Some of you may have read this, but I found it interesting: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1914857,00.html

I only made it through the first page because I have to leave for work, but that came across as very stupid to me. The author is completely missing the key reasons for working out while trying to lose fat. Clearly just trying to find something to fill his quota in the magazine.

Some of you may have read this, but I found it interesting: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1914857,00.html

Wow, that's full of a lot of misconception and misrepresentation of science :doh:

Just for starters:
1) weight loss is not equal to fat loss. Yeah, you can sit on your butt and eat less and lose weight, but you'll end up just a smaller, still soft you for the most part without exercise. Not what I personally want. This is the same problem with too much reliance on BMI in these types of pieces.

2) The exercise constantly referred to seems to be "vigorous" cardio. And that's what most people do that don't achieve results...endless cardio. Just go to a typical chain gym and look on the cardio equipment at all the overweight people.

3) Yes, exercise can increase appetite. Especially again longer lower intensity cardio. On the other hand, studies have shown higher intensity work can do the reverse, suppress appetite for periods of time.

4) Saying the reason fast food restaurants put in playgrounds obviously haven't been around many kids. Kids of a certain age that I've been around beg to go to play in the things, which obviously pulls in the customers to a restaurant vs another restaurant that doesn't have one of the big ball pits. There's not always some devious secret behind these types of marketing things.


...etc

I guess if you just want to lose weight, you might be fine skipping the exercise and just getting up and moving around occasionally as talked about in the article. But IMO, that misses the point for most of us around here.

I really hate 90% of the mainstream health articles I read :bang:

I believe it has some merit. Many of his statements are backed by factual data.

Long story short, the article doesn't blame exercise...but the failure of diet control of our increased appetites due to increased activity... like exercise.

Exercise is cited as having it's proven benefits. The main component to successful weight loss as stated in the article is diet...which has been stated on this forum many times over. In addition to that, one should increase their activity throughout the day...not just at the scheduled time of the day or week for routine workout sessions.:tu:

The reason I liked the article is because I was one of those people. 6-7 years ago, I started working out on my own due to being overweight. I was 5'9", 190 lbs, and not fit at all. I got a gym membership and started doing weights and cardio 5-6 days per week. I actually gained weight. I was eating more and justifying it because I was exercising. A few years ago, I found John Stone's website, plus some advice from a doctor friend of mine, and realized that my problem was my diet. Once I got that under control, the weight came off. Now, with a structured diet and workout, I am in the best shape of my life.

Going back to the article, I don't believe it is stating that people should not exercise, but rather that execise is not enough to make any significant weight loss gains in most overweight people. In fact, it can backfire due to people's perception of what exercise is really doing.

I have friends and coworkers that always say, "As soon as I get in the gym, this weight will come off." I tell them that it likely won't, but that exericse is a start.

Going back to the article, I don't believe it is stating that people should not exercise, but rather that execise is not enough to make any significant weight loss gains in most overweight people.

That's what it should be saying, but it's not doing it well. I :doh:-ed so many times I lost count. The author never clearly gives the proper solution to this non-problem of exercise. The problem lies in the failure to pay attention to food, not in exercise.

People who just want a reason to stop (or never start) exercising will find it in this shabby article, just as people who want a reason to say that trying to lose weight is a futile effort will find fodder.

I already wrote out my full facepalm reaction at my blog.

The video link to Jillian Michaels explaining food and how to structure a meal is actually better than the article. It's good especially for people just begining to learn about food.

Just from my observation, I think there is generally less arguing about what constitutes good nutrition than what constitutes intelligent workouts for a specific fitness goal.

I used to go to this gym that had a snack bar where they sold "healthy" smoothies, candy bars, and espresso drinks. A lot of people would head down to the snack bar after their workout, including me, lol. I had no idea why I wasn't losing weight.

Great response from Runner's World here (http://peakperformance.runnersworld.com/2009/08/people-are-already-talking-about-this-weeks-issue-of-time--magazine-it-arrived-in-my-mailbox-saturday-morning-with-a-bright.html).

Great response from Runner's World here (http://peakperformance.runnersworld.com/2009/08/people-are-already-talking-about-this-weeks-issue-of-time--magazine-it-arrived-in-my-mailbox-saturday-morning-with-a-bright.html).

Good read.:nod: Thanks!:tu:

Great response from Runner's World here (http://peakperformance.runnersworld.com/2009/08/people-are-already-talking-about-this-weeks-issue-of-time--magazine-it-arrived-in-my-mailbox-saturday-morning-with-a-bright.html).

