Rent or own?

A nonsensical analogy. See recent post where the so-called more advantageous "mortgage payment" has lead to burn out, insomnia and depression.

Cathe herself believes that there is a place for steady state cardio in everyone's fitness program, according to recent articles and postings. Guess it depends on what you want to get out of your exercise program.

Clare
 
A nonsensical analogy.
Click to expand...


morningstar said:
Ah, Clare, my little ray of sunshine! How I've missed you!
Click to expand...

I couldn't help laughing out loud. I don't mean to be snarky at all. You are both strong ladies who are never afraid to speak your minds and I admire you both for this trait. I tend to be the one who thinks it is my job to maintain peace in the world.

Morning star, I tried hard to reason why resistance training belongs with hiit rather than steady state. "Does she mean resistance training is the new best thing like hiit and steady state is a classic? Shouldn't kettlebells and be with hiit and resistance stay with steady state by that rationale? Where does plyo belong? Isn't it kinda in between? Why did she leave out my favorite, yoga? Why is yoga new age if it is ancient? Will the barre and pilates gang feel like I do that their fitness preference is not even in contention?" As you can see, I need a life.

Now to answer the question, I want two homes. One I will rent and the other I will own. I also want yoga. Since it hasn't been defined, I get to define it. Yoga =buying a simple home cash-down. No debt, buy exactly what one can easily afford.

Seriously though, weight training gives me the best bang for my buck. If I am short on time, this is what I ought to do for weight/shape/size/non-blubberiness considerations. Yoga is what I enjoy best.

I haven't experienced any difference in appearance results from steady state vs hiit. As cardio vascular fitness training they are good complements. Plyo is a lot of fun as long as it on the Kelly Coffey side of intensity rather than Plyo X side, or when done legs and glutes style between weight sets.
 
it seems to me resistance training, hiit, and plyo keep your metabolism raised significantly longer than the steady state cardio which mostly burns cal while you do it.
i'm not sure i would be able to walk if i did intense training all the time. i would definitely have to balance doing both types of exercise.
 
bayerngirl said:
I am glad I am not the only one, that's comfused:eek:
Click to expand...

Me too! I don't understand this analogy at all.

Why choose? I do steady state at least twice a week, but I also do resistance/weight training, interval training, and plyo/hiit every week. I can't imagine not doing my "LSD" (long slow distance) Sunday hikes, yet in this analogy it falls under "renting" which has a more negative connotation than having a mortgage.

Color me confused! :confused:
 
Okay guys, this was meant to be a fun way to say that building your muscles in various ways gives you something to draw on for the future-it gives you strength and physical benefits that will stand you in good stead for the long haul. HiiT builds your fast twitch muscles, plyo builds your leg muscles and resistance training is all about building strength in a myriad of ways.

Steady state cardio, while having a great many benefits and which I love for other reasons, is like renting a house, in that it gives you fitness for now, but doesn't do much for your future fitness.
 
morningstar said:
Okay guys, this was meant to be a fun way to say that building your muscles in various ways gives you something to draw on for the future-it gives you strength and physical benefits that will stand you in good stead for the long haul. HiiT builds your fast twitch muscles, plyo builds your leg muscles and resistance training is all about building strength in a myriad of ways.

Steady state cardio, while having a great many benefits and which I love for other reasons, is like renting a house, in that it gives you fitness for now, but doesn't do much for your future fitness.
Click to expand...

I must respectfully disagree that steady state doesnt do much for your future fitness.

Functional fitness is not just the ability to sprint after a bus (HIIT), but also to walk home after your car breaks down (Steady State).

Steady state cardio means working in your fat-burn/aerobic heart rate zone (exercise but not be so easy that your heart rate does not rise enough, but not so intense either that you get short on breath). As you keep doing steady state exercise, you will find you need to exert more even in steady state exercise to achieve this target heart rate zone. This could be a reason why two people may report on the same cardio DVD that one found it challenging while the other hardly broke a sweat. Your ability to do longer steady state also improves with time.

That you can handle relatively higher exertion while still maintaining your heart rate in the aerobic range is a benefit for the future in my opinion. You are investing in the health of your heart and lungs with steady state. Regular steady state can be effective at reducing your resting heart rate and regulating cholesterol, insulin levels and blood pressure.

I dont see HIIT as better than Steady State. It may be more suitable for certain objectives.

One thing I must say for the original post. It was certainly off the beaten track. Analogies are a unique way to spark a discussion. It made me think of IQ tests that say stuff like "Green is to environment as blue is to ......?" (Ok, bad example, I cant remember any concrete example now).
 
Last edited:
Perhaps I should clarify further. By future fitness, I meant way in the future- like 90 years old. Strength training, in all its aspects, has been shown to be tremendously helpful in allowing senior citizens to maintain mobility and continue to be active. The fact that it increases bone density is also a factor.
 
morningstar said:
Perhaps I should clarify further. By future fitness, I meant way in the future- like 90 years old. Strength training, in all its aspects, has been shown to be tremendously helpful in allowing senior citizens to maintain mobility and continue to be active. The fact that it increases bone density is also a factor.
Click to expand...

I agree now. :)
 
morningstar said:
Perhaps I should clarify further. By future fitness, I meant way in the future- like 90 years old. Strength training, in all its aspects, has been shown to be tremendously helpful in allowing senior citizens to maintain mobility and continue to be active. The fact that it increases bone density is also a factor.
Click to expand...

But HiiT doesn't fall into this category - you stop, you are going to lose the gains you made. And if you don't continue to keep up with the strength training as you age, you won't magically retain this mobility and high activity level. You've perhaps got an argument for the benefits of retaining bone density, but that's about it.

Everything you list is an important component of fitness. Add flexibility training in there and you've got a nice, comprehensive list. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Our Newsletter

Get awesome content delivered straight to your inbox.

Top