Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Sweat as an indivation of calories burned?
Replies
-
One thing I notice every summer is I'll be riding around on my bike, creating a bit of a breeze because I'm going 15 or 20 mph through still air, and it's enough to cool me down. Then I'll hit a red light, stop, and begin to sweat. I don't think I'm burning more calories standing at a stop light than I am pedaling a bike 20 mph on the flat.2
-
Go google webmd top 9 fitness myths busted and you will see im not wrong0
-
derek1237654 wrote: »Go google webmd top 9 fitness myths busted and you will see im not wrong
Seriously?0 -
derek1237654 wrote: »Go google webmd top 9 fitness myths busted and you will see im not wrong
Can you help me understand how this is useful in the real world, because I'm baffled?2 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »derek1237654 wrote: »Go google webmd top 9 fitness myths busted and you will see im not wrong
Seriously?
Yes it says NOT NECESSARILY0 -
derek1237654 wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »derek1237654 wrote: »Go google webmd top 9 fitness myths busted and you will see im not wrong
Seriously?
Yes it says NOT NECESSARILY
Pretty sure the "seriously?" is in regards to webmd being a terrible source for medical or scientific knowledge.
0 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »derek1237654 wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »derek1237654 wrote: »Go google webmd top 9 fitness myths busted and you will see im not wrong
Seriously?
Yes it says NOT NECESSARILY
Pretty sure the "seriously?" is in regards to webmd being a terrible source for medical or scientific knowledge.
Exactly. That article looks like what you would see in a women's magazine and uses that same language. not to mention he is referencing something that totally contradicts the original hypothesis he is trying to make and prove not to be wrong.
Here is what it says:Fitness Myth No. 6: If you're not working up a sweat, you're not working hard enough.
"Sweating is not necessarily an indicator of exertion," says Tyne. "Sweating is your body’s way of cooling itself."
It's possible to burn a significant number of calories without breaking a sweat: Try taking a walk or doing some light weight training.
Gotta eyeroll at taking a walk or doing some light weight training burning a "significant" number of calories..
In the same breath right after this:Fitness Myth No. 4: Swimming is a great weight loss activity.
While swimming is great for increasing lung capacity, toning muscles, and even helping to burn off excess tension, Harr says the surprising truth is that unless you are swimming for hours a day, it may not help you lose much weight.
"Because the buoyancy of the water is supporting your body, you're not working as hard as it would if, say, you were moving on your own steam -- like you do when you run," says Harr.1 -
You can spend the day walking at a moderate pace and burn significant calories. It's called hiking.
2 -
NorthCascades wrote: »You can spend the day walking at a moderate pace and burn significant calories. It's called hiking.
Oh trust me, I know about that all too well (thank you hiking for my achilles
). 0 -
NorthCascades wrote: »One thing I notice every summer is I'll be riding around on my bike, creating a bit of a breeze because I'm going 15 or 20 mph through still air, and it's enough to cool me down. Then I'll hit a red light, stop, and begin to sweat. I don't think I'm burning more calories standing at a stop light than I am pedaling a bike 20 mph on the flat.
This is not relevant to the point of the OP. He basically acknowledges that environmental factors play into sweat production.
0 -
NorthCascades wrote: »derek1237654 wrote: »Go google webmd top 9 fitness myths busted and you will see im not wrong
Can you help me understand how this is useful in the real world, because I'm baffled?
Meh, not very useful to most people, but large differences in sweat production under similar environmental conditions could be an easy indicator for the novice. I think that is what he is getting at.
Example, if you are someone who usually goes to the gym and walks on the treadmill for 20 minutes and sweats profusely then a day later you walk your 20 minutes on the treadmill but you're looking on your phone the whole time and your shirt is totally dry, you might have a good reason to doubt your intensity and the resultant calories burn.
Now, an indicator isn't proof, it's more akin to circumstantial evidence, but it might be a starting point.0 -
Having done a lot of workouts in the climate control of our home, I think it's a decent indicator of intensity level. I could pretty much bet money and the pace required during steady state on the elliptical to get the sweat dripping. Tough intervals will obviously skew things, but in the overall scheme if I'm sweating much I know I'm over a X MPH/watts output pace.
I think that the wind on the bike outside vs doing that same intensity inside would result in heavy pools of sweat indoors without that wind. It would be interesting to test people at high intensities with a big cooling fan vs none, and see how much it impacts pace vs perceived exertion.0 -
robertw486 wrote: »Having done a lot of workouts in the climate control of our home, I think it's a decent indicator of intensity level. I could pretty much bet money and the pace required during steady state on the elliptical to get the sweat dripping. Tough intervals will obviously skew things, but in the overall scheme if I'm sweating much I know I'm over a X MPH/watts output pace.
I think that the wind on the bike outside vs doing that same intensity inside would result in heavy pools of sweat indoors without that wind. It would be interesting to test people at high intensities with a big cooling fan vs none, and see how much it impacts pace vs perceived exertion.
I agree this would be very interesting to see.0 -
Example, if you are someone who usually goes to the gym and walks on the treadmill for 20 minutes and sweats profusely then a day later you walk your 20 minutes on the treadmill but you're looking on your phone the whole time and your shirt is totally dry, you might have a good reason to doubt your intensity and the resultant calories burn.
Thanks for giving a scenario. I was scratching my head to think of one. Not sure I'm entirely convinced by this one, but I appreciate the help along the way from abstract and weak correlation to real world.
I'll play devil's advocate for a moment and suggest that the distance you cover in 20 minutes is probably a more reliable indicator of effort than how sweaty you got. I'm really skeptical about conditions ever being the same, like the rock climbing gym I used to go to was warmer (and stinkier) when more people were there.1 -
Yeah, I really can't think of a scenario when the sweat would be the most reliable indicator. Both my house and my gym vary in temperature/humidity depending on various factors, the Computrainer sessions I sometimes go to vary based on how close you are to the fan, and the majority of the exercise I do is outside. I was just out running and sweating way more than usual, but it's because it's humid and I'm not used to the humidity. (Humidity--when I'm not yet used to it--actually does make me feel like I'm working harder too, but I'm going to look to my HRM as well as distance and time for that analysis.)0
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »Yeah, I really can't think of a scenario when the sweat would be the most reliable indicator. Both my house and my gym vary in temperature/humidity depending on various factors, the Computrainer sessions I sometimes go to vary based on how close you are to the fan, and the majority of the exercise I do is outside. I was just out running and sweating way more than usual, but it's because it's humid and I'm not used to the humidity. (Humidity--when I'm not yet used to it--actually does make me feel like I'm working harder too, but I'm going to look to my HRM as well as distance and time for that analysis.)
Yeah, I don't think any of us would call it the most reliable method. I think the OP called its negative a half-truth. It's just a very general indication.
Maybe this question might help:
Does the likelihood of sweat rise or fall with increased intensity and time?
ETA: Likewise, does the potential for caloric burn rise or fall with an increase in intensity and time?
1 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Yeah, I really can't think of a scenario when the sweat would be the most reliable indicator. Both my house and my gym vary in temperature/humidity depending on various factors, the Computrainer sessions I sometimes go to vary based on how close you are to the fan, and the majority of the exercise I do is outside. I was just out running and sweating way more than usual, but it's because it's humid and I'm not used to the humidity. (Humidity--when I'm not yet used to it--actually does make me feel like I'm working harder too, but I'm going to look to my HRM as well as distance and time for that analysis.)
Yeah, I don't think any of us would call it the most reliable method. I think the OP called its negative a half-truth. It's just a very general indication.
Maybe this question might help:
Does the likelihood of sweat rise or fall with increased intensity and time?
ETA: Likewise, does the potential for caloric burn rise or fall with an increase in intensity and time?
For me weather seems to make way more of a difference with sweat. Since I start with a workout plan, if I sweat more than expected I'm more likely to make a conclusion about the weather/conditions than intensity. I know my planned intensity and there are other indicators I will notice first if I am working harder than expected.
It's been humid and windy here (sarcastic yay), and yesterday I did a 3.5 hour bike ride followed by a 30 minute run. Because of the wind I didn't sweat nearly as much during the bike, although that was the hard part of the workout, as the brief run after (which I intentionally did slowly and was not intended to be intense). I worked harder on the bike ride for sure.1 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Yeah, I really can't think of a scenario when the sweat would be the most reliable indicator. Both my house and my gym vary in temperature/humidity depending on various factors, the Computrainer sessions I sometimes go to vary based on how close you are to the fan, and the majority of the exercise I do is outside. I was just out running and sweating way more than usual, but it's because it's humid and I'm not used to the humidity. (Humidity--when I'm not yet used to it--actually does make me feel like I'm working harder too, but I'm going to look to my HRM as well as distance and time for that analysis.)
Yeah, I don't think any of us would call it the most reliable method. I think the OP called its negative a half-truth. It's just a very general indication.
Maybe this question might help:
Does the likelihood of sweat rise or fall with increased intensity and time?
ETA: Likewise, does the potential for caloric burn rise or fall with an increase in intensity and time?
For me weather seems to make way more of a difference with sweat. Since I start with a workout plan, if I sweat more than expected I'm more likely to make a conclusion about the weather/conditions than intensity. I know my planned intensity and there are other indicators I will notice first if I am working harder than expected.
It's been humid and windy here (sarcastic yay), and yesterday I did a 3.5 hour bike ride followed by a 30 minute run. Because of the wind I didn't sweat nearly as much during the bike, although that was the hard part of the workout, as the brief run after (which I intentionally did slowly and was not intended to be intense). I worked harder on the bike ride for sure.
Again, not intended to be accurate or conclusive but only an indicator.
I'll go ahead and answer the questions I asked:
The likelihood of sweat and calorie burn both increase in correlation to an increase in intensity and time.1 -
People's sweat relies upon the number and type of sweat glands they possess. Some sweat heavily with little exertion or heat, others barely sweat with significant body stress. The variability between individuals of physiology in both structure and function/response suggests to me that sweat itself would make a poor quantitative measure for energy expenditure.2
-
Not at all applicable to me. I am in a weird menopausal stage of breaking a profuse sweat all of a sudden for no apparent reason.4
-
People's sweat relies upon the number and type of sweat glands they possess. Some sweat heavily with little exertion or heat, others barely sweat with significant body stress. The variability between individuals of physiology in both structure and function/response suggests to me that sweat itself would make a poor quantitative measure for energy expenditure.
I agree. However, there is still some qualitative value there for most individuals.0 -
2snakeswoman wrote: »Not at all applicable to me. I am in a weird menopausal stage of breaking a profuse sweat all of a sudden for no apparent reason.
Wouldn't work too well for me, either, though my issue is stress. If I'm sufficiently stressed, I'm sweating, even if I'm sitting and shivering in a freezing cold room.0 -
Since we've 1) continued to point out that the theory put forward is only valid if all other factors are constant and 2) demonstrated that all other things never are constant (it was even pointed out that humidity levels fluctuate despite constant temperatures) can we possibly accept that a) the scenario put forward (using sweat as an indicator when all things are constant) is a strawman since it doesn't occur in real life and that b) sweat is thus not a reliable indivation (sic) of calories burned (especially considering that even if it were, we have no way of measuring the sweat in order to know just how much more sweat there is so that we can determine the increase in calorie burn or even by what proportions the two are related)?3
-
Carlos_421 wrote: »Since we've 1) continued to point out that the theory put forward is only valid if all other factors are constant and 2) demonstrated that all other things never are constant (it was even pointed out that humidity levels fluctuate despite constant temperatures) can we possibly accept that a) the scenario put forward (using sweat as an indicator when all things are constant) is a strawman since it doesn't occur in real life and that b) sweat is thus not a reliable indivation (sic) of calories burned (especially considering that even if it were, we have no way of measuring the sweat in order to know just how much more sweat there is so that we can determine the increase in calorie burn or even by what proportions the two are related)?
Now that's an incredible sentence. Also, I accept both your lemmas 1 & 2, and the conclusions a & b drawn in their wake.2 -
I sweat when I think it's sunny outside.
I wish it were an indicator of effort in my case, I wouldn't be so portly. 1 -
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions