Hard 21 minute run, or slower 30 minute jog.???

[broncojosh]

My question is this: I've started running again for my cardio, and is it better to run 3 miles in say 21 minutes, or slow it down and run it in say 30 minutes. It may sound strange, but I know it is recommended that I keep my heart in my target range for extended periods. So which is better, a hard 20 minute run, or slower 30 minute run...

[bex]

If you are trying to burn fat then slower and longer is the way to go.If you go fast you hit the aerobic level to much which is more for fitness....

[broncojosh]

so slower is better...nice

[Commander_Bash]

you should cycle the intensity one minute lets say on the bike you put it on level 4 then another minute 5 then another minute 6 then drop back to 4....... i heard it works better then just cranking the intensity all the way for the whole session
Peace

[Destructo]

In Franco Columbu's guide to bodybuilding, he states that in order to allow optimum muscle development, not to run more than 5 miles/week. He suggests jogging (lightly)for 1 mile 3days/week immediately following your workout. I did this and noticed serious shreds, plus it beats waiting to pass the 20 min cold barrier on cardio machines.
Personally, I reserve this kind of activity for Sunday-Afternoon-Uphill-Sprints. This tends to build everything nicely, plus it gives an adrenaline rush that I continue to feel all week.
It takes about 15-30min, depending on your strength and endurance. Pick a steep road with little traffic, and make two markers from your starting point: 100m and 200m
Do 4X200m and 6X100m
If you got that in 15min, add 2X400m uphill
You rest on the walk back down, and be sure to stay stretched out to prevent injuries.
I never do more than that, but on some days I like to add ankle weights. If you do this, bring plenty of h2o and an orange to sustain you until you can get some more food.

[solid90062]

Cycle high intensity and low intensity spurts if you can...I personally like the High intensity till you cant stand it any more ...then walk or jog the rest of it till the time of 30-40 mins is reached...
I have read though i dont have the science on hand to prove it that fat burning does not begin until about 20 mins has passes...SO therefore if you stop running at 21 mins you were only in the fat burning zone for a minute (at best a few minutes)..I have also read that the high intensity stuff gets your metabolic rate to a point that after you stop running your body is burning fat half-45mins after the workout... Evidence of the such is to look at the Olympic sprinters..they obviously train in powerful spurts of intensity for short periods they do not do the endurance roadwork of say boxers who jog 2-3miles a day. Wo could complain about being ripped to shreds like Maurice Green?

[tbulldog]

20 minutes balls out=60 minutes walking....choose your poison...

tbull

personal trainer(not to show my ass, but to show credibility)

[Ray]

Originally posted by tbulldog
20 minutes balls out=60 minutes walking....choose your poison...

tbull

personal trainer(not to show my ass, but to show credibility)

Im not a personal trainer but i do know that by keeping your heart beat 60-70% of your max is best for burning fat as well as the max for burning calories. When you go higher you start taping into your muscles for energy instead of fat. 20 minutes of balls out isnt as good for burning fat as 60-70% is. Most likely you'll also lose your hard earned muscle from going all out in aerobics.

[broncojosh]

So wait a second...I could actually go for like an hour walk??!! and do the same thing as my run? hmmm

[Sicilian30]

Nice post guys.. good info..

[tbulldog]

i beg do differ bro, studies show that at short periods of high intensity cardio are equal to longer less intense cardio sessions.....the reason the intense sessions are short is to prevent your body from tapping into protein within the muscle...jogging for 30+ min will cause a muscle burning effect, studies also conclude after 7-10 min jogging a persons body taps into the fat stores for energy, giving 10-13 minutes of rapid fat burning, you can do what you want to do, if you get bored easily jog for 20 min, if you love walking on a threadmill for an hour go for it...and no 20 minutes of jogging will not burn Muscle...

tbull

[tbulldog]

HotBod January 99

By Brad Schoenfeld, CSCS

Welcome All:
Happy New Year! Welcome to all the new subscribers to the HotBod newsletter as well as those who have been with us from the beginning. Each month we'll explore issues relating to the three major areas of fitness: exercise, nutrition and supplementation. As always, your comments, questions and suggestions are always appreciated.

TRAINING CORNER: Cardiovascular Intensity/The Right Speed

This myth was given credence when several research studies indicated that low- intensity activities burned a greater percentage of fat calories than high- intensity activities. These studies validated that the body prefers to use fat as its fuel source during low-intensity exercise (equating to roughly 60% of the calories burned, as opposed to about 40% from high-intensity exercise).

However, it is misguided to believe that the selective use of fat for fuel will translate into burning more total fat calories. High-intensity exercise burns more fat calories on an absolute basis than lower intensity activities. Since the most important aspect of training intensity is the total amount of fat calories burned-not the percentage from fat-higher intensity exercise has the decided edge.

Furthermore, when you consider the time related efficiency of training, low- intensity exercise provides a very poor cost/benefit dividend. After all, why would you want to spend an hour running on the treadmill when you can get better results from training for half that time? In final analysis, if fat burning is your aim, performing cardiovascular exercise at a high level of intensity is your best choice.

www.highnrg.com/newsletter/jan99.htm

[broncojosh]

Great posts. More undecided now than ever. Maybe I'll do a 25 minute run.

[Pheedno]

15 second sprint, 1 minute walk -20 reps

[Ray]

The faster you go the more aerobic the cardio is. So the faster you run then the more you are breaking down muscle. If your on a low calorie diet you want to break down as little muscle as possible so the fat goes, not fat AND muscle.

[Ray]

I meant anearobic

[tbulldog]

i use 20min high intensity twice a day, works great, i do agree one 20 min session 3xweek will bring slow results, play with it if you choose High intensity to see what works for ya

[tbulldog]

well short time periods WILL NOT BREAK DOWN MUSCLE.....its not the fat calories burned, its total cal.....did you read the post above RAY?

[Ray]

Originally posted by tbulldog
well short time periods WILL NOT BREAK DOWN MUSCLE.....its not the fat calories burned, its total cal.....did you read the post above RAY?

Yes, i realize that its the total calories that burn fat because calorie deficite=weight loss. YES, i did read the above post. The post states, at the top that RESEARCH has shown that lower but longer exercises tend to burn fat better than high intensity exercises. Where is this study done or better yet where the hell are the other studies to back this one up?! I hope your not just going by One study because im sure i can bring up contradicting studies.
Now say that they didnt write that first paragraph. READ the second paragraph at the last sentence. While i dont agree (im sure most will)with part of what they say: the most important part of exercise is fat burned. But then it says
NOT THE PERCENTAGE FROM FAT . In other words YES you will burn more fat BUT you'll also burn more MUSCLE. The percentage of burning fat goes down the more intense the exercise is and the % of burning muscle goes up. So lets say you burn 300 calories from low intensity exercise the chances of breaking down muscle for energy is little and say you burn 280 calories from fat and glycoge and about 20 calories of muscle. Now, lets say you worked out for the same amount of time but with very high intensity and burned 400 calories. Now the body is burning muscle at a higher percentage EVEN THOUGH you are burning more fat. So now your burning 340 calories from fat but 60 calories from muscle also. So that means the fat loss to muscle loss ratio is now smaller even though you are burning more fat.

Also, ask what COMPETING bodybuilders do for cardio. Do they run sprints? I dont think so. They want to keep as much as their hard earned muscle as possible while getting rid of fat.
High Intesity aerobic exercise does have its advantages but not to a bodybuilder. For athletes that require high oxygen uptake, speed, power and the ability to work at a fast pace, high intensity exercise is obvioulsly very important.

