Styleforum › Forums › Lifestyle › Health & Body › Putting Very Little Weight in Calorie Counting Methods (The New York Times)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Putting Very Little Weight in Calorie Counting Methods (The New York Times)

post #1 of 6
Thread Starter 
Interesting article to share with the forum before it's moved to the archives.

Link.
post #2 of 6
Interesting stuff. I was not surprised that holding on to the railings while using a treadmill reduces the number of calories you burn by 40%. I know there is a huge difference in the way I feel after using the eliptical machines when I don't hold on. The muscles in my legs get far more of a workout.
post #3 of 6
I think the efficiency of the machine does help one cheat a little. I find on an eliptical I will burn more calories with less effort in half the time (according to the machine) as I do on a stationary. I see people on the eliptical reading magazines and what not, while I'm struggling and sweating balls on the stationary. When I get off that bike I am worked and when I get off the eliptical I feel half as worked. I don't put to much stock into calorie counts.
post #4 of 6
That's interesting, I know that it reduced the calories but I didn't know it was that much. I'll be sure to tell my clients.
post #5 of 6
I've noticed a few younger women at the gym use the calorie counter on the cardio machine as their goal instead of the clock. They don't stop until they hit 300 (or 500) calories.

Ellipticals are popular because their calories counts are very optimistic.
post #6 of 6
They really need a new title for that. Cause calorie counting works, assuming your numbers are accurate.

So really estimating burned calories from exercise is what fails, not things like monitoring food caloric intake.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Health & Body
Styleforum › Forums › Lifestyle › Health & Body › Putting Very Little Weight in Calorie Counting Methods (The New York Times)