Wait, don’t answer.

Actually it was really meant to be more of a rhetorical question.  Plus it was rhetorically aimed at some news and research dorks. So don’t answer.

So why did I even ask the question?  Well you see this past week a study came out the said exercise does not boost metabolism.  Yes, they claimed exercise  DOES NOT boost metabolism.

So that is why I posed the question: “Do I look stupid?” Because despite the above photographic evidence to the contrary, I am not. (So stop laughing.)

And that is why I knew there was something hinky afoot. (That and 20 years of getting people in shape of course.)

Now we all know that one of the best ways to get headlines is to have a story involving blood, carnage and mayhem. As the saying goes “If it bleeds it leads.” Thankfully this story involved none of that. (I would not want to know what kind of workout involves blood and carnage. Yuck.)

Arguably the second best way to get headlines is to state something as fact that is completely contrary to public belief or perception. For instance I guarantee something like “George W. Bush confirmed to have genius IQ” would definitely be the leading story on the nightly news.

 
Einstein, is that you?  No, wait- it’s just George.

In this case the headline read :

Exercise not likely to rev up your metabolism
Studies bust myth that working out gives you a fat-burning boost

(You can read the full story on MSNBC here.)

Blasphemy!

But hidden in that headline was also a clue to why these people had their head up their collective a**es.  The key phrase was “working out”.

So let’s ask what is working out?  I have people come into my training center that tell me they “work out” several times per week by going for what amounts to a leisurely stroll. 

Buddy, that ain’t working out.

And it turns out what the researchers did was not what I would call working out either.

So what was their version of working out?  Turns out it was riding an excer-cylce.  Granted it was at various levels of intensity but what it boils down to is they tested steady state cardio. These people were doing a single activity for a given length of time.  What they ended up showing is that you burn calories while you do it, but not after.

News Flash: That Ain’t a News Flash.

I rest my case: Is he working out or playing Wii?

So all they proved is what I and other advanced trainers have been saying for years:  cardio does nothing to increase metabolism.  Maybe that should have been the headline.

So to those who wrote the headline (and even those claiming that this is some definitive study on the matter): Nice try.

None shall pass…

They did not test any form of weight training,  resistance training or interval training.  All of which DO in fact increase metabolism.

Now I am not saying that cardio is useless, it is not.  It just should not be your primary weapon in your war on fat.  You need to choose an activity that is consistent with your goals and your time availability. You need to do what will give you the biggest metabolic bang for your buck.  It literally should depend on how much time you have to dedicate.

Got 30 minutes? Do resistance training exclusively.

Got 45 minutes?  Through in some intervals.

Got 60 or more minutes?  Do some “cardio”.

Literally in that order.

Joshua Carter, CPT The Body Transformation Expert Carter Fitness http://carterfitness.com 818-337-6175

PS: None of this means s^*t if your diet sucks so get that taken care of too.