[tbulldog]

Dear Fat-Burning Exerciser,
Generally, carbohydrate is the primary fuel burned during
high-intensity aerobic exercise. During low-intensity exercise, we burn
more fat. This information has been promoted in the weight loss arena
to suggest that if you want to burn fat and lose weight, you should
exercise at a low intensity. However, the overriding concern should be
how many calories you expend during your workout, not how much fat you
burn. The amount of calories you burn will eventually be translated
into fat loss. There is no evidence that the substrate utilized during
exercise (i.e. fat vs. carbohydrate) has an effect on long-term fat
loss. In addition, you may be burning a larger percent of fat with
low-intensity exercise, but the total grams of fat burned is usually
greater with high-intensity exercise because the total energy
expenditure is higher. Therefore, we recommend that you follow a high
carbohydrate diet and include carbohydrate containing foods in your pre-
and post-exercise meals. This carbohydrate will give you the energy you
need to perform your best, whether it be at high- or low-intensities.
Thanks for writing.
The Nutriquest Team
studies conducted at Cornell University
Http://cuinfo.cornell.edu/dialogs/nq/nq1996/nq960919

[tbulldog]

http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art2088.asp


by Monica Neave
Twenty minutes of high intensity cardio increases your aerobic capacity (VO2max) dramatically, maintains lean muscle mass, boosts your metabolism during and after exercise, and burns more fat calories than 30-45 minutes of low intensity cardio. Sound too good to be true? It’s not. In one research study participants who engaged in 90 sessions of traditional cardio over a 20 week period lost 1% bodyfat, while participants who engaged in 25 sessions of moderate intensity cardio then 35 sessions of high intensity cardio over a 15 week period lost 3% bodyfat. Additional studies have shown that participants who engaged in short high intensity training lost 9 times more fat than those who performed long low intensity training. Longer low intensity cardio can actually be counterproductive for more fit individuals because it burns up hard earned muscle decreasing fat burning. It’s also incredibly boring and time consuming and doesn’t do much for your aerobic capacity.

HIGH-INTENSITY INTERVAL TRAINING:

THE OPTIMAL PROTOCOL FOR FAT LOSS?

James Krieger

As exercise intensity increases, the proportion of fat utilized as an energy substrate decreases, while the proportion of carbohydrates utilized increases (5). The rate of fatty acid mobilization from adipose tissue also declines with increasing exercise intensity (5). This had led to the common recommendation that low- to moderate-intensity, long duration endurance exercise is the most beneficial for fat loss (15). However, this belief does not take into consideration what happens during the post-exercise recovery period; total daily energy expenditure is more important for fat loss than the predominant fuel utilized during exercise (5). This is supported by research showing no significant difference in body fat loss between high-intensity and low-intensity submaximal, continuous exercise when total energy expenditure per exercise session is equated (2,7,9). Research by Hickson et al (11) further supports the notion that the predominant fuel substrate used during exercise does not play a role in fat loss; rats engaged in a high-intensity sprint training protocol achieved significant reductions in body fat, despite the fact that sprint training relies almost completely on carbohydrates as a fuel source.

Some research suggests that high-intensity exercise is more beneficial for fat loss than low- and moderate-intensity exercise (3,18,23,24). Pacheco-Sanchez et al (18) found a more pronounced fat loss in rats that exercised at a high intensity as compared to rats that exercised at a low intensity, despite both groups performing an equivalent amount of work. Bryner et al (3) found a significant loss in body fat in a group that exercised at a high intensity of 80-90% of maximum heart rate, while no significant change in body fat was found in the lower intensity group which exercised at 60-70% of maximum heart rate; no significant difference in total work existed between groups. An epidemiological study (24) found that individuals who regularly engaged in high-intensity exercise had lower skinfold thicknesses and waist-to-hip ratios (WHRs) than individuals who participated in exercise of lower intensities. After a covariance analysis was performed to remove the effect of total energy expenditure on skinfolds and WHRs, a significant difference remained between people who performed high-intensity exercise and people who performed lower-intensity exercise.

