7 ms·
The majority of weight is lost through respiration, that's the C in CO2. Exercise is great for health, and does help weight loss. But diet is the only thing tha
by overcast 6y ago
The majority of weight is lost through respiration, that's the C in CO2. Exercise is great for health, and does help weight loss. But diet is the only thing that is going to resolve this. You consume far more calories in a regular sized Milkyway then you're going to burn exercising in 50 minutes that's for sure. Here's a chart of just those tiny "fun sized" Halloween candies. https://www.popsugar.com/fitness/What-Takes-Burn-Off-Halloween-Candy-32307957 https://www.popsugar.com/fitness/What-Takes-Burn-Off-Hallowe...
- cududa 6y agoAccording to your chart and a full size Milky Way being 240 calories, it’s more like 30 minutes
- kwkelly 6y agoIt could be even more wrong. Running burns around 100kcal/mile[1], so assuming a fairly pedestrian 8min/mile, that's only 20 minutes. [1]: https://apnews.com/article/51de4cba6ffe48b0886cf9b2c7a6ba8a https://apnews.com/article/51de4cba6ffe48b0886cf9b2c7a6ba8a
- overcast 6y agoI would venture to guess, most people struggling with weight, aren't putting 20minutes of running in. That's at least a couple miles.
- nitrogen 6y ago8 minute miles is really fast, actually, especially if we are considering people who need to lose weight.
- reportingsjr 6y agoAn 8 minute mile is definitely not fairly pedestrian. Someone who is out of shape and trying to lose weight is probably going to be doing 13-18 minute miles typically.
- overcast 6y agoDepends on the exercise of course, that's 80 minutes of walking.
- lnsru 6y agoI can double this. Weight loss depends 85% on food. I am under stress, my eating pattern is terrible. I am training 500 minutes a week and it does barely affect weight loss.
- jvanderbot 6y agoFor me, stress causes more eating and weight gain, and exercise relieves stress. I expect this is at play in the 300 minutes recommendation.
- srik 6y agoAs they say - You lose weight in the kitchen and get fit in the gym.
- bumby 6y agoI.e., “you can’t outrun your mouth”
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- brodouevencode 6y agoNot sure why you're getting downvotes, but this is correct. Though I've heard it as "you can't outrun your s----y diet".
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- vsareto 6y agoYou can move furniture 40 hours a week and definitely outrun a shitty diet.
- bumby 6y agoMany of us did so when we were young but I doubt many can do so for any longitudinal period without deleterious health effects. Try not to take it quite so literally. The point is it’s much more work to overcome a poor diet with exercise than the other way around.
- brodouevencode 6y agoTaking your extreme, low population example into account, then yes you are correct.
- plorkyeran 6y agoMy personal experience was that it was entirely incorrect. I was gradually gaining weight due to being sedentary and not paying attention to my calorie intake. Once I started exercising regularly I started having to pay attention to my calorie intake because otherwise I didn't eat enough. I significantly outrode my mouth without that even being an explicit goal. I dislike it as an expression because while fixing your diet is probably the easier thing for most people, it completely disregards the possibility of finding a form of exercise that you enjoy enough to want to do it.
- mhb 6y agoCompletely orthogonal to TFA, but OK.
- deeviant 6y agoThe problem with this is that the lizard brain takes over. Brain says eat your are staving to death, eat it'll make you happy, eat... or else. You can't control urges to eat, you can only do your best to resist them. However, exercise, is always under your control, so it is a great tool. Exercise also has all sorts of non weight loss health benefits that aren't tangential but complementary to weight loss, including staving off weight-loss induced muscle loss. Without a doubt, you can't lose weight without getting a grip on diet, but I don't think a diet only approach is a good one. I had problems keeping a healthy weight in my past and the method that worked best for me was to target a diet a bit below my metabolic rate, one that would have me losing weight at a slow but steady clip (and would also start to trigger the lizard brain to eat eat eat), then add moderate exercise to the equation.
- packetlost 6y ago> You can't control urges to eat, you can only do your best to resist them. This is going to depend from person to person. Like most things, you can train yourself to control your hunger/appetite. Some people will have no real issue, others it will be an uphill battle.
- ogre_codes 6y ago> However, exercise, is always under your control For me, this is a big part of it. I can schedule a daily ride. While I can schedule not eating from 8am until 8pm, I'll usually wind up in the kitchen at some point when I'm thinking about something else.
- inglor_cz 6y ago"You can't control urges to eat, you can only do your best to resist them." My experience says that I feel a lot less hunger on intermittent fasting than trying to eat small meals frequently. Most other IF practicioners say the same. Hunger feelings ("brain says eat") are hormonally driven and not entirely mechanical in their occurence.
- PopeDotNinja 6y agoA large person will burn way more calories from simply going for a walk than a small person. I'm 6'5', 270 lbs, went for a 3 mile walk this morning, and burned maybe 460 calories. A person weighing 135 going for the same walk would burn 230 calories. In either case, me and 50%-me would have burned off a 230 calories candy bar.
- overcast 6y agoSure, but a large person is probably eating 3x as much food.
- gumby 6y agoThe article argues that exercising reshapes your dietary desires in a positive way.
- ogre_codes 6y agoAnd it is spot on with my experience. If you only work out a few times, it's easy to over-eat to compensate, but if you are working out regularly—5-6 times a week—your desire for food changes. Dieting does not change the amount of activity you do. Also, it is more important to be healthy and fit than skinny.
- mybandisbetter 6y agoWhile it is true that exercise cannot solve excessive calorie consumption (since exercising makes us eat more), it is important for weight management. A lack of exercise screws with the body's feedback loops, undermining its "metabolic flexibility": its ability to handle sugar and fat efficiently. Let's take a look at just one perverse feedback loop. When your body has a glucose spike, it is very important that its billions of muscle cells are willing to say "yes" to insulin and uptake that glucose. Otherwise, the body lacks an efficient disposal mechanism. If you don't contract muscles throughout the week, insulin production has to go up to yell louder at muscle cells to please, please take the glucose. High insulin levels also sends two messages to fat cells: 1. do not release current fat stores for energy, and 2. absorb glucose to create more fat. When all that glucose finally is taken up by cells, and if insulin does not fall quickly enough, fat cells do not release energy (because insulin is telling them not to), and so the body becomes hungry even though it has excess fuel available. Our bodies evolved under the conditions that we exercised to an extreme quantity everyday. Without exercise, its energy management systems get all nutty. Some level of exercise is important to avoid perverse, counterproductive feedback loops that undermine our goals.
- scns 6y agoJohn Berardi did his Phd on the optimal post workout drink: 50g of glucose and 30g of whey protein.
- yuribro 6y agoThis general statement makes no sense. How can it not depend on the size of the person? What about the other food he consumed in that day, or the goal. Does a powerlifter needs the same outcome as a climber? Is it the same for someone which tries to lose weight?
- ogre_codes 6y agoHave you ever struggled with weight loss? I mean serious 60-80 pounds overweight and done it successfully? I've spent 30 years bouncing between 260 and 185 pounds. Every single time I've successfully lost weight it started with exercise. Diet alone has absolutely never worked for me.
- bumby 6y agoI think weight loss = (calories in - calories out) is a useful approximation but vastly over generalizes. The human body is a complex system with many more inputs. Hormone levels, inflammation etc. all can play a role.
- inglor_cz 6y agoIt is like saying that for an airplane to fly level, the force of gravity must be precisely counteracted by the lift generated by the wings. Scientifically true, but in order to successfully pilot the plane, not very helpful. Keeping the plane in air and keeping your body fit requires knowledge of its mechanisms, not just the physical principles of operation.
- laichzeit0 6y agoIt’s important to separate the mechanism of weight loss from the method you use to achieve it. The mechanism is consuming less calories than you’re expending. How you do that is up to you. For example, I’ve lost weight on a fast-food only diet, because I like eating burgers and pizza. I just make sure I’m consuming less than 2200 calories, which puts me at approximately 15% caloric deficit. If you want to eat more, say at 2500 calories, then you’ll have to exercise enough to burn another 300 calories so you’re still in deficit. You can bump up your “maintenance” calories by putting on more lean mass, by weight training for example.
- ogre_codes 6y ago> It’s important to separate the mechanism of weight loss from the method you use to achieve it. I think it's far more important knowing what actions work for an individual to achieve weight loss. Most everyone knows that X calories in and X calories is the end target. Knowing how you can reach that balance is the hard part. Every time I see some kind of forum about weight loss there are a million people popping in talking about "Putting the fork down" or "Calories In < Calories Out". But this is worthless because in the end, having a solution that a person is capable of doing is far more important than theory.