running after working out? = bad?

Discussion in 'Fitness & Nutrition' started by ay thunderrcat, Nov 13, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ay thunderrcat

    ay thunderrcat You can have all the hoes, I'm gon keep the women.

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Messages:
    14,236
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    THA COV, LA, CA
    well im trying to cut, and im eating clean and seeing results, but i was thinking, if i run after i work out, would it be burning my muscles? because i usually run for 30 minutes in the morning, then at night when i go work out i run for another 20 minutes after im done. would that make me lose muscle instead of fat?
     
  2. ay thunderrcat

    ay thunderrcat You can have all the hoes, I'm gon keep the women.

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Messages:
    14,236
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    THA COV, LA, CA
  3. Abomb

    Abomb New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2005
    Messages:
    20,480
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    when you are done lifting, you want to get protein into your body asap. thats all i can comment on.
     
  4. lif

    lif New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2005
    Messages:
    3,097
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    London, Ontario
    workout, take PWO shake, run, ideally
     
  5. Elfling

    Elfling New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    Messages:
    36,575
    Likes Received:
    0
    Cardio after lifting is just fine. I prefer to separate when I can, but half an hour of running after lifting isn't going to destroy your gains.
     
  6. ay thunderrcat

    ay thunderrcat You can have all the hoes, I'm gon keep the women.

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Messages:
    14,236
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    THA COV, LA, CA
    cool thanks, i was just afraid itll destroy any gains i make.
     
  7. 94civicEX

    94civicEX New Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2003
    Messages:
    4,778
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Utah
    Lots of differing viewpoints on it.

    One I heard here is to drink your shake while you do your cardio :p.
     
  8. Marijuanair

    Marijuanair Remember to have your pet spayed or neutered! OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2004
    Messages:
    20,434
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    AZ
    I do cardio pre workout. Then, usally many hours later, I do a few miles of walking in the evening.
     
  9. DTR rex

    DTR rex New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2004
    Messages:
    14,518
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Chi-Town
    After your workout (lifting) your body is going to be requiring protein. When you workout you stretch and tear muscle fibers and your body immediately starts looking for nutrients (one of which is protein) to feed the muscles through increased blood flow... Hence that "pumped" feeling people get after a workout.. which is essentially increased blood flow and temporary volumization of muscles.

    What does this mean: After a workout is an optimum time to get protein in your body because it needs it. Therefore, I would not recommed finishing your workout and then running, and then showering and eating etc... It could be well over an hour before you get your first gram of protien in.

    My advice: After your workout, have a small water based protein shake (1 scoop or so) or a protein bar. Then go ahead and do cardio and after cardio/showering go home and get in a well balanced and high protein meal.
     
  10. themadpaki

    themadpaki There is no money. OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2004
    Messages:
    4,004
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    One of the Beaches, CA
    My opinion:

    Listen to no one. Test out for one week. If gains do not happen, add shake or more shake.

    Retest

    Repeat until cutting + gains happen. Or cutting + a lil' gainin'
     
  11. Chalkitup

    Chalkitup New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2004
    Messages:
    482
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Australia
    You're kidding right? You expect the untrained naked eye is going to be able to accurately gauge the difference with so many other variables in the mix?

    Getting your protein shake in 20mins after you train is fine. Cardio training before you lift is not.

    If you're running to burn fat stop doing that and get up an hour early of a morning and walk instead it's more beneficial.
     
  12. Elfling

    Elfling New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    Messages:
    36,575
    Likes Received:
    0
    Walking is not more beneficial than running. I assume you're referencing the old (untrue) bit about lower-intensity burns more fat.
     
  13. timberwolf

    timberwolf New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,974
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Toronto
    I like doing a mile before my workout as a warmup and calorie burner to boot.
     
  14. Chalkitup

    Chalkitup New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2004
    Messages:
    482
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Australia
    No, you're right I should've stated it was just my experience because I can't back it up.

    Could you, please?
     
  15. Chalkitup

    Chalkitup New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2004
    Messages:
    482
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Australia
    timber, warming up is warming up running for 20 mins is not warming up.

    I also ride or row for about 5mins before training.
     
  16. Elfling

    Elfling New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    Messages:
    36,575
    Likes Received:
    0
    ??? You're not making much sense. I'm not being bitchy :) seriously. But what are you meaning by walking is more beneficial in your experience, and some light cardio isn't warming up tendons/muscles?
     
  17. timberwolf

    timberwolf New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,974
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Toronto
    Well...right now...anywhere between 12-15min. In the summer though... I did half my cardio before and half after. But then, cardio was somewhat the priority since I was cutting.

    Actually two things that I was doing 'wrong'... no food before working out and doing cardio first.
     
  18. Chalkitup

    Chalkitup New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2004
    Messages:
    482
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Australia

    Sorry posting at work. My point was that warming up pre w/o is not only fine but recommended. I don't see 20minutes of hard running as a necessary method of warm-up. Light cardio like a couple of k's on the bike, tread or rower are fine but you shouldn't be "ripping into it" IMO. YMMV and since I'm not educated well in the field I'll stick to saying that its my experience. Full-on cardio (read: above and beyond warm-up) depletes your muscles of glycogen and will hinder your work out.

    WRT running Vs walking if you're cutting to be skinny fine but in my experience, which is maximising muscle retention and reducing appetite, walking is more beneficial.

    It's cool, I know you're not being bitchy and hopefully you feel the same about my posts. But I would be interested to read some about dispelling the myth of low intensity=fat burn & high=cardio
     
  19. Elfling

    Elfling New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    Messages:
    36,575
    Likes Received:
    0
    NP :p I'll dig it up. Basically it's that you technically burn a higher percentage of fat at low intensities, but you burn MORE fat total at higher intensities, not to mention more calories overall.
     
  20. Chalkitup

    Chalkitup New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2004
    Messages:
    482
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Australia
    Haha now who's not making sense :p

    Higher percentage of what total? i.e if it were a percentage of your total fat stored than it would contradict your second statement.
     
  21. timberwolf

    timberwolf New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,974
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Toronto
    100% of 100 calories burned at low intensities is still less than 50% of 250 calories is pretty much the difference between low and high intensity. The advantage of low intensity is less catabolic especially when in a hypocaloric intake.
     
  22. Elfling

    Elfling New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    Messages:
    36,575
    Likes Received:
    0
    You're smarter than that :rolleyes: percentage of calories burned during exercise.
     
  23. Elfling

    Elfling New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    Messages:
    36,575
    Likes Received:
    0
    Here- and it's not Lyle, it's Cosgrove:

    [​IMG] The Fat Burning Zone.


    • Nope. Sorry - it doesn't exist. The fat burning zone is a concept that the body burns a greater amount of fat at lower intensity aerobic exercise than it does at higher intensities. This is a misinterpretation. [​IMG]It's true that the body burns a greater percentage of fat at lower intensities than at higher intensities, but taking this to its logical conclusion - the body will burn a greater amount of fat as a percentage lying on the couch than doing anything else right?
      And we know how good lying on the couch works for fat loss. It's the "as a percentage" line.
      At lower intensities the body may burn 50% of the calories from fat, while at higher intensities it may only burn 35% of calories from fat.
      However, at higher intensities you burn way more total calories, and more fat calories overall than you do at lower intensities.
      Think about a real world example - are sprinters (running 10-20s) fatter than marathon runners (2-2.5 hours of running). No. Actually sprinters carry less body fat than distance runners due to their muscle mass.
     
  24. TZ

    TZ Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    39,483
    Likes Received:
    1
    Need protein ASAP. Screw running
     
  25. Chalkitup

    Chalkitup New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2004
    Messages:
    482
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Australia
    Hehe no really, I'm not ;)

    Interesting article but the analogy is bogus IMO. We all know that fat levels are strongly dependant on diet as well as exercise so to leave one of these out of the comparison is moot.

    Do you feel it would be accurate to transpose that low intensity is more efficient in burning fat only that it would take more walking exercise to burn the same amount of fat total. I think its also worth noting that since it is less efficient those carbs and proteins being used up are technically being wasted from a muscle building/retaining perspective. Would you agree?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page