By
Susan J Wilkinson
Not the usual recommendation
I've seen a few articles recently on doing a power packed workout just once a week to cut down on time spent exercising. This is an unusual suggestion, it's usually accepted that workouts should be more frequent, ideally at least 3 times a week. Is working out just once a week effective, though and, more importantly, are there any risks?
The ASCM recommends...
For many years a lot of fitness advice has been based on the position stands of American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM). Their current stand on exercise frequency is that, for cardio we should do either:
• moderate intensity work for more than 30mins at least 5 times a week
• vigorous work for 20 minutes or more at least 3 times a week
• or a combination of the two for a total energy expenditure of 500-1000 MET minutes at least once a week
For a rough idea, using figures from the Compendium of Physical Activities ( https://sites.google.com/site/compendiumofphysicalactivities/Activity-Categories/running ) 500 MET minutes would be, for example, around 45 minutes of running at 6.7 mph
As far as strength and flexibility training are concerned, at least twice a week is recommended. This is because once a week wouldn't be enough to maintain the muscle adaptations caused by exercise, so you would make very little progress.
Is it safe?
So, based on this, for cardio at least, it seems that once a week is enough if you're prepared to work hard. Very hard. The other thing to think about is whether there is any risk. I couldn't find any reference to this, but I would be concerned that working out vigorously once a week would be more likely to result in muscle soreness, stiffness and injury than more frequent exercise. Maybe this wouldn't be the case for fit, young individuals, but I'd say anyone else should be very careful trying this.
Conclusion - a good idea or not?
On the whole, I don't think it's that good. For young, fit people who want to maintain their cardiovascular fitness and don't have a lot of time it could be a good compromise, but even so for all-round fitness they would have to do some strength and flexibility as well, plus an extra strength/flexibility session during the week. It would be better to go for the 20 minutes of vigorous exercise 3 times a week option, maybe doing cardio/strength intervals.
I've seen a few articles recently on doing a power packed workout just once a week to cut down on time spent exercising. This is an unusual suggestion, it's usually accepted that workouts should be more frequent, ideally at least 3 times a week. Is working out just once a week effective, though and, more importantly, are there any risks?
The ASCM recommends...
For many years a lot of fitness advice has been based on the position stands of American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM). Their current stand on exercise frequency is that, for cardio we should do either:
• moderate intensity work for more than 30mins at least 5 times a week
• vigorous work for 20 minutes or more at least 3 times a week
• or a combination of the two for a total energy expenditure of 500-1000 MET minutes at least once a week
For a rough idea, using figures from the Compendium of Physical Activities ( https://sites.google.com/site/compendiumofphysicalactivities/Activity-Categories/running ) 500 MET minutes would be, for example, around 45 minutes of running at 6.7 mph
As far as strength and flexibility training are concerned, at least twice a week is recommended. This is because once a week wouldn't be enough to maintain the muscle adaptations caused by exercise, so you would make very little progress.
Is it safe?
So, based on this, for cardio at least, it seems that once a week is enough if you're prepared to work hard. Very hard. The other thing to think about is whether there is any risk. I couldn't find any reference to this, but I would be concerned that working out vigorously once a week would be more likely to result in muscle soreness, stiffness and injury than more frequent exercise. Maybe this wouldn't be the case for fit, young individuals, but I'd say anyone else should be very careful trying this.
Conclusion - a good idea or not?
On the whole, I don't think it's that good. For young, fit people who want to maintain their cardiovascular fitness and don't have a lot of time it could be a good compromise, but even so for all-round fitness they would have to do some strength and flexibility as well, plus an extra strength/flexibility session during the week. It would be better to go for the 20 minutes of vigorous exercise 3 times a week option, maybe doing cardio/strength intervals.
For more fitness articles go to http://www.postnatalreshape.blogspot.co.uk or http://www.postnatalreshape.co.uk
Article Source:
http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Susan_J_Wilkinson
