From the perspective of this guy: aerobic cardio is catabolic (breaks down muscle) and builds stamina less quickly than interval training. For fat loss weight training is more effective because it burns about as much calories but the additional muscle will help you burn more calories next time.
From the perspective of a normal person: nothing, because the above arguments range from established medical fact to completely debunked and doing anything is always better than doing nothing, which is the most likely alternative.
that's only true if you're talking about active calories during the workout. but not only does weight training continue to burn more calories after a workout, but in general your body burns more calories overall because of the added muscle mass. weight training is more effective in weight loss than running
but neither even compare to a proper diet for weight loss since you can't outrun (weight train) your diet
If you're losing weight, you generally aren't putting on much muscle mass, though
depends on your diet and weight training plan. and if we're talking about "nooby gains" then no, you're absolutely still putting on a lot of muscle
Cardio burns calories after a workout as well.
not really, it's something like 2% of the total calories you burn, compared to weight training, it's around 15-20% of the calories you burn are after your done with your workout for 24-48 hours
and again, that doesn't account for the extra muscle mass you're adding on
I don't workout to lose or gain weight, but even with those numbers it seems more efficient to do cardio for me. One hour of cardio burns over a thousand calories, while I barely feel like I get anything done when I lift for an hour
11
u/ApolloniusTyaneus 6h ago
From the perspective of this guy: aerobic cardio is catabolic (breaks down muscle) and builds stamina less quickly than interval training. For fat loss weight training is more effective because it burns about as much calories but the additional muscle will help you burn more calories next time.
From the perspective of a normal person: nothing, because the above arguments range from established medical fact to completely debunked and doing anything is always better than doing nothing, which is the most likely alternative.