Endurance Training: 5 min. = 6 hrs.

by **foweyman** » Mon Aug 31, 2009 2:22 pm

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/2 ... es-a-week/

I wonder if the results would be similar for already fit people.

by **WouterB** » Mon Aug 31, 2009 3:44 pm

Pfieuw, you should test that! I suggest you pour concrete in an old rucksack, put it on your back and jump in at the deep side of the pool. Just remember to get out after 20 seconds. Let us know if it worked.

by **foweyman** » Tue Sep 01, 2009 5:45 pm

ArtVandelay wrote:the only thing the article says is that the cells in the rats that exercised for 6 minutes showed "preliminary molecular changes that would increase endurance", not that endurance was actually increased.

Actually it said that the 6 hr. group showed preliminary changes and the 5 min group showed the same results. You are right that endurance wasn't tested in the rats, but the reported endurance increases of the two human groups were identical.

ArtVandelay wrote:intense/interval workouts have their place, but at the end of the day, 2-6 minute workouts are never going to be solely sufficient to prepare you for ~12hr days of climbing, and they are never going to be solely sufficient for significant weight loss.

Do you have any references for this that compare long and short training regimes? I've read some, but I'm not sure there has been enough comparative testing of the endurance enhancement of short, high intensity workouts to reach this conclusion. One study reported that the high intensity workouts increased production of human growth hormone, which reduced the appetite.

by **Augie Medina** » Tue Sep 01, 2009 8:03 pm

Sounds like the panacea of a magic pill or always wanting a shortcut to every objective. One, I truly believe in the benefits of anerobic workouts, whether it's interval workouts on the track or bike or weight training doing Olympic lifts (Snatch, Power Clean, Clean and Jerk). But I think to do an endurance event such as an ultramarathon, you have to train your body to stay on its feet for hours and hours and you won't achieve this "wiring" of your endurance systems by doing Tabata intervals.

The article makes the point that people looking for a quick fix usually overlook, that is, that anerobic workouts truly hurt if you're doing them right. That's of course why most people won't stick with them. And they can lead to injury unless you've built a base of fitness from which to work.

Of course, if you do nothing but long aerobic workouts, you fail to develop your anerobic systems. This will leave you at a disadvantage when you need to perform short, intense bursts of effort such as that dyno on your trad climb or moving quickly up that last 500 feet of gain when time is of the essence.

In short, you need both types of workouts in your training. The short one won't substitute for the longer one.

by **justing** » Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:50 am

Does anybody do these Tabata intervals? These are the ones where you go 20 seconds all out, take a 10 second break, and then repeat for a total of 8 sets. I try to work in some interval training about once a week into my workouts, and tonight I thought I'd try doing the Tabata things. I did pullups first, then situps, pushups and hill sprints.

It was sufficiently tough, especially the hill sprints. :shock:

The pullups didn't go so well though. I do sets of pullups pretty regularly (~1-2 days a week I'll do four sets of pullups averaging around 9 per set.). But after four 20 second rounds I was having a hard time even doing one pullup. To make it through all 8 rounds I would have to pace myself, which would seem to go against the whole spirit of the thing. Am I just a weakling? Let me rephrase. Is it only because I'm a weakling? Or should I do something other than the pullups? Any other thoughts re: the Tabata intervals?

by **kheegster** » Thu Sep 03, 2009 11:05 am

ArtVandelay wrote:
Your Dudeness wrote:
ArtVandelay wrote:the only thing the article says is that the cells in the rats that exercised for 6 minutes showed "preliminary molecular changes that would increase endurance", not that endurance was actually increased.

intense/interval workouts have their place, but at the end of the day, 2-6 minute workouts are never going to be solely sufficient to prepare you for ~12hr days of climbing, and they are never going to be solely sufficient for significant weight loss.

The workouts aren't 2-6 minutes. As I wrote above, my 5 minutes of running takes 35 minutes. I can walk 12 hours in the mountains without any trouble.

uh, i was talking about the article which is about a study done on rats that exercised for only a few minutes, not about your workout which is 35 minutes. the article tries to suggest that people can get fit and healthy and get better endurance working out literally less than 10 minutes per week...i was just stating my opinion that i think that's a bunch of bullshit.

Interval training does jack shit for fat burning, and most of us require regular endurance/aerobic workouts to ensure that we're not carrying too much beer belly.

by **foweyman** » Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:30 pm

kheegster wrote:Interval training does jack shit for fat burning, and most of us require regular endurance/aerobic workouts to ensure that we're not carrying too much beer belly.

Not really: "Percent body fat showed a decreasing trend in the interval training group, but no change was found in the steady state training group . The interval training group showed an acute 5.4% increase in resting metabolic rate 24 hours post-exercise . This may explain, in part, the trend for a 4.8% decrease in body fat percentage. These findings show that even if caloric expenditure during exercise is equal, higher intensity exercise may further aid weight loss due to an acute increase in energy expenditure up to 24 hrs following exercise."

King, J., Panton, L., Broeder, C., Browder, K., Quindry, J., & Rhea, L. (2001). A comparison of high intensity vs. low intensity exercise on body composition in overweight women. Medicine and Science in Sports & Exercise, 33, A2421

for more info. goggle "interval training fat burning"

by **foweyman** » Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:50 pm

justing wrote:Does anybody do these Tabata intervals? These are the ones where you go 20 seconds all out, take a 10 second break, and then repeat for a total of 8 sets. I try to work in some interval training about once a week into my workouts, and tonight I thought I'd try doing the Tabata things. I did pullups first, then situps, pushups and hill sprints.

It was sufficiently tough, especially the hill sprints. The pullups didn't go so well though. I do sets of pullups pretty regularly (~1-2 days a week I'll do four sets of pullups averaging around 9 per set.). But after four 20 second rounds I was having a hard time even doing one pullup. To make it through all 8 rounds I would have to pace myself, which would seem to go against the whole spirit of the thing. Am I just a weakling? Let me rephrase. Is it only because I'm a weakling? Or should I do something other than the pullups? Any other thoughts re: the Tabata intervals?

I regularly do 6 or 7, 20 sec. hill sprints (100% effort) with 3-5 min. rest intervals. The first 4 are about the same speed, but the rest get slower and slower and more painful. With a mere 10 sec. rest interval, even the 2nd one would be noticeably slower. This is fairly close to what the humans did in the above study. The Tabata study was on a bike which would probably be slightly less exhausting in a 20 sec. sprint than running, but I'd be really surprised if a 10 sec. recovery didn't cause a significant reduction in the speed of subsequent intervals.

by **iceisnice** » Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:18 pm

DO NOT GET SCIENTIFIC INFO FROM THE NYTIMES!!!!

Mainstream newspapes ALWAY misinterpret scientific results. The conclusions made about the athletes is just plain dumb (by the NYTIMES....the scientists). That experiment was not done in a vaccum. ALL of those athletes had big aerobic (yes, lots of LSD) conditioning behind them. The fact that no significant results we seen in a couple of weeks in NOT surprising. A couple of weeks is not enough to change things AND the athletes that did the interval stuff had an aerobic background already! This is nothing new. Interval/wieght training wil help an athete out (endurance athletes mostly) but ONLY on the strong backbones of an aerobic base.

by **foweyman** » Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:56 pm

iceisnice wrote:DO NOT GET SCIENTIFIC INFO FROM THE NYTIMES!!!!

Mainstream newspapes ALWAY misinterpret scientific results. The conclusions made about the athletes is just plain dumb (by the NYTIMES....the scientists). That experiment was not done in a vaccum. ALL of those athletes had big aerobic (yes, lots of LSD) conditioning behind them. The fact that no significant results we seen in a couple of weeks in NOT surprising. A couple of weeks is not enough to change things AND the athletes that did the interval stuff had an aerobic background already! This is nothing new. Interval/wieght training wil help an athete out (endurance athletes mostly) but ONLY on the strong backbones of an aerobic base.

Always?? Probably true sometimes, but it seems like a huge generalization. In this instance the NYT summary was far more accurate than yours. The subjects were "active but untrained" and not highly trained athletes. (which is why I initially asked how it would pertained to trained athletes) Furthermore, there were significant and similar changes reported in both groups and not "no significant results".

Can you cite any studies that support your last contention, because this study directly contradicts it.

