Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

"aerobic exercise doesn't increase fat loss" complete with references

Burning_Inside

Elite Mentor
I found this on my comp. it's about 3 years old. figured I'd post it.


"Its actually a myth that the fat burning zone exists between 60-70% target heart rate.

Below is an article that was listed on Leanfitness.com (www.thefactsaboutfitness.com) which states that cardio in the "fat burning zone" has a very minor effect. You're better off with high intensity workouts to create bigger calorie deficits....


Aerobic exercise: Does it really speed up fat loss?

Despite the popularity of moderate intensity aerobic exercise, the majority of research shows that it has a minor effect on the rate of weekly fat loss. This is despite organisations such as the American Council on Exercise claiming that up to three pounds of fat loss per week is a realistic target. However, there are studies indicating that aerobic exercise encourages healthier eating patterns - more physically active people are less likely to eat foods with a high fat content. Individuals including physical activity as part of a weight loss strategy are also far more likely to keep in shape than those who rely on dieting alone.

Aerobic exercise defined

January is a busy time for most exercise centres. Most clubs seem full of enthusiastic newcomers keen to remove the excess fat they managed to accumulate during the festive season. The countless number of treadmills, rowing machines and steppers that adorn most gyms are usually in constant demand, based on the claim that moderate aerobic exercise will speed up fat loss.

A typical programme normally consists of steady state aerobic exercise (such as cycling or walking) at 70-80% of maximum heart rate. This type of workout can last anywhere between 20 and 60 minutes, depending on the fitness level of the individual (Utter et al., 1998). Although most people begin these programmes with the intention of sticking with them, the reality is often very different. After six months, half of those who begin an exercise programme will have given up (Leith, 1992), deciding they simply don't have the time to train regularly (Dishman, 1991).

Why most people give up on exercise

You and I know there are usually two reasons behind any decision - the real reason, and the one that sounds good! Individuals claiming that "they don't have the time" are often hiding the fact that their expectations were not met. Simply put, they were not making the kind of progress they were promised. The time and effort being invested in the exercise programme were not matched by any kind of tangible benefit. In other words, exercise did not produce a measurable change that was significant enough to justify the amount of effort being put in.

On an intellectual level, most people are aware that exercise can play an important role in enhancing longevity, reducing the risk of disease, and improving quality of life. However, any good salesperson will tell you that we don't make our decisions based on intellectual reasoning. We base them on emotion. Most of us exercise because, at a very basic level, we simply want to look and feel better. We exercise because it appeals to our sense of vanity and pride. We want to feel good about ourselves.

The problem comes when there is a conflict between what you expect from an exercise programme, and what you actually get. One of the keys to making sure exercise becomes a habit is to establish precisely what results you can expect from moderate aerobic exercise. And that's where the trouble lies. It's common for many individuals starting an exercise programme to expect to lose around two pounds of fat each week. Even the American Council on Exercise suggests that up to three pounds of fat loss per week is an achievable goal. But is this a realistic target? Can an aerobic exercise programme really produce such rapid changes in body composition?

Aerobic exercise has a small effect on the rate of fat loss

Some answers come from a recent review of several hundred weight loss studies, conducted by Dr Wayne Miller and colleagues at The George Washington University Medical Centre (Miller et al.,1997). The team examined 493 studies carried out between 1969 and 1994. Miller and his associates wanted to determine whether the addition of aerobic exercise to a restricted calorie diet accelerated weight loss. Twenty-five years of weight loss research showed that diet and aerobic exercise provides only a very marginal benefit (in terms of weight loss) when compared to diet alone.

TABLE 1. Average weight loss over a 15-week period

Method Weight Loss
Aerobic exercise - 3.3kg (7.3lb)
Restricted calorie diet - 7.8kg (17.2lb)
Exercise & diet - 9kg (19.8lb)

This is not the only research to cast doubt over the effectiveness of moderate aerobic exercise. A study completed at Appalachian State University also showed little effect on body composition over a 12-week period (Utter et al., 1998).

The research team assigned a group of 91 obese women to one of four groups. Group one followed a restricted calorie diet (1,200 - 1,300 calories per day), group two performed moderate aerobic exercise for 45 minutes, five days each week, while a third group combined the exercise and diet programme. The fourth group acted as controls.

