Conditioning vs cardio

Options
Jayj180894
Jayj180894 Posts: 286 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
What burns more kcal?
«1

Replies

  • stanmann571
    stanmann571 Posts: 5,728 Member
    Options
    Define conditioning.

    Define Cardio
  • jemhh
    jemhh Posts: 14,261 Member
    Options
    The one that requires the exerciser to use more energy. That will vary by person and by specific activity, intensity, length of time, etc.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,970 Member
    Options
    Nordic skiing!
  • Jayj180894
    Jayj180894 Posts: 286 Member
    Options
    Conditioning: Medcine ball slams, Weighted squats, kettle bell swings, glute kick backs, push ups, sit ups. 10 reps 5 sets.
    Cardiovascular: slow jog 10/15min, elliptical 10/15mins, stationary bike 10/15 medium effort
  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    Options
    Jayj180894 wrote: »
    Conditioning: Medcine ball slams, Weighted squats, kettle bell swings, glute kick backs, push ups, sit ups. 10 reps 5 sets.
    Cardiovascular: slow jog 10/15min, elliptical 10/15mins, stationary bike 10/15 medium effort

    Cardio
  • Jayj180894
    Jayj180894 Posts: 286 Member
    Options
    I just can't seem to find the amount of energy output for conditioning exercises and can't do full minutes yet
  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    Options
    Jayj180894 wrote: »
    I just can't seem to find the amount of energy output for conditioning exercises and can't do full minutes yet

    Calisthenics
  • stanmann571
    stanmann571 Posts: 5,728 Member
    Options
    Jayj180894 wrote: »
    Conditioning: Medcine ball slams, Weighted squats, kettle bell swings, glute kick backs, push ups, sit ups. 10 reps 5 sets.
    Cardiovascular: slow jog 10/15min, elliptical 10/15mins, stationary bike 10/15 medium effort

    Kettlebell swings are cardio... if jogging or elliptical are cardio. For that matter so are medicine ball slams.

    The rest of your "conditioning" is strength training.
  • WayTooHonest
    WayTooHonest Posts: 144 Member
    edited May 2017
    Options
    As I understand it, cardio burns more in the short term. Weight lifting burns less initially but more over the long term. The downside with cardio is your body easily becomes acclimated and thus it becomes less effective over time. This is why HIIT has become so popular: it combines the best of both worlds, and all the switching up keeps you from becoming "used" to it.

    That being said: the best exercise is the one you will stick to. Cardio, or lifting, or whatever exercise isn't going to do you any good if you hate doing them. So do what you like! You are more likely to succeed.
  • GiddyupTim
    GiddyupTim Posts: 2,819 Member
    Options
    Okay. I'm just guessing. But I gonna say: burpees!
  • Jayj180894
    Jayj180894 Posts: 286 Member
    Options
    Yes burpees lol
  • Jayj180894
    Jayj180894 Posts: 286 Member
    Options
    My heart rate is usually higher and I sweat more doing 10 squats ×4 than it does on the bike though
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,876 Member
    Options
    Jayj180894 wrote: »
    My heart rate is usually higher and I sweat more doing 10 squats ×4 than it does on the bike though

    How long are you on the bike...what kind of intensity are you riding at? Your heart rate lifting is only elevated for a very short time...beyond that, energy expenditure is not directly correlated to your heart rate, it is just used in algorithms to estimate energy expenditure using a HRM...that algorithm also assumes a steady state aerobic activity.
  • jemhh
    jemhh Posts: 14,261 Member
    edited May 2017
    Options
    Jayj180894 wrote: »
    I just can't seem to find the amount of energy output for conditioning exercises and can't do full minutes yet

    That's because you are out of shape. The point of conditioning is to get into better shape, not to burn calories. It is supposed to be challenging.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,970 Member
    Options
    WayTooHonest wrote: »
    As I understand it, cardio burns more in the short term. Weight lifting burns less initially but more over the long term. The downside with cardio is your body easily becomes acclimated and thus it becomes less effective over time. This is why HIIT has become so popular: it combines the best of both worlds, and all the switching up keeps you from becoming "used" to it.

    That being said: the best exercise is the one you will stick to. Cardio, or lifting, or whatever exercise isn't going to do you any good if you hate doing them. So do what you like! You are more likely to succeed.

    How does doing hill repeats on a bike incorporate the best of the strength training world and prevent me from getting used to cycling?
  • moonstroller
    moonstroller Posts: 210 Member
    Options
    The intensity of your workout determines the amount of calories you burn. Walking fast will burn more calories than walking slow over the same distance and terrain. Naturally if you run that same course you'll burn even more calories. Whether you bike, run, speed walk, swim, or whatever you do, it's how hard you push yourself that determines how many calories you'll burn.
  • moonstroller
    moonstroller Posts: 210 Member
    Options
    WayTooHonest wrote: »
    As I understand it, cardio burns more in the short term. Weight lifting burns less initially but more over the long term. The downside with cardio is your body easily becomes acclimated and thus it becomes less effective over time. This is why HIIT has become so popular: it combines the best of both worlds, and all the switching up keeps you from becoming "used" to it.

    That being said: the best exercise is the one you will stick to. Cardio, or lifting, or whatever exercise isn't going to do you any good if you hate doing them. So do what you like! You are more likely to succeed.

