BREAKING: new study - 60 seconds of stadium stairs as effective as 45 min running

Hahaha, that's this guy. Hilarious

fred wrote:

rjm33 wrote:

Is it Jon Orange?

Nope, no mention of neuromuscular efficiency, although it could be a setup

Didn't you think the style was similar to Jon?

So just a ......?

Did you read the warning study about the connection between HIIT, PGC1alpha, and baking soda?

Do not try your PED synergism stunt again fred.

Do you remember what happened last time?

track400meters1 wrote:

Distance running is like some kind of disease that people get addicted to and it literally destroys their bodies from the inside out.

This might be my new favorite quote. Welcome to LetsRun.

That may be the single worst waste of time ever put on youtube. Thank god for the skipping function.

Fred. That you tube video was really good! It looks like track400meters1 does a lot of science research reading.Do you know where he is doing his science research reading?I am going to guess the gothic romance science fiction section at Barnes & Noble.

Go for it in your 20s wrote:

I only race now three or four times a year. I'll do the holiday races if I feel up to it.

And yeah, the weird thing is, I'm "running" less now than I did 10 or 15 years ago, and I'm 10 or 15 years older. And while I used to finish maybe top ten back then, I almost always win now (10k and less, that's all I race).

rjm33 and others will say that's what happens when you get to the 70+ class or whatever, but nobody here has any idea about my age. And few here have any sense at all. Mixing it up is good. HIIT is good.

You know how most serious runners do intervals during the week? That's HIIT. You should also be doing short hills @ max once or twice a week, and that's also a very good stimulus. It's not either/or, though older runners tend to avoid hard running because of the injury risk.

The scientists who study this stuff are for some reason deliberately ignorant of training methods, so their studies are always bullsh*t like "Wow! Fattos who did 4 weeks of hills had better results than fattos who were too out of shape to run at a hard pace for 45 minutes. Running for 45 minutes is worthless!". Of course, this is the only kind of study that gets picked up by the media outlets, so the general populace is fed a steady diet of nonsense about exercise along with a new fad diet every 3 years.

Stadium stairs are no joke!

So what's going on with this site? I don't see my previous comment anywhere?

Is this a violation of my free speech? Does anyone know if this is a violation of my free speech?

I'm really getting sick of my comments being deleted on here.

Does free speech not apply to internet forums?

I don't get it.

Never mind I see my comment on this thread. But still have had multiple comments deleted on other threads..

The thing is, most letsrun posters are already self selected for the 1-5% of the population that can get away with distance running...but don't try to claim that it is great for your metabolism, muscles, joints, body fat % or heart....better than sitting on the couch? Yes. But most forms of exercise are better. It's understandable...I used to be the same way, if you do something everyday and love it, and have never had problems doing it, you are going to vehemently defend it.

For overall health HIIT is much more effective than distance efforts-here's why:

For lean body mass retention while dieting HIIT is better (Mtor vs AMPK)

For fat loss it is better.

For cardiac health HIIT is better

For improving your 5k or marathon time LSD is better-most people don't care about that but letsrunners do, so to them a 5k pr is worth some losses in LBM or insulin sensativity.

For your hormones and metabolism HIIT is MUCH better. You'll never need a distance runner with high test unless they are doping. Cortisol, however, they have in abundance.

For maintaining under 10% body fat HIIT is better.

For maintaining or improving your power/weight ratio HIIT is much better.

For reducing appetite HIIT is better.

Joint health...do I even have to say?

There may be caplirization benefits of LSD but apart from that there isn't much.

The reason you see more people doing 20-40min easy rather than 6x30-45s HARD...

is that 20-40min easy is...easy, relaxing, carefree, your mind can wander...

and 6x30-45s burns, hurts, you feel like you want to die after the 4th interval, and afterwards you are completely out of breath, dizzy and get a headache.

Personally, I LOVE the feeling of the last 2/3 of HIIT and afterwards...because I know my homeostasis has been disrupted, and the I know that those few minutes of pain and discomfort and hell are the reason why I don't look like those mammoths destroying their joints and probably the treadmill as well.

If I do HIIT and lift heavy, I can eat whatever the hell I want and still be ~10-12% body fat. (I'm 86kg) And if I tighten up the diet I'll slowly go down to 7-8%. Seriously, some days 3500-4000+ cal and losing weight. Whereas before I was running 80mpw on 2000 cal and GAINING weight. (Was 70kg) You need to look at the hormonal effect of training rather than just the calories burned.

Anecdotally, doing any kind of distance work (walking is OK) even intervals over ~600m will kill my strength in the gym faster than anything. And for what?

OK. Here are some excerpts from your post:

For improving your 5k or marathon time LSD is better-most people don't care about that but letsrunners do

You'll never need a distance runner with high test unless they are doping.

There may be caplirization benefits of LSD but apart from that there isn't much.

Are you doing your research at the gothic romance science fiction section at Barnes & Noble also?

Do you need a runner with high testosterone who may be doping?

You and 400meter1 may be perfect for each other.

There are also some effects of lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) far beyond just increased capillary density of muscle fibers.

no really? Some of us don't do all this distance stuff and can still trash people in 10ks

support? speed work? wrote:

no really? Some of us don't do all this distance stuff and can still trash people in 10ks

Can you trash the 27:30 guys doing 120 miles a week?

rjm33 wrote:

Fred. That you tube video was really good!

It looks like track400meters1 does a lot of science research reading.

Do you know where he is doing his science research reading?

I am going to guess the gothic romance science fiction section at Barnes & Noble.

fred wrote:

Barnes and Noble - mutant spectrum section

Where do you find these videos fred? That one was even better than the last youtube video you posted. Very impressive.

Unfortunately, Matt London is way faster at 35m, 100m, and 200m than me.

I am now going to completely remodel my training program in my basement later today. How about you?

Lyfter wrote:

I'm sure you've seen this, since every major publication picked it up today.

Yes, this is really true. High intensity training like running up stadium stairs is as effective as 45 min of endurance running.

The additional benefit is that you will not overuse your joints and will not get arthritis at young age.

Did not see it in major publications.

Googled it, couldn't find anything but this thread was the top result.

Four pages and not a single poster has made reference to the original supposed study, no links! . I don't think anyone asked for it neither. Seriously...

As for my prediction, if such a study exists or past studies similar to it: the experimental design is flawed. and LRC people, of all people! The overachievers of the world! In business, in school, in country living, in physical strength, in running endurance, in weight lifting... I could give you pages and pages of the bragging I have read. I'm not against it. I'm saying, of all places of discussion, this is the one place you'd expect balanced athletes.

So I theorize these studies are flawed because they take some segment of the imbalanced Middle Aged professional who somehow only does slow distance and no speed, hill work etc. Of course you'll see results. It's called insert the missing part of the deficiency in their balanced regimen. If you took casual lifters who eat too much fat, calories (a natural byproduct of focused casual lifting cycles), people who somehow are dearly lacking serious cardio and cardio endurance activity, and they do it, they are going to see benefits. Life is a back and forth process of these systems.

I used to do more serious amateur running and I worked hard. I still consider 45 minutes of a run long, and that was when I was in shape. 60 second stairwell workout, or a steep hill, etc is not some revolution. You need both. End of story, until someone can cite the thread and talk some more specific points.

*experimental design and sample are both flawed

I must say this thread is getting me excited about exercise again, after being down about it for a day or two. Haha. But this post strikes me as funny. I'm not sure what you call being a star, but your body fat numbers and mpw sound like it, but not the language. Your advice rings true for couch potato and fat average professional joes, but seems bizarre on the LRC overachiever forum. I don't think people on here or good distance runners are averse to physical pain. Hard thinking in moral, philosophical and artistic realms, perhaps, but not physical pain. We've heard stories about runner MMA fighters, runner boxers, runner swimmers, runner mountain climbers, runners living off the grid far from grocery stores, runner power lifters, runners with great fitness flexibility core strength, runners good at speed work, sprinters, runners good at soccer, runners good at basketball, runners who did football, the list goes on and on. For what it's worth, HIIT on a treadmill is prob 800m pace for decent distance runners. True speed , ie sprinting, should not be done on a treadmill. Unsafe, ineffective, foolish looking.

Air boxing, boxing/MMA, swimming, 2v2 basketball/soccer, can be done like HIIT.

For me, I'm nowhere near a star runner even though I've known many, and my problem is keeping weight off and reappearance of nagging imbalances and injuries and not recovering well in non workout time. If I could do unlimited hard exercises and stack them and reap the benefits like a billionaire, I would already. Can't do that but I'm trying to build a foundation again.

I don't mind the pain during a workout. Usually hard but limited workouts make me feel dizzy and awful for an hour or two after. And workouts that are too difficult will leave me feeling bad for the 24 hours following, leading to bad non workout choices...

Your story is interesting. You should provide more detail. It just sounds like you were sufficiently developed in distance running and your body with its own preferences needed less running and more other activity. So your findings may be skewed. If you hadn't been a distance runner and did that weight lifting you do, the results might have been not as profound. Just an idea, like the people who say "I dropped my mileage and sharpened and got a PR!" After a lifetime of crazy mileage. Well , yeah, there are orthodox theories for that...

Anyway

rjm33 wrote:

Where do you find these videos fred? That one was even better than the last youtube video you posted. Very impressive.

Unfortunately, Matt London is way faster at 35m, 100m, and 200m than me.

I am now going to completely remodel my training program in my basement later today. How about you?

OK I have to be truthful. I'm doing 3 second sprints in my basement, too. Load up on the bicarbonate, and they are a piece of cake.