Body type & value of cardio vs heavy lifting

[Gladiola]

I don't think it's like one type of person needs cardio more than the other; nobody really needs it.

What about keeping your heart & lungs healthy?

I find it interesting that no one is acknowledging the fact that we are really FIGHTING our bodies in trying to get bf very low. Isn't it considered unhealthy for women to be below 15% bf?

Our bodies have fat stores for a reason - to protect us from starvation, to help us sustain a new life if we get pregnant (our bodies are always trying to prepare for that) --- so wouldn't it stand to reason that some people would have to go to great lengths to get body fat very low - regardless of diet? & 60 min cardio 5X/week isn't even that extreme of a measure.

 

[Temple]

"What about keeping your heart and lungs healthy"

My thoughts exactly. Sure, limit the cardio while you are trying to add large amounts of mass but overall, whether we like it or not it is necessary. Especially if our goal is anything other than simple aesthetics. I think it would be safe for me to say that there is NOONE on this board that loathes cardio as much as I do however, I love to snowski, I love to waterski and a whole lot of other things that require cardiovasular fitness to go along with my muscles.

Eating under maintenance at least for me only results in less energy for my workouts and ultimately a battle royale with my body. Eating at maintenance and a little cardio and the fat drops much faster....but maybe that's just me.

 

[sysopt]

Sysopt, I totally agree.

Maybe there's new research that refutes this, and someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I was always under the impression that cardio burned calories while you were doing it, and the boost to your metabolism after the fact was negligible. So essentially, instead of doing 400 calories worth of work on the treadmill, you could simply eat 400 calories less to get the same effect. I'm aware that cardio has other benefits like increasing VO2 max, and (depending on the intensity) recruiting Type I and Type II muscle fibers, but where energy balance is concerned, decreasing one's caloric intake is equal to doing cardio.

you got that right babe

 

[sysopt]

My thoughts exactly. Sure, limit the cardio while you are trying to add large amounts of mass but overall, whether we like it or not it is necessary. Especially if our goal is anything other than simple aesthetics. I think it would be safe for me to say that there is NOONE on this board that loathes cardio as much as I do however, I love to snowski, I love to waterski and a whole lot of other things that require cardiovasular fitness to go along with my muscles.

Eating under maintenance at least for me only results in less energy for my workouts and ultimately a battle royale with my body. Eating at maintenance and a little cardio and the fat drops much faster....but maybe that's just me.

you're taking it out of context; I was speaking from a strictly losing fat perspective, not heart and lung health.

 

[sysopt]

What about keeping your heart & lungs healthy?

I find it interesting that no one is acknowledging the fact that we are really FIGHTING our bodies in trying to get bf very low. Isn't it considered unhealthy for women to be below 15% bf?

Our bodies have fat stores for a reason - to protect us from starvation, to help us sustain a new life if we get pregnant (our bodies are always trying to prepare for that) --- so wouldn't it stand to reason that some people would have to go to great lengths to get body fat very low - regardless of diet? & 60 min cardio 5X/week isn't even that extreme of a measure.

you're taking it out of context; I was speaking from a strictly losing fat perspective, not heart and lung health.

 

[Temple]

Okay, so let's take the heart/lung benfit out of the equation.
Strickly from a fat loss perspective:
I maintain at roughly 2100 calories
if I drop my calories by 400 leaving me at 1700 within weeks I will see a slowdown in metbolism. However if I do I slight caloric reduction plus the addtion of moderate cardio my metabolic rate remains high.
The exception that I can see would be in women who have mass and metabolism that requires very high caloric needs 2500-3000 or more. I don't think you can make a blanket statement that diet alone can produce very low bodyfat in all people.

 

[FitFossil]

...I don't think you can make a blanket statement that diet alone can produce very low bodyfat in all people...

My thoughts exactly. Even if there are thousands of scientific studies proving people can achieve low bodyfat on low calorie diets alone, I don't care, because FOR ME, I do better on a moderate calorie diet WITH moderate cardio. I have more energy on cardio days (4x week) even though my calorie intake is about the same. If I drop calories and don't do cardio, I'd probably better stay in bed!

I'm of the belief that the body's like a machine. It functions better when used regularly.

 

[sysopt]

Well, if you feel better, and say you're more energenic (you would know a whole lot more about the way you feel than I), then by all means, god bless your souls and do it. However, like I said before, a slight restriction in calories will do just fine; nobody truly needs cardio, although some might feel more comfortable doing it.
Just for the record, I have always had low bodyfat, I have low bf, and probably always will ; I also find cardio to be extremely boring, but that's just me. I'm trying to be as unbiased as possible. *rips ass*