Anonymous wrote:Cardio makes me very hungry, and I've gained 10 lbs since I started at the gym a year ago. Thinking it would be better to sit on my ass.

Calories in, calories out. If like to eat, cardio exercise can be a great way to allow yourself to eat more, but you must maintain a calorie deficit. Lots of people find it hard to maintain a deficit when they do cardio, so they eat more than they burn and gain weight.

It doesn't help that almost everyone WILDLY overestimates the calories burned by exercise, and most fitness gadgets indicate the total calories burned while exercising rather than the net (i.e. the difference between what you burned while jogging and what you would have burned while sitting on your butt). I remember years ago calculating that the world champion women's marathoner could eat back all the calories burned during her 14 miles per day of training runs by eating a large muffin and a big bagel with cream cheese after her runs. After my last marathon, I ate back all the calories I burned during the race while walking back to my hotel from the finish line (in the form of a giant bag of peanut M&Ms).

Also, unless you weigh every bite that goes in your mouth, you are likely to dramatically overestimate calories eaten.

Anonymous wrote:

You are 100% wrong. The lose fat, and I assume she wants to lose fat, you have to burn it, the only way to burn fat (reduce the size of the fat cells) is to do via cardio. Limiting food (calories) will reduce lean body mass which is what you want not to get rid of.

If a person is working out properly and at a high enough level to burn fat they will actually increase their caloric intake due to the need to fuel their body. resistance weight training is a key component as well as a diet.

there is no quick fix, this isn't a reality tv show, for the OP to drop the 30 lbs and do it properly so they look like normal and not a bag of bones with skin hanging off them it should take about a year.

Oh, so much bro-science woo... my brain hurts.

OP... as this post clearly illustrates, lots of people like to sound off with strong opinions that are based on zero knowledge. I'd strongly advise you to head over to the Community -> Fitness and Exercise forums on MyfitnessPal dot com. Lots of informed people there, many of whom have lost a ton of weight and sustained significant fitness for many years.

It's not necessary, and it's really hard to out exercise a bad diet, so just be clear on the fact that intake control is key. I do think that for many people (me included), exercise has a positive effect on insulin resistance, so I really do see quicker improvements when I work out. I also find that I'm more accountable with my diet when I work out because I can see how hard I have to work out to burn off the equivalent of some of the junk I used to eat.

Anonymous wrote:Body pump is cardio.

Do what you enjoy but I would swap body pump for a heavy lifting workout twice per week to get more bang for your buck in terms of time.

I was thinking the same thing. I love body pump and I can feel my heart rate increase. I am not overweight, so I am not looking to lose weight. I just want to tone up and have defined muscles, and I get that with body pump.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not OP but someone very interested in this topic. After reading all these posts by people who seem to know what they're talking about, I'm more confused than ever. So do you need cardio or not? Or is it sufficient to do HIIT & strength w/ diet and be perfectly healthy & lose weight? Is the cardio in HIIT sufficient? This other person on this thread seems to be saying that 30 min of cardio is not enough.

No, you don't need to do cardio to lose weight. You need a calorie deficit. That is all. The easiest way to do that is to eat less.

This is an oversimplification, since the body is not a fixed system. If you create a drastic caloric deficit, your metabolism will adjust to burn fewer calories (and probably make you sluggish etc). By how much probably has a genetic component to it. That being said, creating a caloric deficit is still a requirement. And one of the better ways to achievement is not through drastic/binge-dieting but instead through sustainable dietary changes that result in a lower calorie diet overall. There are certainly problems with South Beach Diet, but that is one of the mainstream diet programs out there that sets up lifestyle change as the goal.

In terms of metabolism boosting, exercise is a great way to do that. Science is mixed here, but it seems like increasingly muscle helps increase your metabolism overall due to the fact that it takes more energy to maintain and to move muscle around (this is why the caloric burn for two people of the same weight can be really different). Muscle is also more dense than fat, which is why BMI is a terrible indicator of obesity in athletic people. I think there is a decent amount of evidence to suggest that the heart rates that are considered optimal for cardiac health are actually too high for "fat burning". So if your goal is weight loss, traditional cardio probably won't serve you as well as interval training which builds more muscle and increases your heart rate but not as much.

Ultimately, though, everyone's bodies are different and you need to find what's best for you. I basically can't lose weight without incorporating strength training, but DH visibly gets leaner after only a couple weeks of being diligent about cardio.

Do it for your heart, OP! Walking and dancing count.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Fourth, I'm not sure I understand your sentence: "If a person is working out properly and at a high enough level to burn fat they will actually increase their caloric intake due to the need to fuel their body." I think maybe you meant to say increase their "caloric needs" or "caloric deficit?" Again, you don't need a minimum intensity level to burn fat. That's actually backwards. The more you spike your intensity level, the more your body will attempt to digest carbohydrates instead of fat. In any case, cardio isn't the best way to spike an increase in caloric need. Your metabolism does peak for a short period after engaging in cardio exercise. Some studies say it stays elevated for 30-90 minutes. But it peaks for even longer after strength training or HIIT, with some studies showing an elevated metabolism for a day or more. If you have limited time to exercise, you will get a significantly larger weight loss benefit from strength training than cardio.

Again, I'm not anti cardio. I just think dieting and weight training/HIIT are both significantly more important for weight loss.

you do not need to run a caloric deficit to loose weight. most people have no idea that when the loose weight, they are loosing lean body mass due to the fact they are not exercising. You are born with a certain # of fat cells, unless you are active or have a high metabolism your fat cells will increase in size. Think of a bubble getting larger. To reduce them, your body needs to "burn " the fat, it isn't actually burring it but it is reducing the size of the fat cells. For your body to get to that point you need to be doing a minimum # of aerobic exercise where your heart rate is at least 80 of your max hr. until you are at that level, and most people do not reach that level because they think 30 minutes is enough you are not doing anything -there I agree but if you are working out properly, and once your heart rate is up and stays up for at least 30 minutes above the80% you will start to reduce the fat cells.

dieting is a marketing tool, most of us trainers encourage our clients to eat more healthy and more of it because it isn't the good high quality foods that are making them fat.

This is just not true. And if you're a trainer, you should probably know how to spell lose.