Low Carb Friends  
Netrition.com - Tools - Reviews - Faces - Recipes - Home


Go Back   Low Carb Friends > Eating and Exercise Plans > Weight Loss Plans > JUDDD
Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-19-2013, 05:23 AM   #31
Very Gabby LCF Member!!!
 
SlowSure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London/Herts UK
Posts: 3,954
Gallery: SlowSure
Stats: 157/105/105-110
WOE: JUDDD Maintenance.
Start Date: 2011
Similarly, on the topic of exercise and fat mass (rather than 'starvation mode'): The Effect of Exercise on Visceral Adipose Tissue in Overweight Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
SlowSure is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old 05-19-2013, 02:31 PM   #32
Very Gabby LCF Member!!!
 
calichris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 3,984
Gallery: calichris
Stats: 273.7/212/147 or size 8/10
WOE: 2000/1000 rotations, moderate carb
Start Date: 11/3/14; JUDDD 7/11/12
Thanks SlowSure!

So the first article seems to say (if I can translate the science-ese) that exercise can increase your level of fitness and health indicators even if a person remains overweight, and the second says that even if you don't reduce your calories, you can lose visceral fat from moderate to high intensity exercise? Trying to get the take-away message from the fancy scientific language.

It's too early to make any conclusions, but as an active exerciser it is interesting to me that I seem to be losing better since increasing my DD calories this week for a "maintenance break." Weird. Too soon to tell, though ... could be just a fluke.

Last edited by calichris; 05-19-2013 at 02:32 PM..
calichris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2013, 03:48 AM   #33
Very Gabby LCF Member!!!
 
SlowSure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London/Herts UK
Posts: 3,954
Gallery: SlowSure
Stats: 157/105/105-110
WOE: JUDDD Maintenance.
Start Date: 2011
Calichris, you've got the take-away message from both of those papers.

One or the other, not both, seems to be the finding when it comes to strict caloric restriction and exercise at moderate-intensity or above. I could speculate that is why your maintenance break is working out well for you.

It's never really been in vogue but I think the notion of Allostasis and Allostatic Load has a lot to offer as a valuable way of thinking about health and balancing competing stresses and stressors in individual and social lives. (I can't see any advertising on the site but to be on the safe side, searching with the terms:
Allostatic Load and Allostasis
Bruce McEwen and Teresa Seeman
should return a good overview of the topic. The wikipedia account of Allostasis is reasonable and quotes Sapolsky, below.)

Robert Sapolsky:Why Zebras Don't Get Ulcers:
Quote:
Homeostasis is the regulation of the body to a balance, by single point tuning such as blood oxygen level, blood glucose or blood pH. For example, if a person walking in the desert is hot, the body will sweat and they will quickly become dehydrated. Allostasis is adaptation but in regard to a more dynamic balance. In dehydration, sweat occurs as only a small part of the process with many other systems also adapting their functioning, both to reduce water use and to support the variety of other systems that are changing to aid this. In this case, kidneys may reduce urine output, mucous membrane in the mouth, nose and eyes may dry out; urine and sweat output will decrease; the release of arginine vasopressin (AVP) will increase; and veins and arteries will constrict to maintain blood pressure with a smaller blood volume.
We all know it isn't, but we sometimes talk as if losing body fat is a formulaic activity rather than the multi-factor phenomenon that it is and thinking about allostatic load reminds me of that. If somebody is stressed at work and home, then mentally and emotionally, exercising may be good for them, but it doesn't necessarily follow that it isn't an added physical stress if you're also stressing your body by reducing calories. (IYSWIM)
SlowSure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 04:14 AM   #34
Very Gabby LCF Member!!!
 
SlowSure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London/Herts UK
Posts: 3,954
Gallery: SlowSure
Stats: 157/105/105-110
WOE: JUDDD Maintenance.
Start Date: 2011
Ray Cronise has posted an interesting piece: Muscling Your Metabolism (Part 3).

It's difficult to have an opinion because there are few comparable data sets to provide a context and most of his data seem to be from men (far less peri or post menopausal women). However, it does seem to emphasise that for the non-elite athletes amongst us, and particularly overweight people who are exercising, there is little weight-loss from exercise (usual caveat that there are other benefits, such as probably better blood sugar regulation, increased cardiovascular fitness and maybe emotional advantages).
SlowSure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 04:53 AM   #35
Very Gabby LCF Member!!!
 
