File :-(, x, )
cardio: before or after breakfast? Anonymous
I've heard lots of people supporting either side of the argument. Which is better for fat loss?
>> Anonymous
try getting a real job.
>> Anonymous
Die
>> Anonymous
before is okay if you don't care about your muscles
after otherwise
>> The Dark One !UYklPQPVhw
Doing it before causes the body to pull from its fat stores a lot more. Doing it after your body will pull on the energy from your breakfast.

If you're really worried about losing muscle, take some L-glutamine before you exercise.
>> Anonymous
Before. You can protect your muscles some what by having a 40 gram whey shake before you go down. Gives your stomach something to chew on but doesn't hurt the "fasted cardio" effect too much.
>> Anonymous
I can't remember what the best timing is, but to actually USE your breakfast during your workout, I think you need to wait ~45 minutes after eating. Otherwise, your GI system hasn't had enough time to make the food accessible to the rest of your body.

I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.
>> Anonymous
before
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
I love hearing all these faggots who've listened to too many fat powerlifters who make rationalizations about their body fat levels.

You aren't going to lose muscle from morning fasted cardio. Even if you're in recovery. Basic human physiology is still as true as it ever was - when your liver glycogen is depleted and your muscular glycogen is low, your body will start oxidizing body fat, not muscle. It wouldn't make sense otherwise... it takes more 'effort' for your body to burn muscle than fat, and there's no demand for protein to rebuild the muscles while you're actually working out, because your body hasn't even 'realized' it needs to recover yet.

This is why you don't feel sore until the day after, when Delayed Onset Muscle Soreness kicks in. That's the most important time you have to make sure you're getting plenty of protein in, because if you don't, your body will cannibalize existing muscle to rebuild. Post-workout nutrition is important as well.

tl;dr People who decry fasted cardio don't like getting up early and make excuses about it.

Picture related, as it is Ken Shamrock doing AM cardio.
>> Anonymous
y tha fuk wood u cardio in da am wen ull fukin bern mussle. fukin tarrrrd.
>> Anonymous
>>73260

0/10
>> Anonymous
>>73260
LMAO
>> Anonymous
>>73255
no. not really but whatever makes you happy.
>> MSU
>>73255

Semi true. And then again, semi not. The logic behind the idea that it will hurt your muscles is true for long period without eating. If you ate at 7pm the night before, and then worked out nearly 12 hours later: yes you can potentially hurt you muscle volume. (different from muscle mass)

Which is best to lose fat? The 45min period suggested does hold some truth. But who wants to east breakfast before running a mile? Especially since a "breakfast" is supposed to be the biggest meal of the day to optimize weight loss to begin with. (kicks off your metabolism, provides the body with energy)

Best answer? Eat something VERY light before an AM workout. Whats a "light" meal? Depends on what your body really would consider "light" When I was playing college ball a few years back I ate an apple before our 5am workouts (at ~ 4:30am) That generally kept hunger pains away during the work out and did not feel heavy enough in my to make me wan to puke. Those were also some of my most "cut" days. :)

The apple will not be enough in your system to keep your body from wanting to take from fat reserves even if if does "get into the system"

Morning workouts (lifting) will also help you burn fat throughout the day.
>> MSU
>>73290here again...

I forgot to mention to eat the "BIG" breakfast after the morning routine. Drinking a shake with the meal is also a good idea.

On the shake note, I NEVER advise drinking a shake alone after a morning pre breakfast workout. This WILL cause you to have very sharp drops in your energy level after your body is essentially done trying to proc whats in your system. (the shake) research has also shown some varying levels in how long that takes with different stuff... I wouldn't suggest it. If you do you could be trying to bum juice and cookies off someone before pulling out a blankie.
>> Anonymous
>>73290

Explain how it is 'semi' true. I don't see any reason why your body would suddenly start breaking down muscle tissue while in the middle of being exerted when there's fat and possibly replenished glycogen just sitting there?

I'd also be curious to know what you think this distinction between muscle 'volume' and 'mass' is.
>> Anonymous
>>73453

As your body has, in fact, been digesting the entire night there may not be anything in your stomach depending on when you ate the night before, what you ate, etc. The body then goes to the fat.

There have been two variables studied in how long/how much fat your body will actually try to get this energy from before it looks towards your muscles. Why? Because your body senses that it is being stressed for a prolonged amount of time without the replenishment of resources, food. Giving up the bodies last resource, fat, is the last thing the body wants to do.

So it is "semi" true based on when the last time you ate was, what it was, how much, and how quickly you metabolize it.

On the subject of "volume and mass" http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/gen01/gen01652.htm

Just because you asked:

Muscle mass: How much muscle is really there.
Muscle volume: the physical appearance of size.

For this conversation that is how I am going to define it. And since most people like having muscle volume in certain key areas (the ones they usually work the most) hurting that wouldn't be accomplishing much for them.
>> Anonymous
>>73481

If you're mentioning specific 'variables' studied, I'm assuming you know the source for this. What is it?

Your definition of 'mass' and 'volume' sounds like original research. It's generally a bad idea to start coining neologisms in the middle of a discussion, if for no other reason than it's confounding to people who aren't inside your head. Are you talking about the simple superficial appearance, or are you talking about muscle fiber type and density?
In either case, it's still a moot point, because you aren't suddenly going to start losing muscle because you're burning a lot of calories, as long as you're eating well enough. I do agree that adequate nutrient timing is very important though, and yes, if your last meal was in the early evening and you're doing cardio 12 hours later, your recovery will suffer and you may not get the same gains you would have normally because the protein synthesis is interrupted. But you aren't going to lose muscle mass while doing the cardio, because fat is the preferred fuel when glycogen is depleted, except under special circumstances.

I will add one important thing I think my original post was lacking, though. Your body type is also very important. The likelihood of your body breaking down existing muscle tissue throughout the rest of the day (i.e. after morning fasted cardio) is greatly dependent on your meso-type as well as diet. Endomorphs and mesomorphs are more likely to burn fat, while ectomorphs are probably more likely to burn muscle.

So maybe the tl;dr of this all is that if you're a skinny bastard, don't do morning fasted cardio to get your abs and serratus showing, but if you're a lard-ass Fatlus type, go for it.
>> Anonymous
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfieXKN_Vbg&feature=related
>> Anonymous
shitstorm of faggots who don't know jack shit about OP's topic. no conclusion here just like creatine threads.
>> Anonymous
>>73505
the volume of a 'muscle' can be larger than the actual mass of fibre as they retain water and glycogen.
>> Anonymous
>>73290here

>>73505re:>>73855

>Are you talking about the simple superficial appearance, or are you talking about muscle fiber type and density?
Yes. Density in that the actual mass of the muscle. Not the "volume" which would be the amount of space it takes up. While your muscle will not "lose" density it will lose the appearance of "volume" or size.

>If you're mentioning specific 'variables' studied, I'm assuming you know the source for this. What is it?

You fucking serious? Google mother fucker. And even if i felt like it, you insult me later in your post.

>because you aren't suddenly going to start losing muscle because you're burning a lot of calories, as long as you're eating well enough.
>while ectomorphs are probably more likely to burn muscle.

Care to make up your fucking mind?

>because fat is the preferred fuel when glycogen is depleted, except under special circumstances.

Yeah, like not eating for 12 hours and then trying to work out in excess. Fat is the prefered method for teh body. I said so. But after it takes so much from the fat, it stops. Whats another place in the body you find glycogen ready to use for your muscles in an "emergency" like fashion. ... ... the muscle.

Fuck off... im drunk and youre a dip shit.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>73890

Lol, I like how you've slowly degraded from a tripfag into a cussing weiner who has to take quotes out of context and try to twist their meanings. So we'll play your game.

>Yes. Density in that the actual mass of the muscle. Not the "volume" which would be the amount of space it takes up. While your muscle will not "lose" density it will lose the appearance of "volume" or size.

You can't tell (especially at the level of natural trainees) how 'dense' someone's muscles are by looking at it. Maybe IFBB pros with suicidally low water and body fat levels on contest day, but for the average person, it's impossible to visually discern how 'dense' ('mass') a person's muscles are. Aside from this having very little to do with the subject of fasted cardio.

>You fucking serious? Google mother fucker. And even if i felt like it, you insult me later in your post.

If you think something is true, then the onus is on you to back it up. I'm not going to bother googling something that I covered in the fundamentals of my first year classes.

>Care to make up your fucking mind?

My goodness, you have the mouth of a sailor! You've also conveniently left out the time frame I was using, by taking my quotes out of context. For the first quote, that was about *while exercising*, i.e. when you're actually doing the cardio. The second quote referred to the rest of the day after doing the cardio. It's a good tactic though, I'm sure you nabbed most of the people who were reading.

(cont)
>> Anonymous
>Yeah, like not eating for 12 hours and then trying to work out in excess. Fat is the prefered method for teh body. I said so. But after it takes so much from the fat, it stops. Whats another place in the body you find glycogen ready to use for your muscles in an "emergency" like fashion. ... ... the muscle.

Here, I'll quote you to respond. Except this time it's in context. Observe:

>Fat is the prefered method for teh body. I said so.

But didn't you say earlier...

>Giving up the bodies last resource, fat, is the last thing the body wants to do.

Make up your mind, good sir! And finally...

>Whats another place in the body you find glycogen ready to use for your muscles in an "emergency" like fashion. ... ... the muscle.

Is this where you're getting this whole thing about 'mass and volume'? While it's true that muscles do contain quite a bit of glycogen, it's not what they're made of. They're made of tensile protein muscle fibers. Glycogen is more like a kind of carbohydrate that body has synthesized. It's also replenished as long as you're eating a steady supply of carbohydrates. This is why pros carb-load before showtime, because it replenishes muscle glycogen and gives them a fuller look, which might be the 'muscle volume' you're talking about.

>Fuck off... im drunk and youre a dip shit.

Alcohol will negatively impact your testosterone levels. I'm going to use my liver to store glycogen (haha, see what I did there?), not to convert useless alcohol into lipid.
>> Guil
     File :-(, x)
>>74178
>from a tripfag
You can go now.

>MSU
Minnesota State?
>> Anonymous
>>74181

D'awwwwww, someone feel alienated?
>> Guil
     File :-(, x)
>>74189
You must be trolling. If not, learn your terminology.

>D'awwwwww
You can definitely go now.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>74190