Kind of makes sense to my layman brain. If you weigh more, you are expending more energy to actually move around, and you have more cells in your body which need energy. For at least half of that equation the weight vest makes theoretical sense.
To me that seems similar to walking around while being obese vs not being obese. One will spend way more calories per day than the other, just existing and doing normal activities day to day. I'm not sure why we would even need studies to prove that. It's just common sense
i believe the difference here is that muscle mass was not reduced which is what typically happens when one simply does caloric restriction. could be misinterpreting it though.
The second study loses a lot of validity by pursuing such an aggressive calorie deficit. 1100-1300/ cals/day a day is insane, at such a high calorie deficit I'm not sure if even steroids could prevent muscle loss.
I've started introducing rucking/pack training into my routine because I like hiking and I want to be able to carry all my gear easily over beautiful country.
I've just started rucking so too early to see results but feel better for it 1st time put 2 10kg wt plates in backpack and went hard on treadmill for 30 mins at gym then 2nd time about 11.75kg of water bottles pkts of rice in backpack and 30 mins walk on beach am going to keep trying as have lost weight and put weight back on An extra 10 - 20 kgs would unlikely be enough to harm as you would likely only wear it for relatively short durations over the cousre of a whole week - need to be sensible in how you wear the extra weight eg properly fit the backpack
@@rachellesawyer6523 I did 18kgs over 2 days, but that was my gear for the hike and the pack got lighter over the days as we drank the water and ate the food. I think day 2 was more like 16kgs. It felt good in a properly adjusted pack. I use about 10kgs for my training weight at the moment.
At about 1:42 the list of adverse reactions to wearing a weight vest does not include knee pain, unless that is included in arthragia and/or myalgia. I am somewhat surprised by that. I thought that one of the benefits of losing weight is less stress on one's knees. Wearing a weight vest would add that stress back.
Arthralgia is "joint pain", so it does indeed include knee pain. Keep in mind that in the table we can see that basically all differences in adverse effects except "musculoskeletal disorders" are "NS", i.e. not statistically significant. Doesn't mean there is no difference but the size of the study is too small to assess the direction or magnitude of differences, if there are any.
I am puzzled by how wearing a vest that weighs 11% of one's weight for eight hours should be classified. Is it non-exercise (the NE part of NEAT), or it is low-level, long-lasting exercise?
![BOWKYLION - วิงวอน (ex-change) [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/cLdnZWDaO-w/mqdefault.jpg)
Kind of makes sense to my layman brain. If you weigh more, you are expending more energy to actually move around, and you have more cells in your body which need energy. For at least half of that equation the weight vest makes theoretical sense.
To me that seems similar to walking around while being obese vs not being obese. One will spend way more calories per day than the other, just existing and doing normal activities day to day.
I'm not sure why we would even need studies to prove that. It's just common sense
i believe the difference here is that muscle mass was not reduced which is what typically happens when one simply does caloric restriction. could be misinterpreting it though.
Akira Toriyama was right.
The second study loses a lot of validity by pursuing such an aggressive calorie deficit. 1100-1300/ cals/day a day is insane, at such a high calorie deficit I'm not sure if even steroids could prevent muscle loss.
Can confirm. I start everyday with a 6km weighted hike.
I've started introducing rucking/pack training into my routine because I like hiking and I want to be able to carry all my gear easily over beautiful country.
I've just started rucking so too early to see results but feel better for it
1st time put 2 10kg wt plates in backpack and went hard on treadmill for 30 mins at gym then 2nd time about 11.75kg of water bottles pkts of rice in backpack and 30 mins walk on beach am going to keep trying as have lost weight and put weight back on
An extra 10 - 20 kgs would unlikely be enough to harm as you would likely only wear it for relatively short durations over the cousre of a whole week - need to be sensible in how you wear the extra weight eg properly fit the backpack
@@rachellesawyer6523 I did 18kgs over 2 days, but that was my gear for the hike and the pack got lighter over the days as we drank the water and ate the food. I think day 2 was more like 16kgs. It felt good in a properly adjusted pack. I use about 10kgs for my training weight at the moment.
okay a few people here are thinking that if they increase the weight on their legs they'll break... no you won't
I mean obviously you'll lose weight wearing that, it's difficult to move IN THAT!
At about 1:42 the list of adverse reactions to wearing a weight vest does not include knee pain, unless that is included in arthragia and/or myalgia. I am somewhat surprised by that. I thought that one of the benefits of losing weight is less stress on one's knees. Wearing a weight vest would add that stress back.
Arthralgia is "joint pain", so it does indeed include knee pain. Keep in mind that in the table we can see that basically all differences in adverse effects except "musculoskeletal disorders" are "NS", i.e. not statistically significant. Doesn't mean there is no difference but the size of the study is too small to assess the direction or magnitude of differences, if there are any.
It would add some of the stress back, but not all of it. I've lost 41KG, I don't think anyone is suggesting I wear a 41KG weight vest.
Could it just be that wearing a weight vest increases your NEAT?
I am puzzled by how wearing a vest that weighs 11% of one's weight for eight hours should be classified. Is it non-exercise (the NE part of NEAT), or it is low-level, long-lasting exercise?
Categories can be tough. I have the same question for my semi-active job. @@tomjones8235
@@tomjones8235Could be a good excuse for packing on a lot of weight: “why are you eating all those burgers and fries?”
“I’m trying to up my NEAT” 😂
I know @Team3DAlpha would approve
thxs helpful
I appreciate that wearing a weighted vest COULD help decrease body weight but it seems like an inconvenient and hard way of doing it IMO.
I think larger, more credible studies will debunk this.