn
    marieautumn Posts: 932 Member
    Options
    i think there are benefits to each, so go with what you enjoy more. i did crossfit for a year and didn't lose any body fat, and once i cut out the crossfit and just started doing cardio at the gym (elliptical and stairmaster mostly), i lost 12 pounds and reduced my BF%. Personally, i enjoy both work outs, but i like that i can go to the gym and do cardio and RELAX. There isnt much brain power required to work on the elliptical or climb stairs. It's a nice way to unwind from a stressful day at work.
  • ixap
    ixap Posts: 675 Member
    Options
    (and trust me, not burning many calories by jogging 4 miles in an hour compared to even 15 minutes of HIIT).

    where are you getting these numbers? a 140-lb woman is burning 400 calories jogging an hour (about 6 calories per minute); are you claiming they could burn upwards of 800 calories in 15 minutes of HIIT?

    I don't think so!

    Even if you burn THREE TIME the calories per minute doing HIIT (18 calories per minute -- pretty much impossible, to start with) -- that would be 270 calories burned in 15 minutes, which is less than the 400 burned in an hour of SS.

    Furthermore, if you were truly doing HIGH intensity training that burned triple the typical cardio calories per minute, you would be limited to doing that about 15-20 minutes, 3 times per week, right? Whereas you can do steady state for hours per week. I often run 40-60 miles per week; this burns thousands of calories each week and makes it nearly impossible for me to get overweight; hardly a waste of time any way you look at it.
  • ILiveInTheGym
    ILiveInTheGym Posts: 2
    Options
    HIIT can only be done on alternate days. What about the other days - does it pay off or not to do steady state on other days? What about effect of steady state cardio on telomere? Anyone knows?
  • NavyKnightAh13
    NavyKnightAh13 Posts: 1,394 Member
    Options
    bumping for later read when I am not so tired

Categories