Why Exercise Won't Make You Thin • Hacker News Board

Re: Why Exercise Won't Make You Thin

#31

Post by slig » Sun, Aug 09, 2009, 7:07 PM UTC

dkarl wrote: post #21

ghshephard wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"if you don't show some self-restraint" - the articles premise was that the brief bursts of activity reduce your ability to show self-restraint. I find it interesting that people think "self-restraint" is some magical ability that isn't weakened/enhanced like any other capability of people. The reality is that managing the "Self-Restraint" muscle is probably much more important than trying to manage other muscles.

Self-restraint is a hackable psychological phenomenon in one's brain. I agree that it is not an innate moral power, but I disagree that it is a distinct human quality that can be strengthened. Self-restraint boils down to optimism. People can put themselves through anything if they have faith that it will pay off in the end. Rational knowledge doesn't help, and it isn't a matter of simply being harsh with oneself, ei…

Thanks for the comment. Made me think in a way that I've never thought before.

Re: Why Exercise Won't Make You Thin

#32

Post by kingkongrevenge » Sun, Aug 09, 2009, 7:10 PM UTC

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #23

kingkongrevenge wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Weight gain = Calories In - Calories out Not true. People and lab animals can be made to get fatter while in caloric deficit with elevated insulin levels.

This comes up in Hacker News every time a health story comes up, usually quoting a pop-sci writer. You've stated it by far the clearest with no vagueness or handwaving so hopefully you can answer this (or provide pointers to research): In this theory where does the stored energy (i.e. the fat) come from if not from the calorie intake? How can this be done for more than a short period of time (e.g. I know you can brea…

> you can break down muscle for energy

Yes. Lean body mass can atrophy from starvation while fat deposits are growing.

The point is more that the equation as stated is a useless way to think about fat loss. Hormones drive the lean vs. fat configuration of your body, not calorie counting. Cut out someone's pancreas and they'll waste away no matter what they eat. Inject testosterone or growth hormone and they will get leaner and more muscular, all else held constant. Inject insulin and they'll get fatter.

Exercise affects your body composition more effectively when you focus on how it changes your hormone profile rather than count calories burned. High resistance major muscle group exercises boost growth hormone and testosterone and increase insulin resistance. Long distance training actually reduces testosterone levels.

Re: Why Exercise Won't Make You Thin

#33

Post by physcab » Sun, Aug 09, 2009, 7:12 PM UTC

I remember the days when I was on the collegiate crew team and I worked out twice a day for 3 hours. At the end of the season I gained 20 lbs (probably of muscle) but I remember distinctly eating about 5 times a day compared to my normal 2-3 times a day now.

Re: Why Exercise Won't Make You Thin

#34

Post by seasoup » Sun, Aug 09, 2009, 7:15 PM UTC

mr_luc wrote: post #16

The article itself it insightful. But, brother hackers, can we allow an article whose title is a blatant lie to be voted to the top of Hacker News? Running is exercise. Running 1600 meters, on average, burns 124 calories for a man. ("Energy Expenditure of Walking and Running", Syracuse Uni study). This only takes a few minutes. Even if a person is taking in massively more calories than their body needs -- let's say,…

The article states that people compensate for increased bouts of exercise by either consuming more calories or decreased activity later in the day. It goes on to cite a number of studies showing this effect.

Basically, if someone runs a few miles, they will reward themselves with a treat that negates or even overcompensates for the calories expended. Failing that, they will do less physical things later in the day... sit and watch TV instead of working in the garden for example.

Sure, some people have the willpower to go for a run and not eat more to compensate, but the majority of people do not. Any those that do might not even notice that they decrease later exertions to compensate.

Re: Why Exercise Won't Make You Thin

#35

Post by jzdziarski » Sun, Aug 09, 2009, 7:15 PM UTC

Hmm I exercise daily and have been more tempted to eat healthier foods, rather than undo all the work my body has put in exercising. I'm down 30LB in the past 45 days. Time can suck it.

Re: Why Exercise Won't Make You Thin

#36

Post by anamax » Sun, Aug 09, 2009, 7:19 PM UTC

mr_luc wrote: post #22

ohlol wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What calculator are you using? 1000/124 = 8 Eight miles is more than a couple.

Bloops -- changed to "a few". At a leisurely 10 minutes per mile, that's 1.3.. hours of running. Well, overeating by a thousand calories is a lot. But even assuming you burned 0 other calories, still, the argument holds. You can, indeed, get thin by exercise. If one stubbornly insisted on ONLY getting thin by running, and steadfastly refused to take responsibility for what went into one's piehole, STILL -- it would b…

> So it's not only doable, but EMINENTLY doable.

I'll bite - how many hours/week do you run?

Re: Why Exercise Won't Make You Thin

#37

Post by kscaldef » Sun, Aug 09, 2009, 7:25 PM UTC

dkarl wrote: post #27

mr_luc wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bloops -- changed to "a few". At a leisurely 10 minutes per mile, that's 1.3.. hours of running. Well, overeating by a thousand calories is a lot. But even assuming you burned 0 other calories, still, the argument holds. You can, indeed, get thin by exercise. If one stubbornly insisted on ONLY getting thin by running, and steadfastly refused to take responsibility for what went into one's piehole, STILL -- it would b…

Running an hour a day is a dicey proposition because of the possibility of injury. I would say it's impossible for the vast majority of people who are overweight, no matter how carefully they worked up to it. You'd have to be skinny, have excellent form, and not have any unfixable pre-existing injuries or weaknesses.

running an hour at a 10 minute mile (6 mph) is unlikely to lead to injury.

Re: Why Exercise Won't Make You Thin

#38

Post by kingkongrevenge » Sun, Aug 09, 2009, 7:28 PM UTC

absconditus wrote: post #25

pohl wrote: post #12

The first thing that jumped out at me is that weight is the wrong metric in the first place. I'd rather be the same weight but have more, and better proportioned, muscle mass. (Muscle burns calories even when you're resting...it's a much better knob to tweak than the number of calories burnt during exercise.) The author might be better off by giving away his bathroom scale and thinking about his body as a system.

The article does address this to some extent. For example: "According to calculations published in the journal Obesity Research by a Columbia University team in 2001, a pound of muscle burns approximately six calories a day in a resting body, compared with the two calories that a pound of fat burns. Which means that after you work out hard enough to convert, say, 10 lb. of fat to muscle — a major achievement — you wo…

The "muscle burns calories" idea is a popular myth, as you explain.

The value of muscle mass is that it buffers glucose and insulin. Muscle forms and stores glycogen that would otherwise go right to fat cells. These glycogen stores then also help control appetite, fending off acute snack attack hunger pangs that a scrawny person accustomed to a high carb diet gets when blood sugar wanes.

Re: Why Exercise Won't Make You Thin

#39

Post by tocomment » Sun, Aug 09, 2009, 7:29 PM UTC

On a related note, has anyone found any studies examining how much your metabolism actually decreases when you diet?

I've been tracking my weight and calories/exercise for over a year, and I've noticed the oddest thing. I can eat up to 3000 calories/day with no exercise and not gain weight. But I have to eat under 2000 calories/day to lose any weight.

I seem to have this dead zone 2000-3000 calories where my body seems to set my metabolism to whatever I eat.

(Of course the math and statistics confused the bejezus out of me, so I may be completely wrong.)

Re: Why Exercise Won't Make You Thin

#40

Post by dkarl » Sun, Aug 09, 2009, 7:39 PM UTC

kscaldef wrote: post #37

dkarl wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Running an hour a day is a dicey proposition because of the possibility of injury. I would say it's impossible for the vast majority of people who are overweight, no matter how carefully they worked up to it. You'd have to be skinny, have excellent form, and not have any unfixable pre-existing injuries or weaknesses.

running an hour at a 10 minute mile (6 mph) is unlikely to lead to injury.

Over forty miles per week with no rest days == too much for most people, way too much if you're overweight. Sure, some people do a lot more, but there are always exceptions. Every running trail and running club is disproportionately populated by people who have better resistance to injury. Steady running is one of the most challenging things you can do to your joints. (I find doing fartlek over a given distance a lot easier to recover from than steady running.) Running slowly isn't necessarily better, since a lot of injuries are caused by the up-and-down impact, and there's a limit to the extent you can reduce the up-and-down.

The obvious solution is cross-training, but there aren't many things you can do by yourself that burn calories as well as running.