File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Morning (fasted) cardio!
Question 1: How much more effective is it for trimming down fat? What I've read is that it takes energy directly from your fat stores. However, this conflicts in my mind with the apparent downside which is, the loss of muscle. Which brings us...
Question 2: Is there any way to offset muscle loss due to fasted cardio, for instance by mixing resistance or weight training into your morning routine? Diet maybe?

picture unrelated.
>> Anonymous
Without eating anything?

shitty for you, you'll destroy your muscles, gotta eat something.

cardio sucks anyways, but whatever
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
How about a liter of water and some protein half an hour before to minimize catabolic effects?
>> Anonymous
>>301996
OP, BTW
>> Anonymous
That would work
>> Anonymous
>>302005
Would it still be as effective in terms of quickly metabolizing fat?
>> Anonymous
>>302013
of course not, but the point is the fine line between metabolism of fat and catabolism of lean muscle. One is good, the other bad. You body will go to carbs as long as it has them. Once you use up the carbs, It goes to fat and muscle. Pop some protein, so your body uses that to spare/ rebuild the muscle it is using up during your cut.
>> Anonymous
>>302016
Sounds good. Thanks for the help! Tomorrow I stop wrecking my muscles.
>> Anonymous
The cardio is going to make you more efficient at burning fat, making it hard to burn fat though...
>> Anonymous
listen to slayer and motorhead every morning for all the sustenance you need
>> Anonymous
>>302028
But I already do that anyway!?!

>>302027
I don't follow. More efficient at burning fat means harder to burn fat? Plz explain
>> Anonymous
>>302050
More efficient means it is using less fat to output the same amount of energy
>> Anonymous
>>302050
Your body right now is like a shitty SUV. It takes like 300lbs of fat to go 2 miles. The more you work it the more you turn it into a sleek hybrid vehicle. It only takes 3lbs of fat to go 2 miles.

Meaning, the more you do cardio, the less you will gain from it each time.

But that is like saying LOL THE MORE U PUMP WEIGHTS THE LESS MUSCLE U GAIN- it's true but that's no reason to not do it.
>> w/ CSCS + BS in exerc phys
hasnt this topic been closed already?

the rumours that circulate constantly amongst the unwashed masses....sigh.

and lemmie guess, eating protein after a work out makes you store fat? and dont squat/oly lift because 'you'll get bulky' and cease being athletic?

cortisol you retards. avoid it. eat 1st.

then comes teh question, as man is designed as an anaerobic animal, do we need "cardio"-->aerobics (ie. the silly steady state 70% HR kind) at ALL?

really think about this. do you have ANY idea how little of an impact the calories you burn will be compared to offset of 'stressful starvation mode' on your hormones (already coming off of 8hrs of fast from sleep?) ?
>> Anonymous
>>302090
I'm considering only sleeping in 4 hour intervals, and waking up in between to have another meal
>> w/ CSCS + BS in exerc phys
>>302096

think

"what is my body designed to do"

raid the fridge and AM cardio are not it.

think on the 40,000 year level (since no significant mass adaptation has occured to the homo sapien sapien genome since then)

sleep and eat

achieve balance if this is supposed to be long term. WTF are you thinking sleeping in intervals?

godam the popular media/culture/'fitness' images the world shows you all
>> Anonymous
>>302117
I'm not running man, I just need to get big.

I figure the more calories I can pack in, the better. I'll adjust my sleeping pattern, anyways
>> Anonymous
>>302090
HIIT in the morning motherfucker do you do it?!
>> Anonymous
>>302090
I actually don't have any idea, which is why I asked. Perhaps if you weren't so high up on that horse you could come down and explain it to us? Because I'm not understanding most of what you're trying to say, in between your rants about how dumb we all are.
>> w/ CSCS + BS in exerc phys
>>302185

do i look like the oracle @ delphi?

think, use that brain. im not paid for this and im serving as a pure resource. there's gotta be an angle here for me.
>> Anonymous
>>302090

I thought man has 3 energy pathways, not just the anaerobic one
>> w/ CSCS + BS in exerc phys
here is a bone incase i've been too meany pants for you all

Schuenke MD, Mikat RP, McBride JM.
Effect of an acute period of resistance exercise on excess post-exercise oxygen consumption (EPOC): implications for body fat management.
Eur J Appl Physiol 2002 Mar;86(5):411-7

This group looked at the effects of circuit weight training on EPOC.

The exercise routine consisted of three exercises (the bench press, the power clean and the squat), performed with 10RM loads as a circuit. The circuit was performed four times (i.e. twelve total sets) and took 31 mins.

EPOC was elevated for 38 hours post workout (possibly longer as this was when the researchers stopped measuring). The duration and magnitude of the EPOC observed in this study indicates the importance of the role of high intensity resistance training in a fat loss program.

AND

from alwyn cosgrove

"As my colleague Alan Aragon said:

"Caring how much fat is burned during training makes as much sense as caring how much muscle is built during training."
Think about that. If we looked at a weight training session that started at 9am and finished at 10am - how much muscle would we see built if we stopped looking at 10am? None.

In fact - we'd see muscle damage. We could make the conclusion that weight training does not increase muscle - in fact it decreases muscle right? It's only when we look at the big picture - and look at the recovery from the session - that we find the reverse is true - weight training builds muscle.

Fat loss training is the same way. Someone talking about the benefits of the "fat burning zones" or "fasted cardio" is a sure sign that the individual has stopped looking at the end of the exercise session. They have come to the conclusion that fasted, lower intensity steady state exercise burns the most fat and made a massive leap of faith to suggest it is best for real world fat loss."
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>302205
>there's gotta be an angle here for me

Judging by almost all of your posts, inflating your own ego and beating people with it seems like enough of an angle for you.
>> Anonymous
>>302205
Well first off, no one dragged you here and forced you to post.
Second, I have no clue what you look like, so for all I know you could look just like the oracle at Delphi...except you'd also have to be a woman. And the oracle was alleged to predict the future...all I'm asking is for a simple explanation, with minimal snarling if possible.
Third, you're not a useful resource if you're just going to shout without clarifying anything, especially if most of your post is arrogantly belittling everyone else. I'm not a bio major and my knowledge about nutrition and fitness doesn't come through formal schooling, so I don't know how I'm supposed to come up with answers on my own.
>> w/ CSCS + BS in exerc phys
>>302216
what else could i possible get from this?

other than dirty hands and a general sense of disgust for the human race?

i do it for the occassional glimmers, ever so slight, of hope, that maybe, of the 100s of fucktards who read this, one just might google the keywords i write and change the whole game for himself for the rest of his life.

its hardlove or no love. but if you prefer to feel good about being in the dark, so be it.
>> Anonymous
>>302223
Relax, big guy, you definitely post some informative things.

You're just a douche, though, in case you didn't know.
>> w/ CSCS + BS in exerc phys
>>302222
neither did I originally,

there arent many MSc candidates getting along with a completed pre-law background as well...if you catch my drift
>> Anonymous
>>302211
Well, thank you I guess, though that last line is the only sort of relevant one. That sounds more like a philosophical or...ethical argument, if you will, than a scientific explanation or actual information.
>> w/ CSCS + BS in exerc phys
>>302225
ill go with that

i thought /fit/ was about squatz, getting stronger, and (sigh) getting "riptd" w/curls?

whats with this backlash? were you all not birthed of /b? as such, you should have no emotions/soul to hurt. i sure as hell dont
>> w/ CSCS + BS in exerc phys
>>302230
the scientific explanation was provided IF YOU LOOK UP THE JOURNAL ARTICLE I GOOGLED FOR YOU. hell i gave u it 100%, U physically have to read it...for fucks sake
>> Anonymous
>>302233
The problem is when your being a dick for whatever chuckles you get out of it gets in the way of an efficient transfer of useful, relevant information.
Also,>>302223if we're so "disgusting" to you, maybe you should...ah....go someplace else?
>> Anonymous
>>302233

>>302233

Some other guy here, idk, but to me just reading you nick screams 'listen to me i'm fucking great'. Perhaps if you name or tripfagged with a different handle people wouldn't be so hostile? I mean, I'm a senior in an exercise science program and like to yell at the bicept p33k idiots here as well, but the handle is just so in your face to people that have some sort of knowledge in training that it is really aggravating.
>> Anonymous
>>302244
>your being a dick
HARDEN THE FUCK UP GIRLYMAN.

HE PROVIDED INFORMATION IN A CONCISE AND CLEAR WAY.
IF YOU ARE TOO FUCKING STUPID OR LAZY TO COPY PASTE HIS REFERENCES INTO GOOGLE, YOU SHOULD JUST EAT ANOTHER BURGER FATTY, BECAUSE YOU AIN'T GOING ANYWHERE.
>> w/ CSCS + BS in exerc phys
>>302244
no really, whats wrong with the form of transmittal? ends and means arguement here?

dont worry, i will be -gone- soon, as my apt does not yet have broadband (modest grant) and i'm stealing from the girl (too dumb to password) who lives few apts down from me, leaving me with intermittent at best internet connection. enough for kicks on 4chan, not enough for COD4. wait till sept for the $ to provide such extravagence as my very own cable inet.
>> Anonymous
>>302237
Alright dude, watch that blood pressure there. Wouldn't want you to burst a blood vessel on this here internets.
For the record, I didn't google it because the majority of what you quoted wasn't relevent to my question.
Then again, I guess no one should ask anything on /fit/ if they can just google it?
>> w/ CSCS + BS in exerc phys
>>302253
i thought at best, 1 in 100 heard of those letters in my nick. 1 in 500 know what they mean. it the world of total Anonymous posting, i thought a little 'face' to the posts might add credence to my words, which may be the tipping point for a random /fit/er to try my kool-aid versus the uninformed (but extremely opinionated) Flex reader/ ex JV highschool football player

what do you recommend?
>> Anonymous
>>302268
PRECISELY.
NOW YOU UNDERSTAND WHY EVERY
"Hai guise, i r fat, WHY IS I FAT?!"
or
"Hai guise, i r skinny, HOW DOES I GET BIGGER"
POST [WHICH IS 70% OF /fit/] CAN BE ANSWERED WITH A SIMPLE 'EAT CLEAN' WITH EITHER
EAT MORE
or
EAT LESS
>> w/ CSCS + BS in exerc phys
>>302268
im too "fit" to worry about that

my blood vessels are as supple as natural DD tits
>> Anonymous
>>302281
Oh, well, nevermind then.
>> Anonymous
>>302273

Ahh, can't help you there, been racking my brain the past few weeks for the coolest handle to come up with. I actually got to leave to go to work now, but lol what the hell, if I see you around /fit/ another time as CSCS I'll just post as ACSM TRAINER and we'll figure something out. Later man
>> w/ CSCS + BS in exerc phys
>>302305
Our plan will work as long as there are not ACE trainers throwing their hats into the ring...then we'll really be back in the dark ages

cheers