Biking and running are aerobic exercises that can greatly benefit a person’s health and fitness.
In this article, we compare biking and running for their capacity to burn calories, health benefits, injury risk, and cost.
The number of calories that cycling and running burn depends on several factors, such as speed, terrain, weight, and the person’s metabolism.
People who weigh more will burn more calories during either exercise, while those who weigh less will burn fewer calories.
The following table shows the approximate number of calories a male weighing 154 pounds (70 kilograms) would burn during cycling and running. Speeds are in miles per hour (mph) and kilometers per hour (km/h).
The table below provides an estimate of calories burned during 1 hour of activity for people of different weights. Weight is in pounds (lb) and kilograms (kg).
If a person wants to find out the number of calories they will burn for their specific weight for various activities, they can use a calorie calculator, such as this one.
Additionally, some people may be able to cycle for longer than they can run, which will also affect the number of calories they burn overall.
Cycling uses all the major muscle groups. It uses and builds up the leg muscles in particular, including:
- quadriceps (rectus femoris, vastus lateralis, vastus medialis, and vastus intermedius)
- hamstrings (biceps femoris, semitendinosus, and semimembranosus)
Some of the key muscles involved in running include:
Running and cycling both bring heart health benefits.
Regular cycling reduces the risk of cardiovascular disease and helps:
- improve lung health
- stimulate circulation
- strengthen heart muscles
- lower resting pulse rate
- reduce levels of fat in the blood
A large-scale study on 263,450 participants found that cycling to work reduced the risk of cardiovascular disease, cancer, and all-cause mortality. The study also found that walking to work lowered the risk of cardiovascular disease.
Another study found that cycling was beneficial for people recovering from stroke and helped improve heart rate recovery after exercise.
Running also helps improve cardiovascular health. A 2019 review found that running reduced the risk of cardiovascular, cancer, and all-cause mortality.
The research suggests any amount of running is more beneficial than no running, and higher doses of running may not significantly improve mortality benefits.
Even small doses of running, such as 5–10 minutes per day at speeds of less than 6 mph (9.7 km/h), can substantially reduce the risk of cardiovascular and all-cause mortality.
A 2018 study from the journal Circulation looked at the effects of long-distance endurance running on heart health. The study suggests that running a full marathon creates more strain on the heart than shorter distances, such as a half-marathon or 10K run.
A full marathon is 26 miles (about 42 km), a half-marathon is 13 miles (about 21 km), and a 10K is 6.2 miles (10 km).
Scientists need to do further research to investigate the long-term effects of long-distance running on the heart.
Running may be better for long-term bone health than cycling. This is
Mansour suggested investing in a few things to switch up your at home workout including a vibrating foam roller and a pilates ring.
The pilates ring can be used to tone multiple areas of your body and the roller can help massage your muscles before and after a workout to increase blood flow.
If you’re trying to be mindful about what you eat, Mansour also suggested a few easy swaps.
Skip some of the calories for an extra serving of vegetables by swapping pasta noodles for zucchini noodles.
Try some alternative flours such as almond or coconut in your holiday baking, Mansour suggested.
Or, to cut down on sugar, you can sub out sugar for apple sauce or honey, she said.
And if you are looking to treat yourself to some new athleisure wear this holiday season, Mansour shared some fashion trends.
Opt for leggings with cropped look or cut-outs ass well as workout shirts with back cut-outs, she said. All the pieces are great for running laps and running errands.
Mansour has a whole host of other health and fitness tips available on her website.
Copyright © 2020 WLS-TV. All Rights Reserved.Read More
Health and fitness expert Stephanie Mansour discussed the impact that just a one hour time can have on our body’s rhythm.
Even though many people have experienced weight gain with gyms being closed and more opportunities for potential stress-snacking, weight loss is still possible leading up to the holidays.
It’s possible to lose one to two pounds a week by making a few healthy changes in fitness and diet, Mansour said.
RELATED: Fitness expert Stephanie Mansour offers tips on how to stay positive during COVID-19 pandemic
Mansour recommended incorporating workouts into your daily routine- and it can be simple!
Don’t forget to set a date to recalibrate as well, Mansour said.
More tips to maintain a healthy lifestyle are available on Mansour’s website.
Copyright © 2020 WLS-TV. All Rights Reserved.Read More
There’s been a lot of talk about the effectiveness of popular weight-loss plan intermittent fasting. With many studies being done on this time-restricted eating plan, there’s also always new information being presented, but the end result is largely the same: intermittent fasting works for weight loss.
Recently, a study was published in JAMA that looked at time-restricted eating and its weight loss effects in both men and women. As the results were shared, some of the information seemed to get misconstrued, according to a doctor who now wants to clarify.
Monique Tello, M.D., MPH, a practicing physician at Massachusetts General Hospital, director of research and academic affairs for the MGH DGM Healthy Lifestyle Program, and clinical instructor at Harvard Medical School, was not involved in the study. But, she recently published a blog post on Harvard Health’s blog saying she had seen headlines about this study claiming that intermittent fasting doesn’t work and has a significant negative impact on muscle mass. She believes, though, that these research results have largely been misinterpreted. (Related: 5 Science-Backed Benefits of Intermittent Fasting.)
The original study tested 141 overweight patients over a period of 12 weeks. Some were put on a time-restricted eating plan while others followed a traditional eating plan. Dr. Tello points out that there was no true control group in the study because each patient was put on a schedule of some sort. A true control group would have been given no instructions or guidelines.
In the end, both groups lost weight, but the study showed that the intermittent fasting group lost more, including muscle mass that wasn’t identified in those on a traditional eating plan. But as Dr. Tello explains in her post, the study makes no mention about the quality of food both groups were eating.
“By the way, all of these folks may have been eating fried or fast foods, and sugary sodas and candy—we don’t know,” writes Dr. Tello in Harvard Health. “The study doesn’t mention quality of diet or physical activity. This isn’t how IF is supposed to be done! And yet the IF folks still lost between half a pound and 4 pounds.”
Plus, Dr. Tello notes that both groups were given a structured eating plan. Dr. Tello believes having a true control group, in which participants continued to eat as they normally would, could’ve made these research findings more conclusive.
She reiterated that the study did, in fact, show that intermittent fasting works for weight loss, it’s just that some of the results weren’t necessarily presented properly, and the study was, perhaps, a bit flawed in its setup.
“While this one negative study adds to the body of literature on IF, it doesn’t reverse it,” Dr. Tello writes in her post. “We simply need more high-quality studies in order to have a better understanding of how to most effectively incorporate IF into a healthy lifestyle.”
To get more weight-loss news delivered straight to your email inbox every day, sign up for our newsletter!
Earlier this month, Chrissy Teigen and her husband, John Legend, shared the devastating news that they’d lost their baby boy, Jack, at around 20 weeks due to complications with his placenta. Throughout her pregnancy Chrissy had been posting regular updates online, detailing the complications she was unfortunately facing.
When Jack tragically passed, the brave couple also chose to share their grief with the world alongside a series of intimate photos, taken while in hospital. Baby loss awareness charity, Tommy’s, said this can be an important part of the grieving process for parents (in response to trolls leaving cruel messages on Chrissy’s social media accounts). Following that, Chrissy has been relatively quiet online, bar telling fans she and John are ‘quiet but okay’.
Now, the model, cookbook author and presenter has spoken in greater depth about what she’s been going through in a moving blog post. It begins with her thanking everybody for their kind words during this intensely difficult time, and for sharing their own stories too. She adds that notes beginning with ‘You don’t have to respond to this’ were helpful, as she felt quite overwhelmed (but appreciative) of the support.
Speaking about the moment she was told by doctors that her third child would not survive to full term, Chrissy wrote on Medium: ‘After a couple nights at the hospital, my doctor told me exactly what I knew was coming — it was time to say goodbye. He [Jack] just wouldn’t survive this, and if it went on any longer, I might not either. We had tried bags and bags of blood transfusions, every single one going right through me like we hadn’t done anything at all. Late one night, I was told it would be time to let go in the morning.’
Addressing the people who (bafflingly) went out of their way to write nasty messages underneath her personal photos, Chrissy said that John was reluctant to capture their pain at first, but that she knew she ‘needed to know of this moment forever, the same way I needed to remember us kissing at the end of the aisle, the same way I needed to remember our tears of joy after Luna and Miles. And I absolutely knew I needed to share this story.’
Showing an amazing amount of strength, she added, ‘I cannot express how little I care that you hate the photos. How little I care that it’s something you wouldn’t have done. I lived it, I chose to do it, and more than anything, these photos aren’t for anyone but the people who have lived this or are curious enough to wonder what something like this is like.
Loss of smell is common in COVID-19, but fewer people say they have this symptom than objective tests reveal, a new study finds.
In fact, about 77% of COVID-19 patients who were directly measured had smell loss, but only 44% said they did, researchers found.
Direct measures of smell involve having patients smell and report on actual odors, while self-reporting includes getting data through patient questionnaires, interviews or electronic health records, the study authors explained.
“Objective measures are a more sensitive method to identify smell loss related to COVID-19,” said study co-author Mackenzie Hannum, a postdoctoral fellow at Monell Chemical Senses Center in Philadelphia.
Subjective measures, “while expedient during the early stages of the pandemic, underestimate the true prevalence of smell loss,” said Vicente Ramirez, a doctoral student at the University of California, Merced, and summer intern at Monell.
The research suggests subjective measures underestimate the true extent of smell loss and that it may be an effective tool for diagnosing COVID-19 early, the authors said in a Monell news release.
For the study, the researchers reviewed previously published studies on COVID-19 and loss of smell.
Their findings were published online recently in the journal Chemical Senses.
Senior author Danielle Reed, associate director at Monell, suggested that “measuring people for smell loss may become as routine as measuring body temperature for fever.”
For more on COVID-19, head to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Copyright 2020 HealthDay. All rights reserved.
Gabriele Fitness & Performance, a personal training gym in Berkeley Heights, recently made an announcement concerning its fat loss after 40 book. The personal training gym indicated that the book is out and specifically designed for people who are over 40 years.
Berkeley Heights, NJ – Gabriele Fitness & Performance, a personal training gym in Berkeley Heights, recently shared information about its fat loss after 40 book. The Fitness trainer in Berkeley Heights shared that the book is out and specifically designed for people who are over 40 years.
The fitness trainer went on to provide specific information about the fat loss after 40 book. According to the Fitness coach Berkeley Heights, the main topic covered in this book include the proper ways to lose 10-15 pounds in 6 weeks.
Gabriele Fitness & Performance also highlighted specific information about weight loss after 40. According to the trainer, people over 40 can lose weight without fad diets and body exercises that beat up their bodies. The fitness trainer stated that people could regain control over their health and weight if they get nutrition and fitness program that is right for them. The team also said that personal trainers can make one regain energy and have a more active life. Gabriele Fitness & Performance thus stressed on the importance of having the right nutrition and fitness program that is tailored to one’s preferences and needs. The trainer affirmed that they are glad and more than willing to help people who are over 40 with their weight loss needs and care.
About Gabriele Fitness & Performance
Gabriele Fitness & Performance is a personal fitness trainer in Berkeley Heights. The trainer helps and assists people aged 40 plus lose weight through customized nutrition and fitness program that suits them. The staff is an expert in helping people gain energy, lose weight and add more life to their years without fad diets and workouts that strains their bodies. For more information, contact Gabriele Fitness & Performance today.
Company Name: Gabriele Fitness & Performance
Contact Person: Vince Gabriele
Email: Send Email
Phone: (908) 464-4441
Address:63 Industrial Rd
City: Berkeley Heights
State: NJ 07922
Country: United States
When Stacey Maravola’s hair started falling out in clumps two months after she tested positive for Covid-19, she was not initially concerned.
“I washed my hair one day and I’m pulling handfuls upon handfuls. And I’m like, ‘Maybe because it was up in a scrunchie,’” Maravola, 44, of Leetsdale, Pennsylvania, said.
But nearly two months later, the hair loss has not stopped. Each time Maravola, a health and lifestyle coach, shampoos her hair, fistfuls come out, getting tangled around her fingers and sticking to her legs as she showers.
“I’ve had to limit hair washes because I’m terrified,” she said. “I’m not a big emotional person, but I can tell you, this has changed me. I cry every single time I take a shower.”
Maravola is one of many coronavirus survivors dealing with dramatic hair loss, something that experts say is not entirely unexpected following a serious illness — but can be jarring nonetheless.
“It is upsetting, especially for those who have gone through a significant clinical course of Covid, to then experience this as well,” said Dr. Sara Hogan, a dermatologist and health sciences clinical instructor at the David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles. “But oftentimes, patients, once they have a diagnosis and they understand that typically this will get better, they feel better.”
Sudden hair loss can happen after any stressful event, including major surgery or even an emotional stressor such as starting a new job, Hogan said. The pandemic appears to have led to a large uptick in people who are seeing their hair thinning, she said: Hogan used to see an average of three to five hair loss patients a week and now sees up to seven a day.
Why severe assaults to the body or mind sometimes trigger hair loss is not entirely understood. In the majority of these cases, the patient is diagnosed with telogen effluvium, a temporary condition in which he or she sheds many more hairs than the typical 100 or so that people lose in a day. Telogen effluvium usually begins about three to six months after the stressor has happened, and in most patients, the problem will resolve within four to six months, according to Hogan. (In rare cases, unremitting stress can lead to chronic shedding, she added.)
Researchers do not believe Covid-19 attacks the hair follicles, meaning the hair loss is the body’s reaction to the physiological and emotional stress that the disease caused, rather than a symptom of the disease itself. And many hair loss patients that Hogan and other dermatologists are currently seeing have never had the coronavirus to begin with.
“It’s just all the other tolls of the pandemic that are leading to the hair loss,” such as financial worries or grieving the death of a family member, said Dr. Lauren Kole, an assistant professor of dermatology at the University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Medicine.
Hair loss following Covid-19
A maternity clinic that delivers about half the babies in Medicine Hat has announced it will no longer accept new patients by the end of January, and will be closed by the end of July unless new funding can be found.
While family physicians typically pay their own overhead, a gap in Medicine Hat’s obstetric services in the mid-2000s led to the creation of the Family Medicine Maternity Clinic.
Funding was provided by the local Primary Care Network (PCN) and Palliser Health, which later merged with the other regional health authorities to form Alberta Health Services.
Dr. Gerry Prince, a family doctor who helped establish the clinic in 2006, told the Calgary Eyeopener on Monday that the clinic will be closing because the PCN’s funding is due to end in March, and AHS wants the clinic to cover the overhead that includes rent, utilities and all staffing costs.
Prince said this would be impossible, as the costs to run the maternity clinic are roughly double the amount of what it can bill for patient services — and the doctors are already paying overhead for their family practices.
“[The clinic] is closing because AHS is backing out of our partnership, and says that they want to rent us the space that we’ve been able to occupy for the last 17 years with their support,” Prince said.
“And the numbers they’ve given us are just impossible. So, they’ve given us an overhead number, which is about double the amount of billing that we would actually do through the clinic in a year.… Our guys, you know, as much as they love it, just — there’s no way you can do that.”
A ‘flawless service’
The Family Medicine Maternity Clinic was established due to a crisis of accessibility, Prince said. At the time, obstetrics was a declining service in the area.
“There [were] fewer and fewer physicians doing it, and got down to the point where there were only two family docs delivering about half of the babies in town — as well as running the regular community clinic,” Prince said.
“It was becoming quickly unmanageable.”
Prince said that some of the local doctors turned to health authorities and asked for help.
The regional health authority agreed, and later partnered with the Primary Care Network to meet the community need. The clinic was established, attached to the Medicine Hat Regional Hospital.
“We went with this idea of a maternity clinic, a dedicated care centre, and they helped support it. And ultimately, we built a specified, designated, custom-design clinic area in our new ambulatory care building,” Prince said.
Eventually, Prince said, that clinic would deliver 500 to 600 babies a year.
“We’ve had a flawless service that’s been providing great care for 17 years.”
Soon, it’s all coming to an end — and why is complicated.
“The docs want to provide the services, we just need to be able to manage it financially. So the real question is, whose job is it [to save
In recent weeks it has come to light that the White House blocked an effort by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control to require the use of face masks on public and commercial transportation and initiated, against the wishes of CDC scientists, a March 2020 CDC order to close the U.S. border to asylum seekers – both moves widely and publicly condemned by public health experts. These are just the latest revelations that demonstrate how the administration has hobbled the CDC’s work during the COVID-19 crisis and diminished its scientific standing. On issues related to COVID-19, reports document that the White House has edited CDC publications and altered advisories on testing contacts, on school opening strategies, and on the danger of singing in churches.
The danger of allowing political motives to sculpt the CDC’s messages during a pandemic risks something far larger than “just” adding a few million cases and an extra couple hundred thousand deaths from COVID-19. Unlike the EPA or FDA, which wield regulatory power, the CDC achieves its goals mostly by directly communicating evidence and advice to the public and health professionals. Over 1,000 past and present CDC researchers signed an open letter condemning the politicization of CDC. Today, young people cannot remember when the CDC released evidence on the dangers of guns in the home or the relative safety for women of a legal abortion over full-term births without vicious condemnation from Washington DC.
In 1999, I had the epidemiological success of a lifetime while working for an NGO in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) at the peak of their war that involved five neighboring armies. In a rural district, we documented that around 1,600 children had died of measles in the previous few weeks. Immediately, UNICEF pledged to get the vaccine needed, and my NGO and the Ministry of health prepared to vaccinate the population. After 3 weeks of preparation, UNICEF announced that they had searched across the entire African continent and there was no measles vaccine available.
Five years earlier, I had finished the CDC’s Epidemic Intelligence Services fellowship or EIS. The two-year fellowship, started in 1951, was designed to create a close-nit cadre of public health professionals and spread them across the centers and branches with the various areas of expertise that constitute the CDC. Somehow, 60 trainees at a time managed to build the CDC into a tight-knit, expert community. While there, I had met “the” CDC expert on measles control, Stan. I called his office with a satellite phone and, miraculously, he answered. I explained the situation and pleaded, “Stan, I desperately need 60,000 doses of measles vaccine!” He asked me to call him back in four hours. When I did, and he gleefully said, “Les, I found you 60,000 doses, and the syringes and vitamin A tablets to go with it.” I was astonished and asked where the vaccine was? It was ready for us to pick up