Just wondering how everyone feels about this artical...

Wow.. whoooo wrote this?

Ssooo.. no cardio???

the author of this article is an idiot

So cardio makes you fat?

Let's take a look at triathletes, cyclists, and runners. Not to many fatties in the big leagues of those sports?

I met with a trainer at my gym yesterday, which I was then informed that if I wanted to lose 100+ pounds, that I would have to do strength training.

The Aqua & Hydro classes I'm taking DO work with water weights, so wouldn't that accomplish any "Strength training" I would need to do. And, doesn't it just sound like the trainer wants to sell training hours?

The article actually makes sense to me. Most cardio is a problem for me because: knees. I want to keep what knee function I have. I like kettlebells. They are fun and make me stronger and I don't have to join a gym.

Nothing surprises me when it comes to "experts" in the health/diet fields.Remember when bacon was bad,eggs were evil,eat lots of

olive oil,dip bread in it. Now we can't eat bread,fruit is too much sugar & pork is the new white meat

The exercise article might be 100% true,but at 69.....I have no years to wait, for them to actually come to a solid,researched conclusion. Guess I will just keep on counting calories & doing exercises that work for me.

I agree completely with going "cardio-free." With that being said, this is the worst written health article I have ever read, and I feel slightly less intelligent after reading it. Yahoo.com is notorious for publishing these kind of articles.

You would think if a guy was going to use terms like HRV and EPOC, he would actually do research on what they are. Then to argue that people that do cardio are going to gain weight?

I've never been so embarrassed to be a personal trainer.

It really doesn't matter what aspect of health you look at - you will find an "expert" somewhere who takes an opinion to the extreme.

I do firmly believe that muscles are an important factor of long term health and that strength training aids in promoting a healthy metabolism which in turn can lead to weight loss. That does not meanthat Cardio is in itself not also a beneficial activity with it's own set of related benefits.

The article also completely misses the mark by theorizing that the only reason anybody is at the gym or exercising is either to lose weight or maintain weight loss. That is probably true for a large percentage of people, but many people are exercising or participating in sports for reasons completely unrelated to their weight.

There truly is only one reason to exercise: To increase your metabolism in order to burn more calories 24 hours a day, seven days a week. What is the only style of exercise that accomplishes that goal? Strength training. Increasing your metabolism through strength training is the key to successful, permanent weight loss.

Bollocks.....

I stopped reading at this exact part of the article...

mine isn't so

LOL!

I don't have an advanced degree in exercise physiology -- but neither does the author. He's got a business degree, alongside "27 years of experience with weight loss,"....whatever that means. The whole article reads like one long commercial for a bunch of books that he wrote -- already a red flag, and a good reason to be skeptical.

However, I do agree that strength training should not be neglected, especially over one's lifetime because muscle atrophy as you get older is indeed a biological fact.

I'm thinking that he paints such a harsh picture of cardio in order to be as "shocking" and "controversial" as possible and sell more of his books...

I don't even like cardio, but I like sketchy salesmen even less...

Someone else posted the same article on here.. It's bullcrap, plain and simple.

This article encourages the new fad mentality of "Cardio is evil; weights are awesome. Therefore, you should hate cardio and preach about weights.", which is stupid. Mostly because it focuses on how you want to look, rather than perform. Our society is so focused on how people should LOOK, rather than what they should be able to DO, we sell things like exercise just because we'll LOOK better, which doesn't guarantee anything about how we'll be able to function or what benefits we're actually getting.

I run long-distance because my lungs, heart, and circulatory system get much stronger and more efficient. I lift weights and do high-intensity training because it helps keep me well-rounded, and helps strengthen the support from muscles I need to do the things I love. BALANCE is the key to being a well-conditioned athlete that performs well, and doesn't simply LOOK a certain way. There are people I see in the gym who work hours upon hours with weight to look bigger, but if you put them outside and asked them to toss hay bales all day, they'd have to stop after a few rounds because they aren't actually conditioned to do coordinated work. I can go from running five miles to horseback riding to pulling trees, all in the same day, because the workouts I do focus on helping me perform better, not just look better.

It's all about what your goals are. If you want to LOOK a certain way, fine, subscribe to the theory that cardio is evil, sucks, and will make you fat. You'll look as awesome as you want that way. If you want to actually DO things, and focus on how you can PERFORM better, ditch the mentality that something has to inherently suck because it alone doesn't do everything you want, and work on finding balance.