Diet, not lack of exercise, drives obesity, a new study finds • Hacker News Board

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

#361

Post by tpm » Fri, Jul 25, 2025, 12:24 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #142

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,…

> you can, and will, eat just about whatever you damn please and not gain weight I don’t know if any athlete who can sustain themselves on a junk diet.

"somewhere between 60-120g carbs/hour" and that's on the flat stages (more in the mountains) of TdF would be considered junk food anywhere outside of sport.

Source: https://www.cyclingnews.com/features/mango-flavour-and-120g-...

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

#362

Post by const_cast » Fri, Jul 25, 2025, 1:33 PM UTC

rgoulter wrote: post #316

const_cast wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's more complicated than this, because muscle raises your basal metabolic rate. If you look at bodybuilders, they're buring 400 calories a day, regardless of exercise. Having an extra 100 pounds of muscle means your body just burns A LOT of calories doing absolutely nothing. This is part of the reason why men burn more calories than woman just right out of the gate.

> men burn more calories than woman just right out of the gate Sure, but parent's point is that the energy input from sugary snacks like chocolate roughly equates to a significant amount of exercise. (Over an hour of walking). -- Maybe the caloric equivalent amount of walking is a little longer or shorter for different bodies. How might you take action from this understanding, though. Gaining an extra 100 pounds of m…

You don't need 100 pounds of muscle to reap the benefits.

My point is, yes eating a sugary snack takes 1 hour of walking. But it doesn't take 1 hour of weightlifting. It can take 0 hours of weightlifting, if you've already been weightlifting.

Even with walking and running, you do build muscle. When the treadmill says 100 calories, you didn't actually burn 100 calories - you burned 100 plus the increased rate from the muscle you gained.

So, if you're an athletic person, you're burning more calories regardless of if you work out. Just by existing, sleeping, whatever, you have a big head start. For some athletes, this head start is in the 1000s of calories range.

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

#363

Post by const_cast » Fri, Jul 25, 2025, 1:35 PM UTC

0cf8612b2e1e wrote: post #193

const_cast wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's more complicated than this, because muscle raises your basal metabolic rate. If you look at bodybuilders, they're buring 400 calories a day, regardless of exercise. Having an extra 100 pounds of muscle means your body just burns A LOT of calories doing absolutely nothing. This is part of the reason why men burn more calories than woman just right out of the gate.

A pound of fat burns ~3 calories, while muscle is ~8 per day. Sure, it is different, but unless you are the Rock, most people do not have enough muscle mass to make a difference.

This is just not true, if you look at women and men of similar height men still burn significantly more calories.

Hormones, I'm sure, play a role too but testosterone is sticky. More weightlifitng raises your testosterone - so you should be seeing that benefit.

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

#364

Post by JKCalhoun » Fri, Jul 25, 2025, 1:37 PM UTC

cthalupa wrote: post #274

tartoran wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren't you worried at all about side effects from ozempic and what happens when you stop taking it?

What side effects? Stomach discomfort when you start on the med and titrate up? Current recommendations on the GLP-1s is to keep using them even after goal weight.

I have heard that feelings of nausea as a side effect are almost a given.

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

#365

Post by JKCalhoun » Fri, Jul 25, 2025, 1:44 PM UTC

nerdjon wrote: post #113

JKCalhoun wrote: post #20

I have been, rather lazily I suppose, trying to tweak my diet in such as way as to lose weight; and with little to show for it. I'm not sure that there is much if any processed food still in my diet (maybe just the English muffin in the morning?). I stopped buying/drinking soda pop decades ago (a low-hanging fruit indeed — I lost almost 10 pounds within a month of making that dietary change alone). And since I have t…

So I will first emphasize, try to avoid a "diet" and feeling the need to eliminate anything. Unless you just really struggle with impulse control and you need those guard rails, for me the only way that I managed to loose about 45 lbs was by looking at things this way. I did not cut a single thing out of my diet, what I did was make smart choices/swaps at home that still satisfied cravings most of the time so when I…

This is what I am trying to do as well. Switch out bad habits for healthy ones. But it looks like I also need to dial down the quantity — maybe drop to two meals a day.

> Easy one was not keeping soda in the house anymore

Yeah, no shit. As I mentioned in another comment, that was a low hanging fruit that saw me lose nearly 10 pounds when I cut that out of my diet.

I want to scream at people when I see them hanging 6-packs off the sides of their grocery carts — or seem them stacking cases of soda in the cart undercarriages.

U.S. grocery stores are depressing places when you come to recognize, as has been said, that more or less the whole store minus the end-aisles (where produce, deli, etc. are) is just processed crap.

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

#366

Post by SirMaster » Fri, Jul 25, 2025, 1:57 PM UTC

kelnos wrote: post #334

SirMaster wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>You'll find that burning 500 calories on a treadmill feels like an eternity That's because you are doing it on a treadmill... Try doing a more fun activity outside in the world and in nature. Like cycling. I can cycle for 120 miles outdoors in about 6 hours in a single day and have a positive experience and memory of doing it and that burns about 8200 calories according to a calculators for my weight.

Unfortunately I think you'll find that many people just don't actually enjoy these sorts of activities. To me, cycling 120 miles (or even just 20 miles) is not something I'm interested in doing regularly. I've tried various things, and I've found that I can get myself to go outside running (usually 3-5 miles in one session) a few times a week, but even that feels like a chore. I've been doing hot yoga (as well as a y…

I used to do pretty much nothing outdoors. Running is actually the one I find the most boring and I don't run. I am not even sure I can comfortably run that well anymore with part of my leg and foot being permanently numb after a disc herniation, I never really tried.

But I found that I love all the rest of it. I love cycling and hiking for hours and playing all sorts of sports. In the summer I play pickleball like 3-5 days a week for usually 3 hours at a time at local parks.

I mean I can't stand cycling on a bike in a gym, but go out to local trails and I love it. I think it's the fresh air, the wind rushing past me, the sights and smells and being out in nature that make it all fun for me. Also exploring new places all the time too to hike and bike though are what seem to keep it exciting and interesting for me.

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

#367

Post by reverendsteveii » Fri, Jul 25, 2025, 2:15 PM UTC

tpm wrote: post #350

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.

Your bike ride is too short to lose weight.

it's not though, because I lost 25% of my weight

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

#368

Post by recursive » Fri, Jul 25, 2025, 2:18 PM UTC

audinobs wrote: post #356

recursive wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot. But a possible amount.

The problem is comparing the average person to one of the greatest Olympic athletes is completely pointless because of genetics. Shaq could easily dunk a basketball weighing 300lbs. You can't infer from that then that any person can weigh 300lbs and dunk a basketball.

I'm not the one who brought up Michael Phelps. Much less extreme cases have worked too. It's probably easier than dunking a basketball.

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

#369

Post by tpm » Fri, Jul 25, 2025, 2:28 PM UTC

reverendsteveii wrote: post #367

tpm wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your bike ride is too short to lose weight.

it's not though, because I lost 25% of my weight

"For two years I was biking 6-8 miles every day, doing resistance training and maintaining 210lbs"

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

#370

Post by reverendsteveii » Fri, Jul 25, 2025, 2:47 PM UTC

darkwater wrote: post #213

reverendsteveii wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

my anecdata aligns with yours. A year of cardio every day and resistance 6 days a week bought me no weight loss, 2 years of limiting myself to 1800 cals/day on top of that stripped me of 25% of my body weight.

Cool, but being physically active is not just to lose weight but to gain health. Your heart works more, your lungs work more, they develop a bit more, putting more oxygen in your body and the effects compound over time. So if you can, do both: control calories intake and exercise.

I did exactly that, and I thought I made that clear in my original comment but maybe I was unclear. With that being said, this article is about drivers of obesity so weight control is sort of the topic du jour itt.