This discussion has been locked.

You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Calculations of calories burn looks suspicious

Guys, something is suspicious here.

On saturday I did an experiment. Same track which is 8km long.

In the morning, I did a run on it, which took me 45' and my watch says I burnt 500cal.

In the afternoon, I did the exact same track but this time, I walked, which took me 3 hours (I walked slowly !) and the watch says I burnt 750cal.

How is this possible and is this even correct ? I would have thought the run would burn a lot more calories ?

Thanks

- Jean.

0 steve_s_t over 2 years ago

I don't see that as odd. Put another way, you ran at 650 calories per hour and walked at 250 calories per hour.

0 ovekvam over 2 years ago in reply to steve_s_t

It was popular to believe that covering a given distance would spend the same amount of calories for walking, jogging and running. That amount should be around your weight in kg per km. But modern research has found it to be false. For the same distance, you spend less calories walking than jogging, and even more if you run.

I suspect the figures mentioned above includes the passive calories burned. If you look at active calories, it should be higher when running.

0 JRKingOfBeer over 2 years ago in reply to ovekvam

Thanks guys, what you're saying makes sense.