Whats best time for some cardio?

[skynard_83]

I was wondering what time of day would it be best for cardio...I mean in the morning when you haven't ate yet or maybe later in the day before or after dinner?

[jimmyinkedup]

Let me put it to you this way.
Lets say you require 2500 cals/ day to maintain so thats what you consume.
On top of that you burn 400 cals/day doing cardio.
What difference would it make when u burn the 400 cals?

The answer - absolutely no difference whatsoever. Do it when its convenient and you are able to consotantly do it.

[skynard_83]

Ok so then to make a difference and i'm using your 2500 calories/day i'd have to up on cardio for results and being consistent at it?

[AD]

i had always thought that fasted cardio or post-workout cardio is better than random time cardio.

[Back In Black]

I've just done 'random time' cardio. As long as the quality of your cardio is good for whatever purpose you want it to serve, it matters not. My random time cardio differs to my post lifting cardio.

[Turkish Juicer]

Any time is a good time for cardio, maybe with an exception of an intense cardio session right before lifting weights for obvious reasons.

[jimmyinkedup]

I used to swear by fasted am cardio or pwo cardio. I would ever argue the benefits. I bought into the "immeadiately burn bodyfat for fuel" and so on.
It turns out it just doest matter. You cant trick the body to burn more fat by timing activity any more so than you can by timing meals. Ultimately it all balances out. I sometimes still do cardio in am because I do like the way it starts my day , I often do it pwo because i'm at the gym and its convenient - but Ive found its more important just to do it. Ive also turned more twords recreational cardio I enjoy during the nice times of the year like cycling.
IMO when it comes to cardio the nike slogan "just do it" is the key - not when.

[jimmyinkedup]

Ok so then to make a difference and i'm using your 2500 calories/day i'd have to up on cardio for results and being consistent at it?

I didnt mean to confuse the issue - my point was do it whenever - the results will be the same. As turkish pointed out intense cardip pre workout prob isnt a good idea - for obvious reasons - but the end result re fatloss will be the same whenever you do it. My only suggestion is if planning it - plan it when it is convenient and you will not have to skip it.

[AD]

I used to swear by fasted am cardio or pwo cardio. I would ever argue the benefits. I bought into the "immeadiately burn bodyfat for fuel" and so on.
It turns out it just doest matter. You cant trick the body to burn more fat by timing activity any more so than you can by timing meals. Ultimately it all balances out. I sometimes still do cardio in am because I do like the way it starts my day , I often do it pwo because i'm at the gym and its convenient - but Ive found its more important just to do it. Ive also turned more twords recreational cardio I enjoy during the nice times of the year like cycling.
IMO when it comes to cardio the nike slogan "just do it" is the key - not when.

i still really like the idea of "immediate fat burn". the explanation almost sound scientific and physiological. may i know where did it turn out that it doesnt matter? i feel a little disappointed that the simplified explanation is true, that weight gain or loss is just = calories in - calories out. if thats the case, why cant we also simplify the "calories in"? why do we have to stick to complex carb and avoid simple sugars? since calories are just calories in the end.

anyway, if i there is something for me to read regarding the fallacy of "immediate fat burn", Jimmy, would you be so kind. thanks.

[ironbeck]

I usually finish with cardio at the end of my workout...

[jimmyinkedup]

i still really like the idea of "immediate fat burn". the explanation almost sound scientific and physiological. may i know where did it turn out that it doesnt matter? i feel a little disappointed that the simplified explanation is true, that weight gain or loss is just = calories in - calories out. if thats the case, why cant we also simplify the "calories in"? why do we have to stick to complex carb and avoid simple sugars? since calories are just calories in the end.

anyway, if i there is something for me to read regarding the fallacy of "immediate fat burn", Jimmy, would you be so kind. thanks.

Google "fasted cardio myth". Alan Aragon , Alwyn Cosgrove , Layne Norton all weigh in on this. (Aragon with studies of course)
My post was referring more to my personal experience - but that should give you some other input and hard data. If you think about it - it just makes sense. You cant trick the body - ultimately it all balances out.
RE your simple carbs analogy there are a few probs with this - 1-you cant disregard insulin. 2-our goal isnt just to be a certain weight - we strive for lbm and a bf%. 3- There should be some general heath concerns making lower gi complex carbs much more prudent than simple carbs.

[AD]

Thanks for the tip. Will be busy reading up tonight.

[AD]

Google "fasted cardio myth". Alan Aragon , Alwyn Cosgrove , Layne Norton all weigh in on this. (Aragon with studies of course)

i had a quick glance at the Alan Aragon article. dated 2006. seems like he thinks fed cardio burns as much fats as fasted cardio, unless the cardio last more than 2 hrs, then the fat metab in fed cardio is less after that.

does that mean that fasted cardio is actually not crap? its just means that fed cardio is just as good for trained athletes?

[jimmyinkedup]

i had a quick glance at the Alan Aragon article. dated 2006. seems like he thinks fed cardio burns as much fats as fasted cardio, unless the cardio last more than 2 hrs, then the fat metab in fed cardio is less after that.

does that mean that fasted cardio is actually not crap? its just means that fed cardio is just as good for trained athletes?

I wouldnt say (nor did I) that fasted cardio is crap - it just isnt any more effective for our purposes than fed cardio. Also if fasted cardio results in decreased intensity for you it may end up being less effective only from the standpoint of lower intensity = less cals burned.
The traditional thought process was fasted cardio forced you to immediately burn bodyfat which would result in more bodyfat burned (lost) - however when you look at the big picture that just isnt the case.

[AD]

I wouldnt say (nor did I) that fasted cardio is crap - it just isnt any more effective for our purposes than fed cardio. Also if fasted cardio results in decreased intensity for you it may end up being less effective only from the standpoint of lower intensity = less cals burned.
The traditional thought process was fasted cardio forced you to immediately burn bodyfat which would result in more bodyfat burned (lost) - however when you look at the big picture that just isnt the case.

ya, i kind of got the wrong impression regarding the "crap" part.

i havent got time to read thru your other recommendations yet, but from Aragon, he didnt actually disprove "fasted cardio burn fat first". he kind of said fed cardio also burns fats at the same rate as fasted?

[spywizard]

i had always thought that fasted cardio or post-workout cardio is better than random time cardio.

that's because your glycogen levels are depleted, thus the 300-400 cals that are stored in the liver are not there, thus during low/long intensity cardio, from step #1 you are burning fat for energy.. vs using the 1st 20-30minutes burning glycogen, then fat..

but i happen to agree with jimmy... do the cardio..