HIT and Fat Loss at the same time

"Fuzz141" <fuzz141 RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1112685726.422553.313090@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Hi All,
>
> Is it better for someone who has 35%+ body fat to lift weights, or just
> concentrate on cardio at first? I've read conflicting views. I'd
> like to use the HIT method of weight training - should I wait until
> I'm closer to 15%?
>
> Thanks in advance!!!
>

I'd say cardio + weights will be the most beneficial, since you'd be
building muscle aswell as burning fat, make sure you consume a high protein
, low carb diet, and DO NOT eliminate carbs completely.
 >> Stay informed about: HIT and Fat Loss at the same time 

On 5 Apr 2005 00:22:06 -0700, "Fuzz141" <fuzz141.DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Hi All,
>
>Is it better for someone who has 35%+ body fat to lift weights, or just
>concentrate on cardio at first? I've read conflicting views. I'd
>like to use the HIT method of weight training - should I wait until
>I'm closer to 15%?
>
Both weights and cardio are you friends in weight loss. Besides
burning calories, weights help you preserve muscle while you diet.
Your diet, BTW, is what you should be the most concerned about.
Using HIT should be the least. It involves using relatively heavy
weights for few all out, balls to the wall sets to failure. If you're
new to weights you could easily hurt yourself training that way and
you just don't need to for fat loss. Look for a vanilla beginners
weightlifting routine instead.
Here's a good place to start. (Ignore the focus on womens weight
training. It's still beginner oriented.)
http://www.stumptuous.com/training_menu.html

While you're there you might want to also checkout the info on eating.
http://www.stumptuous.com/eating_menu.html
 >> Stay informed about: HIT and Fat Loss at the same time 

In article <1112685726.422553.313090.TakeThisOut@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
"Fuzz141" <fuzz141.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> writes:
> Hi All,
>
> Is it better for someone who has 35%+ body fat to lift weights, or just
> concentrate on cardio at first? I've read conflicting views.

My *very* amateur opinion is that, assuming your BF% is indicative
of your over-all fitness, you'd best be served by first getting a
thorough physical--incl. a heart stress test, at least.

> I'd
> like to use the HIT method of weight training -

Why? Are you planning on professional or amateur athletics? Don't
get me wrong: If HIT is what you really think you want to do, don't
let *me* discourage you. But don't think you have to do HIT to get
in shape or stay in shape. Most of all: Don't make the mistake of
thinking "I'll just get really, really intense, work the fat off,
then I can coast."

> - should I wait until
> I'm closer to 15%?

I think you should wait until the results of that thorough physical
and then work up to HIT.

Btw: I was measured at 25% BF just a month ago. I'm sure it's
already much lower. I started HIIT last Saturday--after about a
month of slowly ramped-up strength training and aerobic/cardio thrice
a week. I'll be doing HIIT once a week from here, out. *But*, I've
been doing light toning and stretching exercises for two years. Been
walking 1/4 to 1/2 mile per day for the same period. Plus summer
yard work (incl. push-mowing) and winter snow-shoveling. I had a
thorough physical before embarking on my intensified program, incl.
heart stress test, heart valve sonogram, and leg BP and sonogram
tests.

>
> Thanks in advance!!!

You're welcome. Good luck.

--
Jim Seymour | "It is wrong always, everywhere and
WARNING: The "From:" address is a | for everyone to believe anything upon
spam trap. DON'T USE IT! Use: | insufficient evidence."
jseymour.TakeThisOut@LinxNet.com | - W. K. Clifford, ca. 1876
 >> Stay informed about: HIT and Fat Loss at the same time 

rwk RemoveThis @LinxNet.com (Runs With Knives) wrote in news:1155hn2dgag3895
@corp.supernews.com:

> In article <1112685726.422553.313090 RemoveThis @z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
> "Fuzz141" <fuzz141 RemoveThis @yahoo.com> writes:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Is it better for someone who has 35%+ body fat to lift weights, or just
>> concentrate on cardio at first? I've read conflicting views.
>
> My *very* amateur opinion is that, assuming your BF% is indicative
> of your over-all fitness, you'd best be served by first getting a
> thorough physical--incl. a heart stress test, at least.
>
>> I'd
>> like to use the HIT method of weight training -
>
> Why? Are you planning on professional or amateur athletics? Don't
> get me wrong: If HIT is what you really think you want to do, don't
> let *me* discourage you. But don't think you have to do HIT to get
> in shape or stay in shape. Most of all: Don't make the mistake of
> thinking "I'll just get really, really intense, work the fat off,
> then I can coast."
>
>> - should I wait until
>> I'm closer to 15%?
>
> I think you should wait until the results of that thorough physical
> and then work up to HIT.
>
> Btw: I was measured at 25% BF just a month ago. I'm sure it's
> already much lower. I started HIIT last Saturday--after about a
> month of slowly ramped-up strength training and aerobic/cardio thrice
> a week. I'll be doing HIIT once a week from here, out. *But*, I've
> been doing light toning and stretching exercises for two years. Been
> walking 1/4 to 1/2 mile per day for the same period. Plus summer
> yard work (incl. push-mowing) and winter snow-shoveling. I had a
> thorough physical before embarking on my intensified program, incl.
> heart stress test, heart valve sonogram, and leg BP and sonogram
> tests.
>
>>
>> Thanks in advance!!!
>
> You're welcome. Good luck.
>

What JC said.

HIT is not HIIT.

HIT is not HST.

HIT is dead stupid for a beginner at 35% BF.

HIIT is dead stupid for a beginner at 35% BF.

HST isn't dead stupid but is unnecessary for someone at 35% BF.

Jeezus, guys.

Hugh


--
Experience keeps a dear school, but fools will attend no other.
 >> Stay informed about: HIT and Fat Loss at the same time 

"Hugh Beyer" <beyerxyzzy.RemoveThis@acm.org> wrote in message
news:Xns962F8796DED9hughrbeyeracmorg@130.81.64.196...
> rwk.RemoveThis@LinxNet.com (Runs With Knives) wrote in news:1155hn2dgag3895
> @corp.supernews.com:
>
>> In article <1112685726.422553.313090.RemoveThis@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
>> "Fuzz141" <fuzz141.RemoveThis@yahoo.com> writes:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> Is it better for someone who has 35%+ body fat to lift weights, or just
>>> concentrate on cardio at first? I've read conflicting views.
>>
>> My *very* amateur opinion is that, assuming your BF% is indicative
>> of your over-all fitness, you'd best be served by first getting a
>> thorough physical--incl. a heart stress test, at least.
>>
>>> I'd
>>> like to use the HIT method of weight training -
>>
>> Why? Are you planning on professional or amateur athletics? Don't
>> get me wrong: If HIT is what you really think you want to do, don't
>> let *me* discourage you. But don't think you have to do HIT to get
>> in shape or stay in shape. Most of all: Don't make the mistake of
>> thinking "I'll just get really, really intense, work the fat off,
>> then I can coast."
>>
>>> - should I wait until
>>> I'm closer to 15%?
>>
>> I think you should wait until the results of that thorough physical
>> and then work up to HIT.
>>
>> Btw: I was measured at 25% BF just a month ago. I'm sure it's
>> already much lower. I started HIIT last Saturday--after about a
>> month of slowly ramped-up strength training and aerobic/cardio thrice
>> a week. I'll be doing HIIT once a week from here, out. *But*, I've
>> been doing light toning and stretching exercises for two years. Been
>> walking 1/4 to 1/2 mile per day for the same period. Plus summer
>> yard work (incl. push-mowing) and winter snow-shoveling. I had a
>> thorough physical before embarking on my intensified program, incl.
>> heart stress test, heart valve sonogram, and leg BP and sonogram
>> tests.
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance!!!
>>
>> You're welcome. Good luck.
>>
>
> What JC said.
>
> HIT is not HIIT.
>
> HIT is not HST.
>
> HIT is dead stupid for a beginner at 35% BF.
>
> HIIT is dead stupid for a beginner at 35% BF.
>
> HST isn't dead stupid but is unnecessary for someone at 35% BF.

Expand on that please
 >> Stay informed about: HIT and Fat Loss at the same time 

"Jay" <jpw646 DeleteThis @swbell.net> wrote in news:MjB4e.1893$3z3.9
@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com:

> "Hugh Beyer" <beyerxyzzy DeleteThis @acm.org> wrote in message
> news:Xns962F8796DED9hughrbeyeracmorg@130.81.64.196...
>> rwk DeleteThis @LinxNet.com (Runs With Knives) wrote in news:1155hn2dgag3895
>> @corp.supernews.com:
>>
>>> In article <1112685726.422553.313090 DeleteThis @z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
>>> "Fuzz141" <fuzz141 DeleteThis @yahoo.com> writes:
>>>> Hi All,
>>>>
>>>> Is it better for someone who has 35%+ body fat to lift weights, or
just
>>>> concentrate on cardio at first? I've read conflicting views.
>>>
>>> My *very* amateur opinion is that, assuming your BF% is indicative
>>> of your over-all fitness, you'd best be served by first getting a
>>> thorough physical--incl. a heart stress test, at least.
>>>
>>>> I'd
>>>> like to use the HIT method of weight training -
>>>
>>> Why? Are you planning on professional or amateur athletics? Don't
>>> get me wrong: If HIT is what you really think you want to do, don't
>>> let *me* discourage you. But don't think you have to do HIT to get
>>> in shape or stay in shape. Most of all: Don't make the mistake of
>>> thinking "I'll just get really, really intense, work the fat off,
>>> then I can coast."
>>>
>>>> - should I wait until
>>>> I'm closer to 15%?
>>>
>>> I think you should wait until the results of that thorough physical
>>> and then work up to HIT.
>>>
>>> Btw: I was measured at 25% BF just a month ago. I'm sure it's
>>> already much lower. I started HIIT last Saturday--after about a
>>> month of slowly ramped-up strength training and aerobic/cardio thrice
>>> a week. I'll be doing HIIT once a week from here, out. *But*, I've
>>> been doing light toning and stretching exercises for two years. Been
>>> walking 1/4 to 1/2 mile per day for the same period. Plus summer
>>> yard work (incl. push-mowing) and winter snow-shoveling. I had a
>>> thorough physical before embarking on my intensified program, incl.
>>> heart stress test, heart valve sonogram, and leg BP and sonogram
>>> tests.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks in advance!!!
>>>
>>> You're welcome. Good luck.
>>>
>>
>> What JC said.
>>
>> HIT is not HIIT.
>>
>> HIT is not HST.
>>
>> HIT is dead stupid for a beginner at 35% BF.
>>
>> HIIT is dead stupid for a beginner at 35% BF.
>>
>> HST isn't dead stupid but is unnecessary for someone at 35% BF.
>
> Expand on that please
>
>
>

All of it, or just the last point?

Hugh


--
Experience keeps a dear school, but fools will attend no other.
 >> Stay informed about: HIT and Fat Loss at the same time 

Thanks for all of your responses. I was speaking of HIT, and not HST
(this is the first place I have heard of HST). I am not an absolute
beginner at weight training. I have been doing it off and on for years
now, so my form is pretty good. The reason I posted in the first place
was that I was reading Mike Mentzer's book on HIT. While reading it, I
read somewhere else (forget where now) that you shouldn't be doing ANY
weight training if you're more than 20 pounds overweight. So - I guess
my specific questions would be:

1. Is doing HIT dangerous for someone as out of shape as I am? I have
been given the green light by my doctor to exercise.
2. Is it possible to gain muscle while losing fat (this article I read
said it wasn't, but it was possible to maintain the muscle you already
have by lifting).
3. What, if any, supplements should I be taking that will help in
adding muscle, but also help in losing fat?

Thanks again for all of the great answers I've read so far!
 >> Stay informed about: HIT and Fat Loss at the same time 

"Hugh Beyer" <beyerxyzzy DeleteThis @acm.org> wrote in message
news:Xns962F9E04EEDCAhughrbeyeracmorg@130.81.64.196...
> "Jay" <jpw646 DeleteThis @swbell.net> wrote in news:MjB4e.1893$3z3.9
> @newssvr12.news.prodigy.com:
>
>> "Hugh Beyer" <beyerxyzzy DeleteThis @acm.org> wrote in message
>> news:Xns962F8796DED9hughrbeyeracmorg@130.81.64.196...
>>> rwk DeleteThis @LinxNet.com (Runs With Knives) wrote in news:1155hn2dgag3895
>>> @corp.supernews.com:
>>>
>>>> In article <1112685726.422553.313090 DeleteThis @z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
>>>> "Fuzz141" <fuzz141 DeleteThis @yahoo.com> writes:
>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>
>>>>> Is it better for someone who has 35%+ body fat to lift weights, or
> just
>>>>> concentrate on cardio at first? I've read conflicting views.
>>>>
>>>> My *very* amateur opinion is that, assuming your BF% is indicative
>>>> of your over-all fitness, you'd best be served by first getting a
>>>> thorough physical--incl. a heart stress test, at least.
>>>>
>>>>> I'd
>>>>> like to use the HIT method of weight training -
>>>>
>>>> Why? Are you planning on professional or amateur athletics? Don't
>>>> get me wrong: If HIT is what you really think you want to do, don't
>>>> let *me* discourage you. But don't think you have to do HIT to get
>>>> in shape or stay in shape. Most of all: Don't make the mistake of
>>>> thinking "I'll just get really, really intense, work the fat off,
>>>> then I can coast."
>>>>
>>>>> - should I wait until
>>>>> I'm closer to 15%?
>>>>
>>>> I think you should wait until the results of that thorough physical
>>>> and then work up to HIT.
>>>>
>>>> Btw: I was measured at 25% BF just a month ago. I'm sure it's
>>>> already much lower. I started HIIT last Saturday--after about a
>>>> month of slowly ramped-up strength training and aerobic/cardio thrice
>>>> a week. I'll be doing HIIT once a week from here, out. *But*, I've
>>>> been doing light toning and stretching exercises for two years. Been
>>>> walking 1/4 to 1/2 mile per day for the same period. Plus summer
>>>> yard work (incl. push-mowing) and winter snow-shoveling. I had a
>>>> thorough physical before embarking on my intensified program, incl.
>>>> heart stress test, heart valve sonogram, and leg BP and sonogram
>>>> tests.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks in advance!!!
>>>>
>>>> You're welcome. Good luck.
>>>>
>>>
>>> What JC said.
>>>
>>> HIT is not HIIT.
>>>
>>> HIT is not HST.
>>>
>>> HIT is dead stupid for a beginner at 35% BF.
>>>
>>> HIIT is dead stupid for a beginner at 35% BF.
>>>
>>> HST isn't dead stupid but is unnecessary for someone at 35% BF.
>>
>> Expand on that please
>>
>>
>>
>
> All of it, or just the last point?
>
> Hugh

HST isn't dead stupid but is unnecessary for someone at 35% BF.
 >> Stay informed about: HIT and Fat Loss at the same time 

"Jay" <jpw646.TakeThisOut@swbell.net> wrote in news:n9C4e.8225$c76.330
@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com:

> "Hugh Beyer" <beyerxyzzy.TakeThisOut@acm.org> wrote in message
> news:Xns962F9E04EEDCAhughrbeyeracmorg@130.81.64.196...
>> "Jay" <jpw646.TakeThisOut@swbell.net> wrote in news:MjB4e.1893$3z3.9
>> @newssvr12.news.prodigy.com:
>>
>>> "Hugh Beyer" <beyerxyzzy.TakeThisOut@acm.org> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns962F8796DED9hughrbeyeracmorg@130.81.64.196...
>>>> rwk.TakeThisOut@LinxNet.com (Runs With Knives) wrote in news:1155hn2dgag3895
>>>> @corp.supernews.com:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <1112685726.422553.313090.TakeThisOut@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
>>>>> "Fuzz141" <fuzz141.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> writes:
>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is it better for someone who has 35%+ body fat to lift weights, or
>>>>>> just concentrate on cardio at first? I've read conflicting views.
>>>>>
>>>>> My *very* amateur opinion is that, assuming your BF% is indicative
>>>>> of your over-all fitness, you'd best be served by first getting a
>>>>> thorough physical--incl. a heart stress test, at least.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd
>>>>>> like to use the HIT method of weight
>>>>>> training -
>>>>>
>>>>> Why? Are you planning on professional or amateur athletics? Don't
>>>>> get me wrong: If HIT is what you really think you want to do, don't
>>>>> let *me* discourage you. But don't think you have to do HIT to get
>>>>> in shape or stay in shape. Most of all: Don't make the mistake of
>>>>> thinking "I'll just get really, really intense, work the fat off,
>>>>> then I can coast."
>>>>>
>>>>>> - should I wait until
>>>>>> I'm closer to 15%?
>>>>>
>>>>> I think you should wait until the results of that thorough physical
>>>>> and then work up to HIT.
>>>>>
>>>>> Btw: I was measured at 25% BF just a month ago. I'm sure it's
>>>>> already much lower. I started HIIT last Saturday--after about a
>>>>> month of slowly ramped-up strength training and aerobic/cardio
thrice
>>>>> a week. I'll be doing HIIT once a week from here, out. *But*, I've
>>>>> been doing light toning and stretching exercises for two years.
Been
>>>>> walking 1/4 to 1/2 mile per day for the same period. Plus summer
>>>>> yard work (incl. push-mowing) and winter snow-shoveling. I had a
>>>>> thorough physical before embarking on my intensified program, incl.
>>>>> heart stress test, heart valve sonogram, and leg BP and sonogram
>>>>> tests.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks in advance!!!
>>>>>
>>>>> You're welcome. Good luck.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What JC said.
>>>>
>>>> HIT is not HIIT.
>>>>
>>>> HIT is not HST.
>>>>
>>>> HIT is dead stupid for a beginner at 35% BF.
>>>>
>>>> HIIT is dead stupid for a beginner at 35% BF.
>>>>
>>>> HST isn't dead stupid but is unnecessary for someone at 35% BF.
>>>
>>> Expand on that please
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> All of it, or just the last point?
>>
>> Hugh
>
> HST isn't dead stupid but is unnecessary for someone at 35% BF.
>
>

Really "a beginner at 35% BF" but those two probably go together.

The OP needs a basic program that will maintain or increase muscle while
he diets off the weight. He'll do fine with a basic whole-body routine 3x
week, not going to failure, increasing weights when he feels like he can
without pushing the envelope. JC pointed to a couple of such routines at
the stumptuous URL.

HST is a complicated system of progression which requires that you figure
out your maxes ahead of time. That's already problematic for a beginner,
and they aren't going to stay the same anyway. Then HST has you push up to
your max over two weeks, which a beginner doesn't need to do. HST also
wants you to choose a set of exercises, which a beginner doesn't have any
criteria for. It's all overkill.

Hugh


--
Experience keeps a dear school, but fools will attend no other.
 >> Stay informed about: HIT and Fat Loss at the same time 

"Hugh Beyer" <beyerxyzzy RemoveThis @acm.org> wrote in message
news:Xns962FAA1FD5CAAhughrbeyeracmorg@130.81.64.196...
> "Jay" <jpw646 RemoveThis @swbell.net> wrote in news:n9C4e.8225$c76.330
> @newssvr11.news.prodigy.com:
>
>> "Hugh Beyer" <beyerxyzzy RemoveThis @acm.org> wrote in message
>> news:Xns962F9E04EEDCAhughrbeyeracmorg@130.81.64.196...
>>> "Jay" <jpw646 RemoveThis @swbell.net> wrote in news:MjB4e.1893$3z3.9
>>> @newssvr12.news.prodigy.com:
>>>
>>>> "Hugh Beyer" <beyerxyzzy RemoveThis @acm.org> wrote in message
>>>> news:Xns962F8796DED9hughrbeyeracmorg@130.81.64.196...
>>>>> rwk RemoveThis @LinxNet.com (Runs With Knives) wrote in news:1155hn2dgag3895
>>>>> @corp.supernews.com:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In article <1112685726.422553.313090 RemoveThis @z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
>>>>>> "Fuzz141" <fuzz141 RemoveThis @yahoo.com> writes:
>>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is it better for someone who has 35%+ body fat to lift weights, or
>>>>>>> just concentrate on cardio at first? I've read conflicting views.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My *very* amateur opinion is that, assuming your BF% is indicative
>>>>>> of your over-all fitness, you'd best be served by first getting a
>>>>>> thorough physical--incl. a heart stress test, at least.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd
>>>>>>> like to use the HIT method of weight
>>>>>>> training -
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why? Are you planning on professional or amateur athletics? Don't
>>>>>> get me wrong: If HIT is what you really think you want to do, don't
>>>>>> let *me* discourage you. But don't think you have to do HIT to get
>>>>>> in shape or stay in shape. Most of all: Don't make the mistake of
>>>>>> thinking "I'll just get really, really intense, work the fat off,
>>>>>> then I can coast."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - should I wait until
>>>>>>> I'm closer to 15%?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think you should wait until the results of that thorough physical
>>>>>> and then work up to HIT.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Btw: I was measured at 25% BF just a month ago. I'm sure it's
>>>>>> already much lower. I started HIIT last Saturday--after about a
>>>>>> month of slowly ramped-up strength training and aerobic/cardio
> thrice
>>>>>> a week. I'll be doing HIIT once a week from here, out. *But*, I've
>>>>>> been doing light toning and stretching exercises for two years.
> Been
>>>>>> walking 1/4 to 1/2 mile per day for the same period. Plus summer
>>>>>> yard work (incl. push-mowing) and winter snow-shoveling. I had a
>>>>>> thorough physical before embarking on my intensified program, incl.
>>>>>> heart stress test, heart valve sonogram, and leg BP and sonogram
>>>>>> tests.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks in advance!!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You're welcome. Good luck.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What JC said.
>>>>>
>>>>> HIT is not HIIT.
>>>>>
>>>>> HIT is not HST.
>>>>>
>>>>> HIT is dead stupid for a beginner at 35% BF.
>>>>>
>>>>> HIIT is dead stupid for a beginner at 35% BF.
>>>>>
>>>>> HST isn't dead stupid but is unnecessary for someone at 35% BF.
>>>>
>>>> Expand on that please
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> All of it, or just the last point?
>>>
>>> Hugh
>>
>> HST isn't dead stupid but is unnecessary for someone at 35% BF.
>>
>>
>
> Really "a beginner at 35% BF" but those two probably go together.
>
> The OP needs a basic program that will maintain or increase muscle while
> he diets off the weight. He'll do fine with a basic whole-body routine 3x
> week, not going to failure, increasing weights when he feels like he can
> without pushing the envelope. JC pointed to a couple of such routines at
> the stumptuous URL.
>
> HST is a complicated system of progression which requires that you figure
> out your maxes ahead of time. That's already problematic for a beginner,
> and they aren't going to stay the same anyway. Then HST has you push up to
> your max over two weeks, which a beginner doesn't need to do. HST also
> wants you to choose a set of exercises, which a beginner doesn't have any
> criteria for. It's all overkill.
>
> Hugh
HST doesn't have to be as complex as it is made out be. As a beginner,
saying to hell with max testing, picking out complex multi joint exercise
and progressing as the movement is learned will be as easy a routine to
follow as any. There is no magic in using exactly 15 reps.
Why not use a routine such as:
Squats or Deadlift
leg curl or leg extention
bench
overhead press
row
pulldown until chins can be done
lateral raise
curl
dip
those last two optional.
Doing reps in good form, terminating sets when form drops. Eating a sub
caloric nutritous diet.
As this person progresses, hypertrophy will occur, with the frequency
helping learn the movements. Would I do negatives? no. I would keep adding
weight slowly, and when a top is reached where weight increase could not
reasonably done, I would step back two or three notches and slowly progress
again. With a third top, I would use the strategic deconditioning time as
it is intended, but use a longer duration aerobic exercise in the interim.

HST is solid, the numerical calculations are not as necessary as people get
so neurotic about. Better than no foundation in my humple opinion.

Now I am going back to super slow session, lol
 >> Stay informed about: HIT and Fat Loss at the same time 

In article <Xns962FAA1FD5CAAhughrbeyeracmorg.DeleteThis@130.81.64.196>,
Hugh Beyer <beyerxyzzy.DeleteThis@acm.org> writes:
[snip]
>
> Really "a beginner at 35% BF" but those two probably go together.

Probably a pretty safe bet .

>
> The OP needs a basic program that will maintain or increase muscle while
> he diets off the weight.

You might wish to expand on what you mean by "diet," lest the OP
think you mean something like "cut out all the fat and carbs."

> He'll do fine with a basic whole-body routine 3x
> week, not going to failure, increasing weights when he feels like he can
> without pushing the envelope.
[snip]
>

That's *precisely* what I did, starting over a month ago, *after*
getting that comprehensive physical I mentioned (several times). I
bumped the weight stacks as I felt I could do so *easily* for at
least the first three weeks. I've only the last week or so begun
pushing for temporary muscle failure--and then not every visit, nor
on every machine. And only last Saturday started HIIT (to 90% of
est. MHR), once a week, on the aerobic/cardio equipment. I'm also
wearing a heart-rate monitor, which I keep a fairly close eye on
even when doing strength training, and I'm paying very close
attention to what my body's telling me.

I figure putting myself in the hospital, or worse, trying to get
fit would put a serious crimp in my workout schedule .

Oh, by the way, for the OP: I've only lost a couple pounds in the
last month, it's true. But I'm pushing much more weight on most of
the machines, had to let my watch-band out a notch, had to take my
belt *in* a notch, and am starting to see some muscle definition I
haven't seen in a long, long time. That means that, despite what you
might *think* to be relatively light workouts, I've dumped an
appreciable amount of fat and gained a not insignificant amount of
muscle mass. My resting heart rate is down by at least 5-10 bpm,
too.

--
Jim Seymour | "It is wrong always, everywhere and
WARNING: The "From:" address is a | for everyone to believe anything upon
spam trap. DON'T USE IT! Use: | insufficient evidence."
jseymour.DeleteThis@LinxNet.com | - W. K. Clifford, ca. 1876
 >> Stay informed about: HIT and Fat Loss at the same time 

"Jay" <jw66.RemoveThis@swbell.net> wrote in
news:YEE4e.2119$3z3.475@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com:

> "Hugh Beyer" <beyerxyzzy.RemoveThis@acm.org> wrote in message
> news:Xns962FAA1FD5CAAhughrbeyeracmorg@130.81.64.196...
>> "Jay" <jpw646.RemoveThis@swbell.net> wrote in news:n9C4e.8225$c76.330
>> @newssvr11.news.prodigy.com:
>>
>>> "Hugh Beyer" <beyerxyzzy.RemoveThis@acm.org> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns962F9E04EEDCAhughrbeyeracmorg@130.81.64.196...
>>>> "Jay" <jpw646.RemoveThis@swbell.net> wrote in news:MjB4e.1893$3z3.9
>>>> @newssvr12.news.prodigy.com:
>>>>
>>>>> "Hugh Beyer" <beyerxyzzy.RemoveThis@acm.org> wrote in message
>>>>> news:Xns962F8796DED9hughrbeyeracmorg@130.81.64.196...
>>>>>> rwk.RemoveThis@LinxNet.com (Runs With Knives) wrote in news:1155hn2dgag3895
>>>>>> @corp.supernews.com:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>> <1112685726.422553.313090.RemoveThis@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
>>>>>>> "Fuzz141" <fuzz141.RemoveThis@yahoo.com> writes:
>>>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is it better for someone who has 35%+ body fat to lift weights,
>>>>>>>> or just concentrate on cardio at first? I've read conflicting
>>>>>>>> views.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My *very* amateur opinion is that, assuming your BF% is indicative
>>>>>>> of your over-all fitness, you'd best be served by first getting a
>>>>>>> thorough physical--incl. a heart stress test, at least.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'd like to use the HIT method of
>>>>>>>> weight training -
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why? Are you planning on professional or amateur athletics?
>>>>>>> Don't get me wrong: If HIT is what you really think you want to
>>>>>>> do, don't let *me* discourage you. But don't think you have to do
>>>>>>> HIT to get in shape or stay in shape. Most of all: Don't make the
>>>>>>> mistake of thinking "I'll just get really, really intense, work
>>>>>>> the fat off, then I can coast."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - should I wait
>>>>>>>> until
>>>>>>>> I'm closer to 15%?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think you should wait until the results of that thorough
>>>>>>> physical and then work up to HIT.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Btw: I was measured at 25% BF just a month ago. I'm sure it's
>>>>>>> already much lower. I started HIIT last Saturday--after about a
>>>>>>> month of slowly ramped-up strength training and aerobic/cardio
>>>>>>> thrice a week. I'll be doing HIIT once a week from here, out.
>>>>>>> *But*, I've been doing light toning and stretching exercises for
>>>>>>> two years. Been walking 1/4 to 1/2 mile per day for the same
>>>>>>> period. Plus summer yard work (incl. push-mowing) and winter
>>>>>>> snow-shoveling.
>>>>>>> I had a thorough physical before embarking on my intensified
>>>>>>> program, incl. heart stress test, heart valve sonogram, and leg BP
>>>>>>> and sonogram tests.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks in advance!!!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You're welcome. Good luck.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What JC said.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HIT is not HIIT.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HIT is not HST.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HIT is dead stupid for a beginner at 35% BF.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HIIT is dead stupid for a beginner at 35% BF.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HST isn't dead stupid but is unnecessary for someone at 35% BF.
>>>>>
>>>>> Expand on that please
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> All of it, or just the last point?
>>>>
>>>> Hugh
>>>
>>> HST isn't dead stupid but is unnecessary for someone at 35% BF.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Really "a beginner at 35% BF" but those two probably go together.
>>
>> The OP needs a basic program that will maintain or increase muscle
>> while he diets off the weight. He'll do fine with a basic whole-body
>> routine 3x week, not going to failure, increasing weights when he feels
>> like he can without pushing the envelope. JC pointed to a couple of
>> such routines at the stumptuous URL.
>>
>> HST is a complicated system of progression which requires that you
>> figure out your maxes ahead of time. That's already problematic for a
>> beginner, and they aren't going to stay the same anyway. Then HST has
>> you push up to your max over two weeks, which a beginner doesn't need
>> to do. HST also wants you to choose a set of exercises, which a
>> beginner doesn't have any criteria for. It's all overkill.
>>
>> Hugh
> HST doesn't have to be as complex as it is made out be. As a beginner,
> saying to hell with max testing, picking out complex multi joint
> exercise and progressing as the movement is learned will be as easy a
> routine to follow as any. There is no magic in using exactly 15 reps.
> Why not use a routine such as:
> Squats or Deadlift
> leg curl or leg extention
> bench
> overhead press
> row
> pulldown until chins can be done
> lateral raise
> curl
> dip
> those last two optional.
> Doing reps in good form, terminating sets when form drops. Eating a sub
> caloric nutritous diet.
> As this person progresses, hypertrophy will occur, with the frequency
> helping learn the movements. Would I do negatives? no. I would keep
> adding weight slowly, and when a top is reached where weight increase
> could not reasonably done, I would step back two or three notches and
> slowly progress again. With a third top, I would use the strategic
> deconditioning time as it is intended, but use a longer duration aerobic
> exercise in the interim.
>
> HST is solid, the numerical calculations are not as necessary as people
> get so neurotic about. Better than no foundation in my humple opinion.
>
> Now I am going back to super slow session, lol
>
>

Nothing wrong with what you're outlining but it idn't HST, it's a fairly
standard basic routine. HST has a whole bunch of careful thinking behind
it and if you depart too far from the parameters you're not doing HST
anymore.

Hugh


--
Experience keeps a dear school, but fools will attend no other.
 >> Stay informed about: HIT and Fat Loss at the same time 

Hugh Beyer <beyerxyzzy DeleteThis @acm.org> sigged:

> Experience keeps a dear school, but fools will attend no other.

Nice!
 >> Stay informed about: HIT and Fat Loss at the same time