Quote:
Originally Posted by rhadin
I'm curious: what is the basis for the above assertion? Why would it be counterproductive to walk for more than 1 hour to lose weight? Assuming one's goal was to lose weight via the treadmill, how would you know what the most effective time would be?
|
I can't find a definite testreport as I've read it in several magazines and books. The idea is that for fat loss, muscle mass is most important. And doing prolonged cardio at which your total energy is used up, your body will start using muscles besides fat.
That's because the human body doesn't solely use one type of energysource, but a combo. So even though, during low intensity cardio sessions, most energy comes from fat, a bit are taken from sugar and protein. In the long run, the easy-access protein will be used, your muscles.
Some quick googleinfo
Quote:
|
Watch out: Avoid running, which, when combined with lifting days, can decrease muscle size due to the large energy expenditure it demands. "When the body is faced with a calorie deficit, the muscles are one of the first places it goes, along with fat stores, to supply energy to your other systems," says Rubenstein. So, in this case, running will lead your body to feast on its own muscle tissue.
|
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...9/ai_108838859
http://www.allspiritfitness.com/libr...h_cardio.shtml
http://www.healthrecipes.com/muscle.htm
http://www.arthurdevany.com/2007/03/...ch_cardio.html
Besides... a more intense training is more effective in time and energy put into it (do a search on HIIT or even tabata)