PDA

View Full Version : EPOC...Oh Snap.


Dave Van Skike
01-27-2009, 11:13 AM
Doesn't exist?


Effect of HIIT on lipid oxidation during postexercise recovery
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2009 Feb;41(2):364-74.

Effect of high-intensity interval exercise on lipid oxidation during postexercise recovery.

Malatesta D, Werlen C, Bulfaro S, Chenevière X, Borrani F.

Institute of Sport Sciences and Physical Education (ISSEP), University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland. davide.malatesta@unil.ch

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to examine whether lipid oxidation predominates during 3 h of postexercise recovery in high-intensity interval exercise as compared with moderate-intensity continuous exercise on a cycle ergometer in fit young men (n = 12; 24.6 +/- 0.6 yr). METHODS: The energy substrate partitioning was evaluated during and after high-intensity submaximal interval exercise (INT, 1-min intervals at 80% of maximal aerobic power output [Wmax] with an intervening 1 min of active recovery at 40% Wmax) and 60-min moderate-intensity continuous exercise at 45% of maximal oxygen uptake (C45%) as well as a time-matched resting control trial (CON). Exercise bouts were matched for mechanical work output. RESULTS: During exercise, a significantly greater contribution of CHO and a lower contribution of lipid to energy expenditure were found in INT (512.7 +/- 26.6 and 41.0 +/- 14.0 kcal, respectively) than in C45% (406.3 +/- 21.2 and 170.3 +/- 24.0 kcal, respectively; P < 0.001) despite similar overall energy expenditure in both exercise trials (P = 0.13). During recovery, there were no significant differences between INT and C45% in substrate turnover and oxidation (P > 0.05). On the other hand, the mean contribution of lipids to energy yield was significantly higher after exercise trials (C45% = 61.3 +/- 4.2 kcal; INT = 66.7 +/- 4.7 kcal) than after CON (51.5 +/- 3.4 kcal; P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: These findings show that lipid oxidation during postexercise recovery was increased by a similar amount on two isoenergetic exercise bouts of different forms and intensities compared with the time-matched no-exercise control trial.

I poached this blurb from an unnamed source but some will remember why this sounds familiar.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/steady-state-versus-intervals-training-and-fat-loss-explaining-the-disconnect-pt-1.html

Steven Low
01-27-2009, 02:24 PM
It exists...

It's not significant or anything... considering one pound of fat is 3600 calories. Lyle argues for the same thing (that it's not significant) in his HIIT vs. ET series.

Gant Grimes
01-27-2009, 05:53 PM
I read about it on an unnamed source myself. I don't think this surprises anybody on this board. The keys for the Abz and Tats crowd is caloric deprivation (with healthy fat, ergo insulin control) via Zone, not magic intervals. In the gym, or in the kitchen, you still have to put the work in.

I'll give props to Steve Low (S-Low :) ) for advocating steady state cardio and weights/HIIT for the severely overweight to the CF crowd months ago. He was the lone voice in the wilderness.

Patrick Yeung
01-27-2009, 05:58 PM
What is EPOC and what are you guys even discussing? Sorry, the study looked interesting, I have always thought that LSD was the way to go for fat loss, but then I learned that intervals were suppose to be much better.

From the looks of the studie's results, it dosent look like there is any difference really in fat loss at least.

But what is EPOC, or 'Abz/Tats' Gant is mentioning?

Derek Weaver
01-27-2009, 06:13 PM
Let's see if I've got my acronyms up to par... EPOC = Excess Post Execise (hidden E in the acronym I guess) Oxygen Consumption.

If that's not it... at least it looks like it could be.

This is a Cosgrove thing if I remember right.. It's not really important in the big scheme of things. As in, it's not going to put your results over the top... so don't count on it doing so.

Abz/Tats... a group of people concerned with abs and tats.

Mike ODonnell
01-27-2009, 06:21 PM
Abz/Tats... a group of people concerned with abs and tats.

are the tats next to the lats?

Lyle said it best....intervals then slow-go for that stubborn fat....but that is the "stubborn fat"...which implies a level of fitness already.

Dave Van Skike
01-27-2009, 06:33 PM
I advocate LSD all the time...but alternatively get a rash of shite for it from a whole host of quarters including abzandtatzandgunzmetconites.........or get accused of advocating recreational drug use, which i do

...IS THAT SO WRONG?

Derek Weaver
01-27-2009, 06:38 PM
Mike,
Often the tats are ON the lats... it's cooler that way when you hit that bodybuilder lat pose and spread out the tribal.

Dave,
No, it's not wrong at all. There's room for everything. Including mescaline, lsd, peyote... and jogging.

I'm glad we're having this discussion.

George Mounce
01-28-2009, 03:11 AM
I advocate LSD all the time...but alternatively get a rash of shite for it from a whole host of quarters including abzandtatzandgunzmetconites.........or get accused of advocating recreational drug use, which i do

...IS THAT SO WRONG?

Wrong, no. But I'm not a fan of it for two reasons. LSD is boring as hell (well at least to me and countless others), and since most people don't know how to run properly, it destroys their joints. (I personally tell people to row, rather than run.)

You have to remember to most "LSD" means getting on a elliptical at 5 resistance and going slow enough to talk on a cellphone and watch TV without breaking a sweat for 20 minutes. I'd rather they be coughing up phlegm during a 5 min session of intervals and call it good. Sorry, I may be a "metconite", but I'd rather be that then some lazy ass who isn't doing any good by going nice and slow.

I guess I just figure even the quote-unquote "LSD" elite would smoke most of us comparatively. I won't be running a 2:30 marathon anytime soon. If anything, I'd actually like to educate the masses that LSD is a lot faster then people realize, and "slow" is a misnomer.

Allen Yeh
01-28-2009, 03:13 AM
Didn't Alwyn come out last year sometime saying he was wrong about EPOC and such?

Joe Birch
01-28-2009, 03:56 AM
If there's no difference in fat loss then all the more reason to advocate high intensity exercise > LSD since there are countless peer reviewed examples (as well of plenty of opinions from those who've tried both) of the potential aerobic, anaerobic and strength benefits you can gain from short bouts of intense exercise compared to longer bouts of steady state exercise.

(P.S. not trying to imply that LSD has no role in some peoples training).

Garrett Smith
01-28-2009, 04:54 AM
Derek,
There's no missing second E, it goes like this: "Excess Postexercise Oxygen Consumption".

I love my "LSD" hill walks on the weekends, great for stress relief and getting outdoors. Movement without much "effort" required, physical or mental. However, if I relied on those for my fitness, well, my fitness wouldn't be much at all.

When exercise is hard, make it hard, when it is easy, make it easy. Hanging around too long in that middle area is what I don't think people should do too much of.

Steven Low
01-28-2009, 08:11 AM
If there's no difference in fat loss then all the more reason to advocate high intensity exercise > LSD since there are countless peer reviewed examples (as well of plenty of opinions from those who've tried both) of the potential aerobic, anaerobic and strength benefits you can gain from short bouts of intense exercise compared to longer bouts of steady state exercise.

(P.S. not trying to imply that LSD has no role in some peoples training).
There is a difference in FAT loss. For example:

http://www.exrx.net/FatLoss/HIITvsET.html

There is no difference in EPOC as EPOC calories burned are insignificant. That does not mean isn't a difference in body composition changes.... because of *nutrient partitioning.*

Emily Mattes
01-28-2009, 10:16 AM
If there is still an ultimate difference in body composition changes, then why not advocate that as a reason to do interval-type training, and why worry about advocating EPOC at all? Seems silly to focus your advocacy on an effect that apparently doesn't exist when there are so many good effects that do exist.

Derek Weaver
01-28-2009, 01:33 PM
Garrett,
Thanks. I need to brush up on my fancy fitness acronyms.

Emily,
Any hard training should improve p-ratio, through insulin sensitivity and other mechanisms. Interval training is simply the most fun way to achieve the desired effect.

Mike ODonnell
01-28-2009, 04:24 PM
Most people who enjoy the benefits of interval training also usually have a high lifestyle activity factor (plenty of other activity to oxidize "burn" fat). Anyone selling intervals ONLY usually neglects to mention that whole part.....or just wants your money.

Patrick Yeung
01-29-2009, 07:30 AM
Someone else posted an article on here about how growth hormone is the main contributor to fat loss. Now, dont we all know that GH is released when you do short intense bursts of movements, aka, intervals?

On the flip side though, LSD training does train your body to burn fat instead of carbs for energy because there is no way to ingest enough carbs to cover a 3 hour race, let alone 24hr + races. But, it does inhibit GH as well as burn muscles.

For these reasons, id always push it up to 90%+ of max for the last few miles of my LSD runs to try and promote GH.

They both work, just differently, and for different reasons. We're trying to compare apples to oranges.

Dave Van Skike
01-29-2009, 07:42 AM
eating less than is required for activity is the main contributor to fat loss.

see the faces of sly stallone, and mickey rourke for a clue on the amounts of GH required to make a Significant Difference in fat loss when compared to the whole eating thing....

one could devote a lot of time to navel gazing and pondering the exercise science in the hopes of beating researchers to the punch vis a vis manipulating one's hormonal profile...or, one could forget the whole line of BS and just.......you know,..... try it and see what works in the only experiment that matters.

Mike ODonnell
01-29-2009, 08:22 AM
Someone else posted an article on here about how growth hormone is the main contributor to fat loss. Now, dont we all know that GH is released when you do short intense bursts of movements, aka, intervals?.

Hence why you do some sort of short/explosive training for GH release and THEN go for some slower movements.....the combination works, not just doing 4 min of burpees and then going to sit and watch TV. GH releases the fat....then you still have to burn it in the muscle in an oxygen environment....aka aerobic state.

chris hill
01-29-2009, 09:22 AM
Didn't Alwyn come out last year sometime saying he was wrong about EPOC and such?

Allen, i believe he did say that but although he may have had the detail wrong he was still doing the right thing. He compared it to electricity saying that if we suddenly discovered that electricity worked completely differently to how we currently believed we would still flick the switch on the wall to light our homes.

(i'm paraphrasing from memory)

Derek Weaver
01-29-2009, 11:03 AM
eating less than is required for activity is the main contributor to fat loss.

see the faces of sly stallone, and mickey rourke for a clue on the amounts of GH required to make a Significant Difference in fat loss when compared to the whole eating thing....

one could devote a lot of time to navel gazing and pondering the exercise science in the hopes of beating researchers to the punch vis a vis manipulating one's hormonal profile...or, one could forget the whole line of BS and just.......you know,..... try it and see what works in the only experiment that matters.

Dave,
Well said.

No matter what anyone says, the laws of thermodynamics still apply to humans (Yes, I'm stealing from Lyle here). Eat less, lose weight. Eat less crap, more good stuff, workout harder, lose fat and keep muscle. Simple but not easy.