Is 60+ mins of exercise too much?
shayjgordon
Posts: 90 Member
I recently watched an episode of Steven & Chris and their fitness expert said that you should do 30-60 mins of exercise per day. Great, that's do-able! She also said not to go over 60 mins per day, and that it's not good for your body.
I know you need to listen to your body, and if it needs a break, take a break. But if you can push through a 2 hour workout, then why not, right? Is there such a thing as too much exercise? If you're not in pain and feel comfortable to keep going, isn't that a good thing? I do 45-70 mins of cardio then 25-30 mins of strength all from home, should I cut back? Maybe do 30 mins of cardio but go harder, keeping my heart rate higher, so I can still burn the calories, then 30 mins of strength?
Thanks!
I know you need to listen to your body, and if it needs a break, take a break. But if you can push through a 2 hour workout, then why not, right? Is there such a thing as too much exercise? If you're not in pain and feel comfortable to keep going, isn't that a good thing? I do 45-70 mins of cardio then 25-30 mins of strength all from home, should I cut back? Maybe do 30 mins of cardio but go harder, keeping my heart rate higher, so I can still burn the calories, then 30 mins of strength?
Thanks!
0
Replies
-
I personally don't think 60+ minutes of exercise is too much. There must be some qualification behind the statement made. Perhaps for people that aren't conditioned to work out longer?0
-
I'm up a creek if true.0
-
I think that some people put too much emphasis on the quantity of exercise and not the quality. Some people can work out for 20 minutes and get results that take others hours because of the difference in intensity. Look at the results people have gotten just by doing 30DS. I think your body will let you know if you are working out too much (too hard). I don't think the amount of time you work out makes much difference.0
-
I personally don't think 60+ minutes of exercise is too much. There must be some qualification behind the statement made. Perhaps for people that aren't conditioned to work out longer?
Yeah, I'm thinking there was more context to that then a simple claim of more then 60 is a bad thing.
If true, then every marathon runner must be in terrible shape :laugh:0 -
That doesn't seem true. I did a 100 min bootcamp last night and 104 min bike ride today... (after mowing the lawn). Although I have tons of available calories today. I won't be eating them all, not sure I could unless I went to McDonald's and ate a couple big macs and a huge fry. lol0
-
If true... stick a fork in me, I'm done :laugh:0
-
If this "expert" can call and tell me how I'm supposed to complete an Ironman in under 10 hours on 30 to 60 minutes of training a day I'd be pleased because it sure would save me a lot of grief from the wife about how much time I spend training.0
-
Yeah, I totally agree that quality is the most important. I'm sure she meant on a regular basis, people aren't running marathons daily lol. Thanks for your input...I'm just going to do keep doing what I have been doing!0
-
Exercise has no bearing on fat loss.
All that matters is (1) slash carbohydrate intake and (2) daily calorie deficit.
Adding exercise does not change your calorie defecit. Adding exercise simply means, YOU CAN EAT MORE, IF YOU WANT TO. THat is the one and only benefit of exercise, for fat loss.
If your aim is literally to LOSE FAT, then, just EAT LESS and forget about exercise.
Say you need 2000 calories a day (just for example). If you do 400 calories of exercise, you will need 2400 calories a day.
In the first case: if you eat 1700 calories, you will have a 300 calorie deficit. Makes sense?
In the SECOND case, if you eat 2100 calories .. you will have the identical 300 calorie deficit. There's no difference.
Exercise just makes you want to eat more.
if you happen to want to exercise, that's fine. But THE ONE AND ONLY THING THAT MATTERS is the calorie deficit.0 -
60+ minutes is not too much as long you take rest days.
If you're in the gym and you're strength training for 2 hours a day , 6 days a week....THAT is too much.
Longer training isn't smarter training. Your CNS will thank you later.0 -
Exercise has no bearing on fat loss.
All that matters is (1) slash carbohydrate intake and (2) daily calorie deficit.
Adding exercise does not change your calorie defecit. Adding exercise simply means, YOU CAN EAT MORE, IF YOU WANT TO. THat is the one and only benefit of exercise, for fat loss.
If your aim is literally to LOSE FAT, then, just EAT LESS and forget about exercise.
Say you need 2000 calories a day (just for example). If you do 400 calories of exercise, you will need 2400 calories a day.
In the first case: if you eat 1700 calories, you will have a 300 calorie deficit. Makes sense?
In the SECOND case, if you eat 2100 calories .. you will have the identical 300 calorie deficit. There's no difference.
Exercise just makes you want to eat more.
if you happen to want to exercise, that's fine. But THE ONE AND ONLY THING THAT MATTERS is the calorie deficit.
You're half right.
I don't need to slash carbs to lose weight. Just the calorie deficit.
Low carb and/or Ketogenic diets have no metabolic advantage.
Edit: I also failed to mention that if you want good body composition and retain LBM, then yes resistance training exercise matters.0 -
Exercise has no bearing on fat loss.
All that matters is (1) slash carbohydrate intake and (2) daily calorie deficit.
Adding exercise does not change your calorie defecit. Adding exercise simply means, YOU CAN EAT MORE, IF YOU WANT TO. THat is the one and only benefit of exercise, for fat loss.
If your aim is literally to LOSE FAT, then, just EAT LESS and forget about exercise.
Say you need 2000 calories a day (just for example). If you do 400 calories of exercise, you will need 2400 calories a day.
In the first case: if you eat 1700 calories, you will have a 300 calorie deficit. Makes sense?
In the SECOND case, if you eat 2100 calories .. you will have the identical 300 calorie deficit. There's no difference.
Exercise just makes you want to eat more.
if you happen to want to exercise, that's fine. But THE ONE AND ONLY THING THAT MATTERS is the calorie deficit.
Why do I have a feeling I need an umbrella for the *kitten* storm that's about to blow through here?0 -
When I lost my first 48 lbs prior to MFP I worked out at least 2 hours a day. I never felt better and I'm trying to work back up to that level.
Some people work jobs for 8 hours a day harder than some of us exercise so I don't think it's harmful at all.0 -
Exercise has no bearing on fat loss.
All that matters is (1) slash carbohydrate intake and (2) daily calorie deficit.
Adding exercise does not change your calorie defecit. Adding exercise simply means, YOU CAN EAT MORE, IF YOU WANT TO. THat is the one and only benefit of exercise, for fat loss.
If your aim is literally to LOSE FAT, then, just EAT LESS and forget about exercise.
Say you need 2000 calories a day (just for example). If you do 400 calories of exercise, you will need 2400 calories a day.
In the first case: if you eat 1700 calories, you will have a 300 calorie deficit. Makes sense?
In the SECOND case, if you eat 2100 calories .. you will have the identical 300 calorie deficit. There's no difference.
Exercise just makes you want to eat more.
if you happen to want to exercise, that's fine. But THE ONE AND ONLY THING THAT MATTERS is the calorie deficit.
Why do I have a feeling I need an umbrella for the *kitten* storm that's about to blow through here?
:laugh:0 -
60+ minutes of anything intense would be too much for me. I'd never be able to eat that many calories back.
0 -
I'm up a creek if true.
Me too!
I do that as a minimum daily and often twice that and more, and I'm 61 years old! I Jazzercise everyday, often doing back to back classes. also strength training and walk and hour a couple times a week. :noway:0 -
Exercise has no bearing on fat loss.
All that matters is (1) slash carbohydrate intake and (2) daily calorie deficit.
Adding exercise does not change your calorie defecit. Adding exercise simply means, YOU CAN EAT MORE, IF YOU WANT TO. THat is the one and only benefit of exercise, for fat loss.
If your aim is literally to LOSE FAT, then, just EAT LESS and forget about exercise.
Say you need 2000 calories a day (just for example). If you do 400 calories of exercise, you will need 2400 calories a day.
In the first case: if you eat 1700 calories, you will have a 300 calorie deficit. Makes sense?
In the SECOND case, if you eat 2100 calories .. you will have the identical 300 calorie deficit. There's no difference.
Exercise just makes you want to eat more.
if you happen to want to exercise, that's fine. But THE ONE AND ONLY THING THAT MATTERS is the calorie deficit.
0 -
I have heard of over training, but I think 60+ minutes is fine, just need to make sure you have rest days and stuff.0
-
i think if you balance cardio, weight training and some quality stretching/yoga, then the more the merrier!! i try to do the tri-fecta at the gym on tues, thurs and sat of spin (50 min), group power(55min) (barbell class) and basic yoga (50 min). i feel like a million bucks after that!!0
-
When I lost my first 48 lbs prior to MFP I worked out at least 2 hours a day. I never felt better and I'm trying to work back up to that level.
Some people work jobs for 8 hours a day harder than some of us exercise so I don't think it's harmful at all.
for realz!!! i think that is what has gotten america into this rotund shape! people used to "work" at work... all day working and moving and now we sit at a desk, drive all day, etc then worry if X number of minutes is too much. i log a lot of gym minutes and my work is pretty intense.... i feel like a warrior!! 0 -
Oh, I hope not. I'd have to succumb to only finishing 37 half marathons instead of the 50 I have planned.
We're either going to have to convince Congress to let 13 states secede from the Union, or I'm going to have to exercise more than 60 minutes at a time to prepare. I don't hold my breath for Congress to do anything.
I'm going to continue on with 60+ of training runs and half marathons.0 -
I don't believe more is better. I'd rather have more bang for my buck when working out. Also if your body decide that 2 hours a day is the new normal then you stop, you will gain weight. I have seen it happen.
I do 45 minutes a day 5 days a week and it work for my life0 -
I think after 45 minutes to an hour (of cardio- I assume we're talking cardio here since # of minutes isn't really a measure of strength training) you get diminishing returns on your exercise investment. As in, you get tired, get lazy with form, and come bumping up against your lactate wall for less and less extra benefit.
That being said, I don't feel like I've had a good conditioning workout without 60 mins of hard cardio- with warm ups and cool downs making it roughly 80 mins.0 -
60+ minutes of anything intense would be too much for me. I'd never be able to eat that many calories back.
I like working out and generally work out for an hour to an hour and a half 7 days a week. The hardest thing for me is, the better shape I am in, the less calories I burn. Stinks because I have absolutely no problem eating my calories back. Matter of fact, that's half the reason I work out!0 -
depends on if your body can handle it. I spend 25-30 doing yoga then another 30-35 doing (Running in Place, Jumping Jacks,Push Up, Crunches) works for me. I guess what I'm trying to say is every one is different0
-
Focus on quality over quantity. Twenty minutes of High Intensity Interval training is better than an hour of running at let's say 6mph.
If you are exercising for 60 minutes at low intensity then it is fine though if you are exercising at a really high speed then 60 minutes is too much.0 -
I would have to say there are too many variables and the 60 minute statement is just a generalization.
There is no "one size fits all".
If you eat enough, well balanced foods. Give yourself a break if you feel sore or your very tired and don't work the same areas of the body intensely every single day of the week, more power to you
0 -
I limit my workouts to 50-70 minutes per day. I do however workout 7 days per week.0
-
Exercise has no bearing on fat loss.
All that matters is (1) slash carbohydrate intake and (2) daily calorie deficit.
Adding exercise does not change your calorie defecit. Adding exercise simply means, YOU CAN EAT MORE, IF YOU WANT TO. THat is the one and only benefit of exercise, for fat loss.
If your aim is literally to LOSE FAT, then, just EAT LESS and forget about exercise.
Say you need 2000 calories a day (just for example). If you do 400 calories of exercise, you will need 2400 calories a day.
In the first case: if you eat 1700 calories, you will have a 300 calorie deficit. Makes sense?
In the SECOND case, if you eat 2100 calories .. you will have the identical 300 calorie deficit. There's no difference.
Exercise just makes you want to eat more.
if you happen to want to exercise, that's fine. But THE ONE AND ONLY THING THAT MATTERS is the calorie deficit.
Why do I have a feeling I need an umbrella for the *kitten* storm that's about to blow through here?
^^This^^. Got my full poncho and boots on!!0 -
The thing about exercise is that if you want to do a lot of it, sometimes easier exercise is a better idea than harder. By that I mean that if I went for a 4 1/2 hour walk, that's roughly the equivalent of 1 1/2 hours of running. I could manage the walking, but I couldn't manage the running.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 427 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions