HIIT cardio vs. Standard 1hr 60-70% heart rate

[noexcuses88]

I have been doing 1 hr of cardio in the morning on a empty stomach 4-5 days a week 60% of my heart rate. I usually loose about 700-800 calories doing it that way.

On the other hand I have heard that doing HIIT cardio program would burn more fat. I would be doing this program possibly 3-4 times a week after working out.

Which do you guys think would be more beneficial in my cutting regimen? And
should I incorporate both into my lifting/cutting program?

[NotSmall]

I have been doing 45 mins on an inclined treadmill at 70% MHR since christmas, every morning on an empty stomach, I have been losing fat steadily up to a couple of weeks ago when my fat loss seemed to stagnate despite the fact that my diet is the best it has ever been.

I read this today on Chris Aceto's site Nutramedia and as of tomorrow I will be giving HIIT a go:

http://www.nutramedia.com/training.cgi

[nyjetsfan86]

it doesnt matter what you are doing if you are at 60% you are burning the same amount of fat no matter what

[NotSmall]

it doesnt matter what you are doing if you are at 60% you are burning the same amount of fat no matter what

Erm, I think you may have missed the point a bit...

[slut seeker]

it won't hurt to swich it up a bit, ive tried both. i read that you loose more fat while doing 60% steady but loose more weight while doing hiit (mus & fat)

[UpstateTank]

HIIT has always perked my interest...

granted 60min of "low intesity" cardio isnt bad, but 15-20min seems ALOT more enticing

[noexcuses88]

HIIT has always perked my interest...

granted 60min of "low intesity" cardio isnt bad, but 15-20min seems ALOT more enticing

I know... I have gotten mix answers for the longest time. For two weeks I will be doing 45 mins of low intensity cardio in the morning (4-5 times a week) and hiit after 3 of my workouts this week. I wanna see how both of them work together. I have always thought that more is better and hiit seems so easy(used to do wind sprints all the time in football) compare to 1hr of straight cardio.

[the hulkster]

cals in vs calories out, low intensity are you burning fat mostly yes, but in matter of total cals and fat high intensity will burn more calories quicker, are you going to lose much muscle from doing HITT some but little, are you going to burn some muscle glycogen during low intensity some but little, I like to do both, swolecat on the other hand, if anyone remembers him is all for low intensity, he looks better than me and has many rebuttles to back up his answers.

my 2 cents

[auslifta]

2 times a week long slow cardio, 3 times a week 2o min high intensity works best for me

[NotSmall]

cals in vs calories out, low intensity are you burning fat mostly yes, but in matter of total cals and fat high intensity will burn more calories quicker, are you going to lose much muscle from doing HITT some but little, are you going to burn some muscle glycogen during low intensity some but little, I like to do both, swolecat on the other hand, if anyone remembers him is all for low intensity, he looks better than me and has many rebuttles to back up his answers.

my 2 cents

Swolecat certainly knows his stuff but then Chris Aceto has trained Arnold Schwarzenneger, Mike Francois, Jay Cutler, Evander Holyfield... the list goes on, so if he recommends HIIT then I'm in!

[the hulkster]

I have been doing 45 mins on an inclined treadmill at 70% MHR since christmas, every morning on an empty stomach, I have been losing fat steadily up to a couple of weeks ago when my fat loss seemed to stagnate despite the fact that my diet is the best it has ever been.

I read this today on Chris Aceto's site Nutramedia and as of tomorrow I will be giving HIIT a go:

http://www.nutramedia.com/training.cgi

I love the article but what's with the whole 18 seconds or less, it takes much less time than that to tap the pcr stores, to gauge a true sprint you will not be able to keep the same (100%) effort for a full 18 seconds, I wonder if the point is to get further down into the chain of anaerobic glycolysis and tap into glycogen? that would be more of a compatable time range for that. anyone know the answer?

[NotSmall]

I love the article but what's with the whole 18 seconds or less, it takes much less time than that to tap the pcr stores, to gauge a true sprint you will not be able to keep the same (100%) effort for a full 18 seconds, I wonder if the point is to get further down into the chain of anaerobic glycolysis and tap into glycogen? that would be more of a compatable time range for that. anyone know the answer?

Not me! lol

email Chris and ask him!

[UpstateTank]

i read an abstract once comparing 'conventional' cardio vs. HIIT...

the gist of the article was w/ 'conventional' low intensity, lengthy cardio you were going to burn more calories during the actual session then you would during a session of HIIT, however, a person doing HIIT will burn more calories throughout the day b/c it kicks yer metabolism into higher gear

if i remember correctly someone who did HIIT cardio for a year burned around 11 extra pounds vs. someone who did 'conventional' cardio for a year...ill see if i cant dig up the thread

[the hulkster]

i read an abstract once comparing 'conventional' cardio vs. HIIT...

the gist of the article was w/ 'conventional' low intensity, lengthy cardio you were going to burn more calories during the actual session then you would during a session of HIIT, however, a person doing HIIT will burn more calories throughout the day b/c it kicks yer metabolism into higher gear

if i remember correctly someone who did HIIT cardio for a year burned around 11 extra pounds vs. someone who did 'conventional' cardio for a year...ill see if i cant dig up the thread

There can be some truth to that but the low intensity would have to be lengthy like you said but overall, you get more bang for your buck so to speak with HITT.

[nyjetsfan86]

yea you will lose more weight doing HITT but you are also losing more muscle that way

[the hulkster]

yea you will lose more weight doing HITT but you are also losing more muscle that way

the loss is not as significant as many think, especially with proper nutrition. GREAT THREAD BY THE WAY WHOEVER STARTED IT.

[nyjetsfan86]

it all d e p ends on the person, its not extremly significant but IMO id rather lose body fat then lose fat and muscle but everything also d e p ends on what your goals are if youre 150 lbs over weight you are going to want to just drop as much as you can at first, but if youre looking to get cut up and not lose weight really then i would go with the 60-70% heart rate

[noexcuses88]

the loss is not as significant as many think, especially with proper nutrition. GREAT THREAD BY THE WAY WHOEVER STARTED IT.

Thanks man appreciate it. I am actually really curious about this. Even in here we are getting mixed answers. I am going to try to research this and get back at you guys

[UpstateTank]

it all d e p ends on the person, its not extremly significant but IMO id rather lose body fat then lose fat and muscle but everything also d e p ends on what your goals are if youre 150 lbs over weight you are going to want to just drop as much as you can at first, but if youre looking to get cut up and not lose weight really then i would go with the 60-70% heart rate

see thats the thing...the study i read on this said muscle loss was just as much as it wuld be w/ 'conventional' cardio...but fat loss overall was greater

otay im gonna dig up the thread

[UpstateTank]

cardio on empty stomach??

DAMN IM GOOD

and anoter just explaining it
http://www.musclemedia.com/training/hiit.asp#hiit

[Columbus]

Remember 99% is diet!!!! You can get ripped without cardio.......

[noexcuses88]

cardio on empty stomach??

DAMN IM GOOD

and anoter just explaining it
http://www.musclemedia.com/training/hiit.asp#hiit

Good post... So you think that 9 to 15 min sessions burn more fat calories throughout the day than a 1hr cardio session?

[the hulkster]

Lyle McDonald, an expert on bodybuilding nutrition and author of "The Ketogenic Diet," agrees. He argues that the body will compensate later in the day and is simply "too smart" for strategies like this to ever work: "All that research says is that you burn a greater proportion of fat this way, which I agree with 100%," says Lyle. "The majority of research shows that as far as real world fat loss goes, it doesn’t really matter what you burn. Rather, 24-hour calorie balance is what matters. Because if you burn glucose during exercise, you tend to burn more fat the rest of the day. If you burn fat during exercise, you burn more glucose during the day. The end result is identical. If that weren’t the case, then athletes like sprinters who never ‘burn fat’ during exercise wouldn’t be shredded. Basically, they burn so many calories that they remain in balance and don’t gain any fat. So, while morning cardio probably provides some psychological benefits to bodybuilders who are programmed to do it that way, I can’t say that I think it will result in greater ‘real world’ fat loss, which is what matters."

I am an exercise physiologist and do agree with this for the most part.(above)
genetics com into play but still true.


"These guys are working from the assumption that it’s just a matter of calories in vs. calories out, period," Chris continued. "With that line of reasoning, they’d be forced to say that if I consume nothing but candy bars and Coca-Cola, and take in 100 calories less than maintenance, I’d lose weight. We know it’s not that simple. You also have to account for ratios of carbs, protein, and fat. Then there’s meal frequency too: From real world results we know you put down more muscle mass from 5 or 6 meals a day than from 3 meals a day. There are more things involved than just calories."


There are more things involved then just calories but his stance on this is directed toward nutrient dense foods, positive nitrogen balances, carbohydrate timing, etc. but the simple fact is that if you do not consume as many calories as your RMR and DEE require you will lose wieght, you will be more than likely malnourished, matter of fact I know of a girl here very recently that was diagnosed with malnutrition and anorexia and when I asked her what her diet was, she replied, "snickers bars, diet pop, and cigarettes" skinny as a rail.

