On Health, Weight Loss, and Personal Responsibility

[murphy12]

I've been having good results with some of the Hindu body-weight exercises. There are some demonstrations on youtube.

[Jack M]

what the heck is p90x?

http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=p90x

As for types of calories, etc, I don't know anything about this stuff, but I do know that it seems to be quite often that if I'm hungry and eat an apple, 5 minutes later I'm hungrier than I was originally!

[Seraph]

Everything I've read is at odds with this. Some foods digest quickly. When this happens, the glycemic index spikes. The excess glucose is easily stored as fat. Foods that are digested slowly, do not cause these spikes. So two foods of equal calorific value, might have very different effects on glycemic index. A person on a 2000 calorie/day diet of simple carbs like Twinkies, will likely store more fat, than a person on a 2000/day diet of complex carbs like whole grain bread and vegetables. The effect would be exaggerated, if the Twinkie eater ate them all in three sitting per day.

It's the equivalent of a time release capsule on a pill. For example if you eat long grain rice, barley, steel cut oats, they have a husk on them, that as they dissolve in your stomach, it regulates the amount of carbohydrate that your stomach and lower intestines is processing and the amount that is available to enter into your bloodstream. When you remove that fiber, and you eat something like white rice, white bread, instant oatmeal, you have eliminated that time release effect and all those carbs go straight to your blood stream.

[Aisling]

http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=p90x

jack i'm lazy. i had googled it but didn't want to read all about it. i wanted it summed up :p ;)

[Allee]

In a nutshell? - a cheesy trainer kicks your a$$ for three months.

[Jack M]

doing some camping this summer and hauling around empty bottles sucks.

dunno if BL Golden Wheat comes in cans, but I have seen Wittekerke in cans. Not a light (reduced-cal) beer though, but a very good summer beer.

[Aisling]

In a nutshell? - a cheesy trainer kicks your a$$ for three months.

ta, allee!

[Steve Prokopiw]

Neil wins...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30826120/

That article is a bit misleading as lifting weights has been shown to increase metabolism. Of course, the meatheads at the gym typically eat too much...they are strong and fat.

As for smaller meals, there is benefit...but not as it relates to losing weight:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19943985

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3592618

Long story short...if a friend wants my advice, it's simple:

a) Choose a hobby you love and firm up the calorie intake (based upon your ability to sustain it)

b) Do P90X or Crossfit and firm up the calorie intake (based upon your ability to sustain it)

For me...I do 15-20 hours of cardio each week, but that's only because I enjoy it (not because it's the best method). If I wanted a beach body, see "b" above.

K

To do 15-20 hours of training;I'd be at a professional level.As it is I get in about 10 hours,maybe 12 and it was good enough to have the fastest bike split of anyone over 40 in all of my first three triathlons .

I only mention this as it relates to training response and calories burned being relative to the intensity level of the activity.The usefulness of the calories themselves aids in a more positive physiological(read,Healthy)response.

I stand by what I said about more useful calories and their effect.And the fact that smaller meals followed or preceded by shorter but more intense workouts are a much more practical method for many people whether athletes in training,fitness enthusiasts such as yourself,or simply people looking to lose weight with something more meaningful and with a higher chance of long lasting success than pharmaceutical or medical means(magic bullet approach).

The title of the op is 'On Health,Weight Loss,and Personal Responsibility'.

Sure a person can have all their calories at once, and then they could do a 4 hour low intensity workout to burn the excess calories, but most people don't have that kind of time or level of focus or dedication.My points are based on the reality that we all have busy lives and and vices but can still adapt our intake habits and exercise/activity habits to allow for our differences be they physical,career related,emotional etc.

I do agree of course,that excess calories cause weight gain.It's simply,well, oversimplifying, and unrealistic from a practical sense to make it as cut and dried as 'Hey,stop eating'.

[Kent]

Steve -

Perhaps you're overlooking the basic premise of calories....to provide energy. In order to do work, your body needs a fuel source. Unused fuel is stored in the body as fat. Fat is a pretty decent fuel source, btw.

Sure...some calories burn cleaner than others, but a calorie is still a calorie (see Jack's post). You can eat the "cleaniest" calories according to your definition 12 times a day, but if you have too many....you store as fat. It's a math problem.

To reduce fat, you simply burn more energy than your consume.

3500 calories in a pound of fat.

If you're 15 pounds overweight, then create a gap of 52,500 calories with diet and/or exericse over a period of time and you're there....

My only realy point is this thread is that...you're right, exercising THAT much for the average American is not realistic, so it really comes down to toning up the diet...not exercising. Much easier to drop the Snickers bar than run 3 miles.

[Petrol]

My only realy point is this thread is that...you're right, exercising THAT much for the average American is not realistic, so it really comes down to toning up the diet...not exercising. Much easier to drop the Snickers bar than run 3 miles.

I agree.

btw, does that 3 mile run really burn the additional 297 calories the snickers bar adds to your diet?

I ask because I've heard it said that the average 150 dude "burns" about 100 calories for every mile he logs.

My question is, "Is that 100 calories burnt per logged mile In-Addition-To *OR* INCLUDING those calories that would otherwise be burnt as I sat on my fat azz." based on my calculated Basal metabolic rate of 1902.5, of-course

[Neil Gendzwill]

Fitday calculates it as "in addition" to BMR. However this is all very personal. Running one km does not necessarily burn the same # of calories for me as it does for someone else, even if we are the same weight. Running style, terrain, weather etc all factors into it. So use calorie/exercise counting as a guide to figure out what you need to do but if you find you are not losing as you expect, eat less or exercise more.

This advice is meant for the average person trying to get less fat/more fit. If you are trying to get super lean/fit then I think the calories in/out model is too simplified. Try looking someplace like Body Recomposition for interesting info on ketogenic diets and all kinds of other bizarre stuff.

[BobD]

Steve -

Perhaps you're overlooking the basic premise of calories....to provide energy. In order to do work, your body needs a fuel source. Unused fuel is stored in the body as fat. Fat is a pretty decent fuel source, btw.

Sure...some calories burn cleaner than others, but a calorie is still a calorie (see Jack's post). You can eat the "cleaniest" calories according to your definition 12 times a day, but if you have too many....you store as fat. It's a math problem.

To reduce fat, you simply burn more energy than your consume.

3500 calories in a pound of fat.

If you're 15 pounds overweight, then create a gap of 52,500 calories with diet and/or exericse over a period of time and you're there....

My only realy point is this thread is that...you're right, exercising THAT much for the average American is not realistic, so it really comes down to toning up the diet...not exercising. Much easier to drop the Snickers bar than run 3 miles.

That's just not the way it works. The body is most likely to store fat in response to stimuli, that is hunger. The body is best able to store fat when the glycemic index is high. Two people burning the same energy, can eat the same amount of calories and have totally different outcomes.

It is also not simply a matter of burning calories. Different exercise regimes will have very different effects on weight loss, despite requiring theoretically the same number of calories.

[Steve Prokopiw]

Understood that calories provide energy, but I may not have explained my own point well enough.Exercise/physical activity and eating/calorie intake are best done in intervals.Getting meaningful exercise multiple times a day for shorter periods is very often more practical and more effective for multiple reasons than one long bout, as is eating smaller portions more often instead of huge portions or binging.The many potential benefits go beyond mathematics.

Most sedentary people will do anything to avoid exercise,but very few of them, as statistics obviously show,have a snowballs chance of succeeding at eating less.After all,junk food,which is a large percentage of commercially available food, has increasingly been found to be every bit as addictive as drugs.

Our society has brought the obesity epidemic on it's collective self.The government,the media,the school system,big pharma,big aggrabiz,all are to blame for exercise and truly healthful eating being treated as something uncool or even liberal.We're sleeping in the lazy,gluttonous,greedy bed of fat we've made.

[kitu]

"Calories are calories." This is so old knowledge that weight loss or getting fat is based only on calories. Eating is not mathematics.

KISS principle: Change from high GI to low GI carbohydrate is enough (as a very simpicated version, not the whole thruth, eg. foods acidity also affects, meaningless for athletes..). Eg. leave out white sugar or change to fructose or artificial sweetening and so on.. => You don't even have to think how much you eat or have to be hungry - well to certain level of eating

Low GI food keeps your blood sugar at a correct level for a lot longer time as high GI food. High GI food makes a strong peak in blood sugar and after that it's getting even to a lower level, which makes your body to think that you should eat again to raise it.. Pancrease is providing insulin to correct this situation. And after enough loooong time of this peaking on insulin level's, you'll propably get diabetes and all the related diseases

Those diets based on calories restictions/calculations won't last long anyway because they all think that you should suffer and be hungry.

And as a consequence you just lose a lot of weight but by losing mostly (heavy) muscles - looks good on weighing, though. More serious side effect is that as you lose muscles you will get fat even easier after that wonder diet, as there's not that much muscles anymore..

[Alaskan Rover]

Posted by Kitu:

"Eating is not mathematics."

Very TRUE, Kitu...

I think the original title of this thread was "On health, weight loss and personal responsibility"....each one of these words fit together with a fluid synergy. They mesh, both in principle and in application.

Health and weight-loss are less about numbers and more about changing one's habits and outlook. Take stock of what your activities per day are and how they affect your life. Do you spend too much time on the couch, in front of the TV?...turn the damn thing off for awile per night, and go for a brisk walk outside, instead. Eating too many cookies or whatever junkfood? Keep track of how many you eat...try eating a few less each day...baby steps. Its an old, old addage...but less meat and carbos and MORE healthy veggies and different proteins would help. I eat lots of beans and other legumes, as they have lots of proteins and few cholesterols. Peanut butter, while high-fat is still healthy...and celery and peanut-butter makes a GREAT healthy snack. Try and replace a lot of the red-meat with fish and turkey...at least a few meals a week. Nothing terrible about red-meat...it has needed amino acids, but Americans tend to over indulge. Investigate such different foods such as Cous-cous, etc...very tasty and very healthy. Try growing a LOT more food in the garden. Sure, it takes more time...but how much time do you now spend watching TV (or typing on a keyboard like am doing right now!!)?? If you can, try and stay away from too many prepared, boxed/canned food. If you prepare the night before (soak beans, etc) you can make your own versions, and not spend as much time as you may think. In short....there IS such a thing as "eating right", and it is NOT simply about eating less, although it is important to match your input with your ouput. Most people know the difference between "good healthy food" and "unhealthy food". It is just that "eating wrong" is easier . You ARE what you eat. Eat Fresh. Bake your own bread...make your own mind.

Exercise!! Eating right goes hand in hand with getting more exercise. Americans and 'First World' people in general, are getting less and less exercise. We need to do whatever we can to get more. Exercise need not be boring or excrutiating...it can be as simple as going for a walk and then working up to a run. Tennis is GREAT exercise, raquetball same. Mountain biking. Kayaking well work your arms AND your heart at the same time. I do a lot of rock-climbing and sailing and kayaking and rowing...and find those keep me well-toned up...and I thrown in lots of biking to work my legs. These sports are exercise and also really FUN for me. I HATE circuit-training in a gym. I think the thought of hitting a gym that's maybe populated by grunting meatheads turns many people off exercise. You need to do what is FUN for you...but that gives you a work-out at the same time. Don't expect golf to give you enough work-out.

Eating right and decent, fun exercise ARE a type of 'personal responsibility'....and if you combine the two...you will also lose weight and trim up. It will take time...but ANY good endeavor takes committment.

And don't just think about it as maybe something to start next week...begin NOW...tonight. Unless you happen to have another body and another lifetime stored in the closet.

Gravity IS Life.

[Aisling]

I don't buy these statements coming out recently about junk food being as addictive as hard core drugs. that's simply insane. I think that is just giving sedentary over-eaters another excuse... "i'm sorry... its not me... its ... its... the donuts! dear god... put me in rehab!"

:P

honestly do you think that people who were cut off from candy would go through the same DT's as a heroin or crack addict?

give me a break.

if junk food were sooo highly addictive I wouldn't be able to step away from the fries. I can't even say when the last time I had them was. since changing my diet over and exercising like a maniac (this is what happens when Ais has no job LOL) I've not craved one bit of junk food. If i have a treat every now and again it doesn't lead to another and another and another til I'm sitting on the couch rubbing a newly formed buddha belly. As someone said, its about being personally responsible for your own actions. that said... .i'm off for my run... its not raining!!!!!!!!!! woooo!

[BobD]

I don't buy these statements coming out recently about junk food being as addictive as hard core drugs. that's simply insane. I think that is just giving sedentary over-eaters another excuse... "i'm sorry... its not me... its ... its... the donuts! dear god... put me in rehab!"

:P

honestly do you think that people who were cut off from candy would go through the same DT's as a heroin or crack addict?

give me a break.

if junk food were sooo highly addictive I wouldn't be able to step away from the fries. I can't even say when the last time I had them was. since changing my diet over and exercising like a maniac (this is what happens when Ais has no job LOL) I've not craved one bit of junk food. If i have a treat every now and again it doesn't lead to another and another and another til I'm sitting on the couch rubbing a newly formed buddha belly. As someone said, its about being personally responsible for your own actions. that said... .i'm off for my run... its not raining!!!!!!!!!! woooo!

The science is just starting to be understood, and it isn't very straight forward. the chemistry of foods and the body are turning out to be incredibly complex. It does make sense though, that we would have evolved to be attracted to easy calories.

The recent campaign by the Corn refiners Association to counter the facts on high fructose corn syrup is an example of this. They basically say sugar is sugar, but hfcs does not promote the same reaction in the body as real sugar. This is the really interesting area that is being researched more now. How the body signals the brain that it is sated. HFCS doesn't do this, and is the reasons people can pig out on foods sweetened by HFCS, without feeling sated.

You can't complain about people's eating habits, and not complain about the lies the food manufacturers are allowed to spin.

Getting the big food manufacturers out of government, and letting unbiased nutritionist give advice on good eating would be a good start to reducing health care cost.

[Jack M]

Our society has brought the obesity epidemic on it's collective self.The government,the media,the school system,big pharma,big aggrabiz,all are to blame for exercise and truly healthful eating being treated as something uncool or even liberal.We're sleeping in the lazy,gluttonous,greedy bed of fat we've made.

Oh my god. I guess nobody is responsible for anything they do eh? Everyone is a helpless victim.

A lot of people simply can't tell the difference between hunger and boredom. A lot of people are simply lazy.

[boarderboy]

The first law of Thermodynamics is a heartless thing. Calories in = Calories burned + Calories stored.

I must confess Bud Light Golden Wheat is delicious.

I probably wouldn't choose it as my go-to brew, but it's by far the best 'Lite' beer I've tasted.

That "Coriander and Citrus Peels" treatment gives it some character and, for me at least, seems to mask that 'thin bitterness' lesser Lites have always exhibited.

Thanks, Jack

BB

p.s. Last time I had 'fries? Yesterday noon. Guess I'll have to atone with

with a couple of GW's tonight...

[shawndoggy]

To do 15-20 hours of training;I'd be at a professional level.As it is I get in about 10 hours,maybe 12 and it was good enough to have the fastest bike split of anyone over 40 in all of my first three triathlons .

Steve have you considered just racing bicycles? IIRC from meeting you at OES ever so briefly last year you are a pretty skinny dude (i.e. climber's physique), so if you are putting out mad watts in a tri, methinks you could be a pretty good masters bicycle racer. Lots of stategery involved too, which can make it fun (in comparison to the purer test of mettle that is the tt/tri/marathon).

[skatha]

The science is just starting to be understood, and it isn't very straight forward. the chemistry of foods and the body are turning out to be incredibly complex. It does make sense though, that we would have evolved to be attracted to easy calories.

The recent campaign by the Corn refiners Association to counter the facts on high fructose corn syrup is an example of this. They basically say sugar is sugar, but hfcs does not promote the same reaction in the body as real sugar. This is the really interesting area that is being researched more now. How the body signals the brain that it is sated. HFCS doesn't do this, and is the reasons people can pig out on foods sweetened by HFCS, without feeling sated.

You can't complain about people's eating habits, and not complain about the lies the food manufacturers are allowed to spin.

Getting the big food manufacturers out of government, and letting unbiased nutritionist give advice on good eating would be a good start to reducing health care cost.

There were 2 recent articles in the Annuals of IM-HFCS has a higher mercury content that sucrose and HFCS is metabolized differently and can lead to increased insulin release. High insulin levels are associated with down-regulation of the receptors, insulin resistance, and obesity. Insulin is an anabolic hormone-it causes fat gain, not muscle gain. In any case, anything that is illegal in Mexico has to be bad and HFCS is illegal to use in food there. That's why Mexican Coke is so good-it's made with sugar.:D

As for ConAgra and ADM and their ad campaign, what do you expect? As an aside, there is no such thing as the "family farm" anymore. The farmers sold to Conagra and ADM. The farm subsidies that used to go to people now go to these corporations and "the corn farmers" in this country are actually those two corporations. I would say they have every incentive to prevaricate a bit

[BobD]

Some of the big soft drink manufacturers are starting to make real sugar a selling point for some sodas, like Dr Pepper "Heritage". Often you pay a premium for real sugar. I pay twice the price for marmalade and jams.

I often laugh at things like granola bars, with their healthy image, but loaded with hfcs and saturated fat. At least the exception for those is actually cheaper - Target's own brand.

[carvedog]

dunno if BL Golden Wheat comes in cans, but I have seen Wittekerke in cans. Not a light (reduced-cal) beer though, but a very good summer beer.

I have to say I love Sam Adams Light. Not sure if I swallowed the pill, but often it is my go to beer in a bottle.

More bite and flavor than most domestic lagers but still has a nice clean finish.

Ok - back to the ....other stuff.

[Aisling]

carvedog i love sam light as well.. it doesn't have that... bleh ... taste of other lite beers :)

there's nothing wrong w liking sam adams products!

[Jack M]

I have to say I love Sam Adams Light.

It's a great light beer. Really awesome at lunch during a day of hard carving.

As an aside, there is no such thing as the "family farm" anymore.

Wow you obviously have no idea what you're talking about.