<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>SFB Fitness &#187; cardio</title>
	<atom:link href="http://sfbfitness.com/tag/cardio/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://sfbfitness.com</link>
	<description>Stronger, Faster, Broader. Personal Training in Toronto ON.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 15:52:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Strength Training or Cardio for Fat Loss?</title>
		<link>http://sfbfitness.com/nutrition/strength-training-or-cardio-for-fat-loss/</link>
		<comments>http://sfbfitness.com/nutrition/strength-training-or-cardio-for-fat-loss/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2009 16:40:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Cameron</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Nutrition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Training]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cardio]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[diet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fat loss]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strength training]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sfbfitness.com/?p=309</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Alan Aragon has a ton of great resources on his website and he&#8217;s a fantastic writer on fitness, nutrition, and training. In an issue of his Research Review from 2008 he brought attention to a study done in 1999 comparing strength and endurance training for obese dieters. You can read the abstract here. If you [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://alanaragon.com">Alan Aragon</a> has a ton of great resources on his website and he&#8217;s a fantastic writer on fitness, nutrition, and training. In an issue of his <a href="http://www.alanaragon.com/researchreview">Research Review</a> from 2008 he brought attention to a study done in 1999 comparing strength and endurance training for obese dieters. You can read the abstract <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10204826?ordinalpos=1&amp;itool=entrezsystem2.pentrez.pubmed.pubmed_resultspanel.pubmed_rvdocsum" target="_blank">here</a>. If you want to avoid the overly technical details, here&#8217;s the experimental setup:</p>
<div id="attachment_313" class="wp-caption alignright" style="width: 303px"><img class="size-medium wp-image-313" title="scale" src="http://sfbfitness.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/scale-293x300.jpg" alt="Not a fan of this view? Read on!" width="293" height="300" /><p class="wp-caption-text">Not a fan of this view? Read on!</p></div>
<ul>
<li>Two groups of obese individuals were put on identical 800kcal (very restrictive) liquid diets for 12 weeks.</li>
<li>One group did endurance or &#8220;cardio&#8221; training 4 times a week for one hour (walking, biking, or stair climbing).</li>
<li>The other group underwent strength training 3 times a week using 10 stations with increasing number of sets.</li>
<li>Fat loss, change in body composition, and change in resting metabolic rate (RMR) was measured at the conclusion of the study.</li>
</ul>
<p>The results were astonishing (for many people):</p>
<p><span id="more-309"></span></p>
<ul>
<li>Both groups lost significant body mass, BUT the strength trained group had no loss in lean body mass (muscle).</li>
<li>The endurance trained group lost significant amounts (nearly 10lbs) of lean body mass.</li>
<li>The strength trained group lost on average MORE body fat (~4lbs) than the endurance trained group.</li>
</ul>
<p>Additionally, the resistance trained group actually increased their RMR, while the endurance trained group suffered a significant (14% decrease). Essentially, the resistance trained group&#8217;s metabolism sped up over the 12 weeks, while the endurance trained group&#8217;s slowed down as their bodies conserved energy!</p>
<p>What can we take away from this study?</p>
<ol>
<li>Losing significant amounts of body fat requires calorie restriction (eating less) &#8211; although not with the severity done in this study.</li>
<li>Strength training is superior to endurance training for conserving muscle mass, AND losing fat, AND maintaining a healthy metabolism.</li>
</ol>
<p>For those individuals looking to lose weight and fat out there the prescription is clear. First, reduce the calories you consume &#8211; this can mean simply eating less OR eating less calorie dense food. Substituting leafy vegetables for rice and pasta, drinking water instead of soft drinks or juice, or snacking on fruit instead of baked goods are easy ways to start. Second, begin a strength training program to conserve muscle mass and keep your metabolism going strong. And finally, if you have the time, add cardio work such as walking, swimming, or stair climbing for overall cardiovascular health.</p>
<p>Of course, my absolute BEST recommendation would be to start a personal training program with SFB Fitness where all aspects of your training will be optimized for your specific goals. <a href="http://sfbfitness.com/contact/">Contact us today!</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://sfbfitness.com/nutrition/strength-training-or-cardio-for-fat-loss/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Two Fat Loss Myths</title>
		<link>http://sfbfitness.com/nutrition/two-fat-loss-myths/</link>
		<comments>http://sfbfitness.com/nutrition/two-fat-loss-myths/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 00:52:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>cameron</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Nutrition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Training]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cardio]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fat loss]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[myths]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[spot reduction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[targetted fat loss]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sfbfitness.com/?p=189</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Two training myths explained today, both dealing with fat loss.
1. Targeted Fat Loss
This is a great one.  For men and women it&#8217;s getting rid of that extra bit of fat around the midsection to reveal their abs. For women it&#8217;s the bit of fat on the underside of their upper arm. Everyone wants to get [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Two training myths explained today, both dealing with fat loss.</p>
<p><strong>1. Targeted Fat Loss</strong></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">This is a great one.  For men and women it&#8217;s getting rid of that extra bit of fat around the midsection to reveal their abs. For women it&#8217;s the bit of fat on the underside of their upper arm. Everyone wants to get rid of it, and there a million products/routines/pills that promise to do so. But the fact is, it&#8217;s impossible to target fat loss on any part of the body. Fat is deposited around the body without any regard to whether the muscles underneath have been worked.  That&#8217;s why all those crunches never gave you a six-pack.</p>
<p><strong>2. Aerobic Training is Best For Fat Loss</strong></p>
<p><strong><span id="more-189"></span></strong></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">This one is rooted in actual science, although it&#8217;s ultimately just as misguided as myth #1. Aerobic training &#8211; low to moderate intensity activity where your heart rate is about 60-75% of your max heart rate (HRM) &#8211; burns energy primarily via the oxidative energy pathway (approximately 70%). Put simply, fat molecules are broken down into energy which your muscles use. High intensity exercise on the other hand &#8211; sprints, circuit training, or heavy strength training where your heart rate is typically above 75% HRM  - burns energy primarily via the glycolytic energy pathway (about 50%). In this case, glucose (sugar) is the primary energy source with fat taking a smaller role. Unthinking trainers and the fitness industry took this physiological fact and prescribed low to moderate intensity exercise &#8211; the &#8220;fat burning zone.&#8221;<br />
BUT, low intensity training however, burns fewer calories. A lot fewer &#8211; so an hour on the treadmill might mean 300 burned calories or roughly 220 fat calories, but an hour of circuit training could burn something more like 600 calories! Even though less comes from fat, half of 600 (that&#8217;s 300 for those who&#8217;ve had their morning coffee) is more than 200 or so. So ditch long duration, low intensity training for the most part. It&#8217;s boring and largely ineffective for losing fat.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://sfbfitness.com/nutrition/two-fat-loss-myths/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
