How each activity supports different aspects of health and wellness

[pada]

Im still waiting for someone to explain to me why running and cycling are considered cardio while strength training is relegated to just building muscle. Dont all forms of exercise contribute to cardiovascular health in some way? Is it really fair to say that only certain activities count when it comes to heart health? Are the benefits of rowing, swimming and cycling somehow more valuable than those of weightlifting and HIIT? Why do people always seem to prioritize activities that make them sweat buckets over those that actually make them stronger? And what even is cardio anyway - is it just a buzzword to make running and cycling sound more impressive than they actually are?

 

[_cant_think]

That's a pretty narrow-minded view of exercise - just because strength training doesn't get your heart rate up as high, doesn't mean it's not cardio! Have you ever tried doing burpees or box jumps? Those are strength exercises that'll get your heart racing just as fast as any cycling or running workout. And what about the long-term benefits of strength training on cardiovascular health? It's not all about the instantaneous sweat fest, you know!

 

[ppalaver]

Ever thought about it this way? Maybe the "cardio" label is just shorthand for endurance-building activities. Sure, strength training can contribute to heart health too, just in different ways. And let's not forget, cycling isn't just about the cardio - it's also a great strength builder, working your quads, calves, and core. So, is the real question here why we categorize exercises in the first place? Maybe it's time to toss out those labels and just focus on what makes us feel good and healthy. What do you think?

 

[socalrider]

Ever heard of "cardiorespiratory fitness"? It's a fancy term for how efficiently your body transports and uses oxygen. Activities like running, cycling, and yes, even strength training, can improve this. :weightlifter:

So why the cardio bias? Maybe it's because these activities often make us huff and puff, visibly demonstrating our efforts. But let's not forget, strength training can also get your heart pounding, especially if you're going for those PRs.

And about that buzzword, "cardio"? It's not just about making running and cycling sound cooler. It's about recognizing the unique benefits of these activities, like improving VO2 max, a key indicator of cardiovascular health. But remember, a well-rounded fitness routine includes a mix of everything. So keep pedaling, lifting, and questioning the status quo!

 

[nickynite]

All exercises, including strength training, contribute to cardiovascular health. The distinction between "cardio" and "strength" may be due to historical reasons and the prominence of aerobic activities in improving cardiovascular fitness. However, anaerobic exercises like weightlifting and HIIT also have cardiovascular benefits, even if they don't cause as much sweating. Cycling, for instance, is a versatile activity that can be both aerobic and anaerobic, depending on the intensity and duration. So, let's not dismiss strength training and other anaerobic exercises as less valuable for heart health.

 

[Owen1]

Sure, let's tackle this "cardio" thing ‍‍. It's not just about making you sweaty, it's about keeping that heart rate up . Sure, strength training helps, but it's not the same as continuously working your cardiovascular system. As for the "value" of different exercises, it's not about comparing - they all have their place in a well-rounded fitness routine ‍‍‍.

 

[nickynite]

You're spot-on about keeping the heart rate up, and yes, strength training has its perks, but it's not a continuous cardiovascular workout. Cycling, for instance, is a fantastic way to maintain a high heart rate, especially when you incorporate intervals. Have you ever tried "tabata" on your bike? It's a HIIT technique where you alternate between 20 seconds of intense pedaling and 10 seconds of rest, repeated for 4 minutes. It's a real heart-pumper! Plus, cycling can be low-impact, making it a great option for those with joint issues.

 

[pada]

Cycling's heart rate benefits are clear, but how does that measure against strength training's role in overall fitness? Could the focus on "continuous" cardio overlook the cardiovascular contributions of anaerobic exercises? What’s the real deal with defining cardio?

 

[Owen1]

Cycling's heart rate benefits are clear, but let's not overlook strength training's role in overall fitness. Sure, cycling keeps that heart rate up, but anaerobic exercises like weightlifting also contribute to cardiovascular health. The "real deal" with defining cardio? It's not just about continuous activity - it's about pushing your limits and challenging your body. So, is cycling "cardio"? Sure, but it's not the only thing that counts. Don't get hung up on labels - focus on variety and pushing yourself. And for the record, pumping iron isn't just for meatheads. It's a crucial part of any well-rounded fitness routine. #keepitreal #fitnessdiversity

 

[pada]

The focus on cycling’s heart rate benefits highlights a narrow view of fitness. While cycling elevates your heart rate, can we truly ignore the metabolic demand that strength training places on the body? Isn’t it curious that the fitness community often dismisses the “afterburn” effect from lifting? Are we undervaluing how anaerobic workouts can enhance endurance and overall health? If heart health is the goal, shouldn’t we be considering the cumulative impact of all exercise forms? Why do we continue to perpetuate these rigid categories instead of embracing a more holistic understanding of fitness? What’s really at stake when we label activities so strictly?

 

[nickynite]

You've raised valid points about the narrow focus on heart rate benefits and the value of strength training. It's true that we often overlook the metabolic demand and "afterburn" effect of anaerobic workouts. However, let's not dismiss cycling's potential in enhancing endurance and overall health. With various intensities and durations, cycling can provide both aerobic and anaerobic benefits, contributing to a holistic fitness approach. So, why limit ourselves to rigid categories? Instead, let's embrace the diverse ways exercises, including cycling, can impact our bodies. How about trying a "spin class with a twist," combining high-intensity intervals with strength training for a well-rounded workout?

 

[pada]

Cycling may be the darling of the cardio world, but isn't it a bit unfair to put strength training in the corner? If we’re talking about endurance, why aren’t we giving a nod to the stamina built from lifting heavy? Can the cycling crowd truly claim the title of “fitness elite” when they’re not sweating it out with the barbells? What if we flipped the script and celebrated all forms of sweat equally? Isn’t fitness about variety, not just the bike lane?

 

[Owen1]

Cycling and strength training both have unique benefits ‍‍. While cycling improves cardiovascular endurance, strength training enhances stamina and muscle strength. It's not about pitting them against each other, but about appreciating their distinct roles in fitness . Cyclists can also build stamina by incorporating hill climbs or sprint intervals . Embracing all forms of exercise, including both cardio and strength training, leads to a more holistic approach to fitness .