What have you got to lose?
Most days, just getting to the gym is more than half the battle for most people. And once there, they want to make the most of their time and effort.
If your members are trying to lose some weight, it pays to choose a cardio machine that has been proven in scientific tests to burn more calories at the same level of effort than others. It turns out, not all cardio machines are created equal. In fact, the differences are pretty surprising.
Get the skinny on cardio
The University of Wisconsin-La Crosse recently conducted a study that compared three cardio machines to see if there was a difference in heart rate, oxygen consumption and calories burned.1
Guess what? Even though the subjects exercised at the same exact self-selected high level of effort, there was a difference in how many total calories they burned, depending on the equipment!
The Cybex Arc Trainer burned 16% more calories than an elliptical trainer and 9% more calories than the Precor AMT device. See figures below.
The dramatic difference between the level of effort on each piece of equipment may have something to do with the knee. A different study compared knee stress on the Arc Trainer and elliptical and found that the elliptical was much more stressful on the knee joint. It is possible that this higher level of stress is increasing the amount of effort or discomfort that the exercisers felt while working on the elliptical devices.
Putting these facts into action
What should you do with this newfound knowledge?
The American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) recommends that as part of a weight loss program, a minimum of 300 calories should be expended during each exercise session for a minimum of three to five days per week.2 With an estimated 61% of American adults either overweight or obese,3 weight loss or weight maintenance is most likely a goal for the majority of your gym’s clientele.
Now, you can tell your members that they can get better results for their time and effort on the Cybex Arc Trainer compared to the two Precor cardio machines - the research proves it!
Learn the Difference
1 Hendrickson, K., Porcari, J. P., & Foster, C. “Relative exercise intensity, heart rate, oxygen consumption and caloric expenditure when exercising on various non-impact cardio trainers.” Cybex International, Inc. University of Wisconsin-La Crosse. 22 October 2014 <http://media.cybexintl.com/cybexinstitute/research/research_ArcvAMTandEFX.pdf>
2 Haskell, W.L., Lee, I.M., Pate, R.R., Powell, K.E., Blair, S.N., Franklin, B.A., Macera, C.A., Heath, G.W., Thompson, P.D., & Bauman, A. Physical Activity and Public Health: Updated Recommendation for Adults from the American College of Sports Medicine and the American Heart Association. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 39 (8): 1423-1434, 2007.
3 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Physical Activity and Health: A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion; 1996.