Explain this contradiction.
Replies
-
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.
The statement on their website is "90% exercise, on average, about 1 hour per day." (nwcr.ws/Research/default.htm)
You could be right. The statement alone doesn't tell us which type of average was used. If they used the mean, the 90% implies they ignored the zeros. Even so, there can't be many of them who exercised only thirty minutes, or the average would be lower. There must be a few who put in big numbers, but probably none over 8 hours a day and the physical exhaustion that would cause would prevent very many putting in numbers like that. For this to work, there has to be a lot of people putting in an hour or more per day of exercise.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.
I very much doubt that 90% of the people participating in this forum will successfully maintain their weight loss. Sorry the stats just don't support that.
People maintain their weight loss doing one simple, but difficult thing....managing their calorie intake in conjunction with their calorie burn. Not sure why this concept seems to be so mind boggling. Calories in = calories out = Maintenance.
That's kind of my point. I expect many of the people participating in this forum will maintain their weight loss, but if we look at some people who have been successful at maintaining their weight loss, the thing they have most in common is that they exercise and they exercise a lot. If someone wants to mimic them, they would exercise for an hour a day (among other things). Perhaps they are all wrong and don't need to exercise, but let's suppose they are right. How is it possible that exercise results in successful maintenance when it isn't even necessary for weight loss?
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
TimothyFish wrote: »The National Registry of Weight Control reveals that 90% of the people who maintained a loss of 30 pounds or more for at least a year exercise about 1 hour per day. So, exercise is the most important factor when maintaining weight loss, but during the dieting phase, calorie restriction is more important, even to the point that people are often told that exercise isn’t required. Explain this apparent contradiction.
I just turned in my initial paperwork for the NRWC and exercise is not a factor in my maintenance plan, just like it wasn't a factor in my weight loss plan. I've been successfully maintaining an almost 60lb loss for two years now.
eta: if I had to pick ONE thing that I think is the biggest factor in my maintenance plan, it would have to be my daily weigh-ins. If my weight creeps up above my maintenance range then I know I've gotten too relaxed with my calorie intake and I go back into a deficit until I settle back into my maintenance range.0 -
Some people are of the opinion that the lack of exercise leads to a decreasing TDEE, so people will either gain weight or they will have to continue to eat less and less.0
-
TimothyFish wrote: »Some people are of the opinion that the lack of exercise leads to a decreasing TDEE, so people will either gain weight or they will have to continue to eat less and less.
Just for fun...
What's exercise?
Are we counting walking in here or just purposeful, intense cardio, etc? Is there a difference between walking <2000 steps per day, 10,000 per day and more?
I may not have a solid 60 straight minutes per day to dedicate to exercise, whatever that may mean, but I can get to 8000 steps and scare up another 10-20 minutes to get to my 10k by the end of the day ,which in turn should mean I get more calories. At present, if I get in 10k steps, I can eat ~1600 calories per day and lose. If I move more, that number goes up a bit. Move less, down it goes. And this is just me making sure I do a lap around the building every 30 minutes + maybe a 10 minute walk over lunch.
My weight loss and Fitbit burns support the above conclusions.
Food for thought.
~Lyssa
0 -
TimothyFish wrote: »Some people are of the opinion that the lack of exercise leads to a decreasing TDEE, so people will either gain weight or they will have to continue to eat less and less.
I thought we now had evidence of this. It would seem fairly intuitive - the fitter you are, the more "briskly" you are likely to be in all of your movements, which may well imply more movement in total, which of course raises TDEE.
For myself, I am completely convinced that regular vigorous exercise is the key to successful weight management. It may not be necessary in theory, but in practice, I can't adhere to a solid deficit without exercise. And I know I'm not alone in that, there are many others who experience the same.0 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »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.
If you go to the bottom of their research summary page to look at the links to the actual studies they have done phone surveys of unsuccessful weight maintainers vs. successful maintainers. I forget the specific things they were surveying for in that one, though.
I've spent a bit of time on that site! It's pretty interesting.
0 -
TimothyFish wrote: »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.
WTF?
You don't understand the data. Learn what "on average" means to start with.
-2 -
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.
I very much doubt that 90% of the people participating in this forum will successfully maintain their weight loss. Sorry the stats just don't support that.
People maintain their weight loss doing one simple, but difficult thing....managing their calorie intake in conjunction with their calorie burn. Not sure why this concept seems to be so mind boggling. Calories in = calories out = Maintenance.
That's kind of my point. I expect many of the people participating in this forum will maintain their weight loss, but if we look at some people who have been successful at maintaining their weight loss, the thing they have most in common is that they exercise and they exercise a lot. If someone wants to mimic them, they would exercise for an hour a day (among other things). Perhaps they are all wrong and don't need to exercise, but let's suppose they are right. How is it possible that exercise results in successful maintenance when it isn't even necessary for weight loss?
I have a friend on my list who's in maintenance. She exercises 3 times a week for a half an hour.
She did not just enter maintenance.
Look, here's where I'm coming from.
Exercise is great. I enjoy it. While I don't like to consider myself this way, I am functionally disabled in that I can't always use my body at will. Extenuating medical circumstances and all. For the purposes of census data, I'm considered disabled.
I am not alone in this regard.
Pushing and pushing an agenda that "an hour of exercise a day shows a commitment to maintenance" or "if you want to mimic a maintainer, you'll exercise an hour a day" or "an hour a day rulezzz everyone else droolz" agenda is just ...
I'll never be able to do that.
Yet I'll maintain my weight loss, I guarantee you that, because no matter what, I do manage to squeeze in at least three days at the gym and I watch my food like a hawk.
So just stop. Or add some caveats.
We're not all the same.
0 -
TimothyFish wrote: »Some people are of the opinion that the lack of exercise leads to a decreasing TDEE, so people will either gain weight or they will have to continue to eat less and less.
I think it's in equal measure protein consumption and strength training which preserves LBM that helps this. Your TDEE is going to drop as you lose weight no matter what.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
TimothyFish wrote: »The National Registry of Weight Control reveals that 90% of the people who maintained a loss of 30 pounds or more for at least a year exercise about 1 hour per day. So, exercise is the most important factor when maintaining weight loss, but during the dieting phase, calorie restriction is more important, even to the point that people are often told that exercise isn’t required. Explain this apparent contradiction.
You didn't really submit a contradiction for your thread. You submitted a large, awkward, random assemblage of sentences. In fact, the sentences you apparently kidnapped in the dead of night and forced into this violent and arbitrary plan of yours clearly seemed to be placed on the thread against their will. Reading your post(s)/responses was like watching unfamiliar, uncomfortable people interact at a cocktail party that no one wanted to attend in the first place. You didn't submit a contradiction. You submitted a hostage situation.
-1 -
Cryptonomnomicon wrote: »TimothyFish wrote: »The National Registry of Weight Control reveals that 90% of the people who maintained a loss of 30 pounds or more for at least a year exercise about 1 hour per day. So, exercise is the most important factor when maintaining weight loss, but during the dieting phase, calorie restriction is more important, even to the point that people are often told that exercise isn’t required. Explain this apparent contradiction.
You didn't really submit a contradiction for your thread. You submitted a large, awkward, random assemblage of sentences. In fact, the sentences you apparently kidnapped in the dead of night and forced into this violent and arbitrary plan of yours clearly seemed to be placed on the thread against their will. Reading your post(s)/responses was like watching unfamiliar, uncomfortable people interact at a cocktail party that no one wanted to attend in the first place. You didn't submit a contradiction. You submitted a hostage situation.
This post is a work of art. I raise my morning tea to you, sir.
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »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.
I very much doubt that 90% of the people participating in this forum will successfully maintain their weight loss. Sorry the stats just don't support that.
People maintain their weight loss doing one simple, but difficult thing....managing their calorie intake in conjunction with their calorie burn. Not sure why this concept seems to be so mind boggling. Calories in = calories out = Maintenance.
That's kind of my point. I expect many of the people participating in this forum will maintain their weight loss, but if we look at some people who have been successful at maintaining their weight loss, the thing they have most in common is that they exercise and they exercise a lot. If someone wants to mimic them, they would exercise for an hour a day (among other things). Perhaps they are all wrong and don't need to exercise, but let's suppose they are right. How is it possible that exercise results in successful maintenance when it isn't even necessary for weight loss?
I have a friend on my list who's in maintenance. She exercises 3 times a week for a half an hour.
She did not just enter maintenance.
Look, here's where I'm coming from.
Exercise is great. I enjoy it. While I don't like to consider myself this way, I am functionally disabled in that I can't always use my body at will. Extenuating medical circumstances and all. For the purposes of census data, I'm considered disabled.
I am not alone in this regard.
Pushing and pushing an agenda that "an hour of exercise a day shows a commitment to maintenance" or "if you want to mimic a maintainer, you'll exercise an hour a day" or "an hour a day rulezzz everyone else droolz" agenda is just ...
I'll never be able to do that.
Yet I'll maintain my weight loss, I guarantee you that, because no matter what, I do manage to squeeze in at least three days at the gym and I watch my food like a hawk.
So just stop. Or add some caveats.
We're not all the same.
Yep, and there's a few of us who just don't have a desire to do structured exercise, me being one of them, and yet I'm maintaining without any issues
I've done a bit of exercise here and there since I transitioned into maintenance (the summer that I transitioned I walked, for example), but I've never factored it into my maintenance plan, as far as adjusting my calories goes. What I've done/do generates so few extra calories that it just doesn't have an impact on my maintenance.
What HAS had an impact though-
-daily weigh-ins so I have an accurate idea of where my weight is at
-always follow portion/serving sizes and use my food scale on a regular basis
-spot check my daily calorie intake here on MFP/scrap paper (been keeping track in a notebook on my kitchen counter lately)
-always look up restaurant nutritional info before I eat out, and always go in with a meal pre-picked out, which fits into my calories goals. I eat out several times a week, so this is a big one for me
eta: when I first transitioned into maintenance I did consider exercise a factor, because it gave me new goals to work toward/something new to focus on instead of losing weight. However, I never took it any further than sporadic exercise. Some walking, some body-weight strength training at different times etc, but never a set exercise schedule with a set amount of time dedicated towards it every week, and definitely not 7 hours a week-gah that sounds awful.
And as I settled into maintenance more, I got away from this. Over the past fall/winter I did no exercise at all. Still maintained.
Right now I'm doing a push-ups challenge, but it's only for 3 times a week/few minutes a time and if I broke down the calories burned, it's less than 300 calories, for the WHOLE week.0 -
macgurlnet wrote: »TimothyFish wrote: »Some people are of the opinion that the lack of exercise leads to a decreasing TDEE, so people will either gain weight or they will have to continue to eat less and less.
Just for fun...
What's exercise?
Are we counting walking in here or just purposeful, intense cardio, etc? Is there a difference between walking <2000 steps per day, 10,000 per day and more?
I tried to dig into that a bit more too, and wasn't all that successful, but I did discover that a large part of the 90% who exercise are basically just walking. Whether they are counting walking extra during the day, vs. planned walks, I don't know, but I think it goes along with daily or weekly weighing being important--people who are still bothering to focus on things like being active during the day in ANY WAY are motivated, just like people who are daily or weekly weighing.
I'm not at all sure that the activity is the key to maintenance vs. the fact that they are motivated means that they would eat in a way necessary to maintain regardless (although more activity obviously makes it less burdensome to do so).
Anyway, I know for me activity (and also intentional exercise) is important, as it also has been when losing, but I find this interesting.0 -
Is it really that hard to understand why many people who successfully maintain weight exercise?
Someone is serious about losing weight and getting healthy.
So they lose weight and try to maintain weight.
They also know that exercising is healthy for you so they do that too.
They don't maintain weight because they exercise, they exercise and maintain weight because they want to be healthy.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »macgurlnet wrote: »TimothyFish wrote: »Some people are of the opinion that the lack of exercise leads to a decreasing TDEE, so people will either gain weight or they will have to continue to eat less and less.
Just for fun...
What's exercise?
Are we counting walking in here or just purposeful, intense cardio, etc? Is there a difference between walking <2000 steps per day, 10,000 per day and more?
I tried to dig into that a bit more too, and wasn't all that successful, but I did discover that a large part of the 90% who exercise are basically just walking. Whether they are counting walking extra during the day, vs. planned walks, I don't know, but I think it goes along with daily or weekly weighing being important--people who are still bothering to focus on things like being active during the day in ANY WAY are motivated, just like people who are daily or weekly weighing.
I'm not at all sure that the activity is the key to maintenance vs. the fact that they are motivated means that they would eat in a way necessary to maintain regardless (although more activity obviously makes it less burdensome to do so).
Anyway, I know for me activity (and also intentional exercise) is important, as it also has been when losing, but I find this interesting.
Given that the data is from people self reporting, it seems likely that "exercise" is whatever the person reporting it believes is exercise. In the physical activity guidelines that recommend exercising so many minutes per week, they are usually talking about moderately intense exercise (walking fast, pushing a lawn mower, riding a bicycle on level ground). The guidelines cut the time recommendations in half for people who are doing vigorous exercise (running, swimming laps, riding a bicycle fast or on hills). I expect that the data we're talking about here deals with moderately intense and above.0 -
Oh look I got flagged for having a sense of humor *cries on the inside* here are my suggestions for a new flagging system.
-2 -
Cryptonomnomicon wrote: »Oh look I got flagged for having a sense of humor *cries on the inside* here are my suggestions for a new flagging system.
I like this flagging system since I got two spam...I'm like WTF...spam...never mind the abuse flags for being "blunt"
I wish we could see who flags us and what threads now that would be cool...0 -
Cryptonomnomicon wrote: »Oh look I got flagged for having a sense of humor *cries on the inside* here are my suggestions for a new flagging system.
HEY, I NEED THESE! This is fantastic!0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »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.
If you go to the bottom of their research summary page to look at the links to the actual studies they have done phone surveys of unsuccessful weight maintainers vs. successful maintainers. I forget the specific things they were surveying for in that one, though.
I've spent a bit of time on that site! It's pretty interesting.
I wasn't looking for the results of studies. I've read plenty of articles on the subject, many of which take the view that there are significant differences between weight loss and maintenance and that exercise is much more important in maintenance than it is to achieve weight loss. But I wanted to see how the MFP community interpreted the data. After the seeing so many responses that were either off topic or were assuming some ulterior motive on my part, I am regretting that decision.0 -
We are also advised to drink 8 glasses of water a day. Yet 100% of people who drink water die. And a large number of people who drink water, gain weight.
I have gotten a lot of exercise every day for years. Still couldn't loose weight. Started tracking my calories 7 weeks ago. I am down 20 pounds. Results speak louder than some article on the net.
You can't just look at one variable and decide that that one is the most important factor out of all of the others. Life is much more complicated than that. Weight loss requires thinking carefully about the whole picture. Not just one piece of the puzzle.
0 -
Oh look more flagging.
-3 -
shadowfax_c11 wrote: »We are also advised to drink 8 glasses of water a day. Yet 100% of people who drink water die. And a large number of people who drink water, gain weight.
I have gotten a lot of exercise every day for years. Still couldn't loose weight. Started tracking my calories 7 weeks ago. I am down 20 pounds. Results speak louder than some article on the net.
You can't just look at one variable and decide that that one is the most important factor out of all of the others. Life is much more complicated than that. Weight loss requires thinking carefully about the whole picture. Not just one piece of the puzzle.
Didn't someone already post this? I'm too tired of this nonsense to go back and look.
Of course 100% of the people who drink water die. 100% of people die. But you don't have 90% of the general population that exercises, on average, about 1 hour per day. That is why that 90% is significant.
And it doesn't matter that you couldn't "loose" weight. No one is saying that the 90% means that people are able to lose weight through exercise. The fact is, many people who exercise are surprised by the fact that they aren't losing weight, but that's the way it is. But the data indicates that the vast majority of the people who maintain their weight loss do exercise. This implies that maintenance is significantly different from weight loss, not that weight loss is a result of exercise, which your post suggests.
0 -
TimothyFish wrote: »shadowfax_c11 wrote: »We are also advised to drink 8 glasses of water a day. Yet 100% of people who drink water die. And a large number of people who drink water, gain weight.
I have gotten a lot of exercise every day for years. Still couldn't loose weight. Started tracking my calories 7 weeks ago. I am down 20 pounds. Results speak louder than some article on the net.
You can't just look at one variable and decide that that one is the most important factor out of all of the others. Life is much more complicated than that. Weight loss requires thinking carefully about the whole picture. Not just one piece of the puzzle.
Didn't someone already post this? I'm too tired of this nonsense to go back and look.
Of course 100% of the people who drink water die. 100% of people die. But you don't have 90% of the general population that exercises, on average, about 1 hour per day. That is why that 90% is significant.
And it doesn't matter that you couldn't "loose" weight. No one is saying that the 90% means that people are able to lose weight through exercise. The fact is, many people who exercise are surprised by the fact that they aren't losing weight, but that's the way it is. But the data indicates that the vast majority of the people who maintain their weight loss do exercise. This implies that maintenance is significantly different from weight loss, not that weight loss is a result of exercise, which your post suggests.
The only one who thinks this implies anything of the sort is you.0 -
TimothyFish wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »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.
If you go to the bottom of their research summary page to look at the links to the actual studies they have done phone surveys of unsuccessful weight maintainers vs. successful maintainers. I forget the specific things they were surveying for in that one, though.
I've spent a bit of time on that site! It's pretty interesting.
I wasn't looking for the results of studies. I've read plenty of articles on the subject, many of which take the view that there are significant differences between weight loss and maintenance and that exercise is much more important in maintenance than it is to achieve weight loss. But I wanted to see how the MFP community interpreted the data. After the seeing so many responses that were either off topic or were assuming some ulterior motive on my part, I am regretting that decision.
?????? My reply was in context to someone wondering if it would be more helpful if the registry also would cull data from people who didn't maintain their losses for comparison's sake.
0 -
TimothyFish wrote: »shadowfax_c11 wrote: »We are also advised to drink 8 glasses of water a day. Yet 100% of people who drink water die. And a large number of people who drink water, gain weight.
I have gotten a lot of exercise every day for years. Still couldn't loose weight. Started tracking my calories 7 weeks ago. I am down 20 pounds. Results speak louder than some article on the net.
You can't just look at one variable and decide that that one is the most important factor out of all of the others. Life is much more complicated than that. Weight loss requires thinking carefully about the whole picture. Not just one piece of the puzzle.
Didn't someone already post this? I'm too tired of this nonsense to go back and look.
Of course 100% of the people who drink water die. 100% of people die. But you don't have 90% of the general population that exercises, on average, about 1 hour per day. That is why that 90% is significant.
And it doesn't matter that you couldn't "loose" weight. No one is saying that the 90% means that people are able to lose weight through exercise. The fact is, many people who exercise are surprised by the fact that they aren't losing weight, but that's the way it is. But the data indicates that the vast majority of the people who maintain their weight loss do exercise. This implies that maintenance is significantly different from weight loss, not that weight loss is a result of exercise, which your post suggests.
No, I think you're alone on that one.
0 -
Cryptonomnomicon wrote: »
Oh look more flagging for talking about flagging.
*Abuse - When a post is flagged 5 times as Abuse, it is hidden from the board and sent for moderation. The point of this feature is to get offensive or upsetting content reported to the mods and removed from the boards to reduce the number of people who have to see it.
What is Abuse: Pornography, graphic or disturbing images, hate speech, etc. Basically, if you wouldn't want your children or your boss standing behind you when you open the post, or if having it on your computer would get you fired from your job, you can consider it Abuse. This is for severe, urgent violations.
What is not Abuse: General community guideline violations, posts you disagree with, posts by people you are arguing with in a forum, and anything else that does not meet the criteria above.
You can actually get into trouble for abusing the flagging feature.
Seriously lighten up, so what some users don't agree with your observations or methodology...welcome to the internet and life in general. As far as me going off topic yes I post humorous gifs, memes and replies but it is because I don't take life too seriously and it often makes the threads a little more entertaining to visit.
*http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10007789/flagged-content-reported-posts-warning-points#latest0 -
What percentage of people who eat breakfast every day also do 1 hour of exercise at least 5 times a week? Do we then conclude that eating breakfast causes one to burst into spontaneous zumba?[/quote]!
HAHAHA ... thanks for a good laugh this morning!!
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