Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

If chronic cardio is bad for the heart, is HIIT really bad for the heart??

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • If chronic cardio is bad for the heart, is HIIT really bad for the heart??

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9g8e...ature=youtu.be
    Ok, so extreme chronic endurance exercise damages the heart.
    But, when I do HIIT/sprints, my heart is POUNDING out of my chest.
    Talk about overuse! This can't be good either.
    Is there any evidence that HIIT causes even worse heart damaged over time than slow cardio?

  • #2
    No.... not at this time.

    Comment


    • #3
      You don't understand. It's not your heart pounding that is bad. It's the chronic part that is bad. Short bursts turn on all kinds of beneficial hormones in your body. Long term slogging it out kills your mitochondria and down-regulates all those beneficial hormones.
      Female, 5'3", 50, Max squat: 202.5lbs. Max deadlift: 225 x 3.

      Comment


      • #4
        Chronic cardio as I understand it is high on long degradation from constant use and pretty low on recovery.

        M.

        Comment


        • #5
          Who is to say pumping at 100% for 5-10 mins doens't also kill mitochondria or whatever? I'd think whatever overuse issues you get from a 2 hour run are also present when the heart is pinned at 100%, even if for a shorter duration. The common denominator is that the heart is being taxed, either way.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by OnlyBodyWeight View Post
            Who is to say pumping at 100% for 5-10 mins doens't also kill mitochondria or whatever? I'd think whatever overuse issues you get from a 2 hour run are also present when the heart is pinned at 100%, even if for a shorter duration. The common denominator is that the heart is being taxed, either way.
            Not really. You're missing quite a bit.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by OnlyBodyWeight View Post
              Who is to say pumping at 100% for 5-10 mins doens't also kill mitochondria or whatever? I'd think whatever overuse issues you get from a 2 hour run are also present when the heart is pinned at 100%, even if for a shorter duration. The common denominator is that the heart is being taxed, either way.
              Ummm.... Science?

              Yours might be the common sense answer, or conclusion, but research does not support it.
              I got 99 problems but a pancake ain't one...

              My Journal

              Height: 6'3"
              SW (Feb 2012): 278
              SBF: 26% (Scale)
              CW (Sept 2015): 200
              CBF: 17% (Scale)

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by OnlyBodyWeight View Post
                Who is to say pumping at 100% for 5-10 mins doens't also kill mitochondria or whatever? I'd think whatever overuse issues you get from a 2 hour run are also present when the heart is pinned at 100%, even if for a shorter duration. The common denominator is that the heart is being taxed, either way.
                You're right. The heart is indeed being taxed either way. The difference is this: A brief dose of high stress will cause the body to over-compensate to improve it's condition given enough time/nutrition afterwards.

                More frequent and longer duration stress does not necessarily give the body the time to compensate, nor a profound reason to make any significant depth of change.

                In other words, if you did HIIT too frequently that would be just as bad, or worse than chronic cardio.
                Last edited by brittney_bodine; 02-07-2014, 08:32 AM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Skip to 1:02:00. This should answer your question related to mitochondria and adaptations to exercise.

                  Paleo Diet & Strength Training Biochemistry | Doug McGuff M.D. | Full Length HD - YouTube

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Everything I've ever read supports HIIT over chronic cardio. This is just one such article:

                    New Study Shows Cardio Workout May Damage Your Heart

                    The question you need to ask though is why any training of this type, do you really need it ?

                    Remember: The function of the cardiovascular system is to support the muscular system – not the other way around. If the human body is logical (and we assume that it is) then increases in muscular strength (from a proper strength-training program) will correlate to improvements in cardiovascular function

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Long slow distance trains your body only to do long slow distance. HIIT trains you body to be able to adapt very quickly to different heart rates. Heart rate variability is a very good indicator of good health.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Some more points of interest:

                        There is no such thing as aerobic exercise! We have all heard that activities such as jogging and cycling are “aerobic” while those such as weight training and sprinting are “anaerobic”. These distinctions are not 100% correct. The words aerobic and anaerobic refer to metabolic pathways which operate continuously at all times and in all activities. You cannot “turn off” either of these pathways by merely increasing or decreasing the intensity of an activity.

                        A word on intensity: Few of the “experts” who promote aerobics will debate our last statement. What they do say, however, is that gentle low-intensity activities use the aerobic pathway to a greater degree than they use the anaerobic pathway. We agree with this statement completely and feel that it should be taken to its logical conclusion: The most “aerobic” activity that a human being can engage in is sleeping!

                        Consider this: Dr. Kenneth Cooper (author of Aerobics, The New Aerobics, Aerobics for Women), the US. Air Force Cardiologist who coined the term “aerobics” (meaning a form of exercise) and has promoted their use for over 25 years now admits that he was wrong! According to Dr. Cooper, further research has shown that there is no correlation between aerobic endurance performance and health, longevity, or protection against heart-disease. He will admit, however, that such activities do carry with them a great risk of injury. Further, he admits that gross-overuse activities such as running may be so damaging to the body as to be considered carcinogenic.

                        Irving Dardik, MD, former vascular surgeon, contends that: “The basic concept of aerobics conditioning is wrong.” He also contends that the best way to train the vascular system is to build flexibility into its response by using short bouts of elevation followed by sudden recovery, then demanding activity again.

                        Elevated heart rate is not an indicator of exercise intensity, exercise effect, or exercise value. It is quite possible to experience an elevated pulse, labored breathing, and profuse sweating without achieving valuable exercise. Intense emotional experiences commonly cause these symptoms without a shred of exercise benefit.

                        Even if an elevated pulse is necessary for cardiovascular conditioning (we do not doubt that pulse elevation may be necessary, but we do not believe that it should be the emphasis of a conditioning program) remember that some of the highest heart-rates on record were achieved during Nautilus research performed at West Point. The West Point cadets commonly experienced heart rates in excess of 220 beats per minute during Nautilus exercise. These pulse rates were maintained for periods of 20-35 minutes.

                        What about endurance? Won’t my athletic performance suffer if I don’t do aerobics?

                        Endurance for athletics and recreational activities is primarily a result of three factors: skill, muscular strength, and genetics. Heritable factors (genetics) are considered to be non-trainable or, in other words, you cannot do much about them. Increasing one’s skill in an activity is a result of practicing that activity. For long-distance runners skills such as stride length and efficiency can be trained through practice (practice on a treadmill doesn’t serve this purpose as it is not the same as road-running). Muscular strength is the single most trainable factor in endurance performance. It is the muscles that actually perform work. When strength increases, the relative intensity of any given task decreases.

                        Athletes often talk about training their “wind”. Actually our bodies’ ability to use oxygen is not as trainable as once believed. Consider that in a resting state the lungs can saturate with oxygen the blood moving through them during the first one-third of the total transit time. At maximal exertion, saturation speed might slow to one-half of the total transit time. Even with some compromise of pulmonary function (illness, injury, etc.) the lungs can usually perform their job quite adequately. It is the muscle’s ability to use the nutrients delivered to it that needs training. This is most efficiently addressed by strength-training.

                        More on the subject of “wind”: Most exercise physiologists refer to the phenomenon of “wind” as maximal oxygen uptake. One Canadian researcher has determined that maximal oxygen uptake is 95.9% genetically determined.

                        A 1991 study at the University of Maryland showed that strength training produced improvements in cycling endurance performance independent of changes in oxygen consumption.

                        Covert Bailey, author of Fit or Fat and advocate of “gentle aerobic exercise” now recommends wind sprints to those seeking to become maximally fit. Why wind sprints? Because sprinting is a much more intense muscular activity than jogging. Why not wind sprints? Because as with other running, the risk of injury is just too great! Pulled hamstrings, sprained ankles, and damaged knees are too high of a price for a marginal increase in fitness. Strength training greatly increases the intensity of muscular activity (much more so than sprinting) and greatly reduces the risk of injury!

                        Ideal Exercise possesses signed testimonials from members who have improved their endurance performance for running, skiing, and other activities while following a program of high intensity strength training and following this policy:

                        Aerobics… Just Say No!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Both are better than sitting on the couch eating Cheetos.

                          Lot's of hair splitting going on here. The more I work with my routine, the more I think Mark has it pretty right when he talks about lift heavy things a couple times a week, sprint a couple times a week and move slow a couple of times a week (obviously a paraphrase).

                          Over training is over training no matter what the activity. But if I want to be able to run down the street without gasping for air, I probably need to do some running so I can build up to running down the street. Yes, strength training would benefit but if all I do is strength train, I'm still going to suck wind if I try to run to the end of the street. I have tried this as a personal experiment. That said, running hurts my back and I really cant do it but adding a walk or bike ride of about an hour, twice a week has really made a difference for me.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Your heart loves some good long slow movement(cardio) Its when you reach the aerobic level that bad stuff starts to happens(stress, damage, cortisol, lack of fatloss). The difference between low level and aerobic level varies from person to person based on how the heart responds to the activity. Plus you want to lose that face fat and that lower back fat, fasted slow movement is a good way to do that.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Bobert View Post
                              Your heart loves some good long slow movement(cardio) Its when you reach the aerobic level that bad stuff starts to happens(stress, damage, cortisol, lack of fatloss). The difference between low level and aerobic level varies from person to person based on how the heart responds to the activity. Plus you want to lose that face fat and that lower back fat, fasted slow movement is a good way to do that.
                              Any form of exercise is poor for fat loss.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X