Calorie Counting Vs Exercise

Options
13»

Replies

  • Zedeff
    Zedeff Posts: 651 Member
    Options
    weightlosstrainer wrote: »
    Exactly what do you mean by this? I am going to assume that you either didn't read a single thing that was written, haven't done your own research or made an overall encompassing judgment based on either my photo or your own insecurity. This is actual research, not "broscience". If you disagree with it, why not post your in-depth rebuttal as to why instead of arrogantly and incorrectly labeling something as stupid as "a load of broscience" for whatever the reason you came up with. I do not subscribe to the whole "bro" mentality, in fact, I am far from it...so for someone to make this general and outright incorrect assessment is just asinine and presumptuous.

    Actual research has citations. This is just a lot of opinions.
  • SpockAdventures
    SpockAdventures Posts: 103 Member
    Options
    It seems like everyone is making this much more complicated than it needs to be....the fact is it's all about mathematics. It's what you put in your body vs. what you put out. If C is calories you eat, E is calories burned in exercise, B is your bmr, D is your calorie deficit and 1lbs = 3500 calories, then you just have to find the right combination of numbers to fit the equation...

    B - (C-E) = D
    e.g. 1800 - (1600-300) = 500

    3500/D = # of days to lose 1 lbs.
    e.g. 3500/500 = 7 days

    Even if you don't exercise, if you eat less than your BMR, you'll lose weight. You will just lose weight faster if you add in an extra activity that has a high calorie burn rate. It's pretty straight forward.
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    Options
    MystifiedFluff wrote: »
    StaciMarie1974 wrote: »
    But your lifestyle, tendencies, etc. will dictate what you need to focus on.

    Precisely my point! I want to know if those who gained a certain way have better luck losing it a certain way. Yet many people are just spouting off the same old 'calories in < calories out' which IS true, but not as clear cut as they think. You can make that 'deficit' in three ways: lower in numbers, higher out numbers, or a combination. But if you are just starting out, that can seem confusing. Where does one start? I'm trying to see if there's a pattern so that a person can look at their lifestyle, say based on the 'cause' of the weight gain, what they should perhaps focus on first in order to maximize weight loss.

    You are confusing/conflating thermodynamics with behavior patterns and causality with coincidence. Which usually ends up down a rabbit hole.
  • TitikiOoh
    TitikiOoh Posts: 40 Member
    Options
    For me if I was going to focus both on exercise and food in the beginning I would have failed, like I have failed before for the simple reason that it would have been to much. So I started by slowly making changes to my diet.
  • SpockAdventures
    SpockAdventures Posts: 103 Member
    Options
    Azdak wrote: »
    MystifiedFluff wrote: »
    StaciMarie1974 wrote: »
    But your lifestyle, tendencies, etc. will dictate what you need to focus on.

    Precisely my point! I want to know if those who gained a certain way have better luck losing it a certain way. Yet many people are just spouting off the same old 'calories in < calories out' which IS true, but not as clear cut as they think. You can make that 'deficit' in three ways: lower in numbers, higher out numbers, or a combination. But if you are just starting out, that can seem confusing. Where does one start? I'm trying to see if there's a pattern so that a person can look at their lifestyle, say based on the 'cause' of the weight gain, what they should perhaps focus on first in order to maximize weight loss.

    You are confusing/conflating thermodynamics with behavior patterns and causality with coincidence. Which usually ends up down a rabbit hole.

    I agree with Azdak - basic laws of biology and physics can't change because of someone's behavior. It's very very simple. Calories in vs. Calories out. It's not that difficult, you just have to take the time to actually measure all of your food and accurately count your calories, and find out your real bmr so you know how much of a deficit you need to lose weight. There's no pattern....those who consume less lose more.

    If it's a matter of not knowing where to start, start with a very stringent diet plan, this is what I've had to do. I eat the same thing every day, so I don't even have to think about my caloric intake. I eat a bowl of fiberous or corn based cereal in the morning, a salad and an ensure for lunch, a very very less than 75calories snack in the afternoon and a lean cuisine or healthy choice for dinner. If counting calories and all that is overwhelming, start on a plan like that so you don't have to worry about figuring out the calorie in vs. calorie out.
  • gle8442
    gle8442 Posts: 126 Member
    edited November 2014
    Options
    Here's the way I think about it... you lose weight when calories in < calories out. So a very inactive me might get a 500 calorie a day deficit by eating 1000 calories a day when completely sedentary (if my TDEE is 1500 calories). Or a fairly active me might get a 500 calorie a day deficit by eating 2000 calories a day when my TDEE is 2500.

    In either scenario, I might be losing weight at a similar rate, but just from personal experience I know that the second situation is WAY easier for me to maintain... if I'm exercising regularly, I have more energy and I feel more positive (yay endorphins!). If I am in good shape, I can burn off 600-750 calories in a 1-hour run... deficit for the day accomplished, done, now go think about something else! My body is machine that is tuned to burning calories.

    On the other hand, if my TDEE is 1500 and I'm eating at 1000, I can guarantee you I am going to be cranky and exhausted. My body is trying to run on the fewest calories possible...so every signal to my brain is telling me to slow down, and I'm low-energy and constantly thinking about food. Plus, if I'm out of shape than a 600 calorie workout might take me two hours instead of one.

    Put another way, in either case the deficit is the same, but in the low-exercise scenario I am taking in only 66% of what I would really like to be eating, and in the active scenario, I'm taking in 80% of what I'd like to be eating. 80% is an easier deficit to maintain than 66%... so I'd rather be more active and get a the same net loss with a smaller %TDEE deficit, if possible.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    SpockAdventures wrote: »
    It seems like everyone is making this much more complicated than it needs to be....the fact is it's all about mathematics. It's what you put in your body vs. what you put out. If C is calories you eat, E is calories burned in exercise, B is your bmr, D is your calorie deficit and 1lbs = 3500 calories, then you just have to find the right combination of numbers to fit the equation...

    I agree with this, but there's a mental element too--what will be sustainable for a particular person both long enough to lose and then later to maintain?

    My understanding of the OP (which may be imperfect) is that he/she is proposing that if one gained due to a sedentary lifestyle adding exercise would be more sustainable, whereas cutting calories (which weren't particularly high already) might be more difficult. But if one gained while active due to overeating, cutting calories would be the way to go.

    My guess is that that's true in some cases, but in others the person overate because he/she cares about food and would have a harder time cutting calories than exercising more, whereas (even more common) others might not be active because they dislike exercise and have a particular lifestyle and would find that harder to change than their food choices.

    For me, though, it's always intertwined if I'm talking about what works for the mental component of this. I can't lose weight just by deciding to be more active (although I now eat at a level that would cause me to gain if I were completely sedentary, so arguably that means I am losing solely through exercise). More significantly, I just naturally eat better and find it easier to eat in a way that helps me lose weight or maintain my weight when I am active and focused on activity-based fitness goals. And I know I can certainly gain weight by cutting out activity.
  • DevilsNegu
    DevilsNegu Posts: 60 Member
    Options
    Weightloss is all about numbers
    What u put in needs to be lower then what u put out.

Categories