Comments on: One Pound of Fat = 3500 Calories http://journalofhealthyliving.com/one-pound-of-fat-3500-calories.htm To a healthier, richer, and more rewarding life Wed, 17 Feb 2010 12:05:38 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Andrew http://journalofhealthyliving.com/one-pound-of-fat-3500-calories.htm/comment-page-1#comment-567 Andrew Mon, 06 Oct 2008 13:03:27 +0000 http://journalofhealthyliving.com/?p=82#comment-567 There is human physiology at play as well. It is true that ‘the more strenuous the exercise, the more calories you burn’. But exactly where the calories come from is another story. When you push your body, it switches to anaerobic mode (with the increasing lack of oxygen) and starts to burn the carbohydrates in the body. In aerobic mode (low intensity exercises) you body burns predominantly fats, because there is better supply of oxygen. So, distance and time do play a part :) It is important to note however that high intensity exercises, such as running, help burn fats indirectly by increasing the metabolic rate after an exercise session. There is human physiology at play as well. It is true that ‘the more strenuous the exercise, the more calories you burn’. But exactly where the calories come from is another story. When you push your body, it switches to anaerobic mode (with the increasing lack of oxygen) and starts to burn the carbohydrates in the body. In aerobic mode (low intensity exercises) you body burns predominantly fats, because there is better supply of oxygen. So, distance and time do play a part :)

It is important to note however that high intensity exercises, such as running, help burn fats indirectly by increasing the metabolic rate after an exercise session.

]]> By: Jason http://journalofhealthyliving.com/one-pound-of-fat-3500-calories.htm/comment-page-1#comment-399 Jason Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:36:48 +0000 http://journalofhealthyliving.com/?p=82#comment-399 I agree with Sheamus and "Anon". Running and walking a mile are 2 vastly different things in regards to your body. Running brings your cardiovascular system more in to play and exercises more muscles throughout your body, hence the extra calories burned. Admittedly, walking can affect your cardio system, but again it's low intensity and it's probably after 2 or 3 miles you'll see any affect. Running is second most inefficient way of travel for your body (behind swimming), more calories are exerted for the same distance traveled. BTW, cycling is shown to be the most efficient, but is still quite a hefty workout. I agree with Sheamus and “Anon”. Running and walking a mile are 2 vastly different things in regards to your body. Running brings your cardiovascular system more in to play and exercises more muscles throughout your body, hence the extra calories burned. Admittedly, walking can affect your cardio system, but again it’s low intensity and it’s probably after 2 or 3 miles you’ll see any affect.

Running is second most inefficient way of travel for your body (behind swimming), more calories are exerted for the same distance traveled. BTW, cycling is shown to be the most efficient, but is still quite a hefty workout.

]]> By: anon http://journalofhealthyliving.com/one-pound-of-fat-3500-calories.htm/comment-page-1#comment-363 anon Wed, 13 Aug 2008 23:20:51 +0000 http://journalofhealthyliving.com/?p=82#comment-363 No, there is a lot more at play then just distance and time. There was a recent article in running that they did research into the actual calories burned comparing walking and running. Running burned more per mile, not just per minute. There is a huge change in mechanics between running and walking that play into calories burned. No, there is a lot more at play then just distance and time. There was a recent article in running that they did research into the actual calories burned comparing walking and running. Running burned more per mile, not just per minute. There is a huge change in mechanics between running and walking that play into calories burned.

]]> By: Dave http://journalofhealthyliving.com/one-pound-of-fat-3500-calories.htm/comment-page-1#comment-278 Dave Thu, 17 Jul 2008 15:03:21 +0000 http://journalofhealthyliving.com/?p=82#comment-278 Actually...the original post is correct. It's all in how you look at it. Running a mile and walking a mile briskly will burn pretty much the same calories. Yes, you burn more per minute running but...you finish the mile much quicker than walking. If you run and walk for the exact same amount of time, no doubt you exert more running and burn more energy. But if you run only, say half the time as you would walking....you get the point? The issue is that if you are exerting less energy, you need to do it longer. Walking briskly is about as good as it gets for the average person. Actually…the original post is correct. It’s all in how you look at it. Running a mile and walking a mile briskly will burn pretty much the same calories. Yes, you burn more per minute running but…you finish the mile much quicker than walking.

If you run and walk for the exact same amount of time, no doubt you exert more running and burn more energy. But if you run only, say half the time as you would walking….you get the point?

The issue is that if you are exerting less energy, you need to do it longer. Walking briskly is about as good as it gets for the average person.

]]> By: Post 4th of July Roundup | Health, Fitness, Exercise, and Weight Loss (55 pounds in 10 weeks) http://journalofhealthyliving.com/one-pound-of-fat-3500-calories.htm/comment-page-1#comment-228 Post 4th of July Roundup | Health, Fitness, Exercise, and Weight Loss (55 pounds in 10 weeks) Sun, 06 Jul 2008 13:07:34 +0000 http://journalofhealthyliving.com/?p=82#comment-228 [...] you know that One Pound of Fat = 3500 Calories? Journal of Healthy Living explains calorie deficits in relation to weight loss [...] [...] you know that One Pound of Fat = 3500 Calories? Journal of Healthy Living explains calorie deficits in relation to weight loss [...]

]]> By: Sheamus http://journalofhealthyliving.com/one-pound-of-fat-3500-calories.htm/comment-page-1#comment-220 Sheamus Tue, 01 Jul 2008 23:37:09 +0000 http://journalofhealthyliving.com/?p=82#comment-220 While your general advice is excellent you burn a LOT more calories running than you do walking. http://www.nutristrategy.com/activitylist3.htm If you think about it, it's common sense - your physical exertion is MUCH higher. Walking 4mph, @ 15 minutes/mile, burns about 281 calories per <b>hour</b> for a 155-pound man. Conversely, running at 7mph - 8:30/mile - burns 809 calories/hour for the same bodyweight. I've seen this 100 calories/mile for walking number a few places of late but I think it's bad data that has become passed around as 'fact'. If you weighed 300 pounds, there might be something to it, but otherwise walking even at a brisk pace is only a nominal calorie burn. It's still better than nothing, of oourse - a lot better! :) However, to really benefit from walking, you need to be <a href="http://iamsheamus.com/get-in-shape/so-you-dont-want-to-start-running-but-still-want-to-lose-lots-of-weight/" rel="nofollow">walking hills</a>, and at a good pace (4mph+)! :) While your general advice is excellent you burn a LOT more calories running than you do walking.

http://www.nutristrategy.com/activitylist3.htm

If you think about it, it’s common sense – your physical exertion is MUCH higher.

Walking 4mph, @ 15 minutes/mile, burns about 281 calories per hour for a 155-pound man. Conversely, running at 7mph – 8:30/mile – burns 809 calories/hour for the same bodyweight.

I’ve seen this 100 calories/mile for walking number a few places of late but I think it’s bad data that has become passed around as ‘fact’. If you weighed 300 pounds, there might be something to it, but otherwise walking even at a brisk pace is only a nominal calorie burn.

It’s still better than nothing, of oourse – a lot better! :)

However, to really benefit from walking, you need to be walking hills, and at a good pace (4mph+)! :)

]]>