The current trend in fitness seems to be to bash cardio and encourage weight-training. Imo this is a good trend considering all the time wasted walking on treadmills all over the western world in recent years. This has probably been caused by the 'low intensity fat burning zone' BS that has been in circulation for quite some time now.

On the other hand cardio is getting a bit too much bad rap these days. Now the trend is to encourage high-intensity cardio - but imho this comes with some pitfalls as well.

Here are two articles that I personally agree with:
http://www.figureathlete.com/article/training/the_cardio_secret&cr=
Beware, there's a lot of product promo. The site is very legit though, the figure athletes are arguably the hottest women alive today, and they are dead serious about optimising fitness and minimizing fat. The eye-candy for the gents ought to be spectacular on figureathlete.

Here's the other one, as a dedicated runner I personally agree with it 100%
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/blog/2008/04/28/steady-state-versus-interval-training-getting-to-the-point-part-1/

Great reads Mary, thanks.

QUOTE:
No offense, but these statements are usually made by people, who, let's just say, could use a little cardio!

Let me put an "amen" sister out to the author of that.
www.figureathlete.com is a product of "T-nation"...Don't get me wrong, T-nation is an excellent resource for people who are serious about getting top shape. I want to remind you, however, that all serious figure athletes use drugs including steroids.

Now with that out of the way, I want to say that if you are over age 30, You can NOT avoid cardio if you want to get lean.

To be honest my genetic predisposition is toward running. Several people in my family are 5000 and 10000 meter record holders. When I run hard core I get skinny (gross like) as hell! I get fast though, and the gains in speed come easy.

My weight lifting gains come slow, and with fat. There is no way for me to gain muscle mass by doing intense cardio. However I can't get rid of the lard with weight lifting alone.

I find that doing 6 to 10 week bulking periods that include high intensity weight lifting and calorie increases, result in gains in mass. I also get fat.

To counter that I do similar periods of "cutting" where I try to do cardio in a manner that isn't so intense (<150 bpm) that I lose mass, but I keep the weight lifting intensity high enough that I don't "waste away".

I'm going to have to read that 2nd article another 4 times before I fully grasp it.

I'd say that you need to proceed with certain caution on "figureathlete". The diets these women use are very harsh and restrictive, and to me it seems that those who compete actively bring their fat percentages down to levels where amenorrhea (no periods) usually sets in. That is NOT healthy at all.

I gather the second article argues against regular high-intensity cardio done several times a week for someone who 1) lifts heavy weights regularily (ie heavy loads for legs), 2) does no other form of cardio and 3) is on a very low-carb diet. I've noticed that the latest trend is to promote HIIT-cardio. I know next to nothing about the finer points of the best methods to build muscle. But the fact is that among the distance-runner folks it's an age-old wisdom that - albeit all experienced runners do HIIT as part of their training (it's essential to improve your speed-endurance) - certain rules have to be followed or you'll end up with a burn-out and injury. One of the rules is that you shouldn't do it more than twice a week. Another rule is that you shouldn't even attempt it before you are running regularily and can run comfortably for 1hr. A third rule is that you need to fill up your body's glycogene-stores to the brim before a HIIT-session or you won't be able to do it.

I find the best results come from resistance exercise/weight lifting and short burst of intense cardio. I've started circuit workout and inbetween sets I go all out with a jumping rope. I don't have a treadmill but wow a jumping rope can kick your butt!

Here's a cardio routine that I think is quite excellent - and I swear that it has always worked wonders for me at least. It's also a basic program that all running-experts and coaches worth their salt will hand out to those who want to really improve their cardio-fitness (when the goals are specific to running the length of the intervals vary depending on the distance you are training for). And it's perfectly true that there are only three key-workouts per week that you absolutely have to stick to (interval session, fast-paced session and long slow session). When I've done this routine I've actually had problems with loosing too much weight.
http://www.figureathlete.com/article/training/the_fat_inferno_cardio_program&cr=

Interesting article Mary.

I've done all three types of cardio at various times, but never thought about stitching them together in a program like I do lifting, with certain types of cardio on different days.

I'm filing this away.

Dr. Christiaan Barnard in his book 50 Ways to a Healthy Heart really takes issue with "aerobics" and jogging, stating that it doesn't fit as an exercise for about 90% of the population. Runners run because they are thin to begin with. He suggested strength training for muscle composition, eating as many fruits and vegetables as possible, and parking at the back of the mall parking lot and walking to JC Penney's from there, instead of trying to sneak into the handicap spot.

Dr. Douglas McGuff wrote once that if people quit doing aerobic activities the overall health of the country would increase.

However I have two good friends who have lost significant amounts of weight either jogging or power walking. Are they outliers? Plus a life long friend who is a doc sent me an article from the JAMA a few years back. Their studies showed that the more active people are in sports that require an aeriobic response, the longer lived these people were. (The wording was actually 'lower mortality rate' but that term is bulls%*t since we all have the same mortality rate 100%. That's like those anti smoking ads: Smokers have a higher mortality rate than non smokers. No they don't, it's the same mortality rate. We all die.)

I do disagree though with the new "high intensity" workouts though that promote once a week strength workouts, etc. I have done these and after not to long a period found myself laboring to get up flights of stairs.

Someone above mentioned strength training with intense aerobic training: i.e. Body for Life or Power 90 type programs. (I finished the Power 90 program about 6 years ago with very good results.) Two summers ago I did the old Charles Atlas Dynamic Tension program and it worked quite well in promoting fat loss. (Yes it is still around: www.charlesatlas.com.)

People just need to find "their" exercise" and do it.

T.

Imo it's both very sad and completely ridiculous how the experts/fanatics in the different camps keep bashing each other.

Now we have the muscle- and strength-people calling the cardio-aficionados 'skinnyfats', and the cardio-folks are unisonely shaking their heads at the 'muscleheads' and claiming that they are heading for burn-out and a heart-attack. Both camps agree though that yoga and pilates are mostly expensive fads sold to the ladies under false pretenses.

I sort of wish that they could all come together, compare notes and learn from each other's experiences (the yoga- and pilates-crowd would have their say as well), and try to come up with a basic and do-able formula for a program that would include muscle-strength, cardiovascular fitness and flexibility. Because imho all three are essential in the long run for overall health and wellbeing.

Lyle McDonald's stuff is good. I'm currently interviewing him about his new book for my site.