Pediatric journal boasts about benefits of exergaming

by Griffin McElroy { Jul 19th 2009 at 5:30PM }

Kids-focused health journal Pediatrics recently published a study that would shock those who decry the health benefits of exergames. The study, which was performed by researchers from the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, measured young people's energy expenditure while at rest, while playing Dance Dance Revolution at two different skill levels, while walking and running on a treadmill and while boxing and bowling on Wii Sports. That sounds like more physical exertion than we go through in a year.

Some of the comparisons between these activities yielded somewhat unsurprising results -- playing the video games burned three times the calories the kids spent at rest, of course. However, the researchers also found that playing these games was a comparable activity to "moderate to intense walking," despite the fact that Wii Sports requires little lower-body movement. It seems that for the first time in recent memory, we've got science on our side. Hooray!

[Via Kotaku]

Tags: ddr, exercise, exergaming, health, pediatrics, science, study, wii-sports

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)

ArchiGamer [thephilosophyofgames.wordpress.com] @ Jul 19th 2009 5:34PM

Yay Science!!

Cody @ Jul 19th 2009 7:03PM

"It seems that for the first time in recent memory, we've got science on our side. Hooray!"

In the sense of the video gaming public, sure.

In the sense of Joystiq, lol no. This place is like 70% 360 fanboy territory. They don't wanna hear this rubbish of exergaming and motion gaming.

Until Natal releases anyways ;)

FNG @ Jul 19th 2009 8:24PM

look at the effort by the graphics team!

shadowbender @ Jul 19th 2009 5:38PM

So now Obama should stop crapping his pants about "Kids need to get off the gaming".

dAnixx @ Jul 19th 2009 6:14PM

as if all games are like wii sports ... that's why he was a wii perhaps? :P

MystileArmor @ Jul 19th 2009 5:50PM

"That sounds like more physical exertion than we go through in a year."

Doesn't masturbation count as physical excercise? No? Yeah I don't work out alot either then.

ArchiGamer [thephilosophyofgames.wordpress.com] @ Jul 19th 2009 5:57PM

Aren't you a lit-you know what, never mind, I don't want to know.

MystileArmor @ Jul 19th 2009 6:00PM

I really should change my avatar, shouldn't I? All my comments are just that little bit more disturbing this way.

It is fun acting like a fat little testosterone-lacking german boy.

ArchiGamer [thephilosophyofgames.wordpress.com] @ Jul 19th 2009 6:06PM

But we like disturbing, gross, and a little on the creepy-side on our comments....

MystileArmor @ Jul 19th 2009 6:13PM

Like drinking a fat Megan Fox's bathwater? Hey atleast I didn't get a hardon from a dead chick.

[tre] [blogs at trespeak.tumblr.com] @ Jul 19th 2009 6:15PM

There's no such thing as a fat Megan Fox.

MystileArmor @ Jul 19th 2009 6:25PM

Yes there is:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_d1HZX2-tXKQ/SiLNn8Id61I/AAAAAAAAAsA/utRrItbgZLQ/s1600-h/meganfoxFAN_com-abcupfronts-2005may17nyc-m001+copy.jpg

ArchiGamer [thephilosophyofgames.wordpress.com] @ Jul 19th 2009 6:29PM

"Hey at least I didn't get a hardon from a dead chick."

Yeah, cause you can't!

See, disturbing, gross, and little creepy, perfect for the Interwebs.

*cheesy commercial music*

The Internet: Destroying Society With Every Porn Site

Family: Thanks Internet!!

[tre] [blogs at trespeak.tumblr.com] @ Jul 19th 2009 7:06PM

Wow. That was a disturbing sight.

tmacairjordan87 (aka Mr. Negativity) @ Jul 19th 2009 5:52PM

I find it extremely hard to believe you're spending as much energy occassionaly waving your arms around on wii sports as "moderate to intense" walking. In fact, I'm calling bullshit on that.

ArchiGamer [thephilosophyofgames.wordpress.com] @ Jul 19th 2009 5:56PM

More BS than the study by BYU that linked gamers to being potheads and female gamers having lower self-esteem?

I think not.

tmacairjordan87 (aka Mr. Negativity) @ Jul 19th 2009 6:00PM

The pothead one I could be lead to believe. I played WoW a lot and it seemed like everyone in chat were pretending to be potheads. Same thing on xbox live, at least with the people who aren't 12 year olds. The wow one aggravated the hell out of me cause they would all spam the trade chat channel, whereas on Live I can just mute all those dumbasses.

Moptimus Slime (The Return of Princess Griffin) @ Jul 19th 2009 6:01PM

yeah, especially with something as physically demanding as walking. I mean, you can't just have Joe Schmoe get up and decide to walk around the block, you gotta put in months of preparation, slowly working your way up from short distance walks until you reach a level of physical stamina that allows you to walk long distances

ArchiGamer [thephilosophyofgames.wordpress.com] @ Jul 19th 2009 6:03PM

Yeah, but they weren't linking it to players that we playing on Xbox Live or anything, they just said playing ANY game leads to someone becoming addicted to drugs, specifically pot.

tmacairjordan87 (aka Mr. Negativity) @ Jul 19th 2009 6:04PM

Your sarcasm fails when it says "moderate to intense walking." That's not regular walking, that's more like speed walking. You try telling me you're spending more energy on wii sports than speed walking.

Vidikron @ Jul 19th 2009 6:47PM

Yeah, I can believe the DDR, but I have to call BS on Wii Sports... especially bowling. I mean, the maximum number of throws in 1 game of bowling would be 21, right? And it's less if you hit any strike along the way or don't get the 3rd throw in the 10th frame. So they're saying that swinging 1 arm holding a Wiimote 21 times is somehow burning as many calories as "intense walking" over the same period of time? Bullshit. One person walking fast would take more than 21 steps before you could finish 1 frame in the bowling game.

sam @ Jul 20th 2009 7:24AM

yeah, it's lucky that calling 'bullshit' is sufficient to completely dismiss any article in a well-respected and peer-reviewed science journal...

...OH WAIT IT ISN'T.

to be fair, the paper is not available for free so you probably can't realistically read it, check their methodology, and determine whether or not it is indeed bullshit. I don't have access to it either. Here's the abstract (ie this is what the 'Source' link should've been), but it doesn't go much further than the information in the article above..

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/peds.2008-2851v1

Without that detailed evidence, however, I think we should probably assume that medical scientists are capable of measuring or accurately estimating energy usage, unless somebody proves otherwise... regardless of how many uninformed Internet commenters 'call bullshit'.

I do want to know what levels of DDR they used - I can see 'moderate to intense walking' on like three to (maaaaybe) five-foot songs, but after that, um, little bit more than 'intense walking' I think...

tmacairjordan87 (aka Mr. Negativity) @ Jul 20th 2009 11:18AM

Sometimes you don't need a science degree, just a common sense degree. I don't doubt the DDR thing, cause I've seen people go crazy on that, but I'm talking about the Wii Sports comparison.

I'll say it again. If you're getting as much excercise out of Wii Sports as you are speed walking, you're doing one or both of those wrong. I don't need a science degree to know that is complete BS. You don't get hardly any energy excertion out of Wii Sports (at least, if you do it right and not flail your arms around stupidly).

Vidikron @ Jul 20th 2009 12:46PM

@sam

Sorry, I still call bullshit. Again, take a look at Wii Sports Bowling. The maximum number of throws in a game is 21. That's 21 swings of ONE ARM. Of course, let's be generous and say the person is also taking a step forward at the same time, I've seen people do that. That's 21 arm swings and 21 steps over what, maybe a 15-30 minute time period depending on how fast you play?

Now compare that to "intense walking". Most people doing any sort of walking for exercise swing BOTH of their arms and, of course, both legs. Each arm swings (one forward, one back) with EACH single step. So now it just depends on how fast your going... what are they calling intense walking? I think most people would consider it to be somewhat fast, so maybe 5 steps over 3 seconds? It could be faster than that, but that seems reasonable. So 5 steps and 10 arm swings over 3 seconds. Over 15 minutes that translates to 1500 steps and 3000 arm swings.

So, Sam, are you telling me that we should believe that 21 arm swings and 21 steps (we'll call it 42 for each since you technically have to step/swing back too) in a 15 minute game of Wii Sports bowling burns as much, or more, calories than 15 minutes of intense walking that generates 1500 steps and 3000 arm swings? Really? Ignoring that I do indeed have a science degree, as Tmac points out anyone can see that this conclusion is absurd.

Vidikron @ Jul 20th 2009 12:50PM

Hey, better yet, rather than just crunching obvious number, why don't you actually try it? Personally I've played quite a few games of Wii Sports Bowling and have never been the least bit winded after playing a game. Play a single game of Wii Sports Bowling and then go outside and walk fast for 15 straight minutes and then honestly tell us which left you more winded at the end.

Tim @ Jul 19th 2009 6:03PM

NO BAR RAPING, DAMMIT! :P

I'm glad DDR's getting scientific recognition. :)

KeegdnaB @ Jul 19th 2009 6:13PM

Only noobs DON'T use the bar

Tim @ Jul 20th 2009 7:02PM

Pfft, please, bar = crutch.

Cypher @ Jul 19th 2009 6:06PM

Sure, it seems that with Science the public will drift towards our side, but then a random newspaper will grab a random idiot off the street claiming to have done, "extensive research", which is actually just some random BS about how video games ruin your life.

And everyone believes them.

autobot71ironhide @ Jul 19th 2009 8:46PM

"...They declined to talk about the virtual music industry..."

Ryan P. @ Jul 19th 2009 6:35PM

I'm not surprised. Have you ever played DDR? It can be quite the workout!

JimWood27 @ Jul 19th 2009 6:46PM

oh so we are all Wii Sports fans when it garners positive results like this but not when it is 'destroying gaming' with high sales?

Mr Khan is over 9000 @ Jul 19th 2009 6:55PM

But this is the *bad* kind of science, because it's pro-Wii.

We could do without this science.

tmacairjordan87 (aka Mr. Negativity) @ Jul 19th 2009 9:55PM

No it's bad science because it's flat out wrong. If you're getting as much excertion out of wii sports as you are speed walking, you're doing one or both of those wrong.

sam @ Jul 20th 2009 7:28AM

@tmac:

a) who said what you call 'speed walking' is the same as what they call 'intense walking'?

b) calling something definitely 'wrong' when you haven't even read it and don't know anything about how it was done or even the detail of its conclusions, wow, that's not something I'd expect from tma- oh wait, right...

Uncontrol @ Jul 19th 2009 7:01PM

those graphics are just shockingly bad

Char6296 @ Jul 19th 2009 7:34PM

Uncontrol, the lack of HD does not necessarily indicate bad graphics.

Uncontrol @ Jul 19th 2009 7:41PM

you're correct, it doesn't (see: RE4), but look at that fucking thing

there's a difference between "not HD" and "nobody made half an effort to make this game not look like shit"

ArchiGamer [thephilosophyofgames.wordpress.com] @ Jul 19th 2009 7:44PM

ITS A FREAKING BOWLING SIMULATOR!!!

I think those graphics are good enough for the game....

Uncontrol @ Jul 19th 2009 7:45PM

for a game with that level of sales, it's pretty inexcusable imo

all miis should've been in wind waker style

Quiggy @ Jul 19th 2009 7:49PM

Doom. Goldeneye. Nethack. Ocarina of Time. Resident Evil. Mega Man. Sonic. Mario 64. Banjo Kazooie.

All of these games and many more have terrible graphics by today's standards. And yet they're still stupidly fun to play. Amazing how that works, y'know?

Uncontrol @ Jul 19th 2009 7:50PM

the most recent game on that list is like a decade old

Char6296 @ Jul 19th 2009 7:52PM

Why use such a drastic word as inexcusable? It isn't really. It's a bundle game, just to help you to adjust to the motion sensing. It doesn't have to have super magical graphics.

Uncontrol @ Jul 19th 2009 7:53PM

except a lot of people bought the wii just to play this game

Char6296 @ Jul 19th 2009 7:57PM

Let them do that, Uncontrol. Not everyone is a graphic whore. Some don't care about how it looks and only about how it plays. Like those people who bought the Wii just to play Wii Sports.

Uncontrol @ Jul 19th 2009 7:59PM

it has less to do with the game's appearance itself and more to do with the complete lack of effort put into it by its development team -- though that's pretty representative of nintendo's philosophy these days, isn't it?

never mind though, i'm a graphic whore because laziness pisses me off *goes back to playing mother 3*

Char6296 @ Jul 19th 2009 8:03PM

They must have put in a bit of effort. I mean, if they didn't put in any effort, the controls'd be broken quite badly, amirite?

I don't get what you mean about why you're a graphics whore because laziness pisses you off.

Quiggy @ Jul 19th 2009 11:08PM

@Uncontrol Your point? I'm pointing out that games with shitty graphics can in fact play well. Wii Sports was a glorified tech demo, yes, but that was the point! The point was to create an excellent example of the gameplay possible with the Wii controller, and it succeeded admirably. Good graphics can help make a good game better, yes. But Wii Sports has fun gameplay, and that's really the point.

Fun DMC @ Jul 20th 2009 1:28AM

"Uncontrol, the lack of HD does not necessarily indicate bad graphics."

I'm sorry, but I just have to comment on this

We all know the lack of HD does not necessarily indicate bad graphics. You did not need to say this.

But look at that, up there.

It looks like shit. And it's due to more than the Wii simply lacking the ability to output HD resolutions. And you know that.

So why'd you respond with ^^that? It just... confuses me.

The game is decent, but really.

It looks like shit.