Content deleted Content added
m Signing comment by 81.157.140.152 - "→Oxygen Deficit and Oxygen Debt: " |
m Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 2 WikiProject templates. Create {{WPBS}}. Keep majority rating "C" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 2 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Physiology}}, {{WikiProject Sports}}. Remove 1 deprecated parameter: importance. Tag: |
||
| (11 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|
{{WikiProject Physiology |importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Sports }}
}}
==Untitled==
Well since you clearly haven't learned anything that reverts don't help, I'll discuss here. That the fact you just removed is true is very simple to show. Simply do the calculation for the caloric expenditure that is claimed for the EPOC effect. Then calculate the caloric expenditure from a given amount of time of anaerobic training then for the same amount of time of aerobic training. Let's use an hours worth of each. An hour of primarily anaerobic weightlifting would run to about 200 calories or so being generous, mostly because you can't do it continuously for the whole hour by definition. Then lets ignore the fact that the EPOC effect does not raise the entire metabolism, and divide a day's metabolic rate into an hour, lets use 2400/24=100. Then lets say EPOC accounts for 25% more for 4 hours (an amount and duration high enough that I don't think any peer reviewed science would support, but lets use it for illustration.) That adds to another 100 calories over normal metabolism, for a total of 300. An hour of moderate to slow jogging burns about 600 calories. So its 600 vs 300 using very generous assumptions on the EPOC side. Therefore the added fact is correct. I misplaced the paper I had making the calculations, but no matter what reasonable numbers you use, the fact remains correct. - [[User:Taxman|Taxman]] 00:49, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)
Line 42 ⟶ 48:
#One study showed a regime of interval training (mostly anaerobic) to be superior to endurance training (mostly aerobic) in terms of fat loss.
What we should all be looking for here is to find the passage that we ''can'' include without argument--merely reverting edits isn't going to get us anywhere. In particulary, let's avoid accusations of lying or vandalism. [[User:Demi|Demi]] <sup>[[User_talk:Demi|T]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Demi|C]]</
:::* Taxman has proved in this and other articles that he doesn't understand the facts; he's just trying to pretend that citing anything with the words in it is a reference to the truth. [[User:Blair P. Houghton|Blair P. Houghton]] 01:06, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Line 100 ⟶ 106:
::And just to make this clear, I am not 129.223.115.87. Any developer could check that. - [[User:Taxman|Taxman]] 00:09, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)
What I learnt in medical school was that anaerobic metabolism is inefficient, and would lead to a higher energy consumption. The [[lactic acid|lactate]] formed would need [[gluconeogenesis]] in the liver, with additional energy expenditure (and, supposedly, catch-up oxygen consumption).
Taxman is correct that the exrx.net page does not establish a causal link. Blair P. is right that for all intents and purposes, energy=calories=fat. It just takes a fair amount of exercise to deplete [[glycogen]] stored in muscles and to initiate lipolysis (fat decomposition). I'm happy to look at specific articles from the Len Kravitz page; I may have full-text access to some of the ''Metabolism'' articles. [[User:Jfdwolff|JFW]] | [[User_talk:Jfdwolff|<small>T@lk</small>]] 19:43, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
*Well, energy may equal calories (by definition, of course) and it ''can'' equal fat, but the study in question is about ''fat loss''--and really, subcutaneous fat loss. That's not the same thing: as you say, there are many stores of energy in the body that are non-fat. Frankly, I'm not sure there's any conclusion to be drawn from the study ''that is useful in explaining EPOC''. [[User:Demi|Demi]] <sup>[[User_talk:Demi|T]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Demi|C]]</
Oh, and in this ({{PMID
== Protected and discussion page ==
Line 131 ⟶ 137:
Studying the oxygen deficit and getting redirected here. It is not the same thing. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/81.157.140.152|81.157.140.152]] ([[User talk:81.157.140.152|talk]]) 18:39, 3 November 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
==Oxygen debt in Torture Victims and Asthmatics==
I am not sure that all forms of [[torture]] in which an oxygen deficit is induced to build up an oxygen debt can be called "[[exercise]]" & in some people (i'm thinking of asthmatics and people with some blood conditions) i think the debt may be caused not so much by the use of ATP rising above the maximum rate at which the system that produces it is able to do so but the maximum capacity at which the system can create ATP falling below the rate at which the ATP is being used up; the system being one that includes not only the blood but also the breathing. Breathing becomes difficult in asthmatics during an asthma attack.[[Special:Contributions/109.158.139.223|109.158.139.223]] ([[User talk:109.158.139.223|talk]]) 14:48, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
== Actual paper that is summarised on www.exrx.net ==
Found a PDF of the study that's summarised on http://www.exrx.net/FatLoss/HIITvsET.html.... http://www.colorado.edu/intphys/Class/IPHY3700_Greene/TIPS/exIntesity/Tremblay.pdf. Might be a better reference for the wikipage. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Glen newell|Glen newell]] ([[User talk:Glen newell|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Glen newell|contribs]]) 03:51, 30 January 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
| |||