I've been thinking about fasted cardio lately, and I suspect that the benefits may be exaggerated. When I break down what's actually happening in logical steps, I don't see how the time of day that we perform cardio can make much difference.

If I have a BMR of 2500 calories and do a 500 calorie workout before breakfast, I'll burn 3000 calories overall in the day.

If I do the same workout after a couple of meals... surprise surprise, I'll still burn 3000 calories overall.

The logic has always been that doing cardio fasted burns fat, not a meal that's just been eaten. But if we burn the meal off, then our "normal metabolism" will start burning fat for normal bodily processes, surely.

The only real argument that I can think of is that our metabolism is boosted by cardio (how much of a "boost" is pretty much speculative from what I've read) and the earlier we do cardio, the more hours of "boost" we can benefit from (since going to sleep reduces the metabolism).

Does anybody have any info that proves this logic incorrect?

I beileve it´s better to do fasted cardio in the morning if you are cutting and if you are doing LISS... But I think people that expect a huge difference compared to not doing it fasted will be disappointed.

If you are not cutting or if you prefer to do any sort of higher intensity cardio it makes no sense at all to do it fasted, IMO.

If you dont like to do it fasted you dont have to. It´s certainly possible to "cut" and get good progress anyway. It´s up to you to decide if you think it feels right and if you like fasted cardio. It will probably not hurt to try it for a week...

I agree, I believe they are exaggerated as well. I've never had a problem cutting doing cardio any time of the day. The logic behind fasted cardio breaks down a bit - for example, the most popular premise is that "you have no carbohydrate in your bloodstream so your body is forced to burn fat" ... and this is utterly not true. If that were the case, you'd drop dead because the body requires a very tight regulation of blood sugar levels ... if you don't eat, the liver makes up the balance by releasing stores so from a blood sugar level you still have glucose (in fact some people have livers that overcompensate and actually raise the levels quite high).

Also, when you engage in intense exercise, the body tends to burn a bit more from protein (most specifically branched-chain amino acids) as well, not necessarily the best thing for someone who has a goal to gain muscle mass.

Jeremy

Fasted cardio is debatable. Some swear by it while some say there's no difference in doing it fasted than unfasted. I think SwoleCat really believes in fasted cardio. Also, Tom Venuto said that although fasted cardio theory is rejected by the scientific community, it works as proved in real life results. IMO, it does burn more fat, despite the same amount of calories burned, but not to the point where it'll make a huge difference. If you want to find out the truth, you should try fasted cardio for a couple weeks on a cut, measure results carefully, including tape measurements, skinfold, weight, etc. Do the same for unfasted cardio while keeping every other variables the same and compare the results.

Exaggerated? Perhaps. I think it's simply a case of people expecting too much from a particular form of exercise.

I've done "fasted" cardio at all times of day - all it requires is that you avoid carbs for a couple of hours before and after doing it. I've done it in the morning, at lunchtime, and in the evening - as long as I avoid carbs before and after, I lose fat. Period. However, this is in conjunction with carefully regulating calories and food intake throughout the day, and performing some weight lifting separate from cardio.

With that kind of exercise output and careful dietary regulation, anyone can lose body fat.

The science behind it matters very little to me anymore; all I know is that it works. This forum has long-since suffered from over-analysis and a simultaneous lack of execution, if you ask me, and you didn't. It's time to stop debating what kind of cardio is best and simply execute some plan of action, regardless of its degree of perfection.

-R

It's time to stop debating what kind of cardio is best and simply execute some plan of action, regardless of its degree of perfection.

-R

I agree wholeheartedly.
Excellent post -R, thumbsup!

With that kind of exercise output and careful dietary regulation, anyone can lose body fat.

The science behind it matters very little to me anymore; all I know is that it works. This forum has long-since suffered from over-analysis and a simultaneous lack of execution, if you ask me, and you didn't. It's time to stop debating what kind of cardio is best and simply execute some plan of action, regardless of its degree of perfection.



Well, without a doubt actions speak louder than words! I personally have had good results with both, but prefer doing cardio later in the day. However, if I believed fasted morning cardio to be significantly more effective, I'd be willing to do it over afternoon cardio.

I agree that there can come a point of obsessive analysis that isn't proportional to the amount of actual physical work being done. On the other hand, I've long experimented with cardio, and since the idea of doing fasted cardio is a very mainstream "core" aspect of fat loss, I thought others might have similar views on it.

I think SwoleCat really believes in fasted cardio. Also, Tom Venuto said that although fasted cardio theory is rejected by the scientific community, it works as proved in real life results.

Yes, it's a staple of mine in my own approach (simply view my pictures of me ripped at 3-4% bodyfat, proof is in pictures, not in periodicals that debate one method vs. another) I'm a "I'll prove it to you by doing it" type of person. By using this approach, being ultra ripped cannot be debated, case closed, next!

I agree also with Venuto in that real life results are that what matter. What we look like matters, not periodicals debating what works or not. None of my clients have EVER failed to succeed with me, and always have them do fasted LISS no matter bulking or cutting. (Never hiit either).

You either do it or you don't, that's fine by me. I no longer debate this issue I simply throw up 100's of photos of myself or those that I have assisted with a track record a mile longer or more.

~SC~

Yes, it's a staple of mine in my own approach (simply view my pictures of me ripped at 3-4% bodyfat, proof is in pictures, not in periodicals that debate one method vs. another) I'm a "I'll prove it to you by doing it" type of person. By using this approach, being ultra ripped cannot be debated, case closed, next!

I agree also with Venuto in that real life results are that what matter. What we look like matters, not periodicals debating what works or not. None of my clients have EVER failed to succeed with me, and always have them do fasted LISS no matter bulking or cutting. (Never hiit either).

You either do it or you don't, that's fine by me. I no longer debate this issue I simply throw up 100's of photos of myself or those that I have assisted with a track record a mile longer or more.

~SC~

Your results are unparalleled. Wouldn't you agree that the type of cardio you do (in your system or otherwise) is the LEAST important out of 1) Diet; 2) Lifting; 3) Cardio. Or would you rank daily, fasted LISS somewhere else in that short list?

Your results are unparalleled. Wouldn't you agree that the type of cardio you do (in your system or otherwise) is the LEAST important out of 1) Diet; 2) Lifting; 3) Cardio. Or would you rank daily, fasted LISS somewhere else in that short list?

He will probably say they work in conjunction with each other. However, when I was on his program I did very little cardio and still got amazing results. For MY BODY, cardio is the least important thing. I used to try and do cardio but after a while, and in order to make this a lifestyle (that is enjoyable), I quit doing cardio. I stay active because it is fun but unless I get the urge or I am going for a super body comp goal, I will never do cardio for cardio sake ever again.

I have read Bluestreak say many times that he has thrown optimal out of the window and replaced it with being consistent. I think this shows maturation regarding the fitness process. If you want to do cardio do it. If you prefer it fasted then do that.

Your results are unparalleled. Wouldn't you agree that the type of cardio you do (in your system or otherwise) is the LEAST important out of 1) Diet; 2) Lifting; 3) Cardio. Or would you rank daily, fasted LISS somewhere else in that short list?

I don't see an order being important, but I do see the components together being very key. If I had to rank them I'd rank them nutrition first, cardio second, weight training third. W/out sound nutrition, the other two don't really yield what they should. However, the wrong type of cardio done with proper nutrition to support weight training can also screw things up. Hence the reason that I supply a complete protocol in my customized approaches that address all 3 in depth, in certain order, and for very key reasons. (Shortest way from point A to point B) There are may ways to "skin a cat", yes, but I am fully confident that my method(s) are definitely platinum in nature and it's lead me to the success that I possess today.

Cardio is also VERY KEY for the most important muscle in the body, that being the heart. W/out that being healthy and trained, well, you're dead.

~SC~