Can you alternate HIIT (no equipment) and HIIT Treadmill workouts?
Briankbl
Posts: 13 Member
Something I've been doing the last couple weeks is starting Monday with an at-home HIIT workout, no weights or special equipment, using an app called Fitify. Then Tuesday, I do HIIT on the treadmill. Wednesday is rest day. Thursday, HIIT with no equipment. Friday, HIIT treadmill. Weekend, rest.
So I get 4 HIIT workouts a week. Now, questions:
1) I'm just starting out in this world. Been going for 3 weeks. Before this, my lifestyle was very complacent, never counting calories, never exercising. Is 4 HIIT workouts a week too many to start with? I see a lot of sites online recommending only doing 3 a week.
2) Is alternating my HIIT workouts effective? Going from no equipment one day to the treadmill the next? Should I stick to just one style for higher effectiveness? Or is alternating good?
3) For HIIT treadmill, some sites say you're active set should go 30 seconds. Some say a minute. I just read one that said 4 minutes active, 4 minutes rest. As a beginner, what do you recommend?
Thanks all!
So I get 4 HIIT workouts a week. Now, questions:
1) I'm just starting out in this world. Been going for 3 weeks. Before this, my lifestyle was very complacent, never counting calories, never exercising. Is 4 HIIT workouts a week too many to start with? I see a lot of sites online recommending only doing 3 a week.
2) Is alternating my HIIT workouts effective? Going from no equipment one day to the treadmill the next? Should I stick to just one style for higher effectiveness? Or is alternating good?
3) For HIIT treadmill, some sites say you're active set should go 30 seconds. Some say a minute. I just read one that said 4 minutes active, 4 minutes rest. As a beginner, what do you recommend?
Thanks all!
0
Replies
-
I would interchange it with one LISS (sustained low to moderate intensity) work out just for increased stamina and a different way to work out your heart and muscles. Keep it fresh...avoid overuse injuries and the like.
Good job getting started!0 -
As a beginner, what do you recommend?
Don't do HIIT at all - totally inappropriate if you are just starting out having not exercised before.
Luckily what you are describing is probably just circuit training/calisthenics and cardio interval training - just with the current fashionable marketing misuse of the term HIIT calling it something it's not (possibly with the exception of the 30sec effort if that's maximal effort).
You haven't mentioned your goals (short and long term), capabilities, restrictions and what you enjoy. That's the place to start from.
9 -
As a beginner, what do you recommend?
Don't do HIIT at all - totally inappropriate if you are just starting out having not exercised before.
Luckily what you are describing is probably just circuit training/calisthenics and cardio interval training - just with the current fashionable marketing misuse of the term HIIT calling it something it's not (possibly with the exception of the 30sec effort if that's maximal effort).
You haven't mentioned your goals (short and long term), capabilities, restrictions and what you enjoy. That's the place to start from.
What he said, definitely.4 -
Goals: I'm currently 188lbs, my goal is to get back down to 155lbs. MFP has me on a 1500 calorie diet in order to lose 2lbs every week.
Capabilities: Fully capable.
Restrictions: I own a treadmill and a stationary bike. No other equipment.
I've done quite a bit of research on high intensity interval training and it's really the route I'd like to take.3 -
Goals: I'm currently 188lbs, my goal is to get back down to 155lbs. MFP has me on a 1500 calorie diet in order to lose 2lbs every week.
Capabilities: Fully capable.
Restrictions: I own a treadmill and a stationary bike. No other equipment.
I've done quite a bit of research on high intensity interval training and it's really the route I'd like to take.
If your goal is purely burning calories then (real) HIIT is a dreadful choice as it's a low calorie burner due to the very short duration, of which at least half the time is recovery so the average is dragged way down.
The fatigue also may reduce your activity the rest of the day and compromise tomorrow's exercise.
I recently did a very intense interval session (for fitness) on an indoor bike for just over an hour and the calorie burn was roughly equal to a brisk steady state ride.
The intervals left me hungry, tired, fatigued and sore. The steady state ride is something I can do with zero impact on hunger or fatigue.
Long duration, moderate intensity cardio of a type you enjoy (or can endure) would be the far better choice for your goal. But that assumes you aren't using MyFitnessPal as designed which would have you eating back your exercise calories.
An aggressive weight loss goal and not eating back exercise calories is going to be unsustainable and ill-advised though.
Your fitness goals is really what I was asking BTW!9 -
Goals: I'm currently 188lbs, my goal is to get back down to 155lbs. MFP has me on a 1500 calorie diet in order to lose 2lbs every week.
Capabilities: Fully capable.
Restrictions: I own a treadmill and a stationary bike. No other equipment.
I've done quite a bit of research on high intensity interval training and it's really the route I'd like to take.
That's a pretty big deficit when you only have 30lbs to lose4 -
Goals: I'm currently 188lbs, my goal is to get back down to 155lbs. MFP has me on a 1500 calorie diet in order to lose 2lbs every week.
Capabilities: Fully capable.
Restrictions: I own a treadmill and a stationary bike. No other equipment.
I've done quite a bit of research on high intensity interval training and it's really the route I'd like to take.
If your goal is purely burning calories then (real) HIIT is a dreadful choice as it's a low calorie burner due to the very short duration, of which at least half the time is recovery so the average is dragged way down.
The fatigue also may reduce your activity the rest of the day and compromise tomorrow's exercise.
I recently did a very intense interval session (for fitness) on an indoor bike for just over an hour and the calorie burn was roughly equal to a brisk steady state ride.
The intervals left me hungry, tired, fatigued and sore. The steady state ride is something I can do with zero impact on hunger or fatigue.
Long duration, moderate intensity cardio of a type you enjoy (or can endure) would be the far better choice for your goal. But that assumes you aren't using MyFitnessPal as designed which would have you eating back your exercise calories.
An aggressive weight loss goal and not eating back exercise calories is going to be unsustainable and ill-advised though.
Your fitness goals is really what I was asking BTW!
I am not really why you say HIIT is "a dreadful choice" for expending calories?
Seems to me it probably should be included in some form in one's exercise routines.
https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/early/2019/01/23/bjsports-2018-0999280 -
GiddyupTim wrote: »
Goals: I'm currently 188lbs, my goal is to get back down to 155lbs. MFP has me on a 1500 calorie diet in order to lose 2lbs every week.
Capabilities: Fully capable.
Restrictions: I own a treadmill and a stationary bike. No other equipment.
I've done quite a bit of research on high intensity interval training and it's really the route I'd like to take.
If your goal is purely burning calories then (real) HIIT is a dreadful choice as it's a low calorie burner due to the very short duration, of which at least half the time is recovery so the average is dragged way down.
The fatigue also may reduce your activity the rest of the day and compromise tomorrow's exercise.
I recently did a very intense interval session (for fitness) on an indoor bike for just over an hour and the calorie burn was roughly equal to a brisk steady state ride.
The intervals left me hungry, tired, fatigued and sore. The steady state ride is something I can do with zero impact on hunger or fatigue.
Long duration, moderate intensity cardio of a type you enjoy (or can endure) would be the far better choice for your goal. But that assumes you aren't using MyFitnessPal as designed which would have you eating back your exercise calories.
An aggressive weight loss goal and not eating back exercise calories is going to be unsustainable and ill-advised though.
Your fitness goals is really what I was asking BTW!
I am not really why you say HIIT is "a dreadful choice" for expending calories?
Seems to me it probably should be included in some form in one's exercise routines.
https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/early/2019/01/23/bjsports-2018-099928
I thought I explained it fully in my post?
A widespread review of many different exercise types lumping a whole load of different interval training modalities together shows a marginal difference. Which could be for any number of reasons including adherence, personality types, levels of determination etc. etc.
What that review emphatically doesn't say is that interval training creates a larger calorie burn.
Interval training in all their different methodologies can be a very valuable PART of most people's overall fitness routine - which is very different to exercising for calorie burns.
3 -
I think it suggests that maybe your body gets adapted to steady, moderate exercise and probably it is good to give it a shock periodically.
Certainly it is a review, and all such meta-analysies are imperfect. But it is the best there is at present and it clearly shows that the people who did HIIT lost more fat mass -- in less time, I might add.
You might want to quibble. But you cannot deny that that is what these rather qualified researchers concluded, and the journal -- a rather reputable one -- thought the data and analysis was good enough to publish it.3 -
GiddyupTim wrote: »I think it suggests that maybe your body gets adapted to steady, moderate exercise and probably it is good to give it a shock periodically.
Certainly it is a review, and all such meta-analysies are imperfect. But it is the best there is at present and it clearly shows that the people who did HIIT lost more fat mass.
You might want to quibble. But you cannot deny that that is what these rather qualified researchers concluded, and the journal -- a rather reputable one -- thought the data and analysis was good enough to publish it.
It doesn't suggest any such thing as the almost mythical "adaptation".
If that happens as all the effect is so tiny as to be insignificant. (e.g. Lance Armstrong's exercise efficiency is reputed to have increased 1% in a year from hours and hours of training as a pro cyclist at a level few people can even approach).
What usually happens for most people is that as their fitness improves their exercise capabilities increase and so their endurance or intensity increases and their exercise burns increase not decrease. My maximal burn rate for steady state cycling has increased by 20% for example from getting fitter.
It also makes no mention of calorie counting or calorie burns. You are projecting a lot into a review and putting a slant on it that simply isn't there. What it shows is that people who did a wide variety of interval training lost a little bit more fat - that's all it says. The reasons you give are pure speculation.2 -
I am not going to pull out the quotes for you.
What it says is that the people who did high-intensity interval training and sprint interval training spent sigificantly less time exercising and acheived greater reductions in total absolute fat mass.
How can that not be helpful in a program of weight loss?3 -
GiddyupTim wrote: »I am not going to pull out the quotes for you.
What it says is that the people who did high-intensity interval training and sprint interval training spent sigificantly less time exercising and acheived greater reductions in total absolute fat mass.
How can that not be helpful in a program of weight loss?
I can't explain it any better to you and no you certainly aren't going to pull any quotes from it about "shocking your body" or "exercise adaptation" for the simple reason they aren't there.
Can interval training be a good thing? Yes of course, I'm not arguing it isn't, my point was very specific and I thought clear.
Is a program of only intense interval training for an exercise beginner whose only goal appears to be weight loss as per the OP a good idea? IMHO, no it's an awful idea.3 -
K.
You misstated your case, though. You did not say 'Is a program of ONLY intense interval training ...."
You said: "If your goal is purely burning calories then (real) HIIT is a dreadful choice as it's a low calorie burner due to the very short duration, of which at least half the time is recovery so the average is dragged way down."
This meta-analysis would seem to say that the differences in duration are irrelevant. Shorter HIIT produced greater reductions in total absolute fat mass.
I probably would agree with you, of course, if we are talking about 'only' sprinting or even 'only' slow and long.2 -
The meta-analysis doesn't say differences in duration are irrelevant for calorie burns - you are conflating two very different things, fat loss results differences over many weeks from a variety of studies is a completely subject from the very specific exercise calorie burn point I made. It's a very, very simple point surely?GiddyupTim wrote: »K.
You misstated your case, though. You did not say 'Is a program of ONLY intense interval training ...."
You said: "If your goal is purely burning calories then (real) HIIT is a dreadful choice as it's a low calorie burner due to the very short duration, of which at least half the time is recovery so the average is dragged way down."
This meta-analysis would seem to say that the differences in duration are irrelevant. Shorter HIIT produced greater reductions in total absolute fat mass.
I probably would agree with you, of course, if we are talking about 'only' sprinting or even 'only' slow and long.
If you think short duration exercise when a high proportion of that short duration is recovery time is a large calorie burn you must have a very odd idea of what large burns are!
I'm doing a 4hr cycle ride tomorrow, I'm not planning on it being either sprints or slow.
Yes duration is a huge factor in calorie burns.
1 -
Okay then....
Wow.
"irrelevant" was probably an imprecise term.
But, if the calorie burns of the people doing moderate intensity exercise for longer were so much greater, why did the other people have greater reductions in fat, in the same number of weeks?
Recovery is individual. I go for 10-mile runs and I go to the track and run 100-m and 200-m sprints. I am an old dude, with a beat-up body. So I find the long runs are much harder on me and often require an off day afterwards because I am a bit beat up.
I have made my points. I'm out.
Thanks for the discussion.4 -
TavistockToad wrote: »
Goals: I'm currently 188lbs, my goal is to get back down to 155lbs. MFP has me on a 1500 calorie diet in order to lose 2lbs every week.
Capabilities: Fully capable.
Restrictions: I own a treadmill and a stationary bike. No other equipment.
I've done quite a bit of research on high intensity interval training and it's really the route I'd like to take.
That's a pretty big deficit when you only have 30lbs to lose
I'm just following the numbers MFP set up for me.1 -
Something I've been doing the last couple weeks is starting Monday with an at-home HIIT workout, no weights or special equipment, using an app called Fitify. Then Tuesday, I do HIIT on the treadmill. Wednesday is rest day. Thursday, HIIT with no equipment. Friday, HIIT treadmill. Weekend, rest.
So I get 4 HIIT workouts a week. Now, questions:
1) I'm just starting out in this world. Been going for 3 weeks. Before this, my lifestyle was very complacent, never counting calories, never exercising. Is 4 HIIT workouts a week too many to start with? I see a lot of sites online recommending only doing 3 a week.
2) Is alternating my HIIT workouts effective? Going from no equipment one day to the treadmill the next? Should I stick to just one style for higher effectiveness? Or is alternating good?
3) For HIIT treadmill, some sites say you're active set should go 30 seconds. Some say a minute. I just read one that said 4 minutes active, 4 minutes rest. As a beginner, what do you recommend?
Thanks all!
So can we get back to helping me with these questions now lol? I think I know where those other two posters stand haha. But I would really REALLY appreciate some more input. Thanks.0 -
Sorry your thread went off into left field...
My suggestions would be:- Go back to your goal set up and pick a deficit that may be more sustainable and less unpleasant than the maximum of 2lbs a week.
- Realise that your weight loss will primarily come from eating less, exercise for most is a minor player and if you use this tool as designed it's completely neutral as regards speed of loss. It's trying to teach a life lesson about doing more means you get to eat more, do less and you have to eat less.
- Set some health and fitness goals to help pick an exercise routine that matches those goals (both long and short term). Ideally IMHO a combination of both cardio and strength/resistance training. Make it enjoyable hopefully as that gives you a far higher chance of success.
- Build up slowly and steadily (intensity and duration) being new to exercise will make you vulnerable to injury. Exercise doesn't have to hurt or make you feel like you are going to puke to be beneficial.
- Look way into the future when building both eating and exercise habits. A regular exercise routine is a major common factor in people who successfully maintain at their goal weight.
- Have a serious think about the third leg of your calorie balance that often gets overlooked - daily activity. How can you build more movement into your normal day? Less time sitting, more time on your feet.
Best of luck.3 -
TavistockToad wrote: »
Goals: I'm currently 188lbs, my goal is to get back down to 155lbs. MFP has me on a 1500 calorie diet in order to lose 2lbs every week.
Capabilities: Fully capable.
Restrictions: I own a treadmill and a stationary bike. No other equipment.
I've done quite a bit of research on high intensity interval training and it's really the route I'd like to take.
That's a pretty big deficit when you only have 30lbs to lose
I'm just following the numbers MFP set up for me.
no, you choose the rate of loss, MFP doesn't. MFP just gives you the options of how much weight you want to lose per week.2 -
Best bet for cardio is to find something you enjoy and build fitness-based goals around that. If you like running, there are training plans out there for various goals.. beginner wanting to complete a distance or wanting to improve speed, which will generally include some base runs, some longer duration endurance runs, and some higher intensity interval runs. And will slowly build up the miles to avoid injury. There are lots of options for cardio - cycling, hiking, dancing, rollerblading, snowshoeing,...., so no reason to do something you don't enjoy for the sake of watching some calorie burn numbers on a screen. The activity that you will repeatedly continue to do for hours (because you find it fun) will be the one that ultimately causes the largest calorie burn. It doesn't have to be a suffer-fest.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 901 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.2K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions