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

Best for fat burning----walking or running

This is a lot of intellectualizing about a very simple concept. If we assume that increasing physical exertion (force) over a given unit time will increase the caloric expenditure (obvious, since energy is the variant, and energy is, after all, heat) over that same unit of time, then where is the mystery? Increase the energy expenditure, and you increase the amount of tissue burned to produce the energy. All that is required is finding a way to instruct the body to get the energy form the fat cell preferentially. So, the first objective is to increase the intensity, and the second objective is to prioritize fat as the primary energy source.

The first objective is easily met. We can compute the force needed by using the equation F=ma, and we will quickly see that on a level surface, the factors are: leg turn over speed, stride length, and body weight. Obviously, this means that it is possible for a fast walk to be more effective than a slow run, provided the striding is done correctly. This also illustrates why sprints are the obvious choice for high intensity--you have maximum turn over, stride length, and bodyweight propulsion. That equals maximum energy output.

Ok, now about this muscle wasting idea. First off, muscle yields much less energy per pound, about 600 calories in fact. So it seems to vanish at a pretty good rate once it starts burning. But we can tap fat first, simply by entering into ketosis. Well, some of us are pretty close to ketosis in the morning, at least a lot closer than we are at night. We may even be close enough to deplete the glycogen within the first few minutes of cardio, and thereby we tap our fat stores pretty early in the routine.

Now what I do is this. I take about a gram or so of ALA along with my energy drink, sans calories, and hit the sauna until I feel that lightheadedness come on. Then, I hit the treadmill and start those windsprints. I always have a bottle of orange juice right there, and when things get dicey, I sip that juice.

This works, people. This works better than anything else, if you can pull it off.

In second place is a fast uphill walk with weights. Just hit the ALA and sauna/xenadrine, and get a couple of five pound dumbells, put the incline at a maximum and walk uphill at four mph for thirty minutes. Do it first thing in the am on an empty stomach, for the reasons mentioned above.

I don't know what this contrary analysis/skepticism from this Nelson guy is stemming from, but at first glance it looks an awful lot like arrogance.

Its real simple. Get a ketostick, try the above exercise regimen, and see the results for yourself. The stick will tell you what you already guessed, and within a week, the fat will be visibly lessened.

Add to this the presence of a good anticatabolic, such as trenbelone or winstrol, and you will have absolutely no trouble whatsoever getting lean in short order. It isn't easy at all, but it sure is effective.

After all, the question of muscle wasting is the only real valid one, and that question is effectively answered by that ever reliable fina/winny stack. Both can keep muscle in place even in a calorie deficit, and that is without any exercise whatsoever. I can fire enough fina/winny and just eat less, and I will start looking ripped, all the while staying pretty strong. When I add those sprints and uphill walks with weights, I get from seven percent to around four or finve within two weeks, easy.

Plenty of pics of me around here to prove this, folks.

Best of luck.
 
I have been jogging 4 minutes; then doing sprints, running top speed 20 seconds, walking 10 seconds, repeating this 8 times to total 4 minutes; then jogging another 4 minutes, for a total overall of 12 minutes. All in a hilly area. It has worked pretty well for me.
 
thanks

for the response Andy13. Yeah, I've taken my heart rate while weight training. It does get up there, usually to about 130-150bpm if I'm really cranking out the sets, like on back/chest superset day.
 
Fukkenshredded,

Can you give an example of your windsprint routine.... like speed, duration of the sprints, is it one long sprint or several sprints with fast walking (rest) in between.

trying to set something like this up for myself, just don't know where to start.

thanks,
 
You could not be more wrong. I do NOT assume that one study with a small "n" is "hard evidence" simply it is a study done that provides us with information that under the design of the study certain things occurred which were reported, these results would "seem" to lend support to a very popular notion. Since when do the words "seems to indicate" equal hard evidence? Who is using bad logic here? Just because you say , if the order were reversed the results would be different does not make it so! I'll see if I can find the full text of the study to make sure there was suffiicient time between trials, yes they were seperate trials. BTW, my read does not indicate that the first three were in a fasted state, they were conducted a certain time after eating, to me that is not a fasted state. Maybe we were reading different studies.... Besides I am not sure how changing the order would have any effect, it sounds like the trials were done on seperate days. You might try to be somewhat less condescending, you are probably not the only person in the world who has had graduate level stat courses and experimental design. You have actually disproved nothing unless your opinion is somehow all that it takes. Also, i understand that just because a study does not exist does not mean that something is not so, give me a break! Give us something to go on here besides your very colorful "fork in the eye" analogy, the physiology of what we are talking about is not rocket science, I would think if someone took some time to dig out the texts we could get a lot of answers. At least that way we would not be basing our opinions on "flawed" studies and very subjective opinions.

And finally, what in the world has your remark about testosterone got to do with what we are talking about? Remember, you are the one who brought up "logic", I believe the logical fallacy you are trying to think about right now would be "false analogy" or "the two objects or events being compared are relevantly dissimilar". I suppose i fyou want we could take a look at the research on the effect of aerobic exercise on test levels but we might want to save that for another thread.

I had hoped that you would be able to discuss this without inuendo using your considerable knowledge and bring to the table some relevant information. I am still waiting. :)

Nelson Montana said:
jboldman: This is the problem:

You assume that because a "study" was done it is "hard evidence," as you say. But I just disproved the study! It was not well controlled! It wasn't even conducted properly! Yet, that logic eludes you. You say I am not offering "hard evidence."Logic is evidence, bro. A misconducted study is bullshit. But some people love the numbers and the titles, ya know?

And another thing. Just because a study doesn't exist doesn't mean something isn't so. A_LOT OF PEOPLE NEED TO GET THAT THROUGH THEIR HEADS!!! There isn't a single study to show that poking a five inch fork into my eye is any worse than poking a four inch fork into my eye. But LOGIC tells me it's gonna hurt.

BTW, there are plenty of studies that show aerobic activity lowers testosterone, so let it go man. You're wrong. BUT...you can do and believe whatever you want.
 
Funken shredded: You're all over the place. First you're trying to get glycogen depleted, then you're sipping orange juice. Then you say you're "more in ketosis in the morning" which doesn't make sense because you either are or you aren't and if you are, it isn't good. Then you talk about avoiding catabolism by using drugs! What's your point?

When someone says "it worked for me" it is meaningless. EVERYTHING works. But some things work better han others and some things will continue to work whereas others won't. That's the whole argument.

jbolderman: We're just not going to see eye to eye here. You mentionend "hard evidence" and I was trying to show that the evidence you produced was flawed. What does losing testosterone have to do with catabolism? Do I really have to explain this? What you're not understanding is that results slow down over time. Comparing the results from the early testing to that of the later testing distorts the outcome. A more accurate test would be to split the people up into 2 groups and compare the results from those who had fasted and those who didn't but even then, there are countless variables.
 
Nelson:

Your right of course, guess we are not seeing eye to eye, seems like you are addressing a more global issue while I was addressing a very specific issue, ie do you burn more fat in a fed or unfed state. Within that narrow parameter, I'm not sure test has much significance, perhaps. I also believe you when you state that results slow down over time, I am just having a problem with results slowing down over three or four bouts of exercise, and, if results (fat burning) slowed down why the later bout, that of the fasting state as opposed to the post prandial previous states showed more fat loss. BTW, thanks for not coming back with a flame, I am really interested in these questions both the specific issue I was talking about and the more global ones. i have always been a proponenet of the idea that reasonably intelligent folk with reasonable attitudes can eventually see their way to reasonable solution/answers.

jb
==============



"jbolderman: We're just not going to see eye to eye here. You mentionend "hard evidence" and I was trying to show that the evidence you produced was flawed. What does losing testosterone have to do with catabolism? Do I really have to explain this? What you're not understanding is that results slow down over time. Comparing the results from the early testing to that of the later testing distorts the outcome. A more accurate test would be to split the people up into 2 groups and compare the results from those who had fasted and those who didn't but even then, there are countless variables."
 
Counterstrike said:
Advaik

how do you suggest for one to deal with shin splints? i started jogging a while back 2 miles 3 times a week tog et in shape but stopped for 3 months b/c shin splints never went away and got worst. If i start running is that too hard for a beginner or atleast one that been layback for a while? will it improve endurance and stamina faster than jogging? I want and need distance like up to 5-6 miles so I don't think sprint will work for me.
Would Nolva help with this fat reduction at 10 mg ed?

I just got out of the Army, I've been running non-stop 3-4 times a week for 4 years. Mon and Wed we ran 4 miles and Fridays we ran 6 miles. Once a month we JOGGED 12 miles. I've had to deal with shin splints right before a PT test. One of my buddies showed me a trick to deal with it, and it has always worked for me since. Buy some cloth wrist bans that basketball players normally wear, and slip them over your shin where the splints normally accure. I don't know why it works so well, it just does. Hope this helps.
 
Sheesh...

Closer to ketosis in the morning, bro. Semantics notwithstanding, the point is easily recognized. The orange juice is there in case I get too faint too quickly. Five grams of sugar is easily burned very quickly. Just hop along right on the border of ketosis, see.

And what is my point about using drugs for anticatabolic benefits?

You gotta be kidding. This is a board dedicated to that very discussion. The use of steroids to assist muscle building/prevent muscle wasting.

Not a terribly difficult point to internalize.

Think of this another way. I have outlined an approach to fatburning/muscle preservation that has worked well for me, and has worked well for every single person that I know that has tried it.

What you have done is argue that nothing is really provable, from an intellectual standpoint. But we are all waiting for a tangible routine, even a suggestion, that could serve as a real world approach to this challenge.

Now, I am no doctor...I am not even a bodybuilder. But I recognize that there are some irrefutable facts, and while they may be difficult to support with syntax, especially in the absence of a stack of studies, at the end of the day, the proof is in the results.

What are you going to do with your clients who want to win a contest...send them up on stage with a stack of studies and a microphone?

I will stand by my advice on this one. And moreover, I will challenge you to disprove the effectiveness of this approach in the real world. In other words, try it out and see what happens.

In the meanwhile, I will be watching for an alternative suggestion from you, and I will even undertake a routine that you suggest, so that I can add to my own empirical knowledge.

How much simpler could this be? Engage in exercise that burns tissue, encourages muscle trauma, and take drugs that preserve muscle and encourage muscle growth. Be as intense as possible in both regards, factoring in all available safety issues. Voila. Ripped and muscular.
 
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
============================================
Am J Physiol 1995 Dec;269(6 Pt 1):E1031-6 Related Articles, Links


Effect of physical exercise on glycogen turnover and net substrate utilization according to the nutritional state.
============================================
Proc Nutr Soc 1995 Mar;54(1):107-21 Related Articles, Links


Fuel selection, muscle fibre.

Hultman E.
 
Top Bottom