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

Depends on the user

[manekineko2]

Without a doubt, the results of this study depend heavily on the methodology of how they had players play. This study got a total of eleven individuals in order to reach this conclusion.

There are two ways to play the Wii, especially Wii sports: You can really get into it, swinging yours arms and making big motions and make it exercise (while having more fun in my opinion).
Or you can play it like a video game, and just twitch the controller around. Of course, as Tycho and Gabe put it so eloquently, that makes you a toolbox:
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/11/13

In reaching the conclusion that Wii is only a 2% increase in calorie burning over 360 games, I'm sure the kids were only moving their wrists. Then, the difference breaks down to 360 = twitching thumbs, Wii = twitching wrists. I could believe that twitching wrists instead of just thumbs is a 2% increase in calories burnt over the 360.

I know that when playing Wii boxing and making real punching motions, my arms get physically tired and I can work up a sweat after long enough. I am sure if someone wanted to, they could run another study and grab another headline by stating something like Wii Burns As Many Calories as Real Workout.

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. :-)