Re: Secret of wt. loss

QueenDanceALot · ‎04-18-2013

@sidsmom wrote:
Has anyone read the article,
“The Exercise Paradox”
Scientific American, Feb 2016

Kinda throws out the ‘burning off calories with movement’ idea.
It’s behind a paywall but basically says,
we all burn the same amount of calories a day regardless
if we walk around the block or run a marathon every day.
2600/men, 1900/women.

@QueenDanceALot
I tagged you thinking your IDEA publications might have mentioned something about this...

@sidsmom

Hey, no, I haven't seen anything like that in the IDEA publication or anywhere else.

I will look into it, but I find it very difficult to believe that a competitive athlete requires the same amount of calories per day to maintain their weight than a couch potato.

Impossible, actually. Makes no sense to me whatsoever. Michael Phelps has a much larger requirement for energy (glycogen, calories) than does an accountant.

What I do know, though, and much has been written about it, is that most people greatly overestimate their energy (caloric) needs with standard fitness (or daily living) activities. And that those "calories burned" digital things are notoriously inaccurate.

What we also know is that very fit people are more EFFICIENT at using energy, and that could certainly account for part of this.

But I can't imagine giving a desk worker the food load of a world record holding weightlifter and the desk worker not gaiing weight from the large caloric increase.

But I will try to find the entire article and see what it says. Interesting.

fortune · ‎03-14-2010

@Puppy Lips wrote:
All sounds well and good. As a side note, I am already sick of seeing Oprah Winfrey on her weight loss commercials. I could do without her, and Marie Osmond for that matter.

@Puppy Lips

Oprah is still overweight and Marie lost the 50 lbs. a LONG time ago on
Dancing With the Stars.

GRACIE · ‎04-14-2010

My weight had always been between 113 to115 lbs( under 5 feet) with excersisizing,and no diet restrictions Then after a promotion at the age 50+ I focus on the job and not myself.I gain 40 Ibs in ten years.

I change that, last year.I lost that 40 +lbs. I still eat my bread and pasta,but not everyday.l excersize 45 minutes in the morning, eat lunch and walk for 30 minutes. Evening tonning excersize for 45 minutes. 5 days a weeks, two days off( days varies) As I mentioned the forum" home -plurging topic in QVC". This works for me. I did not buy into any hype or diet plans. Don't eat this and do this. I do what I think is best for me, a combination of everything,but satisfaction to me.

My job evaluation are still outstanding,my faith, family(for me that includes my dogs )are my first priority,but I take time for myself. Read articles on fitness,due what's best for you. Realize the mold for someone else, maybe is not for you. There are no quick fix. Life is not perfect, like yourself and everything will fall into place no matter your weight. Patience grasshopper.

sidsmom · ‎11-25-2011

@QueenDanceALot wrote:
@sidsmom wrote:
Has anyone read the article,
“The Exercise Paradox”
Scientific American, Feb 2016

Kinda throws out the ‘burning off calories with movement’ idea.
It’s behind a paywall but basically says,
we all burn the same amount of calories a day regardless
if we walk around the block or run a marathon every day.
2600/men, 1900/women.

@QueenDanceALot
I tagged you thinking your IDEA publications might have mentioned something about this...
@sidsmom

Hey, no, I haven't seen anything like that in the IDEA publication or anywhere else.

I will look into it, but I find it very difficult to believe that a competitive athlete requires the same amount of calories per day to maintain their weight than a couch potato.

Impossible, actually. Makes no sense to me whatsoever. Michael Phelps has a much larger requirement for energy (glycogen, calories) than does an accountant.

What I do know, though, and much has been written about it, is that most people greatly overestimate their energy (caloric) needs with standard fitness (or daily living) activities. And that those "calories burned" digital things are notoriously inaccurate.

What we also know is that very fit people are more EFFICIENT at using energy, and that could certainly account for part of this.

But I can't imagine giving a desk worker the food load of a world record holding weightlifter and the desk worker not gaiing weight from the large caloric increase.

But I will try to find the entire article and see what it says. Interesting.

@QueenDanceALot

Here’s an online article/blog summarizing it.

(I hesitate to post sections for the article that I purchased since

copyright laws, etc.)

https://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/why_physical_activity_does_little_to_control_weight

And a videos:

https://youtu.be/l7C80sIJv74

https://youtu.be/eXTiiz99p9o (2:45 mark)

In a nutshell a research group studied the Hadza Tribe, a tribe of hunters/gatherers out in Tanzania. The researchers intitially thought they would show the hunters burning thousands of calories every day due to their walking/running all day. After extensive blood tests, they concluded they didn’t burn any more calories than the normal American/European who had a sedentary lifestyle. And it doesn’t have anything due to the # of calories you consume...the body will continue to burn the 2600/men & 1900/women. If one is moving a lot (think: marathon runners), the additional energy needed will be extracted from other body energies like building of bone, muscle, brain tissue, endocrine system...which that makes sense...your body begins to break down if one overtrains. Of course, this study/thought doesn’t say not to move...small amounts of movement is good for many things like mental clarity, etc.

Conclusion of this study:

The ‘move more’ is not a factor.

It was/is/always will be ‘All About the Food’ for normal body weight.

Lipstickdiva · ‎03-10-2010

@willdob3 wrote:
@ncascade wrote:
Eat less, exercise more. Read that somewhere.
@Group 5 minus 1

That has actually been proven (scientifically) to be incorrect. But the suggestion is good for business of all sorts so it continues to be marketed as a good idea.

A couple of weeks ago I turned on PBS as I was going to bed and there was a doctor talking about weightloss and some of the myths associated with it.

I haven't really looked into him at all so maybe he's a quack but his name was Dr. Mark Hymann. He's also appeared on Dr. Oz. He said one of the biggest myths out there is that a calorie is a calorie is a calorie. Not true.

He also said there are some industries behind some of these bogus claims being put out there by some medical associations because they are pumping so much money into backing the, these assoc. keep putting out knowingly false information so they don't lose the funding.

QueenDanceALot · ‎04-18-2013

@Lipstickdiva @sidsmom

http://drhyman.com/blog/2014/04/10/calories-dont-matter/

I hope the mods allow this link as Ii don't have time to type this all out, but I think it is a straight-forward easy to grasp explanation of calories, and how their effect on our bodies differ, depending on where they come from.

We can also look at the thermic effect of each protein, carbohydrate and fat, the thermic effect being a measure of how much different foods increase energy expenditure, but that can get confusing in practice as all foods are a combo of both, except for many animal fats which are all fat, not like those from whole foods like nuts and seeds, which also contain carbohydrates and protein as well.

So, the percentages listed here get a bit more complicated, if you are of a mind to track yours

Fats 2-3%

Carbohydrates 6-8%

Protein 25-30%

So, we see that protein has the most complex process of digestion and assimilation. But we have to look at the particular food and determine what percent of THAT FOOD is protein, which is fat, and which is carbohydrate.

The upshot of all of this is that calories aren't created "equal" as they can be good, useful ones (those from whole food sources) and detrimental ones (like those from processed carbohydrates, like soda and chips).

I am still thinking through the carlorie "burn" between say, LeBron James, and Joe Blow Couch Potato. LeBron is certainly a LOT more efficient at using energy sources (stored glycogen, anyone? or how about the ability to replenish ATP for higher force production?) than Joe,(not to mention a high level distance runner or perhaps a sprinter or ballet dancer) who huffs and puffs(speaking of Couch Potato Joe, if you've lost my train of thought) just moving from the couch to the refrigerator, or spending 30 minutes on the eliptical machine..

This opens up a whole new discussion about exercise physiology and how energy is produced in our cells. And how that production changes with type of demand.

Another day!