fatties, you can stop blaming your genes for your weight problem

[bfdd]

So why do some people exercise and eat 1200 calories a day tops and don't lose weight?

I've never understood why people think you need to kill yourself by eating such few calories. You do NOT need to eat less calories to lose weight. A balanced diet is essential along with exercise. It also doesn't take a whole lot of exercise to be healthy and lose some weight.

 

[SlitheryDee]

So why do some people exercise and eat 1200 calories a day tops and don't lose weight?

I honestly don't believe that claim. Has anyone followed these people around for a couple weeks to make sure they're not eating more than they say?

 

[Ns1]

Most of them work out more than the skinny people I know, who by and large don't work out at all.

No one counts calories... at least not accurately, unless they're taking into account the bioavailability, utilization, and other complex factors. Simply adding the number of calories listed on the side of the box is laughable.

Finally, in my experience, the primary concern of any fat person is to not be fat anymore, so it doesn't make sense for a person to be lazy in that aspect but not in others.

So basically they work out so they can eat, got it.


Nothing wrong with that, because that's exactly what I do.

Seriously dude are we really arguing this? Being skinny is generally the result of diet and exercise, and odds are a fatty is fucking up in 1 of those 2 areas.

I refuse to believe anyone following a strict diet and exercise course would fail to lose weight, and I would love to see some proof to refute this argument. By proof I mean a diet + exercise log.

and if you don't have a diet/exercise log, I don't think you're serious.

 

[Blackjack200]

So basically they work out so they can eat, got it.


Nothing wrong with that, because that's exactly what I do.

I'm not sure what you're talking about, but there was recently a study that followed a couple of groups of individuals trying to lose weight and they found that the group that exercised didn't lose any more weight than the group that didn't. They were much healthier, but the conclusion of the study was that if you are looking strictly at weight (as we are here), exercise is not an effective way to go.

 

[Ns1]

I'm not sure what you're talking about, but there was recently a study that followed a couple of groups of individuals trying to lose weight and they found that the group that exercised didn't lose any more weight than the group that didn't. They were much healthier, but the conclusion of the study was that if you are looking strictly at weight (as we are here), exercise is not an effective way to go.

link?

Also how was their diet? I've said several times that diet + exercise go hand in hand.

 

[bhanson]

I work 40 hours a week and go to school full-time and saw myself skimping in the exercise department. I made some changes to accommodate because not much is more important than your health.

I'm taking a class at another campus and biking there. This allows me to be able to exercise 3 times a week and still be getting stuff done. It also provides me an additional incentive to exercise because I don't like missing class. Some days I'll wake up and won't feel at all like exercising but I do it anyway.

This is in addition to the other "small" things I do. My work requires me to walk over 7 miles every day, often times greater than 10 on particularly busy days. I always take the stairs (7 flights a few times a day) and virtually never eat fast food.

I don't think there is ever an excuse for not having enough time to exercise. More than likely you made a choice at some point to forgo exercise in pursuit of something else.

 

[Blackjack200]

I honestly don't believe that claim. Has anyone followed these people around for a couple weeks to make sure they're not eating more than they say?

Without discussing any specific caloric levels, you'd be surprised at how little you can eat and maintain your weight. When I was dieting my fingernails grew much slower, my hair grew much slower (I went from shaving every other day to shaving once a week), my immune system was less effective, etc.

Your body does everything to conserve calories.

link?

Also how was their diet? I've said several times that diet + exercise go hand in hand.

Seriously? It was a well publicized study, and more studies have backed it up. Google "exercise impact on weight loss".

The main hypothesis is that exercise drives hunger. So essentially exercising more was causing these people to eat more.

 

[ShawnD1]

Eating is not the problem. Lack of exercise is the problem. Farmers eat more than anyone else and those bastards are ripped.

I was pretty trim a few months ago when I was working a shit job that involved standing all day and llight lifting. Now that I have a nice desk job, I'm losing muscle very quickly but it seems to be replaced with fat.

 

[ss284]

So why do some people exercise and eat 1200 calories a day tops and don't lose weight?

I think some people really have medical/genetic problems that make it hard to lose weight. These people make up a fraction like the article states.

Also, I think a clear distinction needs to be made: being skinny does not imply healthy or fit. I am relatively skinny but horribly out of shape. I think comparisons should be made between those who are fit and of normal BMI, and those that are actually obese.

 

[Ns1]

Without discussing any specific caloric levels, you'd be surprised at how little you can eat and maintain your weight. When I was dieting my fingernails grew much slower, my hair grew much slower (I went from shaving every other day to shaving once a week), my immune system was less effective, etc.

Your body does everything to conserve calories.



Seriously? It was a well publicized study, and more studies have backed it up. Google "exercise impact on weight loss".

The main hypothesis is that exercise drives hunger. So essentially exercising more was causing these people to eat more.

Church identified the problem and called it "compensation": those who exercised cancelled out the calories they had burned by eating more, generally as a form of self-reward. The post-workout pastry to celebrate a job well done – or even a few pieces of fruit to satisfy their stimulated appetites – undid their good work. In some cases, they were less physically active in their daily life as well.

So basically they exercised and then stuffed themselves.

I'm not seeing where exercise is the problem here, where the problem is clearly stuffing your face afterwards.

here it is, I only skimmed it

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/sep/19/exercise-dieting-public-health

 

[ShawnD1]

I'm not seeing where exercise is the problem here, where the problem is clearly stuffing your face afterwards.

If your hard work can be canceled out by eating a pastry or just 1 big mac then you're doing it wrong. Try doing some difficult work. Do enough reps that you cannot do any more.

If done correctly, people will not want to eat. It's an effect similar to how people who smoke meth do not feel like eating.

 

[Ns1]

If your hard work can be canceled out by eating a pastry or just 1 big mac then you're doing it wrong. Try doing some difficult work. Do enough reps that you cannot do any more.

If done correctly, people will not want to eat. It's an effect similar to how people who smoke meth do not feel like eating.

the study seemed to be talking about women, so most likely it was 1 hour of walking followed up by a slice of chocolate cake because their period is around the corner.

(true story)

 

[Blackjack200]

So basically they exercised and then stuffed themselves.

I'm not seeing where exercise is the problem here, where the problem is clearly stuffing your face afterwards.

here it is, I only skimmed it

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/sep/19/exercise-dieting-public-health

Please show me where I said "Exercise is the problem". What I said is that 'the group that exercised didn't lose any more weight than the group that didn't. They were much healthier, but the conclusion of the study was that if you are looking strictly at weight (as we are here), exercise is not an effective way to go.'

 

[coloumb]

/agree

If I didn't have a job that keeps me on my feet, play recreational hockey every week, and gave up high sugar soda a few years ago [replaced with water], I'd surely have a beer gut. I have noticed that I've gone from a 36 waste to a 33 waste by simply cutting out "fat foods and drinks".

 

[Blackjack200]

If your hard work can be canceled out by eating a pastry or just 1 big mac then you're doing it wrong. Try doing some difficult work. Do enough reps that you cannot do any more.

If done correctly, people will not want to eat. It's an effect similar to how people who smoke meth do not feel like eating.

Just to clarify, you're saying that if people exercise right, they will not want to eat? And that exercise (done correctly of couse) will have an effect on appetite analagous the effect on appetite that crystal meth has?

 

[Ns1]

Please show me where I said "Exercise is the problem". What I said is that 'the group that exercised didn't lose any more weight than the group that didn't. They were much healthier, but the conclusion of the study was that if you are looking strictly at weight (as we are here), exercise is not an effective way to go.'

you're saying that exercise is not effective, I'm saying it is.

The problem is not exercise, it's stuffing your face afterwards.

Therefore, exercise is effective as long as you don't stuff your face afterwards to the point where calories in > calories out.

Is this clear and concise enough? Calories in < calories out = weight loss

back to my morbidly obese woman example: she pounds her supersized chicken quesadilla combo every saturday morning (i misspoke earlier when I said it was a burrito); a whopping 1500 calories! FOR BREAKFAST!

Her exercise prior to said meal? An hour of walking around in the park. 200 calories burned, 1500 calories consumed. I'm sure that won't be her last meal of the day.

 

[Blackjack200]

you're saying that exercise is not effective, I'm saying it is.

The problem is not exercise, it's stuffing your face afterwards.

Therefore, exercise is effective as long as you don't stuff your face afterwards to the point where calories in > calories out.

Is this clear and concise enough? Calories in < calories out = weight loss

Yes, and you can lose weight by eating nothing at all. What's your point? To find some oversimplified and obvious relationship between calories in and calories out? How is that a useful formula if both quantities are unknowable?

Maybe if you approached the question with a shred of curiousity instead of the boorish 'blame fat people' angle, you'd be able to figure some of this out for yourself.

And I never said that exercise was not effective, I said it was a poor strategy for people trying to lose weight. And the study backs me up 100%. Is your argument so poor that you have to misrepresent my claim repeatedly?

 

[Blackjack200]

Her exercise prior to said meal? An hour of walking around in the park. 200 calories burned, 1500 calories consumed. I'm sure that won't be her last meal of the day.

If her exercise routine nets a gain of 1300 calories, we would expect her to gain more than 100 pounds per year (based on the calories in/calories out model). Does she?

 

[theflyingpig]

In my opinion, modern society has been to lenient toward fatties. Most of them think that it is acceptable to be so disgusting, and they even have the gall to show themselves in public. This needs to change. If we are to live in a fat-free society, we have to change the attitudes we have toward fatties. First, we need to legalize fat-beatings. It should not be a crime to punish a fatty for being fat by beating them. Children need to be encouraged to participate in beatings so as to re-enforce the anti-fat attitude. Second, all fatties should be used as laborers. This will serve the public good and give the fatty the opportunity to burn off his shame. Finally, fatties should not be allowed to breed. In a few generations, we will effectively breed-out the fat gene from our species, and will no longer have to deal with fatties and their problems. Everyone knows this.

 

[ShawnD1]

Just to clarify, you're saying that if people exercise right, they will not want to eat? And that exercise (done correctly of couse) will have an effect on appetite analagous the effect on appetite that crystal meth has?

Yes that is correct.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081211081446.htm

They found that the treadmill (aerobic) session caused ghrelin levels to drop and peptide YY levels to increase, indicating the hormones were suppressing appetite. However, a weight-lifting (non-aerobic) session produced a mixed result. Ghrelin levels dropped, indicating appetite suppression, but peptide YY levels did not change significantly.
Based on the hunger ratings the participants filled out, both aerobic and resistance exercise suppressed hunger, but aerobic exercise produced a greater suppression of hunger.

So just as every human has been saying for the past eleventy billion years, getting up and moving around will make you forget about how hungry you really are. Also, as reported by the people on that show Survivor, drinking water suppresses hunger pain.

 

[MrX8503]

lol, there are so many people who are full of BS.

These are the rules:

If you are not an athlete or a senior citizen and your BMI is

25+, You are overweight
30+, You are obese

Period

Considering that 30% of Americans are overweight/obese there is a big disconnect of what it means to be overweight/obese. Its gotten so bad that we are trained to see obese people as overweight and overweight people as normal weight.

If you take in less calories, whether its diet/exercise or some combination of both, for about 99.999% of people out there, you will lose weight. All of these "exceptions" of how its not working out for them is a very small minority and most of the time can be attributed to the person being either lazy or misinformed.

 

[SlitheryDee]

If her exercise routine nets a gain of 1300 calories, we would expect her to gain more than 100 pounds per year (based on the calories in/calories out model). Does she?

It's more complicated than that. If she weighs more than 300 lbs her BMR (the number of calories she needs to take in just to maintain her weight if she does absolutely nothing all day) might be higher than 3000 calories. An hour long walk, even at a very slow pace, would probably burn more like 500-600 calories for a person that size. So, it's more like she still has 2000 calories to go before she even reaches a surplus. Factor in a 1000 calorie lunch and a 1500 calorie dinner and she's only 500 calories over. Also consider that she may not eat at a caloric surplus every day. Some days she'll be sick or on her period or just won't feel like eating as much. Other days she'll eat much more. Some days she'll be active, possibly pushing her maintenance level over the 4000 calorie mark (not so hard to do when you weigh a lot). Others she'll be sedentary. Given those variables you might expect her to gain ~30-40 lbs a year, which is obviously what she's been doing for a while or else she wouldn't be morbidly obese.

If you consider all the factors in your calorie counting it works out. I've done it with great success myself.

 

[Ns1]

Yes, and you can lose weight by eating nothing at all. What's your point?

my point is that fat people eat too much, which your study seems to prove. Except in the study, they replace "eat too much" with fancy words like "compensation", ie I compensate for my lack of will power by stuffing my face with a pastry.

 

[ShawnD1]

my point is that fat people eat too much, which your study seems to prove. Except in the study, they replace "eat too much" with fancy words like "compensation", ie I compensate for my lack of will power by stuffing my face with a pastry.

I wonder if that's mostly a woman thing. Lots of women I know will try to keep things in a balanced state for some strange reason. Like if they find $20, it's ok to piss it away on stupid bullshit because they were fine before they had that $20. It's a very strange way of thinking that tries to stay in the same position forever rather than improving.

 

[QueBert]

lol, there are so many people who are full of BS.

These are the rules:

If you are not an athlete or a senior citizen and your BMI is

25+, You are overweight
30+, You are obese

Period

Considering that 30% of Americans are overweight/obese there is a big disconnect of what it means to be overweight/obese. Its gotten so bad that we are trained to see obese people as overweight and overweight people as normal weight.

If you take in less calories, whether its diet/exercise or some combination of both, for about 99.999% of people out there, you will lose weight. All of these "exceptions" of how its not working out for them is a very small minority and most of the time can be attributed to the person being either lazy or misinformed.

I'm 5'11 and 35lbs over my BMI, yet I wear 34" pants, explain to me how that's obese?