Cardio after weights to burn fat.

According to my former trainer, one should warm up with cardio first, and then do weight lifting...the science behind this according to him is that if you do weight lifting first and then cardio, you would lose muscle mass...

I've noticed that you have 0 lbs lost. So you are newish here.

IMHO here. It's 10x more important that do actually do lift and cardio in whatever order at this stage.

You won't be advanced enough in either area at this point to notice any significant difference.

Just do it and worry about the order later. I've done it both ways.

I have been on here 2 months and only weigh every 4 to 6 weeks so please don't assume by my ticker that I'm new to exercise. And my focus is not on the scales hence it is important to me to get things right so I can achieve my goals.

Even two months is still a beginner IMHO. I sort of have to assume since you logs aren't public.

So how are you exercising right now? List up your routine.

Considering you're only 2 months into this, I'll stand by the logic that doing it in either order is more important at this stage

So, 4 pounds lost makes you some kind of expert??? What the heck kind of answer is this? If the question is over your head and you don't know the answer, simply don't answer. Don't attack someone else for asking a very reasonable question just because you have no clue what they're talking about.

I've been here for about 3 weeks. Lost 4lbs. Yes, I'm new here also. I never said I was an expert and it wasn't an attack. The post might be short and to the point but look at the advice and let me know if it's right or wrong. Then state why.

I've been working out for years. And lost 10lbs PRIOR to joining the site. I joined here because my progress has stopped and I needed a way to track calories. I've learned alot here from the posts.

So again, let me know if someone at her stage should really be worrying about the order vs actually just doing it and see how it works out. I've done it both ways. I value the lifting so I do it first. If I valued the cardio more, I'd do that first. Being so estoteric at this stage (or even where I'm at) seems a LITTLE like nitpicking to me. That is to me, as in my opinion.

So if the question is "over my head", let me know how my answer is an indication of that. Thanks

How can you judge what "stage" I am at merely by either how much weight I have lost or how long I have been on MFP?? Being on here 60 odd days doesn't mean I only started working out that many days ago.

I am happy to list my workout programme but it isn't relevant to the original question.

Here's why. Because it's a GUESS. I HAD to guess because unlike myself, you haven't given me (us) where you are, what you do or anything else for that matter.

To me, it's relavant. Because in the end, we are all here t either lose weight, gain strength, lose fat, get fit or all of the above. If you are doing some advanced marathon workouts then, it might matter. If you are doing 20-30 min of light /moderate exercise (either way), it really won't matter which order. What would matter is you actually do it.

So since you are so defensive about being judged incorrectly, then by all means, set the record straight.

Actually, none of that is relevant to the question posed. Her question was about glycogen storage not anything to do with training for a marathon or not. Again you are proving that the question is over your head, and you are attacking people.

Why can't you just stay out of the discussion if you have nothing of any value to add?!?!?

I've noticed that you have 0 lbs lost. So you are newish here.

IMHO here. It's 10x more important that do actually do lift and cardio in whatever order at this stage.

You won't be advanced enough in either area at this point to notice any significant difference.

Just do it and worry about the order later. I've done it both ways.

I have been on here 2 months and only weigh every 4 to 6 weeks so please don't assume by my ticker that I'm new to exercise. And my focus is not on the scales hence it is important to me to get things right so I can achieve my goals.

Even two months is still a beginner IMHO. I sort of have to assume since you logs aren't public.

So how are you exercising right now? List up your routine.

Considering you're only 2 months into this, I'll stand by the logic that doing it in either order is more important at this stage

So, 4 pounds lost makes you some kind of expert??? What the heck kind of answer is this? If the question is over your head and you don't know the answer, simply don't answer. Don't attack someone else for asking a very reasonable question just because you have no clue what they're talking about.

I've been here for about 3 weeks. Lost 4lbs. Yes, I'm new here also. I never said I was an expert and it wasn't an attack. The post might be short and to the point but look at the advice and let me know if it's right or wrong. Then state why.

I've been working out for years. And lost 10lbs PRIOR to joining the site. I joined here because my progress has stopped and I needed a way to track calories. I've learned alot here from the posts.

So again, let me know if someone at her stage should really be worrying about the order vs actually just doing it and see how it works out. I've done it both ways. I value the lifting so I do it first. If I valued the cardio more, I'd do that first. Being so estoteric at this stage (or even where I'm at) seems a LITTLE like nitpicking to me. That is to me, as in my opinion.

So if the question is "over my head", let me know how my answer is an indication of that. Thanks

How can you judge what "stage" I am at merely by either how much weight I have lost or how long I have been on MFP?? Being on here 60 odd days doesn't mean I only started working out that many days ago.

I am happy to list my workout programme but it isn't relevant to the original question.

Here's why. Because it's a GUESS. I HAD to guess because unlike myself, you haven't given me (us) where you are, what you do or anything else for that matter.

To me, it's relavant. Because in the end, we are all here t either lose weight, gain strength, lose fat, get fit or all of the above. If you are doing some advanced marathon workouts then, it might matter. If you are doing 20-30 min of light /moderate exercise (either way), it really won't matter which order. What would matter is you actually do it.

So since you are so defensive about being judged incorrectly, then by all means, set the record straight.

Actually, none of that is relevant to the question posed. Her question was about glycogen storage not anything to do with training for a marathon or not. Again you are proving that the question is over your head, and you are attacking people.

Why can't you just stay out of the discussion if you have nothing of any value to add?!?!?

I understand the question perfectly. Actually I'm trying to answer in a different way. The question is really just some question is it? Some random technical question about cardio vs lifting order? You have to think about the reasons BEHIND such a question. Why ask such a question? How does such a question related to what this person is trying to achieve? What exactly IS she trying to achieve? That's where I'm coming from.

For the last time, no one has attacked anyone here. YOU made the SAME type of reply/assumption YES?? Yes, But I was happy to clairfy it for context right? You didn't seem to disagree with the explanation either. If you want to take my reply to her as an "attack" then what's your excuse for one of your replies to me? Either they both WERE or both were not. You can't really throw blame my way without implicating yourself here. Then again, I didn't take your statement as an attack, nor did I reply as if it were one. Right?

I'm trying to find articles to answer the question at hand, and so far I've yet to find any that fully answer the question. I did find this one though, that is related and I thought interesting.

http://sweatscience.com/training-without-breakfast-boosts-glycogen-stores/

Lyle makes mention of the mobilization of fatty acids which are then used for fuel, but it seems somewhat vague and inconclusive. Maybe someone will jump back into this thread with some linkies.

Will read the above.

what would you like to know? I can do some looking around with my resources if you need specific studies. But there's a lot out there and without having a very specific set of criteria, the results would be rather vast. I can also tell you from my advanced nutrition, metabolism, and bio-chemistry study (I've done a ton of my own research on the subject) most of what you would like to know. If you're really interested in the human metabolism, I can recommend some books, but most of them are very advanced and require a college level degree in chemistry. Really, in order to truely understand the details about human metabolic rates, you must have an extremely solid grasp on bio-chem.

Firstly, are we not able to ask generalised questions from a genuine interest in science without it having to be about an individual? Because I am fascinated by science but don't necessarily have to be wanting to relate all of it to myself.

But to set the record straight, my goals are fitness, reduction in body fat and increased strength. I am a former competitive swimmer who was ranked second in my country (New Zealand) so have experience in fitness and nutrition.

Now that I am older (41) and taking medication that affects metabolism (20mg of Nadolol for SVT incase you want to know exactly what it is) I want to build muscle AND bone strength, as well as be able to come off the medication. My goals etc are on my profile page.

I am 5'4" about 123 lbs - only weigh myself every 4-6 weeks and the last time was start of September as the scale is not my focus.

Anything else you would like to know??

Sure. what is your typical workout routine? Lifting should be good for your bone density.

what would you like to know?

I would like to know how much of a difference it really makes in the context of overall fat loss.

I presume that things like this (trying to specifically time your cardio relative to your glycogen stores) in the context of overall effectiveness are probably negligable for someone out of shape in the grand scheme of things, and I would also presume that it would only be a tactic that someone who is trying to get contest-lean would even bother to employ, since a good old-fashoined calorie deficit can get you pretty far as is.

But, the above isn't based on fact, I am being presumptuous.

I am skeptical, but definitely enjoy reading peer reviewed research.

I'll see what I can find, but I can tell you that what ends up happening is that the body "compromises" in order to compensate for fatigue factors and hormone response, which means that while you may THINK you're working at a specific rate, you're actually working less (in the cardio phase) and you may THINK you're doing a specific amount of work to build muscle mass (during the weight training phase) you're body will be dividing up resources that should go towards muscle recovery in order to satisfy energy needs for the cardio. The overall result is less than maximal performance for either one.
Flipping them (I.E. doing cardio first then weight training) is even worse actually because before you do the weight training you're flooding your body with cortisol which will cause an even higher anaerobic hormone suppression.

here are some good research studies on FFA's and exercise

http://jap.physiology.org/content/60/3/893.abstract?sid=5dbbd231-0ce6-4199-a62e-7c3124c36afa

http://jap.physiology.org/content/39/3/349.abstract?sid=5dbbd231-0ce6-4199-a62e-7c3124c36afa

http://jap.physiology.org/content/19/3/489.abstract?sid=39b44619-d3be-4fb4-aa18-d729182b77e3


and here are some on the hormones from anaerobic exercise

http://jap.physiology.org/content/101/6/1616.abstract?sid=bb5418db-1b8c-488a-a4bc-517436ce712d

http://jap.physiology.org/content/69/4/1442.abstract?sid=10c2f540-5239-4235-aaa1-5bba1c042463


and finally a few on hormone interaction between cortisol, insulin, and/or testosterone

http://jcem.endojournals.org/content/54/1/131.abstract?sid=4b8baf29-db48-4743-a7ac-1549a70e2a91

http://jap.physiology.org/content/84/3/939.abstract?sid=bc16b137-6057-42c3-bee0-4ea7b2a2270a

http://jap.physiology.org/content/100/5/1647.abstract?sid=ccefafbb-3bcc-478d-bf74-70336377d0c8

Folks,

I'm going to do some editing of this thread to remove the arguments and preserve the debate.

Please make a point to discuss the merits of the facts, and not the worthiness of other members.

In general posts that contain phrases like "You are [insert adjective or noun]" are going to start getting personal very quickly.

Please remember that one of the forum rules is;

4) Do not attack/slam/insult other users. The forums are here so that members can help support one another. Attacks or insults against each other takes away from the supportive atmosphere and will not be tolerated. You can discuss the message or topic, but not the messenger - NO EXCEPTIONS. If you are attacked by another user, and you reciprocate, YOU will also be subject to the same consequences. Defending yourself, defending a friend, etc. are NOT excuses. Violations of this rule are taken very seriously and may result in being banned without warning! If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all.

Thanks,
Steven
MyFitnessPal Staff

Well we are all trying to achieve a desired effect in w/o the benefit of a perfect workout schedule. If she's time limited, what would be your recommendations?

There's really no shortcut to it. I'm not saying you can't do both at the same time, but you're just not going to see the type of benefits you would from splitting them up.

Now, that being said, I'm talking about TRUE weight training to failure, and cardio long enough and hard enough to elicit strong cortisol responses.

My recommendation is to separate the days, even knowing full well that you are doing more specific work that way.
My reasoning is this:
1) Focusing on one training type allows the body to pool all it's resources toward that goal, for the whole day, both during and after the workout.
2) You really don't need more than 3 days of weight training a week, 4 if you really want to push it and do 2 days on upper body routines and 2 on lower body routines, or 3 total body routines (it's not that difficult to do 12 to 14 exercise types in an hour to 90 minutes if you plan it well, give your body 2 days off (weight training, you can do cardio in between days) between weight training sets and that's really all you need unless you're doing some targeted training in which case you'd already know what you want to do)

Someone else mentioned HIIT training. HIIT training is a special kind of anaerobic work. There is a difference between localized muscular failure and localized muscular fatigue, the former is basically low rep high weight training to failure, the latter is HIIT or high rep. low weight training to muscular fatigue. The difference is, 1 focuses on strength and mass gains, while 1 focuses on muscular endurance and anaerobic threshold. HIIT training is unique in that it also works the cardiovascular system to fatigue as well (I.E. you run out of oxygen well before the muscles run out of fuel to burn with the oxygen), these are all good things, but they don't have the same rules. HIIT training enhances EPOC (Exercise Post-Exercise Oxygen Consumption levels) which means a higher metabolic rate for hours after a workout, it increases your anaerobic threshold allowing you to work at a higher level before going anaerobic, it also burns a ton of calories in a short period of time (that's a side benefit), of course, if you do HIIT right, your time for working out is far lower than SSC (Steady State Cardio).
But make no mistake, just because HIIT is anaerobic, doesn't mean it's traditional muscle building activity, it's truly a hybrid exercise, it forces your body to work harder longer, but doesn't work to failure, only fatigue (which feel very similar, but are very different to your muscle physiology).

Yeah, I similarly am interested in the same sort of concept as applied to HIIT (as well as strength training). As far as glycogen stores go, am I depleting them if I lift for an hour intensly? Am I depleting them doing a 10-minute HIIT session?

Based on the answer to those questions, I'd wonder how the depleted (or lack there of) glycogen affects my ability to burn fat.

the answer is most likely yes to both of these, now, whether the depletion is complete depends on your level of work. CAN you work to total glycogen depletion in an hour of weight training, probably, but you'd have to be awful dedicated, likewise, CAN you work to total depletion in 10 Minutes of HIIT? Possibly, but more likely you just depleted your ready glycogen (the glycogen at the muscle site) and your body hasn't replaced it with liver glycogen again. This will all depend on a myriad of factors though, like your aerobic fitness level, your muscle size, the percentage of type I, type IIa, and type IIb muscles, your VO2 max (in the case of HIIT training), your anaerobic threshold, what carbohydrate stores you have in your body, the type of exercise, whether you're male or female...etc.

Take tabata protocol as an example. It's only 4 minutes of anaerobic work, but you burn about as much as a 25 to 30 minute steady state session (you wrap 5 minutes of warm up and 5 minutes of cool down around it). But in that 4 minutes, you're pushing your legs to their breaking point (IMHO the ONLY way to truly do tabata is on a spin bike, sorry guys, I've tried other ways, it's just not as good), but even with all this work, I'm only depleting local muscular glycogen, I'm just not working long enough to deplete my liver glycogen, but it sure does increase my VO2 max levels, which allows me to work harder in my SSC in the long term, which means I can work harder without going anaerobic, thus I can sustain a higher aerobic level of fitness.

For the average person, when it comes to weight loss, it makes no difference.

Few discussions in fitness generate so much discussion for so little purpose.

The times that I have done my strength before my runs I feel like I'm running on empty before I even get into the run. I feel weak and like my stomach is empty (haven't in a day sorta empty) and those runs almost always bonk. The training program I've been usin said to do cardio first, but I'd heard this same thing and had been trying it strength then cardio, but I think I'm gonna listen to the program advice the next few times to see if there's a change in my performance.

same here. I have to do my cardio first or cardio won't happen for me. Plus I seem to burn more calories doing it this way says my HRM.

The times that I have done my strength before my runs I feel like I'm running on empty before I even get into the run. I feel weak and like my stomach is empty (haven't in a day sorta empty) and those runs almost always bonk. The training program I've been usin said to do cardio first, but I'd heard this same thing and had been trying it strength then cardio, but I think I'm gonna listen to the program advice the next few times to see if there's a change in my performance.

same here. I have to do my cardio first or cardio won't happen for me. Plus I seem to burn more calories doing it this way says my HRM.

Wouldn't that indicate that you should eat somethng before working out? (if in fact you are not eating before working out)

Actually it doesn't matter what time of day I do this. I am too tired after weightlifting to even get my usual 30-45 minutes of cardio in. Experimenting with my HRM it always has more cals burned (for me) if I do cardio first then strength vs the other way. That's just my body and my HRM.