New York Times: Exercise May Aid in Weight Loss. Provided You Do Enough.
Options
NorthCascades
Posts: 10,970 Member
Can working out help us to drop pounds after all?
A provocative new study involving overweight men and women suggests that it probably can, undercutting a widespread notion that exercise, by itself, is worthless for weight loss.
But the findings also indicate that, to benefit, we may need to exercise quite a bit.
In theory, exercise should contribute substantially to weight loss. It burns calories. If we do not replace them, our bodies should achieve negative energy balance, use stored fat for fuel and shed pounds.
[...]
Some researchers had begun to wonder, though, if the amount of exercise might matter. Many of the past human experiments had involved about 30 minutes a day or so of moderate exercise, which is the amount generally recommended by current guidelines to improve health.
Personally, I don't find this to be any more provocative than saying having a job helps you pay rent. But there you have it.
A provocative new study involving overweight men and women suggests that it probably can, undercutting a widespread notion that exercise, by itself, is worthless for weight loss.
But the findings also indicate that, to benefit, we may need to exercise quite a bit.
In theory, exercise should contribute substantially to weight loss. It burns calories. If we do not replace them, our bodies should achieve negative energy balance, use stored fat for fuel and shed pounds.
[...]
Some researchers had begun to wonder, though, if the amount of exercise might matter. Many of the past human experiments had involved about 30 minutes a day or so of moderate exercise, which is the amount generally recommended by current guidelines to improve health.
Personally, I don't find this to be any more provocative than saying having a job helps you pay rent. But there you have it.
11
Replies
-
I read this this morning. It really makes no sense unless they accurately tracked the calorie intake of each participant. They just took their word based off of their memories as to if their eating habits had changed during the test period. Well, if you want to know you (the researchers) should've tracked that as well.5
-
"Journalism" today is nothing more than playing Mad Libs.
Overuse of adjectives and adverbs so that hyperbole has become an industry standard.7 -
NorthCascades wrote: »Can working out help us to drop pounds after all?
A provocative new study involving overweight men and women suggests that it probably can, undercutting a widespread notion that exercise, by itself, is worthless for weight loss.
But the findings also indicate that, to benefit, we may need to exercise quite a bit.
In theory, exercise should contribute substantially to weight loss. It burns calories. If we do not replace them, our bodies should achieve negative energy balance, use stored fat for fuel and shed pounds.
[...]
Some researchers had begun to wonder, though, if the amount of exercise might matter. Many of the past human experiments had involved about 30 minutes a day or so of moderate exercise, which is the amount generally recommended by current guidelines to improve health.
Personally, I don't find this to be any more provocative than saying having a job helps you pay rent. But there you have it.
Totally agree! "You can't out-exercise a bad diet" isnt the equivalent of "exercise is useless for weight loss", and it's a shame that's the popular interpretation.5 -
In other news, water is wet.12
-
NorthCascades wrote: »In other news, water is wet.
Cite your sources...6 -
I'll admit I haven't read the article (and doesn't sound like it's worth it), but I do see one huge benefit of exercise for my weight loss and it's been the attitude adjustment. Getting outside and running everyday has really lifted my mood, and when I'm feeling happier/motivated I make better diet choices. On days I've ran I rarely make a poor food choice vs the days I'm lazy and don't do any exercise.9
-
Except that if you actually read the study, it is pretty interesting.
We've been given to believe that you exercise is for conditioning and health, but you must diet to lose weight.
This -- which is kinda a 'duh' when you read it, but was not supported by data previously -- says you can exercise the pounds off. But you have to REALLY exercise! A ton!
Trying to get away with 45 minutes in the gym three days a week, and walking for half an hour the other days, won't cut it.
You need to run for about an hour a day, at least five days a week, depending on your individual size, to lose any appreciable amount. And these study subjects did lose an appreciable amount, almost all of them. They lost 5 percent of their weight in 12 weeks, without any structured dieting program. In fact, they were told not to diet at all.
That said, the real point of this study is that you must be able to run an hour a day, five to six days every week, for 12 weeks if you want to exercise pounds off. That's more exercise than most people can do.1 -
The problem is - not controlling calories in. Did they control calories in? Did they log accurately? Or was this a "tell me what you ate once the study is over on this cute little survey" thing?
I would guess that a little exercise burns a little bit of calories, and people eat a little more, negating the burn,
but...
If people exercise for an extended period of time, they are less likely to absent-mindedly eat back all the calories, thereby losing weight.
Mind blown, amirite?
Exercise can be helpful for weight loss if you are logging accurately and consistently so you ensure you don't eat too many calories back. But it can backfire if you aren't tracking calories because it makes you a bit more hungry plus you feel like you deserve a treat, and you end up breaking even. But lets do more studies about it :huh:3 -
GiddyupTim wrote: »Except that if you actually read the study, it is pretty interesting.
We've been given to believe that you exercise is for conditioning and health, but you must diet to lose weight.
This -- which is kinda a 'duh' when you read it, but was not supported by data previously -- says you can exercise the pounds off. But you have to REALLY exercise! A ton!
Trying to get away with 45 minutes in the gym three days a week, and walking for half an hour the other days, won't cut it.
You need to run for about an hour a day, at least five days a week, depending on your individual size, to lose any appreciable amount. And these study subjects did lose an appreciable amount, almost all of them. They lost 5 percent of their weight in 12 weeks, without any structured dieting program. In fact, they were told not to diet at all.
That said, the real point of this study is that you must be able to run an hour a day, five to six days every week, for 12 weeks if you want to exercise pounds off. That's more exercise than most people can do.
And they forget to mention that if most beginning exercisers ran an hour a day, five to six days every week (or any equivalent amount of exercise), they'd never make it 12 weeks. They would either quit or be injured before then.
I mean, it's a nice hypothesis and everything, but the real life application of it is kinda looking through rose-colored glasses.1 -
Hmm, I could probably manage that for 5 days a week if I started at the end of my current training program. I'm really slow so that would be 35-40 km/week, same as my end of program weekly volume, but spread over 5 days instead of 4.
Been running for over a year though. I definitely couldn't have run that much even last October or November.
And I doubt it would solve my stress eating unless it wound up being really therapeutic...0 -
GiddyupTim wrote: »Except that if you actually read the study, it is pretty interesting.
We've been given to believe that you exercise is for conditioning and health, but you must diet to lose weight.
This -- which is kinda a 'duh' when you read it, but was not supported by data previously -- says you can exercise the pounds off. But you have to REALLY exercise! A ton!
Trying to get away with 45 minutes in the gym three days a week, and walking for half an hour the other days, won't cut it.
You need to run for about an hour a day, at least five days a week, depending on your individual size, to lose any appreciable amount. And these study subjects did lose an appreciable amount, almost all of them. They lost 5 percent of their weight in 12 weeks, without any structured dieting program. In fact, they were told not to diet at all.
That said, the real point of this study is that you must be able to run an hour a day, five to six days every week, for 12 weeks if you want to exercise pounds off. That's more exercise than most people can do.
And they forget to mention that if most beginning exercisers ran an hour a day, five to six days every week (or any equivalent amount of exercise), they'd never make it 12 weeks. They would either quit or be injured before then.
I mean, it's a nice hypothesis and everything, but the real life application of it is kinda looking through rose-colored glasses.
^ exactly.0 -
FWIW - I average well over 300 minutes a week running (plus additional biking, yoga, and some lifting). My diet is pretty well balanced. I can (and have) GAINED weight while doing all of this.
It is 100% about diet. If you don't watch what you eat you can run our *kitten* off and never literally run your *kitten* off.
4 -
GiddyupTim wrote: »Except that if you actually read the study, it is pretty interesting.
We've been given to believe that you exercise is for conditioning and health, but you must diet to lose weight.
This -- which is kinda a 'duh' when you read it, but was not supported by data previously -- says you can exercise the pounds off. But you have to REALLY exercise! A ton!
Trying to get away with 45 minutes in the gym three days a week, and walking for half an hour the other days, won't cut it.
You need to run for about an hour a day, at least five days a week, depending on your individual size, to lose any appreciable amount. And these study subjects did lose an appreciable amount, almost all of them. They lost 5 percent of their weight in 12 weeks, without any structured dieting program. In fact, they were told not to diet at all.
That said, the real point of this study is that you must be able to run an hour a day, five to six days every week, for 12 weeks if you want to exercise pounds off. That's more exercise than most people can do.
Agreed. I think a lot of people miss the point of studies like these. The question they are asking is not "Does CICO not matter if I exercise?," but rather "At what point do your body's hunger signals stop compensating for the added activity?" For most people, a mild to moderate increase in activity will also lead to a mild to moderate increase in hunger. If you start walking an extra 30 minutes a day, you body will simply tell you you are a little hungrier/a little less full/craving more calorie-dense foods. However, this study seems to suggest that these signals max out at some point. If your normal calorie consumption is 2000 kcal a day, your body might have difficulty increasing your hunger past 2500 kcal a day, even if your TDEE increases to 3000 kcal (these are made-up example numbers, I actually don't know the actual ones).
Of course, most people can't do this type of exercise right away, so it seems like the point of these studies are moot, but they still do have some interesting points to make. For many people, part of the difficulty of maintaining a healthy weight is keeping the weight off, which is made more difficult by the fact that calorie counting for the rest of your life is particularly onerous for some people, especially if you don't have the time or resources to make your own food. A solution to this may simply be encouraging people to maintain a highly active lifestyle, which is something they can work up to during weight loss and maintain afterwards.4 -
I gained weight training for a marathon. I was running 40-50 miles a week plus yoga and strength training. My appetite increased exponentially as my miles increased. Apparently, I CAN’T outrun a bad diet. Maybe it’s different for others.0
-
GiddyupTim wrote: »Except that if you actually read the study, it is pretty interesting.
We've been given to believe that you exercise is for conditioning and health, but you must diet to lose weight.
This -- which is kinda a 'duh' when you read it, but was not supported by data previously -- says you can exercise the pounds off. But you have to REALLY exercise! A ton!
Trying to get away with 45 minutes in the gym three days a week, and walking for half an hour the other days, won't cut it.
You need to run for about an hour a day, at least five days a week, depending on your individual size, to lose any appreciable amount. And these study subjects did lose an appreciable amount, almost all of them. They lost 5 percent of their weight in 12 weeks, without any structured dieting program. In fact, they were told not to diet at all.
That said, the real point of this study is that you must be able to run an hour a day, five to six days every week, for 12 weeks if you want to exercise pounds off. That's more exercise than most people can do.
I do an hour or two on the bike most days, including after work. It's fun, and it helps me relax. That it burns calories is "the icing on the cake;" I'd do it if it cost calories instead. I do it because I love it. Anyway, I don't see that as any kind of impossible burden.1 -
NorthCascades wrote: »In other news, water is wet.
Cite your sources...
L.o.l. xD1 -
NorthCascades wrote: »GiddyupTim wrote: »Except that if you actually read the study, it is pretty interesting.
We've been given to believe that you exercise is for conditioning and health, but you must diet to lose weight.
This -- which is kinda a 'duh' when you read it, but was not supported by data previously -- says you can exercise the pounds off. But you have to REALLY exercise! A ton!
Trying to get away with 45 minutes in the gym three days a week, and walking for half an hour the other days, won't cut it.
You need to run for about an hour a day, at least five days a week, depending on your individual size, to lose any appreciable amount. And these study subjects did lose an appreciable amount, almost all of them. They lost 5 percent of their weight in 12 weeks, without any structured dieting program. In fact, they were told not to diet at all.
That said, the real point of this study is that you must be able to run an hour a day, five to six days every week, for 12 weeks if you want to exercise pounds off. That's more exercise than most people can do.
I do an hour or two on the bike most days, including after work. It's fun, and it helps me relax. That it burns calories is "the icing on the cake;" I'd do it if it cost calories instead. I do it because I love it. Anyway, I don't see that as any kind of impossible burden.
Not everyone is you.
Most people who are really heavy, for instance, probably do not exercise that much or they would not be heavy.
They would find it to be a burden if for no other reason than that if you are heavy, and out of shape, it is harder to move.
I would guess that you are not heavy and that, therefore, you are a prime example of what this study just demonstrated -- that is, that intense exercise practiced almost every day will lead to calorie burns that are hard to keep up with, even if strenuous exercise triggers a metabolism change and/or it makes someone so tired they sit for the rest of the day, reasons suggested previously to explain why other studies tended not to find that exercise helped people lose weight.0 -
I'm squarely in the Clydesdale category though.0
-
GiddyupTim wrote: »Except that if you actually read the study, it is pretty interesting.
We've been given to believe that you exercise is for conditioning and health, but you must diet to lose weight.
This -- which is kinda a 'duh' when you read it, but was not supported by data previously -- says you can exercise the pounds off. But you have to REALLY exercise! A ton!
Trying to get away with 45 minutes in the gym three days a week, and walking for half an hour the other days, won't cut it.
You need to run for about an hour a day, at least five days a week, depending on your individual size, to lose any appreciable amount. And these study subjects did lose an appreciable amount, almost all of them. They lost 5 percent of their weight in 12 weeks, without any structured dieting program. In fact, they were told not to diet at all.
That said, the real point of this study is that you must be able to run an hour a day, five to six days every week, for 12 weeks if you want to exercise pounds off. That's more exercise than most people can do.
Agreed. I think a lot of people miss the point of studies like these. The question they are asking is not "Does CICO not matter if I exercise?," but rather "At what point do your body's hunger signals stop compensating for the added activity?" For most people, a mild to moderate increase in activity will also lead to a mild to moderate increase in hunger. If you start walking an extra 30 minutes a day, you body will simply tell you you are a little hungrier/a little less full/craving more calorie-dense foods. However, this study seems to suggest that these signals max out at some point. If your normal calorie consumption is 2000 kcal a day, your body might have difficulty increasing your hunger past 2500 kcal a day, even if your TDEE increases to 3000 kcal (these are made-up example numbers, I actually don't know the actual ones).
Of course, most people can't do this type of exercise right away, so it seems like the point of these studies are moot, but they still do have some interesting points to make. For many people, part of the difficulty of maintaining a healthy weight is keeping the weight off, which is made more difficult by the fact that calorie counting for the rest of your life is particularly onerous for some people, especially if you don't have the time or resources to make your own food. A solution to this may simply be encouraging people to maintain a highly active lifestyle, which is something they can work up to during weight loss and maintain afterwards.
I think this is a good summary of the article and the study, and should be the basis for discussion.
Losing weight and maintaining weight loss is a multifaceted process. Energy balance (or imbalance) is an interaction of a number of behavioral and physical factors. Each new puzzle piece helps improve our overall view.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
- 390 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
- 921 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions