Wii Can't Replace Actual Exercise

Next Generation notes the results of a study into the health benefits of playing the Nintendo Wii. According to the University of Liverpool research, Wii Tennis can't compare with the real thing. "The result showed that the youths burned 60 calories (in nutrition terms) more an hour playing Wii, a 2% increase in the amount of energy burned versus the Xbox 360 players. The study is quoted as saying that 'these increases were of insufficient intensity to contribute towards recommendations for children's daily exercise,' and that active gaming using the Wii is no replacement for actual sports."

Comments

Re:It's still a far cry better than 0%

[AKAImBatman]

2% is better than nothing.

It's also wrong. The summary says:

a 2% increase in the amount of energy burned versus the Xbox 360 players

But the actual STUDY says:

Predicted energy expenditure was at least 51% greater during active gaming than during sedentary gaming. This equates to an increase in energy expenditure of 250 kJ (60 kcal) an hour during active gaming compared with sedentary gaming. In a typical week of computer play for these participants, active gaming rather than passive gaming would increase total energy expenditure by less than 2%; although this figure is trivial it might contribute to weight management.

The emphasis is mine. Taken as a whole, here's what the study says:

1. You burn 51% more energy playing the Wii over the XBox 360.

2. If you always played the Wii rather than the 360, you'd increase your caloric burn for a given WEEK by 2%.

The study also says:

[T]he monitor does not detect arm movements well. Energy expenditure may therefore have been underestimated during active gaming, which involves arm movements.

The conclusion?

Activity promoting new generation active computer games significantly increased participants' energy expenditure compared with sedentary games

Now please mod this story -1 WRONG. Thank you, have a nice day. :-)