Explain this contradiction.
Replies
-
So are you suggesting that people maintaining weight loss are eating whatever they want with complete disregard for macros, just exercising an hour a day and keeping the weight off?0
-
I keep coming back to this trying to comprehend how "condradiction" is being defined. Still no luck.0
-
TimothyFish wrote: »_incogNEATo_ wrote: »That study doesn't mean that the exercise is the most important factor. It just means that people who maintain a loss of 30 lbs or more for over a year are exercising one hour a day. The fact remains that they are eating at a maintenance level. Exercise is not required, still.
So, are you saying that maintaining weight loss might cause people to exercise an hour a day? That doesn't make sense.
The few and far between who are actually successful at maintaining do something that the many others do not. The balance the energy they need with the food they eat. How they do that is completely irrelevant.
And what you said doesn't make sense actually does make sense. A commitment to maintaining might cause people to exercise for one hour a day if they eat above their maintenance calories but are 100% committed to maintaining....then they would go and hit the gym to get back into balance.
Do I think it would be easier to maintain weight loss with the added component of exercise. I imagine so. Is it required or essential? Absolutely not. Calories in, calories out. It's a simple concept that the diet industry has been trying to complicate for decades now.
I very much doubt that 90% of the people participating in this forum think they are going to exercise one hour per day to maintain their weight. I suspect that most think they are going to track their calories and make sure they keep them balanced. Since we know that is conceptually possible, I see no reason to think that they will decide they also need to exercise for an hour a day.0 -
sunn_lighter wrote: »Maybe the contridiction is related to emotional eating. When I exercise I'm generally happier and less prone to eating my feelings, lol.
I can see that as a possibility.0 -
TimothyFish wrote: »TimothyFish wrote: »_incogNEATo_ wrote: »That study doesn't mean that the exercise is the most important factor. It just means that people who maintain a loss of 30 lbs or more for over a year are exercising one hour a day. The fact remains that they are eating at a maintenance level. Exercise is not required, still.
So, are you saying that maintaining weight loss might cause people to exercise an hour a day? That doesn't make sense.
The few and far between who are actually successful at maintaining do something that the many others do not. The balance the energy they need with the food they eat. How they do that is completely irrelevant.
And what you said doesn't make sense actually does make sense. A commitment to maintaining might cause people to exercise for one hour a day if they eat above their maintenance calories but are 100% committed to maintaining....then they would go and hit the gym to get back into balance.
Do I think it would be easier to maintain weight loss with the added component of exercise. I imagine so. Is it required or essential? Absolutely not. Calories in, calories out. It's a simple concept that the diet industry has been trying to complicate for decades now.
I very much doubt that 90% of the people participating in this forum think they are going to exercise one hour per day to maintain their weight. I suspect that most think they are going to track their calories and make sure they keep them balanced. Since we know that is conceptually possible, I see no reason to think that they will decide they also need to exercise for an hour a day.
Why do you think the vast majority of people participating in the forums don't exercise? Just because they say it isn't necessary for weight loss? Because it isn't. It is, however, good for lots of other things, like maintaining apparently.
0 -
stephanieluvspb wrote: »So are you suggesting that people maintaining weight loss are eating whatever they want with complete disregard for macros, just exercising an hour a day and keeping the weight off?
No, not really. Most were doing some other stuff as well, such as weighing at least weekly, and eat about the same thing everyday, etc. But since those who are exercising an hour a day is at such a high percentage, there must be a small percentage who aren't doing some or maybe even any of the other behaviors. But no, we don't have the information about how many people are exercising an hour a day and gaining weight at the same time.0 -
TimothyFish wrote: »Perhaps that is the case. If so, then exercising an hour a day would be a strong indicator of commitment to the healthy lifestyle. Would you conclude that if a person is trying to lose weight but they aren't exercising an hour a day that they will probably regain the weight, because they aren't committed to a healthy lifestyle?
Regular exercise is certainly an indicator that someone is more committed. But I wouldn't go so far as to say if you exercise regularly you are bound to maintain the weight loss. There are plenty of people who do a lot of exercise and are still overweight. Sumo wrestlers. NFL linemen. Olympic weightlifters.
An hour of cardio can be wiped out by one trip through the drive-through.0 -
TimothyFish wrote: »TimothyFish wrote: »_incogNEATo_ wrote: »That study doesn't mean that the exercise is the most important factor. It just means that people who maintain a loss of 30 lbs or more for over a year are exercising one hour a day. The fact remains that they are eating at a maintenance level. Exercise is not required, still.
So, are you saying that maintaining weight loss might cause people to exercise an hour a day? That doesn't make sense.
The few and far between who are actually successful at maintaining do something that the many others do not. The balance the energy they need with the food they eat. How they do that is completely irrelevant.
And what you said doesn't make sense actually does make sense. A commitment to maintaining might cause people to exercise for one hour a day if they eat above their maintenance calories but are 100% committed to maintaining....then they would go and hit the gym to get back into balance.
Do I think it would be easier to maintain weight loss with the added component of exercise. I imagine so. Is it required or essential? Absolutely not. Calories in, calories out. It's a simple concept that the diet industry has been trying to complicate for decades now.
I very much doubt that 90% of the people participating in this forum think they are going to exercise one hour per day to maintain their weight. I suspect that most think they are going to track their calories and make sure they keep them balanced. Since we know that is conceptually possible, I see no reason to think that they will decide they also need to exercise for an hour a day.
Why do you think the vast majority of people participating in the forums don't exercise? Just because they say it isn't necessary for weight loss? Because it isn't. It is, however, good for lots of other things, like maintaining apparently.
90% is a very high percentage. And keep in mind, we aren't talking about 90% who exercised. There are 90% of these people who put in seven hours a week. Even someone who puts in only five hours a week doesn't count. When you think about it, having 90% who put in seven hours of exercise on average is an extremely high percentage.0 -
TimothyFish wrote: »Perhaps that is the case. If so, then exercising an hour a day would be a strong indicator of commitment to the healthy lifestyle. Would you conclude that if a person is trying to lose weight but they aren't exercising an hour a day that they will probably regain the weight, because they aren't committed to a healthy lifestyle?
Regular exercise is certainly an indicator that someone is more committed. But I wouldn't go so far as to say if you exercise regularly you are bound to maintain the weight loss. There are plenty of people who do a lot of exercise and are still overweight. Sumo wrestlers. NFL linemen. Olympic weightlifters.
An hour of cardio can be wiped out by one trip through the drive-through.
No one said that exercise guarantees maintaining your weight. But the data indicates that if someone is able to maintain their weight, there is a very high probability that they are exercising at least an hour a day.0 -
TimothyFish wrote: »TimothyFish wrote: »Perhaps that is the case. If so, then exercising an hour a day would be a strong indicator of commitment to the healthy lifestyle. Would you conclude that if a person is trying to lose weight but they aren't exercising an hour a day that they will probably regain the weight, because they aren't committed to a healthy lifestyle?
Regular exercise is certainly an indicator that someone is more committed. But I wouldn't go so far as to say if you exercise regularly you are bound to maintain the weight loss. There are plenty of people who do a lot of exercise and are still overweight. Sumo wrestlers. NFL linemen. Olympic weightlifters.
An hour of cardio can be wiped out by one trip through the drive-through.
No one said that exercise guarantees maintaining your weight. But the data indicates that if someone is able to maintain their weight, there is a very high probability that they are exercising at least an hour a day.
The data does indicate that...it does NOT however indicate that it is the single most important factor in weight loss.
0 -
TimothyFish wrote: »TimothyFish wrote: »It is the highest one, so that makes it the most important.
You are confusing correlation with causation. It's a common logical fallacy. Just because two things happen at the same time does not mean that one is causing the other. It does not rule out the (often very likely) possibility that some third factor is the actual cause of both of them. In this case, the third factor is that the person is committed to living a healthy lifestyle. This causes both exercising and eating right.
Perhaps that is the case. If so, then exercising an hour a day would be a strong indicator of commitment to the healthy lifestyle. Would you conclude that if a person is trying to lose weight but they aren't exercising an hour a day that they will probably regain the weight, because they aren't committed to a healthy lifestyle?
No Tim, I would not. You know why? Generalities suck. I have a migraine today. I couldn't go to the gym. I possibly won't be able to go tomorrow.
I'm also old and really don't have the stamina thanks to my health to exercise every day.
I am committed, however, to exercising as often as I am able and to maintaining a healthy attitude about food.
Make of that what you will.
You can't apply your singular view of things to everyone's situation.
0 -
TimothyFish wrote: »But the data indicates that if someone is able to maintain their weight, there is a very high probability that they are exercising at least an hour a day.
Yes, that is correct. But that is very different than saying that if you exercise regularly that you are going to maintain your weight.
Also, we don't have any credibility measures for the data. What study did it come from? Was it from a university or non-profit organization? Or was it from Gold's Gym?0 -
Tim -- Reading This:There is variety in how NWCR members keep the weight off. Most report continuing to maintain a low calorie, low fat diet and doing high levels of activity.
78% eat breakfast every day.
75% weigh themselves at least once a week.
62% watch less than 10 hours of TV per week.
90% exercise, on average, about 1 hour per day.
Does not make you this:
0 -
TimothyFish wrote: »TimothyFish wrote: »TimothyFish wrote: »_incogNEATo_ wrote: »That study doesn't mean that the exercise is the most important factor. It just means that people who maintain a loss of 30 lbs or more for over a year are exercising one hour a day. The fact remains that they are eating at a maintenance level. Exercise is not required, still.
So, are you saying that maintaining weight loss might cause people to exercise an hour a day? That doesn't make sense.
The few and far between who are actually successful at maintaining do something that the many others do not. The balance the energy they need with the food they eat. How they do that is completely irrelevant.
And what you said doesn't make sense actually does make sense. A commitment to maintaining might cause people to exercise for one hour a day if they eat above their maintenance calories but are 100% committed to maintaining....then they would go and hit the gym to get back into balance.
Do I think it would be easier to maintain weight loss with the added component of exercise. I imagine so. Is it required or essential? Absolutely not. Calories in, calories out. It's a simple concept that the diet industry has been trying to complicate for decades now.
I very much doubt that 90% of the people participating in this forum think they are going to exercise one hour per day to maintain their weight. I suspect that most think they are going to track their calories and make sure they keep them balanced. Since we know that is conceptually possible, I see no reason to think that they will decide they also need to exercise for an hour a day.
Why do you think the vast majority of people participating in the forums don't exercise? Just because they say it isn't necessary for weight loss? Because it isn't. It is, however, good for lots of other things, like maintaining apparently.
90% is a very high percentage. And keep in mind, we aren't talking about 90% who exercised. There are 90% of these people who put in seven hours a week. Even someone who puts in only five hours a week doesn't count. When you think about it, having 90% who put in seven hours of exercise on average is an extremely high percentage.
It is a high percentage, but it isn't even saying every last one of them put in 1 hour per day. That's an average. Some put in 30 minutes, some put in 90 minutes, but spread out, it's about an hour per day.
0 -
Whatever, I know that when I don't exercise, whether losing or maintaining, the weight doesn't fall off nearly as fast even when I'm
eating at a deficit. Exercising seems to increase the metabolism that was just about obliterated when I quit smoking eleven
years ago. When I exercise regularly, it may be a stubborn loss, but it's a loss all the same.0 -
TimothyFish wrote: »But the data indicates that if someone is able to maintain their weight, there is a very high probability that they are exercising at least an hour a day.
Yes, that is correct. But that is very different than saying that if you exercise regularly that you are going to maintain your weight.
Also, we don't have any credibility measures for the data. What study did it come from? Was it from a university or non-profit organization? Or was it from Gold's Gym?
It's a registry for people who have maintained their weight for a while.
From their website:The National Weight Control Registry (NWCR), established in 1994 by
Rena Wing, Ph.D. from Brown Medical School, and James O. Hill, Ph.D. from the University of Colorado, is the largest prospective investigation of long-term successful weight loss maintenance. Given the prevailing belief that few individuals succeed at long-term weight loss, the NWCR was developed to identify and investigate the characteristics of individuals who have succeeded at long-term weight loss. The NWCR is tracking over 10,000 individuals who have lost significant amounts of weight and kept it off for long periods of time. Detailed questionnaires and annual follow-up surveys are used to examine the behavioral and psychological characteristics of weight maintainers, as well as the strategies they use to maintaining their weight losses.0 -
TimothyFish wrote: »TimothyFish wrote: »Perhaps that is the case. If so, then exercising an hour a day would be a strong indicator of commitment to the healthy lifestyle. Would you conclude that if a person is trying to lose weight but they aren't exercising an hour a day that they will probably regain the weight, because they aren't committed to a healthy lifestyle?
Regular exercise is certainly an indicator that someone is more committed. But I wouldn't go so far as to say if you exercise regularly you are bound to maintain the weight loss. There are plenty of people who do a lot of exercise and are still overweight. Sumo wrestlers. NFL linemen. Olympic weightlifters.
An hour of cardio can be wiped out by one trip through the drive-through.
No one said that exercise guarantees maintaining your weight. But the data indicates that if someone is able to maintain their weight, there is a very high probability that they are exercising at least an hour a day.
Do you understand what the words "on average" mean?
0 -
I've been a part of the registry for a few years now and have maintained a 100 pounds loss for several years. Maintaining a loss is about a balance between exercise and diet. Look, one thing I hear all the time and it is 110% true is you can't outrun a bad diet. I exercise at least one hour per day, I eat healthy most of the time and I manage my calories in. I've found a balance that works for me so I stick with it, something I find is typical with people like myself that have been successful at keeping the weight off.0
-
runnerchick69 wrote: »you can't outrun a bad diet.
Thanks. I think I'm going to make a poster of that and tape it my refrigerator!
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
TimothyFish wrote: »TimothyFish wrote: »TimothyFish wrote: »_incogNEATo_ wrote: »That study doesn't mean that the exercise is the most important factor. It just means that people who maintain a loss of 30 lbs or more for over a year are exercising one hour a day. The fact remains that they are eating at a maintenance level. Exercise is not required, still.
So, are you saying that maintaining weight loss might cause people to exercise an hour a day? That doesn't make sense.
The few and far between who are actually successful at maintaining do something that the many others do not. The balance the energy they need with the food they eat. How they do that is completely irrelevant.
And what you said doesn't make sense actually does make sense. A commitment to maintaining might cause people to exercise for one hour a day if they eat above their maintenance calories but are 100% committed to maintaining....then they would go and hit the gym to get back into balance.
Do I think it would be easier to maintain weight loss with the added component of exercise. I imagine so. Is it required or essential? Absolutely not. Calories in, calories out. It's a simple concept that the diet industry has been trying to complicate for decades now.
I very much doubt that 90% of the people participating in this forum think they are going to exercise one hour per day to maintain their weight. I suspect that most think they are going to track their calories and make sure they keep them balanced. Since we know that is conceptually possible, I see no reason to think that they will decide they also need to exercise for an hour a day.
Why do you think the vast majority of people participating in the forums don't exercise? Just because they say it isn't necessary for weight loss? Because it isn't. It is, however, good for lots of other things, like maintaining apparently.
90% is a very high percentage. And keep in mind, we aren't talking about 90% who exercised. There are 90% of these people who put in seven hours a week. Even someone who puts in only five hours a week doesn't count. When you think about it, having 90% who put in seven hours of exercise on average is an extremely high percentage.
You are misinterpreting "90% exercised, for an average of seven hours a week." That doesn't mean that all of the 90% exercised for at least an hour a week. It means that the average amount of time spent exercising by those in the 90% was seven hours a week.
0 -
76 percent walk, 20 percent do weights, 20 percent bike, 18 percent do aerobics. I didn't see the stat for running or swimming or lots of other things.0
-
mamapeach910 wrote: »TimothyFish wrote: »But the data indicates that if someone is able to maintain their weight, there is a very high probability that they are exercising at least an hour a day.
Yes, that is correct. But that is very different than saying that if you exercise regularly that you are going to maintain your weight.
Also, we don't have any credibility measures for the data. What study did it come from? Was it from a university or non-profit organization? Or was it from Gold's Gym?
It's a registry for people who have maintained their weight for a while.
From their website:The National Weight Control Registry (NWCR), established in 1994 by
Rena Wing, Ph.D. from Brown Medical School, and James O. Hill, Ph.D. from the University of Colorado, is the largest prospective investigation of long-term successful weight loss maintenance. Given the prevailing belief that few individuals succeed at long-term weight loss, the NWCR was developed to identify and investigate the characteristics of individuals who have succeeded at long-term weight loss. The NWCR is tracking over 10,000 individuals who have lost significant amounts of weight and kept it off for long periods of time. Detailed questionnaires and annual follow-up surveys are used to examine the behavioral and psychological characteristics of weight maintainers, as well as the strategies they use to maintaining their weight losses.
I recently "applied" online to the registry, thinking it would be cool to be part of the study and that doing so might keep me that little bit extra mindful* of my maintenance. I am still debating whether to fill out the lengthier written application, which in turn sets you up for periodic longitudinal questionnaires. One thing I've been wondering about is the validity of a study that only looks at the successful maintainers and doesn't compare the behaviors of the successful to the non-successful. There have been a lot of jokes on this thread about 100% of those who are successful or not successful drink water and breathe, to make points about causation, but it also makes a point about correlation. You can't even validly say that exercise correlates with successful maintenance if you don't study the unsuccessful to determine how many of them are exercising seven hours a week. What if it turns out that 95% of those who regain exercise, and the average amount they exercise is seven hours a week? (Yes, I agree it seems unlikely, but science doesn't work by taking data for granted.)
*Just noting that the registry study doesn't appear to have any way to control for the "observation" effect -- by being in it, not only are you aware that your behavior is being observed by the researchers, but you must also observe/take note of/think about your behavior to respond to the longitudinal questionnaires. It certainly is possible that this will affect the maintenance success of those in the study.0 -
I question your definition of "contradiction" - in fact, I fail to see any contradiction at all, Bro.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
I recently "applied" online to the registry, thinking it would be cool to be part of the study and that doing so might keep me that little bit extra mindful* of my maintenance. I am still debating whether to fill out the lengthier written application, which in turn sets you up for periodic longitudinal questionnaires. One thing I've been wondering about is the validity of a study that only looks at the successful maintainers and doesn't compare the behaviors of the successful to the non-successful. There have been a lot of jokes on this thread about 100% of those who are successful or not successful drink water and breathe, to make points about causation, but it also makes a point about correlation. You can't even validly say that exercise correlates with successful maintenance if you don't study the unsuccessful to determine how many of them are exercising seven hours a week. What if it turns out that 95% of those who regain exercise, and the average amount they exercise is seven hours a week? (Yes, I agree it seems unlikely, but science doesn't work by taking data for granted.)
*Just noting that the registry study doesn't appear to have any way to control for the "observation" effect -- by being in it, not only are you aware that your behavior is being observed by the researchers, but you must also observe/take note of/think about your behavior to respond to the longitudinal questionnaires. It certainly is possible that this will affect the maintenance success of those in the study.
As a member of the registry knowing that my actions will be observed doesn't really have an impact on what I eat or how much I exercise. When you've done this as long as I have you realize this is about you and not about what others think. The registry studies those of us who have been successful in an attempt to understand why we are the exception and not the rule with the hope that possibly understanding our successes will eventually help others. I'm sure the registry has people who have gone back to old habits for whatever reason because I'm here to say that maintenance, even as long as I've been doing it, can be a struggle sometimes. Are there flaws? Probably but if it helps people figure out this thing called maintenance then it really doesn't matter. You should sign up. Throw your two cents in to the mix
0 -
abetterluke wrote: »TimothyFish wrote: »TimothyFish wrote: »Perhaps that is the case. If so, then exercising an hour a day would be a strong indicator of commitment to the healthy lifestyle. Would you conclude that if a person is trying to lose weight but they aren't exercising an hour a day that they will probably regain the weight, because they aren't committed to a healthy lifestyle?
Regular exercise is certainly an indicator that someone is more committed. But I wouldn't go so far as to say if you exercise regularly you are bound to maintain the weight loss. There are plenty of people who do a lot of exercise and are still overweight. Sumo wrestlers. NFL linemen. Olympic weightlifters.
An hour of cardio can be wiped out by one trip through the drive-through.
No one said that exercise guarantees maintaining your weight. But the data indicates that if someone is able to maintain their weight, there is a very high probability that they are exercising at least an hour a day.
The data does indicate that...it does NOT however indicate that it is the single most important factor in weight loss.
Of course not. It is well established that exercise is not required for weight loss. Why would anyone think that something that isn't required is the "single most important factor?" It could, however, be the most important factor in weight maintenance (though I doubt "single most").0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »TimothyFish wrote: »TimothyFish wrote: »It is the highest one, so that makes it the most important.
You are confusing correlation with causation. It's a common logical fallacy. Just because two things happen at the same time does not mean that one is causing the other. It does not rule out the (often very likely) possibility that some third factor is the actual cause of both of them. In this case, the third factor is that the person is committed to living a healthy lifestyle. This causes both exercising and eating right.
Perhaps that is the case. If so, then exercising an hour a day would be a strong indicator of commitment to the healthy lifestyle. Would you conclude that if a person is trying to lose weight but they aren't exercising an hour a day that they will probably regain the weight, because they aren't committed to a healthy lifestyle?
No Tim, I would not. You know why? Generalities suck. I have a migraine today. I couldn't go to the gym. I possibly won't be able to go tomorrow.
I'm also old and really don't have the stamina thanks to my health to exercise every day.
I am committed, however, to exercising as often as I am able and to maintaining a healthy attitude about food.
Make of that what you will.
You can't apply your singular view of things to everyone's situation.
I'm just trying to understand the data. But since you have a migraine, I forgive you.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
TimothyFish wrote: »But the data indicates that if someone is able to maintain their weight, there is a very high probability that they are exercising at least an hour a day.
Yes, that is correct. But that is very different than saying that if you exercise regularly that you are going to maintain your weight.
Also, we don't have any credibility measures for the data. What study did it come from? Was it from a university or non-profit organization? Or was it from Gold's Gym?
nwcr.ws/0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K 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
- 424 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