Other/Mixed Aerobic training: Swings done in intervals or LISS?

[GovernorSilver]

The ACSM (American College of Sports Medicine) recommends 150 minutes of moderate intensity aerobic exercise per week, split into smaller chunks. They state:

Physical Activity Guidelines Resources

physical activity guidelines resources created by ACSM Members who are subject matter experts.

www.acsm.org

I would have to do some digging for research studies (which I don't honestly have time for at the moment) used to come to these numbers. The "150 minutes per week" is considered the minimum to see significant improvements in health markers.

I am aware of some of the LISS training methodologies recommending closer to 60min chunks, however, I believe they recommend this to be done in 2-3 sessions, and I doubt they recommend doing it right after strength training. Six hours a week is more like endurance athlete training.

I don't care about endurance training right now. I just want to improve my cardio-respiratory system and maybe shed a little abdominal fat if possible.

I tried looking for clarification as to what counts as "moderate intensity aerobic exercise".

If strength training does not count as this type of exercise, they should say so. And of course if it does count, they should also say so. This would help clear up a lot of confusion.

When we did a 10,000 Steps challenge at one of my old workplaces, the activity-to-steps converter we were given allowed us to enter in a surprisingly wide variety of activities - from housework/yard work to playing guitar to dancing to walking at a shopping mall. We had to remind ourselves to turn off the Health app on our iPhones before biking to work, after we discovered we had been cheating by entering the steps reported by the app, as well as the biking activity. You got X number of steps per hour of biking under average 15 mph, and Y steps for biking in the 15-18 mph range.

 

[watchnerd]

People will do anything to avoid actually training their aerobic systems optimally.

I've made the same observation.

Although I'm not sure why it's such a big trauma to some people.

 

[GovernorSilver]

I've never heard 60 min continuous as a minimum.

I have heard 30+ min continuous.

It was one of the Google results when I entered "LISS cardio".

I didn't save the URL because it was only one result whereas all the others stated 30-60 min.

 

[Adachi]

I've never heard 60 min continuous as a minimum.

I have heard 30+ min continuous.

as a frequent flyer on the plane of "desperately seeking information" that I might use to inform myself about finding something I can squeeze into my day, I have heard minimums as low as 20 minutes of continuous aerobic work, to over 60 minutes of continuous work, depending on the intentions of the adaptations.

there are way too many published recommendations from highly fit and trained athletes, because, of course, they're successful and worth listening to - look at their success - and they are marketed to beginners, neophytes, and laypersons.

one mountain biking routine I saw came from a very accomplished-looking rider, who advised a minimum of 60 minutes, and the 6-week program increased from 60 minutes of steady state riding to >90 minutes.

it was a very big complicated silly program - which I bet would work great for him. but my wife sent it to me asking to do it together - and I told her - this is an unreasonable amount of loading. I'll do it if we cut all the volumes at least in half, maybe by a magnitude (divided by 10), because neither of us is actually fit enough to do any of this. she did not appreciate my rebuffing the proposition, but we're beginners, and the programming was very silly for us to undertake, without additional preparation. But it was absolutely placed in a publication that had many newbies and enthusiasts as readers. it wasn't any kind of serious journal or training materials for advanced riders.

a lot of recommendations for loading, both in time and in rep/set structures, are more like NBA players recommending their size shoe to me; a size ten. I'd probably hurt myself if I actually tried to wear shoes that fit so poorly as theirs would.

but so many people are exposed to this marketing. just as I was. and I wasn't really equipped to combat or second guess it as an unwitting neophyte.

 

[Deleted 20758]

Most of my runs is 30min and it works great.

 

[watchnerd]

as a frequent flyer on the plane of "desperately seeking information" that I might use to inform myself about finding something I can squeeze into my day, I have heard minimums as low as 20 minutes of continuous aerobic work, to over 60 minutes of continuous work, depending on the intentions of the adaptations.

there are way too many published recommendations from highly fit and trained athletes, because, of course, they're successful and worth listening to - look at their success - and they are marketed to beginners, neophytes, and laypersons.

one mountain biking routine I saw came from a very accomplished-looking rider, who advised a minimum of 60 minutes, and the 6-week program increased from 60 minutes of steady state riding to >90 minutes.

it was a very big complicated silly program - which I bet would work great for him.

???

apples vs oranges

Weightlifting programming would look complicated and silly to people who just want to get more fit or more aesthetic, too.

But it works for weightlifting.

A mountain biking program is presumably designed to get you better at mountain biking.

That may not be your objective, but why does that make it silly?

 

[North Coast Miller]

To me, this sort of boils down to LISS vs intervals for basic cardio health, and then unstated “is KB work comparable to other intervals for aerobic response?”

KB intervals will produce a reasonable ROI, but sprint bike, rower, jumprope, etc etc will trigger a better aerobic response and fill the role of LISS more appropriately - that is improving aerobic fitness while not interfering with other strength work.

Ultimately: give it a try for 8 weeks and see how you feel. Check against subjective and objective, RHR, blood pressure, taking stairs two at a time etc.

 

[Adachi]

???

apples vs oranges

Weightlifting programming would look complicated and silly to people who just want to get more fit or more aesthetic, too.

But it works for weightlifting.

A mountain biking program is presumably designed to get you better at mountain biking.

That may not be your objective, but why does that make it silly?

it was silly for us and people like us with day jobs who aren't professionals.

the amount of steady-state pedaling work was way high. and increased in very large steps.
I've had exposure to friends who invest a lot more heavily into their mountain biking experience, riding daily and such but the proposed program would have easily been too big for many of them.

too dense, too complicated, too intense.
they were clearly smokers inviting failure with ease, for a large swath of the audience receiving it.

I guess my point is that as far as LISS programming goes, it starts with where you are, and what your goals are.

I merely meant to point out that recommendations for minimums vary widely, and not necessarily for the best reasons. some of the reason for this broad variance I've observed has to do with high performers being solicited for advice, and in doing their best to answer honestly, and maybe relying on their experience, incurring very high standards for those asking.

 

[watchnerd]

it was silly for us and people like us with day jobs who aren't professionals.

the amount of steady-state pedaling work was way high. and increased in very large steps.
I've had exposure to friends who invest a lot more heavily into their mountain biking experience, riding daily and such but the proposed program would have easily been too big for many of them.

too dense, too complicated, too intense.
they were clearly smokers inviting failure with ease, for a large swath of the audience receiving it.

I guess my point is that as far as LISS programming goes, it starts with where you are, and what your goals are.

I merely meant to point out that recommendations for minimums vary widely, and not necessarily for the best reasons. some of the reason for this broad variance I've observed has to do with high performers being solicited for advice, and in doing their best to answer honestly, and maybe relying on their experience, incurring very high standards for those asking.

Beginners shouldn't use programs meant for advanced people?

Regardless of the training domain.

 

[Adachi]

Beginners shouldn't use programs meant for advanced people?

in my experience, apparently not. however - in my experience - advanced people plans/metrics/standards are often marketed to beginners rather prolifically.

furthermore - in my experience - the beginner is most vulnerable to such marketing.

 

[watchnerd]

in my experience, apparently not. however - in my experience - advanced people plans/metrics/standards are often marketed to beginners rather prolifically.

furthermore - in my experience - the beginner is most vulnerable to such marketing.

Everything is marketed to everybody rather prolifically.

Caveat emptor at every skill level.

 

[Don Fairbanks]

it was silly for us and people like us with day jobs who aren't professionals.

the amount of steady-state pedaling work was way high. and increased in very large steps.
I've had exposure to friends who invest a lot more heavily into their mountain biking experience, riding daily and such but the proposed program would have easily been too big for many of them.

too dense, too complicated, too intense.
they were clearly smokers inviting failure with ease, for a large swath of the audience receiving it.

I guess my point is that as far as LISS programming goes, it starts with where you are, and what your goals are.

I merely meant to point out that recommendations for minimums vary widely, and not necessarily for the best reasons. some of the reason for this broad variance I've observed has to do with high performers being solicited for advice, and in doing their best to answer honestly, and maybe relying on their experience, incurring very high standards for those asking.

I hear you.
What ever happened to getting on a bike, outside, sans all your battery powered $hit, and going for a ride ?

 

[Halfakneecap]

This is great, but ten min of KB swing EMOM wouldnt "get your cardio in this year", as you describe it.

When I started compressing my rest periods with swings on S&S I noticed a definite improvement in my general fitness endurance and recovery.

My only need for cardio other than health is surfing. Lots of easy paddling mixed with short sprints, catching waves and getting under waves. Confusing to work out what works

 

[Boris Bachmann]

I've made the same observation.

Although I'm not sure why it's such a big trauma to some people.

Training in general is a trauma for a lot of people - I assume it's because they've never really done training of any significance and/or the training they did was largely painful/unpleasant experiences. Getting people like that to do, for example, 3 hours of zone 2 is going to be a tough sell even if they are in reasonable shape to begin with and have plenty of time.

I'm grateful that I had plenty of positive experiences to go w. the bad...

 

[bluejeff]

I tried looking for clarification as to what counts as "moderate intensity aerobic exercise".

If strength training does not count as this type of exercise, they should say so. And of course if it does count, they should also say so. This would help clear up a lot of confusion.

Re the first part: they don't expicitly state a HR zone, I believe because the page is aimed at people who aren't exercise specialists, just normal people wanting to get in shape. I found this via link on the same page:

Here you can view and download a PDF explaining the levels of intensity of aerobic exercise. It is explained via talk test, heart rate percentage, and perceived effort:

Resource Detail

I am not trying to be a smartass but right below the quoted section on the original page I linked it has an infographic that says "2X per week- muscle strengthening exercises targetting all major muscle groups." So, they are in fact being specific about strength training being different from aerobic training.

I hear you.
What ever happened to getting on a bike, outside, sans all your battery powered $hit, and going for a ride ?

Damn scooters I can't decide if I dislike scooters or segways more.... Don't get me started on the battery-powered bikes they have all over now...

Okay, curmudgeon-y rant over.

I would ride my bike more, but after experiencing the ability to maintain a steady pace and HR on a stationary bike, it's hard to want to go back to a stop-and-go, uneven work pace, outside ride in a city purely for aerobic training purposes. Don't get me wrong, I'd rather be outside. I just live in a city, and even if I rode on a bike trail, it's flat enough that I wouldn't really be working hard enough, imo.

 

[Don Fairbanks]

Re the first part: they don't expicitly state a HR zone, I believe because the page is aimed at people who aren't exercise specialists, just normal people wanting to get in shape. I found this via link on the same page:

Here you can view and download a PDF explaining the levels of intensity of aerobic exercise. It is explained via talk test, heart rate percentage, and perceived effort:

Resource Detail

I am not trying to be a smartass but right below the quoted section on the original page I linked it has an infographic that says "2X per week- muscle strengthening exercises targetting all major muscle groups." So, they are in fact being specific about strength training being different from aerobic training.



Damn scooters I can't decide if I dislike scooters or segways more.... Don't get me started on the battery-powered bikes they have all over now...

Okay, curmudgeon-y rant over.

I would ride my bike more, but after experiencing the ability to maintain a steady pace and HR on a stationary bike, it's hard to want to go back to a stop-and-go, uneven work pace, outside ride in a city purely for aerobic training purposes. Don't get me wrong, I'd rather be outside. I just live in a city, and even if I rode on a bike trail, it's flat enough that I wouldn't really be working hard enough, imo.

Ha, True! Was also referring to HR straps, watches, phones, apps. programs and the like.

 

[GovernorSilver]

I am not trying to be a smartass but right below the quoted section on the original page I linked it has an infographic that says "2X per week- muscle strengthening exercises targetting all major muscle groups." So, they are in fact being specific about strength training being different from aerobic training.

That's fair. The infographic clearly show strength training and aerobic activity as separate activities.

 

[Don Fairbanks]

Re the first part: they don't expicitly state a HR zone, I believe because the page is aimed at people who aren't exercise specialists, just normal people wanting to get in shape. I found this via link on the same page:

Here you can view and download a PDF explaining the levels of intensity of aerobic exercise. It is explained via talk test, heart rate percentage, and perceived effort:

Resource Detail

I am not trying to be a smartass but right below the quoted section on the original page I linked it has an infographic that says "2X per week- muscle strengthening exercises targetting all major muscle groups." So, they are in fact being specific about strength training being different from aerobic training.



Damn scooters I can't decide if I dislike scooters or segways more.... Don't get me started on the battery-powered bikes they have all over now...

Okay, curmudgeon-y rant over.

I would ride my bike more, but after experiencing the ability to maintain a steady pace and HR on a stationary bike, it's hard to want to go back to a stop-and-go, uneven work pace, outside ride in a city purely for aerobic training purposes. Don't get me wrong, I'd rather be outside. I just live in a city, and even if I rode on a bike trail, it's flat enough that I wouldn't really be working hard enough, imo.

I ride on flat terrain , but always in the biggest gear, except when crossing a busy street.

 

[GovernorSilver]

When I was biking to work, I did indeed use the Strava app to track my distance and speed. I only really cared about the average speed when we were doing the 10,000 Steps challenge, because the steps-per-hour value was higher if the average was more than 15 mph... although I later realized that we were already entering our bike commute time and getting pro-rated scores - so if my ride was 64 min. instead of 1 hour, I got steps credit for the extra 4 min.

I tried to convince some teammates to slow down on their bike commutes to rack up more steps (longer time = more steps) but they weren't having any of that. They insisted it's better to bike faster and get the higher per hour rate... but if your ride is done in 43 min. instead of 63 min. your time is lower...

We lost the per-person average contest, but won the total steps contest thanks to 4 bike commuters on the team, riding at least 30 min. each way. Our prize? Milkshakes!