Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

1min high-intensity exercise 3x a week improves fitness as much as 3x aerobics (2016)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 506 posts

Re: 1min high-intensity exercise 3x a week improves fitness as much as 3x aerobics (2016)

#81

Post by Existenceblinks »

antupis wrote: post #68
throwaway292939 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're completely out of shape, going at HIIT level intensity is also risky. Better to build some kind of baseline before jumping into the deep end.

It is not risky but it is hard and I rather do low intensity running 60 minutes than 8 minutes HIIT.

It is absolutely risky. Easily black out.

EDIT:: added my experience

I was riding mountain bike, and went to competition here and there. And then I stopped for many months, got back and rode the same speed. For real I thought I was going to die, it was almost a black out and panic. Never again risking with "coming back with intensive training" .. just no.

Re: 1min high-intensity exercise 3x a week improves fitness as much as 3x aerobics (2016)

#82

Post by TheAlchemist »

arthurofbabylon wrote: post #64

In personal experience as a dedicated rock climber (traveling full time for half of the last 15 years), I can easily conclude that bursts of intense exercise accomplish a lot more for health and fitness than prolonged, more gentle workouts. Intensity readily builds muscle mass and coordinates muscle fibers, while fostering feelings of clarity and joy. It’s just the easier pathway to “being fit.” Climbers train for in…

This may work in climbing, but as far as I know, it doesn't really work in cycling or running.

Yes, you should do a bit of high-intensity, but also ~80% of your training in those disciplines should be rather low intensity. Basically one does not work without the other.

Re: 1min high-intensity exercise 3x a week improves fitness as much as 3x aerobics (2016)

#83

Post by newaccount74 »

matsemann wrote: post #74
antupis wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not risky but it is hard and I rather do low intensity running 60 minutes than 8 minutes HIIT.

It is risky. People push themselves too hard to keep up and end up with rabdo. (Edit: I was thinking more of a normal HIIT class, not the 1 minute one)

Does that really happen for 3x 20sec max effort on a stationary bike?

Re: 1min high-intensity exercise 3x a week improves fitness as much as 3x aerobics (2016)

#84

Post by cycomanic »

petesergeant wrote: post #23

It's 8 minutes, not one minute The people in the study were out of shape to start with The improved measures were insulin sensitivity index, peak oxygen uptake, and "skeletal muscle mitochondrial content" No change in body mass In conclusion, if you're out of shape, you can improve a limited number of fitness measures just as much doing 3x8 minutes of higher intensity exercise as much 3×45m less intense exercise over…

While you are somewhat dismissive about the results, they really only confirm many other studies which found that HIT (High intensity training, what is discussed in the article) training achieves the same effects as much longer endurance training at much shorter times. This has been found for both non-athletes and athletes and in fact training for professional endurance athletes has drastically changed in the last 5-10 years (read interviews with e.g. professional cyclists, they train significantly less, but at much higher intensities than 7 years ago, lots of them have observed this transition).

However, your point about body mass is correct, without making your calorie intake less than your expenditure you will not loose weight. I also recall that there have been some studies that found it might be harder with HIT, because you are hungrier after HIT than low intensity exercise.

Re: 1min high-intensity exercise 3x a week improves fitness as much as 3x aerobics (2016)

#85

Post by presentation »

matsemann wrote: post #61
pocketarc wrote: post #8

The fact that 1 minute of high intensity exercise (in 10 minutes of lower-intensity stuff) is as good as 50 minutes of moderate-intensity training does really put things into perspective. What I wonder now is - what if you combine both? What if you do 50 minutes of moderate exercise but intersperse that with that same 1 minute of all-out sprints? Is there a bigger benefit, or is it inconsequential? And another questi…

Note that these were untrained people. I doubt a fit person would get any response at all for such a low load. Actually, once you get really fit, you want to decrease the high intensity. Because otherwise it increases your recovery time so much, that the amount you actually can work out is low. Almost all volume a professional endurance athlete does in addition to what a normal amateur does, is low intensity.

Agreed but untrained people are the vast majority of society so findings like this probably hold outsized value.

Re: 1min high-intensity exercise 3x a week improves fitness as much as 3x aerobics (2016)

#86

Post by newaccount74 »

nolok wrote: post #59
epolanski wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well whether you lose/gain weight depends on (caloriesIn - caloriesOut) it's no rocket science. If you didn't compensate anymore as much for lowering the calories out you're obviously going to gain weight.

So what you mean is your original comment could just have much said "exercice results in weight loss unless accompanied by a corresponding change in diet to increase calories intake", aka exercise alone as a change results in weight loss.

People get hungry after exercise and automatically eat more to compensate for the spent calories.

If you start exercising, but don't watch your nutrition, you will most likely not lose weight.

Re: 1min high-intensity exercise 3x a week improves fitness as much as 3x aerobics (2016)

#87

Post by MezzoDelCammin »

personally, I'd be cautious of using this article to build up an exercise routine.

Yes, intervals / HIIT are really effective and they consume relatively little time. Being an egineer it's tempting to use this as a base for some sort of 80-20 heuristics and simply say "this is good enough" and cut the aerobics.

But is it? It's definitely better than doing nothing. But if the goal is some sort of performance improvement (specially in endurance sports - cycling, running, etc.), 9 times out of 10 I'd go with what's today called "polarized training".

The basic idea of polarized training is "yes, intervals are definitely useful to push the body further, but only after a buttload of cardio". The routine then looks something like for every one very low intensity, very long duration session a week, there's one or two shorter all-out interval sessions.

The intervals alone would lead to a plateau pretty quickly...

Happy to provide references in follow-ups, if anyone is interested.

Re: 1min high-intensity exercise 3x a week improves fitness as much as 3x aerobics (2016)

#88

Post by KronisLV »

mindhash wrote: post #38
petesergeant wrote: post #23

It's 8 minutes, not one minute The people in the study were out of shape to start with The improved measures were insulin sensitivity index, peak oxygen uptake, and "skeletal muscle mitochondrial content" No change in body mass In conclusion, if you're out of shape, you can improve a limited number of fitness measures just as much doing 3x8 minutes of higher intensity exercise as much 3×45m less intense exercise over…

such an important point here. The benefits of exercise are maximum when you start from a sedentary life. You will hit plateau at some point and then one has to re-think the plan. I am doubtful that just 10 min exercise over a few years will get you in a better shape. Another factor greatly ignored is HRV as key indicator of recovery and response to an exercise. Andrew Flatt (1) is a researcher and has been studying h…

> The benefits of exercise are maximum when you start from a sedentary life. You will hit plateau at some point and then one has to re-think the plan.

I've noticed something similar. In the countryside, I usually exercise when it's warm outside and track my weight and how much I do each day.

After the winter is over, I start at small amounts of exercise (a few km of running, a small amout of sit ups, push ups, pull ups) and it always feels like initially I drop 3-4 kg of weight rather easily but then it almost plateaus, even if I increase the exercise amount.

Regardless, it's probably worth it in the long term for overall wellbeing. Just an anecdote, but personally it feels like exercise increases how much energy I have (including how tolerable it is, the first weeks when starting again are always miserable).

Re: 1min high-intensity exercise 3x a week improves fitness as much as 3x aerobics (2016)

#89

Post by [deleted] »

Aldipower wrote: post #32

Ok, guys go ahead and do it this way. I stick with my marathon training plan, "which just works"™. Of course, there are also high-intensity workouts included, but the foundation is based on "easy runs" and sightseeing with the bike. There are just no short-cuts. I call the title of the post BS.

[deleted]

Re: 1min high-intensity exercise 3x a week improves fitness as much as 3x aerobics (2016)

#90

Post by dkdbejwi383 »

lynx23 wrote: post #57
dkdbejwi383 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But still have low cardio fitness. A healthy body needs exercise and a good diet.

Question is, how to get that "exercise". I am going to be downvoted, but I am convinced sex twice a week is more or less sufficient for the "exercise" part.

I doubt it. It doesn’t target enough muscle groups and you ideally need some variations of push/pull/lift as muscle groups are engaged in different ways for different motions.

Probably not fantastic for cardio either, ideally you want a lot of training in zone 2 for endurance and some training at max for power.

Post reply on HN