Is walking at a brisk pace or running more efficient? I have heard that walking at a very brisk pace is better. but would like to get a bit more knowledge on this. From what i have searched on the net the argument has been pretty deeply devided.
Sprinting intervals is better, while you dont lose as much fat as steady state cardio during exercise, the elevated metabolism from doing sprints lasts for 24+ hours overall burning alot more calories.
Is it possible to give a short explanation of why intervals elavate your metabolism better than steady state cardio, or is it very complex? Cheers.
I think it's to do with the fact that sprinting stresses the muscles in a way that forces them to grow (much like heavy resistance training), whereas low intensity cardio doesn't place the same stresses and therefore doesn't require the body to make such an adaptive response. I could be mistaken on that though.
Essentially you're wiping the stores of glycogen right out of your muscles with such high intensity work. Anaerobic activities are less efficient than aerobic activities, on the cellular level, which means more energy is wasted when you work anaerobically. Glycogen is processed into pyruvate but rather than being slowly converted into energy with oxygen, it's fermented into lactic acid, a faster but less efficient process. The net effect is that your body takes a big net loss to its energy stores, and for the next 24-48 hours your metabolism is elevated as your body strives to replenish all the glycogen and ATP. Aerobic respiration on the other hand is more energy efficient. When pyruvate is broken down within the cell with oxygen present, the energy yield is greater (more atp is produced) but the process is slower. Aerobic respiration I believe is something like 15x more efficient than anaerobic. So basically, your body doesn't waste as much energy when you're working aerobically, it doesn't burn up as much glycogen, and so when you're done exercising, you're done burning calories. But because of the deficit you create when working anaerobically, when you're done exercising (sprinting or what have you) the calorie burning has just begun Anyone correct me if I'm wrong.
Cool, Thanks for the quick response. Do you have any examples of a routined sprinting interval exercise program?
What he said ^^^ The jist: sprinting is WAY harder on the body and produces a response after exercise. Aerobic activities are easily dealt with by the body, so when you stop your body does not really need to recover all that much.
45 mins of sprints? i dont think youd be sprinting if you were able to last that long. Try to find a sport pitch with lines on it E.G a rugby/football pitch. Start at one end, sprint to the 20 m line then walk back to where you started, next sprint to the 50m line, again walk back to where you started continue to the 75m line and the full 100m, then start goin back down, 75 m ,50m, 20m. do that until your quads physically won't let you sprint anymore.
:bang: :bang: :bang: not sprinting goof jogging,walking, biking,hiking,rowing,stair master, elliptical
Example on a piece of cardio equipment: Set it to "manual" and sprint in intervals. I think I did a minute and a half off and a minute "sprinting". I don't know all the scientific gibberish, but it gets your heartrate up, keeps it up, thereby helping you lose fat. It worked for me
Well....thinking outside of the box.....if you are looking at burning fat, trimming up, etc... what will really work great is applying the trilogy of Diet(Water)…..Supplements like (L-Carnitine)…..Cardio…..and Anaerobic (Weights) to your regime….by applying these concepts, your results will be greater than just looking at cardio alone. Kew-Do
Funny, the only "suppliments" I take are protein shakes, none of that "fat burn" crapola. I'm down 40+ pounds and at least 6% bf (5+ inches off the waistline!). It can be done without all the junk, you just have to work at it to do it naturally
I used the "Interval Running" template when I first started, found here: http://www.t-nation.com/readTopic.do?id=459414
Still doing science and I think that the above satement is true in all its entiratey (never spelt that in my life).
Agreed. Any supplemental help is just the icing on the cake. (Not saying they don't work, just that their overall contribution is a few percent of the overall picture.) That said, some of the fat burners can give you a mood lift that help with the psychological aspects of dieting. But they're no substitute for discipline and hard work.
I'm talking about all those "fat burn" things that promise to help you lose the pounds by taking a couple of pills, not protein shakes (which I need to take as I'm a vegetarian and can only take so much of beans and I *hate* tofu, so veggie protein shakes it is).