Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Beyond a calorie deficit - exercise is good for weight loss?
Replies
-
Christine_72 wrote: »I know without a doubt that I would gain weight without exercise. I start off everyday in the red in my diary, so I DO outrun that until I'm back in the green.
Of course, if i buckled down and ate only what MFP has given me then I would lose weight too,but i don't waaaaannnnaaa
If it's a choice between willpower and exercise, I choose exercise!
100% agree with this.
But I find intense exercise poses other issues.
I can lose on 1200 and sedentary, but it only works short term
I can lose (best) on 300-600 calories/day of exercise, pretty regular.
I have difficulty losing when focused on improving performance and exercising up to 1500-1800 calories or so per day but much less on other days. Mainly, however, when the high exercise days are running-based (I did not have the issue when they were biking-based, but I was also heavier, which might matter, and was skeptical of the calorie total. This topic is basically: why is it hard to lose weight when training for a marathon?)1 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Nikki10129 wrote: »Just a couple of comments on your post:
600 calories daily can be attributed to exercise? What kind of exercise are you doing to burn 600 calories? I do a hardcore kickboxing class for 90 minutes and I'm not burning 600 calories doing that, even though I exercise regularly the rest of the week.
I don't think 600 calories per day is outlandish...I do that pretty easily on my bike on an average ride.
As to the OP, regular exercise can certainly make weight loss easier in that you obviously increase your energy expenditure and I agree that when done properly with a proper diet it can other positive effects on metabolism (though I think focusing on that aspect is kind of majoring in the minors)...but I think it can also be a detriment in that a lot of people create fairly large deficits with diet alone and then go do a bunch of exercise but don't adequately fuel that activity...this is actually a detriment to preservation of lean mass. It can also be a huge stress on the body and raise cortisol levels.
I tend to encourage people to focus on diet for weight management and exercise for fitness and to more or less disassociate the two...in my experience, when people can start looking at fitness for the sake of fitness, they better understand why they would want to fuel that fitness...there are just way too many people crashing their diets and then doing incessant amounts of exercise without knowing or understanding what they're actually doing to themselves.
I think this touches on exactly some critical points. And perhaps metabolic changes due to exercise is majoring in the minors, agree.
We do see people that throw themselves into exercise and large deficits without proper additional calories and the end results then becomes a net deficit that is too large and LBM suffers.
I hadn't touched on stress and cortisol - I think that, along with the related inflammation response is also an important topic. When we talk about taking time to recover and having time off - well, it is probably a long subject by itself.
I'd say beyond cortisol, several neurotransmitters are going to be involved. I believe epinephrine, norepinephrine, and dopamine would all have increase with strength training to facilitate signalling. These are all also involved to some extent in appetite and satiety.
I'm sure with a simplified rat study I could show pictures of brains that prove exercise can replace eating according to some of MFP poster standards.
If you're so smart why CAN'T exercise replace eating? Sometimes I exercise and then I'm not hungry! Let's see your science explain THAT!
/sarcasm
I do need to eventually look into the research about exercise affecting appetite. There seems to be some evidence that variations on a particular gene or genes affects how exercise impacts appetite.
It is probably a bit interesting. I feel like eating everything on the entire planet after a half marathon, but after the first full that I ran I was just not hungry.
I hadn't considered that it was genetic.
I don't recall the first full much (although I know we walked forever and got Chinese after), but I just did a full today and wasn't hungry for a couple of hours and then was ravenous. Got chicken and waffles for a late brunch and it was the best thing ever! I'm similarly not hungry for an hour after a half or tri but then able to eat lots. (I'm always starving after swimming.)
Hey! Congrats!
I haven't had the same experience after the subsequent ones or the 50k, to be honest. I just remember thinking it was so strange based on the experiences that I'd had after half marathons.
The next day? We ate everything.
Thanks!
That makes sense. I wasn't hungry after my 20 mile training run, but ate everything the next day. It's weird how it affects you.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Nikki10129 wrote: »Just a couple of comments on your post:
600 calories daily can be attributed to exercise? What kind of exercise are you doing to burn 600 calories? I do a hardcore kickboxing class for 90 minutes and I'm not burning 600 calories doing that, even though I exercise regularly the rest of the week.
I don't think 600 calories per day is outlandish...I do that pretty easily on my bike on an average ride.
As to the OP, regular exercise can certainly make weight loss easier in that you obviously increase your energy expenditure and I agree that when done properly with a proper diet it can other positive effects on metabolism (though I think focusing on that aspect is kind of majoring in the minors)...but I think it can also be a detriment in that a lot of people create fairly large deficits with diet alone and then go do a bunch of exercise but don't adequately fuel that activity...this is actually a detriment to preservation of lean mass. It can also be a huge stress on the body and raise cortisol levels.
I tend to encourage people to focus on diet for weight management and exercise for fitness and to more or less disassociate the two...in my experience, when people can start looking at fitness for the sake of fitness, they better understand why they would want to fuel that fitness...there are just way too many people crashing their diets and then doing incessant amounts of exercise without knowing or understanding what they're actually doing to themselves.
I think this touches on exactly some critical points. And perhaps metabolic changes due to exercise is majoring in the minors, agree.
We do see people that throw themselves into exercise and large deficits without proper additional calories and the end results then becomes a net deficit that is too large and LBM suffers.
I hadn't touched on stress and cortisol - I think that, along with the related inflammation response is also an important topic. When we talk about taking time to recover and having time off - well, it is probably a long subject by itself.
I'd say beyond cortisol, several neurotransmitters are going to be involved. I believe epinephrine, norepinephrine, and dopamine would all have increase with strength training to facilitate signalling. These are all also involved to some extent in appetite and satiety.
I'm sure with a simplified rat study I could show pictures of brains that prove exercise can replace eating according to some of MFP poster standards.
If you're so smart why CAN'T exercise replace eating? Sometimes I exercise and then I'm not hungry! Let's see your science explain THAT!
/sarcasm
I do need to eventually look into the research about exercise affecting appetite. There seems to be some evidence that variations on a particular gene or genes affects how exercise impacts appetite.
It is probably a bit interesting. I feel like eating everything on the entire planet after a half marathon, but after the first full that I ran I was just not hungry.
I hadn't considered that it was genetic.
I don't recall the first full much (although I know we walked forever and got Chinese after), but I just did a full today and wasn't hungry for a couple of hours and then was ravenous. Got chicken and waffles for a late brunch and it was the best thing ever! I'm similarly not hungry for an hour after a half or tri but then able to eat lots. (I'm always starving after swimming.)
Hey! Congrats!
I haven't had the same experience after the subsequent ones or the 50k, to be honest. I just remember thinking it was so strange based on the experiences that I'd had after half marathons.
The next day? We ate everything.
Thanks!
That makes sense. I wasn't hungry after my 20 mile training run, but ate everything the next day. It's weird how it affects you.
I'm the same. On days that I do loads of exercise I don't tend to eat any more than usual, and I'm ever so proud of the deficit I've achieved.
But then the next day arrives and I eat back what I achieved the day before, pretty much putting me back to where I started.. Oi!
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Nikki10129 wrote: »Just a couple of comments on your post:
600 calories daily can be attributed to exercise? What kind of exercise are you doing to burn 600 calories? I do a hardcore kickboxing class for 90 minutes and I'm not burning 600 calories doing that, even though I exercise regularly the rest of the week.
I don't think 600 calories per day is outlandish...I do that pretty easily on my bike on an average ride.
As to the OP, regular exercise can certainly make weight loss easier in that you obviously increase your energy expenditure and I agree that when done properly with a proper diet it can other positive effects on metabolism (though I think focusing on that aspect is kind of majoring in the minors)...but I think it can also be a detriment in that a lot of people create fairly large deficits with diet alone and then go do a bunch of exercise but don't adequately fuel that activity...this is actually a detriment to preservation of lean mass. It can also be a huge stress on the body and raise cortisol levels.
I tend to encourage people to focus on diet for weight management and exercise for fitness and to more or less disassociate the two...in my experience, when people can start looking at fitness for the sake of fitness, they better understand why they would want to fuel that fitness...there are just way too many people crashing their diets and then doing incessant amounts of exercise without knowing or understanding what they're actually doing to themselves.
I think this touches on exactly some critical points. And perhaps metabolic changes due to exercise is majoring in the minors, agree.
We do see people that throw themselves into exercise and large deficits without proper additional calories and the end results then becomes a net deficit that is too large and LBM suffers.
I hadn't touched on stress and cortisol - I think that, along with the related inflammation response is also an important topic. When we talk about taking time to recover and having time off - well, it is probably a long subject by itself.
I'd say beyond cortisol, several neurotransmitters are going to be involved. I believe epinephrine, norepinephrine, and dopamine would all have increase with strength training to facilitate signalling. These are all also involved to some extent in appetite and satiety.
I'm sure with a simplified rat study I could show pictures of brains that prove exercise can replace eating according to some of MFP poster standards.
If you're so smart why CAN'T exercise replace eating? Sometimes I exercise and then I'm not hungry! Let's see your science explain THAT!
/sarcasm
I do need to eventually look into the research about exercise affecting appetite. There seems to be some evidence that variations on a particular gene or genes affects how exercise impacts appetite.
It is probably a bit interesting. I feel like eating everything on the entire planet after a half marathon, but after the first full that I ran I was just not hungry.
I hadn't considered that it was genetic.
I don't recall the first full much (although I know we walked forever and got Chinese after), but I just did a full today and wasn't hungry for a couple of hours and then was ravenous. Got chicken and waffles for a late brunch and it was the best thing ever! I'm similarly not hungry for an hour after a half or tri but then able to eat lots. (I'm always starving after swimming.)
Hey! Congrats!
I haven't had the same experience after the subsequent ones or the 50k, to be honest. I just remember thinking it was so strange based on the experiences that I'd had after half marathons.
The next day? We ate everything.
Thanks!
That makes sense. I wasn't hungry after my 20 mile training run, but ate everything the next day. It's weird how it affects you.
That fits the evolutionary context - normally anything that would have you moving for 20 sustained miles would mean you're probably best not distracted by appetite - in the case of running from something, you don't have time to eat, and in the case of running after something, you're probably chasing because you have nothing to eat. During that time, the continued release of norepinephrine from the activity should blunt the cortisol build up's effect on appetite that is also going on. Once you slow down, the normal way to get cortisol back to normal will be to eat.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Nikki10129 wrote: »Just a couple of comments on your post:
600 calories daily can be attributed to exercise? What kind of exercise are you doing to burn 600 calories? I do a hardcore kickboxing class for 90 minutes and I'm not burning 600 calories doing that, even though I exercise regularly the rest of the week.
I don't think 600 calories per day is outlandish...I do that pretty easily on my bike on an average ride.
As to the OP, regular exercise can certainly make weight loss easier in that you obviously increase your energy expenditure and I agree that when done properly with a proper diet it can other positive effects on metabolism (though I think focusing on that aspect is kind of majoring in the minors)...but I think it can also be a detriment in that a lot of people create fairly large deficits with diet alone and then go do a bunch of exercise but don't adequately fuel that activity...this is actually a detriment to preservation of lean mass. It can also be a huge stress on the body and raise cortisol levels.
I tend to encourage people to focus on diet for weight management and exercise for fitness and to more or less disassociate the two...in my experience, when people can start looking at fitness for the sake of fitness, they better understand why they would want to fuel that fitness...there are just way too many people crashing their diets and then doing incessant amounts of exercise without knowing or understanding what they're actually doing to themselves.
I think this touches on exactly some critical points. And perhaps metabolic changes due to exercise is majoring in the minors, agree.
We do see people that throw themselves into exercise and large deficits without proper additional calories and the end results then becomes a net deficit that is too large and LBM suffers.
I hadn't touched on stress and cortisol - I think that, along with the related inflammation response is also an important topic. When we talk about taking time to recover and having time off - well, it is probably a long subject by itself.
I'd say beyond cortisol, several neurotransmitters are going to be involved. I believe epinephrine, norepinephrine, and dopamine would all have increase with strength training to facilitate signalling. These are all also involved to some extent in appetite and satiety.
I'm sure with a simplified rat study I could show pictures of brains that prove exercise can replace eating according to some of MFP poster standards.
If you're so smart why CAN'T exercise replace eating? Sometimes I exercise and then I'm not hungry! Let's see your science explain THAT!
/sarcasm
I do need to eventually look into the research about exercise affecting appetite. There seems to be some evidence that variations on a particular gene or genes affects how exercise impacts appetite.
It is probably a bit interesting. I feel like eating everything on the entire planet after a half marathon, but after the first full that I ran I was just not hungry.
I hadn't considered that it was genetic.
I don't recall the first full much (although I know we walked forever and got Chinese after), but I just did a full today and wasn't hungry for a couple of hours and then was ravenous. Got chicken and waffles for a late brunch and it was the best thing ever! I'm similarly not hungry for an hour after a half or tri but then able to eat lots. (I'm always starving after swimming.)
Hey! Congrats!
I haven't had the same experience after the subsequent ones or the 50k, to be honest. I just remember thinking it was so strange based on the experiences that I'd had after half marathons.
The next day? We ate everything.
Thanks!
That makes sense. I wasn't hungry after my 20 mile training run, but ate everything the next day. It's weird how it affects you.
That fits the evolutionary context - normally anything that would have you moving for 20 sustained miles would mean you're probably best not distracted by appetite - in the case of running from something, you don't have time to eat, and in the case of running after something, you're probably chasing because you have nothing to eat. During that time, the continued release of norepinephrine from the activity should blunt the cortisol build up's effect on appetite that is also going on. Once you slow down, the normal way to get cortisol back to normal will be to eat.
Expect for a few things ... the part that most people that run 20 or more will need to eat something along the way to avoid bonking.
... and the part where one gets maximal glycogen replenishment when eating within 30 minutes of exercise.
I think one of the issues with justifying things with an after the fact evo context is that we can probably think up contexts that are justify any behaviour. I could suggest that a runner has a greater chance of evo survival if he or she is eating berries along the way and this is why bonking evolved. Or how about "seeing hallucinations" in exercise induced hypoglycaemia - in evolutions way of keeping you going? I'm not saying your point above is actually wrong - just that a lot of what passes for evolutionary context isn't, it's post-fact justification, where many physiological processes aren't driven necessarily from evolutionary selective survival but as rate limits to physiology and biochemistry. And ok, I'll then go ahead and contradict myself, which in turn are driven by evolutionary context (but often which we can't see clearly).0 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Nikki10129 wrote: »Just a couple of comments on your post:
600 calories daily can be attributed to exercise? What kind of exercise are you doing to burn 600 calories? I do a hardcore kickboxing class for 90 minutes and I'm not burning 600 calories doing that, even though I exercise regularly the rest of the week.
I don't think 600 calories per day is outlandish...I do that pretty easily on my bike on an average ride.
As to the OP, regular exercise can certainly make weight loss easier in that you obviously increase your energy expenditure and I agree that when done properly with a proper diet it can other positive effects on metabolism (though I think focusing on that aspect is kind of majoring in the minors)...but I think it can also be a detriment in that a lot of people create fairly large deficits with diet alone and then go do a bunch of exercise but don't adequately fuel that activity...this is actually a detriment to preservation of lean mass. It can also be a huge stress on the body and raise cortisol levels.
I tend to encourage people to focus on diet for weight management and exercise for fitness and to more or less disassociate the two...in my experience, when people can start looking at fitness for the sake of fitness, they better understand why they would want to fuel that fitness...there are just way too many people crashing their diets and then doing incessant amounts of exercise without knowing or understanding what they're actually doing to themselves.
I think this touches on exactly some critical points. And perhaps metabolic changes due to exercise is majoring in the minors, agree.
We do see people that throw themselves into exercise and large deficits without proper additional calories and the end results then becomes a net deficit that is too large and LBM suffers.
I hadn't touched on stress and cortisol - I think that, along with the related inflammation response is also an important topic. When we talk about taking time to recover and having time off - well, it is probably a long subject by itself.
I'd say beyond cortisol, several neurotransmitters are going to be involved. I believe epinephrine, norepinephrine, and dopamine would all have increase with strength training to facilitate signalling. These are all also involved to some extent in appetite and satiety.
I'm sure with a simplified rat study I could show pictures of brains that prove exercise can replace eating according to some of MFP poster standards.
If you're so smart why CAN'T exercise replace eating? Sometimes I exercise and then I'm not hungry! Let's see your science explain THAT!
/sarcasm
I do need to eventually look into the research about exercise affecting appetite. There seems to be some evidence that variations on a particular gene or genes affects how exercise impacts appetite.
It is probably a bit interesting. I feel like eating everything on the entire planet after a half marathon, but after the first full that I ran I was just not hungry.
I hadn't considered that it was genetic.
I don't recall the first full much (although I know we walked forever and got Chinese after), but I just did a full today and wasn't hungry for a couple of hours and then was ravenous. Got chicken and waffles for a late brunch and it was the best thing ever! I'm similarly not hungry for an hour after a half or tri but then able to eat lots. (I'm always starving after swimming.)
Hey! Congrats!
I haven't had the same experience after the subsequent ones or the 50k, to be honest. I just remember thinking it was so strange based on the experiences that I'd had after half marathons.
The next day? We ate everything.
Thanks!
That makes sense. I wasn't hungry after my 20 mile training run, but ate everything the next day. It's weird how it affects you.
That fits the evolutionary context - normally anything that would have you moving for 20 sustained miles would mean you're probably best not distracted by appetite - in the case of running from something, you don't have time to eat, and in the case of running after something, you're probably chasing because you have nothing to eat. During that time, the continued release of norepinephrine from the activity should blunt the cortisol build up's effect on appetite that is also going on. Once you slow down, the normal way to get cortisol back to normal will be to eat.
Expect for a few things ... the part that most people that run 20 or more will need to eat something along the way to avoid bonking.
... and the part where one gets maximal glycogen replenishment when eating within 30 minutes of exercise.
I think one of the issues with justifying things with an after the fact evo context is that we can probably think up contexts that are justify any behaviour. I could suggest that a runner has a greater chance of evo survival if he or she is eating berries along the way and this is why bonking evolved. Or how about "seeing hallucinations" in exercise induced hypoglycaemia - in evolutions way of keeping you going? I'm not saying your point above is actually wrong - just that a lot of what passes for evolutionary context isn't, it's post-fact justification, where many physiological processes aren't driven necessarily from evolutionary selective survival but as rate limits to physiology and biochemistry. And ok, I'll then go ahead and contradict myself, which in turn are driven by evolutionary context (but often which we can't see clearly).
To use me as an example some more, the 20 mile run was my experiment in fueling, and I had a gel at 5, 10, and 15. No problems and they seemed to help. For the marathon it was hotter than I am used to, so I had some gaterade early on and delayed the gels to 8 miles. Felt a bit questionable in the stomach due to the gaterade, so limited it, but had some, plus two gels.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Nikki10129 wrote: »Just a couple of comments on your post:
600 calories daily can be attributed to exercise? What kind of exercise are you doing to burn 600 calories? I do a hardcore kickboxing class for 90 minutes and I'm not burning 600 calories doing that, even though I exercise regularly the rest of the week.
I don't think 600 calories per day is outlandish...I do that pretty easily on my bike on an average ride.
As to the OP, regular exercise can certainly make weight loss easier in that you obviously increase your energy expenditure and I agree that when done properly with a proper diet it can other positive effects on metabolism (though I think focusing on that aspect is kind of majoring in the minors)...but I think it can also be a detriment in that a lot of people create fairly large deficits with diet alone and then go do a bunch of exercise but don't adequately fuel that activity...this is actually a detriment to preservation of lean mass. It can also be a huge stress on the body and raise cortisol levels.
I tend to encourage people to focus on diet for weight management and exercise for fitness and to more or less disassociate the two...in my experience, when people can start looking at fitness for the sake of fitness, they better understand why they would want to fuel that fitness...there are just way too many people crashing their diets and then doing incessant amounts of exercise without knowing or understanding what they're actually doing to themselves.
I think this touches on exactly some critical points. And perhaps metabolic changes due to exercise is majoring in the minors, agree.
We do see people that throw themselves into exercise and large deficits without proper additional calories and the end results then becomes a net deficit that is too large and LBM suffers.
I hadn't touched on stress and cortisol - I think that, along with the related inflammation response is also an important topic. When we talk about taking time to recover and having time off - well, it is probably a long subject by itself.
I'd say beyond cortisol, several neurotransmitters are going to be involved. I believe epinephrine, norepinephrine, and dopamine would all have increase with strength training to facilitate signalling. These are all also involved to some extent in appetite and satiety.
I'm sure with a simplified rat study I could show pictures of brains that prove exercise can replace eating according to some of MFP poster standards.
If you're so smart why CAN'T exercise replace eating? Sometimes I exercise and then I'm not hungry! Let's see your science explain THAT!
/sarcasm
I do need to eventually look into the research about exercise affecting appetite. There seems to be some evidence that variations on a particular gene or genes affects how exercise impacts appetite.
It is probably a bit interesting. I feel like eating everything on the entire planet after a half marathon, but after the first full that I ran I was just not hungry.
I hadn't considered that it was genetic.
I don't recall the first full much (although I know we walked forever and got Chinese after), but I just did a full today and wasn't hungry for a couple of hours and then was ravenous. Got chicken and waffles for a late brunch and it was the best thing ever! I'm similarly not hungry for an hour after a half or tri but then able to eat lots. (I'm always starving after swimming.)
Hey! Congrats!
I haven't had the same experience after the subsequent ones or the 50k, to be honest. I just remember thinking it was so strange based on the experiences that I'd had after half marathons.
The next day? We ate everything.
Thanks!
That makes sense. I wasn't hungry after my 20 mile training run, but ate everything the next day. It's weird how it affects you.
That fits the evolutionary context - normally anything that would have you moving for 20 sustained miles would mean you're probably best not distracted by appetite - in the case of running from something, you don't have time to eat, and in the case of running after something, you're probably chasing because you have nothing to eat. During that time, the continued release of norepinephrine from the activity should blunt the cortisol build up's effect on appetite that is also going on. Once you slow down, the normal way to get cortisol back to normal will be to eat.
Expect for a few things ... the part that most people that run 20 or more will need to eat something along the way to avoid bonking.
... and the part where one gets maximal glycogen replenishment when eating within 30 minutes of exercise.
I think one of the issues with justifying things with an after the fact evo context is that we can probably think up contexts that are justify any behaviour. I could suggest that a runner has a greater chance of evo survival if he or she is eating berries along the way and this is why bonking evolved. Or how about "seeing hallucinations" in exercise induced hypoglycaemia - in evolutions way of keeping you going? I'm not saying your point above is actually wrong - just that a lot of what passes for evolutionary context isn't, it's post-fact justification, where many physiological processes aren't driven necessarily from evolutionary selective survival but as rate limits to physiology and biochemistry. And ok, I'll then go ahead and contradict myself, which in turn are driven by evolutionary context (but often which we can't see clearly).
To use me as an example some more, the 20 mile run was my experiment in fueling, and I had a gel at 5, 10, and 15. No problems and they seemed to help. For the marathon it was hotter than I am used to, so I had some gaterade early on and delayed the gels to 8 miles. Felt a bit questionable in the stomach due to the gaterade, so limited it, but had some, plus two gels.
Take a look at this - http://www.runnersworld.com/nutrition-for-runners/the-science-behind-bonking
The last paragraph has me thinking. Not sure I can sip every 10 minutes ... but thinking about it.0 -
MFP's algorithm does tend to work against the idea that exercise is good for weight loss, requiring you to eat more to cancel out the exercise calories.
But I'm all for increasing fat oxidation and depleting glycogen reserves.0 -
DancingDarl wrote: »Anything past 30 minutes is just a waste of time. Unless your doing it for reasons other than health.
So a weight lifting session more than 30 minutes is a waste of time?
Nonsense.
1 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »DancingDarl wrote: »Anything past 30 minutes is just a waste of time. Unless your doing it for reasons other than health.
So a weight lifting session more than 30 minutes is a waste of time?
Nonsense.
In the dumb advice you heard thread someone told a poster that anything below 30 minutes is a waste of time, so by process of elimination...
Then shalt thou exercise to thirty minutes, no more, no less. Thirty shall be the minutes thou shalt exercise, and the minutes of the exercise shall be thirty. Fourty minutes shalt thou not exercise, neither exercise thou twenty minutes, excepting that thou then proceed to thirty. Fifty is right out.5 -
stevencloser wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »DancingDarl wrote: »Anything past 30 minutes is just a waste of time. Unless your doing it for reasons other than health.
So a weight lifting session more than 30 minutes is a waste of time?
Nonsense.
In the dumb advice you heard thread someone told a poster that anything below 30 minutes is a waste of time, so by process of elimination...
Then shalt thou exercise to thirty minutes, no more, no less. Thirty shall be the minutes thou shalt exercise, and the minutes of the exercise shall be thirty. Fourty minutes shalt thou not exercise, neither exercise thou twenty minutes, excepting that thou then proceed to thirty. Fifty is right out.
You said there would be no math, sadz.0 -
Christine_72 wrote: »I know without a doubt that I would gain weight without exercise. I start off everyday in the red in my diary, so I DO outrun that until I'm back in the green.
Of course, if i buckled down and ate only what MFP has given me then I would lose weight too,but i don't waaaaannnnaaa
If it's a choice between willpower and exercise, I choose exercise!
I think your point about exercise making maintenance easier, as it allows a bigger calorie window, is a really important one.2 -
Something else I recently thought of was the kind of "domino effect" for a better phrase around exercise, sleep and diet. I personally find that when I exercise I sleep much better. When I sleep better I feel less exhausted and have more energy. It is when I feel exhausted that I snack much more, usually sugary things to give me the energy that I crave. So when I exercise more, I snack less, because I have naturally good energy levels and don't need to "top up". I'm sure some clever-clogs will understand the science behind this (if there is any...), but that's just my subjective experience.2
-
DancingDarl wrote: »Anything past 30 minutes is just a waste of time. Unless your doing it for reasons other than health.
This is an odd, internally inconsistent, and completely useless pronouncement.
0 -
HappyCampr1 wrote: »
Hill of the NWCR sees it as a range where calories needed and calories desired are close enough to work.EvgeniZyntx wrote: »So when recommending that people focus on calorie deficits also remember that activity and exercise also have a multi-factorial positive effect that shouldn't be forgotten.
Exercise is great and is helpful for overall health and even makes CO more efficient. However, for weight loss, it's essentially a separate issue. You can't outrun a calorie surplus. Exercise calories should be eaten back so that the exercise isn't causing extra weight loss because the exercise needs to be fueled.
When people who are trying to lose weight ask about what exercises they should do so that they can lose weight, it makes sense that they are pointed toward CICO and counting calories because that's where weight loss is found. They aren't inquiring about fitness, they are inquiring about weight loss.
ETA: I just saw your diagram. That's essentially what I'm saying about weight loss and exercise being mostly separate topics.
I totally agree.
Finding that perfect spot where the amount of calories you like to eat is supported by your lifestyle is key. If I exercise x-amount, I can eat pretty comfortably with minimal thought or intervention. I could exercise less, but then I'd have to watch what I ate more closely. I could exercise more and eat more, but that doesn't fit my lifestyle as well.
Every one needs to find their own balance and that will differ from person to person.
It always amazes me that people have so much trouble with this. We're all different and have different lifestyles. Personally, I like tips and advice but don't tell me I'm doing it wrong when I've found something that works for me.0 -
DancingDarl wrote: »Anything past 30 minutes is just a waste of time. Unless your doing it for reasons other than health.
This is an odd, internally inconsistent, and completely useless pronouncement.
Agreed.
Due to physical restraints, walking is my main source of exercise. I range about 20K in steps every day.
I walk because it makes me feel good, and I sometimes use walking as a deterrent to overeating. If I feel like having something that doesn't fit into my caloric allotment for the day, I hop on the treadmill and 'earn' it, first. Lots of times, when I'm finished earning it, the craving has passed anyway, and I'll eat back with a better food choice, instead.
I agree that you definitely *can* lose weight without a lick of exercise, but that exercise makes the process much easier and the end result much more pleasing. 1 -
Within the concept of "make it a lifestyle change, not a diet" I found incorporating and slowly increasing the amount of exercise I do to be far more of a significant impact on my lifestyle than simply reducing the amount of calories I ate to achieve my weight loss goals. My weekly plans include evaluating my work and personal scheduled to make sure I can fit in exercise every day. Prior to this, it would have been easy for me to blow off the gym because I have a lot of meetings at work, or hit the snooze button this morning since I was up late watching the Oscars. Since starting this process (hate the word journey), I now prioritize exercise in a way that I never did before. At first that was done simply to have more calories to work with each day, now it truly is part of my life and I feel that is what will make continuing to maintain my loss much easier for me than someone who simply cut calories in order to lose.0
-
Reminds me of Berardi's G-Flux theory:
https://www.t-nation.com/diet-fat-loss/g-flux
Nice in theory, but high activity levels are difficult for me to sustain in practice. As I get older, it is getting difficult for me to recover properly from high activity during caloric deficit and it detracts from my lifting, which is more important to me. If I had more free time, I would love to do more ultra-low impact activity like swimming.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 388 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
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 909 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.2K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions