Bookmark this thread:     |
Login  | |
|
RE: AM HIIT - May 6 2008 9:45:07
| |
|
Integra
Posts: 8544
Joined: Sep. 23 2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: buzzer
quote:
ORIGINAL: Integra
quote:
i was talking about weight loss not performance,you can do both fuelled or infuelled,it wont make any difference if your in surplus you gain defecit you lose.
some people have no choice about fuelling,unless they are prepared to get up an hour earlier just to eat.
also prefulling for hiit/fatloss is not a fundemental requirement as you say performance yes fatloss not really.
Everyone has a choice. They either do cardio fuelled or unfuelled.
HIIT unfuelled is not as effective as fuelled HIIT be it for fat loss or weight loss.
please explain why??? its cald in versus cals out not the type of cardio you do.
Fuelled HIIT = better performance = more calories burned = more weight lost.
| |
|
|
RE: AM HIIT - May 6 2008 10:07:20
| |
|
CoNs
Posts: 5126
Joined: Sep. 18 2006
From: Dunfermline, Scotland
Status: offline
|
Still in agreement with Integra, HIIT is about creating a metabolic disturbance, if your not putting in enough effort the disturbance will be minimal, which will mean minimal calories
its High Intensity Interval Training, not Half Arsed Interval Training
_____________________________
Yes, the girl in my avatar is my girlfriend.
LOL
| |
|
|
RE: AM HIIT - May 6 2008 10:08:20
| |
|
buzzer
Posts: 1034
Joined: Jul. 26 2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Integra
quote:
ORIGINAL: buzzer
quote:
ORIGINAL: Integra
quote:
i was talking about weight loss not performance,you can do both fuelled or infuelled,it wont make any difference if your in surplus you gain defecit you lose.
some people have no choice about fuelling,unless they are prepared to get up an hour earlier just to eat.
also prefulling for hiit/fatloss is not a fundemental requirement as you say performance yes fatloss not really.
Everyone has a choice. They either do cardio fuelled or unfuelled.
HIIT unfuelled is not as effective as fuelled HIIT be it for fat loss or weight loss.
please explain why??? its cald in versus cals out not the type of cardio you do.
Fuelled HIIT = better performance = more calories burned = more weight lost.
again as i have repeatedly said,irrelevent if your not in a defecit.
| |
|
|
RE: AM HIIT - May 6 2008 10:10:44
| |
|
Integra
Posts: 8544
Joined: Sep. 23 2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: buzzer
quote:
ORIGINAL: Integra
quote:
ORIGINAL: buzzer
quote:
ORIGINAL: Integra
quote:
i was talking about weight loss not performance,you can do both fuelled or infuelled,it wont make any difference if your in surplus you gain defecit you lose.
some people have no choice about fuelling,unless they are prepared to get up an hour earlier just to eat.
also prefulling for hiit/fatloss is not a fundemental requirement as you say performance yes fatloss not really.
Everyone has a choice. They either do cardio fuelled or unfuelled.
HIIT unfuelled is not as effective as fuelled HIIT be it for fat loss or weight loss.
please explain why??? its cald in versus cals out not the type of cardio you do.
Fuelled HIIT = better performance = more calories burned = more weight lost.
again as i have repeatedly said,irrelevent if your not in a defecit.
Fuelled HIIT does not mean you are not in deficit.
| |
|
|
RE: AM HIIT - May 6 2008 10:24:00
| |
|
Integra
Posts: 8544
Joined: Sep. 23 2006
Status: offline
|
Starve yourself and hammer the cardio = more weight lost than someone who eats more and exercises less (in most cases)
Eat the same amount of food but fuel your HIIT and you will find that you will burn more calories due to the increase in performance that comes with fuelling your training.
As calories out is more but calories in is the same then in the cases where "calories in V calories out" apply, it will always result in more weight lost.
| |
|
|
RE: AM HIIT - May 6 2008 11:10:30
| |
|
buzzer
Posts: 1034
Joined: Jul. 26 2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Integra
Starve yourself and hammer the cardio = more weight lost than someone who eats more and exercises less (in most cases)
Eat the same amount of food but fuel your HIIT and you will find that you will burn more calories due to the increase in performance that comes with fuelling your training.
As calories out is more but calories in is the same then in the cases where "calories in V calories out" apply, it will always result in more weight lost.
maybe but the difference in cals used would be minimal at best.
| |
|
|
RE: AM HIIT - May 6 2008 18:42:18
| |
|
Integra
Posts: 8544
Joined: Sep. 23 2006
Status: offline
|
Add several minimal differences together and the end results will be much better.
| |
|
|
RE: AM HIIT - May 17 2008 13:14:18
| |
|
richsINS
Posts: 8359
Joined: Jun. 23 2004
From: London, United Kingdom
Status: offline
|
Agree with integra.
I fuel every type of cardio, i still burn calories (Which determine WEIGHT LOSS) and i avoid any problems with muscle loss (due to lack of energy, making body turn to muscle/other tissues). The fact i avoid muscle loss means metabolic rate is not reduced, its risk free!
its about meal planning, lets say its lunch time you want to do cardio and have a sandwich sat there waiting to be eating, its 400 calories but your unsure if you should eat it before then do cardio or after cardio.
Eating it before cardio (then allowing it time to digest):
1) Fuels your cardio - allows more intense activitys(higher speeds, more distance covered, more calories burnt).
2) Avoids muscle loss - Your muscles are fueled, your body will burn the food not other body tissues.
Result: Muscle sparred, better intensity so more calories burnt, no metabolic slow down.
Eating after cardio:
1) Cardio is unfueled, if you get to intense you'll use body tissues to fuel it(after you run out of glycogen stores/go to fast for your body to fuel it with fat).
2) Muscle loss as a result of going to fast.
3) Lower intensity (Less distance covered, slower speed, less calories burnt).
Result: muscle loss, metabolic slow down and fewer calories burnt due to crap intensity.
YOUR STILL EATING THE 400 CALORIE MEAL, PLANNING IT BETTER MEANT BETTER RESULTS - Meal planning is very important.
It'd be a bad idea for example to do a 25 mile run after you've starved for 3 days, then eat 2000kcal meal in comparison to eating the 2000kcal meal... allowing it to digest, then doing the marathon.
Please quote anything you disagree with, i dont believe ive made any mistakes in type this but i may of.
_____________________________
All my posts reflect my opinion and/or current understanding(which may have errors/be incorrect).
Consistency, Progressive overload & Kcal to suit.
Journal(plus poker)
| |
|
|
Printable Version
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread