I never understood the need to do cardio - since its all about creating caloric deficit, why not just eat less and do no cardio ? Say you could eat 1200 kcal over 2 meals and then go burn 1000 kcal off in a lengthy cardio session. Or you could eat 200 kcal and do no cardio at all.
This is considering the following facts: you lift on a regular basis, youre not fat but looking to get rid of extra flab on your abs after bulking cycle and you eat clean at already.
Eating more food plus doing cardio allows for better circulation, better heart and lung health, better nutrient partitioning in the body, and also a higher potential for muscle growth simply from having extra nutrients in the body in the first place.
It’s not just about burning calories.
[quote]Drivethruhero wrote:
I never understood the need to do cardio - since its all about creating caloric deficit, why not just eat less and do no cardio ? Say you could eat 1200 kcal over 2 meals and then go burn 1000 kcal off in a lengthy cardio session. Or you could eat 200 kcal and do no cardio at all.
This is considering the following facts: you lift on a regular basis, youre not fat but looking to get rid of extra flab on your abs after bulking cycle and you eat clean at already.[/quote]
Here is the case against aerobics as presented by one of my mentors and level 4 Poliquin Coach Keith Alpert:
Six reasons why aerobic work is counterproductive
Getting Maximum Results
As a Strength Coach and a Personal Trainer for 15 years, I�??ve had a chance to see many fitness enthusiasts workout at many gyms in my local area and throughout the country. At any given gym or fitness center, the one thing that I notice is how you see the same people doing the same workouts month after month, year after year.
The amazing thing is that these people continue to look the same or they are actually looking worse aesthetically. This is especially true with the constant performance of continuous aerobic work.
What�??s sad about this is that they feel like they are doing everything necessary to get the result they are looking for.
They are resigned to the fact that this is how it�??s going to be and there isn�??t anything that can be done to correct their deficiencies. If you were to ask them what results they would like to get out of their workout, the number 1 answer is �??losing weight or getting thinner.�??
When I am asked what it takes to look �??fitter,�?? the first question I ask is: �??How long have you been doing your current training program?�??
The usual answer I receive is �??somewhere between 6 and 12 months.�?? The typical program they follow is �??30 �?? 60 minutes of continuous aerobic work 3 to 5 times per week.�??
Our training tells us that this is not a good approach to take for the client seeking improving results over time. World renowned strength guru Charles Poliquin has identified 6 reasons why aerobic training is counterproductive to fat loss:
(1) Continuous aerobic work plateaus after 8 weeks of training so anything more is counterproductive.
This is quite an �??eye opener�?? for most people who immediately recognize that they may have been wasting their time for such an extended period. To quote Charles, �??using this principle in preparation for the 92 Olympics, the Canadian Alpine Ski team actually surpassed the Cross-country team on aerobic scores as measured by third party University labs.�?? Who wouldn�??t want to perform as well as the Canadian Alpine ski team?
(2) Aerobic training worsens power locally and systemically �?? in other words, it can make you slower.
If you are an athlete or a �??weekend warrior�?? who likes to participate in athletic events or team sports that require speed and jumping ability, this is the last thing you want from a cardiovascular training program. Coach Poliquin adds that �??the more lower body aerobic work you do, the more your vertical jump worsens. The more upper body aerobic work you do, the more your medicine ball throws worsen.�??
(3) Aerobic training increases oxidative stress which can accelerate aging.
According to Endocrinologist Dr. Diana Schwarzbein (author of The Schwarzbein Principle II ,) �??oxidation�?? is a process that forms free radicals in the body. Normally the body can neutralize free radicals with substances known as antioxidants. It is only when there is an excessive build-up of free radicals that the body cannot neutralize all of the free radicals. This leads to changes to your metabolism which can accelerate aging.
(4) Aerobic training increases adrenal stress which can make you fatter and produce other undesirable health consequences
According to Dr. James Wilson (author of Adrenal Fatigue �?? The 21st. Century Stress Syndrome,) �??normally functioning adrenal glands secrete minute, yet precise and balanced, amounts of steroid hormones�??.
When one does too much continuous aerobic exercise, the adrenal glands are stressed in a way that can upset this delicate balance which could lead to adrenal fatigue. Adrenal fatigue is associated with such symptoms as: tiredness, fearfulness, allergies, frequent influenza, arthritis, anxiety, depression, reduced memory, and difficulties in concentrating, insomnia, feeling worn-out, and most importantly- with respect to this article - the inability to lose weight after extensive efforts.�??
(5) Aerobic training increases body fat in stressed individuals by contributing additional stress.
If you are already going through a lot of stress in your life then adding more �??stress�?? by doing too much continuous aerobic work will actually add more body fat thus making it hard to reach a weight-loss/body fat goal.
(6) Aerobic training worsens testosterone/cortisol ratio which impedes your ability to add fat burning lean muscle.
When the testosterone/cortisol ratio is lowered your ability to add lean muscle tissue, which helps to increase caloric expenditure, is again hampered making weight loss much more difficult. Coach Poliquin notes that �??continuous aerobic work is basically exercise induced castration!�??
I think you should have at least one day each week devoted to cardio training, its more than just a way to burn calores. Just eat extra cals to make up for the deficit. 30-45 minutes is plenty.
I mean, I don’t know anywhere near enough about nutrition to give you a biologically sound answer, but bodybuilders do it and several trainers advocate it (several don’t, but still), so I feel like if cardio were obviously and unequivocally unnecessary nobody would consider it anymore. Not the case though, so I think it must be more complicated than that.
I can guess that since the metabolic deficit created by lifting is largely caused by the strain that creating new muscle puts on your body, as you lift for longer and your gains start to slow, eventually lifting doesn’t create a metabolic deficit beyond what’s required to actually pick the weights up (so once the weights hit the floor the calorie burning slows, unlike when you were starting).
Since lifting heavy things requires that you spend a significant amount of time resting with the weights on the floor (if not then they’re not really all that heavy) your own physical limitations keep you from burning all that many calories during a lifting workout, and so cardio effectively allows you to keep creating a deficit, since you’re burning calories the whole time you’re running.
This is all just speculation, though, you should really be asking a coach or someone more experienced.
Keep in mind “cardio” comes in different varieties:
1.Fast paced, low rest resistance training - which is good for building muscle while still burning calories and promoting heart health.
High Intensity Interval Training - 30-60 second sprints on a bike or running, separated by moderate intensity recover periods. This accomplishes the same as #1.
Steady state aerobic - Less efficient that #2 or #1. Counterproductive to muscle building as Laroyal mentions above. I wouldn’t do it, unless you like it. Or you’re really fat and are already doing #1 and #2 above.
If you stress a muscle it responds by getting stronger so that it can handle more stress. am I right?
now your heart and lungs are muscles also and if you eat less food yes you can stay smaller but then your body adapts to that by lowering your caloric need meaning you will not gain or loose any weight.
what will happen is your muscles will be weak beacuse they dont see a need to be used and if something in yoru body is not used in time it dies.
do you realise how little an obese person can eat and still stay obese? its not the food its the inactivaty that gets to these people.
I know by experiance on this one.
bottom line is if just sit on your ass then you will be weaker than if you get up and do something.
I found this pretty interesting…
It’s Justin Harris getting interviewed by Jim Wendler about cardio and dieting.
Let me elaborate I consider cardio to be aerobic work (low impact long duration) I am all for energy system work (sprinting intervals, sled dragging, etc.) when I say no cardio I mean NO steady state cardio. My fault, I should have elaborated on that.
Cool link! If you have’t seen it already I would recomend his seminar DVD!
Yes, but it’s not just Option A) eat less vs B) more cardio.
You can eat more AND do the cardio and the inclusion of both in a regimen can mean increased metabolism. Isn’t that the principle of G-Flux?
I know too much steady state cardio can be counterproductive, but there was an article on here that said EPOC was overrated (I’m not siding with it, just stating what I read) and that morning cardio or even steady state cardio is still used widely by bodybuilders for fat loss.
If you are concerned with muscle loss during long bouts of cardio, can’t you consume BCAAs to combat this and at the same time, benefit from the increased metabolism that cardio can bring about?
Is there honestly zero benefit to even steady state cardio if nutrition is kept in check to avoid catabolism? It’s starting to sound like that ‘soy is evil’ argument; there’s some truth to both sides, but no conclusive evidence supporting either argument.
