So in theory you could do no exercise at all and still lose weight with a deficit

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.

Not starving. 45% of calories from carbs. 500 Cals reduction daily. Losing weight? Yes!

FreezingDan wrote: »

If you've lost weight via CICO it's because you reduced your carbs in the process.

Oh don't be silly!! I've lost weight on almost 100% junk food. I've lost weight with low fat, high carb. I've lost weight by not changing my diet and just adding exercise. I've lost weight by focusing on healthy foods and not even trying to lose weight. And in the past year, I lost weight by eating somewhat similar to the Mediterranean Diet, which is fairly high carb.

My secret is what I learned in the 1970's. Consume less calories than you burn. That knowledge is what has kept me from becoming obese all these years and kept me at a healthy weight for more than 40 of my 51 years.

Drop your carbs if you need or want to, but it's obviously not the only way to do it.

ceoverturf wrote: »

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?

So...I take it that's a "no" on the research?

lorrpb wrote: »

Sorry but I don't see the point of this discussion. Why would you WANT to lose weight but not have any strength or stamina? Why would you want to risk losing whatever fitness level you have? I used to be unable to walk up a small hill, I couldn't walk more than 1/4 mi without rest and being in pain. It's not a fun place to be, so why do you want to go there? If you're not improving your fitness, strength, and stamina, you're letting it slide backwards. Believe me, I know.

SW 301
CW 196
GW 160
15 mo.

Maybe because some people can't exercise, such as the really morbidly obese trapped in a bed 24/7. How do you think they get enough weight off to be mobile again, let alone exercise?

Some people lose weight by cutting calories.
Some people lose weight by exercising more.
Some people lose weight by doing both.

FreezingDan wrote: »

It's a tough pill to swallow. Here you've all been starving yourself and self-congratulating yourself because you have such good will power. Then someone comes along and pokes holes in your theory and, instead of looking at it objectively, you prefer to instantly dismiss the messenger.

Fine with me. Enjoy your starvation ritual

Yes, it's hard to not get full on 3500 calories per day...:insertsarcasm:

cwolfman13 wrote: »

FreezingDan wrote: »

It's a tough pill to swallow. Here you've all been starving yourself and self-congratulating yourself because you have such good will power. Then someone comes along and pokes holes in your theory and, instead of looking at it objectively, you prefer to instantly dismiss the messenger.

Fine with me. Enjoy your starvation ritual

you're making a huge assumption here that everyone is starving or something...i'm not...nor was I when I was losing weight.

how does eating carbs = starving?

this is why I have difficulty taking low carbers seriously....there are a couple of knowledgable ones around here, but pretty much this line of thinking seems to be the primary thinking of the low carb/keto trend....ignorance.

Well, he probably read an article in some magazine and now he thinks he has it all figured out.

lorrpb wrote: »

Sorry but I don't see the point of this discussion. Why would you WANT to lose weight but not have any strength or stamina? Why would you want to risk losing whatever fitness level you have? I used to be unable to walk up a small hill, I couldn't walk more than 1/4 mi without rest and being in pain. It's not a fun place to be, so why do you want to go there? If you're not improving your fitness, strength, and stamina, you're letting it slide backwards. Believe me, I know.

SW 301
CW 196
GW 160
15 mo.

Every time I tried to add exercise I would give up because I would have trouble breathing. Once I realized that no, I don't have allergies I actually do have asthma, I was able to start getting treatment. Even then, exercise is still hard for me because my lungs still give out before the rest of me does. It took me 6 months to get to the point where I can go for what most people consider a slow walk and actually make it a couple of miles. Even that is hard if I've been having other issues.

There are also people that CAN'T exercise. My aunt is one. She's obese to the point she can barely walk, so she can't exercise. Is she doomed to stay fat? No, if she would actually agree to cut calories and watch what she eats, she'd lose weight (not that she will, but she could).


Now, I'm not saying don't ever exercise. It's good for a lot of other reasons! It's just not necessary for weight loss.

First day back on the forums in like a week and a half.

What a great thread to come back to.

Never change, MFP.

***To the OP: As everyone has been saying, yes you can lose weight without exercise, you just have to make sure to track as accurately as possible, and you'd likely have a lower calorie allowance than you would if you exercised. The more active you are, the more food you get to eat - which is motivation enough for me, honestly - and the healthier your heart will be. Also, if you lift heavy, you will retain muscle throughout the process and look better in the end.***

Further to what Tex pointed out have deleted my post.