Aerobics vs. Anaerobics for fat loss

[kuri]

Ladies and gentlemen the verdict is in.

From Alwyn's blog:

A few loyal readers will remember a few weeks ago that I hypothesized that interval training would help fat loss, but steady state aerobic training may actually have a negative effect in a fat loss program (here)....read on:

I've mentioned this study before - but now the results have been further analyzed and confirmed and after emailing the lead researcher yesterday I received more information.


Trapp EG and Boutcher SH
Fat loss following 15 weeks of high intensity, intermittent cycle training
Fat Loss Laboratory, Faculty of Medicine,
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia

Without going through the study line by line (that's for the guys on the internet forums) I'll summarize the findings briefly:


Two groups:

Group One: performed 40 mins of steady state aerobics at 60% VO2 max, three times per week for 15 weeks.

Group Two: performed 20 mins (i.e. half the duration) of interval training (8s on, 12s off - 60 rounds), three times per week for 15 weeks. Group two started at 5 mins total the first week.

Both groups had dietary intake monitored closely.

The steady state group GAINED 0.5kg of fat in 15 weeks.
The interval training group LOST on average 2.5kg of fat in the same time frame.

When two already very lean subjects were removed (BMI was less than 20) - the interval training groups results improved to an average of 3.9kg of fat (Steven Boutcher told me that two women in the interval group lost 8kg of fat).

Again, look at the numbers - the aerobic training group GAINED fat. The Interval Training group lost 5-8 times as much fat as the steady state group gained despite training for half the time.

Last night a client asked me about this very issue. If he and other clients follows through with advice to do 20 minutes of intervals hopefully other gym member will notice the results they aren't getting.

Then again I'll probably need to print out copies of this and put it on every treadmill

[Matthew]

Then again I'll probably need to print out copies of this and put it on every treadmill

Do it.

[ninja]

This is now an excuse to play more basketball.

awesome.

[AmyPie38]

What about using both? What if you do intervals three times a week and then jog twice a week for 45 minutes just because you enjoy jogging? Will you still get the benefits of the interval training or will those two days of jogging affect the results?

[ninja]

Originally Posted by AmyPie38

What about using both? What if you do intervals three times a week and then jog twice a week for 45 minutes just because you enjoy jogging? Will you still get the benefits of the interval training or will those two days of jogging affect the results?

purely hypothetical, correct?

I also wonder somewhat about this. I have to walk a crapload between classes and j-school and the bus. I walk really fast, so I guess you could consider it "aerobic." (I may be stretching that)

[Chiron]

I'm pretty skeptical of the conclusion. I do think intervals are better for fat loss but I think there must've been some other contributing factor. I don't think the aerobic work is what lead to an increase in bodyfat.

[ninja]

it was the snickers

[Chiron]

Originally Posted by ninja

it was the snickers

lol. Those damn snickers. Especially the ones that have been in the freezer.

[Terry Monk]

Originally Posted by Chiron

I'm pretty skeptical of the conclusion. I do think intervals are better for fat loss but I think there must've been some other contributing factor. I don't think the aerobic work is what lead to an increase in bodyfat.

I was just going to say the same thing. The diets were closely monitored??? How in the hell do you gain fat doing long state cardio? I can't believe it. I can definitely see (and 100% completely believe) that HIIT burns more fat than steady state, that's been proven to me by my own personal experience, but I can't see the steady state group gaining fat!
They probably are burning off some muscle but that's not going to PUT FAT ON.
AmyPie- I seriously, seriously doubt that a steady state session once or twice a week is going to do you any harm. Keep the intensity at a medium level. Lisa~ even suggested to me to add a session of it in order to up my fat loss but I'm scared shitless to lose muscle.
Ninja - maybe if you sprint part of the distance between class and then walk real slow and then sprint, etc. ????? :p:p

[RacerBill]

I'm wondering the same thing, GR. If both groups ate at a caloric deficit, then they both should have lost weight. Steady state cardio might be less efficient at metabolizing fat than intervals, but it's still burning calories. I suspect the "closely monitored" diet is a bit of a stretch.

[Terry Monk]

Great minds, great minds.

[kuri]

For what it's worth I don't think that in most cases doing some cardio is going to cause you to gain fat, and I don't think that is exactly what the above study really comes down to. Then again I'm just a forum guy

From Craig Ballantyne:

Here's the bottom line about cardio:

1) It can and will improve your health.

2) You might be able to lose fat with it, but it will take you twice as long per session as interval training - and intervals have, in my experience, a much greater success rate.

3) Too much cardio can quickly cause injury.

4) The fat burning zone is the biggest cardio myth of them all.

5) You don't have to do at least 20 minutes of cardio before your body starts burning fat (again, huh?!)

So that's what science and experience show about cardio. The day that a study shows cardio causes you to store more fat, believe me, you'll be the first to hear about it.

But until then, hopefully trainers will lay off the "sky is falling" claims about cardio, and stick to what the latest research is showing us. There are just too many merits about interval training, that we don't need to go around making up B.S. claims about cardio to prove our point.

Intervals are great, plain and simple, and cardio leaves a lot to be desired.

[andaheart]

---> 3) Too much cardio can quickly cause injury <----

Thats a broad statement...

[Phaedrus49er]

Originally Posted by andaheart

---> 3) Too much cardio can quickly cause injury <----

Thats a broad statement...

[karky]

no sex
causes
bad eyes

well, appearently, i have a good sex life :p

Does you're hand count?

[Craig]

The "fat gained" in that study was probably well within the standard deviation and it wasn't "significant". I.e. the researchers didn't conclude that the aerobic training caused fat gain.

I actually wrote this newsletter (over a week ago) based on some claims made my a doctor, not in response to what Alwyn wrote. Weird timing.

[andrew_plamondon]

There are 2 things I want to mention :
1) If you do cardio right after lifting, there are more free fatty acids in the blood and the body burns more fat. The FFA were hypothesized to come from a CNS activation (caused by epinephrine).
2) Higher intensity exercise has been found to increase satiety. Maybe those who did HIIT not only increase their EPOC but also ate a little bit less. My guess is that they considered the eating and took it out of the calculations.

I could find the studies if someone is interested, I'm in a hurry now.

And for the sake of it, here's an article on GI and its effect on exercise (ie : none) : http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...=pubmed_docsum

[Jean-Paul]

Expounding on Amy's question, my response to clients who just really enjoy jogging is to go ahead and do it. Just don't be deluded into thinking that it is causing significant fat loss. I think it was Dos who quipped, "it's okay to break the rules, as long as you know you're breaking the rules." I couldn't have put it better.