Running after or before lifting

[LAKER84]

I run 10 minutes before lifting just to warm up then hit the weights for a hr after that I run for 30 minutes..anyways I did some reading and I read that running after lifting is bad..I'm trying to gain muscle at the same time lose fat am I doing anything wrong

[dbcb314]

if you are trying to do that, running is general is stupid


either do HIT or do low intensity cardio


doing cardio before lifting is kinda stupid. you are just wearing yourself out for no reason

[slyfox115]

Listen to DBCB. Your workout should specifically focus on just the weights. There is no way i would be able to lift at the intesnity needed if I ran before a workout (or ran in general). If you just can't go without running, I would maybe do some HIIT in the form on sprints on off days, but thats it. Then keep the cardio to low intesnity on lifting days if you do cardio on these days.

Running can be a VERY catabolic process, and most people with average genetics will overtrain quickly, hindering any gains.

One thing I find ironic is how you see the "runners" at the gym run for 40 minutes at a time yet they constantly look the same.....

[iron addict]

What they said:D

IA

[Richard85]

Listen to DBCB. Your workout should specifically focus on just the weights. There is no way i would be able to lift at the intesnity needed if I ran before a workout (or ran in general). If you just can't go without running, I would maybe do some HIIT in the form on sprints on off days, but thats it. Then keep the cardio to low intesnity on lifting days if you do cardio on these days.

Running can be a VERY catabolic process, and most people with average genetics will overtrain quickly, hindering any gains.

One thing I find ironic is how you see the "runners" at the gym run for 40 minutes at a time yet they constantly look the same.....

so true... why is it if running burns so many calories that those people never "lose weight"?

[Hoops]

so true... why is it if running burns so many calories that those people never "lose weight"?

You don't see too many fat runners. Now joggers...

If you want to warm up before a workout a LIGHT sled or an inclined tred mill are about as intense as I'd want to go. You don't want to already be breathing hard if you're about to do something like squats!

[Kabuki]

Running in either fashion listed is extremely counterproductive to gaining muscle mass.

I used to be a runner but to get where i am i dropped it. Nothing kills my strength quite like running.

Do some reading on sled pulling.

[slyfox115]

Hoops...yes you dont see many FAT runners. But you never see any runners with any appreciable amount of muscle either.

Sled pulling is by far the best form of cardio I have found up to this point.

[Tatyana]

Hoops...yes you dont see many FAT runners. But you never see any runners with any appreciable amount of muscle either.

Sled pulling is by far the best form of cardio I have found up to this point.

To throw a monkey wrench in this whole conversation, it is a bit of a BBing myth that running is catabolic.

Resistance training is also immediately catabolic if you want to get picky.

You do see runners with a lot of muscle. You probably will not see marathon runners or triathletes with a lot of muscle, but they probably also got into these sports as they were more of an ectomorphic body type.



2005 The American Society for Nutritional Sciences J. Nutr. 135:1088-1092, May 2005


Human Nutrition and Metabolism

Aerobic Exercise Training Decreases Leucine Oxidation at Rest in Healthy Adults

Patricia C. Gaine*, Christian T. Viesselman**, Matthew A. Pikosky*, William F. Martin*, Lawrence E. Armstrong, Linda S. Pescatello** and Nancy R. Rodriguez*,3


Departments of * Nutritional Sciences and Kinesiology, and ** School of Allied Health, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269







Both exercise and dietary protein intake affect whole-body protein turnover (WBPTO). Few studies have investigated the effect of aerobic exercise training on WBPTO [leucine rate of appearance (Ra), oxidation (Ox), and nonoxidative leucine disposal (NOLD)] in untrained individuals consuming a specified level of protein. This study examined the effect of aerobic exercise training on WBPTO in untrained men and women during a controlled diet intervention providing 0.88 g protein/(kg · d). After a 2-wk adaptation to the study diet, 7 subjects [3 men, 4 women; 76.1 ± 5.8 kg, 164.7 ± 4.4 cm, 30.7 ± 4.5% body fat, 39.1 ± 2.8 VO2max (maximal oxygen uptake) mL/(kg · min)] participated in 4 wk of aerobic exercise training (running and walking 4–5 times/wk at 65–85% maximal heart rate). WBPTO (determined via constant infusion of 1-[13C] leucine), nitrogen balance, and body composition were determined at baseline and after 4 wk of training. Nitrogen balance (–1.0 ± 0.7 vs. 0.9 ± 1.1 g N/24 h, P = 0.03) improved with exercise training, whereas body mass and composition did not change. Leucine Ra did not change, Ox decreased [18 ± 2 to 15 ± 2 µmol/(kg · h), P 0.001], and NOLD tended to increase [128 ± 18 to 151 ± 19 µmol/(kg · h), P = 0.09] in response to training. These data indicate improved protein utilization in response to exercise training in weight-stable subjects. This study emphasizes the importance of dietary control, with specific regard to energy and protein intakes, in the characterization of protein utilization in response to an exercise intervention.


Whole-body protein utilization is affected by energy intake (1), level of protein intake (2,3), and acute endurance exercise (4,5). The role of energy intake in influencing protein utilization has been recognized for half a century (6). Early nitrogen balance studies by Todd et al. (1) and Butterfield (7) showed that nitrogen retention was improved during periods of energy balance compared with periods of energy deficit (1,8). Achievement of energy balance reduces the reliance on amino acids for energy, thus permitting the body to utilize protein for nonenergy-yielding functions (8).
The level of dietary protein consumption influences whole-body protein utilization. With increasing dietary protein, there is an increase in nitrogen retention (9–12), an increase in the oxidation of leucine (2), and changes in the rates of protein turnover (10,11). Although the implications of the observed changes in rates of protein turnover in response to protein intake are not fully understood, it is clear that increases in dietary protein influence rates of protein turnover (2,11).

Whole-body protein turnover (WBPTO)4 is also affected by an acute bout of endurance exercise. Several studies found that whole-body protein breakdown increased during exercise (13–15), with rates postexercise either decreasing (16) or not differing from those at rest (17). Whole-body protein synthesis decreased (15,17) or did not change during exercise (13,14), but increased in the period after exercise (17,18).

Leucine oxidation increases during exercise in an intensity-dependent manner and may contribute 2–3% of total energy expended during an exercise session (2–4).
Although there is not yet a consensus concerning the influence of an acute exercise bout on protein utilization, even less is known about the influence of chronic aerobic training on protein utilization. Because exercise generally lasts a relatively short period of time relative to time spent not exercising, studying protein turnover at rest may be of greater value to our understanding of the influence that chronic aerobic training has on WBPTO. The purpose of this study was to build on the earlier work of Todd et al. (1) and Butterfield and Calloway (19), who found that exercise training improved nitrogen retention, even at marginal protein intakes, as long as energy balance was maintained. Therefore, we examined the effect of a 4-wk aerobic exercise training program on resting leucine kinetics in healthy, previously untrained men and women, consuming sufficient energy for weight maintenance throughout the training period and a protein intake of 0.88 g protein/(kg · d). The current investigation placed special emphasis on controlling factors identified by Butterfield (7) as being essential for meaningful interpretation of data regarding protein utilization and exercise (7). These factors include the maintenance of energy balance, control of protein intake, and measurements taken after the initial adaptation period to a new exercise program

Discussion

This study evaluated the whole-body protein response to endurance exercise training after the implementation of a closely supervised exercise training program combined with control of energy and protein intake. Previously untrained subjects were fed diets providing sufficient energy to maintain weight throughout the intervention and a protein intake of 0.88 g/kg (11% of total intake), which falls in the range of the current Dietary Reference Intakes recommending that protein comprise 10–35% of energy intake (25). Major findings from this study were a reduction in leucine Ox (oxidation) at rest, no change in leucine Ra (proteolysis), and a tendency for NOLD (an indicator of protein synthesis) to increase. These kinetic data were accompanied by a greater retention of nitrogen and an increased REE after the 4-wk aerobic exercise training program.



