does your height affect your calories burned?

Options
Sweetpea64
Sweetpea64 Posts: 21 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
It seems that being fairly short I have to work harder or move my feet faster than my friends that are taller and have longer legs. So, I was wondering............if you are 6' tall and can walk at 4 mph does it burn as many calories as someone my height 5'5" who has to jog at 4 mph? It seems to me that if at the same speed your legs are going twice as fast that you would burn more calories.
These are the silly things that keep me up at night thinking.

Oh and please don't correct my math I know it isn't exactly twice as fast. Just a general question. :0)

Replies

  • janemem
    janemem Posts: 575 Member
    Options
    I don't know the answer but I do know that at 5' 4" when I walk with my son, who is 6', I know it's a lot harder for me to keep up with him as he strides ahead and my little legs are going much faster than his, so I would presume that I'm burning more?

    I've often wondered how my poor dog feels because I walk him to exercise us both and we've got to the point where we average 4mph for around 90 minutes each time. Fine for me but I do worry I'll give him a heart attack or wear his short legs away, lol! :laugh:
  • F_Chord
    F_Chord Posts: 31 Member
    Options
    I'm 5' 00'' tall [short?] and I was wondering.. Curious to know, now! :D
  • TraceAT
    TraceAT Posts: 54 Member
    Options
    Bump for info, I'm short too!
  • smiffy645
    smiffy645 Posts: 167 Member
    Options
    Found this:

    http://fitnessblackbook.com/main/giants-vs-little-people-body-fat-metabolism-lean-body-mass-etc/
  • jadeaudrey
    jadeaudrey Posts: 22 Member
    Options
    I have read that the bigger you are the more you burn. Just because of the larger oxygen intake, more body to push the blood around etc. But it would be interesting to find out if the amount of effort comes into play. My friend is 5 ft something short, and I am 5 ft 10in. When I walk at 6km an hr it's really no effort for me, where as she is puffing and struggling to keep up with my strides
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    Options
    For the most part, it doesn't make any difference. Biomechanics are such that, while someone with shorter legs may have to take more steps, it is more efficient for them to move so, in the end, it balances out. There was a recent study that looked at this a new way and suggested that taller people DO have a mechanical advantage for certain movements, but there was not enough information to make conclusive statement.

    If you just look at elite distance runners, it is pretty obvious that height gives no advantage at all, and is more a detriment than anything else. I doubt there has ever been a Olympic or World Championship marathoner over 6 feet tall--the guy who just broke the Chicago Marathon course record by over a minute is only 5'2".
  • TheRoseQueen
    TheRoseQueen Posts: 27 Member
    Options
    Interesting concept, Azdak, about height and the elite distance runners. Question: In the world of competition, how would body type (height and muscle type) affect the type of activity one could participate in??? I wonder how this would this apply in the swimming world, for example? You have swimmers who are sprinters - and swimmers who are distance (500 meters or more) --- and you don't usually find sprinters being able to do distance, and vice versa. I heard a comment the other day that most of the Olympic swimmers are all really tall. Are most of them what we would class as "sprinters", not specialists in true distance? My daughter was a distance swimmer in high school and college (up to 1650 meters) - but swimming sprints was totally out of her realm. She is only 5'5"....but quite compact compared to the tall, long-arm and long-legged sprinters. As we go through the world of maintaining and/or loosing weight....body type would/should probably enter into the equation. A person that has "long" muscles (like those a true ballerina in the dance world would possess) compared to those with the shorter and more compact muscles would be more adept at a different style.....kind of like race horses - a thoroughbred vs. a quarter horse. You have many, many, many years of training and experience in the field of exercise science....and I always respect and appreciate what you share. Also, would/could/should exercise workouts for the two different body types be something to take into consideration as well???? Just thinking......
  • BusyRaeNOTBusty
    BusyRaeNOTBusty Posts: 7,166 Member
    Options
    I think it has more to do with weight. Taller people are generally heavier. I'm 5'9" and 157lbs. I'm going to burn more than someone who is 5'0" and 110lbs.
  • Cr01502
    Cr01502 Posts: 3,614 Member
    Options
    It's all about body mass. Poeple who are taller are generally heavier than shorter people therefore they burn more calories.
  • DanaDark
    DanaDark Posts: 2,187 Member
    Options
    It does indeed deal more with weight and body composition. Taller people simply have more weight due to having more body. There is more bone, more skin, and generally larger sized organs. This is what causes them to burn more calories, not simply being taller.

Categories