Diminishing returns on exercise? Best fitness value?

[KarefulKactus15]

Hi,

So I go to the gym 2x a week for 30 minutes and then do cardio after.  Usually alternate between legs and upper body and toss in core like every 3rd exercise.

Not to bore with details, thats not what I want to discuss. . .

So theres a pretty big diminishing returns thing going on with exercise when comparing 1 hour a week vs say.. 10? 

So what do you think is the best TIME/Value in the exercise/fitness world? And it can include things like diet also.     Id like to see what methods you guys think have the highest rate of return for time invested.

[aneel]

Definitely diet is best bang for your buck. Where the investment is all time in the kitchen meal prepping. After that I've found good gains from core based work. But that might be because I'm female and work a sedentary job.

[big_slacker]

What is your goal? Are you TRAINING for a sport, or are you just exercises so you aren't a blob?

Regardless, yes diet is more important for general fitness and you can be reasonably strong and healthy by focusing on 'money' exercises (squats, deadlifts, overhead press, pullups, etc.) and minimizing fluff. 2 hours a week I would consider not enough unless you were supplementing sport specific training. I would say 5 hours a week is about right for the point of diminishing returns.

[AnonymousCoward]

Just this week the government updated their guidelines, and they make a lot of sense. Check them out here. Basically, shoot for five hours a week of activity and work on strength at least twice a week. More is better.

Now onto my own opinions. The most time efficient exercise is the exercise that's a side effect of doing something you'd be doing anyways. So bike commuting/shopping is great. It takes me 30 minutes to get to work, so that's five hours of cardio a week, with zero time wasted on "exercise".

If you can't bike for some reason, then you can get the same benefit from active hobbies. If you have an active hobby you enjoy, then "diminishing returns" aren't a concern because you spend time on your hobbies anyways. Keep trying stuff until you find something you love. Adult sports league (soccer, ultimate, etc), yoga, acrobatics, mountain biking, small boat sailing, pole dancing, martial arts, dance dance revolution, wrenching on cars, landscaping, rock climbing, swimming, golf (without a cart), ...

What I'm trying to convey is that you're asking the wrong question. You shouldn't be trying to optimize your exercise schedule, you should be trying to construct an active lifestyle that you love so that you don't have to "exercise".

[use2betrix]

3 days/wk weight lifting, 1 hour workouts. Running/cardio around 1.5-2 hrs/wk. I aim to run about 10 miles a week.

This, combined with an excellent diet, and I’m in amazing shape. I’m low 180’s lbs. Bench 275x6. Squat 335x6. Hover around 6-9% BF or so. Run 3 miles in 23 minutes and 5 miles in 43 minutes. Physique wise, I get comments from strangers and acquaintances on a very regular basis.

That being said - I’m 30 and have been working out over half my life. Much of it more frequently than I do now. I’ve been doing it so long and I know my body so well that I am able to optimize my workouts, time, and effort spent, far more than the average person. Even now, I’m wayyyy beyond where I was even in my mid 20’s just from knowing so much more.

With fitness, in many senses you can’t replace solid years of experience.

[runbikerun]

The 80/20 rule holds almost everywhere: you'll get 80% of the results with the first 20% of the effort. Five hours a week of hard work will do wonders. It's the bit after that that's tough: I got to a sub-45 10k time in three years, but each minute past that is taking a year to knock off.

use2betrix: if you want it, I'd say you could clear a sub-40 five mile without much prep, perhaps four weeks of moderate training. If you really wanted it, you could probably get to a sub-40 10k with the right training.

[ROF Expat]

What is your goal? Are you TRAINING for a sport, or are you just exercises so you aren't a blob?

Regardless, yes diet is more important for general fitness and you can be reasonably strong and healthy by focusing on 'money' exercises (squats, deadlifts, overhead press, pullups, etc.) and minimizing fluff. 2 hours a week I would consider not enough unless you were supplementing sport specific training. I would say 5 hours a week is about right for the point of diminishing returns.

+1 on identifying your goals before deciding how to get there most efficiently.  It is hard to give a specific answer to a non-specific question.  Knowing where you are in terms of age and current condition would help, too.  If you're 85 years old and just trying to maintain health and avoid sarcopenia, an hour a week of resistance training and another hour or so of cardio is probably great.  If you're 25 and want to be stronger, faster, and/or healthier than you are today, it is probably not enough.  Since diet has been mentioned several times, I would suggest that, if weight loss is a major goal, than focus on diet has to be right up there with exercise. 

Since you were quite specific about time and diminishing returns, If you want to improve your performance, 30 minutes of resistance exercise twice a week followed by an unspecified amount of cardio seems well below any threshold of diminishing returns.  In fact, slight increases in time and effort might bring disproportionate returns.  On the other hand, if you simply want to be reasonably fit and/or maintain your current level of fitness, the advice from other posters to focus on sports/activities/lifestyle might be perfect.  It is really about your own goals. 

If you're interested in efficiency, the real wild card is intensity.  Thirty minutes twice a week of low to moderate intensity exercise on machines in the gym doing sets of 10-15 reps without steadily increasing poundage may help you maintain your current level of fitness, but it will not lead to improvement in strength.  Thirty minutes twice a week of moderate, steady state cardio is good for your heart, but it is unlikely to lead to any improvements.  On the other hand, 45 - 60 minutes of high intensity weightlifting two to three times per week with heavier weight and lower reps can bring significant and rapid improvements in performance if you continually push for improvement.  Sixty minutes a week of high intensity cardio (think interval training) is also probably enough to improve performance and health, at least for a while.  So if time and efficiency are really your biggest issues, you can do a lot with just two or three hours of workouts in a week.  But those workouts will have to be pretty intense.  Plenty of people spend huge amounts of time in the gym without any intensity and wonder why they don't improve.   

FWIW, I'm 55 years old, 5'6", and about 180 pounds (current goal is 165 pounds, and I was up to 212 about two years ago).  I've been fairly serious about lifting weights for years but am currently focused on losing weight.  I lift weights three days a week for an hour and fifteen minutes to two hours per session and try to do very light cardio the other four days for recovery and calorie burn for one to two hours per session.  My numbers are way down since I started dieting and losing weight, but my best squat was 435, Deadlift 455, Bench 265 a few years ago when I weighed over 200 pounds.  My goal is to start training to match those numbers again when I weigh 165. 

[Telecaster]

If you're interested in efficiency, the real wild card is intensity.  Thirty minutes twice a week of low to moderate intensity exercise on machines in the gym doing sets of 10-15 reps without steadily increasing poundage may help you maintain your current level of fitness, but it will not lead to improvement in strength.  Thirty minutes twice a week of moderate, steady state cardio is good for your heart, but it is unlikely to lead to any improvements.  On the other hand, 45 - 60 minutes of high intensity weightlifting two to three times per week with heavier weight and lower reps can bring significant and rapid improvements in performance if you continually push for improvement.  Sixty minutes a week of high intensity cardio (think interval training) is also probably enough to improve performance and health, at least for a while.  So if time and efficiency are really your biggest issues, you can do a lot with just two or three hours of workouts in a week.  But those workouts will have to be pretty intense.  Plenty of people spend huge amounts of time in the gym without any intensity and wonder why they don't improve.   

^This.  Intensity is king.   Personally, the best bang for the time buck I've found is running stairs.  I run up and down a flight of stairs at a local park for 5 or 10 minutes which is almost vomit inducing, but the results are off the charts.  Total workout time including warm up and cool down is about 30 minutes--which is actually the best part.  I can always find 30 minutes, so the barrier to entry is low.  Someone I tend to forget about the vomit inducing moments....

[Monkey Uncle]

Just this week the government updated their guidelines, and they make a lot of sense. Check them out here. Basically, shoot for five hours a week of activity and work on strength at least twice a week. More is better.

Now onto my own opinions. The most time efficient exercise is the exercise that's a side effect of doing something you'd be doing anyways. So bike commuting/shopping is great. It takes me 30 minutes to get to work, so that's five hours of cardio a week, with zero time wasted on "exercise".

If you can't bike for some reason, then you can get the same benefit from active hobbies. If you have an active hobby you enjoy, then "diminishing returns" aren't a concern because you spend time on your hobbies anyways. Keep trying stuff until you find something you love. Adult sports league (soccer, ultimate, etc), yoga, acrobatics, mountain biking, small boat sailing, pole dancing, martial arts, dance dance revolution, wrenching on cars, landscaping, rock climbing, swimming, golf (without a cart), ...

What I'm trying to convey is that you're asking the wrong question. You shouldn't be trying to optimize your exercise schedule, you should be trying to construct an active lifestyle that you love so that you don't have to "exercise".

That has been the best approach for me.  I've never been one to work out for the sake of working out, so I've managed to stay fit by walking everywhere (briskly, including hills), cutting firewood, push-mowing a hilly yard, raking leaves, working on my truck, etc.  I went grouse hunting this past weekend and spent 2 1/2 days walking up and down mountains through god-awful thick brush.

The problem with this approach is that it is difficult to achieve the increase in intensity that Telecaster and ROF Expat mentioned.  You have to keep coming up with creative ways to do more.  I've been walking so much the last 15 years that my grouse hunting activity wasn't enough to get me breathing hard.  I'm in the process of having a huge tree taken down in my yard, and I had to do a marathon wood cutting session the other day to get the huge limbs out of the way so the tree guy could finish taking down the trunk.  I probably cut and moved 3-4 truck loads of wood in a day and half, which is more than I usually do at one time.  After day two, I actually got a bit of an endorphin high, which hasn't happened in many years.  I guess my point is that if you are already reasonably fit and you really want to push yourself more, it takes a tremendous amount of effort to do that through daily non-workout-type activities.

[PeteD01]

Hi,

So I go to the gym 2x a week for 30 minutes and then do cardio after.  Usually alternate between legs and upper body and toss in core like every 3rd exercise.

Not to bore with details, thats not what I want to discuss. . .

So theres a pretty big diminishing returns thing going on with exercise when comparing 1 hour a week vs say.. 10? 

So what do you think is the best TIME/Value in the exercise/fitness world? And it can include things like diet also.     Id like to see what methods you guys think have the highest rate of return for time invested.

You are asking about fitness which is usually thought of as performance specific to a particular activity but I assume that you mean general fitness.

There are two very common misconceptions regarding physical activity and fitness.

1. The volume of dedicated exercise necessary is overestimated and the intensity required for optimal results is underestimated.

2. The volume of non-exercise physical activity at light or moderate intensity (objective intensity (METs or % of VO2max), not subjective intensity) necessary for optimal results is grossly underestimated.

This is much less complicated than it appears at first glance.

Let’s first define exercise and non-exercise physical activityfor the purpose of this discussion:

Exercise is any physical activity that is scheduled and designed with a particular fitness goal in mind.

Non-exercise physical activity is any physical activity occurring during the day not structured with a particular fitness goal in mind.

The amount of non-exercise physical activity per day is what distinguishes a sedentary individual from an active individual. You do not want to be a sedentary individual but, unfortunately, one needs to move under one’s own power for about a couple of hours per day to be out of the sedentary danger zone. There is really no other sane way, unless one is a competitive athlete, to achieve that goal than to incorporate physical activity into one’s daily life as one poster has outlined (reply #3).

Now to fitness:
The right intensity and volume is key. There are two different high intensity training concepts to consider. One is High Intensity Interval Training (HIIT), the other is lactate threshold training. HIIT is hard and can easily be overdone and one can easily come to dread it. HIIT is probably the strongest medicine around in terms of improving performance but needs to be approached carefully. It can be done in addition to lactate threshold training.
Lactate threshold training sounds difficult but really isn’t when defined as exercising at the maximum intensity that can be maintained for 30 to 60 minutes but no longer.
The optimal volume of lactate threshold training is between 15 and 25% of total physical activity but it does not have to be that much to see major improvements.
A healthy person who is physically active (2 hours per day or more of non-exercise physical activity) should be able to tolerate two 30-45 minutes of lactate threshold level intensity training per week after some time getting used to it.

So here you have it:
14 hours per week of lifestyle physical activity plus 1-1.5 hours of high intensity endurance exercise plus about an hour of resistance training (incorporating progressive overload at least initially).

Of course, this is very general but the central message is likely to be valid for everyone who wants to be surprisingly fit and not spend an ungodly amount of time in the gym.

I hope it has become clear that it does not really matter what one does as non-exercise physical activity as long as one is moving under one’s own power for a sufficient amount of time per day.
For cardio exercise and resistance training it is the opposite: quality and correct intensity is everything.

Here is the disclaimer: talk to your doctor before embarking on any high intensity workout plan particularly if you are sedentary.

[PeteD01]

Just this week the government updated their guidelines, and they make a lot of sense. Check them out here. Basically, shoot for five hours a week of activity and work on strength at least twice a week. More is better.

Now onto my own opinions. The most time efficient exercise is the exercise that's a side effect of doing something you'd be doing anyways. So bike commuting/shopping is great. It takes me 30 minutes to get to work, so that's five hours of cardio a week, with zero time wasted on "exercise".

If you can't bike for some reason, then you can get the same benefit from active hobbies. If you have an active hobby you enjoy, then "diminishing returns" aren't a concern because you spend time on your hobbies anyways. Keep trying stuff until you find something you love. Adult sports league (soccer, ultimate, etc), yoga, acrobatics, mountain biking, small boat sailing, pole dancing, martial arts, dance dance revolution, wrenching on cars, landscaping, rock climbing, swimming, golf (without a cart), ...

What I'm trying to convey is that you're asking the wrong question. You shouldn't be trying to optimize your exercise schedule, you should be trying to construct an active lifestyle that you love so that you don't have to "exercise".

That has been the best approach for me.  I've never been one to work out for the sake of working out, so I've managed to stay fit by walking everywhere (briskly, including hills), cutting firewood, push-mowing a hilly yard, raking leaves, working on my truck, etc.  I went grouse hunting this past weekend and spent 2 1/2 days walking up and down mountains through god-awful thick brush.

The problem with this approach is that it is difficult to achieve the increase in intensity that Telecaster and ROF Expat mentioned.  You have to keep coming up with creative ways to do more.  I've been walking so much the last 15 years that my grouse hunting activity wasn't enough to get me breathing hard.  I'm in the process of having a huge tree taken down in my yard, and I had to do a marathon wood cutting session the other day to get the huge limbs out of the way so the tree guy could finish taking down the trunk.  I probably cut and moved 3-4 truck loads of wood in a day and half, which is more than I usually do at one time.  After day two, I actually got a bit of an endorphin high, which hasn't happened in many years.  I guess my point is that if you are already reasonably fit and you really want to push yourself more, it takes a tremendous amount of effort to do that through daily non-workout-type activities.

You are just very fit and subjective intensity has gone down for you, but, rest assured, objective intensity (O2 consumption) has not diminished to the same degree (some, because of increased efficiency). So you are still reaping benefits others have to fight very hard for.

[runbikerun]

Is lactate threshold the same as functional threshold? Because if it is, then two 45-minute sessions of that sounds like absolute hell on earth. I've done an FTP test once, and would happily never do one again.

[rothwem]

Jeez, you guys make me feel like I’m doing it all wrong. I try to work my schedule around so that I can do MORE exercise. I’d be so happy if I could ride a bicycle 15 hours a week like I did in college.

I tend to hit the gym just enough that I *barely* fix any muscle imbalances and core weakness. I hate every minute of it though.

[PeteD01]

Is lactate threshold the same as functional threshold? Because if it is, then two 45-minute sessions of that sounds like absolute hell on earth. I've done an FTP test once, and would happily never do one again.

Functional threshold power (FTP) is the power one can sustain for one hour but no longer. It is not exactly the same as lactate threshold but for practical purposes it is the same just expressed in Watts.
Now the FTP test is another animal as it involves maximal effort for 20 minutes or so and with the results the FTP can be approximately estimated. The FTP test is little bit like an interval from hell but not to be confused with FTP training.
I actually once did lactate threshold training with a heart rate monitor and later switched to monitoring power output (computrainer) which worked better for me.

[PeteD01]

Jeez, you guys make me feel like I’m doing it all wrong. I try to work my schedule around so that I can do MORE exercise. I’d be so happy if I could ride a bicycle 15 hours a week like I did in college.

I tend to hit the gym just enough that I *barely* fix any muscle imbalances and core weakness. I hate every minute of it though.

But the OP  asked for the “best fitness value” in regards to time in the gym.
The answer is pretty straightforward: increase time spent on non-exercise daily activity and optimize quality of exercise.

[mm1970]

Just this week the government updated their guidelines, and they make a lot of sense. Check them out here. Basically, shoot for five hours a week of activity and work on strength at least twice a week. More is better.

Now onto my own opinions. The most time efficient exercise is the exercise that's a side effect of doing something you'd be doing anyways. So bike commuting/shopping is great. It takes me 30 minutes to get to work, so that's five hours of cardio a week, with zero time wasted on "exercise".

If you can't bike for some reason, then you can get the same benefit from active hobbies. If you have an active hobby you enjoy, then "diminishing returns" aren't a concern because you spend time on your hobbies anyways. Keep trying stuff until you find something you love. Adult sports league (soccer, ultimate, etc), yoga, acrobatics, mountain biking, small boat sailing, pole dancing, martial arts, dance dance revolution, wrenching on cars, landscaping, rock climbing, swimming, golf (without a cart), ...

What I'm trying to convey is that you're asking the wrong question. You shouldn't be trying to optimize your exercise schedule, you should be trying to construct an active lifestyle that you love so that you don't have to "exercise".

That has been the best approach for me.  I've never been one to work out for the sake of working out, so I've managed to stay fit by walking everywhere (briskly, including hills), cutting firewood, push-mowing a hilly yard, raking leaves, working on my truck, etc.  I went grouse hunting this past weekend and spent 2 1/2 days walking up and down mountains through god-awful thick brush.

The problem with this approach is that it is difficult to achieve the increase in intensity that Telecaster and ROF Expat mentioned.  You have to keep coming up with creative ways to do more.  I've been walking so much the last 15 years that my grouse hunting activity wasn't enough to get me breathing hard.  I'm in the process of having a huge tree taken down in my yard, and I had to do a marathon wood cutting session the other day to get the huge limbs out of the way so the tree guy could finish taking down the trunk.  I probably cut and moved 3-4 truck loads of wood in a day and half, which is more than I usually do at one time.  After day two, I actually got a bit of an endorphin high, which hasn't happened in many years.  I guess my point is that if you are already reasonably fit and you really want to push yourself more, it takes a tremendous amount of effort to do that through daily non-workout-type activities.

It really depends on your goals.  My goals the last few years?  Burn off work stress, peri-menopause stress, and get faster.

So I've been running, working with a running coach, and running 1/2 marathons (at least: until I bit it on a trail run and had to be carried off by the fire department). 

That means:
30 mins a week of weights, specifically hip/core
20 mins a week of body weight training (pushups, etc)
3 days a week of running: 40 min + 40 min + up to 3 hours for the long runs
1 day a week of elliptical (60 min gab session ) + 10 min weights.

It was effective.  I shaved off > 2 min/ mile off my 1/2 marathon time.


But now I'm injured, and I'm trying to figure out "what next"?  In reality, I'm a dabbler, so I really enjoy working out with others and doing "different things" - hiking, running, swimming, walking, weight training.  The thing I like about dedicated fitness activities (instead of "working it into your day") is that it's really really efficient.

[lexde]

Exercise for fitness, diet for fatness.
I do an hour of hard exercise 5x/week because it also helps manage my mental wellbeing.

Diet, I try to eat well 80% of the time. I haven’t been hitting that goal as frequently as I’d like lately but am trying to get back on track.

I think that’s the sweet spot for me, when I can hit it.

[GuitarStv]

What's your goal?

If your goal is to not be so sedentary that you develop health problems, a couple hours a week is probably enough.

If your goal is to be competitive in a sport, a couple hours a week is not be enough.

If your goal is to de-stress, gain/lose weight, generally feel better . . .  a couple hours might or might not be enough.

[KarefulKactus15]

All good replies. I guess my goal is simple:

Maintain health, not be a blob and be attractive.

For built in exercise: my phone says I walk 2.5 miles average a day.  Then throw in some moderate bedroom activities 3x a week =D.


Probably my best value is going to be integrating some physical activity into my life that I enjoy. Unfortunately the gym hasnt become something I enjoy.  I wish I did, but I just dont....

[GuitarStv]

What do you consider attractive?  Quantify it.
- If you want ripped abs you don't need to workout at all . . . just eat a super clean diet and keep a low body fat.
- If you want big arms/big chest/big shoulders/big traps you need to regularly challenge that muscle with your workout.
- If you want to look like Arnie you need to do drugs AND workout.
- If you want different shaped ears, there's always plastic surgery.

What do you consider healthy?  Quantify it.
- Do you want to deadlift twice your body weight?
- Do you want to cycle 100 miles?
- Do you want to run a 5 min mile?
- Do you want to be able to walk up a flight of stairs without wheezing?



Amorphous goals guarantee failure.  Define exactly what you want, and then we can figure out the most efficient way to get there.

[DS]

Agree with @GuitarStv . When I first started exercising on my own, post high school sports, it started by signing up for a 10 mile race. Helps to have a defined goal to work towards.

[ROF Expat]

All good replies. I guess my goal is simple:

Maintain health, not be a blob and be attractive.

For built in exercise: my phone says I walk 2.5 miles average a day.  Then throw in some moderate bedroom activities 3x a week =D.


Probably my best value is going to be integrating some physical activity into my life that I enjoy. Unfortunately the gym hasnt become something I enjoy.  I wish I did, but I just dont....
[/quote

Maintain health, not be a blob, and be attractive isn't a particularly high bar unless you're currently an unhealthy, unattractive blob.  60 minutes each of fairly intense resistance exercise and cardio each week in addition to a reasonable activity level might well be enough to meet your goals.  But if going to the gym isn't something you enjoy, you'd probably be better off finding things that you do enjoy and doing them at an appropriate frequency and level of intensity.  Running?  Biking? CrossFit?  Basketball?  Skiing?  If you find something that works for you, it will be a lot easier to keep it up for a lifetime. 

[beer-man]

Maintain an active lifestyle and the need for intense daily exercise is greatly reduced.
 Also lift with intensity and short rest between sets and you have lifting+cardio.
 I’ve also noticed that the level of training needed to get you to a fitness/physique is much greater than what is needed to keep you there. Once you get where you want maintenance is much easier with the only occasional need to push too far past homeostasis


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[big_slacker]

All good replies. I guess my goal is simple:

Maintain health, not be a blob and be attractive.

For built in exercise: my phone says I walk 2.5 miles average a day.  Then throw in some moderate bedroom activities 3x a week =D.

Probably my best value is going to be integrating some physical activity into my life that I enjoy. Unfortunately the gym hasnt become something I enjoy.  I wish I did, but I just dont....

The last statement is key, and others have stressed it as well. Just like the old statement about having a job you love means not working a day in your life, having a sport or activity you love means not exercising a day in your life. :D

No need to hang out in the gym. Grab yourself some pushup pods, a doorframe pullup bar and a kettlebell or two from amazon. You can be pretty fit with a few go to bodyweight exercises to supplement a sport that you enjoy. That + diet will keep you lean and fit for your life.

44 here, 165 lbs and I'd guesstimate 12% BF. So many epic rides under my belt. Kudos to the dude walking around at 6-9% BF all the time. I used to in my 20's and 30's, but these days it would mean meal prep and less tasty IPAs a week if any. Not willing to make that those sacrifices. ;)

[soccerluvof4]

I've pretty much exercised all my life but went through a stage of ten years where i lost it because of an injury. Ideally for me I feel 90 minutes 4-5 days a week is ideal BUT having said that I go through stages from boredom. So i might go 3 months where I will walk 10 miles every morning as soon as I get up. Lately I have been doing 90mins on the elliptical to really get the heart rate up . But 6 minutes out of the year I do 45 minutes of Cardio and 45 minutes of weights of which I divide my body into 3 parts i.e chest and tri's , back and bi's , legs and shoulders. Problem for me is because of muscle memory when I lift I gain weight fast and get really hungry.

My best advice is do something and don't shoot to be perfect. Mix it up so you go. Get it out of the way the longer you think about it the less likely you will exercise. I believe its 75% diet 25% exercise but both are important and listen to your body. I weight lifted way to heavy for way to many years and yea i looked good back in the day but my joints and everything else is messed up from heavy lifting.

The old saying is true, It doesn't matter how much time you put in the gym its how wise you use that time.

But get up and go! 90% of the time you will feel better and accomplished.