If you've heard "70% diet, 30% training".....

bcattoes

Um, I think the 70/30 arguement is about losing weight, not running a marathon.....

This ^^ Losing or maintaining weight. Although the most common thing I see on MFP is 80% diet / 20% exercise.

Doesn't work that way for me though. I can eat pretty much anything I want as long as I exercise. But, I realize that is not true for everyone else. It all depends on what you want to eat I guess.

mud7urtle

Once again. I have never seen the associated ratio accompanied by "for weight loss". It was always in regard to fitness in general (which includes gaining fyi)

Also, sure to lose weight, it's 100% diet.. have fun burning all your muscle too, and then your metabolism slowing down enough to where you need physical activity to boost it again.

by trying to destroy overthinking and useless numbers, this thread has just promoted it more.

PJ64

70% of the time you train 30% of your body.........no wait..........you eat 70% of your calories & train 30% of your heart rate.

no no no, I got this :mad: You are 70% water & 30% creatine.............wait that can't be right. I know I will post it in a forum and get
the answer from a certified trainer :bigsmile:

postrockandcats

Don't listen to that non sense.

It's 100% what you put into it.

edit- as in, if you want to lose, you eat at a deficit. If you want to run a marathon, you train. If you want to lift big, you train.

Personally, I want all of it.

highervibes

Once again. I have never seen the associated ratio accompanied by "for weight loss". It was always in regard to fitness in general (which includes gaining fyi)

Also, sure to lose weight, it's 100% diet.. have fun burning all your muscle too, and then your metabolism slowing down enough to where you need physical activity to boost it again.

by trying to destroy overthinking and useless numbers, this thread has just promoted it more.

I've never heard of that % split and understood it to mean "training"

How would you burn all your muscle if 100% of your focus went to diet? For most of the general population who is obese or overweight, taking in adequate protein would be enough. I think if we all looked like you and we tried to cut with no ecercise we would lose a fair chunk of lean mass but I think that point is moot because without exercise we could never look like that lol

boredlimodriver

You're right, its 90/10

You can lose weight doing ZERO training as long as your diet is in check.

troll thread

gr8xpectationz

My doctor told me weight loss is 80% about nutrition, 20% about exercise, BUT exercise is critical for liking what your body looks like as the weight comes off, and exercise sets you up for greater success in maintaining weight loss.

mud7urtle

I

never

once

specified

the

ratio

was

about

losing

weight

only

but

thanks

for

finding

a

way

to

try

and

make

me

sound

wrong

Simple point: Focus on EVERYTHING that is going to be the absolute best for your progress - not "oh this is 20% so I'll miss out on ALL the benefits it could provide"

Goodness people, still overthinking. Everyone is a scientist.

jacksonpt

Ultimately it's about 2 things - goals and context. Neither one get much attention these days on the forums.

If your goal is to win the next halo tournament (or whatever the current hot game is), then neither diet nor exercise matter. If your goal is to lower your cholesterol, then both matter, but for different reasons than if you goal was to win your next triathlon, but on 20lbs of muscle, or lose 100lbs.

As far as context goes... the lack of it is why many people are confused. Rarely can a question be answered with just a single sentence (i.e. "It's more about diet than it is exercise"). Maybe, maybe not. It goes back to my first point. Rarely do people asking questions give enough context to really allow us, the MFP masses, to give meaningful advice. And even less often do we, the MFP masses, give any context to our advice.

Ultimately, as someone said earlier... the more time you spend reading, the less time you spend doing. Anything is better than nothing, but chances are there's always something you could be doing "better". At some point you just need to put in the time and effort, do what you can do, and take the progress.

.

highervibes

You're right, its 90/10

You can lose weight doing ZERO training as long as your diet is in check.

troll thread

I don't think it's a troll thread, why would you say that? What is troll=y about it? You don't agree?

ami5000psu

How is it overthinking? That makes no sense whatsoever.

WendyTerry420

Once again. I have never seen the associated ratio accompanied by "for weight loss". It was always in regard to fitness in general (which includes gaining fyi)

Also, sure to lose weight, it's 100% diet.. have fun burning all your muscle too, and then your metabolism slowing down enough to where you need physical activity to boost it again.

by trying to destroy overthinking and useless numbers, this thread has just promoted it more.

Well it seems you have simply missed it. I think everyone else is agreeing that the saying has been applied to weight loss specifically. I'm not sure how you missed it, but oh well. :flowerforyou:

mud7urtle

How is it overthinking? That makes no sense whatsoever.

B.c it's a pointless ratio

The simple fact is - weight gain and loss in very SIMPLE terms, yes it's diet.


but brb making a scientific formula that lets me know exactly how much effort I should apply to each aspect of changing my body rather than just maximizing results by putting forth best effort in each area.

highervibes

I

never

once

specified

the

ratio

was

about

losing

weight

only

but

thanks

for

finding

a

way

to

try

and

make

me

sound

wrong

Simple point: Focus on EVERYTHING that is going to be the absolute best for your progress - not "oh this is 20% so I'll miss out on ALL the benefits it could provide"

Goodness people, still overthinking. Everyone is a scientist.

Everyone here is DOING. You can do both. If if wasn't for thinking I'd still be low carbing and doing Barbie exercises at the gym. There is nothing wrong with information, discussion and even a little debate. That's how people learn.

highervibes

How is it overthinking? That makes no sense whatsoever.

B.c it's a pointless ratio

The simple fact is - weight gain and loss in very SIMPLE terms, yes it's diet.


but brb making a scientific formula that lets me know exactly how much effort I should apply to each aspect of changing my body rather than just maximizing results by putting forth best effort in each area.

Why are you taking this so personally lol?

hananah89

Besides that fact that this thread is spiraling out of control, I have worked on research at a top accredited university doing weight-loss research. It is 80% diet and 20% fitness if you wish to lose weight. Working out just gives you that extra push, but obviously isn't necessary needed to lose weight.

ami5000psu

How is it overthinking? That makes no sense whatsoever.

B.c it's a pointless ratio

The simple fact is - weight gain and loss in very SIMPLE terms, yes it's diet.


but brb making a scientific formula that lets me know exactly how much effort I should apply to each aspect of changing my body rather than just maximizing results by putting forth best effort in each area.

mud7urtle

^I can't see imgur photos.

Everyone here is DOING. You can do both. If if wasn't for thinking I'd still be low carbing and doing Barbie exercises at the gym. There is nothing wrong with information, discussion and even a little debate. That's how people learn.

Oh absolutely. Proper research goes along with maximizing results

But research/information does not equal silly thrown together ratios that promote laziness in one aspect.

I've seen your responses, we're on the same page trust me. Just others are literally putting words in my mouth (or posts?) when I never specified the ratio for anyhting, and even if I did I still was trying to stress that it wouldn't matter. Why lose out on any benefits to accompany a good diet? Just my opinion. I'm allowing others to have theirs.. if you want to follow ratios (notice how much it keeps changing already too, it's now at 90/10 - see my point) then OK. But there is another way of looking at it, and that is what I am trying to promote.

WendyTerry420

Ultimately it's about 2 things - goals and context. Neither one get much attention these days on the forums.

If your goal is to win the next halo tournament (or whatever the current hot game is), then neither diet nor exercise matter. If your goal is to lower your cholesterol, then both matter, but for different reasons than if you goal was to win your next triathlon, but on 20lbs of muscle, or lose 100lbs.

As far as context goes... the lack of it is why many people are confused. Rarely can a question be answered with just a single sentence (i.e. "It's more about diet than it is exercise"). Maybe, maybe not. It goes back to my first point. Rarely do people asking questions give enough context to really allow us, the MFP masses, to give meaningful advice. And even less often do we, the MFP masses, give any context to our advice.

Ultimately, as someone said earlier... the more time you spend reading, the less time you spend doing. Anything is better than nothing, but chances are there's always something you could be doing "better". At some point you just need to put in the time and effort, do what you can do, and take the progress.

.

:drinker:

boredlimodriver

How is it overthinking? That makes no sense whatsoever.

B.c it's a pointless ratio

The simple fact is - weight gain and loss in very SIMPLE terms, yes it's diet.


but brb making a scientific formula that lets me know exactly how much effort I should apply to each aspect of changing my body rather than just maximizing results by putting forth best effort in each area.

60% of statistics are made up 30% of the time.