High- vs Low-intensity exercise

Breathing, sleeping, running, meditation, yoga, relaxation
dime
Posts: 1231
Joined: Mon 14 Feb 2011 09:24

High- vs Low-intensity exercise

Postby dime » Sun 03 Mar 2013 21:39

Regarding the type of exercise, probably lower intensity (walking, standing) but longer duration is healthier.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 173127.htm
overkees
Posts: 598
Joined: Fri 05 Aug 2011 14:20

Re: High- vs Low-intensity exercise

Postby overkees » Mon 04 Mar 2013 09:31

dime wrote:Regarding the type of exercise, probably lower intensity (walking, standing) but longer duration is healthier.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 173127.htm
For people that mouthbreathe during heavy exercise that is. If you keep on nosebreathing lightly I suggest easy jogging/running would be even better. Just make sure you don't start mouthe breathing and don't start making huge inhales. This is, according to me and my logic, the definition of low intensity exercise.
fred
Posts: 342
Joined: Sun 07 Feb 2010 14:57

Re: High- vs Low-intensity exercise

Postby fred » Tue 05 Mar 2013 06:59

Many studies show the benefit of High intensity exercise versus low intensity exercise :
Maintain and develop muscle/bone mass
Improve both aerobic and anaerobic capacity
Increase your metabolism (burn more fat)
Improve your cardiovascular system
Release of HGH
+all the advantages of low intensity exercise and less time spent
overkees
Posts: 598
Joined: Fri 05 Aug 2011 14:20

Re: High- vs Low-intensity exercise

Postby overkees » Thu 07 Mar 2013 18:16

fred wrote: Maintain and develop muscle/bone mass
Improve both aerobic and anaerobic capacity
Increase your metabolism (burn more fat)
I think these are all sides of the same coin. I think that by having more muscle mass, you will also generate much more CO2 at rest due to a higher metabolism, the fact that your muscles are bigger on itself isn't necessarily an advantage.
The problem with high intensity exercise is that it will do more free radical damage than light exercise as it is associated with a flight/fight response in nature that only needs to be used when light intensity isn't sufficient. Therefore I suggest there needs to be enough rest in between the high intensity workouts, so that you never do so much damage that your body can't repair it.
This is seen, for example, in streetworkers who put a burden on their knees on a regular basis. The body can perfectly overcome such stress and make the knees stronger if there is more time for restoring puproses. However, if they do it everyday the body can't perform it's regenarating tasks. And what is seen is alot of knee injuries and most of can't keep on continuing their jobs after an age of 55s due to these kind of issues.

Stress equals improvement if it is short lasting, stress equals degeneration if it's chronic.
Improve your cardiovascular system
Release of HGH
+all the advantages of low intensity exercise and less time spent
Improvement of cardiovascular system can also be seen in light intensity exercise.
Release of growth hormone is not always beneficial. In old people it results in a higher chance of cancer for example. HGH is highly dependable on context.
Less time spent is indeed a good one. But I really enjoy doing long low intensity training, gives me much more relaxation and results in a much better mental health for me. I can literally run every tension off.

So, I think high intensity is good if it is done in moderation. And, as I've experienced, doing some chin ups and pull ups results in alot more energy and posture. I feel alot better with only a few chin ups a day. My goal is to always breathe through nose during those exercises and prevent muscle aches. I think muscle aches are the result of too much damage. You can easily improve without muscle aches, it just takes longer.

Regarding CP, I think a combination of both is ideal. A higher resting metabolism results also in slower breathing if you exercise breath retraining. I noticed that alot of body build type guys generally breathe a lot through their mouths. I think they will make much more progression if they payed more attention to this. Anyone else noticed this?
fred
Posts: 342
Joined: Sun 07 Feb 2010 14:57

Re: High- vs Low-intensity exercise

Postby fred » Sun 17 Mar 2013 07:24

This recent article synthesises advantages/drawbacks of 3 different types of exercises (sprint/weight training and endurance) :

http://www.charlespoliquin.com/Blog/tab ... ponse.aspx

"To review, if you want to lose fat, do weight training and intervals. If you want to build muscle, overload the muscle with tension by lifting weights. If you want to be efficient but weak, do aerobic exercise. If you want to live long and healthy, do weight training that includes both heavy and powerful exercises."
panacea
Posts: 987
Joined: Wed 23 Jun 2010 22:08

Re: High- vs Low-intensity exercise

Postby panacea » Wed 20 Mar 2013 18:30

The most important thing in my mind is to find a way to be always doing no damage - proper sitting/working postures, sleeping postures/habits etc.. then exercise is always a bonus on top of that rather than trying to band-aid what you screwed up all day long.

