Timeline for Impact of cardio-exercise duration on burned calories
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 24, 2013 at 16:52 | comment | added | JohnP♦ | @zero-divisor - even if it does, that first 10 minutes would be the same if it's 30 min continuous vs. chopped apart. Now, if you go to the extremes and completely cool down between each 10 minute portion, then I suppose there could be some difference. But even a car, if you drive it until warm, shut it off for 5 minutes, it's still "warm" from the previous drive. Same same. I've spent a few days looking around, and I can't find anything that refutes this. If the speed/effort is the same for 30 vs 3x10, and thus the distance, calories should be basically equivalent. | |
| Sep 20, 2013 at 5:51 | comment | added | zero-divisor | Are you sure the difference ist negligible? I think this is completely non-trivial as well. For instance, the fuel consumption of a car on the first miles is a lot higher than after the car has warmed up. Couldn't it be the case that the body behaves similarly? | |
| Sep 20, 2013 at 4:18 | comment | added | JohnP♦ | @zero-divisor 100%? no. Do I think its an exact match? Probably also no, but I think the difference is negligible (Within 10-15 calories). I think the variation would be mostly in the fact that there would be more variance in pacing for the longer run unless you're on a treadmill. But overall, if you spend 30 minutes at a given pace, you will basically burn the same calories as 3 10 minute segments at the same given pace. | |
| Sep 18, 2013 at 19:44 | comment | added | zero-divisor | "Running at a given pace will have the same caloric burn, no matter how you slice it up." I think this statement is non-trivial. Are you sure about it? | |
| Sep 18, 2013 at 16:30 | history | answered | JohnP♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |