|
Author: Don
Date: 09-27-04 13:08
In going through the threads, I saw someone comment that weight loss is 80% eating habits and 20% exercise. I keep a detailed record of my exercise (I no longer log food in maintenance mode).
In a week, I average 4,100 calories burned in exercise alone. This number is fairly accurate as I use a heart rate monitor (set to conservative settings, i.e. 5 lbs lighter than actual weight and one inch shorter than actual height) to calculate calories burned.
I went out to CalorieKing.com and checked. This amount of exercise would allow me to eat a Big Mac everyday of the week and not gain a pound. A Big Mac is 597 calories.
To me, that is more than 20% benefit versus eating less. I think I would put it at 60% eating habits and 40% exercise, with portion control being the biggest part of the 60% eating habits. Do not discount the benefits of exercise. It can allow more room to play with those calories.
Don
Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely
in a well preserved body, but rather to skid-in-sideways,
totally worn out, shouting... "holy **** what a ride!"
232/166/166
|
|
Reply To This Message
|
|
Author: LeeV
Date: 09-27-04 13:28
I think.
This was not a conclusion I arrived at on my own, it's what I have read over and over and over. Now, either they're wrong or I just can't read, lol.
Not saying they ARE wrong, because your ratios sound a little more realistic, but I think what they meant was that since you CAN lose weight without exercising, the 80/20 thing was for lazy people, like me. However, if you're an avid exerciser, then yes, your diet/lifestyle probably *is* 60/40.
I don't really believe the 80/20 thing either because I know people who have lost weight through diet changes alone and have never exercised a day in their life. So I guess it depends on each individual and the type of lifestyle they lead :)
220/175/130
Began New Lifestyle June 18, 2004
|
|
Reply To This Message
|
|
Author: Otta-no-better
Date: 09-27-04 13:40
I agree with Don.
My revelation lately is that exercise is self-perpetuating. I started out walking because I couldn't do anything else ... wrong genetics ... too old ... too stiff ... no time ... no equipment ... no gym ... you get the picture. But some exercise made me feel better, stronger. I felt like trying something else. Weights, right? An old broad like me can't run or anything like that. Certainly no cardio! But then I felt better. I felt like trying something new. Biking, jogging? Guess what? I can do cardio now too!
So my ratio is moving. I worry less about food and more about exercise. Probably about 60/40, like Don said.
I started 100% food and progressed from there.
An excellent post, Don. And particularly noteworthy for anyone who is on a plateau. And those who don't fancy eating salad and veggie dogs for the next 60 years.
Susan lost 40 lbs in 17 months
At goal, under 124 lbs since Sept. 10/04
Eat your protein, muscle is key
Post Edited (09-27-04 13:41)
|
|
Reply To This Message
|
|
Author: LeeV
Date: 09-27-04 14:12
"I started 100% food and progressed from there."
Yep, so Don's right, it's basically based on an individuals diet and exercise levels :)
220/175/130
Began New Lifestyle June 18, 2004
|
|
Reply To This Message
|
|
Click here
for a great cookbook
with quick & healthy
recipes
Weight Lifting
For Absolute Beginners:
Illustrated Guide
CLICK HERE
|
