Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
coolcolj
New member
http://www.cbass.com/interval.htm
Q. In your book Quantum Strength and Power Training (Gaining The Winning Edge) (1996), you wrote: "Statistically, there is a close relationship between V02max and lean body mass." Were you surprised when the Tremblay group - challenging the common belief that low intensity, long duration exercise is best for fat loss - found that short intervals (30-90 seconds) produced substantially more fat loss for each calorie burned exercising? Why?
A. No, I was not surprised by Tremblay's findings showing that low intensity, long duration exercise is not as effective as short intense intervals in reducing body fat. It is relatively easy to explain why this is so.
During strenuous exercise, the rate of metabolism rises, going to about 15 times the basal metabolic rate (BMR) and even higher during intense interval work. For example, running 5 mi/hr the oxygen uptake required is 28 ml 02/min/kg of body weight with 3.7 cal/hr./lb burned, while a short burst of intense interval work may require 100 ml 02/min/kg with 13.8 cal/hr/lb burned. By maintaining the high level of training over a 5 or 6 week period one would expect a significant increase in the ratio of lean body mass to fat. Over a three month period you would be RIPPED like never before.
Intense interval work utilizes a greater percent of the body's muscles, both slow and fast twitch. Also, performing high intensity work places added energy demands on the respiratory system, cardiovascular system and nervous system. Thus more fat and glycogen are burned to support the expanding energy demands of the body during - and after - intense exercise. In other words, the cost of short intense interval exercise is very high in terms of energy demands in comparison to low intensity aerobic exercise. What's more, while at rest trained active muscles burn more fat night and day, contributing to further fat loss.
Q. In your book Quantum Strength and Power Training (Gaining The Winning Edge) (1996), you wrote: "Statistically, there is a close relationship between V02max and lean body mass." Were you surprised when the Tremblay group - challenging the common belief that low intensity, long duration exercise is best for fat loss - found that short intervals (30-90 seconds) produced substantially more fat loss for each calorie burned exercising? Why?
A. No, I was not surprised by Tremblay's findings showing that low intensity, long duration exercise is not as effective as short intense intervals in reducing body fat. It is relatively easy to explain why this is so.
During strenuous exercise, the rate of metabolism rises, going to about 15 times the basal metabolic rate (BMR) and even higher during intense interval work. For example, running 5 mi/hr the oxygen uptake required is 28 ml 02/min/kg of body weight with 3.7 cal/hr./lb burned, while a short burst of intense interval work may require 100 ml 02/min/kg with 13.8 cal/hr/lb burned. By maintaining the high level of training over a 5 or 6 week period one would expect a significant increase in the ratio of lean body mass to fat. Over a three month period you would be RIPPED like never before.
Intense interval work utilizes a greater percent of the body's muscles, both slow and fast twitch. Also, performing high intensity work places added energy demands on the respiratory system, cardiovascular system and nervous system. Thus more fat and glycogen are burned to support the expanding energy demands of the body during - and after - intense exercise. In other words, the cost of short intense interval exercise is very high in terms of energy demands in comparison to low intensity aerobic exercise. What's more, while at rest trained active muscles burn more fat night and day, contributing to further fat loss.
Last edited:
