Aerobics is not necessary for cardiovascular fitness (Was: Weights or running or both?)

[Guest guest]

Aerobics is not necessary for cardiovascular fitness.

Weight-Lifting Regimen Delivered Cardio Benefits

ORLANDO, FLA. — Pure weight training can markedly improve aerobic fitness,

Baum, M.D., reported at Wonca 2004, the conference of the World

Organization of Family Doctors.

A 6-month structured Nautilus weightlifting program resulted in improvements

in cardiocirculatory fitness to a degree traditionally considered obtainable

only through endurance exercises such as running, bicycling, and swimming,

said Dr. Baum, a family physician at Philipps University, Marburg, Germany.

“This opens up new possibilities for cardiopulmonary- oriented exercise

besides the traditional stamina sports,” she noted. New exercise options are

desirable because some patients just don’t care for endurance exercise,

which doesn’t do much to improve muscular strength and stabilization.

Dr. Baum reported on 31 healthy but physically unfit 20- to 45-year-olds,

including 8 women, who completed a Nautilus weight-training program

involving two or three 30- to 40-minute sessions per week for 6 months.

Aerobic capacity, assessed on a graded treadmill exercise test, improved by

33% over the course of 6 months from a mean baseline of 55,475 watt-seconds.

Women improved from a baseline of 47,253 wattseconds to 62,822 watt-seconds,

while endurance performance in men increased from 58,335 to 77,741

watt-seconds.

Meanwhile, mean body weight declined from 77.8 to 67.7 kg. Resting heart

rate dropped from a baseline of 68.5 beats/min to 65.6 beats/min. Heart rate

measured 3 minutes after stopping a maximal exercise test declined from a

baseline of 108.7 to 103.1 beats/min after 6 months of training, with a

larger decrease in women than men.

—Bruce Jancin

Maisch B, Baum E, Grimm W. Die Auswirkungen dynamischen Krafttrainings nach

dem Nautilus-Prinzip auf kardiozirkulatorische Parameter und

Ausdauerleistungsfähigkeit (The effects of resistance training according to

the Nautilus principles on cardiocirculatory parameters and endurance).

Angenommen vom Fachbereich Humanmedizin der Philipps-Universität Marburg am

11. Dezember 2003

Also, consider the following section from a case study from Athletic

Journal, Vol. 56 September 1975 by Dr. from West Point

Military Academy

CARDIOVASCULAR FITNESS

Cardiovascular fitness is an integral component of both an individual’s

level of overall physical fitness and individual’s capability for sustained

athletic performance. A brief review of the basic function of the

circulatory system can clarify these basic assumptions. The primary function

of the circulatory system may be stated in one simple word - “transport.” It

transports essential like oxygen and glucose to the cells, and byproducts,

such as carbon dioxide, from the cells. As would be expected, the

circulatory system is called upon to increase its transport of essentials to

the cells and of waste products from the cells during muscular exertion.

This need, of course, is directly related to the intensity and duration of

exertion. It follows that one of the limiting factors in athletics and sport

is the ability of this system to meet the demands imposed by the body during

competition. Therefore two of the benefits which can be derived from a

functionally efficient circulatory system are an improved capacity for work

(exercise) and an increased ability to perform the transport function.

Traditionally, physicians and exercise physiologists have held that

participation in strength training does not increase an individual’s

capacity to meet the “transport” (oxygen-in –CO2-out) requirement of

strenuous exercise. Although this capacity is collectively known by various

names, this section refers to it by one of its most common designations-

“cardiovascular (C.V.) fitness.”* Numerous researches have found that the

individual who wishes to improve his C.V. capacity by means of an exercise

program must incorporate several factors into his efforts. The program must

be of sufficient intensity to have the heart rate of the participant reach a

level of at least 145-150 beats per minute;** this rate should be sustained

for a minimum of 10-12 minutes; and the participant should engage in such

exercising 3-4 times a week (the literature is equivocal on the exact number

of times).

• *Cardio refers to the “heart” and the vascular portion consists of the

large arteries, the small arteries, the arterioles leading to the tissues,

and the capillaries within the tissues.

• **In general, the more of the body’s large musculature involved in the

exercise, the easier it will be to reach a heart rate of 145-150 beats per

minute. Note: (picture not present) Subjects using a Nautilus Led Curl

Machine during the study.

Note: (picture not present) Subjects using a Nautilus Neck and Shoulder

Machine.

Conventional strength training practices have prevented C.V. improvement

from occurring because even on those occasions when a sufficiently higher

heart rate higher heart rate is attained by a participant, such a rate is

typically not sustained for more than a brief period. In the present study,

an attempt was made to train the wholebody subjects in such a manner that

improvement in their overall level of cardiovascular fitness would occure.

By limiting the rest period between the exercises to a few seconds and by

preventing the subjects from resting during the actual training, a high

degree of intensity was achieved and maintained for the duration of the

workout.

In order to ascertain the effects of the training, several tests were

administered on a pre-post-training basis - to both the wholebody and the

control group members. Differences on the initials test date were determined

by a T-test for each variable. If there were no initial significant

differences, then the T-test was applied to the post-training data to

determine the effects of the training. If there were significant differences

on the initial data, then analysis of covariance was used to determine the

relative degree of any changes which occurred between the two groups as a

result of the training.

Three different states of the cardiovascular function were examined: 1) C.V.

capacity at rest; 2) Responses to sub-maximal work; and 3) responses to

maximal work. The tests for the resting state consisted of measuring each

subjects heart rate (HR), systolic (blood is being forced out of the heart),

blood pressure (SBP), diastolic (the chambers of the heart are filing with

blood), blood pressure (DBP), and systolic tension time index - an accepted

measure of coronary circulation which is calculated by multiplying heart

rate x systolic blood pressure (STTI).

An evaluation of the effects on the sub-maximal state was achieved by having

each subject perform on a bodyguard model 990-bicycle ergometer. An

ergometer is a basic research instrument which allows a subject to pedal

against a resistance (load) which can be predetermined and adjusted (when

necessary) by the experimenter. The sub-maximal tests required each subject

to perform a continuous, progressive ergometer ride with increasing work

loads (360 kpm/min increase) every two minutes until the subject could no

longer sustain the rate (60 rpm) or wanted to stop. This was followed by two

minutes at the initial light load (360 kpm/min), then three minutes of rest.

At each condition, the HR, SBP, DBP, SITTI, and a subjective rating (by the

subject) of his perceived exertion (RPE) were obtained. Cardiac feedback was

provided by means of a continuous EKG which was obtained on each subject

while on the ergometer. The maximal state was evaluated by means of two

measures: total riding time and 2-mile run performance.*

The results of the testing were conclusive. On NONE of the 60 indices

purporting to evaluate the effects of the training on the cardiovascular

function was the control group better on the final testing period (or on the

change from initial to final) than the wholebody group. The following

significant differences (.05 level**) were caused by the training afforded

to the wholebody group: Lower HR at 360, 1080,1260,1620, and 1800 kpm/min;

lower SITTI at 360, and RPE at 1260; a higher amount of work necessary

before the subject achieved a heart rate of 170; a longer ride time; and a

lower time required to run 2 miles. These calculations mean that the

training caused the players to work more efficiently (lower HR) at light,

moderate and near maximal levels. They could also do more work before

reaching a heart rate of 170, as well as more total work. Their improvement

in their 2-mile run performances also indicates that they were less stressed

at maximal levels. For the coach and the athlete, the implication is clear:

these subjects could perform at more efficient rate for a longer period of

time. In the athletic arena, where contest are frequently decided by inches

or other fractions, such training could play an important role.

• *With the exception of administering the 2-mile run test, all

cardiovascular testing was conducted by outside consultants. In light of the

fact that these individuals were not informed until after all testing had

been completed about which subjects were a member of which group – control

or wholebody, their efforts can be accorded an additional degree of

legitimacy.

• **Many researches frequently use .05 as the level of significance. It

means that the differences can be accepted with 95% degree of certainly as

having occurred as a result of the special training.

Drew Baye

Orlando, FL

High Intensity Training

HYPERLINK " http://www.baye.com/ " www.baye.com

===================

_____

From: Supertraining [mailto:Supertraining ]

On Behalf Of sregor99

Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 7:45 AM

To: Supertraining

Subject: Re: VS: Weights or running or both?

What I don't understand is why, at the mention of `running', X

number of people on training forums such as this suddenly cross

themselves, hang garlic around their necks and proceed to place small

wooden crucifixes around their bedrooms.

But we can have it all to some extent. I really admire the guys and

gals who can deadlift or squat big numbers and still run a mile under

6 minutes. The Olympic decathletes have to be in this sort of

condition. (Some will go under 5 minutes of course.)

Okay, we've had fun with the bar-room jokes, but the question was

about running and weight training at the same time. To sum it up,

here is my view.

If you're worried about being healthy, do some aerobic training while

you weight train because it is known to improve cardiovascular health

and quite a bit more. This has nothing to do with Powerlifting

competition or running marathons. That's sport, and you do it because

you like it even if it may not be optimal for health. Running is the

easiest and most productive form of aerobic exercise for most people.

Mel (Siff, the author of Supertraining and the basis of this forum)

was openly sceptical of the advantages of aerobics beyond the

endurance sports. He seemed to be at odds with , the

aerobics guru, most of the time in relation to the benefits of

aerobic exercise for health.

In fact his comment on the Kingwell study on poor arterial compliance

in weight trainers (ref 1 below) in a post I saw elsewhere, was more

or less dismissive.

However, with the weight of evidence now available I am sure Mel

would have to review his position on aerobics and health. The

evidence really is overwhelming that the higher your VO2, the

healthier you can be across a range of parameters and health

conditions. The bottom line is that if you are going to be really fit

for health, you need to be aerobically fit. How fit do you have to

be to be aerobically fit?

Check out this site for the norms for age:

HYPERLINK

" http://www.aerobictest.com/AerobicFitnessImportance.htm " http://www.aerobict

-est.com/AerobicF-itnessImportance-.htm

How you get there is another matter. Try 20RM squat reps, dragging

Kettlebells around, running track intervals and sprints – it's all

great stuff and you will build anaerobic power and fitness for sure,

but you have to do it consistently and in some volume to build

aerobic fitness. To get really aerobically fit, steady-state 70-80%

max heart rate stuff for several hours a week consistently is the

aerobic running option. In any case, a VO2 test is the ultimate

reference.

Here are some interesting references.

Bertovic DA, Waddell TK, Gatzka CD, Cameron JD, Dart AM, Kingwell BA.

Muscular strength training is associated with low arterial compliance

and high pulse pressure. Hypertension. 1999 Jun;33(6):1385--91.

Kullo IJ, Khaleghi M, Hensrud DD. Markers of inflammation are

inversely associated with VO2 max in asymptomatic men. J Appl

Physiol. 2007 Apr;102(4):1374--9.

Colcombe SJ, kson KI, Scalf PE, Kim JS, Prakash R, McAuley E,

Elavsky S, Marquez DX, Hu L, Kramer AF. Aerobic exercise training

increases brain volume in aging humans. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med

Sci. 2006 Nov;61(11):1166--70.

==================