Self-selected exercise intensity of habitual walkers
ABSTRACT This study assessed self-selected exercise intensity of habitual walkers. Twenty-nine healthy adults (22 females, 7 males; age (mean +/- SD) = 34.9 +/- 8.6 yr) performed a typical exercise walk while walking speed was measured by an unseen observer. On a subsequent occasion, the subjects walked at the same pace on a treadmill while several variables related to exercise intensity were measured. The mean self-selected walking pace was 1.78 +/- 0.19 m.s-1. Mean percents of VO2max and HRmax elicited by the treadmill exercise were 52 +/- 11% and 70 +/- 9%, respectively. Mean MET level was 5.2 +/- 1.2, and ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) averaged 10.9 +/- 1.6. Based on reported frequency and duration of walking, weekly energy expenditure in exercise walking was estimated to be 1127 +/- 783 kcal.wk-1. These data suggest that the self-selected exercise intensity of healthy, habitual exercise walkers meets the American College Sports Medicine's recommendation for improvement of cardiorespiratory fitness. These data further suggest that, in this population, the average weekly energy expended through walking reaches a level associated with improvements in health and longevity.
- SourceAvailable from: scsepf.org[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: “Self-selected intensity” might be an applicable health promotion strategy, and there is evidence to indicate that the range of self-selected intensity corresponds to the American College of Sports Medicine's recommendation while interindividual variability is great. Hence, investigating the determinants influencing the range of self-selected intensity is encouraged. The purpose of the present study was to explore the heart rate (HR) responses in subjects with different exercise experience levels to 20 minutes of continuous running at self-selected intensity in outdoor (field) and indoor (treadmill) settings. Twenty-six male participants were recruited and assigned to either a high exercise experience group (HG) or low exercise experience group (LG). Each participant performed two bouts of running in field and treadmill settings on separate days, and the sequences of the testing were counterbalanced. Data were analyzed by descriptive statistics and 2 × 2 mixed design analysis of variance. The intensity represented in HR reserve in HGfield, HGtreadmill, LGfield and LGtreadmill were 80.55%, 65.24%, 88.49%and 82.91%, respectively. HG had lower HR response than LG in both field and treadmill settings, and all participants had higher HR response in the field setting compared to the treadmill. Additionally, the interaction effect between exercise experience and exercise setting was significant. HG self-selected lower exercise intensities might be due to their better heartbeat perception, and therefore they could tune exercise intensity finely in the self-regulation process. The higher HR response observed in the field setting might relate to more disturbances from being in an outdoor environment. Exercise settings should be taken into account when prescribing exercise programs.Journal of exercise science and fitness (JESF) 01/2010; 8(2):73-77. DOI:10.1016/S1728-869X(10)60011-1
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This study aimed to measure stature changes during and after walking and running at a pre-ferred transition speed (PTS) and the recovery period, and to examine differences caused by loads imposed on the spinal column. Seven males and three females aged 22-41 years took part in this study. Subjects The subjects un-derwent 15 minutes of walking or running on a treadmill in a random order. Stature changes were measured during each exercise at inter-vals of 5 minutes and after a 20 minute standing recovery period within units of 0.01 mm. Two-way ANOVA revealed that both main factors, gait (F = 5.250, P < 0.05) and elapsed time (F = 14.409, P < 0.05), had a significant effect on stature. In the post hoc test, stature shrank with time and its loss was found to be greater in running than in walking, but recovered after both exercises. In conclusion, the spinal load in-creases with time during both walking and run-ning at PTS, but is greater in running than in walking. After both exercises, spinal shrinkage shows a similar recovery process and recovers faster in walking to its pre-exercise level.Health 01/2010; 2(12):1377-1381. DOI:10.4236/health.2010.212204
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to: 1) evaluate the quality of promotional pedometers widely distributed through cereal boxes at the time of the 2004 Canada on the Move campaign; and 2) establish a battery of testing protocols to provide direction for future consensus on industry standards for pedometer quality. Fifteen Kellogg's* Special K* Step Counters (K pedometers or K; manufactured for Kellogg Canada by Sasco, Inc.) and 9 Yamax pedometers (Yamax; Yamax Corporation, Tokyo, Japan) were tested with 9 participants accordingly: 1) 20 Step Test; 2) treadmill at 80m x min(-1) (3 miles x hr(-1)) and motor vehicle controlled conditions; and 3) 24-hour free-living conditions against an accelerometer criterion. Fifty-three percent of the K pedometers passed the 20 Step Test compared to 100% of the Yamax. Mean absolute percent error for the K during treadmill walking was 24.2+/-33.9 vs. 3.9+/-6.6% for the Yamax. The K detected 5.7-fold more non-steps compared to the Yamax during the motor vehicle condition. In the free-living condition, mean absolute percent error relative to the ActiGraph was 44.9+/-34.5% for the K vs. 19.5+/-21.2% for the Yamax. K pedometers are unacceptably inaccurate. We suggest that research grade pedometers: 1) be manufactured to a sensitivity threshold of 0.35 Gs; 2) detect +/-1 step error on the 20 Step Test (i.e., within 5%); 3) detect +/-1% error most of the time during treadmill walking at 80m x min(-1) (3 miles x hr(-1)); as well as, 4) detect steps/day within 10% of the ActiGraph at least 60% of the time, or be within 10% of the Yamax under free-living conditions.Canadian journal of public health. Revue canadienne de santé publique 01/2006; 97 Suppl 1:S10-5, S10-6.