TABLE 2. Fat loss following a 12-week programme of diet and exercise

Method Weight Loss
Aerobic exercise - 1.3kg (2.9lb)
Restricted calorie diet - 6.8kg (15lb)
Exercise & diet - 7.2kg (15.8lb)

"Moderate exercise training", says Alan Utter, the researcher leading the study, "…has a minor, nonsignificant effect on fat mass".

Despite the popular support for aerobic training, it does not appear to significantly accelerate fat loss, even when combined with a low calorie diet. When performed without restricting calories, moderate aerobic exercise has only a very small effect on body fat levels.

Why moderate aerobic exercise is so ineffective

This isn't surprising when you consider how many calories are contained in a pound of fat. Each pound of fat contains the equivalent of approximately 3,555 calories (McArdle et al., 1991).

The most fundamental aspect of any fat loss programme is to create a caloric deficit - to expend more calories than are consumed. Unfortunately, moderate aerobic exercise has only a moderate caloric requirement - around 187 calories per session (Utter et al., 1998). Based on this estimate, it could take up to 19 moderate aerobic workouts to lose just 0.45kg (1lb) of fat.

This might come as a surprise to those of you using the calorie counters on exercise machines to monitor energy expenditure during a workout. Unfortunately, these digital readouts are not always accurate. The most reliable way to assess energy expenditure during exercise is to measure oxygen consumption. Each litre of oxygen that you consume generates approximately five calories of energy. For example, if you were to exercise for 30 minutes and consume 30 litres of oxygen, you would have expended approximately 150 calories (five calories x 30 litres). Without directly measuring oxygen consumption, it's difficult to establish an accurate estimate of energy expenditure during a workout.

A second factor affecting the reliability of calorie counters is the difference between net and gross energy expenditure. Gross energy expenditure refers to the energy cost of exercise plus the metabolic rate. Net energy expenditure refers to just the energy cost of exercise. Calorie counters often display gross energy expenditure - so they don't accurately represent the additional energy that is used during exercise. In fact, during a 45 minute workout, net and gross energy expenditure can differ by almost 30% (Utter et al., 1998). The moral? Don't always believe what the machine tells you.

Another popular misconception is the idea that aerobic exercise increases caloric expenditure AFTER a bout of exercise, thus making a further contribution to fat loss. Unfortunately this is not always the case. Excess post-exercise oxygen consumption (the name given to the increase in caloric expenditure following a workout) is more likely to occur after high intensity exercise. Moderate aerobic exercise has very little effect on post-exercise metabolic rate (Sjodin et al., 1996). Furthermore, when an increase in physical activity results in a caloric deficit (as would occur with diet and exercise), there is evidence to show that the metabolic rate does not rise at all (Sjodin et al., 1996).

Does this mean that aerobic exercise is a waste of time? Definitely not.

Aerobic exercise reduces the risk of gaining weight

There is a good deal of evidence to suggest that aerobic exercise can help to prevent the regain in weight that is often seen following a period of dieting (Buemann & Tremblay, 1996). It can be extremely difficult to adhere to the kind of low calorie diet needed to maintain weight loss. As a result, many individuals soon return to their original weight.

Moderate aerobic exercise has been shown to play a vital role in sustaining a healthy body weight. The National Weight Control registry contains a listing of subjects who have lost at least 13.6kg (30lb) of body weight, and kept it off for at least 12 months. Although the individuals on the register used a number of different strategies to reduce body fat, there was one thing they had in common; a commitment to regular exercise. They regularly expended at least 1,306 calories through physical exercise each week (McGuire et al., 1998). Scientists from George Washington University also found that regular exercise helps to maintain higher levels of weekly fat loss 12 months after starting a diet (Miller et al., 1997).

Aerobic exercise promotes healthier patterns of eating

Physical activity as part of a fat loss strategy also appears to encourage healthier eating patterns. Individuals who exercise frequently may perceive food as 'activity fuel', and place greater importance on the quality of their diet. Californian researchers have identified a direct relationship between physical activity and various markers of dietary quality (Johnson et al., 1998). They found that physical activity was associated with healthy eating habits, such as eating fruit and vegetables. More physically active individuals were also less likely to eat foods with a high fat content. "There is a consistent pattern of findings", the researchers concluded, "indicating that more physically active young adults have more healthful diets".

Moderate intensity aerobic exercise may also reduce fat under the skin to a greater extent than diet alone. Fat in the body is stored in three main areas - under the skin, surrounding the internal organs, and between muscle cells. Fat stored under the skin (known as subcutaneous tissue) is one of the main reasons many people decide to lose weight. It's the fat you can pinch; around the waist, arms or hips. Japanese scientists have discovered that a moderate aerobic exercise programme can reduce subcutaneous tissue to a greater extent than diet alone (Abe et al., 1997). In contrast, diets appear to have a greater effect on the fat that surrounds the internal organs (known as visceral fat).

The bottom line

Moderate aerobic exercise does have a role to play in reducing body fat. However, it's important to be clear precisely what to expect from a programme of this type. On a weekly basis, you can expect an additional fat loss amounting to between 0.11kg (0.2lb) (Utter et al., 1998) and 0.22kg (0.5lb) (Miller et al., 1997), depending on the frequency and duration of the exercise.

Although this might not seem like a great deal, it's important to remember that moderate aerobic exercise is a key factor in preventing weight regain following a restricted calorie diet. The majority of research shows that individuals including physical activity as part of a weight loss strategy are far more likely to keep in shape than those who rely on dieting alone.

References

Abe, T., Kawakami, Y., Sugita, M., & Fukunaga, T. (1997). Relationship between training frequency and subcutaneous and visceral fat in women. Medicine and Science in Sports & Exercise, 29, 1549-1553
Buemann, B., & Tremblay, A. (1996). Effects of exercise training on abdominal obesity and related metabolic complications. Sports Medicine, 21, 191-212
Dishman, R.K. (1991). Increasing and maintaining exercise and physical activity. Behaviour Therapy, 22, 345-378
Johnson, M.F., Nichols, J.F., Sallis, J.F., Calfas, K.J., & Hovell, M.F. (1998). Interrelationships between physical activity and other health behaviors among University women and men. Preventive Medicine, 27, 536-544
Leith, L.M. (1992). Behaviour modification and exercise adherence: a literature review. Journal of Sport Behaviour, 15, 60-74
McArdle, W.D., Katch, F.I., Katch, V.I. (1991). Exercise physiology. Energy, nutrition, and human performance (third edition). Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia, USA
McGuire, M.T., Wing, R.R., Klem, M.L., Seagle, H.M., & Hill, J.O. (1998). Long-term maintenance of weight loss: do people who lose weight through various weight loss methods use different behaviors to maintain their weight? International Journal of Obesity, 22, 572-577
Miller, W.C., Koceja, D.M., & Hamilton, E.J. (1997). A meta analysis of the past 25 years of weight loss research using diet, exercise or diet plus exercise intervention. International Journal of Obesity, 21, 941-947
Sjodin, A.M., Forslund, A.H., Westerterp, K.R., Andersson, A.B., Forslund, J.M., & Hambraeus, L.M. (1996). The influence of physical activity on BMR. Medicine and Science in Sports & Exercise, 28, 85-91
Utter, A.C., Nieman, D.C., Shannonhouse, E.M., Butterworth, D.E., & Nieman, C.N. (1998). Influence of diet and/or exercise on body composition and cardiorespiratory fitness in obese women. International Journal of Sport Nutrition, 8, 213-222
The Facts About Fitness is hosted in the UK
UK Fax: (0870) 135-8587
US Fax: 44 870 135-8587
E-mail: [email protected]
Copyright © 2000-2001. Christian Finn. All rights reserved.
 
Interesting..... :)
 
actually......all cardio does is take away calories from your diet so in some ways cardio = calorie restriction + cardio does a body good!
 
OXANDRIN said:
actually......all cardio does is take away calories from your diet so in some ways cardio = calorie restriction + cardio does a body good!


LOL...huh??? Is that science?
 
Gotta laugh at the article myself. Cardio burns calories I know it helps keep me lean Just wish I could do more of it.
 
Jkurz, I don't mean to antagonize you, please take the following as a friendly remark. I think you have an antagonizing way of putting your opinion forward.
 
Where is the BS in this article ?

It just says at moderate intensity, cardio is not that effective at fat burning...

so what ?
 
You have one article on this, while there are millions of articles which say cardio works. Any excuse to be lazy.....
 
JKurz1 said:
because from experience, it works!


>>I will have to agree with you , it just works . When I am trying to lose fat , sometimes I don't even need to change my diet , just add 40 minutes of cardio ED and I start losing some major fat .


Victor
 
I'm very skeptical of this

One thing I have been personally doing is eating MRP's instead of meals for the very reason this article says you should. It is to drop calories. I am not on a 2000 calorie diet. Maybe 1200. Actually in terms of finances it's much cheaper to do MRP then it is to spen 6+ dollars on fast food or even more (10+) dollars to sit down and eat. The latter 2 are also higher in bad fats. Anyway, I have dropped about 10 pounds I am taking thermos before workout for energy, so I am around 235. (5' 10) I have been doing so for several months. Based on the logic posed in this article I should be less then 10% bodyfat , but I probably am at 12 - 15%. The one thing I have not been doing is cardio as I thought just what this sugested that intense workout in the weightroom and lower calories = fat burned. Unfortunately , this hasn't been the case for me.

So on to the treadmill...
 
If you really want to burn fat do your cardio right after your weight workout. I am doing 40 min of stationary bike after every workout. Amazing results.
 
I think the article is geared toward obese people, rather than BBer's who are at <15% and want to get cut up. I think it's a totally different game when you're already somewhat low bf, so I would say this article is not really applicable to almost anyone reading the thread.
 
gjohnson,

a 1200 calorie diet is not healthy for someone at your weight (or probably anyone). I would reevaluate your diet immediately.
 
ProtienFiend said:
gjohnson,

a 1200 calorie diet is not healthy for someone at your weight (or probably anyone). I would reevaluate your diet immediately.

Could you share with me (us) some specific information as to why this is not a good thing to do?? I have read sites such as this http://walking.about.com/cs/calories/l/blcalcalc.htm

That attempt to say you need x amount of calories to maintain weight. I can honestly say that I can gain lean muscle mass on 1/2 that by
1. intake 1 gram protein (whey , soy and caesin) per lb of bodyweight
2. fairly decent carbs (fruit juices , rice, pasta )
3. good fats (peanut butter , sunflower kernels , CLA , flax, cod liver oil)

Believe it or not , I cannot cut out the fat on my stomach doing this, So I started on the treadmill this week.

Any advise is appreciated
 
marqui77 said:
You have one article on this, while there are millions of articles which say cardio works. Any excuse to be lazy.....

Where did it say cardio doesn't work?? That's not what it says, or even suggests.
 
gjohnson5 said:
Could you share with me (us) some specific information as to why this is not a good thing to do?? I have read sites such as this http://walking.about.com/cs/calories/l/blcalcalc.htm

That attempt to say you need x amount of calories to maintain weight. I can honestly say that I can gain lean muscle mass on 1/2 that by
1. intake 1 gram protein (whey , soy and caesin) per lb of bodyweight
2. fairly decent carbs (fruit juices , rice, pasta )
3. good fats (peanut butter , sunflower kernels , CLA , flax, cod liver oil)

Believe it or not , I cannot cut out the fat on my stomach doing this, So I started on the treadmill this week.

Any advise is appreciated

I must agree with PF - for your size, 1200 calories diet is a sure fire way to lose every bit of hard earned muscle you have...........your body will run through those calories EASILY and begin to feast on muscle for fuel....Hell, my 5'6, 115lb girlfriend (although ver active with tennis, weighttraining, yoga, etc) eats at least 2,200........and she doesnt have an ounce of fat on her.....point being, when you deprive your body of calories/fuel, it begins to think you are starving........to combat this, it will hoard bodyfat like there is no tomorrow......the body is a very smart machine and is trained for survival. Your diet needs a big revamping bro..........trust me on this........
 
JKurz1 said:
I must agree with PF - for your size, 1200 calories diet is a sure fire way to lose every bit of hard earned muscle you have...........your body will run through those calories EASILY and begin to feast on muscle for fuel....Hell, my 5'6, 115lb girlfriend (although ver active with tennis, weighttraining, yoga, etc) eats at least 2,200........and she doesnt have an ounce of fat on her.....point being, when you deprive your body of calories/fuel, it begins to think you are starving........to combat this, it will hoard bodyfat like there is no tomorrow......the body is a very smart machine and is trained for survival. Your diet needs a big revamping bro..........trust me on this........

Agreed.

Having such a small amount of calories will also have a negative effect on your BMR (Basal Metabolic Rate). This in turn will make it MUCH more difficult to burn fat now, and in the future. Some symptoms to look for would be low body temperature, lethargy, and muscle wasting. These would definitely be signs that your calories are too low and your BMR has been affected.

It seems to me that someone has made you afraid of calories or food in general. Your best bet would be to list your diet on this board and *hopefully* someone would help you reconstruct your diet, or just do a search (or browse) of the forum to find relevant information.

As a starting place I would recommend starting at ATLEAST 10xBW for calories, 1g protein/lb of bw, and use carbs and fat depending on your personal insulin sensitivity and how active you are. Also, become knowledgable about the GI (Glycemic index) of foods. It is better not to fear carbs, rather know how to use them.

PF
 
That article doesnt take a bodybuilder's goals into consideration. The object of cardio for most on this board is to loose as much fat as possible while SPARING as much muscle as possible. Sure, if you're looking to just loose weight, than higher intensity cardio will work great, but you'll end up looking like a toothpick.
 
ProtienFiend said:
Agreed.

Having such a small amount of calories will also have a negative effect on your BMR (Basal Metabolic Rate).

Kewl , you gave me something to research. Hmmm I doubt if I would burn 1000 calories if I slept all day much less 2300. I jog 2 miles on treadmil and only burn 400 (as indicated on the machine)
Hmmm...

http://www.preventdisease.com/healthtools/articles/while_jogging.html
2 mile at my weight 235 is about 300

excerpt from http://instruct1.cit.cornell.edu/courses/ns421/BMR.html
Thyroxin: The thyroid hormone thyroxin is a key BMR regulator; the more thyroxin produced, the higher the BMR.

Thyroxin on a blood test is labeled as T4 , OK as of March.
TSH = 2.98
Total T4 = 7.7
Free T4 = 1.9
They look all inline

I think the idea of BMR is oversimplified. I need a better understanding of this idea of BMR and how it is calucated and then I will post more information.
 
audiophyle said:
That article doesnt take a bodybuilder's goals into consideration. The object of cardio for most on this board is to loose as much fat as possible while SPARING as much muscle as possible. Sure, if you're looking to just loose weight, than higher intensity cardio will work great, but you'll end up looking like a toothpick.


I guess I better go to sleep so I can get my cardio in :-)
 
gjohnson5 said:
Kewl , you gave me something to research. Hmmm I doubt if I would burn 1000 calories if I slept all day much less 2300. I jog 2 miles on treadmil and only burn 400 (as indicated on the machine)
Hmmm...
QUOTE]

From the article:

"This might come as a surprise to those of you using the calorie counters on exercise machines to monitor energy expenditure during a workout. Unfortunately, these digital readouts are not always accurate. The most reliable way to assess energy expenditure during exercise is to measure oxygen consumption. Each litre of oxygen that you consume generates approximately five calories of energy. For example, if you were to exercise for 30 minutes and consume 30 litres of oxygen, you would have expended approximately 150 calories (five calories x 30 litres). Without directly measuring oxygen consumption, it's difficult to establish an accurate estimate of energy expenditure during a workout. "
 
gjohnson5 said:
Kewl , you gave me something to research. Hmmm I doubt if I would burn 1000 calories if I slept all day much less 2300. I jog 2 miles on treadmil and only burn 400 (as indicated on the machine)
Hmmm...

http://www.preventdisease.com/healthtools/articles/while_jogging.html
2 mile at my weight 235 is about 300

excerpt from http://instruct1.cit.cornell.edu/courses/ns421/BMR.html
Thyroxin: The thyroid hormone thyroxin is a key BMR regulator; the more thyroxin produced, the higher the BMR.

Thyroxin on a blood test is labeled as T4 , OK as of March.
TSH = 2.98
Total T4 = 7.7
Free T4 = 1.9
They look all inline

I think the idea of BMR is oversimplified. I need a better understanding of this idea of BMR and how it is calucated and then I will post more information.

Your thyroid hormones do seem to be in the normal range (although you didn't list T3) so that doesnt seem to be the problem.

Going back to diet, how are your food choices? See, you can be only having 1500 calories a day but if they are all coming from "pork fried rice", what do you think the result will be?

If your BMR is reasonable you might want to investigate your insulin sensitivity. Those with a history of bad eating habits and those who are genetically predisposed to diabetes may have insulin issues. THAT is probably an even bigger issue when it comes to targeting fat loss than even BMR. Low testosterone can also be cause.

It is so very difficult to diagnose the actual cause of these things due to the vast number of contributing factors that sometimes your best bet is just trial an error. With that said, the VERY low calorie diet you are currently on... would be your first error. :)

PF
 
I think the article is showing what we already know, it's that it isn't stating the facts correctly. It seems like the author is basically saying that diet has a larger effect on fat loss than cardio alone. I don't think anyone here with half a brain would disagree with that. At the same time, look at the group that changed nothing other than adding cardio, even they lost weight.
 
JKurz1 said:
IMO read was garbage, but do as you chose.........


Im with JK1. These kinds of publishings are a joke, stuff put out to raise issues and cause confussion, perhaps to "guide"/coerce people into other shit that is convenient to another cause.

How can they say cardio is worhtless? They trying to make me stop doing cardio because a study done with a bunch of 35yrold women that joined the gym just because of their new year resolutions that 95% of them ultimately fail, and do end up failing then Im supposed to identify with this kind of piece of shit?

Cardio is valuable .
 
ProtienFiend said:
Your thyroid hormones do seem to be in the normal range (although you didn't list T3) so that doesnt seem to be the problem.

Going back to diet, how are your food choices? See, you can be only having 1500 calories a day but if they are all coming from "pork fried rice", what do you think the result will be?

If your BMR is reasonable you might want to investigate your insulin sensitivity. Those with a history of bad eating habits and those who are genetically predisposed to diabetes may have insulin issues. THAT is probably an even bigger issue when it comes to targeting fat loss than even BMR. Low testosterone can also be cause.

It is so very difficult to diagnose the actual cause of these things due to the vast number of contributing factors that sometimes your best bet is just trial an error. With that said, the VERY low calorie diet you are currently on... would be your first error. :)

PF


I think your first suggestion is more indicitive then the calories. Based on this information at webmd , even though it deals with women , ther thyroid gland information is not gender specific
http://my.webmd.com/hw/womens_conditions/hw27377.asp
Triiodothyronine (T3). T3 has a greater effect on metabolism than T4, even though T3 is normally present in lower amounts than T4. Most T3 is made from T4 by body tissues after T4 is released from the thyroid gland. The rest of the T3 is produced directly by the thyroid gland. The total amount of T3 in the blood or the amount of free T3 (FT3) can be measured. Normally, less than 1% of the T3 is free.

Free T3 is on the low end of the normal scale at 1.6. I've always know my metabolism is slow as this runs in the family after age 30. Anyway increasing calories in my case will probably lead to fat storage. I'm sure of that as I have a bunch of I'm trying to get rid of. I guess you could call this a cutting pase. I don't want to store fat , I want to get rid of it, and I don't believe you can drop fat and keep 100% of your muscle.

I will go to Chicago and get some t3 and try that. It may be that simple.
I will post info
 
> How can they say cardio is worhtless?
> They trying to make me stop doing cardio
> because a study done with a bunch of
> 35yrold women that joined the gym
> just because of their new year resolutions
> that 95% of them ultimately fail, and do
> end up failing then Im supposed to identify
> with this kind of piece of shit?

I had no intention of creating the impression that "cardio is worthless." Some people have false expectations when it comes to the rate at which they'll lose fat with a program of aerobic exercise. My goal was to point out both the benefits and the drawbacks of "traditional" aerobic exercise as a way to speed up fat loss. Aerobic exercise is something I do myself and also recommend to others.

Best wishes,

Christian

Christian Finn, M.Sc.
Founder, The Facts About Fitness Ltd.
http://thefactsaboutfitness.com/
 
chipvideo said:
If you really want to burn fat do your cardio right after your weight workout. I am doing 40 min of stationary bike after every workout. Amazing results.

Thats what I did for some time with amazing results.

oh and I went thru the entire article and it does have some good points. But we already know that resistance training is the one that keeps energy expenditure after the session and not the cardio. But one thing could be true, and that is that cardio might access fat stores for energy better than cutting calories on its own. Like jk1 said, doing the math on calories is not the only factor for fatloss. Obviously the best regime for fatloss is all _ _ cardio+resistance+diet.

Resorting to only one of the options are just for the trend following types or new comers
 
Top Bottom