Here in the UK, the BBC have started a project in which they've selected a whole street of overweight individuals with a view to filming them being educated to eat better, get fit and, ultimately, get lean.
The premise being that obesity levels are rising and we need to do something about it. Our friends across the pond, particularly those in Detroit, were shown up as an example of what is to come - a nation in which obesity is considered an epidemic.
The BBC program featured a personal trainer and what do you think were the guidelines given to lose the weight? Aerobics, walking, biking, running etc.
It's very early days and she may go on to discuss using resistance training.
I have read the threads in which there has been heated disucssion on the interval training versus steady state cardio fat loss debate. I have fortunate enough to have read a great deal of informative replies by Alywn, Craig, Bill, Adam etc and am of the view that superior fat loss is better achieved by more intense training.
However, on the back of this, I have a question on how we can train an unconditioned, over weight person. Taking my brother-in-law for example: he's 37 years old, a busy guy, can really only manage 2-3 visits to the gym a week, is overweight to the tune of 42 pounds and has little history of exercise.
I figured it seemed sensible to advise him to build up at a least a core level of aerobic conditioning, coupled with a sutiable newbie weights program, rather than go for interval training and weights.
Or maybe I can. After all, we could sets interval levels relative to his capabilities.
So, to the professionals out there who don't use aerobic exercise on clients who need to lose fat, just how to you get them started?
Cheers
PS. This thread is started on the premise that I view higher intensity work is best for fat loss. I don't want this thread hijacked and turned into a debate on the health benefits of aerobic exercise (which I do recognise and have enjoyed reading about in the other threads)
On a side note they reckon it will take around 15 years before we catch up the American's obesity levels.
The current TV trend in this country is now aimed at fat loss and a healthier Britain and I think this can only help, but I do wish the "fitness professionals" would promote the benefits of resistance training
__________________
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is King
The principles remain essentially the same. The intensity will be relative to the individual. A severely deconditioned person may achieve a high perception of effort at a very low intensity (even during walking) in comparison to another who is more fit. Just as someone with no strength training experience may be weak in comparison to one who has been training for several years. Both should train with intensity although the levels may be significantly different.
Some thing to consider however is that "pushing" some deconditioned folks too soon can lead to disinterest in exercise because it's perceived as too difficult. Periods of lower intensity activity will contribute to work capacity and allow them to tolerate progressively more intense activities.
Originally posted by Bill Hartman: The principles remain essentially the same. The intensity will be relative to the individual.
I think this is the key point - I too thought you can train the unconditioned using intensities that seem high to them, though they may be of low intensity to others.
It seems to me that in the case of my brother in law, I would suggest an initial period of low intensity exercise to get going (hell, anything is better than nothing) until he reached a stage where he could interval train more comfortably.
If someone has been assessed and cleared for exercise, a beginner interval program might have them walking at 3.0mph for 1 minute, followed by 3.5 mph for 1 minute. That's interval training for someone with low fitness. It doesn't have to be an intense sprint, b/c as Bill mentioned, "The principles remain essentially the same. The intensity will be relative to the individual."
That's often a good starting point...as long as the program is safe and conservative.
Bill hit the nail on the head. IMO something people too often forget is that we are all individuals. The mind is the #1 thing that is going to make you fail or succeed in the world of fitness.
For someone that's just starting out, excersise might seem discraceful "I'm doing this because I'm fat." and every time they get out there that's going to be going thru their head and they can easily learn to dread exercise even though they're more than physically capible to do it. It's good to make it something that they enjoy so they're doing it because they want to not because they're fat.
I agree with the thrust here. I've done a lot of reading on exercise adherence and motivation, and my favorite exerpsych told me that just 30 percent of the population has the ability to exercise hard without wanting to quit immediately.
For everyone else, it's just painful and unpleasant, and they'll do anything to avoid it.
So my first goal, if I were working with someone who doesn't like or is scared of hard work, is to show them how easy and painless exercise is. Let them see that it's possible to be an exerciser first, and then worry about cranking it up later.
My source says that, when someone is confident he or she can do it, motivation grows, and that can override that person's natural fear of physical discomfort.
Linear Mode
