Movement, Mobility, Strength & Conditioning for life. Increase skill, mobility, strength, flexibility, agility, coordination. Improve your ability to conquer daily and unforeseen physical challenges. Get back to moving like a Human was meant to!
Vlad, I think you may have misunderstood. High intensity does not limit how much you can burn at all. The argument is that high intensity may burn fewer calories because you are working for a shorter period of time, but it build muscle and increases your metabolism so that you continue to burn calories long after you stop. Low intensity only works while you are doing it!
It's possible I may have misunderstood, however, high intensity does limit. The average person (myself included)will not do a high intensity workout for more than 20 minutes, and after 10 minutes, the intesity begins to significantly drop off. You can't do high intensity for long and therefore, you're limited in the number of calories you can burn. Low to medium intensity though, an average person could keep up for roughly 45-60 minutes (equivalent to a 10k run). As well, I don't know how significant this burning calories 'long after you stop' a high intensity workout really is. And it's not like you just stop burning calories after a run either. My point is that both high and low intensity workout have their good points, however, in my humble oppinion endurance in this case will win over intensity if it's strictly about calories.
Vlad, I have read many articles which have confirmed the whole calorie burning issue of high vs. low intensity work ... you DO burn more calories long after a high intensity work out and you do NOT burn calories once you stop a low intensity work out. You can't argue with the science. You are right though, you can only maintain high intensity for a short period of time so, during the activity, you may burn fewer calories than if you spent an hour running. However, the other benefits of high intensity carry over far longer than the low intensity and, in the long run, help your body to burn more calories in the course of the whole day ... while you are NOT active. Don't forget ... endurance training will eventually burn "calories" in the form of muscle. And let's not consider short circuit training as the only form of high intensity. A strength work out ... if you are lifting HEAVY (1 - 5 rep max), is high intensity work that builds muscle, increases metabolism, and helps your body burn calories long after you stop your workout ... even though you are not going as fast as you can and it is spread out over a longer period of time. The issue here may be what people consider as high intensity. :)
Rick, when jogging, the calorie burning does not stop on the last step of the run. The same effect is present as with high intensity....just not intense. You don't just "not burn calories once you stop." Maybe if you're walking slightly faster than usual for your workout. Even then, the effect is still there.
I'm not arguing that you burn more when you stop after an intense workout as opposed to a low intensity one.
Again, this all depends as you said what people consider 'high intensity'. I'll buy that a sub-5-minute-Fran will burn more than a 5k run done in 23 minutes, but will it burn more than a 10K run done in 45-50 minutes?
More over, you can do a low intensity workout everyday without injury, damage to the immune system, etc. With high intensity, you need rest. So, you can't do as many of them. If I was trying to loose 7000 calories a week by workouts, I wouldn't do 7 Fran's, but I'd jog everyday and still be healthy at the end of it.
I don't agree that you won't get injured running, even "jogging" every day. Statistics have shown that 85% of runners experience injuries when running ... an indisputable fact. Mostly because people run improperly and suffer from shin splints, plantar fasciitis, ankle strains, hip and back problems, etc. As for damage to the immune system, excessive training has been proven to cause damage, regardless of the "intensity". Please read a these two posts that I linked to some time ago on the subject: and . Many people train excessively for a long time and get away with it, especially when they are young, but it doesn't mean it is healthy. ;)
Sorry, the original pasting of the links did not take!
"http://www.slowtwitch.com/mainheadings/features/health_doping_slowtwitch2.html" and "http://www.fitnessspotlight.com/2009/3/18/cardio-priority-fat-loss/"
PS. If you are trying to lose 7000 calories a week, you should probably start by cutting out the Super Sized fries and soft drinks! ;) LOL!
Seriously, too many people think training is the answer to losing weight. One lousy meal will negate the relatively few calories burned on your 60 minute run and you will be no further ahead.
If weight loss is your goal, then a proper diet is your first step, not running every day.
By the way...not to start another debate but in your other post you mention that the cavemen ate mostly protein. Is there anything that actually supports this? I would think that meat would be a once-a-week thing at best.
LOL! I think we agree ... to disagree! :) But if you can show me the research that supports long steady state cardio as a successful way to lose weight (long term) and remain strong, powerful, muscular, flexible, agile, athletic, co-ordinated, youthful and healthy, then I will reconsider!
With regards to the other post, I don't pull this stuff out of my butt ... I have read articles, papers, studies, etc. which come to these conclusions. Take it for what it's worth ... unless you know someone who actually followed a caveman around, then we have to rely on the research.
Truth is, cavemen ate whatever they could hunt or gather. I imagine there were long periods without food, then they would gorge on meat when they made a kill and eat whatever leafy things, fruit, nuts and seeds that they could forage.
I seriously doubt that the caveman had a wheat field, corn field, or a McDonalds to get Super Sized fries and soft drinks. ;)
Great reading! You can't dispute the science. The truth of the matter is that if you want to run 45-60 minutes like I used to. Then specialize in running and become weaker in all other areas of fitness. Lets see, last January I was 206 lbs. I started high intensity work-outs and dropped to 182 lbs, of course with the help of proper nutrition. I used to run 40-50 km's a week. I could breath through my nose at a 10km/h pace. Running became very very easy for me. Since changing my exercise routine to high intensity work-outs I am able to run longer, harder, and faster when I decide to run. This is no myth, I see it when I run. I wake up full of energy and retire at the end of the day full of energy. Ok maybe you don't stop burning calories on the last step of a run, but shortly after taking your ipod earplugs out O.o
I never said that doing low paced workouts are the way to go. I based my argument strictly from a calorie burning perspective. All else was not on the table for me.
Personally I think both intense workouts and endurance are important...that's why I do them both and all in between. After all, that's what crossfit really is (to me anyways).
Vlad, you are correct ... we did wander off the topic of "calories burned during the activity". On that basis alone, I agree that spending 60 minutes running might burn more calories than a 10 minute circuit.
And I agree that endurance is important as well and respect the efforts you make to attain that. You obviously balance that with other work (circuit & strength), so it is all good! :)
There are many Crossfit junkies who still love to run and do so on a regular basis. I never meant to imply that running was useless or a waste of time.
I want to simply point out that, if a person has limited time to train, their efforts are best spent doing short high intensity work (which does build endurance as well) rather than long hours doing steady state cardio, because of the added benefits. And if a person wishes to lose weight, their efforts are best spent getting their diet in order instead of relying on the training to do it.
15 comments:
So longer is not always better....
This is a biased article strictly from a calorie burning perspective. High intensity limits how much you can burn if that's the argument.
Vlad
Vlad, I think you may have misunderstood. High intensity does not limit how much you can burn at all. The argument is that high intensity may burn fewer calories because you are working for a shorter period of time, but it build muscle and increases your metabolism so that you continue to burn calories long after you stop. Low intensity only works while you are doing it!
It's possible I may have misunderstood, however, high intensity does limit. The average person (myself included)will not do a high intensity workout for more than 20 minutes, and after 10 minutes, the intesity begins to significantly drop off. You can't do high intensity for long and therefore, you're limited in the number of calories you can burn. Low to medium intensity though, an average person could keep up for roughly 45-60 minutes (equivalent to a 10k run). As well, I don't know how significant this burning calories 'long after you stop' a high intensity workout really is. And it's not like you just stop burning calories after a run either. My point is that both high and low intensity workout have their good points, however, in my humble oppinion endurance in this case will win over intensity if it's strictly about calories.
Vlad
Vlad, I have read many articles which have confirmed the whole calorie burning issue of high vs. low intensity work ... you DO burn more calories long after a high intensity work out and you do NOT burn calories once you stop a low intensity work out. You can't argue with the science.
You are right though, you can only maintain high intensity for a short period of time so, during the activity, you may burn fewer calories than if you spent an hour running.
However, the other benefits of high intensity carry over far longer than the low intensity and, in the long run, help your body to burn more calories in the course of the whole day ... while you are NOT active.
Don't forget ... endurance training will eventually burn "calories" in the form of muscle. And let's not consider short circuit training as the only form of high intensity. A strength work out ... if you are lifting HEAVY (1 - 5 rep max), is high intensity work that builds muscle, increases metabolism, and helps your body burn calories long after you stop your workout ... even though you are not going as fast as you can and it is spread out over a longer period of time. The issue here may be what people consider as high intensity. :)
Rick, when jogging, the calorie burning does not stop on the last step of the run. The same effect is present as with high intensity....just not intense. You don't just "not burn calories once you stop." Maybe if you're walking slightly faster than usual for your workout. Even then, the effect is still there.
I'm not arguing that you burn more when you stop after an intense workout as opposed to a low intensity one.
Again, this all depends as you said what people consider 'high intensity'. I'll buy that a sub-5-minute-Fran will burn more than a 5k run done in 23 minutes, but will it burn more than a 10K run done in 45-50 minutes?
More over, you can do a low intensity workout everyday without injury, damage to the immune system, etc. With high intensity, you need rest. So, you can't do as many of them. If I was trying to loose 7000 calories a week by workouts, I wouldn't do 7 Fran's, but I'd jog everyday and still be healthy at the end of it.
Vlad
I don't agree that you won't get injured running, even "jogging" every day. Statistics have shown that 85% of runners experience injuries when running ... an indisputable fact. Mostly because people run improperly and suffer from shin splints, plantar fasciitis, ankle strains, hip and back problems, etc. As for damage to the immune system, excessive training has been proven to cause damage, regardless of the "intensity".
Please read a these two posts that I linked to some time ago on the subject:
and
.
Many people train excessively for a long time and get away with it, especially when they are young, but it doesn't mean it is healthy. ;)
Sorry, the original pasting of the links did not take!
"http://www.slowtwitch.com/mainheadings/features/health_doping_slowtwitch2.html"
and
"http://www.fitnessspotlight.com/2009/3/18/cardio-priority-fat-loss/"
PS. If you are trying to lose 7000 calories a week, you should probably start by cutting out the Super Sized fries and soft drinks! ;) LOL!
Seriously, too many people think training is the answer to losing weight. One lousy meal will negate the relatively few calories burned on your 60 minute run and you will be no further ahead.
If weight loss is your goal, then a proper diet is your first step, not running every day.
True enough...I think it's 50-50 as a rough cut.
By the way...not to start another debate but in your other post you mention that the cavemen ate mostly protein. Is there anything that actually supports this? I would think that meat would be a once-a-week thing at best.
Vlad
LOL! I think we agree ... to disagree! :) But if you can show me the research that supports long steady state cardio as a successful way to lose weight (long term) and remain strong, powerful, muscular, flexible, agile, athletic, co-ordinated, youthful and healthy, then I will reconsider!
With regards to the other post, I don't pull this stuff out of my butt ... I have read articles, papers, studies, etc. which come to these conclusions. Take it for what it's worth ... unless you know someone who actually followed a caveman around, then we have to rely on the research.
Truth is, cavemen ate whatever they could hunt or gather. I imagine there were long periods without food, then they would gorge on meat when they made a kill and eat whatever leafy things, fruit, nuts and seeds that they could forage.
I seriously doubt that the caveman had a wheat field, corn field, or a McDonalds to get Super Sized fries and soft drinks. ;)
Great reading! You can't dispute the science. The truth of the matter is that if you want to run 45-60 minutes like I used to. Then specialize in running and become weaker in all other areas of fitness. Lets see, last January I was 206 lbs. I started high intensity work-outs and dropped to 182 lbs, of course with the help of proper nutrition. I used to run 40-50 km's a week. I could breath through my nose at a 10km/h pace. Running became very very easy for me. Since changing my exercise routine to high intensity work-outs I am able to run longer, harder, and faster when I decide to run. This is no myth, I see it when I run. I wake up full of energy and retire at the end of the day full of energy. Ok maybe you don't stop burning calories on the last step of a run, but shortly after taking your ipod earplugs out O.o
Lol! Yea, those crazy cavemen.
I never said that doing low paced workouts are the way to go. I based my argument strictly from a calorie burning perspective. All else was not on the table for me.
Personally I think both intense workouts and endurance are important...that's why I do them both and all in between. After all, that's what crossfit really is (to me anyways).
I see validity in both.
Vlad
Vlad, you are correct ... we did wander off the topic of "calories burned during the activity". On that basis alone, I agree that spending 60 minutes running might burn more calories than a 10 minute circuit.
And I agree that endurance is important as well and respect the efforts you make to attain that. You obviously balance that with other work (circuit & strength), so it is all good! :)
There are many Crossfit junkies who still love to run and do so on a regular basis. I never meant to imply that running was useless or a waste of time.
I want to simply point out that, if a person has limited time to train, their efforts are best spent doing short high intensity work (which does build endurance as well) rather than long hours doing steady state cardio, because of the added benefits. And if a person wishes to lose weight, their efforts are best spent getting their diet in order instead of relying on the training to do it.
Agreed.
Vlad
Post a Comment