141–150 of 188 posts
> 1 MET is 1 kcal/kg/hr These guys need to get with the program and use metric units. For example, the cycling world uses watts per kilogram (W/kg) to quantify an athlete's output. This is the correct unit to use. To help with this, note that 1 MET ≈ 1.162 W/kg.
But I agree it's lame.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thank you for providing this information. I've been getting hip pain when running so I'll see if I can incorporate and test the effects of a forefoot strike.
Every time I have had a leg-related running injury (knees, ankles, calfs, hip - you name it) the solution from the physio has always included doing squats. Now if I feel a niggle coming somewhere I just do a bunch more squats throughout the day (whenever I remember really) and that usually solves it after a week or two. Nothing super strenuous - just like 10 to 15, perhaps 2 or 3 times a day I have tried minimal shoe…
- Big muscle groups activated all at once
- Burns a lot of calories
- Strengthens a whole chain of muscles necessary for good posture
- If done right (deep squats) makes you more flexible
So do them even if you don't have pain and you'll be better off anyway
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm a runner and have had a weird question, could a runner defeat a larger human in this way? Like if I found myself in mortal combat with The Rock at 260 lbs after his steroids cycle, could I just repeatedly run away and follow him (while staying out of range) until he tired out and then bonk him on the head with a rock, like a tired antelope? (No offense to The Rock, seems like a great guy) Might explain why we are…
The Rock would be bad at persistence hunting, but it would be weird if he was so susceptible to persistence hunting. What incentive does he have to fatigue himself in this scenario? When it's you vs animal, the animal runs from you since if you catch it you kill it. The Rock could just chill and say bring it on. If you were sufficiently mobile and clever, maybe you could prevent him from reaching food and water until…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also purely anecdotal, but I once lost 17kg (37lb) just by walking an additional 90 minutes a day for several months straight. And successfully maintained the new low weight for years afterward, also by walking moderately more than the usual. The great thing about walking is that you can just keep doing it mindlessly, while also doing other things such as commuting, shopping, running errands and taking care of the do…
90min/day is a lot Ive started doing 6kmh walk for 30min after gym, two times a week and Ive lost like 10kg in 6 months
It is kind of nothing if you live "the old school way", that amount of walking just accumulates. If you live "the post covid way" or "car with close parking lot way", then it becomes large block of time you have to carve separately.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I started trying to pay attention and do some "zone 2" training recently. I came to the sad realization that a moderate jog pushes me well over zone 2. :(
Same here! Have you found a solution? I was pretty happy with 3 miles 3-4 times per week, 10 to 11 minute pace, but apparently for me that's pushing too hard according to zone training. I tried going much slower, and even then my HR raises more slowly, but eventually gets way up there. Alternating my slowest possible jog and walking has taken all the fun out of running for the time being.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
90min/day is a lot Ive started doing 6kmh walk for 30min after gym, two times a week and Ive lost like 10kg in 6 months
Is a lot and is not a lot at all. When I was using buses to get to work, I got almost 90 min of walking and walking like activities a day just by existing - going to stop, standing on the bus, going to store, walking for lunch or to the office toilettes. It is kind of nothing if you live "the old school way", that amount of walking just accumulates. If you live "the post covid way" or "car with close parking lot way"…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are probably sprinting to the bus stop, not running. Running would be below your aerobic threshold, for however well you're trained, and thus should not leave you exhausted or wiped out. The general rule of thumb is that if you can't have a conversation, you're exceeding your aerobic threshold and so are exceeding your pace. Training increases what that pace is, but ultimately no (land?) mammal can exceed their a…
I started trying to pay attention and do some "zone 2" training recently. I came to the sad realization that a moderate jog pushes me well over zone 2. :(
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Short answer no. This is because what gets exhausted is aerobic capacity. When you get within striking range The Rock will still have access to fast twitch muscles & some reduced amount of glycogen for energy release. This would probably be enough to grab you and choke you out. Basically the Mountain vs the Viper fight from game of thrones. If you were of similar size then yes. Basically being smaller really sucks in…
Wouldn’t the endurance preferred human eventually reach a safe distance and not have to fight?
This problem was treated with a bit more sophistication by Harvards Lieberman in „A story of the human body“ and the corresponding nature article [0] establishing persistence hunting as an ancestoral hunting technique of homo sapien. See figure 2b for the plot you were looking for. Running faster is less efficient but only slightly so and walking is a U-shaped curve like most mammal gaites. It shows that in contrast…
I don't doubt the results but I cannot imagine how that can be true, I'm not fit but I've had many 20+hours hikes to the high mountain peaks but if I run to a bus stop when I'm late I'm tired beyond belief and I just cannot maintain running, have to stop
The article seems to actually be answering a different question than it poses. From my experience of roughly analysing this a couple of years ago when I was losing quite a lot of weight, I drew two main conclusions: * Calories used is a function of total distance travelled and your weight, your speed isn't really that significant a factor. * Walking rather than running uses about 80% of the calories for the same dist…
Purely anecdotal, but I was surprised to find out that I gained significant weight when I switched from walking 6 hours/week to riding a bike for the same amount of time. I find it much harder to recover from riding, which makes sense because my heart rate goes way higher. Riding is much more fun, but I suspect you are completely right about walking being the better choice for weight loss. I was at my leanest when my…