Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 30, 2026

Quantifying Arms and Legs Contributions during Repetitive Electrically-Assisted Sit-To-Stand Exercise in Paraplegics: A Pilot Study
Published on: November 11, 2022
The Energy Cost of Sitting versus Standing Naturally in Man
James A Betts1, Harry A Smith1, Drusus A Johnson-Bonson1
1Department for Health, University of Bath, Bath, UNITED KINGDOM.
Purpose:
Prolonged sitting is a major health concern, targeted via government policy and the proliferation of height-adjustable workstations and wearable technologies to encourage standing. Such interventions have the potential to influence energy balance and thus facilitate effective management of body/fat mass. It is therefore remarkable that the energy cost of sitting versus standing naturally remains unknown.
Methods:
Metabolic requirements were quantified via indirect calorimetry from expired gases in 46 healthy men and women (age, 27 ± 12 yr; mass, 79.3 ± 14.7 kg; body mass index, 24.7 ± 3.1 kg·m, waist/hip, 0.81 ± 0.06) under basal conditions (i.e., resting metabolic rate) and then, in a randomized and counterbalanced sequence, during lying, sitting and standing. Critically, no restrictions were placed on natural/spontaneous bodily movements (i.e., fidgeting) to reveal the fundamental contrast between sitting and standing in situ while maintaining a comfortable posture.
Results:
The mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) increment in energy expenditure was 0.18 (95% CI, 0.06-0.31 kJ·min) from resting metabolic rate to lying was 0.15 (95% CI, 0.03-0.27 kJ·min) from lying to sitting and 0.65 (95% CI, 0.53-0.77 kJ·min) from sitting to standing. An ancillary observation was that the energy cost of each posture above basal metabolic requirements exhibited marked interindividual variance, which was inversely correlated with resting heart rate for all postures (r = -0.5; -0.7 to -0.1) and positively correlated with self-reported physical activity levels for lying (r = 0.4; 0.1 to 0.7) and standing (r = 0.6; 0.3-0.8).
Conclusions:
Interventions designed to reduce sitting typically encourage 30 to 120 min·d more standing in situ (rather than perambulation), so the 12% difference from sitting to standing reported here does not represent an effective strategy for the treatment of obesity (i.e., weight loss) but could potentially attenuate any continued escalation of the ongoing obesity epidemic at a population level.
Related Concept Videos
Standing Waves
Free Energy Changes for Nonstandard States
Free Energy and Equilibrium
Recall that Q is the numerical value of the mass action...
What is Natural Selection?
Modes of Standing Waves - I
Modes of Standing Waves: II
For a tube open at one end and closed at the other filled with air, the modes are such that there is always an antinode at the open end and a node at the closed end....

