Cardio after the Trail

[pervy_sage]

This may sound counter intuitive, but the research I have come across says anaerobic exercise in the form of high intensity interval training (aka HIIT or Tabata) would actually be more beneficial to former thru hikers than continuing to chasing the white rabbit (or blaze) of aerobic cardio workouts.

Former thru hikers have essentially made their bodies the Prius of calorie burning. After 2100 miles, a thru hiker can make it through a normal person's day on a single saltine cracker and a bottle cap of Pepsi. Their body does not know it is allowed to be a little more frivolous it's fuel. In addition, when the hiker sees the pounds starting to pile on, they impulsively start consuming less, which sets off the starvation alarm bells, immediately causing the brain to run around turning off all the lights yelling at the stomach for staring blankly into the fridge with the door open. This only serves to make the situation worse, which makes the ex-hiker exercise more and eat less, and round and round we go.

The idea of the HIIT training is to fool the body into consuming mass quantities of calories (primarily carbs) to satisfy the demands of a less efficient anaerobic metabolic process. The ex-hiker needs to convince the body to stop sparing the calories and rev up the metabolism for immediate need, not spare it for the long haul that isn't there. It has also been shown to increase the mitochondria count in muscle tissue. For those who may have slept through biology, the mitochondria are the parts (organelles) of human cells that produces most of the energy used for the cells to do work. In muscle cells, the more mitochondria you have, the more work that can be done, and the more rapidly calories will be burned.

The wonderful thing, which has been backup up by actual medical research, is the interval training can be anything so long as it gets the heart rate up into the anaerobic zone, and only needs to be done a few times a week. Stationary bikes have been used in the research, and benefits are being seen with as little as 20 minutes of workout three days a week. The intervals may involve 1-2 min of intense workout, and 3 minutes "rest" or relaxed workout, repeated over the 20 minute time period. There are different conventions for the intervals, so do your research.

The ex-hiker also needs to eat. Starving is not good. Eat, well.

Hope you find a solution to your problem.

[perrymk]

, is the interval training can be anything

Like walking my dog. Rush! Stop and sniff. Rush to the next spot! Stop and sniff.

[Pedaling Fool]

This may sound counter intuitive, but the research I have come across says anaerobic exercise in the form of high intensity interval training (aka HIIT or Tabata) would actually be more beneficial to former thru hikers than continuing to chasing the white rabbit (or blaze) of aerobic cardio workouts.

Former thru hikers have essentially made their bodies the Prius of calorie burning. After 2100 miles, a thru hiker can make it through a normal person's day on a single saltine cracker and a bottle cap of Pepsi. Their body does not know it is allowed to be a little more frivolous it's fuel. In addition, when the hiker sees the pounds starting to pile on, they impulsively start consuming less, which sets off the starvation alarm bells, immediately causing the brain to run around turning off all the lights yelling at the stomach for staring blankly into the fridge with the door open. This only serves to make the situation worse, which makes the ex-hiker exercise more and eat less, and round and round we go.

The idea of the HIIT training is to fool the body into consuming mass quantities of calories (primarily carbs) to satisfy the demands of a less efficient anaerobic metabolic process. The ex-hiker needs to convince the body to stop sparing the calories and rev up the metabolism for immediate need, not spare it for the long haul that isn't there. It has also been shown to increase the mitochondria count in muscle tissue. For those who may have slept through biology, the mitochondria are the parts (organelles) of human cells that produces most of the energy used for the cells to do work. In muscle cells, the more mitochondria you have, the more work that can be done, and the more rapidly calories will be burned.

The wonderful thing, which has been backup up by actual medical research, is the interval training can be anything so long as it gets the heart rate up into the anaerobic zone, and only needs to be done a few times a week. Stationary bikes have been used in the research, and benefits are being seen with as little as 20 minutes of workout three days a week. The intervals may involve 1-2 min of intense workout, and 3 minutes "rest" or relaxed workout, repeated over the 20 minute time period. There are different conventions for the intervals, so do your research.

The ex-hiker also needs to eat. Starving is not good. Eat, well.

Hope you find a solution to your problem.

That's basically what Lew is saying and after doing it I agree 100% http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUyMYHG_Vcg

But it is important to have a base established and a thru-hike is perfect for establishing that base. I agree with Lew, I don't think very many people at all go anaerobic very often, including gym rats.

[rocketsocks]

This may sound counter intuitive, but the research I have come across says anaerobic exercise in the form of high intensity interval training (aka HIIT or Tabata) would actually be more beneficial to former thru hikers than continuing to chasing the white rabbit (or blaze) of aerobic cardio workouts.

Former thru hikers have essentially made their bodies the Prius of calorie burning. After 2100 miles, a thru hiker can make it through a normal person's day on a single saltine cracker and a bottle cap of Pepsi. Their body does not know it is allowed to be a little more frivolous it's fuel. In addition, when the hiker sees the pounds starting to pile on, they impulsively start consuming less, which sets off the starvation alarm bells, immediately causing the brain to run around turning off all the lights yelling at the stomach for staring blankly into the fridge with the door open. This only serves to make the situation worse, which makes the ex-hiker exercise more and eat less, and round and round we go.

The idea of the HIIT training is to fool the body into consuming mass quantities of calories (primarily carbs) to satisfy the demands of a less efficient anaerobic metabolic process. The ex-hiker needs to convince the body to stop sparing the calories and rev up the metabolism for immediate need, not spare it for the long haul that isn't there. It has also been shown to increase the mitochondria count in muscle tissue. For those who may have slept through biology, the mitochondria are the parts (organelles) of human cells that produces most of the energy used for the cells to do work. In muscle cells, the more mitochondria you have, the more work that can be done, and the more rapidly calories will be burned.

