Best for fat burning----walking or running

[JG1]

F'nshredded:

It is realatively easy to talk the body into burning fat preverentially over carbohydrates, simply exercise on an empty stomach and keep the exercise intensity down.

jb

So would doing as he recommends....4mph at max incline for 30 minutes in the morning be too high of an intensity for fat burning?

 

[40butpumpin]

That's a 15 minute mile, I was doing a 14 minute mile on really rough terraine so I'd have to say no, it's not too high. But I was doing around 4 miles at a little under an hour, seemed perfect. It's when I started jogging it is when I got into trouble...damn shin splints.

 

[Fukkenshredded]

Ok, another thing to remember is that the majority of the fatburning is going to occur outside of the gym. If you engage in a moderate intensity exercise, you will burn fat, true enough.

The thing about sprints is that you only have to do five or six all out sprints to get some great results. The idea is to set the body into a mode that burns up the fat all day long. there are plenty of studies (for all ya intellectuals out dere...) that suppoet the notion that HIGH INTENSITY ANAEROBIC EXERCISE is the most effective pathway to such a condition.

The theory has proven to be true in my case.

Example: Warm up walk for five minutes, followed by a sixty second all out (12mph) sprint, followed by two minute walk, another sprint, and so on, until I literaly lock up, which only take a few minutes. Just go to total depletion, then walk another fifteen minutes or so uphill.

All I am doing is trying to help out here. I am not trying to preach from a soapbox about some esoteric theory. This approach works, people. Believe me.

 

[Seth]

Here is an interesting article on high intensity cardio:



anabolicmass.com



And isn’t 12 mph the same as running a 5 min mile? That is FAST!

 

[biteme]

This is just my thinking – I don’t know crap but this seems logical to me:
Weight loss is taking in less calories then you consume.
Running, walking and swimming all burn more calories then not doing those things.
You can either do them or eat less food.
I don’t believe that if you burn 400 cals running you will lose more muscle then if you just ate 400 cals less that day. This may not apply to you if you are trying to get from 7% bf to 6% body fat.
Either way you have to be under your maintenance level to lose weight.
If your body started to break down some muscle to fuel your workout, then the extra 400 cals that you consume would go towards rebuilding your muscles – remember, you are still under your maintenance amount of cals, so it is not going to be converted to fat.

Something I see you people leaving out is that even when you are through with your aerobic session your metabolic rate is increased for a good while and you burn more calories at rest. Damn this isn't rocket science. Just get a good book. So much bad info on these boards.

 

[biteme]

John G: You're not serious, are you? You're suggesting that if HR gets too high you stop burning fat? Don't mean to flame son, but you're clueless on this one.

DaMann. Of course skill is a factor. Do you think a skilled runner burns as much energy running a mile as someone who is out of shape? If so, you're way off track.

DKH. The good swimmers dont have good bodies because they're good swimmers. They're good swimmers beause they have good bodies! The fat swimmers don't do as well.

Seth: True, everything burns calories. That's the point I'm trying to get across. There is nothing magical about aerobics.

You can only do a certin amount of activity before you overtrain. A bodybuilder should do the maximum amount of bodybuilding. Why waste energy with something that doesn't build muscle and burns less calories than lifting weights? AND PLEASE NOBODY WRITE TO SAY IT'S TO RAISE HEART RATE! Weightlifting raises heart rate just fine.

What makes you an expert? What are your credentials? I know that when I only lifted weights, I was in poor cardio condition. I could bench press 400 pounds but couldn't run around the block without feeling like I was going to pass out. I disagree with you and many exercise scientists would as well. A well rounded exercise program includes weight training and cardio work. When I began incorporating cardio into my workouts, it made a world of difference. There are numerous benefits you get from intense aerobic exercise that you don't get from weightlifting alone. Common sense tells me this as well as the scientific reports I have read. My body doesn't lie.

 

[jboldman]

Seth, that was a great reference. I think the problem we have here is that of black and white. One side says that aerobics suck and weightlifting is the only way to go, the other says, whoa there! Aerobics is a necessary part of any training regime, not only for fat loss but for cardiovascular health. THe truth , I suspect, lies in between. THere is absolutely no doubt that aerobic conditioning leads to a significant reducting in CVR(cardio vascular risk) arguably more reduction than weightlifting(backed up by at least one sudy reported in a well respected peer reviewed journal. It is also an incontrovertable fact that fat is preferntially burned at lower exercise intensity while carbohydrate is the preferred fuel at high intensity(plus 70% VO2 Max.) Now, before you get your undies in a bundle, Nelson, hear me out! By looking at the big picture, it seems that there is room for all to come to the party, it looks like for overall fat loss, interval training is the king for high/low intensity aerobics/anaerobic training vs aerobic only training(although both burn fat and improve cvr. For those not interested in anything other than resistance training. just interested in fat burning it seems that there may be some truth to the notion that resistance training raises the bmr for a long period of time and in an equal energy expenditure situation will burn more fat than low intensity exercise. It is not inconceivable that a comparison can be made to interval training(running/sprinting) to resistance exercise done in such a fashion that the heart rate fluctuates bwtween aerobic and anaerobic. I suggest that there is room for both if done properly. And just to prove that I am open minded on this subject and respond to informtion as I receive it that changes my thinking, expanding my knowledge here is a study just for nelson! <GRIN>

jb
ps, note the standard remarks about well respected, peer riewed, yada yada
===========================================
J Appl Physiol 2002 Oct 11; [epub ahead of print] Related Articles, Links


Effect of Resistance Exercise on Postprandial Lipemia.

Petitt DS, Arngrimsson SA, Cureton KJ.

Department of Exercise Science, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA.

The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of resistance exercise on postprandial lipemia. Fourteen young men and women participated in each of three treatments: 1) control (CON), 2) resistance exercise (RE), and 3) aerobic exercise (AE) estimated to have an energy expenditure (EE) equal that for RE. Each trial consisted of performing a treatment on Day 1 and ingesting a fat-tolerance test meal 16 hours later (Day 2). Resting metabolic rate and fat oxidation were measured at baseline and at 3 and 6 hours postprandial on Day 2. Blood was collected at baseline and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 hours after meal ingestion. RE and AE were similar in EE (1.7 +/- 0.1 vs 1.6 +/- 0.1 MJ, respectively; means +/- SE), as measured using the Cosmed K4b(2). Baseline triglycerides (TG) were significantly lower after RE than after CON (19%) and AE (21%). Further, the area under the postprandial response curve (AUC) for TG, adjusted for baseline differences, was significantly lower after RE than after CON (14%) and AE (18%). Resting fat oxidation was significantly greater after RE than after CON (21%) and AE (28%). These results indicate that resistance exercise lowers baseline and postprandial TG, and increases resting fat oxidation, 16 hours after exercise.