    I've seen this statement a lot, yet I cannot find any research backing up the claim. Most of the time I see the claim linked to a bodybuilding site or connected to weight training. If you do any exercise without making adjustments as you progress, like continuing to run the same pace and distance despite it no longer challenging you, sure, the exercise will have less of an impact on you because you've gotten stronger. The same is true for weight lifting. If you can bench 80 pounds three times for four sets, and then never increase the weight, sets, or reps, you're not going to get stronger. The key, in my opinion, is to push yourself in whatever exercise you're doing.
  • WayTooHonest
    WayTooHonest Posts: 144 Member
    Options
    moonstroller wrote: »
    WayTooHonest wrote: »
    As I understand it, cardio burns more in the short term. Weight lifting burns less initially but more over the long term. The downside with cardio is your body easily becomes acclimated and thus it becomes less effective over time. This is why HIIT has become so popular: it combines the best of both worlds, and all the switching up keeps you from becoming "used" to it.

    That being said: the best exercise is the one you will stick to. Cardio, or lifting, or whatever exercise isn't going to do you any good if you hate doing them. So do what you like! You are more likely to succeed.

    I've seen this statement a lot, yet I cannot find any research backing up the claim.

    I literally Google'd "cardio vs weight lifting calorie burn", and easily found posts linking to Duke University studies, Penn State, and many other universities & medical peer reviewed journals and studies.

    For example:
    "Minute per minute, cardio indisputably burns more calories than strength training, which could explain why compared to strength trainers, aerobic exercisers lose more weight in less time, according to a recent Duke University study.

    "Still, cardio doesn't do much for your muscles. Case in point: In one Penn State study, dieters lost 21 pounds whether they performed cardio or strength training. But for the cardio group, six of those pounds came from muscle, while the lifters lost almost pure fat—and probably fit into their skinny jeans better because of it."

    (Because a pound of muscle is more dense than a pound of fat, and therefore takes up less space.)

    Also, Nerd Fitness is very reputable and tends to present evidence based information, and include links to their resources:
    https://www.nerdfitness.com/blog/cardio-vs-hiit-vs-weights-rebooting-our-research/

    But, the most important part of my original response it this:
    "The best exercise is the one you will stick to. Cardio, or lifting, or whatever exercise isn't going to do you any good if you hate doing them. So do what you like! You are more likely to succeed."
  • moonstroller
    moonstroller Posts: 210 Member
    Options
    WayTooHonest wrote: »
    moonstroller wrote: »
    WayTooHonest wrote: »
    As I understand it, cardio burns more in the short term. Weight lifting burns less initially but more over the long term. The downside with cardio is your body easily becomes acclimated and thus it becomes less effective over time. This is why HIIT has become so popular: it combines the best of both worlds, and all the switching up keeps you from becoming "used" to it.

    That being said: the best exercise is the one you will stick to. Cardio, or lifting, or whatever exercise isn't going to do you any good if you hate doing them. So do what you like! You are more likely to succeed.

    I've seen this statement a lot, yet I cannot find any research backing up the claim.

    I literally Google'd "cardio vs weight lifting calorie burn", and easily found posts linking to Duke University studies, Penn State, and many other universities & medical peer reviewed journals and studies.

    For example:
    "Minute per minute, cardio indisputably burns more calories than strength training, which could explain why compared to strength trainers, aerobic exercisers lose more weight in less time, according to a recent Duke University study.

    "Still, cardio doesn't do much for your muscles. Case in point: In one Penn State study, dieters lost 21 pounds whether they performed cardio or strength training. But for the cardio group, six of those pounds came from muscle, while the lifters lost almost pure fat—and probably fit into their skinny jeans better because of it."

    (Because a pound of muscle is more dense than a pound of fat, and therefore takes up less space.)

    Also, Nerd Fitness is very reputable and tends to present evidence based information, and include links to their resources:
    https://www.nerdfitness.com/blog/cardio-vs-hiit-vs-weights-rebooting-our-research/

    But, the most important part of my original response it this:
    "The best exercise is the one you will stick to. Cardio, or lifting, or whatever exercise isn't going to do you any good if you hate doing them. So do what you like! You are more likely to succeed."

    I was researching "body acclimating to cardio" not a comparison of weight training to cardio, which is now what you're referencing. You cannot make the claim that the human body acclimates quickly to cardio and thus the exercise becomes less effective and then bring out a comparison study which has nothing to do proving your previous statement.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,876 Member
    Options
    WayTooHonest wrote: »
    As I understand it, cardio burns more in the short term. Weight lifting burns less initially but more over the long term. The downside with cardio is your body easily becomes acclimated and thus it becomes less effective over time. This is why HIIT has become so popular: it combines the best of both worlds, and all the switching up keeps you from becoming "used" to it.

    That being said: the best exercise is the one you will stick to. Cardio, or lifting, or whatever exercise isn't going to do you any good if you hate doing them. So do what you like! You are more likely to succeed.

    This is simply not true. There are some very marginal changes to energy expenditure as a result of improved efficiency of movement but they are nominal and usually offset by the fact that someone with a higher level of fitness is going to likely go a bit harder and longer than they were before.

    Energy expenditure from cardiovascular exercise is still a matter of moving mass over distance...

Categories