move less and eat less

fast_eddie_72

You know a thread has gone off the rails when someone trots out the "THAT'S A STRAW MAN!". Usual followed up by "Ad Hominem! Ad Hominem! - almost always used incorrectly, by the way.

Well, to that end, you know who else thought you could lose weight with less exercise? Yeah. You know it. A little German chap some years ago. Went by the name Adolph Hitler...

RUNNING_AMOK_1958

I don't know about the science behind this, but I usually do two long and one short workout every week with days off in between. I've had great results, maybe that's why.

fast_eddie_72

I find you very condescending.

I know this wasn't directed at me, but as long as we're airing our grievances...

...I find you very adversarial and abrasive...

...and I don't like you.

I'm abrasive?. For the most part I've just given my opinion, except in this instance.

Oh, and I'm heartbroken. I think I'll go cry myself to sleep.

Hello. I don't know you and don't have a dog in this race. Then I went and read your post history.

You are abrasive.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/post/by_user/53764292

Ad Hominem! Ad Hominem! The question is moot! lol. Sorry. I'm sure you have a valid point. Linking to a load of references from other people who agree with you often gives your point of view more credibility. I think we've reached that point in this thread..

topazora

when I started my job six months ago, I exercised less and so I had to cut my calories and my weight loss came to a stop. I think maybe my body didn't appreciate the lack of movement and cutting of calories. Now I'm going to the gym to make up for the fact that I'm no long going on 2 hour walks with my mom's dog.

pcastagner

Yeah, but if I say move less, and then someone tears me down for being against exercise, it kind of is a straw man, isn't it?


There is no magic here. There IS a curious situation where 20 minus 10 is not quite working out the same as 15 minus 5. On a practical level. Of course the laws of physics apply the same all over.

Of course the laws of thermodynamics are the same for everyone, at every weight, in every time and place. But sometimes it seems like enforcement is uneven...



I suspect it is the effect of rest.



As for science in this thread, do you mean being discussed, or actual science happening? We aren't scientists. We are consumers of a product produced by scientists.


As for people with a lot to lose not cutting this way, failure of imagination. Lots of people CYCLE THEIR CALORIES already. The logical conclusion here would be to eat less when moving less, eat more when moving more. Cutting three times harder means 66% more days not spent in a negative energy balance.

pcastagner

of course anecdotal evidence isn't science. science is a method, so...

So no science will occur in this thread?


What does it matter though if you create a calorie deficit of 3500 calories while eating 2700 calories a day (exercising 5-6 hours a week) or 2200 calories a day (with 2-3 days a week)? In the end, it will still create a 1 lb loss.

I am struggling to understand how lowering your intake and your TDEE will create more weight loss?

I have been here a year almost, and have yet to see "science occurring" in MFP.

Never have I seen you do any science.

This is a discussion forum for people on the consumer level. If I wanted to do science, I wouldn't start with a cohort that doesnt agree in basic definitions.

Missaldridge

I think you will loose more if you dont exercise if you just start excersing all of the sudden because it replaces fat with muscle but i may not be loosing as much weight as i would if i stopped excerising because it would start destroying my muscke but i am loosing inches instead aswell as still loosing weight

pcastagner

I also lost a lot of weight doing the opposite of what I recommend. It proves nothing. I would be more fit now had I done something better. I would be closer to my goal.

Okay so what you are saying then is this...

I was 40 when I started, 5ft 7 and started at 205...I have in the past weighed as little at 130lbs...so lets use that weight.

If I had just concentrated on losing the 75lbs then started exercise I would have been better off????really???

Now is losing probably 20lbs of muscle mass a good thing???? That would have taken me at what 4 years to build back...bulking, cutting ,bulking, cutting...how is that better?????

No thank you. I prefer to maintain as much of my 120lbs of muscle, eat at a reasonable deficet and take 2-3 years to acheive my ultimate goals (20-22% BF, bench my bw, DL 2x my BW etc) rather than take 1-2 years to lose 75lbs, and another maybe 4 to build back what I lost.

No, that's pretty much a crappy program I wouldn't recommend. Why would you think I would recommend no exercise?

ah because of this post and your response....

I lost around 50lbs without doing any exercise at all. For me it was too overwhelming to learn how to lose weight (for the first time in my life) and also figure out the whole exercise thing (also for the first time in my life). So I decided to focus on diet/calorie deficit. And it worked great for me doing it this way. I lost the weight and improved my health (including getting my glucose number back down into the normal range), and then as I transitioned into maintenance I started walking and my exercise routine has progressed from there. If I had to do it all over I would do the same thing again

Clearly focusing on doing one thing at a time, which is called "specificity", is a really good concept to have when you want I create any adaptation.

Wish I were as smart a you! Took me forever to realize this.

that word... focus... I don't think it means what you think it means. when I focus on one thing it doesn't mean i completely exclude another. if I meant to say "do exclusively", I'd probably say that.

I need a little "straw man award" sticker to post on some of these "takedowns" this one is quite a reach though.

No not trying to create a straw man actually asking a question...just like I did at first to clarify exactly what you meant, not that you clarified much and glossed over my questions like "what do you consider extreme for workouts"

. You are not very precise or concise with your thoughts and the OP was a bit how do I say...confusing then as you continue and not answer questions it gets more confusing then when you say "focus" on one thing...yah that means the main area of interest...trust me I read the words and take their meaning just fine.

Mean what you say, say what you mean and be able to back it up and when asked a question for clarification answer it...but Im not the only one here who still believes this OP is not as great as you think.

I will continue on my way working out 5x a week, lifting 3x out of those 5 and eating at a deficet and not worry about eating less and moving less...as I am getting great results and in less time than a lot of people that are doing this with me outside of MFP.

You see, the kind of person who needs this message already knows that their workouts are too extreme relative to their capabilities. But there is a cognitive distortion going on. If I give real numbers, that kind of person now has a solid target for creating a new version of why they are a special unicorn who needs to train like a pro.

In any case, it's NOT a thread about overtraining and how that can hold you back.


It's a thread about REST, and how it can take you to the next level.

pcastagner

I think you will loose more if you dont exercise if you just start excersing all of the sudden because it replaces fat with muscle but i may not be loosing as much weight as i would if i stopped excerising because it would start destroying my muscke but i am loosing inches instead aswell as still loosing weight

Focusing on rest does not mean you stop exercising.


Moving less does not mean being sedentary.

pcastagner

"how about a more goldylocks type approach for compliance?

some people seem to hold up better through a slow grind, some like to rip a bandaid off as quick as possible.

you just weigh your type against your goals. no reason to let the perfect be the enemy of the good.


but if you are like me, a 300 cal deficit feels more or less like a 1000 cal deficit, only with more energy to get bored with. much easier for me, personally, it turns out, to cut 3 times as hard for 1/3 as long. and oddly more effective now that I got this rest thing down."

@OP - so what I understand you to be saying above is that you are comfortable eating at 1000 calories/day deficit, with less workouts so that you can cut quicker. That is a very steep cut to maintain for an extended period - perhaps if you are someone with alot to lose, and only for a period of time...but, general recommendations on these forums seem to suggest 1 lb/week (500 cals deficit) as a rule of thumb decreasing to 250 deficit as you get within striking range of your goal. I can only speak for myself when I say there is no way I would entertain a 1000 cal deficit for an extended period of time. To me, there is a significant difference between a 300 cal deficit and a 1000 cal deficit.

I agree. However, it appears that OP has decided that his experience is the only one that matters and that anyone else's amounts to a straw man argument if it at all differs from his own.

No, it's a straw man, for instance, if I say MOVE LESS and FOCUS ON REST, and then a bunch of disingenuous and/or reading challenged individuals try to put me into a position of defending a sedentary lifestyle with very little food.


That, not sort of, IS a straw man argument. Exactly.

It's also a straw man if you ask me to defend prolonged steep deficits, especially when I've already expressed concern about the trauma of weight loss and the cumulative effects of many days in a deficit, and that it actually is the underlying reason for doing what I suggest (which, again, is this: when losing weight, FOCUS on rest and your calorie deficit)

Yeah, those are pretty clear and definite examples of the straw man approach to discrediting someone.


As for the personal attacks, they don't bother me so much. Davpul gets a lot of joy from his personal attacks, for instance, and it's no skin off my *kitten* so let him have his therapy.

DavPul

of course anecdotal evidence isn't science. science is a method, so...

So no science will occur in this thread?


What does it matter though if you create a calorie deficit of 3500 calories while eating 2700 calories a day (exercising 5-6 hours a week) or 2200 calories a day (with 2-3 days a week)? In the end, it will still create a 1 lb loss.

I am struggling to understand how lowering your intake and your TDEE will create more weight loss?

I have been here a year almost, and have yet to see "science occurring" in MFP.

Never have I seen you do any science.

This is a discussion forum for people on the consumer level. If I wanted to do science, I wouldn't start with a cohort that doesnt agree in basic definitions.

Soooooo.....you can just put something out there and back it up with......nothing? Everyone who had succeeded by doing the opposite of your claim is either a special snowflake or could maybe/possibly/maybe/sorta had better results if they followed your "plan"? And if dozens upon dozens of well reasoned, informed, and experienced posters have no idea what the hell you're talking about, the problem is with them? Because they just wanna argue? Or they are stupid?

TIL that calling out BS and trying to suss out the reasoning for unreasonable claims is a personal attack.

Brb, gonna fire my therapist because I get everything I need right here on mfp

pcastagner

of course anecdotal evidence isn't science. science is a method, so...

So no science will occur in this thread?


What does it matter though if you create a calorie deficit of 3500 calories while eating 2700 calories a day (exercising 5-6 hours a week) or 2200 calories a day (with 2-3 days a week)? In the end, it will still create a 1 lb loss.

I am struggling to understand how lowering your intake and your TDEE will create more weight loss?

I have been here a year almost, and have yet to see "science occurring" in MFP.

Never have I seen you do any science.

This is a discussion forum for people on the consumer level. If I wanted to do science, I wouldn't start with a cohort that doesnt agree in basic definitions.

Soooooo.....you can just put something out there and back it up with......nothing? Everyone who had succeeded by doing the opposite of your claim is either a special snowflake or could maybe/possibly/maybe/sorta had better results if they followed your "plan"? And if dozens upon dozens of well reasoned, informed, and experienced posters have no idea what the hell you're talking about, the problem is with them? Because they just wanna argue? Or they are stupid?

TIL that calling out BS and trying to suss out the reasoning for unreasonable claims is a personal attack.

Brb, gonna fire my therapist because I get everything I need right here on mfp

Someone stepped in and gave plenty of citations.


So yeah, I can step in here and not back it up with anything except the idea itself and an expectation that my audience shares a certain level of education. Just like you do all the time. Because it's a forum, submissions generally don't come with citations, and don't result in peer reviewed research. It's almost like, I'm not a scientist, and neither are you, we don't do science here, and that standard gets applied awfully selectively (usually by someone who thinks posting an abstract for a journal nobody can access for free is the same as being a scientist).

To the ones who asked for citations, I respectfully reminded I was on iOS and would look for them later. But someone stepped in. Those were GOOD questions, and not once did I complain about them. Nice try.


Division of labor man. Now go do your job, and find a gif to express your profundity and indicate your tribal associations.

"My plan" is not "my plan". It's pretty much literally the program Martin Berkhan recommends, which is a version of RPT. But I'm having trouble figuring out where I laid out "my plan" or on what basis you can criticize it. This post addresses something on the CONCEPTUAL level. Which is important because whichever intellectual framework I use to interpret the data I collect is going to affect the conclusions. When I focus on training, rest is something I do to keep from overtraining. When I focus on rest, rest becomes the conceptual means whereby I am effecting change, and training becomes something I do to keep from over-resting.

I am advocate a shift in concepts.

Why don't you just get into it with Berkhan? Aren't I a little below your intellectual weight class, as you've made clear many times before? He can say "an extra day of rest is more important than an extra day of training", and you can post willy wonka gifs. Oh yeah, then, be sure to bring up "science".



Seriously fed up with you dav. I would at least expect you to gloat, since I lost a firm of this argument to you in the past, WhenI was on the other side. It's almost like this has nothing to do with what was said, and everything to do with who is talking. Almost.

CyberEd312

of course anecdotal evidence isn't science. science is a method, so...

So no science will occur in this thread?


What does it matter though if you create a calorie deficit of 3500 calories while eating 2700 calories a day (exercising 5-6 hours a week) or 2200 calories a day (with 2-3 days a week)? In the end, it will still create a 1 lb loss.

I am struggling to understand how lowering your intake and your TDEE will create more weight loss?

I have been here a year almost, and have yet to see "science occurring" in MFP.

Never have I seen you do any science.

This is a discussion forum for people on the consumer level. If I wanted to do science, I wouldn't start with a cohort that doesnt agree in basic definitions.

Soooooo.....you can just put something out there and back it up with......nothing? Everyone who had succeeded by doing the opposite of your claim is either a special snowflake or could maybe/possibly/maybe/sorta had better results if they followed your "plan"? And if dozens upon dozens of well reasoned, informed, and experienced posters have no idea what the hell you're talking about, the problem is with them? Because they just wanna argue? Or they are stupid?

TIL that calling out BS and trying to suss out the reasoning for unreasonable claims is a personal attack.

Brb, gonna fire my therapist because I get everything I need right here on mfp

Someone stepped in and gave plenty of citations.


So yeah, I can step in here and not back it up with anything except the idea itself and an expectation that my audience shares a certain level of education. Just like you do all the time. Because it's a forum, submissions generally don't come with citations, and don't result in peer reviewed research. It's almost like, I'm not a scientist, and neither are you, we don't do science here, and that standard gets applied awfully selectively (usually by someone who thinks posting an abstract for a journal nobody can access for free is the same as being a scientist).

To the ones who asked for citations, I respectfully reminded I was on iOS and would look for them later. But someone stepped in. Those were GOOD questions, and not once did I complain about them. Nice try.


Division of labor man. Now go do your job, and find a gif to express your profundity and indicate your tribal associations.

So progression isn't needed for weight loss?? or for anything in life??? If a person had been sedentary for several years and was morbidly obese, their best course of action is to just Eat less and continue to lead that sedentary lifestyle they have been leading because their overall success would see better results with this approach over say, eating at a modest deficit and begin a Physical therapy program that would allow them to begin to become mobile and build strength and stamina which in turn will allow them to function better in their overall life bringing not only physical ability but also mental clarity. But instead of resting on their morals they continue to improve always building upon their previous success. As success is achieved they continue to work with their dietician and increase calories to fuel their exercises (all still while running a deficit to continue to lose weight), all while increase their overall strength allowing them to no longer be a recluse but a more productive member of society. How is that a bad thing?? and please don't come back with "Well I never said they had to be sedentary, because if you are not always progressing both mentally and most definitely physically then you will plateau. That is the miracle of the human body, it's ability to continue to improve on every level giving it the challenges to do so. There doesn't have to be limitation during weight loss, maintenance, or weight gain for that matter. Always striving for progression is built into our DNA from birth. It is or should be our survival instinct. It is only when we get complacent that we tend to fall short of our potentials.

pcastagner

of course anecdotal evidence isn't science. science is a method, so...

So no science will occur in this thread?


What does it matter though if you create a calorie deficit of 3500 calories while eating 2700 calories a day (exercising 5-6 hours a week) or 2200 calories a day (with 2-3 days a week)? In the end, it will still create a 1 lb loss.

I am struggling to understand how lowering your intake and your TDEE will create more weight loss?

I have been here a year almost, and have yet to see "science occurring" in MFP.

Never have I seen you do any science.

This is a discussion forum for people on the consumer level. If I wanted to do science, I wouldn't start with a cohort that doesnt agree in basic definitions.

Soooooo.....you can just put something out there and back it up with......nothing? Everyone who had succeeded by doing the opposite of your claim is either a special snowflake or could maybe/possibly/maybe/sorta had better results if they followed your "plan"? And if dozens upon dozens of well reasoned, informed, and experienced posters have no idea what the hell you're talking about, the problem is with them? Because they just wanna argue? Or they are stupid?

TIL that calling out BS and trying to suss out the reasoning for unreasonable claims is a personal attack.

Brb, gonna fire my therapist because I get everything I need right here on mfp

Someone stepped in and gave plenty of citations.


So yeah, I can step in here and not back it up with anything except the idea itself and an expectation that my audience shares a certain level of education. Just like you do all the time. Because it's a forum, submissions generally don't come with citations, and don't result in peer reviewed research. It's almost like, I'm not a scientist, and neither are you, we don't do science here, and that standard gets applied awfully selectively (usually by someone who thinks posting an abstract for a journal nobody can access for free is the same as being a scientist).

To the ones who asked for citations, I respectfully reminded I was on iOS and would look for them later. But someone stepped in. Those were GOOD questions, and not once did I complain about them. Nice try.


Division of labor man. Now go do your job, and find a gif to express your profundity and indicate your tribal associations.

So progression isn't needed for weight loss?? or for anything in life??? If a person had been sedentary for several years and was morbidly obese, their best course of action is to just Eat less and continue to lead that sedentary lifestyle they have been leading because their overall success would see better results with this approach over say, eating at a modest deficit and begin a Physical therapy program that would allow them to begin to become mobile and build strength and stamina which in turn will allow them to function better in their overall life bringing not only physical ability but also mental clarity. But instead of resting on their morals they continue to improve always building upon their previous success. As success is achieved they continue to work with their dietician and increase calories to fuel their exercises (all still while running a deficit to continue to lose weight), all while increase their overall strength allowing them to no longer be a recluse but a more productive member of society. How is that a bad thing?? and please don't come back with "Well I never said they had to be sedentary, because if you are not always progressing both mentally and most definitely physically then you will plateau. That is the miracle of the human body, it's ability to continue to improve on every level giving it the challenges to do so. There doesn't have to be limitation during weight loss, maintenance, or weight gain for that matter. Always striving for progression is built into our DNA from birth. It is or should be our survival instinct. It is only when we get complacent that we tend to fall short of our potentials.

What?

How can I argue I didn't say to be sedentary, without arguing I didn't say to be sedentary? Lol!


Not exercising at all isn't good for you, man. Don't do that. (Although if you are very morbidly obese and in poor health, this is EXACTLY what your doctor will order, because your doc learned in med school that weight loss is a destructive and traumatic process, and has inherent short term risks along with long term benefits)


But if you want to lose weight, rest and a deficit is your "means-whereby", and training should be thought of as a way to make that process work better and with fewer negative side effects.


If you lean out without sufficiently activating your muscular tissues, you'll wind up losing way more than necessary. Everybody knows that, or is about to, so let's just take it for granted, ok?


As for your progression stuff... I totally agree. I'd suggest strength is the safest and best place to look for progress during weight loss, because increasing strength can be the result of learning rather than muscle growth, and strength training is one of the safest forms of training around. Now although learning also is one of those things that work better in a neutral or positive energy balance, it nonetheless works really well in a negative energy balance.

Incidentally, this realization came after this last round of cutting, which started with a switch to an RPT routine specifically recommended as a good pairing with the diet I follow (leangains). I've been overjoyed to see my stalled out lifts start to progress again, but I'm still having trouble believing how much resting I have to do just to follow the basic pattern, never mind that "extra day of rest", which BELIEVE IT OR NOT, IS AN ACTUAL THING.

CyberEd312

of course anecdotal evidence isn't science. science is a method, so...

So no science will occur in this thread?


What does it matter though if you create a calorie deficit of 3500 calories while eating 2700 calories a day (exercising 5-6 hours a week) or 2200 calories a day (with 2-3 days a week)? In the end, it will still create a 1 lb loss.

I am struggling to understand how lowering your intake and your TDEE will create more weight loss?

I have been here a year almost, and have yet to see "science occurring" in MFP.

Never have I seen you do any science.

This is a discussion forum for people on the consumer level. If I wanted to do science, I wouldn't start with a cohort that doesnt agree in basic definitions.

Soooooo.....you can just put something out there and back it up with......nothing? Everyone who had succeeded by doing the opposite of your claim is either a special snowflake or could maybe/possibly/maybe/sorta had better results if they followed your "plan"? And if dozens upon dozens of well reasoned, informed, and experienced posters have no idea what the hell you're talking about, the problem is with them? Because they just wanna argue? Or they are stupid?

TIL that calling out BS and trying to suss out the reasoning for unreasonable claims is a personal attack.

Brb, gonna fire my therapist because I get everything I need right here on mfp

Someone stepped in and gave plenty of citations.


So yeah, I can step in here and not back it up with anything except the idea itself and an expectation that my audience shares a certain level of education. Just like you do all the time. Because it's a forum, submissions generally don't come with citations, and don't result in peer reviewed research. It's almost like, I'm not a scientist, and neither are you, we don't do science here, and that standard gets applied awfully selectively (usually by someone who thinks posting an abstract for a journal nobody can access for free is the same as being a scientist).

To the ones who asked for citations, I respectfully reminded I was on iOS and would look for them later. But someone stepped in. Those were GOOD questions, and not once did I complain about them. Nice try.


Division of labor man. Now go do your job, and find a gif to express your profundity and indicate your tribal associations.

So progression isn't needed for weight loss?? or for anything in life??? If a person had been sedentary for several years and was morbidly obese, their best course of action is to just Eat less and continue to lead that sedentary lifestyle they have been leading because their overall success would see better results with this approach over say, eating at a modest deficit and begin a Physical therapy program that would allow them to begin to become mobile and build strength and stamina which in turn will allow them to function better in their overall life bringing not only physical ability but also mental clarity. But instead of resting on their morals they continue to improve always building upon their previous success. As success is achieved they continue to work with their dietician and increase calories to fuel their exercises (all still while running a deficit to continue to lose weight), all while increase their overall strength allowing them to no longer be a recluse but a more productive member of society. How is that a bad thing?? and please don't come back with "Well I never said they had to be sedentary, because if you are not always progressing both mentally and most definitely physically then you will plateau. That is the miracle of the human body, it's ability to continue to improve on every level giving it the challenges to do so. There doesn't have to be limitation during weight loss, maintenance, or weight gain for that matter. Always striving for progression is built into our DNA from birth. It is or should be our survival instinct. It is only when we get complacent that we tend to fall short of our potentials.

What?

How can I argue I didn't say to be sedentary, without arguing I didn't say to be sedentary? Lol!


Not exercising at all isn't good for you, man. Don't do that.


But if you want to lose weight, rest and a deficit is your "means-whereby", and training should be thought of as a way to make that process work better and with fewer negative side effects.


If you lean out without sufficiently activating your muscular tissues, you'll wind up losing way more than necessary. Everybody knows that, or is about to, so let's just take it for granted, ok?

Your missing the whole progression part of the equation... Where is this success you talk of, if you progressively are preaching to move less. No better yet please explain in the simplest of terms your theory. If someone says don't be sedentary then you say well by all means no don't do that (when to me this is a direct correlation to the whole move less mantra). I have to fall back to the progression thing though because to me if you aren't setting goals and accomplishing them and setting new ones then how will you ever meet your true potential?

SezxyStef

It has taken me a year to figure out, and I'd be a jerk if I didn't share.

Trying to lose weight? Working out more than 3 times a week? There is your problem.


Take a look around at posts from people "doing everything right and not losing". What do almost all of them have in common? Crazy exercise regimen.


Losing weight is a destructive process. By definition. While you are tearing down the body you have now, don't think of training as anything but a way to reduce the damage from this process. Eat less, move less. Find a distraction that isn't going to prolong your weight loss. Working out is not a good one!

Well based on what I have read (and I read all the posts) this maybe should have said something like this.

After a long journey I have found something that I wanted to share.

If you are exercising too much(and that is subjective) and not eating enough to fuel your workouts try eliminating some of that exercise for rest. You are not helping yourself you are hurting your efforts. Rest is as important as anything else when it comes to this journey we are all on.

No one needs to do hours and hours and hours at the gym to lose weight they need a deficet exercise is an added bonus don't treat is as the end all to be all.

Listen to your body, eat the food you need and if that is too much slow down a bit on the exercise.

pcastagner

It has taken me a year to figure out, and I'd be a jerk if I didn't share.

Trying to lose weight? Working out more than 3 times a week? There is your problem.


Take a look around at posts from people "doing everything right and not losing". What do almost all of them have in common? Crazy exercise regimen.


Losing weight is a destructive process. By definition. While you are tearing down the body you have now, don't think of training as anything but a way to reduce the damage from this process. Eat less, move less. Find a distraction that isn't going to prolong your weight loss. Working out is not a good one!

Well based on what I have read (and I read all the posts) this maybe should have said something like this.

After a long journey I have found something that I wanted to share.

If you are exercising too much(and that is subjective) and not eating enough to fuel your workouts try eliminating some of that exercise for rest. You are not helping yourself you are hurting your efforts. Rest is as important as anything else when it comes to this journey we are all on.

No one needs to do hours and hours and hours at the gym to lose weight they need a deficet exercise is an added bonus don't treat is as the end all to be all.

Listen to your body, eat the food you need and if that is too much slow down a bit on the exercise.

Hey, nice job! That's pretty well said!

I'll try to sound more like that next time I have something to say.

Redhead_23

The more I work out the more I hungrier I get. The hungrier I get the more likely I am to overeat/Binge. So the more I exercise, the more I eat, the more I GAIN. This is something I have noticed in my years of trying to lose weight.

CyberEd312

It has taken me a year to figure out, and I'd be a jerk if I didn't share.

Trying to lose weight? Working out more than 3 times a week? There is your problem.


Take a look around at posts from people "doing everything right and not losing". What do almost all of them have in common? Crazy exercise regimen.


Losing weight is a destructive process. By definition. While you are tearing down the body you have now, don't think of training as anything but a way to reduce the damage from this process. Eat less, move less. Find a distraction that isn't going to prolong your weight loss. Working out is not a good one!

Well based on what I have read (and I read all the posts) this maybe should have said something like this.

After a long journey I have found something that I wanted to share.

If you are exercising too much(and that is subjective) and not eating enough to fuel your workouts try eliminating some of that exercise for rest. You are not helping yourself you are hurting your efforts. Rest is as important as anything else when it comes to this journey we are all on.

No one needs to do hours and hours and hours at the gym to lose weight they need a deficet exercise is an added bonus don't treat is as the end all to be all.

Listen to your body, eat the food you need and if that is too much slow down a bit on the exercise.

9 pages into this post and this is the first thing that I would agree with 100%, I would only add that if you do enjoy training and do push yourself then fuel your body in accordance to your performance... Strategically placed rest days are need in any exercise program.... but QFT SezxyStef......

pcastagner

of course anecdotal evidence isn't science. science is a method, so...

So no science will occur in this thread?


What does it matter though if you create a calorie deficit of 3500 calories while eating 2700 calories a day (exercising 5-6 hours a week) or 2200 calories a day (with 2-3 days a week)? In the end, it will still create a 1 lb loss.

I am struggling to understand how lowering your intake and your TDEE will create more weight loss?

I have been here a year almost, and have yet to see "science occurring" in MFP.

Never have I seen you do any science.

This is a discussion forum for people on the consumer level. If I wanted to do science, I wouldn't start with a cohort that doesnt agree in basic definitions.

Soooooo.....you can just put something out there and back it up with......nothing? Everyone who had succeeded by doing the opposite of your claim is either a special snowflake or could maybe/possibly/maybe/sorta had better results if they followed your "plan"? And if dozens upon dozens of well reasoned, informed, and experienced posters have no idea what the hell you're talking about, the problem is with them? Because they just wanna argue? Or they are stupid?

TIL that calling out BS and trying to suss out the reasoning for unreasonable claims is a personal attack.

Brb, gonna fire my therapist because I get everything I need right here on mfp

Someone stepped in and gave plenty of citations.


So yeah, I can step in here and not back it up with anything except the idea itself and an expectation that my audience shares a certain level of education. Just like you do all the time. Because it's a forum, submissions generally don't come with citations, and don't result in peer reviewed research. It's almost like, I'm not a scientist, and neither are you, we don't do science here, and that standard gets applied awfully selectively (usually by someone who thinks posting an abstract for a journal nobody can access for free is the same as being a scientist).

To the ones who asked for citations, I respectfully reminded I was on iOS and would look for them later. But someone stepped in. Those were GOOD questions, and not once did I complain about them. Nice try.


Division of labor man. Now go do your job, and find a gif to express your profundity and indicate your tribal associations.

So progression isn't needed for weight loss?? or for anything in life??? If a person had been sedentary for several years and was morbidly obese, their best course of action is to just Eat less and continue to lead that sedentary lifestyle they have been leading because their overall success would see better results with this approach over say, eating at a modest deficit and begin a Physical therapy program that would allow them to begin to become mobile and build strength and stamina which in turn will allow them to function better in their overall life bringing not only physical ability but also mental clarity. But instead of resting on their morals they continue to improve always building upon their previous success. As success is achieved they continue to work with their dietician and increase calories to fuel their exercises (all still while running a deficit to continue to lose weight), all while increase their overall strength allowing them to no longer be a recluse but a more productive member of society. How is that a bad thing?? and please don't come back with "Well I never said they had to be sedentary, because if you are not always progressing both mentally and most definitely physically then you will plateau. That is the miracle of the human body, it's ability to continue to improve on every level giving it the challenges to do so. There doesn't have to be limitation during weight loss, maintenance, or weight gain for that matter. Always striving for progression is built into our DNA from birth. It is or should be our survival instinct. It is only when we get complacent that we tend to fall short of our potentials.

What?

How can I argue I didn't say to be sedentary, without arguing I didn't say to be sedentary? Lol!


Not exercising at all isn't good for you, man. Don't do that.


But if you want to lose weight, rest and a deficit is your "means-whereby", and training should be thought of as a way to make that process work better and with fewer negative side effects.


If you lean out without sufficiently activating your muscular tissues, you'll wind up losing way more than necessary. Everybody knows that, or is about to, so let's just take it for granted, ok?

Your missing the whole progression part of the equation... Where is this success you talk of, if you progressively are preaching to move less. No better yet please explain in the simplest of terms your theory. If someone says don't be sedentary then you say well by all means no don't do that (when to me this is a direct correlation to the whole move less mantra). I have to fall back to the progression thing though because to me if you aren't setting goals and accomplishing them and setting new ones then how will you ever meet your true potential?

Ehhh!!!

Gimme a minute to edit before you reply, sorry. I have a bad habit of hitting reply too early and then editing.


Addressed progression in the edit, you are right sir, and progressing in my lifts again is just one more reason I am so big on rest now.