6 ms·
Walking in short bursts consume 20-60% more energy than walking continuously
- tcfhgj 2y agoMay it also be explainable by the additionally needed acceleration of the body mass?
- worstspotgain 2y agoCue John Cleese
- scp3125 2y agoThis is because maintaining inertia is efficient, despite the stress on the system. This is the reason High Intensity Interval Training and High Intensity Resistance Training work at all, because you're making a conscious effort in your exercise methodology to eliminate momentum and acceleration from the movements, which increases the work done within the context of your body, reducing the exerted energy lost to mechanical inefficiency of repeated movements. You don't even need to stop moving while walking to see this effect in action. Just try walking so slow that you've eliminated almost all the momentum from the motion of walking. Just try it for a minute straight and see how it feels. (Forewarning: It's going to look ridiculous, like you're walking in slow motion.)
- yetihehe 2y agoThe article doesn't say what is the best burst duration. From paper: > Our findings show that the time-averaged oxygen uptake and metabolic cost are greater for shorter than longer bouts: 30-s bouts consume 20–60% more oxygen than steady-state extrapolations. > After each bout, V̇O2 was measured during the recovery for 7 min while participants were sitting on the same chair So, each participant (there was 10 participants) done a trial of bouts, each bout randomly 10-240s plus 7min rest.
- rojeee 2y agoI'm not an exercise physiologist but I have an interest in it. The article states that more energy is used when the body is gearing up for an activity and I'm guessing this is because if you exercise for only up to a few minutes at a time with sufficient rest in between intervals then you'll end up mostly using the phosphocreatine and anaerobic glycolosis systems which are less efficient than aerobic glycolosis or aerobic lipoylsis. It's why when you start running without a sufficient warm up, you're always a bit out of breath even when running at sub maximal efforts and later on in the same run, even when running faster, your breathing can be super relaxed. The aerobic system takes a while to "spin up". In other words, you start with poor running economy... using more calories to run the same speed but as your aerobic system spins up, your running economy increases and you use less calories to run the same speed. It's my understanding that by doing the type of exercise mentioned in the article - short bursts - you'll get positive physiological adaptations to your anearobic capacity but it won't have much impact on your aerobic capcity, which I would argue is the more important system to train for everyday operations of the human body!
- maeil 2y agoDoesn't this hold for practically any kind of engine, whether biological or mechanical?
- jawilson2 2y agoThis must be related to why HIIT is so effective at quickly dropping fat, even in short (<15 minute sessions). 10 Tabata sets of 40 sec sprints and 20 sec jogs has always been my go-to to lose some weight quickly, while continuing to run longer distances and lift weights.
- FrancoisBosun 2y agoI hate shopping, because it’s start and stop all the time. I get tired after only 30m. Then, I’ll walk home from the office (1h) and will have lots of energy to actually DO something. The title resonated with me very strongly.
- gamjQZnHT53AMa 2y agoWow, your comment really hit it home for me. I have this exact same experience but never identified why I hate going to the shop so much.
- cmgbhm 2y agoIt can also be mental fatigue. Shopping is fundamentally making lots of decisions in sequence.
- stavros 2y agoThat's exactly why I find large stores like IKEA draining. My brain is constantly in decision mode, unlike even at work, where decisions are more spaced out. In stores, you literally have a conveyor belt of items passing through your decision system the entire time you're in the store.
- tommiegannert 2y agoI was walking through the narrow tourist traps that are the Venetian streets the other week. Lots of stores with shiny pins, bracelets, caps, hats and T-shirts. I realized then why I don't like stores: they're too cluttered. Doesn't even have to come down to decisions; just the visual impact makes me want to leave. Perhaps this is what makes Apple stores work. Even webshops tend to have only a few products visible at a time.
- readthenotes1 2y agoMy theory, after looking down the hallway of a mall and seeing a bunch of guys drooping on the benches and a bunch of women walking briskly, even joyously, is there is a coating on the floor that sucks the energy out of some of us and transfers it to others
- rippeltippel 2y agoAnything new here? Isn't it the same principle underlying Tabata/HIIT training methods?
- netdevnet 2y agoI thought HIIT/Tabata was more about intensity so you COMPRESS a whole session in less time. This article is telling you that if you EXPAND the session to allow for pauses, you can get more out of it without increasing the intensity.
- rippeltippel 2y agoThanks, I misintepreted it. So it's essentially about adding pauses every ~30 seconds.
- maroonblazer 2y agoDo I take this to mean that instead of running 5K at a relatively steady pace, I should instead break it up into several walk-short burst run-walk cycles?
- n4r9 2y agoIt depends what your goals are. But if you want to burn calories, intense intervals are known to be a much more efficient approach, yes.
- csmattryder 2y agoYeah, that's a known training method, "High-Intensity Interval Training", HIIT.
- fooqux 2y agoOnly if you want to burn more energy. If you're going for shortest time, you want the steady pace.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- rojeee 2y agoDepends what you want to do. Run a fast 5k? Improve aerobic system? Something else? Short fast bursts of running will improve your anearobic capacity. Slightly longer intervals run a bit slower may target your lactate threshold and lactate clearance rates. Slower running for longer distances will target your aerobic system. As people, and the featured article, notes, short intense intervals may burn the most calories but I would argue for more well rounded fitness you need to do a bit of everything. Due to HIIT, there's loads of people around the world now who have great anearobic metabolism but non-existant aerobic metabolism. The effects are increased autonomic stress from all the anearobic work and an inability to exercise for long durations without quite a lot of stress on your body.
- scp3125 2y agoThat... doesn't sound like HIIT. HIIT shouldn't average out to anaerobic heart rate ranges, otherwise you really lose the benefit of keeping your heart engaged in aerobic ranges during the rests. And to be honest, HIIT used for recreation shouldn't even peak in the elevated ranges above 167 bpm, if you're talking about doing it safely over years for health. Higher than that might be effective in training to increase aerobic capacity or lower your overall heart rate, but may damage your heart over time. The effect of taking those controls on HIIT should result in reducing the autonomic stress response of /all/ exercise on heart rate, not increasing it. The demonstrated effect of HIIT is being able to efficiently scale aerobic capacity without increasing the time required and prolonged physical stress on the body. That's why Olympic athletes have been using interval training for a century, and from the 90s to this day, have used HIIT techniques like Tabata to increase their overall ability to exercise for a long duration, without having to actually commit to exercising for repeated long durations. I'm not sure where you got that piece of information about loads of people with great anaerobic "metabolism" vs aerobic "metabolism". It would truly be very difficult, but not impossible to consistently raise your anaerobic capacity, (which I'm guessing is the implied relation to processing lactic acid efficiently as a fuel source for exercise?) but not raise your aerobic capacity also. Most of the ways I have seen that involve some kind of ketosis, or something that would otherwise deprive the body of the baseline glucose to drive aerobic capacity up in tandem with anaerobic capacity (because there's just not available excess glucose to store as glycogen in muscles beyond basal mechanical muscle operation and may lead to atrophy from burning muscle as a fuel source a.k.a. awful orange piss). And generally you would have a hard time building up extra muscle in that state as well, so it would be generally not advisable/possibly extremely dangerous to do so without proper diet and nutrition. disclaimer - I am not an exercise physiologist or certified in any way. I'm an idiot on the internet, so please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong or don't have it quite right
- nsbk 2y agoCan someone please tell the Fremen?
- darkwater 2y ago> To find out, they recruited 10 volunteers. I mean, It doesn't look like such a complicated study, no? Why didn't they check, IDK, with at least 100 people? With 10, which is 5 per sex, it's almost impossible to not just be anectdata.
- wruza 2y agoTwo questions: had these bursts same W(=FS) over time or proportionally less due to stops? Iow, slow-fast vs normal or slow-normal vs normal? Did they measure energy consumption for replacing short-term resources like creatine phosphate, glucose, etc? Instant oxygen consumption probably doesn’t paint the whole picture. Blood tests obviously required?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- alberth 2y agoInterval Training Makes sense ... short walking bursts is a mild form of 'interval training', which has been shown to have major benefits over constant/prolong exercise.