Exercise doesn't help you lose weight...say what?
Options
Replies
-
KittensMaster wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »
Where are these demonstrations, then?
Every time someone posts a minimum protein recommendation.
Believing otherwise requires claiming that choice of calories has no impact on body composition - if you are prepared to make that claim, I'm happy to discuss it with you.
The idea the caloric value is the only property of a food is incomplete.
Looking at CICO as if it tells the entire story is incomplete.
Nope. Food type is preference only and has nothing to do with weight loss. Calories in/calories out does.
I completely agree.
When I asked - what do I count to lose weight, fat, calories, carbs, sugar? Always the answer was Calories. The rest are nutrients. Calories are a unit of measure.
Yep. It seems to me food type provides nutrients that can either help or hinder us when it comes to satiety, energy levels, and meeting macros and micros.
The listed elements of nutrients and satiety all matter.
Just look at pre and post workout supplements. They have different nutrient contents.
The body needs calories with a different nutrient content at different times
Not so sure why this basic topic seems like rocket science on MFP.
Pre- and post workout supplements are more or less scams.0 -
Burn 500 cals/day ? At 70% of max I burn 10 cals/min so that's about an hour. Very dependent on aerobic fitness and what % of max you can sustain.
Fat oxidation may be a different issue, 500 cals is probably closer to 70 mins or longer but that doesn't fit in a pure calorie world.0 -
bcalvanese wrote: »It's amazing to see how many people think exercise is not that important. I don't know one person (not athletes or body builders) who is at a good fitness level that has any kind of weight control issue.
And this is a "MyFitnessPal" forum, not "MyCaloriePal"...
I have been using exercise as my primary method of losing the weight because lack of exercise over decades is what made me gain all the weight. Sure I watch what I eat more, and have learned a little more about nutrition. I have always liked vegetables, fruits, and foods that are good for me, but I also like a cheesesteak or a couple slices of pizza once in a while.
I'm going to be the person who uses fitness to control my weight, and once I get fit and get to a healthy weight, I'm going to be the person who doesn't have a weight control issue anymore.
JMO.
No, eating too many calories over decades is what made you gain weight. Exercise might have helped you create a calorie deficit, but the calorie deficit is what made you lose the weight.
Sure. If you look at it only from the CI part of the equation.
I look at it from the CO part.
Also, I googled CICO, and it means "Check In Check Out". Seems to be a made up thing on this forum.
I think it should changed to CISOMBAD.
Calories
In
Sit
On
My
Butt
All
Day
0 -
bcalvanese wrote: »bcalvanese wrote: »It's amazing to see how many people think exercise is not that important. I don't know one person (not athletes or body builders) who is at a good fitness level that has any kind of weight control issue.
And this is a "MyFitnessPal" forum, not "MyCaloriePal"...
I have been using exercise as my primary method of losing the weight because lack of exercise over decades is what made me gain all the weight. Sure I watch what I eat more, and have learned a little more about nutrition. I have always liked vegetables, fruits, and foods that are good for me, but I also like a cheesesteak or a couple slices of pizza once in a while.
I'm going to be the person who uses fitness to control my weight, and once I get fit and get to a healthy weight, I'm going to be the person who doesn't have a weight control issue anymore.
JMO.
No, eating too many calories over decades is what made you gain weight. Exercise might have helped you create a calorie deficit, but the calorie deficit is what made you lose the weight.
Double no, going from being at a very good fitness level to a very poor fitness level, and exercising to absolutely no exercise after a car accident and decades of sitting on my butt due to a career change is what made me gain the weight. I never changed my diet at all.
How could you possibly know what caused me to gain weight?
Because there is only one way to gain weight. CICO.
Again, CICO is 2 ways to lose weight.
Calories in (diet)
Calories out (exercise)
I cant understand why you are not seeing that.0 -
bcalvanese wrote: »bcalvanese wrote: »It's amazing to see how many people think exercise is not that important. I don't know one person (not athletes or body builders) who is at a good fitness level that has any kind of weight control issue.
And this is a "MyFitnessPal" forum, not "MyCaloriePal"...
I have been using exercise as my primary method of losing the weight because lack of exercise over decades is what made me gain all the weight. Sure I watch what I eat more, and have learned a little more about nutrition. I have always liked vegetables, fruits, and foods that are good for me, but I also like a cheesesteak or a couple slices of pizza once in a while.
I'm going to be the person who uses fitness to control my weight, and once I get fit and get to a healthy weight, I'm going to be the person who doesn't have a weight control issue anymore.
JMO.
No, eating too many calories over decades is what made you gain weight. Exercise might have helped you create a calorie deficit, but the calorie deficit is what made you lose the weight.
Sure. If you look at it only from the CI part of the equation.
I look at it from the CO part.
Also, I googled CICO, and it means "Check In Check Out". Seems to be a made up thing on this forum.
I think it should changed to CISOMBAD.
Calories
In
Sit
On
My
Butt
All
Day
Burning more isn't going to help you if you're still eating too much. Eating less is going to help you because you're burning calories no matter what you do.1 -
stevencloser wrote: »bcalvanese wrote: »bcalvanese wrote: »It's amazing to see how many people think exercise is not that important. I don't know one person (not athletes or body builders) who is at a good fitness level that has any kind of weight control issue.
And this is a "MyFitnessPal" forum, not "MyCaloriePal"...
I have been using exercise as my primary method of losing the weight because lack of exercise over decades is what made me gain all the weight. Sure I watch what I eat more, and have learned a little more about nutrition. I have always liked vegetables, fruits, and foods that are good for me, but I also like a cheesesteak or a couple slices of pizza once in a while.
I'm going to be the person who uses fitness to control my weight, and once I get fit and get to a healthy weight, I'm going to be the person who doesn't have a weight control issue anymore.
JMO.
No, eating too many calories over decades is what made you gain weight. Exercise might have helped you create a calorie deficit, but the calorie deficit is what made you lose the weight.
Sure. If you look at it only from the CI part of the equation.
I look at it from the CO part.
Also, I googled CICO, and it means "Check In Check Out". Seems to be a made up thing on this forum.
I think it should changed to CISOMBAD.
Calories
In
Sit
On
My
Butt
All
Day
Burning more isn't going to help you if you're still eating too much. Eating less is going to help you because you're burning calories no matter what you do.
Burning more "will" help you if you are eating the same and burning more.
It just amazes me that people cannot see both sides of the equation.
Absolutely unbelievable!0 -
To make sure you're eating the same you still have to keep track of them.1
-
I agree with many of you stating that diet alone is all that is necessary for weight loss. No debate there. I just didn't sit well with the idea of someone stating that exercise does not help you lose weight, because to me it does. Many of you have mentioned the CICO concept. Provided you have the CI side of things in order (not eating excessive amounts of food all week long) and you are aware that a deficit must be present in order to lose weight, I see no reason why exercise would not help you lose weight. For the moment we can ignore all of the awesome health benefits that exercise provides and just focus on the weight loss portion. Exercise increases your calories burned or calories out, thereby helping you to achieve a calorie deficit. However, this is only helpful if you are maintaining a specific level of calories in.
Yeah, totally agree.
I think of it this way--I gained weight in the first place because I was used to being active and eating about 2100-2200 calories per week. I abruptly stopped being active (TDEE decline of about 500 calories/day) and did not adjust my diet. I gained pretty quickly. Also, as I wasn't focused on training anymore, I was less motivated to focus on my diet, staying in shape, and eating healthfully (these are effects for me--not ones I couldn't have avoided if I was motivated in some other way, like health or looking good, and not ones that everyone would necessarily have felt, but true nonetheless). So the absence of exercise mattered for me.
When I started losing, I had to ramp up exercise gradually, as I was quite out of shape, but as I did I was able to (1) lose faster, and (2) create a diet that was more enjoyable and sustainable for me over time, both of which helped me stick with it. Also, it again helped a lot with motivation and feeling like I was making progress even before I was anywhere near a healthy weight.
So I think clearly it does help lose weight.
Before I did MFP, I'd heard a theory of calorie counting that was something like "try to cut 500 calories per day from your intake and exercise for 500 calories per day." Now, lots of people starting out can't do the latter, and I have come around to the idea that it's better to think of activity as overall increasing your maintenance level and fitness, not about the specific calories burned, but I still think it's clearly a helpful took for weight loss. Just for most who don't do a huge amount (i.e., endurance athletes) and who don't track calories it's often not as helpful as they assume or enough,
I think this last is what many of the people disagreeing with you mean, maybe.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »To make sure you're eating the same you still have to keep track of them.
Back when I was at a good fitness level, I never counted calories and maintained a healthy weight for a decade. I agree that you should track them as you are getting to a good fitness level, but once you are there, a healthy weight will pretty much happen all by itself. Unless you're a glutton. And again, I'm talking about a normal person at a good fitness level, and not some extream body builder who has to has to work out for 8 hours, eat half a cow, and then sleep for 10 hours every day... 0 -
bcalvanese wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »To make sure you're eating the same you still have to keep track of them.
Back when I was at a good fitness level, I never counted calories and maintained a healthy weight for a decade. I agree that you should track them as you are getting to a good fitness level, but once you are there, a healthy weight will pretty much happen all by itself. Unless you're a glutton. And again, I'm talking about a normal person at a good fitness level, and not some extream body builder who has to has to work out for 8 hours, eat half a cow, and then sleep for 10 hours every day...
About 15 years ago, I lost about 75 pounds, got very fit, exercised, and felt great.
I thought....wow, I'm here! I can now not pay attention and just listen to my body and because I exercise and I am so fit, I will stay that way!
Five years later, I found myself 33 pounds heavier. That averages to about a five pound gain a year. Sometimes I overate (was a glutton), but not all the time. Being fit was great, but I gained weight because I ate too much food (even though I was fit).
I suggest you take a closer look at that belief. Unless you're eating massive calories all at once, weight comes on over time, and you don't have to be a glutton to have it happen. You just have to eat a little bit over your TDEE on a consistent basis. 0 -
Pretty much flies in the face of empirical evidence, unless you consider large portions of the population to be gluttons, I suppose.bcalvanese wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »To make sure you're eating the same you still have to keep track of them.
Back when I was at a good fitness level, I never counted calories and maintained a healthy weight for a decade. I agree that you should track them as you are getting to a good fitness level, but once you are there, a healthy weight will pretty much happen all by itself. Unless you're a glutton. And again, I'm talking about a normal person at a good fitness level, and not some extream body builder who has to has to work out for 8 hours, eat half a cow, and then sleep for 10 hours every day...
1 -
-
bcalvanese wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »To make sure you're eating the same you still have to keep track of them.
Back when I was at a good fitness level, I never counted calories and maintained a healthy weight for a decade. I agree that you should track them as you are getting to a good fitness level, but once you are there, a healthy weight will pretty much happen all by itself. Unless you're a glutton. And again, I'm talking about a normal person at a good fitness level, and not some extream body builder who has to has to work out for 8 hours, eat half a cow, and then sleep for 10 hours every day...
About 15 years ago, I lost about 75 pounds, got very fit, exercised, and felt great.
I thought....wow, I'm here! I can now not pay attention and just listen to my body and because I exercise and I am so fit, I will stay that way!
Five years later, I found myself 33 pounds heavier. That averages to about a five pound gain a year. Sometimes I overate (was a glutton), but not all the time. Being fit was great, but I gained weight because I ate too much food (even though I was fit).
I suggest you take a closer look at that belief. Unless you're eating massive calories all at once, weight comes on over time, and you don't have to be a glutton to have it happen. You just have to eat a little bit over your TDEE on a consistent basis.
Ok, so it sounds like you gradually changed your diet.
In my case, I changed my activity level.
the only difference is you increased your CI, and I decreased my CO. That's it. There are only 2 equations here, but to discount CO not only limits people to only 1 way of controlling their weight, but makes the body less capable of burning calories which makes it even harder to succeed.
That is why I say fitness level is more important to me.
If people want to count every single calorie, weigh every gram of every bit of food they put in their mouth, fight that battle day after day for the rest of their life, and still be un-fit and just weigh less, that is up to them.
I'm going to get to a good fitness level, have to watch what I eat much less, use the time I would have to spend weighing every gram of food on walking 3 miles at a cardio pace or riding my bike or kayaking, not have to fight an endless battle, and feel great and not only get to a healthy weight, but stay at a healthy weight with very little effort.
People that only use 1 part of the equation are cutting their success rate in half right off the bat by discarding the other part.
Use both parts and see how fast the discarded part becomes the more important part.0 -
DeguelloTex wrote: »
Pretty much flies in the face of empirical evidence, unless you consider large portions of the population to be gluttons, I suppose.bcalvanese wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »To make sure you're eating the same you still have to keep track of them.
Back when I was at a good fitness level, I never counted calories and maintained a healthy weight for a decade. I agree that you should track them as you are getting to a good fitness level, but once you are there, a healthy weight will pretty much happen all by itself. Unless you're a glutton. And again, I'm talking about a normal person at a good fitness level, and not some extream body builder who has to has to work out for 8 hours, eat half a cow, and then sleep for 10 hours every day...
Gluttons and/or couch potatoes. Yes.
there are only 2 parts to the equation. Either eating too much and/or not being active enough.
Just like generations of fast food eaters, there are also generations of couch potatoes.
I blame technology and human nature for a big part of it.0 -
bcalvanese wrote: »bcalvanese wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »To make sure you're eating the same you still have to keep track of them.
Back when I was at a good fitness level, I never counted calories and maintained a healthy weight for a decade. I agree that you should track them as you are getting to a good fitness level, but once you are there, a healthy weight will pretty much happen all by itself. Unless you're a glutton. And again, I'm talking about a normal person at a good fitness level, and not some extream body builder who has to has to work out for 8 hours, eat half a cow, and then sleep for 10 hours every day...
About 15 years ago, I lost about 75 pounds, got very fit, exercised, and felt great.
I thought....wow, I'm here! I can now not pay attention and just listen to my body and because I exercise and I am so fit, I will stay that way!
Five years later, I found myself 33 pounds heavier. That averages to about a five pound gain a year. Sometimes I overate (was a glutton), but not all the time. Being fit was great, but I gained weight because I ate too much food (even though I was fit).
I suggest you take a closer look at that belief. Unless you're eating massive calories all at once, weight comes on over time, and you don't have to be a glutton to have it happen. You just have to eat a little bit over your TDEE on a consistent basis.
Ok, so it sounds like you gradually changed your diet.
In my case, I changed my activity level.
the only difference is you increased your CI, and I decreased my CO. That's it. There are only 2 equations here, but to discount CO not only limits people to only 1 way of controlling their weight, but makes the body less capable of burning calories which makes it even harder to succeed.
That is why I say fitness level is more important to me.
If people want to count every single calorie, weigh every gram of every bit of food they put in their mouth, fight that battle day after day for the rest of their life, and still be un-fit and just weigh less, that is up to them.
I'm going to get to a good fitness level, have to watch what I eat much less, use the time I would have to spend weighing every gram of food on walking 3 miles at a cardio pace or riding my bike or kayaking, not have to fight an endless battle, and feel great and not only get to a healthy weight, but stay at a healthy weight with very little effort.
People that only use 1 part of the equation are cutting their success rate in half right off the bat by discarding the other part.
Use both parts and see how fast the discarded part becomes the more important part.
It doesn't matter what part of the equation is changed to manage weight. The part I'm challenging is your assertion that fitness is synonymous with weight management. It simply is not true.1 -
Might be better to say you have the potential to learn to swim. An unfulfilled one in my case. I'm fine with a snorkel or an air tank though.
Learning to swim in order to exercise sounds like adding another barrier.1 -
bcalvanese wrote: »bcalvanese wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »To make sure you're eating the same you still have to keep track of them.
Back when I was at a good fitness level, I never counted calories and maintained a healthy weight for a decade. I agree that you should track them as you are getting to a good fitness level, but once you are there, a healthy weight will pretty much happen all by itself. Unless you're a glutton. And again, I'm talking about a normal person at a good fitness level, and not some extream body builder who has to has to work out for 8 hours, eat half a cow, and then sleep for 10 hours every day...
About 15 years ago, I lost about 75 pounds, got very fit, exercised, and felt great.
I thought....wow, I'm here! I can now not pay attention and just listen to my body and because I exercise and I am so fit, I will stay that way!
Five years later, I found myself 33 pounds heavier. That averages to about a five pound gain a year. Sometimes I overate (was a glutton), but not all the time. Being fit was great, but I gained weight because I ate too much food (even though I was fit).
I suggest you take a closer look at that belief. Unless you're eating massive calories all at once, weight comes on over time, and you don't have to be a glutton to have it happen. You just have to eat a little bit over your TDEE on a consistent basis.
Ok, so it sounds like you gradually changed your diet.
In my case, I changed my activity level.
the only difference is you increased your CI, and I decreased my CO. That's it. There are only 2 equations here, but to discount CO not only limits people to only 1 way of controlling their weight, but makes the body less capable of burning calories which makes it even harder to succeed.
That is why I say fitness level is more important to me.
If people want to count every single calorie, weigh every gram of every bit of food they put in their mouth, fight that battle day after day for the rest of their life, and still be un-fit and just weigh less, that is up to them.
I'm going to get to a good fitness level, have to watch what I eat much less, use the time I would have to spend weighing every gram of food on walking 3 miles at a cardio pace or riding my bike or kayaking, not have to fight an endless battle, and feel great and not only get to a healthy weight, but stay at a healthy weight with very little effort.
People that only use 1 part of the equation are cutting their success rate in half right off the bat by discarding the other part.
Use both parts and see how fast the discarded part becomes the more important part.
It doesn't matter what part of the equation is changed to manage weight. The part I'm challenging is your assertion that fitness is synonymous with weight management. It simply is not true.
Maybe not true to you.0 -
-
bcalvanese wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »To make sure you're eating the same you still have to keep track of them.
Back when I was at a good fitness level, I never counted calories and maintained a healthy weight for a decade. I agree that you should track them as you are getting to a good fitness level, but once you are there, a healthy weight will pretty much happen all by itself.
Not for everyone.Unless you're a glutton.
My maintenance when sedentary is 1500. So even if I work out to an average of 500 calories per day (at my weight that's about 75 minutes of running, if you subtract out how much I'd burn anyway, I think, or longer biking or swimming or walking). So a reasonable amount to expect, I think, even at a good fitness level.
So I'd gain if I ate more than 2000. It's not that hard for me to maintain when being active and in the habit, but I disagree that I must be a "glutton" if I eat more than 2000. Why moralize it like that? It's overeating, it's not a deadly sin.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 914 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions