I'm not overweight but I was wondering what would burn more body fat:
long distance type of workouts with a lot of even-paced long swim sessions or sprint workouts with mainly sprint intervals.
I don't know a lot about exercise physiology, but Jazz Hands does. I have heard a few times that the whole "fat burning" exercise thing is not necessarily true. I think if you want to burn fat, you need to lose weight and Thrashing is right, go running for that.
I'm not overweight but I was wondering what would burn more body fat:
long distance type of workouts with a lot of even-paced long swim sessions or sprint workouts with mainly sprint intervals.
Well, a lot will depend on the specifics of the workouts. I think what you are getting at is a comparison of lower-intensity work with little (or no) rest, compared to higher-intensity work with significant rest, where the overall workout time is comparable.
What I've heard is that -- regardless of whether you are talking about running, swimming, cycling or whatever -- the low-intensity workout might use more calories during the actual exercise (because you run/cycle/swim farther) but the high-intensity workout might use as many or more in the long-run. The reasoning is that your metabolism remains higher for a longer period of time, and muscle repair uses up still more calories.
But I would imagine the actual trade-off depends on the specifics: how high is the intensity in the interval workout? How much rest? How close to you to your lactate threshold on the aerobic workout? That sort of thing.
I don't get it. Of course you need to lose weight in order to lose body fat and the way to do that is by exercising(plus diet). Any form of exercise burns fat, not just running.
I know that both, long distance swimming and sprint training, burn fat. My question was which of the two do you think burns more fat if you train each for an hour for example.
Btw, running does not burn more body fat;)
Right, I understand your question. What I'm saying and Chris and Q have said even better is there really is no difference in how each type of workout burns fat. In fact, everything you read states that the whole notion of a fat burning workout is kind of ridiculous.
If I have an hour to train I will work as hard as I can regardless of the workout type. With sprint I will go less yardage, indulge in hot tubbing, call friends and family and get in about 200-300 yards, which is about your typical sprint workout, maybe more. With a real workout for distance I'd try to pack in about 4K yards. Either way, I'd be gassed at the end and the same amount of fat would be burned.
The article below doesn't really address the question but it does point out that you can measure fat oxidation and that it does vary at different exercise intensities. It doesn't address post exercise oxygen consumption and caloric burning. Which may be big factors in the overall daily calorie balance sheet.
More importantly, I think, is that different workouts effect appetite differently. This is almost certainly why running (and maybe even walking) is more effective for weight loss for me: If I swim early in the AM I am hungry all day (currently thinking of eating my keyboard) and want to eat lunch at 9 no matter what my breakfast was. If I run early in the AM, which I hate, I don't even think about lunch until 1.
J Strength Cond Res. 2009 Oct;23(7):2090-5.
Quantifying differences in the "fat burning" zone and the aerobic zone: implications for training.
Carey DG.
Health and Human Performance Laboratory, University of St Thomas, St Paul, Minnesota, USA.
Abstract
The primary objective of this study was to examine the relationship of the "fat burning" and aerobic zones. Subjects consisted of 36 relatively fit runners (20 male, 16 female) who completed a maximal exercise test to exhaustion on a motor-driven treadmill. The lower and upper limit of the "fat burning" zone was visually assessed by examining each individual graph. Maximal fat oxidation (MFO) was determined to be that point during the test at which fat metabolism in fat calories per minute peaked. The lower limit of the aerobic zone was assessed as 50% of heart rate reserve, whereas the upper limit was set at anaerobic threshold. Although the lower and upper limits of the "fat burning" zone (67.6-87.1% maximal heart rate) were significantly lower (p "fat burning" zone and MFO, indicating a need for measurement in the laboratory. If laboratory testing is not possible, the practitioner or subject can be reasonably confident MFO lies between 60.2% and 80.0% of the maximal heart rate.
The article below doesn't really address the question but it does point out that you can measure fat oxidation and that it does vary at different exercise intensities. It doesn't address post exercise oxygen consumption and caloric burning. Which may be big factors in the overall daily calorie balance sheet.
More importantly, I think, is that different workouts effect appetite differently. This is almost certainly why running (and maybe even walking) is more effective for weight loss for me: If I swim early in the AM I am hungry all day (currently thinking of eating my keyboard) and want to eat lunch at 9 no matter what my breakfast was. If I run early in the AM, which I hate, I don't even think about lunch until 1.
J Strength Cond Res. 2009 Oct;23(7):2090-5.
Quantifying differences in the "fat burning" zone and the aerobic zone: implications for training.
Carey DG.
Health and Human Performance Laboratory, University of St Thomas, St Paul, Minnesota, USA.
Abstract
The primary objective of this study was to examine the relationship of the "fat burning" and aerobic zones. Subjects consisted of 36 relatively fit runners (20 male, 16 female) who completed a maximal exercise test to exhaustion on a motor-driven treadmill. The lower and upper limit of the "fat burning" zone was visually assessed by examining each individual graph. Maximal fat oxidation (MFO) was determined to be that point during the test at which fat metabolism in fat calories per minute peaked. The lower limit of the aerobic zone was assessed as 50% of heart rate reserve, whereas the upper limit was set at anaerobic threshold. Although the lower and upper limits of the "fat burning" zone (67.6-87.1% maximal heart rate) were significantly lower (p "fat burning" zone and MFO, indicating a need for measurement in the laboratory. If laboratory testing is not possible, the practitioner or subject can be reasonably confident MFO lies between 60.2% and 80.0% of the maximal heart rate.
The problem with equating MFO with maximum weight loss is that it only takes into account the caloric usage during the workout.If nearly all of your calories burned during the workout are fat their will be little increase in post workout caloric use,however if you are getting most of your energy from carbs you are going to be burning calories after the workout in converting fat to carbs to replenish muscle and liver glycogen etc..To maximize weight loss I think you would want to be going the intensity and intervals to maximize sustainable heart rate for the time(relatively fast swims with relatively short rest,but not long slow swims.)
what would burn more body fat
This question is ambiguous. Do you mean, "in which kind of workout does more of the energy the body uses during the workout come from stored fat rather than from stored glycogen?" Exercise physiologists have addressed this question thoroughly and I am pretty sure the consensus answer is the high-volume, low-intensity workout.
Or do you mean, "which kind of workout is a more effective component of a weight-loss program?" I doubt the answer is clear on that issue because of many confounding factors including how much you eat when you are not working out and what your body fat % v. lean muscle % was to start with.
Either will burn off fat if a healthy diet is used. Lots of protein, fruits and veggies.
Anyhow, I've been running for over a month now and I'm noticing the abdominal muscles again like I did last year when I ran for a month.
I think if you want to burn fat, you need to lose weight and Thrashing is right, go running for that.
I don't get it. Of course you need to lose weight in order to lose body fat and the way to do that is by exercising(plus diet). Any form of exercise burns fat, not just running.
I know that both, long distance swimming and sprint training, burn fat. My question was which of the two do you think burns more fat if you train each for an hour for example.
Btw, running does not burn more body fat;)
