HIIT-Just how good is it?

[AndyLegacy]

Is it really all that its cracked up to be?

Currently I'm for running 30 mins twice a week as part of my cutting routine, and so far seeing decent results with it.

Been doing some research and a lot of people say HIIT is great for fat loss when cutting.

So what does everyone think? When it comes to getting a lean muscular physique, is consistent-paced cardio or HIIT more effective?

if so what is the best way to go about it? Was thinking about HIIT with a jump rope or a treadmill

Gawd Bless

[Spanishdream]

In terms of its apparently 'pure' fat loss usage? No different than any other type of cardio.

It'll certainly give your heart a good workout though, and if you cardiovascular fitness is important to you, I recommend it.

[thatoneguy100]

read Jim Stoppani's article on HIIT training. it has its benefits but it can be hindered if you do excess

[Neddysmith]

Great thing about HIIT, is really gets you heart rate going through the roof compared to just normal running/cardio, generally find you burn higher cals in a shorter amount of time, and finally for cutting and maintaining muscle it is great because it is explosive training.

[AndyLegacy]

great replies So far, but

BUMP!!

[Braxley]

There is a lot of different opinion on HIIT, its a weird one. I see a lot of comment about the "afterburn" effect and how thats supposed to "burn 9 times more fat than regular cardio", whether that is broscience or not im not sure so don't take that literally, it certainly wouldn't hurt you to do it 2-3 times a week and assuming you are lifting well and have a sensible diet shouldn't really burn much muscle.

[kevi204]

other than burning more cals in less time, i've heard it's beneficial to help mobilize stubborn fat done while fasted.

[Nelly87]

I would recommend HIIT for maintaining muscle and burning fat. Think of it sprinting vs long distance running. Look at any Olympic long distance runner, they are real tiny with very little muscle mass, then look at sprinters like Husain Bolt, massive with very good muscle definition. Also check out this article posted on the main site by Alex Carson. I can't post direct link so in order to get there paste the following after going to BodyBuilding.com.
/fun/distance-dilemma-running-and-fat-loss.html?mcid=facetraining

[AndyLegacy]

I would recommend HIIT for maintaining muscle and burning fat. Think of it sprinting vs long distance running. Look at any Olympic long distance runner, they are real tiny with very little muscle mass, then look at sprinters like Husain Bolt, massive with very good muscle definition. Also check out this article posted on the main site by Alex Carson. I can't post direct link so in order to get there paste the following after going to BodyBuilding.com.
/fun/distance-dilemma-running-and-fat-loss.html?mcid=facetraining

fantastic advice bro, many thanks!

[nlite2000]

I would recommend HIIT for maintaining muscle and burning fat. Think of it sprinting vs long distance running. Look at any Olympic long distance runner, they are real tiny with very little muscle mass, then look at sprinters like Husain Bolt, massive with very good muscle definition. Also check out this article posted on the main site by Alex Carson. I can't post direct link so in order to get there paste the following after going to BodyBuilding.com.
/fun/distance-dilemma-running-and-fat-loss.html?mcid=facetraining

The muscle mass of a sprinter versus a marathon runner is a specious example. They have different amounts of mass on account of their diets/weight training. Usain Bolt isn't jacked because he does sprints and a marathon runner isn't wispy because he runs marathons.

[msm00b]

I find HIIT to be inferior to moderate steady state cardio (ie going out and running a few miles) for both endurance training and calorie burning potential. I still do it occasionally to augment my running.

[ScaleAndSteel]

I find HIIT to be inferior to moderate steady state cardio (ie going out and running a few miles) for both endurance training and calorie burning potential. I still do it occasionally to augment my running.

I only wish I could Neg you twice for yet another fail post. HIIT is 100X better then regular running for muscle building, fat loss and arguably endurance. You sir, need to stop posting and get a clue.

HIIT training is what makes athletes. It jacks the heart rate, builds muscle, burns fat with your cals in/out and will get you stronger and more athletic looking. Running will get you looking skinny fat. Many runners gain weight or stop losing weight because of the increased appetite too.

Also, strong contradictions in your cutting with your first meal whey+water based on your critisisms of my nutrition. Lol at the fail around here.

[dmacdonal9]

I believe the effects of HIIT are heavily confounded by the volume of resistance training going on in proximity to whatever HIIT you're doing. The big picture is important.

For overall fat loss, there seems to be only mild evidence favoring HIIT over LISS. Here's a good article from Alan Aragon: http://alanaragon.com/myths-under-th...ed-cardio.html. Clearly he's showing evidence in favor of HIIT, and he cites the often-quoted "9x more effective than LISS" idea, and certainly puts it in good context. But note where he says:

When energy expenditure between groups was corrected, HIIT group showed a whopping 9 times the fat loss as the ET group. In the HIIT group, biopsies showed an increase of glycolytic enzymes, as well as an increase of 3-hydroxyacyl coenzyme A dehydrogenase (HADH) activity, a marker of fat oxidation. Researchers concluded that the metabolic adaptations in muscle in response to HIIT favor the process of fat oxidation

The part in bold is the critical bit I think. If you don't correct for overall energy expenditure, the 9X advantage is eroded (granted, to an undetermined extent). This is simply because people can and do perform LIIS for greater durations than HIIT, resulting in more overall calories burned. And more overall fat loss? I would expect so.

Lyle makes the same point here: http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat...ng-part-1.html where he says:

For a given time investment, interval training leads to a greater fat loss and this occurs despite a smaller calorie burn during activity.

So to my mind, the HIIT advantage lies in time efficiency, at least in comparing apples to apples. But when you mix resistance training into the bigger picture, I think LISS gains some advantages there. As Lyle says:

An excess of endurance training, especially at higher intensities [HIIT] (too close to lactate threshold, a topic for another newsletter) seems to cause muscle loss, decrease strength and power, and cause overtraining. This is major issue for bodybuilders and strength/power athletes but can be avoided by keeping the intensity under control [LISS].

And this effect of course is exacerbated when in caloric deficit.

What I take away from the arguments is that HIIT on a deficit (like so many other things) is only appropriate up to the point where recovery and maintenance of lean mass is compromised. In my own experience, that happened when I did it more than once a week. When eating at maintenance or on a surplus, I do HIIT 3x/week, primarily for the CV effects (because then I'm not looking for fat loss).

[msm00b]

I only wish I could Neg you twice for yet another fail post. HIIT is 100X better then regular running for muscle building, fat loss and arguably endurance. You sir, need to stop posting and get a clue.

HIIT training is what makes athletes. It jacks the heart rate, builds muscle, burns fat with your cals in/out and will get you stronger and more athletic looking. Running will get you looking skinny fat. Many runners gain weight or stop losing weight because of the increased appetite too.

Also, strong contradictions in your cutting with your first meal whey+water based on your critisisms of my nutrition. Lol at the fail around here.

This is worth repeating to drive home the point:

This is simply because people can and do perform LIIS for greater durations than HIIT, resulting in more overall calories burned. And more overall fat loss? I would expect so.

Session for session, moderate intensity endurance cardio has the greater potential for burning calories. If you're doing effective HIIT, you're spent after 10-15 minutes. I can go out and run continuously for 45 minutes to an hour, and I'm not even that highly conditioned. Does HIIT stimulate muscle fibers differently? Of course it does, but I do my training for strength/hypertrophy in the gym with Iron - and it works together synergistically with my running. Now, for the "endurance" part of the equation ... endurance comes from sustained aerobic activity that pushes the threshold of your cardiopulmonary system. HIIT is, by definition, ANAEROBIC. Yes I'm gasping after a good cycle of sprints just like I am after a heavy set of squats, deadlifts, or any other major combination lift. Anaerobic. When it comes to building endurance/stamina, it plays a distant second fiddle to sustained steady state cardio done right at your aerobic threshold. I draw a line in the sand between traditional LISS and moderate intensity steady state activity. I can maintain "LISS" indefinitely. Moderate intensity requires that I hover right on the threshold of aerobic/anaerobic.

You continue to prove time and time again that you're an idiot.

I repeat, here's the long list of ScaleAndSteel's credentials:





























(There are none)

Here's a list of your anti-credentials:

-No progress pictures.
-No lifting stats.
-A relative newbie to this forum (Feb of this year).
-More than a few retarded broscience posts
-Probably very little formal education on health/wellness/physiology



PS: I'd apologize for getting your frilly pink panties in a twist for the neg I gave you yesterday - but it was well deserved.

[ScaleAndSteel]

^ Nice post. Oh I see Msm is elightening us with his garbage again...I was talking about the good post above his.

That is exactly why I believe strongly in a mix workout. HIIT, running and lifting and some times just a nice walk. I keep a changing mix them for 4/5 workouts a week.

Edit: Msm...keep trying and lol at credentials...want to see my man card? lol wow. Keep pumping your group think and grinding rep points and post counts.

Also I repeat...you strongly contradict yourself when you say your cut includes a first meal of whey+water but told me I am a moron for it...hmm....lol.

[msm00b]

Also I repeat...you strongly contradict yourself when you say your cut includes a first meal of whey+water but told me I am a moron for it...hmm....lol.

Do you really need a reminder of why you're a moron?

You said this:

Take a shake when you wake up to break catabalism and one within a half hour of working out.

That's broscience. It's wrong. You then went on to say this to AlwaysTryin when he called you out:

High rep power doesn't mean your correct. You are just another moron pretending to be an online expert. It is unfortunate idiots like you keep people from learning things that work.

That's why you got negged. That is why you're a moron. I know you tried to edit out the insults from your posts to save face - fortunately both he and I directly quoted you before it could disappear from the intrawebs. For those interested in reading the thread, you can find it here:

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...#post886597811

I down 2 scoops of whey every morning because work for me starts at the hospital at 0600 - not ending until 1800. It's quick and convenient. I don't take that whey because it's "ZOMG CRITICAL FOR BREAKING THE CATABOLISM". Please refrain from posting until you educate yourself.

God I love nailing bro-tards to the wall

[ScaleAndSteel]

^ wow...just wow. An argument with a 5 year old is pointless. Keep trying to save face but I am done arguing with you. It is unfortunate people actually listen to you because you spend 90% of your day on a website posting for high rep/post counts.

[msm00b]

^ wow...just wow. An argument with a 5 year old is pointless.

Your counterargument is unbelievably cogent.

/golfclap

[jixxxer]

If hiit is so great, y dont pros do it???

[Chazster]

Question moob, if time is not a factor wouldn't walking be better than running? I have read that when exercising for longer periods that lower heart rates have a better fat burn to muscle loss ratio though they also take more time to burn equal calories. Either way, on a cut isn't burning a better fat to muscle ratio the most.sought after thing? Unless you are carrying a lot of fat. If I walked and lost 0.8 pounds of fat for 1 pounds of wight lost vs 0.6 from running (random numbers) I would personally rather lose weight slower with less muscle loss.

If this is truly the case. Let me know.

[thomasko]

I'm with msm00b on this one. I used to just do HIIT and it worked, but not nearly as well as distance running has worked for me. That said --- MIX IT UP! I usually do 2-3 moderate distance runs, 1 distance run, and 1 speedwork session (essentially HIIT) every week. You can benefit from many different types of cardio.

And for those that say HIIT saves time - I'll agree and disagree. If you go tan a few times a week (as I assume most people here probably do) you can save time and money by running without your shirt on outside for 45 mins.

[AndyLegacy]

just want to say thanks to everyone for the great posts!

Keep the debates coming!

[vermeer]

hiit is good but I get better results walking at an 8% incline on treadmill for one hour... yeah thats right walking up hill is amazing cardio. try it.

hiit does help you burn calories after its done.. where regular cardio burns only when preformed...

[msm00b]

Question moob, if time is not a factor wouldn't walking be better than running? I have read that when exercising for longer periods that lower heart rates have a better fat burn to muscle loss ratio though they also take more time to burn equal calories. Either way, on a cut isn't burning a better fat to muscle ratio the most.sought after thing? Unless you are carrying a lot of fat. If I walked and lost 0.8 pounds of fat for 1 pounds of wight lost vs 0.6 from running (random numbers) I would personally rather lose weight slower with less muscle loss.

If this is truly the case. Let me know.

In general I'd ignore fat/muscle burn ratios. Walking for fat loss is just fine. It's slow and won't do much for building up your endurance, but it's fine for fat loss. When choosing cardio the only factors I consider are:

1) Do I enjoy it?.
2) Will doing it be consistent with my goals?

