Exercise and calories: A complicated relationship
In a recent post, I noted by how much certain physical activities burned up more, or fewer, than the approximately 300 calories per hour that successful dieters in one study needed to work off in exercise in order to maintain a lowered weight.
I also offered the obvious qualifier that the energy and elan with which one performs any physical activity will ultimately determine how many calories are consumed.
The fact is, there are some hard truths about calorie burning that must be faced by persons who are attempting to lose weight or maintain a reduced weight and are pursuing an exercise program to that end.
Statistics can never be trusted
Number one, there are dozens of sources online and elsewhere for Calories-Burned-by-Various-Activities statistics — Calorielab among them — and no two of them come up with the exact same numbers for all the given activities.
This is partly because of number two, the fact that these numbers are extremely approximate, and the actual calorie burn for any given individual depends on a whole platoon of factors. New York Times journalist Gina Kolata wrote an excellent article on this subject a few months back, and here is the gist of it:
- Take those “calories” displays on the fitness center machines, and the official calories-burned charts, with a huge grain of salt; the reality is that two people the same age, weight, height, sex, and general fitness level can record different calorie burns even at the same level of physical exertion. If the average stated number of calories burned per hour by activity X is 100, your actual burn rate could be anywhere from 70 to 130.
- Your exercise burn rate is inflated by the amount of calories you burn just by doing nothing, your “resting metabolic rate,” which differs for each of us according to age, gender, body mass and more.
- The calories-burned figures displayed by exercise machines are little more than statistical guesses; different manufacturers use different formulas, different machines are in diverse stages of maintenance, and people differ in how they use them — those who hang or lean on the rails or handlebars of treadmills, stairmasters, stationary bikes and the like can cut their actual burn rate by half.
- Because you become more efficient at any given exercise the more you engage in it, your burn rate per hour will decrease as you become more familiar with the exercise.
But these qualifiers don’t mean you should ignore the calorie-burn activity charts altogether, for a number of reasons, the most important being that people are notorious for overestimating the number of calories they burn, regardless of the activity. While the posted numbers may be mere approximations, they still provide a fairly reliable reality check for people who, for example, assume they are eating up 500 calories per hour through leisurely jogging.
Also, the various burn-rate lists are for the most part in general agreement, and taking an average of two or three of them should put you in the ballpark for the actual number. And the lists are useful indicators of the relative burn values of various activities — swimming laps will always burn about twice as many calories as raking leaves, for instance — to help one spend one’s exercise time as efficiently and productively as possible.
And after jogging, some java
If you have trouble recovering from strenuous exercise — you get so burned out on Monday that you can barely perform on Tuesday — Australian researchers have determined that several strong cups of coffee after intense physical activity can, by boosting the level of glycogen in the muscles, give you more energy — possibly 50 percent more — for the following day’s workout.
If you use the coffee to wash down some complex carbs, even better — one Olympics fitness coach suggests a peanut butter and jelly sandwich or a banana with yogurt — but don’t pig out and undo your good efforts.
(By Robert S. Wieder for CalorieLab Calorie Counter News)
Subscribe to our RSS feed | Weekly e-mail updates | Follow us on Twitter
Related posts from the CalorieLab Calorie Counter News archives:







August 20th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
I read a review of various activities yesterday, and they reported that bowling was a reasonably good calorie burner at, I think, 145 calories an hour. Bowling!! Is this some kind of joke? Maybe if you just kept rolling the ball continuously for an hour! Wont make too many friends that way, and for the cost of the lane for one hour, lipo might be cheaper :-)