Exercise Question

Options
Nysportsred
Nysportsred Posts: 222 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
My exercise routine each week usually consists of two days on the elliptical and two days of zumba. I used to use weights one day a week, but due to an issue with my neck I was advised not to anymore by the doctor. I have no complaints really. I enjoy the workouts and I am down over 40 pounds since I started here so something is working.

My zumba sessions are between 60-70 minutes depending on which program I am doing that day. My elliptical sessions are between 70-85. I have read in the past that 75-90 minutes of an elliptical workout was best, but I read an article recently at the doctor's that said you should be doing 60 minutes of the elliptical and a 5 minute cool down as anything over this would actually be "sabotaging your workout."

Can anyone advise me on what is accurate and if going over the 65 actually does sabotage your workout why is that exactly?

Thanks for any advice and knowledge you can lend me on this subject.

Replies

  • RowingBill
    RowingBill Posts: 36 Member
    Options
    Perhaps it is suggesting your going to be working out of your targeted heart rate zone. That would be my guess and it is nothing but a guess. Oh, by the way, congrats on the missing 40lbs.
  • rileysowner
    rileysowner Posts: 8,099 Member
    Options
    How was it supposed to be sabotaging your workout?
  • MommyMeggo
    MommyMeggo Posts: 1,222 Member
    Options
    Pizza sabotages your workout- not the time spent on the elliptical. =P
  • juggernaut1974
    juggernaut1974 Posts: 6,212 Member
    Options
    Nysportsred wrote: »
    but I read an article recently at the doctor's that said you should be doing 60 minutes of the elliptical and a 5 minute cool down as anything over this would actually be "sabotaging your workout."

    I'd advise not reading any more articles from whatever source you read that one.

    No...there's nothing magical about 60 minutes, that the 61st minute will be sabotaging you. The only possible way one could justify that (and granted, it's a stretch) would be that you don't want to go so hard and so often that you're not giving your body adequate rest/recovery time and/or you go too gung ho early on that you crash & burn after a few weeks.
  • BusyRaeNOTBusty
    BusyRaeNOTBusty Posts: 7,166 Member
    Options
    MommyMeggo wrote: »
    Pizza sabotages your workout- not the time spent on the elliptical. =P

    No, not even pizza does that.
  • Nysportsred
    Nysportsred Posts: 222 Member
    Options
    rileysowner wrote: »
    How was it supposed to be sabotaging your workout?

    don't know.that's why I asked in the first place, isn't it? :-)
  • holothuroidea
    holothuroidea Posts: 772 Member
    Options
    As long as you feel comfortable throughout your workout (not cozy on the couch comfortable but not in pain or struggling to survive) and recover well from them, then it should be fine.

    That was a very arbitrary thing for that article to claim.
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,811 Member
    Options
    There is no best duration. Depends on your goals, fitness levels, intensity etc. etc.
    If longer workouts work for you suggest you carry on.

    If you plan on going beyond (roughly) two hours of fairly strenuous cardio you should think about fuelling your exercise but otherwise no need to over-complicate things.

    Beware magazine articles - they can be harmful to your peace of mind! :smile:
  • rileysowner
    rileysowner Posts: 8,099 Member
    Options
    Nysportsred wrote: »
    rileysowner wrote: »
    How was it supposed to be sabotaging your workout?

    don't know.that's why I asked in the first place, isn't it? :-)

    My assumption is the article would have said what the negative effects were supposed to be. Without doing so it is sort of a stupid article and should be ignored out of hand. Beyond that, my guess is it is still a stupid article for as others have said going more than 60 minutes does not magically undo what the 60 minutes did. You still burned the calories, you still worked your muscles, heart and lungs, and you will still benefit from it.

    For future reference, when you run into claims similar to this about various things in the future, unless the article gives specific reasons why doing something will sabotage something you are doing, just dismiss the article out of hand. If they don't have either the skill or the time to explain why they think something is the case, it is likely they don't have a case at all.
  • BZAH10
    BZAH10 Posts: 5,710 Member
    Options
    Without full context of the "sabotage" reference it's hard to say exactly why that was stated, but my guess would be risk of injury and/or burn out from doing that much cardio. I know. I used to do 90 min. cardio sessions 6 days per week. I admit that sometimes I miss the sweat sessions and how being so physically exhausted made me sleep better, but overall wasting that much time out of my day on a machine staring at the TV is NOT worth it.
  • Nysportsred
    Nysportsred Posts: 222 Member
    Options
    sijomial wrote: »
    There is no best duration. Depends on your goals, fitness levels, intensity etc. etc.
    If longer workouts work for you suggest you carry on.

    If you plan on going beyond (roughly) two hours of fairly strenuous cardio you should think about fuelling your exercise but otherwise no need to over-complicate things.

    Beware magazine articles - they can be harmful to your peace of mind! :smile:
    sijomial wrote: »
    There is no best duration. Depends on your goals, fitness levels, intensity etc. etc.
    If longer workouts work for you suggest you carry on.

    If you plan on going beyond (roughly) two hours of fairly strenuous cardio you should think about fuelling your exercise but otherwise no need to over-complicate things.

    Beware magazine articles - they can be harmful to your peace of mind! :smile:

    Strongly agree.

    Thanks everyone

Categories