According to researchers one minutes of “very intense exercise” on a daily basis can be equivalent to “45 minutes of traditional endurance training”. The findings eradicate the time factor for exercising in a busy sedentary life. Professor of Kinesiology, Martin Gibala, from Canada’s McMaster University, is the lead researcher, who says:
"This is a very time-efficient workout strategy”.
"Brief bursts of intense exercise are remarkably effective”.
The study sought to compare “sprint interval training” with “moderate-intensity continuous training”. The latter is in accord with the “public health guidelines”. The comparison was made on the basis of measuring “cardio-respiratory fitness” and the “insulin sensitivity”.
Twenty seven men subject who led a sedentary life were asked to “perform three weekly sessions of either intense or moderate training” for a period of twelve weeks. The protocols of SIT consisted of “three 20-second 'all-out' cycle sprints” which turned out to be effective in promoting fitness level.
The entire duration of workout, inclusive of two-minute warm-up and three-minute cool down” session lasted for ten minutes. Moreover the curriculum also involved a “two minutes of easy cycling for recovery between the hard sprints”.
The data collected from people performing SIT protocols were compared to a group of subjects who practiced “45 minutes of continuous cycling at a moderate pace, plus the same warm-up and cool down”. At the end of the twelve weeks time frame, the results acquired from both the pools turned out to be “remarkably similar”. Moreover, Gibala added:
"Most people cite 'lack of time' as the main reason for not being active”.
"Our study shows that an interval-based approach can be more efficient -- you can get health and fitness benefits comparable to the traditional approach, in less time”.
References:
http://www.firstpost.com/
"This is a very time-efficient workout strategy”.
"Brief bursts of intense exercise are remarkably effective”.
The study sought to compare “sprint interval training” with “moderate-intensity continuous training”. The latter is in accord with the “public health guidelines”. The comparison was made on the basis of measuring “cardio-respiratory fitness” and the “insulin sensitivity”.
Twenty seven men subject who led a sedentary life were asked to “perform three weekly sessions of either intense or moderate training” for a period of twelve weeks. The protocols of SIT consisted of “three 20-second 'all-out' cycle sprints” which turned out to be effective in promoting fitness level.
The entire duration of workout, inclusive of two-minute warm-up and three-minute cool down” session lasted for ten minutes. Moreover the curriculum also involved a “two minutes of easy cycling for recovery between the hard sprints”.
The data collected from people performing SIT protocols were compared to a group of subjects who practiced “45 minutes of continuous cycling at a moderate pace, plus the same warm-up and cool down”. At the end of the twelve weeks time frame, the results acquired from both the pools turned out to be “remarkably similar”. Moreover, Gibala added:
"Most people cite 'lack of time' as the main reason for not being active”.
"Our study shows that an interval-based approach can be more efficient -- you can get health and fitness benefits comparable to the traditional approach, in less time”.
References:
http://www.firstpost.com/
