Cutting

[ian]

I've been told by the competing bodybuilders in my gym that if I do high intensity (eg running/ football/boxing) exercise I will lose muscle.

Therefore (according to them) the key is going on a treadmill/bike and going really slow for long periods of time.

1/Is this true???
I am sure thier advice is good, however they supplement there 'cutting needs' with sterioids that do much of the job for them and I don't.
2/What effect would a small amount of high intensity cardio have on the body???
3/Surely if cardio occurs on 'off days' the body does not recover as well as normal, also having negative effects.

 

[latin_blast]

Ian, there is so much controversy about it, I am sure nobody feels sure about it........ i have tried both and I have mixed feeling depending on who I read that day and no on how I feel, he he he...... both methods must be good, Tom Venuttos swears that no muscle loss exists with HIIT, specially if you take protein + vitamin C before the HIIT....

 

[Fausto]

To say nothing but the truth (that being existing research), the long, slow type of aerobics is what wastes muscle.

HIIT has not been proven to cause this, specially if you are loading protein afterwards!

Tabata then would turn out to be of themost efficient, some of these bb'ers are cookoo, they wake up in the middle of the night to gobble up protein.

Muscle wasting takes much more than a good nights sleep, after which you can load protein again in the morning anyhow.

I'd dismiss it! It just goes to show how little some ofthese guys know, it is all hearsay!

 

[imported_etothepii]

Exercising causes muscle loss...hmm....

Isn't that called catabolism? Doesn't catabolism take a lot of time to kick in? Doesn't it also require a deficit of calories?

If your cardio is intense but short, and you have enough calories in your system and in your diet, I don't understand how there could be a problem.

 

[latin_blast]

fausto... he he he

, I guess I am one of those bbommers cookoo who grab a shake when waking up at 1-2am..... but I believe it may really help because what doesn't kill you will make you stronger, he he he

 

[faz]

do your cardio on off days ...personaly i do hiit.tabatta.and slow steady...slow st eady will burn more cals while you are doing it but hiit and tabatta will burn more fat over a 24h period..as long as you take enough food in before and after there is no problem..its just the same as doing a weights session...ignore anyone who takes steroids what works for them will not work for you

 

[deli_conker]

My understanding is the following...

When you do cardio, you conciously know how long and how intense you plan to exercise. Your body has no way of knowing this.

So when you exercise at the lower intensity, your body reacts by throwing fuel on the fire so to speak. It does so from fuel that's already in the bloodstream, followed by fuel from stored energy (fat), followed by fuel taken by metabolising muscle mass. At the lower intensity, there isn't a huge need for energy, so it is fairly content by using a proportion that uses a lot more fat than muscle.

When you go with the high intensity cardio, your body will think it needs all the fuel it can get and throws anything on the fire that will burn. The ratio of muscle to fat increases. Remember that your body has no idea how long you plan to exercise, it just knows that it needs energy NOW!


What that adds up to is the following:
<ul>
[*]High intensity cardio burns a higher ratio of muscle to fat than low intensity cardio.
[*]High intensity cardio burns more calories than low intensity cardio in the same amount of time.
[/list]

The more calories you burn, the more weight you lose. The source of the weight depends on the way you burn your calories. If you exercise for 20 minutes at high intensity, you'll burn more calories than exercising for 20 minutes at low intensity. But a bigger chunk of the calories burned will come from muscle mass instead of fat. That's why it is said you need to load with protein afterwards; to replenish what was burned. The only problem with that is that you are now adding calories back into your body which could potentially turn back in to fat.

To burn the same amount of calories with low intensity, you need to do it for longer periods. The trade off is that you have more calories being burned from fat than muscle. It just takes longer to acheive the same amount of calorie loss.

This is just what I've heard on the subject. I'm sure it will be proven and disproven many times in the following years. Personally, when I am cutting, I like to save as much energy as I can for lifting which means I only do the low-to-mid intensity cardio and save my strength for when it matters.

 

[latin_blast]

to tell you the truth Deli, that is exactly what I feel and studied.... but there are so many studies now, my personal experience is with HIIT I wind up more &quot;drained&quot;, tired, weak for my weight lifting, no matter how much I eat.... so, what I do is when I am with high content of fat and want to start getting rid of fat at all cost then I use HIIT once or twice a week + 1-2 low-moderate cardio.... but once I am in a BF% range and I feel good about it then I just do low-moderate cardio 3-4 times a week for half an hour, just for my heart..... I feel fine this way.

 

[faz]

your body will only use muscle if there are no carbs available so as long as you are not training fasted hiit.tabata.are fine..besides doing an hour slow steady is more likely to burn muscle than..20mins hiit or 4mins tabatta..

 

[Fausto]

Faz

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">besides doing an hour slow steady is more likely to burn muscle than..20mins hiit or 4mins tabatta</div>

Thanks, exactly my point!

Muscle will only burn if there is no other source of energy available, this is catabolism. Let us look at Venuto, he claims that early morning fasted cardio sessions get rid of fat fastest, he then recommends fairly high protein breakfast and the result is a high energy day in which fat burning carries oin for the rest of the day.

Long slow aerobic routines burn fat alright but after the fat to muscle ratio is depleted, the muscle wasting then starts, the so called catabolic action, with tabata for instance there is no chance for the energy reuirements to get to this stage!

Just IMHO and from what I have read around...plus it sounds logical!

 

[deli_conker]

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Muscle will only burn if there is no other source of energy available,</div>I don't know about that one. I mean, I can't see the body doing the following...

