8/12 sec. intervals triple fat burning?

johnlvs2run · Post by **johnlvs2run** » January 24th, 2007, 1:06 pm

Thank you to Pam, Bob, Turbo and David standing up for reasoned discussion. Yes you are all correct I have changed the tone of my messages prior to this new year and see the better for this.

Pam, you are quite correct that I view things as a scientist, openmindedly with creative thought, and questioning things that appear to be wrong and/or take people down dead end roads, bolstered only by some conception of ego or authority and no attention to method or protocol. The study in question is a great example of this, usually the first mark of a fallable and misleading study being a personal attack in defense of it.

The important thing is that we look at things openmindedly without bias, and that we are accepting and in defense of others doing likewise. People are welcome to either accept or reject things as they wish. The vital thing is that we nurture and develop our dreams, and place no restrictions on them. There are those who would do so.

Of the last and greatest bastions of freedom and opportunity are the myriad capabilities and capacities that we have for dreaming, independent thinking and free will. Let us continue to culture and make the most of these things while we can.

funnyfidel · Post by **funnyfidel** » January 24th, 2007, 9:05 pm

Let me test how thick your skin is now: 5-0 ouch!

funnyfidel · Post by **funnyfidel** » January 24th, 2007, 9:10 pm

John Rupp wrote: Pam, you are quite correct that I view things as a scientist, openmindedly with creative thought, and questioning things that appear to be wrong and/or take people down dead end roads, bolstered only by some conception of ego or authority and no attention to method or protocol. The study in question is a great example of this, usually the first mark of a fallable and misleading study being a personal attack in defense of it.

.

From one scientist to a self-proclaimed scientist, John you do not view things as a scientist, take that as fact. If you did you would actually review the research rather than a press release. Do not debase scientist by ever thinking you can possibly be one. Your previous post is an example of non-thinking unscientific blindness. You lambaste research without the vaguest understanding of the research undertaken. As a scientist I am insulted that you appear to think that your posts are based on science.

albailey · Post by **albailey** » January 24th, 2007, 9:24 pm

"The scientists found their method could "spot reduce" troublesome areas such as legs and buttocks."

this seems a tad suspect. those same areas just *happen* to be the areas
most likely to firm up through cycling of any duration/intensity. i.e. focused
muscle toning vs. pinpointing fat reduction

i'd be interested to see the published study, sans the media spin.

i've been planning to incorporate 2 or 3 interval sessions per week into my
regimen, as soon as the JVC ends (gotta go long till then

), but will probably
go with a simple '20 on/10 off' tabata-style format, or a simpleton's version
of the wolverine or pete plan. - al.

johnlvs2run · Post by **johnlvs2run** » January 24th, 2007, 10:17 pm

Thanks for all the positive contributions to this thread.

Cheers, light and peace to all.

Widgeon · Post by **Widgeon** » January 25th, 2007, 3:25 pm

funnyfidel, you have repeatedly described yourself as being a scientest, trotted out a little freshman statistics and shown us your PhD and MBA. What is your PhD in? What is the field of study in which your degree was received? What field are you currently working in? Are you currently engaged in active research? Did you recieve your degree from an accredited institution? If so, which one.

I've seen alot of posturing, and I get that you dislike Mr. Rupp. I have yet to see true scientific discussion, eg: discussion of the merits of the research in question, study design, discussion of the physiology or biochemistry on this topic which would allow all of us on the forum to increase or knowledge and understanding of this topic. I have not yet read the paper. Perhaps you would provide a link to the paper so that all of us with interest can review it.

BTW, C2 has removed repeatedly abusive and hateful posters from the forum. It is a policy which was recently adopted. Since you potentially have some positive contributions to make, I would hate to see that happen to you. I have found your repeated personal slurs aand lack of content offensive and counter productive. I think if an untrained person such as Mr. Rupp can change the tone of his posts to become a peaceful and unemotional poster on this forum, than surely someone with your greatly superior training and intellect would be capable of doing the same.

Feel free to flame me as you will. My Degrees are in Chemistry and Biochemistry.

Pam

funnyfidel · Post by **funnyfidel** » January 26th, 2007, 4:42 am

Widgeon wrote:funnyfidel, you have repeatedly described yourself as being a scientest, trotted out a little freshman statistics and shown us your PhD and MBA. What is your PhD in? What is the field of study in which your degree was received? What field are you currently working in? Are you currently engaged in active research? Did you recieve your degree from an accredited institution? If so, which one.

Pam

I received my degrees from the University of Western Australia, yes it is accredited. I graduated with a double major in biochemistry and microbiology. My PhD was in the epidemiology of gastrointestinal diseases in Aboriginal childrenin regional Australia. I held two postdoctoral positions at The Hebrew University in Jerusalem and Cornell University Medical College in New York. My research was in infectious diseases and AIDS-related infection, particularly Mycobacterium tuberculosis. If you want a selected list of my publication I can email one to you. I also taught undergraduate and postgraduate medical and science students. I currently am carrying out research in biofuels for a private company, my own. Anything else you need? Want to know my shoe size?

Widgeon · Post by **Widgeon** » January 26th, 2007, 2:06 pm

funnyfidel, some great background and credentials. Interesting but understandable change to biofuels. Your training would certainly allow that shift. We have very similar training backgrounds with my own also encompassing biochemistry and medicine. Some experience with microbiology, but not to your depth. I do enjoy the hobby of zymurgy as well.

But enough hijacking of this thread there are some very interesting ideas to be discussed from the original post.

Mr. Rupp has questioned safety and fat burning. Without having the benefit of reading the original article, I agree, I would be concerned about the safety of having sedentary individuals begin an intense interval program.

The news report did not indicate if the 45 women involved were sedentary or aerobically conditioned prior to beginning this study. While there is an increased risk of sudden cardiac death during intense training, it tends to be low in conditioned (5+ days/wk), individuals and higher in sedentary individuals. Most of the studies I have seen either started with physically active people or did an initial short term aerobic conditioning program prior to adding interval training. Since Dr. Boutchers' gp has hypothesized, or perhaps determined that elevated catacholamine levels ( epinepharine, norepinepherine eg: adrenaline) levels are induced by interval training, the risk of adverse cardiac events, esp is a person with preexisting heart disease would be of particular concern. Medications and other substances which elevate catacholamine levels or stimulate alpha receptors (acting like a catacholamine) are often not considered appropiate for patients with heart conditions. Some cardiac deaths in healthy individuals have also been attributed to such cardiac stimulation, though I suspect that the levels produced in the body by interval training are significantly lower than those encountered pharmacologically, and therefor may not pose a significant risk.

As for fat burning: Several previous studys have determined that high intensity interval work (HIIT) is superior to aerobic endurance work for overall fat burning; many of these have also documented substantial gains in aerobic conditioning in addition to the expected gains in anaerobic conditioning.

Dr. Tremblay, Canada (1994) used HIIT in a group of unconditioned 30ish yr males. A control group did aerobic work increasing HR from 60-85% HRmax over the course of the 20wk study. The interval gp did either short (15-30s) or long (60-90s) intervals following an initial conditioning program. HIIT time of 15wks. For amount of energy expended between the two groups, the HIIT group burned 9x more fat than the aerobic group.

Dr. Tabata,Japan (1996) used varsity athletes in his study of short intensity, short recovery interval training. One group (controls) did 60min aerobic workouts 5x/wk, and measured aerobic, anaerobic conditioning increases. The interval group basically did 10 min warmup, a series of intervals (20s ant Vo2max 170%) with 10s rest followed by another 20s interval. A total of 8x 20s intrervals or to "fatigue" defined as pedel rotation decreasing below 85rpm, followed by a 5 minute cooldown 5x per week, for six weeks. The interval group posted signifigant (I think 28%) gains in anaerobic capacity, and 14% gains in aerobic capacity compared to the control group.

Dr. Burgomaster, Canada, (2005) Showed significant increases in aerobic and anaerobic capacity with significant fat burning increases in a series of 7-10x 30s sprints with 4min recovery between sprints, with interval training 2x/wk, for I beleive, 6 weeks. His aerobic, anaerobic increases were not as great as Tabata's, due to the longer recovery period. However, the participants all showed significantly increased peak and mean power, something which did not change in Tabata's study, probably due to inadequate recovery time between interval sessions in Tabata's study.

Speculation seems to be that the higher intensity work stresses both fast and slow twitch muscles, and leads to enzymatic adaptations which increase lipid utilization by muscles in the post exersize state.

It would be interesting to know more of the specifics of Dr Boutcher's study. I would also be interested to know how many of the woman who started the study dropped out prior to completion. I use a modification of Dr. Tabata's protocol on my erg. It is a serious butt-kicker. I can only do it about 2x /week.

Many of the articles I have referenced have a much more detailed synopsis provided by Clarence Bass, a body builder, with a wonderful website, and many articles on training, diet, motivation,etc. Highly recommended. You can find him at: cbass.com Look for articles: 10, 11, 12, 112 and 152.

I would enjoy hearing some of the ideas other people on the forum have. I certainly don't feel like I understand all of this, and would love to get some education!

Thanks! Pam

Bob S. · Post by **Bob S.** » January 27th, 2007, 1:05 am

Widgeon wrote: Many of the articles I have referenced have a much more detailed synopsis provided by Clarence Bass, a body builder, with a wonderful website, and many articles on training, diet, motivation,etc. Highly recommended. You can find him at: cbass.com Look for articles: 10, 11, 12, 112 and 152.
Thanks! Pam

Pam,

Interesting message. But I was amused by the reference to Mr. Bass. I checked out his website when was a mention of him on this forum a while back. First I was shocked that he disparaged anything over 500m as being too long. But I was even more shocked by his technique. The one video I saw was rather old, about 5 or 6 years. I certainly hope that in the meantime he has learned to keep his arms straight until his legs are straight and to do the mirror reverse on the recovery. I sent him a message with a couple of references to technique advice, but his response was basically an ad for his program. Admittedly, I am a distance rower, weak but enduring. I regard anything less than 6k as too short.

Bob S. (Since credentials seem to have become a theme in this thread, I should add: professor emeritus of chemistry (plain old organic - very old now). Also, started rowing in 1932.)

funnyfidel · Post by **funnyfidel** » January 27th, 2007, 4:56 am

The question of heart rate and source of energy is a perplexing one for me. I have asked a number of people if you exercise in a carbo burning zone and deplete your glycogen stores without taking in any carbos where is glycogen restored from: fat or protein. If it from fat then wouldn't exercising in a carbo burning zone just be a long way around of burning off fat. Where does ketosis fit into this picture?
Hey Bob S. I have been looking at using saturated sodium silicate to remove free fatt acids from an oil solution. When mixed they form a solid silica gel complex containing the fatty acid. Can this complex be used for anything useful or can it be reversed to release the fatty acids?

Bob S. · Post by **Bob S.** » January 29th, 2007, 1:48 am

funnyfidel wrote: Hey Bob S. I have been looking at using saturated sodium silicate to remove free fatt acids from an oil solution. When mixed they form a solid silica gel complex containing the fatty acid. Can this complex be used for anything useful or can it be reversed to release the fatty acids?

I wasn't aware that silicate has the capacity to complex with fatty acids, but it seems reasonable enough. The first thought that comes to mind would be to try using one of the strong mineral acids to break the complex. I would try adding aqueous HCl and extracting the mixture with a non-polar solvent, perhaps ether or chloroform. If it works, the fatty acids could be recovered by distilling off the solvent. I have no idea what use the complex might have. If it has a high percentage of fatty acid, it would likely be combustible, but smoky. However, use as a fuel would be both wasteful and impractical. No fancy ideas here, just old fashioned chemistry.

Bob S.

grams · Post by **grams** » January 30th, 2007, 12:38 pm

Turbocog, we were in Oz a while back and I found it very easy to find gyms with C2s in them. The 'drop-in' thing worked well with no hassles about how fit I was before they let me use the machine. I didn 't check to see if they have a similar system to the UK of public 'leisure centres'. You might look into it. We were staying inn one location in Oxford for about a month so we joined the local leisure centre. Wonderful facilities and very inexpensive. We had to go through an orientation and then we were in.

rhave fun-keep rowing,
grams

albailey · Post by **albailey** » January 30th, 2007, 1:32 pm

funnyfidel wrote:The question of heart rate and source of energy is a perplexing one for me. I have asked a number of people if you exercise in a carbo burning zone and deplete your glycogen stores without taking in any carbos where is glycogen restored from: fat or protein. If it from fat then wouldn't exercising in a carbo burning zone just be a long way around of burning off fat. Where does ketosis fit into this picture?[...]

i thought i'd read that in the event glycogen stores are exhausted and no subsequent energy is consumed, that glycogen will be restored from fat stores.
unfortunately, i have no idea where i read this, and obviously no idea as to it's validity. but under the same circumstances, i don't think your body will use
protein (muscle tissue?) to restore glycogen unless *all* fat stores have been depleted.

one more day to go for the january challenge, then i can roll some HIIT into my program. i'm looking forward to the change of pace!

Steelhead · Post by **Steelhead** » February 6th, 2007, 11:52 pm

If glycogen is completely exhausted then muscle failure is reached. This happens to me from time to time during wind sprints. HOWEVER, during long endurance exercise, the body uses glycogen and fat as an energy source, and so it takes a long time to exhaust glycogen stores, but anecdotally in some marathons, etc., you see runners collapse.

To restore glycogen, the body uses carbohydrates; not fat, not protein. Hence, the reason why athletes sometimes carbo-load in an effort to increase glycogen.

When doing wind sprints, this is an anaerobic exercise that uses glycogen in the specific muscles being used; running a 10K is aerobic exercise that uses glycogen and fat together, as a source of energy.

Hope this helps.

tincup · Post by **tincup** » March 22nd, 2007, 8:55 am

Hi John Rupp - gardening does 'burn' body fat admirably as does housework and the odd amorous tumble with a significant other - if the advice offered by most exercise and weight control institutions is to be believed. Have you considered that these anecdotal but none the less empirical observations were possibly the starting point of the study whose findings you initially seemed to find questionable? Can you see a pattern of physiological activity that the activities mentioned above might have in common with 8 seconds/12 seconds on an exercise bike for 20 minutes? As an unfit 39 year old male, I found the bike routine did not raise my HR above 140 so it's probably better for me than running for 40 minutes - which fits in with the Aussie scientists' claims.