Rewarding great workout with FOOD. Anyone else?

it's not a reward.. it's just what normal living things do after expending energy.

Interesting. So to be a reward, any given things has to not happen under any other circumstances? Examples please?



Healthy is what exactly? Crap is what? If it fits in your calorie totals, eat it. You have the rest of your life when you eat at maintenance level to worry about these things.


When I had lost the first 30 or so, I wound up having the kinkiest, hottest, most mind blowing sex filled short term relationship with a wonderful girl. Taking care of myself is now forever associated with mind blowing sex and feeling desirable. I don't have to think about it, I just "automatically" strive for discipline in my eating and exercise now.


Rewards are awesome!

it's not a reward.. it's just what normal living things do after expending energy.

this

a) I eat after I workout, because my body needs the fuel. Working out is not a punishment, eating is not a sin. Your body needs fuel. After a long trip by car, I put fuel in my car's tank. After a workout, your body needs carbohydrate, and if you worked your muscles hard, they need protein to start the repair and rebuilding process.

b) from an evolutionary point of view, the main purpose of exercise is to acquire food. The human body has evolved to expect food after a workout. Eating and not working out is like you're failing at hunting and gathering... lots of people experience increased hunger later in the day if they don't eat a good post-workout meal, and this is probably the evolutionary explanation as to why.

c) exercise isn't punishment, food is neither a sin or a reward. You're right, you don't "reward" yourself with food, but that doesn't mean eating after a workout is a moral failing (in fact it's better if you drop the whole idea of food having any moral value at all)..... Exercise is strengthening your body, eating properly is giving your body the nutrients it requires in order for it to strengthen itself. After exercise is a very important time to eat.

d) your post-workout meal should contain protein and carbohydrate. Some say don't eat fat post-workout, I say it doesn't really matter so long as you're on target for your calories by the end of the day. I've had days where I do a really heavy workout then eat nearly half my daily calories in one meal. I don't get hungry again for a very long time after that, and only need small meals, i.e. it's easy to stay within my calories doing this. So eat your post-workout meal.

it's not a reward.. it's just what normal living things do after expending energy.

this

a) I eat after I workout, because my body needs the fuel. Working out is not a punishment, eating is not a sin. Your body needs fuel. After a long trip by car, I put fuel in my car's tank. After a workout, your body needs carbohydrate, and if you worked your muscles hard, they need protein to start the repair and rebuilding process.

b) from an evolutionary point of view, the main purpose of exercise is to acquire food. The human body has evolved to expect food after a workout. Eating and not working out is like you're failing at hunting and gathering... lots of people experience increased hunger later in the day if they don't eat a good post-workout meal, and this is probably the evolutionary explanation as to why.

c) exercise isn't punishment, food is neither a sin or a reward. You're right, you don't "reward" yourself with food, but that doesn't mean eating after a workout is a moral failing (in fact it's better if you drop the whole idea of food having any moral value at all)..... Exercise is strengthening your body, eating properly is giving your body the nutrients it requires in order for it to strengthen itself. After exercise is a very important time to eat.

d) your post-workout meal should contain protein and carbohydrate. Some say don't eat fat post-workout, I say it doesn't really matter so long as you're on target for your calories by the end of the day. I've had days where I do a really heavy workout then eat nearly half my daily calories in one meal. I don't get hungry again for a very long time after that, and only need small meals, i.e. it's easy to stay within my calories doing this. So eat your post-workout meal.

I don't know that it's such a bad thing. Maybe one shouldn't call it a reward. When you work out that much your body needs more fuel. Should you eat it all back? Not if you're trying to lose weight. Should you eat someone of it back my trainer says yes.

Ok now we are getting into theory of learning. Are you saying that one should give a child rewards after punishments? That makes no sense to me.

I'm not talking about children, or learning. I'm talking about the importance of eating a good post-workout meal.

Eating is a biological necessity, to feed the body. Like you put fuel into a car's engine.

Rewards increase frequency of associated behaviors.
Punishments decrease frequency of associated behavior.

Punishments are basically useless for learning new behaviors. In dogs, dolphins, and in people.

I'm not talking about punishments either. I don't know how you're reading all this into my post. I didn't say anything about punishments, other than the fact that exercise is not a punishment.

I'm not talking about learning or trying to modify anyone's behaviour, not human, dolphin, chimp or whatever. I'm talking about why people need to eat after exercise.

