Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

1min high-intensity exercise 3x a week improves fitness as much as 3x aerobics (2016)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 506 posts

Re: 1min high-intensity exercise 3x a week improves fitness as much as 3x aerobics (2016)

#471

Post by asdff »

sasawpg wrote: post #452
asdff wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aerobic activity is not all the same either. Some people run for a mile and think that's good, they are maybe burning only 300 calories doing that though. They hike for 4 miles and its another couple hundred, or its blown with the granola bars. If you bike for an hour at less than 10mph you are burning like 300 calories, but if you bike for an hour at like 16-20mph then you are burning like 1000 calories.

Unlikely you'll be burning 1000kCal at 16-20mph unless you're going up a steady incline and keeping that speed (i.e. high power). That is a bit of an exaggeration. The remainder of your point stands - cycling is a great way to burn a lot of calories.

You'd have to be pushing 250-300 watts an hour to burn that much, but people do burn that much in an hours time if you look around a few bike forums. If you have time to do a long and leisurely ride, 3 hours or so, the length of the new Avatar movie, you'd probably knock out at least 1000 calories imo. Whats nice about a road bike in particular for caloric burning, at least in my experience, is that it makes you want to push the bike and go as fast as you can and keep snapping up through your gears and catch up to the cars (passing them even when they hit traffic or you are descending).

Re: 1min high-intensity exercise 3x a week improves fitness as much as 3x aerobics (2016)

#472

Post by asdff »

jononomo wrote: post #436
asdff wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the assumption with trying to be healthy and track your calories is you are eating a healthy and balanced diet, and not things like potato chips, candy, or gasoline all day. Then with healthier food choices a consistent value for you in your life, you don't have to worry about that Starbucks drink that's 600 calories because you just wouldn't be drinking those things with this new mindset. Then it doesn't eve…

All I know is that if I gorge myself on only eggs and fatty ribeye steaks for weeks on end, then I’ll lose fat, gain muscle, and look good naked. Burn if I eat carbs and drink beer then I gain belly fat and look terrible naked. I never count calories.

Drinks, not just booze, are sleepers for caloric intake. A can of coke or a small bottle of gatorade are 130 calories. Then you have some people who literally hate the taste of water for some reason, so every drink they take of a liquid comes with calories. Just switching to water alone for a person like that could cut out hundreds of calories right there with no other changes to diet or lifestyle.

Re: 1min high-intensity exercise 3x a week improves fitness as much as 3x aerobics (2016)

#473

Post by hungryforcodes »

FatActor wrote: post #461
sn9 wrote: post #446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no idea what you're trying to say. It is an objective fact that caloric surpluses and deficits are fundamental to manipulating bodyweight. Any solution will be about getting people to maintain a surplus or deficit long enough to reach their goal weight. There are many ways to communicate that to people, but pretending or trying to convince others that it isn't true is factually incorrect and literally counter-…

You keep saying less is less more is more. That's a truism which is completely orthogonal to the point, yet you seem to be hung up on it to the exclusion of everything else every other commenter has said to you. Consider that just for a moment.

No its not. CICO, it's that simple. I'll get down voted by the fanatics that say it's more complicated, but it's not. Eat less and exercise more and you will loose weight. A gastric bypass is just a extreme form of this. You cannot avoid the laws of physics.

Re: 1min high-intensity exercise 3x a week improves fitness as much as 3x aerobics (2016)

#474

Post by scotty79 »

jononomo wrote: post #414
scotty79 wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basic physics 100% tells you you won't gain weight in that case.

Are you certain that humans can properly digest gasoline and make use of its calories?

I'm sure that they can't. That's why they won't gain any weight with such diet.

Re: 1min high-intensity exercise 3x a week improves fitness as much as 3x aerobics (2016)

#475

Post by Frost1x »

kelseyfrog wrote: post #370
Frost1x wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calories on nutrition labels should account for potential metabolic energy , not total energy, so the example of gasoline isn't by any means a disproof of the model at all since gasoline is obviously not a food source you safely metabolize. If we looked at total energy of your gasoline we'd need to consider mass to energy conversion as well... but your body can't do that either. Energy your body can metabolize is cle…

Right, and what factors modulate the actual metabolic energy?

Well that's where all the biochemistry comes into play. There are pathways where various components are broken down through physical force, stomach acid, gut bacteria and enzymes, etc.

This looks like a digestible introductory guide: https://themedicalbiochemistrypage.org/digestion-and-digesti...

And a brief description of how all that helps inform calorie counts on nutrition labels: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atwater_system

People make entire career studying these sort of processes. Over time the information is refined. All of this ultimately helps inform how we measure and quantify things like calorie counts on food labels. Again, not perfect, but the process works and improves over time. It's a complex macroscopic system relative to the underlying chemistry and physics but if we assume larger systems are built on, composed, and governed by principles of constituent systems then we have a way of slowly understanding these complex processes and using that knowledge to our advantage.

Just as with software systems we rely on abstract processes below us to talk about things. That doesn't mean the high level abstractions are ignoring the details, it's just that there's value in talking about things simplistically like "calories in" and "calories out" without people looking to take very literal interpretations and trying to convert total energy possible into kcals. Heck, this is why they're "Calories" and not "calories" and why "Cal" has even been proposed to help avoid this sort of confusion.

Re: 1min high-intensity exercise 3x a week improves fitness as much as 3x aerobics (2016)

#476

Post by snowwrestler »

mister_mister wrote: post #435
snowwrestler wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, because excreted calories are typically consistently small for most people. That’s not necessarily true for diabetics, so someone with that condition will have a different experience with it.

And the reason is only the missing of one hormone, and fat cells won't store energy. The opposite also true, there are people with too much insulin that will gain allot weight. > Despite intensive research, the causes of the obesity epidemic remain incompletely understood and conventional calorie-restricted diets continue to lack long-term efficacy. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6082688/

“Get diabetes” is certainly a novel approach to a weight-loss plan, I’ll give you that.

Re: 1min high-intensity exercise 3x a week improves fitness as much as 3x aerobics (2016)

#477

Post by snapcaster »

Arch-TK wrote: post #412
snapcaster wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have yet to hear an _honest_ "i don't have time excuse". Everyone that has said this to me watches hours of netflix, dicks around on phone, etc. etc. Everyone has time, they just don't actually want to be healthy or in good shape. They want to want it

Nobody has time for anything they don't make time for, and making time for 2 hours of exercise related activities is far more difficult to muster (in terms of willpower) than making time for 10-20 minutes of the same. I'm glad that you have unlimited reserves of willpower and have no trouble with procrastination and as a result can just do any task on demand no matter how seemingly unpleasant it sounds, but unfortuna…

I'm not saying i'm perfect, just more honest with myself than using the "don't have time excuse"

Re: 1min high-intensity exercise 3x a week improves fitness as much as 3x aerobics (2016)

#478

Post by Fricken »

xarope wrote: post #450
Fricken wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last few times I've done it was sprinting on stairs. Typically I'll do a 10 minute warm-up, and then 3-8 sprints, 20-40 seconds each, with ~3 minute rests in between. However I'm not super particular about protocols. I just go out, redline my heart rate a few times and call it a session. Last summer I was sprinting stairs every 3 days for a month to prepare for a week of multi-pitch climbing (with huge approaches) in…

Please excuse the bluntness, but I find it hard to believe that you only trained sprints every 3 days (so 2-3 times a week max) to train for huge approaches and multi-pitch climbing (I'm a trad climber and mountaineer too). I assume this was not done in a vacuum, but also included numerous days of climbing and approaches as well, so probably 3/week of climbing, other low intensity work, as well as your then added 2-3…

I've been in condition for these things in the past, but over a winter of mostly just walking, light cycling and gym climbing my legs and cardio had suffered.

It's explosive training, my muscles hurt afterwards, and I needed 3 days to recover. Over the month of stair sprinting every 3 days I regained about 5 pounds of(what I presume is) leg muscle.

The premise behind it is that the high intensity stress of my short sprint sessions is effective way to prepare myself for the all day but lower intensity stresses of big climbs with big approaches, for my heart as well as my legs.

My calves and achilles tendon took a beating on the trip, one thing I wasn't well prepared for was all the standing on my toes.

I've relied on a period of sprints, either on stairs, flat ground or on a bike, to whip myself into condition a half dozen times over the past couple decades. At 46 I find I don't snap into fitness as quickly as I once did.

And I don't live anywhere near big hills, if I did I would train on them more, but not at the full expense of running sprints.

Re: 1min high-intensity exercise 3x a week improves fitness as much as 3x aerobics (2016)

#479

Post by sasawpg »

asdff wrote: post #471
sasawpg wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unlikely you'll be burning 1000kCal at 16-20mph unless you're going up a steady incline and keeping that speed (i.e. high power). That is a bit of an exaggeration. The remainder of your point stands - cycling is a great way to burn a lot of calories.

You'd have to be pushing 250-300 watts an hour to burn that much, but people do burn that much in an hours time if you look around a few bike forums. If you have time to do a long and leisurely ride, 3 hours or so, the length of the new Avatar movie, you'd probably knock out at least 1000 calories imo. Whats nice about a road bike in particular for caloric burning, at least in my experience, is that it makes you want…

At 25% efficiency (on the high side), 1000kCal is about 1050kJ, which is just shy of 300W. Most adults can't sustain 300W for an hour. In addition, reasonable riding conditions (flat, low to moderate winds) will get you moving faster than 20mph at 300W. Most adults are definitely not burning 1000kcal riding a bike for an hour and even fewer are doing that rate of calorie burn for longer than an hour. I regularly have >1000kcal rides, but I have yet to hit 1000kcal for a single hour at my highest intensity. I can do close to 300W for 20 minutes after which time the power drops off rapidly. Larger cyclists that are trained can absolutely sustain 300W for an hour, but won't do this without a significant training effort.

I don't mean to imply that you won't burn a lot of calories cycling, quite the opposite, I think it is one of the easiest and gentlest ways to do so. You are however overstating what most non-elite cyclists can regularly accomplish in terms of calorie burn per hour.

Source: I have averaged 450hrs/yr for last 3 years and closely monitor my data.

Re: 1min high-intensity exercise 3x a week improves fitness as much as 3x aerobics (2016)

#480

Post by petesergeant »

oezi wrote: post #374
tayo42 wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's 4 hours of activity a day. That can't be true. I do that. I should be fading away then but hover at the same weight.

4 hours of strenuous exercise. This should consume around 3000 kcals. Studies have found that humans cannot consume more calories than 2.5x their basal metabolic rate.

Do you have the source for this? I tried ChatGPT:

>> Someone on the internet wrote "humans cannot consume more calories than 2.5x their basal metabolic rate" -- which study might they be quoting?

> I am not aware of a specific study that states that humans cannot consume more calories than 2.5x their basal metabolic rate. Basal metabolic rate (BMR) is the amount of energy a person needs to maintain basic bodily functions such as breathing and digestion, and it can vary greatly depending on factors such as age, sex, and muscle mass. However, the total daily calorie needs of an individual also depend on their level of physical activity and other lifestyle factors. So, it's likely that this statement is a generalization or an over simplification.

Post reply on HN