 |
|
|
|
|
5 miles...that's my lot.....
|
|
|
| Notices |
Welcome to Runners Forum. a friendly online community where you can join fellow runners in discussing all things related to running.
By registering a free account, you will be able to join in the discussions and create your own training blog. |
 |
|

28th May 08, 10:26 AM
|
 |
Real Name: take a wild guess.......
Age: 26
Gender: Male
|
|
Location: Scotland
9.24 miles this week
457.14 miles this year
|
|
|
How did your jog go last night?
O.
|

29th May 08, 07:39 PM
|
 |
Real Name: Trinity
Age: 45
Gender: Female
|
|
Location: south west
0.00 miles this week
242.75 miles this year
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by filaborg
im off for a jog.....then a curry...
|
You'd run faster if you did that the other way round 
|

29th May 08, 07:43 PM
|
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Owain
How did your jog go last night?
O.
|
Thanks for asking Owain....took on board what everyone mentioned and i think for me it has to be jogging different routs. Did not really set out where i was going to go just kept on running, when i arrived home done a google earth to measure my distance and just under 6 miles...so there was an improvement....
|

29th May 08, 11:52 PM
|
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by filaborg
Thanks for asking Owain....took on board what everyone mentioned and i think for me it has to be jogging different routs. Did not really set out where i was going to go just kept on running, when i arrived home done a google earth to measure my distance and just under 6 miles...so there was an improvement....
|
Nice one  Keep your body (and mind) guessing...
|

30th May 08, 08:53 AM
|
 |
Age: 24
Gender: Male
Co-admin
|
|
Location: Warwickshire
11.19 miles this week
1,206.27 miles this year
|
|
What 5 mile barrier eh?  Well done, now you've realised these barriers don't really exist, you'll soon find your way onto longer weekend runs  Sticking in your comfort zone is fine, but it's certainly not the way to speedy improvements!
|

30th May 08, 02:19 PM
|
|
Age: 34
Gender: Male
|
|
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by fandango
If your aim is to lose weight then slower longer runs is the way forward. The lower the intensity of the workout the better it is for weight loss. So I'd agree with Barnsley, drop down the speed, add some distance to the work out and think of the weight loss when you get bored!
|
I'm not sure I agree with this. Higher intensity workouts will burn more fat and have a better effect on metabolism. It is surely better to run 5 miles at a high pace than walk 10 miles. You will burn more calories and, crucially, more fat. Your metabolism will also speed up so the effects will last longer.
|

30th May 08, 03:56 PM
|
 |
Gender: Male
|
|
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JBBury
I'm not sure I agree with this. Higher intensity workouts will burn more fat and have a better effect on metabolism. It is surely better to run 5 miles at a high pace than walk 10 miles. You will burn more calories and, crucially, more fat. Your metabolism will also speed up so the effects will last longer.
|
High intensity will burn more calories, yes, but not neccessarily fat. I'm sure I've read that the fuel for low intesity workouts comes predominently from fat, high intensity from glucose. Someone with more expertise may want to correct me though.
__________________
fandango assumes no legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information within this post. Any opinions expressed may not truly reflect the views of the poster and should be taken with a pinch of salt, two tea spoons of benylin and 12 hours sleep.
|

30th May 08, 05:04 PM
|
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by fandango
High intensity will burn more calories, yes, but not neccessarily fat. I'm sure I've read that the fuel for low intesity workouts comes predominently from fat, high intensity from glucose. Someone with more expertise may want to correct me though.
|
Thats correct (as I understand) breaking through the aerobic threshold of 80% switches the body from fat burning to burning other fuels.
80% of HR max for a new runner is barely running so to burn fat - slow is the new fast
|

30th May 08, 05:11 PM
|
 |
Age: 41
Gender: Male
|
|
Location: Ireland
0.00 miles this week
21.50 miles this year
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by intriathlete
slow is the new fast
|
I'm fashionable at last!!! 
|

31st May 08, 08:11 PM
|
 |
Age: 24
Gender: Male
Co-admin
|
|
Location: Warwickshire
11.19 miles this week
1,206.27 miles this year
|
|
|
The amount of calories burnt doesn't really change depending on your distance - i.e. running 5 miles will burn off approximately the same amount of calories during the run whether you're running 6min/miles or 10min/miles, essentially the difference comes in that with a higher intensity workout you have the added benefit of 'after-burn'... a higher metabolic rate for several hours once exercise has stopped.
Adn as has been said... burning calories doesn't necessarily mean fat... but will usually mean some form off weight loss, but the lower intensity will encourage the body to burn fat preferentially as fuel. As a sidenote, morning runs are better for weight-loss as the metabolism remains elevated through the day, whereas evening runs elevate the metabolism as you're getting ready for bed and the body is naturally slowing down for the night anyway.
|

1st Jun 08, 12:16 AM
|
 |
Age: 21
Gender: Male
|
|
0.00 miles this week
620.09 miles this year
|
|
Some of you are confused... Time for a science lesson  ...
- Fat breakdown does NOT decrease during high intensity workout - it increases.
- It is the proportion of energy derived from fat that decreases.
- This is because fat breakdown requires oxygen (which is limited at high intensities) so we have to break down more glucose instead (glucose can be broken down with no oxygen present to form lactic acid).
- The reason that the proportion of energy derived from fat decreases is because you have a higher proportion of energy burnt from glucose - it is not because you burn less fat at high intensities (in fact, the opposite is true).
- After this sort of exercise, your basal metabolic rate increases (i.e. 'afterburn') As you are low in both glucose and fat therefore you're body breaks down more fat and some protein to replace the energy stores you've lost.
- Basically, JBB was correct. At higher intensity exercises the more fat, carbohydrates and calories you burn. High intensity interval training sessions as near maximum heart rate are the best for fat loss, however, they are by far the hardest to do. If you are not fit enough to maintain HIIT then doing a lower intensity training for longer time will be better.
- Another point that I don't think that is well understood is the difference between triglycerides subcutaneous fat stores (i.e. fat stored under the skin). When we talk about 'fat burning' we are talking about utilising triglycerides (soluble fats). This is the small soluble fats that are present within the blood. This is very different from burning subcutaneous fat (fat stores beneath the skin), which is what I think most people think 'fat burning' means. In truth, subcutaneous fat is not effected by any great extent no matter what sort of exercise you do in the short term. In order to shift subcutanous fat you need to be very determined and will need a sustained exercise program for a long time. There are no quick fixes I'm afraid.
Hope that helps
__________________
Caught me running - Tiesto
Last edited by Revenged; 1st Jun 08 at 12:35 AM.
|

1st Jun 08, 10:16 AM
|
 |
Real Name: Giles
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Moderator
|
|
Location: Paignton
9.45 miles this week
335.17 miles this year
0.00 miles this week
323.04 miles this year
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Revenged
Some of you are confused... Time for a science lesson  ...
|
Great post, thanks
__________________
0 - 14 Miles in 6 months, 2 hours, 13 minutes and 58 seconds.
Start weight: 18 st 4.. Current weight: 14 st 11.. Current Goal: Duchy Marathon, 8th March 2009
|

1st Jun 08, 09:28 PM
|
 |
Age: 24
Gender: Male
Co-admin
|
|
Location: Warwickshire
11.19 miles this week
1,206.27 miles this year
|
|
Agreed a very enlightening post! good stuff rev!
It's the subcutaneous crap I need to shift... and it seems to be taking forever! 
|

1st Jun 08, 10:47 PM
|
 |
Gender: Male
|
|
|
|
We have a winner
Ok, now to test your science Revenged
You say there is no quick fix to shift subcutanous fat, what is the long term fix? Is it simply a case of use more calories than you take in, or is it more complex then that? If I'm out on a run will my body only use glucose and triglycerides fats until the body runs out and then it moves onto subcutanous fat (and protein in extreme cases)? When and how does subcutanous fat get used up?
Basically I want to know how to get rid of my beer belly 
__________________
fandango assumes no legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information within this post. Any opinions expressed may not truly reflect the views of the poster and should be taken with a pinch of salt, two tea spoons of benylin and 12 hours sleep.
|

2nd Jun 08, 01:02 AM
|
 |
Age: 21
Gender: Male
|
|
0.00 miles this week
620.09 miles this year
|
|
|
No there is no quick fix I'm afraid.. Fat breakdown (lipolysis) occurs a lot after exercise when your subcutaneous fat stores are broken down very slowly to replace triglycerides lost and to provide energy (i.e. 'afterburn'). It's just that we have a lot of fat stores as we have evolved to withstand periods of famine and can survive over a month without eating a single meal. This is why it takes a long time to get rid of a beer belly.
As for dieting and calorie restriction I think you should be wary. We live in a diet culture and contrary to popular belief rapid fat loss is impossible. People who experience rapid weight loss are deluding themselves. This sort of weight loss is essentially due to loss of fluids alone - the human body is 70% water! Slimming companies such as rosmary collin's where you win certificates for losing the most weight in the week ('slimmer of the week') are adding to this delusion.
To be honest I'm not the best person to ask about weight loss - I'm eating a lot more now to maintain my weight steady with all this running. I suggest that if you are going to look into science of anything and do not understand it then I suggest you be wary. Very often with health, nutrition and exercise (including running) people overcomplicate things with science unecessarily and it is very unhelpful - especially so when in reality they are not really telling you anything of substance. For example, i've seen it a lot in articles in runnersworld where running is made out to be rocket science when it reality it is a simple activity of one foot in front of another and doesn't not need such in depth analysis. I think the same can be applied to having a healthy diet and trying to lose weight where sometimes relying on your common sense is best.
__________________
Caught me running - Tiesto
Last edited by Revenged; 2nd Jun 08 at 01:05 AM.
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
 |