News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Running as a Thinking Person’s Sport by brianwawok on Wednesday December 14, 2016 @10:43PM (#13182200)
As a sometimes fat runner, I cite myself.

Weight is won or lost in the kitchen. Full stop.

A 1 hour run might burn 500 calories. If you go and eat till you are not hungry, you can easily eat 800 or 900 calories. You are not going to lose much weight at the method.

Re:Running as a Thinking Person’s Sport by Humdeee on Thursday December 15, 2016 @10:24AM (#13185148)
It's a bit more complex than the commonly spouted calories in/calories out argument.

There is still a lot that we don't know with regards to metabolism. I am usually a higher mileage runner during spring to fall months (70-90km / week) and although I scale my eating to offset my calories burned, I will still lose weight. I will not provide a citation but it's quite widely known that metabolism increases as the body normalizes into a training period or regimen. And increasing with diminutive returns as the training increases. Recovery also burns more calories even while sedentary (as you should be when recovering).

Re:Running as a Thinking Person’s Sport by JoeAltmaier on Thursday December 15, 2016 @10:34AM (#13185234)
That's the consumer-side of it. The supply-side argument is what's usually 'spouted': if you're gaining weight, its because too many calories in. Full stop.

Of course the body can/will waste calories, burn them at a higher rate depending on other things. That's not most peoples' problem though: unexpectedly losing too much weight. There's not a billion-dollar industry around that issue.

Re:Running as a Thinking Person’s Sport by naasking on Thursday December 15, 2016 @09:32AM (#13184751)
> Weight is won or lost in the kitchen. Full stop.

I think this is disingenuous. Certainly regulating caloric intake has more impact than exercise because it's "easier" to achieve a caloric deficit, but that doesn't mean running isn't great for weight loss all else being equal.

Furthermore, exercise is important for other health reasons. So maintaining the same caloric intake and adding running is much better than simply reducing your caloric intake by the same amount.

Re:Running as a Thinking Person’s Sport by njs12345 on Thursday December 15, 2016 @07:00AM (#13183986)
A 1 hour run for me burns 1000+ calories: https://www.strava.com/activities/800853045

Of course it's possible to eat 1000 calories' worth of food in one sitting, especially if you're eating something with tons of carbs in. But if you keep your diet roughly the same and go on a 1 hour run three times a week, you'll definitely start losing weight..

Re:Running as a Thinking Person’s Sport by revelation on Thursday December 15, 2016 @10:07AM (#13185039)
You are not burning 1200 calories in a hour run at 10min/mile. At an average 25% efficiency that is the equivalent of producing 350W on an ergo for a whole hour, which is well beyond the genetic ability of the vast majority of the population.

(The idea that sport can't help you lose weight is still ridiculous of course, even if you are only burning 600 calories per hour. Bad habits make you overweight and establishing good habits (like exercise) is the key to get out of that.)

Re:Running as a Thinking Person’s Sport by azemetre on Thursday December 15, 2016 @01:48PM (#13187033)
May I ask how you came to this calculation? I have a relative in my family that regularly touts they are burning 3,000 calories on an elliptical for an hours worth of use.

It'd be nice to have an outlandish comparison to put towards their claim.

Re:Running as a Thinking Person’s Sport by revelation on Thursday December 15, 2016 @02:22PM (#13187350)
You start with gross efficiency, which for humans is going to be 20-30%. So when the tool says you expended 1200 calories and you assume an average efficiency of 25%, that means you produced 1200/4 = 300 kcal of actual work and 1200-300 = 900 kcal in excess heat.

The 300 kcal of work equate to ~349 Watt hours as WolframAlpha will tell you, so if you want to produce that in a single hour you need to continuously put out 349 Watts.

Now we have put lots of humans on scientific ergos which can accurately measure work, and that is a very high number for a single hour for any individual. There is a chart here that gives you the kind of work rates achievable by category:

http://d4nuk0dd6nrma.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/...

It's normalized by weight but it's more accurately height, someone weighing 300lbs isn't suddenly going to produce more power than at a normal weight. The number you're looking for is "FT" or Functional Threshold, which is generally assumed to be around the absolute maximum average power sustainable for an hour. At the end of that you should fall over and puke your guts out. So for someone doing 350 Watts for a hour, that would put them at world class or domestic pro level.

Re:Running as a Thinking Person’s Sport by naasking on Thursday December 15, 2016 @02:24PM (#13187376)
They would have to chug harder than a train to burn 3,000 calories on an elliptical. Chances are it's less than 1,000 calories [1].

[1] http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/08/07/walking-vs-elliptic...

Re:Running as a Thinking Person’s Sport by brianwawok on Thursday December 15, 2016 @12:01PM (#13186054)
I think that 1000 is also including your base calorie burn. I.e. if you sit in chair you burn 300. if you run 10 minute miles, you burn 700. Some of those calorie estimates are a bit off..