Drop calories or do cardio? Which would you prefer?
Replies
-
angelasfree1 wrote: »Definitely do more cardio! I find the more exercise I do, the less inclined I am to binge on bad foods!
Agreed. It just takes too much work to burn it off. I am glad to have the option though.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
You must be new here...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.
Lol
X2 0 -
BILLBRYTAN wrote: »livingleanlivingclean 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.
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.
COMPLETELY WRONG!! I eat an average of 2500 calories per day in the space of 4 hours and I don't eat for 20. I have been doing this all of 2015 so far and have achieved amazing results. Similar stories appear all over the internet if you take the time to research them.
What you describe is 100% consistent with the posting you're declaring to be "COMPLETELY WRONG".
0 -
PS "For all of 2015" would be a bit more meaningful if we weren't in April. Just a free pro tip for ya. :drinker:0
-
carolynmo1969 wrote: »For me, a healthy heart muscle is more important than shapely delts. However, since I mix up cardio and strength training, I'm getting to be smoking hot on the inside and out.
This. As I get older, looking ripped is less and less important to me, but a strong heart muscle is something I still want.0 -
BILLBRYTAN wrote: »livingleanlivingclean 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.
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.
COMPLETELY WRONG!! I eat an average of 2500 calories per day in the space of 4 hours and I don't eat for 20. I have been doing this all of 2015 so far and have achieved amazing results. Similar stories appear all over the internet if you take the time to research them. I have lost 30 pounds since starting in January and my testosterone and hgh are incredible for my age 62. I have been obese since childhood and wish I had known this 40 years ago but I was too busy listening to doctors and other so called experts who knew nothing about nutrition. INTERMITTENT FASTING apparently only works for about 90% of healthy people but it costs nothing and is possible to continue on a long term basis. I have only cheated for 2 days out of 4 months and find this lifestyle relatively easy to maintain.
Have you eaten 2500 calories a day NOT intermittent fasting for the same period of time with different results?
Or did you go from eating whatever you wanted, whenever without any moderation, straight to an IF lifestyle?0 -
I hate cardio. I'm currently going into maintenance and doing none, just to kind of see how little I can get away with and still enjoy enough food. I'm also trying a recomp though, so even if I add some in, it won't be much.0
-
BILLBRYTAN wrote: »
WRONG!! Intermittent fasting yields results far beyond those of mere calorie cutting. Fasting alters the metabolism in a positive manner and promotes proper hormonal balance.Sigh... Like others have pointed out, you are trying to "promote" an IF eating style. Which is great if it works for you and you find it more convenient than other ways to limit calories. It is still limiting calories though. So, to answer your title question, you are dropping calories. How you drop these calories, honestly, it does not matter.peter56765 wrote: »carolynmo1969 wrote: »For me, a healthy heart muscle is more important than shapely delts. However, since I mix up cardio and strength training, I'm getting to be smoking hot on the inside and out.
This. As I get older, looking ripped is less and less important to me, but a strong heart muscle is something I still want.
100% agree.. but not to presume being ripped doesn't mean not having a healthy heart either.
0 -
Can yBILLBRYTAN wrote: »livingleanlivingclean 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.
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.
COMPLETELY WRONG!! I eat an average of 2500 calories per day in the space of 4 hours and I don't eat for 20. I have been doing this all of 2015 so far and have achieved amazing results. Similar stories appear all over the internet if you take the time to research them.
What you describe is 100% consistent with the posting you're declaring to be "COMPLETELY WRONG".
Can you tell us your suggestions for the most time efficient way to hold muscle and maintain single digit bodyfat not lose strength while without feeling miserable year round with relative ease and not worrying a greal deal about food or cardio. You seem to know. real keen to learn what your approach to these things are. 0 -
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.
No, you're not...
You're at minus your BMR added to minus your exercise calories. If you're just using BMR, you're only minus your BMR.
0 -
peachyfuzzle 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.
No, you're not...
You're at minus your BMR added to minus your exercise calories. If you're just using BMR, you're only minus your BMR.
Lol re read the full conversations. 0 -
peachyfuzzle 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.
No, you're not...
You're at minus your BMR added to minus your exercise calories. If you're just using BMR, you're only minus your BMR.
He doesn't math or science. There's nothing we can do for him. He's already gone.0 -
peachyfuzzle 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.
No, you're not...
You're at minus your BMR added to minus your exercise calories. If you're just using BMR, you're only minus your BMR.
He doesn't math or science. There's nothing we can do for him. He's already gone.
I did not see that this was three pages long when I commented. I only have 15 minutes left at work to enjoy the delicious hilarity that is apparently contained herein.0 -
If you burn 400 and eat 400 your back at square one. That's with your BMR as it was.0
-
Hahapeachyfuzzle wrote: »peachyfuzzle 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.
No, you're not...
You're at minus your BMR added to minus your exercise calories. If you're just using BMR, you're only minus your BMR.
He doesn't math or science. There's nothing we can do for him. He's already gone.
I did not see that this was three pages long when I commented. I only have 15 minutes left at work to enjoy the delicious hilarity that is apparently contained herein.
Haha All good 0 -
-
I luv me some cardio. Making time for my 3 day a week workout at the dojo is never a problem. It is just a part of my weekly routine. It's not negotiable. And to be honest I really enjoy it. And the extra calories for dessert afterward are a nice plus. 0
-
Can yBILLBRYTAN wrote: »livingleanlivingclean 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.
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.
COMPLETELY WRONG!! I eat an average of 2500 calories per day in the space of 4 hours and I don't eat for 20. I have been doing this all of 2015 so far and have achieved amazing results. Similar stories appear all over the internet if you take the time to research them.
What you describe is 100% consistent with the posting you're declaring to be "COMPLETELY WRONG".
Can you tell us your suggestions for the most time efficient way to hold muscle and maintain single digit bodyfat not lose strength while without feeling miserable year round with relative ease and not worrying a greal deal about food or cardio. You seem to know. real keen to learn what your approach to these things are.
What does that have to do with the topic of the thread?
IF is awesome sauce. Love it, do it.
But that doesn't change the fact that for the vast majority of people**, a small eating window will make no noticeable difference compared to eating the same calories in some other pattern.
Nor does it change the fact that you strongly disagreed with a post that was actually consistent with what you yourself were claiming.
** Nice attempt at backtracking with the addition of the "single digit body fat" qualification. :drinker:
0 -
Thank yiCan yBILLBRYTAN wrote: »livingleanlivingclean 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.
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.
COMPLETELY WRONG!! I eat an average of 2500 calories per day in the space of 4 hours and I don't eat for 20. I have been doing this all of 2015 so far and have achieved amazing results. Similar stories appear all over the internet if you take the time to research them.
What you describe is 100% consistent with the posting you're declaring to be "COMPLETELY WRONG".
Can you tell us your suggestions for the most time efficient way to hold muscle and maintain single digit bodyfat not lose strength while without feeling miserable year round with relative ease and not worrying a greal deal about food or cardio. You seem to know. real keen to learn what your approach to these things are.
What does that have to do with the topic of the thread?
IF is awesome sauce. Love it, do it.
But that doesn't change the fact that for the vast majority of people**, a small eating window will make no noticeable difference compared to eating the same calories in some other pattern.
Nor does it change the fact that you strongly disagreed with a post that was actually consistent with what you yourself were claiming.
** Nice attempt at backtracking with the addition of the "single digit body fat" qualification. :drinker:
Yes thank you for confirming my presumptions 0 -
0
-
Could you explain what your BMR consist of, that uses 1983 calories in 24 hours ? Excuse my earlier comment as I did NOT understand what you saying.0
-
100% drop calories. Why waste energy on "cardio" when you can pump iron instead? I'm 46 and dropped 40 lbs and 8 inches off my waste in 18 months by lifting heavy compound movements 4 days a week, NO CARDIO AT ALL, and just eating at a slight caloric deficit, with plenty of fat and protein. I think cardio is woefully overrated, unless you are just using it for basic conditioning or specifically for a sport. But for body composition? It sucks. Lift weights and eat a bit less.0
-
-
100% drop calories. Why waste energy on "cardio" when you can pump iron instead? I'm 46 and dropped 40 lbs and 8 inches off my waste in 18 months by lifting heavy compound movements 4 days a week, NO CARDIO AT ALL, and just eating at a slight caloric deficit, with plenty of fat and protein. I think cardio is woefully overrated, unless you are just using it for basic conditioning or specifically for a sport. But for body composition? It sucks. Lift weights and eat a bit less.
I lost 80 in 8 months doing nothing but cardio. And in the 10 months since (equally your 18 months) I have lifted heavy and did cardio to get to a 6' tall, 180lb, and 10-12% bf, dropped 11" from my waist all while eating 3500 cals a day. I'd say my body composition is pretty solid and only getting better. Just sayin'.0 -
I understand what calculator you used, can you explain what is in the calculation of 1983 calories ?0 -
CharlieRuns7225 wrote: »
I understand what calculator you used, can you explain what is in the calculation of 1983 calories ?
That's what I burn sedentary based on no movement. Doing nothing this is what my body burns.0 -
CharlieRuns7225 wrote: »
Exercise calories are an addition-too, not a replacement for your BMR !
You do realise Charlieruns is 100% correct above and your understanding is fundamentally flawed. How can you be so confused about such a simple concept?
Oh and my answer was, its a balance of both and will depend on the day whether I have enough energy and willpower to do more exercise (subject to an overtraining excess) or whether I want to eat less or sacrifice some of my deficit.
The only one confused is you . 0 -
peter56765 wrote: »carolynmo1969 wrote: »For me, a healthy heart muscle is more important than shapely delts. However, since I mix up cardio and strength training, I'm getting to be smoking hot on the inside and out.
This. As I get older, looking ripped is less and less important to me, but a strong heart muscle is something I still want.
This absolutely. Id rather be fit including having a good cv system and lowering the risk of heart disease or a weak heart. I do both, but quite a bit of cardio. Why on earth wouldnt you want a good cv system?0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions