Why the 80% diet 20% exercise rule?

Options
13

Replies

  • corinic91
    corinic91 Posts: 148 Member
    Options
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    Leyshinka wrote: »
    Please help me understand why this is the general assumption to weight loss. I'll try to keep my thoughts simple using the example below:

    A female athlete eats 2500 calories and burns 500 calories with exercise to maintain weight X. She stops her training and leads a sedentary life whilst still eating 2500 calories. Over time she gains weight until she reaches weight XY. She maintains this weight for a number of years. If she starts her athletic training again, burning 500 calories whilst still eating 2500 calories, my simple brain tells me that she would loose weight until she reaches weight X.

    Is that not weightloss due 100% exercise?

    yes but your athlete is on maintenance at 2500

    if she brings back her exercise she will back at maintenance but at a higher weight

    she has to cut calories - easiest in the kitchen

    ^this.
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,942 Member
    Options
    Leyshinka wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    One problem that people who exercise have is that they tend to eat more when they exercise, so they won't actually lose weight. That being said, I find that it is very difficult to create a calorie deficit without exercise. It is possible, yes, but it is more difficult.

    I think most people would be better off if they would focus more on exercise than on diet. When your goals are exercise based, you aren't thinking so much about having to cut out certain foods or some number of calories. Instead, you are thinking in terms of how you can go faster or perform longer. Your focus on food becomes a focus on fueling your workout rather than eating for pleasure.

    Why focus on exercise when a surplus of food is actually the problem to weight gain?

    In my example there was no 'surplus of food' but rather a reduction on exercise. She was on a 2500 calorie the whole time. The only thing that changed was her activity.
    But, exercise created a calorie deficit so the net calories eaten was no longer 2500.
  • sofaking6
    sofaking6 Posts: 4,589 Member
    Options
    As far as I can tell, it's a rule simply because many people overestimate their calories burned during exercise and underestimate their calories consumed. So I think the 80/20 rule is really a way of saying that it's hard to out-exercise a crappy diet. IMO it's just a lazy little saying that shouldn't matter if you're counting calories in and out.
  • Randy589
    Randy589 Posts: 18 Member
    Options
    I think it's possible to lose on just exercise- my husband has lost about 16 pounds not really changing his diet but he took up walking daily and lifting as well as swimming...
    Sure, you can lose if you keep your diet the same but also exercise enough to have a calorie deficit. But in the end it's the calorie count that is making you lose weight, not the exercise. Do you understand the difference?
  • Liftng4Lis
    Liftng4Lis Posts: 15,150 Member
    Options
    psulemon wrote: »
    Weight loss is 100% diet.. Exercise is fitness. But you can create a deficit with diet.

    Said it all.
  • ali2407
    ali2407 Posts: 16 Member
    Options
    mzjenn2u wrote: »
    You can't out exercise a bad diet.....maybe at first but eventually it will catch up with you

    This ^^ I was going to the gym 4/5 times a week, but still stuffing my face a lot of the time with takeaway and chocolate - and unsurprisingly i gained weight !! Diet is key - exercise is a bonus.
  • Vailara
    Vailara Posts: 2,454 Member
    Options
    Personally, I would say that she's controlling her food intake, so it's diet.
  • RHachicho
    RHachicho Posts: 1,115 Member
    Options
    Not so much a rule as it is a good idea. You see it is totally possible to create a huge deficit through exercise. However it really isn't a good idea to do this. Basically these things tend to happen.

    1. You overdo things and you injure yourself. And once your activity falls off your deficit goes to pot.

    2. You don't injure yourself and lose weight but the extreme levels of activity you sustained to create a deficit resulted in quite a bit of muscle loss.

    3. You develop exercise anorexia. Which is a condition where instead of not eating every time you eat something naughty you immediatly have to exercise it off.

    Exercising for a calorie deficit tends, in general to foster an unhealthy relationship with exercise. You should be exercising to get fitter and improve your performance while keeping things sane so you don't overdo it or get injured.

