Another article comparing burst-type HIIT to moderate, steady-state cardio:
https://experiencelife.com/article/steady-state-cardio-vs-high-intensity-interval-training/
Whatever mutually exclusive benefits either one may (or may not) have over the other, the clear winner for fat loss (and time saving) is burst-type HIIT. Nothing new, just thought I'd throw it in. The only apparent downside to burst-type HIIT is the risk of overtraining, which is reiterated here:
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/02/26/how-to-get-fit-in-a-few-minutes-a-week/?_r=0
"The takeaway of both studies is that it is best, if you wish to perform high-intensity interval training, to stick to what is well documented as effective: a few sessions per week of 30- or 60-second intervals so strenuous you moan, followed by a minute or so of blessed recovery, and a painful repetition or four. Done correctly, such sessions, in my experience, get you out of the gym quickly and inspire truly inventive cursing."
Less is more. I can live with that.
https://experiencelife.com/article/steady-state-cardio-vs-high-intensity-interval-training/
Whatever mutually exclusive benefits either one may (or may not) have over the other, the clear winner for fat loss (and time saving) is burst-type HIIT. Nothing new, just thought I'd throw it in. The only apparent downside to burst-type HIIT is the risk of overtraining, which is reiterated here:
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/02/26/how-to-get-fit-in-a-few-minutes-a-week/?_r=0
"The takeaway of both studies is that it is best, if you wish to perform high-intensity interval training, to stick to what is well documented as effective: a few sessions per week of 30- or 60-second intervals so strenuous you moan, followed by a minute or so of blessed recovery, and a painful repetition or four. Done correctly, such sessions, in my experience, get you out of the gym quickly and inspire truly inventive cursing."
Less is more. I can live with that.
Last edited: