Did everyone here......

On Oct 11, 11:40 am, Doug Freyburger wrote:
Hollywood wrote:

But I cannot sit and look and my history of dieting and exercising,
go over my spreadsheets with weight data, measurement data and
exercise data, and tell you that there's any real correlation,
much less causation ...

Going over my history I find times of loss with and without exercise.
I find times of regain without exercise. I do NOT find times of
regain
with exercise.

I had a few weeks where I exercised hard core and regained. I was
eating like crap on travel, but my intervals and full body lifting
wasn't
protective. Bad science, I know.

I have, and suspect you also have, times of stall with exercise.

So to me exercise is about keeping it off. If it helps or hurt during
the time of loss I can't say, but the time duration of loss is a LOT
shorter than the time durection of maintenance.

I am not saying "don't exercise." No no no. And I don't think Taubes
is saying that either. It's just that it doesn't really move the
scale,
at least not as tested in labs (caveats up the whizzy with that one).
It might be they aren't testing the right stuff. It might be that the
studies
are flawed. But, it might be that it really is all about homeostasis,
carbs, insulin responsiveness in muscles vs. fat cells, and the war
between insulin and every other hormone about fat in/out of fat cells.

Last thing: Taubes later talks about adrenaline being a pretty good
mover of fat out of fat cells. If you could exercise, go low carbs,
get
your adrenaline up while your insulin is down, etc, maybe the exercise
might move the tape measure after. But is that the hormones or
the exercise?