Re: Re: SUS 250 diet

Home / Forums / Pharmaceutica / SUS 250 diet / Re: Re: SUS 250 diet

June 3, 2011 at 10:48 am #9035

below is an article that supports your ‘I hate cardio’ idea

EPOC is Excess post-exercise oxygen consumption or AFTERBURN! :mrgreen:

Steady State Cardio: Sucks Worse than Yoga

Not to beat a dead horse, but steady state cardio/aerobics isn’t the most efficient way to burn body fat. I like lists, so I’m going to use a list to prove my point.

1) Steady state cardio doesn’t elevate EPOC all that much, which again is one of the main factors in fat loss. Sure, one hour of steady state cardio will probably burn more calories than one hour of resistance training, but it’s the calories you burn in the other 23 hours outside of the gym that really matter.

Essentially, once you’re done doing steady state cardio, you’re done burning calories. However, with resistance training and/or with high intensity interval training (HIIT), your body’s metabolism will be elevated for upwards of 24 to 48 hours. Thus, you’ll burn a ton more calories. best to do a 20 minute HIIT straight after the weights.

2) Speaking of metabolism, yours is in direct correlation with how much LBM (lean body mass) you have. The more LBM you have, the higher your metabolism. Given that long duration, steady state cardio actually eats away muscle; you’re shooting yourself in the foot in that regard.

3) The “fat burning zone” doesn’t exist. It’s true that your body will burn a greater percentage of fat at lower intensities; however, the total calories being burned is so small that it doesn’t even really matter. Again, it all comes down to EPOC.

4) As Alwyn Cosgrove has pointed out on numerous occasions, your body adapts very well to cardiovascular exercise (in this case, steady state cardio). This is a bad thing. As you get more efficient at running a certain distance, the work required to complete that distance will become less and less as you get fitter.

To improve, you have to go further in order to burn the same amount of calories. What once took you 30 minutes to burn “X” amount of calories, now takes you 45 minutes. Doesn’t sound too efficient in my book.

5) A great analogy I like to use is comparing a marathon runner to a sprinter. Marathon runners do a ton of long distance, steady state work ie tradmill, and yet still average anywhere from 11 to 14% body fat (still somewhat lean, but not very muscular at all. Many of them still have the “skinny-fat” look).

On the other hand, sprinters do anywhere from 10 to 120 seconds of “work” and yet average 6 to 8% body fat. Just goes to show that short, intense bursts of energy (anaerobic work) is generally far superior to longer, less intense bursts of energy (aerobic) when taking body composition into consideration.

6) The majority of your fat loss should come via diet, not copious amounts of steady state cardio/aerobics. From a time efficiency standpoint, which makes more sense? Not eating that bowl of cereal at night (300-500 calories) or spending 60 minutes on a treadmill to burn that same 300-500 calories every single day?

7) Steady state cardio/aerobics does little to change how your body looks. Sure, you may lose 20 pounds, but you’ll still be the same “shape.” You won’t look leaner, only smaller (not to mention weaker).

8) Lets be honest, do you really enjoy spending 45-60 minutes on one piece of equipment?

9) Cardio helps increase blood flow to the muscles and heart. This in turn helps you to feel good physically and mentally. It also helps you perform better in the gym. HIIT strengthens the heart and cardio system in short burts.