BodyRecomposition Support Forums  

Go Back   BodyRecomposition Support Forums > General information > Articles on the Main Site
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Unread 05-24-2011, 07:48 AM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 22,641
Default A 45-Minute Vigorous Exercise Bout Increases Metabolic Rate for 14 Hours

Research review on the main site
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Unread 05-24-2011, 10:13 AM
peter.k peter.k is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 111
Default

Great write up, Lyle. So for athletes who are in energy balance as well as doing long-duration and/or high-intensity stuff, EPOC can account for quite a bit?

Oh, and do you know if there is an increase in NEAT following exercise?

Last edited by peter.k : 05-24-2011 at 10:17 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Unread 05-24-2011, 10:54 AM
Overkill's Avatar
Overkill Overkill is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 719
Default

From my own experience which may mean little to nothing...

As exercise intensity goes up, NEAT goes down. Which would make sense because you're tired.

Quote:
So for athletes who are in energy balance as well as doing long-duration and/or high-intensity stuff, EPOC can account for quite a bit?
Not "and/or"... and.

Those would be pretty brutal workouts just to be able to eat a little more and it's not like you can do that sort of thing every day. I don't think it's that relevant for most. I guess that's pretty much what Lyle already said in the article though.

Last edited by Overkill : 05-24-2011 at 11:00 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Unread 05-24-2011, 10:56 AM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 22,641
Default

I'm the same way: after an hour or 90 minute grinder, I pretty much lay down the rest of the day.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Unread 05-24-2011, 11:10 AM
FutureisNow FutureisNow is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 529
Default

Thanks for the write-up also. At first reading 57% max watts, it didn't sound very intense, but reading your explanation does make it seem so! I agree that the calorie balance issue needs to be explored further; though , as you say, not recommended during dieting anyway.

One hopes the effect kicks in sooner, during a 30-25 minute threshold run for example - if running packs a bigger bang. Not that it matters but it wouldn't be bad either

Last edited by FutureisNow : 05-24-2011 at 11:13 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Unread 05-24-2011, 11:30 AM
peter.k peter.k is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 111
Default

Weird. I'm in the opposite way in terms of NEAT (and thus my question). My burn rate increase by great amount according to the GWF following exercise, caused by both higher rest expenditure and more movement. Even if what I did was very high-intensity.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Unread 05-24-2011, 05:36 PM
dresden dresden is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 382
Default

Isn't the relevant point the lower increase in hunger compared to lower intensities? Not about the study, but about choosing high intensities for fat loss purposes.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Unread 05-24-2011, 07:20 PM
Zé Apelido Zé Apelido is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 401
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dresden View Post
Isn't the relevant point the lower increase in hunger compared to lower intensities? Not about the study, but about choosing high intensities for fat loss purposes.

A related issue that has been bugging me is the apparent imbalance between 'heat balance' and 'mass balance' in regards to high intensity training.

When people talk about thermodynamics, they interchange heat and potential energy from stored molecules (fatty acids, glycogen, etc...). Specifically thermodynamics is about heat transfer. The key assumption made when attributing a certain calorie value to a macronutrient is how much heat it gives off when oxidized. That is the assumed link between mass balance and heat balance.

But when training at higher intensities, more glycogen is broken down without oxygen, which is a different process that releases a different amount of heat per molecule. This alone would go against the assumption of stored carbohydrate having a value of 4 kcal / unit. So more mass would be expended per unit of heat. But still the byproducts of anerobic glycolysis may be oxidized (lactate) to make up the difference, but I read a few papers which indicate that lactate produced is not totally oxidized.

I'm not sure about it, if someone knows more and could clarify that, I would appreciated. But in regards to your question, it could be possible that training with heavy anaerobic component can burn off more glycogen than measured via direct calorimetry (heat).
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Unread 05-24-2011, 07:50 PM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 22,641
Default

Yeah, didn't you already start a thread about this?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Unread 05-24-2011, 07:59 PM
dresden dresden is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 382
Default

Why did he quote me
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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.