Comments on: Schtuff They Said That I Like…

By: Danny McLarty

Danny McLarty — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 05:16:48 +0000

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!

By: Mark Young

Mark Young — Fri, 16 Jul 2010 13:27:59 +0000

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.

By: Danny McLarty

Danny McLarty — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 16:46:04 +0000

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.

By: Mark Young

Mark Young — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 12:06:34 +0000

“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.