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.
What are your unpopular opinions about health / fitness?
Replies
-
Let's put it this way, you have a right to say no. If the cake giver gets upset, too bad...5
-
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »vegaslounge wrote: »I'm late to the thread (it's been a fun read!) but figured I'd throw in my two cents...
I hate the "my coworker is trying to sabotage my weight loss by bringing in treats!" whine. And I don't just say this as a coworker who brings in said treats, I say it as a human being who has free will and doesn't have a paranoid chip on her shoulder, chocolate or otherwise.
You are not so special, and the world not so petty, that Becky from accounting is trying to derail your – yes, YOUR! PERSONAL!– weight loss goals. Even if she is, you aren't tied to your office chair while she crams cookies fois gras-style down your gullet (if this is the case, I think OSHA would be a better organization to contact than MFP). Occam's razor would say that your coworker is trying to be nice and, also, you aren't the only person in the office, buttercup. Maybe Josh from marketing or that guy who delivers the mail whom you've never bothered to learn the name of would like an afternoon pick-me-up.
The "solutions" to this "problem" are usually just as bad. I especially hate the, "throw it away in front of them, they'll get the hint" one. Again, I AM that coworker who brings in homemade goods, and based on feedback, I am a damn good cook. I've also lost 35lb in the last year. I love to bake (it's very soothing) but I don't have much of a sweet tooth so I undoubtedly make more than I know I'd eat for weeks. So, why not share the bounty? Honestly, if a coworker accepted a brownie and then made sure that I saw them throw it in the trash, I wouldn't "take the hint" that I'm not supposed to bring in treats. I'd be a little hurt because I put time, money and effort into doing something nice for the office and you're frankly coming across like a world-class kittenhole and remarkable egotist for no good reason. Even if your coworker is bringing in dollar-store doughnuts, they spent their money to be nice. Hell, my supervisor's treat last month sent me into anaphylaxis and I don't shout "murderer!" every time I see her (sometimes. Not every time.)
Maybe I'm completely wrong. Maybe there really are Brazil-esque businesses where your coworkers surround you chanting "EAT! THE! CAKE!!! EAT! THE! CAKE!!!" and you get a zap to the cajones if you refuse. Is that what real office jobs are like? I've worked in non-profits my professional career, we're kind of the hippies of the corporate world.
I personally think this cake culture is a damaging maladaption. It's not a "nice" thing to bring in fat pills. It's definitely a bad thing to do. But because we have a cake culture in offices, it's almost expected that everyone take their turn bringing in sugary, fatty foods with which to tempt each other. Also to order and share a cake when a coworker has a birthday...yuck. It's just not a healthy practice for us humans to have adopted and yet we have and there's all kind of societal expectations around accepting the food, taking your turn to bring in food, etc. The sooner gone the better.
You've inspired me...I plan to bring in donuts for my team tomorrow.
Seriously, there's no reason we can't eat sweets in moderation, especially as part of a celebration of a person and/or their achievements.
Lol. I hate sweets. Cannot stomach icing...so sweet my teeth hurt. So to me, it's torture to have to pretend to eat some kind of gooey treat. Blerg.
Or you could just not eat it.
I don't. But I see and watch others get pressured into eating this stuff when they'd obviously rather wouldn't.
That's their fault for acquiescing. Not the fault of "cake culture".
Really? So would you apply this thought process to other cultural practices which encourage certain behaviours? Such as encouraging young teens to engage in drinking, but when they do drink to say it's all their fault for swallowing the alcoholic beverages?
Yup. There was a lot about teenage peer pressure I didn't succumb to.
That final decision to drink rests with the teen.
And really, you're making quite a reach equating illegal behavior with benign, friendly social niceties.9 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »
I'll stick with my strong heart and plentiful food from weightlifting and HIIT. More bang for the buck.
Not in my experience. Can't sustain HIIT long enough to burn any meaningful amount of calories, and whatever I burn I eat back twofold or more because it increases my hunger substantially. Now don't get me wrong, no one has to do cardio (or weight lifting, or HIIT for that matter), but you can't call any form of exercise a waste of time because there are clear benefits to being active, health and otherwise.
Yes, sitting on your *kitten* is a much greater waste of time.
Since I don't like exercising in general, I'm going to spend the least amount of time possible to get the greatest benefit which means high intensity. I just want to get it over with so I can get back to thing I enjoy.
And that's totally alright! It's just, this sounds more like preference than opinion.
Nah, I still am not a fan of cardio(but it's better than nothing). I believe there are much greater benefits from high intensity exercise.
How do you know you don't burn as much calories doing HIIT? I believe that much shorter, high intensity exercise may not burn as much at the time, but the residual calorie burn from greater muscle stimulation lasts much longer resulting in more CO.
EPOC (Excess Post Exercise Oxygen Consunption) for HIIT is 14%, for Low Impact Steady State it's 7%. That's the % of residual burn of calories burned during. FWIW. HIIT can't be done for very long so the overall burn is not that big. If you could do 30 minutes of HIIT, your Butner with EPOCH would be about the same as 60 minutes of LISS but who can do 30 minutes of HIIT??
This would depend on the intensity of the HIIT. And as @GottaBurnEmAll stated not all "HIIT" is equal. To me, HIIT means the intervals are 100% all out.
That is the HIIT I'm talking about and in exercise physiology circle based on studies, that is the commonly accepted number. This was discussed in detail on the Lyle McDonald article sjomial linked to. It is also the number Dr. Brad Shoenfeld uses. It pretty objective and not really the subject of much speculation as to variance.
Less that 100% all out would not technically be HIIT but would be considered interval training. The EPOC would fall somewhere between LISS and HIIT depending on intensity. All HIIT is not equal because the Marketing woo machines call everything HIIT today. Things like 1 hours HIIT classes. If you can do it for 1 hour, it ain't HIIT!!
PS: The link sjomial gave is the 2nd in a series of in depth article about the subject and references a lot of the current research. If that is the link you are kind of dismissive of in one of your posts above, I suggest you didn't read it thoroughly. There are links to both the initial article in the series and the following ones at the bottom of the one posted.
I did read it, but I'll look at the references too. My main leaning to HIIT over cardio is that it is closer to weightlifting in it's muscle building potential... if I am not mistaken. However, I pretty much just lift and try to stay away from all that gross running stuff...
The studies that showed muscle building improvements were done with untrained subjects. In someone like you are me doing weight training that has not been demonstrated. In a trained individual, the benefit is primarily increase in VO2 max. HIIT in trained subjects provides cardio benefit.
If you read the series of articles, he covers all of this.
Ah..
So, I understand how HIIT would not improve muscle building in someone who lifts. But wouldn't it build muscle in someone who typically only does cardio (steady state)?
Possibly, I don't know. It wasn't one of the scenarios addressed.
It should. Think of HIIT (or any cardio workout) as a VERY long weightlifting set using VERY light weights. For example, if you're riding a bicycle for an hour and keep an average cadence of 80 rpm on the pedals you've just done 4,800 repetitions. That'll build muscle.
Let's look at Chris Froome (one of the world's elite cyclists right now, who rides more than about 99.9% of all human beings) and see how that works for him:
6 -
I have decided cake culture sucks.
I don't have an office job, but if I did, cake culture would just be a blur of cakes, cookies, bagels and whatnot that people would be mocking ME ME ME ME with that I couldn't eat because gluten.
Therefor, cake culture should be banished. Because I can't get in on it.
We have to think of everyone's feelings, right? That's how this works, isn't it? Am I doing this right?19 -
Bry_Lander wrote: »annaskiski wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »I'm sad for all the cakes feeling terrible now.
Just because someone has a desk job doesn't mean they're lazy AF. They just happen to have a job that isn't active. I'd say the bigger problem here is a culture of screens as entertainment in their various forms than the bringing of cakes to work. People who are more active have little issue fitting in calorie dense deliciousness into their day and why shouldn't they if they can.
Side note: cake doesn't give you cancer because of its toxicity, straw man to compare it to cigarettes.
Not really a straw man as studies have shown that being overweight is as bad as smoking insofar as risk of premature death. Cake can make you overweight...especially as part of a program of unhealthy snacking whilst doing sedentary activities. Both obesity and smoking increase the risk of cancer. It doesn't matter how the cancer is caused ( toxicity vs. Excess fat) you still die.
Seriously dude, you have an eating disorder.
I work in an office, and the there are a large variety of people here. There's a group that bikes for miles before/after during lunch. Another large group converted an unused storage room into a large lifting area. (They brought in those cushiony floor mats, a power cage, several squat racks, etc). Yes, there are some overweight people here as well. I would estimate they make up about 25% of the people here. (Several hundred peeps in this building.) So not the majority by any means.
Sharing food to express friendship has been the cultural norm for humans for thousands of years.
Perhaps you have a problem with cake. You need to learn to deal with it, or you will not be successful. Understand, not everyone needs to lose weight, has diabetes, or other health issues. Cake is not a deadly food.
My office work culture mirrors (or is perhaps worse) than the country as a whole, with perhaps over 70% overweight. How you guys ended up with a workforce of only 25% overweight is amazing, someone should do a case study on your culture!
Our corporate wellness group is desperately trying to get our overweight workforce to adopt healthier lifestyle habits with dismal results The smoking area outside is bustling as is the cafeteria section that sells fried and breaded food. Our site fitness center is never busy and the people there are the ones that need it the least. Charity fundraising entails selling donuts and walking tacos to hundreds of people who would not be able to buy them if the elevator broke down and they had to climb a flight of stairs or two. "Cake Culture" is not an urban legend, I see it in practice all the time.
My office is an engineering building, and I've found at most places (well, all really) that engineers are 'weekend warriors', (biking, running marathons, etc). They are a pretty healthy bunch. I've observed that in an office building of several hundred people, we have 1 smoker. This has been the norm in all the places I've worked at.
My first job out of college was for Motorola. The campus did have a factory building on site. At lunch, it looked like the entire factory workforce was outside smoking. (several hundred). The engineering building had at most 2 people.
I do believe that education has a big impact on health habits.5 -
BTW, I just looked up obesity rates in the US, and in my state (MA), the rate is 20-25%.
If you live somewhere with a 70 % obesity rate, ummm, you have to tell us where you live, as the top states are at about 35%..3 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »I have decided cake culture sucks.
I don't have an office job, but if I did, cake culture would just be a blur of cakes, cookies, bagels and whatnot that people would be mocking ME ME ME ME with that I couldn't eat because gluten.
Therefor, cake culture should be banished. Because I can't get in on it.
We have to think of everyone's feelings, right? That's how this works, isn't it? Am I doing this right?
Unfortunately, this is exactly how stuff like this gets banned. One person gets their feelings hurt, or feels offended when people are generally just trying to be nice and cries about it until nobody else can partake.
Its cake. For people's birthdays. Good God, I don't even know how this topic has sustained debate. If you don't want cake, don't eat cake. If you are unable to say no, or feel the need to pretend to eat it then you have much larger issues than the person bringing in the cake.12 -
annaskiski wrote: »BTW, I just looked up obesity rates in the US, and in my state (MA), the rate is 20-25%.
If you live somewhere with a 70 % obesity rate, ummm, you have to tell us where you live, as the top states are at about 35%..
The "overweight" category has a greater number.2 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »I have decided cake culture sucks.
I don't have an office job, but if I did, cake culture would just be a blur of cakes, cookies, bagels and whatnot that people would be mocking ME ME ME ME with that I couldn't eat because gluten.
Therefor, cake culture should be banished. Because I can't get in on it.
We have to think of everyone's feelings, right? That's how this works, isn't it? Am I doing this right?
Unfortunately, this is exactly how stuff like this gets banned. One person gets their feelings hurt, or feels offended when people are generally just trying to be nice and cries about it until nobody else can partake.
Its cake. For people's birthdays. Good God, I don't even know how this topic has sustained debate. If you don't want cake, don't eat cake. If you are unable to say no, or feel the need to pretend to eat it then you have much larger issues than the person bringing in the cake.
I hope you realize that I was employing the sarcasm font.
I'm in full agreement that it's quite simple to just say no, and if people pushing the cake get butthurt about it, that's their problem. I don't owe anyone anything other than saying "thanks for offering, but no thank you, I'm not hungry."3 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »
I'll stick with my strong heart and plentiful food from weightlifting and HIIT. More bang for the buck.
Not in my experience. Can't sustain HIIT long enough to burn any meaningful amount of calories, and whatever I burn I eat back twofold or more because it increases my hunger substantially. Now don't get me wrong, no one has to do cardio (or weight lifting, or HIIT for that matter), but you can't call any form of exercise a waste of time because there are clear benefits to being active, health and otherwise.
Yes, sitting on your *kitten* is a much greater waste of time.
Since I don't like exercising in general, I'm going to spend the least amount of time possible to get the greatest benefit which means high intensity. I just want to get it over with so I can get back to thing I enjoy.
And that's totally alright! It's just, this sounds more like preference than opinion.
Nah, I still am not a fan of cardio(but it's better than nothing). I believe there are much greater benefits from high intensity exercise.
How do you know you don't burn as much calories doing HIIT? I believe that much shorter, high intensity exercise may not burn as much at the time, but the residual calorie burn from greater muscle stimulation lasts much longer resulting in more CO.
EPOC (Excess Post Exercise Oxygen Consunption) for HIIT is 14%, for Low Impact Steady State it's 7%. That's the % of residual burn of calories burned during. FWIW. HIIT can't be done for very long so the overall burn is not that big. If you could do 30 minutes of HIIT, your Butner with EPOCH would be about the same as 60 minutes of LISS but who can do 30 minutes of HIIT??
This would depend on the intensity of the HIIT. And as @GottaBurnEmAll stated not all "HIIT" is equal. To me, HIIT means the intervals are 100% all out.
That is the HIIT I'm talking about and in exercise physiology circle based on studies, that is the commonly accepted number. This was discussed in detail on the Lyle McDonald article sjomial linked to. It is also the number Dr. Brad Shoenfeld uses. It pretty objective and not really the subject of much speculation as to variance.
Less that 100% all out would not technically be HIIT but would be considered interval training. The EPOC would fall somewhere between LISS and HIIT depending on intensity. All HIIT is not equal because the Marketing woo machines call everything HIIT today. Things like 1 hours HIIT classes. If you can do it for 1 hour, it ain't HIIT!!
PS: The link sjomial gave is the 2nd in a series of in depth article about the subject and references a lot of the current research. If that is the link you are kind of dismissive of in one of your posts above, I suggest you didn't read it thoroughly. There are links to both the initial article in the series and the following ones at the bottom of the one posted.
I did read it, but I'll look at the references too. My main leaning to HIIT over cardio is that it is closer to weightlifting in it's muscle building potential... if I am not mistaken. However, I pretty much just lift and try to stay away from all that gross running stuff...
The studies that showed muscle building improvements were done with untrained subjects. In someone like you are me doing weight training that has not been demonstrated. In a trained individual, the benefit is primarily increase in VO2 max. HIIT in trained subjects provides cardio benefit.
If you read the series of articles, he covers all of this.
Ah..
So, I understand how HIIT would not improve muscle building in someone who lifts. But wouldn't it build muscle in someone who typically only does cardio (steady state)?
Possibly, I don't know. It wasn't one of the scenarios addressed.
It should. Think of HIIT (or any cardio workout) as a VERY long weightlifting set using VERY light weights. For example, if you're riding a bicycle for an hour and keep an average cadence of 80 rpm on the pedals you've just done 4,800 repetitions. That'll build muscle.
I think anything that creates overload will cause some muscle growth if nutritional conditions are right. But, as I said, in the sources I read, it was not addressed. Sadly, many of the studies on HIIT seem to have been done on college campuses utilizing untrained students and the subjects. In Lyle McDonalds articles, he talks about this and how it confounds much of the results.
Obviously, if someone is working, say legs, a couple of times in the gym per week, running or bike riding is not likely to cause lots of muscle development. I can't say it wouldn't cause any though as the act of running or riding is slightly different than weight lifting. So, I'm sure there would be some muscular adaptation that would take place. Whether that would result in hypertrophy though may be questionable. More likely neuromuscular recruitment adaptations.
1 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »I have decided cake culture sucks.
I don't have an office job, but if I did, cake culture would just be a blur of cakes, cookies, bagels and whatnot that people would be mocking ME ME ME ME with that I couldn't eat because gluten.
Therefor, cake culture should be banished. Because I can't get in on it.
We have to think of everyone's feelings, right? That's how this works, isn't it? Am I doing this right?
Unfortunately, this is exactly how stuff like this gets banned. One person gets their feelings hurt, or feels offended when people are generally just trying to be nice and cries about it until nobody else can partake.
Its cake. For people's birthdays. Good God, I don't even know how this topic has sustained debate. If you don't want cake, don't eat cake. If you are unable to say no, or feel the need to pretend to eat it then you have much larger issues than the person bringing in the cake.
I hope you realize that I was employing the sarcasm font.
I'm in full agreement that it's quite simple to just say no, and if people pushing the cake get butthurt about it, that's their problem. I don't owe anyone anything other than saying "thanks for offering, but no thank you, I'm not hungry."
Oh yeah, the sarcasm was pretty evident and your posts rarely fail to clearly make your point. I just know that even though you were being sarcastic, there are others out there who legitimately would love to ban this sort of thing.0 -
annaskiski wrote: »BTW, I just looked up obesity rates in the US, and in my state (MA), the rate is 20-25%.
If you live somewhere with a 70 % obesity rate, ummm, you have to tell us where you live, as the top states are at about 35%..
*Note that I stated "overweight", not exclusively obese
3 -
VintageFeline wrote: »But only if it's good cake.
That's my prob with cake culture... it's so rarely the good cake.6 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »I have decided cake culture sucks.
I don't have an office job, but if I did, cake culture would just be a blur of cakes, cookies, bagels and whatnot that people would be mocking ME ME ME ME with that I couldn't eat because gluten.
Therefor, cake culture should be banished. Because I can't get in on it.
We have to think of everyone's feelings, right? That's how this works, isn't it? Am I doing this right?
Unfortunately, this is exactly how stuff like this gets banned. One person gets their feelings hurt, or feels offended when people are generally just trying to be nice and cries about it until nobody else can partake.
Its cake. For people's birthdays. Good God, I don't even know how this topic has sustained debate. If you don't want cake, don't eat cake. If you are unable to say no, or feel the need to pretend to eat it then you have much larger issues than the person bringing in the cake.
I hope you realize that I was employing the sarcasm font.
I'm in full agreement that it's quite simple to just say no, and if people pushing the cake get butthurt about it, that's their problem. I don't owe anyone anything other than saying "thanks for offering, but no thank you, I'm not hungry."
Of course we all know that one insecure/compliment-seeker who just wants us to pat him/her on the back and tell them what a great person they are for bringing in XX and how delicious it is and how their XX is so much better than anything we've ever tasted, and, "You'll have to give me your recipe," and blah blah blah. Ego strokes, please.
You'll recognize her/him by the thread that is titled, "No one ever compliments me on my weight loss, why????"
Then next week s/he will complain that someone is objectifying him/her with their comments.
Ugh I worked with her. I want to post her name here so you will look out for her, but I'm guessing we all know one.3 -
cmriverside wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »I have decided cake culture sucks.
I don't have an office job, but if I did, cake culture would just be a blur of cakes, cookies, bagels and whatnot that people would be mocking ME ME ME ME with that I couldn't eat because gluten.
Therefor, cake culture should be banished. Because I can't get in on it.
We have to think of everyone's feelings, right? That's how this works, isn't it? Am I doing this right?
Unfortunately, this is exactly how stuff like this gets banned. One person gets their feelings hurt, or feels offended when people are generally just trying to be nice and cries about it until nobody else can partake.
Its cake. For people's birthdays. Good God, I don't even know how this topic has sustained debate. If you don't want cake, don't eat cake. If you are unable to say no, or feel the need to pretend to eat it then you have much larger issues than the person bringing in the cake.
I hope you realize that I was employing the sarcasm font.
I'm in full agreement that it's quite simple to just say no, and if people pushing the cake get butthurt about it, that's their problem. I don't owe anyone anything other than saying "thanks for offering, but no thank you, I'm not hungry."
Of course we all know that one insecure/compliment-seeker who just wants us to pat him/her on the back and tell them what a great person they are for bringing in XX and how delicious it is and how their XX is so much better than anything we've ever tasted, and, "You'll have to give me your recipe," and blah blah blah. Ego strokes, please.
You'll recognize her/him by the thread that is titled, "No one ever compliments me on my weight loss, why????"
Then next week s/he will complain that someone is objectifying him/her with their comments.
Ugh I worked with her. I want to post her name here so you will look out for her, but I'm guessing we all know one.
Yes, we do all know at least one of these. I'm sure I have been viewed as a jerk by those types when I have politely said, I will try just a little taste to see how good it is but I'm working on keeping my youthful figure (joke, joke). I'm not one to cave to pressure and will push back till they stop. I don't owe anyone to have to eat their food to validate them.0 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »I have decided cake culture sucks.
I don't have an office job, but if I did, cake culture would just be a blur of cakes, cookies, bagels and whatnot that people would be mocking ME ME ME ME with that I couldn't eat because gluten.
Therefor, cake culture should be banished. Because I can't get in on it.
We have to think of everyone's feelings, right? That's how this works, isn't it? Am I doing this right?
Unfortunately, this is exactly how stuff like this gets banned. One person gets their feelings hurt, or feels offended when people are generally just trying to be nice and cries about it until nobody else can partake.
Its cake. For people's birthdays. Good God, I don't even know how this topic has sustained debate. If you don't want cake, don't eat cake. If you are unable to say no, or feel the need to pretend to eat it then you have much larger issues than the person bringing in the cake.
In a working culture, the individual with their feelings hurt is allowed to air their grievance in a positive and problem solving manner. Passive aggressive tendencies are monitored, tracked, and corrected. If corrective action is not effective then the bad actor is removed and replaced.0 -
work_on_it wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »But only if it's good cake.
That's my prob with cake culture... it's so rarely the good cake.
But guarantee it will get eaten, even if it's *kitten* cake, while the fresh fruit will be barely touched.5 -
Packerjohn wrote: »work_on_it wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »But only if it's good cake.
That's my prob with cake culture... it's so rarely the good cake.
But guarantee it will get eaten, even if it's *kitten* cake, while the fresh fruit will be barely touched.
At my first office job there was a rule that if a person was late for the weekly staff meeting then they owed donuts at the next meeting. This one guy was late, hated the concept of providing a group of mostly overweight coworkers donuts, and decided to bring in a bag of apples - there was damn near a riot.11 -
Bry_Lander wrote: »annaskiski wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »I'm sad for all the cakes feeling terrible now.
Just because someone has a desk job doesn't mean they're lazy AF. They just happen to have a job that isn't active. I'd say the bigger problem here is a culture of screens as entertainment in their various forms than the bringing of cakes to work. People who are more active have little issue fitting in calorie dense deliciousness into their day and why shouldn't they if they can.
Side note: cake doesn't give you cancer because of its toxicity, straw man to compare it to cigarettes.
Not really a straw man as studies have shown that being overweight is as bad as smoking insofar as risk of premature death. Cake can make you overweight...especially as part of a program of unhealthy snacking whilst doing sedentary activities. Both obesity and smoking increase the risk of cancer. It doesn't matter how the cancer is caused ( toxicity vs. Excess fat) you still die.
Seriously dude, you have an eating disorder.
I work in an office, and the there are a large variety of people here. There's a group that bikes for miles before/after during lunch. Another large group converted an unused storage room into a large lifting area. (They brought in those cushiony floor mats, a power cage, several squat racks, etc). Yes, there are some overweight people here as well. I would estimate they make up about 25% of the people here. (Several hundred peeps in this building.) So not the majority by any means.
Sharing food to express friendship has been the cultural norm for humans for thousands of years.
Perhaps you have a problem with cake. You need to learn to deal with it, or you will not be successful. Understand, not everyone needs to lose weight, has diabetes, or other health issues. Cake is not a deadly food.
My office work culture mirrors (or is perhaps worse) than the country as a whole, with perhaps over 70% overweight. How you guys ended up with a workforce of only 25% overweight is amazing, someone should do a case study on your culture!
Our corporate wellness group is desperately trying to get our overweight workforce to adopt healthier lifestyle habits with dismal results The smoking area outside is bustling as is the cafeteria section that sells fried and breaded food. Our site fitness center is never busy and the people there are the ones that need it the least. Charity fundraising entails selling donuts and walking tacos to hundreds of people who would not be able to buy them if the elevator broke down and they had to climb a flight of stairs or two. "Cake Culture" is not an urban legend, I see it in practice all the time.
I work at a community college with multiple campuses, and there is no cake culture at the small campus I work on (except at Christmas). I am still fat. Not having cake at my work place made no difference.13 -
work_on_it wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »But only if it's good cake.
That's my prob with cake culture... it's so rarely the good cake.
This is why in a few of my jobs I was the bringer of cake. I make good cake.
But as vested as I am in the cake culture I actually don't eat much of it because of the whole most cake is bad cake thing. I'm not wasting calories on substandard fare and I'm not about to bake a whole cake just for me (no office to foist it on now).
My brownies were especially legendary in their day *reminisces wistfully*8 -
VintageFeline wrote: »work_on_it wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »But only if it's good cake.
That's my prob with cake culture... it's so rarely the good cake.
This is why in a few of my jobs I was the bringer of cake. I make good cake.
But as vested as I am in the cake culture I actually don't eat much of it because of the whole most cake is bad cake thing. I'm not wasting calories on substandard fare and I'm not about to bake a whole cake just for me (no office to foist it on now).
My brownies were especially legendary in their day *reminisces wistfully*
Please to send sample.7 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »
I'll stick with my strong heart and plentiful food from weightlifting and HIIT. More bang for the buck.
Not in my experience. Can't sustain HIIT long enough to burn any meaningful amount of calories, and whatever I burn I eat back twofold or more because it increases my hunger substantially. Now don't get me wrong, no one has to do cardio (or weight lifting, or HIIT for that matter), but you can't call any form of exercise a waste of time because there are clear benefits to being active, health and otherwise.
Yes, sitting on your *kitten* is a much greater waste of time.
Since I don't like exercising in general, I'm going to spend the least amount of time possible to get the greatest benefit which means high intensity. I just want to get it over with so I can get back to thing I enjoy.
And that's totally alright! It's just, this sounds more like preference than opinion.
Nah, I still am not a fan of cardio(but it's better than nothing). I believe there are much greater benefits from high intensity exercise.
How do you know you don't burn as much calories doing HIIT? I believe that much shorter, high intensity exercise may not burn as much at the time, but the residual calorie burn from greater muscle stimulation lasts much longer resulting in more CO.
EPOC (Excess Post Exercise Oxygen Consunption) for HIIT is 14%, for Low Impact Steady State it's 7%. That's the % of residual burn of calories burned during. FWIW. HIIT can't be done for very long so the overall burn is not that big. If you could do 30 minutes of HIIT, your Butner with EPOCH would be about the same as 60 minutes of LISS but who can do 30 minutes of HIIT??
This would depend on the intensity of the HIIT. And as @GottaBurnEmAll stated not all "HIIT" is equal. To me, HIIT means the intervals are 100% all out.
That is the HIIT I'm talking about and in exercise physiology circle based on studies, that is the commonly accepted number. This was discussed in detail on the Lyle McDonald article sjomial linked to. It is also the number Dr. Brad Shoenfeld uses. It pretty objective and not really the subject of much speculation as to variance.
Less that 100% all out would not technically be HIIT but would be considered interval training. The EPOC would fall somewhere between LISS and HIIT depending on intensity. All HIIT is not equal because the Marketing woo machines call everything HIIT today. Things like 1 hours HIIT classes. If you can do it for 1 hour, it ain't HIIT!!
PS: The link sjomial gave is the 2nd in a series of in depth article about the subject and references a lot of the current research. If that is the link you are kind of dismissive of in one of your posts above, I suggest you didn't read it thoroughly. There are links to both the initial article in the series and the following ones at the bottom of the one posted.
I did read it, but I'll look at the references too. My main leaning to HIIT over cardio is that it is closer to weightlifting in it's muscle building potential... if I am not mistaken. However, I pretty much just lift and try to stay away from all that gross running stuff...
The studies that showed muscle building improvements were done with untrained subjects. In someone like you are me doing weight training that has not been demonstrated. In a trained individual, the benefit is primarily increase in VO2 max. HIIT in trained subjects provides cardio benefit.
If you read the series of articles, he covers all of this.
Ah..
So, I understand how HIIT would not improve muscle building in someone who lifts. But wouldn't it build muscle in someone who typically only does cardio (steady state)?
Possibly, I don't know. It wasn't one of the scenarios addressed.
It should. Think of HIIT (or any cardio workout) as a VERY long weightlifting set using VERY light weights. For example, if you're riding a bicycle for an hour and keep an average cadence of 80 rpm on the pedals you've just done 4,800 repetitions. That'll build muscle.
I'm sure it builds some muscle in previously sedentary individuals.
It's not very scientific, but I just look at those who primarily do long distance anything and say, "I don't want to look like that." I look at weightlifters or Olympic sprinters and I'm like, " Yeah, that's where I want to be."1 -
I was away this weekend with 4 friends and my BF. One of the ladies was turning 50, and her husband had the hotel put a cake and a balloon in her room. She chose to share the cake with the group. I chose not to have any (I don't like cake that much and I could tell it wouldn't be worth it). You would have thought I refused car insurance. Everyone made a HUGE deal about it, but I didn't care. I stood my ground. Afterwards my BF told me it was horrible cake and I missed nothing. But wow, did I offend.3
-
amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »
I'll stick with my strong heart and plentiful food from weightlifting and HIIT. More bang for the buck.
Not in my experience. Can't sustain HIIT long enough to burn any meaningful amount of calories, and whatever I burn I eat back twofold or more because it increases my hunger substantially. Now don't get me wrong, no one has to do cardio (or weight lifting, or HIIT for that matter), but you can't call any form of exercise a waste of time because there are clear benefits to being active, health and otherwise.
Yes, sitting on your *kitten* is a much greater waste of time.
Since I don't like exercising in general, I'm going to spend the least amount of time possible to get the greatest benefit which means high intensity. I just want to get it over with so I can get back to thing I enjoy.
And that's totally alright! It's just, this sounds more like preference than opinion.
Nah, I still am not a fan of cardio(but it's better than nothing). I believe there are much greater benefits from high intensity exercise.
How do you know you don't burn as much calories doing HIIT? I believe that much shorter, high intensity exercise may not burn as much at the time, but the residual calorie burn from greater muscle stimulation lasts much longer resulting in more CO.
EPOC (Excess Post Exercise Oxygen Consunption) for HIIT is 14%, for Low Impact Steady State it's 7%. That's the % of residual burn of calories burned during. FWIW. HIIT can't be done for very long so the overall burn is not that big. If you could do 30 minutes of HIIT, your Butner with EPOCH would be about the same as 60 minutes of LISS but who can do 30 minutes of HIIT??
This would depend on the intensity of the HIIT. And as @GottaBurnEmAll stated not all "HIIT" is equal. To me, HIIT means the intervals are 100% all out.
That is the HIIT I'm talking about and in exercise physiology circle based on studies, that is the commonly accepted number. This was discussed in detail on the Lyle McDonald article sjomial linked to. It is also the number Dr. Brad Shoenfeld uses. It pretty objective and not really the subject of much speculation as to variance.
Less that 100% all out would not technically be HIIT but would be considered interval training. The EPOC would fall somewhere between LISS and HIIT depending on intensity. All HIIT is not equal because the Marketing woo machines call everything HIIT today. Things like 1 hours HIIT classes. If you can do it for 1 hour, it ain't HIIT!!
PS: The link sjomial gave is the 2nd in a series of in depth article about the subject and references a lot of the current research. If that is the link you are kind of dismissive of in one of your posts above, I suggest you didn't read it thoroughly. There are links to both the initial article in the series and the following ones at the bottom of the one posted.
I did read it, but I'll look at the references too. My main leaning to HIIT over cardio is that it is closer to weightlifting in it's muscle building potential... if I am not mistaken. However, I pretty much just lift and try to stay away from all that gross running stuff...
The studies that showed muscle building improvements were done with untrained subjects. In someone like you are me doing weight training that has not been demonstrated. In a trained individual, the benefit is primarily increase in VO2 max. HIIT in trained subjects provides cardio benefit.
If you read the series of articles, he covers all of this.
Ah..
So, I understand how HIIT would not improve muscle building in someone who lifts. But wouldn't it build muscle in someone who typically only does cardio (steady state)?
Possibly, I don't know. It wasn't one of the scenarios addressed.
It should. Think of HIIT (or any cardio workout) as a VERY long weightlifting set using VERY light weights. For example, if you're riding a bicycle for an hour and keep an average cadence of 80 rpm on the pedals you've just done 4,800 repetitions. That'll build muscle.
I think anything that creates overload will cause some muscle growth if nutritional conditions are right. But, as I said, in the sources I read, it was not addressed. Sadly, many of the studies on HIIT seem to have been done on college campuses utilizing untrained students and the subjects. In Lyle McDonalds articles, he talks about this and how it confounds much of the results.
Obviously, if someone is working, say legs, a couple of times in the gym per week, running or bike riding is not likely to cause lots of muscle development. I can't say it wouldn't cause any though as the act of running or riding is slightly different than weight lifting. So, I'm sure there would be some muscular adaptation that would take place. Whether that would result in hypertrophy though may be questionable. More likely neuromuscular recruitment adaptations.
I'm not going to argue hard for hypertrophy, because I really don't know, but as an n=1, I did lose a couple of clothing sizes over a period of a few years at roughly the same body weight from something most people consider cardio (rowing, mostly boats, some machines), with negligible ancillary strength training. I don't know that NM adaptations can account for size reduction, unless "toning" really is a thing after all (heh).
This really represents a lot of reps (4000-5000 weekly, often, maybe more), with some small workload progressivity via technical improvements along the way.
Clearly, a well designed progressive weight training program would produce similar results much faster, with less workout time investment . . . but, for me, less fun. I'm not well-muscled like the lifting women around here, especially not in a well-rounded, balanced way . . . but neither am I stick-like. IMO only, of course.
5 -
Jancandoit7 wrote: »I hate this idea, and the encouragement I've seen so often stated on MFP... "so long as it fits into your daily calories you can eat anything you want." If one is willing to stick to a weight loss plan, why would they want to eat lots of empty calorie garbage foods? I don't think this should be encouraged- it's counterproductive to getting truly healthy. Shouldn't the goal be to get healthy and not just to become thin? This really bugs me....
Why does "eat what you want" automatically equate to eating "lots of empty calorie garbage foods"?
Late to the discussion, but this is what I always wonder about.4 -
WinoGelato wrote: »estherdragonbat wrote: »Made me smile! Now, I'm off to walk to the shopping mall and get my nephew his birthday present. Back in an hour and a half or so!
But will there be cake at the birthday celebration?
Of course! And I'll likely have some!2 -
estherdragonbat wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »estherdragonbat wrote: »Made me smile! Now, I'm off to walk to the shopping mall and get my nephew his birthday present. Back in an hour and a half or so!
But will there be cake at the birthday celebration?
Of course! And I'll likely have some!
You might as well be smoking.
15 -
Packerjohn wrote: »work_on_it wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »But only if it's good cake.
That's my prob with cake culture... it's so rarely the good cake.
But guarantee it will get eaten, even if it's *kitten* cake, while the fresh fruit will be barely touched.
I guess I really live in a weird part of the country, or work in a field with a lot of weird peeps.
We get a huge box of fruit from our Peapod delivery service every week, one for every floor. The fruit is very popular and def gets eaten. Even stuff that you would think would be hard to share, like large cantaloupes and other melons.
But someone always cuts one up and puts it on the counter. Gone in a few hours...10 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »
I'll stick with my strong heart and plentiful food from weightlifting and HIIT. More bang for the buck.
Not in my experience. Can't sustain HIIT long enough to burn any meaningful amount of calories, and whatever I burn I eat back twofold or more because it increases my hunger substantially. Now don't get me wrong, no one has to do cardio (or weight lifting, or HIIT for that matter), but you can't call any form of exercise a waste of time because there are clear benefits to being active, health and otherwise.
Yes, sitting on your *kitten* is a much greater waste of time.
Since I don't like exercising in general, I'm going to spend the least amount of time possible to get the greatest benefit which means high intensity. I just want to get it over with so I can get back to thing I enjoy.
And that's totally alright! It's just, this sounds more like preference than opinion.
Nah, I still am not a fan of cardio(but it's better than nothing). I believe there are much greater benefits from high intensity exercise.
How do you know you don't burn as much calories doing HIIT? I believe that much shorter, high intensity exercise may not burn as much at the time, but the residual calorie burn from greater muscle stimulation lasts much longer resulting in more CO.
EPOC (Excess Post Exercise Oxygen Consunption) for HIIT is 14%, for Low Impact Steady State it's 7%. That's the % of residual burn of calories burned during. FWIW. HIIT can't be done for very long so the overall burn is not that big. If you could do 30 minutes of HIIT, your Butner with EPOCH would be about the same as 60 minutes of LISS but who can do 30 minutes of HIIT??
This would depend on the intensity of the HIIT. And as @GottaBurnEmAll stated not all "HIIT" is equal. To me, HIIT means the intervals are 100% all out.
That is the HIIT I'm talking about and in exercise physiology circle based on studies, that is the commonly accepted number. This was discussed in detail on the Lyle McDonald article sjomial linked to. It is also the number Dr. Brad Shoenfeld uses. It pretty objective and not really the subject of much speculation as to variance.
Less that 100% all out would not technically be HIIT but would be considered interval training. The EPOC would fall somewhere between LISS and HIIT depending on intensity. All HIIT is not equal because the Marketing woo machines call everything HIIT today. Things like 1 hours HIIT classes. If you can do it for 1 hour, it ain't HIIT!!
PS: The link sjomial gave is the 2nd in a series of in depth article about the subject and references a lot of the current research. If that is the link you are kind of dismissive of in one of your posts above, I suggest you didn't read it thoroughly. There are links to both the initial article in the series and the following ones at the bottom of the one posted.
I did read it, but I'll look at the references too. My main leaning to HIIT over cardio is that it is closer to weightlifting in it's muscle building potential... if I am not mistaken. However, I pretty much just lift and try to stay away from all that gross running stuff...
The studies that showed muscle building improvements were done with untrained subjects. In someone like you are me doing weight training that has not been demonstrated. In a trained individual, the benefit is primarily increase in VO2 max. HIIT in trained subjects provides cardio benefit.
If you read the series of articles, he covers all of this.
Ah..
So, I understand how HIIT would not improve muscle building in someone who lifts. But wouldn't it build muscle in someone who typically only does cardio (steady state)?
Possibly, I don't know. It wasn't one of the scenarios addressed.
It should. Think of HIIT (or any cardio workout) as a VERY long weightlifting set using VERY light weights. For example, if you're riding a bicycle for an hour and keep an average cadence of 80 rpm on the pedals you've just done 4,800 repetitions. That'll build muscle.
I think anything that creates overload will cause some muscle growth if nutritional conditions are right. But, as I said, in the sources I read, it was not addressed. Sadly, many of the studies on HIIT seem to have been done on college campuses utilizing untrained students and the subjects. In Lyle McDonalds articles, he talks about this and how it confounds much of the results.
Obviously, if someone is working, say legs, a couple of times in the gym per week, running or bike riding is not likely to cause lots of muscle development. I can't say it wouldn't cause any though as the act of running or riding is slightly different than weight lifting. So, I'm sure there would be some muscular adaptation that would take place. Whether that would result in hypertrophy though may be questionable. More likely neuromuscular recruitment adaptations.
I'm not going to argue hard for hypertrophy, because I really don't know, but as an n=1, I did lose a couple of clothing sizes over a period of a few years at roughly the same body weight from something most people consider cardio (rowing, mostly boats, some machines), with negligible ancillary strength training. I don't know that NM adaptations can account for size reduction, unless "toning" really is a thing after all (heh).
This really represents a lot of reps (4000-5000 weekly, often, maybe more), with some small workload progressivity via technical improvements along the way.
Clearly, a well designed progressive weight training program would produce similar results much faster, with less workout time investment . . . but, for me, less fun. I'm not well-muscled like the lifting women around here, especially not in a well-rounded, balanced way . . . but neither am I stick-like. IMO only, of course.
A couple of questions for you Ann; were you in a trained and fit state when you started? Could the reduction in clothing sizes have been from BF loss? Muscle gain (hypertrophy) would cause size increases in a lean individual. But in an individual with high to average body fat, not so much and fat loss with weight staying the same would result in size reduction. Eg. the oft referred to recomp.
I've seen your profile pic. Good muscle development!0 -
annaskiski wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »work_on_it wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »But only if it's good cake.
That's my prob with cake culture... it's so rarely the good cake.
But guarantee it will get eaten, even if it's *kitten* cake, while the fresh fruit will be barely touched.
I guess I really live in a weird part of the country, or work in a field with a lot of weird peeps.
We get a huge box of fruit from our Peapod delivery service every week, one for every floor. The fruit is very popular and def gets eaten. Even stuff that you would think would be hard to share, like large cantaloupes and other melons.
But someone always cuts one up and puts it on the counter. Gone in a few hours...
I would be on board with the fruit too. Now if we merge fruit and cake into say a fruit tart with delicious creme patissiere then we're really talking!14
This discussion has been closed.
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
- 426 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