First off I appreciate the feedback from everyone who has had some input, I am excited to delve more into this whole arena and report what I have found to work for me. All the info and feedback allows me to have a more open thought process to pursing a healthy weight loss and lifestyle.
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Originally Posted by
chasm54
if you look further, you'll see that the linked articles explain that once you go anaerobic, your muscles can't metabolise fat because that process is oxygen-dependent. You rely entirely on glycolysis. However, like I said, it really doesn't matter. We are arguing about the minutiae when the OP's question related to the bigger picture.
And the bigger picture is, surprise surprise, what athletes have discovered to work through trial and error over hundreds if not thousands of years. The recipe is extensive exercise at a level one can sustain for a long time, punctuated by intensive efforts to build strength and speed. Don't choose between them, do both, and you'll burn plenty of calories. The difficulty for weight loss about relying too much on HIIT is that you end up doing a lot of workouts which simply aren't long enough to burn thousands of kcal, and anyway you need to be well-fuelled to reach the level of intensity required. So intensive training and staying in big calorie deficits is pretty tough to do.
So, correct me if I am wrong, but you're thought is HIIT style training is good at times, but there is benefit to (for instance) a 30 mile ride at a pace that can be sustained without over exertion and there be "breaks" during it that require a higher exertion to complete (like hills or sprints)? From what I have read, HIIT training should be no more than 30-40 minutes, and unless you are superman there is no one who could do 30 miles in that time, but never thought of "combining" the 2 in a way like that. If, that is, I am following what you are saying.