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

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

#211

Post by mister_mister » Wed, Jan 25, 2023, 1:28 PM UTC

bliteben wrote: post #189

dmix wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> without making your calorie intake less than your expenditure you will not loose weight I've asked on HN a couple times in the past for citations that support this meme and haven't yet found a good source on this. The connection between caloric restriction and weight loss isn't as straight forward as people seem to think, despite that being the standard correlation pushed since the 1950s. Calories seems to be the c…

Calories are a unit of energy. You are arguing against chemistry and physics. Im sure you could find inaccuracies in calorie counts for various foods. Additionally Im sure some foods are more filling and/or healthy at different calorie counts. Arguing that calories in doesn't matter is nearly on the level of Holocaust denialism, as the main picture evidence there is of the effects of calorie deficits.

They are unit of energy and that is correct. But they are not the unit of energy that cells use, they use ATP that is created from ketones, fatty-acids, glucose and oxygen[0]

Measuring food through calories, which are derived from burning food is therefor quite old technology, it's from 1800 when steam engines where main way of powering the western world.

As a thought example to push CICO model to it's end: For example we can't eat coal, but it's very calorie dense. According to CICO model we should be able to eat just little bit of coal, and drink tiny amount of fuel. So that would also suggest there is more to the story of nutrition then CICO.

Mammals are not as simple as factory machines.

For example CICO would suggest to lose weight to eat 500 calories less then normal, as average that would be 2500 for men. But if we would rephrase that: In order to lose weight eat 1/5 less then normal. Then that would have the same effect, that is issue with calories they tell a story about food but it's not the full story. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citric_acid_cycle

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

#212

Post by matwood » Wed, Jan 25, 2023, 1:29 PM UTC

matsemann wrote: post #208

matwood wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> often Citation needed. Which is the point of the person you're responding to. For an untrained person to even get to what is considered 'high' intensity in their first workout is not common. I do all sorts of training with trained and new people alike and have never seen rhabdo in person. I know it can happen, but I think the stories stick out because it's so uncommon.

> Citation needed. But no citation needed from your personal experience of never seeing it..? I think you're reading waaaay too much into what I'm saying.

Yeah. If you're saying 'often' then people who work out and/or train people a lot should have a decent likelihood of seeing it.

I know it happens because I've read articles of it happening. But the way people bring it up any time a fitness discussion occurs is a meme at this point.

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

#213

Post by GatorD42 » Wed, Jan 25, 2023, 1:31 PM UTC

cycomanic wrote: post #84

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-…

Athletes are not training less at higher intensities overall. The dominant paradigm is polarized training - huge amounts of low intensity with small amounts of high intensity mixed in.

https://www.outsideonline.com/health/training-performance/po...

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

#214

Post by onionisafruit » Wed, Jan 25, 2023, 1:31 PM UTC

criley2 wrote: post #170

dmix wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> without making your calorie intake less than your expenditure you will not loose weight I've asked on HN a couple times in the past for citations that support this meme and haven't yet found a good source on this. The connection between caloric restriction and weight loss isn't as straight forward as people seem to think, despite that being the standard correlation pushed since the 1950s. Calories seems to be the c…

You are very right to question this! While the thermodynamics aren't assailable, it turns out that the calorie system is in fact quite fallable and bad! There's a lot of good material on why, I like this talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJQxadvsmEQ But simply put: - Our system for measuring how much "calorie" is in any given food is extremely problematic and unrelated to how the body captures energy - Our system…

Thank you for the recommendation. I watched it and it answered some questions I had.

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

#215

Post by seafoam » Wed, Jan 25, 2023, 1:33 PM UTC

tonystubblebine wrote: post #192

stabbles wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have references for this? My understanding is that low heart rate training is still standard for elite endurance athletes.

I actually think there's a bit of a split at the elite level. Eliud Kipchoge, WR in marathon, seems to only be doing one hard faster than race pace workout each week. Call that the HIT. The others are slow or race pace. What actually stands out most to me is the specificity of running close to a race pace marathon every week. https://www.sweatelite.co/eliud-kipchoge-a-typical-week-of-t... Then on the other end of the…

the specificity of running close to a race pace marathon every week

Suspect that this is also for neurological reasons

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

#216

Post by subharmonicon » Wed, Jan 25, 2023, 1:34 PM UTC

tarsinge wrote: post #180

dmix wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> without making your calorie intake less than your expenditure you will not loose weight I've asked on HN a couple times in the past for citations that support this meme and haven't yet found a good source on this. The connection between caloric restriction and weight loss isn't as straight forward as people seem to think, despite that being the standard correlation pushed since the 1950s. Calories seems to be the c…

This is not a meme but basic physics. This is how you do your cut and bulk cycles to lose and gain exactly a planned amount of weight. My base energy expenditure is relatively low at around 1800 kcal. If I eat 2000 kcal I will gain around 1 kg in 35 days (1 kg of fat is a 7000 kcal surplus), and similarly I could lose 1 by eating 1600 kcal. For finding sources look up "TDEE". Weight loss is complicated because of the…

It’s not that simple, although it may seem that way for some people.

Twice I have been on very extreme calorie counting regimens for months at a time combined with substantial weight lifting and cardio.

Both times I have observed that if I reduce calories the first thing that happens is I start to feel colder in the same environments. My body adjusts to my new caloric intake by reducing my metabolic rate it seems.

I learned about the idea of a “set point” fifteen years ago and I believe it’s related to what I’ve observed.

I have friends who can do something as simple as cutting out a morning cappuccino and they lose weight as a result. If I do that, there is no measurable difference unless I cut much deeper and substantially increase activity at the same time. Then the weight comes off for a bit and then plateaus again, sometimes for weeks or until I make another adjustment.

