We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Wednesday, June 15. 2016
Unless you give yourself 4 or more hours in the gym daily like an anorectic, no. For practical purposes, it is of no use for that.
All exercise which fatigues and stresses the body is good for mental health, fitness, and vitality, and it probably slightly raises calorie-burning and is better than sitting, but exercise alone can never help you lose 10 lbs of belly lard. It's wishful thinking.
As Dr. Phil would say, "Has it worked for you?"
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
I love to watch the fatties on the treadmills and elliptical machines at the gym. Moving and sweating for hours and yet they weigh the same as they did six months ago!
Dated one of the slimmer ones, a physician, and she insisted she was losing weight and demanded to know who I was going to believe: her or my lyin' eyes?
My experience is 'somewhat' different. Training for a marathon I would typically only lose 5-8 lbs in 8 weeks but my muscle definition on my abdomen was dramatic and my waist would lose about 2 inches. This was from a baseline of running everyday and weight lifting 5-6 days a week. I believe if a person who was not excercising regularly were to spend 8 weeks in a pre-marathon program their results would be more dramatic.
I experienced similar results when hiking for a week or more. That is 15-18 miles a day section hiking the Pacific Crest Trail after 7-8 days I would have lost 10 lbs and gained abdominal definition.
Over the years I have had running partners who started 20-30 lbs over weight who were easily able to lose that excess weight in a couple of months and gain definition. Usually these same running partners would adopt my weightlifting regimen so this was part of the equation too.
Most of the 'body builders' I have known used extreme diets to achieve muscle definition (egg white, tuna packed in water, etc.). Different goals and different excercise regimens.
They didn't lose the fat primarily from the gym exercises, but from the overall change in lifestyle and diet that went with their hiking...
If you just go to the gym for an hour every few days and expect to magically lose a lot of weight as a result, you're in for a bummer.
Especially as most people who do that find themselves chugging down gallons of the energy drinks that those gyms push as "absolutely necessary for a healthy exercise regimen" and thus overload their bodies with the very sugar their body's supposed to burn while exercising, leading to no fat being burned at all, in fact they may gain fat as they're likely to take in more carbs from those energy drinks than their bodies burn during their exercise periods.
I can't argue with you because literally everyone is different. If you want to lose weight it is not more complicated than consuming fewer calories than you expend. A two sided equation and to deny that only diet or only exercise will accomplish the goal is provably wrong.
The only point I disagree with is that exercise alone cannot cause you to lose weight or to lose inches on your waistline. It absolutely can, BUT, most people do not choose to exercise vigorously (sometimes for very valid reasons). Most people who begin an exercise program go to the gym 3-5 times a week for an hour or less. This level of effort is good, certainly better than being a couch potato but it falls short if your goal is to achieve good physical condition and optimum weight.
If you are 15-30 or so it is generally easier to maintain condition and weight targets. Often people in this age bracket have little understanding of the problem they have yet to face. If you are 30-50 or so weight management and conditioning is more challenging (depending on your genetics and health issues) and it simply takes more time and effort to reach and maintain optimum weight and conditioning goals. At even older ages in life other factors as well as simple aging complicates this even more. This is why a simple answer for everyone isn't possible. Do what works for you. Try other choices. Don't be too quick to dismiss what others have learned. While it may not work for you it may still be valid for 50% of the population.
Your genetics will determine more than your wishes and efforts will. IMHO the goal should be to balance your health/conditioning efforts with all of the other commitments and constraints in life (family, self development, work and leisure). It is something each of us must work out for ourselves and our situation.
What's wrong? I answered an unsupported claim with an unsupported claim. If he had given me reasons, I would have responded in kind!
Answer: Not you, per se. What's wrong is the rightist cultural obsession with passing around whatever it can rake up that supports a core assumption: That some narrow, vague, socio-religious morality of traditional values and rote convention calls on the righteous man to kill and consume flesh and resist foolish, evil plants.
From that flows all sorts of alarmed outrage that cartooned lettuce-munching leftists are a fundamental scourge on the right and pure and must by God be stomped out of existence by any means necessary; presumption, myth, habit, made-up Science!, boilerplate press, snark, and derision being choice among them for their well-known factual properties.
"Unsupported claims" is a good way to put it, as would be the generally unreliable conversational style thereof, which also has nothing inherently wrong in it to prevent it. Conjecture opinion, and anecdote the subject has going for it...
You can lose fat with exercise if you are in ketosis. You can either exercise until you burn up all the carbs in your system or do low carb which gets you into fat burning quicker.
But with all fat loss, you lose it in the torso last.
Most studies show that people who diet and do aerobic exercise lose more weight than diet alone. Before you tell me I'm wrong, go pull the peer reviewed studies or speak with someone with a doctorate degree in the area. Then re-read what I wrote.
The question is what did the weight consist of. Well, they did lose fat (good)....however, they also lost a lot of muscle mass (bad). so, what's a better solution?
Simply substituting or adding heavy resistance training will help preserve the muscle mass. Of course, if you take the aerobic exercise to extreme, you're still going to lose muscle.
A better option is to add heavy resistance training t your diet and for "cardio" use a barbell approach (sorry for the pun) consisting of 2 (maybe 3) HIIT sessions per week plus easy stuff (like walking) on other days. The resistance training should be HEAVY - something that you can't lift for more than 5 reps (8 tops for things like chins) and focus on compound movements. Don't try to do too much - you're on a calorie restricted diet and your recovery will be limited. A reasonable approach is something like Trap Bar deadlift, Weighted Push Ups, Heavy Sled Push, Heavy Farmer's Walks and some type of chinning/rowing movement.
Mixing intense cardio (HIIT) with very easy cardio (like walking) is much more effective than doing the same middle of the road (again, sorry for the pun) cardio for each training session.
I've lost 140 lbs over the past year, so I think I can speak empirically, if from a sample size of one.
The answer to the exercise or diet question is the same as the answer to the Ginger or Mary Ann question: both at the same time. You won't burn enough calories through exercise alone to make much of a difference, but if you reduce calories without exercise you will scavenge muscle tissue before your fat reserves.
The biggest problem I see with people trying to lose weight through exercise is that they don't go intense enough. walking below the aerobic limit just plain doesn't burn enough calories (walking for 30 minutes at 3.5 mph is the equivalent of about a 1" square brownie, less than that 20 oz. Gatorade you are drinking). It did, however, take several months of walking like this to get into good enough shape that I could maintain a walk/jog above the aerobic threshold long enough to get the burn rate up.
Congratulations! You must feel as though you've been issued a whole new life. What a wonderful thing you've done for yourself and everyone who cares about you.
You lose weight when you create a calorie deficit, which is calories eaten minus calories burned. Most people who increase their exercise will automatically eat enough extra food to compensate (or even over-compensate), especially if they over-count their exercise calories and under-count their food calories, as most of us do. But if you actually control the calories you eat and take care not to increase them with exercise, then of course burning more calories in exercise will increase your calorie deficit and make you lose weight faster.
Despite what the machines and devices tell us, from what I've read, no one but an elite athlete is likely to burn anything close to 700 calories in an hour. For ordinary mortals, 300 calories an hour is far more likely. There aren't enough hours in the day to overcome a severe over-eating habit by exercising at 300 calories an hour. Cut your calories to 1200 a day, though (I'm talking about an ordinary woman, now, not a big guy who lifts weights or something), and the effect of an hour of two of even casual daily exercise will quickly become apparent. Bonus, you'll feel better, too.