Jump to content

Talk:Excess post-exercise oxygen consumption

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Taxman (talk | contribs) at 18:06, 23 March 2005 (comments). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Well since you clearly haven't learned anything that reverts don't help, I'll discuss here. That the fact you just removed is true is very simple to show. Simply do the calculation for the caloric expenditure that is claimed for the EPOC effect. Then calculate the caloric expenditure from a given amount of time of anaerobic training then for the same amount of time of aerobic training. Let's use an hours worth of each. An hour of primarily anaerobic weightlifting would run to about 200 calories or so being generous, mostly because you can't do it continuously for the whole hour by definition. Then lets ignore the fact that the EPOC effect does not raise the entire metabolism, and divide a day's metabolic rate into an hour, lets use 2400/24=100. Then lets say EPOC accounts for 25% more for 4 hours (an amount and duration high enough that I don't think any peer reviewed science would support, but lets use it for illustration.) That adds to another 100 calories over normal metabolism, for a total of 300. An hour of moderate to slow jogging burns about 600 calories. So its 600 vs 300 using very generous assumptions on the EPOC side. Therefore the added fact is correct. I misplaced the paper I had making the calculations, but no matter what reasonable numbers you use, the fact remains correct. - Taxman 00:49, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

Talk about insisting you're the only one who can be right.
An hour of weight training can burn upwards of 500 calories, unless you dawdle. It's about the same number of calories as an hour of moderate cardio, and has a higher EPOC.
(see 'aerobics, general' and 'weightlifting, vigorous')
Again your characterization is biased. If you are going to pick vigorous weightlifting for the heavier person, then lets look at more vigorous running which is upwards of 1000 calories per hour or more. You'll notice the moderate effort lifting compares at 259 calories to the moderate effort running at 690. The caloric expenditure of the ET still vastly outweighs the weight training including the EPOC. Yes Anaerobic training has greater EPOC, its just POV to not note that that effect is less than the caloric expenditure from the endurance training. - Taxman 18:06, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)
HIIT (multiple reps of sprint and recovery) is an anaerobic training method that is proven to burn almost 3 times as much fat while expending about half as much energy during exercise as endurance (continuous moderate-intensity) training.
(see last two rows in table)
Quite interesting, though I haven't had a chance to check the source, or what the quality of the study was. And thank you for pointing it out to support my point. Did you notice in the study the ET used over twice as many calories? Evidence supporting that my point is correct. You can cite this study for that fact and also note that it found greater fat loss in the HIIT scenario if you like though. - Taxman 18:06, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)
The "fact" you added remains incorrect.
--Blair P. Houghton 01:15, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Even your words show that to be false: "while expending about half as much energy during exercise as endurance". So I'm re-adding the correct fact since your data supports it. If you would like to remove it you're going to have to come up with a reliable study that refutes it. - Taxman 18:06, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)