Exercise Ineffective for Weight Loss?

On the recent "Marathon Challenge" episode of PBS' "Nova" series of
science programs, a nutritionist stated that exercise actually doesn't
help as much as diet.

That was news to me!



On Oct 31, 6:36 am, "ATP*" wrote:
Good rant:

http://moynihaninstitute.com/

Good blog discussion at

http://robbwolf.com/

http://arthurdevany.com/

Article on "Scientist and Stairmaster"

http://nymag.com/news/sports/38001/

On Oct 31, 3:58 pm, Prisoner at War wrote:
On the recent "Marathon Challenge" episode of PBS' "Nova" series of
science programs, a nutritionist stated that exercise actually doesn't
help as much as diet.



What BS.

On Oct 31, 5:03 pm, Michelle Steiner wrote:
A nutritionist told me that back in 1976. It's been estimated that you
burn 100 Kcalories per mile (that would vary by weight, of course). One
pound of fat is about 3500 Kcalories. That means you would have to run
thirty five miles to burn up one pound of fat. But that doesn't take
into account other criteria such as burning up sugars and protein.


This is why the hormones are rotting his/her/its brain. If the dumbass
goes by his/her/its own calculations, by running a paltry 35 miles a
week, the person would lose 52lbs a year. A modest and safe amount.

wrote:
Prisoner at War wrote:

On the recent "Marathon Challenge" episode of PBS' "Nova" series of
science programs, a nutritionist stated that exercise actually doesn't
help as much as diet.

What BS.

I've lost while exercising. I've lost while not exercising.

I've maintained while exercising. I've maintained while not
exercising.

I've regained while not exercising. I've never regained while
exercising.

For me it's that simple. It doesn't matter if it effects the loss
phase.
The maintenance phase either lasts and lasts, or I start drifting back
up again ...

On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 14:03:08 -0700, Michelle Steiner
wrote:

In article .com,
Prisoner at War wrote:

On the recent "Marathon Challenge" episode of PBS' "Nova" series of
science programs, a nutritionist stated that exercise actually
doesn't help as much as diet.

That was news to me!

A nutritionist told me that back in 1976. It's been estimated that you
burn 100 Kcalories per mile (that would vary by weight, of course). One
pound of fat is about 3500 Kcalories. That means you would have to run
thirty five miles to burn up one pound of fat. But that doesn't take
into account other criteria such as burning up sugars and protein.

Cutting 3500 Kcals a week means cutting 500 of them a day from one's
diet.

Exercise raises metabolism while at rest, increases muscle mass etc.
There are no 300 pound runners and I mean runners not joggers.

On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 19:44:59 -0600, Tim wrote:

There are no 300 pound runners and I mean runners not joggers.

You have a ****ed up defenition of a runner. I'm curious, at what
magical MPM does jogging become running? I mean by your FU
standards...

Never trust a nutritionist to get anything fully right.

It depends on how much exercise one does. In the past,
when working very physical jobs I easily consumed 5000
calories per day and could lose weight quite easily.
Of course, I was often lifting 20 tons a day and sometimes
much more. The funny thing was I also lifted weights or jogged or
ran sprints when I went home which made the job easy.
I could do push ups with my legs a directly above my head and not ever
find
the max due to boredom. Anyway with exercise like that you will lose
weight.

In time I completed my education as such jobs are for
younger people. Still the wages were good as that was back
before THEY (the industrial free traders and open border bosses)
had fully broken the working class.

The problem with this that people get old. Joints hurt.
Recovery times get longer. Hormone levels drop.
And there aren't enough place to walk or run safely.

----------------------------------------------------


Diabetes Care. 2007 Nov;30(11):2838-42. Epub 2007 Aug 17.

Changes in vigorous physical activity and incident diabetes in male
runners.

Williams PT.

Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Life Sciences
Division, 1
Cyclotron Rd., Berkeley, CA 94720, USA.

OBJECTIVE:
We examined the relationship between changes in reported vigorous
exercise and self-reported physician-diagnosed diabetes in 25,988
active men.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS:
The dose-response relationship between changes in
reported vigorous exercise (running distance, change in kilometers per
week) and
self-reported physician-diagnosed diabetes was followed prospectively
for 7.8 +/-
1.8 years (means +/- SD).

RESULTS:
Logistic regression analyses showed that the
log odds for diabetes declined significantly in relation to men's
change in
running distance (coefficient +/- SE: -0.012 +/- 0.004, P 0.01),
which remained
significant when adjusted for BMI (-0.018 +/- 0.003, P 0.0001). The
decline in
the log odds for diabetes was related to the distance run at the end
of follow-up
when adjusted for baseline distance, with (-0.024 +/- 0.005, P
0.0001) or
without (-0.027 +/- 0.005, P 0.0001) adjustment for BMI. Baseline
distance was
unrelated to diabetes incidence when adjusted for the distance at the
end of
follow-up. Compared with men who ran 8 km/week at the end of follow-
up,
incidence rates in those who ran or = 8 km/week were 95% lower
between 35 and
44 years of age (P 0.0001), 92% lower between 45 and 54 (P
0.0001), 87% lower
between 55 and 64 (P 0.0001), and 46% lower between 65 and 75 (P =
0.30). For
the subset of 6,208 men who maintained the same running distance
during follow-up
(+/-5 km/week), the log odds for diabetes declined with weekly
distance run
(-0.024 +/- 0.010, P = 0.02) but not when adjusted for BMI (-0.005 +/-
0.010, P =
0.65).

CONCLUSIONS:
Vigorous exercise significantly reduces diabetes incidence,
due in part to the prevention of age-related weight gain and in part
to other
exercise effects.

PMID: 17704345

Nat Clin Pract Endocrinol Metab. 2007 Jul;3(7):518-29.

The role of physical activity in producing and maintaining weight
loss.

Catenacci VA, Wyatt HR.

University of Colorado at Denver and Health Sciences Center, Denver,
CO 80262,
USA.

The majority of randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) show only modest
weight loss
with exercise intervention alone, and slight increases in weight loss
when
exercise intervention is added to dietary restriction. In most RCTs,
the energy
deficit produced by the prescribed exercise is far smaller than that
usually
produced by dietary restriction. In prospective studies that
prescribed high
levels of exercise, enrolled individuals achieved substantially
greater weight
loss-comparable to that obtained after similar energy deficits were
produced by
caloric restriction. High levels of exercise might, however, be
difficult for
overweight or obese adults to achieve and sustain. RCTs examining
exercise and
its effect on weight-loss maintenance demonstrated mixed results;
however, weight
maintenance interventions were usually of limited duration and long-
term
adherence to exercise was problematic. Epidemiologic, cross-sectional,
and
prospective correlation studies suggest an essential role for physical
activity
in weight-loss maintenance, and post hoc analysis of prospective
trials shows a
clear dose-response relationship between physical activity and weight
maintenance. This article reviews the role of physical activity in
producing and
maintaining weight loss. We focus on prospective, RCTs lasting at
least 4 months;
however, other prospective trials, meta-analyses and large systematic
reviews are
included. Limitations in the current body of literature are discussed.

PMID: 17581621

On Oct 31, 5:03 pm, Michelle Steiner wrote:



A nutritionist told me that back in 1976. It's been estimated that you
burn 100 Kcalories per mile (that would vary by weight, of course). One
pound of fat is about 3500 Kcalories. That means you would have to run
thirty five miles to burn up one pound of fat.

Yep, the narrator then went on to note something like that...even
running a marathon barely burns a pound of fat!!

But that doesn't take
into account other criteria such as burning up sugars and protein.

Cutting 3500 Kcals a week means cutting 500 of them a day from one's
diet.

I don't mind hunger pangs, but it's the fear that my muscles are being
depleted that's got me worried when dieting. Being 35, I can no
longer count on exercise alone. That's why that news about the
marathon not burning that many calories really surprised me.

--
Support the troops: Bring them home ASAP.

On Oct 31, 9:44 pm, Tim wrote:


Exercise raises metabolism while at rest, increases muscle mass etc.
There are no 300 pound runners and I mean runners not joggers.


Well, most people "exercise" in the sense of "jogging," not "running."

On the news last night some bunch of scientists released new
recommendations regarding diet and cancer: less red meat -- to the
tune of no more than 20 ounces a week!!!!!!!!

Holy cow...how am I supposed to keep benching 315-lbs. on that
diet....

On Nov 1, 4:41 am, wrote:
Never trust a nutritionist to get anything fully right.

It depends on how much exercise one does. In the past,
when working very physical jobs I easily consumed 5000
calories per day and could lose weight quite easily.

Me, too -- in the past, when younger. Which is why I am really upset
at old age. What a ridiculous way to spend the next forty, fifty
years of life, looking uglier and uglier, getting weaker and weaker,
losing more and more of my mind....

Of course, I was often lifting 20 tons a day and sometimes
much more. The funny thing was I also lifted weights or jogged or
ran sprints when I went home which made the job easy.
I could do push ups with my legs a directly above my head and not ever
find
the max due to boredom. Anyway with exercise like that you will lose
weight.

Sure thing, but weight itself is no big deal. That's one thing I
really applauded about this Nova episode, where they made very clear
that weight really doesn't mean much, in terms of health or endurance
strength or speed. That really fat lady with the heart issues wound
up being the fastest female runner of the group!

In time I completed my education as such jobs are for
younger people. Still the wages were good as that was back
before THEY (the industrial free traders and open border bosses)
had fully broken the working class.

Really sucks, yeah, 'cause I'd love a more physical job myself. I
really miss Army infantry on that account.

The problem with this that people get old. Joints hurt.
Recovery times get longer. Hormone levels drop.

Ugh, don't encourage my rants about old age....

And there aren't enough place to walk or run safely.

Luckily, that's not a problem for me.

Where do you live that that's such an issue?