Whats the view on morning cardio in the fasted state? Did a quick search on it and only came up with 2 results.
Ive read lyle mcdonald recommending it for stubborn fat & yet also saying it isnt very significant in other places.
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Lyle McDonald, an expert on bodybuilding nutrition and author of "The Ketogenic Diet," agrees. He argues that the body will compensate later in the day and is simply "too smart" for strategies like this to ever work: "All that research says is that you burn a greater proportion of fat this way, which I agree with 100%," says Lyle. "The majority of research shows that as far as real world fat loss goes, it doesn’t really matter what you burn. Rather, 24-hour calorie balance is what matters. Because if you burn glucose during exercise, you tend to burn more fat the rest of the day. If you burn fat during exercise, you burn more glucose during the day. The end result is identical. If that weren’t the case, then athletes like sprinters who never ‘burn fat’ during exercise wouldn’t be shredded. Basically, they burn so many calories that they remain in balance and don’t gain any fat. So, while morning cardio probably provides some psychological benefits to bodybuilders who are programmed to do it that way, I can’t say that I think it will result in greater ‘real world’ fat loss, which is what matters."</div>
All the studies ive read on it go completely with what hes saying, which is why the whole doing aerobic exercise in the "fat burning zone" is pointless, as is the whole gotta do it for atleast 20 mins before it starts burning fat concept.
Now id assume when you workout in the fat burning zone ud leave your glycogen supplies still relatively full right? So food you eat afterwards is more likely to be stored as fat...which is part of the problem with low intensity exercise.
But in a fasted state..surely the food you eat afterwards would go to restoring glycogen still and so is less likely to be stored as fat ?
Though again to counter that you'd probably be able to do cardio at a greater intensity/duration with a more efficient source of fuel inside you like glucose....which would lead to more calories being burnt..which is always the overall goal.
What are your thoughts on it?
Ive read lyle mcdonald recommending it for stubborn fat & yet also saying it isnt very significant in other places.
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Lyle McDonald, an expert on bodybuilding nutrition and author of "The Ketogenic Diet," agrees. He argues that the body will compensate later in the day and is simply "too smart" for strategies like this to ever work: "All that research says is that you burn a greater proportion of fat this way, which I agree with 100%," says Lyle. "The majority of research shows that as far as real world fat loss goes, it doesn’t really matter what you burn. Rather, 24-hour calorie balance is what matters. Because if you burn glucose during exercise, you tend to burn more fat the rest of the day. If you burn fat during exercise, you burn more glucose during the day. The end result is identical. If that weren’t the case, then athletes like sprinters who never ‘burn fat’ during exercise wouldn’t be shredded. Basically, they burn so many calories that they remain in balance and don’t gain any fat. So, while morning cardio probably provides some psychological benefits to bodybuilders who are programmed to do it that way, I can’t say that I think it will result in greater ‘real world’ fat loss, which is what matters."</div>
All the studies ive read on it go completely with what hes saying, which is why the whole doing aerobic exercise in the "fat burning zone" is pointless, as is the whole gotta do it for atleast 20 mins before it starts burning fat concept.
Now id assume when you workout in the fat burning zone ud leave your glycogen supplies still relatively full right? So food you eat afterwards is more likely to be stored as fat...which is part of the problem with low intensity exercise.
But in a fasted state..surely the food you eat afterwards would go to restoring glycogen still and so is less likely to be stored as fat ?
Though again to counter that you'd probably be able to do cardio at a greater intensity/duration with a more efficient source of fuel inside you like glucose....which would lead to more calories being burnt..which is always the overall goal.
What are your thoughts on it?
