Well this is depressing...

2»

Replies

  • invictus8
    invictus8 Posts: 258 Member
    Dieting is much better for weight loss than steady-state cardiovascular exercise. There's some evidence that lean body mass -- in particular, gaining a higher percentage of muscle mass -- can increase one's metabolism. The article ignores the importance of fat composition!
  • ksutte
    ksutte Posts: 76 Member
    bump
  • ErinBeth7
    ErinBeth7 Posts: 1,625 Member
    Eat right, get activity regularly and you'll see a decrease. Honestly, I think sometimes all these studies complicate weight loss.

    The article presents an interesting theory, but it isn't fact, just a study.
  • ittybittypixie
    ittybittypixie Posts: 25
    Please don''t be depressed, you are working hard and you should be proud!
    Also, for weight loss/maintenance to be sustainable its reasonable to expect it to take about as long to lose the extra weight as it did to gain it. Being at a good weight means you have to make good choices every day for the rest of your life, and your body will thank you for it! :)
  • zyxst
    zyxst Posts: 9,149 Member
    Haha, Java won't run the applet for me to see what the big deal is. :laugh:
  • sylvuz323
    sylvuz323 Posts: 468 Member
    Microsoft isn't letting me access the calculator either...darn. But I definitely believe there is truth to the article. When I first changed to a healthier lifestyle, I dropped 30 lbs in about 3-4 month but then it took me almost a full year to drop another 30 lbs.
  • 2012asv
    2012asv Posts: 702 Member
    Interesting article. So why is this depressing? Basically it's just reiterating what we already know which is the only way to "lose" weight is by creating a calorie deficit. What I took from that was even if you are super active you still need to maintain a healthy diet.

    And for someone who's working hard and already lost nearly 50 lbs I highly doubt it will take several years for you to drop the remaining 50!
  • EvanKeel
    EvanKeel Posts: 1,903 Member
    I read about this study the other day -- this article explains it well. Click on the link in the second-to-last paragraph to see a revised weight loss calculator based on this study. Very depressing, but good to know. (If it's true and accurate)

    http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/01/dieting-vs-exercise-for-weight-loss/

    I understand the title was probably meant to be a turn of phrase, but I think it highlights an important point. There's a difference between being unsatisfied with your weight and having your weight (or lack of timely weight loss) be "depressing."

    For me, making the most of my time here involves trying not to let negative feelings (like depression, poor body image, etc) act as motivators for me. It's not always easy. In fact, I'm not terribly good at it, but it's something I try to remind myself of.

    So, relating this to being frustrated at slow weight loss, focus on the awesomeness of your achievements when you can and let that be your motivation for more, instead of focusing on how long a goal may or may not take.
  • leilatwo
    leilatwo Posts: 4 Member
    I think this means that you should not eat back your exercise calories.
  • tuffytuffy1
    tuffytuffy1 Posts: 920 Member
    Well, this explains alot!!! I put my starting weight in there and I am actually just about where this tool says I should/would be. I guess I am proof that this is pretty accurate.

    Thank you for that idea! I did the same thing, and it said I would lose 18 pounds the first year; and that is pretty spot on as a matter of fact! Very interesting. It says I will lose 17 pounds over the next 12 months to get to my goal weight.

    I have been here for 14 months, and this is a lifestyle for me, not a diet. I don't care that it took me an entire year to lose 17 pounds, they are gone and they are staying off.
  • treetop57
    treetop57 Posts: 1,578 Member
    Their model says that my maintenance intake when I started on December 1, 2011 was 3294 calories. My actual average intake since then has been 2493, a deficit of 800 calories.

    Their model predicts that my weight right now (eight months in) is 224.8 lbs. In fact, it's 212 lbs. So I've lost 12 more pounds than their model predicts.

    My conclusion: Don't let one model depress you. You are a unique snowflake and your path cannot be predicted from the fanciest "one dimensional differential equation energy balance model."

    heymsfield-equation.png
  • npca06
    npca06 Posts: 14 Member
    bump
  • deathtech
    deathtech Posts: 1
    You have to be very leery (?) of all these online calculators, they are more a generalized tool , and since every diet and routine, and body, and metabolism are different, they are never 100% accurate. Dont let this demotivate you. even the BMI index here says I am 24.4 BF% and teetering on the edge of being unhealthy. I am 190 lbs, 6'2". It doesnt take into account my diet, or the fact that i am literally ripped from head to toe and am actually at about 10% BF. Keep your head up, and don't let this stuff get you down.

    Do you not feel better , and look better than when you started ?

    then it's worth it.
  • 0somuchbetter0
    0somuchbetter0 Posts: 1,335 Member
    Interesting article. So why is this depressing? Basically it's just reiterating what we already know which is the only way to "lose" weight is by creating a calorie deficit. What I took from that was even if you are super active you still need to maintain a healthy diet.

    And for someone who's working hard and already lost nearly 50 lbs I highly doubt it will take several years for you to drop the remaining 50!

    I didn't notice the TDEE (current calorie intake) at the bottom of the page at first. So assuming I was eating 2721 cals, it would have taken me a long time to lose 50lbs. That was the depressing part. But I'm actually eating a lot less than that already, plus exercising, plus feeling good....so "depressing" was definitely the wrong word to use. :)

Categories