741–750 of 753 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thats correct. Yes it burns much fuel but also the wrong one
I'm confused. I'm being downvoted but you're saying I'm right?
The conclusion is almost certainly wrong: 1. From a simple sniff test, if this were true, then athletes wouldn't need a lot of calories. This obviously isn't true, eg Phelps eats 8-11K calories a day. I personally eat around 3.5K calories a day. If exercise didn't impact caloric burn I assure you I'd be a lot fatter... 2. The only plausible mechanisms for why exercise wouldn't result in more overall caloric burn is t…
Ie. scientists wouldn't think that average Hadza hunter burns same calories as average sedentary guy from US ... which is the point of this new discovery ... the lifestyle is different enough that you would not think the expenditure will be similar. We always knew there is compensation happening, but we didn't think that much.
But, if Phelps burns 8k calories ... then he perhaps far far exceeds the amount of exercise the average Hadza hunter outputs ... at that point, the body can't just shift some energy expenditure around and compensate for it .. it will in fact need lot more energy to support the physical output.
The article even proposes what the ceiling of input calories (and therefore sustainable output expenditure) is. 4650 cal for 85kg man. So obviously, it doesn't claim that every human on the planet burns the same amount of calories no matter what they do. It only claims that for example energy requirement differences between somebody who outputs 200kcal or 1000kcal in exercise are nearly erased because the body compensates on the BMR. Obviously there is a hard limit on how much body can compensate and save energy by cutting it from other processes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I completely agree with you about poverty and obesity. Those are systemic problems and are going to take something else to escape. Choices are removed for people who get stuck in those black holes, and its true that saying “use a budget” isn’t helpful after those happen. It might be helpful long before, but the forces are too strong for people who are spiraling down or stuck there. So, I hear you and I think you’re r…
> CICO is what bodybuilders and athletes and models use, among many others, people mostly fine-tuning. To nitpick, bodybuilders and athletes usually control their diet at a level where calorie counting is not relevant. An example of that: https://youtu.be/PBfDWstg3Hc It’s interesting that the overlays always show calorie intake, but you hear the guy and at no point he mentions calories, ever. He specifically mentions…
To further nitpick, all of bodybuilding is based on a routine of bulking and cutting, where the cutting phase is intentional calorie deficit before competition. Whether or not they track calories per se, all of them are using CICO and proving that it works.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodybuilding#Bulking_and_cutti...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I dunno, me and the wife realised that certain foods are simply not worth the calorie count. Really nice curry vs Pizza? The curry wins on taste, nutrition and calories. Chocolate bar vs chocolate-chip brioche? If I'm honest, id prefer the brioche (warmed a little, with a cup of decent coffee). It also affected ingredient choices: if I'm gonna make an Indian dish like palak paneer, I find it impossible to get low-fat…
Absolutely. Preventing overeating was likely the biggest contributor to my weight loss. I stopped going back for seconds every time. The next biggest was probably eating higher quality foods, similar to your examples. My memory is fuzzy on this detail, but I believe the times I ended up hungry were largely the days on which I'd had an especially calorie dense meal, like pizza, earlier in the day, so my calorie allowa…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cardio is great for general health, and cannelloni shave off a few extra calories even once you’re good at it. Buy some weights, and put on a few pounds of muscle. The muscle costs more calories to maintain, so for your same diet you can shift you body composition a little. For a beginner you can see a lot of results in about three lifting sessions a week in only a handful of weeks.
Were you trolling me with delicious cannelloni there? :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not? CO2 levels in blood must be tightly controlled. It probably can't get twice as high as usual. If there's already 4% of CO2 in the air around you it's an immediate danger. While you can spend 10 minutes in 3%. If your body could bump up CO2 in exhaled air from 4% to 8% then you'd probably have bo problem surviving in air thay contains 4%.
Its a mix of anerobic and erobic exercis. Its hard to keep the same heart rate while biking. So sometimes the body doesnt need oxygen to burn fuel. So it doesnt exhale co2. As said I am no expert. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anaerobic_exercise
But you'll need to get energy eventually from normal beathing to recycle lactic acid back into glucose in the liver.
So probably after an hour of intense exercise you'll be breathing out more CO2 in the following hours as your body clears up lactic acid.
What's interesting is you get 2ATP from making lactate, but you need 6ATP to recycle lactate back into glucose.
Would that mean that for burning more calories you should have as much of anerobic excercises as possible because it's really ineficient use of glucose?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Its a mix of anerobic and erobic exercis. Its hard to keep the same heart rate while biking. So sometimes the body doesnt need oxygen to burn fuel. So it doesnt exhale co2. As said I am no expert. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anaerobic_exercise
That might be it. Thank you. If anyone wants to read more about it it's called Cori Cycle and it doesn't require oxygen and it doesn't produce CO2. But you'll need to get energy eventually from normal beathing to recycle lactic acid back into glucose in the liver. So probably after an hour of intense exercise you'll be breathing out more CO2 in the following hours as your body clears up lactic acid. What's interestin…
And to that question as said I am nonexpert. Imho sport after a certain (1h or so) time is a mix of both and should burn most calories in a healthy way. As far as I know there was a downside to having too much lactat. And burning calories aint synonym with burning body fat. Short intensity anerobic training is not atacking bodyfat in my opinion. It only uses the reserv in carbs we have anyway ( around 2000kcal) Biking is the best exercise for bodyfatburning in my opinion. If it is more than 2h.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely. Preventing overeating was likely the biggest contributor to my weight loss. I stopped going back for seconds every time. The next biggest was probably eating higher quality foods, similar to your examples. My memory is fuzzy on this detail, but I believe the times I ended up hungry were largely the days on which I'd had an especially calorie dense meal, like pizza, earlier in the day, so my calorie allowa…
I'm trying to figure out if it's possible to make a healthy pizza. Adding gluten to the flour for extra protein, using low fat cheeses etc. If I crack the 500 calorie 12" pizza I'll let you know. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0MpL1KfYEJg
Making the crust very thin is also an obvious way to reduce carbs, and using whole wheat crust also help, and using Khorasan wheat or similar whole grains.
For sweets, I adopted the snob diet: raise your standards so much the average supermarket chocolate bar just doesn't appeal any more, and you are less likely to snack casually :-)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Completely meaningless" and "in no way comparable?" These statements are rather extreme and seem impossible to support. Energy output per mile with real world cycling has enormous variance as well. Why so much concern for precision regarding one and not the other? I don't think there's much point in continuing here.
I'll continue with one last comment just for the sake of others who might be reading. The "distance" displayed on most stationary bikes is calculated by counting flywheel revolutions and multiplying by some arbitrary factor. It has no real correlation with the actual distance you would cover by pedaling a real bike with the same effort. It's a totally pointless number that tells you nothing useful about caloric expen…
I understand the translation between power and mph is somewhat approximated, but I think you could be more generous. It's not unreasonable to make this kind of approximation and the numbers aren't meaningless.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Now, to lose weight simple subtract 500 calories per day from what you eat I appreciate you are trying to be helpful. But most of what you said assumes a certain level or privilege (resources time/money/ableness) that the vast majority of people don't have. People working long hour jobs, or double jobs, or balancing kids/parent responsibilities. Often fast food is the only obvious option, and people aren't buying i…
> assumes a certain level or privilege (resources time/money/ableness) that the vast majority of people don't have Unless you're talking about extremes (e.g. non first-world country, homeless, or disabled people etc) I'm going to call BS on this. Everyone eats, and everyone has 24 hours in a day. I don't know about the rest of the world, but in Australia you can buy a 800g can of tomatoes for $1.50, a 185g can of tun…
If it were as simple as you say, then why (in Australia) is your minimum wage so high? So 2 hours of work on minimum wage can cover a week of food? And you are calling BS on what I said? Okay.