Fat Loss Myths Part 2: Cardio Is Necessary For Fat Loss
Myth: It is necessary to perform cardio on a regular basis to lose fat.
Truth: Cardio is not necessary for fat loss, and contributes relatively little to a fat loss program compared to high intensity strength training.
To lose fat it is necessary to create a calorie deficit - you must consume fewer calories than you expend so the body obtains the difference from your fat stores. While overall activity level has an effect on daily calorie expenditure, additional “cardio” (steady state or interval training) burns relatively few calories even if performed for an hour or more at moderate intensity daily. A greater calorie deficit can be achieved by simply restricting calorie intake, with little time investment other than the few minutes required for planning and recording meals.
The most important benefit of exercise to a fat loss program is not the calories expended during workouts, but the maintenance of muscle tissue while fat is lost. This requires strength training. There is a direct relationship between lean body mass, particularly muscle mass, and metabolic rate - more muscle equals a higher metabolic rate. If calorie intake is reduced significantly without regular, consistent strength training, muscle tends to be lost along with fat resulting in a reduced metabolic rate. Cardio does nothing to prevent muscle loss and may even accelerate it.
While cardio may make a small contribution to a fat loss program, it is highly overrated, and of minimal importance compared to calorie restriction. Contrary to the wishful thinking of the crowds that flock to the treadmills, stairmasters and elliptical machines on Monday night after a weekend of overeating and excessive alcohol consumption, no amount of cardio will make up for poor eating habits. In fact, if calorie intake is not being measured and recorded, cardio will probably make almost no difference at all because it will increase appetite.
The most effective approach for the majority of people is a combination of high intensity strength training and reduced calorie intake. The reduced calorie intake creates the deficit necessary to force the body to use its fat stores for energy, while the high intensity strength training prevents loss of muscle mass.
I currently have one personal training client who lost over 70 pounds of fat in nine months, and another who lost 110 pounds of fat in a little over a year. Both perform high intensity strength training and keep close track of their calorie intake, but do no cardio. Numerous clients of mine have achieved similar results over the past 15 years with the same approach. I once reduced my bodyfat to the low single digits for a bodybuilding competition with no cardio, proving one can become as lean as possible with high intensity strength training and strict diet alone.
2 Comments to Fat Loss Myths Part 2: Cardio Is Necessary For Fat Loss
Hi Drew,
Drew there are also people who will claim that they lost huge amounts of weight/fat by reducing calories only or a combination of cardio activities and reducing calories. I personally find that these approaches are based on the “quick type fix approach” where weight/fat can be quickly lost but can also be put back on just as quickly. I feel that if people want to have permenant weight loss than a combination of high intensity strength training, healthy eating and reduced calories are the keys.
Richard ChartrandJuly 28, 2008
Drew, I have always agreed with your views on this, and am currently down to a lifetime low of under 173.2, training for my first bodybuilding contest in November of 08, for which I will likely be in the low 160’s.
Since starting dieting…. (working with a diet coach, who started me at 225 g pro, 200 g ch and 40 g fat, with one 350 g ch day per week, and now we’ve moved to 225 g pro, 150 g ch and 40 g fat, with one 200 g ch day and another 300g ch day in the same week), I’ve had great results and realize that counting not only all foods and planning, but tracking macros is critical. (in fairness, I’d been dieting for a while but have been working with Diet coach since mid may, and have been losing faster with more calories, than using loose zone guidelines; when I started tracking macros, I realized I was eating a LOT of fat!)
After about 3-4 weeks, I went to my physician to see results of my bloodwork, which I track due to having had heart surgery, etc. in the past. I normally have very good numbers, in terms of ldl and overall cholesterol as well as triglycerides. My achilles heel has always been hdl which is too LOW. Since beginning this diet all my numbers have actually improved EXCEPT hdl, which is even lower.
In fairness, this could be an initial reaction, but my physican claims that aerobic exercise is superior to anaerobic for raising hdl… so I’ve agreed to try something for 3 months… albeit, pretty moderate… I’m strength training twice a week, and on off days I either, walk a brisk km with the greyhounds, or practice my ballroom dancing (since my wife and I are taking private lessons) for 25 minutes. Some would feel this is very moderate and doesn’t even qualify as “cardio” but that’s the 3 month trial. Of course I’m introducing one other variable so I won’t really know. I’ve read that oranges can help raise hdl, and I’m eating 2 or 3 of them most days to be part of my carb “budget”. Any thoughts? from anyone?
July 13, 2008