The truth about exercise

MattC59

The article's hardly suprising, but horizon, tonight, should be interesting !
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-17177251

Horizon: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01cywtq

rick_chasey

Some people get fitter than others, and interval training works.

No way!

kentphil

The words "health benefits" and "fit" are very vague. I'm sure someone who does no exercise and then followed this regime would get health benefits from this. To say they would be as fit as someone who rides 30miles a week; I'm not so sure.

I'll be watching the program tonight with interest.

timmyturbo

Surely consummating a little passion with your partner if you have one for 3 mins , or maybe an hour if you have stamina . Would have the same benefit ? Obviously not if you just let her gone on top all the time . (-:

kentphil

Not sure of I could cope with this as interval training timmyturbo :-) Once is enough for me!

shockedsoshocked

So what's the deal? They've got sedentary people at risk of various health complications and made them do HIIT and find some of them become "fitter" (subjective, obviously).

Judging by the length of the intervals too I'm actually surprised anyone improves aerobically.

DrKJM

There are papers in peer reviewed journals on the approach for example by Tabata et al. Wikipedia summarises it if you search Tabata method. I am in no way qualified to comment on the soundness of the research however, nor on the accuracy of the Wikipedia summary.

jc4lab

The truth about exercise is...it cons you into thinking you can eat as much as you like after...You infact you will eat more than you burn off.and only leave you wondering why the weight aint coming off..

markos1963

timmyturbo wrote:

Obviously not if you just let her gone on top all the time . (-:

I dunno they're are some big girls out there, could be good for core strengthening

napoleond

markos1963 wrote:

timmyturbo wrote:

Obviously not if you just let her gone on top all the time . (-:

I dunno they're are some big girls out there, could be good for core strengthening

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIggH-w1-NE

markos1963

NapoleonD wrote:

markos1963 wrote:

timmyturbo wrote:

Obviously not if you just let her gone on top all the time . (-:

I dunno they're are some big girls out there, could be good for core strengthening

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIggH-w1-NE

:shock: Have you run out of 'normal' porn to look at?

ddraver

Anyone watching then? Some interesting points...

MattC59

Yeah........... not sure.
The key phrase to notice that they kept using was "health benefits", not 'fitness benefits'.

I'm not really suprised that after 12minutes of exercise over a month he was barely any fitter.

Highly subjective I think.

kentphil

Was interesting.
It seems short but intensive exercise has a positive impact on your health, but is that only on previously inactive people?
People respond differently to exercise, so regimes should be tailored to individuals.

The programme didn't show how the high intensive exercise affected already active people.

jim453

KentPhil wrote:

Was interesting.
It seems short but intensive exercise has a positive impact on your health, but is that only on previously inactive people?
People respond differently to exercise, so regimes should be tailored to individuals.

The programme didn't show how the high intensive exercise affected already active people.

But if you're out on your bike every day and pushing hard for one minute on at least one climb then you're obviously already doing way more than the prescribed intense excercise, so are already benefitting from all the positive impacts described. I don't think getting Bradley Wiggins to convulse and rock all over the place for twenty seconds on a hospital excercise bike is going to prove a great deal, nor improve his fitness.

ddraver

With regard to the insulin question, I can see how you are effectively "helping" the body reduce glucose levels in the bloodstream by removing all the glyocgen from the muscles - fair enough. I wonder if you were to continue that exercise regime for months and years how much that would change. I admit I'm a bit out of my depth here though

I'd be interested to know how his V02 max might have changed if he'd taken some of the more traditional approaches to increasing it

Overall, does doing an exercise regime that improves the level of glucose/insulin in the bloodstream and VO2max have MORE Benefits to overall health than reducing e.g. total body fat, cardiovascular fitness etc

Cycloslalomeur

Having watched the programme while hanging the washing I may have missed the Scottish boffin's answer to the obvious correlation/causation question about the genes trumpeted as markers for whether or not an individual will respond to interval training. I'm certainly no expert but the first thought that sprang to my head was that perhaps said genes are merely a part of the complex mechanism that causes some to lead more active lives than others. Could it not be that the "non-responders" have done short bursts of vigorous exercise, thanks to those genes, in their recent past while the "responders" have not?

Cycloslalomeur

Sorry KentPhil, I noticed only now that you'd already had it covered. :oops:

neilo23

What I would have found interesting to know is the effect these 3 minutes of intervals a week would have on someone who already trains regularly. I'm sure most of us already include (longer than 20 second) intervals in our training. Would doing these intervals bring any benefit when completed additionally to regular training? Probably not.

And it really wasn't surprising to see that the waitress who runs around all day is "healthier" than the person who sits on his arse all day.

petemadoc

I missed the end of the program

How much did his V02 max improve by after the 3 minutes a week?

All seemed a bit daft really, a lot of science, money and research into something which should be just common sense

Cycloslalomeur

He pedalled slightly longer than before but his aerobic fitness was unchanged.

neilo23

PeteMadoc wrote:

I missed the end of the program

How much did his V02 max improve by after the 3 minutes a week?

All seemed a bit daft really, a lot of science, money and research into something which should be just common sense

Ha! His VO2 max didn't improve. However, the presenter was, using a DNA test carried out before the VO2 results, identified as someone who would not improve. Apparently not everybody will/can improve.

McBain_v1

I doubt I am a "super responder" but I wish I was.

ddraver

PeteMadoc wrote:

I missed the end of the program

How much did his V02 max improve by after the 3 minutes a week?

All seemed a bit daft really, a lot of science, money and research into something which should be just common sense

Well, a geocentric universe was common sense once, this is what science does...

napoleond

I just generally enjoyed the programme.

neilo23

NapoleonD wrote:

I just generally enjoyed the programme.

I'm enjoying the fact that I can watch British tv again instead of the rubbish over here on the continent! :-)

markos1963

I was very interested about the part regarding keeping moving through the day and the fact the presenter could use up an extra 500 calories without even trying too hard. I often wondered why my wife is so thin given her lack of organised exercise and ability to eat large amounts(she's 5ft 10in and 8st wringing wet) But when I thought about it after the programme I realised she is never still for more than 5mins(infruriatingly) and walks everywhere.

Pross

Didn't see this programme but read an article recently from some bloke called Jason Ferruggia giving reasons why people don't lose fat. There were quite a few questionable reasons but the one that really caught my eye and seemed odd was

Traditional forms of cardio are largely useless for fat loss. But useless is even okay, it’s when it starts to be counterproductive that we have a real problem. Excessive amounts of cardio lead to an overproduction of cortisol which leads to more abdominal fat and numerous health problems. If you want to do cardio that won’t actually hurt you and could do you some good, go for a long walk. No self respecting man should ever be spotted on an elliptical machine.

This seemed nonsensical to me as I haven't seen too many endurance athletes with excess stomach fat and they will be doing more cardio work than the man in the street looking to lose some weight. It seems a contentious issue amongst 'experts' with, unsurprisingly, those involved in body building / lifting type training being the main supporters of the theory (pretty much as with the high protein / low carb diet approach).

MattC59

SteVenMarTin wrote:

I am in no way qualified to comment on the soundness of the research however, nor on the accuracy of the Wikipedia summary and one more thing You infact you will eat more than you burn off.and only leave you wondering why the weight aint coming off..

???

MattC59

Pross wrote:

Didn't see this programme but read an article recently from some bloke called Jason Ferruggia giving reasons why people don't lose fat. There were quite a few questionable reasons but the one that really caught my eye and seemed odd was

Traditional forms of cardio are largely useless for fat loss. But useless is even okay, it’s when it starts to be counterproductive that we have a real problem. Excessive amounts of cardio lead to an overproduction of cortisol which leads to more abdominal fat and numerous health problems. If you want to do cardio that won’t actually hurt you and could do you some good, go for a long walk. No self respecting man should ever be spotted on an elliptical machine.

This seemed nonsensical to me as I haven't seen too many endurance athletes with excess stomach fat and they will be doing more cardio work than the man in the street looking to lose some weight. It seems a contentious issue amongst 'experts' with, unsurprisingly, those involved in body building / lifting type training being the main supporters of the theory (pretty much as with the high protein / low carb diet approach).

I'd have to agree, it seems obvious to me, that if you're on a high protein / low carb diet and you do cardio exercise, then your body is forced into a mode where it tries to store every possible calorie available, because it needs them at a later date. But I might be wrong

usedtobefast

Traditional forms of cardio are largely useless for fat loss. But useless is even okay, it’s when it starts to be counterproductive that we have a real problem. Excessive amounts of cardio lead to an overproduction of cortisol which leads to more abdominal fat and numerous health problems. If you want to do cardio that won’t actually hurt you and could do you some good, go for a long walk.

Some years ago I read "Training, Lactate, Pulse rate" and this study indicated that long walks are the best way to lose weight (combined with regulated calorie input) as the pulse rate is below the aerobic threshold and the body is converting fat for energy to be used by the muscles, where as in the aerobic zone carbohydrate is burnt and no fat.

On the topic of VO2max increase, I thought that primarily this is down to a person physiology and only a small percentage increase in VO2max can be gained by training. Waiting to be corrected on this one.