So in theory you could do no exercise at all and still lose weight with a deficit
Replies
-
not in theory. its a fact.0
-
Not only in theory.0
-
This is very much a short term/long term issue. For the short term and only considering weight loss, yes only diet matters.
For long term sustainable success exercise is critical. Over 90% of people who have lost over 30lbs and kept this off over one year exercise ~30 mins to 1 hour 5x/week.
Theoretically yes, you can do this without exercise, but you decrease your chances of success in doing so.
err no only the deficit matters, it doesn't matter where it comes from.
No dispute here, but in terms of results the vast majority will achieve this by monitoring diet and exercise.
Thats saying something different from your previous pointFor the short term and only considering weight loss, yes only diet matters.
If I burn calories, then the ones I choose not to eat back affect the deficit. Exercise also affects weight loss in other complementary ways. Actually I wonder what the split is for people losing weight from people who use diet alone, exercise alone (probably the smallest) and both. Because its much harder to burn 500 calories than not eat 500, then i also wonder what % of peoples deficits are made up of exercise calories rather than eating less.
Even if you eat back 100% the flexibility that can give people in making a diet more sustainable is significant.
We are in complete agreement. I misstated this and meant to say deficit. I'm trying to keep in context with the origin statement "So in theory you could do no exercise at all and still lose weight with a deficit".
There's a tremendous amount of data here on long term success:
http://www.nwcr.ws/
I agree that it is much easier to not eat than work out; however I also believe this goes against our nature as evidenced by the NWCR results.
0 -
This is very much a short term/long term issue. For the short term and only considering weight loss, yes only diet matters.
For long term sustainable success exercise is critical. Over 90% of people who have lost over 30lbs and kept this off over one year exercise ~30 mins to 1 hour 5x/week.
Theoretically yes, you can do this without exercise, but you decrease your chances of success in doing so.
I don't see how that is possible. The only way for them to gain weight would to be to eat over maintenance consistently to re-gain the weight. Exercise has nothing to do with that.
If someone wants to sit on their butt the rest of their life and eat at deficit/maintenance they won't gain weight.
I'm not commenting on if it's 'healthy'.
Its based on a survey which showed that 90% of the people who managed to maintain also exercised on a regular basis. If exercise has nothing to do with being able to successfullly maintain then why do such a high % do it? I can think of a few reasons, but part of those who will be succcessful will manage to use the calories burned to assist keeping them at maintenance or in deficit, which is more advantageous who dont have those calories to fall back on, all things being equal.
That is no saying to maintain successfully then you must exercise, because thats not true. Read what was written.0 -
Edited: This is very much a short term/long term issue. For the short term and only considering weight loss, yes only deficit matters.
For long term sustainable success exercise is critical. Over 90% of people who have lost over 30lbs and kept this off over one year exercise ~30 mins to 1 hour 5x/week.
Theoretically yes, you can do this without exercise, but you decrease your chances of success in doing so.
I always see that as a correlation. The people who have the mindset to maintain their weight loss are usually smart enough to know that exercise is healthy, and are disciplined enough to make both a routine.0 -
This is very much a short term/long term issue. For the short term and only considering weight loss, yes only diet matters.
For long term sustainable success exercise is critical. Over 90% of people who have lost over 30lbs and kept this off over one year exercise ~30 mins to 1 hour 5x/week.
Theoretically yes, you can do this without exercise, but you decrease your chances of success in doing so.
I don't see how that is possible. The only way for them to gain weight would to be to eat over maintenance consistently to re-gain the weight. Exercise has nothing to do with that.
If someone wants to sit on their butt the rest of their life and eat at deficit/maintenance they won't gain weight.
I'm not commenting on if it's 'healthy'.
I'm getting more into human behavioral issues with this statement. In order to gain weight you have to eat in surplus, indisputable. However people are rarely successful at keeping weight off merely by diet and will eventually return to old habits and overeat. They stop logging and tracking, stop being aware and mindful, and regain the weight. Exercise acts as an immediate feedback mechanism.0 -
0
-
I lost my first thirty pounds without adding any significant exercise.
I got pink in my cheeks when I started exercising seriously. I like exercising more than dieting, and I find the results (not weight related) to be more immediate.
I think regular exercise might be a keystone habit, an indicator of long term success.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »Edited: This is very much a short term/long term issue. For the short term and only considering weight loss, yes only deficit matters.
For long term sustainable success exercise is critical. Over 90% of people who have lost over 30lbs and kept this off over one year exercise ~30 mins to 1 hour 5x/week.
Theoretically yes, you can do this without exercise, but you decrease your chances of success in doing so.
I always see that as a correlation. The people who have the mindset to maintain their weight loss are usually smart enough to know that exercise is healthy, and are disciplined enough to make both a routine.
Correlation is true for me.
I have always exercised when I happen to care about maintaining or losing weight, but it's the mindset that does it, not the exercise. If I had the same motivation but was unable to exercise, I think I'd lose/maintain fine.
I regained after maintaining for 5 years once before, and I stopped exercising before I regained, but I didn't regain BECAUSE I stopped exercising, the same factors resulted in me doing both (largely depression and not caring).0 -
I lost 36 pounds that way prepregnancy. It works.0
-
I lost my first thirty pounds without adding any significant exercise.
I got pink in my cheeks when I started exercising seriously. I like exercising more than dieting, and I find the results (not weight related) to be more immediate.
I think regular exercise might be a keystone habit, an indicator of long term success.
i love working out and a year ago, i couldnt have even IMAGINED saying that!0 -
I lost 40 pounds without exercise. All done through dieting.
If you only have enough willpower to conquer one discomfort, the discomfort of dieting or the discomfort of exercise, choose diet.0 -
i don't personally do this because I want to exercise to be healthy and because being toned looks and feels nice but in theory could you technically lose weight with no exercise at all? As long as you maintain a deficit?
of course...weight management is just math. weight management is far and away easier though when you exercise regularly. when i started out, i just dieted alone and really didn't do any exercise...eventually i couldn't stand my paltry calorie allotments so thought exercising to be able to fit in a beer or two or some extra food would be the way to go...and it was.0 -
maillemaker wrote: »I lost 40 pounds without exercise. All done through dieting.
If you only have enough willpower to conquer one discomfort, the discomfort of dieting or the discomfort of exercise, choose diet.
If I exercise, I can eat plenty so that it's no discomfort. (Plus, it's motivating to focus on getting healthier.)
I also don't see why exercise is discomfort, though -- that seems like a bad attitude.0 -
(Disclaimer: my heart goes out to anyone in a wheelchair who has no chance of exercising. I wish I knew more to help you except CI<CO works.)
they can totally exercise. There was even a thread a couple of months ago about a gentleman that did just that. and he was rather buff in his "after" pictures0 -
Caloric deficit isn't what leads to weight loss - it's the reduction of carbohydrate-dense foods. You might think it's because you're eating less but any diet plan that leaves you hungry can only be effective for so long. And by the way exercise makes you hungry, too.
Just cut down to 10% or less carbs and you've got a plan for life. Exercise is essential - but not for weight loss. I'm living proof.
Cutting calories may lead to short-term weight loss but so does smoking. And neither one is good for your health. Calories in/calories out is the mindset of the 1970's.0 -
Lost 48lbs that way. I've added walking to try and get my asthma under better control, but I don't use it for weight loss.FreezingDan wrote: »Caloric deficit isn't what leads to weight loss - it's the reduction of carbohydrate-dense foods. You might think it's because you're eating less but any diet plan that leaves you hungry can only be effective for so long. And by the way exercise makes you hungry, too.
Just cut down to 10% or less carbs and you've got a plan for life. Exercise is essential - but not for weight loss. I'm living proof.
Cutting calories may lead to short-term weight loss but so does smoking. And neither one is good for your health. Calories in/calories out is the mindset of the 1970's.
No. Losing weight is caused by burning more calories than you consume. At the base of EVERY diet plan, this is what causes weight loss. I didn't cut carbs at all. I love bread, espically garlicy buttery breadsticks, eat them most every work day for lunch, and I lost weight just fine. All I really did was cut down the AMOUNT of everything I ate, not just carbs. I still eat 'junk' food, just less of it.
(edit: sorry, this just really needed a gif)0 -
FreezingDan wrote: »Caloric deficit isn't what leads to weight loss - it's the reduction of carbohydrate-dense foods. You might think it's because you're eating less but any diet plan that leaves you hungry can only be effective for so long. And by the way exercise makes you hungry, too.
Just cut down to 10% or less carbs and you've got a plan for life. Exercise is essential - but not for weight loss. I'm living proof.
Cutting calories may lead to short-term weight loss but so does smoking. And neither one is good for your health. Calories in/calories out is the mindset of the 1970's.
No...just no.0 -
FreezingDan wrote: »Caloric deficit isn't what leads to weight loss - it's the reduction of carbohydrate-dense foods. You might think it's because you're eating less but any diet plan that leaves you hungry can only be effective for so long. And by the way exercise makes you hungry, too.
Just cut down to 10% or less carbs and you've got a plan for life. Exercise is essential - but not for weight loss. I'm living proof.
Cutting calories may lead to short-term weight loss but so does smoking. And neither one is good for your health. Calories in/calories out is the mindset of the 1970's.
Uhh...wait what the what?? No.0 -
(Disclaimer: my heart goes out to anyone in a wheelchair who has no chance of exercising. I wish I knew more to help you except CI<CO works.)
they can totally exercise. There was even a thread a couple of months ago about a gentleman that did just that. and he was rather buff in his "after" pictures
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10195005/wheelchair-user-maintaining-75-lbs-lost-for-4-years/p1
Love this one!0 -
Yes. Just yes. Losing weight is not a math equation. It's a physiological transformation from storing fat to burning fat. The only way to burn fat is to reduce insulin levels. And the only way to that is by reducing your glycemic load.0
-
FreezingDan wrote: »Yes. Just yes. Losing weight is not a math equation. It's a physiological transformation from storing fat to burning fat. The only way to burn fat is to reduce insulin levels. And the only way to that is by reducing your glycemic load.
No. CICO. C'mon dude.0 -
FreezingDan wrote: »Caloric deficit isn't what leads to weight loss - it's the reduction of carbohydrate-dense foods. You might think it's because you're eating less but any diet plan that leaves you hungry can only be effective for so long. And by the way exercise makes you hungry, too.
Just cut down to 10% or less carbs and you've got a plan for life. Exercise is essential - but not for weight loss. I'm living proof.
Cutting calories may lead to short-term weight loss but so does smoking. And neither one is good for your health. Calories in/calories out is the mindset of the 1970's.
I'm not sure this is even up to the standards of broscience.
But hey - even the 70s got a few things right.0 -
FreezingDan wrote: »Yes. Just yes. Losing weight is not a math equation. It's a physiological transformation from storing fat to burning fat. The only way to burn fat is to reduce insulin levels. And the only way to that is by reducing your glycemic load.
Do you have any peer reviewed research to substantiate this position?0 -
I lost almost 100# before I began to even walk more. So, yes, you can, and will, lose weight by eating less calories than you burn.
I have found that I am a lot hungrier now that I exercise regularly, than I was the first 7 months when I did not exercise. Being more active has made me feel better, physically. It is important to do whatever you can to move more. It really helps your over all health.0 -
FreezingDan wrote: »Yes. Just yes. Losing weight is not a math equation. It's a physiological transformation from storing fat to burning fat. The only way to burn fat is to reduce insulin levels. And the only way to that is by reducing your glycemic load.
Objective evidence disagrees.0 -
@ESotrops Losing weight is all about the calorie deficit. Take in less energy from food (calories) than your body expends, exercise or not, and you'll lose weight.
But achieving and maintaining weight loss for many people isn't a simple mathematical equation. How many have started down the weight loss road and given up? How many tried to lose weight, found results were difficult to achieve and/or slow to arrive, and stopped trying? Legions, maybe even a majority of "dieters" fail.
How can exercise help? Exercise improves your physical (and mental) fitness and for many people they will see real results in their health and fitness long before weight loss registers a meaningful impact, and long before the goal weight on the horizon is achieved. Seeing success in the health area can, and should, help motivate most to carry on with their weight loss program. Success breeds success.
While dropping weight alone can improve health outcomes dramatically, if one wants to fully maximize their health over the long run, there improving one's fitness is key. Merely being at goal weight isn't enough. That isn't controversial.
Get fit via any approach that feels best for you and stay fit. Do that independently of weight. Striving to achieve one objective will support the other anyway.
@999tigger as I'm a runner, male, 5'8ish @ 178 pounds, it's easy to burn 500 calories. Most of my runs tend towards 14km and up, meaning 750-1400 calories. I don't run to eat more, but I do appreciate being able to have a beer now and then which running definitely makes easier than squeezing those same calories into a deficit diet (1,350 base for me).
I run for beer.
Ok, I run for fun actually. And beer. Ok, it's mostly for the beer. Sometimes beer while running.
The burn most definitely is not why I run though. I run for fitness and health and the vast array of fun opportunities opened to me as a result. Ultimately that translates to happiness.0 -
FreezingDan wrote: »Caloric deficit isn't what leads to weight loss - it's the reduction of carbohydrate-dense foods. You might think it's because you're eating less but any diet plan that leaves you hungry can only be effective for so long. And by the way exercise makes you hungry, too.
Just cut down to 10% or less carbs and you've got a plan for life. Exercise is essential - but not for weight loss. I'm living proof.
Cutting calories may lead to short-term weight loss but so does smoking. And neither one is good for your health. Calories in/calories out is the mindset of the 1970's.
Holy herp derp batman....FreezingDan wrote: »Yes. Just yes. Losing weight is not a math equation. It's a physiological transformation from storing fat to burning fat. The only way to burn fat is to reduce insulin levels. And the only way to that is by reducing your glycemic load.
so how exactly do *kitten* loads of people lose weight without doing keto? myself included...
the world over has subsisted on a high carbohydrate diet since the beginning...0 -
If you've lost weight via CICO it's because you reduced your carbs in the process.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 427 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions