Trying to gain muscle. Why no cardio?

I can only speculate. I am running and trying to gain muscle. I am focusing on building muscle right now, so I have cut back from running sessions. Part of this is the amount of calories I eat when I'm focused on running + the amount of calories I needed to build muscles became too much for me to do. I had to draw the line and set a priority. Now during the Spring, I will switch over and focus more on running and switch to maintaining my current build.

I agree with trojan, when you perform high intensity cardio, the protein needed by your muscles, is used in running. Now Don't quit on cardio at all. Keep it lite. Gaining weight is not a problem unless you have some illness. Otherwise, a good diet and little workout is enough. Let your body gain some weight. Lite exercise will keep your muscles in shape.

Good topic!

This is interesting to be because my life is essentially steady state cardio (am a livestock farmer) and as well as my lifting I also play rugby (1 or 2 80min training sessions/week and a match (another 80) on Saturday) and will be looking to bulk soon.

Looks like I should be eating a load when I do.

In for a read at it all later

I've seen lots of people that dislike cardio say it's catabolic but the only credible science I've seen related to ultra marathon runners.
If you have some please post....

Here's a report on the ultra marathon runners that showed some leg muscle loss but bear in mind they ran 2,788.7 miles in 64 days - that's over 43 miles a day !
http://healthland.time.com/2010/11/30/lessons-from-ultra-endurance-runners/

The preferred energy sources are glycogen and fat and only when they are depleted would your body turn to protein/muscle.
Most people can do cardio for two hours before glycogen depletion (hitting the wall as marathon runners put it or bonking as cyclists describe it). I don't believe anyone doing a reasonable amount of cardio and has an adequate diet needs to worry about cardio reducing muscle mass. My own experience training for and completing a 100 mile cycle was nothing but increased leg strength and muscle size.

If you think of elite endurance athletes from all sports they all do a huge training volume - so if that was harmful how do they manage to remain elite performers?

I'm no expert, but here's how I see it.

If you need say 3400 calories daily to gain x amount of kg per week (sho, that's a lot of food!) and you do some intense cardio daily and burn say 350 calories, you only "provided" 3150 odd calories for your body to use that day.

Most pro bodybuilders dont do a lot of cardio anyways as muscle burns more calories for maintenance...so the bigger you get...the more you have to eat it seams. I think for us normal folk doing some form of cardio whilst trying to achieve 205 pounds with low bodyfat could easily be done.

Have you ever seen a jacked marathoner? no.

Have you seen jacked sprinters? yes.

This is because long,steady state cardio wears/breaks down and uses muscle as fuel.

That's why body builders do 'incline' walk and some light-medium cardio on an empty stomach 3 x / week for no more than 30 min.


If you focus on lifting weights and do cardio on the side, you will put on a lot of strength/muscle, but you might put on fat as well.
It's a fine balance...

In the end?

It's 100% diet. If you do a lot of running, then eat a lot of complex carbs and eat a lot of protein throughout the day along with omega 3 fatty acid, and other essential supplements to prevent muscle breakdowns.

You notice how after a long run, you can't bench/curl, do any lifts as much as when you don't?

Do your weights first, then do HIIT at the end.

That is because the body will adapt to the conditions and activities it partakes in.

A marathon runner does not need bulky muscles, in fact it would not be conducive to efficient long distance running, therefore the body eventually adapts and you end up with slow twitch fibres in the muscles.

A sprinter on the other hand is partaking in an explosive sport, muscles are needed for this, the body will adapt accordingly, with fast-twitch fibres.

For information by the way, a sprinter DOES do lots of cardio, they run. It is the type of running that will determine the bulk the person ends up with.

Have you ever seen a jacked marathoner? no.

Have you seen jacked sprinters? yes.

This is because long,steady state cardio wears/breaks down and uses muscle as fuel.

I thought this was because being jacked was helpful if you are a sprinter, but being light and lean was helpful if you are a long distance runner.

If you do cardio won't you use up your glycogen reserves first, then body fat, THEN (as a last resort, when the other two are depleted) muscle?

No, you never use just one fuel source. It's always a combination of them, just in varying degrees. It all depends on how fit you are and how used to the workout type you are. Muscle is a last resort fuel, but if you don't use it, you'll lose it. It's expensive to maintain and heavy to carry around, but used as fuel for exercise? Not so much. Takes too long to convert to fuel for short term cardio use.

Tell Chris Hoy that he shouldn't do cardio:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2177954/Olympics-2012-Chris-Hoy-His-intense-workout-regime-diet.html

I guess the cardio is why he eats 6000 calories a day?

1. Gaining muscle requires a calorie surplus. Low intensity steady state cardio can rack up a large amount of calorie expenditure meaning your surplus is eroded or wiped out altogether. So, do less cardio or eat more.

2. Cardio is said to be catabolic (and you want to be in an anabolic state to gain muscle.) The case for this is massively overblown. The hormonal environment tends to become catabolic at around 80 - 90 minutes from one decent study of the matter. Even then this can be mitigated by refuelling appropriately (chocolate milk anyone?)

Up to you how you approach it. If you want to include cardio it isn't a big deal. Either eat more (and who wants to do that right) or don't log significant mileage. Your gainz will be just fine brah