active network espn
Active Home | Directory | Community | eteamz | Results | Support Support | Event Directors & Organizers
Community: Exchange advice in the forums and read running commentary Resources: Personal running log, calculators, links and other tools for runners News: Running news from around the world Training: Articles and advice about fitness, race training and injury prevention Races/Results: Find upcoming races and past results Home: The Cool Running homepage
Cool Running homepage  Search Cool Running Community
Login to Reply
Click to view meatbeagle's profile Rookie
meatbeagle
6 posts since
Mar 30, 2006

Jun 6, 2007 10:26 AM

The "2 pounds per week" thing...

Just a tiny rant here. My running partner is a tiny asian woman and I'm a 6-foot monstrosity. I often read these generalities such as "don't try to lose more than 2 pounds per week," and "in running 1 mile, you burn 100 calories." At 235 pounds, my losing 2 pounds is drastically different than my 100-pound running partner losing 2 pounds. Dragging my 235-pound carcass across a mile simply MUST take more energy than she uses. Where can one get more accurate measurements, and what's up with the general statements?! Alright... I think I'm done now.
Click to view runningforfreedom's profile Pro
runningforfreedom
164 posts since
Dec 14, 2007
1. Jun 6, 2007 10:33 AM in response to: meatbeagle
quote:<HR>Originally posted by meatbeagle:
Just a tiny rant here. My running partner is a tiny asian woman and I'm a 6-foot monstrosity. I often read these generalities such as "don't try to lose more than 2 pounds per week," and "in running 1 mile, you burn 100 calories." At 235 pounds, my losing 2 pounds is drastically different than my 100-pound running partner losing 2 pounds. Dragging my 235-pound carcass across a mile simply MUST take more energy than she uses. Where can one get more accurate measurements, and what's up with the general statements?! Alright... I think I'm done now.<HR>


If you go to runnersworld.com ... there is a calculator that will tell you what you burn on any given distance... you input your weight and miles, and it tells you what you burned during that run... I KNOW I burn more than 100 calories a mile... because I weigh a lot for a woman... As far as the 2lbs a week thing, I don't know... I wish it weren't so, but it is... the reason for that I think is anymore than that and you start to burn muscle instead of fat... it really is hard to cut or burn 7,000 calories a week as is anyway... so 2lbs a week is really a lot if you think about it... and over time it adds up pretty fast... but yeah, you're not the only one who doesn't like it. LMAO Then again at this point I'd be happy losing even one pound a week rather than just maintianing(at least for a little while).

------------------
myspace[/URL" target="_blank">
Higher Chakra Jewlery[/URL" target="_blank">

When running through swarms of love bugs, it has nothing to do with love, but if you just keep running, at least they can't land on you!
Login to Reply
Click to view reboot's profile Legend
reboot
398 posts since
Dec 14, 2007
2. Jun 6, 2007 1:59 PM in response to: meatbeagle
The 100 calories per mile is for a 120 lb person. The relationship of calories burned/mile to weight is a linear one. A 240 lb person would burn 200 cal and a 180 lb person 150 cal.

The two lbs per week is a general guideline. It would require a 1000 calorie deficit each day of the week to meet the goal of 2 lbs per week. For someone like you (a 235 lb runner) who is likely eating around 3500 calories per day, achieving a deficit of 1000 calories still leaves you eating 2500 calories. That is sufficient to get a fully balanced diet and sufficient vitamins etc.

Your running partner, eating a normal quantity likely around 1800 per day, would need to reduce her intake to 800 calories per day to meet the goal of 2 lbs per week. Such a diet would be extremely difficult to create and still have a balanced diet along with all the vitamins etc. To her, the 1000 calories per day represents a reduction in daily food intake of 56% while to you, it only represents a reduction of 28%. Clearly, it is far more onerous for your running partner to attempt 2 lbs per week than it is for you.

------------------
gotta run...
Login to Reply
Click to view Ariann092's profile Legend
Ariann092
681 posts since
Jan 4, 2005
3. Jun 6, 2007 2:54 PM in response to: meatbeagle
Two pounds a week is not a fixed guideline (it was probably being directed at a very specific population when first said - like those in the 150-200 pound range). A much better one would be 1% of your weight per week. For some people, it is perfectly healthy to lose more than 2 pounds a week if they're significantly over 200 pounds and need to lose a lot of weight. I have never been able to lose more than half a pound a week over a sustained period of time, which is less than 1/2% of my body weight - there's just no way I could sustain that low of a caloric intake and still be an active person.
Login to Reply