{"id":1725,"date":"2013-02-20T21:21:13","date_gmt":"2013-02-20T20:21:13","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.pieromaina.me\/wp\/?p=1725"},"modified":"2013-02-20T21:25:09","modified_gmt":"2013-02-20T20:25:09","slug":"2-cardio-mistakes-youre-still-making","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.pieromaina.me\/wp\/2-cardio-mistakes-youre-still-making\/","title":{"rendered":"2 Cardio Mistakes You’re Still Making"},"content":{"rendered":"

Title<\/b>: 2 Cardio Mistakes You’re Still Making
\nBy line:<\/b> By Tom Venuto, CSCS, NSCA-CPT
\nURL: <\/b>www.burnthefat.com<\/a>
\nWord count: <\/b>999 words<\/h4>\n

2 Cardio Mistakes You’re Still Making<\/p>\n

By Tom Venuto, NSCA-CPT, CSCS<\/b> www.BurnTheFat.com<\/a><\/b><\/p>\n

The controversies over cardio for fat loss are\u00a0 endless: steady state versus intervals, fed versus fasted, long and easy versus\u00a0 short and intense, and so on. Obviously there is a lot of interest in cardio\u00a0 training and how to do it right. Sadly, most people are still doing 2 things\u00a0 terribly wrong and it\u2019s killing their results\u2026\u2026 As best as I can figure, there\u00a0 are two major reasons why people are still mucking up their cardio programs for\u00a0 fat loss.<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n

REASON #1: NOT ENOUGH FOCUS ON TOTAL CALORIES BURNED<\/b><\/p>\n

\n

Most people aren\u2019t burning enough darn calories.<\/p>\n

Why? Well, I guess they are too busy worrying about the \u201cproper\u201d type of exercise (which machine or activity), the mode (steady state or intervals), the \u201coptimal\u201d ratio of intervals, or the \u201cbest\u201d duration.Some people coast along on the treadmill at 2.3 miles per hour or some similar sloth-like pace and they think that just by hitting a TIME goal, such as 45 or 60 minutes, that with \u201cX\u201d duration completed, they are assured to get the results they want. On the other extreme, we have folks who have found or created some mega-intense, super-duper short training protocol like the \u201c4-minute wonder workout from Japan.\u201d Just because the workout is high in intensity and it is performed in intervals, they too think they are assured to get the results they want.<\/p>\n

What\u2019s missing in both cases is the realization that total fat loss over time is a function of total calories burned over time (assuming you don\u2019t blow your diet, of course).<\/p>\n

AND\u2026<\/p>\n

Total calories burned is a product of INTENSITY times DURATION, not intensity OR duration.<\/p>\n

Too much focus on one variable at the exclusion of the other can lead to a less than optimal total calorie burn and disappointing results. And remember, intensity and duration are *variables* not absolutes! (\u201cVariable\u201d means you can change them\u2026 even if your \u201cguru\u201d says you can\u2019t!)<\/p>\n

When you understand the relationship and interplay between INTENSITY X DURATION you will find a \u201cSWEET SPOT\u201d where the product of those variables produces the maximal calorie burn and maximum fat loss, based on your current health condition and your need for time efficiency.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

REASON #2: TOO MUCH FOCUS ON WHAT TYPE OF CALORIES BURNED<\/b><\/p>\n

\n

As best as I can figure, there is one whopper of a mistake that is still KILLING most people\u2019s cardio programs and that is\u2026<\/p>\n

Way too much focus on WHAT you are burning during the workout – fats or carbohydrates – also known as \u201csubstrate utilization.\u201d<\/p>\n

This idea comes from the notorious \u201cfat burning zone\u201d myth which actually tells people to exercise SLOWER and LESS intensely to burn more fat.<\/p>\n

Hold on a minute. Pop quiz. Which workout burns more calories?<\/p>\n

(A) A 30 minute leisurely stroll through the park<\/p>\n

(B) A 30 minute, sweat-pouring, heart-pounding, lung-burning run?<\/p>\n

Like, DUH!<\/p>\n

And yet we have trainers, authors and infomercial gurus STILL telling us we have to slow down if we want to burn more fat??? Bizarre.<\/p>\n

The reason people still buy it is because the \u201cfat burning zone\u201d myth sounds so plausible because of two little science facts:<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

<\/div>\n