Tremblay et al (23) performed the most notable study which demonstrates that high-intensity exercise, specifically intermittent, supramaximal exercise, is the most optimal for fat loss. Subjects engaged in either an endurance training (ET) program for 20 weeks or a high-intensity intermittent-training (HIIT) program for 15 weeks. The mean estimated energy cost of the ET protocol was 120.4 MJ, while the mean estimated energy cost of the HIIT protocol was 57.9 MJ. The decrease in six subcutaneous skinfolds tended to be greater in the HIIT group than the ET group, despite the dramatically lower energy cost of training. When expressed on a per MJ basis, the HIIT group's reduction in skinfolds was nine times greater than the ET group.

A number of explanations exist for the greater amounts of fat loss achieved by HIIT. First, a large body of evidence shows that high-intensity protocols, notably intermittent protocols, result in significantly greater post-exercise energy expenditure and fat utilization than low- or moderate-intensity protocols (1,4,8,14,19,21,25). Other research has found significantly elevated blood free-fatty-acid (FFA) concentrations or increased utilization of fat during recovery from resistance training (which is a form of HIIT) (16,17). Rasmussen et al (20) found higher exercise intensity resulted in greater acetyl-CoA carboxylase (ACC) inactivation, which would result in greater FFA oxidation after exercise since ACC is an inhibitor of FFA oxidation. Tremblay et al (23) found HIIT to significantly increase muscle 3-hydroxyacyl coenzyme A dehydrogenase activity (a marker of the activity of b oxidation) over ET. Finally, a number of studies have found high-intensity exercise to suppress appetite more than lower intensities (6,12,13,22) and reduce saturated fat intake (3).

Overall, the evidence suggests that HIIT is the most efficient method for achieving fat loss. However, HIIT carries a greater risk of injury and is physically and psychologically demanding (10), making low- and moderate-intensity, continuous exercise the best choice for individuals that are unmotivated or contraindicated for high-intensity exercise.

1. Bahr, R., and O.M. Sejersted. Effect of intensity of exercise on excess postexercise O2 consumption. Metabolism. 40:836-841, 1991.

2. Ballor, D.L., J.P. McCarthy, and E.J. Wilterdink. Exercise intensity does not affect the composition of diet- and exercise-induced body mass loss. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 51:142-146, 1990.

3. Bryner, R.W., R.C. Toffle, I.H. Ullrish, and R.A. Yeater. The effects of exercise intensity on body composition, weight loss, and dietary composition in women. J. Am. Col. Nutr. 16:68-73, 1997.

4. Burleson, Jr, M.A., H.S. O'Bryant, M.H. Stone, M.A. Collins, and T. Triplett-McBride. Effect of weight training exercise and treadmill exercise on post-exercise oxygen consumption. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 30:518-522, 1998.

5. Coyle, E.H. Fat Metabolism During Exercise. [Online] Gatorade Sports Science Institute. http://www.gssiweb.com/references/s0...20000006d.html [1999, Mar 25]

6. Dickson-Parnell, B.E., and A. Zeichner. Effects of a short-term exercise program on caloric consumption. Health Psychol. 4:437-448, 1985.

7. Gaesser, G.A., and R.G. Rich. Effects of high- and low-intensity exercise training on aerobic capacity and blood lipids. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 16:269-274, 1984.

8. Gillette, C.A., R.C. Bullough, and C.L. Melby. Postexercise energy expenditure in response to acute aerobic or resistive exercise. Int. J. Sports Nutr. 4:347-360, 1994.

9. Grediagin, M.A., M. Cody, J. Rupp, D. Benardot, and R. Shern. Exercise intensity does not effect body composition change in untrained, moderately overfat women. J. Am. Diet Assoc. 95:661-665, 1995.

10. Grubbs, L. The critical role of exercise in weight control. Nurse Pract. 18(4):20,22,25-26,29, 1993.

11. Hickson, R.C., W.W. Heusner, W.D. Van Huss, D.E. Jackson, D.A. Anderson, D.A. Jones, and A.T. Psaledas. Effects of Dianabol and high-intensity sprint training on body composition of rats. Med. Sci. Sports. 8:191-195, 1976.

12. Imbeault, P., S. Saint-Pierre, N. Alméras, and A. Tremblay. Acute effects of exercise on energy intake and feeding behaviour. Br. J. Nutr. 77:511-521, 1997.

13. Katch, F.I., R. Martin, and J. Martin. Effects of exercise intensity on food consumption in the male rat. Am J. Clin. Nutr. 32:1401-1407, 1979.

14. Laforgia, J. R.T. Withers, N.J. Shipp, and C.J. Gore. Comparison of energy expenditure elevations after submaximal and supramaximal running. J. Appl. Physiol. 82:661-666, 1997.

15. Mahler, D.A., V.F. Froelicher, N.H. Miller, and T.D. York. ACSM's Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription, edited by W.L. Kenney, R.H. Humphrey, and C.X. Bryant. Media, PA: Williams and Wilkins, 1995, chapt. 10, p. 218-219.

16. McMillan, J.L., M.H. Stone, J. Sartin, R. Keith, D. Marple, Lt. C. Brown, and R.D. Lewis. 20-hour physiological responses to a single weight-training session. J. Strength Cond. Res. 7(3):9-21, 1993.

17. Melby, C., C. Scholl, G. Edwards, and R. Bullough. Effect of acute resistance exercise on postexercise energy expenditure and resting metabolic rate. J. Appl. Physiol. 75:1847-1853, 1993.

18. Pacheco-Sanchez, M., and K.K Grunewald. Body fat deposition: effects of dietary fat and two exercise protocols. J. Am. Col. Nutr. 13:601-607, 1994.

19. Phelain, J.F., E. Reinke, M.A. Harris, and C.L. Melby. Postexercise energy expenditure and substrate oxidation in young women resulting from exercise bouts of different intensity. J. Am. Col. Nutr. 16:140-146, 1997.

20. Rasmussen, B.B., and W.W. Winder. Effect of exercise intensity on skeletal muscle malonyl-CoA and acetyl-CoA carboxylase. J. Appl. Physiol. 83:1104-1109, 1997.

21. Smith, J., and L. McNaughton. The effects of intensity of exercise on excess postexercise oxygen consumption and energy expenditure in moderately trained men and women. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 67:420-425, 1993.

22. Thompson, D.A., L.A. Wolfe, and R. Eikelboom. Acute effects of exercise intensity on appetite in young men. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 20:222-227, 1988.

23. Tremblay, A., J. Simoneau, and C. Bouchard. Impact of exercise intensity on body fatness and skeletal muscle metabolism. Metabolism. 43:814-818, 1994.

24. Tremblay, A., J. Després, C. Leblanc, C.L. Craig, B. Ferris, T. Stephens, and C. Bouchard. Effect of intensity of physical activity on body fatness and fat distribution. Am J. Clin. Nutr. 51:153-157, 1990.

25. Treuth, M.S., G.R. Hunter, and M. Williams. Effects of exercise intensity on 24-h energy expenditure and substrate oxidation. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 28:1138-1143, 1996.



Washington State University Athletics

[jbrand]

Jesus christ there is a lot of mumbo jumbo in this thread. This topic has been debated to hell and back, my opinion firmly stands that weight training (anaerobic) is more efficient in fat loss than aerobic activity.

First of all, anaerobic exercise in various studies has shown to increase the resting metabolic rate; whereas aerobic exercise only increases the metabolic rate during exercise. Don't go citing studies regarding aerobic activity increasing resting metabolic rate, because there has been research done to support both sides and nothing can be held conclusive here. Next, we know that anaerobic activity utilizes glycogen (to a much larger <full body> extent in comparison to aerobic activity), this has been shown to increase fuel use after training as well as increasing insulin sensitivity, in essence maximizing the expenditure of calories post-training.

As far as the research cited that sides with aerobic training generally brings up the point that aerobic activity utilizes fat for energy, while anaerobic activity only utilizes glycogen. It must be noted though that the fat burned DURING exercise is only a small aspect of the big picture. The way the body responds as far as the BMR not only during but AFTER the activity is of prime concern to the fat loss of the trainee. JMO, for what it's worth.