Cardio vs Fat Loss

[Caesura75]

Whilst in the gym cycling today, I noted the different programs you can select. In particular, there is:

Fat Loss Programme - default setting to achieve +60% of your resting heart rate for a period of 30 mins
Cardio - default setting to achieve +80% of your resting heart rate for a period of 20 mins

Obviously, you can change the workout period and even adjust your target heart rate, but if you complete the default programs you will generally find that the cardio workout burns more calories.

Now, this is slightly confusing because the general message on these forums is 'calorie deficit = fat loss'. If that is the case, then why does the lower intensity workout claim to specifically be a fat loss programme when it in fact doesn't require as much energy as the cardio?

As somebody who is currently training to reduce my body fat percentage, i'm now not sure which workout would be most effective for me.

[glyph98]

Ok, soo this is my opinion and I am sure this will stir up a bunch of mixed opinions and crap from some of the members.


Cardio is not meant to burn body fat!!! It is meant to exercise your heart. It is a muscle and needs the exercise.


When you do cardio, yes you are burning more calories than you would if you were sitting on your butt. However, dedpeding on where your heart rate is at, you are not burning fat.


To burn fat while doing cardio, your heart needs to be slow enough that your fat has time to break down and be turned into a fuel source. If your heart rate is too high, your body can not break down fat fast enough to keep up with the demand, so it starts using protein for fuel (muscles/organs/bones ect..) of course this happens after your glycogen stores are gone.

Look at long distance runners, they have zero muscle on them, their bodies use it all while running.



So the preste programs are designed to keep your heart rate in the right zone so you are using fat for fuel. Yes you burn more calories doing a higher zone, but that does not mean your now burning fat only.



Cardio is such a small part of the game when it come to fat loss. Diet and strength training play a much larger role.

Think about this, doing 30 minutes of cardio keeping your heart rate in the right zone, you might burn 250 calories. You do that 3 days a week, and you burn 750 calories a week. It will take you 5 weeks to burn off one pound of fat.




Cardio is great to keep you healthy, but sucks for fat burning. Diet is king!!!!!

[Caesura75]

Interesting read Glyph. So if I was looking to cut, I assume that you'd be advocating low intensity exercise over more rigorous cardio. Putting it simply, that would suggest that walking is a better fat burner than running?

[TCO76]

If your looking to cut, eat 500 Cal's less than maintenance. Cardio will allow you to eat more than without. And yes, it's that simple.

[acrawlingchaos]

If your looking to cut, eat 500 Cal's less than maintenance. Cardio will allow you to eat more than without. And yes, it's that simple.

I approve this message!

[glyph98]

Interesting read Glyph. So if I was looking to cut, I assume that you'd be advocating low intensity exercise over more rigorous cardio. Putting it simply, that would suggest that walking is a better fat burner than running?

Its not that cut and dry, walking wont do anything but burn stored sugar for the most part, youhave to raise your intensity to the point your heart rate is around 130-135 for your age. Walking wont do that, unless your walking up an incline and your walking fast.


Like I said earlier Diet is King!!! TCO76 said it right, start by eating 500 calories below your maintenance and you should lose about 1 pound of fat a week.

Exercise hard, and do moderate cardio a few days a week and you can increase that to 2 pounds or more a week of fat loss.

[Caesura75]

Thanks for all replies. To be honest, it's not just about cutting and controlling calories. I'm also enjoying the cardio and feel that it's making me feel far more energetic, fitter, and generally a healthier person.

I guess that means I can have my cake and eat it (as long as I keep the cardio going!).

[txironbutt]

Diet is king...500 calorie/day deficit is enough to change your composition. If that's all you are interested in, then do 20-30 minutes of moderate cardio 2-3 times a week for your heart health.

For fat loss, there are 100's of HIIT vs. LISS articles on which is better. From my experience...Higher Intensity leads to better results. I can do hours of LISS and see slow and small changes. When i incorporate Hard/Fast efforts i see quick and much more drastic changes.

You have to decide what you are interested in doing with the body you are building and structure your training to match that goal.

Not all endurance athletes are "sticks" with no muscle. That said, training for a marathon is probably not the best thing to do if your goal is to be as muscular as possible.

[oldsuperman]

How old are you? How tall are you? How much do you weigh? What is your LBM?

[Caesura75]

How old are you? How tall are you? How much do you weigh? What is your LBM?

37, 5ft 9in, 198lbs. Would say bf is around 23 - 25%

[PopeGregorius]

Ok, soo this is my opinion and I am sure this will stir up a bunch of mixed opinions and crap from some of the members.


Cardio is not meant to burn body fat!!! It is meant to exercise your heart. It is a muscle and needs the exercise.


When you do cardio, yes you are burning more calories than you would if you were sitting on your butt. However, dedpeding on where your heart rate is at, you are not burning fat.


To burn fat while doing cardio, your heart needs to be slow enough that your fat has time to break down and be turned into a fuel source. If your heart rate is too high, your body can not break down fat fast enough to keep up with the demand, so it starts using protein for fuel (muscles/organs/bones ect..) of course this happens after your glycogen stores are gone.

This is all nonsense.

http://www.dummies.com/how-to/conten...t-burning.html

- thee is no fat burning zone
- the greater the intensity & longer you exercise, the more fat you oxidise
- high intensity interval training is better than low intensity steady state
http://www.simplyshredded.com/cardio...te-cardio.html
- cardio affects EPOC a well http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excess_...en_consumption

[LowCarbDiabetic]

This is all nonsense.

http://www.dummies.com/how-to/conten...t-burning.html

- thee is no fat burning zone
- the greater the intensity & longer you exercise, the more fat you oxidise
- high intensity interval training is better than low intensity steady state
http://www.simplyshredded.com/cardio...te-cardio.html
- cardio affects EPOC a well http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excess_...en_consumption

^^ This.

Here's the simple breakdown as I understand it:

1. For energy your body uses ATP (Adenosine Tri-Phosphate)

2. Your body generates ATP primarily from glucose/glycogen OR from fatty-acid oxidation, and generally uses a combination of both.

3. At higher-intensity (cardio zone), your ratio of glucose:fat-oxidation is higher than at low-intensity ('fat-burning' zone).

4. So while true that you don't burn as high a percentage of fat during high-intensity exercise, due to the overall increased energy expenditure, higher-intensity exercise STILL burns more fat, regardless of the different ratio.

It's that simple.

Experts, if I'm wrong anywhere, please let me know, thanks!

[TCO76]

Bodybuilding dot com. Just saying.

[oldsuperman]

37, 5ft 9in, 198lbs. Would say bf is around 23 - 25%

Cardio is good for several reasons in weight training.

First it increases you indurence and helps you to repair and recuperate faster during your training. You will actually retain and grow muscle doing cardio. You'll also increase your metabolism so your body will continue to burn fat more efficiently.

Second is for calorie burning. It'll do this two ways. It will either burn calories from stored fat or stores food in your digestive system. The obvious and best thing is to burn stored fat for energy. Therefor do cardio first thing on an empty tummy. Or do it immediately after training. If that isn't possible then do cardio on an empty tummy before bed. If you choose to do it any other time then make sure you haven't eaten at least 2 hours before.

Now the last questionsates how long and how intense to do cardio for a man like you? I would suggest you do a minimum of 30 and no more than 60 mins a session. Obviously the longer the cardio session the more fat you will burn.

Now intensity. At your age and high BF and to make sure your body is in a fat burning state you need to keep your HR at no more than 120 BPM and no less than 115. I know it seems like you're not burning calories unless you're sweating buckets and sucking air like you're in a fire. Yet if you get your HT too high your body will feel threatened and actually store fat instead of burning it!

[Korr]

Here, interesting reading for the whole cardio is good for weight loss debate.

" A study published in the Journal of the American College of Nutrition in April 1999 showed just how damaging the weight loss model can be on metabolic efficiency. This study looked at a group of obese individuals who were put on a very low calorie diet and assigned to one of two exercise regimes. One group did aerobic exercise (walking, biking, or jogging four times per week) while the second group did resistance training three times per week and no aerobic exercise.

At the end of the twelve-week study, both groups lost weight but the difference in muscle vs. fat loss was striking. The aerobic group lost 37 pounds over the course of the study. The resistance-training group lost 32 pounds. A focus on weight loss would lead us to the conclusion that aerobic exercise is best. However, when looking at the type of weight lost it was shown that the aerobic group lost almost 10 pounds of muscle on average while the resistance training group lost fat exclusively and maintained their muscle mass.

To maintain muscle and metabolic rate the focus should instead be on the type of food consumed and the type of exercise done. Where weight loss is about quantity of food eaten and time exercise is done, fat loss is about the quality of food and the type of exercise. A focus on resistance training and lower carbohydrate and higher protein diets is key. "



http://metaboliceffect.com//topic/38...lifestyle.aspx

[EB68]

I hate all forms of cardio and when cutting I just lower my calories to 500 below maintenance and enjoy losing about a pound a week. I do have a fairly active lifestyle though, and lift heavy 5 or 6 days per week.

[acrawlingchaos]

First it encases you indurence and helps you to repair and recuperate faster during your training. You will actually retain and grow muscle doing cardio. You'll also increase your metabolism so your body will continue to burn fat more efficiently.

LISS cardio (as recommended) will do nothing to help retain muscle. Retention of muscle happens through proper protein intake, a narrow deficit and strength training. Excessive cardio (of any kind) can actually be detrimental to muscle retention if the deficit is too steep. I would also like to point out that your body will start to compensate over time and eventually can LISS will become less effective at even burning calories.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...y.2007.164/pdf

Second is for calorie burning. It'll do this two ways. It will either burn calories from stored fat or stores food in your digestive system. The obvious and best thing is to burn stored fat for energy. Therefor do cardio first thing on an empty tummy. Or do it immediately after training. If that isn't possible then do cardio on an empty tummy before bed. If you choose to do it any other time then make sure you haven't eaten at least 2 hours before.

Fasted cardio is a long debunked myth. Substrate utilization isn't that black and white.

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=747976

Now the last questionsates how long and how intense to do cardio for a man like you? I would suggest you do a minimum of 30 and no more than 60 mins a session. Obviously the longer the cardio session the more fat you will burn.

Depending on diet, more is not always better. It COULD cause too steep of a deficit.

Now intensity. At your age and high BF and to make sure your body is in a fat burning state you need to keep your HR at no more than 120 BPM and no less than 115. I know it seems like you're not burning calories unless you're sweating buckets and sucking air like you're in a fire. Yet if you get your HT too high your body will feel threatened and actually store fat instead of burning it!

OK.... now you're just making sh*t up.


Both Aragon and Norton disagree with the use of LISS as a means of burning fat, and Norton advocates HITT as the most appropriate type of cardio to use for fat loss.

[oldsuperman]

LISS cardio (as recommended) will do nothing to help retain muscle. Retention of muscle happens through proper protein intake, a narrow deficit and strength training. Excessive cardio (of any kind) can actually be detrimental to muscle retention if the deficit is too steep. I would also like to point out that your body will start to compensate over time and eventually can LISS will become less effective at even burning calories.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...y.2007.164/pdf

Fasted cardio is a long debunked myth. Substrate utilization isn't that black and white.

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=747976

Depending on diet, more is not always better. It COULD cause too steep of a deficit.

OK.... now you're just making sh*t up.


Both Aragon and Norton disagree with the use of LISS as a means of burning fat, and Norton advocates HITT as the most appropriate type of cardio to use for fat loss.

I had this long answer to all the "expert" advice you posted. Yet I just chose to sum it up in the last two sentences. And by the way. If I were to say the sky is blue, would you say it is green? Just asking.... Good luck pro. I can see by your avi you'll need it.

Look at me and tell me again I don't know what I'm doing. Look at you and tell me you do.

[Karl_Hungus]

Both Aragon and Norton disagree with the use of LISS as a means of burning fat, and Norton advocates HITT as the most appropriate type of cardio to use for fat loss.

You mean HIIT? About a year ago, I was doing this regularly, and I was amazed at how effective it was for fat loss. It is brutal, but I loved what it did for me. Drop fat and increased cardio fitness at the same time.

Should probably do it again (would like to cut down to about 230-ish).

[acrawlingchaos]

I had this long answer to all the "expert" advice you posted. Yet I just chose to sum it up in the last two sentences. And by the way. If I were to say the sky is blue, would you say it is green?

No, I'm not being obtuse. Your information is poor, old and antiquated broscience. The research I presented isn't mine, it is of those who are respected in the field.



Cliffs:
Sh*tty coaches who consistently utilize excessive cardio in conjunction with an excessively low carb intake, will most likely cause metabolic damage in their clients. I would recommend watching this video.

Just asking.... Good luck pro. I can see by your avi you'll need it.

I have been progressing to my own expectations. I'm sure that you have been keeping tabs on my progress though.

Look at me and tell me again I don't know what I'm doing. Look at you and tell me you do.

I can't believe a juicebox is comparing his 10 years of progress to that of a natural novice. SMH. If your only justification for your methods is your physique..... smh.

[acrawlingchaos]

You mean HIIT? About a year ago, I was doing this regularly, and I was amazed at how effective it was for fat loss. It is brutal, but I loved what it did for me. Drop fat and increased cardio fitness at the same time.

Should probably do it again (would like to cut down to about 230-ish).

Yup HIIT (my apologies). Layne goes into detail about the benefits in the above video. Apparently there are few biological compensations that occur with HIIT.

Additionally, HIIT (in an positive energy diet) increases mitochondria, which will facilitate both ATP production and increase the rate of lipolysis (both processes occur in the mitochondria).


Much MUCH more brutal, but worth it.

[induced_drag]

Interesting some of the debates.

I agree with much of it, but also want to say....I do not believe it is always that simple or black and white.

I have long been a proponent of just eat a deficit and cardio is not necessary (except for general health)...etc. But I am changing my viewpoint a little. While cardio might not be necessary to just see your abs, I am finding it quite an efficient way to strip fat while preserving muscle.

It has been said, that from a body composition standpoint, you are better off doing more cardio, and raising your entire TDEE vs just eating at a deficit. People say your body functions better that way from an efficiency standpoint. I am coming to agree with this. The fat loss from cardio, will be different then the fat loss from a plain old deficit. Where it is mobilized can be different as well.

OK....I am going to speak of the unspoken....FASTED CARDIO! I read a book by Lyle McDonald called "the stubborn fat solution". Within, he describes just about everything you can think of when it comes to fat loss. And while there are studies that have shown fasted cardio is not more effective, this might not be telling the whole story. Because of the effect of insulin on fat burning, training in a fasted state may have some effects.

So my point is, I dont think there is any black or white. AND almost no studies are done on bodybuilders but rather performed on the general population. So much of the bodybuilding "broscience" that can not be proven in studies, continues to be a part of elite guys training. The first I can think of is nutrient timing. You can no longer tell me there is no impact from this with carb timing. But it is true, when I was above 10-12% I could not feel the effects. Now as I get leaner, the effects become much more pronounced and are almost undeniable.

Again...no black or white...

But for the avg guy looking to lose weight....it probably does not matter much. HIIT,LISS, Fasted, unfasted......deficit, or just cardio... ALL will work. Try to get in stage ready shape...and these things start to have meaning. I would not totally dismiss what OldSup is saying. It just might not apply to the OP as much.

[Bo_Flecks]

When I was prepping for the Gateway Naturals, I did LISS cardio and MIIT (depending on my energy level) on off-training days. I totally lost the motivation, and eventually the energy for HIIT.

The way I looked at it was that the cardio raised my maintenance level calories, and that allowed me to stay at my 500 calorie deficit and get a little more food in during the day. Not having to cut more food out of my nutrition plan was important to me at the time.

I also do cardio on non-training days when I am on a mass gaining phase for general heart health and VO2 support for my training. For me the VO2 support is huge.

[x-trainer ben]

Whilst in the gym cycling today, I noted the different programs you can select. In particular, there is:

Fat Loss Programme - default setting to achieve +60% of your resting heart rate for a period of 30 mins
Cardio - default setting to achieve +80% of your resting heart rate for a period of 20 mins

Obviously, you can change the workout period and even adjust your target heart rate, but if you complete the default programs you will generally find that the cardio workout burns more calories.

Now, this is slightly confusing because the general message on these forums is 'calorie deficit = fat loss'. If that is the case, then why does the lower intensity workout claim to specifically be a fat loss programme when it in fact doesn't require as much energy as the cardio?

As somebody who is currently training to reduce my body fat percentage, i'm now not sure which workout would be most effective for me.

For the "AVG JOE" just try and hit 60-65%(63% was number in studies)of max heart rate and do it often.

HITT is extremely efficient but is **so taxing** if you really redline it, that it is hard to do consecutive days. That 63% number is repeatable and will get you in the habit of regular exercise which should be the goal anyway

[oldsuperman]

.

I don't see that much difference in what he has said and I. Yet he's dealing with "Athletes" and this man is far, as are most of these forum members including you, and to put them on HITT is self defeating IMO. Also he said, "he had no proof" is the things he said even tho he had some studies. You see, most all bbing is "THEORY" when it comes to diet and training. They are few absolutes because there are so many variables. Yet again I wish you luck in your pursuits and your fitness goals. I'm confident you will figure out what works for you. And I still see the sky is green to you...

[TCO76]

When I was prepping for the Gateway Naturals, I did LISS cardio and MIIT (depending on my energy level) on off-training days. I totally lost the motivation, and eventually the energy for HIIT.

The way I looked at it was that the cardio raised my maintenance level calories, and that allowed me to stay at my 500 calorie deficit and get a little more food in during the day. Not having to cut more food out of my nutrition plan was important to me at the time.

I also do cardio on non-training days when I am on a mass gaining phase for general heart health and VO2 support for my training. For me the VO2 support is huge.

^^this. I am on a beginners routine that says to do cardio on off days but NOT at the sacrifice of losing stamina for work days! I approve this statement!

[acrawlingchaos]

snip

So much disappoint.

"Athletes" and this man is far, as are most of these forum members including you,

Well let me bow out and take my rightful place with the rest of the 035 slobs.

[kimm4]

If your looking to cut, eat 500 Cal's less than maintenance. Cardio will allow you to eat more than without. And yes, it's that simple.

Agreed.^^

So much disappoint.

Well let me bow out and take my rightful place with the rest of the 035 slobs.

This is why I rarely post here. I'm so fukin sick of the holier than thou attitudes...it's ridiculous...

[RobertD2]

Whilst in the gym cycling today, I noted the different programs you can select. In particular, there is:

Fat Loss Programme - default setting to achieve +60% of your resting heart rate for a period of 30 mins
Cardio - default setting to achieve +80% of your resting heart rate for a period of 20 mins

Obviously, you can change the workout period and even adjust your target heart rate, but if you complete the default programs you will generally find that the cardio workout burns more calories.

Now, this is slightly confusing because the general message on these forums is 'calorie deficit = fat loss'. If that is the case, then why does the lower intensity workout claim to specifically be a fat loss programme when it in fact doesn't require as much energy as the cardio?

As somebody who is currently training to reduce my body fat percentage, i'm now not sure which workout would be most effective for me.

Long ago in a galaxy far away there was a study done. This showed that LISS and similar low intensity stuff burned a higher percentage of calories from fat. The study authors not being math majors got confused by this and began promoting LISS for fat loss.

1% of Bill Gates money is better then 100% of a homeless persons money.

[EjnarKolinkar]

Well let me bow out and take my rightful place with the rest of the 035 slobs.

ITT I learned:

acrawlingchaos is smart and reads the same stuff I do. I would back his play but my avi is weaker than his.

Broscience built the sport of bodybuilding, and continues to build it, now with phd bros.

Boflecks (big trophy) posting with fit it in your program type logic. <Pssst OP

Time to renew my vow to never, fawking, ever, post my opinion in a cardio thread beyond cardio is good, do it for building your wind and health.

Lurking device engage.