The truth about.....

PeteReadmfp18
PeteReadmfp18 Posts: 15 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
Watching a bbc documentary 'The Truth About Fitness' and the general theme seems to be lighter resistance weights, bodyweight training, HIIT training is the way to go (unless you are a bodybuilder sculpting body parts).

And while 10k steps per day is good, that theory has been around since the 1960's and there is as much benefit in a few 10 minute bursts of fast walking/light jogging per day.

I saw another one called 'The Truth About Weight Loss' and the results were saying for active people, lower carb and higher protein is the key.
Also while clean eating is great for the fibre/vitamins - it really does not matter if you have treat days as long as you stay under calories or at worse break into your exercise calories.

Also surprisingly, jogging is not as bad for your joints as we think - because by jogging 20 minutes means your feet hit the floor less than 20 minutes of walking (and the joint pressure from jogging actually can ease arthritis)

Amazing what stuff you can learn from these programmes!

Replies

  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    Not 'everyone' thinks running is bad for you in the first place...
  • yirara
    yirara Posts: 9,389 Member
    How many people are actually able to do HIIT? And that's not a light training. Or did the BBC fall into the interval training = HIIT trap as well?
  • PeteReadmfp18
    PeteReadmfp18 Posts: 15 Member
    TavistockToad wrote: »
    Not 'everyone' thinks running is bad for you in the first place...

    You are right - not everyone does but there is a belief by some that running hurts your knees - thanks to the bad press
  • PeteReadmfp18
    PeteReadmfp18 Posts: 15 Member
    yirara wrote: »
    How many people are actually able to do HIIT? And that's not a light training. Or did the BBC fall into the interval training = HIIT trap as well?

    I like HIIT training on gym bike or elliptical - but jogging wise i prefer slow and steady
  • pamfin
    pamfin Posts: 169 Member
    I saw an article on the BBC website about the 10000 steps/three brisk walks idea and thought that it was very interesting. It's more achievable in a day too. I can park my car slightly further away and get one in on each end of my working day and can get a ten minute walk into a 30 minute lunch break.
  • megs_1985
    megs_1985 Posts: 199 Member
    Low resistance is good as a way for women to keep their bones healthy as they age and that’s about it. You can lift heavy and not aim to be a bodybuilder too though. Fitness isn’t black and white which is why I usually don’t like those kind of shows/articles. They are usually cherry picked and biased though those seem less sonthen others.
  • gentlygently
    gentlygently Posts: 752 Member
    I saw the programme too and found it interesting (tho overstated). For those who didn't, it is research based so atleast there is an attempt at latest research results om which to base your opininion!

    Anyway I downloaded the Active 10 app the NHS has recently created - that is promoting the same approach. It tells you how much of your walking is 'brisk' (broadly 3 miles an hour or more) - and tells you if you manage this for more than c10 mins in amy one stretch (which is where the heart health cardiovascular benefits really kick in).

    I like it. For example I walked over 11000 steps yesterday. Around 50 mins of this was at a brisk pace (It gave me the total time too). But I only walked at a brisk pace continuosly (ir 10 mins stretch) twice.

    It is good for my overall health that I was on my feet that much. My body would benefit even more if I managed to walk faster more of the time.

    I shsll be trying,

    I thought the programme overstated as clearly it is better to do both - lots of walking around, much of it active. But the key point is that some fast walking (10 minute bursts) is better than lots of slow walking if you want to make a significant improvement in your heart health. Or have limited time (or whatever) and find a steps goal discouraging.

    (And if you want to think calorie burn not heart health - it is good to know what proportion of your day's walking is actually at what pace for the mfp calorie 'eat back')

    Thanks for the OP. I came onto the forum to find other users of this Active 10 app!
  • CattOfTheGarage
    CattOfTheGarage Posts: 2,750 Member
    megs_1985 wrote: »
    Low resistance is good as a way for women to keep their bones healthy as they age and that’s about it.

    I thought high resistance was better for bone health. I'm assuming the low resistance recommendation is more for cardiovascular fitness?

    This is the problem, "fitness" or "health" can mean different things.
  • BitofaState
    BitofaState Posts: 75 Member
    The programs of Michael Mosley do at least have some foundation in science and research. I think the issue is that you have to see who the target audience is - the 80% who fail to get enough exercise or the 20% who do go to the gym, perform resistance training, break into a sweat for more than 30 minutes 12 times a month.

    The message that it's easier to fit in training and get health benefits than most people think is important for the majority of the population, although many would be surprised how infrequently they walk at a brisk pace for 10 minutes or more (good call on the Active 10 app - available here https://www.nhs.uk/oneyou/active10/home#6ga83gI1b7cqbs0J.97 )*

    The context is also that Mosley admits he hates exercise so has looked for the base minimum to have a health impact in a number of these programs. It's like the 5-2 diet, finding what may work for those that struggle with self motivation.

    I think the real message is to do as much as you can without giving yourself injuries, but this program at least shows how to achieve the minimum in a time efficient manner.

    *this is the NHS that the Donald is so keen to disparage performing proactive health management because that's what a universal health care system looks like*
  • jenilla1
    jenilla1 Posts: 11,118 Member
    CattOfTheGarage wrote: »
    megs_1985 wrote: »
    Low resistance is good as a way for women to keep their bones healthy as they age and that’s about it.

    I thought high resistance was better for bone health. I'm assuming the low resistance recommendation is more for cardiovascular fitness?

    This is the problem, "fitness" or "health" can mean different things.

    This is my understanding as well.
  • Lean59man
    Lean59man Posts: 714 Member
    There are all kinds of opinions about weight loss and exercising.

    All are right and none are right.
  • PKM0515
    PKM0515 Posts: 2,937 Member
    edited February 2018
    PeteReadmfp18 wrote: »
    Beginning to think that posting in forums is a bad idea - all i did was try to contribute

    I'm glad you posted. I found the information interesting. :)
  • VintageFeline
    VintageFeline Posts: 6,771 Member
    Michael Mosley? I am going to say that the science is probably skewed in a lot of places, that chap has an agenda and used his title erroneously (he hasn't practiced in eons).

    That said, the ten minute bursts of purposeful get the heart rate up a little, walking is a good thing to promote if getting 10k steps, an arbitrary number, is more of a challenge for you.

Categories