Interval Training vs Steady State Cardio For Fat Loss – On Trial
In this podcast we review the popular claim that high intensity interval training is superior to steady state cardio for fat loss.
The research supporting the claims you see and hear may not be what you think.
The fact that a research paper is published doesn’t mean it is accurate, and it rarely means it supports the claims the fitness and nutrition industry is trying to make from it.
In this podcast we will deconstruct the claim about interval training and walk you through the most popular and commonly quoted research paper that supposedly ‘proves’ that interval training is the gold standard for fat loss.
Get ready for another trip down the rabbit hole.
John
CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE SCREEN CAPTURE VIDEO OF THE PODCAST:
INTERVAL TRAINING VS STEADY STATE CARDIO
(The video will auto-start, just give it a second)
.
Interval Training vs Steady State Cardio for Fat Loss - Which is Better? [75:46m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Leave a Reply
Get The Report…
Hi guys!
I’ve recently become a fan of your website and your views on fitness. I particularly enjoy the honest, practical and pragmatic attitude in the “Adonis” proposition.
I must say this podcast, which I haven’t heard in its entirety and please do forgive me for that because is one and a quarter hour long, has left me nonetheless very confused.
This is not only because until today I have been reading a lot about the apparent benefits of interval training, but also and above all because in your own Adonis Effect workouts you prescribe two interval workouts per week yourselves!
That makes me want to ask you two things:
The simplest question is: do you intend to continue with this recommendation/prescription in your workouts? If so why?
Second, and perhaps a more complex question:
Are HIIT workouts still a good idea to do even if they don’t “burn more calories”? I’m asking this because there are many more claims that have been made about HIIT after 1994, the date of the study you “deconstructed”, such as:
*They may at least increase, and certainly not reduce, the EPOC effect (or Exercise Afterburn)
*That HIIT may suppress your appetite a little.
*May help people to train at the appropiate intensity since they may find them less boring
*Decreased muscle catabolism! (that’d be a biggie I guess)
Also I have read that in the case of another super famous study: the one by Tabata and made with already highly fit athletes the ones following what was finally to be known as the “Tabata protocol” increased their VO2 max nearly as much as the steady state group yet they also, unlike the steady group, gained anaerobic capacity.
To summarise my post: Is it possible that interval is no worse for fat-burning in the short term, and by improving fitness and the capacity to train harder, perhaps better in the long term in an indirect manner?
Eagerly awaiting your answer with great curiosity.
P.S. Could you summarise the main points you make in this long podcast in something that would fit one sheet of paper?
Sandro,
Good question.
I think intervals are fine for getting a good cardiovascular workout in. Mostly because they’re not boring, and you can get a decent amount of work done in a short period of time. (this is mostly why they are in our workout)
Keep in mind I was not deconstructing the aspects of general cardiovascular ‘fitness’ benefits of intervals vs steady state.
I think they’re both good for overall fitness, and intervals are just less boring.
All of the newer research you’re talking about measures ‘surrogate’ endpoints. In other words, they’re not measuring ‘weight loss’ but some other obscure metabolic measurement that they are assuming might infer weight loss at some later date.
I just believe that anyone who is pounding away at intervals isn’t really all that concerned about a few percentage points on their max oxygen consumption or the activity of some enzyme somewhere in their body…most people want to build muscle and drop fat plain and simple…and until I see a piece of research that measures these two exact endpoints I will remain un-impressed with any further research on surrogate endpoints.
Most people think intervals are superior for weight loss even tho there is no proof that they are. (which is the claim we were deconstructing)
So in short my point is that any kind of exercise that gets your heart rate up (either steady state or intervals) is going to have all kinds of cardio vascular and overall health benefits (which I am all for).
The research that Tabata and others are doing is dissecting down smaller and smaller and obscure endpoints that will never really apply to the average person. It’s the minutiae that these people are studying, and not the main meat of the matter.
There is also a wealth of research showing that very low intensity activity such as walking is more than sufficient for improving overall health.
As far as I am concerned as a guy who just wants to be healthy and look my best, I’ll never need to make cardio any more complex than this. I mix a few simple intervals with a few slow steady state cardio sessions (walking) each week and that will be enough for me to maintain the look and feel I want.
JB
Thank you John. All’s clear now
I really believe, as a Kenpo Black-belt and still keep in shape.
people who work out not only lose weight, they also gain muscles, a pound of muscle is as heavy as about four pounds of fat, and that means the weight remains the same, and you melt
Hey John.
I just watched the video in its entirety. Good stuff.
You both made everything about the study itself – and how it could be or was manipulated to fit the marketing endpoint – crystal clear. I think the confusion may be like the previous poster mentioned, where there are other bodies of research that show that HIIT is more effective at burning fat with less overall volume. And also at raising the EPOC. I think that’s the gist that the hype is based around, right?
You asked if more clarification was needed in the email… I think what would be nice would be a study done using a larger pool of subjects, ranging from a moderate to high level of fitness, using more accurate direct measurements of calorie expenditure during exercise and for X hours afterward, and body fat testing done by competent individuals or better, a BodPod, or something.
And above all – total calorie consumption tracking. Now I just said it would be nice, didn’t say it was at all possible. Haha. Like you said about tracking food, I guess it’s impossible.
So I guess my question is: Is there even a point to bother trying to do a study on this stuff when who knows if these folks are just going back to their dorm rooms and pigging out? I mean there’s no way you could exercise for 20 weeks, 5 times a week, and not lose weight unless your calories are going up, right?? How are we ever supposed to get a truly accurate study done of this subject? Jesus christ!
Well, I would like to share my experience with steady state and interval training.
I’ve been keeping track of my bodyfat with skinfold measurements, Lange calipers, every three days, for roughly the last year. I consider myself pretty proficient and accurate with them. I’m somewhat OCD when it comes to my measurements. haha.
I started keeping track on 1/1/09.
Since my bodyfat was about 9% to start, the way my stupid womanly bodyfat distribution is, the last of it gathers around the midsection; so along with the standard ACE sites, I added a horizontal pinch of the oblique? (love handle) and another horizontal pinch appr. 2″ above the navel. I wanted to see how the fat reduced over my midsection particularly. I take my measurements every three days.
I did steady state cardio for approximately 30-35 min/day (3.2 mile loop), at about 6-7 rpe, which I did from Jan-Sept, approximately 5 days/wk. I compared results acheived from doing only interval training, no ss, from Sept-present, every third day using 2-3 two minute bursts at rpe of about 9 or 10, with 4 minute rest periods inbetween, rpe of about 5 or 6. (2.4 mile loop, approximately 21 minutes total with 5 min warm up)
What I found with my steady state training was an average of 2-3 mm total, lost over just those three abdominal measurement sites, every 3 days. With my interval training, just those 20 minutes every third day gets me an average of 2-3 mm total at the same sites.
Also after every workout (steady state and interval) I would do 10-15 minutes of simple calisthenics. About 9-12 total sets of bw squats, pushups, paint can curls and rows.
I consider my caloric intake during both periods to be obviously somewhat below my bmr requirements.
If you actually read through this entire horsesh*t self-study of mine, thanks! I’m clearly not a scientist but just wanted to share my honest experience with it. Oh and I do now do a mix of both, because I find that a few consecutive days of steady state does a much nicer job of keeping my blood pressure right where it should be.
Comment if u like, otherwise keep up the awesome podcasts, it’s nice to hear some unbiased viewpoints about all this crap I’ve been doing for so long!
–Mac
I don’t have a question..I’d just like to make a comment. I do both steady state and interval cardio. They both work for me. I’m not disputing your arguement, I’m just saying they both helped me lose 160 pounds. Intervals are a great alternative. I wear a heart rate monitor and during a 24 hour period of doing the exact same routine…one day of intervals and one day of steady state, I burned the same amount of calories. But my heart rate gets much higher doing intervals and that’s what I’m aiming for. Shooting it way up, then recovering. Shooting it up again, then recovering. A much better workout than 60 minutes at the same pace. I guess it all comes down to doing what works for the individual. Interesting topic though. Thanks, Steve
When I was 19 I would jog for about 4 miles every other day and was pretty lean, without 6 pack tho. Then I tried Hiit at least once a week, where I am pretty lean with 6 pack, but im 31 now and I watch my diet very well, which to me seems to be the key to it all. I am doing hiit now followed by SS for 20-25 minutes right after. During the week I do some cardio, because Hiit burns out my legs and I have been doing strength training on legs 4-5x a week so I cant do hiit until the end of the week.
I’m confused tho, and this is why. If its calories in, calories out, and SS targets fat mainly and burns more calories, than SS is better, plus you can do it more often without burnout, which is important if you do resistance training on legs also. You may build more muscle with hiit, but isnt it true that 1LB of muscle would only account for 10 more calories burned in a single day, metabolism wise? which isnt anything. Many people are confused in thinking that weight training is going to get them thinner, my thought is that diet and body movement(cardio, turbulence training, kettlebell training) will burn the fat, while weight training will just replace the fat with tone, nice looking muscles and not much else. am i right?
BUT, if you look at sprinters, they are rediculously lean and ripped up, and those long distance runners look like skeletons. So why the vast difference in body type, obviously if I continue the sprinting, will I look like a sprinter? I certainly hope so, wouldnt they be the ones to test since they are already doing the test for you compared to the long distance guys?
Seth,
I wouldn’t use ‘sprinters’ as a model to shoot for and I wouldn’t assume at all that you would just end up looking like one. First of all what sprinters are you talking about? World class level sprinters, or the sprinters on the local high school team?
Unless you know exactly what they are taking (drugs) or you are cut from the same genetic cloth (remember most high level sprinters were already genetically gifted athletes and probably lean and muscular before they ever started training, which incidentally is how many of them wind up competing in sprinting in the first place) it not realistic to assume that by sprinting you’ll end up looking like a world class sprinter.
The argument makes more sense the other way around..and that is: If you already look like a world class sprinter, then odds are you’re probably pretty fast too!
Weight training will stimulate muscle growth and eating fewer calories will be your best bet for getting lean and dropping bodyfat. A mix of cardio styles of training will be great for your overall health/fitness and sure it’ll burn a few extra calories.
This is the meat of the matter and getting caught up in slicing and dicing cardio sessions into specific interval sessions versus steady state isn’t going to amount to all that much difference in the way you look. As long as you’re doing enough work to shed fat and build muscle the specifics for how you go about burning the fat don’t really matter.
JB
So, the take-home message is… don’t believe everything you read, especially when it’s an advertisement quoting a “study”.
Guys you said the human body can only loose so much weight over a certain periode (healthy that is) ??? Why then have I been able to loose 89 lbs (fat) and gain 20 pluss in toned muscle in only four month’s. Ive checked out with the doctors and I feel better than I have in twenty years (40 yrs old). I didnt do this through your program but you have given me the incentive to create my own program.. So thanks .. If you ever need some ideas to help the slow starter or for people with the will but not the drive Id love to help.. The program Im working on is easy, for the person that looks in the mirror and doesnt think they have it in them.. I can prove them wrong for there own benifit.. I had results in three days.. No drugs no bullshit just me, one simple machine and the will to feel better. This is coming from someone who has allways had a weight issue.. Born fat lived fat not gona die fat.
Maddness
Maddness,
First of all congrats on the big transformation, that is fantastic!
Second, it’s not uncommon for people to be able to drop a lot of weight quickly as you did. I was training with a guy who had similar results this year. It seems that people with more to lose can lose a bunch of it really quickly. (my buddy lost 95 pounds in about 6 months)
the first 40-50 pounds came off really fast, and then he started to normalize to a more conservative rate of loss. This is completely normal as some of the excess weight is water and due to a constant inflammatory response to excess fat and calories.
Once people get down to lower body fat percentages (around 15-17%) it becomes tougher to lose more weight and this is when weight loss realistically slows down to about 1-2 pounds per week at the most.
After all, anyone who is below 20% body fat simply doesn’t have much more fat to get rid of until they start to waste away. It would be unrealistic to think that a person who is around 15% body fat could lose weight as quickly as someone who is around 30-40% bodyfat.
Thanks again for your comment, I always find stories like yours very inspiring.
JB
hey JB,
Thanks for answering my question so quickly. I was talking about olympic sprinters, but knowing how often they get caught with Performance inhancers, It probably isnt realistic to think I could get that ripped. It does make sense that people that are already gifted athletically, would go on to be the ones doing the world class competitions. I dont know, maybe its just the optimist inside me thinking that, if I try hard enough, and practice enough that eventually I could do some of the same things.
I read in an ESPN magazine last month, stating that genetically, athletes are the same as regular joes, I think except for a few athletes, that have something to do with their calves springing faster or making them faster, I cant remember all the details.
What I am doing is working, I’m at 10% Body fat and looking to go down to 5% or so. It takes time, and it is getting hard to lose fat, but I am progressing again with a few tweaks to my diet. If my cardio is working, then it shouldnt matter the difference between SS or Hiit, they are both effective. I just want it to be efficient, you know, the fastest route to the nicest looking body I can achieve.
Psychologically speaking, HIIT > Steady state workouts for me.
Steady state workouts…no matter what it is, is simply way too boring for me to do on a long term basis.
Thanks for taking the time to discuss this subject. I really appreciate it. I?ll post a link of this post in my site.
Just for the record Robert, a pound of muscle weighs the exact same as a pound of fat. The volume may be different, but a pound is a pound is a pound
I consider, that you commit an error. I suggest it to discuss.