Fitness for weight loss - high vs low impact?

[edgeofheaven]

Group of my friends were chatting.

Friend 1: great shape, primarily does Pilates and a bit of Kayla Itsines type workouts

Friend 2: overweight, does HIIT/boot camp/kickboxing 3x per week

F1 says she does even though lower impact exercise burns fewer calories, she doesn’t get as hungry afterwards so can control calorie intake better.

F2 feels she wants to maximize calorie burn at each workout. But she definitely eats more than F1 which is why she’s not losing weight.

Do you think F1’s theory is correct? That choosing lower impact exercise is better holistically?

I’m trying to decide which path to take for myself. I have a bit of weight to lose (3-5 kg) and my gym offers a mix of all of these class types.

Weight training to build muscle mass really helps weight loss. Has made a huge difference for me. But aerobic fitness also needed for health so I'd say a mix. Increase protein and reduce carbs in diet. I'm not carb free or anything like it but a small shift has helped.

@BIWI my post is about exercise, not diet.

If I wanted diet advice I'd have asked for it.

I'm already doing my own diet but I want to do the best combination of exercise alongside it to achieve my desired goals.

If you think telling me that eating less will help with weighs loss is news then you're treating me like an idiot.

Not at all. But I was taking issue with your dismissal of posts/posters as unpleasant.

There was a BBC programme a while back that looked at people doing HIIT and cardio workouts in relation to when they ate. It concluded that to get the afterburn effect of those types of exercise and lose weight women should eat carbs before exercise and not in the 90min after. It's to do with how men and women burn fat v carbs.

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/4glyLcrhgqQtPGQYM11l1YJ/the-big-experiment-how-can-i-get-my-body-to-burn-more-fat-without-doing-more-exercise