Why exercise produces less weight loss than you might expect
#51
Senior Member
It's not that I think doctors don't care, or aren't qualified but they are restrained by certain regulations that make them the last to be able use a different treatment than what has become the standard of care. In our world the standard of care has been engineered to be prescription drugs. A doctor would be operating outside standards to treat with diet and lifestyle changes, though the better ones may very well discuss those issues. Just as a FYI, I never have had a doctor suggest diet or lifestyle changes even when I was pushing 400 lbs and on pain pills and injections.to keep going. That's why I am a bit vocal about looking at multiple sources for health information.
#52
Klaatu..Verata..Necktie?
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 18,446
Bikes: Litespeed Ultimate, Ultegra; Canyon Endurace, 105; Battaglin MAX, Chorus; Bianchi 928 Veloce; Ritchey Road Logic, Dura Ace; Cannondale R500 RX100; Schwinn Circuit, Sante; Lotus Supreme, Dura Ace
Liked 12,361 Times
in
6,324 Posts
This is something that has been touched on many times in T&N, though I don't see a particular thread on it.
Lots of folks have pointed out that exercise (or rather, exercise alone) doesn't lead to weight loss. More specific would be that if your data tracking (power meter, etc.) tells you that you are burning x calories/week, over the long term, you aren't going to lose x/3500 pounds week (where 1 lb. = 3500 calories, usually).
A lot of this is commonly ascribed to greater food intake - exercise makes you hungrier, or you give yourself license to eat more b/c you had a long ride, or you consume calories as fuel before and during your ride.
The interesting and relatively new dimension (last 10 years or so) is metabolic compensation. The idea is that if you tire yourself out with a ride, you do less during the day. E.g., from calories you burn Saturday morning, you must subtract the calories you aren't burning Saturday afternoon because you're sitting on the couch, rather than doing household chores. Or because of your pre-work workout, you are tired and therefore are fidgeting less in your chair at work. From my understanding, some metabolic compensation isn't even voluntary - i.e., it's an evolutionary mechanism to conserve energy that kicks in, regardless of your level of non-workout activity.
There have been some good articles on this.
Here's one in the NYT (behind a paywall). https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/22/w...-calories.html
Another, from Vox. https://www.vox.com/2018/1/3/1684543...-burn-calories
For me, the take home message isn't that you can't lose weight from exercise. From my own experience, I know that I can. Rather, it is that exercise is a rather limited weight loss tool, with net results likely to be smaller than one might hope.
Lots of folks have pointed out that exercise (or rather, exercise alone) doesn't lead to weight loss. More specific would be that if your data tracking (power meter, etc.) tells you that you are burning x calories/week, over the long term, you aren't going to lose x/3500 pounds week (where 1 lb. = 3500 calories, usually).
A lot of this is commonly ascribed to greater food intake - exercise makes you hungrier, or you give yourself license to eat more b/c you had a long ride, or you consume calories as fuel before and during your ride.
The interesting and relatively new dimension (last 10 years or so) is metabolic compensation. The idea is that if you tire yourself out with a ride, you do less during the day. E.g., from calories you burn Saturday morning, you must subtract the calories you aren't burning Saturday afternoon because you're sitting on the couch, rather than doing household chores. Or because of your pre-work workout, you are tired and therefore are fidgeting less in your chair at work. From my understanding, some metabolic compensation isn't even voluntary - i.e., it's an evolutionary mechanism to conserve energy that kicks in, regardless of your level of non-workout activity.
There have been some good articles on this.
Here's one in the NYT (behind a paywall). https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/22/w...-calories.html
Another, from Vox. https://www.vox.com/2018/1/3/1684543...-burn-calories
For me, the take home message isn't that you can't lose weight from exercise. From my own experience, I know that I can. Rather, it is that exercise is a rather limited weight loss tool, with net results likely to be smaller than one might hope.
__________________
"Don't take life so serious-it ain't nohow permanent."
"Everybody's gotta be somewhere." - Eccles
"Don't take life so serious-it ain't nohow permanent."
"Everybody's gotta be somewhere." - Eccles
#53
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,977
Bikes: Specialized Roubaix, Canyon Inflite AL SLX, Ibis Ripley AF, Priority Continuum Onyx, Santana Vision, Kent Dual-Drive Tandem
Liked 739 Times
in
442 Posts
I understand the theory, but it doesn't really apply to me in the sense that I don't count calories, eat what I feel like (plenty of carbs and desserts), and lose weight without any intentional actions other than cycling more.
It seems that the common pitfalls are overreacting to being slightly hungry or trying too hard to create a calorie deficit rather than approaching weight loss less intensely. I've never dieted. Obviously I'm eating less than I burn, but I'm not ravenous afterward nor am I somehow more active than expected the next day so I'm not dramatically underfueling nor have a magical metabolism that doesn't compensate by running slower. I can easily gain weight, especially on vacation - at the beginning of the year after returning from one, I weighed 148 lbs. After ramping up the saddle time since the end of January, I've steadily gone down to my lowest weight since a 2020 underfueled vEveresting at 136 lbs today.
I believe the reason that I'm naturally eating less than I burn is similar to why sleeping longer can also lead to weight loss, in that I simply eat less due to less time/opportunity to eat. I don't eat a full meal during a mid-ride lunch stop because it would just sit in my stomach, and I don't eat twice as much for dinner to make up for that + the deficit from the rest of the ride. Sometimes I eat a lot and feel quite full all night, other times I'm slightly peckish before bed, but I don't worry or fuss over any mild hunger pangs. My eating habits may not be optimal for gaining peak fitness, but it's not like I'm training for results, so I'm happy just to keep a decent level of power without much extra unnecessary weight.
It seems that the common pitfalls are overreacting to being slightly hungry or trying too hard to create a calorie deficit rather than approaching weight loss less intensely. I've never dieted. Obviously I'm eating less than I burn, but I'm not ravenous afterward nor am I somehow more active than expected the next day so I'm not dramatically underfueling nor have a magical metabolism that doesn't compensate by running slower. I can easily gain weight, especially on vacation - at the beginning of the year after returning from one, I weighed 148 lbs. After ramping up the saddle time since the end of January, I've steadily gone down to my lowest weight since a 2020 underfueled vEveresting at 136 lbs today.
I believe the reason that I'm naturally eating less than I burn is similar to why sleeping longer can also lead to weight loss, in that I simply eat less due to less time/opportunity to eat. I don't eat a full meal during a mid-ride lunch stop because it would just sit in my stomach, and I don't eat twice as much for dinner to make up for that + the deficit from the rest of the ride. Sometimes I eat a lot and feel quite full all night, other times I'm slightly peckish before bed, but I don't worry or fuss over any mild hunger pangs. My eating habits may not be optimal for gaining peak fitness, but it's not like I'm training for results, so I'm happy just to keep a decent level of power without much extra unnecessary weight.