BioSpace Collaborative

Academic/Biomedical Research
News & Jobs
Biotechnology and Pharmaceutical Channel Medical Device and Diagnostics Channel Clinical Research Channel BioSpace Collaborative Employers
  Post Job | Search Resumes | Login

NEWSLETTERS
Free Newsletters
Archive
My Subscriptions

NEWS
News by Subject
News by Disease
News by Date
PLoS
Search News
Post Your News
JoVE

CAREER NETWORK
Job Seeker Login
Most Recent Jobs
Search Jobs
Post Resume
Career Fairs
Career Resources
For Employers

HOTBEDS
Regional News
US & Canada
  Biotech Bay
  Biotech Beach
  Genetown
  Pharm Country
  BioCapital
  BioMidwest
  Bio NC
  BioForest
  Southern Pharm
  BioCanada East
  US Device
Europe
Asia

DIVERSITY

PROFILES
Company Profiles

INTELLIGENCE
Research Store

INDUSTRY EVENTS
Research Events
Post an Event
RESOURCES
Real Estate
Business Opportunities

PLoS By Category | Recent PLoS Articles
Public Health and Epidemiology - Women's Health

Non-Exchangeability of Running vs. Other Exercise in Their Association with Adiposity, and Its Implications for Public Health Recommendations
Published: Friday, July 13, 2012
Author: Paul T. Williams

by Paul T. Williams

Purpose

Current physical activity recommendations assume that different activities can be exchanged to produce the same weight-control benefits so long as total energy expended remains the same (exchangeability premise). To this end, they recommend calculating energy expenditure as the product of the time spent performing each activity and the activity's metabolic equivalents (MET), which may be summed to achieve target levels. The validity of the exchangeability premise was assessed using data from the National Runners' Health Study.

Methods

Physical activity dose was compared to body mass index (BMI) and body circumferences in 33,374 runners who reported usual distance run and pace, and usual times spent running and other exercises per week. MET hours per day (METhr/d) from running was computed from: a) time and intensity, and b) reported distance run (1.02 MET•hours per km).

Results

When computed from time and intensity, the declines (slope±SE) per METhr/d were significantly greater (P<10-15) for running than non-running exercise for BMI (slopes±SE, male: -0.12±0.00 vs. 0.00±0.00; female: -0.12±0.00 vs. -0.01±0.01 kg/m2 per METhr/d) and waist circumference (male: -0.28±0.01 vs. -0.07±0.01; female: -0. 31±0.01 vs. -0.05±0.01 cm per METhr/d). Reported METhr/d of running was 38% to 43% greater when calculated from time and intensity than distance. Moreover, the declines per METhr/d run were significantly greater when estimated from reported distance for BMI (males: -0.29±0.01; females: -0.27±0.01 kg/m2 per METhr/d) and waist circumference (males: -0.67±0.02; females: -0.69±0.02 cm per METhr/d) than when computed from time and intensity (cited above).

Conclusion

The exchangeability premise was not supported for running vs. non-running exercise. Moreover, distance-based running prescriptions may provide better weight control than time-based prescriptions for running or other activities. Additional longitudinal studies and randomized clinical trials are required to verify these results prospectively.

  More...