HIIT vs regular cardio

[Achilles]

What do you prefer and what do you think is best?

 

[mexiFRO]

For me, HIIT worked a little better when I was dropping weight. I also sweat a lot more which is something that I personally like. I felt like I also accomplished more and burned more calories with HIIT.

 

[TJ]

HIIT burns more calories and will do more far more cardiovascular wise. I'm pretty sure IS has a study about post exercise oxygen consumption when comparing HIIT to other forms of cardio. The PEOC is much higher and longer when doing HIIT, too.

 

[Turkish1530]

^^^ like he said Ironslave has a study that compares HIIT with regular cardio and one big fact that I recall about HIIT is that you burn more overall throughout the day doing HIIT than you would doin regular...............I actually use HIIT now during my diet and do it twice a week on my non-training days and i think that it makes a huge difference

 

[PrinceVegeta]

But does this include a normal training regimen of at least 4 days of week? wouldnt that much training + HIT cardio burn you out? and doesnt HIT cardio burn muscle faster then normal cardio would?

 

[philosopher]

But does this include a normal training regimen of at least 4 days of week? wouldnt that much training + HIT cardio burn you out? and doesnt HIT cardio burn muscle faster then normal cardio would?

Depends on a lot of different things like cals intake, workout routine, day to day activity etc. HIIT doesnt burn more muscle, cardio by itself is catabolic by keeping it as sort but as intense as possible you avoid becomming to far in that catabolic zone.

 

[Ironslave]

 

[Ironslave]

Notice, there appears to be a "threshold" for intensity and EPOC generation. For example, the person who exercised for 2 hours at around 55% of their VO2 max generated very little EPOC.

However, the person who exercised for say 5 minutes at an insanely high intensity got a large EPOC, considering the time they exercised. (~110% of their VO2 max, which I won't get into, since it isn't possible to exercise at a VO2 higher than your max... though it is possible to increase your exercise intensity beyond the point of VO2 max, perhaps that is what this means, but it is poorly labeled).

Notice though that exercise intensity below 60% rarely gives much of an EPOC, regardless of time (which makes sense theoretically as well, as both intensity and duration play a role).

But also, keep in mind that though someone may not get much of an EPOC from exercising for 2 hours at 50% of their VO2 Max, they will be burning a LOT of calories throughout the exercise period. In contrast, someone who exercises for 5 minutes probably isn't going to burn many calories, no matter how hard they exercise.

 

[philosopher]

^^Totally true but from a bodybuilder standpoint you would be better of doing something less than 2 hours cardio. Dont get me wrong I think both have their place but if I must choose between HIIT or stady state cardio I would choose HIIT.

 

[TJ]

Eh, I think 5 minutes if kind of an unfair comparison for HIIT. I would imagine the cardiovascular benefit and calorie burning would be very high if someone's interval training lasted about 15 minutes and then they walked at a brisk pace for another 15-20 minutes if they are really concerned about dropping fat.

 

[philosopher]

Eh, I think 5 minutes if kind of an unfair comparison for HIIT. I would imagine the cardiovascular benefit and calorie burning would be very high if someone's interval training lasted about 15 minutes and then they walked at a brisk pace for another 15-20 minutes if they are really concerned about dropping fat.

Totally agree

 

[Ironslave]

Eh, I think 5 minutes if kind of an unfair comparison for HIIT. I would imagine the cardiovascular benefit and calorie burning would be very high if someone's interval training lasted about 15 minutes and then they walked at a brisk pace for another 15-20 minutes if they are really concerned about dropping fat.

You shouldn't get any debate on this. It's my preferred method of cardio, actually.

 

[TJ]

You shouldn't get any debate on this. It's my preferred method of cardio, actually.

I wasn't trying to get into a debate (and I probably wouldn't with you)...I just wanted to make it clear that HIIT can be done longer than 5 minutes (depending on the intervals I guess).

 

[Turkish1530]

I personally do HIIT for 20 min. total on the elliptical....(2 min. slow resistance at 1 and 30 seconds as hard as possible resistance on 18-20 20 being the max of the machine)...afterwards i do slow cardio for about 40 min.......i train 5 days a week and do slow cardio on these days for an hour usually either speed walking or elliptical and on my 2 "off" days I do HIIT as i explained

 

[The Creator]

If carbs are really really low, I wouldnt suggest doing much HIIT, and if you do make it short and on your days off of resistance training. Overall, you are going to burn more calories using HIIT. That being said, during HIIT, your RER changes so that you actually are burning more percentage of carbohydrates than you are fat. Depending on a few factors, HIIT probably burns somewhere in the ballpark of 50% carbs 50% fat. Doing low intensity cardio you may be more in the range of 25% carbs 75% fat, but you are not burning as many calories as a whole. The whole idea of losing weight is to burn more calories than you consume, and to burn through your energy stores (carbohydrates) so that you can utilize adipose tissue.
Personally, I do a combination. Low intensity cardio on the days I work out and HIIT on my off days. It works well for me.

so as this image illustrates, RER goes up when doing higher intensity cardio. Dont get the wrong idea here, I think HIIT is great and I use it. This just illustrates what I was saying.

 

[Ironslave]

If carbs are really really low, I wouldnt suggest doing much HIIT, and if you do make it short and on your days off of resistance training. Overall, you are going to burn more calories using HIIT. That being said, during HIIT, your RER changes so that you actually are burning more percentage of carbohydrates than you are fat. Depending on a few factors, HIIT probably burns somewhere in the ballpark of 50% carbs 50% fat. Doing low intensity cardio you may be more in the range of 25% carbs 75% fat, but you are not burning as many calories as a whole. The whole idea of losing weight is to burn more calories than you consume, and to burn through your energy stores (carbohydrates) so that you can utilize adipose tissue.
Personally, I do a combination. Low intensity cardio on the days I work out and HIIT on my off days. It works well for me.

so as this image illustrates, RER goes up when doing higher intensity cardio. Dont get the wrong idea here, I think HIIT is great and I use it. This just illustrates what I was saying.

All true, but there are so many other events/adaptations at the cellular level to keep in mind, so the classical relative % of substrate utilization is a bit misleading. HIIT and even better, adaptation to HIIT exercise is awesome for fat burning (and health).

 

[The Creator]

^^ agreed. The only time I would say to stay away from HIIT is for those folks who prefer to do there cardio first thing in the morning on an empty stomach. When carbohydrates are very very low, I think it can lead to a very catabolic environment primed for muscle wasting. In general, it is a great way to lose fat and improve cardiovascular health.