* Extreme events reveal an alimentary limit on sustained maximal human energy expenditure. "We compiled measurements of total energy expenditure (TEE) and basal metabolic rate (BMR) from human endurance events and added new data from adults running ~250 km/week for 20 weeks in a transcontinental race. For events lasting 0.5 to 250+ days, SusMS decreases curvilinearly with event duration, plateauing below 3× BMR. This relationship differs from that of shorter events (e.g., marathons). Incorporating data from overfeeding studies, we find evidence for an alimentary energy supply limit in humans of ~2.5× BMR; greater expenditure requires drawing down the body’s energy stores. Transcontinental race data suggest that humans can partially reduce TEE during long events to extend endurance." https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/sciadv.aaw0341
Extreme events reveal an alimentary limit on sustained maximal human energy expenditure
Caitlin Thurber, Lara R. Dugas, Cara Ocobock
Show all 6 authors
Bryce Carlson, John R. Speakman, Herman Pontzer
2019 · Science Advances
- HN score
- 0
- Mentions
- 4
- Readers
- 3
- Months
- 3
From the abstract
Maximum sustained energy expenditure in humans is limited by energy intake and strongly tied to event duration.
Metadata: Crossref. Abstracts retain their original authors’ rights.
In the conversation
Original HN comments, with labels from simple text rules. A label describes the whole comment and may miss context or irony. Read the discussion to make up your own mind. About the labels
4 selected excerpts · 4 total mentions
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aaw0341 "Incorporating data from overfeeding studies, we find evidence for an alimentary energy supply limit in humans of ~2.5× BMR" A good book the topic is Herman Ponzer's "Burn" The main issue seems the surface area of the GI tract.
Yes, those marathon runners mentioned might reduce their TEE from 6200 to 4900 kcal/day. But that is still way more than most office workers eat. And if you check the article: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aaw0341# == The reduction in TEE among RAUSA subjects can be partly attributed to marginally reduced body mass and daily mileage (table S3). Still, even after accounting for these changes, Week 20 TEE was 596 kcal/day lower (range, 400 to 923 kcal/day) than expected == So they did loose weight during the marathons and the metabolic compensation is less than half of what you would think reading the original article. == ... The magnitude of metabolic…
Read the full comment
response in RAUSA athletes (~600 kcal/day, ~20% TEE) is similar to the degree of adaptation reconstructed for the most physically active subjects in a recent cross-sectional study (17) and may reflect humans’ maximal capacity for metabolic compensation. == So if 20% percent is the maximum, it means that if you try to outrun your diet, you might have to eventually exercise 25% more. Except by then you will probably have more muscle mass that will burn more calories even when not exercising. And you will be able to exercise more in less time. Suddenly it does not look so hopeless.
The key insight is that you can eat more, but your body will not consume it. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aaw0341 And nobody is saying you can't expend more energy for shorter times. It is just that you can't sustain it over long times because of our metabolic limits.
Keep following the thread.
More in Other researchMore from the same topics.
Geophysical constraints on the reliability of solar and wind power worldwide
Dan Tong, David J. Farnham, Lei Duan +4
Abstract If future net-zero emissions energy systems rely heavily on solar and wind resources, spatial and temporal mismatches between resource availability and electricity demand may challenge system reliability.
How to improve R&D productivity: the pharmaceutical industry's grand challenge
Steven M. Paul, Daniel S. Mytelka, Christopher T. Dunwiddie +4