Total amount: € 0,00
Indexed/Abstracted in: BIOSIS Previews, EMBASE, Scopus, Emerging Sources Citation Index
Online ISSN 1827-1812
Cody E. MORRIS 1, John C. GARNER 2, Scott G. OWENS 2, Melinda W. VALLIANT 3, Mark LOFTIN 2
1 School of Kinesiology, Recreation and Sport, Western Kentucky University, Bowling Green, KY, USA; 2 Department of Health, Exercise Science and Recreation Management, The University of Mississippi, University, MS, USA; 3 Department of Nutrition and Hospitality Management, The University of Mississippi, University, MS, USA
BACKGROUND: Loftin et al. suggested that when comparing the energy expenditure per mile of overweight walkers, normal weight walkers, and marathon runners, groups were not significantly different. Results showed that as body mass increased, energy expenditure per mile increased but was not significantly different if the mile was walked or run. The purpose of this study was to compare energy expenditure for walking and running for pre- and post- exercise intervention aimed at eliciting a modest weight loss as well as to compare the measured EE values to the predicted EE values derived from the Loftin et al. equation.
METHODS: Fourteen overweight, but otherwise healthy participants (9 female, 5 male) completed the study. Body composition (measured via dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry), preferred walk/run pace, measured and predicted energy expenditure per mile walked/run, and excess post-exercise oxygen consumption following the walk/run were measured pre- and post-intervention.
RESULTS: A within-subjects repeated-measures ANOVA showed that measured walk energy expenditure at both baseline and post-exercise one-mile walk was not significantly different from predicted energy expenditure using the Loftin et al. equation (P>0.05). However, measured run energy expenditure was significantly different from predicted energy expenditure as well as from measured walk energy expenditure (P<0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The current study supports the Loftin et al. equation in its ability to accurately predict walking energy expenditure, but suggests a re-evaluation is necessary as it pertains to running energy expenditure.