Someone validate or nullify this info for me?
- Thread starter RhiannonW
- Start date
Technically, I'd imagine if you did them exactly at the same pace, they would probably burn the same amount of calories.
But, if you split them up, you have the added bonus of revving up the metabolism on two different days. Plus you will probably be able to give more and do it at a higher intensity for 25 minutes 2 days vs. 1 day.
Colleen
But, if you split them up, you have the added bonus of revving up the metabolism on two different days. Plus you will probably be able to give more and do it at a higher intensity for 25 minutes 2 days vs. 1 day.
Colleen
naughtoj
Cathlete
Here is what I know on this other than to ignore it....
General consensus is it takes atleast 20 min of exercise before the body favors fat as the fuel source. Before this time, when exercise first commences, the large majority of fuel comes from stored carbohydrate.
Holding to this theory it would be logical to say that you burn more FAT doing a 50 min session all in one bang. However, nothing changes the amount of calories you are burning unless you are doing another warmup in the second session which would in turn bring down the overall intensity. Calories burned would be the same for the two 25 min sessions as the one 50 min. session....
But then again.....maybe breaking your cardio, especially if it is high intensity, into 25 min sessions instead of one whopping 50 min session, gives you that performance "edge" where you have the energy to jump higher and put more power into all your moves. In this case, you would be raising the intensity level which would burn more calories.
I would do two seperate, very high intensity 25 min. sessions if you tend to peter out after about 30 min. Energy starts sagging after that so I would think the shorter sessions would be of more benefit.
Of course, in my world, I do both!!! Then you don't have to worry about which one is "better". You have days in which you do both and therefore your body never really knows what to expect!!
That is my take....
Janice
General consensus is it takes atleast 20 min of exercise before the body favors fat as the fuel source. Before this time, when exercise first commences, the large majority of fuel comes from stored carbohydrate.
Holding to this theory it would be logical to say that you burn more FAT doing a 50 min session all in one bang. However, nothing changes the amount of calories you are burning unless you are doing another warmup in the second session which would in turn bring down the overall intensity. Calories burned would be the same for the two 25 min sessions as the one 50 min. session....
But then again.....maybe breaking your cardio, especially if it is high intensity, into 25 min sessions instead of one whopping 50 min session, gives you that performance "edge" where you have the energy to jump higher and put more power into all your moves. In this case, you would be raising the intensity level which would burn more calories.
I would do two seperate, very high intensity 25 min. sessions if you tend to peter out after about 30 min. Energy starts sagging after that so I would think the shorter sessions would be of more benefit.
Of course, in my world, I do both!!! Then you don't have to worry about which one is "better". You have days in which you do both and therefore your body never really knows what to expect!!
That is my take....
Janice
schnebbles
Cathlete
I have been wondering this too, since I read something in a magazine. It says that it came from the "International Journal of Obesity" - "that women who took a 30 min walk 5 days a week, lost the same number of inches from their bellies than women who took 1-hr long walks. Break that 1/2 hour into 2 15-minute segments and you'll drop pounds even faster. Researchers at the Univ of Kansas found that people who did so burned almost 2x as many calories as those who exercised for 30 minutes in one stretch."
How do you explain that?
Kathy
How do you explain that?
Kathy
naughtoj
Cathlete
The only way I can explain that is simply by saying it must be on account of the elevated metabolism. Because you are breaking it up, your metabolism is being elevated at two different points in the day and couple that with "afterburn" and possible more calories were burned therefore causing more fat loss.
I personally don't get into the low intensity versus high intensity debate. I am a high intensity junkie I am afraid so longer workouts just tend to bore me unless I am outside doing something such as hiking or rollerblading. I say move more and lose more...that is just the motto I follow...
But I have never read the article you are refferring to Kathy..would be interested if you can get a link...
Janice
I personally don't get into the low intensity versus high intensity debate. I am a high intensity junkie I am afraid so longer workouts just tend to bore me unless I am outside doing something such as hiking or rollerblading. I say move more and lose more...that is just the motto I follow...
But I have never read the article you are refferring to Kathy..would be interested if you can get a link...
Janice
schnebbles
Cathlete
Hi -
Sorry, buy no link.. it came from one of those flimsy little magazines at the grocery checkout. But it apparently came from the International journal of Obesity. I quoted the little article word for word. I just found it to be rather interesting.
I should try to do shorter workouts and see what happens. I know I have been really bad lately, not working out at all!! It's awful. I just got my intensity series too, and don't even have motivation to try it.
A couple weeks ago (i am a scale freak), when I did part of C & W one night & the other part the other night, I actually made it down to my low weight! I know this is sheer coincidence because 2 nights of only 1/2 hr workout certainly couldn't have been miraculous! ha!
Sorry, buy no link.. it came from one of those flimsy little magazines at the grocery checkout. But it apparently came from the International journal of Obesity. I quoted the little article word for word. I just found it to be rather interesting.
I should try to do shorter workouts and see what happens. I know I have been really bad lately, not working out at all!! It's awful. I just got my intensity series too, and don't even have motivation to try it.
A couple weeks ago (i am a scale freak), when I did part of C & W one night & the other part the other night, I actually made it down to my low weight! I know this is sheer coincidence because 2 nights of only 1/2 hr workout certainly couldn't have been miraculous! ha!
>Interesting theory I hadn't thought of(revving the metabolism
>2 days insstead of 1). Thanks!
>
>Can I assume you're a dog lover(by the picture)?
>
>I certainly am. An 'all' animal lover actually.
I'm a big fan of all animals. That is a picture of my Dobe as a pup, 3 months old. Thankfully though he did grow into those ears!
Colleen
>2 days insstead of 1). Thanks!
>
>Can I assume you're a dog lover(by the picture)?
>
>I certainly am. An 'all' animal lover actually.
I'm a big fan of all animals. That is a picture of my Dobe as a pup, 3 months old. Thankfully though he did grow into those ears!
Colleen
MadnNatsmom
Cathlete
It is my understanding that the "afterburn" occurs only after an INTENSE bout of cardio (how "intense" is being judged I don't know) or weight training.
I don't think walking falls into this category, so the two period of "after-burn" would not apply here.
I don't think walking falls into this category, so the two period of "after-burn" would not apply here.