HIIT vs LISS – Which One Burns Fat Faster?

When it comes to optimizing fat loss, two training modalities often dominate the discussion: High-Intensity Interval Training (HIIT) and Low-Intensity Steady-State (LISS) cardio. Both methods have strong followings and offer distinct benefits, but the primary question for many is simple: which one burns fat faster?

To answer this question thoroughly, this article examines each method, explores scientific literature, and evaluates outcomes based on physiological mechanisms and study-based results.

What Is HIIT?

HIIT involves alternating between short bursts of high-intensity activity and periods of low-intensity recovery or complete rest. Typical HIIT sessions last between 15 to 30 minutes. The objective is to push the body close to its maximum heart rate during intense intervals. For example, a HIIT workout may consist of 30 seconds of sprinting followed by 60 seconds of walking, repeated for 20 minutes.

Physiological Mechanism of HIIT

HIIT causes a significant increase in heart rate, oxygen consumption (VO2), and energy expenditure. The body experiences an “afterburn effect” known as excess post-exercise oxygen consumption (EPOC), where it continues to burn calories at a higher rate post-workout. A study by LaForgia et al. (2006) demonstrated that EPOC is substantially elevated after HIIT compared to LISS, resulting in a prolonged fat-burning period post-exercise.

Fat Oxidation in HIIT

Although HIIT relies primarily on anaerobic energy systems during the workout, it stimulates greater fat oxidation post-exercise. Trapp et al. (2008) observed that women who engaged in 20 minutes of HIIT three times a week for 15 weeks lost significantly more subcutaneous fat compared to those who performed steady-state cardio for the same duration.

What Is LISS?

LISS involves performing cardio at a consistent, low to moderate intensity, typically 50-65% of maximum heart rate, for an extended period. Common LISS activities include brisk walking, light jogging, cycling, or swimming. Sessions often last 45 to 60 minutes and rely predominantly on the aerobic energy system.

Physiological Mechanism of LISS

LISS promotes fat oxidation as the primary fuel source during exercise. Because it remains within the aerobic zone, fat is utilized efficiently for energy. A study by Romijn et al. (1993) demonstrated that during prolonged low-intensity exercise, fat oxidation rates are significantly higher than during high-intensity exercise, where carbohydrate usage predominates.

Fat Oxidation in LISS

While fat oxidation is highest during LISS sessions, this effect is mostly limited to the workout duration. Unlike HIIT, LISS produces minimal EPOC, meaning that calorie burn returns to baseline shortly after the workout concludes. Thus, although LISS burns a higher percentage of fat during the session itself, the total energy expenditure may be lower than that of HIIT.

Comparing Caloric and Fat Expenditure

When comparing HIIT and LISS, total caloric expenditure and the proportion of energy derived from fat are crucial metrics. HIIT typically results in higher overall calorie burn due to increased intensity and EPOC.

A study by Boutcher (2011) found that HIIT burned more calories and reduced total body fat to a greater extent than moderate-intensity steady-state exercise. Meanwhile, LISS burns a higher percentage of fat during exercise, but its total calorie output is lower.

Time Efficiency

One of HIIT’s most cited advantages is its time efficiency. In a meta-analysis by Keating et al. (2017), researchers concluded that HIIT could produce similar fat loss and cardiovascular benefits as LISS in significantly less time. Participants who trained with HIIT for just 20 minutes per session, three times a week, achieved fat loss comparable to those performing LISS for 40-60 minutes per session.

Muscle Preservation and Metabolic Benefits

Another significant advantage of HIIT is its impact on muscle mass and metabolic rate. High-intensity exercise promotes the release of anabolic hormones such as growth hormone and testosterone. According to Gibala et al. (2012), HIIT not only helps preserve lean muscle mass but may also increase resting metabolic rate. LISS, on the other hand, can sometimes lead to muscle loss when performed in high volumes without adequate resistance training or protein intake.

Practical Considerations and Population-Specific Factors

HIIT may not be suitable for all populations. Due to its high demands, individuals with cardiovascular conditions, joint issues, or a low fitness base may be at higher risk of injury or overtraining. LISS offers a safer alternative with lower injury risk and is more sustainable for beginners, older adults, or those undergoing rehabilitation. A study by Kemi et al. (2005) emphasized the safety profile of moderate-intensity continuous training in patients with cardiovascular disease, whereas HIIT required more careful supervision.

Psychological Factors and Adherence

Adherence to an exercise program is a major predictor of long-term fat loss. Some individuals find HIIT more engaging due to its variety and shorter duration. However, the intense discomfort associated with HIIT may reduce adherence over time. LISS, being less taxing, may be easier to maintain consistently, particularly for those who enjoy longer, lower-stress activities. Jung et al. (2014) found that while both HIIT and LISS improved cardiovascular fitness, participants reported higher enjoyment and intention to continue with LISS workouts.

Fat Loss Outcomes in Controlled Trials

Direct comparisons in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) provide the most reliable insight into fat loss outcomes. In a study by Alkahtani et al. (2013), participants performing HIIT lost more visceral fat compared to those doing moderate-intensity continuous training, despite a lower total exercise volume. Similarly, a review by Wewege et al. (2017) concluded that HIIT produced greater reductions in total and abdominal fat in overweight individuals than LISS, even with lower time commitment.

Hormonal Responses and Appetite Regulation

HIIT triggers significant hormonal changes that may enhance fat loss. It elevates catecholamines, growth hormone, and adrenaline, all of which promote lipolysis. Moreover, HIIT has been shown to influence appetite-regulating hormones favorably. A study by Sim et al. (2014) reported that post-exercise ghrelin levels (a hunger-stimulating hormone) were lower after HIIT compared to LISS, potentially aiding in calorie control and fat loss.

Final Verdict: Which Burns Fat Faster?

Scientific evidence supports the conclusion that HIIT burns fat faster than LISS, primarily due to its higher total energy expenditure, significant post-exercise fat oxidation, and hormonal adaptations. While LISS remains effective and suitable for a broad population, it is generally less efficient in terms of time and total fat loss outcomes. Therefore, for individuals looking to maximize fat loss in a shorter period, HIIT is the superior choice. However, individual preferences, physical condition, and long-term adherence should guide the choice of exercise modality.

Bibliography

Alkahtani, S. A., King, N. A., Hills, A. P., and Byrne, N. M. (2013). Effect of interval training intensity on fat oxidation, blood lactate and the rate of perceived exertion in obese men. SpringerPlus, 2(1), p.532.

Boutcher, S. H. (2011). High-intensity intermittent exercise and fat loss. Journal of Obesity, 2011, 868305.

Gibala, M. J., Little, J. P., Macdonald, M. J., and Hawley, J. A. (2012). Physiological adaptations to low-volume, high-intensity interval training in health and disease. Journal of Physiology, 590(5), pp.1077-1084.

Jung, M. E., Bourne, J. E., and Little, J. P. (2014). Where does HIT fit? An examination of the affective response to high-intensity intervals in comparison to continuous moderate- and continuous vigorous-intensity exercise in the exercise intensity-affect continuum. PLOS ONE, 9(12), e114541.

Keating, S. E., Johnson, N. A., Mielke, G. I., and Coombes, J. S. (2017). A systematic review and meta-analysis of interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training on body adiposity. Obesity Reviews, 18(8), pp.943-964.

Kemi, O. J., and Wisloff, U. (2005). High-intensity aerobic exercise training improves the heart in health and disease. Journal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation and Prevention, 25(5), pp.299-307.

LaForgia, J., Withers, R. T., and Gore, C. J. (2006). Effects of exercise intensity and duration on the excess post-exercise oxygen consumption. Journal of Sports Sciences, 24(12), pp.1247-1264.

Romijn, J. A., Coyle, E. F., Sidossis, L. S., Gastaldelli, A., Horowitz, J. F., Endert, E., and Wolfe, R. R. (1993). Regulation of endogenous fat and carbohydrate metabolism in relation to exercise intensity and duration. American Journal of Physiology-Endocrinology and Metabolism, 265(3), pp.E380-E391.

Sim, A. Y., Wallman, K. E., Fairchild, T. J., and Guelfi, K. J. (2014). High-intensity intermittent exercise attenuates ad-libitum energy intake. International Journal of Obesity, 38(3), pp.417-422.

Trapp, E. G., Chisholm, D. J., Freund, J., and Boutcher, S. H. (2008). The effects of high-intensity intermittent exercise training on fat loss and fasting insulin levels of young women. International Journal of Obesity, 32(4), pp.684-691.

Wewege, M. A., van den Berg, R., Ward, R. E., and Keech, A. (2017). The effects of high-intensity interval training vs. moderate-intensity continuous training on body composition in overweight and obese adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obesity Reviews, 18(6), pp.635-646.

Was this article helpful?