I saw that as well, but apparently the Times is not good on math.

They are recommending (correctly) that you do 5-6 intervals each session, 3 sessions a week.

You need 4 minutes between intervals and then a 20 - 30 second interval.  Let's assume 20 seconds, so if you do 6 intervals, 3 times a week, that would be 6 minutes of intervals a week, but you need to add in the 4 minutes between each interval (warmup, but no cool down, let suppose), then (4 minutes +  20 seconds) *  6 intervals * 3 days = 78 minutes of exercise, or about an hour 20 minutes, not 6.

I take a spin class in the winter, and you get the best results from that if you have an instructor that does intervals.  Unfortunately, most don't.

Bruce

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 5:07 PM, T. Nee <nee.t@...> wrote:

NYTimes blog has summary of rat data as well limited human data on endurance benefit of short (very short, sub minute) intensity training.

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/24/can-you-get-fit-in-six-minutes-a-week/