That's real interesting Bill. I started doing cardio with just a few excercises for upper body, after a few months I just crashed and burned. Why is aerobic training bad for a middle aged guy?So much of what people do is self-defeating in terms of yoyo dieting, aerobic training, etc. People just get into a downward spiral of being more and more dependent on the dieting and the aerobics because they keep slowing their metabolism down.
A state of depletion
Moderator: Available
I was dreaming of the past...
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
I don't think it's evil per se. I just don't believe it's the answer to all your weight and health problems. There are other equally if not more important things to be working on, like the inevitable loss of muscle mass with age, and bone decalcification. Working on those through weight training also can help with the fat management and working on the heart as well - if you do it right. Aerobics should be a small course in the whole health meal.Mike wrote: Why is aerobic training bad for a middle aged guy?
- Bill
Here is an interesting article that gives a bit of proof and background to the idea that you do not have to do "aerobics" to train the aerobic system. BTW, if you are interested in nutrition and training, this guy has TONS of really interesting articles on his site.
www.johnberardi.com
www.johnberardi.com
Energy Systems
Aerobic and Anaerobic Energy
By Dr. John M Berardi, Ph.D.
First published at www.skifaster.net, 2001.
Finding two coaches that agree on anything is a difficult endeavor. In the world of athletics, certain sports are stepped in tradition, and often this comes at the expense of science. A great example of this is how coaches train their track and field athletes. In a survey, several of the world's elite 800m coaches were asked to quantify the % of energy coming from the aerobic system in the 800m race. These coaches, far from agreeing, argued numbers as low as 35% and as high as 65%. This illustrates that even elite coaches sometimes don't understand the demands of their sport. The purpose of this investigation was to actually measure and quantify the % energy contribution from aerobic and anaerobic energy systems to several track events. This has very important implications for the training and recovery of elite track athletes as well as other athletes training with similar duration exercise.
In this study, 5 elite level 200m, 400m, 800m, and 1500m runners were selected, for a total of 20 subjects. Runners were asked to run on a treadmill at velocities similar to their own personal best race paces. Expired gasses were collected to quantify the amount of energy derived from the aerobic systems and the anaerobic systems.
It appears that the crossover from mostly anaerobic energy use to aerobic energy use occurs between 15-30 seconds. Broken down by race:
200m run: 29% aerobic; 71% anaerobic
400m run: 43% aerobic; 57% anaerobic
800m run: 66% aerobic: 34% anaerobic
1500m run: 84% aerobic; 16% anaerobic
The authors of this study concluded that the relative contribution of the aerobic energy system during track running events is greater than traditionally thought.
These data are at odds with data from several studies done in the 60's and 70's. Methodologies back then were poor and the aerobic costs of shorter bouts of exercise were underestimated. New studies such as this one make it clear that even during events traditionally considered anaerobic, the aerobic system makes a substantial contribution. Modern sprint athletes now have the benefit of understanding that even they need to spend some time focusing on the aerobic energy system for maximal performance.
Energy system contribution during 200- to 1500-m running in highly trained athletes. M. Spenser and P Gastin. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc., Vol 33, No.1, 2001, pp 157-162.
Ever seen any fat sprinters? Ever seen any fat joggers? It isn't so much that aerobics is bad, it's more about anaerobic work being "better". The following excerpt from an article tells you why. The article is worth a read...MikeK wrote:Why is aerobic training bad for a middle aged guy?
http://www.johnberardi.com/articles/tra ... nshape.htm
[/b]The Benefits of Training The Anaerobic Energy Systems
While training the anaerobic energy systems is clearly be of benefit for enhancing athletic performance, there are many other non-athletic benefits as well:
1) This type of training is very calorie expensive. Short, 30-minute workouts can burn in excess of 400kcal during the exercise. While carbohydrates provide much of the fuel used during the high intensity interval, fat is also burned preferentially during the low intensity aerobic recovery period between the high intensity intervals.
2) The post exercise calorie expenditure is huge with this type of exercise. In some studies the resting metabolic rate remains elevated (by 15% or more) up to 24 hours after the workout. Interestingly, after exercise the body preferentially burns fat so this elevated metabolism is burning predominantly fat.
3) This exercise leads to an up regulation of aerobic, anaerobic, and ATP-PC enzyme activity. This means that all the energy systems of the body will operate at higher levels and become efficient at burning calories and generating energy.
4) The muscles used during this type of exercise will change their composition, shifting toward an increased percentage of fast twitch fibers. This increase in power-producing fast fibers comes at the expense of the weaker slow twitch ones. The shift is desired as the fast fibers grow more easily than the slow fibers.
5) There is an increase in specific muscle cell organelles (i.e. the sarcoplasmic reticulum). This leads to a better calcium balance and contractile ability.
6) There are short-lived increases in blood testosterone (38%) and growth hormone concentrations immediately after exercise. While this is debatable, these changes may contribute to an anabolic state in the body.
-
jorvik
By the sounds of it the term "Expert" is used a bit too freely. I've seen experts reverse their opinion totally, so that they are saying the opposite to what they said before. 
.so the term "Expert" to me is a bit ridiculous in many cases.
Years ago I had a friend who used to go to the gym with me, when he was there he did just what he felt like, some days he would lift big weights, sometimes small, with no thought of which body part he was exercising.to he surprised all the Gym experts by developing a fine phisique and very quickly.
The guy with the best phisique I have seen was a Water skier...he went to the same Gym as me he used to go on a run then get to the gym do situps, pull ups and Bench press and then go home.he looked like a beefed up Bruce Lee in his prime
.so the term "Expert" to me is a bit ridiculous in many cases.Years ago I had a friend who used to go to the gym with me, when he was there he did just what he felt like, some days he would lift big weights, sometimes small, with no thought of which body part he was exercising.to he surprised all the Gym experts by developing a fine phisique and very quickly.
The guy with the best phisique I have seen was a Water skier...he went to the same Gym as me he used to go on a run then get to the gym do situps, pull ups and Bench press and then go home.he looked like a beefed up Bruce Lee in his prime
-
jorvik
Van,
Bill always gives excellent advice about training ( we are lucky to have a medical professional on a forum who knows his stuff
)
However, I have heard so many conflicting theories and from so many different sources.
I do tend to do what Bill suggests and vary between high reps and light weights and heavy weights and low weights. For myself I'm very stocky and stiff, that is my genetic makeup...I will never look like Bruce Lee, but I can still lift a fairly decent weight, and bear in mind it's not my favourite form of training, and like yourself I do aerobics.
I do 20 minutes on a cross trainer. The most gains that I have made has been by lifting heavy weight, I mean heavy for me..I've tried little weights and frankly it does nothing I don't loose weight or get definition.it really has very little effect.whereas I feel and notice the difference right away when I lift a big weight.I love to fight it
and I feel like I've done something.but on a bad day if I get the gym and don't feel like doing anything I won't........and some days I'll just do the cross trainer 
I like this guys site
http://www.cbass.com/
becasue he is still trying this stuff out
check out this bit
http://www.cbass.com/PHILOSOP.HTM
Bill always gives excellent advice about training ( we are lucky to have a medical professional on a forum who knows his stuff
)However, I have heard so many conflicting theories and from so many different sources.
I do tend to do what Bill suggests and vary between high reps and light weights and heavy weights and low weights. For myself I'm very stocky and stiff, that is my genetic makeup...I will never look like Bruce Lee, but I can still lift a fairly decent weight, and bear in mind it's not my favourite form of training, and like yourself I do aerobics.
I do 20 minutes on a cross trainer. The most gains that I have made has been by lifting heavy weight, I mean heavy for me..I've tried little weights and frankly it does nothing I don't loose weight or get definition.it really has very little effect.whereas I feel and notice the difference right away when I lift a big weight.I love to fight it
and I feel like I've done something.but on a bad day if I get the gym and don't feel like doing anything I won't........and some days I'll just do the cross trainer I like this guys site
http://www.cbass.com/
becasue he is still trying this stuff out
check out this bit
http://www.cbass.com/PHILOSOP.HTM
I agree, Jorvick. Bill is excellent in all this stuff because he has been through it all.
I will cut back fro 30 mts to 15 [interval training] then work the type of weights he recommends, heavier and more explosively.
Come to think of it, it the way we trained in my soccer days, with lots of sprinting and jumping, and heavy weights to develop powerful kicks and tackling power.
My body, as you see it in the photo, was a machine in those days.
I will cut back fro 30 mts to 15 [interval training] then work the type of weights he recommends, heavier and more explosively.
Come to think of it, it the way we trained in my soccer days, with lots of sprinting and jumping, and heavy weights to develop powerful kicks and tackling power.
My body, as you see it in the photo, was a machine in those days.
Van
Late reply.
What I meant by balance was just that we shouldn't forget aerobics and just do weights. Statistically, we are not going to die of losing a sparring match. We are going to die of heart disease, cancer, and infections of the infirm (such as pnuemonia: "the old man's friend," etc). There is nothing wrong with weight training and it also helps:
--us do karate
--keep up bone mass (but anything with impact including aerobic exercise or plain karate will too)
--improve muscle mass which can increase weight loss even while we sleep
However, if you want to keep your heart healthy, and your blood vessels healthy, and avoid heart attack, heart failure, hypertension, peripheral vascular disease (with attendant leg pain and ulceration), stroke and the death and disability that follow, then aerobic has more to offer you than anaerobic.
Concerns about overdoing aerobic exercise are generally limited to serious athletes who are going to have trainers or have learned about this stuff elsewhere. Generally unless you dehydrate yourself or screw up your electrolytes or get an overuse injury, all things which are predictable, gradual and usually linked to doing unnatrual things like marathoning, it's gonna be hard to overdo aerobic exercise. Certainly easier to handicap yourself with a lifting injury.
I remember in high school doing my 12 pullups and getting mocked by the muscle heads who could do 30... until the next phase of the presidential fitness testing, whatever that was, took us out on the track where I could lie in the grass and rest while the over-lifting, under-exercising set lumbered in at 10-12 minute miles... and then to stretching where I had to wonder how they got their shoes on.
A goal of mine is to get my resting heart rate into the 60s. I'm kind of a caffeinated type A dude so I'm lucky I don't run in the 90s. But aerobic will figure >>>> than anaerobic in my longterm health... remember, they used to use just sanchin--and some jars--for weight training.
What I meant by balance was just that we shouldn't forget aerobics and just do weights. Statistically, we are not going to die of losing a sparring match. We are going to die of heart disease, cancer, and infections of the infirm (such as pnuemonia: "the old man's friend," etc). There is nothing wrong with weight training and it also helps:
--us do karate
--keep up bone mass (but anything with impact including aerobic exercise or plain karate will too)
--improve muscle mass which can increase weight loss even while we sleep
However, if you want to keep your heart healthy, and your blood vessels healthy, and avoid heart attack, heart failure, hypertension, peripheral vascular disease (with attendant leg pain and ulceration), stroke and the death and disability that follow, then aerobic has more to offer you than anaerobic.
Concerns about overdoing aerobic exercise are generally limited to serious athletes who are going to have trainers or have learned about this stuff elsewhere. Generally unless you dehydrate yourself or screw up your electrolytes or get an overuse injury, all things which are predictable, gradual and usually linked to doing unnatrual things like marathoning, it's gonna be hard to overdo aerobic exercise. Certainly easier to handicap yourself with a lifting injury.
I remember in high school doing my 12 pullups and getting mocked by the muscle heads who could do 30... until the next phase of the presidential fitness testing, whatever that was, took us out on the track where I could lie in the grass and rest while the over-lifting, under-exercising set lumbered in at 10-12 minute miles... and then to stretching where I had to wonder how they got their shoes on.
A goal of mine is to get my resting heart rate into the 60s. I'm kind of a caffeinated type A dude so I'm lucky I don't run in the 90s. But aerobic will figure >>>> than anaerobic in my longterm health... remember, they used to use just sanchin--and some jars--for weight training.
--Ian
Just to clarify, anearobic training is not by any means limited to weight training. Sprints, calisthenics, and vigorous kata practice are just three examples of exercise that will work the anaerobic system. And as evidenced in previous posts will also work the oxidative (aerobic) system during rest/recovery, thus providing the same health benefits mentioned above.IJ wrote:What I meant by balance was just that we shouldn't forget aerobics and just do weights. Statistically, we are not going to die of losing a sparring match.
...
However, if you want to keep your heart healthy, and your blood vessels healthy, and avoid heart attack, heart failure, hypertension, peripheral vascular disease (with attendant leg pain and ulceration), stroke and the death and disability that follow, then aerobic has more to offer you than anaerobic.
... remember, they used to use just sanchin--and some jars--for weight training.
The other disadvantage of the long-slow-distance approach to exercise is the wear and tear on the body. I know so many former joggers who are just worn out from all the mileage.
How about splitting daily workouts in two? I've started working out during lunch but can only fit in a good 35 minutes before I have to clean up and get back to work and I don't feel done. I've started to add another trip to the gym in the evening for 20 - 30 minutes to finish up. Good, bad or doesn't matter?
I was dreaming of the past...
If you are looking to improve body composition, what you are doing is probably pretty interesting. Assuming both workouts are pretty intense, you will be benefiting from a revved up calorie burning furnace following both of the sessions. This means you will be burning more energy, even at rest.MikeK wrote:How about splitting daily workouts in two?
I few years ago, I read a study which indicated that a half-hour weight training session was long enough to get the good juices flowing (hormone response like GH and testosterone, etc), and that past 1 hour you started getting too many of the bad juices flowing (cortisol, etc). So you are probably OK there too.
Another study I remember looked at three 10 minute sessions throughout the day compared to a 30 minute continuous session. The three 10 minute sessions showed ALMOST as much benefit as the longer session. So at two 30 minute sessions I would say you are probably getting a lot of benefit.[/img]
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
Splitting up workouts is fine, Mike. But I would recommend doing different things at different parts of the day. Rest is just as important as the exercise itself. It is the recovery stage where lots of beneficial things happen such as elevated BMR, muscle repair and growth, etc.
Anything can be taken to an extreme.
It's also worth noting that when I ran high school and college cross country, we spent at least one day a week doing interval training. It's also telling that marathon runners do not run marathons to train for marathons.
Don't knock interval training and wind sprints until you try it.
As the articles posted explain, you can be increasing your proportion of fast twitch fiber by doing this type of training. And you get aerobic work in your short rest periods while your body is replenishing the phosphocreatine and glycolytic (anaerobic) systems.
What hasn't been posted yet but is now being investigated is that you can extend the anaerobic phase. Rich has been explaining to me that the Marines are specifically working on this in their training. And power/speed is much, much greater during the anaerobic phase.
Furthermore... If you just want to burn calories, becoming a long distance runner isn't the best way to do it. The aerobic system is the most energy efficient system. That means you're going to be best at retaining calories. It's like driving a Prius (aerobic) vs. a 911 (anaerobic). If your goal is to burn gas off, drive like a Porche and enjoy the speed!
There's a lot of good information here. Take time to digest it.
FWIW... This person who doesn't specifically do aerobic training any more at age 51 has a blood pressure of 100/68 (measured yesterday), a total cholesterol that consistently stays below 130, and a resting heart rate in the 50s. And no drugs! Genetics help, but it's not the whole picture. I am but an anecdote, but anecdotes show how it can work.
- Bill
I think balance is important. However I would refute your notion that it's more difficult to overdo aerobic exercise. I've known more than a few examples of young women (particularly aerobics instructors) in early stages of osteoporosis and suffering from amenorrhea while doing excessive aerobic training. It's very telling to me that the gyms now have weights creeping into the aerobics classes. It's odd that aerobics caught on first with women because they could exercise and not have a fear of looking like "Arnold." And then all the benefits of training with iron for women started to come out, as well as the repetitive motion injuries, issues with bone loss, and issues with hormone regulation started to rear their ugly heads.Ian wrote: Generally unless you dehydrate yourself or screw up your electrolytes or get an overuse injury, all things which are predictable, gradual and usually linked to doing unnatrual things like marathoning, it's gonna be hard to overdo aerobic exercise. Certainly easier to handicap yourself with a lifting injury.
Anything can be taken to an extreme.
It's also worth noting that when I ran high school and college cross country, we spent at least one day a week doing interval training. It's also telling that marathon runners do not run marathons to train for marathons.
Don't knock interval training and wind sprints until you try it.
As the articles posted explain, you can be increasing your proportion of fast twitch fiber by doing this type of training. And you get aerobic work in your short rest periods while your body is replenishing the phosphocreatine and glycolytic (anaerobic) systems.
What hasn't been posted yet but is now being investigated is that you can extend the anaerobic phase. Rich has been explaining to me that the Marines are specifically working on this in their training. And power/speed is much, much greater during the anaerobic phase.
Furthermore... If you just want to burn calories, becoming a long distance runner isn't the best way to do it. The aerobic system is the most energy efficient system. That means you're going to be best at retaining calories. It's like driving a Prius (aerobic) vs. a 911 (anaerobic). If your goal is to burn gas off, drive like a Porche and enjoy the speed!
There's a lot of good information here. Take time to digest it.
FWIW... This person who doesn't specifically do aerobic training any more at age 51 has a blood pressure of 100/68 (measured yesterday), a total cholesterol that consistently stays below 130, and a resting heart rate in the 50s. And no drugs! Genetics help, but it's not the whole picture. I am but an anecdote, but anecdotes show how it can work.
- Bill
Damn, I did leave out recovery time. I'm still trying to work all this out with the latest family schedule which is tight so that I can add more karate time to the mix. The other option I'm thinking about is a 30 minute lunch workout everyday doing a different muscle group each day. The problem I've had in the past with this is missing a day and throwing the rotation off.
I was dreaming of the past...
