Most effective fat loss?

[RockHard]

What do you reckon the most effective fat loss exercise would be? I quite like HIIT - 1 min on, 1 min off for about 35 mins (split between x-trainer and rowing machine). BUT, I also like straight out cardio - but I don't feel like I'm doing enough by keeping my heart rate 120-140 - I tend to feel like I'm doing a good workout at 170+ beats per minute. (45 minutes)

[rose]

What do you reckon the most effective fat loss exercise would be?

Whatever burns the most calories with the least amount of effort?

Or, whatever works for you. So long as you're eating right and pushing yourself the fat is going to come off.

If you like different types of cardio, do them all. Variety keeps it interesting and your body guessing. Routine = boring. Mix it up to break plateaus etc.

I know I couldn't do HIIT everyday, and certainly not like a lab rat in the gym. A run under the stars when no one else is awake is a good way to clear your head. Venus and Mars are resplendent on a clear sky at this time of year. I can't figure out which one is Saturn though.

[Pete_S]

What do you reckon the most effective fat loss exercise would be? I quite like HIIT - 1 min on, 1 min off for about 35 mins (split between x-trainer and rowing machine). BUT, I also like straight out cardio - but I don't feel like I'm doing enough by keeping my heart rate 120-140 - I tend to feel like I'm doing a good workout at 170+ beats per minute. (45 minutes)

170+bpm is extremely high and way too high for effective fat loss. Great for cardiovascular fitness if you are a budding triathlete. Your maximum heart rate is 220bpm less your age, so if you were 40 your max would be 180bpm (this would be 100%). 120-140 on average is a good range for most, keep it low-moderate intensity for an extended period (40mins)

[rose]

170+bpm is extremely high and way too high for effective fat loss. Great for cardiovascular fitness if you are a budding triathlete. Your maximum heart rate is 220bpm less your age, so if you were 40 your max would be 180bpm (this would be 100%). 120-140 on average is a good range for most, keep it low-moderate intensity for an extended period (40mins)

What about the HIIT afterburn? Some reports state that the fat burning zone is a myth and HIIT is where it's at:

"[Metabolic adaptations resulting from HIIT] may lead to a better lipid utilization in the postexercise state and thus contribute to a greater energy and lipid deficit."

http://www.cbass.com/FATBURN.HTM

[Pete_S]

You have to be carefull when performing high intensity cardiovasular activity if you wish to preserve lean muscle mass. HIIT cardio is great for the heart and cardio respitory system (and yes will bring some fat burning properties) but can also send the muscles into a catabolic state once the body has utilised glycogen stores. If you want to be lean and are not concerned with burning some muscle as energy (after glycogen depletion) then extended periods of high intensity cardio training is ok. If you don't want to burn away your hard earned muscle mass, then stick with low-mod intensity training. Hope this helps a bit

[rose]

Agreed. Muscle glycogen depletion during HIIT generally occurs between 15-30 minutes. However to a certain extent you can take steps to mitigate depletion.

I therefore advocate short periods of HIIT. Just about everything credible I've read recommends timeframes that do not exceed 30 mins (usually it's less, e.g. 20 mins, inclusive of warm up and cool down).

If anyone is doing 30 mins or more of HIIT each time they do cardio, they're probably not human anyway, heh :shock:

[1day]

i just stick to my 1hr'ish walks to be on the safe side (tryn to keep as much mass as poss) but once in a blue moon i been doin 10minwalk,10minrun,10walk,10run and that seem to keep my fitness in check a bit too :roll:

[rose]

i just stick to my 1hr'ish walks

Do you stop to smell the daises? :pfft:

[1day]

no ,but my dog stops to piss on them :pfft:

[Bobsta]

Im still not too sure about this HIIT thing, i think if you wanna get super fit then definitly its the way to go but if you want to hold on to as much muscle as you can as 1day said a 40 to 60min walk is a much safer option.

I think if you train crazy intense with weights and then go and have the same approach to your cardio you'll burn out.

As long as my diet is in check a 40 to 60min walk 1st thing in the morning does wonders for me, pretty much on a empty stomach, i just have a scoop of whey with water and a shot of black coffee and im off...

no ,but my dog stops to piss on them :pfft:

same with my dog mate, can't believe how much the little bastard pisses!!!

[rose]

Im still not too sure about this HIIT thing... I think if you train crazy intense with weights and then go and have the same approach to your cardio you'll burn out.

Fully agree with that. I wouldn't recommend doing HIIT everytime you do cardio. Some recommendations state two sessions of 20 mins per week max. Or like you say, you'll burn out.

Still think it has it's merits though. If you're pressed for time or get bored of doing the same thing, it can be used to break plateaus or just break a routine.

same with my dog mate, can't believe how much the little bastard pisses!!!

:shock:

[1day]

As long as my diet is in check a 40 to 60min walk 1st thing in the morning does wonders for me, pretty much on a empty stomach, i just have a scoop of whey with water and a shot of black coffee and im off...

do u think it is a must/shud do, to have protien b4 a morning walk? is there any benifit if it is not a hard out HIIT, and concidering u/i have a shake wen i get back anyways with breakfst? if so pleze explain y .

[rooney111]

Im very keen on this topic

What i been told as of now is hiit is the best way to loose fat with minimal muscle loss and for me its like 2min warmup, 40seconds high intensity, 80seconds low, 40 seconds high intensity, 80seconds and repeat 5 or 6 cycles and 4 or 5 min cool down. takes 20mins.

someone also told first thing wake up go for a jog on empty stomach but i read on here nzbb that this approach is not that great

personally i'd be very keen if this thread comes to a good conclusion rather than "both methods are fine.."

[Bobsta]

As long as my diet is in check a 40 to 60min walk 1st thing in the morning does wonders for me, pretty much on a empty stomach, i just have a scoop of whey with water and a shot of black coffee and im off...

do u think it is a must/shud do, to have protien b4 a morning walk? is there any benifit if it is not a hard out HIIT, and concidering u/i have a shake wen i get back anyways with breakfst? if so pleze explain y .

I dont think its a must, but my reasoning is that I have been sleep for the last 8 hours or so, if i walk for an hour thats another hour without any amino acids in my system,so i rather have some aminos in there as to avoid the risk of breaking down muscle since it would have been 9 hours or so since i'd eaten anything by the time i've done my walk.

Obviously we walk 1st thing in the morning as to take advantage of our depleted state in terms of carbohydrate/glycogen in the hope that we'll get our energy by breaking down the fat but i think just a little whey protein in there or any amino tablets is just an insurance pollicy not to break down any muscle. thats how i rationalize it anyway

[1day]

make ssence, i just dnt know whether i cud justify havin shake then hr later havin anotha one(money issues) :doh: :shifty:

[Bobsta]

make ssence, i just dnt know whether i cud justify havin shake then hr later havin anotha one(money issues) :doh: :shifty:

I understand bro, it shouldnt be a full serving, half or a scoop at most, otherwise it be almost like you've had a meal already! you just wanna have some aminos in your system. And also you can still count that as part of your total protein intake, i.e you divide your usual serving of your protein powder that you have everyday for breakfast in two, have half before your walk and half when you get back.

in saying that i have done it without having any protein/aminos before my cardio with good results, but im just trying to leave no stone unturned so to speak

[teamfatboy]

Im very keen on this topic

What i been told as of now is hiit is the best way to loose fat with minimal muscle loss and for me its like 2min warmup, 40seconds high intensity, 80seconds low, 40 seconds high intensity, 80seconds and repeat 5 or 6 cycles and 4 or 5 min cool down. takes 20mins.

someone also told first thing wake up go for a jog on empty stomach but i read on here nzbb that this approach is not that great

personally i'd be very keen if this thread comes to a good conclusion rather than "both methods are fine.."

I think you can say 'both methods are fine' depending on your training objectives - if you're on a cut, then your needs are different to when you're bulking. That HIIT routine you cite is very close to one recommended by Lance Armstrong's trainer for fatburning.

But yes, there are a lot of variables - time of day, time of meals, intensity, Max HR, and so on.

Bottom line - whatever works best for you...

[RockHard]

I train twice a day - first thing in morning, then at lunch time - and rest on the weekends (I have a very busy schedule so this works best for me).

I do cardio every morning - 40 minutes (not HIIT).

Mon, Wed, Fri at lunch I do circuit training (1 set to failure as mentioned in another thread, which works really well- takes about 25 minutes) - and after the circuit, I do 15 - 20 min HIIT.

On Tues and Thurs lunch I go swimming.

I go through A LOT of protein powder (get most of my protein that way + Glutamine). No carbs after 4pm.

[rose]

Bottom line - whatever works best for you...

Bingo. Best statement I can come up with at the moment:

"When you equate total exercise time, as long as you’re doing an intense, progressive strength + conditioning exercise program, you can feel free to choose whichever program you like best."

Im very keen on this topic... personally i'd be very keen if this thread comes to a good conclusion rather than "both methods are fine.."

That's never going to happen, heh. Everyone can find a study to support whatever they want to believe is true. The studies don't necessarily have to be credible so long as the outcome or recommendation makes sense to their brain (i.e. what they want to believe).

A study I read recently :doh: (which I thought was interesting for a variety of reasons), found that steady state cardio was more effective than HIIT for fat loss. But one of the interesting points to note was that the drop out rate was higher for steady state.

Many people might read studies like these and take the findings as gospel. However, on reading this report (and many others) I couldn't help thinking there were too many unanswered variables. It's like statistics, people can skew them any which way to support their point of view.

All of the following statements play on people's fears. Some of them have more obvious ways to mitigate the fear/outcome:

Don't do HIIT or you 'might' lose muscle

Don't eat chocolate or you 'might' get fat

Don't do "X" or you 'might' die

("X" can be anything from sky diving to crossing the street)

Sure, empty glycogen stores might mean your body taps into muscle glycogen for fuel. So find out if it's possible to minimise, delay or stop that from happening. Or try to find the point at which your body responds negatively to something.

My firm belief is that information empowers. And that trying stuff for yourself to see if it works is infinitely better than believing some meme propagated by a flawed report, the ignorant, or ill-informed.

My advice is to not judge something until you've researched it (i.e. arguments for and against) and tried it.

Then, if it doesn't work for you, don't do it.

Bye

Edit: I mean you're not going to do something if you hate it, even if it is effective, are you?

[teamfatboy]

Did people see "Close Up" last night - an adjunct professor in human nutrition and a College of Education researcher and lecturer Dr Cat Pause, both from Massey, discussing 'fat'.... it followed a 31 May article in the Herald.

Essentially, the professor was arguing very carefully that excess fat is a bad thing, but that it's entirely avoidable - the researcher appeared to be advocating that in fact, there were genetic factors and cultural factors and so many other 'excuses.

The professor argued that excess fat should be treated as smoking was in the '60s and '70s, something to be actively managed out of the population because of the threats it represents. The researcher was fixated on 'fat discrimination', neatly avoiding the fact that people essentially get fat because they eat too much - and that no-one's forcing people to over-eat.

It was quite a good little piece - basically, as BB'ers all know, and most of us learn by hard experience, it's all about calories in and calories out, and the quality of those calories - but the message got lost somewhere...

Rose is right - over-eating, like anything else, is voluntary, just like sky-diving or jay-walking. What many people fail to realise is that they have a choice, and indeed a responsibility, to eat appropriately for them.

Motorcycle and bike helmets are now compulsory because they're proven to save lives - and the Professor's point was, I guess, that unless things change, we may have to look at obesity the same way.

Anyhow, this is waaaaaaay off subject - we now return you to your normal programmes

[rose]

Did people see "Close Up" last night

I don't watch TV cos it makes you fat :pfft:

Anyhow, this is waaaaaaay off subject

Is it? I didn't think so. Taking responsibility for your fat loss is still on topic. Without personal responsibility there is no effective fat loss, i.e. there might be temporary fat loss but it's not effective if the fat comes back hey?

"I am fat. I don't want to be fat" is the most effective fat loss weapon there is :wink:

[teamfatboy]

Anyhow, this is waaaaaaay off subject

Is it? I didn't think so. Taking responsibility for your fat loss is still on topic. Without personal responsibility there is no effective fat loss, i.e. there might be temporary fat loss but it's not effective if the fat comes back hey?

"I am fat. I don't want to be fat" is the most effective fat loss weapon there is :wink:

Couldn't agree more - it used to make my wife smile when we were living in America, seeing two huuuuuuuge people discussing the merits of various fat-free ice-cream products in front of the stupidmarket chillers. They may be 'fat-free' but that's not lo-calorie, people!

Getting folk to take responsibility for their %BF is exactly the same as getting them to stop smoking - if you don't, you run dramatically higher chances of serious illness.

The "researcher" had a stat about how only 5% of the population manage to keep weight-loss off - which only proves to me that they had not managed to shift their life-style effectively. They regarded a "diet" as a transitory thing, not a permanent one... grrrr... I could go on, and on, and on :grin:

[VampireChick]

Grrr yes, I almost hate the word diet now.

I've been on a decent nutrition plan and workout schedule for a good few months now and my friends keep asking me, "So when are you going to stop your diet? When are you going to start drinking again? Surely you can't do this forever."

It's a permanent lifestyle for crying out loud! I'm not going to go back to eating crap and exercising twice a week just to please my friends!

[rose]

I'm not going to go back to eating crap and exercising twice a week just to please my friends!

Zomg, Women's Weekly or whatever piece of shyte mag I read it in is right :doh: Peer pressure in full effect, your friends want you to be fat! :shock:

[Loochi]

I just take a T spoon of L-Glutamine and some BCAA caps before cardio in morning. So far so good lol.