fasted cardio

timetogetfit

whats everyones opinion on the fasted cardio debate(do it first thing in the morning before eating) There are some who thinks fatloss will be increased if you do it this way others say its a myth?

g'em

Worrying about the nuances of fasted cardio sits at about # 33 on my "priority list of things to get stressed over for keeping myself in shape". There's a total of 35 things on that list. The chunky (with 95% peanuts) vs smooth (with 92% peanuts) PB debate sits at # 34 with last place going to stressing over whether my cellulite is visible through my lycra workout pants.

It works for fatloss via the same mechanism as any other cardio will. The increase in fatloss it produces (if any) over alternative cardio methods is negligible at best.

If I want to lose fat I sort out my diet. Then I sort out my weight training. Then I figure out how many cardio sessions per week I need to do and how I'm going to do it. If the first two aren't sorted it won't matter how much cardio I do or how much food is in my belly beforehand, I won't be seeing any worthy results.

justsomebloke

agreed I wouldn't bother worrying about it unless you are sitting at around the 6% bf margin and running out of ideas to drop some more

Colm_OReilly

g'em wrote: »

Worrying about the nuances of fasted cardio sits at about # 33 on my "priority list of things to get stressed over for keeping myself in shape". There's a total of 35 things on that list. The chunky (with 95% peanuts) vs smooth (with 92% peanuts) PB debate sits at # 34 with last place going to stressing over whether my cellulite is visible through my lycra workout pants.

It works for fatloss via the same mechanism as any other cardio will. The increase in fatloss it produces (if any) over alternative cardio methods is negligible at best.

If I want to lose fat I sort out my diet. Then I sort out my weight training. Then I figure out how many cardio sessions per week I need to do and how I'm going to do it. If the first two aren't sorted it won't matter how much cardio I do or how much food is in my belly beforehand, I won't be seeing any worthy results.

lol! nice!

Vegeta

g'em wrote: »

If I want to lose fat I sort out my diet. Then I sort out my weight training. Then I figure out how many cardio sessions per week I need to do and how I'm going to do it. If the first two aren't sorted it won't matter how much cardio I do or how much food is in my belly beforehand, I won't be seeing any worthy results.

That's a good paragraph considering the 8 weeks we are entering

Al_Fernz

IMO fasted cardio is about as useful as a one legged man at an arse kicking competition.

Doing any cardio activity in a fasted state is going to leave you lethargic. Therefore,meaning you won't be able to put as much effort into it. If you can't put as much effort into it then you won't get the same benefits from it.

Also, when in a fasted state your body will have a preference towards burning muscle tissue over fat because our bodies are genetically programmed to cling to fat tissure. End result - you start to go towards that skinny-fat look. If this is done over a long period of time you may morph into Richard Simmons.

Dragan

Can you completely deplete your glycogen stores after 6 to 10 hours of inactivity.

No.


End.

celestial

g'em wrote: »

Worrying about the nuances of fasted cardio sits at about # 33 on my "priority list of things to get stressed over for keeping myself in shape". There's a total of 35 things on that list. The chunky (with 95% peanuts) vs smooth (with 92% peanuts) PB debate sits at # 34 with last place going to stressing over whether my cellulite is visible through my lycra workout pants.

It works for fatloss via the same mechanism as any other cardio will. The increase in fatloss it produces (if any) over alternative cardio methods is negligible at best.

If I want to lose fat I sort out my diet. Then I sort out my weight training. Then I figure out how many cardio sessions per week I need to do and how I'm going to do it. If the first two aren't sorted it won't matter how much cardio I do or how much food is in my belly beforehand, I won't be seeing any worthy results.

Negligible is the keyword here. Also, I would imagine that for many people, fasted cardio is liable to make you even hungrier than you would normally be in the morning (cue an extra helping of cereal/toast).

Roper

We used to do it to cut weight but that was for lads who needed to drop an extra .05 of a kilo to get there. Lads who'd be spitting before getting on the scales like. To be honest, I'm not sure if it wouldn't have been the same anyway whether it was on an empty stomach or not.

When I do 5k after eating normally, I'll do it in about 24/25 minutes. If I've had a poor days eating, my times go up to 26-28 minutes. Now I reckon that any weight loss benefit I get from fasting would be made up for by the additional intensity I can bring to the run when I eat properly.

Paralysis by analysis. G'em's right, just do the work.

Pherekydes

This point is addressed every few weeks/months. Use search.

The 'Fitness' brigade don't believe there's any benefit, but the cycling crowd have been doing it since the fifties and getting results. Their aim is not to drop body fat, per se, but to reach the bottom of the glycogen tank and force the body to use fat as fuel. Normally, it takes 2+ hours to deplete the glycogen stores during steady state activity (this is why marathon runners 'hit the wall' near the end of the race). Cyclists can reach this state in about 30 minutes by training first thing on an empty stomach. Normally, it would take them 2+ hours, and they don't have the time or the inclination for such training every day. However, they will be reaching such a state during races, so they need to train for it.

The question is, do cyclists and long distance runners get thinner while training heavily? Do they have the lowest levels of body fat? And do you want to spend up to an hour every morning doing cardio?

g'em

Slow coach wrote: »

...the cycling crowd have been doing it since the fifties and getting results. Their aim is not to drop body fat, per se, but to reach the bottom of the glycogen tank and force the body to use fat as fuel. Normally, it takes 2+ hours to deplete the glycogen stores during steady state activity (this is why marathon runners 'hit the wall' near the end of the race). Cyclists can reach this state in about 30 minutes by training first thing on an empty stomach. Normally, it would take them 2+ hours, and they don't have the time or the inclination for such training every day. However, they will be reaching such a state during races, so they need to train for it.

Well you learn something new every day...

rubadub

I did it for a while and found it OK, it was just a 20min cycle to work. It can suit some people. e.g. you cycle to work early, go to the canteen and have your breakfast, in this time you are getting rested, and stopping sweating, then you can get changed into work clothes at your own pace.

What pros do is not always the best for people looking to get basic exercise. Go to the cycling forum and they will all recommend hybrids and racers- why? they are efficient, you can go faster on less calories- which can be the opposite of what somebody looking to exercise wants!

Pro atheletes will use the most efficient method possible. If I do "competition" chinups I can do 20, but if I do normal slower controlled ones it is around 16-17.

I cycle a fixed commuting distance, takes 20mins on a hybrid and ~24mins on the mountain bike. When on the mountain bike I expend more energy per minute too i.e. if I was to go at the same exertion on the mountain bike it might take 27mins. The limiting factor is "uncomfortableness" and safety on the hybrid. On a mountain bike I try to keep up my usual speed, and arrive in bits!


From from "burn the fat feed the muscle"

1. After an overnight 8-12 hour fast, your body's stores of glycogen are depleted and you
burn more fat when glycogen is low.
2. Eating causes a release of insulin. Insulin interferes with the mobilization of body fat.
Less insulin is present in the morning; so more body fat is burned when cardio is done in
the morning.
3. There is less carbohydrate (glucose) in the bloodstream when you wake up after an
overnight fast. With less glucose available, you burn more fat.
4. If you eat immediately before a workout, you have to burn off what you just ate first
before tapping into stored body fat (and insulin is elevated after a meal.)
5. When you do cardio in the morning, your metabolism stays elevated for a period of
time after the workout is over. If you do cardio in the evening, you burn calories during
the session, but you fail to take advantage of the "afterburn" effect because your
metabolic rate drops dramatically as soon as you go to sleep.
6. Morning cardio gives you a feeling of accomplishment and makes you feel great all day
by releasing mood-enhancing endorphins.
7. Morning cardio "energizes" you and "wakes you up."
8. Morning cardio may help regulate your appetite for the rest of the day.
9. Your body’s circadian rhythm adjusts to your morning routine, making it easier to
wake up at the same time every day.
10. You’ll be less likely to "blow off" your workout when it’s out of the way early (like
when you’re exhausted after work or when friends ask you to join them at the pub for
happy hour).
11. You can always "make time" for exercise by setting your alarm earlier in the morning.

Saabdub

I do pre-breakfast cardio whenever I can get out of bed early enough:D It's a good use of the early hours before I go to work. I supplement with caffeine and take about 5gm of whey powder and some BCAAs to help prevent any muscle breakdown and do 20-30 minutes. I get an early calorie burn and find it increases my metabolism and suppresses my appetite for a few hours. I'm also more relaxed afterwards:). Then I eat normally the rest of the day. I find doing it early means that I'm recovered enough to fit in a full weight workout at 6pm if I want to.

Saabdub