A very interesting article in Time magazine which questions the assumption that excercise equals weight loss. Although excercise is clearly important, it may not be as critical to a weight loss regime as many people think. One figure I've heard quoted is that most weight loss is 80% diet and 20% excercise.

Meat Eaters are Lean (Cheetah), while Vegetarians are over sized (Elephants)

I've been thinking about this a lot lately. Well, to be more honest, I think about this every few years anyhow but lately it has come to mind because the doctor has said that my weight is why I had a miscarriage. (The "whole truth" is more like that gals with PCOS - like me - tend to have trouble carrying babies AND they tend to be overweight... but that's a topic for someplace else.)

Anyhow, as part of my recovery therapy I've been seeing a women's psychological specialist who has put me in touch with the department in the hospital to help me with me weight vs exercise vs hormone issue. As preparation for starting with visiting these folks, they sent me a questionnaire, which of course, made me think about what I eat and how much exercise I get.

Now... to be honest (which I tend to try to be ), I don't get a heck of a lot of exercise. I do live in a building without a lift and I do walk to get groceries AND depending upon what I'm planning to do down town when I head that way (and what the weather is like), about half the time I skip the bus and walk there too.

When I think about exercise though, I don't think about that stuff. That's daily routine, right?

On the other hand, I've only started doing that stuff since I've moved here. Thinking back to my weight when I arrived and what I weighed when I saw the doctor this week... I've lost 13kg in the past year.

Even so, what I think of when someone asks me if I exercise, I think of the gym or some mind-numbing run / walk around a track seeing the same view over and over. Jumping around, doing different arm / leg movements while jumping and calling it aerobics.

In this ongoing thought about exercise and how to get more and diet and how to eat less, or maybe not less but maybe somehow "better"...

I've thought back to my youthful days when I would ride my bicycle to the beach to spend the day frisking about and swimming in the waves of Oahu only to ride my bike to the snack bar and indulge in the normal teenage diet of fries and cheeseburgers with an extra-thick milkshake, yes please! Of course, the snack bar was right by the base pool so we'd generally eat, shower off the salt and jump into the pool. Ahh... to have that "life" again.

Well, that was exercise too... and I didn't think about it as exercise any more than I think about the walk to and from the grocery now. Not only did I not think about how much exercise I was getting but I also didn't think about how little I was snacking.



I don't think anyone does that thoughtless exercise anymore. I think so much emphasis has been put on doing exercise people have lost sight of the simple fact that there are fun things to do which (om goodness!) exercise our bodies. Also, I think too much emphasis has been put on what we can and can't eat.

The problem is, how often do we have time to do something besides head to the gym for a workout rather than head to the park or pool or wherever for some "mind elsewhere" hours of fun which happens to be exercise?

Going to the gym seems like a task, it doesn't seem like fun. Tasks need reward, that's what we've been taught our whole lives, ever since the first time our mom gave us a star for peeing in the potty like a big boy or girl.


I think we need to go back to the mind set - and to the lifestyle which yields the time - to have frolicking fun which happens to be exercise but that is done without thought (and thus needs no "reward").

i hear ya there, peg a. i can't imagine or stand really going to the gym to work out with people watching themselves and everyone else in a mirror as they flex and squat. not my kinda place. for me i've found that activities like yoga and capoeira are the best ways to stay in shape, get exercise and they make me feel stronger in alot of ways. i also like the fact that they are social= i get to know the people that train with me and it really helps me to get my behind to workout cuz i feel like i'm letting them down if i don't show up- a little guilt goes a long way for me!
either way the best way to exercise is to find something that you like to do- and do it. it's tough at first but i've found that the more i do it, the more i wanna do it and i can feel (and see!) the difference when i get lazy and don't go.

good luck and stay strong-
xo

There is a very simple formula to weight loss... burn more calories than you consume.

And Castro as you quite rightly say, exercise is nothing without the diet... the diet is key, and probably the hardest part of losing weight.

Weight is like a bank account. Put in more than you take out and the result is your assets increase. To decrease your assets, you can either input less calories (that is dieting) or burn more calories (that is exercise).

Most effective is to do both. Dieting alone may not succeed because the body goes into economy mode (lower metabolic rate) and burns less calories during resting. Moreover, as soon as the diet is relaxed, the famous yo-yo effect can occur.

Hence, the only successful strategy is to avoid calorie-rich food and simultaneously aerobic exercise.

But weight is often confused with mass, oder? People want less mass, not necessarily weight, right?

Well, muscles weigh more than fat, and burns up a lot more calories... so to lose mass, make muscles.

I think you mean "lean body mass". Otherwise weight and mass are synonymous until you go into orbit.

Ah, I meant volume.

I and my DDD's avoid aerobics, tyvm!

Or perhaps it's because cheetahs only end up eating every couple of days and then rarely finish their meals because of predators such as lions.

Elephants don't seem to do much else apart from eat.

I meant aerobics in a generic/scientific sense, for example walking, jogging, cycling, etc. I did not mean aerobics a la Jane Fonda.

Isn't that obvious?

Exercising will help you put on more muscle but if you're continuing to eat a shedload of crap, then there's nothing much you can do.

Also - why do people care solely about weight loss? Surely the aim is to be more healthy - weight is simply a rough metric.

I agree as I posted a while back here (and got ... ).
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Well at home and with a glass of wine next to the computer , I did a few calculations on the energy efficiency of the human body.
It is generally accepted that, of the 2300 calories we need in a day, we use 60% of the energy for the basic metabolism (heart beat, respiration, keeping the body temperature), 30% for activities (moving, working, thinking) and 10% for digestion of the foodstuff. The excess above 2300 is stored as fat. This opens for a few interesting observations:
Increased physical activity will work only on the 30% of the daily expenditure. One hour at the gym will do very little for you on the overall daily energy expenditure (as it works only on the 30% of the total). Just as well to park oneself in front of the TV…honest, I'm not kidding!

Why not look for a strategy that addresses the 60% of the basic metabolism? Now, much of the basic metabolism aims at keeping us warm (I know, I’m just trying to keep it simple!). The metabolic reactions that help regulate body temperature will increase if we are in a cold environment, jut to keep us warm, or decrease if the environment is warm. On the other hand, we will also radiate heat if absolutely still, this is heat generated by chemical reactions in the body that aim at keeping us alive. Laboratory experiments have shown that in a warm environment (hot room or hot bath etc, no physical activity) we loose around 20 calories/hour as heat in order to avoid overheating. In a somewhat colder environment we will loose about 80 calories/hour (no physical activity).
Now, think of the situation hot bedroom and thick, Swiss style duvet.

In the one case (hot bedroom and duvet), the body uses up 20 Calories per hour for the 8 hours of sleep, or a total of around 160 Calories during the night. In the other case (thin covers, cool room) the body uses up the more natural 80 Calories per hour of sleep for those 8 hours or 640 Calories during the night. The difference of these two situations appears to be 480 Calories per night.
A pound of fat contains 3500 calories. Simple maths will tell you that you can loose a pound of fat every week if you put that duvet away, open the bedroom window and go to sleep!
Have a good night's sleep!

I'm not entirely sure you mean/understand that.

So if I exercise, I just work on the 30% of my daily calorific intake which I'd normally expend anyway? What does that mean? Specifically, what does "work on" mean? That makes no sense whatsoever to me no matter how I try to accommodate the statement.

The point made in the original link was that people tend to compensate for exercising by eating more, which then negates the benefit of exercising in the first place. Not that exercise is a pointless endeavour of itself.

Unfortunately ... if you work in an office 9 -5 an drive there and back and the longest walk is to the caffette for lunch then you will use only ca 30% of the caloric intake on excercise . Note that the figure I stated for calories burned/day was low for the very reason that poeple don't MOVE these days therefore the average energy consumed above the basic mtabolic rate is very low for most people. So, doing the gym etc 45' twice a week is the proverbial drop.

Yes, and I said the same in previous posts. If we burn 400 kcal in 45 minutes we will:
1) be very hungry 2 hours later
2) overeat to reward ourselves for being "good"
3) underestimate the caloreis consumed and overestimate the calories burned
All in line with human Nature ...
If regular, exercise will tone the body, increase the lean tissue (i.e. muscles) which is appreciated in our culture, lean tissue consumes more enery => we stay lean on the same caloric intake / day; excercise is good for health so it is NOT pointelss, however if it will make anyone be Kate Moss' & Co lookalkie .... whatever

It's much easier and more effective to work on the exercise portion. Seriously, if you want to lose weight, running does wonders. It's generally accepted that one burns 100 calories per mile of running. Run 4 miles, burn 400 calories. That's more than 20% of the 2,300 calorie recommended intake. Then there's the 'afterburn' affect, where the body's increased metabolism burns more calories than usual after hard exercise.

I find it amusing that so many people are looking for magic forumulas or special tricks to lose weight. It's easy, really. It's a calorie intake versus expenditure equation. Personally, I find reducing calorie intake a difficult task, even a depressing experience. Increasing calorie expenditure via exercise, however, is both positive and enjoyable.

Just get out there and exercise aerobically.

-Wayne

I think the "magic pill" desire comes from the basic idea that exercise such as running for the purpose of exercise is boring.

You get hot, sweaty, the clothes (depending on your fitness level perhaps) are uncomfortable and stick or bunch in funky places...

So, somewhere along the line, some of us got the idea that exercise is a torturous task and thus deserves reward. Reward with a brew, reward with a slice of cheesecake, reward with a latte... reward.

Running and aerobics is great if you actually enjoy that stuff, don't get me wrong... but for the rest of "us" it is something that works out to being null as we hate it enough so that we break even at best (calories burned vs calories "rewarded") and proverbially shoot ourselves in the foot at worst.

So, the "magic pill" is a personal thing for each individual I think.
For me, something to do which makes the exercise itself either a thoughtless habitual task (such as walking to the grocery) or something fun (goofing off / snorkeling at the beach) would be best.

It's kinda hard as an adult to find someone to play with though.

Going on these two paragraphs I would say that you don't have much chance of losing serious weight if that's how you're viewing the process.

Could you theoretically afford a personan trainer twice or thrice a week to motivate you and kick your arse into doing stuff?

Not after 45 mins.

I've been mildly hungry after a 3-4 hour run.


I've never thought like that. I don't need a reward for something I enjoy.

Even if I'm on a run that I'm not particularly enjoying, the reward is finishing it, otherwise it's the scenery and the terrain.

I've no idea how many calories I've consumed when I take exercise and I never work it out so I never over-estimate how many I've burned.


What's your sample size?