in defense of CARDIO

[woof]

Hey everyone,
I in no means mean to be disrespectful to the many knowledgable and very helpful individuals on this board but I find myself questioning everyones aversion to cardio.

I understand that many of you are competetive in BB/figure and that for your needs, cardio might not be the best fit, but many who post on this board seem only to want to look good and be healthy. Cardiovascular fitness is a BIG part of overall health.

And all this talk of fat people on treadmills! First off, yeah, there are always fat people on the treadmills. And most of them aren't even breaking a sweat. Their HRs are prob 10 beats above what they would be sitting on the couch. There are women bench pressing 5lb dumbells, too, and they are not going to see any gains from that.

I am a bike racer, and I can tell you NONE of my bike racing friends are fat "skinny fat". They are lean and if not muscular, toned. I personally am 13-14%BF and can bench my weight 5 times and do 8-10 pullups even after a 4-6 month layoff from lifting.

Weight loss boils down to one simple formula:
loss (or gain) = cals expended - cals consumed
The problem may lie in people thinking "gee, I ran 4 miles today - I deserve this pint of Ben and Jerry's (1000cal)" or "I better drink this quart of gatorade and eat this powerbar".

You cannot convince me that 30min a few times a week of reasonably INTENSE cardio (esp if you mix things up - run, bike, swim, climb stairs, play b-ball or soccer) will not benefit those looking to lose fat and be healthier. Combine this with the great diet advice that can be found on this site and some lifting 3x a week and I think that this is the best thing for a person looking to be fit (although not necessarily for one looking to compete).

 

[smoknjilly]

believe me I have learned the hard way -

alot of cardio will burn calories, and may get smaller - but to change your body SHAPE, you have to lift.

losing weight with just cardio will leave you with the same shape, just a little smaller. Most women i know would like to change their shape at least a little...

and they must realize that cardio alone will not do that...

I see the same girls day after day puffin away and their shape has not changed one bit, while mine has

 

[woof]

Oh, I agree, one has to do some lifting - I was just saying that cardio is an essential part of a well-rounded fitness program.

Also, I bet a lot of the people you see on the cardio machines do it for a month or so at minimal intensity and then quit so that you are always seeing relative newbies. Like I mentioned above, the same can be said for those that bench 5lb dumbells and lift 10lb on the leg extension machine.

 

[smoknjilly]

no...ive actually seen alot of the same people for a long time..you know the "fat free everything" type of girls...

 

[Sassy69]

I friggen hate cardio, but to be honest it is the only thing that makes a significant change in my bodyfat. I need to do it more & more consistently.

Blah.

 

[JJFigure]

We haven't been saying "don't do cardio, period", we're saying if you want a lean, muscular physique, first you should focus on developing some muscle, and cardio comes second. That doesn't mean you don't do it at all - most of us recognize that having a healthy heart and lungs makes us better lifters.

If you notice, when we give the "cut the cardio down a little" advice, it's because these women are doing an hour/day and are maybe lifting AFTER they do cardio. We're just telling them to shift the emphasis to weight training first, and cut the cardio back to 3-4 times/week. For those of us with a fair amount of LBM, we can get by with even less, but you'll notice, we tend to do very intense HIIT cardio sessions and limit them to 1-3 times/week.

I have no issues with 3-4 30 min sessions/week; the hour long 6-7 days/week sessions need to go though, if you truly want to develop a lean, muscular physique.

 

[newgirl-chargeback]

Nice post JJ. And Sassy -- agreed. I need to do it at 43 years old but not the overabundance I had done.

 

[wilson6]

No one has proved that cardio per se is necessary for health. For a higher VO2 sure, but health, nope. It is physical activity, not cardio.

If we hunted for food by foot, then cardio would be necessary. If you compete in distance events, then cardio is necessary. Most of what we do in everyday life has more to do with muscular endurance and strength than cardiovascular fitness.

Just because you have alot of capillary density, citrate synthase activity and increased mitochondrial density means little in the big health picture. The fact the many that are aerobically fit are also in good health has to do with the fact that they eat well, do some sort of aggressive physical activity and are lean.

If you substitute aggressive resistance training (bodybuilding or circuit style) for the cardio, the results from a health perspective will not be much different assuming you eat clean and are lean. In addition, you will have a higher metabolic rate and greater bone density.

I used to be able to ride 150 mi in a day on a touring bike without issue. Now I do no cardio. Not much has changed. I lift aggressively and watch what I eat. I'm still around 10% bodyfat but weigh about 70 lbs more and eat alot more.

One issue that the big time cardio folks need to be aware of is the generation of free radicals. You make quite a bit doing cardio and long-term free radical pathologies are not a good thing.

W6

 

[slinky]

There is an excellent "cardio roundtable" discussion at T-mag regarding this very topic. I encourage you all (that are interested) into checking it out.

Here's the link:
http://www.t-mag.com/nation_articles/262card.jsp