🚀 go-pugleaf

rns@npg-sd.SanDiegoCA.NCR.COM (Rick Schubert) writes:
>stgprao@st.unocal.COM (Richard Ottolini) writes:

>> Well be prepared for the 5-10 year "surprise".  With time one's metabolism
>> can become very efficient at a given task.  The first five years it was
>> easy to keep weight off.  Afterwards I had to watch my diet again.  The
>> standard metabolic rate for running is given as .75 kcal per pound per mi. 
>> I've estimated my rate at about .5 kcal after 16 years of running. 
>How have you made that estimate?  Unless you've made laboratory measurements
>or have conducted a very carefully-conducted experiment, I don't see how you
>can come up with such a figure (but I'm willing to be convinced).
>Also, the "standard" metabolic rate I've always heard is 0.67 kcal/lb/mile
>(100 kcal per mile for a 150 lb. person).

There's also the metric maxim: 1.0 kcal/kg/km, which I think is a bit
optimistic about burning lots of calories.

Anyway, all of these things are rough guesses, however all runners will
begin to burn fewer and fewer calories per mile because they become more
experienced: as in more efficient, less wasted, flailing effort, smooth
strides, no waggling or head-bobbing, arms nicely positioned, and reduced
levels of breathing at even faster paces.

Speed does factor into the equation per mile, but very little, but all
runners are more or less efficient at different speeds thus raising or
lowering the distance coefficient.

However, going from .75 kcal/lb/mi to .50 seems awfully drastic.
This would be a great study, but a very long term one.
 
-- 
Ken Papai <kpapai@rahul.net>