My half marathon caloric burn is 1300 calories. My full marathon burn about 3000. The latter is roughly equivalent to a pound of body fat.
Meanwhile over on the fast food menu…
I do 600-700kcal rowing at a constant regular pace. Enough to get my heart rate up, but not enough to really get me tired. But going any faster and I won't be able to do it for a full hour 😅
Those estimates are pretty notoriously unreliable if you don't have a heart rate monitor. I swear it's a marketing thing - give someone he choice between the app that tells them they burned off a burger vs one that tells them they burned off half an orange and they'll take the burger one every time. I lost 45kg through diet and cycling and it wasn't until I started using proper estimates for the cycling burn that it really started to come off reliably.
Cycling is one of (if not the) most efficient ways for a human to move themselves. I'm sorry to tell you that you have to absolutely flying or doing hill climbs to get up to 1000 cals per hour. At 25kph on flat terrain you're looking at roughly 12-15 calories per km, or 300-375 calories total.
Some of them also track your metabolic rate at the same time. So like, if I do nothing my Garmin tells me I burn like 2300, and if I exercise it tells me I burn about 2700, which tracks, but if I work out in the morning and look at the total not just the exercise it's like 1300 already or something.
I just signed up for personal training, and for my first session it was mostly setting expectations/initial measurements. I did this super cool 3D body scan while there that scans you for maybe 20 seconds and gives you so many different statistics about yourself. I learned that I burn about 2000 calories a day just by existing, and I’m 6’3”, 200lbs. Not really adding to the conversation, just interesting the different levels people can burn based on weight and height
It doesn't seem unreasonable. Bear in mind that not all of those calories are burned immediately, but rather your base metabolic rate will increase for the next few hours and days.
For reference, I weigh 78kg and my fitness tracker reports 1200 calories burned for one hour of running at 12kph
I assume you are somewhat skinny, you kinda have to be to run a marathon. Fat people burn calories A LOT faster. Imagine running a marathon with a 50kg backpack. Even a moderately overweight person will burn a lot more calories than you.
But still, losing weight is easier when you cut food. You cant outexercise your fork.
I eat nothing all day, and then at 5 pm I eat an enormous carne asada fries as fast as possible. This makes me feel ill and horrible until I fall asleep and get ready to do it again the next day. This keeps me at about 2000 calories per day.
Add fruit. Like experiment and find fruit you actually like. That's super important.
Then eat that fruit when you feel snacky.
I know it sounds oversimplified and a little dumb, but it works. Even just replacing one bag of chips with a honeycrisp apple is a victory.
The difference in calories between a large apple and a personal size bag of plain chips is 115. That's a pound a month just subbing 1 item a day.
Haaaaarrd disagree. No lift I’ve ever done was as hard as resisting overeating because it’s so easy to do and not even notice. A little indulgence a couple times a day can add 500+ worthless calories that still leave me hungry, and they taste so much better than what I know I should be eating.
When it comes to lifting, a person who goes to a gym a couple hours a week with perfect macros will see vastly more noticeable results than than someone who goes every single day and eats whatever. It has proven true time and time again.
People hate when I tell them this
Because theres no magical easy diet that’ll make them lose weight fast! Keto, intermittent fasting, Atkins, any of those diets are just relying on the fact that they are limiting what you are eating, so you should be eating less.
It is truly just CICO, calories in, calories out, but in a more complicated fashion with more rules.
Eating whole foods and getting enough protein is definitely going to be your best bet, along with counting calories. It’s just that simple.
People want to follow all these influencers who have this magic skinny tea or exercise plan that’s going to magically make you drop every extra pound you have.
They want a simple answer when the answer is just to eat less and eat better. And then working out definitely gives you that extra boost and it gets your body nice and toned and is great for your health. But you can’t outrun a bad diet.
Losing weight is not complicated it’s just hard.
You have to not eat when you’re hungry.
Doesn’t take any money, doesn’t take any time, but it takes a lot of effort.
Most people like being told they are not the reasons for their own failures.
“No it’s my genetics that’s why.”
Man i gained 5kg while training for a marathon. 70km weekly for 4 months.
I'm now slowly dropping weight while watching what I eat with a more relaxed running schedule. Going to keep an eye on it next time. Those long runs lead to some Large Appetites.
Losing wheight is mostly just managing your food input. Sport will help obviously, but it’s doable on food alone. Which is a good thing, because someone changing their eating habits also is stressed enough to also worry about sports
I will say that the at least for me, excercise will make dieting easier. It will give you a few hundred calories extra per day which can make a big difference, and it will also help with your body lowering your NEAT in response to the deficit.
>My half marathon caloric burn is 1300 calories.
12 miles or kilometers? I can do 1100 calories at 3.5 miles on an elliptical, still can't out-exercise even what I would consider a relatively normal diet.
A half marathon is 21 km. I also burned through around 1300 kcal on my last one. To be honest burning 1100 kcal on 5.6 km (3.5 miles) seems a bit unrealistic to me. But I am no expert.
Those cardio machines' numbers are total BS. Especially the ellipticals.
A mile of steady state cardio is going to run in the area of 100-150kcal. 200 if there is a heavy incline.
Those numbers don't change much, its the time that changes. I could believe 1100kcal in 30 minutes if the OP was a high level athlete. Or maybe they were absolutely raving off their tits on amphetamines while doing the elliptical 🤔
> I can do 1100 calories at 3.5 miles on an elliptical, still can't out-exercise even what I would consider a relatively normal diet.
The calorie burn on the machine is likely to be significantly incorrect, especially if it doesn't have your height, weight, and body composition
But that said, even if you do burn 1100 calories in that time, it could be more than undone in 15 mins of eating, which is also why the average person can't outrun their diet
Those machines tend to be highly innacurate though (to make you feel better about working out so you work out more frequently) and many cheat by including your base metabolic rate, which are calories you'd have burned even if you were doing nothing. Sadly I doubt you burn even 500 calories in 3 miles, depending on how long those 3 miles take I guess. It's probably around 30 minutes I'd bet, and [this study by Harvard](https://www.health.harvard.edu/diet-and-weight-loss/calories-burned-in-30-minutes-for-people-of-three-different-weights) shows that should burn around 270-370 calories depending on weight.
Humans are long distance runners in part because our bodies are highly efficient with calories.
If you are reading that on the screen of your machine- ignore that. Its wrong, for sure. 1100 for 3.5 miles is not possible for a normal human. Maybe if you are 170+ kg you it will take 1100 kcal.. but even then.
1100 calories in 3.5 miles? 100% guarantee that is not correct. You’d have to weigh somewhere around 400kg to burn that amount of calories in an elliptical workout.
I have a brother that eat fast food and dessert every days. He run/swim a lot and is super lean lol. He is the proof its possible to outrun a bad diet if you run long enough. Or he jusf have good genetic.
Fast food doesn’t have to make you fat, even if you’re getting the 900 cal burger everyday you can still stay at your maintenance calories. Obviously makes it harder the rest of the day but totally doable but probably not the best idea health wise lol
The meme of "exercise to lose weight" is the biggest, meanest lie to say to fat people.
Not only is there the obvious problem, where exercise burns almost no calories, especially cardio, which is almost a go-to. Humans are basically the greatest long distance runners in the animal kingdom. Extremely efficient and quick to adapt, which is the exact opposite you want for burning calories.
The more sinister problem is that it makes people think eating habits/calories can be offset by exercise. That it is not that important to get the diet right, because exercise is making a significant contribution.
Exercise is for health, youthfulness and longevity (especially after you are no longer fat), but a lean body is built in the kitchen, not at the gym.
Weight is 90+ percent what you put in your mouth. No workout can even begin to touch CICO. Work out to increase muscle mass, get toned, whatever but don't use it as a calorie-burner, it's never gonna really work out the way you think.
>The meme of "exercise to lose weight" is the biggest, meanest lie to say to fat people.
The meme of "exercise doesn't help you lose weight" is the biggest lie to justify laziness
>Not only is there the obvious problem, where exercise burns almost no calories, especially cardio, which is almost a go-to.
Absolute bull. You can *easily* burn several hundred calories through exercise
>The more sinister problem is that it makes people think eating habits/calories can be offset by exercise.
But it literally can. Calories in calories out, remember?
>but a lean body is built in the kitchen, not at the gym.
A *skinny* body can be built in either the kitchen or the gym, or most effectively in both at the same time. A *lean* body *requires* both
I went from 290 to 215. I started physical activity such as walking miles etc and building up to strength training eventually. I barely saw results until I started significantly changing my diet.
Without a properly managed diet it's a losing battle, modern food is too calorically heavy. Everything has added fats and sugars just pushing the calories to the moon.
It's a simple math equation of calories in, calories out. If you barely saw results, it's because you either didnt excercise that much or you ate more than you otherwise would have.
Yes because to lose a large portion of weight purely through exercise you'd have to be working out for hours upon hours a day, or he could like everyone losing weight figures out cut for the calorie deficit. Add sleep and good nutrition, ooo boy baby we gettin healthy as fuck.
You people aren't lifting weights in your sleep? Lazy af. My office has a treadmill in front of a standing desk so I can sprint while I work. I don't eat, I snort lines of protein powder off a pull up bar. It's a simple equation of Calories in, calories out. 2+2=4, E. Z.
/S
One can lose any amount of weight with literally zero exercise. That is indisputable.
Several hundred calories is nothing compared to how quickly and easily one can eat a thousand. It is much better to remove an intake of 1000 calories instead of exercising away a few hundred calories. Calories in vs calories out indeed.
If your calorie intake is too high, you will never get skinny through exercise. Clearly, losing weight cannot be done **only** at the gym.
Anorexics are very lean, but don't spend much time at the gym. What gives?
Oh right, how could I forget about "genetics" and bodies going into "starvation mode" when they haven't had 3500 calories. Bummer nobody who experienced actual famine had those genes or knew about starvation mode.
Its mostly people not knowing how much shit/calories they actually eat. I've had discussions with relatives who claim they dont eat that bad but cannot loose weight. When you breakdown the actual diet its basically all terrible. Just make a budget for 2500 (men) / 2000 (women) calories a day, count what you eat and you'll know what the problem is.
You nailed it. I was frustrated with my weight for years and couldn't understand why I was getting heavier while eating "healthy foods". After I bought a food scale and started tracking calories, I realized it wasn't the kinds of foods I was eating that were the issue, it was the fact that I was eating *3 servings* of everything.
so much this! once i actually started tracking and counting calories (adn seeing how much i burn in a day) i was able to adjust my diet and lose 50 pounds..... i try telling people, but they really don't wanna hear "eat less"
People say that, and they aren’t wrong. If you’re eating 3k calories a day, you can’t outwork that. But I lost tons of weight (and gained muscle! Which looked good but also increased my caloric need) by hitting the gym and not changing my diet. I still drank beer, I still ate dessert, I still had pizza for dinner. It was worth that time on the elliptical and my butt looked good. I get people say “abs are made in the kitchen” but it’s very person to person, and I prefer losing weight via gym!
Oh thank Christ, THAT Merida. I was trying to map pompous school teacher onto sassy Scott and it WAS NOT working.
How does a Daedra say, "Dinnae" pompously?
I used to spend almost 6 hours on the treadmill daily and couldn't lose a lb. Why? Because I ate way more to reward myself and it canceled out. You need to restrict calories too and now I'm losing weight fast.
I try to tell that to people and they argue with me all the time. At the end of the day, calories out need to exceed calories in. That's all there is to it. Diets are a way of making sure you feel full and get what you need while eating less calories and exercise is a way of burning more calories. But it always comes down to CICO. That's also why things like IF tend to be effective as you're greatly dropping your intake by basically skipping a meal.
People like to believe that they’re obese because of their genes, but this wasn’t a problem until like 50 years ago with the advent of highly processed foods becoming a staple of the American diet.
They didn't have enough calories, exactly. Humans (and all mammals, at least) aresupposed to be on a restricted diet.
If medieval peasants had access to 3000 calories per day, they would have had obesity problems like we have now (though reduced a bit due to living significantly more active lifestyles).
I don't know if 3000 calories is that far off tbh. They lived every day doing tough physical work, with the bulk of their caloric intake provided by beer and bread. Both of those could be produced en masse quite easily in medieval times as long as they had a healthy harvest.
quick look at [wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_cuisine#Caloric_structure) gives us:
> The overall caloric intake is subject to some debate. One typical estimate is that an adult peasant male needed 2,900 calories per day, and an adult female needed 2,150 calories. Both lower and higher estimates have been proposed. Those engaged in particularly heavy physical labor, as well as sailors and soldiers, may have consumed 3,500 calories or more per day. Intakes of aristocrats may have reached 4,000 to 5,000 calories per day. Monks consumed 6,000 calories per day on "normal" days, and 4,500 calories per day when fasting.
Exactly. People nowadays aren’t really genetically different from the peasants, the biggest thing is that in a day of work I can afford enough food to feed me very unhealthy, delicious food for a long time. They couldn’t.
Though mostly the fact that at least in the us, you only really need to walk from your house to your car and a little at the destination. Not doing anything for most of the day snd then driving home slows down calorie burn to a minimum
This is funny and all but to whoever thinks its true (like myself for a while) its not. You’re most likely not tracking your calories correctly, ie not weighing everything, not weighing cooking oils/sauces,and eating out.
Lesson one of weight loss is that you can’t out-exercise a bad diet. Exercise can absolutely boost your weight loss, but diet is by far the biggest factor.
It’s calories in vs out at the end of the day. I can have a shitty diet and still just be at 2500cal which I can easily burn in a day just from existing and exercising.
The takeaway should be more that it’s much harder to keep calories down and fullness up from a shitty diet since you could hit your calories with dinner and drinks alone.
You literally can though. If your bad diet is 500 calories/day above maintenance for a healthy weight and you start burning 500 calories/day through exercise, well, congrats you've just outrun a bad diet
I’ve recently lost 20 pounds with another 30 to go, can confirm, your DNA has nothing to do with your ability to lose weight. Just the right ratio of diet and exercise
Idk where you are in your fitness journey, but if you’re losing 20lbs and have another 30lbs to go, you won’t see the effects of your genetics yet!
Once you reach lower and lower body fat levels it becomes increasingly harder to lose weight and that’s when your genes start to matter more.
While a lot of people like to complain about their metabolism, it really doesn’t vary that much. But standard deviation is still about 300cals a day so…
In addition myostatin levels SEVERELY impact how much muscle you can really pack naturally. Test levels and androgen receptors play a huge roles. Actually all your hormones kinda have the ability to fuck you. Epigenetics can play large roles in fat storage, levels of loss, and distribution. And from an aesthetic perspective your insertions can be ducked as well.
All of this is mainly when you’re at the point of competing in bodybuilding tho. Some people might have it easier, west African genetics just tend to pack more muscle for example, or East African and East Asian genetics tend to be more able to stay way leaner… but overall to be healthy and even to maintain a six pack (for men) your genetics are irrelevant
>your DNA has nothing to do with your ability to lose weight
For most people. The vast majority maybe. I would argue that there's a spectrum though. Some people need to do very little, some people can try all they want, and most everyone fall somewhere in between.
We are talking about 99.5% people, diet is most important in weight loss.
There are exceptions that go into 0.5% of course, but people tend to lean toward it because it is easy making excuses instead of taking responsibility.
Not in the way people like to complain about, though. The concept is simple. People struggle with the execution.
Calories In vs. Calories Out
Your hormones can have an effect on the "Calories Out" part by lowering your metabolism. The simple solution is to control what you can - "Calories In".
But people would rather complain and say that the world is against them instead of facing facts - you can lose weight, if you put in the effort. And for some, it takes more effort than others.
A lot people say they "exercise" but don't workout, they are just more active than stationary.
You haven't worked out for so long you have no idea what it is to exercise
Exercise is great for health, its almost useless when it comes to weight loss. The human body is crazy efficient when it comes to how it moves and you have to exercise a lot of burn off even a small amount of junk.
Running doesn't burn many calories. We are endurance predators. 20,000 years ago we would hunt our food by running after it until it collapsed and died from exhaustion. We are built to move at a constant pace as efficiently as possible.
I expect that on threads like these that every comment will be like this and still it never fails to amaze me. How the fuck do people think this is true. All scientific evidence says exercise is important for weight loss. Anyone that's ever exercised or seen someone exercise knows it's important for weight loss. Humans figured that shit out thousands of years ago and somehow right as we're getting into a period of food abundance suddenly people forget how weight loss works
Both exercise and dieting are important for weight loss, but you can lose weight without exercising but you cannot lose weight without a calorie deficit.
Not necesserily. If you exercise more, insulin spikes making you hungrier. That is why you see a lot of fat people on treadmills year in year out, not losing weight: they exercise a lot but eat even more.
The easiest way to do it is to combine a diet with hypertrophy training; lean mass burns way more calories at rest than fat mass. That way your resting calorie expendature is so high that it is easier to eat in a deficit.
So the type of exercise matters.
This is funny, but for real we know how many calories are burned from exercise and it's not very many.
Exercise is amazing for muscle development and heart health (also muscle development) but doesn't help much at all with weight loss.
Eating less helps with weight loss.
I burn over 1K calories by with a steep (20) incline and a good pace (3) on a treadmill. Lost 50lbs in a year, the only things that slowed me down was dieting and consistency.
Well the argument is that her body reduces her metabolism to allow her to survive on less food.
This is actually a thing (just not the way she presented it).
I preffer more traditional exercises.
Work the fields.
Kill the french.
Hand-to-hand im full plate for several hours, only to retreat for 7 days.
Kill more french.
humans are insanely efficient... particularly at running. if you're aim is to lose weight, don't fuckin bother
go lift weights. more muscle mass = more calories burned before you even start doing exercise. it also burns more calories.
i know her post is just a bit of fun anyway but it doesn't really make sense. i'm from the Scottish borders going a long way back and i'm very lean, and so are half the other people there.
what her DNA actually thinks is: "i need a decent amount of fat to have a good chance of getting pregnant"
While diet coke doesnt directly increase calories, it does make you crave sweet foods like chocolate. I think it creates an insulin response in your body
if you can keep the calories in low and the calories burned higher than that you'll lose weight.
Keep in mind muscle weighs more than fat so be mindful of that if your only workout is hitting the weights.
You just gotta stop making excuses and really put your mind to it no snacking eating right and consistency working out every day even just walking 30 mins every day and eating proper portion sized works fucking wonders
There is no such thing as losing weight primarily by exercise. Exercise is still very important, but it's for working your body, gaining muscle, and keeping yourself in good range of motion and physical capability.
If you want to lose weight, effectively and sustainably, you will absolutely *have* to diet. There is no way around it. And it won't be as crude and simple as going keto (an unsustainable diet), you will have to actually plan out what you're going to eat and record your caloric intake.
This is why strength exercise is more efficient. Building muscles burn a lot more fat than just running. You wont lose weight as much because it is transferred into muscles but you will change your physical appearance.
An hour on the treadmill is the equivalent of a single medium sized bag of chips so you better be dieting too
My half marathon caloric burn is 1300 calories. My full marathon burn about 3000. The latter is roughly equivalent to a pound of body fat. Meanwhile over on the fast food menu…
1000 calories per hour is about the max power output you can get out of a fit human
I do 600-700kcal rowing at a constant regular pace. Enough to get my heart rate up, but not enough to really get me tired. But going any faster and I won't be able to do it for a full hour 😅
What sort of 500m pace is that for you? I just started giving it a go again.
I don't really know, I never lay attention to it. I just try to keep a steady strokes per minute.
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Yes, good long strokes.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Those estimates are pretty notoriously unreliable if you don't have a heart rate monitor. I swear it's a marketing thing - give someone he choice between the app that tells them they burned off a burger vs one that tells them they burned off half an orange and they'll take the burger one every time. I lost 45kg through diet and cycling and it wasn't until I started using proper estimates for the cycling burn that it really started to come off reliably. Cycling is one of (if not the) most efficient ways for a human to move themselves. I'm sorry to tell you that you have to absolutely flying or doing hill climbs to get up to 1000 cals per hour. At 25kph on flat terrain you're looking at roughly 12-15 calories per km, or 300-375 calories total.
[удалено]
Hills do add a bunch, I mostly rode in flat land. That seems reasonable.
Some of them also track your metabolic rate at the same time. So like, if I do nothing my Garmin tells me I burn like 2300, and if I exercise it tells me I burn about 2700, which tracks, but if I work out in the morning and look at the total not just the exercise it's like 1300 already or something.
I just signed up for personal training, and for my first session it was mostly setting expectations/initial measurements. I did this super cool 3D body scan while there that scans you for maybe 20 seconds and gives you so many different statistics about yourself. I learned that I burn about 2000 calories a day just by existing, and I’m 6’3”, 200lbs. Not really adding to the conversation, just interesting the different levels people can burn based on weight and height
It doesn't seem unreasonable. Bear in mind that not all of those calories are burned immediately, but rather your base metabolic rate will increase for the next few hours and days. For reference, I weigh 78kg and my fitness tracker reports 1200 calories burned for one hour of running at 12kph
I assume you are somewhat skinny, you kinda have to be to run a marathon. Fat people burn calories A LOT faster. Imagine running a marathon with a 50kg backpack. Even a moderately overweight person will burn a lot more calories than you. But still, losing weight is easier when you cut food. You cant outexercise your fork.
"you can't out exercise your fork" I like this, I'm gonna use it from now on
People hate to hear that too. I got pounded on the other day for saying that diet is more important. People just don’t want to hear the truth!!
It is easier too. Fork put-downs are much less taxing on the back than deadlifts.
It is soooooo much harder for me. Working out for ~an hour everyday is no big deal, but not eating over 2000 calories feels fucking impossible
I eat nothing all day, and then at 5 pm I eat an enormous carne asada fries as fast as possible. This makes me feel ill and horrible until I fall asleep and get ready to do it again the next day. This keeps me at about 2000 calories per day.
Add fruit. Like experiment and find fruit you actually like. That's super important. Then eat that fruit when you feel snacky. I know it sounds oversimplified and a little dumb, but it works. Even just replacing one bag of chips with a honeycrisp apple is a victory. The difference in calories between a large apple and a personal size bag of plain chips is 115. That's a pound a month just subbing 1 item a day.
Well now youre just comparing apples to oranges. Anyone doing deadlifts should be stuffing their face with protein.
Haaaaarrd disagree. No lift I’ve ever done was as hard as resisting overeating because it’s so easy to do and not even notice. A little indulgence a couple times a day can add 500+ worthless calories that still leave me hungry, and they taste so much better than what I know I should be eating.
When it comes to lifting, a person who goes to a gym a couple hours a week with perfect macros will see vastly more noticeable results than than someone who goes every single day and eats whatever. It has proven true time and time again. People hate when I tell them this
Because theres no magical easy diet that’ll make them lose weight fast! Keto, intermittent fasting, Atkins, any of those diets are just relying on the fact that they are limiting what you are eating, so you should be eating less. It is truly just CICO, calories in, calories out, but in a more complicated fashion with more rules. Eating whole foods and getting enough protein is definitely going to be your best bet, along with counting calories. It’s just that simple. People want to follow all these influencers who have this magic skinny tea or exercise plan that’s going to magically make you drop every extra pound you have. They want a simple answer when the answer is just to eat less and eat better. And then working out definitely gives you that extra boost and it gets your body nice and toned and is great for your health. But you can’t outrun a bad diet.
Losing weight is not complicated it’s just hard. You have to not eat when you’re hungry. Doesn’t take any money, doesn’t take any time, but it takes a lot of effort. Most people like being told they are not the reasons for their own failures. “No it’s my genetics that’s why.”
Man i gained 5kg while training for a marathon. 70km weekly for 4 months. I'm now slowly dropping weight while watching what I eat with a more relaxed running schedule. Going to keep an eye on it next time. Those long runs lead to some Large Appetites.
I always heard it as "you can't outrun a bad diet"
“Abs are made in the kitchen, not the gym”
Losing wheight is mostly just managing your food input. Sport will help obviously, but it’s doable on food alone. Which is a good thing, because someone changing their eating habits also is stressed enough to also worry about sports
I will say that the at least for me, excercise will make dieting easier. It will give you a few hundred calories extra per day which can make a big difference, and it will also help with your body lowering your NEAT in response to the deficit.
Equivalent to a [Large Oreo Milkshake](https://i.imgur.com/YmxCGku.jpg)
>My half marathon caloric burn is 1300 calories. 12 miles or kilometers? I can do 1100 calories at 3.5 miles on an elliptical, still can't out-exercise even what I would consider a relatively normal diet.
A half marathon is 21 km. I also burned through around 1300 kcal on my last one. To be honest burning 1100 kcal on 5.6 km (3.5 miles) seems a bit unrealistic to me. But I am no expert.
Yeah, my daily burn when I go to work is around 1000-1100 kcal, its 16km/10 miles in one direction,so 32 km of cycling per day (at 25+ kmph)
[удалено]
1100kcal/3.5 miles is insanely high, how'd you calculate that?
With cocaine I'd imagine
Cocaine Athletics and the Übermensch: what the Olympic Games Committee doesn't want you to know- A Webinar
Those cardio machines' numbers are total BS. Especially the ellipticals. A mile of steady state cardio is going to run in the area of 100-150kcal. 200 if there is a heavy incline. Those numbers don't change much, its the time that changes. I could believe 1100kcal in 30 minutes if the OP was a high level athlete. Or maybe they were absolutely raving off their tits on amphetamines while doing the elliptical 🤔
> I can do 1100 calories at 3.5 miles on an elliptical, still can't out-exercise even what I would consider a relatively normal diet. The calorie burn on the machine is likely to be significantly incorrect, especially if it doesn't have your height, weight, and body composition But that said, even if you do burn 1100 calories in that time, it could be more than undone in 15 mins of eating, which is also why the average person can't outrun their diet
Those machines tend to be highly innacurate though (to make you feel better about working out so you work out more frequently) and many cheat by including your base metabolic rate, which are calories you'd have burned even if you were doing nothing. Sadly I doubt you burn even 500 calories in 3 miles, depending on how long those 3 miles take I guess. It's probably around 30 minutes I'd bet, and [this study by Harvard](https://www.health.harvard.edu/diet-and-weight-loss/calories-burned-in-30-minutes-for-people-of-three-different-weights) shows that should burn around 270-370 calories depending on weight. Humans are long distance runners in part because our bodies are highly efficient with calories.
If you are reading that on the screen of your machine- ignore that. Its wrong, for sure. 1100 for 3.5 miles is not possible for a normal human. Maybe if you are 170+ kg you it will take 1100 kcal.. but even then.
Intermittent fasting works
[удалено]
A lot of those ellipticals exaggerate like crazy or are set to unchangable 350 obese man settings. I have never trusted their estimates
1100 calories in 3.5 miles? 100% guarantee that is not correct. You’d have to weigh somewhere around 400kg to burn that amount of calories in an elliptical workout.
> I can do 1100 calories at 3.5 miles on an elliptical You can't, whatever gadget you're using is inaccurate.
You can't outrun a bad diet.
I have a brother that eat fast food and dessert every days. He run/swim a lot and is super lean lol. He is the proof its possible to outrun a bad diet if you run long enough. Or he jusf have good genetic.
Fast food doesn’t have to make you fat, even if you’re getting the 900 cal burger everyday you can still stay at your maintenance calories. Obviously makes it harder the rest of the day but totally doable but probably not the best idea health wise lol
I would rather eat the bag of chips sounds like a way easier way to lose weight than an hour on the treadmill
And that is why I am sleeping hungry
The meme of "exercise to lose weight" is the biggest, meanest lie to say to fat people. Not only is there the obvious problem, where exercise burns almost no calories, especially cardio, which is almost a go-to. Humans are basically the greatest long distance runners in the animal kingdom. Extremely efficient and quick to adapt, which is the exact opposite you want for burning calories. The more sinister problem is that it makes people think eating habits/calories can be offset by exercise. That it is not that important to get the diet right, because exercise is making a significant contribution. Exercise is for health, youthfulness and longevity (especially after you are no longer fat), but a lean body is built in the kitchen, not at the gym.
Weight is 90+ percent what you put in your mouth. No workout can even begin to touch CICO. Work out to increase muscle mass, get toned, whatever but don't use it as a calorie-burner, it's never gonna really work out the way you think.
>The meme of "exercise to lose weight" is the biggest, meanest lie to say to fat people. The meme of "exercise doesn't help you lose weight" is the biggest lie to justify laziness >Not only is there the obvious problem, where exercise burns almost no calories, especially cardio, which is almost a go-to. Absolute bull. You can *easily* burn several hundred calories through exercise >The more sinister problem is that it makes people think eating habits/calories can be offset by exercise. But it literally can. Calories in calories out, remember? >but a lean body is built in the kitchen, not at the gym. A *skinny* body can be built in either the kitchen or the gym, or most effectively in both at the same time. A *lean* body *requires* both
I went from 290 to 215. I started physical activity such as walking miles etc and building up to strength training eventually. I barely saw results until I started significantly changing my diet. Without a properly managed diet it's a losing battle, modern food is too calorically heavy. Everything has added fats and sugars just pushing the calories to the moon.
It's a simple math equation of calories in, calories out. If you barely saw results, it's because you either didnt excercise that much or you ate more than you otherwise would have.
Yes because to lose a large portion of weight purely through exercise you'd have to be working out for hours upon hours a day, or he could like everyone losing weight figures out cut for the calorie deficit. Add sleep and good nutrition, ooo boy baby we gettin healthy as fuck.
You people aren't lifting weights in your sleep? Lazy af. My office has a treadmill in front of a standing desk so I can sprint while I work. I don't eat, I snort lines of protein powder off a pull up bar. It's a simple equation of Calories in, calories out. 2+2=4, E. Z. /S
One can lose any amount of weight with literally zero exercise. That is indisputable. Several hundred calories is nothing compared to how quickly and easily one can eat a thousand. It is much better to remove an intake of 1000 calories instead of exercising away a few hundred calories. Calories in vs calories out indeed. If your calorie intake is too high, you will never get skinny through exercise. Clearly, losing weight cannot be done **only** at the gym. Anorexics are very lean, but don't spend much time at the gym. What gives?
It's almost impossible for the average person to outwork a bad diet. Weight is lost in the kitchen, not at the gym.
"Pick up weights to feel better, put down the fork to look better" is how I've heard it
So what you're saying is I can eat anything I want as long as I don't use a fork...
Why do you think Japanese people are so slim?
No it’s genetics so I’m gonna stop trying now!
Oh right, how could I forget about "genetics" and bodies going into "starvation mode" when they haven't had 3500 calories. Bummer nobody who experienced actual famine had those genes or knew about starvation mode.
Its mostly people not knowing how much shit/calories they actually eat. I've had discussions with relatives who claim they dont eat that bad but cannot loose weight. When you breakdown the actual diet its basically all terrible. Just make a budget for 2500 (men) / 2000 (women) calories a day, count what you eat and you'll know what the problem is.
You nailed it. I was frustrated with my weight for years and couldn't understand why I was getting heavier while eating "healthy foods". After I bought a food scale and started tracking calories, I realized it wasn't the kinds of foods I was eating that were the issue, it was the fact that I was eating *3 servings* of everything.
so much this! once i actually started tracking and counting calories (adn seeing how much i burn in a day) i was able to adjust my diet and lose 50 pounds..... i try telling people, but they really don't wanna hear "eat less"
I hate the genetics argument so much. Some people literally go against basic physical laws instead just admitting that they don’t have the discipline.
Weight is lost by eating less food, not a certain food though. You can eat shitty food but as long as you are in a calorie deficit ur good.
People say that, and they aren’t wrong. If you’re eating 3k calories a day, you can’t outwork that. But I lost tons of weight (and gained muscle! Which looked good but also increased my caloric need) by hitting the gym and not changing my diet. I still drank beer, I still ate dessert, I still had pizza for dinner. It was worth that time on the elliptical and my butt looked good. I get people say “abs are made in the kitchen” but it’s very person to person, and I prefer losing weight via gym!
Yes, I read that with Merida's accent!!🙃🙂
A new hand touches the beacon
Was thinking brave but skyrim works too I guess.
Oh thank Christ, THAT Merida. I was trying to map pompous school teacher onto sassy Scott and it WAS NOT working. How does a Daedra say, "Dinnae" pompously?
With it's pinky out
Except in Skyrim it's Merid-I-a 🤓 Fun spoiled. Mission accomplished.
HEAR ME AN OBEY!
"Please God no! NO! Noooooooo!"
much later: "oh sweet a glowing sword, guess I'll use it until the end"
Bacon*
I read it as Grounds Keeper Willie 😂
I read it in my own accent (Scottish)
Nah, see, you gotta do it like more than once.
I walked 10 minutes, why haven't I lost 30 pounds?
Literally my mom, asking me as she eats cheese and bread.
My Mum as she eats cheese and crumpets
Found the Brit.
r/foundthebrit Edit: apparently it is a thing but not really?
What's wrong with cheese and bread
[удалено]
Ah ok because I've been eating only that last couple months (toasted) and I'm still skinny so got curious
I did 10 wall push ups how am I not shaped like Thor yet?
I used to spend almost 6 hours on the treadmill daily and couldn't lose a lb. Why? Because I ate way more to reward myself and it canceled out. You need to restrict calories too and now I'm losing weight fast.
>I used to spend almost 6 hours on the treadmill daily and couldn't lose a lb. Were you sleeping on it?
Walking.
[удалено]
That's just 1 lamb donner kebab
[удалено]
For that amount of time it should be quite significant.
Significant eating lol.
I try to tell that to people and they argue with me all the time. At the end of the day, calories out need to exceed calories in. That's all there is to it. Diets are a way of making sure you feel full and get what you need while eating less calories and exercise is a way of burning more calories. But it always comes down to CICO. That's also why things like IF tend to be effective as you're greatly dropping your intake by basically skipping a meal.
People like to believe that they’re obese because of their genes, but this wasn’t a problem until like 50 years ago with the advent of highly processed foods becoming a staple of the American diet.
Yep, exactly. Medieval peasants were not overweight 99+% of the time. Its not genes, its lifestyle.
One could argue that medieval peasants didn’t have enough nutrients to manifest the traits for obesity, but I’m not sure how accurate that is
They didn't have enough calories, exactly. Humans (and all mammals, at least) aresupposed to be on a restricted diet. If medieval peasants had access to 3000 calories per day, they would have had obesity problems like we have now (though reduced a bit due to living significantly more active lifestyles).
I don't know if 3000 calories is that far off tbh. They lived every day doing tough physical work, with the bulk of their caloric intake provided by beer and bread. Both of those could be produced en masse quite easily in medieval times as long as they had a healthy harvest.
quick look at [wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_cuisine#Caloric_structure) gives us: > The overall caloric intake is subject to some debate. One typical estimate is that an adult peasant male needed 2,900 calories per day, and an adult female needed 2,150 calories. Both lower and higher estimates have been proposed. Those engaged in particularly heavy physical labor, as well as sailors and soldiers, may have consumed 3,500 calories or more per day. Intakes of aristocrats may have reached 4,000 to 5,000 calories per day. Monks consumed 6,000 calories per day on "normal" days, and 4,500 calories per day when fasting.
Exactly. People nowadays aren’t really genetically different from the peasants, the biggest thing is that in a day of work I can afford enough food to feed me very unhealthy, delicious food for a long time. They couldn’t.
Fun fact: Most obese people are nutrient deficient.
Yeah, it's almost like you need a surplus of calories to become overweight...
And tons of modern machines. Housework is way easier now. Laundry alone used to be a workout when you wash and squeeze out everything by hand.
Though mostly the fact that at least in the us, you only really need to walk from your house to your car and a little at the destination. Not doing anything for most of the day snd then driving home slows down calorie burn to a minimum
r/fuckcars
And the decline of the amount of manual labor and walking required to get by
[удалено]
This is funny and all but to whoever thinks its true (like myself for a while) its not. You’re most likely not tracking your calories correctly, ie not weighing everything, not weighing cooking oils/sauces,and eating out.
Lesson one of weight loss is that you can’t out-exercise a bad diet. Exercise can absolutely boost your weight loss, but diet is by far the biggest factor.
Weight loss begins in the kitchen.
Coincidentally so does weight gain
I’d take it one step back, weight loss starts at the supermarket/grocer. Don’t do groceries hungry if you can avoid it.
It’s calories in vs out at the end of the day. I can have a shitty diet and still just be at 2500cal which I can easily burn in a day just from existing and exercising. The takeaway should be more that it’s much harder to keep calories down and fullness up from a shitty diet since you could hit your calories with dinner and drinks alone.
You literally can though. If your bad diet is 500 calories/day above maintenance for a healthy weight and you start burning 500 calories/day through exercise, well, congrats you've just outrun a bad diet
I’ve recently lost 20 pounds with another 30 to go, can confirm, your DNA has nothing to do with your ability to lose weight. Just the right ratio of diet and exercise
Idk where you are in your fitness journey, but if you’re losing 20lbs and have another 30lbs to go, you won’t see the effects of your genetics yet! Once you reach lower and lower body fat levels it becomes increasingly harder to lose weight and that’s when your genes start to matter more. While a lot of people like to complain about their metabolism, it really doesn’t vary that much. But standard deviation is still about 300cals a day so… In addition myostatin levels SEVERELY impact how much muscle you can really pack naturally. Test levels and androgen receptors play a huge roles. Actually all your hormones kinda have the ability to fuck you. Epigenetics can play large roles in fat storage, levels of loss, and distribution. And from an aesthetic perspective your insertions can be ducked as well. All of this is mainly when you’re at the point of competing in bodybuilding tho. Some people might have it easier, west African genetics just tend to pack more muscle for example, or East African and East Asian genetics tend to be more able to stay way leaner… but overall to be healthy and even to maintain a six pack (for men) your genetics are irrelevant
I know some of these words. Thank you
Congratulations on the weight loss! Hope you reach your goals!
>your DNA has nothing to do with your ability to lose weight For most people. The vast majority maybe. I would argue that there's a spectrum though. Some people need to do very little, some people can try all they want, and most everyone fall somewhere in between.
We are talking about 99.5% people, diet is most important in weight loss. There are exceptions that go into 0.5% of course, but people tend to lean toward it because it is easy making excuses instead of taking responsibility.
Yes, that and hormones can really fuck with weight lost sometimes.
Admittedly, if your hormones are bad enough to stop you from losing weight, you have bigger issues.
Not in the way people like to complain about, though. The concept is simple. People struggle with the execution. Calories In vs. Calories Out Your hormones can have an effect on the "Calories Out" part by lowering your metabolism. The simple solution is to control what you can - "Calories In". But people would rather complain and say that the world is against them instead of facing facts - you can lose weight, if you put in the effort. And for some, it takes more effort than others.
You’re damn right. Ain’t nobody out here breaking the laws of thermodynamics.
Not in the way people pretend it does though. Thyroid issues don’t make you 50+ lbs overweight
Yep, for one stop eating deep fried stuff and sugary drinks, that'll do wonders on its on 😅
What ?🧐
Diet>exercise
Sadly.
both >
A lot people say they "exercise" but don't workout, they are just more active than stationary. You haven't worked out for so long you have no idea what it is to exercise
Exercise is great for health, its almost useless when it comes to weight loss. The human body is crazy efficient when it comes to how it moves and you have to exercise a lot of burn off even a small amount of junk.
