Is exercise necessary?
Replies
-
While SezxyStef is technically correct, for some people their body will lower there metabolism to such a point that the necessary calorie deficit to lose weight by food restriction alone is dangerous, and might be mentally impossible. I know for me that if I don't exercise I can maintain my weight on 1500 calories a day. My body lowers its metabolism to match that. As my "normal" BMR is about 2200 calories, I'd have to go to 1000 calorie deficit to lose, and my rate would be like 0.5lbs a week. Sorry my will power is not up to that! Hungry & tired all the time to lose 2 lbs a month? Forget it!
But really the OPs real question is more about how to exercise. Running causes pain, so why run? I cant run (bad knees), and for people in my weight class, running is really bad for the knees! I started with walking, just 20-30 minutes a day. Then went on hikes on the weekend, longer and longer, with more rugged terrain, hills, etc. Once that became easy, and took so much time for any real benefit, I moved to the gym. I wear a heart rate monitor to make sure that I'm getting good benefit from my exercise. Once my body gets used to an exercise, and no longer uses as much energy to do that exercise, I change it. Up the speed on the machine, add more resistance, etc.
Right now I do 70-80 minute work outs that have a 750-1000 calorie burn 5 times a week. I stay around 1800 calories intake. That's a 6-8000 calorie weekly deficit. About the 2lbs a week rate. BUT I lose about 1.25 lbs a week. Cause my body is so damn good at lowering it metabolism... in case I need that fat for the winter
0 -
I just know when I work out, my body feels better, my mindset is where it should be, and for me, I can't starve 135 lbs off of my body. Even with severe arthritis, I have to keep moving or I will be dead, just like many of my family members that lived sedentary.0
-
Have you heard the saying "Abs are made in the Kitchen, not the gym". It's sort of true. I think what you put in your body determines how thin you are but if you're thin and can't walk up a flight of stairs without being out of breath then what's the point?0
-
cwolfman13 wrote: »gizmosmom02 wrote: »I sort of know the answer to this question. Weight loss is all about a calorie deficit, therefore exercise isn't absolutely necessary, but it does help with toning and increases the calorie deficit. That's the theory.
Has anyone lost weight without exercising? I ask because every time I try to jog on my treadmill I am so sore the next day I can barely walk. Not kidding. Also, exercise makes me more hungry. I need to lose 50 lbs.
Thanks for your advice.
It's necessary for your health but not weight loss. That said, without exercise, calorie targets are rather paltry. It's not so much about increasing your deficit as it is about being able to eat at a sustainable level of intake to lose weight and maintain sanity.
Example...without exercise I can only eat around 2,000 calories per day to lose about 1 Lb per week...this is because without exercise my maintenance is around 2,500 calories per day. Conversely, with exercise I can eat 2300 - 2500 calories per day and lose about 1 Lb per week because my maintenance jumps to 2800 - 3000.
0 -
While SezxyStef is technically correct, for some people their body will lower there metabolism to such a point that the necessary calorie deficit to lose weight by food restriction alone is dangerous, and might be mentally impossible.
If this is the case for people then they have messed around with their calories and messed up their metabolism. This is something i did myself for a number of years but it can be fixed. I went from not losing weight on 1100 calories a day to raising calories and carbs in a measured way to end up at a point where I could then drop back down and I was dropping body fat on 1800 calories a day. I can't recommend enough that people join up with a GOOD Personal Trainer who knows their stuff and can guide you through approaching nutrition in a healthy, nourishing and sustainable way as opposed to just dropping your own calories an unhealthy amount any time you hit a plateau.0 -
Not for weight loss. For good health and being a fully-functional human, yes, it is. It helps to retrain your brain to enjoy movement and then the challenge of pushing yourself. If you search for "physical culture" you'll see a lot of philosophizing about fitness endeavors.
0 -
kellyzita4 wrote: »I certainly can't speak for everyone, but in my experience, exercise is absolutely necessary. If I only eat a calorie deficit, I just don't lose at all. As soon as I start walking, though, the weight loss happens. I know that in theory, I shouldn't have to walk, but in reality, I do if I want to lose.
So what that says to me is, you're not really in calorie deficit, unless you exercise off some of your intake. That doesn't mean that the exercise is essential, just that you're not expending what you think you are in the background. There may be a number of reasons for that, but it is all about the energy deficit. If you're not losing weight, then you've got energy coming from somewhere. You might be absorbing solar energy through your skin, and converting that to body mass, or you might be collecting wind energy in your hair, and converting that to body mass. If either of those two, then well done, you are exceptional.
Personally speaking, when I was initially losing weight and had a fairly low calorie goal, I found it fery difficult to keep within that goal if I didn't train. I'd still feel quite hungry and a bit miserable if I ate to my calorie goal, but if I ran off 300-400 calories, then ate that back I was still hitting the same calorie goal and didn't feel rough. Possibly psychological, possibly physiological in some way, but it was part of the system I had to use.
Even now when I'm broadly at maintenance I can sometimes struggle with my goal if I don't go and train.
0 -
Well it isn't necessary. But it helps lose weight, keeps you healthy and makes you fitter and stronger. On that basis I would say do it.0
-
Right now I do 70-80 minute work outs that have a 750-1000 calorie burn 5 times a week. I stay around 1800 calories intake. That's a 6-8000 calorie weekly deficit. About the 2lbs a week rate. BUT I lose about 1.25 lbs a week.
That's almost certainly a result of overestimating the calorie expenditure.
1000 calories is a ten mile run or thereabouts. Possibly 9 miles for you, but not radically different.0 -
While SezxyStef is technically correct, for some people their body will lower there metabolism to such a point that the necessary calorie deficit to lose weight by food restriction alone is dangerous, and might be mentally impossible. I know for me that if I don't exercise I can maintain my weight on 1500 calories a day. My body lowers its metabolism to match that. As my "normal" BMR is about 2200 calories, I'd have to go to 1000 calorie deficit to lose, and my rate would be like 0.5lbs a week. Sorry my will power is not up to that! Hungry & tired all the time to lose 2 lbs a month? Forget it!
But really the OPs real question is more about how to exercise. Running causes pain, so why run? I cant run (bad knees), and for people in my weight class, running is really bad for the knees! I started with walking, just 20-30 minutes a day. Then went on hikes on the weekend, longer and longer, with more rugged terrain, hills, etc. Once that became easy, and took so much time for any real benefit, I moved to the gym. I wear a heart rate monitor to make sure that I'm getting good benefit from my exercise. Once my body gets used to an exercise, and no longer uses as much energy to do that exercise, I change it. Up the speed on the machine, add more resistance, etc.
Right now I do 70-80 minute work outs that have a 750-1000 calorie burn 5 times a week. I stay around 1800 calories intake. That's a 6-8000 calorie weekly deficit. About the 2lbs a week rate. BUT I lose about 1.25 lbs a week. Cause my body is so damn good at lowering it metabolism... in case I need that fat for the winter
we are talking about extremes here...very few people have metabolic disorders and most on these boards to claim it don't have any medical evidence to back it up and use it because they aren't in a deficit do to inaccurate logging.
For example you need to burn 3500 calories to lose 1lb of fat...that doesn't change with a metabolic disorder it just gets a little harder to do it...0 -
Having just read the thread again, some of you have some crazy views.0
-
I think the issue is you think exercise has to mean a jog on the treadmill. Find something you enjoy doing that gets you up and moving even if it's just a quick lunchtime walk or taking a dance class. It's good for your body and it will help with weight loss as it increases your daily burn.0
-
Having just read the thread again, some of you have some crazy views.
It is the forum of woo after all Thought this was in GD&WL, sorry
Carbs don't count if you eat them under a full moon, standing on one leg whilst in an easterly wind. Westerlies will double the calorie count though...0 -
The more muscle mass one has the higher their metabolic activity will be. Therefore it is highly recommended to exercise as well as clean up your diet. Yes a caloric deficit will help weight loss however these calories need to be "good" calories (meaning fuel for your body not just food for the sake of eating). As for your treadmill problem. Try incline walking at as high as incline your treadmill will go. Walk about 3-4 KMPH (1.5-2.5 MPH) and try to keep your heart rate around 60% of your VO2 max (look up a generic chart for your age). This will promote fat loss, since loosing "weight" means muscle as well, this will help target fat primarily.0
-
If you can exercise, exercise. Necessary - not really but take a long time without it. I think you overdo it. Slow down and increase things gradually.0
-
MeanderingMammal wrote: »Having just read the thread again, some of you have some crazy views.
It is the forum of woo after all Thought this was in GD&WL, sorry
Carbs don't count if you eat them under a full moon, standing on one leg whilst in an easterly wind. Westerlies will double the calorie count though...
Ahh, that's what I've been doing wrong... I wish you would have told me this sooner lol0 -
gizmosmom02 wrote: »I sort of know the answer to this question. Weight loss is all about a calorie deficit, therefore exercise isn't absolutely necessary, but it does help with toning and increases the calorie deficit. That's the theory.
Has anyone lost weight without exercising? I ask because every time I try to jog on my treadmill I am so sore the next day I can barely walk. Not kidding. Also, exercise makes me more hungry. I need to lose 50 lbs.
Thanks for your advice.
I've notice when people don't exercise their skin looks flabby and/or loose not toned. When i lost weight years ago i exercised daily and gained lean muscle and i loved how tight and toned i was. Trying to lose again after gaining and i actually find it more difficult to lose when i do not exercise, even though it makes me more hungry, plan for that! have healthy meals/snacks etc ready to go so you don't binge. good luck
0 -
Is exercise necessary for weight loss? No.
Is it good for a better body comp? Yes.
Is it good for making you stronger/faster/more powerful/have greater endurance/more flexible*? Yes.
*delete as applicable according to exercise regime/training programme.
0 -
You can temporarily win the battle with weight in the kitchen. Exercise is not necessary to be at a calorie deficit and burn fat. That said...there is so many health reasons to exercise.. Heart health, mental health, brain function, bone density, cell turnover, hormone health....it is difficult to make any argument not to include exercise in your life.
I do appreciate that there are health conditions that make exercise impossible...in my experience there are individuals who diet successfully through calorie restriction alone but they are simply amazing to overcome that challenge of dieting without activity.0 -
I say it depends on your goals.
Many years ago I lost 25 lbs. without exercise for an event. I was just a slightly smaller, but flabbier version of my old self. At that time all I cared about was the weight on the scale, so yes that worked for me.
This time around I wanted a tighter, fitter body with good physical fitness so I incorporated exercise (speed walking, lifting, workout videos...nothing extreme).
The scale would often stall even though I was losing fat and inches.
Although it was very frustrating, I decided to hide the scale for a while and continue to monitor my eating and exercise consistently. I did eventually reach my goal which was a dress size/measurement range not a scale weight.
Good luck!
Edited to add...I ended up gained that 25 lbs. back and then some. Exercise helps me a great deal with maintaining.0 -
MeanderingMammal wrote: »Right now I do 70-80 minute work outs that have a 750-1000 calorie burn 5 times a week. I stay around 1800 calories intake. That's a 6-8000 calorie weekly deficit. About the 2lbs a week rate. BUT I lose about 1.25 lbs a week.
That's almost certainly a result of overestimating the calorie expenditure.
1000 calories is a ten mile run or thereabouts. Possibly 9 miles for you, but not radically different.
I use a heart rate monitor that does calorie estimation. I can't run (bad knees), so it's hard to say how many miles it is. But part of my routine is 10 minutes on the Stairmaster and it reports 0.9 miles, and 20 minutes on the elliptical and it reports about 2.2 miles. So yeah 70-80 minutes should be about 9-10 miles running equivalent. Here is today's track:
0 -
MeanderingMammal wrote: »Right now I do 70-80 minute work outs that have a 750-1000 calorie burn 5 times a week. I stay around 1800 calories intake. That's a 6-8000 calorie weekly deficit. About the 2lbs a week rate. BUT I lose about 1.25 lbs a week.
That's almost certainly a result of overestimating the calorie expenditure.
1000 calories is a ten mile run or thereabouts. Possibly 9 miles for you, but not radically different.
I use a heart rate monitor that does calorie estimation. I can't run (bad knees), so it's hard to say how many miles it is. But part of my routine is 10 minutes on the Stairmaster and it reports 0.9 miles, and 20 minutes on the elliptical and it reports about 2.2 miles. So yeah 70-80 minutes should be about 9-10 miles running equivalent. Here is today's track:
@lonerockz hrm with a chest strap are fine for steady state cardio but otherwise eh...not so much. I see weights in there..HRM is no good for that...at all.0 -
I lost almost 50 pounds with minimal exercise. I would walk occasionally, at most 3 times a week but not there were weeks when I didn't walk at all. I'm just not an exercise kinda gal. I do think I need to incorporate it into my lifestyle now that I am maintaining though.0
-
I use a heart rate monitor that does calorie estimation. I can't run (bad knees), so it's hard to say how many miles it is. But part of my routine is 10 minutes on the Stairmaster and it reports 0.9 miles, and 20 minutes on the elliptical and it reports about 2.2 miles. So yeah 70-80 minutes should be about 9-10 miles running equivalent.
So of your 80 minutes about 25 are activities where heart rate has any meaningful relationship with calorie expenditure.
From minute 10 to minute 60 your heart rate has no relationship with your calorie expenditure. Note that between minute 55 and minute 60 you were stationary, so burning nothing more than your BMR.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Necessary for weight loss? No.
Necessary for looking good naked? Absolutely.0 -
gizmosmom02 wrote: »I sort of know the answer to this question. Weight loss is all about a calorie deficit, therefore exercise isn't absolutely necessary, but it does help with toning and increases the calorie deficit. That's the theory.
Has anyone lost weight without exercising? I ask because every time I try to jog on my treadmill I am so sore the next day I can barely walk. Not kidding. Also, exercise makes me more hungry. I need to lose 50 lbs.
Thanks for your advice.
No, exercise is not necessary to lose weight. A calorie deficit is necessary to lose weight.
However, exercise is good for your health and it increases the total amount you burn, affording you an opportunity to eat more while still creating the calorie deficit necessary to lose weight.
Any activity is better than no activity. You do not need to jog on your treadmill. You can walk. Even if you only start off walking five minutes at a time, that is five minutes better spent than sitting on your bottom.
Get off your bottom. It's good for you.
0 -
Required? No. But I'm sure it helps. Like my doctor told me, exercise is/can be an important part of losing weight but food/nutrition is far more important.0
-
As far as I am concerned walking is boring and doesn't burn enough calories to make it worth while. Swimming is more fun, doesn't hurt and burns more per hour unless your power walking. And you do not have to be a good swimmer in a pool to get the benefit. You can just tread water briskly, (look on youtube). At 250 lbs your going to burn an amazing amount of calories in one hour. It will speed up your weight loss and make you feel great.
Good luck, stick with it, your worth it!
0 -
You've got to find an exercise that interest you . If jogging is boring or it's too painful add music do dancing turn on the radio and dance as if no one's watching. have a goal to take so many steps a day so many stairs today make it a contest0
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