Just read a copy of Bill Phillip's Body for life. He says that it has been proven that HIIT cardio is better than 65-75% for burning body fat. He recommends 20 minutes a day 3 times a week. No more, no less. Anyone have any thoughts? I have been doing 75%+ for 45 minutes every morning (7 days a week). If this guy is right, I can save myself a lot of time.

Just read a copy of Bill Phillip's Body for life. He says that it has been proven that HIIT cardio is better than 65-75% for burning body fat. He recommends 20 minutes a day 3 times a week. No more, no less. Anyone have any thoughts? I have been doing 75%+ for 45 minutes every morning (7 days a week). If this guy is right, I can save myself a lot of time.

There are studies that have shown that interval training is the most effective. It is the old wind sprint form of cardio. He works you to 4 peaks in 20 min.

Be sure and work the weights into your plans for best results.

Just read a copy of Bill Phillip's Body for life. He says that it has been proven that HIIT cardio is better than 65-75% for burning body fat. He recommends 20 minutes a day 3 times a week. No more, no less. Anyone have any thoughts? I have been doing 75%+ for 45 minutes every morning (7 days a week). If this guy is right, I can save myself a lot of time.

I have found the 65-75% works better FOR ME. If u read through the MAAAAANNNNYYYYYY posts regarding this battle, you will find people on both sides of the fence. While I am not on Swolgenix, I have read that 65-75% cardio is what people using that plan swear by....and from what i have seen, they have great results.

Just read a copy of Bill Phillip's Body for life. He says that it has been proven that HIIT cardio is better than 65-75% for burning body fat. Oh, so now it's been "proven". Well, that should end all debate. :nod:

Just kidding, of course. Personally, I've stayed with the traditional low intensity cardio. I really don't know why except that it's always worked for me and if it ain't broke, I don't try to fix it.

If you're curious, I suggest you try HIIT for a month or so and see how it works for you. I know lots of people swear by it. Report back and tell us how it worked for you.

From what i have read, i think to possibly get the best of things you should combine hiit and 65-75% cardio along with a good nutritional programme and resistance training, do this and i think you get the best of everything.

Anything wrong with doing my usual 45 minutes at 65-75% and during that time throw in a minute here and there of 80-95%?

Nothing wrong at all with combining the 2 types of cardio.

Anything wrong with doing my usual 45 minutes at 65-75% and during that time throw in a minute here and there of 80-95%?

Of course not, If you do it on a treadmill, bring the incline up and down. If you start getting winded back off on incline and get your breath back then start back up again.

My opinions of the BFL book are that Bill's strength is simplifying the process of getting fit. Everyone on the market has a quick-fix, and IMO Bill doesn't promise you that...but! he doesn't market his book toward those who are already in shape. If you're just starting out and you aren't sure what kind of cardio is good or bad, and on top of that you're probably thinking "Oh man, I'm going to have run for 2 hours everyday!" or something crazy...so what Bill is saying (if you read between the lines) is that ONE HOUR PER WEEK is all that is necessary, rather than an hour a day. Which I think is one of hte strong points of his book: It's a way to kick start a healthy lifestyle.

HOWEVER

When it comes to my personal opinions, they are as follows:
If you are a good judge of percieved rate of exertion (PRE), and your body stays relatively consistent day-by-day, HIIT is great. Its quick, its efficient, and it certainly works (see John Stone, page 1 ;)).
I'm not a great judge of PRE, because I don't want to be...I don't want 25 min of thinking about whether i"m at 50%, 10%, 90% or 42.23985% I just want to stay at a certain HR and stay there. I warm up, I kick it to 140bpm, I chill there for 35 min, and I cool down. I have the time to spend doing that kind of excersize, and if you'll take a look at my daily pictures you'll certainly see that SGX (which has the low-intensity;long duration as cardio) has shred me up!

Both will work, its about whats best for you personally.

Well, I decided to do both at the same time. I get up to 75% pretty quick, then kick it into 85% for a minute, back down for a couple of minutes then 90% for a minute, etc. I get up to 100%+ for a minute back down and find that I can easily keep it at 80-85% for the rest of the workout. I do a total of 45 minutes on a Nordic Track elliptical every morning.

Well, I decided to do both at the same time. I get up to 75% pretty quick, then kick it into 85% for a minute, back down for a couple of minutes then 90% for a minute, etc. I get up to 100%+ for a minute back down and find that I can easily keep it at 80-85% for the rest of the workout. I do a total of 45 minutes on a Nordic Track elliptical every morning.

I could definitely be wrong here, but it sounds to me like you are just keeping your body in a catabolic state for a longer period of time. In other words, you are at risk for burning more muscle than had you just done a 20 minute HIIT session. I personally would either stick to one or combine them, but not in the SAME workout. You are of course welcome to try whatever you want, just my 2 cents.

A case could be made for HIIT by simply looking at the psysiques of the short distance sprinters versus the marathon runners in last months Olympics.

It seems that it is very hard for me to keep my hr in the 65-75% range lately. I have to slow down to a point where it feels like I am doing nothing at all. I thought this was the goal we were striving for, to improve our fitness to a point where what used to be hard is no longer hard. I used to have to put forth quite a bit of effort to get to 75%, now I can do 85% with about the same effort, and 65% feels like I am not working out at all. Based on that, should I still keep in the 65-75% range for fat burning? I thought that doing 75% and then throwing in some 85, 90, 95, and 100 would accomplish both fat burn and improved fitness. It certainly burns more calories, but I don't want to lose any muscle mass, as that is much harder for me to put on. As your fitness improves, working out at a higher hr shouldn't burn the muscle, should it?

I know he recos 3 X week, but remember he's aiming this at people who are doing well just to get off their ass, rather than anything else. His program is a good starting point, but for fat loss I've no doubt that a greater volume of cardio than merely 60 min/week is better than sticking to such a lowly number.

I know he recos 3 X week, but remember he's aiming this at people who are doing well just to get off their ass, rather than anything else. His program is a good starting point, but for fat loss I've no doubt that a greater volume of cardio than merely 60 min/week is better than sticking to such a lowly number.

Everything that I have read about HIIT says no more than 20 minutes per day, 3 to 5 times per week.

A case could be made for HIIT by simply looking at the psysiques of the short distance sprinters versus the marathon runners in last months Olympics.

Contrary to popular belief, running does not keep you in that 65%-75% range at all. You actually get into the 80%+ range almost immediately after your body warms up. Add to that the fact that those 'distance' runners you're referring to actually run that distance at the fastest speed their body is capable of, not at the leisurley pace you're implying, and you get a terrible example to use for what you're saying.

A better example would be like comparing John Stone and Swolecat. John lost all his weight through HIIT and weights, whereas Swolecat has repeatedly sworn by low-intensity cardio for fat-loss. Both got to where they wanted to be, and both are widely recognized here as having done it 'right'. Do what you want, but realize that neither way is ever going to be certifiably 'wrong', so give up trying to persuade.

Contrary to popular belief, running does not keep you in that 65%-75% range at all. You actually get into the 80%+ range almost immediately after your body warms up. Add to that the fact that those 'distance' runners you're referring to actually run that distance at the fastest speed their body is capable of, not at the leisurley pace you're implying, and you get a terrible example to use for what you're saying.

A better example would be like comparing John Stone and Swolecat. John lost all his weight through HIIT and weights, whereas Swolecat has repeatedly sworn by low-intensity cardio for fat-loss. Both got to where they wanted to be, and both are widely recognized here as having done it 'right'. Do what you want, but realize that neither way is ever going to be certifiably 'wrong', so give up trying to persuade.

:claplow:


I hate that sprinter vs. marathon runner argument. Marathon runners run at like 80% (maybe more) of their heart rate for HOURS on end. Yes, you're going to burn tons of muscle, or at least be unable to add any. But they don't care because a muscular body type is not for a marathon runner. Noone ever said go run a marathon as cardio. It's 45-60 mins of LOW-INTENSITY (65-75% MHR) cardio, not 2-4 hours at 80%. This is of course purely for fat loss reasons.

:claplow:


I hate that sprinter vs. marathon runner argument. Marathon runners run at like 80% (maybe more) of their heart rate for HOURS on end. Yes, you're going to burn tons of muscle, or at least be unable to add any. But they don't care because a muscular body type is not for a marathon runner. Noone ever said go run a marathon as cardio. It's 45-60 mins of LOW-INTENSITY (65-75% MHR) cardio, not 2-4 hours at 80%. This is of course purely for fat loss reasons.


Good post, I think some people actually think if they just do HIIT they will grow like 100m runners, i would be intrigued to actually see a workout plan for somelike like maurice green or darren campbell, someone who runs 100ms, just to see how much free weight exercises they have in their schedule.

Read this forum given to me by taffer. It pretty much ansers all the questions about HIIT versus low intensity cardio.

http://www.abcbodybuilding.com/forum/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=science&Number=813116&fpart=1&PHPSESSID=