Gym or Diet or both?
Manly_hood
Posts: 83 Member
Curious to see the people's point of view
0
Replies
-
Both! Although I think that diet has to be the biggest priority. Can't out-run a bad diet.0
-
both0
-
From a general point of view, diet is for weight, exercise is for fitness and wellbeing. Doing both kinda helps each other out though so exercising while losing weight will speed up your loss and switching up some things in your diet can sometimes leave you feeling like you have more energy so you can exercise more.0
-
Depends upon your goal.
But, generally I prefer to see exercise as a tool for health and physical performance whilst eating is a tool to fuel yourself or manage ones weight.
In practice, for me that means both.0 -
"Both" is absolutely the best answer. If one or the other, diet. But both is by far the best choice.
I can tell you from experience that you can't out-exercise a bad diet. As a wanna-be bicycle racer, I rode and trained my a** off but the weight didn't come off until I took control of the diet. The old axiom of weight loss being 90% done in the kitchen is true.0 -
I don't think you should see it as a diet, but a change of lifestyle (stop it and it will pile up again). But officially just the calorie reduction should help, however the gym will provide additional calorie burn which is an extra tool.0
-
Like the replies so far, for weight loss, eat at calorie deficit, for overall health improvement, move more. Whatever physical activity you enjoy and will stick with.0
-
Depends.
Your diet is for weight loss/maintenance/gain, while exercise is for general health.
I was a prime example of not being able to outrun a bad diet. Before I really understood calorie deficits and weight loss, I thought I could just run and lose weight. Yeah, some probably can (if they're overeating by a smaller surplus), but even with running I was eating too much so I wasn't losing weight. Once I got my calories in check, weight loss happened.0 -
I think it is easier to start with adjusting your diet. Planning meals, using a scale, logging your foods, etc. Then while doing this start adding extra physical activity. Park farther away from stores, take the stairs instead of elevator, etc. Once you feel pretty solid on the diet changes...it comes more naturally rather then a chore to try to remember....then add in "official" exercise like elliptical, workout video, etc.
I feel diet is the most important. You cannot just make up for bad eating with just the gym. But then exercise with good eating is the best combo because they aid each other and boost weight loss.0 -
"Lose weight in the kitchen and build muscle in the gym." If you are looking purely at balancing out calories, for me, it is 80% diet intake/20% exercise0
-
HStheBusyBee wrote: »Both! Although I think that diet has to be the biggest priority. Can't out-run a bad diet.
Well said!0 -
Sex, weights, and protein shakes.0
-
tryin2die2self wrote: »HStheBusyBee wrote: »Both! Although I think that diet has to be the biggest priority. Can't out-run a bad diet.
Well said!
Perhaps, but more accurate would be, can't out run eating more calories than you burn.
0 -
Everyone wrote valid points and I believe diet will be more than enough if the goal is just to loose weight but it may take bit longer. You can loose weight quickly if u diet and going to gym at the same time. One thing I am sure is gong to gym doesn't help to loose weight unless u don't control your diet.0
-
True calories check really helpsDepends.
Your diet is for weight loss/maintenance/gain, while exercise is for general health.
I was a prime example of not being able to outrun a bad diet. Before I really understood calorie deficits and weight loss, I thought I could just run and lose weight. Yeah, some probably can (if they're overeating by a smaller surplus), but even with running I was eating too much so I wasn't losing weight. Once I got my calories in check, weight loss happened.
0 -
Everyone wrote valid points and I believe diet will be more than enough if the goal is just to loose weight but it may take bit longer. You can loose weight quickly if u diet and going to gym at the same time. One thing I am sure is gong to gym doesn't help to loose weight unless u don't control your diet.
Some exercises will speed up weight loss - Long steady state cardio for example. Others will slow down weight loss - Strength conditioning work for example.
The difference is LSS Cardio will encourage both fat and muscle metabolisation* whereas strength conditioning will decrease muscle metabolisation*.
Fat loss is a sub-set of weight loss.
* when in calorific deficit.0 -
StealthHealth wrote: »Everyone wrote valid points and I believe diet will be more than enough if the goal is just to loose weight but it may take bit longer. You can loose weight quickly if u diet and going to gym at the same time. One thing I am sure is gong to gym doesn't help to loose weight unless u don't control your diet.
Some exercises will speed up weight loss - Long steady state cardio for example. Others will slow down weight loss - Strength conditioning work for example.
The difference is LSS Cardio will encourage both fat and muscle metabolisation* whereas strength conditioning will decrease muscle metabolisation*.
Fat loss is a sub-set of weight loss.
* when in calorific deficit.
That's something new info to me. Can u pls give some examples for LSS ?0 -
Diet = looking good with clothes
Diet + exercise = looking good without clothes
0 -
-
-
Both0
-
both. people who exercise regularly are, simply enough, healthier than people who don't. and i am fairly sure there's a fair amount of evidence that moderate, consistent exercise and diet leads to sustainable weight loss and an easier path to maintenance.0
-
My LSS (Long Steady State) cardio abbreviation is probably not an industry standard but by that I mean exercise that (with adequate training) can be continued over a long period of time and with little to no change in intensity.
Examples:- Distance running or long sessions on a treadmill
- Log Elliptical machine sessions
- Distance cycling or cycling at a constant pace on a static bike
- Long, constant rate, rowing sessions
In these instances the person exercising will be able to maintain the pace of exercise over a prolonged period* and as such, record significant calorific burns and in that instance the energy must come from somewhere. Once the gylcogen has been depleted, fat and muscle will be used**.
* how long is prolonged? - I don't know but what is sure is that there is not going to be a universal magic number under which we are all OK and above, even by 1 minute, you are doomed to lose all your muscle. Discussion forums (yes, I know!) seem to favour sub 45 mins as a reasonable amount but I don;t think that there is any science to back that up and if you are glycogen depleted before exercise then that number will be lower.
** the ratio of fat and muscle metabolism is likely to rely on many factors, but certainly genetics wold play a part.
0 -
StealthHealth wrote: »My LSS (Long Steady State) cardio abbreviation is probably not an industry standard but by that I mean exercise that (with adequate training) can be continued over a long period of time and with little to no change in intensity.
Examples:- Distance running or long sessions on a treadmill
- Log Elliptical machine sessions
- Distance cycling or cycling at a constant pace on a static bike
- Long, constant rate, rowing sessions
In these instances the person exercising will be able to maintain the pace of exercise over a prolonged period* and as such, record significant calorific burns and in that instance the energy must come from somewhere. Once the gylcogen has been depleted, fat and muscle will be used**.
* how long is prolonged? - I don't know but what is sure is that there is not going to be a universal magic number under which we are all OK and above, even by 1 minute, you are doomed to lose all your muscle. Discussion forums (yes, I know!) seem to favour sub 45 mins as a reasonable amount but I don;t think that there is any science to back that up and if you are glycogen depleted before exercise then that number will be lower.
** the ratio of fat and muscle metabolism is likely to rely on many factors, but certainly genetics wold play a part.
That's actually lot of info. Very helpful thank you0 -
Some exercises will speed up weight loss - Long steady state cardio for example. Others will slow down weight loss - Strength conditioning work for example.
The difference is LSS Cardio will encourage both fat and muscle metabolisation* whereas strength conditioning will decrease muscle metabolisation*.
I am curious about these two statements. I understand LSS - calories/hour times lots of hours is the simple equation - but what evidence suggests that it "speeds up weight loss"? Against what alternative?
I haven't seen any evidence that strength conditioning slows down weight loss, unless of course one is trading a higher calorie/hour burn for a lower one, like LSS for strength training; a calorie deficit is a calorie deficit, whatever the source. Can you share some study that suggests otherwise?
Strength training increases muscle metabolism by increasing muscle mass, which burns more calories, pound for pound, than fat.
0 -
I've always heard that losing weight is 10% exercise and 90% diet. I'd agree, solely based on my personal experience. I can skip exercise and still lose, but if I fudge too much on my diet, even with exercise, it stalls my weight loss.0
-
Both, but diet is the MOST important! I have always been very active. Even though I ran 20 -25 miles a week, I gradually put on extra weight even though I was counting calories and eating salads and skipping meals. I finally had enough and changed my nutrition. I started having 2 meal replacement shakes a day and I started losing weight. I couldn't believe it. I am 48. I then added nutritional cleansing one day a month and I even lost more. I have put on lean muscle and I feel so energetic! Best health decision I have made for myself. My nutrition is not a diet but a lifestyle for me. I have kept the weight off for a year!!!0
-
HStheBusyBee wrote: »Both! Although I think that diet has to be the biggest priority. Can't out-run a bad diet.
Exactly!!
Someone said something on here once and I can't remember word for word: Exercise is for endurance/health. Diet is for losing weight.0 -
I was being over simplistic ind under clear:
With fixed calories adding in cardio will increase calorific burn and therefore weight loss.
At the same calorific input, swapping the cardio for strength training will slow down weight loss because of the smaller burn.
so as you say:abernathysymthe wrote: »... that strength conditioning slows down weight loss, unless of course one is trading a higher calorie/hour burn for a lower one, like LSS for strength training; a calorie deficit is a calorie deficit, whatever the source.
sorry for confusion
0
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
- 427 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