Articles

Cardiovascular vs. Weight Training:
Which is Best for Weight Loss?
By Rick Mayo

If you have ever visited a health club, you may have noticed something. It seems as if all of the "fit looking" people are working out with weights while the people that appear "unfit" are sweating it out on the cardiovascular machines. Why is that?

Researchers at the Cooper Clinic in Dallas recently conducted a study that shed some light on this subject. It appears as though cardiovascular activity burns calories while you are performing that given activity but that the after burn of calories is relatively minimal. Weight training, on the other hand, burns fewer calories during the activity but metabolism tests show an after burn that lasts up to 24 hours following a moderate weight training session. This after burn expenditure exceeds the total calories burned during cardio activity.

Consider this analogy:

Cardiovascular activity is like an hourly job. You clock in when you start and you clock out when you stop. You are only "getting paid" for that amount of time. Weight training is like a salaried position. You burn calories around the clock from the time invested in a moderately intensive weight training session.

Does that mean that you don't have to do cardiovascular activity? In a word, no. Your heart is the most important muscle in your body and it needs to be strengthened. Also, you do burn a moderate amount of calories while you are performing your cardiovascular workout.

The ideal exercise program should include both weight training and cardiovascular exercise. If your exercise goals involve weight loss and or body fat reduction, you should be weight training at least three times a week for 30-45 minutes. For a healthy heart you should perform cardio activity at least three times per week for 30 minutes.

I should mention that the most important exercise for weight loss is "push backs." This is the toughest of all exercises as it involves pushing back from the dinner table a little sooner than you normally do! But that's a subject for another article . . .