Confusion or Why I only listen to my coach concerning cardio

[HoustonTXMuscle]

While stocking up on groceries this morning, picked up the latest issue of MD mainly for the Mr. O preview. What I really found interesting were two articles that dealt with cardio. The first (page 100) concerned training intensity and fat loss. The second (page 252) dealt with putting the myth to rest concerning fasted cardio in the morning burning more fat. This is just another glaring example of contradicting information. Having served on the editorial boards of two scientific journals, I personally found this unbelievable! Surely the senior editors must talk to each other and should have caught this. Or are they too busy re: ads for supplements, etc. Aside from that, it's not surprising that many of the same questions, particularly with regard to cardio, keep popping up in these forums. No wonder individuals often have a problem with a particular regimen due to the fact that one can always find some one telling them to do just the opposite. As I'm paying my coach, I'm going to continue doing fasted LISS cardio, and ignore all others. It's worked for me and seems in-line with my goals. According to my stats which are measured weekly it also hasn't contributed to lean muscle loss.

[Taur]

It's worked for me and seems in-line with my goals.

Here I have condensed your entire post to everything you need to know.


That is what makes this game of Bodybuilding so great. Everyone is different and it is up to you to find what works for your body. This is why you can have information that seems to contradict each other; what will work for one person will not work for another person. You have to experiment through trial and error to find out what your body will repond to. Sorry, no one book is going to tell you what your particular body will or will not repond to, you can't pay someone to magically come up with a routine immediately for you; it is all trial and error and takes a lifetime to learn. And then, once you think you know what works BAMMMMM.... Plateau, then nothing seems to be working and it is back to the drawing board.

This game takes a lifetime to master.

[Taur]

Funny, I remember a program called Cybergenics from I think the Late 80s that had you doing your entire workout routine early in the morning after fasting all night long. This was way before the current PreWorkout drinks and from what I remember it was based on all kinds of so called Scientific evidence.

Call me a sucker because I bought one of these 90 day boxes. My system just could not handle working out on an empty stomach.

[HoustonTXMuscle]

Actually, I could have condensed my original post to that rather trite phrase: "Don't believe anything you read or hear and only half of what you see." Brought the subject up, as I found it rather hilarious that two articles (not column fillers) in a single issue in essence presented views that were diametrically opposite; resolving nothing. Too often, one assumes that because information has been committed to words that it is automatically true. And don't believe everything you read.

[ljimd]

Here I have condensed your entire post to everything you need to know.


That is what makes this game of Bodybuilding so great. Everyone is different and it is up to you to find what works for your body. This is why you can have information that seems to contradict each other; what will work for one person will not work for another person. You have to experiment through trial and error to find out what your body will repond to. Sorry, no one book is going to tell you what your particular body will or will not repond to, you can't pay someone to magically come up with a routine immediately for you; it is all trial and error and takes a lifetime to learn. And then, once you think you know what works BAMMMMM.... Plateau, then nothing seems to be working and it is back to the drawing board.

This game takes a lifetime to master.

I've been preachin' this ^^^^^ for a long time. Most want to be force fed a single rigid means to an end.

Actually, I could have condensed my original post to that rather trite phrase: "Don't believe anything you read or hear and only half of what you see." Brought the subject up, as I found it rather hilarious that two articles (not column fillers) in a single issue in essence presented views that were diametrically opposite; resolving nothing. Too often, one assume that because information has been committed to words that it is automatically true. And don't believe everything you read.

Good catch. How many folks devour every word of those mags as gospel?

[hazto]

I agree, not one type of cardio gets the same results for everyone. To change things up I just tried hit for 4 weeks with no results. When I do liss I always see results.

[DubfromGA]

Guess those editors were doing what it takes to sell copy and generate more funds from supplement manfs adds. I swear it seems that 95% of most muscle mags are supplement adds. ARGGHHHHH.




LISS is what I prefer.

My schedule dictates when I do it.

I prefer to do it separately from lifting but sometimes due to scheduling I do so immediately following lifting. Is this a huge blunder on muscle gains?


I've got so much fat to burn.

[pbohart]

I will add one sub bullet to the "everyone is different, do what works for you" piece of briliant advice.

That is - Determine a routine, then STICK WITH IT for at least 3-4 months before you make a change. My problem is I am new - so I am highly influenced by publications and advice from BB.com. I read a good piece of advice and I try it out. Before I give it a decent amount of time to determine if it is working or not - I read another piece of contradicting information and change-up my routine. This is nonsense on my part.

I have been doing HIIT for a long time based on an article I read form Alwyn Cosgrove called "The Hierarchy of Fat Loss". I am no longer in the phase where "fat loss" is my primary motivation. Now my primary motivation is muscle building and preserving gains. As such - I am going to move to longer LISS sessions to try and preserve my gains vs. HIIT.

AND....I am going to stick with it for 4 months so I can make a real evaluation on if it is working or not!

[ArchAngel'73]

I read that very same issue and didn't get confused.
If memory serves me correctly the bottom line of both of those articles is what matters most when doing cardio for fat burning is not the time but the intensity of the cardio.
MD has also consistantly blasted the sh*t out of fasted state cardio and keto dieting.

I'm not arguing here, just offering my perspective on MD.
This mag blows anything else out of the water. They have consistant published research findings, often with the same topics presented in each seperate issue so the reader can read the study results and then read another on a related topic.


For example, a few months ago they had research conclsusions from 3 seperate studies dealing with weight training in older men.
Conclusion...volume training as we get older is more beneficial than intensity.

[michail71]

I read that very same issue and didn't get confused.
If memory serves me correctly the bottom line of both of those articles is what matters most when doing cardio for fat burning is not the time but the intensity of the cardio.
MD has also consistantly blasted the sh*t out of fasted state cardio and keto dieting.

What about IF dieting? I also see conflicting discussions here on interval/intensity cardio. It all gets so confusing with the conflicting studies and opinions on here.

All I know is I'll feel terrible if exercising fasted.

[ArchAngel'73]

What about IF dieting? I also see conflicting discussions here on interval/intensity cardio. It all gets so confusing with the conflicting studies and opinions on here.

All I know is I'll feel terrible if exercising fasted.

IF as in intermittant fasting?
I haven't read much on that, not saying its not out there. IMO, carb cycling is more effective than IF.

I have done fasted everything, cardio and weight training. Non-fasted got me more results.

[bigtallox]

If memory serves me correctly the bottom line of both of those articles is what matters most when doing cardio for fat burning is not the time but the intensity of the cardio.

For what it's worth, my experience doing strongman type cardio supports that, it's not the time but the intensity.

For example, a few months ago they had research conclsusions from 3 seperate studies dealing with weight training in older men.
Conclusion...volume training as we get older is more beneficial than intensity.

But my experience doesn't support that. Guess I'm not an "older man" yet.

[ArchAngel'73]

For what it's worth, my experience doing strongman type cardio supports that, it's not the time but the intensity.




But my experience doesn't support that. Guess I'm not an "older man" yet.

Of course your posts are worth something bro.

For what its worth, those studies pertained to hypertrophy, not strength training, and I'm not surprised your experience doesn't support that.

[bigtallox]

those studies pertained to hypertrophy, not strength training

I was referring to my gym sessions. Overhead pressing, squatting, deadlifting, cleans, etc can't be for hypertrophy? Maybe I'm just not advanced enough but I don't see where hypertrophy ends and strength training begins ( but then again, I don't think my pro strongman training buddy/coach does either ).

[Diev]

I have always been a subscriber to the old cliche that "there is more than one way to skin a cat". Just because 2 different people recommend 2 different approaches it doesn't necessarily mean that one is right and one is wrong. Both methods could be equally effective.

I read this analogy somewhere not long ago, picture 4 men (or women) walking towards a town, one is coming from the North, one is coming from the South, 1 from East, 1 from the West.

All 4 people are travelling in different directions (using different approaches) yet all are still moving forward towards their goal.

Surely any cardio is better than no cardio?

[HoustonTXMuscle]

I read that very same issue and didn't get confused.
If memory serves me correctly the bottom line of both of those articles is what matters most when doing cardio for fat burning is not the time but the intensity of the cardio.
MD has also consistantly blasted the sh*t out of fasted state cardio and keto dieting.

I'm not arguing here, just offering my perspective on MD.
This mag blows anything else out of the water. They have consistant published research findings, often with the same topics presented in each seperate issue so the reader can read the study results and then read another on a related topic.


For example, a few months ago they had research conclsusions from 3 seperate studies dealing with weight training in older men.
Conclusion...volume training as we get older is more beneficial than intensity.

Perhaps I should have avoided the use of the word, "confusion", in the title of this thread. Nine months ago, had I read both articles I certainly would have been confused. Your assessment is correct. Furthermore, I found both articles are well written and referenced. However, reading the first article, the final paragraph states: "Take advantage of the only time of the day that one is truly in a fasted state, right after waking up, to maximize the mobilization of stored fat from the fat cells." The second article (which reviews several recent articles) concludes by stating: "In sum the review article does not support cardio in the morning on an empty stomach for enhanced fat loss. Additionally training on an empty stomach accelerates muscle tissue brakdown--which may be considered counterproductive for fat loss." From my perspective, I felt that a beginner, (and I consider myself a student and certainly not as experienced as you) having read both articles would be totally confused and left wondering "Okay, which way is it?"

[Kraken]

This happens on bbing.com too. Ever read some of the articles written for the website? Some of them look like they have been written by children, and some of them have been. There are hundreds of contradicting articles on this website. I see how having two articles in the same rag can be even more crazy though.

Several years ago I was on this website and learned very little. I found myself simply arguing with people and learned that most forums just seem to follow a single though process on everything. Now, having matured considerably, have more training, research and experience with me, and being able to weed though a lot, I am learning a lot more this time around and spending less time arguing because I choose to ignore certain things.

On a last note, I think I made a post a few months back about an article I read in MD, where the writer was answering a question from a reader about how to improve his diet for strength. The writer explained how he would benefit from sodium added to his diet, which is somewhat true, and then re-wrote and entire diet for him. Oh, his revised diet? It was exactly the same as the reader's original diet, he just added "add salt" to every meal. I was thinking, 'strong work, moron, you did nothing to help this guy'. Why did he even bother re-writing the diet, almost like he wanted people to think he vested time in to helping the reader. Oh, he threw in a name brand of salt too, making it look even more fake

[jayluk4600]

I lifted for over 23 yrs and only maybe once did I read anything about weightlifting. I knew these following simple things.. I had to train hard and heavy to get bigger and stronger. Lighter weight and higher reps is not a bad thing but not ideal for gaining muscle mostly endurance. I had to eat lots of protein and a fairly healthy diet rich in everything I need ( I knew the basics about foods)

Everything I did learn was from my HS football coach (not much) and some 30 yr old weightlifting book I had never returned to the library. Now after coming to these forums I have learned quite a bit more espec about diet and calories and how simple it is to lose or gain weight.

I never once picked up a muscle mag or read the latest findings in some medical journal, I seemed to do ok. In those years I packed on muscle and size and kept it simple. So much stuff is so overcomplicated it just does not concern me. I reckon if you compete in shows or powerlifting or strongman every edge is helpful but in the end it boils down to the simplest of things.

I am not bashing anyone who reads everything they get their hands on, heck thats prob better then how I go about it. Just saying how i been doing the last 23-24 yrs.

[jayluk4600]

Above I strayed from the topic and I apologize for that, but the same thing for cardio, the harder you do cardio the more calories and fat your gonna burn. Makes sense to me. I knew that without 10 medical and weightlifting mag articles to tell me that. Are people out there that clueless to the basics of most things they need it spoon fed over and over and over ?