    That being said it is hard to ignore the affect large amounts of exercise has on a deficit. So basically I use this rule. I plan my diet around my exercise. Not my exercise around my diet. If my activity level goes up I eat to maintain my current surplus or deficit. I don't work my *kitten* off and overdo it in order to create a deficit.
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,401 MFP Moderator
    edited January 2015
    Options
    psulemon wrote: »
    Weight loss is 100% diet.. Exercise is fitness. But you can create a deficit with diet.

    False information. It's the accumulation of calories in vs calories out. Logic. : )

    ummm.. yea..


    Diet refers to the calories you eat... not a specific type like Paleo, Vegetarian or other... It implies CICO..
  • galprincess
    galprincess Posts: 682 Member
    Options
    athletes who retire usually gain weight as they eat as much as they were when training so they are fuelling their bodies for a workout they aren't going to do therefore no longer in deficit. an athlete that is active will burn more calories therefore able to eat more once you cut down exercise the deficit also shrinks as you cant eat back exercise calories
  • Kalikel
    Kalikel Posts: 9,626 Member
    edited January 2015
    Options
    This whole argument is really just an "Is the glass half full or half empty?" kind of thing.

    You can say that since your calories in are less than your calories out, it is the amount of IN that is responsible.

    You can say that since your calories out are more than your calories in, it is the amount of OUT that is responsible.

    Either way, you're wrong. Either way, you're right.

    These two things are happening together and one is not more responsible than the other.

    There is no 80/20 rule.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    Kalikel wrote: »
    This whole argument is really just an "Is the glass half full or half empty?" kind of thing.

    You can say that since your calories in are less than your calories out, it is the amount of IN that is responsible.

    You can say that since your calories out are more than your calories in, it is the amount of OUT that is responsible.

    Either way, you're wrong. Either way, you're right.

    These two things are happening together and one is not more responsible than the other.

    There is no 80/20 rule.

    Agree. That's basically what I was trying to say above too.
  • 2snakeswoman
    2snakeswoman Posts: 655 Member
    Options
    In 2009, I lost 15 pounds with exercise alone. Then a constellation of circumstances resulted in me losing the exercise habit and that weight came right back. I should have changed my diet.
  • allanakern
    allanakern Posts: 245 Member
    Options
    lmao you're thinking about this way too much. its a concept that reach your goals 80% of the time but realizing nobody Is 100% perfect 100% of the time.
  • SoDamnHungry
    SoDamnHungry Posts: 6,998 Member
    Options
    It doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is creating a calorie deficit.

    For most folks, though, a 500 calorie defect in the kitchen is far, far easier that a 500 calorie deficit in the gym. You can cut out soda for the day, or run 5 miles. Which is easier for your generally sedentary, overweight individual?

    This. Calorie deficit is how you lose weight. You can create a calorie deficit by eating less or by exercising more, or a combination of both.

  • chrisa8170
    chrisa8170 Posts: 466 Member
    Options
    It's simpler than that and a basic calculation - less calories that you need = weight loss therfore eating less and/ or exercising more should create a defecit and theerefore loss. Remember 3500 calories is generally accepted as equaling 1Lb so 500 cals less per day = 1Lb loss in a week. well it worked for me
  • nilbogger
    nilbogger Posts: 870 Member
    Options
    80/20 is just a basic rule of thumb that works for the average person.

    Sure, you could, in theory, lose weight from exercise alone, but most people won't.

    Assuming a person was eating at maintenance (which is probably not the case if that ends up needing to lose weight), he or she could lose weight by eating exactly the same amount and adding exercise. But many people who add exercise and don't track calories will end up eating slightly more because exercise makes them hungrier.

    It is also far easier to cut calories through food than exercise. It can take just a few moments to eat several hundred calories, but hours to burn that same amount.

    And for the record I think it IS possibly to out-exercise a "bad diet", but it takes hours a day of training, time that most people don't have.
  • TR0berts
    TR0berts Posts: 7,739 Member
    Options
    It's a phrase - nothing more. There is no real 80% or 20%.

    It's simply shorthand to state that you have to keep your overall diet (Calories) in check. Exercise can help, but if you're not paying attention to your diet, it's more difficult to achieve your goals.