Previous studies are limited regarding the influence of aerobic training on resting leucine kinetics. Unlike the present study, investigations by Lamont et al. (4), McKenzie et al. (5) and Short et al. (26) found no effect of training on resting leucine oxidation. The Lamont study (4) initially observed trained individuals to have higher rates of resting leucine Ox; however, once data were corrected for fat-free mass, these differences disappeared. It is important to point out that the Lamont study was a cross-sectional design that compared 2 distinct groups, i.e., a trained and untrained group. Findings from the present study are strengthened by the study design used in which weight-stable subjects served as their own controls, before and after the 4-wk aerobic exercise training program.
Studies by McKenzie et al. (5) and Short et al. (26) are more similar in design to the current study, in that leucine kinetics was measured in the same individuals before and after 38 d and 4 mo of aerobic training, respectively. Discrepancies in leucine Ox from these studies and the present may be due to variations in protein intake. In the McKenzie et al. study (5), dietary intake reflected subjects’ habitual intakes, resulting in dietary protein consumption that exceeded that of the present study [1.2–1.7 vs. 0.88 g/(kg · d)] (5). Similarly, subjects in the Short et al. study (26) consumed a greater percentage of energy from protein than in the present study (15 vs. 11%). The increased availability of leucine, subsequent to the higher protein intakes in these 2 studies, may have masked an attenuation of leucine Ox in response to exercise training, given that leucine Ox can be influenced by leucine availability (2,27).
Although leucine Ra and NOLD did not increase significantly, both of these were correlated with the observed increase in REE. Indeed, previous research supports a strong relation between protein turnover and resting metabolic rate (28). Failure to detect significant difference may simply have been a reflection of insufficient power to detect changes. Power calculations indicate that 10 and 15 subjects would have been required to detect significant differences in NOLD and Ra, respectively. Although this increase in protein turnover was not significant, it may have ultimately driven the physiologic changes that resulted from training (i.e., increased REE, improved nitrogen balance, decreased protein oxidation and leucine Ox).
In the current study, protein oxidation was reduced after a 4-wk aerobic exercise training program. A shift toward a greater reliance on fat vs. carbohydrate for fuel is a widely accepted adaptation to endurance training (5,29). However, there is limited documentation of metabolic adaptations to aerobic training specific to the utilization of protein for fuel. Despite protein’s minimal contribution as an energy source, it is important to fully understand the effect of aerobic exercise training on WBPTO, given that nutritional supplementation can clearly regulate protein-related metabolic responses to exercise (30,31). Observations regarding protein oxidation in the present study are consistent with the noted decrease in leucine oxidation, and suggest that conservation of the essential amino acid leucine may be a possible adaptation to endurance exercise training. Such an adaptive response is reasonable, given the central role of this BCAA in muscle protein metabolism, especially during high-intensity exercise. Indeed, McKenzie et al. (5) found that aerobic training decreased the exercise-induced activation of the branched chain keto-acid dehydrogenase (BCKAD) enzyme in muscle despite training, resulting in an overall increased BCKAD capacity.
Increases in VO2max with exercise training have been associated with increases in mitochondrial density and oxidative enzyme activity (5,32,33). Although enzyme activity was not measured in this study, observed improvements in VO2max suggest that there was an increased oxidative capacity after training. Perhaps the synthesis of mitochondrial proteins offers a plausible explanation concerning why we observed aerobic exercise training to enhance nitrogen retention and conservation of leucine, despite no change in lean body mass.
The improvement in nitrogen retention, decreased reliance on protein as a fuel source, and maintenance of lean body mass suggest that a protein intake of 0.88 g/kg was sufficient for our exercising study population. This amount of protein consumed is similar to the amount deemed adequate in a study by Meredith et al. (10), who found that 0.94 g/(kg · d) was required to achieve nitrogen balance in exercising, weight-maintaining subjects.
Maintenance of energy balance is likely an important factor in sustaining nitrogen balance when daily protein intake is 0.9 g/kg, given the relation between energy and protein utilization. Exercise training influences this relation by requiring additional energy to meet the demands of increased expenditure. Although slight increases in energy intakes in response to exercise training were adequate for subjects to maintain body weight throughout the training intervention, it is important to note that the current study was limited by the fact that total daily energy expenditure was not measured precisely. Nevertheless, we contend that the adjustment in energy intake at the onset of training for the purpose of weight maintenance was likely critical to the observed exercise-induced improvements in protein utilization. This important relation among exercise training, energy balance, and protein utilization is supported by the earlier work of Todd et al. (1) and Butterfield and Calloway (19), who found that exercise improved nitrogen retention, even at marginal protein intakes, as long as energy balance was maintained.
Although inactivity results in the loss of lean body mass, the scientific literature is limited on the extent to which physical activity can improve protein utilization in healthy adults (8). The current investigation sheds light on this question in demonstrating that a 4-wk endurance exercise program resulted in improved protein utilization and nitrogen retention, in subjects consuming a weight maintaining diet containing 0.88 g protein/(kg · d). Leucine oxidation decreased in response to training, suggesting a possible conservation of this essential amino acid at rest. Additionally, this study provides further support for a relation between protein turnover and resting metabolic rate because we found strong correlations with the exercise-induced increases in these measurements. Future investigations designed to manipulate energy and protein intakes are warranted to further characterize the relations among energy balance, level of protein intake, and protein utilization in response to aerobic exercise training



http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/content/full/136/2/379
© 2006 American Society for Nutrition J. Nutr. 136:379-383, February 2006


Nutrient Physiology, Metabolism, and Nutrient-Nutrient Interactions

Aerobic Exercise Training Increases Skeletal Muscle Protein Turnover in Healthy Adults at Rest1,2

Matthew A. Pikosky*, Patricia C. Gaine*, William F. Martin*, Kimberly C. Grabarz*, Arny A. Ferrando, Robert R. Wolfe and Nancy R. Rodriguez*,3


* Department Nutritional Sciences, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT and Department of Surgery, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX


3 To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: nancy.rodriguez@uconn.edu .
The effect of a 4-wk aerobic exercise training program (30–45 min, 3–5 d/wk, 65% maximal heart rate) on mixed skeletal muscle protein fractional synthetic rate (FSR), fractional breakdown rate (FBR), and net protein balance (FSR – FBR) (NET) was examined in 8 healthy, previously unfit men and women [21.0 ± 0.4 y, 163.7 ± 4.4 cm, 75.6 ± 5.7 kg, 33.5 ± 4.1% body fat, VO2peak 38.6 ± 2.3 mL/(kg·min)] fed eucaloric diets providing 0.85 g protein/(kg·d) for the 6-wk study. Measurements were made at baseline after 2 wk of diet intervention only, and after 4 wk of aerobic exercise training and diet intervention. Primed continuous infusions of ring-[2H5]-phenylalanine (2 µmol/kg; 0.05 µmol/(kg·min) and [15N]-phenylalanine (2 µmol/kg; 0.05 µmol/(kg·min) were used to assess skeletal muscle protein turnover at rest via the precursor-product method. Endurance training improved cardiovascular fitness, with a significant increase in VO2peak (P < 0.01) and a significant decrease in running time on a standard course (P < 0.01). There were no significant changes in body mass or composition. There was a significant increase in FSR (0.077 ± 0.007 vs. 0.089 ± 0.006%/h, P < 0.05) and decrease in NET (FSR – FBR) (–0.023 ± 0.004 vs. –0.072 ± 0.012%/h, P < 0.05); FBR tended to increase (0.105 ± 0.014 vs. 0.143 ± 0.018%/h; P = 0.06) after training. Findings show that aerobic training for 4 wk increases skeletal muscle protein turnover in previously unfit subjects.


KEY WORDS: • phenylalanine • endurance exercise • skeletal muscle protein turnover

Exercise has a profound effect on protein metabolism. Of particular interest is the influence that exercise has on skeletal muscle protein turnover (SMPTO)4, given that skeletal muscle comprises 40% of all body protein stores (1). The magnitude and direction by which exercise influences SMPTO are affected by a variety of factors including the mode, intensity, and duration of the exercise performed, as well as the training state of the individual. Although the SMPTO response to resistance training has been clearly established, much less is known about endurance exercise. After resistance exercise, there is a significant increase in the rates of both mixed muscle fractional synthesis (FSR) and breakdown (FBR) (2–5) . The magnitude and duration of the increase in synthesis exceed that of breakdown, resulting in an improved net muscle protein balance after resistance exercise. However, in the fasted state, net balance remains negative until nutrients are provided (6–12).


The effect of endurance exercise on SMPTO is far less clear. To date, only 3 studies have examined FSR after endurance exercise in fasting humans (13–15). Carraro et al. (14) and Sheffield-Moore et al. (13) both found increases in FSR after treadmill walking at 40% VO2 max.

A high intensity swimming workout employed by Tipton et al. (15) resulted in a 41% increase in FSR; however, this effect was not significant. It is difficult to draw definitive conclusions from only 3 studies that differ greatly in design. However, collectively, these findings suggest that FSR increases after acute endurance exercise.

Although there is not a consensus concerning the influence of an acute exercise bout on SMPTO, even less is known about the influence of chronic aerobic training. Because exercise generally lasts for a relatively short period of time relative to time spent not exercising, studying SMPTO at rest may be of greater value to our understanding of the influence of chronic aerobic training on SMPTO. To date, only one study has examined the effect of chronic aerobic exercise training on mixed skeletal muscle FSR. In that study, 4 mo of cycling resulted in a 22% increase in FSR in fasted individuals at rest (16).

Although that investigation provided novel findings about the synthetic response in muscle to aerobic exercise training, rates of breakdown were not determined. Rates of synthesis and breakdown are necessary for complete characterization of SMPTO and will better define the effect of endurance exercise on protein metabolism.


The present investigation employed the measurement of rates of both protein synthesis and breakdown to determine how aerobic exercise training influenced skeletal muscle protein turnover at rest. Subjects in this study were previously untrained, healthy men and women. To minimize the influence of diet (specifically variations in energy and protein intake), subjects consumed a eucaloric diet providing a constant level of protein throughout the 6-wk intervention.

This study is unique because it assesses the effect of aerobic exercise training on both FSR and FBR in human skeletal muscle during a period for which dietary control was implemented. We tested the hypothesis that a 4-wk aerobic training program would result in an upregulation in skeletal muscle protein turnover as indicated by increases in both FSR and FBR.
The findings of the present study will allow for more complete comparisons regarding the effect of training mode on SMPTO and provide a foundation for future studies examining the effect of nutritional supplementation with endurance exercise on SMPTO.

The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate skeletal muscle protein turnover at rest in previously unfit men and women before and after participation in a closely supervised aerobic exercise training program during a euenergetic diet intervention for which protein intakes were controlled. The 4 wk of aerobic exercise training affected resting skeletal muscle protein turnover as evidenced by an increase of FSR, a decreased NET, and a trend toward an increased FBR. In addition, 4 wk of endurance training improved fitness, as indicated by increased VO2peak and faster time to complete a standard 4.8-km course.

Research examining the response of skeletal muscle protein metabolism to aerobic exercise training is limited. A recent study by Short et al. (16) provides the only other data regarding skeletal muscle protein metabolism after aerobic exercise training in human volunteers. These investigators observed a 22% increase in FSR at rest, after 4 mo of aerobic training in previously untrained subjects. This is consistent with the present investigation in which FSR increased 17% at rest after 4 wk of aerobic training. Although the subjects in the Short study encompassed a greater age range (19–87 y) than that of the present study (18–25 y), similar improvements in VO2peak were documented from pre- to post-training (9.5 vs. 8.4% for the Short study vs. present study, respectively).


The increase in FSR after endurance training noted in these studies may in large part reflect an increased synthesis of proteins responsible for bringing about the adaptations associated with this mode of exercise [i.e., increased mitochondrial volume (24), mitochondrial enzyme activity (25), capillary to muscle fiber ratio, capillary density, and the number of capillaries around a given muscle fiber (25)]. Although we do not have data supporting this hypothesis, Short et al. (26) found increased glucose transporter (GLUT)-4 mRNA and GLUT-4 protein levels after training, and mitochondrial biogenesis was evident from increases of mitochondrial enzymes and mitochondrial protein mRNA. Furthermore, the increase in mixed muscle synthetic rates was not paralleled by changes in fat-free mass or leg muscle size (26).

The addition of FBR in the current study provides further insight into the effects of aerobic exercise training on skeletal muscle protein turnover because it enables the calculation of NET protein balance (FSR – FBR). Until now, this had not been determined at rest after an aerobic training program. FBR tended to increase (P = 0.06), ultimately resulting in a more negative NET balance after the 4-wk training program.

A negative NET is expected in fasting subjects, where rates of breakdown exceed those of synthesis in the absence of exogenous amino acids (8).

However, the finding of a more negative NET after endurance training differs from what is observed after resistance exercise. A single bout of resistance exercise results in improved NET balance because rates of synthesis are elevated by a greater magnitude and for a longer duration than rates of breakdown (10).

The catabolic environment observed acutely in the present study may not be representative of the 24-h skeletal muscle protein turnover response after aerobic training. Attempting to quantify or extend the effect of this observed NET balance, assessed over a 3-h time period in a fasting state, on lean body mass in the long term would be an oversimplification of protein turnover. As discussed by Phillips et al. (27), the maintenance of lean body mass over the course of a day is due to a fluctuation between the gains and losses of muscle proteins in response to feeding and fasting. Therefore, in the present study, although net balance was more negative after training in the fasted state, it is likely that there was a compensatory positive net muscle protein balance in response to feeding because no changes were noted in body composition and or body mass throughout the 4-wk training period. This notion is supported by multiple studies in which a shift to a positive net balance occurs following feeding after resistance (6,8–10) and endurance (28) exercise.

In the current investigation, plasma BCAA, EAA, and NEAA concentrations declined in response to 4 wk of aerobic exercise training. It is unlikely that there was an increased use of amino acids for fuel because both leucine oxidation and total protein oxidation decreased at rest after training (19). Because changes in circulating amino acid levels do not necessarily reflect intracellular amino acid availability, the physiological significance of these small differences in the context of the changes noted in skeletal muscle protein turnover must be viewed cautiously.

Our findings of a more negative NET balance and a decrease in plasma amino acid concentrations after training suggest that the protein intake of 0.85 g/kg body weight consumed throughout the investigation may have been less than optimal in our exercising subjects despite their adequate energy intakes. A substantial amount of research showed that individuals who participate in routine aerobic training likely have protein needs in excess of the current RDA for protein (20,29–32).

However, it should be noted that there are some that refute this notion (33,34), especially in situations in which energy intake is sufficient to meet the demands of exercise (34,35). Furthermore, Levenhagen et al. (28) examined nutritional supplementation after endurance exercise and concluded that amino acid rather than energy availability was more important for postexercise repair and synthesis of muscle proteins. Perhaps if subjects had consumed a greater level of protein in the current study, free amino acid pools would have expanded, thereby limiting the need for amino acids derived from endogenous sources and attenuating protein breakdown. In a recent study from our laboratory, we in fact demonstrated that variation in protein intake can augment amino acid pools, resulting in changes in FSR after endurance exercise (20).

The findings of the present investigation suggest an upregulation of skeletal muscle protein turnover in response to aerobic exercise training. Given that maintenance of energy balance was a focal point in the current study, the resulting negative NET balance can be attributed to either aerobic training, inadequate level of protein intake, or a combination of both. These findings provide support for future investigations evaluating both FSR and FBR at rest in response to endurance exercise at varying levels of dietary protein to characterize further the skeletal muscle protein metabolic response to this mode of training.

[B.Money]

hmm some interesting posts...

I was always told to do low intensity cardio for only about 5 min before lifting to your blood flowing...is something like that counter productive, or needed?

[slyfox115]

Good read T. I guess I am just basing my opinions on from what I have SEEN first hand. Sometimes science and actual real lift doesnt coincide.

[Hoops]

Sly, you ever seen sprinters? They do run for distance for conditioning...clearly they were built for it. I knew a guy who was about 225-235 and ran a few marathons at pretty respectable times. Maybe the expection to the rule in many cases but it's not like there aren't people with size who run.

[simonmobiledisco]

I don't think 'the runners' at the gym as relevant arguement, even though assumtive I would imagine diet would be the biggest hinderange to change in these people. Considering people who run for 40 mins in my experience have been the people who do little weight training

[slyfox115]

Hoops....agreed. But like you said, these guys are genetically built for this. For the genetically typical person it doesnt necessarily hold true. Trust me I went through that stage too where I was "cutting" by running 2 miles a day with weight training. I lost weight yes but it was a lot of muscle. I am by no means saying its impossible to do both and gain, it just didnt work for me thats all.

[Tatyana]

Good read T. I guess I am just basing my opinions on from what I have SEEN first hand. Sometimes science and actual real lift doesnt coincide.

I always find that statement odd, especially as science is really the observation of natural phenomena.

Obviously with biochemical individuality, running is not going to work for everyone. I would never recommend it to someone who has a hard time putting on muscle.

It is just that there are these set in stone statements in the BBing community, and all too often there is no scientific basis to it, or a mis-interpreted scientific basis, and there is more than one way to skin a cat.

I started middle distance running at 12-13 years, I have done it more consistently than weight lifting until recently.

I have always been a chunky little mesomorph. And I was up to 10 miles/day at one point.

I could do the 'what if' and would my quads be bigger..........but I don't see the point.

[Richard85]

I always find that statement odd, especially as science is really the observation of natural phenomena.

Obviously with biochemical individuality, running is not going to work for everyone. I would never recommend it to someone who has a hard time putting on muscle.

It is just that there are these set in stone statements in the BBing community, and all too often there is no scientific basis to it, or a mis-interpreted scientific basis, and there is more than one way to skin a cat.

I started middle distance running at 12-13 years, I have done it more consistently than weight lifting until recently.

I have always been a chunky little mesomorph. And I was up to 10 miles/day at one point.

I could do the 'what if' and would my quads be bigger..........but I don't see the point.

you just said you were a mesomorph... what if you were an ecto... would you still get the same results with running

[LAKER84]

How about terrel Owens or even ray lewis football players...they run like crazy all the time or even boxers the heavy weight they punch bags lift weights and run and there still big..I just want to know how to burn fat but still gain or maintain
Muscle

[slyfox115]

Laker....you have to understand, these athletes are the genetic ELITE for the most part, and can retain more mass. Have the the genetically typial person do the same as one of the genetic lottery winners, and you will get two totally different results.

We can sit here an speculate all we want, but honestly laker all you can do is try it for a little while, monitor your progress, and make adjustments as/if needed.

[jesus rocks]

I don't care what any study or report or anything says, I will always believe that unless one is genetically elite, running kills strength and size...

[slyfox115]

I don't care what any study or report or anything says, I will always believe that unless one is genetically elite, running kills strength and size...

Yeah but I heard MMA and BJJ gets you shredded :D

[dbcb314]

I love the internet.


People ignore the 1000's of people they see everyday who look "average" at best who are runners. Including the treadmill guys at the gym.


Yet they remember the 1-2 people they see who are big and running.



oh and about the nfl analogies. Those are some of the absolutely best athletes in the world (regardless of sport). So, in turn, they have some of the best athletic genetics in the world.

but still... football is not a distance running sport. It is a sprinting sport. You sprint for 10 secs max, then you rest for 30. sprint. rest. sprint. rest. It isn't like basketball where you are jogging back and forth all game.

[iron addict]

Running and gaining/keeping maximal mass are NOT compatible for genetically typical people--period. No amount of.....well I knew a guy who knew a guy crap, or using NFL players as an example will bend my opinion a bit. I can't count the number of lifters I have seen try to combine running and weight training and failed. Yes, some people can run a couple of miles and still have a good physique, but distance running and bodybuilding are polar opposites and they create a negative effect on recovery when combined.

Run all you want, but don't bitch if your lifts don't go up and your size is static.

IA

[Tatyana]

Running and gaining/keeping maximal mass are NOT compatible for genetically typical people--period. No amount of.....well I knew a guy who knew a guy crap, or using NFL players as an example will bend my opinion a bit. I can't count the number of lifters I have seen try to combine running and weight training and failed. Yes, some people can run a couple of miles and still have a good physique, but distance running and bodybuilding are polar opposites and they create a negative effect on recovery when combined.

Run all you want, but don't bitch if your lifts don't go up and your size is static.

IA

That is what I mean, distance running, forget about it.

I think anyone who wants to run a marathon, or even a 10 K is a bit bonkers.

[Tatyana]

I always find that statement odd, especially as science is really the observation of natural phenomena.

Obviously with biochemical individuality, running is not going to work for everyone. I would never recommend it to someone who has a hard time putting on muscle.

It is just that there are these set in stone statements in the BBing community, and all too often there is no scientific basis to it, or a mis-interpreted scientific basis, and there is more than one way to skin a cat.

I started middle distance running at 12-13 years, I have done it more consistently than weight lifting until recently.

I have always been a chunky little mesomorph. And I was up to 10 miles/day at one point.

I could do the 'what if' and would my quads be bigger..........but I don't see the point.

you just said you were a mesomorph... what if you were an ecto... would you still get the same results with running


..................................

[iron addict]

..................................

LOL:D

[mikethedon]

This is my experience. I would like to think that I have slightly above average genetics....not by much.

I also want to become a police officer and need to be able to run a certain distance for testing purposes. I told IA that i need to pass this test. He said work comes first and lets try it. So i started runing. And weights did start to drop. Now this was me doing twice a week 1.5 miles under 9min. And i noticed that I looked flat, fat loss was not at all helped by the running I actually looked fatter.

Now again Im doing some more testing coming up an have been trying to do tabata style sprints and HITT style 30sec sprint and 30walk to get ready for my testing for a total of 5min, and sometimes 7min. This so far has not affected my training much. It has been three weeks and fat is coming of (slowly because im doing it that way) weights are not moving up quickly at all, sometimes there down. And recovery isnt affected that much.

Over all, I will still sometimes sprint in such a fashion because i NEED to be in good physical standing for my work! but as for with weight lifting, if you dont need to run DONT!!!>

I dont think i have read from any leading "guy" that running is a good idea. And most people will have a friend or no someguy that can and do well.

Like everything else, try it and see.

[Redbeard3261]

What is the cardio of choice? I understand the whole goal of maintaining anabolic as majority of the time as possible for this reason I drink a whey shake at 2:00 a.m. to split the long night hours to prevent reaching a protein or BCAA deficiency through the night

[whoalon]

I am an ecto freak of nature, if they gave awards for who could turn themselves into a skeleton fastest, I would win.

If I look at running shoes, I lose 10lbs and my strength drops.

Joking aside, I have had to run for certain sports, certain jobs, etc, and each time I lost a ridiculous amount of mass, even though I was eating TONS of food. Running is the worst thing I could do for myself from a BB/PL standpoint.

One thing I think most people fail to realize about muscular athletes is that many of them didn't lift to get to that level of musculature. They were just like that already, so it is much tougher to shake the mass from running. If they added 50lbs to their frame right now via weight training, they'd probably have a hard time keeping it on if they were running.

[Richard85]

all the people I see running at Memorial Park here in Houston look like shit

[ChanMan878]

man, i always do 5 mins of elliptical before a workout to warmup. should i do hindu squats/medicine ball throws instead?

[padge]

What about 10-20 minutes of light jogging after a workout? Like just fast enough so that you aren't speed walking anymore. Is that okay?

[iron addict]

What about 10-20 minutes of light jogging after a workout? Like just fast enough so that you aren't speed walking anymore. Is that okay?

Try it. I have a hard time understanding how people do not see that bodybuilding and running are conflicting activities, but perhaps you are not interested in bodybuilding and just want to be in shape, in which case sure--do it.

IA

[padge]

Try it. I have a hard time understanding how people do not see that bodybuilding and running are conflicting activities, but perhaps you are not interested in bodybuilding and just want to be in shape, in which case sure--do it.

IA

I'm not saying that they don't conflict, I believe they do. I was curious if someone could get away with doing low intensity jogging, as opposed to "running", which wouldn't be as destructive on the joints, have a lesser intensity, and a short duration of 10-30 minutes (working your way up from 10min).

[iron addict]

Try it. Tell us how it goes. I does work for people that are simply not interested in maximal mass accrual.

IA

[boostnmuscle]

Try it. Tell us how it goes. I does work for people that are simply not interested in maximal mass accrual.

IA

Agreed, the majority of the population will see a 170 lb guy in the gym running that is in good shape and assume its fine because he's ripped..Truth is 99.9% of the time WONT see a guy carrying 230+ lean muscle on his frame running

[brook12]

if you are trying to do that, running is general is stupid


either do HIT or do low intensity cardio


doing cardio before lifting is kinda stupid. you are just wearing yourself out for no reason



This is actually incorrect.

Doing a LI cardio before workout decreases your general feeling of strength and strength itself by only 1% and an average WO decreases it by 8%, so its normal to run before your WO you just need to get used to it. Unless its not a HIIT and you are not cutting/

[ang.1]

links to back up those numbers plz

[Dobermann]

Running sucks! so im glad its pretty worthless for a power lifter :D but what I want to know is WHY is it so catabolic? Im not talking about the guy who runs every day but the guy like Mike who did a reasonable amount of running and lost strength..

[-mikeV2-]

Okay soo i would like some advice if anyone can help me out...over the past two years ive lost 50 lbs bringing me from 5'7 190 to now 5'9 140...ive been working out for a year and lifting for about 9 months..I have a decent amount of muscle and very little fat except a little flab for my lower abs..i have a noticable four pack above these lower abs..So ive been reading about this running thing and i usually run everyday for a total of 1.5 miles, i perform 6 quarter mile sprints at about 1 min 30 seconds a piece..i usually do these on lifting days in between sets for example ill bench press and then maybe another lift than go sprint...I dont notice that it makes me tired, Problem is i wanna lose this little flab and im scared to stop running because i dont wanna gain weight again but at the same time i wanna build a lean and muscular body..SO basically my question is, is this litttle amount of sprint running okay(ive read on numerous sites that sprints thrown into lifting in between sets is good btw) and is there any suggestions on how i can get rid of this tiny belly? like i said im 5'9 140 lb so im not fat, thanks