Please stop reading stuff into my posts that isn't there.

You said "exercise is not a punishment". You seem imply that one does not need reward after exercise because it isn't a punishment.

That is not what I was implying at all. My whole entire post was on why it's important to eat after exercise, and why the whole concept of reward and punishment has nothing to do with it. You eat after exercise for the same reason why you fill up your car's fuel tank after a long road trip.

You don't exercise to punish yourself. You exercise because it's necessary for good health, and to strengthen your body.

I asked if that is what you are saying because I don't understand the gist of your post. It's a technique called paraphrasing and it's meant to boil down your point to something I can understand, which you can then agree with or disagree with. If you say it's not what you meant, I'm not going to force it on you. People can speak for themselves.

Okay, I'll paraphrase it.

1. drop the whole "reward and punishment" mentality. It leads to a negative relationship with food and exercise.

2. instead adopt the mentality of a) exercise is to strengthen the body, and b) food is to fuel the body, i.e. provide it with the nutrients it needs to strengthen itself.

If you're not talking about learning, what are you talking about, or more importantly, to which life form are you referring? We are constantly learning whether we choose to do so using critical thinking and a plan, or whether we leave it to chance.

I'm talking about humans. I made a vague reference to human ancestors. If you want me to be specific, Homo erectus is probably the best one to think about when asking the question "why does the Homo sapiens body work in this way?" But mostly I was talking about Homo sapiens

I was talking about basic human biology, as in why the body has a *physiological* need for food, and that food is necessary for survival and for keeping the body healthy. Eating after a workout is part of this, it's not a "reward" for "being good"...

Of course food is fuel, but this doesn't mean it can't also be a reward.

I look at it from a purely biological point of view to begin with, i.e. what does the body need to be healthy. the answer is 1. exercise, 2. proper nutrition. there is no way anyone should be viewing either of these in a moral light.... exercise is not punishment, it's something you need to do for good health. proper nutrition is not a reward, it's something you need for good health.

You can't call something that's necessary for basic survival and health a "reward" - it's implying that it can/should be withheld if you are "bad".... proper nutrition is not optional. It's necessary. Exercise is also very important for health... but when people think of it as punishment, they don't want to do it.

Additionally, a lot of people are stuck in a very negative mindset when it comes to food... they view healthy eating and exercise plans as a "punishment" for "being fat" (really that's a sin and a moral failing?? not just an unfortunate consequence of poor nutrition and lack of exercise, that needs to be addressed with better nutrition and exercise?).... they see food as a "reward" that can be withheld if they are "bad" ..... and they get in a cycle of excessive restriction (punishment/withholding of rewards) and then bingeing, and then feeling very guilty like they did something "bad" and need to "punish" themselves for it, with more restriction, more withholding of the "reward" of eating..... bingeing is usually a straight forward physiological reaction to eating too little (there are some exceptions, e.g. binge eating disorder, but this isn't a moral failing or "being bad" either it's a mental illness).... punishing a binge by exercising more and being even more restrictive with food, makes it worse, not better. But as long as this "reward/punishment" mentality is there, the person can't see that their body is simply reacting as it's evolved to do in cases where there's a food shortage... by increasing food-seeking behaviour. They often self-diagnose themselves as having a psychological problem, when their behaviour is totally normal for the circumstances. They punish themselves for doing what their body evolved to do. If a Homo erectus was in a food shortage, they would spend all day obsessing about food, and they would binge like crazy when they got their hands on some. The difference is only that Homo sapiens is irrational enough to attempt self-imposed excessive food restriction when surrounded by food.

Not everyone is in this mentality, but IMO it needs to be nipped in the bud, so when someone is depriving themselves of the nutrition their body needs because they don't deserve a "reward" - then they really, truly need to drop the whole reward/punishment mentality.

For people who are not stuck in a negative mentality, I don't see what's wrong with thinking of food as a reward, if they also understand it's not really a reward, it's a necessity... but IMO they need to be careful of others who may be in a more negative mindset like I've described above.

Btw, when we speak if punishment and reward, we necessarily are speaking of learning.

If you want to define reward and punishment the way experimental psychologists do, that's true. I'm using the layman's terms. If you want to get technical, it's better to move away from needing extrinsic motivation to eat healthy and exercise, and develop a mentality whereby you don't need the extrinsic motivation, because you have a strong intrinsic motivation due to your new, much healthier attitudes towards exercise and eating. You move away from "punishing" yourself with exercise and healthy food, and "rewarding" yourself with treats.... to the exercise itself and the healthy food itself being rewards in themselves, not punishments. Seriously, if you have to constantly "punish" yourself to achieve something, how long are you going to stick at it, or even if you have the willpower to stick at it, how miserable are you going to be in the process? And then what about when you don't do so well, you have to "punish" yourself constantly, or withhold "rewards" constantly....

I would suggest some research into learning theory for an explanation of why punishment mixed with rewards is vastly inferior to rewards only. The whole concept of pairing the two together is an arbitrary and learned behavior itself.


This is what I am getting at. Rewards as a means of shaping behavior has nothing to do with morality. Which means a smart person looking to modify their behavior can safely make use of it to create new patterns.

So in effect, I did understand your post and still feel there is legitimate opportunity for learning something about that for anyone reading this thread, and no need to associate rewards with the very destructive practice of alternating it with punishments.


Adult, child, dog, or dolphin, layman or experimental psychologist (btw they aren't the only people allowed to contemplate this or define things properly), rewards will increase any behavior associated with the reward. Associating that practice with destructive and misguided applications of punishments doesn't actually make sense, and gives you one less tool in your lifestyle adjustment toolbox.

Many of us need any help we can get.

I would suggest some research into learning theory for an explanation of why punishment mixed with rewards is vastly inferior to rewards only. The whole concept of pairing the two together is an arbitrary and learned behavior itself.

This is what I am getting at. Rewards as a means of shaping behavior has nothing to do with morality. Which means a smart person looking to modify their behavior can safely make use of it to create new patterns.

So in effect, I did understand your post and still feel there is legitimate opportunity for learning something about that for anyone reading this thread, and no need to associate rewards with the very destructive practice of alternating it with punishments.

Adult, child, dog, or dolphin, layman or experimental psychologist (btw they aren't the only people allowed to contemplate this or define things properly), rewards will increase any behavior associated with the reward.

Withholding food is a punishment, not a reward. It's negative reinforcement based on punishment. It appears you really, really, associate rewards with punishments, despite your extensive studies. My experience with dogs and self implies this is quite typical but not necessary. I had a lot of trouble eliminating punishment from my work with dogs, because it provided an emotional reward for me by creating the impression that I was decreasing the unwanted behavior in the dog. It was so bad I give up on dog training.

Adding a particularly rewarding food choice to reinforce a behavior can be completely uncoupled from punishment, morality, or any other useless system of teaching and learning specific behaviors (but highly effective for altering group behaviors).

It simply doesn't have to be so, unless one is lacking in imagination.

I think I've pointed out why using rewards is more effective than leaving things to chance. You can either leave things to chance and hope you are one of the lucky ones, or take control of your own fate.

As for whether science is helpful to everyday people, we will have to agree to disagree. I feel the whole point of science is to help everyday people. These concepts are empowering. Increasing desired behaviors is a good thing. Many of us don't have the luxury of being picky or only using techniques that work for a particular subset. I know I don't, and I've observed how rewards affect my every day choices whether I like it or not, so I prefer to increase my ability to shape my behavior.

A smart dieter will keep trying new things, observe the results, and then apply what they have learned. The OP is on the fence about this, and I'd hate to see someone avoid a potentially successful technique for completely arbitrary reasons.

Action - big workout
Reward - tasty food

Action - adjusting food to level of expenditure (treating it like a fuel)
Reward - tasty food


Both actions are desirable. Both rewards are desirable. The OP is wondering if this is a bad habit. I say no, it isn't. It's a great way to teach yourself consistency and by being conscious of both things, to avoid blowing up when you haven't expended the calories, because your lifestyle has changed, or better yet, to find motivation to take make an effort to find effective ways to maintain fitness when the environment changes. This is the top reason I have continued my progress despite living on the road for the past month and a half. Otherwise I would be depending on willpower, which is already being taxed by my environmental change.

Actually I always figured we evolved to seek rewards, and homo erectus or even Australopithecus, or even plants and fungi are no different. Sort of the key to being a successful species. Using rewards as reinforcement is separate from the need to seek them.

I don't see Internet debates as akin to male chest beating in primates. More like the social struggles undertaken by females. Lots of grooming too, and sometimes ganging up to exclude someone.