That being said, higher intensity workouts, whether they be aerobic or not, always present greater gains on a minute-by-minute basis (logically), but using heavy weights, or running very hard, can cause unneccesary injuries or risk of it. It's smarter in my opinion to use smaller weights you can safely control and extend your arms and move like slow motion through water - building up your body's small muscles everywhere, rather than a few for show, which will allow your body to more easily support itself throughout the next days to come when you're exercising and when not, which is what really matters and benefits people..
Same thing for aerobic exercise, it's possible to control breathing while walking and get more benefit without having to subject your skeletal system to the constant stress of running (especially on poor surfaces).
dime
Posts: 1231
Joined: Mon 14 Feb 2011 09:24

Re: High- vs Low-intensity exercise

Postby dime » Wed 20 Mar 2013 19:30

Let's make a general definition.

- intensity doesn't matter much
- frequency matters a lot
- overtraining is the worst thing you can do

Exercise as often as possible at an intensity where you won't overtrain.

Sitting straight all day long: very high frequency, low intensity. It's very good but it's more or less focused only on the back muscles, it could be easy to overstress them.
Want to build muscle strength: lift weights and adjust the intensity to the frequency you can stick to. For example if you can do chinups and pushups like every half an hour every day (you have a bar at home or something), you would do like only 1-2-3 reps every time. If you do more you won't be able to repeat it again in half an hour. But you'll have some really good results. On the other hand if you can afford to go only once a week to the gym, you have to do several sets at once, go to failure, etc. This would be a worse strategy in my opinion.
dime
Posts: 1231
Joined: Mon 14 Feb 2011 09:24

Re: High- vs Low-intensity exercise

Postby dime » Sat 06 Apr 2013 10:59

Walking Can Lower Risk of Heart-Related Conditions as Much as Running
If the amount of energy expended was the same between the two groups (walking and running), then the health benefits were comparable
fred
Posts: 342
Joined: Sun 07 Feb 2010 14:57

Re: High- vs Low-intensity exercise

Postby fred » Mon 08 Apr 2013 11:21

Walking seems to do even better than running in this study :

Running significantly reduced risk for first-time hypertension 4.2 percent and walking reduced risk 7.2 percent.
Running reduced first-time high cholesterol 4.3 percent and walking 7 percent.
Running reduced first-time diabetes 12.1 percent compared to 12.3 percent for walking.
Running reduced coronary heart disease 4.5 percent compared to 9.3 percent for walking.
overkees
Posts: 598
Joined: Fri 05 Aug 2011 14:20

Re: High- vs Low-intensity exercise

Postby overkees » Mon 08 Apr 2013 11:37

They all say little to nothing if there is no difference made between nosebreathing or mouthbreathing.
dime
Posts: 1231
Joined: Mon 14 Feb 2011 09:24

Re: High- vs Low-intensity exercise

Postby dime » Mon 08 Apr 2013 11:47

Yeah as long as you have the time to spend on walking, I also feel it's better.
User avatar
RRM
Administrator
Posts: 8147
Joined: Sat 16 Jul 2005 00:01
Contact:

Re: High- vs Low-intensity exercise

Postby RRM » Tue 09 Apr 2013 10:13

overkees wrote:They all say little to nothing if there is no difference made between nosebreathing or mouthbreathing.
Did you come across studies showing actual beneficial health effects of nosebreathing over mouthbreathing in running / walking?
overkees
Posts: 598
Joined: Fri 05 Aug 2011 14:20

Re: High- vs Low-intensity exercise

Postby overkees » Tue 09 Apr 2013 17:09

Sadly, no. There is just too little research done at this terrain. There is however enough research that clearly indicates this is a no brainer. I will try to make a very broad summary of CO2 and its effects in the human body very soon, first I've still got examanations. There are, however, alot of eyeopeners.
User avatar
Mr. PC
Posts: 609
Joined: Sun 25 Jan 2009 05:16
Location: Canada

low level exercise

Postby Mr. PC » Sat 18 May 2013 18:06

I'm constantly getting low level excersie, walking all day, 'on my feet' while teaching. During the 8 hour day I probably spend 5 hours walking, 1 hour standing, and 2 hours sitting. But I notice when I do a little running, or play soccer with my boys, my mood increases dramatically.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest