|
Ever wondered what's the most calories you can burn per hour? Ever wondered how certain activities/exercises compare with other things (even daily life)? Here is a comprehensive list of around 300 things:
http://www.nutristrategy.com/caloriesburned.htm
(there are also a number of other charts with other stuff like walking uphill, marching, etc. check em out)
Of course these are all relative to surrounding and intensity, but a great general guideline when deciding what exercises to choose.
Some surprising shit on there, as well as a bunch of crap I have no idea what even are. And I'm sure some of these activities can not be exactly accurate depending on how you apply yourself in them. Skateboarding for example, can change greatly depending if you are going uphill, downhill, riding on smooth or rough street, doing tricks over and over, or just peddling down a flat smooth street (I'm assuming they chose the latter).
Top 3 in terms of calorie burning:
- Running >5.5minute mile (10.9mph/17.5kph)
- Cross Country Skiing uphill
- Forestry/Axe Chopping vigorously
Running obviously, but the others lol. Who knew?
I also created a png image with all the activities over 900 CBph per hour at the highest weight class and color coded them sort of arbitrarily on highest, middle-highest, and low-highest.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/JLRBvhM.png)
I always hear things from people who think they know the best exercises or that certain exercises are best or on the same par as others. And I've often debated the subject with co workers or random people. So now you can set them straight. Share the knowledge! Cheers.
 
|
If you're fat, there's no way you're running a 5.5 minute mile o.O
|
On October 10 2013 11:19 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
If you're fat, there's no way you're running a 5.5 minute mile o.O
True, but you can choose something a little more manageable that burns the most calories for you to start and work your way up to that. It's all about being efficient.
|
relevant
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/JBMSvYl.png)
|
vlaric, Last year or so I've been wondering how to cardio and lift at the same time or even if you should. It seems like they are counter-conducive to each other. Do people just do cycles of workout regiments throughout the year? Like a bulking heavy lifting for 3 months, then cardio stuff for 3 months, then hypertrophy rep based stuff for 3 months, etc?
|
lol @ people who do cardio, enjoy looking like a skinny dyel phaggot forever brah
User was temp banned for this post.
|
^omg i lol'd so hard hahahaha
On October 10 2013 11:33 MarlieChurphy wrote:
vlaric, Last year or so I've been wondering how to cardio and lift at the same time or even if you should. It seems like they are counter-conducive to each other. Do people just do cycles of workout regiments throughout the year? Like a bulking heavy lifting for 3 months, then cardio stuff for 3 months, then hypertrophy rep based stuff for 3 months, etc?
cardio is always good for u (improves cardiovascular health), but you're right in that it can make things a little more difficult for those who are 'hard-gainers', the skinny guys who can eat a lot and not put on much weight. usually these guys will not do cardio because it's already hard for them to eat as much as they need to eat to put on mass without the extra caloric deficit that cardio provides.
but for most people (lifters included), cardio isn't necessarily a bad thing or counterproductive to gains. so long as you're eating an adequate amount of protein/calories, it's still very possible to put on mass while partaking in a regular cardio routine. in fact, a lot of the biggest guys in my old gym were training for marathons/half-marathons and stuff like that.
|
I guess it's time to go find some wood to chop
|
On October 10 2013 11:34 iamho wrote:
lol @ people who do cardio, enjoy looking like a skinny dyel phaggot forever brah
I assume Zyzz reference? That guy was an idiot and he died from steroids lol
|
On October 10 2013 11:38 MarlieChurphy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2013 11:34 iamho wrote:
lol @ people who do cardio, enjoy looking like a skinny dyel phaggot forever brah I assume Zyzz reference? That guy was an idiot and he died from steroids lol
Zyzz didn't die from steroids brah.
As the temperature continued to increase, Zyzz managed to regain conciousness. He was still in the sauna, and his heart was beating rapidly with each beat sending intense vibrations of pain throughout his body. Unable to get himself up off the floor, Zyzz begins a series of attempts to open the door, with each failure edging him closer off the ledge into the abyss of death until alas, he manages to open the door and collapses on his back outside.
Zyzz manages to crawl out of the sauna not realising that there is a person standing next to him, observing him, almost as if mocking him. As Zyzz lay on the tiled floor gripping his chest in pain after being unable to both completely move his body completely out of the sauna and unable to identify the person as his vision has deteriorated into a blur, the person presents itself. "Hello, bro" the person greets him, in an enthusiastic tone. "S..Said?" slurs a disoriented Zyzz. It is indeed 'Chestbrah'.
"You took everything from me.." yells Said while gripping Zyzz's hair, lifting his head up to make close eye-contact.
"S-Said, please, call an ambo, i'm ****ed up..." slurs Zyzz, barely able to keep eye contact, before beginning to throw up all over himself.
"Yes, yes, brother, throw it all up, make me taste it, make me smell it!" Utters Said in his now snake-like voice while simultaneously reaching down Zyzz's shorts to grab his penis with his right hand, while using his left hand to scoop up small portions of vomit before passing them into his own mouth to taste. "Mmmm, not so godly now, huh, brother? Tastes like mortality" taunts said again.
"LET'S SEE HOW GODLY YOU ARE NOW BROTHER. YOU TOOK EVERYTHING ME FROM ME. I CANNOT EVEN **** MY OWN GIRL WITHOUT HER WANTING TO WATCH VIDEOS OF YOU, MY OWN BROTHER, FLEXING AS I PUMP AWAY. DO YOU UNDERSTAND MY SHAME? DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE TORTURE YOU PUT ME THROUGH FOR ALL THESE YEARS. I TAUGHT YOU, I TRAINED YOU, I INTRODUCED YOU TO CELLTECH, AND YOU REPAY ME BY MAKING ME YOUR MOP TO CLEAN YOUR **** UP, YOUR SIDEKICK TO CAST JOKES UPON? ME, YOUR OWN DEAR BROTHER." yells an infuriated Said, before pausing to catch his breath. "Now.. NOW... Look at you... So placid, so incapable, so.. weak".
"Said.... You raped a boy... you deserve none of those things.. But i'll still love you as my brother" Replies Zyzz, with all his might. "Now please... get me an ambulance."
"I don't think so. You see, it's my turn.. It's my turn to shine, now. It's my turn to be you. I am going to become you. We will be one, and to begin this transformation, brother, will require one more act for us to do together" States a now calm and collected Said before beginning to roll Zyzz onto his stomach. "I am going to **** you, brother. I am going to **** you, and i'm going to cum inside you. Then you will cum in my mouth. I am going to absorb your life force, brother."
Said begins to unzip his jeans to release a 5.5 inch penis and then continues to pull down Zyzz's shorts.
|
On October 10 2013 11:41 iamho wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2013 11:38 MarlieChurphy wrote:On October 10 2013 11:34 iamho wrote:
lol @ people who do cardio, enjoy looking like a skinny dyel phaggot forever brah I assume Zyzz reference? That guy was an idiot and he died from steroids lol Zyzz didn't die from steroids brah. Show nested quote +
As the temperature continued to increase, Zyzz managed to regain conciousness. He was still in the sauna, and his heart was beating rapidly with each beat sending intense vibrations of pain throughout his body. Unable to get himself up off the floor, Zyzz begins a series of attempts to open the door, with each failure edging him closer off the ledge into the abyss of death until alas, he manages to open the door and collapses on his back outside.
Zyzz manages to crawl out of the sauna not realising that there is a person standing next to him, observing him, almost as if mocking him. As Zyzz lay on the tiled floor gripping his chest in pain after being unable to both completely move his body completely out of the sauna and unable to identify the person as his vision has deteriorated into a blur, the person presents itself. "Hello, bro" the person greets him, in an enthusiastic tone. "S..Said?" slurs a disoriented Zyzz. It is indeed 'Chestbrah'.
"You took everything from me.." yells Said while gripping Zyzz's hair, lifting his head up to make close eye-contact.
"S-Said, please, call an ambo, i'm ****ed up..." slurs Zyzz, barely able to keep eye contact, before beginning to throw up all over himself.
"Yes, yes, brother, throw it all up, make me taste it, make me smell it!" Utters Said in his now snake-like voice while simultaneously reaching down Zyzz's shorts to grab his penis with his right hand, while using his left hand to scoop up small portions of vomit before passing them into his own mouth to taste. "Mmmm, not so godly now, huh, brother? Tastes like mortality" taunts said again.
"LET'S SEE HOW GODLY YOU ARE NOW BROTHER. YOU TOOK EVERYTHING ME FROM ME. I CANNOT EVEN **** MY OWN GIRL WITHOUT HER WANTING TO WATCH VIDEOS OF YOU, MY OWN BROTHER, FLEXING AS I PUMP AWAY. DO YOU UNDERSTAND MY SHAME? DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE TORTURE YOU PUT ME THROUGH FOR ALL THESE YEARS. I TAUGHT YOU, I TRAINED YOU, I INTRODUCED YOU TO CELLTECH, AND YOU REPAY ME BY MAKING ME YOUR MOP TO CLEAN YOUR **** UP, YOUR SIDEKICK TO CAST JOKES UPON? ME, YOUR OWN DEAR BROTHER." yells an infuriated Said, before pausing to catch his breath. "Now.. NOW... Look at you... So placid, so incapable, so.. weak".
"Said.... You raped a boy... you deserve none of those things.. But i'll still love you as my brother" Replies Zyzz, with all his might. "Now please... get me an ambulance."
"I don't think so. You see, it's my turn.. It's my turn to shine, now. It's my turn to be you. I am going to become you. We will be one, and to begin this transformation, brother, will require one more act for us to do together" States a now calm and collected Said before beginning to roll Zyzz onto his stomach. "I am going to **** you, brother. I am going to **** you, and i'm going to cum inside you. Then you will cum in my mouth. I am going to absorb your life force, brother."
Said begins to unzip his jeans to release a 5.5 inch penis and then continues to pull down Zyzz's shorts.
http://i.imgflip.com/43pi6.jpg
User was warned for this post
|
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
On October 10 2013 11:37 vlaric wrote:
cardio is always good for u (improves cardiovascular health), but you're right in that it can make things a little more difficult for those who are 'hard-gainers', the skinny guys who can eat a lot and not put on much weight. usually these guys will not do cardio because it's already hard for them to eat as much as they need to eat to put on mass without the extra caloric deficit that cardio provides.
This is my problem. My stomach can't fit enough food for me to gain any weight T_T
|
On October 10 2013 11:37 vlaric wrote:^omg i lol'd so hard hahahaha Show nested quote +On October 10 2013 11:33 MarlieChurphy wrote:
vlaric, Last year or so I've been wondering how to cardio and lift at the same time or even if you should. It seems like they are counter-conducive to each other. Do people just do cycles of workout regiments throughout the year? Like a bulking heavy lifting for 3 months, then cardio stuff for 3 months, then hypertrophy rep based stuff for 3 months, etc?
cardio is always good for u (improves cardiovascular health), but you're right in that it can make things a little more difficult for those who are 'hard-gainers', the skinny guys who can eat a lot and not put on much weight. usually these guys will not do cardio because it's already hard for them to eat as much as they need to eat to put on mass without the extra caloric deficit that cardio provides. but for most people (lifters included), cardio isn't necessarily a bad thing or counterproductive to gains. so long as you're eating an adequate amount of protein/calories, it's still very possible to put on mass while partaking in a regular cardio routine. in fact, a lot of the biggest guys in my old gym were training for marathons/half-marathons and stuff like that.
I heard that doing marathons often is pretty bad for you. Maybe training and doing one is fine, but overall it's pretty unhealthy which seems kind of strange but I guess it's one of those diminishing returns things. Also, I don't see why you would want all that extra muscle weight on your top half if you're planning to run 13-26 miles. Seems like it would slow you down and make the work all that much harder.
Anyway, I see your point though. I still try and run/walk a couple miles every week for my hearth muscle training! I get enough cardio from warmups and lifting weights imho.
On October 10 2013 11:44 lichter wrote:
This is my problem. My stomach can't fit enough food for me to gain any weight T_T
What height/weight are you? And how old? I would just suggest eating high calorie foods and keeping them around and snack them regularly throughout the day. Ever heard of the GOMAD diet?
|
Weights and lifts than a nice cardio session burns and is proven most effective for me at least, I've lost plenty of weight and gained a noticeable muscle mass in a 4-6 month period. But since then I've seem to reach that plateau stage and also have a reoccurring rotator cuff injury during my elementary school years. =(
|
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
On October 10 2013 11:57 MarlieChurphy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2013 11:44 lichter wrote:
This is my problem. My stomach can't fit enough food for me to gain any weight T_T What height/weight are you? And how old? I would just suggest eating high calorie foods and keeping them around and snack them regularly throughout the day. Ever heard of the GOMAD diet?
5'7, 125lbs, and 27. I doubt there's still room to grow. :p Though I was only 115 a year and a half ago, so I have gained 10 pounds. I also have tiny bones. Like seriously small bones. That's why I weigh so little, it's not for the lack of meat on me.
I googled GOMAD. I'm kinda lactose intolerance (I puke it if I drink enough, but not small amounts).
|
On October 10 2013 12:08 Disregard wrote:
Weights and lifts than a nice cardio session burns and is proven most effective for me at least, I've lost plenty of weight and gained a noticeable muscle mass in a 4-6 month period. But since then I've seem to reach that plateau stage and also have a reoccurring rotator cuff injury during my elementary school years. =(
I too have a problem with my left shoulder. When I was about 11 I was in a pool and playing volley ball. The ball went behind me and my left arm was under water, I reached out and jumped back to hit it and when my arm exited the pressure of the water I over-exteneded or dislocated my shoulder and then popped it back in a second later. It hasn't been 100% ever since. I recently reinjured it again about a year ago lifting weights. It's better now, in fact I think it's better than ever because of the weightlifting because it not only builds muscle, but bones, tendons, and ligaments become stronger as well.
On October 10 2013 12:09 lichter wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2013 11:57 MarlieChurphy wrote:On October 10 2013 11:44 lichter wrote:
This is my problem. My stomach can't fit enough food for me to gain any weight T_T What height/weight are you? And how old? I would just suggest eating high calorie foods and keeping them around and snack them regularly throughout the day. Ever heard of the GOMAD diet? 5'7, 125lbs, and 27. I doubt there's still room to grow. :p Though I was only 115 a year and a half ago, so I have gained 10 pounds. I also have tiny bones. Like seriously small bones. That's why I weigh so little, it's not for the lack of meat on me. I googled GOMAD. I'm kinda lactose intolerance (I puke it if I drink enough, but not small amounts).
You won't be growing more into adult no, but you can still grow and be a stronger version of yourself. Like I mentioned above, weightlifting also increases bone density and other things besides muscles. Start out with low or no weight and just work on form and hypertrophy (high reps/low weight) and just add 5 lbs every week or so until you are at a decent level. It's what I did. Started at like 6'2" 165lbs when I was 26-27 and this morning I am 29 at 192lbs (was up to 205 when I was eating more). You just have to dedicate to lifting and eating a shit load. I usually eat a meal 1-2 hours before working out and have a ~600cal fruit/milk smoothie post workout and then 1-2 hours later eat another meal on top of it. Sucks that you can't have milk because it's honestly one of the best things I would advocate for gains. It has carbs, protein, vitamins, minerals, and all that good shit. I mean think about it, it's babies sole intake for everything the body needs to grow, and they grow fast.
|
Swimming is such a good workout
|
Once you're past the 6 minute mile pace, you're really not doing cardio for the weight loss anymore and just doing it because running is enjoyable and has a lot of cardiovascular and other health benefits if you're not pushing your knees and ankles too hard or incorrectly, so really talking about 5.5 pace for weight loss is a bit silly XD. Lifting and diet is much better for weight loss when you're only running 12 minute miles.
^ I like swimming too but swimming is a lot more work than just running (treadmill) or lifting (dumbbells). Plus, some people are self-conscious about their body, and you're not really going to get great exercise (or lap times) when you're very much overweight. Swimming's great in general though if you're trying to stay fit (not the best for any long-term goals).
|
On October 10 2013 11:57 MarlieChurphy wrote:
I heard that doing marathons often is pretty bad for you. Maybe training and doing one is fine, but overall it's pretty unhealthy which seems kind of strange but I guess it's one of those diminishing returns things. Also, I don't see why you would want all that extra muscle weight on your top half if you're planning to run 13-26 miles. Seems like it would slow you down and make the work all that much harder.
Anyway, I see your point though. I still try and run/walk a couple miles every week for my hearth muscle training! I get enough cardio from warmups and lifting weights imho.
yea those were some pretty extreme examples haha. i'm actually the same way; i used to have a lengthy running cardio routine but i discovered that it really cut into my gains and recovery, so i've settled for lighter cardio workouts with exercises that are less stressful on the joints/ligaments like the elliptical and jumprope.
|
On October 10 2013 12:20 Blisse wrote:
Once you're past the 6 minute mile pace, you're really not doing cardio for the weight loss anymore and just doing it because running is enjoyable and has a lot of cardiovascular and other health benefits if you're not pushing your knees and ankles too hard or incorrectly, so really talking about 5.5 pace for weight loss is a bit silly XD. Lifting and diet is much better for weight loss when you're only running 12 minute miles.
^ I like swimming too but swimming is a lot more work than just running (treadmill) or lifting (dumbbells). Plus, some people are self-conscious about their body, and you're not really going to get great exercise (or lap times) when you're very much overweight. Swimming's great in general though if you're trying to stay fit (not the best for any long-term goals).
I would really only advocate swimming for people if they have joint problems, weight issues or mobility problems that don't allow them to run or cycle.
I'm of the opinion that if it's something you enjoy or look forward to, then it could be a better workout or you're not pushing yourself hard enough and you're taking the easy route.. You need to be doing something that you hate that your body hates for those gains yo! It's also a bit more satisfying and mentally gratifying when you are disciplining yourself. A lot of the times when I workout these days it's more for the mental health than the body health. It's like the best stress reliever, great for depression/bad moods, and overall feeling great after you accomplished your workout both mentally and physically. This is SCIENCE fact, yolo/carpe diem/it is a good day to die!
|
On October 10 2013 12:30 MarlieChurphy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2013 12:20 Blisse wrote:
Once you're past the 6 minute mile pace, you're really not doing cardio for the weight loss anymore and just doing it because running is enjoyable and has a lot of cardiovascular and other health benefits if you're not pushing your knees and ankles too hard or incorrectly, so really talking about 5.5 pace for weight loss is a bit silly XD. Lifting and diet is much better for weight loss when you're only running 12 minute miles.
^ I like swimming too but swimming is a lot more work than just running (treadmill) or lifting (dumbbells). Plus, some people are self-conscious about their body, and you're not really going to get great exercise (or lap times) when you're very much overweight. Swimming's great in general though if you're trying to stay fit (not the best for any long-term goals). I would really only advocate swimming for people if they have joint problems, weight issues or mobility problems that don't allow them to run or cycle. I'm of the opinion that if it's something you enjoy or look forward to, then it could be a better workout or you're not pushing yourself hard enough and you're taking the easy route.. You need to be doing something that you hate that your body hates for those gains yo! It's also a bit more satisfying and mentally gratifying when you are disciplining yourself. A lot of the times when I workout these days it's more for the mental health than the body health. It's like the best stress reliever, great for depression/bad moods, and overall feeling great after you accomplished your workout both mentally and physically. This is SCIENCE fact, yolo/carpe diem/it is a good day to die!
Different people work on fundamentally different levels of mental attitude and fortitude and work towards completely different long-term goals, so it's important to be aware of those. You're trying to to relieve tension, some other guy's trying to lose weight, some other guy's just trying to keep fit so his chiropractor happy and some other really fit guy has stopped and is working to simply keep his muscle from become flabby, some other guy's swimming because that's the only exercise he enjoys but he still wants to keep fit, and some other guy's trying to work out so he lives just a tiny bit longer.
I love encouraging push yourself to the limit all the time, but sometimes that's not appropriate, sometimes that's not safe, and sometimes that's not the best route.
|
Sure. Everyone is different as far as goals and abilities, but I have agreed with Elliot Hulse's idealogy of 'trying to be the best version of yourself' which essentially is just saying work hard and keep at it no matter what it is you are doing. Strive for the best at whatever it is you are doing, but be efficient at it as well.
|
|
|
Hong Kong9152 Posts
swimming fly for most people who have not done it as a sport is going to be very hard i think
|
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
Yes, yes I am.
I already exercise a lot, I guess I just need to devour more food.
|
I burn a lot of calories by runnin' from tha po-lice.
|
Damnit, why doesn't the table include powerwalks? I've found several sources stating that powerwalks are more effective than running (at least if you don't have the stamina to run long/fast enough of course), it would be sweet to see how it compares... say, walking in a high tempo for 1 hour.
|
Don't do long cardio sessions. Do high intensity cardio (sprinting, jumping) for set amounts of time without stopping, then taking a short break. Slowly increase activity to rest ratios as you get stronger.
|
Germany3598 Posts
On October 10 2013 12:19 Whatson wrote:
Swimming is such a good workout
But it's wet and I hate water. I prefer running through the woods.
|
ha, I spent 9 hours cutting down, digging out the rootstock and taking apart a decent-sized yew last week. That's like OVER 9000 calories! Still nursing the blisters, though. And all the bruises are now greenish-blue.
edit: not that I'm fat. And I kinda busted my knee. But it was fun.
|
I do 15kph at the end of my workout for like 2 minutes. 15kph really is fast and cannot be sustained long-term if you are not already in pretty good shape. I do sports 5 times a week, but... I usually run at 12/13kph. But its my warmup for lifting so... npnp :D
|
The more swole you are the higher your BMR. So ironically get BIG to get SKINNY.
|
On October 10 2013 15:56 Tobberoth wrote:
Damnit, why doesn't the table include powerwalks? I've found several sources stating that powerwalks are more effective than running (at least if you don't have the stamina to run long/fast enough of course), it would be sweet to see how it compares... say, walking in a high tempo for 1 hour.
It included walking, at many different speeds, and it also has racewalking up on one of the charts. Sorry, but the several sources you read are entirely bullshit. Just think about the common sense of it all, more air intake, more oxygen being processed, more muscles working harder, more calories burned. Iirc, it's something like 5cals per liter of air, or was it 5 liters per cal. Something like that.
edit-Maybe they compared the fastest walking speed 5mph, to the slowest running speed of 5mph which the chart shows are the same calories burned. I dunno if you could really call either a run or walk, more of a jog to me.
|
On October 10 2013 20:36 NarutO wrote:
I do 15kph at the end of my workout for like 2 minutes. 15kph really is fast and cannot be sustained long-term if you are not already in pretty good shape. I do sports 5 times a week, but... I usually run at 12/13kph. But its my warmup for lifting so... npnp :D
I can never tell how fast I am running on the treadmills because they seem to all sort of vary speeds. I usually set it between 6 and 8 (I don't think it is mph), but I usually warmup doing lots of stretching, then fast walk .15mile, then run 7~ .50, then fast walk .15, run out the rest at 7 or 8, then walk til i'm cooled off. I guess next time I should time how long it takes me to run the .5 to figure my speed. The whole thing takes around 10-11minutes usually.
|
On October 10 2013 15:13 lichter wrote:
Yes, yes I am.
I already exercise a lot, I guess I just need to devour more food.
yea drop the cardio stuff, maybe just run a few times a week for your heart and lungs. Eat a lot and lift more weights. rawr
|
I chopped down around 20 large branches overhanging my fence up the biggest ladder I had using a small hand axe. Talk about sore forearms. My shirt was as wet as it has been since playing outdoor racquet ball in Florida.
Would recommend!
|
On October 10 2013 21:24 MarlieChurphy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2013 20:36 NarutO wrote:
I do 15kph at the end of my workout for like 2 minutes. 15kph really is fast and cannot be sustained long-term if you are not already in pretty good shape. I do sports 5 times a week, but... I usually run at 12/13kph. But its my warmup for lifting so... npnp :D I can never tell how fast I am running on the treadmills because they seem to all sort of vary speeds. I usually set it between 6 and 8 (I don't think it is mph), but I usually warmup doing lots of stretching, then fast walk .15mile, then run 7~ .50, then fast walk .15, run out the rest at 7 or 8, then walk til i'm cooled off. I guess next time I should time how long it takes me to run the .5 to figure my speed. The whole thing takes around 10-11minutes usually.
Mine are KPH and I am doing stretching/a bit of jumping to get at least a bit of heat into the muscles.
I will walk 2,5 - 3 minutes at 6 KPH
I will run at 11/12 KPH for 10 minutes
I will walk at 6 KPH for 2 minutes
I will sprint for 2 minutes at 15 KPH (yes that is sprint for me TT, I could go faster but with exhaustion beforehand and doing it every day, I am not so sure the treadmill wouldn't fuck me hard lol
After that I am doing basic workout. Pullups, Benchpress, Legpress, Shoulderstuff etc... If I do a cardio day, I will set up 5 stations after my initial warmup /running
pushups on 3 bosu (google if you don't know it, its half of a ball)
burpees
kettlebell swings (12kg)
barbell rows+overheadpress with just the bar (20kg)
box jumps
I will do that 3 rounds with 20 reps each. My hurt goes nuts, all muscles sore. After one round, you can get 1 minute break. Its really a sick workout and is really fun. It looks a bit stupid but I am not in the gym to look fine, but to get fit.
:3
I think even better (HIIT) would be mixing those 5 stations with replacing some shit. Like, boxjumps -> deadlift -> burpees -> pushups on bosu -> barbell rows with 65-70% of your max, repeat. Mixing cardio with strength usually burns a ton. But if you want to get fit/lose weigth the biggest part is nutrition anyways.
|
On October 10 2013 21:37 NarutO wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2013 21:24 MarlieChurphy wrote:On October 10 2013 20:36 NarutO wrote:
I do 15kph at the end of my workout for like 2 minutes. 15kph really is fast and cannot be sustained long-term if you are not already in pretty good shape. I do sports 5 times a week, but... I usually run at 12/13kph. But its my warmup for lifting so... npnp :D I can never tell how fast I am running on the treadmills because they seem to all sort of vary speeds. I usually set it between 6 and 8 (I don't think it is mph), but I usually warmup doing lots of stretching, then fast walk .15mile, then run 7~ .50, then fast walk .15, run out the rest at 7 or 8, then walk til i'm cooled off. I guess next time I should time how long it takes me to run the .5 to figure my speed. The whole thing takes around 10-11minutes usually. Mine are KPH and I am doing stretching/a bit of jumping to get at least a bit of heat into the muscles. I will walk 2,5 - 3 minutes at 6 KPH I will run at 11/12 KPH for 10 minutes I will walk at 6 KPH for 2 minutes I will sprint for 2 minutes at 15 KPH (yes that is sprint for me TT, I could go faster but with exhaustion beforehand and doing it every day, I am not so sure the treadmill wouldn't fuck me hard lol After that I am doing basic workout. Pullups, Benchpress, Legpress, Shoulderstuff etc... If I do a cardio day, I will set up 5 stations after my initial warmup /running pushups on 3 bosu (google if you don't know it, its half of a ball) burpees kettlebell swings (12kg) barbell rows+overheadpress with just the bar (20kg) box jumps I will do that 3 rounds with 20 reps each. My hurt goes nuts, all muscles sore. After one round, you can get 1 minute break. Its really a sick workout and is really fun. It looks a bit stupid but I am not in the gym to look fine, but to get fit. :3 I think even better (HIIT) would be mixing those 5 stations with replacing some shit. Like, boxjumps -> deadlift -> burpees -> pushups on bosu -> barbell rows with 65-70% of your max, repeat. Mixing cardio with strength usually burns a ton. But if you want to get fit/lose weigth the biggest part is nutrition anyways.
It seems like your fitness goals are for a sport? Or you learned them from doing sports? They are all more tailored to natural organic movements rather than strength training or muscle building (which is fine).
If you want to incorporate more strength training without giving up what you currently do just make sure you do these 5 things: bench press, front squat, deadlift, pullups, and tricep dips. they hit all the big mover muscle groups as well as all the support muscle groups.
|
On October 10 2013 21:19 MarlieChurphy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2013 15:56 Tobberoth wrote:
Damnit, why doesn't the table include powerwalks? I've found several sources stating that powerwalks are more effective than running (at least if you don't have the stamina to run long/fast enough of course), it would be sweet to see how it compares... say, walking in a high tempo for 1 hour. It included walking, at many different speeds, and it also has racewalking up on one of the charts. Sorry, but the several sources you read are entirely bullshit. Just think about the common sense of it all, more air intake, more oxygen being processed, more muscles working harder, more calories burned. Iirc, it's something like 5cals per liter of air, or was it 5 liters per cal. Something like that. edit-Maybe they compared the fastest walking speed 5mph, to the slowest running speed of 5mph which the chart shows are the same calories burned. I dunno if you could really call either a run or walk, more of a jog to me.
It's more that powerwalking for an hour is quite easy to do even if you're out of shape, while running at a high pace for a whole hour non-stop is borderline impossible, and it's far more effective to powerwalk for 1 hour than to run at a slow pace for 30 minutes then giving up because you're about to die.
|
On October 10 2013 22:16 MarlieChurphy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2013 21:37 NarutO wrote:On October 10 2013 21:24 MarlieChurphy wrote:On October 10 2013 20:36 NarutO wrote:
I do 15kph at the end of my workout for like 2 minutes. 15kph really is fast and cannot be sustained long-term if you are not already in pretty good shape. I do sports 5 times a week, but... I usually run at 12/13kph. But its my warmup for lifting so... npnp :D I can never tell how fast I am running on the treadmills because they seem to all sort of vary speeds. I usually set it between 6 and 8 (I don't think it is mph), but I usually warmup doing lots of stretching, then fast walk .15mile, then run 7~ .50, then fast walk .15, run out the rest at 7 or 8, then walk til i'm cooled off. I guess next time I should time how long it takes me to run the .5 to figure my speed. The whole thing takes around 10-11minutes usually. Mine are KPH and I am doing stretching/a bit of jumping to get at least a bit of heat into the muscles. I will walk 2,5 - 3 minutes at 6 KPH I will run at 11/12 KPH for 10 minutes I will walk at 6 KPH for 2 minutes I will sprint for 2 minutes at 15 KPH (yes that is sprint for me TT, I could go faster but with exhaustion beforehand and doing it every day, I am not so sure the treadmill wouldn't fuck me hard lol After that I am doing basic workout. Pullups, Benchpress, Legpress, Shoulderstuff etc... If I do a cardio day, I will set up 5 stations after my initial warmup /running pushups on 3 bosu (google if you don't know it, its half of a ball) burpees kettlebell swings (12kg) barbell rows+overheadpress with just the bar (20kg) box jumps I will do that 3 rounds with 20 reps each. My hurt goes nuts, all muscles sore. After one round, you can get 1 minute break. Its really a sick workout and is really fun. It looks a bit stupid but I am not in the gym to look fine, but to get fit. :3 I think even better (HIIT) would be mixing those 5 stations with replacing some shit. Like, boxjumps -> deadlift -> burpees -> pushups on bosu -> barbell rows with 65-70% of your max, repeat. Mixing cardio with strength usually burns a ton. But if you want to get fit/lose weigth the biggest part is nutrition anyways. It seems like your fitness goals are for a sport? Or you learned them from doing sports? They are all more tailored to natural organic movements rather than strength training or muscle building (which is fine). If you want to incorporate more strength training without giving up what you currently do just make sure you do these 5 things: bench press, front squat, deadlift, pullups, and tricep dips. they hit all the big mover muscle groups as well as all the support muscle groups.
Its what I do when I do a cardio day. I pump iron 3 times a week but I cannot do whole body workouts 5 times a week and I dont like splits. When I do strenght stuff:
Benchpress/Chestpress
Pullups tight and wide grip
Deadlifts
Occasionally Squats but I injured myself doing them in the past. Its in my head now. I can do squats without weight ass to grass but movement with the bar makes me struggle and it feels funny... its in my head probably.
Furthermore barbell rows/overheadpress. Never did dips or frontsquats. Worth a shot I guess. Will try out, thanks!
|
On October 10 2013 18:19 virpi wrote:But it's wet and I hate water. I prefer running through the woods.
But swimming is the best! Plus if you are doing a real swimming workout you are going to be burning a lot more calories.
There is absolutely no way that treading water burns more calories than fast freestyle or breastroke laps! Whoever did this test must have been going like 1 mph.
Lift for a half hour and then get in the pool and swim for another half hour. Start slow, do some sprints, then warm down for a good 10+ minutes. Good cardio, will help build muscle if you eat right, and won't kill your knees or hips. Breaststroke is best for arms / pectorals, butterfly is good for abs, and frestyle/crawl is great for legs.
|
Fitting username, but I agree.
|
there is no way running is burning more than swimming.
unless you cant swim ofc.
|
The problem with this chart is that it's only taking into account calories burned during the exercise (frankly I wonder how they even do this), but it doesn't account for the rest of the day. Weightlifting and HIIT (i.e. running around really fast) has an effect on your metabolism but most of these exercises, especially running, basically stop once you stop.
On October 10 2013 17:32 Xahhk wrote:
Don't do long cardio sessions. Do high intensity cardio (sprinting, jumping) for set amounts of time without stopping, then taking a short break. Slowly increase activity to rest ratios as you get stronger.
This is crazy talk. :p
|
so what activities continue burning calories after stopping?
|
On October 11 2013 16:52 29 fps wrote:
so what activities continue burning calories after stopping?
Every somewhat prolonged activity basically. Your metabolism doesn't immediately go into saving mode when you stop.
I actually expected rock climbing to be on top. Boxing is also very tiring, especially since coordinating your breath is hard while having to react, and you have to accept hits on the abdomen to not lose cover for your face.
The highest consumption from running can't be achieved that easily. Running like that for a while requires a lot of training.
|
Guys, any activity is good. Usually higher intensity will burn more calories during said activity, and boost EPOC(burns calories at rest).
A mixture of strength training and cardiovascular exercise is probably best, because you get the best of both worlds.
|
On October 10 2013 11:19 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
If you're fat, there's no way you're running a 5.5 minute mile o.O
Follow your dreams
|
i like swimming.
Doesnt kill knees, 4 different styles, complicated techniques and it teaches willpower because if you get lazy and reduce force on you at the wrong times, you get inefficient and things get much worse than actually going through.
Plus of course, if you are a club swimmer and swim sometimes at hours open to public, you look like a total boss 
|
If only the scale would be higher, that'd be beneficial.
Also, sucks that many of the activities are running. I am 6'6" and about 300 lbs, and my fysiotherapist has told me I am not allowed to go running as that's going to absolutely destroy my knees (which are f-ed up already)
|
On October 11 2013 02:40 LaNague wrote:
there is no way running is burning more than swimming.
unless you cant swim ofc.
Why would you think that. There is more power/faster going into your biggest muscle groups in running for starters, IE; more calories.
On October 11 2013 03:37 Jerubaal wrote:
The problem with this chart is that it's only taking into account calories burned during the exercise (frankly I wonder how they even do this), but it doesn't account for the rest of the day. Weightlifting and HIIT (i.e. running around really fast) has an effect on your metabolism but most of these exercises, especially running, basically stop once you stop.
Well obviously there is no fireman climbing an hour high ladder.
I assume they hook up one of those things to each person's face that regulates and counts how much oxygen is used up, from that you can deduce (like I said earlier in the thread) a ratio of something like each liter of air is worth X amount of calories. And then probably have them do the activity for a short time 10-15 minutes and then multiply it x4 for the hour thing. Like I said, it's probably not perfectly accurate but it gives you a general idea of what's going on.
On October 12 2013 09:24 Aelonius wrote:
If only the scale would be higher, that'd be beneficial.
Also, sucks that many of the activities are running. I am 6'6" and about 300 lbs, and my physiotherapist has told me I am not allowed to go running as that's going to absolutely destroy my knees (which are f-ed up already)
fixed.
If you look at the individual charts you can see, generally, the calories burned goes up by about 50 for each 10 or 20 lbs. So you just need to do some quick math to figure it out. My friend and I actually were talking about he goes hiking all terrain for like 6 hours a day with a (he's 200 lbs) 50 lb load on his back. I Think we figured its like 4300 calories burned.
Yea, there are lots of options on there within the top 10 that are pretty good that don't involve the impacts. Cycling at very high pace, skindiving (which is basically like scuba diving without a tank), and some other stuff. Look at all the orange things.
If you are trying to lose weight, the most important thing to remember is just the diet part. It's much much easier to just not put the calories in than to try and burn them out. Our bodies are really good at keeping energy stored. It might help to just sort of make yourself more aware of how many calories something might be just by being able to eyeball it and keep a mental note in your head on how much you are eating. I make a game of it, I try and guess how much I think something might be before I check the label. I'm pretty accurate now.
http://twentytwowords.com/2013/02/18/various-foods-in-portions-of-200-calories-45-pictures/
Like I can eat a half of a bagel in 10 seconds and put in 100 calories, which is about the same as I burn when I run a mile in 11 minutes. You tell me what is easier.
Also, It is important to note that your size is really big, so your weight is going to be naturally higher at a regular level. So your caloric intake will be more closer to 2500 a day (just guessing here). I would bet if you dropped your intake to like the standard 2000 or 2200 a day you would start seeing weight slowly fall off every week. As a general protip, If you're not hungry all the time, you aren't burning calories (especially if you feel like you need 2nd helpings after each meal).
|
On October 12 2013 09:24 Aelonius wrote:
If only the scale would be higher, that'd be beneficial.
Also, sucks that many of the activities are running. I am 6'6" and about 300 lbs, and my fysiotherapist has told me I am not allowed to go running as that's going to absolutely destroy my knees (which are f-ed up already)
try out elliptical (stationary bike). super low impact so it's really easy on the joints.
|
I might be a little bit off the mark here, but I figured this may be a good place to get it straight.
When we look at calories, it is a set number. Does the type of food that generates those calories matter?
As example I take our local cantina at university. We've got 'fat' food (Dutch snacks that are indeed deep fried etc) with a certain calorie intake, yet when I take a baguette with tomato, cheese, lettuce and egg, it has more calories.
In my view, the number is relatively 'irrelevant' untill you actually have two 'healthy' things that are similar in terms of food-type. Am I wrong here or how do you see it? 
(PS: I am Dutch and our food has a lot of potatoes. That's nice and all, but I did notice I lost about 10lbs ever since I started cooking rice-based dishes 1-2x per week, and more importantly, change 95% of the soda intake to pure water. Yaaay)
|
On October 12 2013 20:23 Aelonius wrote:I might be a little bit off the mark here, but I figured this may be a good place to get it straight. When we look at calories, it is a set number. Does the type of food that generates those calories matter? As example I take our local cantina at university. We've got 'fat' food (Dutch snacks that are indeed deep fried etc) with a certain calorie intake, yet when I take a baguette with tomato, cheese, lettuce and egg, it has more calories. In my view, the number is relatively 'irrelevant' untill you actually have two 'healthy' things that are similar in terms of food-type. Am I wrong here or how do you see it? (PS: I am Dutch and our food has a lot of potatoes. That's nice and all, but I did notice I lost about 10lbs ever since I started cooking rice-based dishes 1-2x per week, and more importantly, change 95% of the soda intake to pure water. Yaaay)
I think that calories are a set value, so from a pure calorie standpoint, the baguette is worse. However, there's obviously more to healthy food that low calorie intake, what kind of fat it is, what vitamins it contains and all that good stuff.
I feel your PS though. I've been overight (grossly so) for several years since I lived in Japan (because I ate a ton and partied all the damn time with zero exercise) and my main key to start losing weight was to minimize carb intake. Instead of having 30% of my plate made up of potatoes, pasta and such, I went down to 5-10%, filling it up with sallad instead. It seems to make a really huge difference.
|
Aye!
I lived in China before for about 6 months, and lost like 5-10kg (10-20lbs~) while there due to the rice diet. I by no means paid attention to my food intake there and I still lost weight. So then I get back home in the Netherlands, with the typical food we eat here at home, and boom... in 6 months I went up with about 30lbs :/
I need to cook more for myself, but you know that feeling when you leave home at 07:00 AM and come back at 07:30 PM...
|
To get rid of fatty tissues, you need to get rid of the majority of sugar in your diet.
To lose weight, you need to take in fewer calories than you burn up. Rice/potatoes/pasta are examples of bad calorie foods because you will ingest a lot of calories to get the same amount of nutrition as other foods, and you still have to add other foods and flavours on top of the rice/potatoes/pasta. The rice diet that the Chinese generally eat just pushes you towards something like one or one and a half bowls of rice with lots of side dishes instead of a heaping of pasta alongside a heaping of sides or similar, which is a lot fewer calories.
If you do any significant amount of exercise though (some of the 1K cal activities Murphy listed), you generally have a lot more leeway in terms of eating, and after a long time of continuing those exercises, cutting the sugar intake is more significant than cutting your caloric intake, as long as you're being reasonable with the calories. If you want drastic differences, going with the low calorie, no sugar diet and a medium-high calorie activity will get you places the fastest. Otherwise, you can just do one of these activities, eat slightly better and achieve similar results after a year or something long.
|
On October 12 2013 20:23 Aelonius wrote:I might be a little bit off the mark here, but I figured this may be a good place to get it straight. When we look at calories, it is a set number. Does the type of food that generates those calories matter? As example I take our local cantina at university. We've got 'fat' food (Dutch snacks that are indeed deep fried etc) with a certain calorie intake, yet when I take a baguette with tomato, cheese, lettuce and egg, it has more calories. In my view, the number is relatively 'irrelevant' untill you actually have two 'healthy' things that are similar in terms of food-type. Am I wrong here or how do you see it? (PS: I am Dutch and our food has a lot of potatoes. That's nice and all, but I did notice I lost about 10lbs ever since I started cooking rice-based dishes 1-2x per week, and more importantly, change 95% of the soda intake to pure water. Yaaay)
I think your question is asking if it matters if all calories are the same? Or are some calories better than others? The short answer is calories are calories, and it doesn't matter if they're from a can of soda pop, a piece of fiber bread, a rack of ribs, or a bowl of vegetables or fruit.
Afaik, there is still somewhat debatable as research is done on this kind of thing a lot currently.
The reason why most diets seem to work, or why it seems that you lose weight eating different foods has to do with a couple things. 1, your fullness (the fiber content etc) and 2, how it is eaten (speed you eat, how much air is taken, how much chewing), and 3, size/portion in relation to calories it contains.
I'm going to assume a 1 oz bowl of rice contains far less calories than a 1oz bowl of potatoes (feel free to google it), therefor you could eat a lot more rice and gain less weight. To be honest though, both of those foods aren't very healthy. Potatoes have more nutrition in the skin.
Carbs are important, it's important to get them or else your body starts to cannibalize the muscle to preserve the fat.
Each nutrient has a purpose, and are required. The reason why all these fad diets work, are simply because a person begins to take in less calories (they usually aren't sustainable diets though). By all means, if you can sustain it though, do whatever works for you.
The most important thing to remember is that everything has calories, some foods have negative calories (even though they provide energy, it takes more for the body to process them), some have much bigger portions related to the calories, and some foods also come with great nutrients, vitamins, or minerals along with those calories.
So an example of a 12 oz can of soda, is obviously just water and a bunch of glucose calories. People often refer to this as 'empty calories' or 'empty carbs' which is sort of a misnomer. It contains almost no nutritional value.
On the other hand, a 12oz glass of 100% real orange juice w/ pulp also is essentially water and glucose, and contains a similar value of calories is also not really that good for you as far as weight loss etc. The only difference is that the OJ has fiber, and a bunch of vitamins and minerals that your body also needs so it is more valuable.
Soda an OJ are essentially just as bad for you. You're better off taking a glass of water and a vitamin. But if you are counting calories and carbs, then obviously go with the OJ instead of the soda.
PS- Fiber makes you feel full, start looking into foods high in fiber. They are good for you digestion system as well, especially since it helps slow down the process for all males who will eventually get some form of ass cancer (assuming you live long enough).
PPS- It's also important to remember that everyone is dealt a genetic hand. Some people have pocket aces on the metabolism, and some people have seven duce offsuit. These people just have to be more diligent and work harder to be healthy and may not even ever look as good as the people with the aces. That's just life, everyone is different sometimes.
My hand is probably like 89s, and I work enough to be about JTs. If I worked harder and I might have like KJs or KQo tops imho.
|
On October 16 2013 10:19 MarlieChurphy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2013 20:23 Aelonius wrote:I might be a little bit off the mark here, but I figured this may be a good place to get it straight. When we look at calories, it is a set number. Does the type of food that generates those calories matter? As example I take our local cantina at university. We've got 'fat' food (Dutch snacks that are indeed deep fried etc) with a certain calorie intake, yet when I take a baguette with tomato, cheese, lettuce and egg, it has more calories. In my view, the number is relatively 'irrelevant' untill you actually have two 'healthy' things that are similar in terms of food-type. Am I wrong here or how do you see it? (PS: I am Dutch and our food has a lot of potatoes. That's nice and all, but I did notice I lost about 10lbs ever since I started cooking rice-based dishes 1-2x per week, and more importantly, change 95% of the soda intake to pure water. Yaaay) Carbs are important, it's important to get them or else your body starts to cannibalize the muscle to preserve the fat. Each nutrient has a purpose, and are required. The reason why all these fad diets work, are simply because a person begins to take in less calories (they usually aren't sustainable diets though). By all means, if you can sustain it though, do whatever works for you.
That is a wrong.
'Normally, the carbohydrates contained in food are converted into glucose, which is then transported around the body and is particularly important in fuelling brain function. However, if there is very little carbohydrate in the diet, the liver converts fat into fatty acids and ketone bodies. The ketone bodies pass into the brain and replace glucose as an energy source.
The original therapeutic diet for paediatric epilepsy provides just enough protein for body growth and repair, and sufficient calories to maintain the correct weight for age and height. This classic ketogenic diet contains a 4:1 ratio by weight of fat to combined protein and carbohydrate. This is achieved by excluding high-carbohydrate foods such as starchy fruits and vegetables, bread, pasta, grains and sugar, while increasing the consumption of foods high in fat such as cream and butter'
Ketogenic diet. Its a very good form of dieting and very effective. People often times make the mistake to think 'fat' is bad, but in reality its too much carbohydrates that make people struggle (ofcourse in combination with too much fat). But saying carbohydrates are needed is wrong.
|
I find playing a round of golf in the middle of the day, while walking the course and carrying your own clubs is both a nice burn and also enjoyable at the same time.
But I don't think anything tops swimming.
|
On October 16 2013 17:15 NarutO wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2013 10:19 MarlieChurphy wrote:On October 12 2013 20:23 Aelonius wrote:I might be a little bit off the mark here, but I figured this may be a good place to get it straight. When we look at calories, it is a set number. Does the type of food that generates those calories matter? As example I take our local cantina at university. We've got 'fat' food (Dutch snacks that are indeed deep fried etc) with a certain calorie intake, yet when I take a baguette with tomato, cheese, lettuce and egg, it has more calories. In my view, the number is relatively 'irrelevant' untill you actually have two 'healthy' things that are similar in terms of food-type. Am I wrong here or how do you see it? (PS: I am Dutch and our food has a lot of potatoes. That's nice and all, but I did notice I lost about 10lbs ever since I started cooking rice-based dishes 1-2x per week, and more importantly, change 95% of the soda intake to pure water. Yaaay) Carbs are important, it's important to get them or else your body starts to cannibalize the muscle to preserve the fat. Each nutrient has a purpose, and are required. The reason why all these fad diets work, are simply because a person begins to take in less calories (they usually aren't sustainable diets though). By all means, if you can sustain it though, do whatever works for you. That is a wrong. 'Normally, the carbohydrates contained in food are converted into glucose, which is then transported around the body and is particularly important in fuelling brain function. However, if there is very little carbohydrate in the diet, the liver converts fat into fatty acids and ketone bodies. The ketone bodies pass into the brain and replace glucose as an energy source. The original therapeutic diet for paediatric epilepsy provides just enough protein for body growth and repair, and sufficient calories to maintain the correct weight for age and height. This classic ketogenic diet contains a 4:1 ratio by weight of fat to combined protein and carbohydrate. This is achieved by excluding high-carbohydrate foods such as starchy fruits and vegetables, bread, pasta, grains and sugar, while increasing the consumption of foods high in fat such as cream and butter' Ketogenic diet. Its a very good form of dieting and very effective. People often times make the mistake to think 'fat' is bad, but in reality its too much carbohydrates that make people struggle (ofcourse in combination with too much fat). But saying carbohydrates are needed is wrong.
I don't see how what I said is wrong or contradictory to what you are suggesting.
There is an order to the way the body utilizes resources. Especially when the resources stop coming in. It knows to protect the vital organs and it will do this by first using the extraneous muscle proteins, when it is not getting enough from them, is when it starts to dig into the fat reserves. This is why people often recommend cutting carbs for 3-4 days so the body starts to dig into the fat and then re-upping on them to get the glycogen levels back up in the muscles.They keep doing this over and over and lifting weights so you are not losing too much muscle.
I don't know anything about paediatric epilepsy, do you have personal experience with that or something?
I agree with the sentiment about fats, but I think it's also important to note that cutting carbs or whatever nutrient out of your diet isn't the way you lose weight. It's simply the calories. People mistake the weight loss in these diets as carbs, or fats, or whatever, because they all the sudden cut out 1/3 of the shit they eat every day, which might be up to 1000 calories, so they lose weight.
|
I simply wanted to argue the point that 'carbs are important'. If you wanted to live very low carb to 'basically none' (actually very hard to do, because basically everything has little amount of carbs) you could without issues. As long as the muscles have enough initiative to be sustained/build and the body has enough energy in form of protein and fat, you will sustain or build muscle while still losing fat.
Overall you are right that dieting should be based around calories and not around anything else. Lots of people I still say should cut out carbs/fats because its very high energy for little stuff. Minced meat 250g (mixed beef/pork) is 588kcal for example. 400g chickenbreast is 432kcal. So... you can eat a lot more if you eat low fat / high protein stuff instead of the other way around.
About paediatric epilepsy its just one example where you could use that diet and the person would be perfectly fine.
|
cut carbs get healthy, more proteins powder, more refined sugar gogo ! (edit : just in case, im bullshitting.. dont pay attention)
|
Naruto, came across this on reddit, thought you would be interested in reading: http://www.reddit.com/r/running/comments/1pivdw/running_on_an_empty_stomach/cd2snff?context=1
+ Show Spoiler +I'll preface this by saying that metabolism is an extremely complex topic based on a large number of factors. As a former biologist and ultra-runner I still have only a surface deep grasp on the topic.
To answer your first question...A small amount (about 20%) of your body's glycogen is stored in your liver while a majority (about 80%) of your body's glycogen stores are inter-muscular. The amount of glycogen stored in your liver is highly variable throughout the day depending on activity levels, when and what you last ate, and time of day. If you wake up and go for a run without eating it is safe to assume that your liver glycogen stores are very depleted. However, inter-muscular glycogen stores are far less variable and far more plentiful than liver glycogen stores and will be your body's primary source of fuel for those early morning runs. On inter-muscular glycogen alone you can sustain hours (2+) of intense activity such as running before they are completely depleted. To say that glycogen stores are depleted because you haven't eaten in a while is a faulty assumption to begin with.
To offer you a comprehensive summary...our body is never burning only one source of fuel at a time, rather it operates on a continuum that is affected by a variety of factors. There are three major metabolic passageways through which our body supports activity (i.e. produces atp);phosphagen, glycolytic, and oxidative/aerobic. In the first, phosphate is broken down into atp, in the second glucose goes to atp without the presence of oxygen, and in the third glucose goes to atp in the presence of oxygen. During exercise all three systems are in use. However, as intensity decreases and duration increases the percentage of atp produced through aerobic metabolism increases. In addition to glycogen, fatty acids are also metabolized during exercise. During intense exercise (65%+ of VO2 max) a small amount (<50% of total energy metabolism) of free fatty acids are oxidized for energy while during less intense/endurance exercise a large amount (50-60%) of free fatty acids are oxidized for energy. Therefore, if you go for a long run it can be assumed that about half of your energy is coming from free fatty acids while the remainder comes from the metabolism of glycogen.
A higher percentage of fat oxidation at a given VO2 max is highly conducive to performance because it proportionally reduces the amount of glycogen being utilized to sustain activity. Athletes hit the wall because they are nearing the end of their (very finite) glycogen stores. When that happens, their only real option is to slow down in order to decrease the amount of (finite) glycogen and increase the amount of (nearly infinite) free fatty acids being utilized. It is possible to replenish glycogen stores throughout a race. However, at high intensities (marathon) it is impossible to replenish glycogen stores at the same rate they are being metabolized. It is possible through training and diet to increase the percentage of free fatty acid oxidized at a given VO2 max. This will have the effect of making your glycogen stores last longer. For example, a highly trained marathoner on a higher fat diet will burn free fatty acid for about 45% of his energy at 70% of his VO2 max while a fatty couch potato on a high sugar diet will burn fatty acid for only 20% of his energy at 70% of his VO2 max.
Muscle wasting/muscle metabolism is a negligible factor in exercise with the exception of extreme endurance efforts (ultra-endurance events). I believe that an endocrine response to training can explain the different body types/musculature in endurance athletes and power athletes. For example, a 100m runner trains with short, intense intervals involving fast twitch muscles at near maximal leading while maintaining an intensity near VO2 max. A large amount of HGH, Testosterone, and other anebolic hormones are produced as a result. A similar response is absent/muted while training at sub-maximal intensities (i.e. a long marathon paced run).
If you have any questions please comment and I will do my best to answer.
TL;DR: 1) You are not out of glycogen if you don't eat for a while. You still have plenty in your muscles. 2) Fatty acid metabolism as a percentage of total metabolism is directly proportional to duration of exercise and inversely proportional to intensity of exercise 3)Your body can metabolize up to 60% fatty acids 3) As a competitive athlete, a higher percentage of fatty acid metabolism at a given VO2 max is conducive to greater performance because Fatty acid = almost infinite/ glycogen = finite 4) Muscle wasting not significant to metabolism
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
