Around the world, the best strategies for FAT LOSS are discussed, often focusing only on training and nutrition ...

We forget that more than 60% of the energy we spend corresponds to periods when we are not even "moving" or eating.

All strategies, all guidelines, all new fashions and trends fail because they look only at 40% of the process ...

Let's take a look, it took 2 million years to improve a system that still works for us today. The human species survived for its incredible adaptability. We have already been very hungry! And stop was die.

So for thousands of years we made huge crossings on an empty stomach for food. And so, we have been able to perfect our body to be an efficient machine in energy management (metabolism).

What would be the message our nervous system received when faced with food deprivation and long crossings? Saving energy, which in practice means reducing metabolism.

And what does man of the 21st century to fight obesity?

Cut the ration and hours of exercise (cardio / boardwalk) with plenty! What signal do we send to our systems?

Why do patients who put the gastric band after 12 months regain their lost weight if they get less than 70% of the stomach volume? If you eat less, how can you regain weight?

Anyway, gastric banding is another matter ...

Often the efficiency and effectiveness of the training is sabotaged by the compensatory effects, namely in the energy intake.

So we have one more variable to think about when we think about exercising: what is the most hungry exercise? Or rather, what exercise leads us to eat more FATS?!

Cardio vs. Strength?

Low vs. High Intensities?

Australian researchers wanted to compare the compensatory effect on eating behavior (appetite, "liking and wanting", food intake and nutrient preference) in two interval training protocols: high and moderate intensity

Ten overweight and obese men participated in 2 4-week programs each, separated by 6 weeks of detraining wash-out.

Moderate Intensity (MIIT): ranges from 5min to 20% of work (joules) at 45% VO2peak, ie 9% VO2?!

High Intensity (HIIT): Intervals from 30sec to 90% VO2peak and 30s pause for 30-45min

The first thing that jumps right into view is that the MIIT group pedaled more than twice and for more than twice the HIIT time. Will not it be boring?

There was a compensatory tendency in the MIIT group, comparing with the HIIT, regarding the desire to eat and fat consumption after the intervention.

It was found that the desire to eat increased in MIIT and reduced in HIIT.

Regarding "liking and wanting", the desire for nonfat, high-fat, high-fat (HFSW), low fat and sweet (LFSW), low fat The HIIT group remained negative at all.

It was found that, after 4 weeks of intervention for each protocol, the energy intake (in grams and kcal) was only lower in HIIT.

Fat consumption increased 38% after MIIT and decreased 16% after HIIT.

This theory also shows that both protocols improved their lipolytic efficiency (fat metabolization), but only HIIT reduced fat intake after the intervention.

Does the principle of overcompensation also apply to the energy substrate? That is, the energy substrate used during exercise will be not only replenished but reinforced??

So, will the training protocols that mainly burn fats (low and moderate intensity) have the answer to ingest more fats?

Boardwalk, what for ... To distract, to pass the time, to enjoy the nature, to sell gadgets, to dance, to make new friends ... ok. FAT LOSS ?? Zero!

This study also shows that the (now) so famous interval workout of high intensity, tabata and the like, is much more than using a timer with horns ...

High intensity hurts, moderate intensity can gain weight ...

Rui Madeira text citing Bento A.

in Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. 2014 Dec;24(6):595-604. doi: 10.1123/ijsnem.2013-0032. Epub 2014 Mar 25. Interval training intensity affects energy intake compensation in obese men. Alkahtani SA1, Byrne NM, Hills AP, King NA.