How much cardio vs. strength should I do for weight loss?

Just throwing in this little bit of clarity. Yes, I like to split hairs, but in this case, I think it's important.

Exercise of any sort doesn't burn fat or muscle or whatever else. It burns calories. Where those calories comes from is dependent on a variety of things, but most significantly the fuel source that is most readily available. This will largely be determined by your diet in the 24 (or so) hours leading up to the exercise.

I'm not really going to go much further than that... for the people who agree, I don't need to explain further... and the people who don't aren't open minded enough to have an intelligent conversation with.


.

^^^

Most often the food you have eaten recently perhaps?

Just throwing in this little bit of clarity. Yes, I like to split hairs, but in this case, I think it's important.

Exercise of any sort doesn't burn fat or muscle or whatever else. It burns calories. Where those calories comes from is dependent on a variety of things, but most significantly the fuel source that is most readily available. This will largely be determined by your diet in the 24 (or so) hours leading up to the exercise.

I'm not really going to go much further than that... for the people who agree, I don't need to explain further... and the people who don't aren't open minded enough to have an intelligent conversation with.


.

I was about to post, "Agh! I'm so friggin' confused!" But I THINK this cleared it up A LITTLE for me. Sending you a friend request because you're the only person who's made a lick of sense to me so far.

Just throwing in this little bit of clarity. Yes, I like to split hairs, but in this case, I think it's important.

Exercise of any sort doesn't burn fat or muscle or whatever else. It burns calories. Where those calories comes from is dependent on a variety of things, but most significantly the fuel source that is most readily available. This will largely be determined by your diet in the 24 (or so) hours leading up to the exercise.

I'm not really going to go much further than that... for the people who agree, I don't need to explain further... and the people who don't aren't open minded enough to have an intelligent conversation with.


.

I was about to post, "Agh! I'm so friggin' confused!" But I THINK this cleared it up A LITTLE for me. Sending you a friend request because you're the only person who's made a lick of sense to me so far.

There's a lot of bad information in this thread. But at the end of the day, weight loss is about sustaining a healthy caloric deficit. If you do this with exercise, great. If you do it with diet, great. Just so long as you do it.

I don't think weight training burns much fat, what it does is help you retain your lean muscle in a deficit, so you lose weight on due to this deficit (mostly fat due to the strength training) that way you are a lower BF% at every weight than you would be without strength training. Meaning at your goal weight you will have a lower BF%..

I agree with this. Weightlifting is not about burning calories or burning fat while you do it. It is about gaining strength and maintaining muscle. If you are maintaining a vast majority of your muscle while in a calorie deficit then the majority of weight loss will be from body fat. Muscle is also expensive calorie wise to maintain. Meaning you will simple burn more calories just from having the muscle on you.

Great post! I agree completely.

Cardio can burn more calories than resistance training. Only reisistance training can keep you from looking like *kitten* when you're done losing.

I don't think weight training burns much fat, what it does is help you retain your lean muscle in a deficit, so you lose weight on due to this deficit (mostly fat due to the strength training) that way you are a lower BF% at every weight than you would be without strength training. Meaning at your goal weight you will have a lower BF%..

I agree with this. Weightlifting is not about burning calories or burning fat while you do it. It is about gaining strength and maintaining muscle. If you are maintaining a vast majority of your muscle while in a calorie deficit then the majority of weight loss will be from body fat. Muscle is also expensive calorie wise to maintain. Meaning you will simple burn more calories just from having the muscle on you.

Those are only two aspects of it actually. Another effect is known as "afterburn" or EPOC.

I've done some reading on the EPOC thing.
here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17101527
From that article:
"However, even those studies incorporating exercise stimuli resulting in prolonged EPOC durations have identified that the EPOC comprises only 6-15% of the net total oxygen cost of the exercise."

and in conclusion:

"The role of exercise in the maintenance of body mass is therefore predominantly mediated via the cumulative effect of the energy expenditure during the actual exercise."

agreed. but you`re not looking at things properly. people often confuse epoc with rebuilding tissue as the caloric demand from lifting.

consider this. burn victims require a large increase in calories over normal bmr. serious burns and it`s not uncommon to see 10k calories min required per day. not a typo. thats just the caloric demand needed to rebuild damaged tissue. yet were you to measure epoc, or heartrate, you would find nothing out of the ordinary that suggests the person suddenly had a 6fold increase in BMR.

The goal of lifting is to damage muscle tissue. The body then repairs it stronger. Think of the above example with burns, repair damaged tissue. It`s no different than repairing damaged muscle tissue. Your calorie demands will go up. And it will not be detected by epoc as much. So epoc is a false indicator.

That said, the requirement is damaged tissue to really get the metabolic effects. Consider most peoples `strength`routine where they do light weights, things like arms shoulders and abs for their movements, don`t try to constantly increase weights, etc. They are basically doing cardio, and are not pushing themselves at the intensity needed to fray tissue. so for most people this is a moot point I`m afraid. but point stands, for anyone properly doing resistance training pushing to overload,ya you`re going to need a ton of calories.

cardio is for health reasons alone. some form of endurance based cardio is more beneficial for overall heart health than higher intensity work. but for reshaping your body and building athletic prowess, resistance training and high intensity work prevails.

EDIT: I once asked my trainer this same question. his reply was basically what I just said. He told me you can get the body you want through weight training alone, with no cardio whatsoever. But if you really care about the health benefits of getting fit and healthy, you'll integrate 20-30 minutes a day of moderate intensity, endurance-based cardio 4-5 days a week into your workout plan, because traditional cardio is resistance training for your heart. that's how he put it.

Hi Lisamarie,

As of today, I've lost 31 kg in five months, most of this with the following routine:

1. Try to end each day with 300 - 800 "calories remaining"
2. Five times per week, I run one hour per day on the treadmill ~ 1000 kcal
3. Use a fitbit tracking device, take little evening walks, take the stairs instead of the elevator etc. to burn 300-400 extra kcal per day.

Other advice:
* Drink 3 to 4 liters of water per day. (It also keeps your stomach full.)
* Use a body-fat scale to monitor actual fat loss.
* Adjust the routine whenever stagnation occurs.
* However, keep calm when nothing happens for up to four days. (Probably some hormone-controlled rhythm that makes the body store water for three to four days about once per month.)

I've experimented with all kinds of combinations between cardio and strength training, and currently this is the most time-effective that works quite well and gives me a good and steady muscle buildup, fat loss, loss of visceral fat, and overall weight loss of 200 g per day - thus, 30 kg in 5 months.

Cheers,

Thorsten

Cardio burns fat. Keep the strength to once a week, it doesn't burn fat.

You don't know what you are talking about! yes you can lose weight with cadio for awhile, but eventually you will platue and stay what is called Skinny Fat! Muscle burns FAT! If you want to keep your fat stores become a cardio nut! Your body will fight back and go into storage mode! If you want to lose weight - you have to have a good balance of eating right, weight training and cardio! Oh and cardio does NOT burn FAT it burns CALORIES!

Cardio burns fat. Keep the strength to once a week, it doesn't burn fat.

You don't know what you are talking about! yes you can lose weight with cadio for awhile, but eventually you will platue and stay what is called Skinny Fat! Muscle burns FAT! If you want to keep your fat stores become a cardio nut! Your body will fight back and go into storage mode! If you want to lose weight - you have to have a good balance of eating right, weight training and cardio! Oh and cardio does NOT burn FAT it burns CALORIES!

EXACTLY!!!!!!!

90-120 minutes of cardio a week should do the trick (I do 30 mins. at a time). Cardio and weights together burns fat better than anything else I've ever tried and I've tried pretty much everything. I've tried lifting weights with no cardio I got results but they weren't great. When I added cardio to the mix I lost ALOT of fat. I had a 4 pack going on for a while.Cardio burns fat better than anything else. Everything else is pretty much for toning or growing muscles (not that it doesn't burn any fat just not as much). EATING HEALTHY IS THE MOST IMPORTANT PART. And oh yeah just a tip don't work out abs until you are down to about a 1/4 in. of fat on your stomach because all your doing is building muscle under your fat and making yourself look bigger.