one specific HIIIT question

[Wynton]

So, I've only recently started reading this forum and become acquainted with HIIT. Here's one specific question, which is probably pretty stupid:

I understand the premise of HIIT is that you burn more weight with a series of intense bursts, rather than a long, slow aerobic workout. But assuming that you incorporate short sprint-like activities in your schedule, is there any disadvantage to doing the long, slow aerobic activities as well?

In other words, can the slow, steady type of aerobic activity backfire somehow, by making your body work inefficiently, even if you are following more of a HIIT-like plan on other days?

[bwana devil]

no, there's no draw back to steady state exercise. the trend is just toward HIIT recently. steady state is MUCH better than no exercise.

you generally burn more calories while exercising but once you stop exercising the burning stops. w/ HIIT the calories keep on burning up to 24 hours so overall HIIT burns more.

HIIT is just a more efficient way to exercise which is why it is being touted so much lately. what steady state can accomplish in 45 minutes, HIIT can do in 20.

[thirddan]

one of the reasons that steady state work is looked down upon is that it is inefficient for fat loss...there are still cardiovascular benefits...

people adapt to cardio work quite fast so after some time you are burning less and less calories for the same amount of work, which leads to increased time doing cardio or increased intensity which leads to hiit...

[cbloom]

If your goal is to add muscle then a lot of long steady state cardio could well actually be counter productive. If your goal is just "fitness" then it's fine.

[Wynton]

[ QUOTE ]
If your goal is to add muscle then a lot of long steady state cardio could well actually be counter productive. If your goal is just "fitness" then it's fine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you elaborate? I'm not interested in adding muscle myself, but I'm curious about the science.

If a person is finding time to do all that is entailed in adding muscle, how would the addition of long steady states of cardio hurt that particular goal?

[Northern]

[ QUOTE ]
Can you elaborate? I'm not interested in adding muscle myself, but I'm curious about the science.

If a person is finding time to do all that is entailed in adding muscle, how would the addition of long steady states of cardio hurt that particular goal?

[/ QUOTE ]

Basically... to grow a muscle you need to exercise it and while exercising you burn energy (calories). In order for the muscle to grow it needs the proteins/carbs/fats and doing long calorie burning activites like cardio you will burn the energy needed for the muscles to grow.

For most people to grow bigger they have to consume a surplus of calories and they cannot accomplish this when burning large amounts.

[Wynton]

[ QUOTE ]

Basically... to grow a muscle you need to exercise it and while exercising you burn energy (calories). In order for the muscle to grow it needs the proteins/carbs/fats and doing long calorie burning activites like cardio you will burn the energy needed for the muscles to grow.

For most people to grow bigger they have to consume a surplus of calories and they cannot accomplish this when burning large amounts.

[/ QUOTE ]

So if one does an "excessive" amount of aerobic work plus weight-training, this will result in being both thinner and smaller than if the aerobic work was decreased?

But doesn't there come a point when one has reduced one's body fat percentage so much that more muscle will be produced? Isn't there a theoretical limit to how little body fat one can have?

[thirddan]

hey wynton...
basically it comes down to this...long duration steady state cardio is a catabolic activity, which means that while you are doing it you are breaking down calories to be used and they come from fat, muscle and glycogen stores...in order to build muscle you must be in an anabolic state where you are adding muscle and not breaking it down...

so yes, if you did too much cardio and lifted weights you could end up a smaller thinner weaker version of yourself...note that as a beginner your body is totally unaccustomed to this kind of activity and its possible to have a positive result even if the same activity would be negative for someone with more lifting experience...

and yes there is a limit to how low a person's body fat can be and still be healthy...i think most bodybuilders compete around 3-5% body fat...that is unhealthy and can't be maintained all year...in order to get that low you have to basically use gear and totally starve yourself which turns your body catabolic and you begin to burn muscle rather than fat...

[cbloom]

[ QUOTE ]

So if one does an "excessive" amount of aerobic work plus weight-training, this will result in being both thinner and smaller than if the aerobic work was decreased?


[/ QUOTE ]

Well it depends how much you are eating and when you are eating. But basically, yeah, the aerobic work will make you skinnier and also hurt your efforts to build muscle.

[ QUOTE ]

But doesn't there come a point when one has reduced one's body fat percentage so much that more muscle will be produced? Isn't there a theoretical limit to how little body fat one can have?


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not quite sure what you're saying but I don't think it makes sense. Having some fat actually makes it easier to build muscle, it's not like you first burn fat and then you build muscle; in fact if you do a lot of cardio without much fat on you, you will burn muscle, even if you are doing hard exercise. For example, cyclists in the Tour de France lose muscle over the course of the tour.

Muscle building doesn't happen when you actually lift weights. It happens in the hours and days afterward when your body uses protein and free energy to build muscle fibers. If you're doing a lot of cardio your body will be using its energy for the aerobic activity, not for building muscle.

Presumably when you are doing the cardio you're not eating very heavily so that you can lose fat; that makes things even worse since you might actually burn muscle for energy, and you are sending your body conflicting messages about whether it is a feast or famine (anabolic or catabolic states).

If you really want to build muscle and also do cardio for fitness reasons (lots of athletes do this, people like football players, even cyclists in the off season) - then you need to eat a TON of food, and eat before & after the cardio and even during the cardio. You have to understand that you are not doing the cardio to lose weight or burn fat, but just to build your lung and heart capacity for sports performance.