Inquisitive.me

At least once a week I burst the myth that cardio is the holy grail for fat loss.

Yes, it burns calories—but so does any movement. The idea that cardio is inherently superior probably comes from people misinterpreting “fat oxidation.” But just because your body burns fat during exercise doesn’t mean you’re melting off significant amounts of body fat.

In reality, the fat your body oxidizes in a single session is quite small (source). It just means your metabolism is efficiently using fat for energy—not that you’re instantly slimming down.

When we exercise, our body generates energy from both fat and carbohydrates.

Slow, low-intensity cardio—running, cycling, or any exercise—relies more on fat, especially as glycogen stores drop. Fully fueled, glycogen lasts about an hour before refueling is needed.

As glycogen depletes, fat becomes the primary fuel, which is why endurance athletes often run “in the fat zone” to sustain longer efforts.

High-intensity exercise is different. It relies almost entirely on glycogen. Even if you keep fueling, your body burns energy faster than it can replace it. That’s why intense cardio can feel so exhausting in a short time.

Fat loss isn’t just about burning calories. Our body’s energy stores are limited—like a salary. You can earn more over time, but you can’t spend infinitely.

You can also lose fat by eating less—but that doesn’t mean extreme restriction. Small adjustments over time, paired with activity, often make the biggest difference. Restrict too much, and your energy drops, your daily movement decreases, and your energy balance stays the same.

I notice this in myself: I eat more when I move more, less when I move less. No weight gain. No weight loss. Because it balances itself out.

Cardio only leads to meaningful fat loss if it helps create a calorie deficit. You simply can’t out-cardio a poor diet.

At the core, fat loss is simple (in real life: it’s often not):

Calories in < Calories out = Weight loss

Train more but eat more? The needle doesn’t move.

This is why strength training often gives better long-term returns for fat loss than cardio. Many patients are surprised when I tell them this—because the old narrative is “to lose weight, you have to do cardio.”

The truth is, what matters most is burning more than you eat. How you burn matters, but not as much as you think.

Cardio can burn more calories per minute at high intensity, but over the long term, strength training outperforms cardio for sustainable fat loss and maintaining muscle mass (source). Here’s why:

1. Afterburn (EPOC) – Strength training slightly increases post-exercise oxygen consumption. Your metabolism stays elevated after lifting, and your body continues to burn energy while repairing tissue. It’s not huge—maybe 20% of what you burned during training—but it adds up.
2. Muscle growth – Lifting signals your body to preserve and build muscle. If you restrict calories without training, your body sheds energy-demanding muscle before fat. Losing muscle slows fat loss, like trying to fly a plane that’s too heavy—you want to keep the important parts, not throw them out. Strength training tells your body: “Keep the muscle. Use fat.” And we need those muscles.
3. Higher basal metabolic rate (BMR) – More muscle increases your resting energy expenditure. It’s like passive income for your metabolism. More muscle = more calories burned at rest.
4. Appetite regulation – Research is still exploring this, but many notice they’re hungrier after cardio than strength training. High-intensity aerobic exercise can drop blood glucose quickly, triggering appetite, whereas strength training may cause a milder or even temporary rise in blood glucose due to adrenaline and other hormones.
5. Energy expenditure is limited – More activity doesn’t always mean more calories burned overall. Your body compensates. After a long cardio session, you might fidget less, move less, or conserve energy subconsciously. Diminishing returns are real.

The takeaway?

Cardio is not useless—it burns calories and improves cardiovascular fitness—but it’s not magic for fat loss.

Strength training builds muscle, raises metabolism, preserves your body composition, and gives you sustainable results.

The combination of smart eating, varied movement, and resistance training is what really makes the difference.

🧪 Let’s Experiment

---

Fat loss comes down to energy balance, not a single exercise type.

Instead of forcing yourself to survive through 30 minutes of cardio, let’s take a smarter, more curious approach.

🎯 Try This:

For one week, track:

• What and when you eat – write down all meals and snacks, roughly but honestly. No extremes, just awareness.
• How and when you move – note every little movement: steps, stairs, workouts, anything that gets you off the couch.
• Exercise types and enjoyment – what exercises are you actually doing? Do you like them?

Pay attention to patterns:

• On workout days, do you move more overall, or less because you’re “done” after training?
• Do you eat more on workout days? Do you reward yourself with an extra treat (spoiler: it doesn’t move the needle)?

After tracking, experiment with small tweaks:

• If you mostly do cardio, swap half your sessions for strength training. I’d suggest a 2:1 ratio (strength:cardio) if you’re not training for a marathon (like me 😉).
• If you mostly lift weights, add some cardio for cardiovascular fitness and short-term calorie burn. You can do high-intensity sessions if time is limited.
• Aim to eat a little less and move a little more—no extreme deficits. Keep it sustainable so your body doesn’t go into survival mode.

🧠 Final Thought:

Losing weight doesn’t happen fast—and it shouldn’t. It requires patience and consistency.
Don’t be too hard on yourself, and don’t restrict every aspect of your life. Always ask: Am I able to maintain this one year from now? If the answer is no, it’s not the right approach.

---

Keep it simple, stay curious, and keep learning—you’ve got this.

Take care,

Carina 🦊