4 ms·

Consider the case of an individual who manages to have a stable body mass without training. One would most certainly require more calories if he/her started tr

• silisili 3y ago
  It -really- depends on what you're doing. If you're an olympic athlete swimming 10 miles a day, you need more calories. If you're the typical American walking or jogging even for an hour, you burn basically a can of Coke or two.
• ekianjo 3y ago
  Unless you are exercising 10 hours per day you dont lose much calories by exercising
  • arghnoname 3y ago
    I ran 15 miles on Monday at a pretty relaxed pace (took 2.5 hours). My watch, while probably not perfectly accurate, nevertheless suggested I burned approximately 1640 additional calories during this time. This is 1/4 as much as 10 hours and is a significant proportion of my basal metabolic expenditure. On a more typical day, I may run closer to an hour and be closer to 600-700 calories. I'd still call this significant. You can burn significant calories exercising, but the exercise is probably kind of unpleasant.
    • ekianjo 3y ago
      Good. What I mean is that it is a lot more effort than cutting down on an extra snack. Running a hour for 600 calories does not sound like its very effective since its just about the calories of 2 cookies.
• JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > One would most certainly require more calories if he/her started training Not necessarily. Consider the calories you're burning carrying around fat or being inflamed or from a higher resting heart rate.