# New study shows pre breakfast fasted cardio to burn more fat



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

A recent study showed that cardio performed fasted in the morning compared to cardio performed after a meal utilized 20% more fat....

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130124091425.htm


----------



## onthebuild (Sep 3, 2011)

Pscarb said:


> A recent study showed that cardio performed fasted in the morning compared to cardio performed after a meal utilized 20% more fat....
> 
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130124091425.htm





> They also found that those who had exercised in a fasted state burned almost 20% more fat compared to those who had consumed breakfast before their workout. This means that performing exercise on an empty stomach provides the most desirable outcome for fat loss.


How did they measure the fat that was burned to get that percentage? Was it simply weight lost, which could be lost water weight, muscle or fat?

Or did they use a method of measuring overall fat at the start/finish of the experiment? If so how accurate are the methods of measuring fat?

I feel sceptical that fasted cardio can lead to a 20% increase in burning fat, it seems like a huge percentage!


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

onthebuild said:


> How did they measure the fat that was burned to get that percentage? Was it simply weight lost, which could be lost water weight, muscle or fat?
> 
> Or did they use a method of measuring overall fat at the start/finish of the experiment? If so how accurate are the methods of measuring fat?
> 
> I feel sceptical that fasted cardio can lead to a 20% increase in burning fat, it seems like a huge percentage!


not if the total amount burned on the non fasted it 1lb as 20% of 1lb is not a lot at all.

the point being is that there are studies out there to show there is no difference at all this recent one indicates this not to be true


----------



## JANIKvonD (Jul 7, 2011)

pmsl


----------



## onthebuild (Sep 3, 2011)

Pscarb said:


> not if the total amount burned on the non fasted it 1lb as 20% of 1lb is not a lot at all.
> 
> the point being is that there are studies out there to show there is no difference at all this recent one indicates this not to be true


True, didnt think of it in those terms, but still over a period of months that 20% still adds up.

Would be interesting for someone to take this a step further and compare a fasted cardio group, with unfasted, a control group with no exercise whatsoever but the same diet as all other groups, and possibly a group who exercise last thing at night after all food is consumed.


----------



## ulster_timbo (Jan 6, 2011)

Pscarb said:


> A recent study showed that cardio performed fasted in the morning compared to cardio performed after a meal utilized 20% more fat....
> 
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130124091425.htm


Should I assume this should be steady state only? As I have ready so many times about how "stupid" you would be to do HIIT cardio in a fasted state???


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

ulster_timbo said:


> Should I assume this should be steady state only? As I have ready so many times about how "stupid" you would be to do HIIT cardio in a fasted state???


certainly is not stupid to do HIIT cardio in the morning fasted.


----------



## ulster_timbo (Jan 6, 2011)

Pscarb said:


> certainly is not stupid to do HIIT cardio in the morning fasted.


There is so much conflicting articles and studies on the internet. Its hard to work out which to follow. So many times Iv read that

due to the high intensity of HIIT and in a fasted state would end up putting you in a catabolic state?

So most of it is bro science then??


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

ulster_timbo said:


> There is so much conflicting articles and studies on the internet. Its hard to work out which to follow. So many times Iv read that
> 
> due to the high intensity of HIIT and in a fasted state would end up putting you in a catabolic state?
> 
> So most of it is bro science then??


studies are not Bro science but you need to take a study and apply it to yourself as no one will be able to find a report that duplicates there system/lifestyle....

i did HIIT at the 6 week out mark on my run into the NABBA Universe last year and i was 5lbs heavier than my NABBA British showing 6months earlier where i did not use HIIT


----------



## dtlv (Jul 24, 2009)

ulster_timbo said:


> There is so much conflicting articles and studies on the internet. Its hard to work out which to follow. So many times Iv read that
> 
> due to the high intensity of HIIT and in a fasted state would end up putting you in a catabolic state?
> 
> So most of it is bro science then??


HIIT fasted won't be catabolic to muscle provided you consume enough protein and energy over 24hours... it will of course be catabolic to fat stores but that's what you want 

It does appear that as cardio intensity increases there reaches a point where the total 24hr fat burning advantage (fat kcals burned from the session plus effects upon metabolic rate) switches from being best when training fasted to when training fed, but this level of intensity will likely differ for each person depending upon their level of fitness, the kind of meal eaten beforehand (it has to be a fairly light meal of protein and carbs to boost metabolism, not a large or fatty meal), and perhaps even the specific exercise type... and after all that the difference isn't very large.

Considering Paul has been doing this game for ages, I'd assume his fitness is very good so likely there would be no advantage to him training even fairly high intensity when fed... for a couch potato the opposite may be true however.


----------



## User Name (Aug 19, 2012)

I don't believe in studies any more. There are far too many of them - and more often than not they conflict with a previous study.


----------



## str4nger (Jul 17, 2012)

I do 30-40 mins ssc fasted but I drink a bcaa drink which works for me


----------



## AlwaysANewb (Dec 2, 2012)

str4nger said:


> I do 30-40 mins ssc fasted but I drink a bcaa drink which works for me


I'm the same, 10g BCAA to minimise risk of muscle catabolism.


----------



## Tinytom (Sep 16, 2005)

I've always done my comp cardio fasted. I prefer to have a little glutamine and bcaa though so not truly fasted I suppose.


----------



## Nickthegreek (Jan 27, 2011)

Tinytom said:


> I've always done my comp cardio fasted. I prefer to have a little glutamine and bcaa though so not truly fasted I suppose.


Exactly what i do, have approx 10 g glutamin and 7-8 g bcaa, 2 g l carnitine , 2 g green tea extract and off i go. Normally do it as moderate intensity intervals for between 30-40 minutes . Whether or not a study proves or disproves this all i know is that it works for me. I can see it on the scale and in the mirror.


----------



## ksrcrider (Feb 20, 2013)

Umm.. its been proven several times that running first thing in the morning on a empty stomach isnt really beneficial at all.. While there may be benefits to exercising on empty, there are also certain risks. After about 30 minutes of running on an empty stomach, your body will turn catabolic, tapping your precious muscles for fuel instead of fat reserves. This can lead to overexertion and dehydration. Other risks from running on an empty stomach include dizziness from low blood sugar or an increased chance of injury from the lack of nutrients in the body.

You may burn a higher percentage of body fat when you run on empty, but your training capabilities will be decreased because of lack of food. You won't have the same stamina, strength and endurance, leading to a slower, shortened run that burns fewer calories overall. In addition, the low blood sugar you experience may cause you to eat more after your run than you would otherwise.


----------



## Tinytom (Sep 16, 2005)

ksrcrider said:


> Umm.. its been proven several times that running first thing in the morning on a empty stomach isnt really beneficial at all.. While there may be benefits to exercising on empty, there are also certain risks. After about 30 minutes of running on an empty stomach, your body will turn catabolic, tapping your precious muscles for fuel instead of fat reserves. This can lead to overexertion and dehydration. Other risks from running on an empty stomach include dizziness from low blood sugar or an increased chance of injury from the lack of nutrients in the body.
> 
> You may burn a higher percentage of body fat when you run on empty, but your training capabilities will be decreased because of lack of food. You won't have the same stamina, strength and endurance, leading to a slower, shortened run that burns fewer calories overall. In addition, the low blood sugar you experience may cause you to eat more after your run than you would otherwise.


Not been proven categorically.

All those things you say are not true as fact only as possible risks.

You are correct that a long session would not be more beneficial but gluconeogenisis would be minimal if at all under 45 minutes in duration.

Muscle catabolism is not proven in fasted cardio under an hour in duration. Most bbers would only do 30-45 minutes fasted cardio and if its HIT this would be under 30 minutes.

As has also been said a combo of 5g glutamine and 5g BCAA would prevent catabolism.


----------



## C.Hill (Nov 21, 2010)

ksrcrider said:


> Umm.. its been proven several times that running first thing in the morning on a empty stomach isnt really beneficial at all.. While there may be benefits to exercising on empty, there are also certain risks. After about 30 minutes of running on an empty stomach, your body will turn catabolic, tapping your precious muscles for fuel instead of fat reserves. This can lead to overexertion and dehydration. Other risks from running on an empty stomach include dizziness from low blood sugar or an increased chance of injury from the lack of nutrients in the body.
> 
> You may burn a higher percentage of body fat when you run on empty, but your training capabilities will be decreased because of lack of food. You won't have the same stamina, strength and endurance, leading to a slower, shortened run that burns fewer calories overall. In addition, the low blood sugar you experience may cause you to eat more after your run than you would otherwise.


Where has it been proven mate? Any links to studies?


----------



## ksrcrider (Feb 20, 2013)

http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_article/sports_body_training_performance_interviews/the_fasted_cardio_roundtable


----------



## MRSTRONG (Apr 18, 2009)

onthebuild said:



> How did they measure the fat that was burned to get that percentage? Was it simply weight lost, which could be lost water weight, muscle or fat?
> 
> Or did they use a method of measuring overall fat at the start/finish of the experiment? If so how accurate are the methods of measuring fat?
> 
> I feel sceptical that fasted cardio can lead to a 20% increase in burning fat, it seems like a huge percentage!


the took samples of blood and spun them til the blood and fat seperated leaving the fat at the top , i`ll try find the link .


----------



## MRSTRONG (Apr 18, 2009)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01cywtq


----------



## WilsonR6 (Feb 14, 2012)

How long does fasted cardio is too long? I've been doing fasted 50 lengths which takes me about an hour, if not longer.. too long;


----------



## Mark2021 (Apr 13, 2012)

I should really start doing cardio...


----------



## Tom90 (Jan 29, 2010)

Would you count the calories burnt from fasted cardio, and take it away from calories consumed on that day?

Like if I'd eaten 3000 calories and burnt 250, would that mean my total calories for the day would be 2750, or would it make no difference to the 3000 because essentially I've not burnt off any calories from food consumed that day...


----------



## ksrcrider (Feb 20, 2013)

Whatever calories you eat, is what you eat.. If it worked like that then the "Well if i exercise, then i can eat whatever i want to eat" would be true..


----------



## Tinytom (Sep 16, 2005)

Tom90 said:


> Would you count the calories burnt from fasted cardio, and take it away from calories consumed on that day?
> 
> Like if I'd eaten 3000 calories and burnt 250, would that mean my total calories for the day would be 2750, or would it make no difference to the 3000 because essentially I've not burnt off any calories from food consumed that day...


No it doesn't work like that. For example most adults burn around 1900 calories a day just living. So if you burn an extra 600 calories from training you're up to the RDA for calories. However most people don't just sit around all day they have a job and that burns more calories. So if you are training hard you can eat over 3000 calories a day and not gain too much weight. May actually keep lean depending on your training.

However the types of food you eat will affect insulin levels which in turn affects how the body uses energy. If insulin levels are constantly high from high carb consumption it's unlikely you will ever burn fat. So if you ate haribo all day and trained its likely you'd not lose weight however eating a low carb 3000 calorie diet comprised of low carbs high protein and moderate fats will aid fat burning.


----------



## saxondale (Nov 11, 2012)

ksrcrider said:


> Umm.. its been proven several times that running first thing in the morning on a empty stomach isnt really beneficial at all.. While there may be benefits to exercising on empty, there are also certain risks. After about 30 minutes of running on an empty stomach, your body will turn catabolic, tapping your precious muscles for fuel instead of fat reserves. This can lead to overexertion and dehydration. Other risks from running on an empty stomach include dizziness from low blood sugar or an increased chance of injury from the lack of nutrients in the body.
> 
> You may burn a higher percentage of body fat when you run on empty, but your training capabilities will be decreased because of lack of food. You won't have the same stamina, strength and endurance, leading to a slower, shortened run that burns fewer calories overall. In addition, the low blood sugar you experience may cause you to eat more after your run than you would otherwise.


not how it works for me - I can only run fasted.

There are numerous studies show that you`ll not experience catabolism in anything but the most extreme circumstances.


----------



## Tom90 (Jan 29, 2010)

Tinytom said:


> No it doesn't work like that. For example most adults burn around 1900 calories a day just living. So if you burn an extra 600 calories from training you're up to the RDA for calories. However most people don't just sit around all day they have a job and that burns more calories. So if you are training hard you can eat over 3000 calories a day and not gain too much weight. May actually keep lean depending on your training.
> 
> However the types of food you eat will affect insulin levels which in turn affects how the body uses energy. If insulin levels are constantly high from high carb consumption it's unlikely you will ever burn fat. So if you ate haribo all day and trained its likely you'd not lose weight however eating a low carb 3000 calorie diet comprised of low carbs high protein and moderate fats will aid fat burning.


So would you recommend cycling carbs and fats, depending on if it's a rest or training day?


----------



## Tinytom (Sep 16, 2005)

Tom90 said:


> So would you recommend cycling carbs and fats, depending on if it's a rest or training day?


Yes there's an article I wrote on here called 'losing weight and gaining muscle' some ideas there but it's a few years old now.


----------



## TommyFire (Jul 18, 2010)

ksrcrider said:


> http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_article/sports_body_training_performance_interviews/the_fasted_cardio_roundtable


Lol!

Great study mate!


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

ksrcrider said:


> http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_article/sports_body_training_performance_interviews/the_fasted_cardio_roundtable


I just read this and although it is very interesting debate I fail to see where it proves your statement concerning running or the 30min mark for going catabolic. If you can point it out that would be great.


----------



## ksrcrider (Feb 20, 2013)

I think long story short here is that it all depends on the person.. One person might great amazing benefits, while the other wont get any at all.. Also is the person taking supplements, is their diet good etc.. Everything plays a factors in it. If they did a study on say 100,000 people told half to do cardio on empty stomach and the other half 30min or an hour after they ate. Im sure the results would be all over the place... you look at these studies and their doing it with 100 people. 100 people more then lucky have a better chance on getting a 50/50 results.. Who knows if the people who did these studies are telling the truth 100%..


----------



## onthebuild (Sep 3, 2011)

ksrcrider said:


> I think long story short here is that it all depends on the person.. One person might great amazing benefits, while the other wont get any at all.. Also is the person taking supplements, is their diet good etc.. Everything plays a factors in it. If they did a study on say 100,000 people told half to do cardio on empty stomach and the other half 30min or an hour after they ate. Im sure the results would be all over the place... you look at these studies and their doing it with 100 people. 100 people more then lucky have a better chance on getting a 50/50 results.. Who knows if the people who did these studies are telling the truth 100%..


Got to disagree here mate. 50% is half the sample size regardless of whether the sample size is 100, 100000 or 1000000000.


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

ksrcrider said:


> I think long story short here is that it all depends on the person.. One person might great amazing benefits, while the other wont get any at all.. Also is the person taking supplements, is their diet good etc.. Everything plays a factors in it. If they did a study on say 100,000 people told half to do cardio on empty stomach and the other half 30min or an hour after they ate. Im sure the results would be all over the place... you look at these studies and their doing it with 100 people. 100 people more then lucky have a better chance on getting a 50/50 results.. Who knows if the people who did these studies are telling the truth 100%..


Could you answer my post above please mate


----------



## Tinytom (Sep 16, 2005)

ksrcrider said:


> I think long story short here is that it all depends on the person.. One person might great amazing benefits, while the other wont get any at all.. Also is the person taking supplements, is their diet good etc.. Everything plays a factors in it. If they did a study on say 100,000 people told half to do cardio on empty stomach and the other half 30min or an hour after they ate. Im sure the results would be all over the place... you look at these studies and their doing it with 100 people. 100 people more then lucky have a better chance on getting a 50/50 results.. Who knows if the people who did these studies are telling the truth 100%..


To be fair mate you can't say that 'studies prove this' then when you're questioned say 'studies don't mean anything' which is essentially what you've done.


----------



## saxondale (Nov 11, 2012)

ksrcrider said:


> I think long story short here is that it all depends on the person.. One person might great amazing benefits, while the other wont get any at all.. Also is the person taking supplements, is their diet good etc.. Everything plays a factors in it. If they did a study on say 100,000 people told half to do cardio on empty stomach and the other half 30min or an hour after they ate. Im sure the results would be all over the place... you look at these studies and their doing it with 100 people. 100 people more then lucky have a better chance on getting a 50/50 results.. Who knows if the people who did these studies are telling the truth 100%..


I keep referring to countless US army studies that take two sets of recruits and deliberately set out to starve, over feed, over run or under exercise one set - the results are the same every time.


----------



## ksrcrider (Feb 20, 2013)

If any of you guys are familiar with Layne Norton. Sprung from another thread, here is Layne's piece on why fasted (empty stomach) cardio is not as benefical- and may be worse- than fed cardio:

A new article on fasted cardio appearing in the Strength and Conditioning Journal by Brad Schoenfeld, MSc, CSCS

I put the full text below for those who are interested. For those that are lazy to read the whole thing here are the cliffs:

-research has shown no difference in total fat loss between subjects doing fasted cardio and those doing cardio after eating.

-fat burning consists of 1) liberating fatty acids from adipose tissue through lipolysis and then transport of those fatty acids to other tissues like muscle, liver, heart where they are then 2) oxidized for energy. When you eat before cardio you reduce lipolysis but it ends up not making a difference because lipolysis is NOT the rate limiting step of fat loss when it comes to cardio, it is oxidation that is rate limiting so you end up oxidizing the same amount

-you may burn MORE fat over a 24 hour period when you eat beforehand because there is a GREATER thermogenic response to cardio as opposed to eating fasted

-Lemon et al. demonstrated nitrogen losses were DOUBLED when you train fasted. Fantastic for maintaining muscle in a caloric deficit... NOT

-not eating before cardio will reduce training intensity and means you will burn less calories during cardio because you won't have as much energy.


----------



## Tinytom (Sep 16, 2005)

I'm sure if I looked I could find an article to contradict that.

If you ate carbs before cardio this would raise insulin levels and blunt Gh output.

So I don't buy into the eating before cardio theory. Thousands of bbers train fasted. They can't all be wrong.

There's plenty of anecdotal and also my own experience that fasted cardio does aid fat burning.

Agree there's lots of opinions but you seem to only accept one view as correct.


----------



## ksrcrider (Feb 20, 2013)

I'm no doctor but I trust a lot from what Dr. layne Norton has to say..


----------



## ksrcrider (Feb 20, 2013)

http://www.biolayne.com/ he has a lot of good blogs to watch, also has a podcast radio


----------



## tyramhall (Dec 28, 2011)

Intrresting debate. I have no studies to bring to the table only my own experience. Ive tried both over the last 14 months and can honestly say that i never noticed that much difference in weightloss whether it was fasted or not. I prefer the fasted state cardio purely because it made me feel leaner than if i had eaten first and that was enough of a boost to keep me motivated.

What might work for me clearly may not work for somebody else. I think that what studies show now will no doubt be proved incorrect in the future and vice versa. Its purely trial and error for everybody.


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

ksrcrider said:


> I'm no doctor but I trust a lot from what Dr. layne Norton has to say..


now please answer my question a few posts above....


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

ksrcrider said:


> If any of you guys are familiar with Layne Norton. Sprung from another thread, here is Layne's piece on why fasted (empty stomach) cardio is not as benefical- and may be worse- than fed cardio:
> 
> A new article on fasted cardio appearing in the Strength and Conditioning Journal by Brad Schoenfeld, MSc, CSCS
> 
> ...


this is interesting from Layne but this study clearly says there is a difference...



Pscarb said:


> A recent study showed that cardio performed fasted in the morning compared to cardio performed after a meal utilized 20% more fat....
> 
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130124091425.htm


now if you could refer the study Layne talks about please? not his opinion but the study so it can be compared to this one above.......

and when it comes to studies they are evidence not Fact that something works, if you take a study where the subjects where in there 20's and natural the results would not apply to subject not in there 20's and using PED's hence why you need to reference the study, all i see from your posts is copy and paste from others opinions although valid to a degree it is only valid within a set criteria of the subjects involved........so please answer my question above concerning the sweeping statements you made in post number 20 and please put up the link to the actual study to match your claims not to a persons opinion.


----------



## ksrcrider (Feb 20, 2013)

If fasted state cardio could potentially increase fat mobilization, it's also potentially more catabolic to muscle tissue. This is due to an increase in cortisol production during fasted exercise. Since cortisol levels are already high in the morning, this could lead to more muscle wasting than during non-fasted cardio.



Pscarb said:


> I just read this and although it is very interesting debate I fail to see where it proves your statement concerning running or the 30min mark for going catabolic. If you can point it out that would be great.


----------



## ksrcrider (Feb 20, 2013)

Ill try my best to find something



Pscarb said:


> this is interesting from Layne but this study clearly says there is a difference...
> 
> now if you could refer the study Layne talks about please? not his opinion but the study so it can be compared to this one above.......
> 
> and when it comes to studies they are evidence not Fact that something works, if you take a study where the subjects where in there 20's and natural the results would not apply to subject not in there 20's and using PED's hence why you need to reference the study, all i see from your posts is copy and paste from others opinions although valid to a degree it is only valid within a set criteria of the subjects involved........so please answer my question above concerning the sweeping statements you made in post number 20 and please put up the link to the actual study to match your claims not to a persons opinion.


----------



## Bulk1 (Apr 12, 2007)

Tinytom said:


> I've always done my comp cardio fasted. I prefer to have a little glutamine and bcaa though so not truly fasted I suppose.


 ^ this is tried and tested by many top guys, cant see why there are so many studies trying to prove it's right or wrong, when its already working pretty well.

There is a study that if you hop on one leg for 15 minutes before you take a sh!t that you'll reduce overall BF % by fook all.


----------



## ksrcrider (Feb 20, 2013)

lol did you perform that study yourself.. Cause if so, ill start doing it my self and make a log.



Bulk1 said:


> ^ this is tried and tested by many top guys, cant see why there are so many studies trying to prove it's right or wrong, when its already working pretty well.
> 
> There is a study that if you hop on one leg for 15 minutes before you take a sh!t that you'll reduce overall BF % by fook all.


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

ksrcrider said:


> Ill try my best to find something


that is great how about answering my question concerning your claims on the T nation link please


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Bulk1 said:


> ^ this is tried and tested by many top guys, cant see why there are so many studies trying to prove it's right or wrong, when its already working pretty well.
> 
> There is a study that if you hop on one leg for 15 minutes before you take a sh!t that you'll reduce overall BF % by fook all.


studies are great but like you say tried and tested techniques prove methods work for the individual, you need to take a study and apply it to yourself to see if it is relevant, i have been competing for 21yrs and cardio fasted for me is better than cardio with food in my belly what is annoying is when people try to tell you that a study proves what you have seen with your own eyes is wrong although the study is not relevant.....


----------



## ksrcrider (Feb 20, 2013)

http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_article/most_recent/the_ultimate_cardio_solution_disclosed

Ok, so after reading yes it does work from some people and others no.. Being catabolic if cardio is over extended a long period of time.. 30 min not so much.. Sorry if i made a huge ordeal, and probably should read better instead of skimming for something..



Pscarb said:


> studies are great but like you say tried and tested techniques prove methods work for the individual, you need to take a study and apply it to yourself to see if it is relevant, i have been competing for 21yrs and cardio fasted for me is better than cardio with food in my belly what is annoying is when people try to tell you that a study proves what you have seen with your own eyes is wrong although the study is not relevant.....


----------



## andymc88 (Aug 18, 2011)

This might be a stupid question but do these principles apply to natural trainers, will 1 make you loose more muscle than the other, i mean like fasted cardio at a low intensity vs fasted hiit, non fasted hiit or non fasted low intensity cardio


----------



## Cookie-raider (Mar 15, 2013)

can't do it if I don't eat 2 hours or so before hand I throw up


----------



## Jason88 (Mar 24, 2013)

great read an intresting debate, i always find what the mods have to say highly intresting, an wouldnt question them.

Would it be pointless to use fasted cardio in the mornin while bulking? or can it be used for bulking.and cutting?


----------



## phoenix1980 (Apr 27, 2011)

Pscarb said:


> studies are great but like you say tried and tested techniques prove methods work for the individual, you need to take a study and apply it to yourself to see if it is relevant, i have been competing for 21yrs and cardio fasted for me is better than cardio with food in my belly what is annoying is when people try to tell you that a study proves what you have seen with your own eyes is wrong although the study is not relevant.....


I too respond better to fasted cardio, on a side note you look absolutely amazing in your avi!!!!!nohomo


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

phoenix1980 said:


> I too respond better to fasted cardio, on a side note you look absolutely amazing in your avi!!!!!nohomo


thank you buddy


----------



## physique86 (Aug 22, 2014)

to long there mate needs to be under 45 minutes


----------



## AlexB18 (Dec 10, 2013)

Ive always trained and done cardio fasted, well not truly fasted as I sip on 20g BCAA throughout, ive found I respond a lot better from this rather than training having eaten a few meals, dunno how much of a difference it makes to me from a fat loss perspective but energy levels are nice and high when I train this way


----------



## BoomTime (Feb 19, 2009)

Who cares what the percentage of increase is, any % higher is a better thing surely. I have done both fasted and non, and for me fasted cardio is much more effective


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

physique86 said:


> to long there mate needs to be under 45 minutes


Why?


----------

