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
Cardio: The Big Picture
1 | 2 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

NewYorker

New York, USA

The US government has finally recognized that strength training should be included as part of a healthy life style. The recommendations are also eerily close to Dr. D's: 2-3 sessions per week, 8-10 exercises, 1 or 2 sets focusing on the major muscle groups with a fairly slow lifting style and high intensity.

They also recommend 20-60 minutes of cardio training at 60-80% of max heart rate 3 to 6 times per week. This sounds like good advice.

Are we short-changing ourselves, by avoiding cardio for fear that it will prevent adequate recovery? Any thoughts?
Open User Options Menu

chmmacy

That's the amount of cardio I do now. But the key I think as with my post yesterday is does the cardio affect one's ability to have muscular growth, especially with the limited caloric expenditure that 15 minutes of vigorous weight training can produce.

The Fitday site tells me for 15 minutes of vigorous weight training I spent approx 86 calories. So if I do the 1 set to failure for 8 exercises 2-3 days per week I'm burning 257 calories. Not alot of " cardio" going on there. However, the afterburn of the fatigued muscles should raise the basal metabolic rate for few hours afterword.
Open User Options Menu

Dustin Jordan

Florida, USA

I don't think we're short-changing ourselves. It's not only a matter of recovery. Research, such as "Project Total Conditioning," suggsets that the minimal time between exercises provides adequate cardio trainig.
Open User Options Menu

karma50


Hi All,
I no longer do cardio, and haven't for over 6 mos. Just some casual walking to get outdoors every day. 25 miles of running a week is only about 2500 calories/wk, or ~350 cal/day. That's a pretty poor return for the wear and tear on joints.
As a former avid runner, I have improved my body composition and actually gotten leaner, (~10% bf at 54 YO.)with strength training, although I have only recently adopted a HIT protocol. I formerly did a multiple set, split routine. Also, much fewer aches and pains.
If health is your concern, calorie restriction with optimum, or adequate nutrition, has been shown in animal studies to increase healthy lifespan. Population studies in humans (Okinawa) seem to bear this out. I would suggest you visit the cr society website for more info. You don't have to go as low in calories as they do for results though.
Save your joints. You can use intelligent eating and strength training to stay lean, unless of couse, you really love running.
Griff
Open User Options Menu

GatorFan

My take...

If you're doing cardio to burn calories (running miles and miles to burn a few hundred calories) in an effort to lose weight, why not just reduce you're calorie intake.

I would rather not eat a few oreos and switch from regular Coke to Diet than run for an hour 5 days a week, possibly damaging joints or causing other long term damage AND reducing my recovery ability for strength training.

Cardio vs. HIT for circulatory fitness is a different issue, one that has been discussed many other places and one that I don't know enough about to comment on.
Open User Options Menu

matteos

rwstiess wrote:
My take...

If you're doing cardio to burn calories (running miles and miles to burn a few hundred calories) in an effort to lose weight, why not just reduce you're calorie intake.

I would rather not eat a few oreos and switch from regular Coke to Diet than run for an hour 5 days a week, possibly damaging joints or causing other long term damage AND reducing my recovery ability for strength training.

Cardio vs. HIT for circulatory fitness is a different issue, one that has been discussed many other places and one that I don't know enough about to comment on.


i agree with the above. You dont need cardio to BURN the calories just save time and dont put them in your mouth in the first place.

it takes 45 seconds to eat an aero but 45 mins of running to burn the bugger off (what is the point) I would consider doing cardio for improvment in sports performance (sports specific training) but for fat loss there is little point. Im dropping more fat now than i ever was with 4 hours cardio a week. purely from hit, superhydration and simple dietry changes.

Open User Options Menu

crazeeJZ

NewYorker wrote:
The US government has finally recognized that strength training should be included as part of a healthy life style. The recommendations are also eerily close to Dr. D's: 2-3 sessions per week, 8-10 exercises, 1 or 2 sets focusing on the major muscle groups with a fairly slow lifting style and high intensity.

They also recommend 20-60 minutes of cardio training at 60-80% of max heart rate 3 to 6 times per week. This sounds like good advice.

Are we short-changing ourselves, by avoiding cardio for fear that it will prevent adequate recovery? Any thoughts?

We're not avoiding cardio. Total-body HIT workouts with little rest between exercises IS cardio.

Btw, the government has always been behind the times exercise-wise. Look at their recent recommendation. Them not knowing total-body workouts with little rest between exercise IS cardio too is an example of this also.
Open User Options Menu

Tobes

In most gyms, how practical is it to be able to go from one machine to another with minimal rest?
If you're in a situation where for one reason or another it's just not possible to do that (maybe the only time you can train is during the gym's peak hours or even if it's dead, somebody always seems to be using whatever equipment you need) and you're interested in getting some cardiovascular conditioning, might it be worth doing some cardio?
I don't doubt that it's possible to achive a level of cardiovascular fitness by doing short-rest strength training, I'm just not sure how possible it is to be able to do that in real-world situations.
Open User Options Menu

matteos

Tobes wrote:
In most gyms, how practical is it to be able to go from one machine to another with minimal rest?
If you're in a situation where for one reason or another it's just not possible to do that (maybe the only time you can train is during the gym's peak hours or even if it's dead, somebody always seems to be using whatever equipment you need) and you're interested in getting some cardiovascular conditioning, might it be worth doing some cardio?
I don't doubt that it's possible to achive a level of cardiovascular fitness by doing short-rest strength training, I'm just not sure how possible it is to be able to do that in real-world situations.


a very good point. Precisly why I invested in home gym equipment that I can swich to and from exercises in seconds. The only drawback is that you need space and money. I got my equipment ( a multigym and lots of freewights) on credit and it works out cheaper a month than membership fees. I am also lucky enough to have a garage to train in. Nobody can ask me why I go so slow and only do one set and nobody holds up my routeen.

Open User Options Menu

sonny153

i did stop cardio for about a year, but as i am so sedentary aside from my workouts (3 30 min sessions a week superslow) i recently added 1/2 hr brisk walking on my off days. i haven't found that its made any difference in my recovery as i suppose its moderate enough not to do that, yet effective enough for cardio stimulation. hasn't made any difference in my bf%, which i didn't expect, but i do feel more energetic throughout the day, as i had been feeling very sluggish on my non-workout days. running, unless you need it for a sport, is not necessary.
Open User Options Menu

bday

sonny153 wrote:
i did stop cardio for about a year, but as i am so sedentary aside from my workouts (3 30 min sessions a week superslow) i recently added 1/2 hr brisk walking on my off days. i haven't found that its made any difference in my recovery as i suppose its moderate enough not to do that, yet effective enough for cardio stimulation. hasn't made any difference in my bf%, which i didn't expect, but i do feel more energetic throughout the day, as i had been feeling very sluggish on my non-workout days. running, unless you need it for a sport, is not necessary.


I weight train Monday & Thursday for 30 minutes and go for a brisk walk for 60 minutes Tuesday & Friday .
My brother in law is in the air force and is required to do a fitness test every year , run 1 mile , sit-ups , push-ups , chins , stretching , blood pressure ect all exercise is timed and then your scored . A few months ago his squadron had a family day and I joined in the fitness test with him and scored in the excellent category for my age 40 - 49 .
Avery simple routine that I can do for the rest of my life and it works .

BD
Open User Options Menu

J.W.

Indiana, USA

I typically do 3 days lifting, 3 days cardio. I normally have a resting heart rate of mid to high 50's per minute. I have never done justing lifting to the exclusion of cardio work. The possibility of just doing HIT workouts and maintaining a healthy cardio system is encouraging. I realize that a low resting heart rate is not in itself a marker of cardio health, but I would be interested in hearing what the resting heart rates those who just do HIT type workouts to the exclusion of separate cardio sessions have achieved.
Open User Options Menu

GatorFan

I don't know if this is against any forum rules or not, but here is an interesting article on aerobics/cardio

http://www.superslow.com/...t_aerobics.html

I'm sure many have seen this before, but just in case... here it is. I thought it might contribute to the discussion


Open User Options Menu

spud

I have been following the big debate whether cardio is necessary or not.

I have been reading Further BRAWN by Stuart McRobert.

One question that pops up in the book is as follows.

"After heavy 20 rep squatting, my heart rate is very high. Does this
have the same effect on my cardio system that hard aerobic work
would?"

McRobert's reply is:

"No. The high heart rate from heavy weight training doesn't produce
the oxygen consumption that the same heart rate would if produced by
cardio work. Heart rate alone isn't the key. The way in which it is
produced is critical. A big fright will produce a high heart rate, but
that's not going to improve your cardio system."

So is oxygen consumption really the key? Would I be losing out by not doing cardio?

I still 'pant' frantically when I lift weights, especially when it gets to the hard reps at the end of a set.

Surely if you breathe in a rapid, shallow manner, concentrating on blowing air out as Dr Darden recommends in "Bigger muscles in 42 days" then won't you be consuming oxygen just like you would be if running or cycling?
Open User Options Menu

davise

I don't do cardio to lose weight, I do it for my wind. As unscientific as that sounds, I will tell you from my own body, my own experiment of one, if I do 15-20 minutes of GXP twice a week I can weight train with more intensity and I can train in martial arts with more intensity. Don't care what the studies say etc. I have not done cardio and I have done cardio...it makes a difference. And I'm not talking about a whole lot of cardio here...15-20 minutes twice a week. If you are a bodybuilder only and not an athlete too, skip the cardio. If you play any sports or do any activities that require a moderate amount of endurance do the cardio.
Open User Options Menu

bill1

California, USA

davise wrote:
I don't do cardio to lose weight, I do it for my wind. As unscientific as that sounds, I will tell you from my own body, my own experiment of one, if I do 15-20 minutes of GXP twice a week I can weight train with more intensity and I can train in martial arts with more intensity. Don't care what the studies say etc. I have not done cardio and I have done cardio...it makes a difference. And I'm not talking about a whole lot of cardio here...15-20 minutes twice a week. If you are a bodybuilder only and not an athlete too, skip the cardio. If you play any sports or do any activities that require a moderate amount of endurance do the cardio.

I think this is pretty close to being right on the money. Cardio to lose weight is a joke. How many miles would you have to run full tilt to burn off a Mars bar? " Not ... a whole lot of cardio " allows for the intensity of effort required by the martial arts, sound familiar?

However if the U.S. government is now recomending resistance training I will have to rethink the whole thing. The fact that the powers that be recomend something for any purpose ,means nothing, except that maybe somebody has been aroused from their stupor.

Bill1




Open User Options Menu

kevindill

Maryland, USA

davise wrote:
I don't do cardio to lose weight, I do it for my wind. As unscientific as that sounds, I will tell you from my own body, my own experiment of one, if I do 15-20 minutes of GXP twice a week I can weight train with more intensity and I can train in martial arts with more intensity. Don't care what the studies say etc. I have not done cardio and I have done cardio...it makes a difference. And I'm not talking about a whole lot of cardio here...15-20 minutes twice a week. If you are a bodybuilder only and not an athlete too, skip the cardio. If you play any sports or do any activities that require a moderate amount of endurance do the cardio.

I have to agree here, I too have found that doing the GXP for about 15 mins twice a week has made a big difference in my general fitness and "wind" when doing recreational activities. Much Like Strength training, cardio doesn't require very much to get the benefit of doing it, brief, infrequent and apropriatly intense does the trick.
Open User Options Menu

rtestes

Mississippi, USA

NewYorker wrote:
They also recommend 20-60 minutes of cardio training at 60-80% of max heart rate 3 to 6 times per week. This sounds like good advice.

Are we short-changing ourselves, by avoiding cardio for fear that it will prevent adequate recovery? Any thoughts?


My thoughts, If we are cutting (reducing) or bulking(adding mass), we don't need to add cardio. When we are maintaining, it is a perfect time to add cardio 20-30 minutes 3-4 days a week at 65-75% of max heart rate. Walking say at 3.5 - 4 mph.
Open User Options Menu

eintology

California, USA

rwstiess wrote:
I don't know if this is against any forum rules or not, but here is an interesting article on aerobics/cardio

http://www.superslow.com/...t_aerobics.html

I'm sure many have seen this before, but just in case... here it is. I thought it might contribute to the discussion




Rwstiess,

You said awhile back that people bend information to fit their needs, and man here is a classic case of where you are right with that.

Everyone, do a google search on Irving Dardik M.D., who was one of the names mentionded in the artictle, and tell
all what you come up with.

I'm very familiar (since the mid 80's) with Irving Dardik's approach to achieve what (he) considers to be healthy for optimizing vascular function, and it is not weight training that he is talking about with his exercise approach. He in fact does plyometrics to achieve this result. Win lose or draw the history is there.

You are not getting the nuances of this subject from this article.

Erik

Open User Options Menu

Drew Baye

Florida, USA


Are we short-changing ourselves, by avoiding cardio for fear that it will prevent adequate recovery? Any thoughts?



We aren't avoiding aerobics only because it will interfere with recovery, but because it simply is not necessary. Strength training performed in circuit fashion IS cardio.

Drew Baye
Open User Options Menu

Drew Baye

Florida, USA

As far as getting ripped goes, I know for a fact it isn't necessary. I've had my bodyfat in the very low single digits and don't do any aerobics.

Drew Baye
Open User Options Menu

st3

Drew Baye wrote:
As far as getting ripped goes, I know for a fact it isn't necessary. I've had my bodyfat in the very low single digits and don't do any aerobics.

Drew Baye


Drew,

Do you have a fast metabolism?

What about people you have trained is this the same for them?

Steve

Open User Options Menu

kevindill

Maryland, USA

Drew Baye wrote:
We aren't avoiding aerobics only because it will interfere with recovery, but because it simply is not necessary. Strength training performed in circuit fashion IS cardio.

Drew Baye


On a more general note, for a sedentary person (desk job, couch potato type), In you opinion is 2-3 HIT sessions a week sufficient to convey a significant reduction in health risk factors? Would there be addtional benefit to including more activity? Not trying to pick a fight, just asking for an opinion.
Open User Options Menu

dalinden

Here's a link to a German study relating to this issue.

http://www2.einternalmedicinen...
Open User Options Menu

Drew Baye

Florida, USA

st3 wrote:
Drew,

Do you have a fast metabolism?

What about people you have trained is this the same for them?

Steve



None of my clients do any aerobics, but all of the ones who are strict with their diet do very well.

I think it is important to distinguish here between performing activity for the sake of cardiovascular efficiency, calorie burning, and specific metabolic and skill conditioning.

The average person who just wants to lose fat and be generally fit does not need aerobics. They can get all the benefits they require from strength training more safely and more efficiently.

Competitive athletes will receive tremendous conditioning benefit from strength training, but depending on the sport, position, etc. they may have to perform drills to work on the metabolic conditioning specific to the intensity, duration, etc. of the sport. It depends on the demands of the situation and the individual.

Drew Baye
Open User Options Menu
1 | 2 | Next | Last
Administrators Online: Mod Phoenix
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy