Why Exercise Won't Make You Thin

I think what the article MEANT to say was lack of willpower will not make you thin. Getting up to exercise requires almost as much decision making as making healthy eating choices.  I can not believe this was actually published.  Thanks for the humor.

From the article:

"But like many other people, I get hungry after I exercise, so I often eat more on the days I work out than on the days I don't. Could exercise actually be keeping me from losing weight?"

Apparently Mr. John Cloud doesn't burn calories during exercise...

From the article:"Church calls it compensation, but you and I might know it as the lip-licking anticipation of perfectly salted, golden-brown French fries after a hard trip to the gym."Of course if you swing through McDonald's after the gym you wont lose weight. I think it takes more discipline to eat healthy than to get up and train.

Edited by scottyr7 2009-08-12 8:45 AM

Although I haven't looked up the studies mentioned in the article, I think his article it is an oversimplification.
Yes, many people who exercise will eat more, but not all.
Really, losing weight, maintaining a healthy weight, and stopping weight gain are all about the lifestyle.
Exercise is NOT the primary driver for weight loss. Diet is. However, the benefits from exercise are tremendous, and can include weight loss if associated with a healthy diet.
I wonder if anyone has done a study comparing the amount of time spent walking, standing, etc from 30 years ago to today. I know that for me, my workday is sedentary. I basically get paid to sit in front of a computer.
I use exercise to get some  motion and activity in my life.
However, any benefit I get can be offset by caving to the desire to eat a giant ice cream sunday.
Duh!
Also, there is a difference in goals. General health and body weight managment can certainly be achieved by basic non-rigorous workouts that may not inspire the "compensation" response. However, this is a forum for triathletes. At all levels, we are looking to improve our performance. I think that it is a given that to improve athletic performance, even to get to the point of "I just want to finish" requires a little more than the 30 minutes of walking that they used to recommend.

Edited by eliwashere 2009-08-12 8:56 AM

I agree with this - however when the article said "Which means that after you work out hard enough to convert, say, 10 lb. of fat to muscle...." it lost all credibility with me... (well among a few other statements)


The article is written to appeal to people who want an excuse not to work out.  I think it had the chance to be a good article if it approached it as "exercise without proper diet will not lead to weight loss"  but they actually say "exercise will hinder your weight loss" (instead of "people overestimate how much they burn when exercising" - which was their real point, I think)

We needed a study to conclude that (some) people have trouble with willpower?  It's nice work if you can get it.

I don't think that's what he is saying.  I think he is talking about being more hungry on days he works out and eats more calories than he burns.  It's pretty easy to do if you are working out for a half an hour or so.

So basically you have to diet and watch what you eat to loose weight.  And not eat a 600 calorie muffin after you go running for 3 miles.

I find it much easier to train hard than to resist the urge to devour everything in sight afterward...

The lack of balance in this article is shameful, though. It's like it was written to discourage exercise instead of encouraging smart eating.

To me, weightloss is simple. The number (2000) varies slightly per person.  But for the "average" person:

Calories in - exercise calories out - 2000 = x

If x is negative, weight loss.  If x is positive, weight gain.  Simple.

But this doesn't keep you from losing weight.  Its okay to eat more when you exercise.  Theres only a problem if you overcompensate by eating more calories than you burned during exercise.

I read the article a couple of days ago and was disappointed.  It gives an excuse for people not to exercise who should be exercising.  The gist of the article seemed to be that exercise makes you hungrier so you just eat more and don't lose weight.

It left out a lot of important simple stuff like, to lose a pound a week you need to average a calorie deficit of about 500 calories per day.  Personally I think it's easier to achieve that 500 calorie deficit with a combination of exercise and healthy diet.  

Losing weight isn't easy for most people, but it is certainly achieveable and should include some exercise.

Brian 

That's what I was trying to say.  You said it better. 

I think we're both getting at the same thing.  I am hoping this is what he meant in the article, although I can see that it might be confusing to people who don't understand that.


Edited by Artemis 2009-08-12 9:38 AM

I disagree with this completely.  As others have said, weightloss is about expending more calories than you eat.  If you exercise you burn more calories.  It really is that simple.  I eat A LOT, to the point that many people comment on how much I eat.  And I have a maintained 70 lb weight loss, thanks to exercise.

Edited to add that I read this article a few days ago, and it really ticked me off.  IMO, it's a gross over-simplification of the problem, and validates excuses the lazy have for not getting off their rears.  It also only has a passing mention of the other benefits cardiovascular exercise has for people: lower cholesterol, better BP, I could go on and on.  It really was a sad excuse for journalism.

Edited by jcnipper 2009-08-12 9:47 AM

the author was probably just trying to relate it most of america - most people do not want to exercise (lazy etc), and this is just a way for them to justify it.  .

it always gets me, the key to losing weight is rocket science. . . exercise and eat right!

Yes, that Time article was frustrating. If you didn't exercise and were thinking about it I think it would discourage people from starting an exercise program, thinking they will gain weight.

I think it was very unbalanced. If it's so true how come at a road race or triathlon the crowd is so fit and these people exercise hours upon hours a week? Because the article is wrong or too one sided/sensational like the nightly news teasers. I can't wait to see the letters to the editor on this one. Convert 10 lbs of fat to 10 lbs muscle? WTF?

I think the article makes sense. I bet we can all eat faster than we can swim, bike or run.

As someone who exercises a ton, is in pretty darn good shape and is strong, and still has wanted to be 10 pounds lighter for the past 5 years... I know full well it's due to what I'm eating.

Exercise for fitness, eat properly for weightloss.

 

People have to write catchy headlines these days and often that is done by taking common knowledge and turning it on it's head in any way possible.  Like "veggies kill" and then a story all about how some guy got salmonella from tomatoes.  However they leave out how tomatoes are one of the best foods on the planet for people, how they are helpful in preventing skin cancers, etc. 

Because of the amount of information at our finger tips these days we have enough material to write long articles on this kinda thing without ever having to mention the benefits.  My hope is that people in general are smart enough to realize this is the case. 


Edited by Global 2009-08-12 10:18 AM

From February to July I was exercising without changing my diet (nursing a baby) and I didn't lose any weight but I dropped 3" at my waist and a dress size.  In July I adjusted my diet for weight loss and in the last month have lost 7lbs. 

In my experience exercise will change your body shape, diet will change your body weight.