it's wikipedia.. it's not reliable, and that was from one study where they didn't establish it.

I am curious what exactly does chauvinism have to do with aerobics? I'm female, and I don't cling to the outdated belief that aerobics are the be all/end all of fat loss. Does the fact that I have kept up with fitness (and know what EPOC is) make me a chauvinist as well? If so, then how exactly, as I certainly do not want to be perceived as chauvinist.

If you don't find Wiki to be credible, instead of saying it's not credible, your free to post a link to a credible source disputing what i've linked.

That's interesting info...I didn't know that and as such I found this informative & interesting. I'm just pointing this out because I don't want people to think this entire thread was completely pointless and devoid of any useful information. Thank you Sir Karksalot!

But....OMG.....nobody is saying aerobics is useless!

As compared to watching tv, playing video games or laying around the house....sure, aerobics is FAR superior in terms of its health benefits and ability to burn fat, but COMPARED to weight-training...the fat-burning of aerobics falls (minute-per-result/benefit-per-effort) short.

If you only have 1-hour per day to excercise, you can get better/more results from weight-training....but that's not to suggest aerobics doesn't have a place in anyone's routine. The phrase we continue to hear again and again comes to mind: MIX IT UP

There are benefits derived from aerobics that are outstanding: circulation, respiratorty, etc...it is important and part of any solid exercise regimen....nobody is suggesting it's irrelevent or useless.

Consider this (taken from Lessons from the Miracle Doctors, Jon Barron):

One of the greatest benefits of exercise is increased production of Growth Hormone in the body (it decreases as we age). The benefits of HGH (Human Growth Hormone) is that it tells the liver to produce Insulin-like Growth Factor (IGF-1). Supplements on the market have been shown to increase IGF-1 levels by at least 20% and as much as 100%...HOWEVER, one 30-minute aerobic session can easily increase IGF-1 levels by a good 100% and a solid session of weight-training can increase levels by an incredible 400-800%.

Score:

Aerobics GOOD
Weight-training BETTER

Balanced mix of both BEST

Personally, I weight-train for a bit more then an hour...at that point my understanding is that the blood-sugars are pretty depleted and since the body can't burn fat fast enough to supply the demand of heavy lifting, it can lead to catabolism. Better put: one hour is ideal. At that point I take a few BCAA's, some protein drink and then proceed to do 30-60 minutes aerobics on the elliptical machine....taking advantage of the low-sugar state and letting some LISS work some fat off.

Phate, the info there was good, but the studies are probably old and outdated, and it's only one study. It doesn't go much in debt on the issue of EPOC and HIIT. I've lots of other studies that said HIIT gave EPOC.
I'm just saying that scientists do know why HIIT is superior.
And dude, everyone pretty much knows wikipedia isn't always that reliable.. it's gotten better the past years, as most of what's bull gets deleted pretty quick, but it's still possible for anyone who wants to write an article there.

Thank you for some of your responses. Whilst there are good posters, undoubtedly there are also thugs and bullies present just like there are a few rotten eggs in a basket.

Ah okay, well if you come across another study post it, and as for wiki being credible..they make it sound so freakin smart that i have to believe its true LOL.

you could try to google something like "EPOC HIIT STUDIES" or something like that.. or go to PubMed Home and search for stuff there

I think one of the other problems with aerobics (especially organized classes) is that people tend to over do it. If 30 minutes is good then 60 minutes is better and 90 minutes is even better and if 2 times a week is good then 3 or 4 or 6 times a week are even better. Many inidividuals follow this philosophy of more volume is better and when they fail to see improvement give up completely. Or there are those who overdo it to the point of stress fractures and unbalanced hormone levels, etc. Bottom line there is a lot of bad advice going around out there and a lot of "trainers" and class leaders that don't know what they are doing. Just because it hurts or makes yousweat profusely, does not mean it is "effective".

You heard right. I dont like aerobics.

Classes are normally pre-booked so you cannot horse around in the manner described. I have never heard of such misinformation, where did you read this?

TM:

Do you do any cardio when cutting?

I dont like it either, but do cardio when leaning down. And, personally like the "overall" feeling it gives me.

LOL. I did this, though I didn't fail..i did lose a ****load of fat, but muscle too.

You don't like it because it's unpleasant to do....or because you feel it's ineffective?

It's just funny cause I know several trainers and absolutely NONE of them will come with me on my long-haul bike rides...they seem to avoid cardio like it's the plague and when asked, they merely reply "I don't like it".

From my perspective it gets your heart-rate up, burns come calories and is good for respiratory/circulatory. I haven't read a single diet book that doesn't prescribe it. I recently met a guy who swears aerobics is detrimental on account (as he explains) that it teaches your body to actually store fat...so you have the storge/endurance for these long bouts of cardio. Anything to that?

So you presumably ram weight-lifting down anyone's throat? That seems to be an attitude problem prevalent round here.