Long exercise purely to eat more?

1…5681011…13

Replies

  • Raynne413
    Raynne413 Posts: 1,527 Member
    SoLongAndThanksForAllTheFish wrote: »
    However, the biggest concern is that it DOES create a problem for when you just do not have the time to do huge amounts of exercise and you are used to eating more, or just want to continue eating at those levels. This is how I gain weight, since I tend to do lots of exercise and/or lifting, and then events in my life cause me to not be able to, I fail to notice how much my burns are restricted, thinking I will make up for it later, and I keep on eating the same way for too long and gain.

    That is very true. When I was in my early 20's, I was at the point where I could work out 2-3 hours/day, and really got used to being lenient with my food. THEN I severely sprained my ankle, and couldn't do ANYTHING (although getting around on crutches felt like a workout), and it KILLED me to cut all the way back. It was like, either I cut back on my food or gain weight, and it sucked. LOL
  • Gianfranco_R
    Gianfranco_R Posts: 1,297 Member
    Anyway, personally I run 3/4 times per week when I have enough free time. When I am too busy, I walk 1:30/2 hours per day. It may seem contradictory, but you can break the total time in short walks, that you can do wherever you are, whatever you wear, and you don't need to take a shower afterwards :smiley:
  • sgt1372
    sgt1372 Posts: 3,996 Member
    I generally try to stay w/in my allocated cals/day but, if I want to eat more, I will sometimes do some cardio (10-30 mins of rowing for an extra 100-300 cals) to allow me to eat more but this doesn't happen very often.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    edited December 2016
    middlehaitch wrote: »
    I am now just confused. This post has gone from the original walking 10-15 miles (3-5 hr at my non racing pace) to have an 800 cal extra for an over feed, to 1-2 hr walking/exercise, to dedicating 2 hrs a day to ones health.

    Yes, interesting, no? The whole thing totally changed.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Gianfranco_R wrote: »
    Anyway, personally I run 3/4 times per week when I have enough free time. When I am too busy, I walk 1:30/2 hours per day. It may seem contradictory, but you can break the total time in short walks, that you can do wherever you are, whatever you wear, and you don't need to take a shower afterwards :smiley:

    No, I don't think that's contradictory at all. (I think 90-120 min over the course of a day is reasonable and also somewhat different from what was being discussed. I also think 90-120 min of exercise in a day can be reasonable for many. I just would never say to someone else "2 hours is a drop in the bucket" or why should I care about getting in my planned workout time more efficiently ever? Nor would I suggest that someone who does care about efficiency and getting it in in one hour must be prioritizing poorly.
  • ModernRock
    ModernRock Posts: 372 Member
    CattOfTheGarage wrote: »
    ModernRock wrote: »
    Calculate the calorie goal you'll have when you reach your goal weight and lightly active or less. It seems sensible to me that--while in a calorie deficit--there's really no downside to exercising specifically to be able to eat this future (conservative) maintenance calorie goal. After all, that's how much you'll be eating for the long term anyway. Then, on days when you are highly active or exercise for fitness or fun, you get to eat a little more.

    Personally, the downside to exercising for the purpose of eating more is not addressing the issues that led to weight gain in the first place. (Granted, one of those issues could have been a highly sedentary lifestyle. But, that means more activity is needed either way.) Should life get in the way of increased activity, you'll be left learning how control your eating at a time that is likely to be stressful for the same reasons your activity decreased.

    I'm afraid I totally disagree with this. The downside to forming a habit of eating at your sedentary intake at your goal weight is that if you are a short older woman that is probably around 1200 calories.Even for me, approaching middle age at average height for a woman, my sedentary maintenance at goal will only be around 1500-1600 calories. As I age, it will steadily decrease.

    For many of us who are short and female, increasing activity in order to increase calorie allowance is really the only hope for a decent quality of life, on the way to our goal and as we reach maintenance. I'm getting frustrated with all these messages saying it's somehow "not healthy" for no convincing reason.

    What is not healthy is the modern, Western sedentary lifestyle. My body wants to eat more than 1500 calories because it expects to move more. Our ancestors remained active until death (they had no choice) and that is what we are adapted for.

    Learning to starve ourselves in idleness is neither physically nor psychologically "healthier" than exercising more in order to eat more. Yes, perhaps a health problem will force me into a sedentary lifestyle again in the future, and I'll have to learn to eat less. I'll cross that bridge when I come to it. In the meantime, I'm going to adopt a lifestyle that meets my body's needs - that means more movement, and more food.

    Thanks for your thoughtful reply. It must be said that what you are describing-- the multiple reasons you gave for exercising and being active---is categorically not "exercising purely for the sake of eating more", which is what the original poster was describing and I was addressing. Nowhere do I suggest "starving in idleness" or "learning to starve ourselves". By definition, meeting your calorie needs is not starving.
  • Rocknut53
    Rocknut53 Posts: 1,794 Member
    NorthCascades wrote: »
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    This is true...but it can also be a slippery slope...

    Sure, but what isn't? You can exercise too much so you can eat 10,000 kCal a day, you can also push too hard on the gas pedal on your way in to work, or drink too much coffee to be more productive when you get there. In all things, people need judgement and balance.
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    Certainly one of the advantages for me of regular exercise is to be able to just live life and not give a ton of thought to my diet (though I eat pretty well)...particularly when it comes to beer...but it's not the "reason" I guess...

    To be honest I don't have any one reason for exercising. If you asked me the main reason on two different days, I'll give you two different answers. Some of the most common ones for me are:

    Cabin fever
    Take advantage of a nice day
    Scenery
    To be in shape
    Deal with anxiety

    I sure enjoy the fact that I'm able to eat more and maintain a healthy weight, too, but that's never "the" thing that gets me out the door, probably only because my cabin fever is stronger.

    Ha, did you mention cabin fever? LOL! It's sub zero to 8 degrees so far this week and my dog came up lame. I had to force myself to the treadmill today. Arghhh....it just doesn't make a good substitute to hiking. Your 5 reasons are mine as well, especially the anxiety. Being able to eat a little more is helpful as well, but not the main focus of my exercise.
    As far as having the time, being semi-retired/unemployed helps, but I understand the struggle many have with balancing their time. When I am working it's typically 12-14 hour days for as many days as it takes to get a project done. That doesn't leave much time for working out. Sometimes I get a walk in and that's about it.
  • ogtmama
    ogtmama Posts: 1,403 Member
    Always_Kriss wrote: »
    all i wanna know is where people are finding these thin crust pizza's at the store for under 800 calories LOL cause thin crust pizza, store brand here is still almost 400 calories for 1/5th the pizza... and who the hell cuts a pizza into 5ths?!

    Small ones?
  • ogtmama
    ogtmama Posts: 1,403 Member
    JaydedMiss wrote: »
    Raynne413 wrote: »
    JaydedMiss wrote: »
    NorthCascades wrote: »
    rybo wrote: »
    JaydedMiss wrote: »
    RunRutheeRun wrote: »
    @JaydedMiss so why not try for 4mph or fast /slow intervals and make your walk more time efficient? :smiley:
    I run for 40-50 mins every morning to get at least half my steps in before work.

    I walk however fast i want when im out, Just said 3 mph because 2 hours of my day spent exercising is NOT alot of my time to do. Why you talking about more time efficient than 2 hours :D

    To be young with no responsibilities, where 2 hours a day is considered a drop in the bucket for time.

    We all have our priorities. The average American spends 34 hours a week watching TV, but scoffs at the idea of having 2 hours in a day for their health.

    Finally someone with some sense. Jeez. I havent watched tv in weeks :D

    Most of my tv is done during my strength training. LOL I don't really miss it. Other than that, it is sports the hour I relax before I go to bed.

    I tried to watch tv last week but i honestly couldnt stay focused. I still have my sittong on my booty time, But its mostly spent on these forums now, And on facebook trying to find somewhere to go out to XD Iv really been having issues sitting still i just want to go go go :p

    edit: My issue was never with TV, Just the *kitten* telling me im young with no responsibilities because i make sure my health is a priority in life for atleast a few hours a day. If i wanna go walk for 2-3 hours on my day off and come home to go brain dead to tv all night id do it :D

    I'm 41 and work out an hour or two most days and can walk up to 4 hours with the baby on a good day. I also make time to get brain dead at night when he goes to bed ;)
  • middlehaitch
    middlehaitch Posts: 8,487 Member
    @CattOfTheGarage
    Re:'I'm a bit surprised that so many people are arguing that exercising is unhealthy. I can see it's something to do with motivation that's worrying people, and I'm trying to understand the logic that says it's OK to exercise in order to look good but not in order to eat a cake. I'm not succeeding'

    I think it is a case of over exercising can be as damaging as under eating. Not exercise is unhealthy.

    Also, most are comfortable doing an extra workout or an hours walk to fit in a little something extra on occasion, or calorie hoard. It is the extreme of 10-15 miles that I, and some others, may question.
    There is an indication of binge eating that is being controlled by prolonged exercise in the first post. I have not been sure if it is a ED binge or just a large over feed. If the former it is something beyond this forum.

    A theme on this site is to build lifelong sustainable habits, exercise, and eating protocols. The 10-15miles in a day for an over feed isn't something everyone can agree with as it is a bit extreme and probably not sustainable.

    Mmmm home made cookies or a Naniamo bar.

    Cheers, h.
  • Machka9
    Machka9 Posts: 25,447 Member
    edited December 2016
    ModernRock wrote: »
    Personally, the downside to exercising for the purpose of eating more is not addressing the issues that led to weight gain in the first place.

    I gained a bit of weight because my life became somewhat more sedentary, although not completely of course + we were travelling around the world for many month and trying out all the good food out there.

    We're settled again, exercising more, and back to a normal diet. :)

    GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »
    Not only that, I have a medical condition that calls for exercise as part of managing it. I need to be active to stay healthy.

    Me too!

    NorthCascades wrote: »
    rybo wrote: »
    JaydedMiss wrote: »
    RunRutheeRun wrote: »
    @JaydedMiss so why not try for 4mph or fast /slow intervals and make your walk more time efficient? :smiley:
    I run for 40-50 mins every morning to get at least half my steps in before work.

    I walk however fast i want when im out, Just said 3 mph because 2 hours of my day spent exercising is NOT alot of my time to do. Why you talking about more time efficient than 2 hours :D

    To be young with no responsibilities, where 2 hours a day is considered a drop in the bucket for time.

    We all have our priorities. The average American spends 34 hours a week watching TV, but scoffs at the idea of having 2 hours in a day for their health.

    This always amazes me ... there's so much time for sedentary activities, but no time for active activities.

    Personally, I can't just sit and watch TV ... way too boring. But I can watch TV while run/walking on the treadmill or riding my trainer or lifting weights ... or even doing things like housecleaning and working on other projects that have me up and walking around regularly throughout my evening.

    The other thing is that for me, my 50+ hours of exercise a month (1:40 min a day, every day, on average) isn't usually all at once. And we don't have to put in our daily exercise all at once. I incorporate mine throughout the day so that it hardly feels like I'm exercising at all. :)

    Christine_72 wrote: »
    CattOfTheGarage wrote: »
    SusanMFindlay wrote: »
    Our three year old loves our daily after-dinner walks. We let him help pick where we're going (within reason; if it's -30 degrees out, it will be indoors).

    We started doing after dinner walks this year (they've clashed with bedtime up until now, as we have dinner rather late). It's a really nice habit. It'll be too dark now until at least February, but I'm determined to restart them after that.

    I have such good memories of going for walks after dinner with my parents when i was a kid. We would go for hour+ long walks/explorations most every night. On weekends the bikes would come out and my dad, me and my sister would ride for hours together.

    Me too! I grew up in an active family and have been active my entire life. :)
  • Machka9
    Machka9 Posts: 25,447 Member
    And one more thing ... I mentioned that I exercise just over 50 hours a month and worked that out to an average of 1:40 min/day. But that doesn't really describe what I do.

    If you had a look at my exercise minutes, I put in somewhere between 60 and 90 minutes a day 6 days a week, and then about 300 minutes on one weekend day.

    During the week, I eat my usual 1375 cal + my exercise calories. Just my ordinary diet.

    And then on the 300 minute day, I go for pizza, a large roast dinner, fish and chip, something at one of the local Indian restaurants, an extra dessert, or whatever I want. :)

    And then back to my ordinary diet during the week.

  • Skyblueyellow
    Skyblueyellow Posts: 225 Member
    I think finding time depends upon so many factors. Working full time and having children definitely means that you need to be more creative with scheduling exercise sessions. I do not have time to fit in two hours of exercise on top of my career, my family, and my obligations to my home (laundry, cleaning, dishes, dog, errands, appointments, etc). My husband works full time and attends graduate school so that leaves a lot of the normal daily stuff my responsibility. But I do make time for 30-45 minutes 3-4 times a week. It fits my schedule. When the school year is over my schedule opens up enormously and I have so much extra time.

  • ModernRock
    ModernRock Posts: 372 Member
    CattOfTheGarage wrote: »
    ModernRock wrote: »
    CattOfTheGarage wrote: »
    ModernRock wrote: »
    Calculate the calorie goal you'll have when you reach your goal weight and lightly active or less. It seems sensible to me that--while in a calorie deficit--there's really no downside to exercising specifically to be able to eat this future (conservative) maintenance calorie goal. After all, that's how much you'll be eating for the long term anyway. Then, on days when you are highly active or exercise for fitness or fun, you get to eat a little more.

    Personally, the downside to exercising for the purpose of eating more is not addressing the issues that led to weight gain in the first place. (Granted, one of those issues could have been a highly sedentary lifestyle. But, that means more activity is needed either way.) Should life get in the way of increased activity, you'll be left learning how control your eating at a time that is likely to be stressful for the same reasons your activity decreased.

    I'm afraid I totally disagree with this. The downside to forming a habit of eating at your sedentary intake at your goal weight is that if you are a short older woman that is probably around 1200 calories.Even for me, approaching middle age at average height for a woman, my sedentary maintenance at goal will only be around 1500-1600 calories. As I age, it will steadily decrease.

    For many of us who are short and female, increasing activity in order to increase calorie allowance is really the only hope for a decent quality of life, on the way to our goal and as we reach maintenance. I'm getting frustrated with all these messages saying it's somehow "not healthy" for no convincing reason.

    What is not healthy is the modern, Western sedentary lifestyle. My body wants to eat more than 1500 calories because it expects to move more. Our ancestors remained active until death (they had no choice) and that is what we are adapted for.

    Learning to starve ourselves in idleness is neither physically nor psychologically "healthier" than exercising more in order to eat more. Yes, perhaps a health problem will force me into a sedentary lifestyle again in the future, and I'll have to learn to eat less. I'll cross that bridge when I come to it. In the meantime, I'm going to adopt a lifestyle that meets my body's needs - that means more movement, and more food.

    Thanks for your thoughtful reply. It must be said that what you are describing-- the multiple reasons you gave for exercising and being active---is categorically not "exercising purely for the sake of eating more", which is what the original poster was describing and I was addressing. Nowhere do I suggest "starving in idleness" or "learning to starve ourselves". By definition, meeting your calorie needs is not starving.

    What I'm referring to is adding exercise in order to increase calorie goal, which I would say does count as "exercising to eat more". Whether you're doing it every day to get a regular increase, or every now and then so you can have a takeaway, it seems much the same to me.

    Basically there are two approaches to being stuck with a low calorie goal: move more so you can eat more, or remain sedentary and eat less.

    Even if you are meeting your energy needs by the latter approach, I can't see how it could possibly be healthier. At best it's equivalent (though what we know about the benefits of exercise would suggest the first option is healthier).

    I'm a bit surprised that so many people are arguing that exercising is unhealthy. I can see it's something to do with motivation that's worrying people, and I'm trying to understand the logic that says it's OK to exercise in order to look good but not in order to eat a cake. I'm not succeeding.

    I totally get your point, but much in life is a matter of perspective and motivation. You really can't go wrong with your argument as any movement beyond sedentary could be argued as moving more to eat more. The distinction is the motivation behind the activity vis-à-vis sustainability and overall wellness. You wrote that you exercise and stay active because it is healthy and meets the body's needs (what we are adapted to do). The original poster's question and reasoning, however, was exercising more to binge on pizza. These don't seem much the same to me.
  • Gianfranco_R
    Gianfranco_R Posts: 1,297 Member
    middlehaitch wrote: »
    @CattOfTheGarage
    Re:'I'm a bit surprised that so many people are arguing that exercising is unhealthy. I can see it's something to do with motivation that's worrying people, and I'm trying to understand the logic that says it's OK to exercise in order to look good but not in order to eat a cake. I'm not succeeding'

    I think it is a case of over exercising can be as damaging as under eating    . Not exercise is unhealthy.

    Also, most are comfortable doing an extra workout or an hours walk to fit in a little something extra on occasion, or calorie hoard. It is the extreme of 10-15 miles that I, and some others, may question.
    There is an indication of binge eating that is being controlled by prolonged exercise in the first post. I have not been sure if it is a ED binge or just a large over feed. If the former it is something beyond this forum.

    A theme on this site is to build lifelong sustainable habits, exercise, and eating protocols. The 10-15miles in a day for an over feed isn't something everyone can agree with as it is a bit extreme and probably not sustainable.

    Mmmm home made cookies or a Naniamo bar.

    Cheers, h.

    This is generally true, but I've never read anything about negative effects of too much walking. On the other hand, there is evidence that spending more than 8 hours per day sitting shorten your lifespan. So I think that someone telling to go out for a walk instead of watching tv is giving pretty good advise.
  • Machka9
    Machka9 Posts: 25,447 Member
    I also wonder if there's a definition issue here with the term "binge".

    The OP has said, "Nah i just do it sometimes when i feel like binge eating ill walk extra long to get the calories for an extra meal."

    In other words, I read it that to her, a binge is just an extra meal which she will work for and have on occasion.

    My husband used to suggest that the fact I ate half a large chocolate bar after work some days was a binge.

    Well ... not really. Neither are actually binges in the eating disorder definition of the term where a person frequently consumes unusually large amounts of food and feels unable to stop eating.
    http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/binge-eating-disorder/home/ovc-20182926

    Presumably, the OP has her extra meal, feels satisfied, and carries on with life until a few days later or a week later or wherever she wants another extra meal. Same with my chocolate. I'd have half a bar and that would be it ... then I'd go out for a walk or do the housecleaning or get into my studying or whatever.

    However, some people use the term "binge" as a slangy term to mean having a bit extra to eat now and then.

    So I wonder if some people reading this thread have kind of panicked and assumed "eating disorder" when they read "binge" instead of reading it as the slangy, less accurate, definition.

Categories