[quote]Nich wrote:
If you stress a muscle it responds by getting stronger so that it can handle more stress. am I right?
now your heart and lungs are muscles also and if you eat less food yes you can stay smaller but then your body adapts to that by lowering your caloric need meaning you will not gain or loose any weight.
what will happen is your muscles will be weak beacuse they dont see a need to be used and if something in yoru body is not used in time it dies.
do you realise how little an obese person can eat and still stay obese? its not the food its the inactivaty that gets to these people.
I know by experiance on this one.
bottom line is if just sit on your ass then you will be weaker than if you get up and do something.
[/quote]
Good post
[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:
Yes, but it’s not just Option A) eat less vs B) more cardio.
You can eat more AND do the cardio and the inclusion of both in a regimen can mean increased metabolism. Isn’t that the principle of G-Flux?
I know too much steady state cardio can be counterproductive, but there was an article on here that said EPOC was overrated (I’m not siding with it, just stating what I read) and that morning cardio or even steady state cardio is still used widely by bodybuilders for fat loss.
If you are concerned with muscle loss during long bouts of cardio, can’t you consume BCAAs to combat this and at the same time, benefit from the increased metabolism that cardio can bring about?
Is there honestly zero benefit to even steady state cardio if nutrition is kept in check to avoid catabolism? It’s starting to sound like that ‘soy is evil’ argument; there’s some truth to both sides, but no conclusive evidence supporting either argument.[/quote]
I agree with this.
While my cardio isn’t steady state (cycling 5 hours a week on average), I refuse to belive you won’t be making progress if you are doing steady state, eating enough and lifting heavy weights.
It’s the fucking psycho-analysis of every little thing we do that is sending confusion to people starting out.
[quote]Drivethruhero wrote:
I never understood the need to do cardio - since its all about creating caloric deficit, why not just eat less and do no cardio ? Say you could eat 1200 kcal over 2 meals and then go burn 1000 kcal off in a lengthy cardio session. Or you could eat 200 kcal and do no cardio at all.
This is considering the following facts: you lift on a regular basis, youre not fat but looking to get rid of extra flab on your abs after bulking cycle and you eat clean at already.[/quote]
Yep, this is exactly the right mindset… cardio should not be the primary tool for conditioning. Steady State, low intensity cardio alone is pretty much worthless in my opinion.
However, correctly applied cardio has a myriad of benefits…
Heart health.
Improved cardiovascular performance (some people like to run…).
Maintaining leanness (allows you to better manage caloric balance, reduce yo-yo dieting) year round.
etc.
Can’t argue that cardio can be extremely catabolic, and excessive cardio can ultimately damage efforts to gain muscle / lose fat. But, cardio intelligently implemented into a training plan can be a VERY good thing.
[quote]laroyal wrote:
When the testosterone/cortisol ratio is lowered your ability to add lean muscle tissue, which helps to increase caloric expenditure, is again hampered making weight loss much more difficult. Coach Poliquin notes that �??continuous aerobic work is basically exercise induced castration!�??
[/quote]
so what would he suggest for cardiovascular fitness??
[quote]AccipiterQ wrote:
Coach Poliquin notes that �??continuous aerobic work is basically exercise induced castration!�??
so what would he suggest for cardiovascular fitness??[/quote]
Sprinting.
At least as far as I’ve read.
[quote]Otep wrote:
AccipiterQ wrote:
Coach Poliquin notes that �??continuous aerobic work is basically exercise induced castration!�??
so what would he suggest for cardiovascular fitness??
Sprinting.
At least as far as I’ve read.[/quote]
could you point me towards something that talks about how much sprinting? I’m curious as to how much I would need to do.
I love sprints.
[quote]LiamBrady wrote:
Keep in mind “cardio” comes in different varieties:
1.Fast paced, low rest resistance training - which is good for building muscle while still burning calories and promoting heart health.
High Intensity Interval Training - 30-60 second sprints on a bike or running, separated by moderate intensity recover periods. This accomplishes the same as #1.
Steady state aerobic - Less efficient that #2 or #1. Counterproductive to muscle building as Laroyal mentions above. I wouldn’t do it, unless you like it. Or you’re really fat and are already doing #1 and #2 above.[/quote]
Please explain exactly what “steady state cardio” is. Is this riding a bike at max (150+ bpm) heart rate for an extended period of time? IS there any benefit to doing my cardio right after lifting - or can I do it at any time of the day?