MB Madaera
Lost 31.7 lbs fat
Built 11.7 lbs muscle


Chris Madaera
Built 9 lbs muscle


Keelan Parham
Lost 30 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle


Bob Marchesello
Lost 23.55 lbs fat
Built 8.55 lbs muscle


Jeff Turner
Lost 25.5 lbs fat


Jeanenne Darden
Lost 26 lbs fat
Built 3 lbs muscle


Ted Tucker
Lost 41 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle

 
 

Determine the Length of Your Workouts

Evaluate Your Progress

Keep Warm-Up in Perspective


ARCHIVES >>

"Doing more exercise with less intensity,"
Arthur Jones believes, "has all but
destroyed the actual great value
of weight training. Something
must be done . . . and quickly."
The New Bodybuilding for
Old-School Results supplies
MUCH of that "something."

 

This is one of 93 photos of Andy McCutcheon that are used in The New High-Intensity Training to illustrate the recommended exercises.

To find out more about McCutcheon and his training, click here.

 

Mission Statement

H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy

Privacy Policy

Credits

LOG IN FORUM MAIN REGISTER SEARCH
Trentine
First | Prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

HeavyHitter32

Nwlifter wrote:
Very true!
There are also physical arterial and cardiac changes with aerobics that aren't seen with brief heavy strength training.




I've read that before too...how about with more moderate, cumulative fatigue, short rest type training?
Open User Options Menu

HD2

Grant D. wrote:
Trentine's knowledge of resistance exercise is in the top 10 in the USA.
Trentine's physique relative to his frame size is in the top 0.0001%.
Trentine's machines are likely in the top 2 in the World in 2017.
Trentine's strength is also top 0.0001% as witnessed by how easy and focused he handled a stacked super duo-squat

However, as Josh said earlier ... I paraphrase ... "must eliminate outroading". That said as one advances with high focused intensity they must assure no outroading since it will bulljive one into thinking gains are being made when it is skill-building, cheating, etc. And, this is why RenEx stagnates as all dynamic machine programs will .. except for newbies.


https://youtu.be/Y1G0xoTEeBs. I'm watching this video for a second time , when I first saw this I didn't notice the extra 45 pound plate pinned to the super stack!
Open User Options Menu

Average Al

Nwlifter wrote:
Very true!
There are also physical arterial and cardiac changes with aerobics that aren't seen with brief heavy strength training.


ATP 4 Vitality wrote:
HD2 wrote:
My understanding of the methods is that they are specific to the equipment they build, it may be that what they teach is only useful with RenEx. I'm not sure of this though.

Anaerobic conditioning can not drive aerobic respiration well. Equipment is a non-factor. Any program that only teaches anaerobic conditioning has limited value. Joshua's website contains anti-aerobic conditioning articles. Most experts don't agree with Joshua's articles on aerobic conditioning. Current science does not agree with Joshua either.



Here is a link to a chapter from a physiology text book with the title "Cardiovascular Responses to Exercise":

http://downloads.lww.com/...r_Responses.pdf

Although it mostly talks about conventional aerobics, there are short sections dealing with static and dynamic resistance exercise. After reading it, I concluded that one of the main difference between aerobics and heavy resistance training was the effects on venous return and stroke volume.

In conventional aerobics, you get enhanced venous return and increases in stroke volume. That doesn't happen with static contractions or heavy dynamic resistance training. It also isn't likely to happen with SuperSlow reps where you seek to keep constant tension on the muscles. Because of those differences, conventional aerobics produces different cardiac adaptations than heavy resistance training.
Open User Options Menu

Nwlifter

Yes, good info.
I have a text that also points out, heavy weight training causes left ventricle hypertrophy, it also thickens arterial walls, where aerobic training increases the size of arteries, making them larger 'inside', which is really a good thing as people age, lessens he change of narrow arteries later in life.


Average Al wrote:
Nwlifter wrote:
Very true!
There are also physical arterial and cardiac changes with aerobics that aren't seen with brief heavy strength training.


ATP 4 Vitality wrote:
HD2 wrote:
My understanding of the methods is that they are specific to the equipment they build, it may be that what they teach is only useful with RenEx. I'm not sure of this though.

Anaerobic conditioning can not drive aerobic respiration well. Equipment is a non-factor. Any program that only teaches anaerobic conditioning has limited value. Joshua's website contains anti-aerobic conditioning articles. Most experts don't agree with Joshua's articles on aerobic conditioning. Current science does not agree with Joshua either.



Here is a link to a chapter from a physiology text book with the title "Cardiovascular Responses to Exercise":

http://downloads.lww.com/...r_Responses.pdf

Although it mostly talks about conventional aerobics, there are short sections dealing with static and dynamic resistance exercise. After reading it, I concluded that one of the main difference between aerobics and heavy resistance training was the effects on venous return and stroke volume.

In conventional aerobics, you get enhanced venous return and increases in stroke volume. That doesn't happen with static contractions or heavy dynamic resistance training. It also isn't likely to happen with SuperSlow reps where you seek to keep constant tension on the muscles. Because of those differences, conventional aerobics produces different cardiac adaptations than heavy resistance training.


Open User Options Menu

HeavyHitter32

nwlifter, thoughts on my question?

Is short rest, multi-set cumulative fatigue training a better option for the heart in this regard?
Open User Options Menu

HD2

Average Al wrote:
Nwlifter wrote:
Very true!
There are also physical arterial and cardiac changes with aerobics that aren't seen with brief heavy strength training.


ATP 4 Vitality wrote:
HD2 wrote:
My understanding of the methods is that they are specific to the equipment they build, it may be that what they teach is only useful with RenEx. I'm not sure of this though.

Anaerobic conditioning can not drive aerobic respiration well. Equipment is a non-factor. Any program that only teaches anaerobic conditioning has limited value. Joshua's website contains anti-aerobic conditioning articles. Most experts don't agree with Joshua's articles on aerobic conditioning. Current science does not agree with Joshua either.



Here is a link to a chapter from a physiology text book with the title "Cardiovascular Responses to Exercise":

http://downloads.lww.com/...r_Responses.pdf

Although it mostly talks about conventional aerobics, there are short sections dealing with static and dynamic resistance exercise. After reading it, I concluded that one of the main difference between aerobics and heavy resistance training was the effects on venous return and stroke volume.

In conventional aerobics, you get enhanced venous return and increases in stroke volume. That doesn't happen with static contractions or heavy dynamic resistance training. It also isn't likely to happen with SuperSlow reps where you seek to keep constant tension on the muscles. Because of those differences, conventional aerobics produces different cardiac adaptations than heavy resistance training.


Can you quote this part? I read the entire study and I'm unclear how you came to this conclusion.
Open User Options Menu

Average Al

HD2 wrote:
Can you quote this part? I read the entire study and I'm unclear how you came to this conclusion.


OK. This will be long because there isn?t really a concise statement within the chapter to this effect. It is something I pieced together from information in several different places.

Page 352 (Light to Moderate Submaximal Exercise)

?During exercise of this intensity the cardiorespiratory system is is often used to describe this type of exercise. During steady state exercise, the exercise is performed at an intensity such that energy expenditure is balanced with the energy required to perform the exercise. The plateau evidenced by the cardiovascular variables (in Figure 13.1) indicates that a steady state has been achieved.

The increase in stroke volume results from an increase in venous return, which, in turn, increases the left ventricular end?diastolic volume (LVEDV) (preload). The increased preload stretches the myocardium and causes it to contract more forcibly in accordance with the Frank-Starling law of the heart described in Chapter 12. Contractility of the myocardium is also enhanced by the sympathetic nervous system, which is activated during physical activity. Thus, an increase in the left ventricular end?diastolic volume and a decrease in the left ventricular end?systolic volume (LVESV) account for the increase in stroke volume during light to moderate dynamic exercise (Poliner, et al., 1980).

Page 370 (Cardiovasculare Responses to Static Exercise):

?Cardiac output increases during static contractions owing to an increase in heart rate, with the magnitude of the increase dependent upon the intensity of exercise. Stroke volume (Figure 13.17b) remains relatively constant during low-intensity contractions and decreases during high-intensity contractions. There is a marked increase in stroke volume immediately following the cessation of high intensity contractions (Lind, et al., 1964; Smith, et al., 1993). This is the same rebound rise in recovery as seen in a-VO2 diff, VE, and VO2 (Chapter 11). The reduction in stroke volume during high-intensity contractions is probably the result of both a decreased preload and an increased afterload. Preload is decreased because of high intrathoracic pressure, which compresses the vena cava and thus decreases the return of venous blood to the heart. Because arterial blood pressure is markedly elevated during static contractions (increased afterload), less blood will be ejected at a given force of contraction.?

Page 372-3 (Comparison of Aerobic and Static Exercise):

?Aerobic exercise (treadmill) is characterized by a large increase in heart rate, which contributes to an increased cardiac output. Aerobic exercise also shows a modest increase in systolic blood pressure and a relatively stable or decreasing diastolic blood pressure. Aerobic exercise is said to impose a ?volume load? on the heart. Increased venous return leads to increased stroke volume, which contributes to an increased cardiac output.

In contrast, fatiguing static exercise (handgrip) is characterized by a modest increase in heart rate but a dramatic increase in blood pressure (pressor response). Mean blood pressure increases as a result of increased systolic and diastolic blood pressure. Static exercise is said to impose a ?pressure load? on the heart. Increased mean arterial pressure means that the heart must pump harder to overcome the pressure in the aorta.?

Page 374-5 (Cardiovascular Response to Resistance Exercise):

?Weight-lifting or resistance exercise includes a combination of dynamic and static contractions (Hill and Butler, 1991; MacDougall, et al., 1985). At the beginning of the lift, a static contraction exists until muscle force exceeds the load to be lifted and movement occurs, which leads to a dynamic concentric (shortening) contraction as the lift continues. This is then followed by a dynamic eccentric (lengthening) contraction during the lowering phase (McCartney, 1999). Furthermore, there is always a static component associated with gripping the barbell. During dynamic resistance exercise there is a dissociation between the energy demand and the cardiorespiratory system. In contrast, during dynamic endurance activity the cardiorespiratory system is directly tied to the use of oxygen for energy production. In part, the reason for this dissociation between oxygen use and cardiovascular response to resistance exercise is that much of the energy required for resistance exercise comes from anaerobic (without oxygen) sources. Another important difference between resistance exercise and aerobic exercise that affects cardiovascular responses is the mechanical constriction of blood flow during resistance exercise because of the static nature of the contraction.?

Page 375-6 (Resistance Exercise to Fatigue):

?A different pattern of response is seen when a given load is performed to fatigue. In this case the individual is performing maximal work regardless of the load. Figure 13.22 shows the cardiovascular response at the completion of leg extension exercise performed to fatigue. Subjects performed 50%, 80%, and 100% of their one repetition maximum (1 RM) as many times as they could, and cardiovascular variables were recorded at the end of each set (Falkel, et al., 1992). Subjects could perform the 100% load only one time, of course; but they could perform the 80% and 50% loads an average of 8 and 15 times, respectively. Thus, the greatest volume of work was performed when the lightest load was lifted the greatest number of times. Cardiac output at the completion of the set was highest when the lightest load was lifted for the greatest number of repetitions (Figure 13.22a).

The stroke volume achieved at the end of a set was similar for each condition (Figure 13.22b) and was slightly below resting levels. This is in contrast to significant increases in stroke volume measures typically obtained during aerobic exercise. Thus, dynamic resistance exercise does not produce the stroke volume overload that dynamic endurance exercise does (Hill and Butler, 1991; McCartney, 1999).?

---

Now these pieces of information seem to fit with or explain the observation that heavy resistance training and marathon running produce different types of hypertrophy of the left ventricle. Resistance training, which imposes a pressure load on the heart, is said to increase the thickness of the heart muscle or cause concentric hypertrophy, whereas prolonged steady state aerobics is said to increase the size or volume of the left ventricle, or cause eccentric hypertrophy.
(Reference:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2300466/)

If two different kinds of exercise produce different adaptations to the heart muscle, they probably can?t be said to be equivalent, even if both result in improved endurance.






Open User Options Menu

Nwlifter

Sorry didn't see your question, the texts don't address that specifically, but knowing how this works and considering that aerobics are a continual steady state, CFT is very close in effect I would say.

HeavyHitter32 wrote:
nwlifter, thoughts on my question?

Is short rest, multi-set cumulative fatigue training a better option for the heart in this regard?


Open User Options Menu

HeavyHitter32

Nwlifter wrote:
Sorry didn't see your question, the texts don't address that specifically, but knowing how this works and considering that aerobics are a continual steady state, CFT is very close in effect I would say.

HeavyHitter32 wrote:
nwlifter, thoughts on my question?

Is short rest, multi-set cumulative fatigue training a better option for the heart in this regard?



I was thinking similarly, thanks.
Open User Options Menu

HD2

Average Al wrote:
HD2 wrote:
Can you quote this part? I read the entire study and I'm unclear how you came to this conclusion.

OK. This will be long because there isn?t really a concise statement within the chapter to this effect. It is something I pieced together from information in several different places.

Page 352 (Light to Moderate Submaximal Exercise)

?During exercise of this intensity the cardiorespiratory system is is often used to describe this type of exercise. During steady state exercise, the exercise is performed at an intensity such that energy expenditure is balanced with the energy required to perform the exercise. The plateau evidenced by the cardiovascular variables (in Figure 13.1) indicates that a steady state has been achieved.

The increase in stroke volume results from an increase in venous return, which, in turn, increases the left ventricular end?diastolic volume (LVEDV) (preload). The increased preload stretches the myocardium and causes it to contract more forcibly in accordance with the Frank-Starling law of the heart described in Chapter 12. Contractility of the myocardium is also enhanced by the sympathetic nervous system, which is activated during physical activity. Thus, an increase in the left ventricular end?diastolic volume and a decrease in the left ventricular end?systolic volume (LVESV) account for the increase in stroke volume during light to moderate dynamic exercise (Poliner, et al., 1980).

Page 370 (Cardiovasculare Responses to Static Exercise):

?Cardiac output increases during static contractions owing to an increase in heart rate, with the magnitude of the increase dependent upon the intensity of exercise. Stroke volume (Figure 13.17b) remains relatively constant during low-intensity contractions and decreases during high-intensity contractions. There is a marked increase in stroke volume immediately following the cessation of high intensity contractions (Lind, et al., 1964; Smith, et al., 1993). This is the same rebound rise in recovery as seen in a-VO2 diff, VE, and VO2 (Chapter 11). The reduction in stroke volume during high-intensity contractions is probably the result of both a decreased preload and an increased afterload. Preload is decreased because of high intrathoracic pressure, which compresses the vena cava and thus decreases the return of venous blood to the heart. Because arterial blood pressure is markedly elevated during static contractions (increased afterload), less blood will be ejected at a given force of contraction.?

Page 372-3 (Comparison of Aerobic and Static Exercise):

?Aerobic exercise (treadmill) is characterized by a large increase in heart rate, which contributes to an increased cardiac output. Aerobic exercise also shows a modest increase in systolic blood pressure and a relatively stable or decreasing diastolic blood pressure. Aerobic exercise is said to impose a ?volume load? on the heart. Increased venous return leads to increased stroke volume, which contributes to an increased cardiac output.

In contrast, fatiguing static exercise (handgrip) is characterized by a modest increase in heart rate but a dramatic increase in blood pressure (pressor response). Mean blood pressure increases as a result of increased systolic and diastolic blood pressure. Static exercise is said to impose a ?pressure load? on the heart. Increased mean arterial pressure means that the heart must pump harder to overcome the pressure in the aorta.?

Page 374-5 (Cardiovascular Response to Resistance Exercise):

?Weight-lifting or resistance exercise includes a combination of dynamic and static contractions (Hill and Butler, 1991; MacDougall, et al., 1985). At the beginning of the lift, a static contraction exists until muscle force exceeds the load to be lifted and movement occurs, which leads to a dynamic concentric (shortening) contraction as the lift continues. This is then followed by a dynamic eccentric (lengthening) contraction during the lowering phase (McCartney, 1999). Furthermore, there is always a static component associated with gripping the barbell. During dynamic resistance exercise there is a dissociation between the energy demand and the cardiorespiratory system. In contrast, during dynamic endurance activity the cardiorespiratory system is directly tied to the use of oxygen for energy production. In part, the reason for this dissociation between oxygen use and cardiovascular response to resistance exercise is that much of the energy required for resistance exercise comes from anaerobic (without oxygen) sources. Another important difference between resistance exercise and aerobic exercise that affects cardiovascular responses is the mechanical constriction of blood flow during resistance exercise because of the static nature of the contraction.?

Page 375-6 (Resistance Exercise to Fatigue):

?A different pattern of response is seen when a given load is performed to fatigue. In this case the individual is performing maximal work regardless of the load. Figure 13.22 shows the cardiovascular response at the completion of leg extension exercise performed to fatigue. Subjects performed 50%, 80%, and 100% of their one repetition maximum (1 RM) as many times as they could, and cardiovascular variables were recorded at the end of each set (Falkel, et al., 1992). Subjects could perform the 100% load only one time, of course; but they could perform the 80% and 50% loads an average of 8 and 15 times, respectively. Thus, the greatest volume of work was performed when the lightest load was lifted the greatest number of times. Cardiac output at the completion of the set was highest when the lightest load was lifted for the greatest number of repetitions (Figure 13.22a).

The stroke volume achieved at the end of a set was similar for each condition (Figure 13.22b) and was slightly below resting levels. This is in contrast to significant increases in stroke volume measures typically obtained during aerobic exercise. Thus, dynamic resistance exercise does not produce the stroke volume overload that dynamic endurance exercise does (Hill and Butler, 1991; McCartney, 1999).?

---

Now these pieces of information seem to fit with or explain the observation that heavy resistance training and marathon running produce different types of hypertrophy of the left ventricle. Resistance training, which imposes a pressure load on the heart, is said to increase the thickness of the heart muscle or cause concentric hypertrophy, whereas prolonged steady state aerobics is said to increase the size or volume of the left ventricle, or cause eccentric hypertrophy.
(Reference:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2300466/)

If two different kinds of exercise produce different adaptations to the heart muscle, they probably can?t be said to be equivalent, even if both result in improved endurance.








Sorry I still do not see the supporting information.
Open User Options Menu

1958

Texas, USA

This entire "aerobics" non-sense came about in the late 20th century.Goodness gracious!! How did we as a species survive the preceding centuries without it?
Marcph/ATP 4 Vitality,Darden's after dinner walks are a prescription for divergence from further nighttime eating,not for exercise.Read his books.
Open User Options Menu

ATP 4 Vitality

HeavyHitter32 wrote:
nwlifter, thoughts on my question?

Is short rest, multi-set cumulative fatigue training a better option for the heart in this regard?


I'm sorry for interjecting, but short rest, multi-set cumulative fatigue is not even close to aerobic conditioning for proper endurance training. No current competitive endurance athlete uses this technique either. There are many reasons for this.

Primarily, weight lifting is an anaerobic activity first and foremost with many stops and starts. Secondly, there is much occlusion during anaerobic activity. Lastly, weight lifting generally works specific sections of the body.
Real aerobic activity requires you to use most of the large muscle groups rhythmically and continuously with little or no occlusion.
Open User Options Menu

Grant D.

Once one begins to progress "load moved" is tainted with outroading. However, other protocols which focus the load into a muscle(s) without outroading eliminate the cheat and skill

These other protocols are Max Pyramid, Ultra-Slow Done in One, 303030 (thanks Doc!), Omega, Max Contraction. Thus any gains in dynamic loading will stagnate eventually. The higher the speed and/or intensity the quicker the stagnation. There are bloggers on this very site who throw a lotta weight ... around their injury cycles.
Open User Options Menu

hit4me

Florida, USA

I agree that traditional weight training Is more anaerobic than aerobic, however, If you try the true HIT style of training 2 to 3x per week, you will feel the aerobic benefit, if you don't then you are not performing it correctly
Open User Options Menu

Nwlifter

It depends a lot on what and how your doing that CFT training. Night before last, I did 10 sets of squats alternated with 10 sets of standing calves, my heart was elevated very much, for more than 20 minutes. The constant elevated HR is the stimulus part of aerobics. I'm sure I used more major muscles of the body then I would have on a treadmill.
Now 4 sets of 8, with 2 minutes rest beween sets, that I'm sure your right and would have very little aerobic benefits.


ATP 4 Vitality wrote:
HeavyHitter32 wrote:
nwlifter, thoughts on my question?

Is short rest, multi-set cumulative fatigue training a better option for the heart in this regard?

I'm sorry for interjecting, but short rest, multi-set cumulative fatigue is not even close to aerobic conditioning for proper endurance training. No current competitive endurance athlete uses this technique either. There are many reasons for this.

Primarily, weight lifting is an anaerobic activity first and foremost with many stops and starts. Secondly, there is much occlusion during anaerobic activity. Lastly, weight lifting generally works specific sections of the body.
Real aerobic activity requires you to use most of the large muscle groups rhythmically and continuously with little or no occlusion.


Open User Options Menu

HeavyHitter32

Nwlifter wrote:
It depends a lot on what and how your doing that CFT training. Night before last, I did 10 sets of squats alternated with 10 sets of standing calves, my heart was elevated very much, for more than 20 minutes. The constant elevated HR is the stimulus part of aerobics. I'm sure I used more major muscles of the body then I would have on a treadmill.
Now 4 sets of 8, with 2 minutes rest beween sets, that I'm sure your right and would have very little aerobic benefits.


Yep. My physician said, so long as you keep that heart rate up (for your given age) for at least 20 min, it doesn't matter what the activity is. It makes total sense.

I've even seen some articles from Mayo Clinic stating 15 minutes gives a response.
Open User Options Menu

HeavyHitter32

ATP 4 Vitality wrote:
HeavyHitter32 wrote:
nwlifter, thoughts on my question?

Is short rest, multi-set cumulative fatigue training a better option for the heart in this regard?

I'm sorry for interjecting, but short rest, multi-set cumulative fatigue is not even close to aerobic conditioning for proper endurance training. No current competitive endurance athlete uses this technique either. There are many reasons for this.

Primarily, weight lifting is an anaerobic activity first and foremost with many stops and starts. Secondly, there is much occlusion during anaerobic activity. Lastly, weight lifting generally works specific sections of the body.
Real aerobic activity requires you to use most of the large muscle groups rhythmically and continuously with little or no occlusion.


I still do some fast walking on treadmill and exercise biking, but it's been causing me knee issues so I had to cut way back. That is something you run into with "cardio" work sometimes. It takes a pounding on your joints with the highly repetitive activity. If you can adjust your weight training to hit your target heart rate for 20 min, you should be fine. I can do CFT training 3 days per week and "cardio" exercises twice per week - should be all I need.

I know, there is swimming, but I have no interest in that and would be far too inconvenient for my schedule - I train at home.
Open User Options Menu

Crotalus

As far as my 'cardio work' goes , I walk 2-3 hours a day on an average, sometimes more, doing 20-40 minutes dog walking as part of my dog boarding services. It's on flat ground through woods and fields and never get winded etc. so I don't know if this qualifies as "real cardio".

Even in my hard core HIT days when that's all I believed in , I still didn't think it was all an athlete needed to reach a complete fitness level for their sport.

You guys that do, do you believe a long distance runner or bicyclist can excel by just doing two 20 minute HIT workouts a week ? Are you then figuring those hours of running / riding is just 'skill work' ?

I don't know if they still are a HIT training football team, but years ago the Cincinnati Bengals were big believers in HIT and didn't they also run as part of their training ?

Don't read this wrong .... my dog walking is THE ONLY 'cardio' I'll do because I hate running, treadmills, stair climbers, stationary bikes, etc.

But I don't believe everything is addressed by squats and leg presses ... even if done in the old HIT fashion.
Open User Options Menu

simon-hecubus

Texas, USA

Crotalus: What you're doing is more than healthy enough. Even if you were so inclined, deliberately adding elevated-HR steady-state aerobic $#!+ would probably do more harm than good.

BTW, "aerobic" by definition, means "with oxygen". So I'd say your long doggy walks qualify beyond anyone's hopes or needs.

I'm actually kinda jealous --- I'd love that for a job.
Open User Options Menu

ATP 4 Vitality

HeavyHitter32 wrote:
Yep. My physician said, so long as you keep that heart rate up (for your given age) for at least 20 min, it doesn't matter what the activity is. It makes total sense.

I've even seen some articles from Mayo Clinic stating 15 minutes gives a response.


Unfortunately, your doctor's opinion is not what the American Heart Association recommends.

AHA Recommendation

For Overall Cardiovascular Health:

At least 30 minutes of moderate-intensity aerobic activity at least 5 days per week for a total of 150

OR

At least 25 minutes of vigorous aerobic activity at least 3 days per week for a total of 75 minutes; or a combination of moderate- and vigorous-intensity aerobic activity

AND

Moderate- to high-intensity muscle-strengthening activity at least 2 days per week for additional health benefits.

For Lowering Blood Pressure and Cholesterol

An average 40 minutes of moderate- to vigorous-intensity aerobic activity 3 or 4 times per week
Open User Options Menu

Nwlifter

Yep, people were made to 'move', not to ride in cars and shop on amazon lol and sit on the couch all day. More movement is healthier, we know the idea of one 15 minute superslow workout a week (10,080 minutes in a week) and then 10,065 minutes of rest isn't going to be a healthy fit scenario.
Open User Options Menu

ATP 4 Vitality

Anaerobic activity, of which HIT without question is, uses primarily the alactic and glycolytic energy systems. The location of ATP-CP and glycolysis occur in the cytoplasm of the cell, not the mitochondria. The end product of glycolysis yields only 2 ATP, occurs without oxygen, and is not as an efficient means of ATP production as the electron transport chain is in the mitochondria.

All 3 energy systems operate at the same time. Glycolysis initially needs ATP to begin the process. Guess where this ATP come from, the AEROBIC energy system which produces up to 38 ATP per glucose molecule. Building up the enzymatic concentration gradient of the aerobic energy system ramps up ALL energy systems as the aerobic energy system becomes the backbone of energy production. This is why aerobics are useful. Furthermore, the more potent the aerobic energy system is, the more FAT is utilized instead of glucose. A "dipping" into anaerobic ATP production due to poor aerobic conditioning leads to glycogen depleted levels. The higher the aerobic conditioning, the better one burns FAT.
Open User Options Menu

Crotalus

simon-hecubus wrote:
I'm actually kinda jealous --- I'd love that for a job.


Yeah, not to rub it in but playing with dogs for a living is great to put it mildly. There are some draw backs like anything, however. This facility is where I boarded my dogs when I traveled years ago and now I manage it.

If there's one thing I did RIGHT in my life it was always trying to making a living doing the things I loved to do ; playing music , wildlife photography , breeding reptiles and making dogs feel happy, safe and secure until their owners come home

Despite my families disagreement with me on this I was never one of those guys who did something I hated just for more money. So many friends of mine were paying back incredible student loans on an education that landed them a job THAT THEY HATED ! I could never figure that out ...

But the dog walking is entirely my thing I started up there ... and I do it for CASH .... not a dime of my walking $$$ ever found it's way to Obama or the rest of those assholes.

Another way to look at is I'm getting paid a few hundred dollars a month cash do do my cardio, LOL. Now if I can get someone to pay me for the three weight workouts a week ...
Open User Options Menu

HeavyHitter32

ATP 4 Vitality wrote:
HeavyHitter32 wrote:
Yep. My physician said, so long as you keep that heart rate up (for your given age) for at least 20 min, it doesn't matter what the activity is. It makes total sense.

I've even seen some articles from Mayo Clinic stating 15 minutes gives a response.


Unfortunately, your doctor's opinion is not what the American Heart Association recommends.

AHA Recommendation

For Overall Cardiovascular Health:

At least 30 minutes of moderate-intensity aerobic activity at least 5 days per week for a total of 150

OR

At least 25 minutes of vigorous aerobic activity at least 3 days per week for a total of 75 minutes; or a combination of moderate- and vigorous-intensity aerobic activity

AND

Moderate- to high-intensity muscle-strengthening activity at least 2 days per week for additional health benefits.

For Lowering Blood Pressure and Cholesterol

An average 40 minutes of moderate- to vigorous-intensity aerobic activity 3 or 4 times per week


Actually, trying to recall I don't think he stated 20 minutes...I think I was mixing up something else I read. But I know he said so long as your heart rate in in the recommended range for aerobic affect based on your age, etc.

But even still, 25 min, three times per week of vigorous cardio and two hard weight training sessions is feasible for most.
Open User Options Menu

HeavyHitter32

Even 10 minutes a day better than nothing.

http://www.mayoclinic.org/...rt/faq-20057842
Open User Options Menu
First | Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | Next | Last
Administrators Online: Mod Phoenix
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy