Schtuff They Said That I Like…
July 14, 2010 by danny · 4 Comments
In my weekly blog reading, I always come across some great info. from my colleagues. So every now and then I’ll share with you some of the information that I really liked. This is information that I want to help spread to as many people as possible, as it can only help more people reach their health and physique goals.
This comes from an interview that Jason Ferruggia did with Chad Waterbury. Chad just came out with a new fat loss book called Body of F.I.R.E. In the interview, Jason Asked Chad; “What are the three biggest mistakes you see people making when trying to lose fat?“ Part of Chad’s answer; ”The first mistake is performing long duration cardio at 
a low intensity. Nothing wastes muscle tissue faster than jogging for an hour. When muscles are forced to continuously contract for 45 minutes or an hour, that energy has to come from somewhere. The body is very stubborn and doesn’t want to use fat for energy because it’s much easier to break down muscle tissue instead. This is why marathon runners are skinny and weak.”
And then, in the comments section below a reader asked Jason; ”
“I know you’ve said in the past Jay that you don’t like mid-range stuff because humans weren’t born to run long distances. Almost all the research articles that I’ve found show the complete opposite. I have no doubt that high-intensity will get you jacked, but is it really because we’re born to do it? Is there something I’m missing?”
And Jason’s response;
“Way back in the hunter gather/ caveman days humans did two things- they walked for long durations going out to gather food and supplies needed to build shelters, and they sprinted after their prey or away from predators who were trying to eat them. They never 
jogged for the sake of jogging or if they were migrating to another region they walked, not jogged.
Yeah, you can run long distances if you want to. But it is the worst form of exercise for your body.”
I couldn’t agree more. You can see that I’ve previously written similar – check it out here and here.
Moral of the story; when getting your cardio in, keep the intensity low (like a 30 minute walk) to help burn some extra calories, contribute to speeding up the recovery process (like after a hard weight training workout), and to help preserve muscle (medium paced jogs are just fast enough/intense enough to actually impede recovery). And perform high intensity cardio, something like the examples I gave in the links I provided just above.
This holds true for non-athletes and athletes alike. So keep it low intensity or high intensity, but avoid medium at all cost.
About danny
“Nothing wastes muscle tissue faster than jogging for an hour. When muscles are forced to continuously contract for 45 minutes or an hour, that energy has to come from somewhere. The body is very stubborn and doesn’t want to use fat for energy because it’s much easier to break down muscle tissue instead.”
- Ummm….not so much. I call bullshit. Jogging does not “waste away muscle”. I am FAR from being a runner by any means. I personally hate it. But the old “steady state burns muscle” nonsense is largely unfounded. More to the point, there is little research actually done on intervals and fat loss.
There is some, but most interval stuff looks at performance. Even the supportive interval stuff doesn’t make it look as amazing as some might think.
Hey Mark. My thoughts; I guess we can look at all cardio as catabolic. In the end we’re not gonna lose a whole lot, if any muscle, if we eat to support our goals (hypercaloric diet in the case of gaining mass/not losing muscle). More than what any science may say, it’s the observation of many strength coaches that those that perform “a lot” of long(er) steady-state running quite often end up with a weak, “not so impressive” looking physique.
And as I mentioned in my post, I’m just not a big fan of medium paced running, because I don’t think it is as productive (actually can be counter-productive) in the recovery process as low(er) paced cardio, and not as efficient as HIIT.
Hi Danny,
While walking might facilitate recovery it certainly isn’t going to burn very many calories making it almost useless for fat loss unless someone is going to do it for hours on end. HIIT is also more efficient in terms of time, but the isn’t much research that shows it to be tremendously more effective than moderate steady state anyway.
If efficiency for time or performance is the goal I think HIIT is best. Otherwise, there isn’t a huge difference between SS and HIIT.
Yes, I’m very much into efficiency for the majority of my “personal training” clients, athletes, and myself. Which is a BIG reason that for the majority, I prefer HIIT most of the time. When I say “walking,” I’m actually talking about any type of NEPA… playing catch with your kids + going on walks + taking the stairs rather than the elevator etc. etc. all adds up to a leaner body. I also like “active recovery” by doing lower intensity circuits like Eric Cressey outlined awhile back in his “Cardio Confusion” article @ t-nation.
While I’m not sure if any activity is actually wrong, I do believe that some is “more right.”
Thanks for your thoughts Mark!