I grew up in a world that didn't have cardio...

[maverick2112]

Anyone thats thinks they need cardio try what I did........Last summer I was doing my cardio with a heart rate monitor on and I was noticing my heart rate was between 130-150....the fat burning zone listed on the treadmill........so I did this for about 3 weeks while lifting weights 3 days a week. My cardio session were for about 30-45 minutes............then one day I wore the heart rate monitor while I was lifting ands guess what.........I could easily keep my hr at 130-150 bpm as long as I was'nt taking really long rest periods between sets...........So I got to thinking if my heart is working the same as if I were running why not just lift and kill 2 birds with one stone...........and guess what else I noticed.......(1)..My workouts were a helluva lot better without the cardio. (2)It seems to me that the cardio effected my recovery process in a negative way....................(3) and last but not least I think alot of people do cardio to feel better about their crappy eating habits.............if you are eating a clean diet and lifting weights you shouldnt really need cardio to get a low bodyfat............

 

[bicepts101]

No it isn't.

The problem that so many people don't get is that the discussion here is not about the benefits of heart health through exercise. It's about how those benifits can be obtained. And that's possible with weight training, sports or simply an active lifestyle. Traditional "aerobic exercise" is less effective, potentially harmful and ultimately unneccesary. It that's too difficult to comprehend, there really is no need to discuss this further.

In weight training were we or were we not taught to hit all muscles in everwhich direction. Cardio is another direction to hit you entire body at one time. No matter how any body puts it there is no substitute for running 2 miles. You can't get its benefits from weight training.

Now on the other hand i think there are many form of cardio that are usless like ever single aerobics video ever made. But there is just no substitute for running.

 

[Zoomster]

Interesting, I used to tell people that progressive weight training was a better way to lose weight than cardio and get laughed at.

 

[jboldman]

Nelson, there is always(well not always) a germ of truth behind your ramblings but you make it so hard on those of us have have even a rudimentary knowledge of logic, statistics, and experimental design. My god man, quoting examples of 1 person to prove your points! If only you could just constrain yourself to what you believe and what you know and maybe seek professional counseling in logic we could learn soemthing from you but when you support your ideas with this kind of rhetoric it makes it very difficult. I'm trying, i really am.

The only real thing i could glean from this last post is that running is a potentially harmful pastime which, i would agree, it can be. But running is NOT the only form of cardio.

And finally, there actually was a study done comparing the different types of exercise and cardiovascualr risk(i think we can all agree that there is a link here with longevity). Now we can all argue experimental paradigm but at least in this study, running was associated with a 42% reduction in risk, weight training was asociated with a 23% reduction in risk. This would at least "indicate" that there is some benefit to cardio, perhaps even moreso than weight training. It certainly opens the door.

jb


======================================
JAMA
Exercise Type and Intensity in Relation to Coronary Heart Disease in Men


Mihaela Tanasescu, MD; Michael F. Leitzmann, MD; Eric B. Rimm, ScD; Walter C. Willett, MD; Meir J. Stampfer, MD; Frank B. Hu, MD


Context Studies have shown an inverse relationship between exercise and risk of coronary heart disease (CHD), but data on type and intensity are sparse.

Objective To assess the amount, type, and intensity of physical activity in relation to risk of CHD among men.

Design, Setting, and Participants A cohort of 44 452 US men enrolled in the Health Professionals' Follow-up Study, followed up at 2-year intervals from 1986 through January 31, 1998, to assess potential CHD risk factors, identify newly diagnosed cases of CHD, and assess levels of leisure-time physical activity.

Main Outcome Measure Incident nonfatal myocardial infarction or fatal CHD occurring during the follow-up period.

Results During 475 755 person-years, we documented 1700 new cases of CHD. Total physical activity, running, weight training, and rowing were each inversely associated with risk of CHD. The RRs (95% confidence intervals [CIs]) corresponding to quintiles of metabolic equivalent tasks (METs) for total physical activity adjusted for age, smoking, and other cardiovascular risk factors were 1.0, 0.90 (0.78-1.04), 0.87 (0.75-1.00), 0.83 (0.71-0.96), and 0.70 (0.59-0.82) (P<.001 for trend). Men who ran for an hour or more per week had a 42% risk reduction (RR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44-0.77) compared with men who did not run (P<.001 for trend). Men who trained with weights for 30 minutes or more per week had a 23% risk reduction (RR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.61-0.98) compared with men who did not train with weights (P = .03 for trend). Rowing for 1 hour or more per week was associated with an 18% risk reduction (RR, 0.82; 05% CI, 0.68-0.99). Average exercise intensity was associated with reduced CHD risk independent of the total volume of physical activity. The RRs (95% CIs) corresponding to moderate (4-6 METs) and high (6-12 METs) activity intensities were 0.94 (0.83-1.04) and 0.83 (0.72-0.97) compared with low activity intensity (<4 METs) (P = .02 for trend). A half-hour per day or more of brisk walking was associated with an 18% risk reduction (RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.67-1.00). Walking pace was associated with reduced CHD risk independent of the number of walking hours.

Conclusions Total physical activity, running, weight training, and walking were each associated with reduced CHD risk. Average exercise intensity was associated with reduced risk independent of the number of MET-hours spent in physical activity.

Every generation is willing to laugh at the foolshness of the convebtional wisdom of the past, yet they're unwilling to admit it exists in the present. They want to think NOW, they got in right. Then the next generaton will be the ones laughing.

And by the way, using athletes as examples of cardio conditioning is meaningless for 3 reasons.

One they don't train for bodybuilding purposes. They train to excel at their sport.

Two: It doesn't matter if all that running they do cause shin splints and effusion of the patella nd osteophytes when they're 35. By then, their career is over.

Three: More and more athletes are forgoing traditional aerobics and doing more quick paced (i.e. anerobic) cardio conditioning.

The brain trust who says weight training doesn't burn as many calories as aerobics is simply dead wrong and that's provable.

And finally, there is absolutely no evidece that aerobic activity will extend lifesppan more than any other form of exercise. Let me say that last part one more time for those who are a little slow -- MORE THAN ANY OTHER FORM OF EXERCISE!

Jim Fix did aerobics ervery day. Heart attack at 37. Dead at 42

John Grimick did weight training as his form of exercise until he died at 85.

Bob Hope played golf. Alive at 100.

And Sofas point was excellent about how the medical profession not too long ago had all these asinine theories about the evils of weight training. Now they recommend it. Today they say aerobics are good. The next generation will know better. And people will laugh at what idiots all the people who rode stationary bikes were.


And on that note, I'm out of here. I'll be out of town for a week. Fight amongst yourselves.

 

[poantrex]

Someone tell me why nelson came back....its as if he takes special joy in posting non-sensical bullshit with few facts to back it up.

 

[jboldman]

There is no doubt why he comes back. He enjoys the attention/notoriety and since his book is internet based he lives and dies by the internet and since this may be the biggest board on the net......

But, I enjoy his posts in a perverse way, keeps things interesting and every once in a while he makes some good points. I do see him as a voice of reason and moderation among a world or "more is better." I just wish he would clean up his logical arguement skills. That last post would have gotten him laughed out of a freshman logic course.

jb

 

[Bulldog_10]

Nelson, there is always(well not always) a germ of truth behind your ramblings but you make it so hard on those of us have have even a rudimentary knowledge of logic, statistics, and experimental design. My god man, quoting examples of 1 person to prove your points! If only you could just constrain yourself to what you believe and what you know and maybe seek professional counseling in logic we could learn soemthing from you but when you support your ideas with this kind of rhetoric it makes it very difficult. I'm trying, i really am.

The only real thing i could glean from this last post is that running is a potentially harmful pastime which, i would agree, it can be. But running is NOT the only form of cardio.

And finally, there actually was a study done comparing the different types of exercise and cardiovascualr risk(i think we can all agree that there is a link here with longevity). Now we can all argue experimental paradigm but at least in this study, running was associated with a 42% reduction in risk, weight training was asociated with a 23% reduction in risk. This would at least "indicate" that there is some benefit to cardio, perhaps even moreso than weight training. It certainly opens the door.

jb


======================================
JAMA
Exercise Type and Intensity in Relation to Coronary Heart Disease in Men


Mihaela Tanasescu, MD; Michael F. Leitzmann, MD; Eric B. Rimm, ScD; Walter C. Willett, MD; Meir J. Stampfer, MD; Frank B. Hu, MD


Context Studies have shown an inverse relationship between exercise and risk of coronary heart disease (CHD), but data on type and intensity are sparse.

Objective To assess the amount, type, and intensity of physical activity in relation to risk of CHD among men.

Design, Setting, and Participants A cohort of 44 452 US men enrolled in the Health Professionals' Follow-up Study, followed up at 2-year intervals from 1986 through January 31, 1998, to assess potential CHD risk factors, identify newly diagnosed cases of CHD, and assess levels of leisure-time physical activity.

Main Outcome Measure Incident nonfatal myocardial infarction or fatal CHD occurring during the follow-up period.

Results During 475 755 person-years, we documented 1700 new cases of CHD. Total physical activity, running, weight training, and rowing were each inversely associated with risk of CHD. The RRs (95% confidence intervals [CIs]) corresponding to quintiles of metabolic equivalent tasks (METs) for total physical activity adjusted for age, smoking, and other cardiovascular risk factors were 1.0, 0.90 (0.78-1.04), 0.87 (0.75-1.00), 0.83 (0.71-0.96), and 0.70 (0.59-0.82) (P<.001 for trend). Men who ran for an hour or more per week had a 42% risk reduction (RR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44-0.77) compared with men who did not run (P<.001 for trend). Men who trained with weights for 30 minutes or more per week had a 23% risk reduction (RR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.61-0.98) compared with men who did not train with weights (P = .03 for trend). Rowing for 1 hour or more per week was associated with an 18% risk reduction (RR, 0.82; 05% CI, 0.68-0.99). Average exercise intensity was associated with reduced CHD risk independent of the total volume of physical activity. The RRs (95% CIs) corresponding to moderate (4-6 METs) and high (6-12 METs) activity intensities were 0.94 (0.83-1.04) and 0.83 (0.72-0.97) compared with low activity intensity (<4 METs) (P = .02 for trend). A half-hour per day or more of brisk walking was associated with an 18% risk reduction (RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.67-1.00). Walking pace was associated with reduced CHD risk independent of the number of walking hours.

Conclusions Total physical activity, running, weight training, and walking were each associated with reduced CHD risk. Average exercise intensity was associated with reduced risk independent of the number of MET-hours spent in physical activity.

But jboldman...you must understand that one person lifted weights and lived until he was 85, and another person did cardio all the time and died at 42...so cardio must kill people.

And maverick...what you did was find a new way to do cardio. If you can lift weights and keep your HR that high, that's just another form of cardio...it's not that you're NOT DOING the cardio...you just did it a different way. Probably not as effective at being constantly active, but pretty good nonetheless. And your workouts probably got better because you were doing less work. That's the one possible downfall (other than the musculoskeletal strain it can place on the body if you do high impact work) of cardio, if you're already doing alot of weight lifting and other work, you may overtrain. You just have to plan your cardio sessions better.

 

[poantrex]

Let me state this one more time: the key to burning a maximal amount of calories (which is obviously desirable for burning fat) is CONTINUOUS ACTIVITY. *CONTINUOUS*, not 2 minutes of activy, then 2 minutes of rest, and so on. There is no doubt that weight lifting will elevate your heart rate, but not at the rate that a good hard 15 minute run will. High intensity cardio is far superior for burning fat, based on my own experience.