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

221–230 of 506 posts

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

#221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spending more time in Zone 3 is harder, sure, but it isn't more beneficial than spending that time in Zone 2. You're training different metabolic states, and working harder/suffering more doesn't actually matter.

Yes. But if we're at the level where we care about zones and total intensity because of recovery, one probably isn't doing a combined workout at all. Either it's a low intensity or a high intensity workout, not a combination of both.

Plenty of people who care about zones and total intensity do a low intensity session with a high intensity kicker.

I got the idea from Prof. San Millan: https://peterattiamd.com/inigosanmillan/

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

#222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exercise doesn't result in changes in body mass (weight loss), unless accompanied with a diet. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/jan/28/study-reveal... .

Like the saying goes, you can't out-train a bad diet (unless you're a complete outlier like Eddie Hall or Micheal Phelps or DK Metcalf). This is a good podcast on the topic as well: https://www.artofmanliness.com/health-fitness/health/new-sci...

I don't think Eddie Hall is a good example of being able to "out-train a bad diet". He eats and trains for one very specific purpose - to get stronger. His physique reflects that. He's pretty fat, don't let his visible abs fool you.

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

#223
post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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-…

> 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…

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_energy

Food (calories in) is just a form of energy your body is capable of utilizing. Fat is just a physical medium to store energy for use in your body. For your body to move and perform actions (live), you require energy. All things considered at this scale, if you expend more energy than you consume, you'll ultimately either die (due to lack of energy) or use other forms of energy in your body (e.g. fat).

This is of course the 30,000 ft view and there's a lot of complex biology and chemistry going on but it's pretty straightforward if you believe the law of conservation of energy is correct and our bodies aren't doing some sort of nuclear physics to process energy and instead relying on various forms of chemical and physical energy.

As you point out, it's not so cut and dry though in practice. There's a time component here and our bodies get quite clever. We build up efficiency of certain tasks over time requiring less energy usage. We resist building muscle because it requires more energy to maintain. Some food's energy density isn't perceived very well by our bodies and we remain more or less hungry irrelevant of potential calories making it more difficult to maintain a calorie deficit/diet based solely on our bodies senses. Many nutritional information products don't accurately measure calories of food, sometimes making it difficult to use as a base metric (theres a lot of errors in these measurements, especially by small food producers/providers). We also have incredible difficulty trying to estimate how many calories our body is actually expending because it's a fairly complex system (the "calories out" part of the equation) although there are some figures out there to help you estimate these within some general ranges depending on factors like age, diet, fitness, activity and so on--it's not perfect but it's something to work with quantitatively.

The benefit of calorie counting though is that there are fairly basic physical and chemical principles at play that make it a useful tool in weight loss and management. Even if a bit variable (both the in and out) and sometimes inaccurately represented, it gives us something fairly quantitative to work with, measure, and change around to control our weight. We can measure it and change other variables in our lifestyles to, over time, manage weight. It works and the statement is valid but it's not simple to use by any means, there's a lot one needs to learn over time to better learn how to measure their in/out and overall body feeling based on these factors.

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

#224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's 8 minutes, not one minute > 3x8 minutes of higher intensity exercise Not exactly (unless I got something wrong): ”SIT involved 3x20-second 'all-out' cycle sprints (~500W) interspersed with 2 minutes of cycling at 50W”.

50W is nothing, and 500W isn’t really a sprint. For an adult male, you should be pushing 1000-2000 over 20 second sprints. Walking slightly uphill is probably more intense than a 50w bike.

50W is barely moving on a bicycle.

But 500W is a significant effort for an untrained person, particularly somebody of smaller stature.

FWIW, I'm an avid recreational cyclist and my 1-hour power fluctuates in the 250W-280W range at 68-70kg body weight. My all-out sprint power is over 1000W, but not by much. 2000W is enough to win elite sprints, both on the track and on the road.

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

#225
post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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-…

> 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…

Absolutely ridiculous to call this a “meme”. It is the most basic fact about how to lose weight. Stop eating altogether and see what happens (spoilers: you’ll lose weight as your body devours itself because your body needs calories to operate)

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

#226
It looks like they made people do things that require more short term oxygen uptake and as a result they adapted to be able to uptake more oxygen in the short term. I wouldn't so readily dismiss the myriad of other physical adaptations that result from long term, high volume, low intensity exercise, such as improved bone density, better fat metabolism, stronger heart muscles, better endurance and resilience, better mental health and cognition etc.

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

#227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like the saying goes, you can't out-train a bad diet (unless you're a complete outlier like Eddie Hall or Micheal Phelps or DK Metcalf). This is a good podcast on the topic as well: https://www.artofmanliness.com/health-fitness/health/new-sci...

Reading about the diet of DK Metcalf that is Low carb, Intermittent fasting, with plenty of vegetables is according to the latest science. Eddie Hall has goal based diets, Normal people wouldn't be able to process the amount of food he eats, can't be healthy to eat that much. But at the same time it's clearly working for him. Just saying genetics does a disservice to them.

Intermittent fasting contributes nothing to weight loss beyond the psychological effect, which may result in calorie restriction. This is the latest science.

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

#228
post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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-…

> 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…

I have the same question: People often calculate with calories as if it is really simple math. But - honest question - does my body really have to suck up every calorie or could it excrete some calories in the toilet and also vary that amount depending on my caloric intake? For example, I have read somewhere that you urinate superfluous proteins - which also have calories. Also, if I'm hungry I get cold. I might put on another layer. So my "base energy expenditure" could vary with the amount of calories I eat, right?

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

#229

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…

The measures that improved are more important then body mass itself. Body mass is an aesthetic measure. The improved measures were directly related to the health. And "fitness" itself is measured by performance, not by how you look like - which would make it third measure.

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

#230

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 vast majority of that WR in marathon is doing low intensity long runs every day with only one day dedicated to race pace. That still broadly strikes me as primarily low-intensity training.
Post reply on HN