I grant you wriggling around trying to push is a small expenditure of energy, but if one were to isolate the muscle being worked, it still takes X amount of force to lift the weight... if the muscle is capable of doing it at all.TPRJones wrote:All that huffing and puffing and struggling and faster heart rate takes more wasted calories than the simple calm lift of the body builder.A body builder is going to do it easily. A noob is going to huff and puff and raise his heart rate, but no more work was done...
40 aint no joke - General fitness thread
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
The less efficient newb will expend more energy due to being less efficient, despite doing the same amount of work.
In the amateur, the circulatory system will work harder to oxygenate the blood, ship it to the muscles, and recover. As his heart gets better at moving the blood around, it'll adjust to the stress and maintain a steadier rhythm while the iron's being pumped or pool is being swam. The best example would be pitting a regular marathon runner versus a sedentary office dreg over a 5K. I guaran-goddamn-tee you the marathon man will have barely broken a sweat and the other guy will be dead on his feet.
It doesn't matter if I'm benching a 100 pounds or an Olympic weightlifter is doing it, in theory the same amount of energy (in terms of joules and watts) is required ... if the technique and movements are the same.
Edited By Malcolm on 1454086530
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Your muscles need fuel. How it gets there counts for a bit.GORDON wrote:I grant you wriggling around trying to push is a small expenditure of energy, but if one were to isolate the muscle being worked, it still takes X amount of force to lift the weight... if the muscle is capable of doing it at all.TPRJones wrote:All that huffing and puffing and struggling and faster heart rate takes more wasted calories than the simple calm lift of the body builder.A body builder is going to do it easily. A noob is going to huff and puff and raise his heart rate, but no more work was done...
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Ok, I agree that a triphammer heartbeat is burning a few more calories overall... but I don't think enough to count in this conversation. We're talking about the ATP/energy a muscle needs to perform a task, like lifting a weight. I say it is the same whether weak or strong. Catt disagrees.Malcolm wrote:Your muscles need fuel. How it gets there counts for a bit.GORDON wrote:I grant you wriggling around trying to push is a small expenditure of energy, but if one were to isolate the muscle being worked, it still takes X amount of force to lift the weight... if the muscle is capable of doing it at all.TPRJones wrote: All that huffing and puffing and struggling and faster heart rate takes more wasted calories than the simple calm lift of the body builder.
I'd even expand my statement to say that the weightlifter expends X amount of energy easily lifting a weight.... and the couch tater, even though he pushed REALLY FUCKING HARD, didn't even expend X amount of energy at all, if he couldn't lift the same weight.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
We're talking about the ATP/energy a muscle needs to perform a task, like lifting a weight. I say it is the same whether weak or strong. Catt disagrees.
I don't think he does. Because we aren't. We're talking about how many calories are burned performing a task. I would assert that people in worse shape do so less efficiently and thus burn more calories doing so. The ATP/energy of the muscles is probably the same, but that's irrelevant because it's not where the proposed differences come from.
"ATTENTION: Customers browsing porn must hold magazines with both hands at all times!"
GORDON wrote:I think just because you suffer a lot to run a mile when you are out of shape doesn't mean you did any more work or burned more or fewer calories that does a marthoner, you just suffered a lot to burn them.
If you want to talk work, people with more muscle and less fat have a way easier time jogging.
Edited By Malcolm on 1454088541
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
I still disagree with regards to exercise. The efficiency of the work being done matters.GORDON wrote:I don't think heart rate is a valid indicator, by itself, of how many calories you are burning. Which was my original observation.
Take cars. You can take cars with the same weight, and they will consume more or less energy to get the same distance traveled (work).
Efficiency matters. Moving 100 lbs 2 feet will burn more calories in the inefficient person.
It's not me, it's someone else.
Here you go Gordon, people have done science.
Heart rate matters.
2) Firstbeat Algorithm (Current – 2nd Generation): The Firstbeat algorithm is the most accurate Garmin device calorie measurement that can be done without external testing. But it’s actually not developed natively by Garmin. It’s developed by a Finish company (Firstbeat Technologies) that has its roots in calculations around Olympic athletes, specifically Nordic skiing. Their calculation uses user inputted variables including gender, height, weight and fitness class. It then combines this data with heart rate information from the ANT+ heart rate strap. Specifically, it evaluates the time between heart beats (beat to beat) to determine estimated MET (Metabolic Equivalent), which in turn is used determine actual work expenditure.
This makes the system one of the more accurate non-invasive options (read: doesn’t require a laboratory), within about 10% accuracy. Firstbeat has published a fascinating white paper detailing the technology and accuracy rates. This little snippet below though helps to show where the technology lies accuracy-wise – with it being right in the upper-middle compared to full-board lab operations on one end, and ‘distance/time’ calculations on the other end (click below to expand picture).
Heart rate matters.
It's not me, it's someone else.
Yes.
Although, just to be a pain in the ass, I would also point out that muscle efficiency probably plays a small role. Well-toned muscle mass probably uses the energy more efficiently than unworked flab. But that particular difference is probably too small to matter much.
Although, just to be a pain in the ass, I would also point out that muscle efficiency probably plays a small role. Well-toned muscle mass probably uses the energy more efficiently than unworked flab. But that particular difference is probably too small to matter much.
"ATTENTION: Customers browsing porn must hold magazines with both hands at all times!"
TPRJones wrote:Yes.
Although, just to be a pain in the ass, I would also point out that muscle efficiency probably plays a small role. Well-toned muscle mass probably uses the energy more efficiently than unworked flab. But that particular difference is probably too small to matter much.
I highly doubt your statement that it doesn't matter.
The efficiency of human muscle has been measured (in the context of rowing and cycling) at 18% to 26%. The efficiency is defined as the ratio of mechanical work output to the total metabolic cost, as can be calculated from oxygen consumption.
Source
People are horribly efficient engines, and that efficiency varies.
Edited By TheCatt on 1454097422
It's not me, it's someone else.
Happened to bump into a personal trainer tonight, and we were chatting, and I brought up today's discussion. I told her we'd been having a debate, and I told her what my original position was. She nods and says, "Yeah, that sounds right." Then I told her the counter position. She says, "Yeah, that sounds right."
She has big boobs.
She has big boobs.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
More data proving Catt is right
Edited By TheCatt on 1454270835
We also see that elite lifters are more efficient users of their calories than mid-level lifters are.
Edited By TheCatt on 1454270835
It's not me, it's someone else.