Aerobic Exercise Beats Resistance Training at Burning Belly Fat

Joined
Feb 10, 2009
Messages
1,275
(Aug. 25, 2011) ? Aerobic exercise is your best bet when it comes to losing that dreaded belly fat, a new study finds. When Duke University Medical Center researchers conducted a head-to-head comparison of aerobic exercise, resistance training, and a combination of the two, they found aerobic exercise to be the most efficient and most effective way to lose the belly fat that's most damaging to your health.
-----------------------
This isn't the fat that lies just under your skin and causes the dreaded muffin top. Belly or abdominal fat -- known in scientific communities as visceral fat and liver fat -- is located deep within the abdominal cavity and fills the spaces between internal organs. It's been associated with increased risk for heart disease, diabetes, and certain kinds of cancer.
"When it comes to increased health risks, where fat is deposited in the body is more important than how much fat you have," says Duke exercise physiologist Cris Slentz, Ph.D., lead author of the study published in the American Journal of Physiology. "Our study sought to identify the most effective form of exercise to get rid of that unhealthy fat."
The Duke study showed aerobic training significantly reduced visceral fat and liver fat, the culprit in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Aerobic exercise also did a better job than resistance training at improving fasting insulin resistance, and reducing liver enzymes and fasting triglyceride levels. All are known risk factors for diabetes and heart disease.
Resistance training achieved no significant reductions in visceral fat, liver fat, liver enzyme levels or improvements in insulin resistance. The combination of aerobic with resistance training achieved results similar to aerobic training alone.
"Resistance training is great for improving strength and increasing lean body mass," says Slentz. "But if you are overweight, which two thirds of the population is, and you want to lose belly fat, aerobic exercise is the better choice because it burns more calories." Aerobic training burned 67% more calories in the study when compared to resistance training.
The eight-month study followed 196 overweight, sedentary adults (ages 18-70) who were randomized to one of three groups: aerobic training; resistance training or a combination of the two. The aerobic group performed exercises equivalent to 12 miles of jogging per week at 80% maximum heart rate. The resistance group performed three sets of 8 -- 12 repetitions three times per week. All programs were closely supervised and monitored to ensure maximum effort in participation.
While the training programs were rigorous and substantial, Slentz says their previous research leads him to believe similar results could be achieved with a more moderate aerobic exercise program.
"What really counts is how much exercise you do, how many miles you walk and how many calories you burn," he says. "If you choose to work at a lower aerobic intensity, it will simply take longer to burn the same amount of unhealthy fat."

Additional Duke co-authors include: Lori A. Bateman, M.S., William E. Kraus, M.D., Leslie H. Willis, M.S., A. M.S., Lucy W. Piner, M.S., Victoria H. Hawk, M.P.H., R.D., Michael J. Muehlbauer, Ph.D., Greg P. Samsa, Ph.D., Rendon C. Nelson, M.D., Kim M. Huffman, M.D., Ph.D., Connie W. Bales, Ph.D., R.D.
The following co-authors are affiliated with East Carolina University, which was also a training site for this study: A Tamlyn Shields, M.A.. Charles J Tanner; Joseph A. Houmard, Ph.D
 
The study was fucked up from the beginning 3 sets of 8-12 reps 3 X times per weeks vs. 12 miles of jogging per week. 15 minutes weight training per week vs 3 to 4 hours jogging per week little wonder why the jogging burned more calories. This isn't science it's pure bullshit.
 
Here is an article from Ask Men.com that explains a lot in regard to the two methods of training.

Weight Lifting For Fat Loss



It's common to associate building muscle with weight lifting and fat loss with cardio training. Unfortunately, by doing so, you're really selling yourself short on potential results that could be seen if you truly understand the intricacies of working out, particularly when it comes to weight lifting for fat loss.

Weight lifting can actually prove to be a very effective method for losing weight, provided you go about it in the right manner. Here is the information you need to know about why you should choose weight lifting to help with fat loss, and how to design a program to get the results you desire.
weight lifting for fat loss
Increased metabolic rate
The first reason weight lifting is a good option for fat loss is because it boosts metabolic rate both over the short term as well as over the long term. In the hours after an intense weight-lifting session you will experience an increase in metabolic rate. What?s more, weight lifting will help you maintain your total amount of lean muscle mass, creating a permanent increase in metabolism.

Cardio training will only cause a short rise in metabolic rate for an hour or two after the session, taking away from the overall calorie-burning benefits compared with resistance training.

Often, overdoing cardio will actually decrease your total lean body mass, so you could see a reduction in metabolism over time working against your fat loss efforts.
Altered body composition
The second reason to choose weight lifting for fat loss purposes is because, while cardio may make you lose weight, weight lifting will help you lose body fat, altering your body composition.

Many individuals who just hop on the treadmill to lose the pounds don?t end up looking much different -- even if they do successfully lose 10 to 20 pounds. This is because they still have the same proportion of muscle mass to body fat; they are just "smaller."

Weight training will help change the way you look completely, giving the impression that you?ve replaced fat with muscle and are actually working at improving your body and changing your body composition.

Weight lifting for fat loss is a great alternative to cardio and will give you better, more visible results...
 
Strength training increases resting metabolic rate and norepinephrine levels in healthy 50- to 65-yr-old men



Department of Medicine, University of Maryland at Baltimore 21201.

Abstract

Resting metabolic rate (RMR) decreases with age, largely because of an age-related decline in fat-free mass (FFM). We hypothesized that a strength-training program capable of eliciting increases in FFM would also increase RMR in older individuals. To test this hypothesis, RMR, body composition, and plasma concentrations of certain hormones known to affect RMR were measured before and after a 16-wk heavy-resistance strength-training program in 13 healthy men 50?65 yr of age. Average strength levels, assessed by the three-repetition maximum test, increased 40% with training (P < 0.001). Body weight did not change, but body fat decreased (25.6 +/- 1.5 vs. 23.7 +/- 1.7%; P < 0.001) and FFM increased (60.6 +/- 2.2 vs. 62.2 +/- 2.1 kg; P < 0.01). RMR, measured by indirect calorimetry, increased 7.7% with strength training (6,449 +/- 217 vs. 6,998 +/- 226 kJ/24 h; P < 0.01). This increase remained significant even when RMR was expressed per kilogram of FFM. Strength training increased arterialized plasma norepinephrine levels 36% (1.1 +/- 0.1 vs. 1.5 +/- 0.1 nmol/l; P < 0.01) but did not change fasting glucose, insulin, or thyroid hormone levels. These results indicate that a heavy-resistance strength-training program increases RMR in healthy older men, perhaps by increasing FFM and sympathetic nervous system activity.
 
The study was fucked up from the beginning 3 sets of 8-12 reps 3 X times per weeks vs. 12 miles of jogging per week. 15 minutes weight training per week vs 3 to 4 hours jogging per week little wonder why the jogging burned more calories. This isn't science it's pure bullshit.

What else is there to say...
 

Trending

Back
Top