Does strength training actually work?

I think the main thing is to be patient, I started strength training about 3-4 months ago and I'm seeing results now, my waist is getting small and I'm much stronger than I was a few months ago. I would say just keep at it. Also it's fine not to do cardio, unless you want the fitness aspect but for fat loss, strength training is better IMO because it burns more fat ( where as cardio you lose fat and muscle).

We have similar stats and I hazard a guess that you need more calories, I'm at around 1600 but that's at slight deficit too... I find all my results stall as soon as I go lower than 1500, it's just not enough

lift roughly 3-4 times a week, I must admit I've dropped back on the cardio though and maybe 1 day a week.

You might want to rack up the CV to 3 sessions per week, resistance training doesn't really burn anything like the same level of calories and as your goal is quite low it'll give you much more flexibility around what you eat. You probably need to think about optimising your protein intake as well.

that it's driving you to eat too little, and if you're training heavily you'll have a greater demand for food

this part is not true.

A lot of people who lift do no cardio...

If you like cardio go ahead but cardio is for heart and lung health and as for calories burned doing cardio vs lifting you can't even compare them.

It's like saying an applie is a piece of steak...

ETA: I will say you can up your calories easily and still lose while lifting...I eat about 1700 a day and lose.

But you have to be patient...I've been lifting for 6months and still a ways off on my mid section.

I am adding an ignorant question here so forgive me - but I am curious. Surely the nature of the strength training is significant?

yeah it does, if your goal is to lose weight its completely unnecessary though.

My goal is to lose fat so i lift weights.

plus.. being strong is fun

yeah it does, if your goal is to lose weight its completely unnecessary though.

My goal is to lose fat so i lift weights.

plus.. being strong is fun

No it isn't. Strength training helps with preservign muscle mass, and it's great for maintaining bone density. It's good for an age and weight.

Everything you said is correct, but so is what i said... lifting weights is not at all necessary for you to lose weight. You can lose weight doing cardio and weights or doing just cardio or even doing just weights. You can lose weight surviving on fast food and soft drink. All thats required to lose weight is a caloric deficit.

Thanks guys. So is adding a bit more cardio, say 2-3 days a week, going to help reduce inches?

CV, strength training and tracking your diet work together to reduce your weight and improve your shape.

It'll contribute to it, but in its own right it won't give you the optimum results.

Yes. Here's my best personal example. The first year I was here I lost 50 pounds eating at a calorie deficit, doing cardio and a little strength training. The second year, I focused on strength training. I lost 2 pounds but went from a size 10 to a size 6.

caloric deficit is most important

I have been weight lifting for over a year now I didn't lose inches nor weight, but people comment on my muscle tone...it's very obvious...and it changes the way I move too. It gets noticed...

I still wish more tangible changes..but guess that's how it is for now...

For an equivalent period resistance training would burn between three and four hundred calories.

How did you work out the relative calories burnt?
Is this a period continually resistance training, as you would be continually running?

I figured that in the context of the point that was challenged an assessment based on elapsed time would be most appropriate, recognising that in an hours worth of resistance training there is reasonable proportion of reduced intensity when reconfiguring equipment and resting between sets.

I got the range on resistance training from injecting my own metrics into four different exercise trackers, and it seemed reasonably consistent with many of the discussions here.

(1000 is a fair bit for just over an hour's running, even including BMR, but does depend on weight etc, of course.)

It was a hilly offroad session on the Salisbury Plain Training Area, so probably a little overcooked, but again loading the file into the same four trackers gave me a range with 1000 being most conservative, although MFP reduced it a little on import. I was in one of the forestry areas on the plain this morning for 13k and the count was even higher, although I was anaerobic for a reasonable amount of that, given how steep some of the terrain is. It's probably about 150 to 200 higher than a flat road session, like South Bank of the Thames.

Notwithstanding all of that my original point remains the same, CV and resistance are complementary, they have different outcomes. There was discussion the other day that likened it to a range of effect, which struck me as quite a useful way describe it. Stuff like light weights with lots of fast paced reps give a predominantly CV effect with minimal resistance effect. Similarly grinding a bike up a steep climb goes anaerobic and has much less CV effect but a fair resistance effect, whereas 30kph on a flat road is predominantly CV with minimal resistance effect.

for that "post burn" thing, I havent found reliable sources on affirmative studies and data..but guess my reseach skill may not be as competent...

Anyway, I recently got a bodymedia fit armband. I was wondering if this thing could help me track if post burn exists and what pattern it might be following...just a thought...