Diet or Exercise: What's the Best Way to Lose Weight?

Redgal56

Not sure how I feel about this article I found on Yahoo today:

By Brierley Wright, M.S., R.D., Nutrition Editor, Eating Well Magazine

I recently received a question from the reader--diet or exercise: what's the best way to lose weight? If you really want to see that number on the scale drop, what you put in your mouth matters most. People who simply cut calories to slim down lose about 2 pounds a week, says a study in the International Journal of Obesity and Related Metabolic Disorders. At the same time, people who exercise but don't restrict calories drop less than half a pound each week. Get a meal plan that fits your calorie needs to lose weight.

Why doesn't physical activity produce the same pound-dropping results as calorie restriction? One thought is that though exercise burns calories, it doesn't rev your metabolism, says a study in Obesity Reviews. It also doesn't prevent your metabolism from slowing as you lose pounds. As you slim down--via any method--your metabolism slows incrementally with your weight loss and, despite what many believe, exercising doesn't keep that from happening. As you lose weight, you burn fewer calories via exercise. For example, a 150-pound person who works the elliptical for 30 minutes burns about 306 calories. After losing 10 pounds, that person will burn about 286 calories doing the same workout. So to burn 306 calories, you'd need to extend your workout.

Think diet and exercise combined equals more weight lost? Guess again: research shows people who diet and exercise for weight loss drop the same amount of weight as people who only diet. They are, however, more successful keeping the weight off than their counterparts who simply eat less.

Don't Miss: 5 Weight-Loss Tips and Habits That Don't Work

Bottom line: Cut calories to lose weight. But add in some activity to stay slim long term. Plus, exercise can boost your mood and energy.

LoraF83

The best way to lose weight is a calorie deficit. You can achieve the deficit by eating less or exercising more or a combination of the two.

The reason studies and articles like this say you have to diet is that exercise can make you hungrier. So, if you're not tracking/logging your food, you could overeat. Overeating = too many calories = weight gain.


And yes, when you weigh less, you burn fewer calories during your workouts. But what the article leaves out is the fact that you need fewer calories to maintain your weight. You won't be able to eat as much as you did (overall) before you lost the weight.

BrianSharpe

One thought is that though exercise burns calories, it doesn't rev your metabolism, says a study in Obesity Reviews. It also doesn't prevent your metabolism from slowing as you lose pounds. As you slim down--via any method--your metabolism slows incrementally with your weight loss and, despite what many believe, exercising doesn't keep that from happening.

Not entirely accurate (with diet alone yes....you're losing lean muscle mass along with fat)

http://www.webmd.com/diet/ss/slideshow-boost-your-metabolism

http://www.webmd.com/diet/features/make-most-your-metabolism

http://sportsmedicine.about.com/od/anatomyandphysiology/a/rmr.htm

lots more where these came from.......

4legsRbetterthan2

It is oddly written and I think that is the biggest problem with it, the whole second paragraph leaves me wondering if they are insinuating that cutting calories will rev your metabolism, but maybe that is just me.

Overall I think the message that diet is the greatest factor in weightloss is accurate however I don't agree with what seems like a complete dismissal of exercise as a contributor.

Strange and definitely not the best or most helpful work I have read.....

Holly_Roman_Empire

Redgal56

I know! It makes me wonder about the 6 hours of exercise I do every week. I always believed it was 'Eat Less, Move More' but according to this article the 'Move More' isn't necessarily that important.......

LoraF83

I know! It makes me wonder about the 6 hours of exercise I do every week. I always believed it was 'Eat Less, Move More' but according to this article the 'Move More' isn't necessarily that important.......

A calorie deficit makes you lose weight.

Exercise makes you look good naked.

a_stronger_me13

I know! It makes me wonder about the 6 hours of exercise I do every week. I always believed it was 'Eat Less, Move More' but according to this article the 'Move More' isn't necessarily that important.......

A calorie deficit makes you lose weight.

Exercise makes you look good naked.

Bingo. Want to retain lean body mass? You better workout (aka lift) and eat enough protein. You want to just get to a number on the scale? Diet your little heart out.

I prefer both in moderation.

Bry_Fitness70

You can lose weight by diet alone, but what kind of body and state of health will result? If you want to look good/healthy, be strong, have endurance, and have a healthy cardio-vascular system, strength train and engage in some sort of cardio (run/bike/swim/etc.) in addition to dieting.

ChaplainHeavin

I believe the article is factual but only to a point. What it seems to leave out is that the person who regularly exercises and watches what he/she eats will be more FIT! I work on a college campus and see many heavy people and very skinny people who have to catch their breath just to climb three flight of stairs. I also see a lot of heavy students and thin students who are, well, flabby and have very little muscle tone. What the two have in common is that they are not fit.

cwolfman13

I lost the same amount of weight with diet alone as I did with diet and exercise together...because I understood/understand the relationship between my activity and my calorie requirements. When I was dieting alone I could only eat around 1800 - 1900 calories per day to lose about 1 Lb per week...that was because my non exercise maintenance calories were only around 2,300 - 2,400 calories per day.

When I started exercising I was simply able to eat more and achieve the same loss rate goals...instead of eating 1800 - 1900 calories I could eat 2,200 - 2,300 calories and achieve that same rate of weight loss...because my maintenance number also increased with that increased activity.

There really is no magic...it's just math and creating an energy deficit. The size of that deficit overwhelmingly dictates your rate of loss...whether you are creating that with your diet or exercise or some combination of both. It really comes down to understand what your body needs as per your activity.

I would also add that excessive exercise can often be counterproductive to weight loss goals...training for competitive endurance events for example requires a substantial amount of fuel for recovery and reparation of the body...which means you need to eat...and often, the body's desire to replenish energy and nutrients will override ones ability to maintain an energy deficit.

I personally advocate using ones diet (noun) for weight control and exercising for fitness. I exercise whether I'm in maintenance or cutting...it makes no difference...exercise should be performed for the sake of fitness and overall health and well being. Exercise really shouldn't be about your calorie burn...your Exercise Activity Thermogenesis (EAT) is a rather smallish element of your overall calorie requirements, save for athletes and whatnot.

rsclause

I really don't think I could have achieved the weight loss I did if I didn't exercise. While the article may be mathematically true, I feel that exercise is a key component of my lifestyle change. I also think that the added muscle and exercise is going to make phase two of maintaining my new weight easier. I also think that the quality of the food is as important as the quality. No degree, just a gut feeling.

jodyrew

As far as I know, when you exercise, it helps your bowel movement, thus, aiding in digestion and metabolism. But, I do believe that diet and exercise should really go together. It's a hard feat, but the result will be rewarding. You just need to find the perfect liefstyle for you.