8/12 sec. intervals triple fat burning?

Rowing for weight loss or weight control? Start here.

Postby johnlvs2run » March 22nd, 2007, 10:36 pm

tincup wrote: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 regards to untrained people, no, that would be much too strenuous. The first things to do are to improve one's health and endurance. Improving one's health is #1 by far more important of anything else.

As to exercise the most important for health is endurance, cardiovascular endurance, muscular endurance, improving the strength of one's tendons, ligaments, and so on, all very closely related with one's health.
66 .. 5'9" .. 143lbs
http://johnlvs2run.wordpress.com/category/concept2-rowing-videos/
User avatar
johnlvs2run
Half Marathon Poster
 
Posts: 3227
Joined: March 16th, 2006, 1:13 pm
Location: western u.s.

Postby tincup » March 23rd, 2007, 11:45 am

Hi John Rupp - the 12 second/ 8 second routine is an exercise regime that has the secondary effect of developing tendon strength etc. in much the same way as gardening, walking etc. It would be interesting to hear from you when you have done a couple of 20 minute bike sessions - and/or when you have observed very unfit people (e.g. moi @ 25 kg over my ideal lightweight racing weight) doing the routine. I can assure you, from personal experince, the results are remarkable - this is a major breakthrough and exercise enthusiasts everywhere should be encouraging the less fit members of the species to have a go.
tincup
Paddler
 
Posts: 9
Joined: March 22nd, 2007, 5:45 am

Postby johnlvs2run » March 23rd, 2007, 12:22 pm

Tincup,

The problem with those who focus on disease to give advice is that they are then creating more sickness and disease. The medical profession are experts in disease, and can name thousands of diseases that no one has ever heard of before. In fact they can create diseases out of thin air. And when healthy people go to them, then they can create many sicknesses and diseases for them too. Because that is their focus.

But they know nothing about health, fitness or longevity. Because of the focus on disease, they are not able to help people to be healthy, and they don't talk about cures for any disease. Rather they are admonished to not mention the possibility of any cure or remedy for any disease, and get angry if someone else talks about that or is cured by some alternative methods to theirs. This all seems very strange but makes perfect sense really, as their focus is disease and not cures.

Now if you want to take their advice that is certainly up to you. We all have free will to make our own choices, and you are welcome to do that. Being 25kg overweight is not so good though, did you get that from taking their advice before? Did the 8 sec for 20 minutes work for you then? If so then why are you still 25kg overweight and unhealthy. Just curious. Maybe I can learn something here. Anyway variety is what makes the world go round, yes? It's all an experiment and a learning experience. Hopefully we can enjoy the journey and all will come out for the best.

Cheers.
66 .. 5'9" .. 143lbs
http://johnlvs2run.wordpress.com/category/concept2-rowing-videos/
User avatar
johnlvs2run
Half Marathon Poster
 
Posts: 3227
Joined: March 16th, 2006, 1:13 pm
Location: western u.s.

Postby Steelhead » March 23rd, 2007, 1:14 pm

John Rupp wrote:Tincup,

The problem with those who focus on disease to give advice is that they are then creating more sickness and disease. The medical profession are experts in disease, and can name thousands of diseases that no one has ever heard of before. In fact they can create diseases out of thin air. And when healthy people go to them, then they can create many sicknesses and diseases for them too. Because that is their focus.

But they know nothing about health, fitness or longevity. Because of the focus on disease, they are not able to help people to be healthy, and they don't talk about cures for any disease. Rather they are admonished to not mention the possibility of any cure or remedy for any disease, and get angry if someone else talks about that or is cured by some alternative methods to theirs. This all seems very strange but makes perfect sense really, as their focus is disease and not cures.

Now if you want to take their advice that is certainly up to you. We all have free will to make our own choices, and you are welcome to do that. Being 25kg overweight is not so good though, did you get that from taking their advice before? Did the 8 sec for 20 minutes work for you then? If so then why are you still 25kg overweight and unhealthy. Just curious. Maybe I can learn something here. Anyway variety is what makes the world go round, yes? It's all an experiment and a learning experience. Hopefully we can enjoy the journey and all will come out for the best.

Cheers.


I don't want to get bogged down with blather about the medical and nutrtition professions, so I'll just comment on my experience with the 8/12 cycling routine, which I applied after reading the report/study.

This is a routine that applies to everyone whether physically in shape or not; here's why I think this: When sprinting for 8 seconds it is perceived effort; in other words, a fat person out of shape would not "sprint" as fast as a fit person; the 12 seconds speaks for itself.

The point of this routine is that it burns calories twice as fast as just cycling at a constant pace. Of course! Sprinting burns more calories than non-sprinting. 40% of the time the cyclist is sprinting, and 60% of the time she is cycling at a slower pace, which means that 60% of the time she is in a fat burning mode and 40% of the time she is burning glycogen; it is just interval training with some observed results that are interesting for those with limited time who want to maximize that time vis-a-vis burning calories.

Mathematically, it makes sense, and since people differ the actual number of calories burned by any given person when compared with others in better or worse physical condition will differ.

Getting side-tracked on which is better, a slow pace for a long time versus a fast pace for a short time, misses the point of this study and the reason for using the 8/12 program, in my opinion. It is something a person can do in addition to what she is already doing, or something to replace.

As for attacking someone's argument by attacking the person, well, we all know this is cowardly and illogical. The point of these forums is to help others not attack or ridicule them simply because our pet theories differ.

Bottomline: the 8/12 program is worth trying if time is limited. The 8/12 program has nothing to do with diatribes against doctors. I suggest that Dr. J. Fuhrman, Dr. J. McDougall, Dr. Campbell, and others, are exceptions to the generalized rule argued by Mr. Rupp; so his generalizations add nothing to rational discussion.

But what do I know? I'm just a lawyer who wonders why some people on this forum are not sued for libel. :twisted:
Mike

"Sometimes we have to do more than our best, we have to do what is required." Winston Churchill

Completed the Certificate Program in Plant-Based Nutrition through eCornell and the T. Colin Campbell Foundation, January 11, 2011.
User avatar
Steelhead
1k Poster
 
Posts: 162
Joined: March 22nd, 2006, 3:05 am
Location: Washington

Postby johnlvs2run » March 23rd, 2007, 5:51 pm

Steelhead wrote:which means that 60% of the time she is in a fat burning mode and 40% of the time she is burning glycogen


Hi Mike,

The next time you do this, check your heart rates well through the 20 minute piece, and let me know how much they are coming down in each of the 12s coasts. For the changes to be occurring as you suggest, then your heart rates should be at max for each of the 8s sprints, and recover to 70 percent of heart rate reserve while you are rowing for 12s each time at an easier pace in between. I have done many sessions of this type through the years and never once have I found that much of a change in 12s, so I am very interested to hear details of your results going from a max heart rate to 70 percent within 12 seconds at a slower pace, and repeating this result 60 times in 20 minutes. I must admit you have sparked my curiousity.

As example here is a session I did a couple of times:
4 sets of 25x 30s sprints with 30s easy in between
plus 4 sets of 5x 30s sprints with 30s easy between
r5:00 between sets

In the first 4 sets my highest heart rates were 149/145, i.e. 149 at the end of the sprints and 145 after 30s recovery. In the shorter faster sets my maximum heart rates were 160/148, i.e. 160 at the end of the all out sprints and 148 at the end of the 30s of easy recovery. The ranges of my heart rate reserve were respectively 81 percent after sprints and 78 percent at end of recoveries, and 89.3 percent after sprints and 80 percent after recoveries.

Whether or not you will agree that my endurance is much better than yours, you might understand why I am so interested to see your results, that you would not only reach higher heart rates than me after much shorter sprints, but will also recover to only 70 percent of your heart rate reserve in 12 seconds. Your results are amazing to me and I hope you will be willing to share your results in great detail.

Cheers.
66 .. 5'9" .. 143lbs
http://johnlvs2run.wordpress.com/category/concept2-rowing-videos/
User avatar
johnlvs2run
Half Marathon Poster
 
Posts: 3227
Joined: March 16th, 2006, 1:13 pm
Location: western u.s.

Postby Steelhead » March 23rd, 2007, 6:06 pm

John Rupp wrote:
Steelhead wrote:which means that 60% of the time she is in a fat burning mode and 40% of the time she is burning glycogen


Hi Mike,

The next time you do this, check your heart rates well through the 20 minute piece, and let me know how much they are coming down in each of the 12s coasts. For the changes to be occurring as you suggest, then your heart rates should be at max for each of the 8s sprints, and recover to 70 percent of heart rate reserve while you are rowing for 12s each time at an easier pace in between. I have done many sessions of this type through the years and never once have I found that much of a change in 12s, so I am very interested to hear details of your results going from a max heart rate to 70 percent within 12 seconds at a slower pace, and repeating this result 60 times in 20 minutes. I must admit you have sparked my curiousity.

As example here is a session I did a couple of times:
4 sets of 25x 30s sprints with 30s easy in between
plus 4 sets of 5x 30s sprints with 30s easy between
r5:00 between sets

In the first 4 sets my highest heart rates were 149/145, i.e. 149 at the end of the sprints and 145 after 30s recovery. In the shorter faster sets my maximum heart rates were 160/148, i.e. 160 at the end of the all out sprints and 148 at the end of the 30s of easy recovery. The ranges of my heart rate reserve were respectively 81 percent after sprints and 78 percent at end of recoveries, and 89.3 percent after sprints and 80 percent after recoveries.

I think you will agree that my endurance is much better than yours. But whether you do or not, you might understand why I am so interested to see your results, that you would not only reach higher heart rates than me after shorter sprints, but will also recover to only 70 percent of your heart rate reserve in 12 seconds. Your results are amazing to me and I hope you will be willing to share your results in great detail - as doing so will hopefully shed more light on this new scientific discovery.


Hi John,

I have pretty good endurance, although I have only rowed 60,000 meters at one time straight, and then later that day did two cycling spinning classes.

My point is that if you take any person regardless of their condition, they will burn more calories using the 8/12 split than if they were to cycle at a constant "resting" rate simply because 40% of the time they are cycling as fast as they can, and then 60% of the time they are recovering.

When I tried this, at first, I had it ass-backwards and did a 12/8 split for one hour; now that was difficult. Afterwards, I thought I had better reread the article, and discovered that it is 8/12 not 12/8; so then the next day I did another hour at 8/12 and it was much, much easier.

I had my maximum heart rate tested a few weeks back on a stationary bike and at 60 it is 195; I have not had it tested on the erg, or while jogging. The test was done after I had already done an hour spinning class and had done squats so I think my max heart rate should be higher, and I will have it tested again without exercising before the test.

When I did the 8/12 for one hour watching the clock the entire time to stay on time, I was so busy watching the clock that I did not take my heart rate, since I was just experimenting as to perceived exhaustion and to get a feel for it. I will say that I was sweating much more than a typical cycling class. The next time I tried it (the next day), I set the resistance to a hill climbing level rather than a flat road level, and that was way more fun and interesting.

The next time I do this, I'll wear my heart rate monitor and see what is going on with my heart.

BTW, I do agree with the theory of low exertion to burn fat and not over tax the heart, but keep in mind that the 8/12 system is for those who do not have a lot of time and want to burn twice the calories in a given time frame than they normally would. So we have to be careful and not compare apples to oranges so to speak.
Mike

"Sometimes we have to do more than our best, we have to do what is required." Winston Churchill

Completed the Certificate Program in Plant-Based Nutrition through eCornell and the T. Colin Campbell Foundation, January 11, 2011.
User avatar
Steelhead
1k Poster
 
Posts: 162
Joined: March 22nd, 2006, 3:05 am
Location: Washington

Postby johnlvs2run » March 23rd, 2007, 6:59 pm

Hi Mike,

Thanks for sharing.

Your endurance looks very good.

Do you think a person would burn more calories doing the hour at 8/12 than by just rowing hard straight through for the hour? I wonder, as it seems to me that going at maximum effort for the hour would burn more calories, considering for every increase in effort there needs to be an exponential decrease to compensate. Thus it seems to me that going steady would burn more calories in the time period than breaking it up with sprinting and jogging, though I'm sure there are other benefits either way.

The usual sessions we do would be way too difficult for the average person though. Any of my immediate neighbors would probably keel over from attempting even 20 minutes in that manner. Once a person builds their endurance then it's much easier though.

Cheers.
66 .. 5'9" .. 143lbs
http://johnlvs2run.wordpress.com/category/concept2-rowing-videos/
User avatar
johnlvs2run
Half Marathon Poster
 
Posts: 3227
Joined: March 16th, 2006, 1:13 pm
Location: western u.s.

Postby Steelhead » March 23rd, 2007, 7:43 pm

John Rupp wrote:Hi Mike,

Thanks for sharing.

Your endurance looks very good.

Do you think a person would burn more calories doing the hour at 8/12 than by just rowing hard straight through for the hour? I wonder, as it seems to me that going at maximum effort for the hour would burn more calories, considering for every increase in effort there needs to be an exponential decrease to compensate. Thus it seems to me that going steady would burn more calories in the time period than breaking it up with sprinting and jogging, though I'm sure there are other benefits either way.

The usual sessions we do would be way too difficult for the average person though. Any of my immediate neighbors would probably keel over from attempting even 20 minutes in that manner. Once a person builds their endurance then it's much easier though.

Cheers.


I think rowing hard straight through would burn more calories than the 8/12, but it all depends on the definition of "hard." Another question would be whether a person could row harder during the 8 seconds by taking the 12 second rest than going strong the entire time. But if we have the stamina, then going full out the entire time is going to burn more calories than going full out 8 seconds then backing off for 12, etc.

The goal with the 8/12 to me is to push even harder during the 8 seconds and then backing off to what for most would not be a recovery. But you raise some great issues.

Keep in mind that this 8/12 program is for stationary spinning cycles; not ergs. There is a big difference based on my own cross-training.

As for erging, when my nephew in the US Marine Corps visited and he saw me erging for over an hour, he decided that he could do that too and show up his old Marine uncle; he reached failure at about 10 minutes. He could have got on a spinning cycle however and stayed all out for over an hour; well, maybe.

Endurance and stamina matters! And doing a short 8/12 spin for 20 minutes will not cut it if you are like me; stamina means being able to work hard for hours with little water or food.

Semper Fi.
Mike

"Sometimes we have to do more than our best, we have to do what is required." Winston Churchill

Completed the Certificate Program in Plant-Based Nutrition through eCornell and the T. Colin Campbell Foundation, January 11, 2011.
User avatar
Steelhead
1k Poster
 
Posts: 162
Joined: March 22nd, 2006, 3:05 am
Location: Washington

Postby Nosmo » March 23rd, 2007, 8:52 pm

Steelhead wrote:[...]
Endurance and stamina matters! And doing a short 8/12 spin for 20 minutes will not cut it if you are like me; stamina means being able to work hard for hours with little water or food.

Semper Fi.



In the 70's when I started cycling seriously, the conventional wisdom was to workout without much food and water. That philosophy has been completely discredited. If you want to be fast you need to train hard and that requires fuel and being well hydrated. The first sign of dehydration is fatigue, which doesn't do much good for ones endurance.

If you want to loose weight then, minimizing your food intake is a good idea. But if you want to go several hours without food, you can't go too hard or you will bonk big time--need to burn fat to last. Of course few people erg for more then 90 minutes, so food and water is usually not much of an issue.


DId anyone read the article? Why did they try 12/8 not 60/30?
Nosmo
10k Poster
 
Posts: 1595
Joined: November 21st, 2006, 3:39 pm

Postby Steelhead » March 23rd, 2007, 9:23 pm

Nosmo wrote:
Steelhead wrote:[...]
Endurance and stamina matters! And doing a short 8/12 spin for 20 minutes will not cut it if you are like me; stamina means being able to work hard for hours with little water or food.

Semper Fi.



In the 70's when I started cycling seriously, the conventional wisdom was to workout without much food and water. That philosophy has been completely discredited. If you want to be fast you need to train hard and that requires fuel and being well hydrated. The first sign of dehydration is fatigue, which doesn't do much good for ones endurance.

If you want to loose weight then, minimizing your food intake is a good idea. But if you want to go several hours without food, you can't go too hard or you will bonk big time--need to burn fat to last. Of course few people erg for more then 90 minutes, so food and water is usually not much of an issue.


DId anyone read the article? Why did they try 12/8 not 60/30?


Bottom-line, I agree with you.
Mike

"Sometimes we have to do more than our best, we have to do what is required." Winston Churchill

Completed the Certificate Program in Plant-Based Nutrition through eCornell and the T. Colin Campbell Foundation, January 11, 2011.
User avatar
Steelhead
1k Poster
 
Posts: 162
Joined: March 22nd, 2006, 3:05 am
Location: Washington

Postby tincup » March 24th, 2007, 8:19 am

Hi John & Steelhead, my weight continues to fall using the 8/12 routine - now down to 23 kg's over my previous optimum of 71kg - and I hate to admit it that's a total drop of 11kg's since starting to exercise after reovering from long term (4 years mostly immobile) serious injury picked up in one of the less hospitable regions of our planet. John - I have to say that you sound like a lovely man but you sure were born with your foot in your mouth!

The 8/12 works on a bike because you can set the resistance according to how you are feeling - HR starts to go up and you just drop a couple of levels.

Keep paddling :roll:
tincup
Paddler
 
Posts: 9
Joined: March 22nd, 2007, 5:45 am

Postby Steelhead » March 24th, 2007, 12:59 pm

tincup wrote:Hi John & Steelhead, my weight continues to fall using the 8/12 routine - now down to 23 kg's over my previous optimum of 71kg - and I hate to admit it that's a total drop of 11kg's since starting to exercise after reovering from long term (4 years mostly immobile) serious injury picked up in one of the less hospitable regions of our planet. John - I have to say that you sound like a lovely man but you sure were born with your foot in your mouth!

The 8/12 works on a bike because you can set the resistance according to how you are feeling - HR starts to go up and you just drop a couple of levels.

Keep paddling :roll:


That is great to hear about the success of the 8/12 routine. As I mentioned before, I can understand how and why it works. From my own experience, this routine really does work great on a stationary bike--I use it on a spinning cycle; I set the resistance based on how hard I want to work out and just leave it there. I haven't used it using a HRM though; I'll do that soon. Since you are getting leaner using the 8/12 routine, how long do you cycle (20 or 30 or 60 minutes, e.g.), and how many days per week?

I have to keep watching the clock though to ensure that I hit the 8 second and 12 second marks; I've worked out a way to count the time which is very close, and I suppose I really don't need to be so concerned about an exact 8/12 routine. What do you do to stay on the 8/12 time? Just curious (watching the clock does make the time seem to go by quickly).

I think if we drop the resistance to as low as John does by using a cover over the fly wheel, etc., then the 8/12 could work on an erg; but as I think about it as I type, I think at any drag factor the 8/12 could work (since it is all relative). Have you tried it on your erg? I haven't (yet).
Mike

"Sometimes we have to do more than our best, we have to do what is required." Winston Churchill

Completed the Certificate Program in Plant-Based Nutrition through eCornell and the T. Colin Campbell Foundation, January 11, 2011.
User avatar
Steelhead
1k Poster
 
Posts: 162
Joined: March 22nd, 2006, 3:05 am
Location: Washington

Postby tincup » March 24th, 2007, 3:50 pm

Hi Mike - the 8/12 workout does not translate to the erg even at very low settings but I'm not sure why!

The 'spinning' set up on a stationary bike yields good results. Where I work out the bike is a very good model that beeps at me when I should start pedalling harder and also tells you to easy off - also gives a HR feedback that is within 2 beats of my polar monitor. I don't think it's all that important if you are 1 or 2 seconds out - e.g do 9 seconds hard instead of 8.

I do a 20 minute bike session three times a week. Additionally every week I do three low rate workouts over 40-90 minutes on the erg, breaking every 20 minutes for a stretch (imposed by the physio people but once I got used to this I found it works because my technique stays solid for the whole workout).

I'm fairly sure that introducing the weekly bike routine has a causal relationship with my recent weight loss. This could of course all be down to adding 60 minutes of exercise to what I was already doing - but on the other hand I have over the same period replaced three 40 minute jogging sessions per week with four leisurely walks with the dog so this probably doesn't figure.

If you can find the 'runners world' (Brit publication) website at www.runnersworld.co.uk you could read their write up of the 8/12 bike workout published in the March edition - the improved fat burning is apparently brought about by complex physiological changes that are the result of having to change pace constantly. There must be a way of achieving the same result on an erg but I certainly don't know what it is! The article I read maintained that people should stick to their normal endurance running workouts to build up stamina and only use the bike workout to lose fat, if necessary.
tincup
Paddler
 
Posts: 9
Joined: March 22nd, 2007, 5:45 am

Postby Nosmo » March 26th, 2007, 12:54 pm

tincup wrote:
If you can find the 'runners world' (Brit publication) website at www.runnersworld.co.uk you could read their write up of the 8/12 bike workout published in the March edition


Can you post the link. I can't seem to find it. I'm not impressed by the search feature.
Thanks
Nosmo
10k Poster
 
Posts: 1595
Joined: November 21st, 2006, 3:39 pm

Postby tincup » March 27th, 2007, 6:39 am

Hi Nosmo - sorry it is difficult - will follow up with copy of article when I get a moment :roll:
tincup
Paddler
 
Posts: 9
Joined: March 22nd, 2007, 5:45 am

PreviousNext

Return to Weight Loss & Weight Control

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest