Drop calories or do cardio? Which would you prefer?

Options
mtvstaff
mtvstaff Posts: 57 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
:):p;)
«1345678

Replies

  • angelasfree1
    angelasfree1 Posts: 29 Member
    Options
    Definitely do more cardio! I find the more exercise I do, the less inclined I am to binge on bad foods!
  • mtvstaff
    mtvstaff Posts: 57 Member
    Options
    Here is an interesting perspective in terms of weight loss/Control. Lets use me for an example.. I weigh 92Kg ATM. My body fat fluctuates from around 8-11% lets say 10% BF. So if I weigh 92kg and my BF is 10% I'm holding 10kg of fat. My BMR being Sedentary is 1983 Calories per day. So if you divide that by 24 hours (1 Day) 1983 divided by 24 = 82.625 Calories per hour being burnt over a 24hour period (And use I know we sleep and metab etc but keeping things simple) So lets say if I don't eat 3 hours i would burn 3x 82.625 = 247.875 Calories. Or say I don't eat for 5 hours thats 413 Calories! Now how long would i have to walk or jog on the treadmill to gain the same calorie loss? Since I've been thinking this way Ive found it a great approach to weight control and it works great! I personally don't like running or doing cardio (Unless i have to for competition) but this approach works just the same :)
  • livingleanlivingclean
    livingleanlivingclean Posts: 11,751 Member
    Options
    mtvstaff wrote: »
    Here is an interesting perspective in terms of weight loss/Control. Lets use me for an example.. I weigh 92Kg ATM. My body fat fluctuates from around 8-11% lets say 10% BF. So if I weigh 92kg and my BF is 10% I'm holding 10kg of fat. My BMR being Sedentary is 1983 Calories per day. So if you divide that by 24 hours (1 Day) 1983 divided by 24 = 82.625 Calories per hour being burnt over a 24hour period (And use I know we sleep and metab etc but keeping things simple) So lets say if I don't eat 3 hours i would burn 3x 82.625 = 247.875 Calories. Or say I don't eat for 5 hours thats 413 Calories! Now how long would i have to walk or jog on the treadmill to gain the same calorie loss? Since I've been thinking this way Ive found it a great approach to weight control and it works great! I personally don't like running or doing cardio (Unless i have to for competition) but this approach works just the same :)

    What does not eating for 3 or 5 hours have to do with anything? Does that mean if I don't eat for 23 hours I've saved loads of calories, and it negates the 4000 I could eat in the last hour?

  • livingleanlivingclean
    livingleanlivingclean Posts: 11,751 Member
    Options
    But to answer your question, I'd rather less food - there is benefits to cardio though and sometimes it's necessary
  • mtvstaff
    mtvstaff Posts: 57 Member
    Options
    What does not eating for 3 or 5 hours have to do with anything? = Based on your BMR you could burn equivalent calories per hour instead of jogging or doing cardio. :D
  • LKArgh
    LKArgh Posts: 5,179 Member
    Options
    mtvstaff wrote: »
    What does not eating for 3 or 5 hours have to do with anything? = Based on your BMR you could burn equivalent calories per hour instead of jogging or doing cardio. :D

    This makes even less sense.
  • mtvstaff
    mtvstaff Posts: 57 Member
    Options
    What is you BMR and I can try to Re-explain?
  • ScottJTyler
    ScottJTyler Posts: 72 Member
    Options
    Extra activity allows you to eat more food and therefore gain more nutrition. Depending on your goals, it's usually better to exercise more and eat more.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    Options
    aggelikik wrote: »
    mtvstaff wrote: »
    What does not eating for 3 or 5 hours have to do with anything? = Based on your BMR you could burn equivalent calories per hour instead of jogging or doing cardio. :D

    This makes even less sense.

    Indeed...
  • mtvstaff
    mtvstaff Posts: 57 Member
    Options
    try this link :Dhttp://www.bmi-calculator.net/bmr-calculator/#result
  • mtvstaff
    mtvstaff Posts: 57 Member
    Options
    ScottJTyler wrote: »
    Extra activity allows you to eat more food and therefore gain more nutrition. Depending on your goals, it's usually better to exercise more and eat more.

    Yes that is correct but if you expend calories and put them back you are at square one again. But i do understand what you are saying.
  • LKArgh
    LKArgh Posts: 5,179 Member
    Options
    Let me explain what is confusing about your post, so you can explain what you meant :)

    Let's say my BMR is 1500. Totally random but nice round number.
    Take a medium apple and say it has 100 calories. Again, probably not accurate but nice and round number.
    So, I can eat 15 apples per day and not gain or lose weight. And do nothing.
    So, I decide to sleep 9 hours per day, and eat 1 apple per hour I am awake. 15 hours awake = 15 apples.
    The next day, I decide to spend 10 of my awake hours in my back yard, staring at the clouds passing over me, and not eating. Then I eat 3 apples per hour the remaining 5 hours. So, 15 apples, again.
    In one scenario, I was eating every single hour. In the second scenario, I have managed to not eat a single calorie for 10 hours.
    Why do you think there is a difference by the end of the day ?
  • livingleanlivingclean
    livingleanlivingclean Posts: 11,751 Member
    Options
    mtvstaff wrote: »
    ScottJTyler wrote: »
    Extra activity allows you to eat more food and therefore gain more nutrition. Depending on your goals, it's usually better to exercise more and eat more.

    Yes that is correct but if you expend calories and put them back you are at square one again. But i do understand what you are saying.

    As long as "square one" is still in deficit if your goal is weight loss, what's the issue?
  • mtvstaff
    mtvstaff Posts: 57 Member
    Options
    I guess what I'm trying to say is you can use your own BMR as a weapon for fat loss/Weight control. Vs Doing Cardio. You can still meet your daily Calorie intake but use in a shorter period like you would in IF (Intermittent fasting) etc. And if that makes it easier for people to lose weight or control it thats a good thing. :D
  • Snow3y
    Snow3y Posts: 1,412 Member
    Options
    I haven't done cardio in hell-long... I'm kinda considering it though, just as a new approach for myself.. Either that, or doing HIIT, because I'm lazy to go to the gym twice a day
  • livingleanlivingclean
    livingleanlivingclean Posts: 11,751 Member
    Options
    mtvstaff wrote: »
    I guess what I'm trying to say is you can use your own BMR as a weapon for fat loss/Weight control. Vs Doing Cardio. You can still meet your daily Calorie intake but use in a shorter period like you would in IF (Intermittent fasting) etc. And if that makes it easier for people to lose weight or control it thats a good thing. :D

    It makes no difference when you eat your calories. If you eat your calories in an hour, or spread them over 24, you will get the same results.
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,811 Member
    Options
    More exercise and more food - I enjoy both so it's a win/win.

    My "cardio" is mostly cycling on beautiful country roads so it's hardly a chore.
  • alyhuggan
    alyhuggan Posts: 717 Member
    Options
    I think what OP is recommending is fasting and eating all your calories in a short time frame as it'll keep you full. When I used to do IF I'd only eat between 12 and 5, was usually too full to eat after that.
  • LKArgh
    LKArgh Posts: 5,179 Member
    Options
    alyhuggan wrote: »
    I think what OP is recommending is fasting and eating all your calories in a short time frame as it'll keep you full. When I used to do IF I'd only eat between 12 and 5, was usually too full to eat after that.

    It looks like it, but it does not make sense together with the title of the thread.
  • mtvstaff
    mtvstaff Posts: 57 Member
    Options
    aggelikik wrote: »
    Let me explain what is confusing about your post, so you can explain what you meant :)

    Let's say my BMR is 1500. Totally random but nice round number.
    Take a medium apple and say it has 100 calories. Again, probably not accurate but nice and round number.
    So, I can eat 15 apples per day and not gain or lose weight. And do nothing.
    So, I decide to sleep 9 hours per day, and eat 1 apple per hour I am awake. 15 hours awake = 15 apples.
    The next day, I decide to spend 10 of my awake hours in my back yard, staring at the clouds passing over me, and not eating. Then I eat 3 apples per hour the remaining 5 hours. So, 15 apples, again.
    In one scenario, I was eating every single hour. In the second scenario, I have managed to not eat a single calorie for 10 hours.
    Why do you think there is a difference by the end of the day ?

    So 1500 divide that by 24 you will have your calories per hour. (A handy way to think I was trying to mention)

    Or weekly, 1500 x 7 days = 10,500 per week

    Lets say you slept 10 hours and in that 10 hours you burnt 620 calories (by not eating) as your maintenance is 1500 sedentary.

    You have 14 hours left of the day.

    Doing nothing and eating nothing you will burn the remainder of the 1500 that is the last 880 calories.
    Now Lets say this was a Monday so your coming into Tuesday with a solid 1500 Deficit.

    Tuesday you eat your 1500 maintenance. And you do the same the next 6 days.

    There fore instead of hitting the total of 10,500 calories for that week you hit 1500 under because of Mondays antics.

    People forget when you do not eat your body is still using calories and those calories can ad up!… because your body its still burning.

    You can use this as an additional tool to supplement your regime like I do. And it works.

    My example showed 1500 less by not going to the gym. This was done in 24 hours to make it simple but it can be spread over days. :D

Categories