Don't Tell Me You Can't Lose Weight With Exercise
Options
Replies
-
SusanMFindlay wrote: »RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »dotwilldoit wrote: »Wtf is zwift
Just a glance at the site - you cycle on an indoor bike while watching pretend you cycle through pretend outside.
Lol, why not just cycle outside and get the free vit D and fresh air?
Great for mental and physical health that way.
We find cycling a great family activity.
Where I live, it goes down below -30 degrees Celsius in the winter (so, -20ish Farenheit?). The roads are often snowy and/or icy - and the shoulder may well be covered with snow. For some of us, outdoor cycling isn't an option for several months out of the year. I love outdoor cycling, but it'll never be a year-round activity where I live.
All this! I'm training for an event in the beginning of April, and so far 2 rides have been rained out (and there will be more if the weather projections are accurate). If I didn't put in the time on the trainer I wouldn't be ready to do the event. I also want to say that many people enjoy indoor cycling and don't ride outdoors at all, it's really not fair to dis people who's goals and perspective are different than yours.2 -
Personally, I do think that many of the posters on this site underestimate the value of physical activity. I understand that somebody who eats 5,000 calories/day (and isn't a muscular giant) will have a hard time doing enough physical activity to burn more than 5,000 calories/day so that they can lose weight. And I understand that we don't want to discourage people with disabilities who cannot exercise (since it is clearly possible to lose weight simply by eating less).
BUT there is a pervasive attitude by many (but not all) posters that you can hardly burn any calories through physical activity. Somebody with a really active job will post to ask if they're okay to eat 1200 (or 1500) calories/day, and a bunch of sedentary people will say "sounds good to me; your job probably burns a couple hundred calories, but I don't eat back my exercise calories and it's never hurt me" (paraphrased, but a common sentiment). A lot of posters don't seem to appreciate that, for somebody with the right lifestyle, physical activity can burn as many calories as their BMR - or more. Or that physical activity doesn't have to be "going to to gym" type exercise.
So, I understand where the OP is coming from. They want to point out something that is very rarely given credit on these forums - that if somebody is maintaining their current weight, they *can* create a deficit simply by increasing physical activity as long as they don't increase calorie intake.
And, yes, we should keep telling the "I work out all the time; why am I not losing weight" posters to check their calorie intake - because clearly they *did* increase calorie intake when they started working out.4 -
Look_Its_Kriss wrote: »I am confused.. i dont think anyone has ever said exercise doesn't cause weight loss..
I've saw someone on here say it doesn't cause weight loss0 -
PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »ThatUserNameIsAllReadyTaken wrote: »PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »ThatUserNameIsAllReadyTaken wrote: »PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »ThatUserNameIsAllReadyTaken wrote: »I have seen it stated here a LOT that exercise has little to do with weight loss. I have always disagreed with that idea as any activity which increases calorie burn will assist in weight loss.
Exercise is always helpful but its effects are limited when it comes to fat loss.
I would love to see some further reading on this! Please mention me by name when you post the link!
What reading? It's basic stuff. If you keep the same diet and add exercise, you will lose via increased TDEE until you reach equilibrium. At that point, if you still need to lose more, you'd either have to increase TDEE again or decrease your calorie intake. That's the whole CICO thing people blather on about on these boards.
So this is basic knowledge we are all programmed with upon birth or does it just magically come to us in a dream? You are rambling about TDEE etc... the fact remains. You have brought nothing to back up your claim. You are telling me that the effect exercise has on fat loss is limited. I am waiting for some explanatory and reliable source that brought you to the conclusion that the effect exercise has on fat loss is limited. I once weighed 200 lbs. The ONLY thing I did was walk on a daily basis and I lost 70 lbs. I did not change my diet, I did not increase my exercise etc... I went from sedentary to not. That is all. I do not believe the effect that exercise has on fat loss is "limited".
I was eating 2500 to 3000 calories a day at 250 lbs and gaining. In order to get to a healthy weight without changing my diet, I would have had to add 1000 to 1500 calories a day in exercise, just to hit the top of the healthy BMI range. Since my goal isn't to be the fattest I can be without a doctor giving me crap about it, adding that insane amount of exercise a) would not have gotten me to my goal, and b) would not have been sustainable to even get to that max weight in the first place, making the whole thing a moot point. That is where the usefulness of exercise in weight loss is limited. Nobody ever said it isnt useful at all, but its limit is based on your calorie intake vs. your (increased) TDEE and how it compares to your goals.
90 minutes of swimming with no change in diet would give a 250 pound person a 1000 calorie deficit. Doesn't seem crazy or impossible to me.2 -
PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »ThatUserNameIsAllReadyTaken wrote: »PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »ThatUserNameIsAllReadyTaken wrote: »PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »ThatUserNameIsAllReadyTaken wrote: »I have seen it stated here a LOT that exercise has little to do with weight loss. I have always disagreed with that idea as any activity which increases calorie burn will assist in weight loss.
Exercise is always helpful but its effects are limited when it comes to fat loss.
I would love to see some further reading on this! Please mention me by name when you post the link!
What reading? It's basic stuff. If you keep the same diet and add exercise, you will lose via increased TDEE until you reach equilibrium. At that point, if you still need to lose more, you'd either have to increase TDEE again or decrease your calorie intake. That's the whole CICO thing people blather on about on these boards.
So this is basic knowledge we are all programmed with upon birth or does it just magically come to us in a dream? You are rambling about TDEE etc... the fact remains. You have brought nothing to back up your claim. You are telling me that the effect exercise has on fat loss is limited. I am waiting for some explanatory and reliable source that brought you to the conclusion that the effect exercise has on fat loss is limited. I once weighed 200 lbs. The ONLY thing I did was walk on a daily basis and I lost 70 lbs. I did not change my diet, I did not increase my exercise etc... I went from sedentary to not. That is all. I do not believe the effect that exercise has on fat loss is "limited".
I was eating 2500 to 3000 calories a day at 250 lbs and gaining. In order to get to a healthy weight without changing my diet, I would have had to add 1000 to 1500 calories a day in exercise, just to hit the top of the healthy BMI range. Since my goal isn't to be the fattest I can be without a doctor giving me crap about it, adding that insane amount of exercise a) would not have gotten me to my goal, and b) would not have been sustainable to even get to that max weight in the first place, making the whole thing a moot point. That is where the usefulness of exercise in weight loss is limited. Nobody ever said it isnt useful at all, but its limit is based on your calorie intake vs. your (increased) TDEE and how it compares to your goals.
90 minutes of swimming with no change in diet would give a 250 pound person a 1000 calorie deficit. Doesn't seem crazy or impossible to me.
Or one spin class per day...0 -
PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »ThatUserNameIsAllReadyTaken wrote: »PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »ThatUserNameIsAllReadyTaken wrote: »PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »ThatUserNameIsAllReadyTaken wrote: »I have seen it stated here a LOT that exercise has little to do with weight loss. I have always disagreed with that idea as any activity which increases calorie burn will assist in weight loss.
Exercise is always helpful but its effects are limited when it comes to fat loss.
I would love to see some further reading on this! Please mention me by name when you post the link!
What reading? It's basic stuff. If you keep the same diet and add exercise, you will lose via increased TDEE until you reach equilibrium. At that point, if you still need to lose more, you'd either have to increase TDEE again or decrease your calorie intake. That's the whole CICO thing people blather on about on these boards.
So this is basic knowledge we are all programmed with upon birth or does it just magically come to us in a dream? You are rambling about TDEE etc... the fact remains. You have brought nothing to back up your claim. You are telling me that the effect exercise has on fat loss is limited. I am waiting for some explanatory and reliable source that brought you to the conclusion that the effect exercise has on fat loss is limited. I once weighed 200 lbs. The ONLY thing I did was walk on a daily basis and I lost 70 lbs. I did not change my diet, I did not increase my exercise etc... I went from sedentary to not. That is all. I do not believe the effect that exercise has on fat loss is "limited".
I was eating 2500 to 3000 calories a day at 250 lbs and gaining. In order to get to a healthy weight without changing my diet, I would have had to add 1000 to 1500 calories a day in exercise, just to hit the top of the healthy BMI range. Since my goal isn't to be the fattest I can be without a doctor giving me crap about it, adding that insane amount of exercise a) would not have gotten me to my goal, and b) would not have been sustainable to even get to that max weight in the first place, making the whole thing a moot point. That is where the usefulness of exercise in weight loss is limited. Nobody ever said it isnt useful at all, but its limit is based on your calorie intake vs. your (increased) TDEE and how it compares to your goals.
90 minutes of swimming with no change in diet would give a 250 pound person a 1000 calorie deficit. Doesn't seem crazy or impossible to me.
1) Not everybody has the time (or the ability/fitness level, or the access to water) to swim 90 minutes a day.
2) That's theoretically correct - if calories are being accurately tracked/maintained and the person isn't eating an ad libitum diet. Unless one is conscientiously monitoring their intake, it's rarely that neat of a situation.
3) A further proviso is ensuring that NEAT isn't being downregulated due to the increased exercise and/or the person isn't eating more due to increased hunger from exercise. n=1, but I find that swimming makes me absolutely ravenous afterward, much more so than any other form of cardio.
As has been repeated over and over again, both in this thread and elsewhere, the answer to the question "will exercise help me lose weight?" is a qualified/conditional Yes. If a sustained caloric deficit is being created by the combination of caloric intake and expenditure, one will lose weight; if a sustained caloric deficit is not being created by the combination of caloric intake and expenditure, one will not lose weight.3 -
PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »ThatUserNameIsAllReadyTaken wrote: »PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »ThatUserNameIsAllReadyTaken wrote: »PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »ThatUserNameIsAllReadyTaken wrote: »I have seen it stated here a LOT that exercise has little to do with weight loss. I have always disagreed with that idea as any activity which increases calorie burn will assist in weight loss.
Exercise is always helpful but its effects are limited when it comes to fat loss.
I would love to see some further reading on this! Please mention me by name when you post the link!
What reading? It's basic stuff. If you keep the same diet and add exercise, you will lose via increased TDEE until you reach equilibrium. At that point, if you still need to lose more, you'd either have to increase TDEE again or decrease your calorie intake. That's the whole CICO thing people blather on about on these boards.
So this is basic knowledge we are all programmed with upon birth or does it just magically come to us in a dream? You are rambling about TDEE etc... the fact remains. You have brought nothing to back up your claim. You are telling me that the effect exercise has on fat loss is limited. I am waiting for some explanatory and reliable source that brought you to the conclusion that the effect exercise has on fat loss is limited. I once weighed 200 lbs. The ONLY thing I did was walk on a daily basis and I lost 70 lbs. I did not change my diet, I did not increase my exercise etc... I went from sedentary to not. That is all. I do not believe the effect that exercise has on fat loss is "limited".
I was eating 2500 to 3000 calories a day at 250 lbs and gaining. In order to get to a healthy weight without changing my diet, I would have had to add 1000 to 1500 calories a day in exercise, just to hit the top of the healthy BMI range. Since my goal isn't to be the fattest I can be without a doctor giving me crap about it, adding that insane amount of exercise a) would not have gotten me to my goal, and b) would not have been sustainable to even get to that max weight in the first place, making the whole thing a moot point. That is where the usefulness of exercise in weight loss is limited. Nobody ever said it isnt useful at all, but its limit is based on your calorie intake vs. your (increased) TDEE and how it compares to your goals.
90 minutes of swimming with no change in diet would give a 250 pound person a 1000 calorie deficit. Doesn't seem crazy or impossible to me.
Heehee when I was 233 I couldn't do 90 minutes of anything. 40 lbs down and I can do a 5k which takes right at an hour. But if I'm honest 90 minutes of any sustained exercise I can't do yet.2 -
leanjogreen18 wrote: »PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »ThatUserNameIsAllReadyTaken wrote: »PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »ThatUserNameIsAllReadyTaken wrote: »PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »ThatUserNameIsAllReadyTaken wrote: »I have seen it stated here a LOT that exercise has little to do with weight loss. I have always disagreed with that idea as any activity which increases calorie burn will assist in weight loss.
Exercise is always helpful but its effects are limited when it comes to fat loss.
I would love to see some further reading on this! Please mention me by name when you post the link!
What reading? It's basic stuff. If you keep the same diet and add exercise, you will lose via increased TDEE until you reach equilibrium. At that point, if you still need to lose more, you'd either have to increase TDEE again or decrease your calorie intake. That's the whole CICO thing people blather on about on these boards.
So this is basic knowledge we are all programmed with upon birth or does it just magically come to us in a dream? You are rambling about TDEE etc... the fact remains. You have brought nothing to back up your claim. You are telling me that the effect exercise has on fat loss is limited. I am waiting for some explanatory and reliable source that brought you to the conclusion that the effect exercise has on fat loss is limited. I once weighed 200 lbs. The ONLY thing I did was walk on a daily basis and I lost 70 lbs. I did not change my diet, I did not increase my exercise etc... I went from sedentary to not. That is all. I do not believe the effect that exercise has on fat loss is "limited".
I was eating 2500 to 3000 calories a day at 250 lbs and gaining. In order to get to a healthy weight without changing my diet, I would have had to add 1000 to 1500 calories a day in exercise, just to hit the top of the healthy BMI range. Since my goal isn't to be the fattest I can be without a doctor giving me crap about it, adding that insane amount of exercise a) would not have gotten me to my goal, and b) would not have been sustainable to even get to that max weight in the first place, making the whole thing a moot point. That is where the usefulness of exercise in weight loss is limited. Nobody ever said it isnt useful at all, but its limit is based on your calorie intake vs. your (increased) TDEE and how it compares to your goals.
90 minutes of swimming with no change in diet would give a 250 pound person a 1000 calorie deficit. Doesn't seem crazy or impossible to me.
Heehee when I was 233 I couldn't do 90 minutes of anything. 40 lbs down and I can do a 5k which takes right at an hour. But if I'm honest 90 minutes of any sustained exercise I can't do yet.
Neither could I. First the person has to be able to even DO the exercise, then they have to be able to do it EVERY. SINGLE. DAY. FOREVER. Not in a million years of do-overs would I have been able to do that.3 -
When I was younger and knew nothing, I would work out 3-4 hours 3-5 days a week. Frequently, I would stop at Burger King on the way home from the gym! I'd eat my fast food and then go to sleep shortly afterwards. I looked great but always wondered why I was in the gym so long compared to other people I would see there. Then years later, I learned how bodybuilders lose weight (fat) and tried that. I ate more protein, counted calories and worked out hard and smarter. Lost a ton of fat in a really short amount of time. Another time, I broke my ankle and was out of commission for 6 months. I gained 70 pounds in a year. Then lost it in 5 months following a high protein diet, counting calories, lifting and doing cardio. So as virtually everyone has already said, exercise can help if you are in a calorie deficit. But changing what and how much you eat is really what can take the weight off.
BTW, I have Zwift and it's OK. Nothing to write home about. I prefer my other cycling app (which I won't mention) where I can create my own maps and ride all over the world.1 -
ThatUserNameIsAllReadyTaken wrote: »PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »ThatUserNameIsAllReadyTaken wrote: »PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »ThatUserNameIsAllReadyTaken wrote: »PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »ThatUserNameIsAllReadyTaken wrote: »PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »ThatUserNameIsAllReadyTaken wrote: »I have seen it stated here a LOT that exercise has little to do with weight loss. I have always disagreed with that idea as any activity which increases calorie burn will assist in weight loss.
Exercise is always helpful but its effects are limited when it comes to fat loss.
I would love to see some further reading on this! Please mention me by name when you post the link!
What reading? It's basic stuff. If you keep the same diet and add exercise, you will lose via increased TDEE until you reach equilibrium. At that point, if you still need to lose more, you'd either have to increase TDEE again or decrease your calorie intake. That's the whole CICO thing people blather on about on these boards.
So this is basic knowledge we are all programmed with upon birth or does it just magically come to us in a dream? You are rambling about TDEE etc... the fact remains. You have brought nothing to back up your claim. You are telling me that the effect exercise has on fat loss is limited. I am waiting for some explanatory and reliable source that brought you to the conclusion that the effect exercise has on fat loss is limited. I once weighed 200 lbs. The ONLY thing I did was walk on a daily basis and I lost 70 lbs. I did not change my diet, I did not increase my exercise etc... I went from sedentary to not. That is all. I do not believe the effect that exercise has on fat loss is "limited".
I was eating 2500 to 3000 calories a day at 250 lbs and gaining. In order to get to a healthy weight without changing my diet, I would have had to add 1000 to 1500 calories a day in exercise, just to hit the top of the healthy BMI range. Since my goal isn't to be the fattest I can be without a doctor giving me crap about it, adding that insane amount of exercise a) would not have gotten me to my goal, and b) would not have been sustainable to even get to that max weight in the first place, making the whole thing a moot point. That is where the usefulness of exercise in weight loss is limited. Nobody ever said it isnt useful at all, but its limit is based on your calorie intake vs. your (increased) TDEE and how it compares to your goals.
You would lose to an extent. The OP (which is who I was addressing in the first place) mentions losing with out changing his diet and only after adding exercise. In your case no you would not lose down to a healthy range without cutting calories but you would lose something. WHICH WAS MY POINT. (and I never said you could still eat like a moose and not lose weight.) I said you could lose with the addition of exercise. How MUCH is individual. Obviously if you are eating that much there is a window of loss and then you would have to change, BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT THE OP IS TALKING ABOUT. So if you need to start your own thread to argue about your very different argument you are welcome to do it instead of trying to hijack this one.
The point is, the OP was taking other people's words about the effectiveness of exercise in losing weight without changing diet and spinning it to mean you CAN'T lose weight just by adding exercise, and countering that false intent with his own experience. It's not derailing. It's addressing the intent of the OP.
Hence...amyrebeccah wrote: »
You CAN LOSE WEIGHT USING EXERCISE. You don't have to believe it or like it. Obviously not every thing applies to every one across the board in a strict and exact way. ANY person who increases their calorie burn will lose weight in some amount. That is what I am talking about and you are arguing that it is not possible.
This is absolutely wrong. No matter how much you increase your calorie burn, you can easily out eat it. Athletes do this all the time. I have done it. You can burn ridiculous amounts of calories and still gain weight by eating a surplus of calories.6 -
Lol, ever met anyone who couldn't swim? It would be pretty impossible for them till they learned how to swim well.PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »ThatUserNameIsAllReadyTaken wrote: »PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »ThatUserNameIsAllReadyTaken wrote: »PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »ThatUserNameIsAllReadyTaken wrote: »I have seen it stated here a LOT that exercise has little to do with weight loss. I have always disagreed with that idea as any activity which increases calorie burn will assist in weight loss.
Exercise is always helpful but its effects are limited when it comes to fat loss.
I would love to see some further reading on this! Please mention me by name when you post the link!
What reading? It's basic stuff. If you keep the same diet and add exercise, you will lose via increased TDEE until you reach equilibrium. At that point, if you still need to lose more, you'd either have to increase TDEE again or decrease your calorie intake. That's the whole CICO thing people blather on about on these boards.
So this is basic knowledge we are all programmed with upon birth or does it just magically come to us in a dream? You are rambling about TDEE etc... the fact remains. You have brought nothing to back up your claim. You are telling me that the effect exercise has on fat loss is limited. I am waiting for some explanatory and reliable source that brought you to the conclusion that the effect exercise has on fat loss is limited. I once weighed 200 lbs. The ONLY thing I did was walk on a daily basis and I lost 70 lbs. I did not change my diet, I did not increase my exercise etc... I went from sedentary to not. That is all. I do not believe the effect that exercise has on fat loss is "limited".
I was eating 2500 to 3000 calories a day at 250 lbs and gaining. In order to get to a healthy weight without changing my diet, I would have had to add 1000 to 1500 calories a day in exercise, just to hit the top of the healthy BMI range. Since my goal isn't to be the fattest I can be without a doctor giving me crap about it, adding that insane amount of exercise a) would not have gotten me to my goal, and b) would not have been sustainable to even get to that max weight in the first place, making the whole thing a moot point. That is where the usefulness of exercise in weight loss is limited. Nobody ever said it isnt useful at all, but its limit is based on your calorie intake vs. your (increased) TDEE and how it compares to your goals.
90 minutes of swimming with no change in diet would give a 250 pound person a 1000 calorie deficit. Doesn't seem crazy or impossible to me.
And as mentioned, it has to be something that can be sustained. If not, and EATING patterns haven't change, weight regain is inevitable. I've seen it happen lots times in my profession.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
3 -
So zwift is an indoor exercise bicycle?? Not quite sure from your post...0
-
CarShelley wrote: »I always heard that too and its BS, I lost all the weight by training 5 times a week....
That's because you created a calorie deficit. Exercise is just one of the ways to do that.
A calorie deficit is required to lose weight. The exception would be a medical issue that needs attention.0 -
ThatUserNameIsAllReadyTaken wrote: »I am still standing by my comment that exercise helps create that deficit. Your daily diet may not have you in a deficit until you add in 30 minutes or more of exercise a day. Exercise and create a deficit without needing to eat less, don't exercise and eat at maintenance or possibly above and have no deficit. I don't even understand how this is even debatable. Not only does exercise help create a deficit, it helps with getting some amount of lean muscle mass which in turn creates a greater burn in general, even if you aren't gaining that lean mass you are using the lean mass you already have. It requires more energy to use muscle than it does to carry around extra body fat which is just dead weight.
But.....
Nobody has said it did not create a deficit. It....does.
But, you won't lose weight if you exercise and do not eat at a calorie deficit. I know, I gained 30 pounds running three times a week because I ate too much food.
9 -
SeptemberFeyre wrote: »So zwift is an indoor exercise bicycle?? Not quite sure from your post...
No. Not exactly.0 -
Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »Zwift is a good way to train indoors in inclement weather or once night falls early. I've been looking into getting it, but meanwhile, I simply use an indoor trainer and do commercial intervals.
One of the nice things with Zwift is that it connects with Strava. When I do my indoor trainer workouts, I have to manually enter them.
Cyclists know about this stuff ... but if you're not a cyclist, you probably aren't familiar with it all.
As for exercise and weight loss ... of course it works.
Which indoor trainer do you like?
I have a Nashbar fluid trainer which I've had for years.
Unfortunately Zwift won't work with it.0 -
Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »Zwift is a good way to train indoors in inclement weather or once night falls early. I've been looking into getting it, but meanwhile, I simply use an indoor trainer and do commercial intervals.
One of the nice things with Zwift is that it connects with Strava. When I do my indoor trainer workouts, I have to manually enter them.
Cyclists know about this stuff ... but if you're not a cyclist, you probably aren't familiar with it all.
As for exercise and weight loss ... of course it works.
Which indoor trainer do you like?
I have a Nashbar fluid trainer which I've had for years.
Unfortunately Zwift won't work with it.
Ah, fluid! I don't care about the zwift part. I was looking at trainers and couldn't decide which one would be good. I was thinking a magnetic would be alright too.0 -
SeptemberFeyre wrote: »So zwift is an indoor exercise bicycle?? Not quite sure from your post...
Zwift is a virtual world that you move through by riding on a turbo trainer that is connected to it. They are working on connecting treadmills to it as well, but they haven't said when that feature will be available to the general public.Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »Zwift is a good way to train indoors in inclement weather or once night falls early. I've been looking into getting it, but meanwhile, I simply use an indoor trainer and do commercial intervals.
One of the nice things with Zwift is that it connects with Strava. When I do my indoor trainer workouts, I have to manually enter them.
Cyclists know about this stuff ... but if you're not a cyclist, you probably aren't familiar with it all.
As for exercise and weight loss ... of course it works.
Which indoor trainer do you like?
I have a Nashbar fluid trainer which I've had for years.
Unfortunately Zwift won't work with it.
Any trainer is supposed to work. All you need is a speed sensor on the back wheel of the bike and an ANT+ dongle on the computer. Technically, you could just raise the back wheel off the ground with something and it would work, though it wouldn't be much of a workout if you don't have resistance.1 -
Larissa_NY wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »TimothyFish wrote: »I've been losing weight lately. It isn't intentional. I've been maintaining my weight for a couple of years now, but over the past few weeks I've noticed a slow but steady decline in my weight. 208 was my goal, then it slipped to 205, which seemed fine, but then it slipped to 204 and this week it is 203. I haven't been counting my food calories, but rather I've been following my normal habits. Bacon and eggs and a banana for breakfast. Whatever Aramark is serving on the "Home" line at work. Something light for supper. And various snacks to round out rest. The thing that has changed is my exercise. I've never really liked riding my bicycle inside, but because of Zwift I don't mind it so much. That means that I have fewer off days for rain or darkness or because I don't want to mess with traffic. It also means that I have more 1,000 calorie workouts. There are no stop signs on Zwift, so I'm putting in more effort during the same amount of time that I put in outside. Burning more calories while eating about the same amount translates in to weight loss.
Um, yeah? I didn't think that was controversial. If someone is eating at maintenance then significantly ups their exercise, and doesn't change their eating of course they will lose weight.
You would not think so, would you? And yet I've seen multiple people on here, in response to someone saying something like "It's 80% diet and 20% exercise," posting "No! It's 100% diet!" Apparently those people have discovered food logging and fallen into some sort of singularity where basic math doesn't exist.
This is the kind of confusion that arises when people try to quantify an abstraction (or certain other types of complex mental constructs). It's an example of fuzzy thinking.
I could say that "human beauty is 65% symmetrical facial features" and we could argue about it all day, because the starting proposition is gobbledygook, nonsense, meaningless in any concrete sense.
"Weight loss is 80% diet" or any similar construct, even one without numbers in it ("weight loss takes place in the kitchen") - similarly not meaningful in a concrete way.
The only way "basic math" applies sensibly in this kind of argument is if someone says "I created 30% of my 1000 calorie deficit with exercise, and 70% by eating below my NEAT".
JMO. Carry on.2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 391 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 922 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions