Cardio fails to produce fatloss - interesting studies
Replies
-
Now I didn't see a distinction between fat and weight loss in the OP's post. That in itself is a reason for me to go read elsewhere.
As for steady state cardio vs interval vs strength. Hey, as long as it lets me eat more and feel better, sign me up.
I like being able to brag about running 2h straight. I like the way lifting changes my shape (hate being sore all the time though), and I may try some intervals seen as they are the current craze. Running is my favourite because it is easy, relaxing and I could do it almost every day if I wanted to, without feeling adverse effects.
If lack of time is your only reason to diss cardio, I'd translate that to lack of ambition.0 -
There are so many benefits to cardio. It releases endorphins so you feel great, it helps control appeitite, speeds up your metabolism, helps burn calories and the list goes on.....
So add all that with a healthy eating plan = a happier healthier you!!!!0 -
...
There are plenty of folk on these forums with "perfect" bodies who would give themselves a coronary running for a bus.
...
Exaggerate, much? I'm completely sedentary other than getting to and from my desk job and a once weekly 30 min heavy lifting session and even I can run for a bus without gasping for air. Seriously doubt the folks who put in the work for the "perfect" bodies would have more trouble than I would unless they starved their way there.
My old gym was very grit & sawdust with many of my friends being male power lifters training for Strongman competitions and the like. They would be the first to admit that a few intervals on a stationary bike or a mile of running would totally wear them out.
People train for different priorities and I know plenty of men who only weight train and never do any cardio whatsoever, and they will happily admit that their cardiovascular endurance is ****e, whether you personally like it or not.0 -
...
There are plenty of folk on these forums with "perfect" bodies who would give themselves a coronary running for a bus.
...
Exaggerate, much? I'm completely sedentary other than getting to and from my desk job and a once weekly 30 min heavy lifting session and even I can run for a bus without gasping for air. Seriously doubt the folks who put in the work for the "perfect" bodies would have more trouble than I would unless they starved their way there.
My old gym was very grit & sawdust with many of my friends being male power lifters training for Strongman competitions and the like. They would be the first to admit that a few intervals on a stationary bike or a mile of running would totally wear them out.
People train for different priorities and I know plenty of men who only weight train and never do any cardio whatsoever, and they will happily admit that their cardiovascular endurance is ****e, whether you personally like it or not.
So people at your gym = plenty of folks on these forums
Seems legit0 -
In my experience, strength training can also help with endurance gains so again...I doubt those who focus mainly on strength training would just keel over from short cardio.
I don't doubt it at all. The gyms are filled with people lifting weights who flat out cannot complete a 5km run.
If someone can't bang out 5km, they are plainly and simply not fit. And "six minutes of sprinting" will not fix that.
So that's your line for fitness? If you can't run 5K you aren't fit?
I think that's a pretty fair baseline. Even if you're slow as a bloke you should be able to knock out 5k in 25mins. If you can't run for 25mins that's pretty poor.0 -
...
There are plenty of folk on these forums with "perfect" bodies who would give themselves a coronary running for a bus.
...
Exaggerate, much? I'm completely sedentary other than getting to and from my desk job and a once weekly 30 min heavy lifting session and even I can run for a bus without gasping for air. Seriously doubt the folks who put in the work for the "perfect" bodies would have more trouble than I would unless they starved their way there.
My old gym was very grit & sawdust with many of my friends being male power lifters training for Strongman competitions and the like. They would be the first to admit that a few intervals on a stationary bike or a mile of running would totally wear them out.
People train for different priorities and I know plenty of men who only weight train and never do any cardio whatsoever, and they will happily admit that their cardiovascular endurance is ****e, whether you personally like it or not.
So people at your gym = plenty of folks on these forums
Seems legit
Of course if might be possible that folk here are from a completely different planet. It has been considered.0 -
Look, calories are calories. It doesn't matter how you exercise. Calorie deficit is going to make you lose weight. These studies are bs.0
-
As many others have said, a calorie deficit causes fat loss. You can achieve that through any exercise program (or no exercise) and diet. If you want to improve body composition and get stronger then strength train. If you want to eat extra calories and improve your conditioning and cardiovascular health, then do cardio.
If you don't want to put in the work, then don't.0 -
In my experience, strength training can also help with endurance gains so again...I doubt those who focus mainly on strength training would just keel over from short cardio.
I don't doubt it at all. The gyms are filled with people lifting weights who flat out cannot complete a 5km run.
If someone can't bang out 5km, they are plainly and simply not fit. And "six minutes of sprinting" will not fix that.
So that's your line for fitness? If you can't run 5K you aren't fit?
I think that's a pretty fair baseline. Even if you're slow as a bloke you should be able to knock out 5k in 25mins. If you can't run for 25mins that's pretty poor.
Totally off topic here, but it took 3 years of running for me to be able to break 25 mins for my 5k time. Us slow blokes start off a lot slower than you may think0 -
So that's your line for fitness? If you can't run 5K you aren't fit?
I think that's a pretty fair baseline. Even if you're slow as a bloke you should be able to knock out 5k in 25mins. If you can't run for 25mins that's pretty poor.
I can't do a 5k in 25 minutes, my best time is 30 minutes. But I've completed 3 half marathons so far this year. So although I can run non-stop for over 2.5 hours does that mean that based on your statement I am unfit because I can't do a 5k in 25 minutes?0 -
So that's your line for fitness? If you can't run 5K you aren't fit?
I think that's a pretty fair baseline. Even if you're slow as a bloke you should be able to knock out 5k in 25mins. If you can't run for 25mins that's pretty poor.
I can't do a 5k in 25 minutes, my best time is 30 minutes. But I've completed 3 half marathons so far this year. So although I can run non-stop for over 2.5 hours does that mean that based on your statement I am unfit because I can't do a 5k in 25 minutes?
Seems so0 -
well then.. i really dont know how I lost 80 pounds :noway: :happy:0
-
Look, calories are calories. It doesn't matter how you exercise. Calorie deficit is going to make you lose weight. These studies are bs.
:drinker: cheers!0 -
In my experience, strength training can also help with endurance gains so again...I doubt those who focus mainly on strength training would just keel over from short cardio.
I don't doubt it at all. The gyms are filled with people lifting weights who flat out cannot complete a 5km run.
If someone can't bang out 5km, they are plainly and simply not fit. And "six minutes of sprinting" will not fix that.
So that's your line for fitness? If you can't run 5K you aren't fit?
I think that's a pretty fair baseline. Even if you're slow as a bloke you should be able to knock out 5k in 25mins. If you can't run for 25mins that's pretty poor.
wow. I'm in pretty good shape, and I'm lucky do do a 5k in 25 mins. That's an 8 minute mile, which most people can't just "struggle through".0 -
interesting ....
but i eat the same ( I am NOT dieting... although I may be snacking a little less ) and I went from sedentary to doing cardio and I am seeing weight loss of 2-3 lbs a week.
0 -
I'm intentionally splitting hairs here, just because I want clarity...
A calorie deficit in and of itself will results in weight loss. How much of that weight comes from fat loss varies, correct? Genetics, exercise, macros, etc...
So to say a calorie deficit = fat loss could be misleading for some people, no?0 -
wow. I'm in pretty good shape, and I'm lucky do do a 5k in 25 mins. That's an 8 minute mile, which most people can't just "struggle through".
Let's put it another way - forget the distance - if someone can't run for 30 minutes without puking their guts out or having to recover for three days, then I don't consider them fit. That should be around 3 miles/5 km, plus or minus.
And for the record, I myself do not quite yet met that standard, so I'm talking about myself here, too.0 -
So that's your line for fitness? If you can't run 5K you aren't fit?
I think that's a pretty fair baseline. Even if you're slow as a bloke you should be able to knock out 5k in 25mins. If you can't run for 25mins that's pretty poor.
I can't do a 5k in 25 minutes, my best time is 30 minutes. But I've completed 3 half marathons so far this year. So although I can run non-stop for over 2.5 hours does that mean that based on your statement I am unfit because I can't do a 5k in 25 minutes?
Seems so
yeah I'm with you guys. I don't much care for that part that was quoted in bold above. By whose standards am I considered un-fit If I can't run x distance in x amount of time? :grumble:0 -
"But you can get those same health benefits (and more) with much shorter, much more exciting, and invigorating workouts. More on that in a minute... "
I'm not sure that this entirely takes into account that what some people find 'exciting' and 'invigorating' would bore someone else senseless.
The most effective exercise is the one you love.0 -
wow. I'm in pretty good shape, and I'm lucky do do a 5k in 25 mins. That's an 8 minute mile, which most people can't just "struggle through".
Let's put it another way - forget the distance - if someone can't run for 30 minutes without puking their guts out or having to recover for three days, then I don't consider them fit. That should be around 3 miles/5 km, plus or minus.
And for the record, I myself do not quite yet met that standard, so I'm talking about myself here, too.
What about people that don't/can't run but can powerwalk? are they unfit because they can't run? what if you can do 30-60min on the elliptical at a high-ish resistance but don't run? still unfit? How about if they swim a certain distance or time but still can't run?
What about those with disabilities? Will they never be able to be fit?0 -
I understand your point, and generally agree with it. But technically that's not true."But you can get those same health benefits (and more) with much shorter, much more exciting, and invigorating workouts. More on that in a minute... "
I'm not sure that this entirely takes into account that what some people find 'exciting' and 'invigorating' would bore someone else senseless.
The most effective exercise is the one you love.
From a fat loss standpoint, the most effective exercise is the one your are worst at, i.e. least adapted to.0 -
What a load of BS
This article basically makes out cardio is useless, and it's not essential.
As someone said, cardio burns calories. To lose weight, one needs to eat a deficit in calories. The people who did cardio, but only lost the same amount as the people who dieted, clearly ate more than those who didn't do exercise.
I just did 15 minutes of HIIT training on my treadmill, and I burned 171 calories, but according to this shoddy study, them 171 calories must be imaginary.
Simple mathematics and the ability to work simple equations out can debunk that theory.0 -
I understand your point, and generally agree with it. But technically that's not true."But you can get those same health benefits (and more) with much shorter, much more exciting, and invigorating workouts. More on that in a minute... "
I'm not sure that this entirely takes into account that what some people find 'exciting' and 'invigorating' would bore someone else senseless.
The most effective exercise is the one you love.
From a fat loss standpoint, the most effective exercise is the one your are worst at, i.e. least adapted to.
If by 'fat loss standpoint' you mean 'how to shed it fastest', well maybe. If you mean 'the way I build and maintain a healthy lifestyle for the foreseeable future' then I'm afraid my view holds more water.
Loving a particular form of exercise also doesn't make you good at it for what it's worth.
I'm a good weight lifter - I'm physically very strong, and built (under the blubber) for strength. I'm a slow runner. But I love running, and merely like lifting.
I'm 'worst' at running, but I get a huge amount out of it, and it will always be the cornerstone of a sustainable healthy lifestyle for me.0 -
I understand your point, and generally agree with it. But technically that's not true."But you can get those same health benefits (and more) with much shorter, much more exciting, and invigorating workouts. More on that in a minute... "
I'm not sure that this entirely takes into account that what some people find 'exciting' and 'invigorating' would bore someone else senseless.
The most effective exercise is the one you love.
From a fat loss standpoint, the most effective exercise is the one your are worst at, i.e. least adapted to.
If by 'fat loss standpoint' you mean 'how to shed it fastest', well maybe. If you mean 'the way I build and maintain a healthy lifestyle for the foreseeable future' then I'm afraid my view holds more water.
True. But this thread isn't about long term sustainability. It's about fat loss.0 -
Sure. And I find it bizarre that people wish to separate the two. Which is MY point.0
-
That's one reason that Americans are overweight and out of shape. Everyone is looking for the six minute shortcut and nobody wants to do the work whether that work be on the road or in the weight room.
This and a whole other myriad of other stuff...
i do cardio to pass my fitness, test, make me feel good, make my job easier, boost my circulation, and it still burns calories so lets me eat more generously!!!0 -
So that's your line for fitness? If you can't run 5K you aren't fit?
I think that's a pretty fair baseline. Even if you're slow as a bloke you should be able to knock out 5k in 25mins. If you can't run for 25mins that's pretty poor.
I can't do a 5k in 25 minutes, my best time is 30 minutes. But I've completed 3 half marathons so far this year. So although I can run non-stop for over 2.5 hours does that mean that based on your statement I am unfit because I can't do a 5k in 25 minutes?
Seems so
yeah I'm with you guys. I don't much care for that part that was quoted in bold above. By whose standards am I considered un-fit If I can't run x distance in x amount of time? :grumble:
well, 25mins is a pretty elite speed to 'knock out' a 5k. i'm a slow runner. we are not all nimble and spritely. some of us are not natural athletes and have to work hard to achieve our goals. i'm a proud plodder. i've ran 8 halves and 2 fulls in the last 18 months. so, am i not fit then?
and fwiw OP, on the actual article, fat loss vs weight loss are 2 very different things. and to say you don't lose weight doing cardio just doesn't make sense. interval training is also good, as is weight training. generally, if you move more and eat within your caloric goals then you are likely to 1- get fitter and 2- lose weight.0 -
Cardio has so many more benefits than just burning calories. If I don't get in enough cardio in a week, I am miserable to be around (ask my husband!). I am a recovering cardio addict. It wasn't until a couple of weeks ago that I reduced the amount of cardio from 6+ hours a week to 3-3.5 hrs a week and increased my heavy weight training that I really saw results. I have been stuck in my size 4 since I had kids. Got rid of some cardio and replace it with weights and BAM - size 2 - in 2 weeks!0
-
bump0
-
From the conclusion of the second paper cited (couldn't find the first one produced in full online):
Conclusion: Exercise plays an equivalent role to CR (calorie restriction) in terms of energy balance; however, it can also improve aerobic fitness, which has other important cardiovascular and metabolic implications.
ie it doesn't matter if the calorie deficit comes from exercise or from diet alone as far as fat loss. What ground-breaking new information
This doesn't make cardio useless or ineffective. 0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K 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
- 424 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