Your response wasn't bad either. While quietly lurking, I enjoy reading a lot of your posts witeowl. :)

Honestly, the TIME article really reminded me of the kind of selective research used by Taube in his book, Good Calorie, Bad Calorie...except this article is utter crap. If you can sift through Taube's extreme bias, it's actually a decent book. The article just takes it to a whole new level.

Great response from Runner's World here (http://peakperformance.runnersworld.com/2009/08/people-are-already-talking-about-this-weeks-issue-of-time--magazine-it-arrived-in-my-mailbox-saturday-morning-with-a-bright.html).

That's a good find.

It seems like the TIME article is just telling people what they want to hear; "lose weight with less effort."

If you're making love to a box of doughnuts in the office parking lot then maybe you can get some use out of the article and drop a few pounds. But like any 'diet' advice, it'll work, for a few weeks, but just. Long term results need long term sustainable committments.

When are people going to learn that there are no shortcuts to anything worth having? Money, health, success.

I H A T E articles like this one, it makes my job SO much harder. Most people read documents like this, or just read what they want to - that exercise is a myth and won't work - and use that as support for their unhealthy lifestyle. It is kinda like negative support that 'ha my diet won't work and this article proves it' without looking deeply into it. While it may have some scientific truth that is being 'picked at' to create a story that TIME wants to create, many people will read it superficially: exercise is pointless!

For people who are little more educated about fitness and health, like the majority of people on this forum, we can see what the article is trying to get at. But the average person will honestly read what they want - understand little of it - and take out what they want. I have seen this numerous times, again and again and again.

People trust magazines too much, it makes me go nuts. Don't even have me go on a rant about those muscle mags that comes out with "NEW SCIENCE BREAKTHROUGH! GET RIPPED IN 3 WEEKS WITH THIS REVOLUTION NEW WORKOUT!." every month

:bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::b ang::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::ban g::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang: :bang::bang::bang::bang: + infinity

eh, isn't the bottom line calorie deficit = weight loss. If you can have a calorie deficit without working out.. hey that's your thing. Not everybody has the time to spend hour + at the gym, and preparing 6+ meals a day. This article is basically saying yes you can slim down, to a healthy weight and you don't need to pump iron, to do it. .which is true.. You just won't be stronger, or fit in other ways, but you will be healthier and not obese which is what the majority of people really are trying to do. I came here, because it wasn't just about getting slim but js when from fat to fit. Which is what i want to do, be in better shape so I can peruse the actives I enjoy.

eh, isn't the bottom line calorie deficit = weight loss.

Not necessarily.

Jedi posted this the other day:

dBnniua6-oM

I think it's much more complicated than two variables of input and expenditure.

I H A T E articles like this one
...
:bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::b ang::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::ban g::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang: :bang::bang::bang::bang: + infinity

Yeah, but tell us how you really feel.

:D

In response to that video, this is what I meant in my other post that once you understand organic chemistry nutrition just goes crazy. Things you thought you know or seem to be logical are not. You have to see past those marketing tricks, supplement labels, company sponsored studies and hit the books. Once you understand what is happening it will really change your world.

I agree that this article is not scientific and is more of an opinion piece. I did get something useful out of it. The concept that some people may spend their hour officially working out and then the rest of the day lounging and eating bad as a result.

I don't think most people treat themselves to fries because they think there were so good, but people out there probably don't realize just how bad for you something like a yogurt-like desert could be, or whipped coffee drink. I don't usually fall into the trap of treating myself to certain reward food because I worked out.

But something that I definitely do, is be more sedentary on days that I work out harder. And after reading this I am going to be more aware of it. This week I took a day off from work and outside of working out for an hour I basically sat around the house reading, internetting or watching tv. I will have to keep in mind that exercising even intensely for an hour, doesn't mean I should sit on my ass for the other 15 waking hours of the day.

In response to that video, this is what I meant in my other post that once you understand organic chemistry nutrition just goes crazy. Things you thought you know or seem to be logical are not. You have to see past those marketing tricks, supplement labels, company sponsored studies and hit the books. Once you understand what is happening it will really change your world.

I had no idea.:eek: Honestly, as I was watching this...thinking of my grandkids shoving those QuikTrip sugar drinks in their faces...the chocolate milk my little grandson so dearly loves...it brought me to tears.

Shit. What are we doing.....

Not necessarily.

Jedi posted this the other day:

dBnniua6-oM

I think it's much more complicated than two variables of input and expenditure.


meh..