2 ms·

Exercise burns far fewer calories than I thought (I was surprised by this too). If you walk a mile, you only burn 100 or so calories and that assumes you are wa

Exercise burns far fewer calories than I thought (I was surprised by this too). If you walk a mile, you only burn 100 or so calories and that assumes you are walking briskly. That isn't enough to really change things for many people.

gmassman 5y ago
Calories burned is just the start of the benefits of exercise. It also promotes muscle development which will cause fewer aches and pains as one ages. It increases lung capacity through deeper breathing, which promotes the parasympathetic nervous system and helps keep one more relaxed throughout the day. It strengthens the heart, leading to lower blood pressure and a lower resting heart rate. Health and weight are much more complicated than simply calories in minus calories out.
sasawpg 5y ago
Not all cardio is built the same and walking/running (for many) is not the most efficient way to burn calories. Most "calories burned" are also an estimate, often based on heart-rate and other body parameters. I burn anywhere from 500-800+ calories per hour when cycling (depending on intensity, based on actual recorded power). I'm fairly light (63-64kgs) so my power (and as a result energy expenditure) will be less than that of someone larger. An endurance run for me will burn much closer to an estimated 300kCal/hr. While I'm no longer a runner, even at peak I would run only 4-5hrs/week (and usually no more than 1:30-1:45hrs/run). I readily cycle 4-5 hours though and burn 3000kCal+. So if goal is to burn as many calories as possible, I would consider cycling and swimming, since both burn a considerable amount and can be done for longer stretches of time without major body impact. The unfortunate drawback of cycling is the lack of impact that makes it easy to cycle for long amounts. Have to balance that with other forms of exercise to stay healthy.
- notacoward 5y ago
  > An endurance run for me will burn much closer to an estimated 300kCal/hr. Measured how? At what most people would consider a normal running pace the expenditure for your weight should be at least 800kCal/hr according to every source I've seen. On the flip side, 3000kCal over "4-5 hours" is 600-750kCal/hr. I know cyclists tend to underestimate the efficiency gain of wheels vs. legs and thus mistranslate their higher speed to higher effort, but reality is quite different.

gmassman 5y ago

Calories burned is just the start of the benefits of exercise. It also promotes muscle development which will cause fewer aches and pains as one ages. It increases lung capacity through deeper breathing, which promotes the parasympathetic nervous system and helps keep one more relaxed throughout the day. It strengthens the heart, leading to lower blood pressure and a lower resting heart rate. Health and weight are much more complicated than simply calories in minus calories out.

sasawpg 5y ago

Not all cardio is built the same and walking/running (for many) is not the most efficient way to burn calories. Most "calories burned" are also an estimate, often based on heart-rate and other body parameters. I burn anywhere from 500-800+ calories per hour when cycling (depending on intensity, based on actual recorded power). I'm fairly light (63-64kgs) so my power (and as a result energy expenditure) will be less than that of someone larger. An endurance run for me will burn much closer to an estimated 300kCal/hr. While I'm no longer a runner, even at peak I would run only 4-5hrs/week (and usually no more than 1:30-1:45hrs/run). I readily cycle 4-5 hours though and burn 3000kCal+. So if goal is to burn as many calories as possible, I would consider cycling and swimming, since both burn a considerable amount and can be done for longer stretches of time without major body impact. The unfortunate drawback of cycling is the lack of impact that makes it easy to cycle for long amounts. Have to balance that with other forms of exercise to stay healthy.

notacoward 5y ago
> An endurance run for me will burn much closer to an estimated 300kCal/hr. Measured how? At what most people would consider a normal running pace the expenditure for your weight should be at least 800kCal/hr according to every source I've seen. On the flip side, 3000kCal over "4-5 hours" is 600-750kCal/hr. I know cyclists tend to underestimate the efficiency gain of wheels vs. legs and thus mistranslate their higher speed to higher effort, but reality is quite different.