[UpstateTank]

Good post... So you think that 9 to 15 min sessions burn more fat calories throughout the day than a 1hr cardio session?

ive never tried HIIT personally but from that one post, hearing others experiences, and reading up on it i think it does

[NotSmall]

Lyle McDonald, an expert on bodybuilding nutrition and author of "The Ketogenic Diet," agrees. He argues that the body will compensate later in the day and is simply "too smart" for strategies like this to ever work: "All that research says is that you burn a greater proportion of fat this way, which I agree with 100%," says Lyle. "The majority of research shows that as far as real world fat loss goes, it doesn’t really matter what you burn. Rather, 24-hour calorie balance is what matters. Because if you burn glucose during exercise, you tend to burn more fat the rest of the day. If you burn fat during exercise, you burn more glucose during the day. The end result is identical. If that weren’t the case, then athletes like sprinters who never ‘burn fat’ during exercise wouldn’t be shredded. Basically, they burn so many calories that they remain in balance and don’t gain any fat. So, while morning cardio probably provides some psychological benefits to bodybuilders who are programmed to do it that way, I can’t say that I think it will result in greater ‘real world’ fat loss, which is what matters."

I am an exercise physiologist and do agree with this for the most part.(above)
genetics com into play but still true.


"These guys are working from the assumption that it’s just a matter of calories in vs. calories out, period," Chris continued. "With that line of reasoning, they’d be forced to say that if I consume nothing but candy bars and Coca-Cola, and take in 100 calories less than maintenance, I’d lose weight. We know it’s not that simple. You also have to account for ratios of carbs, protein, and fat. Then there’s meal frequency too: From real world results we know you put down more muscle mass from 5 or 6 meals a day than from 3 meals a day. There are more things involved than just calories."


There are more things involved then just calories but his stance on this is directed toward nutrient dense foods, positive nitrogen balances, carbohydrate timing, etc. but the simple fact is that if you do not consume as many calories as your RMR and DEE require you will lose wieght, you will be more than likely malnourished, matter of fact I know of a girl here very recently that was diagnosed with malnutrition and anorexia and when I asked her what her diet was, she replied, "snickers bars, diet pop, and cigarettes" skinny as a rail.

I think I'll take Chris Aceto's word over Lyle Mcwhatshisface!

[Quil]

Remember 99% is diet!!!! You can get ripped without cardio.......

Maybe YOU can get ripped without cardio...but I don't believe for a second that I could. I agree that diet is key and the singlemost important aspect of cutting, but some of us simply must do cardio to cut.

[noexcuses88]

Maybe YOU can get ripped without cardio...but I don't believe for a second that I could. I agree that diet is key and the singlemost important aspect of cutting, but some of us simply must do cardio to cut.

I perfectly agree with you but what I think he was meaning to say was that your Diet must be in check first before you get into any regime

[Columbus]

most dont need it...........

[Quil]

I perfectly agree with you but what I think he was meaning to say was that your Diet must be in check first before you get into any regime

I don't know man...it says right there in his post "you can get ripped without cardio". Anyways...

I'm toying with this HIIT idea, but I do my cardio in the AM on an empty stomach, so I'm a little hesitant as far as how much muscle I'm going to lose. My diet is pretty well in check, but I've reached a plateau in my current cut, so I need something to jumpstart it again. I guess it couldn't hurt to try for a week or two and see how it goes...

[Quil]

most dont need it...........

I don't know that I'd even agree with that statement, but hey it's all good. I'm not splitting hairs here.

[NotSmall]

I don't know man...it says right there in his post "you can get ripped without cardio". Anyways...

I'm toying with this HIIT idea, but I do my cardio in the AM on an empty stomach, so I'm a little hesitant as far as how much muscle I'm going to lose. My diet is pretty well in check, but I've reached a plateau in my current cut, so I need something to jumpstart it again. I guess it couldn't hurt to try for a week or two and see how it goes...

I've just switched my AM cardio to HIIT for the same reason and I gotta say that it definitely revs you up for longer afterwards, I cool down fairly quick after normal 60-70% cardio but after HIIT I'm sweating for ages!

[Columbus]

Seriously, have you ever tried to get shredded or even sub 10% without cardio? Cardio has it's benefits, heart and health wise and also helps to get pretty lean, but at the expense of losing SOME mass along the way......all I was saying was that if your diet is in check, you train hard, etc....youi CAN get pretty damn lean..........many competors dont do it unti the last few stages to really get down to sub numbers....

[noexcuses88]

I've just switched my AM cardio to HIIT for the same reason and I gotta say that it definitely revs you up for longer afterwards, I cool down fairly quick after normal 60-70% cardio but after HIIT I'm sweating for ages!

I have been doing both hiit and regular cardio. 3-4 times a week of reg. cardio(45mins) and 2-3 times hiit. I haven't had any significant weight loss yet but I will give it another 2 weeks. I got my plan from

http://sparkpeople.com/resource/Fitn...les.asp?id=621

The chart makes you sprint for 1 min which I think is insane but I do it anyway.

As for the diet "end all be all" statement, not all of us are as fortunate to be blessed with a lighting speed metabolism.

[Quil]

As for the diet "end all be all" statement, not all of us are as fortunate to be blessed with a lighting speed metabolism.

That's what I'm saying...believe me, I am strict on my diet, which is clean, and I drink up to 2 gallons of water a day. My metablolism just moves at a snails pace. I can't really see how to get my diet much cleaner, and if I dropped cardio out of the equation altogether, I can't see how in the world I would cut up. I think the people that are able to cut without doing regular cardio are probably (mostly) the same people that are hardgainers when it comes to putting on mass...which is not my problem at all. I have a large framewith broad shoulders and somewhat long legs that is suitable for putting on mass, but it's an act of congress to get the fat off.

I'm going to try the HIIT out starting next week. I keep a log of my weight and measurements so I should be able to tell pretty quickly whether it's having the desired effect or if I'm withering and my strength numbers are going down.

Good discussion in this thread...sorry I joined the party so late.

[noexcuses88]

That's what I'm saying...believe me, I am strict on my diet, which is clean, and I drink up to 2 gallons of water a day. My metablolism just moves at a snails pace. I can't really see how to get my diet much cleaner, and if I dropped cardio out of the equation altogether, I can't see how in the world I would cut up. I think the people that are able to cut without doing regular cardio are probably (mostly) the same people that are hardgainers when it comes to putting on mass...which is not my problem at all. I have a large framewith broad shoulders and somewhat long legs that is suitable for putting on mass, but it's an act of congress to get the fat off.

I'm going to try the HIIT out starting next week. I keep a log of my weight and measurements so I should be able to tell pretty quickly whether it's having the desired effect or if I'm withering and my strength numbers are going down.

Good discussion in this thread...sorry I joined the party so late.

Thanks for that. I am really interested in seeing what progress you get with the hiit program. Do you mind posting ur initial measurements and your measurements when you see a change happen? I also have a large frame also and Loosing weight feels damn near impossible. I haven't seen much of a change in the last week of hit. I am interested in seeing how that turns out for you

[noexcuses88]

I've just switched my AM cardio to HIIT for the same reason and I gotta say that it definitely revs you up for longer afterwards, I cool down fairly quick after normal 60-70% cardio but after HIIT I'm sweating for ages!

I also read in multiple articles that hiit should be done after your workout b/c it helps reach your vO2 max and helps further facilitate the fat burning progress. I believe there are more benefits doing hiit after your workout b/c your body will be in more fatuigue. They say it takes about 30mins even on a empty to burn fat calories going 60to 70% of your heart rate (references below). That is why hiit is so effective.

This link has a chart of compassions b/t conventional cardio and hiit. Scientific measurements and results on a 8 week cycle. It is worth the read.
http://www.exrx.net/FatLoss/HIITvsET.html

[Quil]

Thats an interesting chart...

I'd be glad to post some of the numbers I come up with here in a week or two. Now I just need to refine how I'm going to approach the HIIT. I've done it before where I sprint for one minute and then walk for one minute, but I've been reading where you should walk until you reach about 130bpm before sprinting again. Any thoughts on which approach would be better?

[noexcuses88]

Thats an interesting chart...

I'd be glad to post some of the numbers I come up with here in a week or two. Now I just need to refine how I'm going to approach the HIIT. I've done it before where I sprint for one minute and then walk for one minute, but I've been reading where you should walk until you reach about 130bpm before sprinting again. Any thoughts on which approach would be better?

With hiit we are supposed to get our heart rate down to 140 or less during the recovery period. 60-70% of MHR. If you are anything like me, It will be impossible to get ur bpm down to 130 in a minute. This site has a really neat chart.

http://sparkpeople.com/resource/Fitn...les.asp?id=621

I am currently using this one. I am able to get my bpm down to 130ish during the recovery period. I do this by walking at a decent pace. If you are in better condition, a light jog could bring it down as well. It is a 4 minute recovery period so it should be easy to get ur heart down.

[Quil]

OK cool, that gives me a good foundation. I don't think it will take me 4 minutes to get back down to 70% MHR, so I may end up with a couple more sprints in there, but basically it will be the same. I wonder if doing this 4 times a week will be too much...I'm in good cardio shape now, and I had been doing some interval training 2 times a week previously. I may try 4 and see how I feel.

[Ronnie Rowland]

It all ***ends on the diet!!! If you are on a low carb diet or a timed carb diet then use moderate intensity cardio. HIIT is fine if you arent dropping carbs or fats only or you are cutting carbs and fats together.