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
-
Carlos_421 wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »Denying the existence of a Cake Culture seems a little silly when the mere mention of "cake" inspires multiple pages of passionate gushing over cake and other desserts...
Don't get me wrong, I love cake...but I don't need my toes to count the number of times I eat it in a year. I might not even need both hands.
Right? I have a workplace that has cake for most birthdays, and other baked goods brought in besides, and there's still only baked goods a couple times a month, max. I'm flabbergasted that this is suddenly in the gun for the obesity issue.6 -
-
Bry_Lander wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »VioletRojo wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »Denying the existence of a Cake Culture seems a little silly when the mere mention of "cake" inspires multiple pages of passionate gushing over cake and other desserts...
I think what is being denied is that Cake Culture is a bad thing.
Or that "Cake Culture" (seriously?... ok...) is responsible for obesity.
I don't think that It is responsible for obesity - but for a lot of people, it enables and perpetuates obesity.
I respectfully disagree. It doesn't "do" anything. It's just an inanimate food object. Peoples choices enable and perpetuate obesity. If you are obese, you know you should not be overindulging in cake.
Once someone is obese, they probably have insulin sensitivity issues that help keep them obese. But, cake doesn't enable and perpetuate anything. It's just a kind of food. We have all kinds of foods around us every day everywhere we go. It's all about people making choices.
it's pretty nuts to think that social pressures don't affect behavior of the population. A single individual has responsibility for their actions, but societal pressures absolutely influence outcomes in aggregate.
A culture where people show affection or appreciation by offering unhealthy food, and taking offense if that food is rejected, will without question cause more people to be obese, when considered across a population of 300 million people.
You are making the classic error of mistaking individual behavior for group behavior. Even if 90% of people can turn down the cake, the fact that the cake is presented is causing the other 10% to be more obese, which raises the incidence of obesity in the population. That's just how populations work.
Perfect example of the 'victim' mentality.
16 -
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!
Definitely in an untrained state to start - depleted even (chemotherapy, other life challenges) . Certainly there was fat loss - a fair bit. But if weight stays the same, something of equivalent weight was gained. Not just water, I think. That'd be a lot of water, over quite a time scale. Fat loss alone, with no compensating gain elsewhere, would mean lower body weight.
Recomp is fat loss with muscle gain, resulting in smaller body size at the same weight, because muscle is more compact than fat pound for pound . . . as I understand it.
And thank you.
Essentially, yes. And that is what I believe happened to you. Especially given that you started in an untrained state.
In the HIIT studies, that is what happened with untrained subjects. The gained muscle mass. So, the wrong conclusion was jumped to that HIIT universally causes muscle mass growth. McDonald's contention is that in untrained individuals, yes. In trained individuals, "no _____ way" is the how he expressed it.
Just as a minor point of clarification: Rowing is not mostly HIIT. In fact it's rarely HIIT - HIIT workouts are typically used as you'd expect: As a fraction of the workouts leading to a key competition, presumably to move VO2 max. Most of rowing (especially at my level) is LISS or regular intervals.
But yes, what you say is what I think happened: Newbie gains and recomp . . . from "cardio", mostly LISS and regular intervals. It's a strength endurance sport.
Another n=1 anecdote: Elite rowers weight train extensively, of course, and do
absurd volumes of cardiovascular work, mostly rowing (boat, machine) but also some cardio cross-training such as running or biking. On water, there are two types of rowing: Sculling, two oars per person, so laterally symmetric; and sweep, one oar per person so laterally asymmetric. Many sweep rowers specialize in a particular side, starboard or port. A former member of my rowing club had been a competitive collegiate, then US national team, rower. After her rowing career, one of her (non-sports specialist) doctors asked her if she knew that her muscular development was asymmetric - more muscle development on the side she most rowed with. (Of course she did.) Trained individual, effect of very high volume "cardio".
Yup, rowing is not HIIT pretty much any exercise from an untrained state is going to cause muscle development and cause certain hormonal fat burning adaptations. HIIT causes that to happen faster initially but LISS will cause it to happen also over a longer time frame.
I think rowing has a much more intense resistance component to it than biking or running. I'm not a spectacular runner but there are times I can get in the right rhythm with my stride and breathing that it feels fairly effortless. It's just a matter of how long my legs can go until they are past their point of conditioning and the energy runs out. Maybe once you get the muscles condition rowing is like that also? But I'm guessing getting in good rowing shape takes some work.
A peculiar thing about rowing is that you can increase your effort for quite a long time, essentially increasing the workload per stroke (you also increase your strokes per minute if your technique and conditioning allow). Doing so makes you go faster. You can keep getting faster (diminishing returns of course) until you age out or injure out, maybe. Strength improvements facilitate this, of course, but technique improvements also do so in ways that might not be superficially obvious. If it ever gets to feel effortless, other than by applying less effort, I haven't come close to finding that point.
When you see very skilled rowers race, it can look almost effortless. It isn't. Races are essentially two anaerobic sprints with varying amounts of AT in between. Watch what elite crews do after the finish line; collapse is not unusual.So, it would not surprise me that there would be muscular development at the very least and building of muscle mass in an untrained subject.
On the subject of cross training, most elite athletes have resistance training as part of their regimen. There is just no downside to it. My lifting helps my running or biking immensely and I am not even close to elite level. They would need to just to stay competitive. Do elite rowers use HIIT either before big meets or going into the season to get V02 max improvements for the most serious competitions?
I don't know details of training planning at the national team level. Based on my experience with friends and coaches of mine who coach at the collegiate level, as well having pursued coaching certification myself via education & training led by such folks, collegiate coaches at major programs use periodized training plans that include a component of high intensity work as part of prep for the most important competition(s). The training plans include quite a few variations in intensity and duration of workouts to train various capabilities, with the emphasis shifting at different times during the season in a series of macrocycles and microcycles. There's a parallel strength track, technique work (often as a component of LISS or interval workouts), and attention to nutrition.
4 -
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.
Really? Cuz in our department people would be scouring the interwebz for recipes that you could enjoy. Wouldn't require any sort of ban.
A few months ago I brought a berry mix (strawberries, blueberries, raspberries, blackberries) to a coworker who had previously said "no thanks" to an offer of a candy bar. Pointed out that berries are sweet but particularly low-sugar as far as fruits go, and high in nutrients and fiber. She burst out laughing at first and then started crying and gave me a hug.
Somebody brings in a fruit & veggie tray? I LUVZ YOUUU!
Edit: because mobile suuuuuux. *grumble*7 -
clicketykeys 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.
Really? Cuz in our department people would be scouring the interwebz for recipes that you could enjoy. Wouldn't require any sort of ban.
A few months ago I brought a berry mix (strawberries, blueberries, raspberries, blackberries) to a coworker who had previously said "no thanks" to an offer of a candy bar. Pointed out that berries are sweet but particularly low-sugar as far as fruits go, and high in nutrients and fiber. She burst out laughing at first and then started crying and gave me a hug.
Somebody brings in a fruit & veggie tray? I LUVZ YOUUU!
Edit: because mobile suuuuuux. *grumble*
Haahaa yup, I have an amazing recipe for gluten free choco orange cake...1 -
clicketykeys 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.
Really? Cuz in our department people would be scouring the interwebz for recipes that you could enjoy. Wouldn't require any sort of ban.
A few months ago I brought a berry mix (strawberries, blueberries, raspberries, blackberries) to a coworker who had previously said "no thanks" to an offer of a candy bar. Pointed out that berries are sweet but particularly low-sugar as far as fruits go, and high in nutrients and fiber. She burst out laughing at first and then started crying and gave me a hug.
Somebody brings in a fruit & veggie tray? I LUVZ YOUUU!
Edit: because mobile suuuuuux. *grumble*
You're an angel!!
Thats so nice of you to take notice. 1 -
clicketykeys 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.
Really? Cuz in our department people would be scouring the interwebz for recipes that you could enjoy. Wouldn't require any sort of ban.
A few months ago I brought a berry mix (strawberries, blueberries, raspberries, blackberries) to a coworker who had previously said "no thanks" to an offer of a candy bar. Pointed out that berries are sweet but particularly low-sugar as far as fruits go, and high in nutrients and fiber. She burst out laughing at first and then started crying and gave me a hug.
Somebody brings in a fruit & veggie tray? I LUVZ YOUUU!
Edit: because mobile suuuuuux. *grumble*
We have one guy at work who is very serious about his body building and health, and for his birthday someone brought in the most amazing fruit platter/basket thing, with the fruit all cut into cool shapes, and fruit kebabs, and yogurt dipping sauces.9 -
annaskiski wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »VioletRojo wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »Denying the existence of a Cake Culture seems a little silly when the mere mention of "cake" inspires multiple pages of passionate gushing over cake and other desserts...
I think what is being denied is that Cake Culture is a bad thing.
Or that "Cake Culture" (seriously?... ok...) is responsible for obesity.
I don't think that It is responsible for obesity - but for a lot of people, it enables and perpetuates obesity.
I respectfully disagree. It doesn't "do" anything. It's just an inanimate food object. Peoples choices enable and perpetuate obesity. If you are obese, you know you should not be overindulging in cake.
Once someone is obese, they probably have insulin sensitivity issues that help keep them obese. But, cake doesn't enable and perpetuate anything. It's just a kind of food. We have all kinds of foods around us every day everywhere we go. It's all about people making choices.
it's pretty nuts to think that social pressures don't affect behavior of the population. A single individual has responsibility for their actions, but societal pressures absolutely influence outcomes in aggregate.
A culture where people show affection or appreciation by offering unhealthy food, and taking offense if that food is rejected, will without question cause more people to be obese, when considered across a population of 300 million people.
You are making the classic error of mistaking individual behavior for group behavior. Even if 90% of people can turn down the cake, the fact that the cake is presented is causing the other 10% to be more obese, which raises the incidence of obesity in the population. That's just how populations work.
Perfect example of the 'victim' mentality.
lol what?5 -
cmriverside wrote: »clicketykeys wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »It is absolutely about being a big girl/boy and not caving to pressure. I figure if I say "No, thanks," to offers of food - that's all I need to do. If someone pushes, I repeat. Third time they get, "Seriously? Did you not hear me say no the first two times?"
I think we worry way too much about what other people think of us. Who cares if Mary from accounting doesn't like that I don't eat her pineapple upside down cake? If she doesn't like it, that's her problem to figure out. Can't change Mary. Can only control me.
So today was a REALLY hard day for me. As it happened there was pizza and fun size candy bars. I had some of each even though I had packed lunch. If I hadn't had a kitteny day id have passed. But if it hadn't been available id have survived without it.
PS: @vegaslounge I'm in NWGA. If you're ever gonna be in the area hmu and I'll take you to my fave Indian place.
um. Did you mean to quote me?
I did, actually! (Though, mmm, Nathan Fillion. DREAMY. *chinhands*) Yes, I could have said "no thanks" to the pizza or candy bars that were on offer today. Normally it wouldn't have been a problem. But I had the most awful day in months, at least, possibly in a year, and... I wouldn't have spent money on treats. Because I'm an incredible skinflint. But since they were free? HELL. FRIKKIN. YES.
My point was that I don't think - for me, at least - it's about the pressure. It's about the opportunity. Motive and opportunity, you know? The motive is always there, unfortunately ;D
BTW, here's my other Fave Detective, George Crabtree:
3 -
clicketykeys wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »clicketykeys wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »It is absolutely about being a big girl/boy and not caving to pressure. I figure if I say "No, thanks," to offers of food - that's all I need to do. If someone pushes, I repeat. Third time they get, "Seriously? Did you not hear me say no the first two times?"
I think we worry way too much about what other people think of us. Who cares if Mary from accounting doesn't like that I don't eat her pineapple upside down cake? If she doesn't like it, that's her problem to figure out. Can't change Mary. Can only control me.
So today was a REALLY hard day for me. As it happened there was pizza and fun size candy bars. I had some of each even though I had packed lunch. If I hadn't had a kitteny day id have passed. But if it hadn't been available id have survived without it.
PS: @vegaslounge I'm in NWGA. If you're ever gonna be in the area hmu and I'll take you to my fave Indian place.
um. Did you mean to quote me?
I did, actually! (Though, mmm, Nathan Fillion. DREAMY. *chinhands*) Yes, I could have said "no thanks" to the pizza or candy bars that were on offer today. Normally it wouldn't have been a problem. But I had the most awful day in months, at least, possibly in a year, and... I wouldn't have spent money on treats. Because I'm an incredible skinflint. But since they were free? HELL. FRIKKIN. YES.
My point was that I don't think - for me, at least - it's about the pressure. It's about the opportunity. Motive and opportunity, you know? The motive is always there, unfortunately ;D
BTW, here's my other Fave Detective, George Crabtree:
I LOVE George although Murdoch is sooooooo easy on the eyes.3 -
Alatariel75 wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »Denying the existence of a Cake Culture seems a little silly when the mere mention of "cake" inspires multiple pages of passionate gushing over cake and other desserts...
Don't get me wrong, I love cake...but I don't need my toes to count the number of times I eat it in a year. I might not even need both hands.
Right? I have a workplace that has cake for most birthdays, and other baked goods brought in besides, and there's still only baked goods a couple times a month, max. I'm flabbergasted that this is suddenly in the gun for the obesity issue.
Exactly. If the only time I ever ate in a caloric surplus was when other people provided me with treats, I'd have never become overweight.
I became overweight because of the daily indulgences in burgers, fries, pizza, pop tarts and cookies that I ate of my own accord with not one soul pressuring me to do so.
Compared to the calories I've spent my own money to consume, free treats at the office amount to so much of nothing that to claim them as the reason for people becoming or remaining obese is downright absurd.16 -
826_Midazaslam wrote: »Blaming your metabolism is such a cop-out.
Nothing drives me crazier than someone telling me they can't lose ANY weight because their metabolism is too slow. It's simple, CICO. Yes there are cellular differences in how your body metabolizes things, but at the end of the day, if you burn 2000 calories and only put in 1500, you're going to lose weight. Your metabolism is not some magical thing that defies the laws of thermodynamics.
I don't think it's simple at all. My metabolism is crazy awesome, and yes: nearly magical. I can eat a ton, not exercise, and the damage is minimal - these days. When I was younger, there was no damage at all. I pretty much won the metabolism lottery.
It's not a stretch to recognize that there are people on a completely opposite spectrum. One of my friends eats way better than I do, and in reasonable quantities. She also exercises regularly. Her size doesn't budge.12 -
unparalleledAF wrote: »826_Midazaslam wrote: »Blaming your metabolism is such a cop-out.
Nothing drives me crazier than someone telling me they can't lose ANY weight because their metabolism is too slow. It's simple, CICO. Yes there are cellular differences in how your body metabolizes things, but at the end of the day, if you burn 2000 calories and only put in 1500, you're going to lose weight. Your metabolism is not some magical thing that defies the laws of thermodynamics.
I don't think it's simple at all. My metabolism is crazy awesome, and yes: nearly magical. I can eat a ton, not exercise, and the damage is minimal - these days. When I was younger, there was no damage at all. I pretty much won the metabolism lottery.
It's not a stretch to recognize that there are people on a completely opposite spectrum. One of my friends eats way better than I do, and in reasonable quantities. She also exercises regularly. Her size doesn't budge.
You likely have a high NEAT (fidgety, move around a lot, take a lot of steps, don't sit down much). You're not with your friend 24/7, often people uncomfortable with their weight will keep up appearances with company and look like they eat reasonable portions and well. It's not a lottery, the differences in average BMR aren't that huge. You naturally eat close to your energy requirements. Your friends doesn't.6 -
Bry_Lander wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »VioletRojo wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »Denying the existence of a Cake Culture seems a little silly when the mere mention of "cake" inspires multiple pages of passionate gushing over cake and other desserts...
I think what is being denied is that Cake Culture is a bad thing.
Or that "Cake Culture" (seriously?... ok...) is responsible for obesity.
I don't think that It is responsible for obesity - but for a lot of people, it enables and perpetuates obesity.
I respectfully disagree. It doesn't "do" anything. It's just an inanimate food object. Peoples choices enable and perpetuate obesity. If you are obese, you know you should not be overindulging in cake.
Once someone is obese, they probably have insulin sensitivity issues that help keep them obese. But, cake doesn't enable and perpetuate anything. It's just a kind of food. We have all kinds of foods around us every day everywhere we go. It's all about people making choices.
it's pretty nuts to think that social pressures don't affect behavior of the population. A single individual has responsibility for their actions, but societal pressures absolutely influence outcomes in aggregate.
A culture where people show affection or appreciation by offering unhealthy food, and taking offense if that food is rejected, will without question cause more people to be obese, when considered across a population of 300 million people.
You are making the classic error of mistaking individual behavior for group behavior. Even if 90% of people can turn down the cake, the fact that the cake is presented is causing the other 10% to be more obese, which raises the incidence of obesity in the population. That's just how populations work.
Again, cake isn't unhealthy. Or any other treats. They are calorie dense. Context.11 -
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...
This is what cake culture could become if it got a healthy makeover. I have no issues with bonding over food at work, I just have the opinion that it's not nice to offer people unhealthy foods and then get all offended if they refuse to eat it. Far nicer to offer a person something that is good for them as well as being yummy.6 -
19 -
tomfharris wrote: »Hi Guys, new to the forums. My name is Tom and I am a PT in the UK. I run a website www.thefitnessgypsy.co.uk with loads of free training and dietary advice. I also do online training and personalised meal plans. Very happy to help out with questions on here too. Please see my bio picture for my own personal transformation. All the best,
Tom
Keeping your promotional posts at least somewhat related to the topic of the thread would be a good idea.7 -
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...
This is what cake culture could become if it got a healthy makeover. I have no issues with bonding over food at work, I just have the opinion that it's not nice to offer people unhealthy foods and then get all offended if they refuse to eat it. Far nicer to offer a person something that is good for them as well as being yummy.
I honestly can't say I've ever experienced someone getting offended by my saying "no" to cake at the office. Having said that, I would not care if they did...
"It is none of my business what people think of me. I am what I am and I do what I do. I expect nothing and accept everything..."
-Anthony Hopkins8 -
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...
This is what cake culture could become if it got a healthy makeover. I have no issues with bonding over food at work, I just have the opinion that it's not nice to offer people unhealthy foods and then get all offended if they refuse to eat it. Far nicer to offer a person something that is good for them as well as being yummy.
I honestly can't say I've ever experienced someone getting offended by my saying "no" to cake at the office. Having said that, I would not care if they did...
"It is none of my business what people think of me. I am what I am and I do what I do. I expect nothing and accept everything..."
-Anthony Hopkins
Yeah, I've been turning down most baked goods in the workplace for about ten years now (I'm vegan) and I've never once had anybody act offended, upset, or bothered. Since most people I work with don't know I'm vegan, they're probably just assuming that I don't want any or I'm not hungry and it doesn't seem to bother them in the least.
Maybe I've been unusually lucky, but this has been in three different workplaces.6 -
Lemon bars > cake, pie, cheesecake, etc7
-
I am another person who almost always ignores emails like "there are donuts and bagels in the kitchen for breakfast!" or cake (I don't care about cake) or cannolis (I like good cannolis) or Christmas cookies that appear. I also tend to ignore cakes that get brought in for special occasions unless I planned for it for some reason. I've been at goodbye parties in a conference room where others are eating cake, and no one cared or asked me why I wasn't eating cake.
That said:Bry_Lander wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »VioletRojo wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »Denying the existence of a Cake Culture seems a little silly when the mere mention of "cake" inspires multiple pages of passionate gushing over cake and other desserts...
I think what is being denied is that Cake Culture is a bad thing.
Or that "Cake Culture" (seriously?... ok...) is responsible for obesity.
I don't think that It is responsible for obesity - but for a lot of people, it enables and perpetuates obesity.
I respectfully disagree. It doesn't "do" anything. It's just an inanimate food object. Peoples choices enable and perpetuate obesity. If you are obese, you know you should not be overindulging in cake.
Once someone is obese, they probably have insulin sensitivity issues that help keep them obese. But, cake doesn't enable and perpetuate anything. It's just a kind of food. We have all kinds of foods around us every day everywhere we go. It's all about people making choices.
it's pretty nuts to think that social pressures don't affect behavior of the population. A single individual has responsibility for their actions, but societal pressures absolutely influence outcomes in aggregate.
This is true, IMO, but all we can do is accept the environment we are in, as individuals, and work with it. I'd say it's helpful to maybe try to make the environment easier to navigate, overall, AND recognize that it doesn't dictate what we do, as individuals.
One thing we can do is help improve the environment. I don't think banishing cake or not allowing people to have goodbye parties or a Cubs cake when the Cubs won the World Series (yes, we did this, clearly not why people are fat, and at least one White Sox fan loudly refused to eat any, without any negative social backlash).
However, I do think having alternative options is a great thing, so bring in some fruit or veg, maybe. If the company has snacks available, ask to have healthier snacks (we did this, doesn't matter to me since I don't snack, but helpful for some). We have work lunches that adhere to certain requirements (there are vegetarian options) so having healthier ones (suggesting healthier options) is one thing I've tried to do personally, just so I find them more enjoyable/easier to eat. By "healthy" I don't mean that food choice rather than diet is what is important, obv, just easy shorthand.
I found seeing that other people had lost weight or talking about active pursuits to be inspiring, so maybe suggesting a group or company entry at a 5K (most of the firms I have been at did this) or seeing if you can suggest a deal at a building workout room, if there is one, or local gym might be an idea, stuff like that. If obesity is an issue at your workplace, there might even be more -- lots of people have work WW (I would hate that but my friend enjoyed it and won some WW contest her office ran). Clearly use your good sense and don't make yourself obnoxious, but there are things that can be done to make the environment better.
I don't think assuming that someone who brings in donuts for breakfast or a cake = bad person and enabler or has bad motives, or seeing dumping the excess Halloween candy in the office kitchen as evil is especially helpful. AND, in the current US, food is everywhere, so I doubt office goodies are the issue if the office has lots of obese people. It's not tough to have coffee runs that involve high cal coffee and sweets replace the office goodies, after all.7 -
VintageFeline wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »VioletRojo wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »Denying the existence of a Cake Culture seems a little silly when the mere mention of "cake" inspires multiple pages of passionate gushing over cake and other desserts...
I think what is being denied is that Cake Culture is a bad thing.
Or that "Cake Culture" (seriously?... ok...) is responsible for obesity.
I don't think that It is responsible for obesity - but for a lot of people, it enables and perpetuates obesity.
I respectfully disagree. It doesn't "do" anything. It's just an inanimate food object. Peoples choices enable and perpetuate obesity. If you are obese, you know you should not be overindulging in cake.
Once someone is obese, they probably have insulin sensitivity issues that help keep them obese. But, cake doesn't enable and perpetuate anything. It's just a kind of food. We have all kinds of foods around us every day everywhere we go. It's all about people making choices.
it's pretty nuts to think that social pressures don't affect behavior of the population. A single individual has responsibility for their actions, but societal pressures absolutely influence outcomes in aggregate.
A culture where people show affection or appreciation by offering unhealthy food, and taking offense if that food is rejected, will without question cause more people to be obese, when considered across a population of 300 million people.
You are making the classic error of mistaking individual behavior for group behavior. Even if 90% of people can turn down the cake, the fact that the cake is presented is causing the other 10% to be more obese, which raises the incidence of obesity in the population. That's just how populations work.
Again, cake isn't unhealthy. Or any other treats. They are calorie dense. Context.
Lolz! No way man!! I blame cake!!2 -
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...
This is what cake culture could become if it got a healthy makeover. I have no issues with bonding over food at work, I just have the opinion that it's not nice to offer people unhealthy foods and then get all offended if they refuse to eat it. Far nicer to offer a person something that is good for them as well as being yummy.
How about not acting all offended if they don't want to eat what is offered.
As others have said, that has never happened to me and I'd find it really odd.
I don't snack, so I don't care what you consider healthy -- if you offer me fruit or a boiled egg or some chicken breast thoughtfully prepared, there's a decent chance I won't want it. It's acting like it's wrong not to eat it that's the problem, not bringing in a cake.
"Cake culture" (LOL, still) in my office has nothing to do with things being offered, anyway. It's a lunch with a sweet at the end that you can take or not, or a special occasion cake (that you can take or not), or sweets in the kitchen (which may or may not be announced with an email). NOT people going around saying "please, eat my leftover Halloween candy."6 -
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!
Definitely in an untrained state to start - depleted even (chemotherapy, other life challenges) . Certainly there was fat loss - a fair bit. But if weight stays the same, something of equivalent weight was gained. Not just water, I think. That'd be a lot of water, over quite a time scale. Fat loss alone, with no compensating gain elsewhere, would mean lower body weight.
Recomp is fat loss with muscle gain, resulting in smaller body size at the same weight, because muscle is more compact than fat pound for pound . . . as I understand it.
And thank you.
Essentially, yes. And that is what I believe happened to you. Especially given that you started in an untrained state.
In the HIIT studies, that is what happened with untrained subjects. The gained muscle mass. So, the wrong conclusion was jumped to that HIIT universally causes muscle mass growth. McDonald's contention is that in untrained individuals, yes. In trained individuals, "no _____ way" is the how he expressed it.
Just as a minor point of clarification: Rowing is not mostly HIIT. In fact it's rarely HIIT - HIIT workouts are typically used as you'd expect: As a fraction of the workouts leading to a key competition, presumably to move VO2 max. Most of rowing (especially at my level) is LISS or regular intervals.
But yes, what you say is what I think happened: Newbie gains and recomp . . . from "cardio", mostly LISS and regular intervals. It's a strength endurance sport.
Another n=1 anecdote: Elite rowers weight train extensively, of course, and do
absurd volumes of cardiovascular work, mostly rowing (boat, machine) but also some cardio cross-training such as running or biking. On water, there are two types of rowing: Sculling, two oars per person, so laterally symmetric; and sweep, one oar per person so laterally asymmetric. Many sweep rowers specialize in a particular side, starboard or port. A former member of my rowing club had been a competitive collegiate, then US national team, rower. After her rowing career, one of her (non-sports specialist) doctors asked her if she knew that her muscular development was asymmetric - more muscle development on the side she most rowed with. (Of course she did.) Trained individual, effect of very high volume "cardio".
Yup, rowing is not HIIT pretty much any exercise from an untrained state is going to cause muscle development and cause certain hormonal fat burning adaptations. HIIT causes that to happen faster initially but LISS will cause it to happen also over a longer time frame.
I think rowing has a much more intense resistance component to it than biking or running. I'm not a spectacular runner but there are times I can get in the right rhythm with my stride and breathing that it feels fairly effortless. It's just a matter of how long my legs can go until they are past their point of conditioning and the energy runs out. Maybe once you get the muscles condition rowing is like that also? But I'm guessing getting in good rowing shape takes some work.
A peculiar thing about rowing is that you can increase your effort for quite a long time, essentially increasing the workload per stroke (you also increase your strokes per minute if your technique and conditioning allow). Doing so makes you go faster. You can keep getting faster (diminishing returns of course) until you age out or injure out, maybe. Strength improvements facilitate this, of course, but technique improvements also do so in ways that might not be superficially obvious. If it ever gets to feel effortless, other than by applying less effort, I haven't come close to finding that point.
When you see very skilled rowers race, it can look almost effortless. It isn't. Races are essentially two anaerobic sprints with varying amounts of AT in between. Watch what elite crews do after the finish line; collapse is not unusual.So, it would not surprise me that there would be muscular development at the very least and building of muscle mass in an untrained subject.
On the subject of cross training, most elite athletes have resistance training as part of their regimen. There is just no downside to it. My lifting helps my running or biking immensely and I am not even close to elite level. They would need to just to stay competitive. Do elite rowers use HIIT either before big meets or going into the season to get V02 max improvements for the most serious competitions?
I don't know details of training planning at the national team level. Based on my experience with friends and coaches of mine who coach at the collegiate level, as well having pursued coaching certification myself via education & training led by such folks, collegiate coaches at major programs use periodized training plans that include a component of high intensity work as part of prep for the most important competition(s). The training plans include quite a few variations in intensity and duration of workouts to train various capabilities, with the emphasis shifting at different times during the season in a series of macrocycles and microcycles. There's a parallel strength track, technique work (often as a component of LISS or interval workouts), and attention to nutrition.
Thanks Ann. Fascinating stuff! BTW, Philly is a great rowing city. During prime season there is always lots of activity down on Boathouse Row.1 -
I think that companies would be better off as far as the health of their employees if they did not encourage cake culture as much as it is encourage.
I don't mind it myself as I will say no if I don't want it and not worry about it but I do know from experience that before I got educated I wouldn't have said no....except for medical reasons aka gluten or diabetes.
And lots don't. I work in a company where we have a lot of call centre people who are overweight to obese....and are getting bigger at work because the company is not worrying about their physical health like they do about mental health.
For example
They (call center) get served waffles with their choice of toppings which is the following:
bananas, strawberry syrup, whipped cream, powdered sugar, chocolate syrup, caramel etc.
they don't say no and often go back for 2nds...all the while sitting for 8-10 hours on the phone.
Lack of education has made it so they aren't going to say no thanks I am good...as most don't know even how to count calories let alone what servings are etc. Yes we have on site gyms and yes we have discounts at gyms but no education on why it's important...
Do I think we should stop serving cake at work...heck no...but I think that education and physical health should be a higher priority than it is...right up there with mental health.
PS out health insurance is higher due to people being out due to type 2 diabetics being out a lot...5 -
Don't know what the point is from those saying they've never ( as far as they know) offended anyone by turning down treats in the office. Are you all saying that because you haven't encountered it, it doesn't or can't happen? Or what?6
-
Bry_Lander wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »VioletRojo wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »Denying the existence of a Cake Culture seems a little silly when the mere mention of "cake" inspires multiple pages of passionate gushing over cake and other desserts...
I think what is being denied is that Cake Culture is a bad thing.
Or that "Cake Culture" (seriously?... ok...) is responsible for obesity.
I don't think that It is responsible for obesity - but for a lot of people, it enables and perpetuates obesity.
I respectfully disagree. It doesn't "do" anything. It's just an inanimate food object. Peoples choices enable and perpetuate obesity. If you are obese, you know you should not be overindulging in cake.
Once someone is obese, they probably have insulin sensitivity issues that help keep them obese. But, cake doesn't enable and perpetuate anything. It's just a kind of food. We have all kinds of foods around us every day everywhere we go. It's all about people making choices.
Yes food is an inanimate object, as are cigarettes, alcohol, and drugs. And yet millions of people are overweight, smoke, are alcoholics, and are drug addicts - tell them to knock it off.
Peer pressure and the need for social acceptance play an enormous role in addiction. I don’t find the value in stuffing my face with cake with obese people or doing shots at the bar with alcoholics, even though I am not obese and not an alcoholic. There are social events that can further relationship building without perpetuating destructive habits.7 -
I was amused just now. I get most of my meat from an awesome online supplier in the UK and my latest box jut arrived. I got a free "healthy" snack tester. I shall include a picture. 1. It's a 180 calorie bomb. 2. It's tiny. 3. It tastes like *kitten*. Or at least what I imagine *kitten* to taste like.
Pass the cake.
9
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.2K 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
- 422 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
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions