5 ms·
That's the correct answer. You can't exercise your way out of a high calorie, high sugar diet, unless you're willing to dedicate several hours per day to intens
by adventured 5y ago
That's the correct answer. You can't exercise your way out of a high calorie, high sugar diet, unless you're willing to dedicate several hours per day to intense exercise. Normal exercise is an atrocious approach to countering high calorie intake, it simply can't work. You can work out for an hour, and one soda wipes it out entirely, or a couple slices of pizza.
No, the problem is and will remain dietary in nature. Americans could stop all exercise across the board, change their diets, and lose massive amounts of weight trivially, just by cutting out a few common items that nearly all obese Americans over-consume. I've yet to meet an obese American whose diet I couldn't trivially radically alter by just removing a few particularly horrible things (eg sugary drinks, ice cream, pasta/pizza, high sugar snack goods). People think they have to change everything about what they eat and go to the gym five times per week to drop weight, and that's entirely false, all they have to do is eliminate or dramatically reduce the couple worst items in their diet and that's usually enough (it's rare that there are dozens of villains in their diet that matter, it's almost always just a few items that are doing 3/4+ of the damage).
- porlune 5y ago>> You can work out for an hour, and one soda wipes it out entirely, or a couple slices of pizza. Not exactly, just because you've replaced those calories doesn't mean that your body didn't gain muscle mass which itself requires calories just for your body to maintain. This leads to a higher basal metabolic rate, which ends up burning calories even while you rest.
- Retric 5y agoThat’s overstated, look at say elite marathon runners who do incredible amounts of daily exercise without bulking up. A 500 calorie workout might only be 400 extra over spending that time sitting on that couch. Similarly extra muscle on it’s own takes energy but fat also burns energy so even modest weight loss balances that out.
- dundarious 5y agoBeing overweight also raises your metabolism. Focus on the mass, not so much the rate.
- yarcob 5y agoHaving lots of muscle mass isn't healthier than being slim. It's healthier than being fat, but being slim is going to be a lot easier on your heart, joints, and other organs. (Have a look at people who are 80+ and fit. Most of them are slim. You don't see a lot of bulked up old people)
- zeku 5y agoYour overall point might be correct, but your old people one is just wrong. Old people aren't super muscular because you need high levels of testosterone to support musculature, and it naturally declines with age and particularly tanks when you are elderly.
- nradov 5y agoThe digestive system also gradually loses the ability to absorb protein with age. Elderly people actually need more protein just to maintain muscle mass, but most of them fail to adjust their diets accordingly.
- nradov 5y agoLean muscle at rest only burns about 8 kcal/day/kg more than fat. So the metabolic effect is pretty small.
- Scoundreller 5y agoAt rest sure, but you gotta carry all that extra weight around when you do anything else.
- nradov 5y agoCarrying around an extra kg of weight takes roughly the same energy regardless of tissue type.
- junker37 5y agoThis is correct. I do cardio 10-15 hours/week and have to count my calories so I don't gain weight.
- tonyedgecombe 5y agoI read some research recently that showed that when you exercise you tend to be less active through the rest of the day. You balance it out without thinking about it. I've seen that myself, a long bike ride will often be followed by an evening on the sofa.
- traceroute66 5y ago> Americans could stop all exercise across the board, change their diets, and lose massive amounts of weight trivially, just by cutting out a few common items that nearly all obese Americans over-consume To be fair, the yanks don't even need to change their diets to loose weight .... they just need to eradicate those stupid portion sizes. A steak doesn't mean half the cow on your plate, a sandwich doesn't mean putting everything you can find in the shop (including the kitchen sink, if you could !) in between two slices of bread ... etc..etc..etc Its simply grotesque.
- cmurf 5y agoLabor and rent are more expensive than the food. The large portions are intended to distract the consumer with the illusion they are paying primarily for food rather than a massive markup.
- handrous 5y agoFree refills on sodas with waiters waiting to pounce and refill your cup every time it's 1/3 down from full, can be added to the list. Also, soda servings in excess of 20oz (already huge!) to begin with, regardless of refills.
- BlackJack 5y agoI upvoted this comment, but people are not so dumb to only eat junk food. There are environmental/psychological factors why people overeat. Other research shows that people will overeat "healthy food" i.e. huge dollops of olive oil, or fruit juice, because it's "healthy." I agree that reducing bad food and portion control is the answer, but it's very hard to drive behavioral change in people. And the health industry has done a "good" job of creating medication to enable bad lifestyles i.e. metformin for Type2 Diabetes, other drugs to manage cholesterol, etc.
- nradov 5y agoThere's no evidence that a diet high in olive oil increases obesity or all-cause mortality.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- caylus 5y agoThere's plenty of evidence that eating too many calories increases obesity. GP's point is that calories coming from a "healthy" source doesn't mean they don't count. Drenching one's salad in olive oil rather than canola oil won't help someone lose weight, nor will switching from soda to a fruit juice with the same amount of sugar in it (ancillary benefits of e.g. vitamins notwithstanding)
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]