8 Amazing Fitness Facts You Ignored For Sure

AliceA2013

"4. One can lose most of their fat by ONLY changing their diet, and with NO exercise whatsoever. The fact that exercise is necessary to lose fat is one of the most established and suffer-inducing social myths."

But exercise, apart from preventing muscle loss during dieting, also:
1. helps prevent osteoporosis (weight-bearing exercise)
2. helps prevent heart disease (cardio-vascular exercise)
3. improves your sense of well-being and helps to improve/prevent depression
4. improves/maintains flexibility and balance, particularly in older people (Tai Chi, Yoga)
5. improves your stamina
6. helps to maintain weight loss

disneygallagirl

great post. thanks for sharing.

bodoschmitt

I agree - you can lose weight without any exercising. Most of my weight loss of 35 pounds in less than 2 month is due to a drastically reduced diet.
However, whenever the weather here is good enough not to rain or drizzle, I go for a hour long brisk walk. This means that instead of burning about 100 calories per hour, I burn 500 calories per hour (according to my fitbit).
I have now reached target 1 of my weight loss. For my next target I am increasing my calorie intake so that I loose much more slowly. Hopefully I can keep this up until I reach a normal BMI (27.5 at the moment) and learn how to keep my weight constant

JUDDDing

I call bull on 8.

It's probably mostly extra burn from the air-guitar and air-drum solos that are required...

danasings

#3 is no joke! 19 days without lifting over Christmas break and I've yet to regain my pre-vacation bench reps. I also went into a cut at the end of January, but was able to reach pre-vacation parity on other lifts (squats, deads, oh press, rows) before doing so. Will now need to wait until fall/winter bulk before getting bench levels back up. I'm cancelling Christmas this year.

Christmas is overrated, anyway. :laugh:

I had an injury sideline me for 2 1/2 weeks...when I returned to lifting, I definitely lost strength. Kinda sucks, especially when the time off is unavoidable.

cubsgirlinny

*

Huebras

I call bull on #3. I've stopped lifting for 2-3 three weeks a few times and never lost any strength. Always picked back up where I left off. With that said, I've also stopped for a few months and HAVE seen a decrease in strength but I wouldn't say 3-5 months worth. I'm not what you would consider a serious lifter but I do work out a few times a week. Is #3 geared towards serious lifters?

Are you lifting to failure or just going in a doing some sets of 10 with a weight that isn't the max you can do? I ask because say you are use to doing 3 sets of 10 with 100 pounds. Your 1 rep max may be 150 pounds. If you take 3 weeks off and go grab 100 pounds and are still able to do your sets that doesn't mean you haven't lost any strength or that you would still be able to do your 1 rep max of 150 pounds. I am just throwing the weights out there as basic examples. Not lifting for 3 weeks most people will definitely lose some strength. I notice it when I miss a workout or 2 in a row.

Yes I do lift to "failure". I didn't say you wouldn't lose any strength, my real beef is the the statement of the "amount" of loss. 2 weeks of no lifting equals 3-5 months of progress lost? Maybe it's bc I've only lifted for a year now but I really don't think that if I would have stopped doing pull ups for two weeks five months after I started, I would drop from doing 10 pullups (my limit 5 months after starting) to just being able to do 2 (that's how many I could do when I started). Again, I call bull.

heybales

Interesting article filled with tidbits:
http://www.youcefbanouni.com/388/8-exercise-facts-you-ignored-for-sure/

***********************************
1. A dehydration of 2% of your water volume can result in a decrease of muscular performance of 20 to 30%
2. When fasting for a long period (several days in a row, without eating ANYTHING), 30% of the weight loss is muscle loss.
3. Detraining (when you stop training) from resistance training for 2 weeks results on average in the loss of the performance acquired in 3 to 5 months of serious training. In aerobics (depending on studies/people) 8 weeks to 8 months are sufficient to lose ALL OF THE AEROBIC PERFORMANCE.

More detail and sources in the original article.

I'll have to find the info on those 3, because at blank face value there must be more to the story.

1 - I know years and years ago when this first came out, it was followed up with another study that showed it was overblown and debunked to the extent claimed. Again more details around why dehydrated and what is the effort.
For one thing, if you are sweating during exercise, you are also burning carbs, which frees up water to be used where it's needed, even if not in the blood stream. That's where the studies have some flakiness, 2% reduction where exactly?

2 - Do you continue to exercise during this fast? Then I could see it. But studies on cultures that fast regularly for a week at a time, and do a whole lot more meditation during that time, don't lose much muscle mass. They may lose LBM, but that ain't the same as muscle mass.

3 - This isn't correct either if keeping active. Now bed-ridden fighting off a sickness or injured is more to the story than is stated. But many lifters will report taking up to 2 weeks off and coming back stronger. I'm not even that level of lifting and that is true for me too.
And the neuro-network memory will cause you to return quickly if you really were off for months at a time, you won't lose nearly that much advancement, and if you do because you were gone that long, won't take long to get it back.
Aerobic conditioning though, ya, that is lost quickly, again depends on what manner and reason they stopped exercising, injury or sickness, or other priorities and stopped.

heybales

6. The 3 standard (non-failure) sets or more do not provide more results than 1 single set to failure (muscle hypertrophy).

This interests me, I am trying to maximize the limited time I have available during the work week. Can anyone confirm this statement?

I agree. I want to look more into this one...

http://www.exrx.net/WeightTraining/LowVolumeTraining.html

Only a 5% increase with additional sets/reps.

You can go low volume, 1 warm-up set at 50% working weight, and 1 working set of whatever reps you desire for your goals.

I do 15 for endurance focus.

happythermia

8. Fast music during effort makes you consume more calories

Wait...music is making me fat?

:P

Lleldiranne

8) fast music during effort makes you consume more calories.


What does this even mean?

It means listening to some B.A. music while pumpin' iron, man!!! Fast-paced music gets you up and goin' and your heart beats faster. LOL, I listen to Black Veil Brides or heavy rock when working out. Good times

I've heard this study too. To OP should have said you use more calories, not consume more, I think?

Karabobarra

#3 is totally unfair...


Very interesting article, thank you for posting

jennifershoo

#3 Sucks big time!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So once you start lifting, you can never stop or you lose your gains super fast :sad:

3dogsrunning

8) fast music during effort makes you consume more calories.


What does this even mean?

It means listening to some B.A. music while pumpin' iron, man!!! Fast-paced music gets you up and goin' and your heart beats faster. LOL, I listen to Black Veil Brides or heavy rock when working out. Good times

I've heard this study too. To OP should have said you use more calories, not consume more, I think?

The OP quoted an online article and provided the link. It was pretty clear what was meant and if you check the article linked, it clarifies further.

jennifershoo

6. The 3 standard (non-failure) sets or more do not provide more results than 1 single set to failure (muscle hypertrophy).

This interests me, I am trying to maximize the limited time I have available during the work week. Can anyone confirm this statement?

I don't know. I'm far away from an expert. i can just say that I'm doing the Chalean Extreme program and it's based on that principle. On month 2, the workouts are only one set of lifting super heavy to reach failure at 6-8 reps.

Lleldiranne

8) fast music during effort makes you consume more calories.


What does this even mean?

It means listening to some B.A. music while pumpin' iron, man!!! Fast-paced music gets you up and goin' and your heart beats faster. LOL, I listen to Black Veil Brides or heavy rock when working out. Good times

I've heard this study too. To OP should have said you use more calories, not consume more, I think?

The OP quoted an online article and provided the link. It was pretty clear what was meant and if you check the article linked, it clarifies further.

I admit, I didn't read the article at first, but I peeked at it now. Interesting, the studies I've heard report the opposite - that performance and burn increase by listening to upbeat music.

ETA: I also pulled up the study that the article referenced (Birnbaum L, Huschle B, and Boone T. Cardiovascular responses to music tempo during steady-state exercise. JEPonline 2009; 12(1):50-56) … The conclusion states "On the other hand, it may allow individuals to burn slightly more calories during steady-state exercise when they listen to fast tempo music while still avoiding an increase in the work of the heart (MVO2)."

So I can stand by my original statement. You DO use more oxygen, which translates in general to a higher caloric burn, when you are listening to fast paced music (doing the same exercise -- it was very controlled in that respect).


And no where in the original study did they report even looking at calorie consumption after any of the workouts. The writers of the "facts" article just put that in there themselves.

Look at sources of some of the other "facts" too … a weekly tv show aired in France? every decent dietician? Really?

Sorry, this article has lost all credibility for me.

FunkyTobias

5. Full-body training maximizes hormonal response and therefore muscle development

Source: The 4-Hour Body, Tim Ferris.

This here is enough to disregard anything he has to say.

6. The 3 standard (non-failure) sets or more do not provide more results than 1 single set to failure (muscle hypertrophy).

Source : “Berger in retrospect: effect of varied weight training programmes on strength”, Carpinelli, Br J Sports Med 2002;36:3–324

Also wrong. See:

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/research-review/strength-and-neuromuscular-adaptation-following-one-four-and-eight-sets-of-high-intensity-resistance-exercise-in-trained-males-research-review.html

and

Single vs. multiple sets of resistance exercise for muscle hypertrophy: a meta-analysis.
Krieger JW. J Strength Cond Res. 2010 Apr;24(4):1150-9. [Medline]
PURPOSE: Previous meta-analyses have compared the effects of single to multiple sets on strength, but analyses on muscle hypertrophy are lacking. The purpose of this study was to use multilevel meta-regression to compare the effects of single and multiple sets per exercise on muscle hypertrophy. METHODS: The analysis comprised 55 effect sizes (ESs), nested within 19 treatment groups and 8 studies. Multiple sets were associated with a larger ES than a single set (difference = 0.10 +/- 0.04; confidence interval [CI]: 0.02, 0.19; p = 0.016). RESULTS: Multiple sets were associated with a larger ES than a single set (difference = 0.10 +/- 0.04; confidence interval [CI]: 0.02, 0.19; p = 0.016). In a dose-response model, there was a trend for 2-3 sets per exercise to be associated with a greater ES than 1 set (difference = 0.09 +/- 0.05; CI: -0.02, 0.20; p = 0.09), and a trend for 4-6 sets per exercise to be associated with a greater ES than 1 set (difference = 0.20 +/- 0.11; CI: -0.04, 0.43; p = 0.096). Both of these trends were significant when considering permutation test p values (p < 0.01). There was no significant difference between 2-3 sets per exercise and 4-6 sets per exercise (difference = 0.10 +/- 0.10; CI: -0.09, 0.30; p = 0.29). There was a tendency for increasing ESs for an increasing number of sets (0.24 for 1 set, 0.34 for 2-3 sets, and 0.44 for 4-6 sets). Sensitivity analysis revealed no highly influential studies that affected the magnitude of the observed differences, but one study did slightly influence the level of significance and CI width. No evidence of publication bias was observed. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, multiple sets are associated with 40% greater hypertrophy-related ESs than 1 set, in both trained and untrained subjects.

jennifershoo

8. Fast music during effort makes you consume more calories

Wait...music is making me fat?

:P

Only if you listen to this song: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pgPq4FGWfk&amp;sns=em
????

freckledrats

4. One can lose most of their fat by ONLY changing their diet, and with NO exercise whatsoever. The fact that exercise is necessary to lose fat is one of the most established and suffer-inducing social myths.

Best tip anyone can ever retain or understand. I am living proof of it. Lost 50 pounds without doing any exercise at all.

I try to get this point across to as many people as I talk to.

Great post, mrs mack

No. One can lose WEIGHT with only diet change. It will not all be fat. Without exercise, there will be a significant percentage of muscle mass along with the fat. You can actually increase your body fat % while eating at a deficit and losing weight.

That's what I was thinkin'! Not fat, weight! Trust me, I've had an uber busy month of overtime at work and my gym time has drastically dropped. Yet, I've been attempting to keep at a deficit and still am losing. A heck of a lot slower, but I'm still losing weight. Just dropped 2-3 pounds over the past week and a half (mostly due to stress, haha) but still!

You cannot avoid losing muscle to some degree at a calorie deficit. Even pumping iron as best you can, some of that weight loss will still be muscle, it merely changes the ratio for the better. And no, eating at a deficit with no exercise does not mean you only lose muscle and no fat. You just lose the greatest amount of lean tissue compared to someone at the same calorie deficit, but who is also strength training. Read: strength training, not bopping around on the elliptical or stationary bike. (No offense to elliptical boppers, as I am definitely one of those my own self.)

(Just clarifying for any of the potentially confused***)

heybales

You cannot avoid losing muscle to some degree at a calorie deficit. Even pumping iron as best you can, some of that weight loss will still be muscle, it merely changes the ratio for the better. And no, eating at a deficit with no exercise does not mean you only lose muscle and no fat. You just lose the greatest amount of lean tissue compared to someone at the same calorie deficit, but who is also strength training. Read: strength training, not bopping around on the elliptical or stationary bike. (No offense to elliptical boppers, as I am definitely one of those my own self.)

(Just clarifying for any of the potentially confused***)

Actually, there are plenty of studies where they lost not only NO muscle mass, but not even any LBM and their RMR stayed up, with steep deficits, doing lifting and eating enough protein.

The problem is, short studies compared to hitting goal weight, and under constant study guidance, and no weight changes in prior 3 months usually, so just starting out basically.

And once the people got of the study and were on their own to finish off their weight loss if they so desired, it all falls apart with that supervision. Because doubtless changes would have taken place once they had less fat to lose.