A log of the days and times of Byran Smucker: a happily-married, left-handed, tenor-singing, fair-thinking, Jesus-believing, familyandfriendsandchurchandfootballandbasketball-loving, graduate student in Statistics and Operations Research at Penn State, who’s a Mennonite to boot.
Can anyone verify that the expenditure of energy (i.e. the rate of calorie burnage) is proportional to distance? Like, running a mile in 4 minutes or walking it in 16 burn roughly the same amount of energy?
posted by Byran @ 7:38 PM
5 comments
5 Comments:
That's what the calorie-burning charts have always told me, much to my disgust. If I half killed myself jogging a mile, it ought to burn more calories than walking that distance.
but, dorcas, by jogging that mile in 4 minutes, you saved 12 minutes! in which you can recover. ;-)
So jogging won't burn any more calories, but it is better for your heart I think.
Walking and jogging are probably pretty similar, but...
While running a person moves up and down a lot more. I guess they aren't performing net work because they always come back down again, but maybe there is some friction involved that burns extra calories. A person also engages more upper body muscles by swinging arms, etc while jogging.
However, I guess these factors are negligible...
Cycling...that is the ticket! Less damaging on the knees than jogging, faster than walking, and when you need to recover, you can sit and coast.
Post a Comment
<< Home