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

341–350 of 506 posts

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

#341

Post by MuffinFlavored »

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…

What if you aren't super out of shape? Do the results translate/is the "hack" too good to be true?

Working out for 45 minutes a day isn't fun

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

#342

Post by algoatecorn »

PaulHoule wrote: post #203
fsloth wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many people benefitting from more exercise are elite endurance athletes?

You might not want to emulate elite endurance athletes in that they get too much of a good thing…. That kind of training puts you at risk of atrial fibrillation.

PAFIYAMA. Happened to me at 27yo. Thankfully ablation solved the problem and I'm more or less "cured". Interestingly, I had many ectopic beats post-surgery which subsided once I regained my old fitness level.

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

#343

Post by trynewideas »

GatorD42 wrote: post #213
cycomanic wrote: post #84

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-…

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...

Injury risk plays a part in that, especially for athletes, and is something most SIT/HIIT studies that focus on metabolic impacts don't usually measure: https://www.minervamedica.it/en/journals/sports-med-physical...

> With particularly high rates of knee and ankle sprains and strains, neuromuscular training and pre-strengthening programs, which have been previously demonstrated to be effective among young athletes, may be particularly worthwhile in prospective participants

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

#344

Post by lukeschlather »

gassiss wrote: post #316
acuozzo wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is not a meme but basic physics. The issue is: How are we defining calories IN? Consider the extreme example of having a parasitic worm living in your digestive system. Is IN == [food passing mouth] or is IN == [food not being ingested by worm(s)]? Now consider "normal" digestive flora. How are we defining IN here?

you're technically right, but just nitpicking. Of course you could count the calories in fibers and that wouldn't make you fat, as your body can't process that. But most people do not eat fiber for 90% of their meals

People often switch from more processed grains to whole grains specifically to increase their fiber intake and reduce the processable calories they're ingesting. I don't think it's nitpicking at all, this is the most basic stuff you need to think about when doing dieting - CICO is naive at best.

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

#345

Post by tayo42 »

oezi wrote: post #279
dropofwill wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jay Vine recently said in an interview that last year his max hours per week was 30 and that wasn’t training, it was a big week in a grand tour. His coach at least seems to be on a mid 20s hours a week approach. Jay implied this was a change throughout the peloton, but you can still see old school strategies doing well (Bernal for example does huge volume in base from strava).

One key thing to remember is that humans can't do much more than 30 hours per week of exercise because they can't consume sufficient calories to compensate. It has come to the point that tweaking nutrition science to feed athletes better so they can train more is a key aspect of the ultra endurance training (e.g. the Norwegian Iron Men around Olaf Alexander Bu).

That's 4 hours of activity a day. That can't be true. I do that. I should be fading away then but hover at the same weight.

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

#346

Post by kasey_junk »

MacsHeadroom wrote: post #289
syzarian wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If metabolic rate changes due to caloric restriction then this doesn’t negate the view that basic physics dictates that calories in minus calories out determines weight loss. It just means that a corresponding change to calories out can occur with caloric restriction. It is a physical reality that calories in minus calories out determines weight loss. It is also a reality that adhering to this might be very difficult…

Nobody is contesting the physical reality of CICO; what they are contesting is that the "calories out" section of the diet is as easily controlled as previously thought. I'm supposedly on a 1500 calorie deficit, eating ~1300-1500 calories a day and burning ~3000, according to my fitbit. But I'm only losing about 0.5lbs per week. My conclusion is that I'm really only burning 2000 calories despite HIIT 3x/week, strengt…

Both your calories in numbers and calories out are subject to extreme estimation error.

Also body composition changes can make “weight loss” difficult as you replace fat with muscle. You can also get a gross estimate of muscle/water/fat mass to see those changes (or go get a very accurate measurement a few times in a facility equipped for such things).

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

#347

Post by algoatecorn »

kritiko wrote: post #327
PaulHoule wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might not want to emulate elite endurance athletes in that they get too much of a good thing…. That kind of training puts you at risk of atrial fibrillation.

A recent study on this encourages exercise regardless. https://openheart.bmj.com/content/9/2/e002154 > Conclusion: Although older male endurance athletes experienced an increased risk of AF, the long-term risk of stroke was substantially reduced compared with non-athletes.

True, but I think the commentor is referring to the U-shaped relationship of AF and endurance training.

Higher probability with zero exercise, lowest probability at moderate exercise, but an increase in probability as you enter the extreme territory. In my case, 1000+ hours/year for 8 years led to this outcome

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

#348

Post by epistemer »

itsoktocry wrote: post #153
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…

> 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…

Out of shape people don't stick to high intensity training.

It takes awhile to get your lactic clearance up. Most people will quit after a few workouts because literally feeling like you are going to throw up is not fun.

It is January so the gym is loaded with the New Years resolution crowd still. Most the people who started doing HIT on Jan 1st will quit by mid Feb. It is almost like clockwork and why I always reset and make January my recovery month.

If anything HIT is probably a net negative because if you are out of shape it is just reinforcing the idea that the gym is a painful and miserable experience.

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

#349

Post by cico3646373 »

syzarian wrote: post #310
aantix wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want to increase muscle mass, why don’t you just keep lifting increasingly heavier weights? If you want to lose weight, just keep eating increasingly less calories. Because that trivializes the problem. There’s physiological pushback on many dimensions.

I suggest a better response to CICO is not that this isn’t true but that it is hard for a variety of reasons. One’s response to CICO ought not be to deny basic physics. There was a comment that it is basic physics that CICO is true and it got pushback. My post was to point out that the pushback against that comment were wrong in the sense of not actually disputing CICO. The responses should have been of the form, “Ab…

It's not so much that I would dispute the physics, but I personally wonder about digestion. This strict cico model seems to make the assumption that every digestive system extracts the same amount of energy from the same foods, which I find unlikely but am certainly not an expert. If I eat a bunch of grass, I am pretty sure I'll probably get sick and have some unpleasant bowel movements but I won't draw many calories from the grass. Unlike a cow.

Personally though, I find it rather easy to maintain a particular weight. I just wear pants with the right waist size and if they feel tight I take it easy on eating for a day or two. I have had the same weight +/- 1.5kg for 20 years. Losing weight beyond my comfortable baseline is exceedingly difficult though.

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

#350

Post by Ar-Curunir »

snowwrestler wrote: post #340
mister_mister wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question how do we explain why people without insulin are able to stay thin, while eating massive amounts of calories with the CICO model. Because that case is breaking the model. Since your stating that eating once a day is the same as eating once a day. Would you have any sources for that claim? Did you know there is allot of research going into the effects of intermittent fasting[0]? If you would search for OM…

You can’t break the “model” as it is basic thermodynamics. If a diabetic is consuming many calories but also excreting many calories, that is still calories in and calories out.

Pooping out excess calories is not usually what people mean by “calories out” in CICO
Post reply on HN