Adarq.org

Flies in the face of everything you might think you know about training. The pervasive myth behind HIIT is that a diet of low reps, low volume, heavy weighs and nothing else is sufficient to get one strong, lean, fast, big etc. I think it's taken for granted here and elsewhere that anaerobic activity is superior to aerobic, that aerobic work detracts from strength, speed, power etc.

Here is an ebooklet that contradicts this idea -

http://anthonymychal.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/TheMythofHIIT.pdf

thoughts?

rely brosefs.. i don't see anyone logging road work or even talking about it anywhere on the forum. not saying people don't do it, or abide by aerobic work just don't see it being stressed or emphasised much.

if you were are talking about the aerobic/anaerobic tradoff well yea it's overstated because no one wants to look or perform like a marathon runner right?

I probably run about 10 miles a week just due to rugby training/games. If you were going for strength/speed/poweretc. I don't think aerobic activity would be the best way to go.
Look at American football V Rugby. American football is like an anaerobic game and the athletes are heaps stronger, faster and powerful than rugby players. The only thing rugby players have over American football players is endurance.
Same as you look at basketball and soccer players. You'd expect them to be ripped or whatever because they do soo much cardio but they have even more fat than rugby backs and most american football players. You could argue that they don't need muscle because they're not playing a contact sport but than you'd think they'd be ripped but most of them are just skinnyfat.

Most basketball and soccer players are skinny-fat? Good grief, maybe recreational 30 year olds, the majority of professional bball and soccer players are ripped as fuck 6%BF, they just don't have the extra 40lbs of muscle that football players do.

Please summarize for us why the author thinks that you can build strength better with high reps as opposed to low reps.

The author doesn't argue that anywhere.

Here is what he does claim ..  comments in parenthesis mine not the authors

Why HIIT makes you less explosive (doing HIIT means working at a lower intensity, and since it's further from maximal attempts it wont make you more explosive)
● Why aerobic doesn’t equal long distance runs (you can do 20-30 min aerobic workouts that give most of the aerobic benefits)
● Why aerobic training doesn’t take hours (see above)
● Why HIIT is a bad way to burn calories (workouts too  brief, not much work is done, EPOC is neglible)
● Why EPOC is overblown (see above)
● Why HIIT isn’t more “natural” (caveman/hunter argument, meh, neither here nor there)
● Why aerobic training is natural (see above)
● Why aerobic work makes you look like a sprinter, not a marathon runner (sprinters actually end up doing a lot of aerobic work in their training as well as the maximal stuff)
● Why HIIT doesn’t burn more fat (calories burnt less than from a good aerobic session)

 Some of those points are good in that article.  He seems to be an evosport (schroeder) guy as I saw his ldiso articles as well, so dont be close minded to everything he says, but also take some things with a grain of salt.

http://jap.physiology.org/content/98/6/1985.longthis guy, and everyone for that matter, needs to read this paper start to finish http://www.hindawi.com/journals/jobes/2011/868305/

FIrst sentence is pretty funny, perhaps a bit extreme for a journal article but oh well.

According to this review, calories are nonsensical, they have nothing to do with this bullshit, whatsoever. EPOC is NOT the main reason HIIT burns more fat than aerobic training. It's probably a hormonal effect (GH and epinephrine and cortisol). Tremblay (cited in the first paragrph under HIIE and fat loss - http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0026049594902593) a 9-fold rate of fat loss per calorie burned. That article was published 18 years ago, so I don't know what these professors are reading. I also have no idea what protocol tremblay used.

Myth 11:
I think he just made up his book. Thankfully it's free and uncopyright because it is of very poor quality. We all very well know that hiit is supposed to burn way less calories..


The last part about stress though is the most important. HIIT fails to increase vagal tone after the exercise bout. I'm not sure what the chronic effects are though.