LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers > General Discussion > The Fashionable

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 222
0 members and 222 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 4,499, 10-26-2015 at 08:55 AM.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-04-2018, 04:26 PM   #2416
ThurgreedMarshall
[intentionally omitted]
 
ThurgreedMarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 26,326
Re: All you need are looks and a whole lot of money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop View Post
I feel like maybe I am missing something, and it may be because I never took physics, but let me try again.

The machine can measure how many watts you produce. Wikipedia tells me a watt is a unit of power, a measure of energy transferred per unit time. So if the machine can measure watts and time, you can derive energy. Calories are a measure of energy. So the machine should be able to measure calories of work performed. It is true that bodies will differ in terms of how efficiently they can mobilize the body's resources to convert them to do work. It is also true that it takes more energy to move a bigger body, but if you can input weight and it can calculate watts, doesn't that address that issue?
First, no one puts their height, weight, age, and sex into those machines. If they did, yes, the read would be more accurate.

Second, I don't know how you can write the last two sentences next to each other. The better athlete you become, the fewer calories you will burn (workouts being equal). I have been doing a lot of HIIT workouts. If you and I did the same exact workout, I would burn far fewer calories than you. If I did the same distance run as Coltrane, he would burn far fewer calories than I.

If it were a simple matter of if you go X fast for X amount of time you will burn X amount of calories if you weigh X amount and are X tall etc., athletes would not plateau. As the body gets more efficient it needs fewer calories to do the same amount of work. This is why athletes will throw sprints in on a distance run to force their bodies to work harder (even while reducing the total number of miles run).

TM
ThurgreedMarshall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2018, 04:28 PM   #2417
Hank Chinaski
Proud Holder-Post 200,000
 
Hank Chinaski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Corner Office
Posts: 84,053
Re: All you need are looks and a whole lot of money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop View Post
I feel like maybe I am missing something, and it may be because I never took physics, but let me try again.

The machine can measure how many watts you produce. Wikipedia tells me a watt is a unit of power, a measure of energy transferred per unit time. So if the machine can measure watts and time, you can derive energy. Calories are a measure of energy. So the machine should be able to measure calories of work performed. It is true that bodies will differ in terms of how efficiently they can mobilize the body's resources to convert them to do work. It is also true that it takes more energy to move a bigger body, but if you can input weight and it can calculate watts, doesn't that address that issue?
I'm on ignore?
__________________
Tan and fit!!!
Hank Chinaski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2018, 04:31 PM   #2418
Hank Chinaski
Proud Holder-Post 200,000
 
Hank Chinaski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Corner Office
Posts: 84,053
Re: All you need are looks and a whole lot of money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop View Post
Yes, that makes sense. But the machine should be able to accurately measure how much work you did, which is the minimum your body burned. If you could trust machines to get that right (which I'm not sure you can), then that number would be useful as a comparison for a single person across different workouts.
Assuming you use the same machine, or another machine that uses the same algorithm, one can certainly compare one workout to the next. The problem is people think "I burned 343 calories. That takes away the burger i just ate." The calorie number is actually a bit contrived.
__________________
Tan and fit!!!
Hank Chinaski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2018, 04:38 PM   #2419
Pretty Little Flower
Moderator
 
Pretty Little Flower's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Flower
Posts: 7,924
Re: All you need are looks and a whole lot of money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop View Post
Yes, that makes sense. But the machine should be able to accurately measure how much work you did, which is the minimum your body burned. If you could trust machines to get that right (which I'm not sure you can), then that number would be useful as a comparison for a single person across different workouts.
I think the machines these days can fairly accurate how many watts you have produced. And you can definitely use watt meters to effectively assess your workouts against each other. But the part where the machine should be able to accurately measure how much work you did is where we are talking about different things, I think. Different people need to work different amounts to produce a watt. For example, look at this estimate of how many calories you burn sustaining certain watt levels depending on your weight.

http://www.fitnessforweightloss.com/...ationary-bike/

Significant differences in calories burned while sustaining the same watts depending just on how much you weigh. And even these numbers are just a loose approximation, because a 200 lb person with 35% body fat is going to burn a different amount of calories than a 200 lb person with 6% body fat.
__________________
Minister of New New Super Heavy Funk.

I am not sorry.
Pretty Little Flower is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2018, 04:41 PM   #2420
Tyrone Slothrop
Moderasaurus Rex
 
Tyrone Slothrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 30,259
Re: All you need are looks and a whole lot of money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall View Post
First, no one puts their height, weight, age, and sex into those machines. If they did, yes, the read would be more accurate.
For some machines (a treadmill, e.g.), I get why you need weight, but I don't get why you need the other characteristics.

Quote:
Second, I don't know how you can write the last two sentences next to each other. The better athlete you become, the fewer calories you will burn (workouts being equal). I have been doing a lot of HIIT workouts. If you and I did the same exact workout, I would burn far fewer calories than you. If I did the same distance run as Coltrane, he would burn far fewer calories than I.
Honest question: Is this true? Do individuals get more efficiently at converting stored calories to work produced?

Quote:
If it were a simple matter of if you go X fast for X amount of time you will burn X amount of calories if you weigh X amount and are X tall etc., athletes would not plateau. As the body gets more efficient it needs fewer calories to do the same amount of work. This is why athletes will throw sprints in on a distance run to force their bodies to work harder (even while reducing the total number of miles run).
For some aspects of biomechanics, I get that improving one's form will make you more efficient, particularly for sports where the form is much more complicated. But for a stair master or a exercise cycle, is there really much to that? And is it just biomechanics, or does the body actually do better at the biochemistry?

Not arguing -- just something I would like to understand better. Also, was trying to make a distinction before between the work performed (your output, measured in energy) and the calories burned (how much stored energy your body needs to do the former) -- seems like the former should be easy to measure, the latter not so much. Maybe I didn't make that distinction clear.
__________________
“Faced with the choice between changing one’s mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof”
- John Kenneth Galbraith
Tyrone Slothrop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2018, 04:42 PM   #2421
Tyrone Slothrop
Moderasaurus Rex
 
Tyrone Slothrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 30,259
Re: All you need are looks and a whole lot of money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski View Post
I'm on ignore?
Never. I actually like to read your posts aloud in different voices, to the amusement of my co-workers, in the hopes that doing so will shed more light on what you mean, but it doesn't always help. As I say, I amuse my co-workers, so that's a plus.
__________________
“Faced with the choice between changing one’s mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof”
- John Kenneth Galbraith
Tyrone Slothrop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2018, 04:43 PM   #2422
Tyrone Slothrop
Moderasaurus Rex
 
Tyrone Slothrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 30,259
Re: All you need are looks and a whole lot of money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski View Post
Assuming you use the same machine, or another machine that uses the same algorithm, one can certainly compare one workout to the next. The problem is people think "I burned 343 calories. That takes away the burger i just ate." The calorie number is actually a bit contrived.
Am I on ignore? Question I was asking was not calories burned, but calories of work performed.
__________________
“Faced with the choice between changing one’s mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof”
- John Kenneth Galbraith
Tyrone Slothrop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2018, 04:43 PM   #2423
Tyrone Slothrop
Moderasaurus Rex
 
Tyrone Slothrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 30,259
Re: All you need are looks and a whole lot of money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower View Post
And even these numbers are just a loose approximation, because a 200 lb person with 35% body fat is going to burn a different amount of calories than a 200 lb person with 6% body fat.
Why is that?
__________________
“Faced with the choice between changing one’s mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof”
- John Kenneth Galbraith
Tyrone Slothrop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2018, 04:44 PM   #2424
Hank Chinaski
Proud Holder-Post 200,000
 
Hank Chinaski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Corner Office
Posts: 84,053
Re: All you need are looks and a whole lot of money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop View Post
Am I on ignore? Question I was asking was not calories burned, but calories of work performed.
You mean by the mechanical machine, or the human one? The mechanical machine only knows itself.
__________________
Tan and fit!!!
Hank Chinaski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2018, 05:15 PM   #2425
Pretty Little Flower
Moderator
 
Pretty Little Flower's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Flower
Posts: 7,924
Re: All you need are looks and a whole lot of money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop View Post
Why is that?
A muscular body burns more calories than a fatty body, and tends to burn more calories at rest than a non-muscular body. But if you are muscular, you are more likely to be in good cardio shape, and your body may be more efficient and need fewer calories to, for example, maintain X MPH on a treadmill or bike.
__________________
Minister of New New Super Heavy Funk.

I am not sorry.
Pretty Little Flower is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2018, 05:34 PM   #2426
ThurgreedMarshall
[intentionally omitted]
 
ThurgreedMarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 26,326
Re: All you need are looks and a whole lot of money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop View Post
For some machines (a treadmill, e.g.), I get why you need weight, but I don't get why you need the other characteristics.
Because it take someone who is 5' 6" and a fat 200 pounds considerably more effort and work to run one mile than someone who is 6' 2" and an athletic 200 pounds to run that mile. Men and women burn calories differently. Young people burn calories much better than old people.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop View Post
Honest question: Is this true? Do individuals get more efficiently at converting stored calories to work produced?
Yes.

https://www.outsideonline.com/178665...lories-newbies

https://www.mensjournal.com/health-f...ries-20160209/

The way I think about it is, if your body didn't get more efficient (or, at some point just shut down your ability to burn fat stores for safety purposes), we could all do one week's worth of work on an exact diet, measure the percentage of fat lost and how many calories were taken in, and then figure out exactly when we could reach a specified goal. Obviously that doesn't work. People plateau and at a certain point, stop losing fat stores altogether. You have to work much much harder to lose the same amount of fat the closer you get to 0% body fat.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop View Post
For some aspects of biomechanics, I get that improving one's form will make you more efficient, particularly for sports where the form is much more complicated. But for a stair master or a exercise cycle, is there really much to that? And is it just biomechanics, or does the body actually do better at the biochemistry?
Here's an article that looks at the opposite way--reducing muscle efficiency increased calories burned.

https://now.uiowa.edu/2015/02/reduci...burning-muscle

TM

Last edited by ThurgreedMarshall; 06-04-2018 at 06:44 PM..
ThurgreedMarshall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2018, 07:49 AM   #2427
Icky Thump
Registered User
 
Icky Thump's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,647
Re: All you need are looks and a whole lot of money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane? View Post
CICO. That's it. You want to gain muscle? Eat at a calorie surplus and lift heavy. You want to lose weight (but retain some of that muscle you gained)? Eat at a calorie deficit (but not too much of a deficit as you'll lose too much muscle) and lift heavy.

If you consistently eat in a deficit, you will lose weight (unless you lie to your app about what you eat or underestimate what you eat - which people do a lot).
Sorry, maybe I am older than all of you but when I lift heavy shit I just hurt for days.
__________________
You can breathe, you can blink, you can cry. Hell, you're all gonna be doing that!

Last edited by Icky Thump; 06-05-2018 at 11:51 AM..
Icky Thump is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2018, 09:35 AM   #2428
Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Registered User
 
Greedy,Greedy,Greedy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Government Yard in Trenchtown
Posts: 18,849
Re: All you need are looks and a whole lot of money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icky Thump View Post
Sorry, maybe I am older than all of you but when I lift heavy I just hurt shit for days.
I lost about 30 pounds when I was on chemo, but have now gained 60 back afterwards thanks to the extreme slow-down of my metabolism. My oncologist was generally happy with me getting about 40+ back, but now I have to start working on getting it off.

The thing I most fear: having to deal with a lot of people talking about weight loss. Thanks, guys, this whole conversation has driven home how great my distaste is for obsessing on the subject.
__________________
A wee dram a day!
Greedy,Greedy,Greedy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2018, 12:58 PM   #2429
ThurgreedMarshall
[intentionally omitted]
 
ThurgreedMarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 26,326
Re: All you need are looks and a whole lot of money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icky Thump View Post
Sorry, maybe I am older than all of you but when I lift heavy shit I just hurt for days.
I don't think you need to lift heavy until you are already in fairly good shape (and who's to say you're not--I have no idea). I do think people need to lift in combination with cardio in order to maximize weight loss and redistribution (because let's face it, it doesn't matter what you weigh once you get within a certain range--it matters how you've shifted the proportion of fat to muscle). Also, if you have more muscle, you burn more calories at rest and your body uses calories it would have otherwise stored as fat.

When I think "lift heavy," I mean "heavy for you or me or whoever." And I don't mean bro lifting (bench, curls, extensions, repeat). I mean hitting muscle groups that you would never think of hitting on your own--and that usually means a trainer or a class of some sort.

TM
ThurgreedMarshall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2018, 03:31 PM   #2430
Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Registered User
 
Greedy,Greedy,Greedy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Government Yard in Trenchtown
Posts: 18,849
Re: All you need are looks and a whole lot of money.

In a sign that things have come full circle around here, can I just say, this is fucking crazier than Trump at a Rally. Total lunacy. What are they thinking?
__________________
A wee dram a day!
Greedy,Greedy,Greedy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:36 AM.