1) burn glycogen in the muscle till it's gone
2) burn glycogen in the liver (if not fasted) til it's gone
3) release fat into blood stream til it's gone
4) catabolize muscle mass til it's gone

It would be really easy to cut the fat if that were true. You'd just exercise until it was all gone.

I still think the body starts with the glycogen already available and then looks to other sources simultaneously. When you go more intense, the body plans for the future so to speak, and throws some muscle (which takes longer to transform into energy) on the fire.

 

[Razien99]

I was under the impression that your body is always using a different ratio of protein/carbs/fat for energy anyway &amp; that the ratio depends on the duration and intensity of your exercise session.

Tom venuto explains it some more here:
http://www.healthrecipes.com/muscle.htm

Its dependant on many things. If your glycogen supplies are low, your bodys going to utilize more protein for energy...which is why i dont fully trust morning cardio in the fasted state. Anyway if it really worries you as latin blast suggested at the start...just consume some form of protein beforehand..that way your body wont need to break down muscle to get it as it will already be in your bloodstream. Plus proteins been shown to have no effect on fat oxidization, so people should really consume it before all forms of exercise regardless of the situation.

I would think high intensity exercise really doesnt last long enough for it to have any significant effect anyway, no matter what the % of energy that comes from protein is.

 

[Fausto]

Razien99

Thanks for recuing me there! I hate these scientific &quot;pointers&quot;.

The guys who are worried about loosing muscle because of HIIT, just should not bother to do it instead of theorizing about muscle loss.

Too me muscle loss is only significant when you start looking emaciated or that you lost so much it is visible, these qunatities we are debating about are hardly visible and if we get smart by using nutrition before/after we should not have a problem.

'nough said!

 

[faz]

your body releases cortisol which uses muscle as energy so long as you have enough protein and carbs in your system then you are ok
quote from deli...
1) burn glycogen in the muscle till it's gone
2) burn glycogen in the liver (if not fasted) til it's gone
3) release fat into blood stream til it's gone
4) catabolize muscle mass til it's gone

It would be really easy to cut the fat if that were true.
yes and muscle look at marathon runners

 

[Heavy Duty dude]

The problem is that you can't do HIIT often. It is tiring, you don't have much muscle glycogen when you cut and it stresses the CNS and the joints/tendons. I doubt someone natural can do it more than 2x/week on top of his workouts. I certainly can't.

Even IF it's good you still need another form of cardio if you want to accelerate fat loss - low intensity cardio being the next best alternative, with a fat burner if possible -.

 

[imported_etothepii]

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">When you do cardio, you conciously know how long and how intense you plan to exercise. Your body has no way of knowing this.
</div>

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">When you go more intense, the body plans for the future so to speak</div>

You seem to be contradicting yourself here. The body responds to stimulus, right? This response is programmed by nature. The program can be changed by training -- the body is adaptive. If you train 50 minutes slow arobic per day, your body will adapt to that over time. Same should go for HIIT.

Catabolism is a drastic survival skill. The body resorts to catabolizing itself as a last resort. Not sure where I'm going with this, but I find it hard to believe that the body will begin to eat itself after 4 to 12 minutes. Seems a lot more likely after 35, 45 or 50 minutes, unless you are conditioned -- reprogrammed -- to exercise in that way.

 

[robefc]

Personally I do 2 sessions of HIIT and 2 sessions of steady state cardio per week.

They both have things going for them fat loss wise, cardio health wiseand and also from a convenience point of view - HIIT doesn't take as long, steady state is easier and not as stressful on the system/legs.

I never ever do low intensity because tt's not as beneficial for cardiovascular health and I've read a lot of articles exposing the myth of the fat loss zone - suffice to say that although you may be burning a greater percentage of fat at the time you have to take into account both the overall amount of calories burned during exercise (e.g. 60% of 500 calories is not as much as 40% of 1000 calories) and post exercise.

Ensure you take in enough carbs and protein pre and post cardio (as you do for your weight training sessions) and I don't see how burning muscle enters the equation.

Cheers

Rob

 

[latin_blast]

hi guys, I decided to reappear here, after these last 2 days traveling to Rio.... Fausto, the garotinhas here sent you their regards, he he he.....I am having a tough time with the gym at the hotel, not a lot of things to choose from, not even a bench is available, so I have to do bench press with DB's and lying on a step, I knew it would be a challenge to keep with the HST routine.... well, now about the subject..... guys, I will be the devil's advocate.... I understand that HIIT is more fat-burning efficient in terms of calories and low-med intensity is more efficient in terms of percentage.... and actually, in my case at least, I don't bother too much about the &quot;quantity&quot; of calories to burn, I care more about the percentage..... at the end of the day, I can control the deficit/surplus of calories not only by exercising but also with my nutrition,.... on the other hand I don't have that many weapons at my disposal for the percentage of fat to be burned..... so, I try to burn as much percentage as possible of fat and control the surplus/deficit with the nutrition..... does that make sense at all ??.... am I missing something

 

[robefc]

Well regardless of your calorie consumption in my example of burning 500/1000 calories you'd have burned more fat in the latter example, you could have eaten more and you'll be healthier.

At least that's the way I see it.

Cheers

Rob

 

[Fausto]

Latin - you lucky bug!

Send them my regards!

I think the point's been made! HIIT is a lot more efficient in my opinion, steady state, may also suit many here, but long drawn out cardio is not my cup of tea at all!