4 ms·
Cycling the same kcal/hour as walking? That's very slow cycling. A much better measure is kcal/km, as that is at least somewhat more independent of speed. No c
by jules 16y ago
Cycling the same kcal/hour as walking? That's very slow cycling. A much better measure is kcal/km, as that is at least somewhat more independent of speed.
No citations on life extension.
Recommends situps, which destroy your back. Leg lifts have the potential to do the same.
Doesn't mention how many kcal/g fat is (it's 9 kcal/g), which is a useful figure if you're trying to lose weight.
- alexgartrell 16y ago> Recommends situps, which destroy your back. Citation needed, big time. Everything I've ever heard (from high school and college level athletic trainers and strength coaches) has said that a strong core helps your back. I can back this up anecdotally, as years of heavy squats made it painful to drive far in my car's crappy driver's seat, but some ab work (and other exercise) made the problem go away. When I googled I got http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/17/core-myths/ http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/17/core-myths/ which basically said "A couple of experts question the (what has so far been considered) the authoritative study. Ab work and lower back work (hyper extensions) just seem like the way to strengthen ones back. Is there another solution that I'm not aware of?
- lukenathan 16y agohttp://startingstrength.com/index.php/site/core_stability_training/ http://startingstrength.com/index.php/site/core_stability_tr...
- jules 16y agohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sit-up_(exercise) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sit-up_(exercise) I didn't do a study myself, I just heard it multiple times and assumed that it was true. I have also experienced lower back pain in school when we did sit ups, but of course that doesn't mean that it will do long-term damage. > Situps can be dangerous due to high compressive lumbar load[1] and may be replaced with the crunch in exercise programs[2].
- sliverstorm 16y agoI've always heard cycling is the most energy efficient form of transportation for a human, period. Why exactly do situps destroy your back? I am rather fond of doing hanging situps (hanging by knees) with weights. I wonder if they are just as bad...?
- jules 16y agoSure, cycling is more efficient kcal/km wise, but at least the speed that I and most people I know cycle is more intensive than walking kcal/second. The sit ups: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sit-up_(exercise) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sit-up_(exercise) I don't know if the same applies to hanging sit ups, but this Wikipedia article says: > Situps can be dangerous due to high compressive lumbar load[1] and may be replaced with the crunch in exercise programs[2].
- mkramlich 16y agoregarding situps: I've read that crunches give much the same benefit as situps, but without situps increased risk of hurting something.
- tremendo 16y agoThis is what I learned too. No longer have my reference book, it was like 20-years ago, but situps tug at you lower vertebrae and increase the risk of lower-back injuries. Crunches exercise your abdomen without that undesirable side-effect. Since it's harder to isolate your lower abs, it's best to target those first (leg-raises with bent-knees and pelvis, or easier knee-ups) and then hit the upper abs which by now have already done some work and will really burn.
- jedc 16y agoSitups and leg lifts don't destroy your back. Doing them improperly can destroy your back. Doing them properly can really improve core strength and make you a much safer athlete, as core strength is needed for most activities you do in life. Unfortunately most people are never truly taught how to exercise their core properly. (I'm certainly no expert, but have had a couple of sessions with trainers who actually know what they're doing.)