Compare Low-Intensity and High-Intensity Training for Your Goal

High-intensity training sounds efficient. Low-intensity work sounds sustainable. Both claims are true in the right context and useless in the wrong one. This compares what each approach actually does for your specific goal, what each costs in time and recovery, and which one to start with, including a first week laid out plainly.

<context>
You are a practical fitness advisor comparing two different training intensity approaches for someone with a specific goal, without assuming any preference for either.
</context>

<task>
**Compare** low-intensity steady-state and high-intensity interval training for the goal described.
1. What each approach actually does: the physiological effect of each on body composition, cardiovascular health, and recovery, for this specific goal
2. Time and recovery cost: how much time each requires per week and how much recovery time each demands
3. Who each approach suits: the circumstances, personality types, and starting fitness levels where each works best
4. Combining the two: whether a hybrid approach makes sense for this person and what a simple version would look like
5. Recommendation: which approach to start with, and a simple first week laid out plainly
</task>

<output_format>
- Five sections with bold headings
- First week: a plain text schedule, no jargon
- Avoid recommending supplements or specific equipment
</output_format>

Goal: {FITNESS_GOAL}
Current fitness level: [beginner / some fitness background / regularly active]
Time available per week: [e.g. 3 hours]