Author: Sorting Last Post on Top Message:
CRAZYCATLADY40 Posts: 137
8/8/12 10:51 A

I use water aerobics instead of Zumba for Aquazumba.

But you do burn less calories than regular Zumba, however I love it, works your muscles more especially arms and legs.



MORGANWADE SparkPoints: (2,407)
Fitness Minutes: (3,850)
Posts: 28
8/8/12 10:17 A

I enjoy working out in the pool also, I usually water jog for about 30 minutes and then do kicks and such. I really enjoy Zumba on land, have never done it in the water. I also have a home gym with elliptical, treadmill, and an exercise bike. My exercise bike my husband bought for my birthday in July, Question? It doesn't seem to burn very many calories. 30 minutes 114 calories seems pretty low. I have various workouts on the bike, I have just being doing it manually for the first few weeks and then work up to the different programs. Does anyone have a stationary bike? If so, do the programs offer more resistance, therefore, burn more calories? I am going about 9.6 to 11.2 mph. emoticon

Edited by: MORGANWADE at: 8/8/2012 (10:18)
LILYGESSERT SparkPoints: (2,051)
Fitness Minutes: (2,492)
Posts: 8
8/8/12 8:09 A

It is interesting how many calories are burned on the tracker here for just treading water. I started to do this and stopped my regular swimming. And if you do intense intervals and get the heart up it should work. I swim 6 days a week. I do walk and ride a bike though. However if the tracker is supposed to be so reliable then I am going with this.

DRAGONCHILDE SparkPoints: (56,921)
Fitness Minutes: (14,252)
Posts: 9,633
8/7/12 7:45 P

Remember that exercise makes your musculoskeletal system stronger, too. I don't know if you suffer from arthritis or not (I assume so, but feel free to correct me.) I do, and I've found that my joint pain has VASTLY improved since I started exercising regularly. It's amazing the difference! I used to be unable to run at all because of joint pain and shin splints... but my body has adapted amazingly well!

Either way, you're going to do great. :) I just know it!

TXSASSY76 Posts: 688
8/7/12 7:40 P

LOL! That's true! I'll probably enjoy land exercise more if my joints didn't hurt so bad afterwards... but you may be right... once winter comes, maybe I'll be strong enough to handle them better. Losing some of this weight will help with that too, I'm sure!

DRAGONCHILDE SparkPoints: (56,921)
Fitness Minutes: (14,252)
Posts: 9,633
8/7/12 7:37 P

Hopefully by the time winter arrives, you'll be strong enough that the land exercises don't hurt your joints as much!

TXSASSY76 Posts: 688
8/7/12 7:29 P

I absolutely LOVE working out in the pool! I am MUCH more tired after my workouts than when I do normal (on land) workouts. However, I FEEL GREAT! I can't wait for the next day to come so I can get back in the pool and go at it again. The other thing I really like, is that although my muscles are sore (since I've not used them in a couple of years - at least not like I do now)... my knees, ankles, back, wrists and elbows don't hurt! Don't know what I'm gonna do when winter comes - YIKES!!!!! emoticon

CMCOLE Posts: 2,667
8/7/12 5:29 P

Glad you enjoyed it.
Our Zumba Toning instructor also taught that last winter, and may do it again, or someone else may be doing it this year. She said it was great for the participants (easier on the joints, etc.), but hard on her, because she's on the deck trying to show the participants what to do.

UNIDENT Posts: 33,498
8/7/12 2:12 A

Compare for yourself in Spark's database -

100 minutes of Water Aerobics vs 100 min of Aerobics low impact.

The burn difference is about 2/3rds for water aerobics. It's not as much calorie burn as standard aerobics.

I'm not really sure what the truth is. I know that I'd be more tired doing 10 minutes of walking in water than 10 minutes of walking in air. So yes it seems that must be burning more. But Spark's own database says aerobics burns less when you do it in water - they tend to use reliable and repeated fitness science studies for their data.

Oh, and as for the actual question asked - since I find that for me aerobics low impact and zumba are minimally different, I would just use the water aerobics entry to track water zumba.

Edited by: UNIDENT at: 8/7/2012 (02:12)
DRAGONCHILDE SparkPoints: (56,921)
Fitness Minutes: (14,252)
Posts: 9,633
8/6/12 6:04 P

Yes, water provides more resistance. And provides you with greater support and lower impact. The two kinda offset each other. Estimates on whether it burns more or less differ depending on the exercise. For most exercises, it's less. The increased resistance is offset by your reduced weight and strain. you're not fighting against exercise. You move at a slower pace, against increased resistance... instead of a faster pace. It's just different! Basically, while you do burn more calories than a similar activity at the same pace, you can't move as fast as you would on land. I could probably burn more calories water walking at 2 MPH than I could walking at 2 MPH on land... but I can go up to 7 MPH on land. :) So overall, I will burn more calories on land.

Zumba, for example, is a very high-impact, high-energy activity. Much of its calorie burn comes from that high impact. In general, low impact exercise will not burn as much as low impact. It's the speed and impact that give zumba it's high calorie burn... by definition, you will be moving slower in the water.

Some examples: www.nutristrategy.com/activitylist4.htm>

Strength training doesn't burn a lot of calories. :) I'm sorry, but it doesn't. It does result in added benefits like increased calorie burn at rest, etc, but the act of lifting weights is an anaerobic exercise. It's not the same as cardio; Cardio generally burns more calories overall. :)

www.sparkpeople.com/community/ask_the_expe
rts.asp?q=49


The benefits of strength training are vastly superior to that of just cardio alone; don't get me wrong. I LOVE strength training, and feel it should be the focus of any routine. It is just not a big calorie burner, though. The muscles don't use energy the same way, and the relationship between heart rate and energy use is not the same, either.

And I'm also not saying that water aerobics isn't a great form of exercise; it really comes down to whether or not you enjoy and will do it. You will not be able to get an accurate guess; Water Zumba hasn't been studied the way most stuff has. It's best to go with the generic "water aerobics entry" because you're going to underestimate, if anything. There's no way you'll be able to guess at the actual burn.

Either way, this is not my specialty. Others who are more knowledgeable than me will have to explain it better. :)

Edited by: DRAGONCHILDE at: 8/6/2012 (18:08)
TXSASSY76 Posts: 688
8/6/12 5:31 P

Actually, I've done a LOT of research concerning water exercise or aquafitness and have found that water provides 12 to 15 times more resistance than air, meaning itís possible to burn as many as 3 and a half times more calories than if you workout on land at a moderate pace. Water exercise is GREAT for giving your body a fabulous calorie burn with very low impact.

Water, like air, is made of a bunch of molecules floating around. With water, these molecules are more closely packed together and form a more dense environment. This environment makes it pretty tough to swing your arms and legs around, especially when compared to air. If you try to swing your arms and legs quickly, the water pushes back, and you can only move your body at a controlled, constant speed. A water workout uses more energy because of the resistance of the water. Again, water is 12 - 15 times the resistance and 830 times ticker than air!

You are right... it is adding a strength component to it... "strength training" - which builds muscle. However, you are wrong in saying that strength does not burn huge amounts of calories. We all know that strength training is one of the BEST ways to burn calories. The more muscles that you recruit during an exercise, the more calories that you will burn - as muscle burns more calories than fat. You will also burn more calories after the workout for a period of time!

DRAGONCHILDE SparkPoints: (56,921)
Fitness Minutes: (14,252)
Posts: 9,633
8/6/12 4:40 P

Actually, water activities usually burn less. This is because your body is supported by the water itself (making your body work less hard to achieve the same results.) You lose the advantage of gravity and your own body weight. :) Plus you're moving more slowly. It's adding a strength component to it, but frankly, your heart rate doesn't get as high, and strength doesn't burn huge amounts of calories.

There's no way to estimate exactly (HRMs aren't as helpful with water-related activities, because of the reduce temperature of the water throwing off heart rate levels) but you can use the "water aerobics" option in the Spark tracker.

TXSASSY76 Posts: 688
8/6/12 3:50 P

Recently I started doing water aerobics, and other aquatic exercises. Someone mentioned on one of my blogs that they had done "Water Zumba" and loved it! So... I did some & LOVED it! However, I have NO idea how many calories I burned. Does anyone know how many calories are burned during water zumba?

I went ahead and logged it as if it was just regular zumba... but I believe working out in the water actually burns more calories. If anyone could shed some light... or knows the answer... please let me know. Thanks in advance! emoticon

Page: 1 of (1)  




Other Fitness and Exercise Topics:

Topics: Last Post:
I need of a new workout routine! Help! 7/24/2013 11:39:25 AM
Balancing Food and Exercise is hard! 7/8/2013 8:45:10 PM
printing meal plans 9/8/2013 6:24:42 PM
Any suggestions for headphones? 9/26/2013 5:18:47 AM
endurance not emproving 9/19/2013 12:52:40 PM

Diet Resources: kid food allergies | kid picnic food | kid food crafts