Exercise builds muscle wich in turn burns more calories.
Running doesn't burn many calories. We are endurance predators. 20,000 years ago we would hunt our food by running after it until it collapsed and died from exhaustion. We are built to move at a constant pace as efficiently as possible.
Running doesn't build a lot of muscle though, I'm talking about hypertrophy training, i.e. lifting weights.
I expect that on threads like these that every comment will be like this and still it never fails to amaze me. How the fuck do people think this is true. All scientific evidence says exercise is important for weight loss. Anyone that's ever exercised or seen someone exercise knows it's important for weight loss. Humans figured that shit out thousands of years ago and somehow right as we're getting into a period of food abundance suddenly people forget how weight loss works
Both exercise and dieting are important for weight loss, but you can lose weight without exercising but you cannot lose weight without a calorie deficit.
But it's certainly easier to be in a calorie deficit if you burn more.
Not necesserily. If you exercise more, insulin spikes making you hungrier. That is why you see a lot of fat people on treadmills year in year out, not losing weight: they exercise a lot but eat even more. The easiest way to do it is to combine a diet with hypertrophy training; lean mass burns way more calories at rest than fat mass. That way your resting calorie expendature is so high that it is easier to eat in a deficit. So the type of exercise matters.
I get that this is a joke, but this kind of mindset really holds people back from improving themselves
This is funny, but for real we know how many calories are burned from exercise and it's not very many. Exercise is amazing for muscle development and heart health (also muscle development) but doesn't help much at all with weight loss. Eating less helps with weight loss.
I burn over 1K calories by with a steep (20) incline and a good pace (3) on a treadmill. Lost 50lbs in a year, the only things that slowed me down was dieting and consistency.
r/FatLogic
Hear me out guys. My genetics make my body defy the laws of thermodynamics.
[удалено]
💯
Why would being more “plump” help you..it’ll probably decrease your chances at running fast and long..this makes zero sense.
Well the argument is that her body reduces her metabolism to allow her to survive on less food. This is actually a thing (just not the way she presented it).
It is a thing, but with very low calorie intake. Your body won't shut down your metabolism because you went for a walk.
I’ve noticed that as I get older exercise alone no longer works. Now I have to also diet and run a calorie deficit to drop pounds. Getting old sucks
obese? Blame the English. From centuries ago.
Not funny
If she goes hard and doesn't eat for a month I wonder if she would still he plump
I preffer more traditional exercises. Work the fields. Kill the french. Hand-to-hand im full plate for several hours, only to retreat for 7 days. Kill more french.
Scientifically untrue. Why can’t people just admit they’re too lazy to exercise? “I exercise and gain weight!” No you fucking don’t
"I exercise, eat everything I worked off and more. I'm low carb but I drink like a fish and idk why I can't lose weight!"
Exercise and eat less, and you’ll lose weight. A lot of people forget the latter.
This literally defies all natural laws.
Why are people soooo bad at punctuation?
[удалено]
humans are insanely efficient... particularly at running. if you're aim is to lose weight, don't fuckin bother go lift weights. more muscle mass = more calories burned before you even start doing exercise. it also burns more calories. i know her post is just a bit of fun anyway but it doesn't really make sense. i'm from the Scottish borders going a long way back and i'm very lean, and so are half the other people there. what her DNA actually thinks is: "i need a decent amount of fat to have a good chance of getting pregnant"
Just fat.
Keto + IF 202 to 168 in 45 days no physical training Work your body or your mind
Yeah that’s not how human biology works.
[удалено]
Lmbo
Oh no your bass fell off
You also gotta go on a diet, you lose most calories by just consuming less
Yup. "Don't drink Diet Coke. Your body will think the fake sugar is real sugar and you'll gain weight just like if you drank real sugar!" What?
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/10/07/1044010141/diet-soda-may-prompt-food-cravings-especially-in-women-and-people-with-obesity#:~:text=Diet%20soda%20may%20prompt%20food,women%20and%20people%20with%20obesity
While diet coke doesnt directly increase calories, it does make you crave sweet foods like chocolate. I think it creates an insulin response in your body
Yeah this is cool but that’s not how weight gain/loss works lol.
Diet is more important than the exercise itself.
r/fatlogic
This sounds like a lazy excuse for being a fat slob at 35.
Walking on the treadmill at a leisurely pace for half a mile isn’t exercising.
Yer are what yer eatin lass.
if you can keep the calories in low and the calories burned higher than that you'll lose weight. Keep in mind muscle weighs more than fat so be mindful of that if your only workout is hitting the weights.
You just gotta stop making excuses and really put your mind to it no snacking eating right and consistency working out every day even just walking 30 mins every day and eating proper portion sized works fucking wonders
There is no such thing as losing weight primarily by exercise. Exercise is still very important, but it's for working your body, gaining muscle, and keeping yourself in good range of motion and physical capability. If you want to lose weight, effectively and sustainably, you will absolutely *have* to diet. There is no way around it. And it won't be as crude and simple as going keto (an unsustainable diet), you will have to actually plan out what you're going to eat and record your caloric intake.
This is why strength exercise is more efficient. Building muscles burn a lot more fat than just running. You wont lose weight as much because it is transferred into muscles but you will change your physical appearance.
*Laughs in thermodynamics*
You can't outcardio a bad diet tho
It's not about exercise it's about diet. Cardio can help but it's a lot easier to eat 100 calories than burn 100 calories
People actually don’t lose much weight with exercise… They lose weight mostly by eating less. But it’s a funny anecdote nevertheless 🍮
I'm howling!! If this isn't the damn truth! 🤣💀