The DEBUNKING thread.........myths that need to be trashed

Heres one I liked...
"I don't want to bulk up, I just want to tone up!"

Uh, flex.
Say hello to your muscle.
Now, you can either leave it as it is and simply burn fat via cardio. Or you can do strength training, build the muscle up a bit, and burn off less fat to get it to show through.

There is so such thing as toning. You either build muscle and burn fat, or you simply burn fat. Be happy with what you have under there or go build more.

I gave a distance: 10 miles. At two different paces. Same distance, different speed, which is what he was talking about.

Then you have to take into consideration that cycling on a stationary can include resistance- this can change the outcome.

Edited: plus, when you're cycling faster you're trying harder.
I think this goes off of the general assumption that the ratio to speed and effort is equal in both instances.

An interesting paper on running efficiency vs walking efficiency

http://edulife.com.br/dados\Artigos\Educacao Fisica\Fisiologia do Exercicio%
5CEnergy%20expenditure%20of%20walking%20and%20running%20comparison%20with%
20prrediction%20equations.pdf

The physics of running vs walking is not as simple as weight * distance between the start and end point, you have to consider the efficiency of how you get between the two points which will include both the vertical distance travelled and (too a much smaller extent) such things as wind resistance.

Not everything in life is equivalent to a sphere in a vacuum

I entered walking 2.0 mph for 30min in the database and it said I would burn 91 calories, I entered in running a 6min mile for 6min (to equal the same 1 mile I entered for walking) and it said I would burn 116 calories. So really the difference isn't that huge (only 25 calories)! Thanks for the information, I learned something interesting today!

Err your math's a bit off. It would take 10 minutes of running at 6 mph to hit 1 mile traveled. at 6 minutes you'd be at .6 miles traveled. Which means that if you entered it as you said jogging at 6 mph would burn almost double the calories.

Speed does play a factor in how many calories are burned. Think of a car. If moving the same amount of weight the same distance at any speed resulted in the same energy expended then you wouldn't get better gas mileage at different speeds. 60 or 120 mph and you'd burn exactly the same amount of gas in 100 miles? no, no you won't.

I totally get the car thing!!
I walked 5 miles pushing my daughters stroller which is 15 lbs and then add her weight 32 took me an hour and a half and my HRM said I burned 980 calories......I can run the same 5 miles with out the stroller in 1 hour and burn 650 so I am totally sticking with it is not the same walk run burn the same! There are so many factors that it just doesnt make sense!! LOL

saying running a mile and walking a mile burns the same number of calories is a very old school way of thinking an has been proven incorrect time and time again....

This.

wait did I read that right....you saying you burn as many calories walking the same distance as a run or did I confuse myself?

If the distance it the goal, let's say 1 mile, whether you run it or walk it the calories burned is the SAME.

What about net calories? I have read that, while its basically true that you will burn the same number of total calories regardless of whether you run or walk 1 mile, you will burn more net calories during the higher intensity workout. Aren't net calories more relevant to weight loss that total calories.

where do i start

1. "YOU'RE BUILDING AND GAINING MUSCLE, THAT'S WHY THE SCALE IS MOVING"

YES you can build muscle on a caloric deficit(4). (btw 2out of 5 Americans are obese) saying that is rare doesn't mean it can be done. It depends more on your body type. Endo vs Ecto vs Meso each will gain muscle at a different rate and loss fat at a different rate. Meso would build muscle as long as they took in enough protein and stayed over the starvation point, were an ecto couldn't build muscle with out going heavy on calories, an Endo would fall in the category you based your topic on.

2. "YOU ARE BUILDING LONG LEAN MUSCLES"

no you can't change the length of your muscle all you can do is control the size of it . (see below)

3. "I DON'T LIFT BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO GET BULKY"

Alright ... here we go Look the "Bulk" of your muscle is controlled (in part) by the amount of testosterone(1)you have , most women lack enough to look like a body builder and never have to worry about it. Also (in part) by hypertrophy training(2) which will allow you to grow bigger muscles where endurance training will allow you to get stronger with out the bulk.

4. "YOU CAN'T LOSE WEIGHT UNLESS YOU EXERCISE WITH AN ELEVATED HEART RATE"-

You are right on this one , you can lose weight watching TV and not moving all you have to do is not eat anything.
Does that make it effective? no
does that even make it a good idea? no
If you are going to commit to a weight loss program you have to understand it won't be comfortable if it is you are doing it wrong.
They use to talk about fat burning zone, your HR hits that point you are burning primarily fat, if you amp it up you burn more fat but you will also burn muscle. Its like this you burn more calories doing HIIT every other day opposite steady rate cardio every other day then you will doing steady cardio every day(3). You compare a 2 mile walk to a mile run. a mile run will not only burn more calories but will also increase your Resting Metabolic Rate... meaning you burn more during you exercise and will continue to burn more throughout your day.

Sources:
(1)http://ajpendo.physiology.org/content/283/1/E154.short
(2)http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_article/sports_body_training_performance/endurance_and_hypertrophy_paradox
(3)http://www.teenbodybuilding.com/justin6.htm
(4) http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/2007/04/29/from-geek-to-freak-how-i-gained-34-lbs-of-muscle-in-4-weeks/

I see what you're saying about 2 miles walked vs 1 mile running... but in my experience I've found that I burn MORE calories when I run 1 mile than if I walk 2 miles.

I understand the theory behind it - but, in my experience running 1 mile is gonna burn a whole lot more calories than simply walking for 2 miles.

You don't. You may FEEL that way, and it's not a theory. It's basic physics. If I ran as fast as I could I might last a couple of hundred yards and felt my lungs burning, my heart rate high and fall to the ground to catch my breath. If I walked 400 yards, I wouldn't be breathing hard, my lungs wouldn't be burning, and I could probably walk even further. I would have burned more calories WALKING than running even though the running FELT HARDER.

Um. No I don't FEEL that way. I can read calories burned and it clearly shows if I go 1 mile running and 2 miles walking - I don't burn the same amount of calories. Not at all. I can run 1 mile and burn almost 200. If I walk 2 miles, I MIGHT burn 125. BIG difference.