Low impact exercises

Walking it the best

First suggestion would be professional / medical advice as to safe exercises for your current condition. That said, also know that while a cardio session will "burn" far more calories than the same time spent building strength and muscle mass, over time the body will efficiently adapt very differently. Cardio eventually slows metabolism to require more and more exertion for the same calorie "burn" per session, while muscle mass forces faster metabolism and increased constant 24/7 "resting" metabolic rate. Do your own research on all this.
If a goal is more strength and control, by building and reinforcing muscle, tendons and cartilage around joints (along with metabolic rate), with the above pro guidance you might consider isometrics - static resistance training done bodyweight or with minimal inexpensive gear. Lots of good examples online, here's a quick workout example from one dedicated website:
https://ashotofadrenaline.net/towel-isometrics/

Dealing with a some minor tennis elbow and shoulder pain I spent most of February, March and April this year doing isometric routines and worked past the joint problems to start back with dumbbell, resistance band and suspension trainer workouts.

(snip)
. . . know that while a cardio session will "burn" far more calories than the same time spent building strength and muscle mass, over time the body will efficiently adapt very differently. Cardio eventually slows metabolism to require more and more exertion for the same calorie "burn" per session, while muscle mass forces faster metabolism and increased constant 24/7 "resting" metabolic rate. Do your own research on all this.
(snip)

The bolded is important.

Strictly speaking, what's said there is basically true, but I fear it could be a bit misleading for someone relatively new to exercise.

Cardio doesn't slow metabolism over time, nor do we burn materially fewer calories doing the same cardio activity at the same objective intensity for the same duration/frequency at the same bodyweight. (If we did, I'd be fat again, since I've been doing pretty much the same exercise for around 22 years, and counting calories for 9 of them. ).

When we do some particular dosage of cardiovascular exercise, we get fitter - no surprise. That same exercise will feel easier, and - because it's less challenging - it won't keep on improving our fitness. At a certain point, doing the same thing will just maintain cardiovascular fitness where we are, more or less.

At that point, yes, we do need to increase something to keep making fitness progress: Duration, frequency, objective intensity (such as pace/speed), or switch to a different more challenging exercise modality. That won't necessarily be more fatiguing or otherwise problematic for that fitter person.

As cardiovascular fitness improves, our heart gets stronger, so it pumps more blood (and oxygen) per beat. That means our heart rate will be slower for the same exercise, and heart rate monitors or fitness trackers may estimate that we're burning fewer calories. That's a limitation in the devices' algorithms, not a reality about the true calorie burn. It's oxygen consumption that correlates pretty well with calorie burn, not heartbeats. Heartbeat is just a limited proxy, much easier to measure with affordable consumer-available devices.

There may be some decrease in calorie burn over time for certain activities where skill (efficiency) is a factor, but it's mostly not a big deal arithmetically.

I'm not dissing strength training. It's good and vitally important.

But the increased burn at rest, in most researchers' current estimates, is quite small: Muscle burns maybe 2-4 calories per pound per day more at rest than a pound of body fat (which is also metabolically active). However, it does take extra calories to build a pound of muscle (slowly ), and it's probable that with a fitter, stronger body it's easier and more fun to move in daily life, so we move more (not necessarily consciously) when stronger and burn more calories that way.

I 100% agree with the PP about the general benefits of strength training (including isometrics). Good stuff.

IMO, smart people do both strength training and cardiovascular exercise, keeping each one manageably challenging in order to make progress. Which to emphasize may vary with personal goals and preferences.

As the PP said, do some reading yourself if you want to understand the whole story. Don't believe every random poster here (including me), because we each have our own biases.

MargaretYakoda wrote: »

@annPT77 the tl;dr of hypermobility is its an umbrella term for connective tissue disorders that can range from mild to frankly disabling. Hypermobility often results in repeated injuries. Dislocations and sprains are common. Issues with blood pressure regulation can also affect some hypermobile individuals ability to exercise safely.

Disclosure: I have always had very “loose joints” and am prone to rolling my ankles.

Thanks, Margaret - I did/do have a general idea of what hypermobility means, but didn't want to claim any kind of direct or in-depth knowledge. Your comment about it ranging in severity and nature is really important!

I have personal experience with limiting impact (and torque on lower-body joints, in my case) , and that's all - wanted to be clear about that.

BTW, when you said this, did you mean carbs or calories?

MargaretYakoda wrote: »

As for burning calories you can lose weight without doing exercise. It really is all about carbs-in-carbs-out (there are some details but in the end that’s the main thing)

I've become a rower believer. There is some technique to learn but, done correctly, there is almost no impact on joints. Every move is controlled and you can actively and easily manage the intensity. I can get my heart rate up to the anaerobic threshold and keep it there for 30 minutes to 1 hour without any joint pain. The whole-body nature of the movement (legs, core, shoulders, arms) makes it a pretty good conditioning exercise, too. For a 76-year-old guy like me, it feels pretty good.