* * * * *
Dear Dr. Dixon,
Here is my
question.
Basic physics
state that Energy = Mass X Distance. I told a friend that means
that if you run 50 miles or bike 50 miles it burns the same amount
of calories, he didn't believe me. Additionally, according to this,
hills shouldn't make a difference on calories burned, just on power
output, that is contra-intuitive.
What am I not
accounting for?
David
|
|
* * * * *
Dear David,
What
a great question. It has taken me awhile to marshal the answers and
formulae appropriate. Most of my experts were adamant that they would
rather bike fifty miles than run it and all said they would rather run
on the flat instead of uphill. Of course, we all knew it but ferreting
out the real answers took time.
Fuel processing, weight
bearing, incline, size in square meters, time , temperature, are
involved and probably more factors then you want to know. Turns
out you must take into consideration body mass or weight while running.
ACSM says it is important while running but not while cycling. Walking
formula is ml/min/kg but cycling with the seat holding you up is ml/min.
Incline is important
and the ACMS energy consumption formula for incline is: ml/kg/min=
[speed (m/min)x 0.1] [speed (m/min) x 1.8 x % grade].
More calories are used
for running because of the bodyweight used to propel that distance.
Mass x distance = calories burned/energy.
One correspondent allowed as how it might make 50 kcal difference and
reminded us that one donut is 200.
Experts employed; James J., Eugene, OR; Susan K.,Editor, Running and
Fitness; Bethesda, MD; Adam G., MS Exercise Physiologist < the
real formulae>;William J., Orthopaedic Surgeon and Squash Player.
George L. Dixon, Jr.,
M.D.
|