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
Dr. Darden, Time to Take A Stand
1 | 2 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

rtestes

Mississippi, USA

I have asked this question before and usually receive short non-committal answers. It deals with how many calories does a pound of muscle burn a day. You have used 37.5 as an average of a 25-50 range in your books.

In the last book NEW HIT, you reported that Hudlow gained 18.5 pounds of muscle and his RMR was raised 28.6 calories per pound.

I have used this information often when trying to introduce people to the need for resistance training. More and more they have come back with mention of studies that say a pound of muscle only raises RMR by 6 calories a day, blowing everything I have been led to believe in the past. Look at this article as an example:

http://www.optimalhealthpartne...

With your background and degree, I am sure you keep up with studies and where the science presently is. What does Dr. Whitney or Schendel have to say about this. If this is true then cardio may be the best exercise. What is the truth? Is the muscle's effect on metabolism up for grabs? What made the past numbers used to be so far off?
Open User Options Menu

JJ McClinton

Cardio, the best exercise to raise RMR? I don't think so. Just visit any cardio spin class and look at the results yourself. Resistance training used in conjunction with cardio or just regular physical activity is the best way to go.
Open User Options Menu

Ellington Darden

Take a stand?

I've taken a stand by publishing what I believe in my last two books: "The New HIT" and "The Bowflex Body Plan."

I do not agree with Ellis. A pound of muscle requires significantly more than 6 calories per day.

Cardio exercise is not the best form of exercise to lose fat. Again, I talk about the why's in my last two books.

Ellington
Open User Options Menu

AShortt

Ontario, CAN

HeHe 6 calories! bloody silly.

It should also be kept in mind that more muscle means you can generate more force in all your daily actions...and will, thus burning more calories when performing the same tasks and activities. That should be told to clients as it is obvious and easy to picture in the minds eye. This is no different than suggesting being more active in general in that both add up over days weeks and months. Furthermore, I point out that more muscle often leads to a more active lifestyle because you feel stronger, look better and carry yourself better. Good C.V. conditioning is fine but only really noticeable when under cardio exertion, so unless you were way...way out of shape you won't notice a big difference. The enhanced feeling isn't from the cardio it is from the "lightness" (fat weight loss) caused by the dieting. More muscle is what makes people feel like doing more longer with greater zest.

Besides major cardio leads to a reduced ability to burn fat as the body is not dumb and like dieting it realizes it is losing fat stores which it perceives as highly important for survival. Remember for most of our evolution there as been little food, poor quality and lots of unpredictable "feast and famine" cycles.

In addition, fat burning exercise like cardio is similar to dieting in that both tend to encourage muscle loss as well. This is disastrous especially to woman and people 55 plus. You can never have, build or retain too much muscle provided your means of doing so are safe...HIT is as safe as it gets while being highly effective.

After my short spiel I have never had even one, even the most die hard cardio nut not understand and actively accept this sensible and proper point of view on building muscle as a primary in fitness.

Regards,
Andrew
Open User Options Menu

karma50

Andrew,
What you say makes a lot of sense. I think leaner, stronger people tend to move around more and use that muscle for everyday tasks. I think the straight calculations from BMR may be misleading in that regard.
I also agree for us older types, brief, intense bouts of exercise are best. I have a few over 50 jogger neighbors that I see out slogging several times a week. They don't look happy. They don't look like fit people.
Griff
Open User Options Menu

Nwlifter

6 per DAY? Egads!
Dr. Darden is right, that is WAY too low. Muscle is active tissue, even at rest. Muscles are never completely flacid.

Open User Options Menu

Cherry

karma50 wrote:
Andrew,
What you say makes a lot of sense. I think leaner, stronger people tend to move around more and use that muscle for everyday tasks. I think the straight calculations from BMR may be misleading in that regard.
I also agree for us older types, brief, intense bouts of exercise are best. I have a few over 50 jogger neighbors that I see out slogging several times a week. They don't look happy. They don't look like fit people.
Griff


Regarding CARDIO.. Stop and think for one moment.. ever see a fat runner? i'm not referring to the 'off-again on-again weekend jogger' but the consistent serious RUNNER. Ever see a fat one? I haven't, but i have seen plenty of fat weight lifters and BB's.

That should tell you something about the potential of cardio to burn calories and trim the fat.

:)

Open User Options Menu

gmw5

New Zealand

A fat runner? There are only two types of runners - the runners that run once in a blue moon who look out of shape and chubby - and the rest of them that look like they are at home in a concentration camp bordering on death with skinniness. That is an honest comment too. I have a lot of friends that swear by running - and they are dead skinny - with no muscle on their frames at all
Open User Options Menu

rtestes

Mississippi, USA

Ellington Darden wrote:
Take a stand?

I've taken a stand by publishing what I believe in my last two books: "The New HIT" and "The Bowflex Body Plan."

I do not agree with Ellis. A pound of muscle requires significantly more than 6 calories per day.

Cardio exercise is not the best form of exercise to lose fat. Again, I talk about the why's in my last two books.

Ellington


And I agree with you. But I wanted additional ammo to defeat the argument. A number of months ago, a study came out that stated that muscle only burned 6 calories, it made all the news wires. I think it was built on this study:

Wang, Z., Heshka, S., Zhang, K., Boozer, C.N., & Heymsfield, S.B. (2001). Resting energy expenditure: systematic organization and critique of prediction methods. Obesity Research, 9, 331-336

Most of the things I find on the net are quoting the 6 calorie figure now.

I really think it is a conspiracy to tear down weight training. If you know of nothing to defeat them, maybe someone else does. I was hoping you had the answer.




Open User Options Menu

rtestes

Mississippi, USA

Some more sites pushing the six calorie number:

www.bodyrecomposition.com/Articles/metabolicrate.html

www.thefactsaboutfitness.com/news/cals.htm

exercise.about.com/od/exerciseworkouts/f/muscle.htm
====================================

Then I see Clarence Bass saying that Lawrence E. Lamb, M.D., in his book The Weighting Game (Lyle Stuart, 1988) Researchers led by Dr. Ancel Keys at the University of Minnesota measured the energy requirements of people of different ages with different amounts of bodyfat. They found that the energy requirement of fat-free body weight (weight of the body minus the bodyfat) were remarkably constant for both men and women between the ages of 20 and 60. All the subjects, no matter what their sex or age, burned about 1.28 calories per hour per kilogram (2.2 lbs.) of fat-free body weight, under resting conditions.

And here is an outtake from a MSN article on fitness:

"In her book Ultimate Fitness: The Quest For Truth About Exercise And Health, Gina Kolata talked to Claude Bouchard, Ph.D., a world authority on virtually all things related to obesity. His response: Sorry, but muscle actually has a relatively low metabolic rate at rest.

Bouchard is likely familiar with the article "Dissecting the Energy Needs of the Body," from a 2001 issue of Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition and Metabolic Care. This article gave me new respect for my kidneys, which burn 182 calories per day for every pound they weigh, and for my brain, which clocks in at 110 calories for every pound it weighs. But my muscles, damn them, are lazy. They burn six calories per pound, barely edging out fat's two-calorie burn. In other words, if you lose one pound of fat and replace it with one pound of muscle, your net gain in calorie burning is four calories a day. Enjoy the celery stick."
==============================
I suppose the 6 calorie argument is that Organs burn most of the calories not muscles and we have just been overestimating them.

Here is a response to Dr. Ellis:

slowburn.typepad.com/my_weblog/2006/05/metabolic_muscl.html
Open User Options Menu

AShortt

Ontario, CAN

Cherry wrote:
karma50 wrote:
Andrew,
What you say makes a lot of sense. I think leaner, stronger people tend to move around more and use that muscle for everyday tasks. I think the straight calculations from BMR may be misleading in that regard.
I also agree for us older types, brief, intense bouts of exercise are best. I have a few over 50 jogger neighbors that I see out slogging several times a week. They don't look happy. They don't look like fit people.
Griff

Regarding CARDIO.. Stop and think for one moment.. ever see a fat runner? i'm not referring to the 'off-again on-again weekend jogger' but the consistent serious RUNNER. Ever see a fat one? I haven't, but i have seen plenty of fat weight lifters and BB's.

That should tell you something about the potential of cardio to burn calories and trim the fat.

:)




The point is running may enhance a specific of your fitness, which is fine if you wish it for sport specific needs or just because you enjoy running.

Lots of people play, say tennis to help get and stay in shape, is it the best way? Not even close, especially if you have mediocre genetics and have fat to lose. Besides, many of the repetitive actions of tennis and running are injurious in the long run. The impact adds up like any sport and life in general, genetics and your fitness level dictate how much you can take.

Your drawing a conclusion about running improperly, people aren't out running in numbers who are fat because it is too tough do with the extra weight. Just strap on 30 lbs of water and see how you do.

This sport of running attracts those who are suited to it and there are some who are chubby and try to stick at it. This is why the overweight folks stick to the cardio machines...and they are, lined up like cattle to the slaughter by the hundreds of thousands in gyms all over.

As well, you are in luck today because I just did a consult on a runner. She is a life long serious runner and felt that this prep for a 10K didn't go well at all. She felt like she wasn't in the same condition as in the past even though she followed some famous fitness/runners program.

I tested her body comp. and though she looked 15% B.F. (thus still fitting her cloths) she was 22%! She wasn't that shocked as she felt it, Now in her late 30's the muscle was wasted from all the running and bodyfat had crept up. Basically, all that running and she was soft and this is a gal who is a very clean eater.

Genetics, what she could achieve fine in her 20's is no longer possible and wasting (over use atrophy) and age have brought her fitness levels DOWN even with all that running.

She has a phys Ed. Degree and thought she knew the scoop but when she saw one of my clients who is in her 40's and trains only twice a week she woke up and smelled the muscle and came to me ;^) She had asked my client if she runs and she said "my trainer said that fine for fun once in a while but mix it up with all sorts of activities for balance". Again running is an activity even a sport but not a means to proper fitness, we aren't designed to run all the time.

As for fat iron pumpers well they are weightlifters not fitness people they do it for different reasons. That most runners are thin is no different from most chess club members being good at chess. Play with a club all you want but if you haven't got it then 10 year olds will be beating you regularly.

Regards,
Andrew
Open User Options Menu

Ellington Darden

rtestes wrote:
Some more sites pushing the six calorie number:

www.bodyrecomposition.com/Articles/metabolicrate.html

www.thefactsaboutfitness.com/news/cals.htm

exercise.about.com/od/exerciseworkouts/f/muscle.htm
====================================

Then I see Clarence Bass saying that Lawrence E. Lamb, M.D., in his book The Weighting Game (Lyle Stuart, 1988) Researchers led by Dr. Ancel Keys at the University of Minnesota measured the energy requirements of people of different ages with different amounts of bodyfat. They found that the energy requirement of fat-free body weight (weight of the body minus the bodyfat) were remarkably constant for both men and women between the ages of 20 and 60. All the subjects, no matter what their sex or age, burned about 1.28 calories per hour per kilogram (2.2 lbs.) of fat-free body weight, under resting conditions.

And here is an outtake from a MSN article on fitness:

"In her book Ultimate Fitness: The Quest For Truth About Exercise And Health, Gina Kolata talked to Claude Bouchard, Ph.D., a world authority on virtually all things related to obesity. His response: Sorry, but muscle actually has a relatively low metabolic rate at rest.

Bouchard is likely familiar with the article "Dissecting the Energy Needs of the Body," from a 2001 issue of Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition and Metabolic Care. This article gave me new respect for my kidneys, which burn 182 calories per day for every pound they weigh, and for my brain, which clocks in at 110 calories for every pound it weighs. But my muscles, damn them, are lazy. They burn six calories per pound, barely edging out fat's two-calorie burn. In other words, if you lose one pound of fat and replace it with one pound of muscle, your net gain in calorie burning is four calories a day. Enjoy the celery stick."
==============================
I suppose the 6 calorie argument is that Organs burn most of the calories not muscles and we have just been overestimating them.

Here is a response to Dr. Ellis:

slowburn.typepad.com/my_weblog/2006/05/metabolic_muscl.html


I like what Fred Hahn has to say about the 6-calorie concept. His weblog has a lot of valuable discussion.

Ellington

Open User Options Menu

karma50

Cherry,
I used to be a dedicated runner. I don't do any "cardio" now, except HIT. I have better blood lipid counts, lower bp, and I feel a lot better than I did as a runner. I also had a knee surgery which was directly related to running long distances. I also find that mindfull eating is really the key to leaness, not exercise.

I agree that many weightlifters are overweight. My wife and I saw a really huge guy at the gym doing dumblell work while eating a power bar of some sort! Chewing and lifting. Like many of these huge people, he had a prominent gut. In fact I think that weightlifting and in particular bodybuilding, can be unhealthy activities for a lot of reasons.

If it wasn't for the work of Dr. D and AJ, I would probably never have touched a weight, and stuck with bw exercises in a circuit fashion, like we did in the service. I actually did this for quite some time and occasionally ran sprints and short distances. I think it's much more effective for metabolic fitness than running, and you work the whole body.
Griff
Open User Options Menu

simon-hecubus

Texas, USA

Cherry wrote:
Regarding CARDIO.. Stop and think for one moment.. ever see a fat runner? i'm not referring to the 'off-again on-again weekend jogger' but the consistent serious RUNNER. Ever see a fat one? I haven't, but i have seen plenty of fat weight lifters and BB's.

That should tell you something about the potential of cardio to burn calories and trim the fat.

Yo, dude. You're comparing apples and oranges.

If you ask us not to talk about the 'off-again on-again weekend jogger', then we ask you to leave out the people who sit on the same machine for 10 minutes, resting 2-4 minutes between their 3-plate sets.
Open User Options Menu

BF Bullpup

Massachusetts, USA

Cherry wrote:
Regarding CARDIO.. Stop and think for one moment.. ever see a fat runner? i'm not referring to the 'off-again on-again weekend jogger' but the consistent serious RUNNER. Ever see a fat one? I haven't, but i have seen plenty of fat weight lifters and BB's.

That should tell you something about the potential of cardio to burn calories and trim the fat.


Burn calories, yes. Trim fat, no. What do you say about all those fat walkers? Walking is cardio, too.
Open User Options Menu

kevindill

Maryland, USA


"In her book Ultimate Fitness: The Quest For Truth About Exercise And Health, Gina Kolata talked to Claude Bouchard, Ph.D., a world authority on virtually all things related to obesity. His response: Sorry, but muscle actually has a relatively low metabolic rate at rest.


The probelm here is an apples and oranges argument. A muscle AT REST does not use much energy. So if you are in a COMA, your muscles might only use 6 calories per lb. But the minute you get your lazy but up out of bed or off the couch, the burn rate goes up. Sitting upright, standing and normal daily activites, increase the burn rate of an added lb of muscle to between 25 - 50 kcal per lb, depending on the person. So while the clinical definition of BMR may be raised very little, the functional burn rate is much higher.

Regards
Kevin Dill
Open User Options Menu

SB2006

I have been amazed at the finish line of marathon races to see really heavy people (4 hour+ times of course) actually finish. It is disheartening to see how relatively few calories an hour of cardio training requires.

I know of a woman (she is still heavy) who walks hard one hour per day. She was tested on a treadmill and it was determined that she burned approximately 7 calories per minute walking. 420 calories per hour! A Big Mac contains almost 600 calories and it can be consumed in a few minutes.

Empirical observation says that added muscle mass increases a trainee's calorie output. More muscle mass is the primary reason that men require substantially more calories than women.
Open User Options Menu

JOE W

Cherry wrote:
karma50 wrote:
Andrew,
What you say makes a lot of sense. I think leaner, stronger people tend to move around more and use that muscle for everyday tasks. I think the straight calculations from BMR may be misleading in that regard.
I also agree for us older types, brief, intense bouts of exercise are best. I have a few over 50 jogger neighbors that I see out slogging several times a week. They don't look happy. They don't look like fit people.
Griff

Regarding CARDIO.. Stop and think for one moment.. ever see a fat runner? i'm not referring to the 'off-again on-again weekend jogger' but the consistent serious RUNNER. Ever see a fat one?

:)



Cherry,
Yes ! I have seen runners who ran the Boston Marathon in under three hours who were what I call "skinny fat " .
They had skinny muscles but were still fat.
A better question would be...Have you ever seen a massively muscular marathoner ?

Joe
Open User Options Menu

smuchnick

Maryland, USA

All,

I've been mostly lurking here since I started TNHIT 1 1/2 years ago. I'm very happy with where I've wound up in the program. I went from nearly 180 lbs two years ago to a steady 140 (at 5' 6" that's about 9-10% body fat). I'm down to two days in the gym per week, doing fairly short, very intense HIT sets, plus a small amount of intense interval cardio to warm up.

That said, I've worked in a third day each week for running. At first I started with shorter runs, but I've found that anything between 5 miles and half-marathon is ideal for me. Interestingly, I've found that the intensity learned in HIT workouts transfers well to my style of running, which is more interval-focused. I always try to push my CV system to the edge and back - my estimated VO2 max would be at 185 beats per minute, so whether on a run or in the gym doing HIT, I try to bounce up and down between 130 and 170.

Recently on a "fun" run I passed some people who asked me the question I love to hear from folks these days: "are you in training for a triathalon?" I love that question because my two days/week of HIT keep my type IIb muscle fiber nice and solid, definitely not a "runners" physique. I didn't have enough time to tell them the answer - my resting heart rate is 40 and my blood pressure is 105/60. And that, my friends, is the ultimate training goal, at least for me at age 49!

Steve.
Open User Options Menu

elecjet

New York, USA

rtestes wrote:
I have asked this question before and usually receive short non-committal answers. It deals with how many calories does a pound of muscle burn a day. You have used 37.5 as an average of a 25-50 range in your books.

In the last book NEW HIT, you reported that Hudlow gained 18.5 pounds of muscle and his RMR was raised 28.6 calories per pound.

I have used this information often when trying to introduce people to the need for resistance training. More and more they have come back with mention of studies that say a pound of muscle only raises RMR by 6 calories a day, blowing everything I have been led to believe in the past. Look at this article as an example:

http://www.optimalhealthpartne...

With your background and degree, I am sure you keep up with studies and where the science presently is. What does Dr. Whitney or Schendel have to say about this. If this is true then cardio may be the best exercise. What is the truth? Is the muscle's effect on metabolism up for grabs? What made the past numbers used to be so far off?


i just had a chance to read the article about this ellis guy. He is full of crap IMO. Muscles is definetly more active by alot more then he says. People with muscle lose it for a few reasons and that one being getting lazy and eating more.

If your muscles are active and you have everything else in check then the body will show it.

Open User Options Menu

HamsFitness

smuchnick wrote:
All,

I've been mostly lurking here since I started TNHIT 1 1/2 years ago. I'm very happy with where I've wound up in the program. I went from nearly 180 lbs two years ago to a steady 140 (at 5' 6" that's about 9-10% body fat). I'm down to two days in the gym per week, doing fairly short, very intense HIT sets, plus a small amount of intense interval cardio to warm up.

That said, I've worked in a third day each week for running. At first I started with shorter runs, but I've found that anything between 5 miles and half-marathon is ideal for me. Interestingly, I've found that the intensity learned in HIT workouts transfers well to my style of running, which is more interval-focused. I always try to push my CV system to the edge and back - my estimated VO2 max would be at 185 beats per minute, so whether on a run or in the gym doing HIT, I try to bounce up and down between 130 and 170.

Recently on a "fun" run I passed some people who asked me the question I love to hear from folks these days: "are you in training for a triathalon?" I love that question because my two days/week of HIT keep my type IIb muscle fiber nice and solid, definitely not a "runners" physique. I didn't have enough time to tell them the answer - my resting heart rate is 40 and my blood pressure is 105/60. And that, my friends, is the ultimate training goal, at least for me at age 49!

Steve.


Steve,

superb job my friend, sounds like you have fitness dialled in to what you need - and well done on getting things sorted so finely!

I like to see a well rounded approach i.e. a mix of more than one training method.

HIT maybe the most efficient exercise method but variety in life promotes mental health as well as physical.
Open User Options Menu

HamsFitness

kevindill wrote:

"In her book Ultimate Fitness: The Quest For Truth About Exercise And Health, Gina Kolata talked to Claude Bouchard, Ph.D., a world authority on virtually all things related to obesity. His response: Sorry, but muscle actually has a relatively low metabolic rate at rest.

The probelm here is an apples and oranges argument. A muscle AT REST does not use much energy. So if you are in a COMA, your muscles might only use 6 calories per lb. But the minute you get your lazy but up out of bed or off the couch, the burn rate goes up. Sitting upright, standing and normal daily activites, increase the burn rate of an added lb of muscle to between 25 - 50 kcal per lb, depending on the person. So while the clinical definition of BMR may be raised very little, the functional burn rate is much higher.

Regards
Kevin Dill


Lovely to see sense int he midst of black and white text that people seem to take as gospel and not see the common sense aspects of things.

Cheers Kevin

Rest and active measurements would be totally different.

They seem to be making a comparison as meaningful as saying a car always uses 1 litre of fuel per hour - they seem to have forgotten that cars and muscle are constantly moving bewteen idling states and high speed movement states.

the two different states clearly burning differing amounts of fuel!

Open User Options Menu

Cherry

According to this source:

a 170lb man running an 8 min mile will burn 150 cals every 10 mins.

that,s a pretty good clip but doable, i can string at least FIVE of those on a bad day = 600 cals
and i am heavier!


from same source:

"weight training (muscular strength)" = 60 cals per 10 mins.

"weight training (super circuit)" = 137 cals every 10 mins.

giving benefit of experience and giving you benefit of the doubt i will assume that TWENTY mins of super circuit training is doable (2 X 137)? maybe twice per week?

i can do cardio EVERY DAY! i can burn hundreds of cals EVERY DAY.


you tell me what activity between the two here has more potential for fat burning? especially since sig fat burning kicks in much later AFTER glycogen stores are in state of depletion.


now, you quibble with these FACTS, but none of you, NONE, have presented anything else in way of evidence other than a lot of hot air.

you got the beef? lets see it, now.

haha

:)
Open User Options Menu

simon-hecubus

Texas, USA

Cherry wrote:
According to this source:

a 170lb man running an 8 min mile will burn 150 cals every 10 mins...

.."weight training (super circuit)" = 137 cals every 10 mins...

...now, you quibble with these FACTS, but none of you, NONE, have presented anything else in way of evidence other than a lot of hot air.

you got the beef? lets see it, now.


150 cal/10 min vs. 137 cal/10 min

Wow, you really showed us there Sesame...uh...I mean Cherry.
Open User Options Menu

Cherry

simon-hecubus wrote:
Cherry wrote:
According to this source:

a 170lb man running an 8 min mile will burn 150 cals every 10 mins...

.."weight training (super circuit)" = 137 cals every 10 mins...

...now, you quibble with these FACTS, but none of you, NONE, have presented anything else in way of evidence other than a lot of hot air.

you got the beef? lets see it, now.


150 cal/10 min vs. 137 cal/10 min

Wow, you really showed us there Sesame...uh...I mean Cherry.



i fail to see your sarcasm. i've been instructed here that i can burn more cals resistance training than running, and that as a result resistance training is superior for fat loss.

According to this source, i can do a 10 minute run burning 150 vs 137 (super circuit) weight training. According to MY math, that's more. Furthermore, I can string at least FIVE of these runs in a WO. How many SUPER CIRCUIT 10 min cycles can you string?? Can you do an HOUR of super circuit resistance training?? LOL. hmm. prob not. can you do SUPER CIRCUIT training FIVE days per week?? hmm prob not..

LOL

:)
Open User Options Menu
1 | 2 | Next | Last
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy