controversial? 10 fitness facts everybody gets wrong

Smuterella

just interested in peoples thoughts on this:

www.askmen.com/top_10/fitness/ten-fitness-facts.html

Di3012

Interesting information in that link OP! I always thought that running or walking a mile burned the same amount of calories, but the way they explained it on that site, made sense.

cekeys

I was sure #2 "Running wears out your knees" was true. My father in law was a marathon runner unti his doctor told him to stop because of damage he had to his knees. Maybe he was prone to knee damage?

Azdak

I was sure #2 "Running wears out your knees" was true. My father in law was a marathon runner unti his doctor told him to stop because of damage he had to his knees. Maybe he was prone to knee damage?

First you have to define what you mean by "knee damage". If by "knee damage" we mean osteoarthitic deterioration of the bones and joints, then the evidence suggests that, no, running does not inherently cause greater damage. In fact, as the article states, there is some research to suggest that running can help strengthen knees over time (although I am familiar with the study he cites and I think it's an older one).

If we define "damage" as overuse injuries, then it's a different story. Running is a high impact activity and is associated with much higher rates of injury in the form of tendinitis and other soft tissue injuries. Those are usually not degenerative in nature, but I suppose could lead to some chronic problems over time that could end up being debilitating.

Azdak

It was interesting seeing someone else push back as hard as he did against the ridiculous overhyping of HIIT that is so endemic today in fitness literature.

GorillaNJ

Can someone copy and paste... I cant get to the link

surlydave

An interesting read.

10 Fitness Facts

Is running really bad for your knees? Find out here.

By James Fell,
Page 1:

Inspired by the response to our 10 Facts That Everyone Gets Wrong, we decided to enlist one of our fitness experts to compile 10 fitness facts that, you guessed it, everyone gets wrong.

Top 10 lists are subjective. There are many common fitness facts, frauds and myths that are not on this list and some weird ones that are. This list is comprised of 10 that I've personally found are often misunderstood and that I want to clarify.
Page 2: You need to train hard to see your abs

Remember Iggy Pop and his rippling abs? Do you think after a show he was going to the gym to do abdominal crunches on a Swiss ball? No, he was heading back to his hotel room to shoot smack and bang groupies.

And what he wasn’t doing was eating that much, because heroin suppresses appetite. Being in a state of regular caloric deficit kept Iggy’s frame at a low body fat level, and the abs popped out. That’s the way it works. You can enhance the look of your abs with some focused work, but if they’re covered in flab, no one will ever know.
Page 3: Exercise is about burning calories

Burning calories is just about the least important thing exercise does. Far more important is what is known as a “training effect.” Exercise has the ability to make you stronger, faster, more agile, and more flexible. It can make you more skilled at various sports and enhance your cognitive capabilities. It also enhances immune function and promotes longevity.

And if fat loss is your goal, intense exercise has a tendency to transform you into a better eater.
Page 4: Weightlifting is an effective fat-loss strategy

By far the most effective fat loss strategy is carefully controlling caloric intake. Sustained and intense aerobic exercise can be a valuable addition to this.

Weightlifting does burn calories, but when compared to hard aerobic training, it pales. A hard session with the iron burns only 20% more calories per hour than walking at 4 mph, according to Essentials of Strength Training and Condition. And I’m sorry to tell you that adding muscle does not rev up your resting metabolism.
Page 5: Low-carb diets are effective for weight loss

The only thing that matters is calories. Caloric deficits can be done in a healthy way and an unhealthy one. Many experts consider low carb to be unhealthy, and I agree with them. I know that some experience weight-loss success with this approach, but I consider this diet as a last resort for the lazy.

Yes, there is evidence that it can be good for controlling appetite because of the high protein levels and the fact that the diet restricts a bunch of bad carbs that are high in calories. However, it also restricts the good carbs that are essential for exercise performance, the ones that can be quite satiating and contain valuable nutrients.
Page 6: A high-protein diet is effective for gaining muscle

At a certain point, you just don’t need it anymore. Unless you’re shooting the juice and training long hours to build muscle fast, your body can only use so much. I had some conversations with nutrition expert Alan Aragon who told me that those looking to gain weight only need about 1.4 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight per day.
Page 7: Walking a mile burns the same number of calories as running it does

Walking at 4 mph increases your resting metabolic rate (RMR) by a factor of five. Running at twice that speed increases RMR by 13.5 times, more than three times the metabolic increase for only double the speed.

It’s also worth noting that running has a lot more of those beneficial training effects mentioned in No. 10 than walking does.
Page 8: Exercising causes you to eat more

A pile of research fails to show that there is any such thing as “working up an appetite.” In reality, a significant amount of exercise does not contribute to increased appetite and, as mentioned in No. 9, can lead to healthier eating habits.
Page 9: Getting in shape raises your metabolism

An in-depth and tightly controlled study of identical twins by renowned obesity researcher Dr. Claude Bouchard found the opposite to be true. Exercise boosts metabolism during the act of exercise. However, as you improve physical fitness, your body begins to operate more efficiently so that you burn fewer calories while at rest and during exercise. Losing fat will also contribute to burning fewer calories because fat is somewhat metabolically active and you have less body weight to cart around with you everywhere.
Page 10: Running wears out your knees

This 18-year-long study compared runners with non-runners and found no difference in the development of knee osteoarthritis between groups. In reality, running provides valuable training and lubrication for various body joints to enhance cartilage health.
Page 11: "X" is the best form of exercise

You want to know the real best form of exercise? It’s the one you love. It’s the one you are motivated to do regularly and train hard at. It’s the one you want to keep improving at. That one is best.

Juliejustsaying

I find it to be spot on with everything I have learned in nutrion and nursing classes. and as a side note, low carb diets are scary, you need carbs for your brain to function people!!!!

Nice read, thanks.

firstnamekaren

I really, really get tired of hearing "this is wrong, this is right" when it comes to losing weight. I'm not in the greatest mood, but there's just too much information, and worse, misinformation out there.

Bigpelly8

So all I need to do to get abs is get on the Heroin kick!! I wish I knew that a year ago!!

Smuterella

I really, really get tired of hearing "this is wrong, this is right" when it comes to losing weight. I'm not in the greatest mood, but there's just too much information, and worse, misinformation out there.

That's kinda why I posted it as "controversial" ... I do like to see a difference of opinion.

TeaBea

Wow - great article. Thanks for posting this!

714rah714

Enjoyed reading the list and the way the information was presented.

GorillaNJ

I would like to see some research that proves number 4... I have seen much cited that says the opposite.

tigersword

While I can agree with most of the list, the part I disagree with is the weight lifting doesn't burn calories part. True, you don't burn a ton during the weight lifting itself, but the after burn from the metabolic repair is much greater than cardio. Does it burn more total? Probably not, but the changes to body composition from weight training are much greater than the changes from all cardio.

Also, I like how the author stated that adding muscle does nothing to speed up your metabolism, but losing fat will slow it down. Muscle is about twice as metabolically active as fat, so it stands to reason that if losing fat slows your metabolism down, adding muscle WILL speed it up. (No, muscle doesn't burn 50 calories per pound like some people claim, but it does burn 6 or 7, compared to 2-3 for fat.)

mandylooo

It was interesting seeing someone else push back as hard as he did against the ridiculous overhyping of HIIT that is so endemic today in fitness literature.

I can't get into the site it has been posted on. What does he say about HIIT?

Azdak

While I can agree with most of the list, the part I disagree with is the weight lifting doesn't burn calories part. True, you don't burn a ton during the weight lifting itself, but the after burn from the metabolic repair is much greater than cardio. Does it burn more total? Probably not, but the changes to body composition from weight training are much greater than the changes from all cardio.

Also, I like how the author stated that adding muscle does nothing to speed up your metabolism, but losing fat will slow it down. Muscle is about twice as metabolically active as fat, so it stands to reason that if losing fat slows your metabolism down, adding muscle WILL speed it up. (No, muscle doesn't burn 50 calories per pound like some people claim, but it does burn 6 or 7, compared to 2-3 for fat.)

I think the point is that, in the grand scheme of things, the difference between the two is not that much. Given that fact that most people are not going to gain 30 or 40 pounds of muscle, the effect of "muscle raises metabolism" is grossly over hyped IMO, esp when it's parroted by idiots like JM while they are doing shoulder presses with 3lb weights.

Having said that (and by doing so, perpetuating the nonsense myself), I think the whole argument is pointless. Regardless of the mechanism, lifting weights is an essential part of permanent losing weight and an essential part of a fitness program.

Quite frankly, it doesn't need any more justification than that.

Azdak

It was interesting seeing someone else push back as hard as he did against the ridiculous overhyping of HIIT that is so endemic today in fitness literature.

I can't get into the site it has been posted on. What does he say about HIIT?

Same author, different article:

http://www.askmen.com/sports/bodybuilding_900/962_popular-metabolism-myths-part-2.html

Essentially he says that EPOC is not that big a deal, that HIIT has a place in a training program but the benefits are overstated, and that the differences reported between HIIT and steady-state in terms of fat loss are modest at best.

He goes a step farther than I would and characterizes HIIT as a strategy mostly only for competitive athletes. I understand his point, but I think it has practical applications for just about any exerciser.

But, overall, I would say his views are shared by many people who I would consider "serious" exercise scientists.

bcattoes

You want to know the real best form of exercise? It’s the one you love. It’s the one you are motivated to do regularly and train hard at. It’s the one you want to keep improving at. That one is best.

Pretty much everything in that article meshes with my personal experiences with exericse and weight loss over the past 30+ years. But this last paragraph is the most important message of all IMO.

addisondisease

Yeah number 4 is off.

If you look a Jay Cutler, Dave Tate, Wendler, and Ronnie Coleman, these guys eat 7,000+ calories, just to stay big. Their muscular bodies need all the extra food, if they started eating even just 3,000 calories, they would lose fat and muscle mass.

mandylooo

It was interesting seeing someone else push back as hard as he did against the ridiculous overhyping of HIIT that is so endemic today in fitness literature.

I can't get into the site it has been posted on. What does he say about HIIT?

Same author, different article:

http://www.askmen.com/sports/bodybuilding_900/962_popular-metabolism-myths-part-2.html

Essentially he says that EPOC is not that big a deal, that HIIT has a place in a training program but the benefits are overstated, and that the differences reported between HIIT and steady-state in terms of fat loss are modest at best.

He goes a step farther than I would and characterizes HIIT as a strategy mostly only for competitive athletes. I understand his point, but I think it has practical applications for just about any exerciser.

But, overall, I would say his views are shared by many people who I would consider "serious" exercise scientists.

Thanks.

Rae6503

Yeah number 4 is off.

If you look a Jay Cutler, Dave Tate, Wendler, and Ronnie Coleman, these guys eat 7,000+ calories, just to stay big. Their muscular bodies need all the extra food, if they started eating even just 3,000 calories, they would lose fat and muscle mass.

I don't think he's saying that athletes don't need to eat a lot, he's just saying exercise doesn't actually make you hungrier than you'd be if you didn't exercise.

tigersword

Exercise is generally an appetite suppressant.

tigersword

While I can agree with most of the list, the part I disagree with is the weight lifting doesn't burn calories part. True, you don't burn a ton during the weight lifting itself, but the after burn from the metabolic repair is much greater than cardio. Does it burn more total? Probably not, but the changes to body composition from weight training are much greater than the changes from all cardio.

Also, I like how the author stated that adding muscle does nothing to speed up your metabolism, but losing fat will slow it down. Muscle is about twice as metabolically active as fat, so it stands to reason that if losing fat slows your metabolism down, adding muscle WILL speed it up. (No, muscle doesn't burn 50 calories per pound like some people claim, but it does burn 6 or 7, compared to 2-3 for fat.)

I think the point is that, in the grand scheme of things, the difference between the two is not that much. Given that fact that most people are not going to gain 30 or 40 pounds of muscle, the effect of "muscle raises metabolism" is grossly over hyped IMO, esp when it's parroted by idiots like JM while they are doing shoulder presses with 3lb weights.

Having said that (and by doing so, perpetuating the nonsense myself), I think the whole argument is pointless. Regardless of the mechanism, lifting weights is an essential part of permanent losing weight and an essential part of a fitness program.

Quite frankly, it doesn't need any more justification than that.

I can agree with that, but, in my opinion, when writing any kind of article, especially one intending to inform, I think it's rather important to be consistent and not contradict yourself, as that just confuses the reader.

catlady100

Exercise is generally an appetite suppressant.

I generally feel more hungry after a hard cardio workout. Is it all in my head?

addisondisease

Yeah number 4 is off.

If you look a Jay Cutler, Dave Tate, Wendler, and Ronnie Coleman, these guys eat 7,000+ calories, just to stay big. Their muscular bodies need all the extra food, if they started eating even just 3,000 calories, they would lose fat and muscle mass.

I don't think he's saying that athletes don't need to eat a lot, he's just saying exercise doesn't actually make you hungrier than you'd be if you didn't exercise.

I was talking about how the metabolic rate doesn't change, these men obviously need more just to maintain. They've changed their metabolic needs over time.

ktaft77

Great article! Thanks for posting, I especially like # 8:

Burning calories is just about the least important thing exercise does. Far more important is what is known as a “training effect.” Exercise has the ability to make you stronger, faster, more agile, and more flexible. It can make you more skilled at various sports and enhance your cognitive capabilities. It also enhances immune function and promotes longevity.



This is the biggest reason I am trying to get in shape again! The weight loss will be a huge bonus, but its been a long time since I felt really healthy and that means more to me than being a smaller size.

Sublog

I really, really get tired of hearing "this is wrong, this is right" when it comes to losing weight. I'm not in the greatest mood, but there's just too much information, and worse, misinformation out there.

Well, this stuff in this article is correct and on the cutting edge of nutrition and exercise science. It is as correct as anything we have right now.

Bradyns

#10 -- All it has convinced me to do is start taking smack...

#9 -- Not to mention the assisted RMR Losing fat while you aren't exercising has never been easier!

#8 -- Catabolism [burning fat], isn't the best way to build muscle... Anabolism is the muscle builder!!!

#7 -- Is pretty true, it's all about the caloric deficit; if you are doing some intense exercise, carbs can be useful.

#6 -- Eat ALL the protein!

#5 -- This is where HIIT is brilliant!

#4 -- Mind over matter!

#3 -- Force = Mass x Acceleration (The more you weigh, the more force you need to apply to get from A to

#2 -- Recommend checking with your GP..

#1 -- Sexercise is the best form of exercise. ;D

solpwr

Yeah number 4 is off.

If you look a Jay Cutler, Dave Tate, Wendler, and Ronnie Coleman, these guys eat 7,000+ calories, just to stay big. Their muscular bodies need all the extra food, if they started eating even just 3,000 calories, they would lose fat and muscle mass..

Those guys are juicing. Don't for a minute think that their lifestyle is comparable to yours, unless you are on an anabolic steroid regimen.

addisondisease

Yeah number 4 is off.

If you look a Jay Cutler, Dave Tate, Wendler, and Ronnie Coleman, these guys eat 7,000+ calories, just to stay big. Their muscular bodies need all the extra food, if they started eating even just 3,000 calories, they would lose fat and muscle mass..

Those guys are juicing. Don't for a minute think that their lifestyle is comparable to yours, unless you are on an anabolic steroid regimen.

Currently? no.

Regardless of their steroid use, even natural power lifters and body builders STILL need more calories just to maintain weight.