2.6K Post(s)Gender: MaleGoal: BodybuildingDate Joined: October 10, 2013
Posted
Nation,
I have partaken, like Scott and a few others, in the MuscleGenes genetic testing. This is great science and I think will take a lot of the guess work out of training for everyone and revolutionize the fitness industry. I haven't gotten my results yet but I did get the accompanying booklet on a host of topics and info. One of the more controversial topics is cardio. Musclegenes references several studies that suggest that no cardio should be done before or after working out but rather at least 6 hours before or after. Now if you peruse the Internet, you will also find lots of studies stating the best time to do cardio is immediately after working out and the best type of cardio is HIIT (High Intensity Interval Training). MuscleGenes agrees with HIIT as the best cardio but that is it.
I reviewed the referenced studies as well as other studies stating the opposite. I have been involved in selling analytic software for businesses since 2011. I am fairly well versed - but not an expert - on statistical modeling. You have predictive models and you have observational models. Predictive models use very complex math and algorithms to predict future outcomes from historical data. Observational studies look for correlation and cause and effect in a current data set. Because the algorithms used for predictive modeling do not work well with large data sets, they use smaller portions of historical data then use a series of cross-validation techniques to ensure the model hits the sweet spot between bias (accuracy) and variance (ability to reproduce the results over many different data sets).
Observational analysis doesn't have this problem. The algorithms they use become more accurate and the insights garnered are more relevant the larger the sample size. The more data, the better.
My point in all this is all the observational studies I have seen concerning when is the best time to do cardio have used sample sizes too small to truly be statistically relevant, in my opinion. You can make statistics say anything you want. If I go from selling $100 month to $200 month, my sales increased 100%. If I sell 20 million a month and then increase to 30 million a month, my sales "only" increased 50%. Thus, it is very easy to assume a high statistical correlation if the sample size is too small.
My opinion is everyone has to see what works best for themselves. This includes the timing, type, and duration of the cardio. You will know quickly if what you are doing is working or not. I personally do HIIT right after my workouts and I have mostly done cardio after my workouts for many, many years and I saw no detrimental effects. The bottom line is the human body is so complex it is virtually impossible to develop a "one-size-fits-all" policy for cardio. This is not the fault of MuscleGenes or the myriad other companies and people providing advice on weight lifting and cardio. It is more a function of the wide variability of humans :-)
John
34 years of lifting and nutritional experience and resident "old man" :-)
MS Athlete and past Super Hermanite since 2013.
I have partaken, like Scott and a few others, in the MuscleGenes genetic testing. This is great science and I think will take a lot of the guess work out of training for everyone and revolutionize the fitness industry. I haven't gotten my results yet but I did get the accompanying booklet on a host of topics and info. One of the more controversial topics is cardio. Musclegenes references several studies that suggest that no cardio should be done before or after working out but rather at least 6 hours before or after. Now if you peruse the Internet, you will also find lots of studies stating the best time to do cardio is immediately after working out and the best type of cardio is HIIT (High Intensity Interval Training). MuscleGenes agrees with HIIT as the best cardio but that is it.
I reviewed the referenced studies as well as other studies stating the opposite. I have been involved in selling analytic software for businesses since 2011. I am fairly well versed - but not an expert - on statistical modeling. You have predictive models and you have observational models. Predictive models use very complex math and algorithms to predict future outcomes from historical data. Observational studies look for correlation and cause and effect in a current data set. Because the algorithms used for predictive modeling do not work well with large data sets, they use smaller portions of historical data then use a series of cross-validation techniques to ensure the model hits the sweet spot between bias (accuracy) and variance (ability to reproduce the results over many different data sets).
Observational analysis doesn't have this problem. The algorithms they use become more accurate and the insights garnered are more relevant the larger the sample size. The more data, the better.
My point in all this is all the observational studies I have seen concerning when is the best time to do cardio have used sample sizes too small to truly be statistically relevant, in my opinion. You can make statistics say anything you want. If I go from selling $100 month to $200 month, my sales increased 100%. If I sell 20 million a month and then increase to 30 million a month, my sales "only" increased 50%. Thus, it is very easy to assume a high statistical correlation if the sample size is too small.
My opinion is everyone has to see what works best for themselves. This includes the timing, type, and duration of the cardio. You will know quickly if what you are doing is working or not. I personally do HIIT right after my workouts and I have mostly done cardio after my workouts for many, many years and I saw no detrimental effects. The bottom line is the human body is so complex it is virtually impossible to develop a "one-size-fits-all" policy for cardio. This is not the fault of MuscleGenes or the myriad other companies and people providing advice on weight lifting and cardio. It is more a function of the wide variability of humans :-)
John
The best scenario for me is to do cardio on a separate day or AFTER my training when I get home.
Whenever I run before lifting I feel much weaker.
But since I started doing HIIT training for 25 minutes, cardio doesn't seem to take away as much if I was to do it before a lift.
Who knows, maybe its all just mental and I am crazy :)
Need 1 on 1 coaching? Send me a direct message to learn more!
I have partaken, like Scott and a few others, in the MuscleGenes genetic testing. This is great science and I think will take a lot of the guess work out of training for everyone and revolutionize the fitness industry. I haven't gotten my results yet but I did get the accompanying booklet on a host of topics and info. One of the more controversial topics is cardio. Musclegenes references several studies that suggest that no cardio should be done before or after working out but rather at least 6 hours before or after. Now if you peruse the Internet, you will also find lots of studies stating the best time to do cardio is immediately after working out and the best type of cardio is HIIT (High Intensity Interval Training). MuscleGenes agrees with HIIT as the best cardio but that is it.
I reviewed the referenced studies as well as other studies stating the opposite. I have been involved in selling analytic software for businesses since 2011. I am fairly well versed - but not an expert - on statistical modeling. You have predictive models and you have observational models. Predictive models use very complex math and algorithms to predict future outcomes from historical data. Observational studies look for correlation and cause and effect in a current data set. Because the algorithms used for predictive modeling do not work well with large data sets, they use smaller portions of historical data then use a series of cross-validation techniques to ensure the model hits the sweet spot between bias (accuracy) and variance (ability to reproduce the results over many different data sets).
Observational analysis doesn't have this problem. The algorithms they use become more accurate and the insights garnered are more relevant the larger the sample size. The more data, the better.
My point in all this is all the observational studies I have seen concerning when is the best time to do cardio have used sample sizes too small to truly be statistically relevant, in my opinion. You can make statistics say anything you want. If I go from selling $100 month to $200 month, my sales increased 100%. If I sell 20 million a month and then increase to 30 million a month, my sales "only" increased 50%. Thus, it is very easy to assume a high statistical correlation if the sample size is too small.
My opinion is everyone has to see what works best for themselves. This includes the timing, type, and duration of the cardio. You will know quickly if what you are doing is working or not. I personally do HIIT right after my workouts and I have mostly done cardio after my workouts for many, many years and I saw no detrimental effects. The bottom line is the human body is so complex it is virtually impossible to develop a "one-size-fits-all" policy for cardio. This is not the fault of MuscleGenes or the myriad other companies and people providing advice on weight lifting and cardio. It is more a function of the wide variability of humans :-)
John
I've been experimenting with cardio ever since I started hitting the gym.
Before I went to the gym I was going for longish, slow, steady runs for about 40 minutes every day. Then I switched things up to doing HIIT for 20 minutes every day, but one thing I always did was do it straight after my workouts.
Earlier this year though I decided maybe it was holding me back in terms of muscle growth doing it then, and I acutally stopped doing it completely - I wouldn't do that again, I wasn't impressed with the results of no cardio for a month.
Now that I'm back into it, I do it once at night and once right after my workout, soon it's going to be twice at night at least and once after a workout.
It's hard to tell, but I think doing it later on is more beneficial, for me anyway. I've never really tried it before lifting, but don't plan to either :)
I think my main problem at the moment is making sure I am eating enough calories to get those muscles to grow...FOOD FOOD FOOD!
I have partaken, like Scott and a few others, in the MuscleGenes genetic testing. This is great science and I think will take a lot of the guess work out of training for everyone and revolutionize the fitness industry. I haven't gotten my results yet but I did get the accompanying booklet on a host of topics and info. One of the more controversial topics is cardio. Musclegenes references several studies that suggest that no cardio should be done before or after working out but rather at least 6 hours before or after. Now if you peruse the Internet, you will also find lots of studies stating the best time to do cardio is immediately after working out and the best type of cardio is HIIT (High Intensity Interval Training). MuscleGenes agrees with HIIT as the best cardio but that is it.
I reviewed the referenced studies as well as other studies stating the opposite. I have been involved in selling analytic software for businesses since 2011. I am fairly well versed - but not an expert - on statistical modeling. You have predictive models and you have observational models. Predictive models use very complex math and algorithms to predict future outcomes from historical data. Observational studies look for correlation and cause and effect in a current data set. Because the algorithms used for predictive modeling do not work well with large data sets, they use smaller portions of historical data then use a series of cross-validation techniques to ensure the model hits the sweet spot between bias (accuracy) and variance (ability to reproduce the results over many different data sets).
Observational analysis doesn't have this problem. The algorithms they use become more accurate and the insights garnered are more relevant the larger the sample size. The more data, the better.
My point in all this is all the observational studies I have seen concerning when is the best time to do cardio have used sample sizes too small to truly be statistically relevant, in my opinion. You can make statistics say anything you want. If I go from selling $100 month to $200 month, my sales increased 100%. If I sell 20 million a month and then increase to 30 million a month, my sales "only" increased 50%. Thus, it is very easy to assume a high statistical correlation if the sample size is too small.
My opinion is everyone has to see what works best for themselves. This includes the timing, type, and duration of the cardio. You will know quickly if what you are doing is working or not. I personally do HIIT right after my workouts and I have mostly done cardio after my workouts for many, many years and I saw no detrimental effects. The bottom line is the human body is so complex it is virtually impossible to develop a "one-size-fits-all" policy for cardio. This is not the fault of MuscleGenes or the myriad other companies and people providing advice on weight lifting and cardio. It is more a function of the wide variability of humans :-)
John
I have been doing Cardio after weight training for past 5 months and its been going great, my weight did increase and i love the muscle definition, although i did't notice any muscle loss but surely i got more lean.
I did try doing cardio before weight training but just like scott said it also made me weaker i wasn't able to lift that properly that i used to, i did stick to that program for some weeks but i switched it to cardio after weight training it works for me.
You are absolutely right about the fact that human body is too complect to develop one policy that fits everyone, so its just about doing what works for you best.
Veni Vidi Vici : I came, I saw, and I conquered.
Started Lifting December 2012, almost 2 years of lifting experience.
Age 19, Pursuing Computer Science engineering.
I have partaken, like Scott and a few others, in the MuscleGenes genetic testing. This is great science and I think will take a lot of the guess work out of training for everyone and revolutionize the fitness industry. I haven't gotten my results yet but I did get the accompanying booklet on a host of topics and info. One of the more controversial topics is cardio. Musclegenes references several studies that suggest that no cardio should be done before or after working out but rather at least 6 hours before or after. Now if you peruse the Internet, you will also find lots of studies stating the best time to do cardio is immediately after working out and the best type of cardio is HIIT (High Intensity Interval Training). MuscleGenes agrees with HIIT as the best cardio but that is it.
I reviewed the referenced studies as well as other studies stating the opposite. I have been involved in selling analytic software for businesses since 2011. I am fairly well versed - but not an expert - on statistical modeling. You have predictive models and you have observational models. Predictive models use very complex math and algorithms to predict future outcomes from historical data. Observational studies look for correlation and cause and effect in a current data set. Because the algorithms used for predictive modeling do not work well with large data sets, they use smaller portions of historical data then use a series of cross-validation techniques to ensure the model hits the sweet spot between bias (accuracy) and variance (ability to reproduce the results over many different data sets).
Observational analysis doesn't have this problem. The algorithms they use become more accurate and the insights garnered are more relevant the larger the sample size. The more data, the better.
My point in all this is all the observational studies I have seen concerning when is the best time to do cardio have used sample sizes too small to truly be statistically relevant, in my opinion. You can make statistics say anything you want. If I go from selling $100 month to $200 month, my sales increased 100%. If I sell 20 million a month and then increase to 30 million a month, my sales "only" increased 50%. Thus, it is very easy to assume a high statistical correlation if the sample size is too small.
My opinion is everyone has to see what works best for themselves. This includes the timing, type, and duration of the cardio. You will know quickly if what you are doing is working or not. I personally do HIIT right after my workouts and I have mostly done cardio after my workouts for many, many years and I saw no detrimental effects. The bottom line is the human body is so complex it is virtually impossible to develop a "one-size-fits-all" policy for cardio. This is not the fault of MuscleGenes or the myriad other companies and people providing advice on weight lifting and cardio. It is more a function of the wide variability of humans :-)
John
Sweet John! I can't wait to hear your results, if you are going to share them with us that is. As for cardio I usually try to do mine on seperate days but depending on my routine I don't seem to have a problem if I do mine before or after my lifting as long as I keep it 20-30 mins. I do however prefer mine after lifting and I do it only twice a week.
I have been training coming up on 6 years and have made some great gainz. I've done a lot of trial and error on myself as well as learned from others and through research online. I've come along way in strength and size since I've started. I will continue to learn and make myself better each day. MS Athlete/Super Hermanite BEING CHALLENGED IN LIFE IS INEVITABLE, BEING DEFEATED IS OPTIONAL.
20 Post(s)Gender: MaleGoal: BodybuildingDate Joined: August 8, 2014
Posted
A few months ago I read "Which Comes First, Cardio or Weights?: Fitness Myths, Training Truths, and Other Surprising Discoveries from the Science of Exercise" by Alex Hutchinson, which is a really interesting book about what scientific studies have found concerning a variety of fitness-related questions. About this specific topic, he tells that studies have shown that if you do weights and cardio on the same day, the improvements obtained from the second activity (mass and strenght for weights, endurance for cardio: calory consumption basically doesn't change ;) ) are much lower than what you would get if you did it on another day, mainly not because of previous tiredness but because the muscles have already "tuned" on the adaptation response triggered by the first activity. But, as long as you don't overdo the second activity (like intense running for over one hour after weights), that doesn't influence much the results of the first.
Bottom line is: don't do cardio before weights, if you do both on the same day, and the more time you let pass between weights and cardio, the better the endurance gains you'll make with cardio. But because most of us don't really care about them, just fat-burning, cardio right after weights is fine for most of us.
PhD student in laser & particle accelerator Physics.
Ju Jitsu black belt.
Back to training seriously since 1 year.
Goal: become like Jean-Claude Van Damme in his prime.
I have partaken, like Scott and a few others, in the MuscleGenes genetic testing. This is great science and I think will take a lot of the guess work out of training for everyone and revolutionize the fitness industry. I haven't gotten my results yet but I did get the accompanying booklet on a host of topics and info. One of the more controversial topics is cardio. Musclegenes references several studies that suggest that no cardio should be done before or after working out but rather at least 6 hours before or after. Now if you peruse the Internet, you will also find lots of studies stating the best time to do cardio is immediately after working out and the best type of cardio is HIIT (High Intensity Interval Training). MuscleGenes agrees with HIIT as the best cardio but that is it.
I reviewed the referenced studies as well as other studies stating the opposite. I have been involved in selling analytic software for businesses since 2011. I am fairly well versed - but not an expert - on statistical modeling. You have predictive models and you have observational models. Predictive models use very complex math and algorithms to predict future outcomes from historical data. Observational studies look for correlation and cause and effect in a current data set. Because the algorithms used for predictive modeling do not work well with large data sets, they use smaller portions of historical data then use a series of cross-validation techniques to ensure the model hits the sweet spot between bias (accuracy) and variance (ability to reproduce the results over many different data sets).
Observational analysis doesn't have this problem. The algorithms they use become more accurate and the insights garnered are more relevant the larger the sample size. The more data, the better.
My point in all this is all the observational studies I have seen concerning when is the best time to do cardio have used sample sizes too small to truly be statistically relevant, in my opinion. You can make statistics say anything you want. If I go from selling $100 month to $200 month, my sales increased 100%. If I sell 20 million a month and then increase to 30 million a month, my sales "only" increased 50%. Thus, it is very easy to assume a high statistical correlation if the sample size is too small.
My opinion is everyone has to see what works best for themselves. This includes the timing, type, and duration of the cardio. You will know quickly if what you are doing is working or not. I personally do HIIT right after my workouts and I have mostly done cardio after my workouts for many, many years and I saw no detrimental effects. The bottom line is the human body is so complex it is virtually impossible to develop a "one-size-fits-all" policy for cardio. This is not the fault of MuscleGenes or the myriad other companies and people providing advice on weight lifting and cardio. It is more a function of the wide variability of humans :-)
John
Hi Nation,
I'm finally back on board (hopefully), with little more time which I can share here. And there almost can't be better topic for comeback :D
After almost completing course for PT, I actually still don't understand meaning of: cardio! I think this is expression mostly generated by fitness industry/population and have no strict usage/meaning around fitness nation. Do you all, who practise cardio, have answers to: why I am doing cardio? What is purpose of it? How does it work? What I benefit from it? What is it?(!)
Also, when listening and read about cardio...I do it for heart/health. I do it for loosing fat. I do it for additional burning calories on training. I do it...because I read on internet/friend of friend told like. Do you mean and talk about same thing when discuss about cardio?
In general basics, there are 4 major parameters: anaerobic & aerobic training and hormonal & nervous respons to training stimulus. Every training system and type is combination of those 4 things and final results corespond to training stimulus; different parameters have different impact and therefore different results/body adaptations. Like all other training types, also cardio can be anaerobic or aerobic workout or combination of both. And all three provide different results.
Because of these reasons I don't "know" the expression cardio, but use aerobic and anaerobic, or endurance workout. Actually, cardio as cardio-vascular/respiratory exercise should last at least 10 min before it's "detected" by body as such exercise. Therefore warm-up and cool-down don't count as cardio, even if done by "cardio-type" exercise (eg running).
Ever since is my opinion, that if you have specific workout and goals, don't mix training types. Therefore, if you work hypertrophy, don't do cardio in the same training session. I agree here, that at least 6 hours have to be in-between training sessions. Same is true for streching; it is adviced not to do it just after workout, but to do seperate training session for this; at least 6 hours in-between. If you are recreational athlete, do this on different days.
Claiming that HIIT is best cardio...is ridiculous and missleading. It is gaining on popularity rapidly and some very strong reasons are on it's side:
- training session duration is quite short - in fast paced life-style this is huge adventage
- you are "dead" after workout - people think workout is good only if you are dead tired and lost 2 liters of water by sweat
- if done right, body is "on fire" additional 24-48 hours
Those three factors are, in my opinion, main reasons, why HIIT is excelent type of cardio workout and have adventage over continous cardio workout such as running. But on other hand, say that running is not efficient, if you always run 45 minutes 3 times a week... do always 3x12 wtih 70% 1RM...is it successfull? OK, then first learn about how to do proper "cardio" and then judge. It's similar story with carbs, but I won't go in nutrition right now :)
Ouh, btw, I also think that if you are able to do HIIT training AND serious "regular" training (hypertrophy, strength, power/explosiveness) then one of them or both are not done like they should be. OK, I admit, tabata is classified as HIIT and if you do one (4 min) you should still be able to do regular training. But then this is not cardio...
A word about genetic testing...I won't be too smart, because I didn't have time to "study" this thing more in detail, but I think this won't be revolution in fitness industry. In Slovenia we have this option I think already for 1.5 years, but results focus more on nutrition. I never dig too much into that and also there is no talk about that at all. Personally, I think this is useful for pro athletes like world-class athletes or like Scott, because those people pursue last missperfections. It is quite interesting "toy" for serious "recreational" athletes like @jmboiardi, who knows his body, have training experiences, have knowledge about training, nutrition and body itself. And it is useless for all others. If you have PT, it is good help for him, but if PT is good, he/she can drive you to success in "classic way".
Otherway, especially as an engineneer I fully support developing technology and science in that way...but...
Currently I would rather test myself about muscle fibre types % in my body, I see that data as much more usefull. If I'm right, I saw that MuscleGenes test gives you also that, but honestly, I doubt you get true value from spit of saliva.
As conclusion, I agree with John, that human body is too complex and too adaptable (also for bad habits and other inputs), that is impossible to have "one-size-fits-all" policy for anything.
I would like to add that we should have put much more effort in knowledge...and useage of our brains. Learn about very basics, like muscle fibre types, metabolism processes, energy ways body have, etc, etc. Basic principles about how we works are same for all...and we should learn more from, hmm, past observational analysis. Something it works for 50, 100, 1000 years, it works with reason.
BR, Gregor
Super Hermanite
NCSF personal trainer
NLP coach
IronMan finisher
