Last i saw on this is that there isn’t a 1:1 relation between increased calorie burn by increased exercise and total calorie burn. There are some but also the body diverts energy from one task to another. Still the best way to loose weight, maintaining a calorie deficit, is to eat less. Way easier said than done.
Comment on Attempt to motivate people to take the stairs
hawgietonight@lemmy.world 1 week ago
A typical hamburger is about 500 kcal so you would have to go up those stairs 100 times to burn it off in theory.
But science is now saying that burning off calories isn’t related to excersise… you burn the same amount doing or not doing physical activity. So I don’t know if this is relevant anymore.
tissek@sopuli.xyz 1 week ago
Carnelian@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Yeah the body compensates for it to an extent.
You know how lot of people report exercise makes them feel better? Releases dopamine, relaxes them. A result is that they actually fidget less, their heart rate slows, and other energy burning processes in their body relax.
The buffer is relatively large in fact, like possibly over 200-400 calories per day depending on the person. I think of it as the body’s flywheel for keeping an energy balance.
One should keep exercising, for the numerous benefits. There also is a point where you are burning calories that need to be made up (either through eating or weight loss), ask any endurance athlete. Just not likely to hit the threshold in 20 mins on the treadmill, which is what many people do for exercise
tissek@sopuli.xyz 1 week ago
Something I never really got from the summaries on the research is how much training increase they looked at. And what type. I bet going fron 0 to 30 minutes a day would look different than the span 0-120.
Do you BTW have a link to the paper?
Carnelian@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Check out the revised Kurzgesagt script, they have pretty much the best and most up to date collection of research papers at the moment
I actually was introduced to the topic by Mike Israetel when he was reviewing Herman Pontzer’s research. So when I watched the original Kurz I was super confused because it seemed to make a different conclusion than the work they were citing. I’m glad they made the revised version
MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 1 week ago
Way easier said than done.
Brain is a greedy removed and tricks you.
BatrickPateman@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Sounds counterintuitive. Do you happen to have a source for this?
hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 week ago
That’s very very simplified version of it.
The more you do an exercise, the more efficient your body becomes for it.
So a person who runs 10km every day still burns approximately the same amount of calories as a sofa potato running only to toilet and fridge.
BUT if you do heavier exercises than your regular, you’re going to be burning more calories than your average daily ~1800-2000kcal
DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 1 week ago
Don’t take fitness advice from Lemmy, case evidence #345322
Nollij@sopuli.xyz 1 week ago
Unsurprisingly, fitness is always more complicated than it seems.
You are certainly correct that runners don’t burn (much) more calories than a couch potato. But weightlifters do, vs a couch potato of the same weight.
The thing about cardio is that the calories go directly into effort. The calories burned are roughly proportional to the effort (distance). But the moment you stop, the calories stop getting burned.
If you are doing weightlifting, the calories spent at the time to lift a heavy object are minimal. But it instructs your body to add muscle to better handle all the heavy lifting you do. Once you have that muscle, you burn a ton of calories 24 hours per day just keeping it alive. It becomes part of your base metabolic rate. It burns nearly the same calories whether you’re at the gym, or sitting on the couch. And it will continue to burn those calories until your body decides you no longer need that extra muscle mass and it atrophies.