SlowSure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London/Herts UK
Posts: 3,954
Gallery: SlowSure
Stats: 157/105/105-110
WOE: JUDDD Maintenance.
Start Date: 2011
Some extracts from the Cronise article. I highlighted the sections in bold.

Quote:
You can’t out-exercise your mouth.

Let’s take a look at a few exercises and some of the claims about metabolism and I think it will be clear that exercise has a lot of benefits, but burning fat is not at the top...

We now have seen in Muscling Part 1 and Part 2 that metabolism has two important components: RMR and RQ. The first, RMR, is a short term measure of a person fasted at rest and that measurement (typically about 15 minutes) is projected over the next 24 hour period as an estimate of total energy should be used if no additional activity occurs. It’s in a sense a minimum, or floor measurement and your total expenditure will likely be higher over the day. RQ (respiratory quotient) is a breath by breath analysis during the period measured of the % Fat and % Carbohydrate being utilized. It tells us how much of each fuel is being used. Like RMR, RQ is EXTREMELY sensitive to activity and is constantly changing to accomodate the body’s fuel needs...

I will take some “heat” for this, so let me begin with the same disclaimer I’ve given on exercise in general. We shouldn’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. Even though I don’t think exercise is a particularly good way to lose weight (in fact it mostly slows it down) does not mean I am opposed to it or think it is unhealthy. Likewise, I love kettle bell swings, so please don’t take this as some sort of assault on exercise or even kettelbells in particular.
Cronise conducted experiments to assess how much energy during the workout was derived from carbohydrate/glycogen and how much from fat and what the figures were after the workout (to assess if there was any post-exercise metabolic boost). He gives the data, discusses the findings and concludes:
Quote:
The truth: His metabolism returned to normal after 2 minutes and his RQ within 8 minutes. Sorry folks, no raging metabolism – it was news to me as well. We’ve been duped.
Cronise then discusses a set of data readings from observing cold stress and exertion.

Overall, he concludes:
Quote:
I think it should be obvious why one should abstain from exercise if you want to lose fat rapidly....I am not asking you to lay perfectly still, just don’t do anything that looks like a repetition or makes you sore. Walking, going for a leisurely swim, or biking is okay, but don’t turn it into a race. Playing with the kids, throwing a frisbee or walking the dog all keep you active. Your body KNOWS it needs to burn fat on a restrictive diet and it’s not going to burn lean tissue just because it is there.

On the other hand, if you insist on tearing down tissue exercising, every time you do you are shifting the body away from fat burning (rise in RQ), recovery DOES require food to fuel the tissue breakdown/repair, and you’ll never guess it spot on – tending to over eat. No one I have coached with has loss lean muscle mass, but certainly the apparent “strength” goes down. ...[A] few weeks in the gym once the ideal weight is reached and you’ll be back to where you started.

The sports research we tap into when generalizing to the population at large was mostly performed with the idea increasing performance/endurance....The problem of course is that we’ve taken this information with a broad brush and painted it onto every person overweight and suggested this obesity pandemic is one of inactivity. That’s not the case. When one makes an informed decision about how they want to lose weight and has a choice between rapid weight loss without significant exercise or slower weight loss and risk of injury with it, then they are actually choosing. On the other hand, blaming the weight issue on a slow metabolism, lack of activity, or avoiding the connection that one is chronically over-nourished, obfuscates the problem and frustrates the person trying to make a change. Finally, we have the ridiculous, ubiquitous metabolism claims bombarding us every day. Your metabolism likely isn’t broken unless you don’t feel a pulse. You might have metabolic dysfunction due to chronic over nutrition, but that can be greatly improved, or completely reversed, with proper diet.

This post is not gear toward elite athletes, or any athletes at all. There are ways to exercise at lower levels of RQ. The point I am trying to make centers on the barrage of metabolic boosting claims and “fat burning zones,” which all disproportionately suggest that if a person is overweight, lack of activity caused or was a major contributor and more activity is going to fix it. The root problem is one of intake not output. Either way, we need to all understand that no matter how hard we work, our ability to eat and the modern day access to enormous calorie sources must be taken into account.

...Certainly there’s nothing wrong with exercise and many benefits, but fat loss, especially rapid fat loss, isn’t one of them. You might say, but it makes me feel so much better and I would say you can get the same serotonin hit from mild cold stress in a contrast shower, stop eating, get within striking distance of your ideal weight as soon as possible and then resume exercise. It’s a choice and it’s not the only way, but the myth of metabolism pushes many in a direction that ultimately fails.
I'd like to see a lot more data from other people and there seems to be a dearth of data from women.

Nonetheless, it's interesting and in line with the 2 reviews that I posted above.
SlowSure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 07:07 AM   #36
Junior LCF Member
 
Shelly_S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 49
Gallery: Shelly_S
Stats: 225/174/155 5'2" 45yr
WOE: 2/1/13 Shangri La (225lb); 3/13/13 JUDDD (215 lbs)
Start Date: 3/13/13 - 28 weeks on JUDDD - 41 lbs gone/51 total
This is fascinating! Since starting JUDDD 10 weeks ago, I have not done much formal exercise and I stopped going on long hikes because they increased my appetite. I've lost a steady 2 lbs per week, whereas in the past when I cut calories and exercised a ton, I never saw these consistent losses. In fact, it seemed like the more I exercised, the more stubborn my fat was and I just thought I wasn't doing enough or that something was wrong with my metabolism and maybe that wasn't the case. I have always felt that exercise had "saved" me from being a diabetic like my mom because she had become diabetic around 40 and never exercised, whereas I've shown no signs of it despite my weight having been so high for several years plus my age and I've always exercised. But who knows?

Anyway, since doing JUDDD I haven't really felt the urge to do more than 20 mins of interval cardio and some kettlebell swings like once a week or every other week and I was feeling guilty about that. After reading this info, I'm going to give myself permission to quit formal exercise (unless I'm really inspired) until I'm at my ideal weight and see how I feel and monitor the results.

Thank you everyone for contributing to this discussion.
Shelly_S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 08:48 AM   #37
Major LCF Poster!
 
Yennie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: PNW
Posts: 1,597
Gallery: Yennie
Stats: 5'3" 35yo 199/sig/146 No longer obese!
WOE: A.I. 1/1-1/20; JUDDD 1/21/13, Potatoes as needed
Thanks you again, SS, for finding marvelous & scientific work to back up what most of us feel in our gut.
I'm at a difficult place now, there I'm starting to be a little fussed with my losses (seriously, another 3# bounce up yesterday? The same 3# for the last 3 weeks? Come on!) but I need to start training for the 1/2 marathon or I will not finish it, or will do so in immense amounts of pain.
I think I'm just going to have to accept that this stall is going to be the price I pay for wanting to run along the Sea Wall in August and focus on NSVs. UG!
__________________

*****************************************
My Potato Hacking Journal
All I ask is that you lead an evidence-based life.
Yennie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 08:55 AM   #38
Way too much time on my hands!
 
KeirasMom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 15,169
Gallery: KeirasMom
Stats: 277.6/150/150
WOE: Whatever plan keeps me around 150 lbs!
I didn't do much formal exercise during WLM and lost very well. When I was nearing goal, I started exercising and my loss slowed down. I have often wondered if it was, as others have claimed, that I was close to goal and weight loss slows down near goal, or if it was because of the exercise. It's interesting to see others' experiences.
KeirasMom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 09:36 AM   #39
Major LCF Poster!
 
Nicole T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Annapolis, MD
Posts: 1,069
Gallery: Nicole T
Stats: 193/189/170
WOE: hCG/Paleo
Start Date: 10/7/13
Quote:
Originally Posted by calichris View Post
I really want to write about this, but it's too late to do it justice! I lean toward the possibility that an exercise/diet balance could be important for some of us. I can envision someone eating little enough and burning off enough calories a day that it would be possible to put the body under a kind of stress that could negatively affect weight loss. Michael Mosely's Horizon episode on exercise shows that different people's bodies actually respond to the same exercise in different ways, so I think that all that really matters is finding what works for each of us individually. As in so many things, it may or may not be what works for someone else.
Maybe this is why a few women here have actually starting losing again once they "took a break" and upped their DDs to 800 calories!
Nicole T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 09:38 AM   #40
Major LCF Poster!
 
Nicole T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Annapolis, MD
Posts: 1,069
Gallery: Nicole T
Stats: 193/189/170
WOE: hCG/Paleo
Start Date: 10/7/13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shelly_S View Post
This is fascinating! Since starting JUDDD 10 weeks ago, I have not done much formal exercise and I stopped going on long hikes because they increased my appetite. I've lost a steady 2 lbs per week, whereas in the past when I cut calories and exercised a ton, I never saw these consistent losses. In fact, it seemed like the more I exercised, the more stubborn my fat was and I just thought I wasn't doing enough or that something was wrong with my metabolism and maybe that wasn't the case. I have always felt that exercise had "saved" me from being a diabetic like my mom because she had become diabetic around 40 and never exercised, whereas I've shown no signs of it despite my weight having been so high for several years plus my age and I've always exercised. But who knows?

Anyway, since doing JUDDD I haven't really felt the urge to do more than 20 mins of interval cardio and some kettlebell swings like once a week or every other week and I was feeling guilty about that. After reading this info, I'm going to give myself permission to quit formal exercise (unless I'm really inspired) until I'm at my ideal weight and see how I feel and monitor the results.

Thank you everyone for contributing to this discussion.
I'm also one who GAINS weight whenever I start any kind of formal exercise program--especially high-intenisity cardio! I think mine has to do with stressing out my adrenals and raising my cortisol. So for now, I'm just doing brisk walking every day (aim for 45 minutes) and I'm going to start throwing around some kettle bells a few times a week for my arms

p.s. Check out Endomorphic body types--pretty sure that's what I am and why I gain when I exercise. The other two types are mesomorphs and ectomorphs.
Nicole T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 11:08 AM   #41
Way too much time on my hands!
 
LoCarbGal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Arizona
Posts: 10,442
Gallery: LoCarbGal
Stats: 318.5/???/140 5'4" 48 yrs
WOE: HDE/JUDDD/Lowish Carb
Thanks for that info SlowSure. I have suspected as much seeing myself and friends struggle with exercise and not losing. I was contemplating getting up REALLY early to start walking every day (it's hot here in AZ - have to do it before the sun is fully up or whew), but now I think I'll wait until the weather cools down and see where I am weight wise.

I'm currently doing some light weight work a few times a week with my mom, who has recently been diagnosed with osteoporosis. She is starting with very light weights and I use a bit heavier. No serious lifting or anything, but enough for soreness, and I can feel new muscles building. I'm sure this could be affecting my losses, and maybe even explain some slight gains. I'm not going to stop because this is important for Mom. And I'm enjoying the new muscle definition. I'll just have to deal with the scale.
__________________
~~~LCG aka Carol~~~

Ordinary things, done consistently, produce extraordinary results. ~ Keith Cunningham

My Journal: LoCarbGal's Balancing Act ~ Losing Fat, Building Muscle, & Living Life!
LoCarbGal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 11:26 AM   #42
Very Gabby LCF Member!!!
 
calichris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 3,984
Gallery: calichris
Stats: 273.7/212/147 or size 8/10
WOE: 2000/1000 rotations, moderate carb
Start Date: 11/3/14; JUDDD 7/11/12
Interesting article! I am taking it with a grain of salt, however.

I do agree with the article that for most people, exercise alone may not be enough. I also think it is perfectly OK to lose weight without exercise. Unlike the author, however, I do not agree that everyone should postpone any exercise more strenuous than throwing a frisbee until they reach goal.

I have exercised all along, and it has not stopped me from losing 67 pounds in a year. Maybe (?) I would have lost faster without the exercise, but I don't care .... I feel fantastic! I love the muscle definition (under the remaining fat) ... it really makes me look better now than I otherwise would, and I am so thrilled with my increased fitness over a year ago. I feel so much healthier and better, and it is not just being lighter ... it's what I can do.

I'm not entirely convinced with some of this points:

"I think it should be obvious why one should abstain from exercise if you want to lose fat rapidly"

Maybe I would need to read the whole article, but it is not obvious to me at all. It is clear from anyone who watches The Biggest Loser that the contestants lose much, much more with their extreme exercise routines (which I think are too much and do not advocate) than they would by diet alone.

"Your body KNOWS it needs to burn fat on a restrictive diet and it’s not going to burn lean tissue just because it is there."


I'd have to research this more, but is he saying that the body under some conditions does not consume lean tissue?

"On the other hand, if you insist on tearing down tissue exercising, every time you do you are shifting the body away from fat burning (rise in RQ), recovery DOES require food to fuel the tissue breakdown/repair, and you’ll never guess it spot on – tending to over eat."

If he is arguing that people who aren't watching their diet overcompensate for exercise, I think that does happen. If you are also watching your diet/counting calories, you don't need to worry about "guessing" or overeating.

"Your metabolism likely isn’t broken unless you don’t feel a pulse. You might have metabolic dysfunction due to chronic over nutrition, but that can be greatly improved, or completely reversed, with proper diet."

This just seems so simplistic to me! This statement bothers me a lot, because I know there are people doing everything right with diet that are not getting results.

"The point I am trying to make centers on the barrage of metabolic boosting claims and “fat burning zones,” which all disproportionately suggest that if a person is overweight, lack of activity caused or was a major contributor and more activity is going to fix it. The root problem is one of intake not output."

Here I generally agree.

"You might say, but it makes me feel so much better and I would say you can get the same serotonin hit from mild cold stress in a contrast shower, stop eating, get within striking distance of your ideal weight as soon as possible and then resume exercise."

I could not disagree more re: feeling better. There are about a million studies showing the million ways exercise makes you feel better and healthier, and saying a contrast shower would have the same results?

It's interesting food for thought. I do think that some active exercisers do not seem to get the results on the scale they should, and I don't think you have to exercise to lose weight. For me, I want to include exercise as part of a healthier lifestyle, and it is not stopping my weight loss, although it may have slowed it for a time. I have noticed in my limited (2 weeks) experiment that I seem to need more DD calories to lose better while exercising. It's been a dramatic difference.
calichris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 01:04 PM   #43
Very Gabby LCF Member!!!
 
SlowSure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London/Herts UK
Posts: 3,954
Gallery: SlowSure
Stats: 157/105/105-110
WOE: JUDDD Maintenance.
Start Date: 2011
I share some of Calichris' objections albeit we differ on some points. To be fair to Cronise, although he seems to undercut this in different parts of the article, he is emphatic that he is not advising people that they shouldn't exercise - he is arguing (I think) that if they are doing it solely because they believe it boosts the metabolism, then they should feel free to stop, because it doesn't. However, if they want to improve CV fitness or find it improves mental wellbeing then exercise is grand, as long as it's understood that it may be slowing the rate of fat loss. (As per the reviews, fat loss seems to accompany strict caloric restriction or moderate intensity exercise but seems to slow with a combination of the two.)

As for The Biggest Loser, I'm a trifle hampered by never having seen it. Oddly, however, there has been at least one academic study of the impact on the metabolisms of the participants. The paper is: Metabolic Slowing with Massive Weight Loss despite Preservation of Fat-Free Mass Metabolic Slowing with Massive Weight Loss despite Preservation of Fat-Free Mass

Quote:
Context: An important goal during weight loss is to maximize fat loss while preserving metabolically active fat-free mass (FFM). Massive weight loss typically results in substantial loss of FFM potentially slowing metabolic rate.

Objective: Our objective was to determine whether a weight loss program consisting of diet restriction and vigorous exercise helped to preserve FFM and maintain resting metabolic rate (RMR).
...
Conclusions: Despite relative preservation of FFM, exercise did not prevent dramatic slowing of resting metabolism out of proportion to weight loss. This metabolic adaptation may persist during weight maintenance and predispose to weight regain unless high levels of physical activity or caloric restriction are maintained.
Yoni Freedhoff of Weighty Matters blog discusses the paper which throws up some interesting findings. You might guess what these findings are from his somewhat dramatic blog post title: The Biggest Loser Destroys Participants' Metabolisms. (I've highlighted some sections in bold.)
Quote:
The term metabolic adaptation is given to the phenomenon whereby when a person loses a certain percentage of weight, their metabolisms slow by greater amounts. This process may be theoretically accelerated with more rapid weight loss as a consequence of the rapidly losing body metabolizing calorie burning muscle along with fat to make up for its massive energy deficit.

And as far as rapid non-surgical weight loss goes, there's probably no weight loss program more rapid than that of the television show The Biggest Loser, where it’s not uncommon for contestants to lose upwards of 150lbs at an averaged pace of nearly 10lbs a week.

Of course what’s different about the Biggest Loser as compared with most other non-televised rapid weight loss programs is the incredibly large amount of exercise concurrently involved, along with an almost certainly severe degree of stress, peer pressure and dietary restriction given the team and competitive nature of the show ...

So is the weight lost on the Biggest Loser...healthy? Does the huge amount of exercise protect contestants against the show doing marked damage to their metabolisms?

The answer to both of those questions certainly appears to be, "No".

[In the study cited above], Darcy Johannsen and friends studied the impact 7 months of Biggest Loser weight loss had on the resting and total energy expenditures of 16 participants. They used all the latest gadgets to do so including indirect calorimetry and doubly labeled water. So what happened? By week 6 participants had lost 13% of their body weight and by week 30, 39%. More importantly by week 6 participants metabolisms had slowed by 244 more calories per day than would have been expected simply as a function of their weight loss and by week 30, by 504 more.

That's basically a meal's worth of calories a day that Biggest Loser contestants no longer burn as a direct consequence of their involvement. How do you think you'd do at maintaining your weight if you ate an extra meal a day?
Freedhoff does quite a neat comparison with a study of people who exhibited similar dramatic weight loss due to surgery but hadn't accompanied it with the high volume, high intensity exercise of Biggest Loser contestants.
Quote:
But maybe that's typical. After all, metabolic adaptations are a known consequence to weight loss - couldn't that be all we're seeing here? I guess it's too bad there's no control group the study could have used for comparison.

Actually there kind of is. Bariatric surgery patients lose massive amounts of weight in a hurry as well, and they generally do so without the inane extremes of lifestyle endorsed by the Biggest Loser. If there were a study on the impact bariatric surgery losses had on resting and total energy expenditure, that would certainly offer some insight as to the healthfulness of Biggest Loser's weight loss program.

...There is such a study. Published in 2003 in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition researchers looked at the impact bariatric surgical losses had on the resting and total energy expenditures of 30 men and women whose pre-operative average BMIs of 50 were within 1 point of the Biggest Loser contestants' averages of 49, and who lost a Biggest Loser style average of 117.5lbs. And guess what? While resting energy expenditure indeed was shown to slow, it didn't slow down in excess of what would be expected by weight loss alone. In other words? Looking at these two studies, Biggest Loser style weight loss destroys metabolisms dramatically more than does bariatric surgery and does so in huge excess of what would be expected simply as a consequence of losing weight
There are some caveats that Freedhoff notes. Nonetheless, interesting. (NB I did follow up the publication to see if any letters had been published that disputed the findings or queried any of the assessments or their timings but none had.)

Overall, I can see that there are data sets and reviews that support the notion that caloric restriction and moderate intensity exercise may slow fat loss in combination: that isn't an argument against continuing exercise where people are deriving other useful benefits from it.

The Johannsen study concludes:
Quote:
"Unfortunately, fat free mass preservation did not prevent the slowing of metabolic rate during active weight loss, which may predispose to weight regain unless the participants maintain high levels of physical activity or significant caloric restriction"

Last edited by SlowSure; 05-29-2013 at 01:06 PM..
SlowSure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 02:19 PM   #44
Very Gabby LCF Member!!!
 
calichris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 3,984
Gallery: calichris
Stats: 273.7/212/147 or size 8/10
WOE: 2000/1000 rotations, moderate carb
Start Date: 11/3/14; JUDDD 7/11/12
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlowSure View Post
To be fair to Cronise, although he seems to undercut this in different parts of the article, he is emphatic that he is not advising people that they shouldn't exercise - he is arguing (I think) that if they are doing it solely because they believe it boosts the metabolism, then they should feel free to stop, because it doesn't.
He does give a mixed message, doesn't he?

I don't know ... it's interesting. I'm not completely convinced one way or the other, yet, but it's intriguing. Sometimes all the conflicting theories make me feel . His tone really seemed condescending/dismissive to me though, but maybe I feel defensive because I exercise (and I never would have thought I'd ever be saying that ).

I am very much not surprised that what The Biggest Loser contestants are doing by putting their bodies under such extreme stress and losing so much so quickly ultimately does some damage. I just wanted to make the point, though, that many of them do lose consistently much more than it would be possible to lose by diet alone, so exercise must be doing something. You can visibly see the fat being lost and the muscle being gained, too. But yes, ultimately it seems much too fast to be a good thing.

Last edited by calichris; 05-29-2013 at 02:21 PM..
calichris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 02:32 PM   #45
Very Gabby LCF Member!!!
 
SlowSure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London/Herts UK
Posts: 3,954
Gallery: SlowSure
Stats: 157/105/105-110
WOE: JUDDD Maintenance.
Start Date: 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by calichris View Post
I am very much not surprised that what The Biggest Loser contestants are doing by putting their bodies under such extreme stress and losing so much so quickly ultimately does some damage. I just wanted to make the point, though, that many of them do lose consistently much more than it would be possible to lose by diet alone, so exercise must be doing something. You can visibly see the fat being lost and the muscle being gained, too. But yes, ultimately it seems much too fast to be a good thing.
I haven't seen the Biggest Loser but my impression is that they carry out high volume, high intensity exercise, which is not what most of us do. That volume and intensity coupled with severe caloric restriction is a different kettle of fish to moderate intensity and comparatively low to medium volume amounts of training.

Cronise could do with being clearer that he is distinguishing the normal rote advice to people who want to achieve weight loss (and follow WOEs and programmes similar to those found on JUDDD) and unusual circumstances such as Biggest Loser. (Cronise does stress that the advice is typically grounded in what would help elite athletes derive greater performance advantage from their training than what is of use to everyone else.)

Agreed that this area is unclear and sadly lacking in adequate, relevant data that matches the more usual fat loss scenarios.
SlowSure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 02:50 PM   #46
Major LCF Poster!
 
Nicole T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Annapolis, MD
Posts: 1,069
Gallery: Nicole T
Stats: 193/189/170
WOE: hCG/Paleo
Start Date: 10/7/13
Quote:
Originally Posted by calichris View Post
He does give a mixed message, doesn't he?

I don't know ... it's interesting. I'm not completely convinced one way or the other, yet, but it's intriguing. Sometimes all the conflicting theories make me feel . His tone really seemed condescending/dismissive to me though, but maybe I feel defensive because I exercise (and I never would have thought I'd ever be saying that ).

I am very much not surprised that what The Biggest Loser contestants are doing by putting their bodies under such extreme stress and losing so much so quickly ultimately does some damage. I just wanted to make the point, though, that many of them do lose consistently much more than it would be possible to lose by diet alone, so exercise must be doing something. You can visibly see the fat being lost and the muscle being gained, too. But yes, ultimately it seems much too fast to be a good thing.
I can't begin to imagine the damage that kind of intense exercise does to their adrenal glands! They must be pumping cortisol like crazy!
Nicole T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 04:34 PM   #47
Junior LCF Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Colorado
Posts: 13
Gallery: Azubah
Stats: 185/??/135
WOE: Trying JUDDD
Start Date: 2/26/12
Delurking for a minute -- great discussion, great cites! Thanks so much!

I haven't watched the Biggest Loser for a few years now, because it was just too over-the-top for me. But I do remember a couple of seasons where a competitor couldn't exercise because of injury, and those competitors did better than most of the exercisers. I seem to recall the woman who got rhabdomyolysis and couldn't exercise at all came in either first or second (don't quote me on that, though.) The woman who got a stress fracture and spent the whole time paddling around in the swimming pool did extremely well too.
Azubah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 05:54 PM   #48
Big Yapper!!!!
 
Librarygirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 9,166
Gallery: Librarygirl
Stats: HW 207/(JUDDD) 198/CW 172/GW 150 5'4 49 yo
WOE: JUDDD
Start Date: Low calorie 6/12 ; Low carb 9/12/ ; JUDDD 11/13/12
Interesting stuff here! I know that when I was exercising intensely 3-4 days a week, plus walking (step aerobic classes), I couldn't understand why I couldn't lose weight. I didn't really need to lose a lot of weight at that time, but I bet if I had focused soley on diet, it would have been easier. I have always heard diet AND exercise and basically been told if I didn't exercise I'd never lose and keep it off.
Librarygirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2013, 08:07 AM   #49
Senior LCF Member
 
Planelman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
Posts: 876
Gallery: Planelman
Stats: 350.1/206.4/190(10%BF) 6' 44
WOE: Leangains/Carb Backloading
Start Date: 7/14/2011
Here is the effect that exercise, specifically strength training, had on my weight loss. I exercised the whole time, but once I started doing strength training it accelerated the fat loss and stopped the muscle loss even increasing muscle a bit. Through the last 22 months I averaged about 1.6 pounds lost each week, which is a really healthy pace which gave my body time to adjust and adapt to the weight change. I'm not sure excluding exercise would have increased the pace of weight loss over that time frame or not, but I am happy where I am now. I know that because of the exercise and the pace of my loss I have a lot less loose skin than some of the other people at my gym that have lost similar or less weight where they did not do strength training until they were done losing.

__________________
Mike

159.3 Pounds lost since 7/14/2011

Low Calorie: 7/14/2011 - 80lbs lost
Primal: 4/20/2012 - 55.3lbs lost
JUDDD: 4/10/2013 - 23.4lbs lost
Nutritional Ketosis 9/1/2013 - 15.4% BF
Planelman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2013, 09:20 AM   #50
Way too much time on my hands!
 
Kissa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: London UK
Posts: 19,046
Gallery: Kissa
Stats: 184/137/126 5'3" Age 67
WOE: JUDDD restart 8/25/2014
Start Date: 2001 Atkins -50 2011 JUDDD - 10
Fascinating thread.

Amazing graph Mike. Congratulation on all counts.
Kissa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2013, 09:22 AM   #51
Major LCF Poster!
 
Nicole T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Annapolis, MD
Posts: 1,069
Gallery: Nicole T
Stats: 193/189/170
WOE: hCG/Paleo
Start Date: 10/7/13
Well, after a month on 4:3 (one week was 5:2), I am STILL 180.2 (was 180.6 a month ago).

Starting today I am adding in a kettle bell workout to my 45 minute walk each day. Maybe I need to build more muscle to burn the stubborn fat off
Nicole T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2013, 09:41 AM   #52
Big Yapper!!!!
 
Librarygirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 9,166
Gallery: Librarygirl
Stats: HW 207/(JUDDD) 198/CW 172/GW 150 5'4 49 yo
WOE: JUDDD
Start Date: Low calorie 6/12 ; Low carb 9/12/ ; JUDDD 11/13/12
Nicole, check out my thread about higher DDs. I'm not sure it would work as well without fasting EOD, but it helped me go lower, finally!
Librarygirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2013, 11:15 AM   #53
Very Gabby LCF Member!!!
 
calichris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 3,984
Gallery: calichris
Stats: 273.7/212/147 or size 8/10
WOE: 2000/1000 rotations, moderate carb
Start Date: 11/3/14; JUDDD 7/11/12
Mike, how fantastic to have evidence of losing fat and saving/gaining muscle! How did you figure this out? Do you have a scale that reads body fat, or ? I would love to have data like this.

p.s. I am also hopeful that by losing a bit more slowly (average 5-6 lbs/mo) but exercising it might be good for skin?

Last edited by calichris; 05-30-2013 at 11:18 AM..
calichris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2013, 12:16 PM   #54
Senior LCF Member
 
Planelman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
Posts: 876
Gallery: Planelman
Stats: 350.1/206.4/190(10%BF) 6' 44
WOE: Leangains/Carb Backloading
Start Date: 7/14/2011
In the beginning I had a few readings done on a hand held sensor at the gym, so I only had a few done over that time to get body fat %, muscle %. Then after a while I wanted to track it more often so I bought a scale that does it and provides body fat % and muscle %. This is by no means 100% accurate and depending on your hydration level it can change 2-3% from day to day, so doing it at the same time everyday, under the same conditions helps to see the actual trend if not the exact number. I've checked the body fat % against some online calculators which use various measurements along with weight/height and it is fairly close when looking at an average over several days.

Going slowly with the weight loss is a big factor in giving your skin time to adjust and tighten up. Building muscle will help fill in the space vacated by fat, with a smaller more dense structure so that the skin doesn't have to adjust and tighten up as much.
Planelman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2013, 10:56 PM   #55
Very Gabby LCF Member!!!
 
calichris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 3,984
Gallery: calichris
Stats: 273.7/212/147 or size 8/10
WOE: 2000/1000 rotations, moderate carb
Start Date: 11/3/14; JUDDD 7/11/12
Mike - it seems as though if you are using the same tool at the same time and getting fairly consistent results then that is a good sign that you have a pretty good picture of what is going on.
calichris is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:07 AM.


Copyright ©1999-2014 Friends Forums LLC. All rights reserved. - Terms of Service | Privacy Policy
LowCarbFriends® is a registered mark of Friends Forums, LLC.