One of the times I went through this weight loss regimen I had an air displacement plethysmograph near the end of the weight loss that concluded I had 178lbs lean body mass. I had likely bulked up a little through all the weightlifting I was doing but have always had a fair bit of muscle so you might expect my resting calorie burn to be very stable and for small adjustments in calories to not impact resting metabolic rate, but that’s not what I observed in practice.

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

#217

Post by strken » Wed, Jan 25, 2023, 1:36 PM UTC

notafraudster wrote: post #155

itsoktocry wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 12 weeks This seems like a pretty negative reading. How about: Sedentary people (who have the most issues and highest healthcare costs), can see significant improvements in health by exercising for a fraction of time normally…

It's a win _if_ the barrier to getting sedentary people to improve their health through fitness is time cost and not all of the other costs associated with habit formation. My guess is for most sedentary people the biggest thing is that they manage to talk themselves out of doing anything, or once they start, talk themselves into allowing cheating/skipping rather than drilling in the habit. (Not that this is bad news…

I've gone through phases of being sedentary(ish), and I think it wasn't just time cost or cheating, it was going straight to high-intensity exercise because I thought exercise was "meant" to be difficult and unenjoyable.

Most fit people have pretty good intuition about their bodies. They choose appropriate workouts, they don't run at high intensity too long and give themselves a stitch when they're meant to be doing endurance training, they know what it feels like to be lazy versus what it feels like to need a lower intensity rest day, they enjoy at least some of the exercise they do. When a sedentary person starts exercising on their own, they often don't know the benefits of training at a lower intensity, and adopt a "no pain no gain" approach, which is counterproductive if it doesn't build on a solid foundation of good habits.

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

#218

Post by snapcaster » Wed, Jan 25, 2023, 1:41 PM UTC

Arch-TK wrote: post #164

notafraudster wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a win _if_ the barrier to getting sedentary people to improve their health through fitness is time cost and not all of the other costs associated with habit formation. My guess is for most sedentary people the biggest thing is that they manage to talk themselves out of doing anything, or once they start, talk themselves into allowing cheating/skipping rather than drilling in the habit. (Not that this is bad news…

Time cost is one of the major obstacles for more than just the reason of "it takes this X minutes out of your week". If you tell me I have to spend 45 minutes doing exercise 3 times a week my mind will be filled with excuses and the dread of how exhausted I will feel after 45 minutes and how it will likely be more like a 2 hour time commitment every time I do it. It's a much easier sell to say: 10 minutes where you'r…

I have yet to hear an _honest_ "i don't have time excuse". Everyone that has said this to me watches hours of netflix, dicks around on phone, etc. etc. Everyone has time, they just don't actually want to be healthy or in good shape. They want to want it

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

#219

Post by tarsinge » Wed, Jan 25, 2023, 1:41 PM UTC

mister_mister wrote: post #184

tarsinge wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not a meme but basic physics. This is how you do your cut and bulk cycles to lose and gain exactly a planned amount of weight. My base energy expenditure is relatively low at around 1800 kcal. If I eat 2000 kcal I will gain around 1 kg in 35 days (1 kg of fat is a 7000 kcal surplus), and similarly I could lose 1 by eating 1600 kcal. For finding sources look up "TDEE". Weight loss is complicated because of the…

The body is not closed system if it would be perfect close system then eating once a day or once per week would have the same effect spreading that over the day. The cells do not use calories. They use ATP, converted different pathways such as glucose, fatty acids, ketones and oxygen. Calories are measured by burning them, so that means we are using two different measurements that may overlap but are not compatible.…

Eating once a day indeed has nearly the same effect. Once a week is not possible due to physical limits of processing that volume of food.

It's easy to explain your example with diabetics: very simply insulin is what allow muscle to use glucose, but also what stop the body from using its fat reserves. From your link:

> Desperate to stop its cells from starving, her body had released hormones that, in turn, released byproducts called ketones that turned her blood acidic. If she had not been rushed to the emergency room, she would have died.

This is similar to the effect of a ketogenic diet, when you avoid eating carbs to avoid insulin secretion, forcing the body to convert the fat reserves to provide glucose for the cells. Diabetics type 1 don't produce insulin, so they just skip insulin shoots to stay in that "mode" but it has obviously other serious health side-effects for them as discussed in that article.

Also individuals are not the same, there is a lot of variation in TDEE (genetics, health, weight, insulin sensitivity, metabolism, ...). But once you have figured the TDEE for an individual, calorie counting becomes very accurate. Just from the fitness community there is an overwhelming body of research and evidence: https://sci-fit.net/bulking-deficit-gaining/. If you are in calorie deficit, you lose weight. If you are in a surplus, you gain.

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

#220

Post by wordpad25 » Wed, Jan 25, 2023, 1:41 PM UTC

snovv_crash wrote: post #182

frognumber wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I cut my calorie intake by a moderate amount, I don't lose any fat. If I cut my calorie intake by an extreme amount, I start to lose fat. My hypothesis is that the equation that weight loss is related to calorie intake minus expenditure, but I think the conclusions one draws from it fail to take into account how much the body can control expenditure. My body seems to naturally drift up in fat weight, very slowly -…

You probably subconsciously downregulate your physical activity when you reduce calories, due to lower energy levels. If you wear a fitness tracker and equate number of steps to high calories you should see a difference even with slight reductions in caloric intake. Even the amount of fidgeting you do during the day can change your base caloric expenditure.

another thing is to measure total calories intake and spending weekly.

Daily metrics can vary wildly without affecting overall result.