Fat Loss Theory: Running and Aerobics (Part 1)

Part 2

It is a widespread belief that aerobic exercise, such as running, is necessary for fat loss. This all got started shortly after Dr. Kenneth Cooper's book Aerobics was published in 1968.

For some reason, aerobic exercise became a widespread phenomenon in the 1970s... and unlike other trends and fads, aerobics had staying power. Interestingly enough, the 1970s was also the time that bodybuilding went mainstream (thank you Arnold).

I could rant about how these two styles of training ruined fitness for decades (and will continue to do so)... however, I will instead take the objective road. Since I've already written about bodybuilding splits not being conducive to fat loss, this series of posts will analyze running/aerobics and their effectiveness as a fat loss tool.

Fasted Cardio (Part 2): Intensity Theory In Question?

In Part 1 of this three part series, I set the stage for tackling a potential concern I knew I would be hearing about sooner or later, that is, the idea that fasted cardio somehow disproves or discredits the theory of absolute intensity and thus the theory of fat loss.

(Interestingly enough, a day after I posted that entry, a new article in favor of fasted cardio appeared on the T-Nation website... and also in favor of selling you a bunch of supplements.)

Anyway, like I said previously, this post is not designed to convince you whether fasted cardio works or doesn't work. I'm going to ignore that point entirely because you can read enough about that anywhere. You won't find what I'm about to say anywhere else on the Internet. No mindless rehashing of ideas in this post! Rather, we are going to assume that fasted cardio is effective and take it from there...

Fasted Cardio (Part 1): The Theory of Fat Loss Counter Point?

Sooner or later, someone was going to call me and my book out. Someone was going to challenge it. Someone was going to say, "Fasted cardio burns fat very effectively and is completed at a very low absolute intensity. Doesn't that contradict the theory of absolute intensity in your book?"

P90X (Part 1): The Absolute Intensity Argument

One of my readers, a young man who goes by Mr. Huntington, sent me a question about P90X a little while ago. He wondered if I would recommend P90X as a fat loss program because he personally felt that it was useless. He said that he knows a bunch of people who have tried it and quit because it was "too hard" or they got injured or that they just flat out didn't like it. I responded to him with a lengthy email. He subsequently mirrored some of my thoughts on an Internet forum and the response was enormous. Why was that?

You see, I am not a fan of P90X at all. However, I know that thousands upon thousands of people attempt the program. I also know that many of these same people are missionaries for the cause. You see, the marketing for P90X is amazing. What they have essentially done is created a tribe of people who will defend it to the death for no other reason than that they are convinced that "everybody is doing it."  Why do they think everybody is doing it? The advertising tells them it is so. The advertising also tells them that everybody gets ridiculously amazing results and that it is by far the best and most comprehensive fat loss program on the market. Let me tell you something. The marketing team for P90X did a FANTASTIC job. You can't avoid the commercials. You can't avoid the thousands of people that sell the product as part of Beach Body's multi-level marketing scheme. You can't type P90X into Google and find a bad review because they have flooded the Internet with hundreds and hundreds of pages telling everybody about how awesome it is.

So anyway, before I make a bunch of people mad at me, I want to say that this 3 part series will not mindlessly rant about how much I dislike P90X or anything like that. What I am going to do here is raise an intelligent argument based on sound training principles to hopefully open up a discussion about P90X as a fat loss program. Ready?