Here's the original study: http://jp.physoc.org/content/586/1/151.full.pdf+html
where you can learn all about pyruvate dehydrogenase E1 alpha protein content, 3-hydroxyaceyl CoA dehydrogenase maximal activity, and protein content of peroxisome proliferated-activated receptor-lambda coactivator 1-alpha...it's almost as painful as the high intensity workout.

by **justing** » Fri Sep 04, 2009 9:36 pm

I do Tabatas, with pullups, they are a great way to suffer.
Keep doing the pullups, but keep an exercise band handy and when you start to fail, use the band. http://www.ehow.com/video_2351694_doing ... ll-up.html (wfs)
Or learn the kipping pull up. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAZaHzd6qAY (wfs). The kipping pull up is more of a metabolic conditioning exercise as opposed to pure strength of a dead hang pull up. As such, it is more in line with a Tabata workout as you are going for Metcon, not pure strength.
An aside, if you are doing 4 sets of ~9 pullups once or twice a week, where's your improvement? Try adding weights ~10 - 20lbs. Try doing 10 sets as many as you can each set, even if it's just one. Or try doing 100 pullups, not matter how long or how many sets it takes.
Or just sub in the air squat (great Tabata exercise) http://media.crossfit.com/cf-video/Cros ... Squats.wmv (wfs).

Those are some good suggestions, even if the crossfit videos are a little frightening to the uninitiated.

I may just substitute something like the air squats for the pullups for now.

To make strength improvements, I seem to need to be lifting weights at least two times a week. Fortunately during the summer I've been working in more actual climbing and hiking plus travelling in general, leaving less room for time spent in the gym. So I've been closer to once a week with the lifting for the last couple of months. Seems just enough to maintain but not improve.

BTW, those 10 second rests sure do go by in a damned hurry!

by **Augie Medina** » Sat Sep 05, 2009 12:24 am

It seems that an appropriate partner for the "Double Mint" air squat would help ease the pain.

Justing, when time constraints reduce me to very short weight sessions (for example, warm up plus only 15 minutes), I stick to the basics: squats (front and back), deadlifts and bench presses. Do them with minimal rest between sets and it'll leave huffing and puffing.

by **atavist** » Sat Sep 05, 2009 1:53 am

It's one thing to use rats to test chemo and exploratory cancer treatments, but using rats to test an exercise regimen is just lazy. Then extrapolating the results to humans really makes me question the research practices of the first scientist mentioned in the article. Or couldn't he find any obese subjects in Japan?

by **atavist** » Sat Sep 05, 2009 1:57 am

bird wrote: He likened it to our ancestors...walk through the savannah all day gathering, then a short burst to hunt and kill a gazelle (or something like that).

That's an intense burst of speed. Definitely outside my comfort zone.

by **Grampahawk** » Sat Sep 05, 2009 3:01 pm

Your Dudeness wrote:I've been doing something along the line of interval training now for about 6 months. A year ago I tried to take up running again because I really love the way it makes me feel but within a few months I got an overuse injury (Achilles tendon). One day after that and after it seemed the Achilles tendon had healed I was in the gym got on a tread mill and started walking slowly on it sort of just screwing around, kind of stretching. Before I knew it I had started running (i never liked tread mills--all my running was done outdoors). Anyway, I now workout on the treadmill about 2-3 times a week. I walk at 3-4 MPH for about 5 minutes, then run 9 MPH for 1, then walk 5 and run 1 at 10 mph, walk 5 and run 1 at 11-12 mph, walk 5 run 1 at 10 mph, walk 5 and run 1 at 9 mph and then walk 5. In 35 minutes that's only 5 minutes of running. The calorie counter thing on the machine claims I'm burning 320 calories which is probably accurate to within plus or minus 75 calories? I'm old and over weight and live at 7,300' so even though those speeds aren't setting any records I really feel it. For me there is an enormous difference between doing my fastest minute at 11 mph or doing it at 12 mph. I don't think I could do this 2-3 times in a week with a fastest minute run at 12 mph but it is pretty easy for me to do it 2-3 times a week with a fastest minute of 11 mph. I haven't had any over use injuries since i started this tread mill gig and I still get out and climb around on the local peaks for exercise too. Between the hamster gig and my wife cracking the whip I've lost 12-14 pounds since January.

Keep in mind that the calorie counter on the treadmill is 10-15% over-stated because the machine makes it easier to run.

Endurance Training: 5 min. = 6 hrs.

Endurance Training: 5 min. = 6 hrs.

Who is online