Am I right to disagree with this??

[Stephan]

http://www.cspinet.org/nah/2_00/ten_myths04.html

I think this person is full of it!!

[HCcD]

Umm, it depends ...

There was an article last year in Runner's World, or was that Triathlete's Magazine commenting on something similar ....

As it has been said, many times ... in the end, it's all about calories in vs calories out .....

They suggested that for endurance athletes (i.e. marathoners, IM'ers, etc.) that some may actually gain weight during the training, due to the extra calories that they are consuming before, during and after their training ....

The logic being that "I/They will just burn it off ...."

Further to that article, endurance athletes may run a few times a week, but, slog off the rest of the week, recovering ... taking the elevators, escalators in stead of walking a flight of stairs or two .... Getting into the car and driving a block or two to the grocery store rather than walking or running or cycling, etc .....

They need to document and/or provide more of the information of the case study with the individual's lifestyle, etc., before making a judgement call on it's validity or invalidity ....

[La]

The thing that bothers me about the article is that it might discourage inactive people from becoming active because they'll think, "Why bother?"

[ultraslacker]

Further to that article, endurance athletes may run a few times a week, but, slog off the rest of the week, recovering ... taking the elevators, escalators in stead of walking a flight of stairs or two .... Getting into the car and driving a block or two to the grocery store rather than walking or running or cycling, etc .....

solution: get a dog. lol

I've already lost a couple of pounds since getting Sammy!

[turd ferguson]

I think what he's saying is that exercise is not a magic bullet, and I tend to agree. Athletes can't do whatever they want just cause they work out.

If you count calories in miles, it makes some sense - for example, a hunk of carrot cake from Starbucks equals 8 miles, you get a sense for the proportions between food and exercise.

I don't think he's saying that there's no point to exercise, he's saying that exercise doesn't fix everything, you still have to watch intake.

[Stephan]

To me it's simple math, what goes in must be burned out. The best way to burn it out is to exersise, the other option is to put less in.

That's it.

[HCcD]

Further to that article, endurance athletes may run a few times a week, but, slog off the rest of the week, recovering ... taking the elevators, escalators in stead of walking a flight of stairs or two .... Getting into the car and driving a block or two to the grocery store rather than walking or running or cycling, etc .....

solution: get a dog. lol

I've already lost a couple of pounds since getting Sammy!

I've tried, but can't find no pug anywhere ....

[anners]

"Walking or running a mile burns about 100 calories. But sitting still for the same time burns about 50 or 60 calories. "

doesn't it take about an hour to burn 50 or 60 calories by sitting? most of us can walk/run/crawl quite a bit farther than a mile in an hour.

[Jo-Jo]

Further to that article, endurance athletes may run a few times a week, but, slog off the rest of the week, recovering ... taking the elevators, escalators in stead of walking a flight of stairs or two .... Getting into the car and driving a block or two to the grocery store rather than walking or running or cycling, etc .....

solution: get a dog. lol

I've already lost a couple of pounds since getting Sammy!

I've tried, but can't find no pug anywhere ....

Hey...want C-Moss for the summer

[HCcD]

Further to that article, endurance athletes may run a few times a week, but, slog off the rest of the week, recovering ... taking the elevators, escalators in stead of walking a flight of stairs or two .... Getting into the car and driving a block or two to the grocery store rather than walking or running or cycling, etc .....

solution: get a dog. lol

I've already lost a couple of pounds since getting Sammy!

I've tried, but can't find no pug anywhere ....

Hey...want C-Moss for the summer

She'd love my version of a bootcamp ....

Running 200-300K per month and cycling another 600-900K ...

[wantmeback]

"Walking or running a mile burns about 100 calories. But sitting still for the same time burns about 50 or 60 calories. "

doesn't it take about an hour to burn 50 or 60 calories by sitting? most of us can walk/run/crawl quite a bit farther than a mile in an hour.

Good point!

The article makes it sound like a mile = 100 calories and the equivalent time sitting burns 50-60. But you're right, most calculators will say someone who weighs 150 lbs burns about 60 calories per hour sitting. If I can walk 4 MPH, then I would be burning about 400 calories versus 60 sitting around. Are we just reading it wrong or is the author just totall out to lunch on this one???

[jacob42.2]

The thing that bothers me the most about this load of crap is that When I was fat 230 lbs monster, who did nothing but sit all day, and started running, I drop the fat, and got down to 160lbs. My eating habits haven't changed, nor, has my consumsion of alcohol (liquid) fat. And yet, here I am, still running, and not getting to that point again.

This article is a piece of crap, and I'd love to bring it into school for others to take a look and rip it apart.

[dwayne_runs_far]

"Walking or running a mile burns about 100 calories. But sitting still for the same time burns about 50 or 60 calories. "

doesn't it take about an hour to burn 50 or 60 calories by sitting? most of us can walk/run/crawl quite a bit farther than a mile in an hour.

That's the part that had me thinking this guy is an idiot. If I burn 50 calories for every 8 minutes I spend sitting around that would translate to about 3000 calories expended while at work alone.

That is complete rubbish and based on voodoo math/science.

Dwayne

[HCcD]

For all you science geeks out there ... what the heck does this whole metabolic rate stuff mean then ... suggesting that the average person, just to survive (err maintain balance) is anywhere from 1200-2500 calories per day ....

[jacob42.2]

I can explain it to you...but do you really want me to? It's quite complicated, and different people, and different walks of life are all affected by different "types" of metabolism...but the word it self is general too all people. Meaning, the transformation of foodstuff into energy in complete lamans.

[dgrant]

When we say a person generally burns 100-120 calories per mile, is that over and above their basal metabolic rate?

[Jwolf]

As has been mentioned, the article has a major math flaw. If you sit around and do nothing for 10 minutes, you burn about 10 calories, not 50-60. You burn about 50-60 per HOUR, not per 10 minutes (the average BMR is about 1500 cal/day).

We do need to take into account NET calories when we figure out how many calories we are burning. So if we burn 100 calories per 10 minutes while running, that's about 90 net calories. Or 540 net calories per hour, over and above the 60 base.

Imagine if we really burned 50-60 calories doing nothing for 10 minutes. That would be 7200 calories per day.

[Irongirl]

Further to that article, endurance athletes may run a few times a week, but, slog off the rest of the week, recovering ... taking the elevators, escalators in stead of walking a flight of stairs or two .... Getting into the car and driving a block or two to the grocery store rather than walking or running or cycling, etc .....

solution: get a dog. lol

I've already lost a couple of pounds since getting Sammy!

I've tried, but can't find no pug anywhere ....

a pug won't run with you - or walk very far!

[Jwolf]

When we say a person generally burns 100-120 calories per mile, is that over and above their basal metabolic rate?

It's a flaw in how we talk about calories burned, because it actually includes basal. But as I said in my above post, the article is also flawed-- we burn about 10 calories doing nothing for that time, not 50-60. So when we say that running burns 100-120 calories per mile, the NET calories burned is really 90-110.

It is something to consider when we talk about calories burned per hour of activity, though. And something that often gets missed in those calorie-counting programs. Often it seems like the basal calories are getting counted twice, which might mean a difference of 100-200 calories per day. Doesn't sound like much, but it might be if you're trying to lose weight by counting calories.

[HCcD]

Further to that article, endurance athletes may run a few times a week, but, slog off the rest of the week, recovering ... taking the elevators, escalators in stead of walking a flight of stairs or two .... Getting into the car and driving a block or two to the grocery store rather than walking or running or cycling, etc .....

solution: get a dog. lol

I've already lost a couple of pounds since getting Sammy!

I've tried, but can't find no pug anywhere ....

a pug won't run with you - or walk very far!

what if I put him/her in a backpack and/or on a cage in the front of my bike ...

[Croyd]

what if I put him/her in a backpack and/or on a cage in the front of my bike ...

Our little pug had no trouble going on 2-4 hr hikes with us when he was younger. We did have to lift him over some of the big (to him) obstacles

[runJrun]

Imagine if we really burned 50-60 calories doing nothing for 10 minutes. That would be 7200 calories per day.

Imagine how much food you would have to consume...and just from sitting!

I agree that the article is very misleading - it makes it sound like exercising does not really benefit you in your weight loss goals. If I was trying to lose a significant amount of weight and read this article I would feel very discouraged.

[The Joggler]

Also, you can get an "after-burner" effect from exercise if you do speed intervals or stregnth training.

I just finished a 10-mile run, so if I follow this article's advice it looks like I can consume about 8,200 calories today – sweet!! What's for dinner?

http://thejoggler.blogspot.com
Michal