We are pleased to announce that on March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor will be introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the upcoming changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!

Your METS and how they can help extend your life

opher
opher Posts: 19
edited September 2024 in Fitness and Exercise
A while back I got tired of seeing the METS stat on the gym machines without having the faintest clue what it means. One quote I found was that according to a study published in 2005 in the New England Journal of Medicine "Women whose exercise capacity [in METs] at the start of the study in 1992 was less than 85% of the predicted value for their age were twice as likely to have died over the next eight years compared with those who achieved 85% or better." That seemed like a good reason to keep reading about it, so I researched some more and wrote up what I found: "What Are METs and How Can They Help Improve Your Fitness?" (see http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1413619/what_are_mets_and_how_can_they_help.html). Let me know what you think (or leave a comment on the article).

Replies

  • atla_moves
    atla_moves Posts: 54
    There's also a good section on this in the book "New Rules of Lifting for Women" with a longer list of each exercise and its equivalent METs. Cycling 10-12mph is also 6 METs. Hatha yoga is 2.5. I aim for 21-40 per week, and reach my minimum just with weight lifting/yoga. I try to reach the max with hiking/cycling.
  • opher
    opher Posts: 19
    You can't add up METS from different workouts. The METS is a rate measurement, sort of like the speed of a car. You do not sum up the speed you go on different trips, and in the same way, you'd not sum up METS from different workouts. You can, however, set up a METS goal and measure how many minutes you exceed that level on a daily, weekly, and/or monthly basis.
  • atla_moves
    atla_moves Posts: 54
    I'm not saying that I work out at an average of 21-40 METs. I'm saying that I aim for about 21-40 MET-hours per week. My basis for this is this 1999 study in the New England Journal of Medicine:

    http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa021067#t=articleResults

    In table 1 ( http://www.nejm.org/action/showImage?doi=10.1056/NEJMoa021067&iid=t01 ), you can see that they analyzed 5 groups of women, divided by MET-hours per week. The highest quintile had a median of 32.8 MET hours per week, and had the lowest incidence of heart disease. That is what I base my goals on, since heart disease is quite prevalent in my family.
  • opher
    opher Posts: 19
    Gotcha! I thought you were summing up the METS (as in, today I hit 16, yesterday 14, and the day before 15, so my total is 14+15+16 = 45 which would be nonsensical).

    Since you're summing up METS * hours, that's completely reasonable. In my car example, it's the equivalent of summing speed * hours which equals the total distance traveled. Good for you (and a great bit of advice to others)!
This discussion has been closed.

Categories