Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Diet, not lack of exercise, drives obesity, a new study finds

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 396 posts

Re: Diet, not lack of exercise, drives obesity, a new study finds

#241

Post by kelnos »

bsoles wrote: post #61
mvieira38 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you say Luka, Neymar and others are outrunning their diets? Did Shaq, too? You don't automatically get a good physique by being an athlete, you still have to earn it. People just see that all of the top athletes have earned it and take it for granted, like they don't have world class dieticians and a huge financial incentive to maintain a strict diet

Michael Phelps did outswim his diet. He famously ate a lot of junk food and pizza, and yet remained fit because of his huge daily calorie expenditure. A direct quote from an interview with him, where he states: "I just sort of try to cram whatever I can into my body. It’s pretty much whatever I feel like eating, I’m going to eat".

Sure, but I think we can still safely say you can't outrun a bad diet when only less than 1% of people who try are successful at it.

Re: Diet, not lack of exercise, drives obesity, a new study finds

#242

Post by hermitcrab »

reverendsteveii wrote: post #176
Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is such a myth and I have no idea where it's coming from. For people that are merely trying to lose weight, it's effectively true. When you're out of shape, you won't have the strength or endurance to exercise long and hard enough to actually burn significant calories. For athletes that are running marathons or doing powerlifting, yes, it's certainly false. Massive bodybuilders that are already deadlifting hun…

I'm 5'6", 165lbs, I bike 6-8 miles every day and do resistance training 6 days/week. I also have limited myself to 1800 cals/day and at least 130g protein. For two years I was biking 6-8 miles every day, doing resistance training and maintaining 210lbs which, at my height, is bordering on clinical obesity. If you could be healthy just by training and eating what you want I would have done it twice.

I don't understand how you wouldn't lose weight. Are you sure the 1800 kcals is accurate. Are you including what you drink?

Re: Diet, not lack of exercise, drives obesity, a new study finds

#243

Post by nradov »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #103
knicholes wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try a diet plan where you prep your own meals and intake a specific amount of calories. I've used Clean Simple Eats in the past. Diet only works. Diet+exercise works better, and adds all of the benefits of exercise.

I walk over 2 miles a day. My doctor suggested weight training (which I had not thought of as a way to lose weight — I don't think of it as an aerobic workout).

Two miles is almost nothing.

Re: Diet, not lack of exercise, drives obesity, a new study finds

#244

Post by reverendsteveii »

hermitcrab wrote: post #242
reverendsteveii wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm 5'6", 165lbs, I bike 6-8 miles every day and do resistance training 6 days/week. I also have limited myself to 1800 cals/day and at least 130g protein. For two years I was biking 6-8 miles every day, doing resistance training and maintaining 210lbs which, at my height, is bordering on clinical obesity. If you could be healthy just by training and eating what you want I would have done it twice.

I don't understand how you wouldn't lose weight. Are you sure the 1800 kcals is accurate. Are you including what you drink?

Oh no, I lost weight when I was on the 1800kcal. it was when I was working out what I intuitively feel like is a lot more than most people but still eating what I wanted that I didn't lose weight, which anecdotally fits with the premise of the article.

Re: Diet, not lack of exercise, drives obesity, a new study finds

#245

Post by kelnos »

dragonwriter wrote: post #81
jmyeet wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the existence of elite athletes alters the central point: it is vastly to go into calorific deficit by altering diet than increasing exercise. Running is around 600 calories per hour [1]. A large fries from McDonald's is 480 calories. A can of Coke is 140 calories. What's easier? Not eating the fries and drinking the Coke or running vigorously for an hour? When you look at the group who have become morb…

> I don't think the existence of elite athletes alters the central point: it is vastly to go into calorific deficit by altering diet than increasing exercise. You left out the key word in that sentence, which should have appeared after “vastly”. I assume you mean easier, but in fact that’s not true for a lot of people. > You get to 600+ pounds and you actually need like 20,000 calories just to maintain that weight. T…

> You left out the key word in that sentence, which should have appeared after “vastly”. I assume you mean easier, but in fact that’s not true for a lot of people.

Not sure I agree with that. I think it's probably true that adopting even a minimal exercise regimen is easier than adjusting diet, for most people.

But actually turning that new exercise regimen into a calorie deficit is significantly harder. Not only do you have to exercise probably quite a bit per week to get you into a deficit, you have to actively work to not eat more. If you start an exercise regimen, I guarantee you're going to be hungrier, and unless you're very strict with yourself, you can easily eat enough extra to wipe out most or all of the new calorie "savings".

Re: Diet, not lack of exercise, drives obesity, a new study finds

#246

Post by Kirby64 »

snozolli wrote: post #77
siliconc0w wrote: post #41

If you eat 4k calories but burn 5k, you'll lose a lot more weight than if you ate 1000 and burned 2000. So running can help but you still need a calorie deficit. Eating and burning more boosts your metabolism - if you measure a body builder during a bulk they are like a furnace, burning 1-2k over baseline. They still put on fat but it's a lot less than what you'd think given the amounts they're eating.

If you eat 4k calories but burn 5k, you'll lose a lot more weight than if you ate 1000 and burned 2000. Each of those is a 1,000 Calorie deficit. if you measure a body builder during a bulk Incidentally, the terms "bulking" and "cutting" come from bodybuilders taking steroids. I know that non-chemically-enhanced people have started using these terms, but it's honestly foolish. When you're not cycling anabolic steroid…

> Incidentally, the terms "bulking" and "cutting" come from bodybuilders taking steroids.

Since when? Are you sure you don't mean 'blast' and 'cruise', which specifically has connotations of steroid usage?

> When you're not cycling anabolic steroids against metabolic stimulants like Clenbuterol, it really doesn't apply.

Why wouldn't it apply?

Re: Diet, not lack of exercise, drives obesity, a new study finds

#248

Post by nluken »

appreciatorBus wrote: post #194
nluken wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would say that in practice 99% of people can't outrun a bad diet, but not because of any sort of physiological reason. You simply need to train so much that most people won't ever approach the level of running/cycling/lifting they would need to do so. If you're training like an elite athlete (for me and my at the time roommate that was running 85, or in his case, 100+ miles a week with a few lift sessions) you can,…

Sure but for the purposes of mass communication or creating helpful and memorable aphorisms "you can't out run a bad diet" is an appropriate summarization of the research. If it's all ppl get out of it, the worst that might happen is that a handful of up & coming elite athletes might need their coaches to help them unlearn it, as opposed to the status quo where literal millions of ppl are trying & failing to outrun t…

Yes and I understand that. I was specifically replying to a comment about this phrase being a myth for athletes.

Re: Diet, not lack of exercise, drives obesity, a new study finds

#250

Post by drdec »

recursive wrote: post #218
drdec wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many hours per day was he swimming?

A lot. But a possible amount.

Clearly a possibly amount since he did it.

Would it be possible for someone who was not supporting themselves that way? I.e. for someone with a 40 hr / week job?

Post reply on HN