Exercise might not help lose weight

If you want to apply specific science, numbers and math to exercise and weight loss/gain, there are a lot of things to keep in mind. And every body is different. The mentality that "I've burned X calories today, so that means I can eat X-Y calories and still lose weight!" is not a good one. Your body is not a mathematical equation. Treat yourself every now and then, but don't cheat yourself.


But Jimmy, all authoratative sources in the world of human nutrition tell us weight control is mathematical. There's no smoke and mirrors involved. It really is a matter of Calories in versus Calories out.


A few things I think you should keep in mind.

Do you want to lose weight, or do you want to lose size? Weight is just an arbitrary number, in my opinion.


I totally agree with you there. People wanting to lose weight should throw the scales out and just use a tape measure around the waist and hips....for as you say, one is better doing resistance exercise to preserve lean tissue while on a dietary Calorie deficit.


Muscle weighs about four times more than fat.

I respectfully have to correct you on that Jimmy. The specific density of human muscle tissue is approx 15% more than human fat. ie human fat has a specific density of .918g/ml...human muscle a SD of 1.06g/ml.

Maybe you are confusing energy density of the two tissues. Fat has around 7830Cals/kg and Muscle around 1200Cals/kg
= 7830/1200 = 6.5x.




Don't worry about weight, worry about how you look and how you feel. A lot of people who exercise to lose weight actually gain to begin with, but they do lose size. Later on, they usually lose weight as well.

If you increase your muscle mass (this does not mean you will get big and bulky, a common misconception.) you will increase your calorie burning capacity. IE, for a given amount of cardio exercise, you will burn more calories the more muscle mass you have. So, lift weights. Once a week is a sensible minimum. By increasing your calorie burning capacity, you will also be able to eat quite freely - once you're where you want to be.


Although it is true that muscle burns more energy than fat, this principle is highly exaggerated by the fitness industry.
Why?

1. The scientifiic literature shows that most people who take up weightlifting will not increase muscle mass by more than 2kg.
2. The metabolic rate of muscle is estimated at 10-15Cals/kg/day.
3. therefore, the extra Cals burnt by the extra muscle at rest is ~30 Cals/day
4. therefore, any extra Cals burnt will be more dependent on the energy consumed by doing the weights themselves...and considering most reps are completed with 3secs, surprisingly little energy is burnt by weightlifting....in the order of 3-5x BMR.
5. Further, most people only do a weights session in less than 60 minutes.

The more likely reason people look stronger and fitter with weights are that they are cutting fat from within and around the muscle tissue, in addition to toning the muscle.

Now I have to get back to work....


Exercising for 30 minutes six times a week will arguably not get you as good results as 60 minutes three times a week. Before you can access the fat stored in your body, you have to go through the calories you have ingested that day - which according to popular belief is around the 30 minute mark. Mind you, doing shorter intervals of exercise is great, as it improves your cardio fitness even though you might not be burning a lot of fat. I read a study that said five one-hour cardio sessions a week is the optimal amount.

Excercise is very important, but regardless of whether you want to lose weight or gain it, diet is what will make the difference.

If you want to lose weight, avoid eating carbs and sugar within 4 hours before going to sleep. These kinds of foods are energy, and if unspent, your body will store them as fat. Other than that, do eat them. How many people do you know who've gone on a diet and almost become a different person? No energy, bad sleep, mood swings etc. Carbs are important, just avoid them before going to sleep.

If you want to gain weight, eat. Lots. Especially protein. But make sure you lift weights.

-"Jimmy"

Heh. Obesity's no longer an epidemic, it's a PANDEMIC. Ohnoez.


Sure is.........



the concept of natural overweight-ness has no basis in science or history.

Clearly you've never met a Samoan.


Sure have....treat em all the time as they are great rugby players.
Though you'll find they were a healthy race until they discovered western takeaway food. The ones living in NZ and Australia have forgotten or never learnt how to eat and live traditionally because they migrated away from their grandparents and parents, and have been seduced by the indulgences of the west.



Have you ever seen any other mammal that is naturally overweight?

Have you met a lot of animals that died of old age, cancer, or tooth decay, either? Most animals in the wild live on the edge of starvation. I think I prefer my chubby tummy to dying of starvation, thank you.


Deary me Lise....where did you hear most animals live on the edge of starvation? if that were true, then animals wouldn't have successfully reproduced and nurtured their offspring for thousands of generations.......they would have quickly become extinct if they were living on such a razor's edge...... And yes, great apes nurture their offspring big time..... for up to 8 years, teaching them how to find food and build social networks with others.



Whether the weight stays off, is dependent on how well those people have integrated what a natural diet is, and avoided the temptation to go back to eating as before.

Point A: a natural diet? "Natural" is a semantic minefield. What, exactly, does that mean? Humans, like beavers, build homes. Yet a skyscraper is viewed as unnatural? If eating GMO foods is unnatural, why isn't eating hybrid foods?


I think it is reasonable to call natural whatever has given many successive generations of one's predecessors a Darwinian survival advantage. Further, if a particular lifestyle choice infers a sustainable survival advantage, then I think it is reasonable to state that that choice is more suited to the genetic makeup of that species......ergo, Dean Ornish's artherosclerosis reversal diet would seem to confer a significant survival advantage.....therefore could be considered more naturally suited to the genetic makeup of homo sapien sapien......but obese people in general do not have an apetite for his diet....if they did, they wouldn't be overweight....

So the question of importance in obesity research as per the paper I linked to above, is what drives some people to consume massively more Calories than they expend? What has gone wrong with their satiation centre that they would make life choices that prematurely kill them?....that end their ability to perpetuate their gene lineage?



Point B: If you can introduce people who have kept that weight off for over five years, I'd be delighted. But it seems, again, like you just like blaming the fat people - I just love how easily your conversation morphs to "they don't maintain the weight because they have no willpower!" Have you examined their food diaries? Have you accused them of lying? I have known many overweight people who maintain 800 calorie per day diets and have not lost weight - they've just been miserable and hungry all the time.

It isn't just a matter of will power....it is a matter of breaking poor eating habits taught by ignorant parents. You see, no one ate fast food until 50 years ago because it didn't exist. What has happened is that people have out of their own ignorance been seduced by the taste of fast food. Did you watch Supersize Me? It is very interesting how fast food can physiologically addict its consumers. ....just as cocaine and heroin can feel good, so too is an energy dense diet combined with a sedentary lifestyle. My clinical experience is that obese people tend to be addicted to poor dietary choices, hence why they feel miserable on a healthy diet. But to blame healthy food for making a junk food addict feel miserable is faulty thinking....



Does it mean NOTHING that UNIVERSALLY people have trouble maintaining weight loss? If losing weight is so easy, why, then, do we spend so much time discussing it? Obviously it's because so many of us have moral tie-ups with fat - it's okay to hate fat people, because they're not trying hard enough. They're morally wrong, and we're right.

Losing weight is as easy as eating as your grandparents did........Look at the Okinawans....those born before WWII have the highest rate of centennarianism in recorded history. However, the younger generations who have adopted the modern western convenience food diet are porking up and developing all the morbidities of the west. Instead of asking why fat people are detested, why not ask why we disrespect our ancestors enough to think they ate inferior diets to us. What makes you think a diet of processed food is a more intelligent choice than fresh fruit and vege and lean meats?

It doesn't take will power to sustain a healthy diet. It takes habit formation.

18

-"Lise"

The Okinawans were another group studied by Phelan, and are usually cited not as an example of "people who are thin and therefore are healthy" but "people who eat so few calories that their body is 'oh shi, I have to keep them alive long enough to reproduce.' " Many of these that lived before WWII? WERE on the brink of starvation. Meiji-era Japan was a rough place. Also, given that Okinawa was an insular nation of its own for a long time, there's likely a LARGE genetic component to that longevity.


Phelan has a very twisted interpretation of the data, if that is indeed what he believes. Part of the Okinawan advantage is a low stress lifestyle. You might read the original literature in this field, in addition to the China Study....



I know, for example, that I have gained weight because I eat crap and don't exercise (enough), as I've just gained weight since I took a job with hot- and cold-running donuts. And the 7-14 pounds the average American has gained in the past 30 years (obesity panic aside), may, in fact, be a result of that kind of eating, the prevelance of high-fructose corn syrup in our diet, etc, etc.

What alternative causes do you think may have contributed to the extra American poundage, if not eating of higher Caloric density food.



But I'm telling you that there a lots of people who are doing everything right, and yet still can't shed the pounds, and are ostracized as "not trying hard enough."


Well, that just flies in the face of the science. So many people think science is a big scam that doesn't respect more natural wisdom. People cite a few anecdotes that seem to contradict the overwhelming weight of scientific consensus and they think that means the science is totally invaidated. I am not that suspicious of my fellow man, especially as far as science goes. I have the utmost respect for the scientific method.

In most studies, self reporting of food intake is notoriously fraught with lies and deception of self and others. I would therefore say that those who say they are doing everything right, are not. Most days I have people tell me the same thing. "I am eating right and the weight won't budge".....It isn't until you sit down with them and work out their Calorie intake and expenditure, and the food choices they make, and submit them to a test of their knowledge of portion size and Calorie content of various foods, that you prove to them that they just plain don't know enough about the Calorie content of food.

And Lise, I'd encourage you to get educated about the Calorie content of the food you eat. For a start, why not find out how many Calories are in each of the donuts you eat. Then work out how many miles or km's you will have to walk to burn off those Calories. Here's a hint......A female weighing 75kg will have to walk 3.5km or for 40 minutes at 5kph to expend 100 Calories above their resting metablic rate.

Now, your generic original glazed Krispy Kreme 52g donut is 200 Calories.....Now be honest with yourself on when you are going to go out and walk 7km to walk that donut off. Being overweight is a no win game.....the heavier you get, the more your knees or back hurt when you try and exercise.....




Look, I don't deny that people overeat, that people eat past satiety. One of my favorite "diet books" is Mindless Eating, which explores this very fact. Another is YOU: On a Diet, which talks about just how tough dieting is, and basically tells you how to replace your current diet with nutrient-dense foods and to trigger those satiety triggers sooner.


Yes, I am familiar with Roizen and Oz's books and teachings, and think they are excellent. Gee, even Oprah has taken them under her wing.
I'd also encourage you to take Dean Ornish seriously.



I've said all I think I can Lise in relation to this. We'll just have to hold to our differing perspectives.... Have a great 2008, and easy on the donuts.