4 ms·

The ubiquity of car-centric designs in major population areas of the US has produced immeasurable harm both environmentally and physically. I've seen obese fami

The ubiquity of car-centric designs in major population areas of the US has produced immeasurable harm both environmentally and physically. I've seen obese family members lose tens of pounds while spending a few months in Europe in part because they have to walk a few extra miles each day (and in part due to dietary changes, I'm sure).

sasawpg 5y ago
Walking "several miles per day" isn't sufficient enough to burn tens of pounds without a major diet change. Even at 5 miles per day, you'd be likely burning 350-450kCal, which is not enough of an expenditure to make that much of a difference. For weight loss, even moderate exercise will not yield same results as significant diet changes will.
- jjice 5y ago
  The parent said > in part because I assume the other part is diet change from being in European countries.
  - sasawpg 5y ago
    The parent implied diet was less impactful than walking.
- DiggyJohnson 5y ago
  It's hard to disagree with such a objective view, but I would like to validate that I've seen similar changes in my friends and peers that travel. A reduced diet and moderate exercise can really do more than you expect.
- thebean11 5y ago
  Walking burns more calories if you are carrying around lots of weight..
- marginalia_nu 5y ago
  The advice really should depend on where you are. There's an old adage that says "you can't outrun your fork", and that's very much true. Cardio alone will often be compensated by increases in hunger. If you aren't on top of your diet, then exercising probably won't amount to much. In general, if you are very heavy, you can usually get away with significant calorie deficits through diet alone, as your base metabolic rate is so high. You should still be active for other health benefits, but your weight loss is best accomplished from from eating better and less. But the lighter you get, the more cardio matters, because at some point you'll start to have problems getting nutrition from not eating enough. This is especially true if you are getting shredded. I think this is in part why there's so much conflicting advice on this. You have former fat people saying "nah, it's all diet", and you have very fit people saying "no way, it's totally cardio". They're both right, in their respective domain.
- culturestate 5y ago
  > Walking "several miles per day" isn't sufficient enough to burn tens of pounds...you'd be likely burning 350-450kCal [per day] Assuming your diet (and thus your caloric intake) stayed exactly the same, burning an extra ~450 calories per day should net a loss of ~4 pounds per month. Over, say, a six-month span, that'd be roughly 20 pounds lost - easily within the bounds of "tens of pounds after several months."
  - sasawpg 5y ago
    And yet somehow walking alone does not seem to be a sufficient weight loss method for vast majority of people (nor does moderate cardio which burns considerably more).
  - caeril 5y ago
    > Assuming your diet (and thus your caloric intake) stayed exactly the same Correct, but how many fat people are going to "reward" their efforts with a 450kcal treat? Answer: Most.
    - culturestate 5y ago
      Possibly, but the implication here is that you aren't specifically exercising - you're just being more active as a byproduct of being in a different environment. The impetus to "reward" yourself for that behavior would seem to be lower. On days that I go to an office, I don't (consciously) base my lunch decisions on whether I walked, took the train, or used a car service that morning, know what I mean?
      - caeril 5y ago
        > I don't (consciously) base my lunch decisions on whether I walked Emphasis on consciously. Your leptin/ghrelin balance will do that for you, and you won't even think about it.
  - sasawpg 5y ago
    Unfortunately, weight loss is slightly more complicated than that, 450kCal/day for a month isn't quite 4lbs/month (even for fat) and my estimate of 350-450kCal/day for walking several miles is likely an over-estimate. I would find it quite unlikely for most people to lose even 20lbs only as a result of added walking in 6 months without diet changes.
- anonymousab 5y ago
  I think going from almost no exercise to walking a few miles a day probably has enough of a positive effect as to help some people break the "feel like crap > eat comfort and junk food to feel better > feel like crap later" death spiral. If they had reached some sort of "stable" level of obesity, that is if they had plateaud their weight gain naturally, then a sudden consistent 400kcal deficit would result in some change. Assuming they didn't eat more to make up for it.
- syki 5y ago
  Walking alone with no other changes will do little for weight loss. But exercise does affect diet and satiety. There are also changes in terms of mental well being. Keeping active has benefits well beyond mere calorie expenditure. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34869516/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34869516/
- lkbm 5y ago
  350kCal a day is about 30LBs of fat per month. The challenge is adding five miles of walking without your diet ramping up to offset it.
  - sasawpg 5y ago
    You'll want to double check your math. 350kCal/day for a month is just over 10kCal. That's definitely not 30lbs of fat or even remotely close.
digbybk 5y ago
This is the key. We like to blame people for being inactive and overweight, but we've designed our transportation and food systems so that only the most motivated can be anything else.
- macNchz 5y ago
  Yeah I've thought about this in the past in the context of software development "sane defaults"...here in NYC just going about normal daily activities easily results in 3+ miles of walking per day. The "default" lifestyle involves walking to transit, walking to shops etc. Plenty of people use cars, but in very many situations it's more cumbersome than walking/transit. Whenever I visit family in the midwest it can be a bit of a culture shock: by default you might find yourself walking a few hundred feet per day. With garages built into every house, few sidewalks and office parks/shopping centers that are only accessible by car, you have to make an explicit effort to get any exercise.
kevstev 5y ago
Just an anecdote- but the wife and I when we go to Europe eat well and post lots of pictures and such and people make jokes like- how much weight did you put on while you were away? And most of the time we actually come home down 2-3 pounds, and its because we are walking around and seeing sights and such- the meals we eat aren't an issue- especially since portions are much smaller.
- mmmpop 5y ago
  Yep, same here. Last 2 week trip to Paris / Chamonix resulted in my losing a few pounds just because we're covering 12 - 14 miles on foot daily. It probably helps that I don't really care for much French food and just ate kebab the whole time.
t_von_doom 5y ago
To echo what a few other posters have said, but the other way around: As a European who’s visited the states a few times, the portion sizes always amaze me. They are gargantuan in comparison to what I’m used to Edit: Fun video - https://youtu.be/rg3Y3tCmBWo https://youtu.be/rg3Y3tCmBWo The _smallest_ Burger King drink has 90ml more liquid than the _largest_ UK size

sasawpg 5y ago

Walking "several miles per day" isn't sufficient enough to burn tens of pounds without a major diet change. Even at 5 miles per day, you'd be likely burning 350-450kCal, which is not enough of an expenditure to make that much of a difference. For weight loss, even moderate exercise will not yield same results as significant diet changes will.

jjice 5y ago
The parent said > in part because I assume the other part is diet change from being in European countries.
- sasawpg 5y ago
  The parent implied diet was less impactful than walking.
DiggyJohnson 5y ago
It's hard to disagree with such a objective view, but I would like to validate that I've seen similar changes in my friends and peers that travel. A reduced diet and moderate exercise can really do more than you expect.
thebean11 5y ago
Walking burns more calories if you are carrying around lots of weight..
marginalia_nu 5y ago
The advice really should depend on where you are. There's an old adage that says "you can't outrun your fork", and that's very much true. Cardio alone will often be compensated by increases in hunger. If you aren't on top of your diet, then exercising probably won't amount to much. In general, if you are very heavy, you can usually get away with significant calorie deficits through diet alone, as your base metabolic rate is so high. You should still be active for other health benefits, but your weight loss is best accomplished from from eating better and less. But the lighter you get, the more cardio matters, because at some point you'll start to have problems getting nutrition from not eating enough. This is especially true if you are getting shredded. I think this is in part why there's so much conflicting advice on this. You have former fat people saying "nah, it's all diet", and you have very fit people saying "no way, it's totally cardio". They're both right, in their respective domain.
culturestate 5y ago
> Walking "several miles per day" isn't sufficient enough to burn tens of pounds...you'd be likely burning 350-450kCal [per day] Assuming your diet (and thus your caloric intake) stayed exactly the same, burning an extra ~450 calories per day should net a loss of ~4 pounds per month. Over, say, a six-month span, that'd be roughly 20 pounds lost - easily within the bounds of "tens of pounds after several months."
- sasawpg 5y ago
  And yet somehow walking alone does not seem to be a sufficient weight loss method for vast majority of people (nor does moderate cardio which burns considerably more).
- caeril 5y ago
  > Assuming your diet (and thus your caloric intake) stayed exactly the same Correct, but how many fat people are going to "reward" their efforts with a 450kcal treat? Answer: Most.
  - culturestate 5y ago
    Possibly, but the implication here is that you aren't specifically exercising - you're just being more active as a byproduct of being in a different environment. The impetus to "reward" yourself for that behavior would seem to be lower. On days that I go to an office, I don't (consciously) base my lunch decisions on whether I walked, took the train, or used a car service that morning, know what I mean?
    - caeril 5y ago
      > I don't (consciously) base my lunch decisions on whether I walked Emphasis on consciously. Your leptin/ghrelin balance will do that for you, and you won't even think about it.
- sasawpg 5y ago
  Unfortunately, weight loss is slightly more complicated than that, 450kCal/day for a month isn't quite 4lbs/month (even for fat) and my estimate of 350-450kCal/day for walking several miles is likely an over-estimate. I would find it quite unlikely for most people to lose even 20lbs only as a result of added walking in 6 months without diet changes.
anonymousab 5y ago
I think going from almost no exercise to walking a few miles a day probably has enough of a positive effect as to help some people break the "feel like crap > eat comfort and junk food to feel better > feel like crap later" death spiral. If they had reached some sort of "stable" level of obesity, that is if they had plateaud their weight gain naturally, then a sudden consistent 400kcal deficit would result in some change. Assuming they didn't eat more to make up for it.
syki 5y ago
Walking alone with no other changes will do little for weight loss. But exercise does affect diet and satiety. There are also changes in terms of mental well being. Keeping active has benefits well beyond mere calorie expenditure. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34869516/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34869516/
lkbm 5y ago
350kCal a day is about 30LBs of fat per month. The challenge is adding five miles of walking without your diet ramping up to offset it.
- sasawpg 5y ago
  You'll want to double check your math. 350kCal/day for a month is just over 10kCal. That's definitely not 30lbs of fat or even remotely close.

digbybk 5y ago

This is the key. We like to blame people for being inactive and overweight, but we've designed our transportation and food systems so that only the most motivated can be anything else.

macNchz 5y ago
Yeah I've thought about this in the past in the context of software development "sane defaults"...here in NYC just going about normal daily activities easily results in 3+ miles of walking per day. The "default" lifestyle involves walking to transit, walking to shops etc. Plenty of people use cars, but in very many situations it's more cumbersome than walking/transit. Whenever I visit family in the midwest it can be a bit of a culture shock: by default you might find yourself walking a few hundred feet per day. With garages built into every house, few sidewalks and office parks/shopping centers that are only accessible by car, you have to make an explicit effort to get any exercise.

kevstev 5y ago

Just an anecdote- but the wife and I when we go to Europe eat well and post lots of pictures and such and people make jokes like- how much weight did you put on while you were away? And most of the time we actually come home down 2-3 pounds, and its because we are walking around and seeing sights and such- the meals we eat aren't an issue- especially since portions are much smaller.

mmmpop 5y ago
Yep, same here. Last 2 week trip to Paris / Chamonix resulted in my losing a few pounds just because we're covering 12 - 14 miles on foot daily. It probably helps that I don't really care for much French food and just ate kebab the whole time.

t_von_doom 5y ago

To echo what a few other posters have said, but the other way around: As a European who’s visited the states a few times, the portion sizes always amaze me. They are gargantuan in comparison to what I’m used to Edit: Fun video - https://youtu.be/rg3Y3tCmBWo https://youtu.be/rg3Y3tCmBWo The _smallest_ Burger King drink has 90ml more liquid than the _largest_ UK size