I enjoy running. If you enjoy running, by all means run. If you enjoy cycling ... then cycle. If you enjoy interval sprints ... then do interval sprints. My other goal with cardio is how it helps with my training. As I mentioned earlier, I get all the str/hypertrophy training I want/need in the gym. My goal with cardio is therefore to get the best calorie-burn on time investment and also improve endurance. Minute for minute, few things will burn calories like a sustained run with a sub 8-minute mile pace (some will, but most will not). Minute per minute will sprinting burn more? Of course, but remember for every 15-30 seconds you spend sprinting, you'll be spending 3-4x that amount of time walking and gasping for air.

HIIT is fine. MISS is fine. LISS is fine.

Do what you enjoy and what's consistent with your goals.

The only thing I'm not fine with is the perpetuation that HIIT is somehow hands down the best or only form of effective cardio from a bodybuilding standpoint. The classic misrepresentation is the 'sprinter' vs 'marathoner' body habitus. Such arguments completely miss the point. Both forms of athletes are highly specialized to their chosen sport, and the best of each sport that you'll see competing on TV will have the ideal body shape for optimal performance. For the marathoner - that's going to be a guy who's incredibly light. Every pound on their body is another pound they have to haul over 26-50+ miles. Every pound they carry is another pound slowing them down. Sprinters are basically the opposite, and the ideal body is one that's compact yet lean and capable of extreme performance on the anaerobic spectrum. The common misconception is that running distance will make you look like a marathoner or that sprinting will make you look like a sprinter.



The guy on the right didn't get large hypertrophied upper body muscles by sprinting - he earned every ounce of that in the gym as supplemental training to augment his performance in his chosen sport.

The guy on the left didn't get emaciated by running long distance. Running distance didn't shrink his muscles to oblivion. His lack of muscle was a conscious choice in NOT incorporating resistance training. Why? Because every extra pound on his body that isn't helping him run his incredibly long distance is dead weight.

Your work in the gym will dictate your muscular development.

Choose the type of cardio you enjoy and the type that rewards you in ways you're looking to be rewarded. For me, I picked moderate distance running. It's got an excellent return on time investment and helps build stamina that helps me in the gym.

[kwade89]

I stongly believe in HIIT!!!! 2 years ago I jogged 2-3 times a week 2-3 miles at a time.... When hitting the weights I could not achieve any gains! Last year I started doing HIIT and immediately began to see improvement in the gym! Being able to lift more and retain muscle! Even to mention easily staying at a lower BF%... I have recently started HIIT again. Right now I am full on sprinting half of the track and then walking half. So on for about 20-30 min or till I am completely spent! I love the energy that is associated with it days afterwards. My only con is that it gets hard to sleep afterwards when training in the evening. In my opionion HIIT is the way to go. It really helps with my core strenght also.

[kornish]

I just finished 60 days of the Insanity (a HIIT program) and overall lost very little strength but about 10lbs of fat. I'm around 15% BF now but my lifts are only slightly lighter than before I started the program. My cardio on short sprints and hills is off the chart compared to before (1 mile at 6% grade at a 8:00min pace). My long run performance is mostly unchanged.

I kept a clean diet with a ratio of 20%/50%/30% (fat/carb/protein) and even maintained a caloric deficit averaging 500-600 calories. When I felt drained and wiped out I upped my carbs the next day (for the next day only) and that seemed to recharge me for the next workout.

My legs are significantly more tone and have grown. I'm planning on another month or two back in the weight room interspersed with Insanity workouts to keep what I gained under the program and then back to Insanity again. In all honesty I was constantly worried about losing lean mass but stuck with my diet and the program. All the worry it seems was unfounded.

My 2 cents

Is it really all that its cracked up to be?

Currently I'm for running 30 mins twice a week as part of my cutting routine, and so far seeing decent results with it.

Been doing some research and a lot of people say HIIT is great for fat loss when cutting.

So what does everyone think? When it comes to getting a lean muscular physique, is consistent-paced cardio or HIIT more effective?

if so what is the best way to go about it? Was thinking about HIIT with a jump rope or a treadmill

Gawd Bless