Fat Loss and Running

[KoolDrew]

Matt Perryman just posted an article on his blog that I think makes a very good point that people often forget when dieting, which can be summed up in this paragraph.

It?d be nice if it were as easy as just going out and running until you were lean; some people might be able to do this, if they have the genes for it. Most people won?t. They?ll run into issues with the body fighting back as their ?recovery sink? empties out. Fat loss stops, and instead of doing the one thing that would help - resting and eating more - the average person assumes s/he isn?t working hard enough and eats less food while doing more activity. Sooner or later these people give up in frustration.

The trick is to help your body keep the sink as full as it can. Work with the adaptation process, not against it. You?ll be much happier (and leaner) for your efforts.

I see the bold part way too often, which is why I often recommend diet breaks and deloads.

Here's the full article:
http://www.ampedtraining.com/physique/fat-loss-running/

 

[EvilYoda]

My method is even better:

don't run.

(I suck at it and need to work on it just about as much as I do my clean, snatch, kipping pullup, etc, LOL)

 

[TallBill]

I've started running recently without modifying my diet to much. I do plan on switching weight gainers to one that uses complex carbs instead of simple ones to see if that helps too. Not that I'm "fat" but I do have some bodyfat that I'd like to shed.

 

[KoolDrew]

Originally posted by: EvilYoda
My method is even better:

don't run.

(I suck at it and need to work on it just about as much as I do my clean, snatch, kipping pullup, etc, LOL)

Even without running, dieting too hard for too long is never a good idea. Many people make it even worse by adding a ton of exercise in the mix.

 

[brikis98]

It's a good point in general. People often have unrealistic expectations for diet & exercise. When reality sets in and they see how long progress actually takes, they quite naturally assume that doing more will speed things up. More often then not, this leads to overtraining, poor nourishment, frustration and eventually, failure.

I'd also note that long slow distance (LSD) running is a crappy way to train for just about anything, whether your goal is weight loss or improved fitness. Of course, it's way better than nothing, but unless you actually need LSD abilities (ie, you're a triathlete), there are far better alternatives. The Crossfit Journal's What is Fitness? article does a pretty good job of discussing this.

 

[KoolDrew]

I'd also note that long slow distance (LSD) running is a crappy way to train for just about anything, whether your goal is weight loss or improved fitness. Of course, it's way better than nothing, but unless you actually need LSD abilities (ie, you're a triathlete), there are far better alternatives. The Crossfit Journal's What is Fitness? article does a pretty good job of discussing this.

Both methods have there pros and cons and both can be used effectively.

 

[Megatomic]

LSD is great for fat loss as you keep your cardiopulmonary systems in the fat burning zone almost the whole time. Of course the afterburn duration is shorter... That's the tradeoff right there.

 

[brikis98]

I was going to write a long reply about how LSD running is almost never the optimal choice whether your goal is fat loss, improved cardiovascular health or increased physical performance, but someone has already done that for me: "Endurance Training: Intervals vs. Long-Slow/Steady-Distance". Yes, LSD running is extremely easy to get into and its low intensity is a good way to start for someone completely untrained. However, once a small base of fitness has been built, LSD running alone is not a great choice.

 

[RagingBITCH]

Originally posted by: brikis98
I was going to write a long reply about how LSD running is almost never the optimal choice whether your goal is fat loss, improved cardiovascular health or increased physical performance, but someone has already done that for me: "Endurance Training: Intervals vs. Long-Slow/Steady-Distance". Yes, LSD running is extremely easy to get into and its low intensity is a good way to start for someone completely untrained. However, once a small base of fitness has been built, LSD running alone is not a great choice.

If you're a runner or into tri's, you need to do both. I'd still do some form of LSD though - only doing intervals or LSD just gets boring, and the average Joe is likely to get burned out from working out doing it.

 

[brikis98]

Originally posted by: RagingBITCH

Originally posted by: brikis98
I was going to write a long reply about how LSD running is almost never the optimal choice whether your goal is fat loss, improved cardiovascular health or increased physical performance, but someone has already done that for me: "Endurance Training: Intervals vs. Long-Slow/Steady-Distance". Yes, LSD running is extremely easy to get into and its low intensity is a good way to start for someone completely untrained. However, once a small base of fitness has been built, LSD running alone is not a great choice.

If you're a runner or into tri's, you need to do both. I'd still do some form of LSD though - only doing intervals or LSD just gets boring, and the average Joe is likely to get burned out from working out doing it.

If you read the article I linked, he says exactly that: if your sport specifically requires LSD running - ie, a triathalon or marathon - then obviously you need to do a decent amount of LSD running, although even those sports typically use a good amount of interval training. However, no matter what you do, LSD running only is typically less than optimal.

 

[KoolDrew]

LSD running alone is not a great choice.

And where did I say either one done alone would be a better choice? Both have there pros and cons, even though there seems to be a current fascination with interval training and many people seem to think it's the only way to train. However, I'm not going to write out a long reply as to why as it's already been done. Lyle McDonald did a a month long series on Steady State vs Interval Training and here's the final conclusion where he links to all of the articles:

http://www.bodyrecomposition.c...ally-a-conclusion.html

 

[Megatomic]

I incorporate VO2 max, LT, and efficiency training into my weekly schedule. As part of that, HIIT is a player. So is LSD. And so is strength. Working on just one facet is shortsighted and will lead to less than optimal results. I don't think anyone here espouses ONLY doing LSD work, not that I've seen anyway.

 

[Megatomic]

Originally posted by: KoolDrew
http://www.bodyrecomposition.c...ally-a-conclusion.html

Excellent linkage. That guy's homepage is now bookmarked.

 

[brikis98]

Originally posted by: KoolDrew

LSD running alone is not a great choice.

And where did I say either one done alone would be a better choice?

You didn't. In fact, my comments in this thread aren't really directed at you or any recommendations you make. They are general comments on what the average person does for "exercise" - a slow, steady run a few times per week. Many people consider LSD running to be the end all of exercise and I think it's important to mention that doing LSD running alone is typically suboptimal. The Crossfit Journal and dragondoor articles I linked are good explanations of why.

Oh, and thanks for the link to Lyle's article, I'll read through it when I get some time.