Anyone have any results working out two hours or day

Options
1235»

Replies

  • lucerorojo
    lucerorojo Posts: 790 Member
    Options
    This whole thing about "lazy" people not having time to exercise was started because I wrote in my post that fitting in 2 hours of exercise per day might be a challenge with a job. Someone followed up with people sitting on the coach for 2 hours watching TV. I thank those who have responded to that because as you've written people have different lives and situations and it might not just be "laziness" driving these decisions.
  • mgalsf12
    mgalsf12 Posts: 350 Member
    Options
    Who has time to workout 2 hours a day? Hiking on weekends is the only time that I do that much cardio in a day.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    Options
    mgalsf12 wrote: »
    Who has time to workout 2 hours a day? Hiking on weekends is the only time that I do that much cardio in a day.

    I would think that *many* people would have time to exercise for two hours a day if they made it their priority. The real issue is that most of us have hobbies, non-work obligations (school, volunteer work, housework etc), a desire to spend time with family, and things like commuting that we prioritize over working out that much.

    I *could* work out two hours a day if I wanted to, it would just come at the expense of other things in my life.
  • mitch16
    mitch16 Posts: 2,113 Member
    Options
    I think it all depends on your goals and your lifestyle... I work out for more than 2 hours several days a week--especially if I combine a yoga class and a run, or if I go skiing, surfing, or cycling...

    As they say though--you can't outrun a bad diet... If you are working out for 2 hours or more because you are bingeing, or working out for 2 hours or more and undereating to lose weight quickly then it may be considered disordered.
  • newheavensearth
    newheavensearth Posts: 870 Member
    Options
    mgalsf12 wrote: »
    Who has time to workout 2 hours a day? Hiking on weekends is the only time that I do that much cardio in a day.

    I find it. It's a matter of scheduling.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,970 Member
    Options
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    Tiffanyisalibra wrote: »
    Anyone have any results doing cardio for two hours or more than two hours . What was your weight loss results ? How many calories did you eat .
    Exercise is for health and fitness

    Exercise is for whatever reason people want to exercise. Don't try to limit other people.
  • Machka9
    Machka9 Posts: 24,865 Member
    Options

    kimny72 wrote: »
    ttreit wrote: »
    Machka9 wrote: »
    Marcie9278 wrote: »
    I would imagine two hours of cardio would mean you would have to eat a ton more to be in that sweet spot of losing weight .

    No.

    If "cardio" is a brisk walk, 2 hours will only get you about 400 calories. If you're aiming to lose weight, you'd probably only want to eat about 200-300 of those.

    If "cardio" is a bicycle ride, 2 hours will get you 800-1000. Again, if you're aiming to lose weight, you'd probably only want to eat about 400-700 of those.

    Sadly ... even 700 calories doesn't equate to "a ton". It doesn't even cover a small frozen pizza.

    I don't understand this idea. I walk an hour or two a day, every day. If I burn an extra 400 calories a day that's an extra 12,000 calories a month. On top of the calorie benefit for weightloss I am becoming healthier. When I'm healthier I feel better. When I feel better I don't feel the need to make myself feel better by eating. It's a great cycle.

    Exercising plus running a calorie deficit is a wonderfully effective way for a lot of people to lose weight. However isn't the whole point of losing weight to become healthier? There are plenty of unhealthy skinny people. I guess I just can't imagine not doing both if I've made a decision to become healthier.

    The post you quoted was responding to someone who said you would have to eat a "ton" more if you did cardio for 2 hours a day. Unfortunately, many people overestimate how many cals their exercise burns and end up out-eating their calorie burns. Or the exercise increases their appetite and if they aren't logging accurately this bites them in the keister.

    Not to split hairs, but not everyone wants to lose weight to be healthier, and not everyone is ready to commit to both the diet and exercise portions of the equation. I know plenty of people who stay fat because they aren't ready to commit to exercise and think they can't lose the weight if they don't exercise. I know plenty of people who feel healthy enough, but want to look better. So there is value in making it clear that you can lose weight sitting on the couch by just eating less. You are absolutely right though, if your goal is "as healthy as I can be" exercise is super important, possibly even more important than diet. It is for sure the most powerful tool in my toolbox :drinker:

    In my case, I exercise to meet goals. I'm a long distance cyclist. In order for me to be a long distance cyclists, I have to put in the hours.

    Being lighter helps me be a better long distance cyclist, so I lost weight by eating fewer calories than I burn.

    But I also have a fairly strong appetite and like a whole variety of food. So one of the benefits of cycling long distances is that I can get a pizza after, or go out for Indian food, or hit the fish and chips shop or whatever. :)

Categories