Better for Fat Loss, H.I.I.T. or Cardio?

[WavyDavey]

An interesting video was posted this week, covering the debate about which method is better for weight and fat loss- High Intensity Interval Training (H.I.I.T), or Low Intensity Steady State (Cardio).

Let me say, I have been a huge proponent of HIIT because of its time efficiency and how it boosted my metabolism. But there are good reasons to go with traditional cardio-- such as it taxes the recovery system less than HIIT does. For that reason, I'm switching back to LISS, for the time being. Sorry, peak zone training.

I found this a balanced overview, and it's helpful that he cites studies that support the reasoning on both sides.

Which method do you use? Or do you use both?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ir83IWRVTOw&t=1s

[WendyB]

I use both. I think you need variety in your workouts. I try to mix it up as much as I can. Your body gets use to doing the same thing all the time. It needs difference. Same with food Your body needs difference as well. Don't eat the same thing every day

[GershonSurge]

I prefer Classical Light Intensity Training because it FITs for me.

Training effect is a function of Frequency, Intensity, Time and rest. 

I prefer to lift every day because I enjoy it. I also enjoy long routines with lots of variety. Because of this, intensity has to be lower. 

Resistance training is not really effective for weight loss compared to walking. Based on my experience with monitoring calories burned during different activities, washing dishes is the most effective way to burn calories outside of the big three -- jogging/running, bicycling and swimming. 

The title of the video is classical reductionist thinking. It assumes resistance training is better for weight loss then say diet or extended work during the day. Either way it turns out, those who funded the research win by being able to sell more of their product.

As it turns out, a whole food plant based diet is the best way to lose weight. The weight comes off along the side effect of preventing, arresting or curing most degenerative diseases (those not caused by a bacteria or virus). Unfortunately, there is not much funding for new research products because nobody profits from it.

The benefit of resistance training is muscles that are better able to function during the day. This becomes more important as we age. 

Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find anyone who has been around resistance training for 40 or 50 years who has written a book outlining the best ways of training starting from beginner and going to elite. The best example of Classical Light Intensity Training is boot camp in the military. It is difficult, but if you look closely it is light intensity.

The reason I know this is by regulation, they are only allowed to exercise for 50 minutes without a break. To get to 50 minutes of continuous exercise, it has to be light intensity. The body physically cannot stay in the peak range for more than about four minutes a day. Cardio results in waste products that can take 24 hours or more to eliminate. Jack LaLanne said he never did cardio. His light intensity was higher than other people's cardio. 

Time to start my workout. 🙂

[GershonSurge]

@WavyDavey,

Thanks for the video recommendation. I got a chance to watch it after my workout.

There is in an in between level of training I'll call "Somewhat Higher Intensity Training." Let's say a person is training to pass a military physical fitness test (PFT), which requires 50 sit ups in 2 minutes. We can use the Sit and $hit method. When they get to the point where they can do 20 sit ups, they can transition to doing 10 at a slow pace and 10 at the pace that will pass the test. Increase by one sit up every six days. Eventually, they will have a breakthrough, and they will get their $hit straight.

The same method could be used for push-ups. Much of the progress is neuromuscular, placement of the hands, and coordinating the breathing. If a person can't do one push up, they can start by leaning against a wall or laying on carpeted stairs. 

[HokieHoo]

I recently stumbled across a website that I think explained things really well for me. 

https://www.aworkoutroutine.com/the-best-way-to-lose-weight-fast-and-keep-it-off/ 

I am not affiliated nor did I purchase anything. I just found the information straight forward and easy to understand. The writer personally doesn't advocate for cardio ever. However, he also recognizes that people should do what works for them. He says, "So then which method is best? Simple: whichever one best suits your personal needs and preferences, is most convenient, efficient and sustainable for you, and will make you most likely to consistently be in the required deficit you need to be in." With that mentality, we can justify what ever we are doing as long as it is working for us!

I do some of both- mostly in small doses. I like cardio- especially in the form of sport because it feels more like fun and less like working out.  Since I play tennis, that is mostly low-cardio with bursts of higher activity. I also do cardio workouts so I can make it through long singles matches. My most frequent exercise is a brisk walk which I do daily. I also do speed intervals, and try to work in some jogging steady state and am working to build up my endurance. I also occasionally do HITT because I like the efficiency. Last, I do other random things (step aerobics, pilates, yoga, plyometrics, squats, pushups, etc) because, as Wendy says, I like/need variety. I am not very structured in my workouts. I force myself to put on workout clothes and do as much as I can and keep going until I stop. Not very scientific, but it is keeping me in my deficit (along with my food consumption plan) and I can see the following improvements: reduced weight (20lbs since January), fitness on the tennis court, increased flexibility, and can last longer in workouts (more pushups, longer sprint intervals, etc.). 

[GershonSurge]

@WavyDavey, @Mukluk4,

I use my Classical Light Intensity Training (C-LIT) under the theory that if I train at 80% effort, my 100% effort will increase at the same time. I'd worked my way to 23 pushups. The extra 20% (which is really 25% of what I was doing), suggested I could do 30 pushups without too much problem.

I decided to combine HIIT and C-LIT by doing 20 seconds at high intensity and 20 seconds at low intensity to see if I could do 30 pushups in 40 seconds. I made it with a second to spare. I could have done maybe 10 more without too much effort given another 10 seconds.

This worked so well that I may use it during the twelve week period that follows this one. I'll need to fiddle with how to gradually increase the time and intensity.

[Baltoscott]

Good video @WavyDavey.  Have to admit that I haven’t really jumped on the HIIT bandwagon.  In part because it is so ‘trendy’ — kind of like cross fit — and in part because it is kind of unpleasant.  I agree that the video is balanced and gives a good breakdown + and - of both HIIT and LISS.  Glad to hear I’m probably not missing out much by not emphasizing HIIT a lot.  Especially given that it is a little redundant of weight lifting.

In practice I do actually do a bit of both in my bike commuting.  My morning “to work” commute is usually not too intense so I don’t get all sweaty (unless I’m trying to catch a train and I know getting to the station a couple of minutes quicker will mean I don’t have to wait 30 minutes or an hour for the next train).  My evening “going home” commute, on the other hand, features a lot more hills (because I get “floor credit” on my fitbit) and I like to push up the hills.  But because they are hills, there are relative rest periods inbetween the high intensity climbing parts.  

My walks and hikes are generally moderate effort — around 3.5 - 4.5 mph on when on flat ground, 2-3 mph doing trails/hills in the woods — and would mostly be LISS.  

[WavyDavey]

---

@Baltoscottwrote:

Good video @WavyDavey.  Have to admit that I haven’t really jumped on the HIIT bandwagon.  In part because it is so ‘trendy’ — kind of like cross fit — and in part because it is kind of unpleasant.  I agree that the video is balanced and gives a good breakdown + and - of both HIIT and LISS.  Glad to hear I’m probably not missing out much by not emphasizing HIIT a lot.  Especially given that it is a little redundant of weight lifting.

In practice I do actually do a bit of both in my bike commuting.  My morning “to work” commute is usually not too intense so I don’t get all sweaty (unless I’m trying to catch a train and I know getting to the station a couple of minutes quicker will mean I don’t have to wait 30 minutes or an hour for the next train).  My evening “going home” commute, on the other hand, features a lot more hills (because I get “floor credit” on my fitbit) and I like to push up the hills.  But because they are hills, there are relative rest periods inbetween the high intensity climbing parts.  

My walks and hikes are generally moderate effort — around 3.5 - 4.5 mph on when on flat ground, 2-3 mph doing trails/hills in the woods — and would mostly be LISS.  

---

Hi @WendyB, what do you do for HIIT, exercise-wise?

@Baltoscott, I wouldn't count out HIIT with strength training. I think Jeff makes a couple of mistakes in his view of HIIT.

One, I don't think lifting is really comparable to HIIT. The closest I can get to peak zone while lifting is doing a heavy 1RM.  And even then it's only for brief seconds. And I can only catch the spikes with a chest strap. The Fitbit will average those spikes out. So I think of lifting more as "micro-HIIT". If I do enough reps to last 30 seconds, there's no way my heart rate would sustain a high rate throughout. Your riding sounds much more HIIT-like than lifting to me.

The other thing he neglected to mention, is something that comes up on the Starting Strength forums when we discuss this issue. That is, HIIT seems to support muscle retention better than LISS. The classic example, is distance runners vs. sprinters. Just a quick look at their bodies would seem to indicate that sprinters have no problem building muscle. Whether this is because sprinters tend to lift weights more than distance runners, or HIIT itself is more anabolic, is up for debate. But it is an easily observed phenomena.

[WendyB]

@WavyDaveyI find a lot of things on YouTube. They even have some HIIT for the kettle-bell Which I have a set of.

[Baltoscott]

Good points, @WavyDavey.  I agree that my bike/hill work is more like HIIT than my weight-lifting.  I like your description of weight-lifting as "micro-HIIT."  My lifting and bike hill work probably complement each other to some extent, but they are not substitutes.  That is, if I want to get faster going up hills, hill training is more important that squats, and if I want to squat more, doing squats is more important to hill training.  :-).  And I think the hill training is more likely to improve my heart-health than weight lifting is.  

But back to your initial question of whether HIIT or LISS is better for fat loss, do you agree with Jeff that makes little to no difference?  

As to sprinter vs. long distance runner bodies, I wonder if the enormous caloric expenditure of serious long distance runners or other endurance athletes has anything to do with their inability to build "sprinter/weight-lifter" muscle.  They may just not be able to eat enough to sustain the caloric surplus needed to grow bigger muscles.  And, in any event, I suspect you are right that long distance runners tend to be less likely than sprinters to lift weights.  

[HokieHoo]

@WavyDavey I like the Fitness Blender videos (fitnessblender.com again no affiliate or purchases). The filters are great because you can choose the videos to target one part of the body or all over and you can pick the length of workout that you want. I like that they are pretty simple videos.

Before watching the video and reading this thread, I really didn't equate bike/run/etc intervals with HIIT, but as the video, you, and @Baltoscott mention that can be HIIT. So maybe I do more HIIT than I previously thought. Thanks for sharing.

[GershonSurge]

@Baltoscott,

Depending on how seriously you take your bicycle riding, you might want to consider rollers. They are a bit tough to get used to. I recommend being next to a wall. They help to increase spin rate while staying smooth. A stationary bike isn't much good for this as they don't become unstable at a high spin rate when the rider isn't smooth.

Many recreational riders develop knee and back problems because they tend to push at 50-60 rpm. It's better to be at 90 to 110 rpm except for some conditions like going uphill where the rider is standing up.

[WavyDavey]

---

@@Baltoscott wrote:

But back to your initial question of whether HIIT or LISS is better for fat loss, do you agree with Jeff that makes little to no difference?  

---

I lean more towards the HIIT camp for fat loss. I agree with him that the difference in calories burned is not much. My experience says there is a metabolic effect with HIIT that LISS cannot touch. It did something fundamental to my metabolism that I didn't get from LISS. It's possible it was an adaptation from the weights, but one coach I follow swears the two together are exponential in effect.

My weight training has been consistent the past year, but during periods of adding just two 20 minute HIIT sessions a week, I found weight tends to come off easier (too easy?). Not so good for my bulking phase.  I am more of an intensity-driven person, so HIIT engages my mind better than LISS.

I like the way you take advantage of the natural interval training that hills allow. Much more organic than my timed HIIT in the gym.

My dream feature for the FitbitOS is a HIIT app that doesn't use fixed times for the intervals, but rather by how much time detected in peak zone.  This way, as the intervals get tougher and tougher, the app would automatically increase the rest period (or decrease the work period), to keep the heart rate in a target HIIT zone.

[Baltoscott]

@GershonSurge - Thanks for the link.  Some of the other readers may be interested in rollers, but not me.  I think many recreational bike riders develop knee/back problems because they don’t set their bikes up right.  Seats are often too low to get full leg extension, and sometimes handlebars are lower than seat-height leading to a dramatic forward lean and too much pressure on wrists and arms.  And then there are under-inflated tires, confusion about when to change gears .... but I digress.

The main reason I don’t like rollers is because they seem like a waste of time to me. I don’t own a bike to ride inside.  The point is to get outside, stay out of the car, and to see the world.  I own cars, but I’ve ridden a bike as a primary means of getting around for most of my life.  In 1996, when I was 36, I started recording my mileage.  Since then, through March 9, I’ve ridden more than 77,042 miles.  I say “more than” because I’ve recorded every mile ridden on bikes I own, but I miss some of the mileage I do on vacations or on bike share bikes in Baltimore and DC.  

As it happens, I do have a cadence sensor on one of my bikes.  I don’t pay a ton of attention to it but I see that for today’s ride to and from the gym it says my average was 78 rpm, and my high was 106 rpm. Like you, I’ve read that I should aim to be around 90-110.  I’ve got the gears for it, and used to try and hit those numbers, but I find it feels kind of unnatural, so I just don’t worry about it.

[Mukluk4]

I would say I fall into the "both" category.

I use LISS for post workout/sport recovery to get the circulation going and reduces a ton of my joint pain.

I play a ton of basketball and that really falls into the HIIT (along with the sport specific training to better myself)

[SunsetRunner]

I was trying to do HIIT for about three months with the Concept2 Rower. Mind you I only did it twice a week, as I researched it and the info I found told me you should Not do it more than 2 times a week.

Although, from what I understand, a real HIIT workout should leave you floored, literally. So, I would guess my HIIT workouts, while intense, they didn't leave me lying on the floor exhausted.

Doing the intensity I did left me a lot more hungry too, which is why I went back to moderate intensity cardio. I felt like it was wearing me out, and was lowering my enthusiasm for going to the gym. I would rather keep my enthusiasm high and do lower intensity.

[Dominique]

I agree the video gave a fair overview, with the pros and cons of each form of cardio. One of the pros of HIIT is its time efficiency, while conversely LISS is less time efficient. It’s definitely true, but I actually prefer LISS precisely because it’s more "wasteful". Here is why: my job involves spending most of the time in front of a computer; we know that sitting all day is bad for you, so I want to spend as much time as possible NOT sitting; walking (an enjoyable form of LISS for me) is ideal for that. By the same token, I also don’t mind doing "wasteful" forms of resistance training: rather than focusing exclusively on big compound movements (touted as the "efficient" way of lifting weights), I also include quite a few isolations movements that consume a lot of time for little return.

Bottom line: if I were Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos or any similarly ultra-busy person, I would try to squeeze in as much exercise in as little time as possible, but since I’ve got plenty of time on my hands, I don’t mind "wasting" it doing less optimal forms of exercise.