The wonderful thing, which has been backup up by actual medical research, is the interval training can be anything so long as it gets the heart rate up into the anaerobic zone, and only needs to be done a few times a week. Stationary bikes have been used in the research, and benefits are being seen with as little as 20 minutes of workout three days a week. The intervals may involve 1-2 min of intense workout, and 3 minutes "rest" or relaxed workout, repeated over the 20 minute time period. There are different conventions for the intervals, so do your research.

The ex-hiker also needs to eat. Starving is not good. Eat, well.

Hope you find a solution to your problem.

Wow Pervy Sage, that sure saved me from reading all the technical stuff, thanks for posting this, you make it make sense, good stuff here.

Not sure how I came up with John Pervy Sage, sorry bout that, again great read!

[pervy_sage]

, is the interval training can be anything

Like walking my dog. Rush! Stop and sniff. Rush to the next spot! Stop and sniff.

That will work, so long as u walk fast enough to "feel the burn" between sniffings.

[pervy_sage]

As a followup, addendum, whatever...this was a short blog post I did on my pre-thru hike exercise research. Covers much of the same plus touches on specific targeted exercises. I really need to look up the research papers on the HIIT to flesh out that post.

http://psrat.blogspot.com/2012/03/sw...th-oldies.html

[Pedaling Fool]

This is kind of interesting http://newsroom.unsw.edu.au/news/hea...rint-fight-fat (article copied below). They're talking specifically about sprinting on a bike, but I don't see why it wouldn't apply to any other type activity, say sprinting in a run or high intensity weight training. I also, typically, do much more than 3 sprints during my rides, of course I save the hardest sprints for the end of the ride. Yesterday I did 30 miles and at least 15 sprints -- I was pretty beaten up by the end, especially since it was all on sun-beaten roads. But I've learned that when I do a normal ride, without sprints (which isn't very often), it is so, so easy to cruise.


Sprint to fight fat

29 June 2012


Men can significantly cut the visceral fat in their abdomen with one hour of interval sprinting per week instead of relying on seven hours of jogging a week for a similar result, according to new Australian research.

Just 20-minutes of sprints on an exercise bike, three times a week, is all that’s required, the University of New South Wales researchers found.

“Sprints are a very time efficient form of exercise,” says Associate Professor Steve Boutcher, who led the UNSW Medicine research.

“The sprint program, LifeSprints, reduced visceral fat with seven times less exercise time and has a much greater impact on cardiovascular and metabolic health than reductions of subcutaneous fat stores in the legs and arms.”

Men who participated in the research lost two kilograms of body fat, 17 per cent of visceral fat, and put on 1.2 kilograms of muscle in their legs and trunk after the 12-week exercise bike sprints program.

“Other studies using aerobic exercise, such as continuous jogging, have found that the amount of exercise needed to produce a similar decrease in visceral fat was around seven hours per week for 14 weeks,” Professor Boutcher says.

The team of researchers has previously studied the impact of the sprinting program on women, which also showed a significant loss of body fat from stationary cycling for 20 minutes, three times a week.

LifeSprints were also good for those who wanted to boost muscle mass.

“Participation in regular aerobic exercise typically results in little or no gain in muscle mass, whereas moderately hard resistance exercise over months may increase muscle mass. The amount of LifeSprints exercise, however, needed to significantly increase muscle mass appears to be much less,” Professor Boutcher says.

The research was carried out by UNSW Medicine PhD candidate Mehrdad Heydari, with body composition assessment by Professor Judith Freund from St Vincent’s Hospital’s Nuclear Imaging Department. It was funded by Diabetes Australia and is published in the Journal of Obesity.

Media contact: Associate Professor Steve Boutcher | UNSW School of Medical Sciences | 02 9385 2877 |

[et_afig]

I recommend reading Born to Run. I know there are people against it, but its out there and its all valid data and examples.

I hated running, I started slowly with my minimalist shoes (Merrel Trail Gloves) and now the only thing that hurts is my calves because I was able to pound down more miles of pavement than I normally would have with regular tennis shoes.

[leaftye]

They're talking specifically about sprinting on a bike, but I don't see why it wouldn't apply to any other type activity, say sprinting in a run or high intensity weight training.

Sprinting in a run would be killer. It's almost by definition not sprinting if you can do it for 20 minutes. It's different on a bike. I don't know why. The idea makes sense though.

[Pedaling Fool]

Sprinting in a run would be killer. It's almost by definition not sprinting if you can do it for 20 minutes. It's different on a bike. I don't know why. The idea makes sense though.

Yeah, if you're going at it for 20 minutes, it is definitely NOT a sprint.

Actually, I kill myself more when I sprint while cycling. I can sprint so hard that I actually get light-headed and my heart is wanting to pound thru my chest and sometimes even some chest pain involved, try not to do that too often, but it’s easy to do.

Whereas when I’m running when I sprint, which I usually do about 3 times during a run, my heart feels like it wants to pound thru my chest, but don’t really have the other issues like in cycling. I’m sure I could if I really pushed it, but it’s just so much easier to do it on a bike. Maybe it has something to do with the speed and wanting to get that little bit more of speed out of my bike, I don’t know.

I generally agree that running is more difficult than cycling, but if you want to get your heart pounding on a bike, it’s very easy to do, very easy. The problem with cycling is that most people fall victim to the advantages of cycling, such as sitting, riding just fast enough to create a pleasant breeze, allowing your momentum to do most of the work, riding in the shade and staying out of the wind or away from hills. But if you’re a serious cyclists it can be a very serious cardio workout.

The other problem with cycling is that my cycling legs don't convert too well to running (or hiking) legs, but my running legs more readily convert to cycling legs, not perfect, but a much easier transition.