confused- obese newbie training (lifting vs cardio)

[minxywildkat]

Just wanted to say good for you for getting back into the lyfestyle. Stick with it even when your feeling your lowest hit it harder. You will do it

Hello ladies!

Now I've taken some time to look around the female section and I've gathered that eating right and lifting heavy are both extremely important. My question is about cardio. I'm notably heavy at 5'3 c. 265 lbs now. I'm returning to exercise after a long stretch that includes depression (toughest fight to date) and of a lot of weight gain rather quickly plus a crazy sedentary lifestyle that I'm working on changing.

I'm not afraid to work hard or get in there. I'm not afraid to lift or "get bulky".

But in my current shape and trying to get some sense of feeling normal again isn't cardio really important for me too?
I keep seeing advice through this site saying you don't need cardio but..

with so much extra body fat to lose, I'm just afraid of doing this "3x a week" lifting and diet and the weight coming off so slowly that I get discouraged. I understand you're not supposed to lose weight too fast but I'm not at my body's "set point" or average weight (if that makes any sense). I don't feel right, its affecting the rest of my life and I'm just at a "you know.. I'm done with the fat thing" point.

so just so you know, I'm on keto and it's working for me (I feel best on it as well). And as of right now, just had my 1st week back at the gym and it felt great.

it it my goal to shed a lot of body fat and as it comes off, a strong, fit frame emerges. I'm not looking to be just a smaller version of my current shape. And anyway I know gaining muscle helps me burn fat faster.. so how do I incorporate cardio or is the consensus still "just don't"

I'm ready to work, I just don't know what to focus on to build a strong exercise program for myself. Trying to carve out my inner rockstar here

open to your suggestions everyone
thanks so much for reading!

ps - new rules of lifting for women / and or nrol for abs.. was thinking of taking a look-see @ my local B&N. an amazon reviewer said that someone like me with so much to lose shouldn't bother with this book .. what do you guys think?

[gwnorth]

i am.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17101527



so yeah, you do an hour or steady state, and burn 300 cals + 7% EPOC (21 calories) = 321 calories
or you do 20 mins of intervals and burn 150 cals + 15% EPOC (22.5 calories) = 172.5 calories

which one is more calories and less stressful to the body?



i don't give a toss what she believed, that's no base for writing articles about the evils of cardio. what's the last time you had a look at professional marathon runners? few fat chicks there.

...

really, i don't understand what your beef with cardio is. i've been a cardio-running skinny-fat chick, too, and never got anywhere with it. that had little to do with the cardio. it had all to do with the retarded sht that determined my so-called 'weight training and diet'.

i just don't see the point of telling an obese, sedentary person that it's okay to do some walking and such, but that it has no effect on her fat loss.

here





now, if you want a longer answer -

cardio is nothing but a tool in a toolbox. i'm not getting into the purported health aspects here, but in terms of fat loss all any extra expended energy does, is create/add to an energy deficit. the body doesn't care whether you created that deficit through diet or exercise (or both). it senses a deficit, and burns fat to make up for it. simple as.

whether or not cardio is needed, DEPENDS ON THE CONTEXT - lifestyle, NEAT, basal metabolism, bodyweight et cetera. if you can do without, fantastic. if you feel you want to do a bit more cardio in order to create a bigger deficit, or eat more, then go for it. just make sure you actually do maintain a deficit.

in other words, KNOW what you are doing. not merely ASSUME what you're doing. easier said than done, of course.

a slightly unrelated rant on my part is the thing is that the majority of people who love to piss on cardio seem to be reformed cardioholics, who have been doing cardio for all the wrong reasons in combination with an inadequate training regime and a crappy diet. but now they have seen the light, and there is no reason at all cardio should be done, ever, by anyone, because they fuked up themselves. great. that's their context, but it has nothing to do with the effects of cardio itself.

cardio doesn't make you 'toned'. cardio doesn't build lean mass. cardio doesn't make you lose fat, if you eat all the calories + more back.

that has nothing to do with what cardio actually does = it burns calories. what happens nexts DEPENDS ON THE CONTEXT.

so yeah, if the context is a skinny-fat chick who does 1hr cardio 6 days a week and wants to 'tone', then of course she needs to drop the cardio, because she needs to build mass. cardio doesn't aid in that. an obese person who wants to lose fat can apply cardio because she needs to lose fat

the other thing is that TOO MUCH cardio on TOO LITTLE calories does hinder fat loss, but not because of cardio per se, it is because the energy deficit is too big, and women don't do well on that (hormones out of whack, water retention etc.).

the third thing is that for all the HIIT whores here; HIIT - if done correctly - is a great stress to the body. combined with a deficit and decreased recovery, HIIT can and does blow people up (see chicks who do HIIT 3-4 days a week. ouch.). low-intensity SS doesn't do that. plus, sprints were originally implemented to help improve anaerobic threshold in relation to endurance training and intervals do come with a distinct point of diminishing returns (in terms of effectiveness) as the body adapts to it. doesn't happen to the same degree with SS.

you know all that. so what's the answer? the answer is that IT DEPENDS ON THE CONTEXT. not that 'cardio is useless' and shouldn't be used and doesn't aid in fat loss.

that's just plain dogmatic, and i did find it odd you'd post the same misconstructed t-mag article after we had a comparable exchange a few years back.

that's all

Repped you. Some strong solid advice.

[tresjjjolie]

Just wanted to say good for you for getting back into the lyfestyle. Stick with it even when your feeling your lowest hit it harder. You will do it

thanks a lot for the encouragement

and once again thanks to everyone in this thread for the input
it doesn't fall on deaf ears!

[Cytrainer913]

OP, I hope you don't mind my jumping in on your thread.

Dear freebirdmac and other readers,

I too have cardio questions. I am also obese. Besides dropping the excess bodyfat I'm been carrying for decades I also want to rebuilt the muscles I lost while being away from the gym for a year (our family life was turned upsidedown when my brother substained a spinal cord injury and four months later I fell and substained a nondisplaced tibial plateau fracture).

I am currenly working with a personal trainer once a week. He has me doing cardio on the recumbent bike (currently 30 minute sessions but he wants me to increase it to 40 minutes) three times a week. I also do 30 minutes of walking five days a week (due to taking public transit).

I have a lot of bodyfat that I need to drop but I don't want to do in a stupid manner that impares my health (I am living with an indolent lymphoma -- I've been on low weekly doses of oral chemo since 1998 -- and type 2 diabetes -- Dx in 2008).

Because I'm also on a statin and a beta blocker (my doctor does this with all his diabetic patients), I'm wondering if doing more cardio will improve my heart health? And maybe I can get off these meds?

I know diet is a huge issue in improving my health. After an ultrasound for another issue which turned out to be nothing, I was told that I have a fatty liver. I'm guessing that the main reason for this condition is due to poor dietary choices on my part, but some of it is due to a side effect of the chemo.

Thanks for your thoughts on this.

Shire

Please tell me you are not paying someone for sessions where you sit on the bike for an entire session? You can do that on your own, get you moving off of the bike

[kmp411]

Repped you. Some strong solid advice.

Very solid advice

[freebirdmac]

For the record, I have never been a cardio queen. Or even a cardio peon. My cardio always came from sports related activities. I simply do not waste my time using cardio for fat loss. Second, be realistic. It takes hours and hours of cardio to lose 1 pound. And that 1 pound can easily be a combination of fat and lean muscle. Third, it is diet, diet , diet that controls your gains and losses. Fourth, lifting weights not only helps create a caloric deficit but unlike cardio can spare muscle loss and can result in muscle gains while on a deficit. Fifth, gaining muscle while at a deficit is easier for newbies, harder for the trained. Add hours of cardio in and even a newbie is going to run out of gas and the ability to properly recover.

If anyone wants more in depth reading, see Lyle McDonald's many articles, including training the obese beginner. http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat...ss-part-1.html (part I has a nice chart) and http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat...-beginner.html.

Diet, diet, diet + lifting is all that is needed. Walking or other light cardio activities are good for active recovery. Save your performance goals for when you can nutritionally support them.

[Miranda]

It takes hours and hours of cardio to lose 1 pound. And that 1 pound can easily be a combination of fat and lean muscle. Third, it is diet, diet , diet that controls your gains and losses. Fourth, lifting weights not only helps create a caloric deficit but unlike cardio can spare muscle loss and can result in muscle gains while on a deficit. Fifth, gaining muscle while at a deficit is easier for newbies, harder for the trained. Add hours of cardio in and even a newbie is going to run out of gas and the ability to properly recover.

indeed. do you feel anyone has disputed this?

no-one's suggested 'hours and hours' of cardio, or said ALL fat loss should come from cardio, or said anything about the benefits of weight training on a diet. no-one's suggested too much or too intense cardio doesn't impact recovery and is hence detrimental to progress.

strawmen don't add anything to the debate.

[Cytrainer913]

For the record, I have never been a cardio queen. Or even a cardio peon. My cardio always came from sports related activities. I simply do not waste my time using cardio for fat loss. Second, be realistic. It takes hours and hours of cardio to lose 1 pound. And that 1 pound can easily be a combination of fat and lean muscle. Third, it is diet, diet , diet that controls your gains and losses. Fourth, lifting weights not only helps create a caloric deficit but unlike cardio can spare muscle loss and can result in muscle gains while on a deficit. Fifth, gaining muscle while at a deficit is easier for newbies, harder for the trained. Add hours of cardio in and even a newbie is going to run out of gas and the ability to properly recover.

If anyone wants more in depth reading, see Lyle McDonald's many articles, including training the obese beginner. http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat...ss-part-1.html (part I has a nice chart) and http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat...-beginner.html.

Diet, diet, diet + lifting is all that is needed. Walking or other light cardio activities are good for active recovery. Save your performance goals for when you can nutritionally support them.

This type of cardio only training can also add to drops in metabolism and drops in strength as well, thus muscle loss can happen overtime as well. And muscle is the most important thing to keep that metabolism up. Dieting should be about losing Bodyfat, not just weight, no matter what the size of the individual. And with women that need to lose a good amount of weight, the weight training can help to maintain the muscle and metabolism. If the muscle starts to go, so does bone mass, so always keep that weight training in your program, no matter what your weight, sex, or age is.

I always say if you listed in importance for the three things to help one lose fat, the order is this
1. DIET-most important
2. weight training
3. I look at this part, the cardio, as very body type dependent, and the necssary evil thrown in when it is really needed and the 1st two are kind of at a standstill. So this yes, I believe is a small part of the equation and bigger and bigger as the body type slides more towards the endomorph side of things.

[freebirdmac]

indeed. do you feel anyone has disputed this?

no-one's suggested 'hours and hours' of cardio, nor said ALL fat loss should come from cardio, nor said anything about the benefits of weight training on a diet, nor suggested too much or too intense cardio doesn't impact recovery and is hence detrimental to progress.

strawmen don't add anything to the debate.

Miranda, your posts were contradictory and it was difficult to ascertain what point you were trying to make. You don't like the citations, fine. That much I get. We've argued them before. That is done. It's pointless to rehash them. Move on and please tell the OP what she should do.

[Miranda]

it was difficult to ascertain what point you were trying to make.

the way i see it -

your point: cardio is useless for fat loss.
my point: it depends.

'cardio is useless for fat loss' is an absolute statement. you defend it by posting clearly biased anecdotal evidence, and articles that exaggerate the importance of EPOC.

i've read lyle's above articles, and i agree with them, for what that's worth. however, if you read them clearly, nowhere does he state that cardio is 'useless'; rather than that is has a lot smaller effect on fat loss than people commonly believe. hence, if you think cardio is *magic* you are clearly misguided.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/res...ch-review.html

What I didn’t really address in the Training the Obese Beginner series is that, for some people, adding exercise works stunningly to generate fat loss. That is, while the average response is often poor, averages tend to mask individual responses. Some people do great but others do not. Raising the question of what the individual differences between folks are.

he makes the point that [obese] beginners cannot generate the same calorie burn as advanced or elite trainees due to their poor overall fitness. to increase fitness, clearly, it is a good idea to exercise more. no-one becomes fitter by sitting all day and eating at a deficit as far as i know.

of course strength training is important, but much as beginners do poorly with aerobic exercise, they don't excel in the weight room. they need to learn to do the exercises properly, and they can't work at an intensity required to generate response, often due to poor overall fitness. [the same reason the intensity required to get desired response from sprints is beyond beginners and unfit people.] walking for 'recovery' from a weights session in the beginning especially is moot.

so, the OP could start with 1-2 weights sessions to learn the ropes, and walk at a sustainable yet a push-a-bit intensity 3-5 x week. it helps stimulate fat-burning pathways, it burns a few calories , and it can help adherence (highly individual). as she becomes fitter, she can up the intensity, or reassess where she's at and see from there.

[freebirdmac]

the way i see it -

your point: cardio is useless for fat loss.
my point: it depends.

'cardio is useless for fat loss' is an absolute statement. you defend it by posting clearly biased anecdotal evidence, and articles that exaggerate the importance of EPOC.

i've read lyle's above articles, and i agree with them, for what that's worth. however, if you read them clearly, nowhere does he state that cardio is 'useless'; rather than that is has a lot smaller effect on fat loss than people commonly believe. hence, if you think cardio is *magic* you are clearly misguided.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/res...ch-review.html

Actually, I am quite comfortable saying cardio is not needed at all for fat loss without any citations and do so frequently. I did so here for the OP and provided what I called fun reading for another poster. Regardless of your opinion on my opinion or the citations, why can't you simply answer the OP's question giving your own take on what's best?

For the record I have never said 'cardio is useless for fat loss' in this or any other thread. You're arguing on an absolute statement that was never made.

[Miranda]

cardio is not needed at all for fat loss[...]I have never said 'cardio is useless for fat loss' in this or any other thread.

semantics.

for the record, feel free to say what you want, but the article you think is 'fun' reading is so badly put together and doesn't prove anything i can't but help to react to it. clearly that's my problem, but for a woman of your calibre, t-nation and its affiliates aren't exactly recommended reading, as much as they strengthen dearly held beliefs.

why can't you simply answer the OP's question giving your own take on what's best?

i did. it's above your reply. i posted, wanted to edit a typo, and the computer destroyed it.

[bosgirlin09]

My experience training obese/unconditioned clients is that their overall lack of fitness hinders their training in the weight room (obviously). When I advise cardio (and I do for all obese clients, and no, it should never be during personal training time!) it's not primarily for the added energy deficit (though it can't hurt), but to increase their fitness/endurance for training. Many obese clients, because they are pretty sedentary to begin with, find the cardio does help with recovery.

On another note, it is nearly impossible for anyone to gain mucle in a catabolic state, however it's achieved. So the OP doesn't really need to worry about cardio taking away from her strength/muscle gains. If her goal is to lose fat, then that it the primary goal. However, you can "prime the pump" by learning proper training technique, improving neuromuscular connections, increasing muscle endurance, etc. Once the fat is lost, the body is in a great place to start building some good lean mass

[shirehobbit]

Please tell me you are not paying someone for sessions where you sit on the bike for an entire session? You can do that on your own, get you moving off of the bike

Rest assured, I am not. I ride the bike on my own time.

[freebirdmac]

semantics.

for the record, feel free to say what you want, but the article you think is 'fun' reading is so badly put together and doesn't prove anything i can't but help to react to it. clearly that's my problem, but for a woman of your calibre, t-nation and its affiliates aren't exactly recommended reading, as much as they strengthen dearly held beliefs.



i did. it's above your reply. i posted, wanted to edit a typo, and the computer destroyed it.

You were using "sematics" to start a debate. And they are not the same.

Your "stupid reading", "strawman" and "misconstrued" editorials are petty. Why even have a forum? Any comments made by anyone would fall under the same category with your reasoning. Why take note of your earlier post with some good points and some contradictions? You can't even trust studies on PubMed as many are done poorly and have funding sources influencing the outcome. You also seemed to miss the post to whom the references were given. That person, not the OP, asked a related question and specifically stated that she wanted to rebuild lost muscle mass.

I like the T-Nation article. It hits on the mixing of goals as well as the over estimation of calories burned. The author isn't a newbie. She has diet and training experience. She started with an already fit, athletic, and muscular body. Yet she was surprised at what she looked like after her competition. If an experienced person can go through this, hell yes a newbie can learn sometime from it. Sometimes it's not so much about the nitty gritty details as it is about the global idea. Her article is no different than someone posting their experiences here.

So your exercise advice is lift 1-2x week and cardio 3-5x a week versus my lift 3x week and active recovery 1-2x week. The choice is up to the OP.

[Cytrainer913]

Rest assured, I am not. I ride the bike on my own time.

it's the way you wrote it then, there are trainers out there that do this

[Miranda]

Your "stupid reading", "strawman" and "misconstrued" editorials are petty. Why even have a forum? Any comments made by anyone would fall under the same category with your reasoning.

why are you inflamed over this? there are several ways to influence people, perpetrate myths, and state opinions as fact. people use strawmen and other logical fallacies, and post irrelevant links in discussion. others point them out.

You can't even trust studies on PubMed as many are done poorly and have funding sources influencing the outcome.

this is a good example. fact: a number of studies indexed on pubmed are done poorly. fallacy: you can't trust [any studies on] pubmed.

does it follow pubmed shouldn't be used? prefer use something like 'rachel hits the final nail on the cardio coffin?'

pubmed is nothing but a database, and same studies and abstracts can be found elsewhere, too. many well-respected authors in the fitness field reference and search pubmed. not because it is 'pubmed' but because it is easily accessible.

of course it is recommended to read the actual study yourself if possible, but a throwaway 'you can't even trust pubmed' is nothing but, well, misguided opinion stated as fact.

I like the T-Nation article. It hits on the mixing of goals as well as the over estimation of calories burned. The author isn't a newbie. She has diet and training experience. She started with an already fit, athletic, and muscular body. Yet she was surprised at what she looked like after her competition. If an experienced person can go through this, hell yes a newbie can learn sometime from it. Sometimes it's not so much about the nitty gritty details as it is about the global idea. Her article is no different than someone posting their experiences here.

this is about the third time you've posted that article to support your opinion on cardio. i've dissected its flaws before. either you missed my reply, or disregarded it.

either way, why don't YOU tell exactly HOW the article supports that cardio, if applied intelligently to a fat loss regime, does not aid in fat loss?

[Emma-Leigh]

now, if you want a longer answer -

cardio is nothing but a tool in a toolbox. i'm not getting into the purported health aspects here, but in terms of fat loss all any extra expended energy does, is create/add to an energy deficit. the body doesn't care whether you created that deficit through diet or exercise (or both). it senses a deficit, and burns fat to make up for it. simple as.

whether or not cardio is needed, DEPENDS ON THE CONTEXT - lifestyle, NEAT, basal metabolism, bodyweight et cetera. if you can do without, fantastic. if you feel you want to do a bit more cardio in order to create a bigger deficit, or eat more, then go for it. just make sure you actually do maintain a deficit.

in other words, KNOW what you are doing. not merely ASSUME what you're doing. easier said than done, of course.

a slightly unrelated rant on my part is the thing is that the majority of people who love to piss on cardio seem to be reformed cardioholics, who have been doing cardio for all the wrong reasons in combination with an inadequate training regime and a crappy diet. but now they have seen the light, and there is no reason at all cardio should be done, ever, by anyone, because they fuked up themselves. great. that's their context, but it has nothing to do with the effects of cardio itself.

cardio doesn't make you 'toned'. cardio doesn't build lean mass. cardio doesn't make you lose fat, if you eat all the calories + more back.

that has nothing to do with what cardio actually does = it burns calories. what happens nexts DEPENDS ON THE CONTEXT.

so yeah, if the context is a skinny-fat chick who does 1hr cardio 6 days a week and wants to 'tone', then of course she needs to drop the cardio, because she needs to build mass. cardio doesn't aid in that. an obese person who wants to lose fat can apply cardio because she needs to lose fat

the other thing is that TOO MUCH cardio on TOO LITTLE calories does hinder fat loss, but not because of cardio per se, it is because the energy deficit is too big, and women don't do well on that (hormones out of whack, water retention etc.).

the third thing is that for all the HIIT whores here; HIIT - if done correctly - is a great stress to the body. combined with a deficit and decreased recovery, HIIT can and does blow people up (see chicks who do HIIT 3-4 days a week. ouch.). low-intensity SS doesn't do that. plus, sprints were originally implemented to help improve anaerobic threshold in relation to endurance training and intervals do come with a distinct point of diminishing returns (in terms of effectiveness) as the body adapts to it. doesn't happen to the same degree with SS.

you know all that. so what's the answer? the answer is that IT DEPENDS ON THE CONTEXT. not that 'cardio is useless' and shouldn't be used and doesn't aid in fat loss.

that's just plain dogmatic, and i did find it odd you'd post the same misconstructed t-mag article after we had a comparable exchange a few years back.

that's all

This

My experience training obese/unconditioned clients is that their overall lack of fitness hinders their training in the weight room (obviously). When I advise cardio (and I do for all obese clients, and no, it should never be during personal training time!) it's not primarily for the added energy deficit (though it can't hurt), but to increase their fitness/endurance for training. Many obese clients, because they are pretty sedentary to begin with, find the cardio does help with recovery.

On another note, it is nearly impossible for anyone to gain mucle in a catabolic state, however it's achieved. So the OP doesn't really need to worry about cardio taking away from her strength/muscle gains. If her goal is to lose fat, then that it the primary goal. However, you can "prime the pump" by learning proper training technique, improving neuromuscular connections, increasing muscle endurance, etc. Once the fat is lost, the body is in a great place to start building some good lean mass

This.

the way i see it -

your point: cardio is useless for fat loss.
my point: it depends.

'cardio is useless for fat loss' is an absolute statement. you defend it by posting clearly biased anecdotal evidence, and articles that exaggerate the importance of EPOC.

i've read lyle's above articles, and i agree with them, for what that's worth. however, if you read them clearly, nowhere does he state that cardio is 'useless'; rather than that is has a lot smaller effect on fat loss than people commonly believe. hence, if you think cardio is *magic* you are clearly misguided.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/res...ch-review.html



he makes the point that [obese] beginners cannot generate the same calorie burn as advanced or elite trainees due to their poor overall fitness. to increase fitness, clearly, it is a good idea to exercise more. no-one becomes fitter by sitting all day and eating at a deficit as far as i know.

of course strength training is important, but much as beginners do poorly with aerobic exercise, they don't excel in the weight room. they need to learn to do the exercises properly, and they can't work at an intensity required to generate response, often due to poor overall fitness. [the same reason the intensity required to get desired response from sprints is beyond beginners and unfit people.] walking for 'recovery' from a weights session in the beginning especially is moot.

so, the OP could start with 1-2 weights sessions to learn the ropes, and walk at a sustainable yet a push-a-bit intensity 3-5 x week. it helps stimulate fat-burning pathways, it burns a few calories , and it can help adherence (highly individual). as she becomes fitter, she can up the intensity, or reassess where she's at and see from there.

This.

OP, I hope you don't mind my jumping in on your thread.

Dear freebirdmac and other readers,

I too have cardio questions. I am also obese. Besides dropping the excess bodyfat I'm been carrying for decades I also want to rebuilt the muscles I lost while being away from the gym for a year (our family life was turned upsidedown when my brother substained a spinal cord injury and four months later I fell and substained a nondisplaced tibial plateau fracture).

I am currenly working with a personal trainer once a week. He has me doing cardio on the recumbent bike (currently 30 minute sessions but he wants me to increase it to 40 minutes) three times a week. I also do 30 minutes of walking five days a week (due to taking public transit).

I have a lot of bodyfat that I need to drop but I don't want to do in a stupid manner that impares my health (I am living with an indolent lymphoma -- I've been on low weekly doses of oral chemo since 1998 -- and type 2 diabetes -- Dx in 2008).

Because I'm also on a statin and a beta blocker (my doctor does this with all his diabetic patients), I'm wondering if doing more cardio will improve my heart health? And maybe I can get off these meds?

I know diet is a huge issue in improving my health. After an ultrasound for another issue which turned out to be nothing, I was told that I have a fatty liver. I'm guessing that the main reason for this condition is due to poor dietary choices on my part, but some of it is due to a side effect of the chemo.

Thanks for your thoughts on this.

Shire

Please - as a doc - I would REALLY, REALLY caution you against getting this sort of advice on the web.
Your situation isn't something that people should be giving you 'general advice' for.

[freebirdmac]

why are you inflamed over this? there are several ways to influence people, perpetrate myths, and state opinions as fact. people use strawmen and other logical fallacies, and post irrelevant links in discussion. others point them out.



this is a good example. fact: a number of studies indexed on pubmed are done poorly. fallacy: you can't trust [any studies on] pubmed.

does it follow pubmed shouldn't be used? prefer use something like 'rachel hits the final nail on the cardio coffin?'

pubmed is nothing but a database, and same studies and abstracts can be found elsewhere, too. many well-respected authors in the fitness field reference and search pubmed. not because it is 'pubmed' but because it is easily accessible.

of course it is recommended to read the actual study yourself if possible, but a throwaway 'you can't even trust pubmed' is nothing but, well, misguided opinion stated as fact.



this is about the third time you've posted that article to support your opinion on cardio. i've dissected its flaws before. either you missed my reply, or disregarded it.

either way, why don't YOU tell exactly HOW the article supports that cardio, if applied intelligently to a fat loss regime, does not aid in fat loss?

Miranda, you mis my point time and time again. I have never, ever, in any freaking post called cardio useless. I do put lifting ahead of cardio as it's benefits outweigh cardio when it comes to fat loss. Cardio is not needed for fat loss. Period. That is a fact. Hell lifting isn't needed. You can sit on you ass on the couch and lose weight. Cardio will not put muscle on you nor will it preserve muscle like lifting can and will. Cardio is over freaking used and starting from a point where it is not emphasized, where diet and lifting are is what's best. Using cardio as a means of active recovery instead of the God of weight loss as most people use it helps break the mindset. Unless someone has been cardio obsessed I always say lift 3x week, cardio 2x week. I do not leave it out. Nor do I over emphasize it. Where you get this horrid idea that I believe cardio can't be used intelligently must come from your imagination. You have a majorly fscked up idea of what I think and you continuously refuse to listen or read properly. Your long post that you got your buddies to quote over and over again is stuff I have said repeatedly. There isn't even a conflict. You however chose to have a hard on with me ignoring what I actually say. You didn't even get the good that comes out of the T-Nation article because you are so blinded. This isn't about any intelligent reasoning, this is personal and goes back years. I am so over and done with you. Where is the ignore function?

[Miranda]

what makes you think it is personal?

you are very obviously against cardio for weight loss for anyone. it springs out clearly in almost all your posts where you give fat loss advice.

however, you have given out incorrect advice in the past - especially suggesting that HIIT is better for fat loss than steady state. it isn't. all i've done is point that out, and i do that whenever i notice the myth raising its head.

as for the t-nation article, i'm not sure what it offers readers, other than a confused, uneducated woman. but consider these two gems. they are the core of the article:

There are two big problems with this.

1. As I explained earlier, you burn fewer total calories as your body adapts. So even if you're burning a higher percentage of fat, you aren't burning as many calories overall. It's like winning 80% of a Lotto jackpot. It sounds good until you realize that the jackpot is just fifty bucks.

2. Your body actually becomes efficient at storing fat. Since you're now burning fat as your primary source of fuel, your body adapts and becomes very good at storing fat. Blame it on a dumb self-preservation mechanism built into the body's operating system.

the first is correct, however as much as people overestimate EPOC, they vastly overestimate how much more 'efficient' they become in terms of calorie burn. it's not like you burned 300 cals today, tomorrow you'll only burn 150. and adaptation isn't specific to steady state, it applies – a lot faster – to HIIT and strength training.

the second claim is simply a bunch of sht. show me evidence that increased fat utilisation for energy leads to increased efficiency in fat storage.

really, you have posted that article several times in the past to support that 'cardio doesn't work' for fat loss or whatever variety you employ. i've then pointed out bla bla. you either don't respond, or disregard it. then it starts again.

either you don't want to consider my points, or you are so in love with rachel's plight, that it must be retold again and again. either way it seems you have firmly made up your mind.

[KimberleyRN]

I would like to propose a different view on cardio. I was a cardiac RN for 16 years, I do cardio for the benefits to my HEART. I do not see it as a way to lose weight.

My focus is on being FIT. I see fitness as a balance between strength, flexibility and stamina. When I see someone that is 'unbalanced' (as in large muscles and no flexibility, or flexibility with no strength) I tend to view them as needing to be balanced.

My husband and I are not super huge, nor super strong, nor do we run marathons... but, we are balanced.

My focus for the original poster (OP) would be to focus on all 3 areas of fitness... walk outside, stretch, and start with simple weight training (some will utilize body weight ONLY at first).

I am hoping that the original poster will not be confused by the debating, and will press on toward making progress in her overall fitness.

It is more important that small healthful changes occur steadily over a period of time; rather than making drastic changes quickly which will frustrate her and make her less likely to succeed.

Remember, fitness is a JOURNEY, not a destination.

Good Luck, and BE WELL!

[shirehobbit]

...I would like to propose a different view on cardio. I was a cardiac RN for 16 years, I do cardio for the benefits to my HEART. I do not see it as a way to lose weight...

Thank you for your post. I'm the second obese poster and I want my heart to be fit just as much as I want to lose my excess bodyfat. Because I'm a person with type 2 diabetes on BP meds I am concerned that a heart attack or stroke has my name on it! My meds keep my BP in the standard range but I want to be able to do this with a heart and diabetic healthy diet and exercise (no meds). This is one of my long range goals.

Cheers,

Shire

[shirehobbit]

...Please - as a doc - I would REALLY, REALLY caution you against getting this sort of advice on the web.
Your situation isn't something that people should be giving you 'general advice' for.

Thanks, Emma.

I don't see an onc (my derm treats my cutaneous lymphoma). I don't see an endo because my HMO requires diabetic patients to be on insulin. *growl* So that leaves my PCP. He wants me to do *at least* 30 minutes a day of cardio (with my max HR not to exceed 150).

So it stands to reason that if I follow his advice and eat a heart heathly diet (but not too many grains because it screws up my blood sugar levels) I will become fitter over time and my excess bodyfat will *gradually* decrease.

Cheers,

Shire

[freebirdmac]

Thanks, Emma.

I don't see an onc (my derm treats my cutaneous lymphoma). I don't see an endo because my HMO requires diabetic patients to be on insulin. *growl* So that leaves my PCP. He wants me to do *at least* 30 minutes a day of cardio (with my max HR not to exceed 150).

So it stands to reason that if I follow his advice and eat a heart heathly diet (but not too many grains because it screws up my blood sugar levels) I will become fitter over time and my excess bodyfat will *gradually* decrease.

Cheers,

Shire

Your lifting also qualifies as part of the heart health guidelines. http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/Gettin...p#.T1O_tGC3kic

[shirehobbit]

Your lifting also qualifies as part of the heart health guidelines. http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/Gettin...p#.T1O_tGC3kic

Oh, yes! Forgot to include that! We're both pleased that I'm lifting again.

Shire