I have one in my house, I use it every now and then, and I was wondering how much fat it would actually burn if I did it at a medium setting for say, half an hour?
doesnt matter what setting its p much the same~ ( btw you should focus on your diet more instead of exercise)
diet is generally going to be more important than exercise, not saying that you shouldn't exercise. You just probably won't burn a measurable amount of fat in half an hour.
if you're eating 4000 calories a day and you only really need 2000, exercising isn't really going to do you much good.
[editline]25th May 2011[/editline]
also for the sake of example running for an hour at around 8 miles an hour burns almost 1000 calories
if you work your ass of (like, 100%) you can burn around 500 calories per hour
3500 calories is a pound of fat, so if you're burning 500 calories running for half an hour maybe a 1/6th of a pound. But it's important to point out that 500 calories is relatively little and can be cut out of the diet. (this is an exaggeration because you won't be able to run 8 miles an hour for an hour) you won't be malnourished as long as you cut out the junk food.
also [url]http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/exercise/SM00109[/url]
[QUOTE=caaaasus;30048674]doesnt matter what setting its p much the same~ ( btw you should focus on your diet more instead of exercise)[/QUOTE]
What
...
Have you even tried a good cross trainer ? Highest resistance burns a fuckton more cals. It's like crawling upstairs with a fat lardass on your back.
[QUOTE=sp00ks;30049156]if you work your ass of (like, 100%) you can burn around 500 calories per hour[/QUOTE]
You can burn more than that by jogging.
[QUOTE=Maucer;30079291]
You can burn more than that by jogging.[/QUOTE]
is this real life
[QUOTE=NotMeh;30079538]is this real life[/QUOTE]
Intensity doesn't nessecarily mean more fat loss. It has been shown that exercises at vo2 (60%) are much more effective in terms of fatloss. (Can't find the study, will look into it later)
Yes it's known that when your pulse is lower the body can use straight fat, not glycogen storages, as a source of energy. But how does it matter, calories are calories.
[QUOTE=sp00ks;30049156]if you work your ass of (like, 100%) you can burn around 500 calories per hour[/QUOTE]
Well it really depends on weight.
[QUOTE=Maucer;30080038]Yes it's known that when your pulse is lower the body can use straight fat, not glycogen storages, as a source of energy. But how does it matter, calories are calories.[/QUOTE]
The answer is right here. I can't answer what you already seem to know
But if you use up your glycogen the food you eat later on will fill the gap, and won't be stored as fat.
[QUOTE=Maucer;30079291]What
...
Have you even tried a good cross trainer ? Highest resistance burns a fuckton more cals. It's like crawling upstairs with a fat lardass on your back.
You can burn more than that by jogging.[/QUOTE]
? im talking about fat vs carbs and although higher intensitys ( as in above lactate threshold ) burns more glycogen it also helps with daily fat oxidization but as anyone should know prolong periods of high intensity is hard , so some people might like doing it in intervals ( then other hormones comes into play and its a alot of explaining that im lazy about) but lower intensity ( the same as most elite athletes do )burns more fat but less total calories and
[B]tl;dr it doesnt really matter[/B] ( unless youre bulking then i greatly suggest you do lower intensity)
Yeah I agree, it's not the duration that kills you, its the intensity.
[QUOTE=caaaasus;30094267]? im talking about fat vs carbs and although higher intensitys ( as in above lactate threshold ) burns more glycogen it also helps with daily fat oxidization but as anyone should know prolong periods of high intensity is hard , so some people might like doing it in intervals ( then other hormones comes into play and its a alot of explaining that im lazy about) but lower intensity ( the same as most elite athletes do )burns more fat but less total calories and
[B]tl;dr it doesnt really matter[/B] ( unless youre bulking then i greatly suggest you do lower intensity)[/QUOTE]
Nigga if you bulking don't do that gay ass low intensity shit, infact cross trainers are gayer than dick in your butt
Do hill sprints like a boss, cry like a bitch from the pain and your lungs being on fire, go home and eat your heart out, get depressed from overtraining, contemplate suicide, experience rebound effect week after. I bet you will have tank legs at the end of your bulk.
thats dumb. why would you try to release a certain hormone that directly inhibits another that is probably the most important hormone for muscle building?
[QUOTE=caaaasus;30146282]thats dumb. why would you try to release a certain hormone that directly inhibits another that is probably the most important hormone for muscle building?[/QUOTE]
I dunno I thought the same thing. Ask Charles Poliquin, it's a method he apparently favors with his elite level bodybuilders, he over-trains them to the point of depression and potential muscle loss and then apparently there's a massive rebound effect during the recovery weeks.
((P.S this is the same guy who is p. much the trollface of the bodybuilding world, so as to whether it actually happens or not, I don't know, but he seems to be a respected name))
[editline]30th May 2011[/editline]
although I have read something about super accumulation before, so it might actually be true
looked him up and it seems hes started to/have become in it for the profit. hes saying some really batshit stuff thats obv not true. it seems he charges quite a bit to train under him. i wouldnt trust him tbh
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
