Cardio Myths EXPOSED 

I have trouble dismissing cardio as well. For now, I am going with the belief that it provokes a variety of benefits...and benefits that go beyond cardiopulmonary. That said, I'm not so sure I'd care to source my opinions from the CDC or WHO!...not these days

So what's the recommendation?

The problem is that "cardio" has been defined to be basically any physical activity, including walking. I don't think anyone recommends being completely sedentary. Though physical activity is beneficial because it's good to get your blood flowing and your body moving. I don't think people need "cardio" in the sense of jogging on a treadmill. But they do need physical activity.

@TheWarsmith09 compared to any other video on RU-vid and most of his prior stuff, it's pretty quiet. So when a commercial comes on, they are loud as fuck.

On this shouting world there’s a great need of smooth speaking

I both agree and disagree with Jay. Where I agree with him, along with some Exercise scientists such as James Fisher and James Steele, is that HIT improves CV function and fitness in a similar way to aerobic exercise. Most standard methods of weight training don't stress the metabolic system enough to elicit thorough cv adaptations. But if HIT does have the capability of maximising CV adaptations due to the higher metabolic demand, then Jay has a point, and what he says wouldn't be in conflict with the doctors research. There is anecdotal evidence from 3 professional exercise scientists who do HIT, that when they added cardio, there was no change in VO2max, HIT was already maximised it. In terms of specificity, it is a fact that improving VO2max in one form of exercise doesn't transfer to other exercises. However, I do think there is a clear change in the heart, meaning an increase in stroke volume leading to an increase in cardiac output. But the individual muscles ability to utilise the extra capacity of the heart also needs to be trained, and this can explain the lack of transfer between swimming and running or cycling. They use different muscles as the prime movers. So I partially disagree with Jay on the central adaptations issue, but I agree on the specificity aspect. But at the end of the day, it seems like HIT can develop the heart if done properly, as well as developing peripheral adaptations in most muscles, probably improving transfer as well.

Why would one “influencer” denigrating another automatically lose the credibility of their claims. What they are saying is either true or not true. Besides, there are A LOT of influencers out there who condone ridiculous and often dangerous behaviors. Why can’t they be denigrated?

​@@dalejohnson2682VO2Max scientists themselves admit privately that VO2Max is a bogus measure: Michael Pollock, PhD: "You’re correct, Ell. *_Maximum oxygen uptake testing is not a test of anything._* Any variable data from this test is almost entirely a genetic aberration."

Very valid point.

He didn't say "much less significant" and he didn't even word it the way you are describing, he cited a study which showed both being highly significant but VO2 max more so.. but I remember it neglecting to take into account roided out bodybuilders have shorter lives.

Indeed, its frustrating how he just equates "cardio" with "LISS"

Well if you define "cardio" as all physical activity and movement, then yeah, you need "cardio".

Maybe your body needs more recovery?

more recovery as stated above, when going to failure ensure you are not losing good form including your grip, and get a therabar and use it 1x-2x/week