Preferences

alexey-salmin parent
You can try long-distance running. 100km a week allows you to indulge extra 5000-8000k calories.

I also enjoy food and always ate a lot (like 2 meals at lunch), and I was thin all the way up to 30 thanks to fast metabolism I guess. If I didn't start running 5 years ago my choice would be between severe cuts to my diet or obesity.


maccard
I fundamentally think pushing people who want to lose weight into cardio is a mistake. It’s definitely good for you but unless you know how to eat you are going to find yourself over eating very quickly
BigGreenJorts
Been upping my cardio recently for non weight reasons (just want to improve overall endurance for certain sports and heart health) man have I been feeling this. It's crazy how much just a little bit of extra cardio revs up my appetite. It's been about a week and I'm still figuring out how to manage it.
rkomorn
100km/week isn't just "cardio", though. It's a whole lot of it.

I agree that "a little cardio" (eg 30-45 minutes 2-3 times a week) can definitely be counterproductive.

I have to mix in a lot of weight lifting to actually lose weight and offset the appetite creep.

alexey-salmin OP
I don't know, it's not an easy path but it works more often than fasting for people around me.

Or you're suggesting exercise but of different kind?

maccard
It’s way easier to avoid eating the calories than it is to exercise them off in practice. For most people exercise will cause them to feel hungry, and to eat. I’d you don’t know how much to eat you’ll end up having the wrong effect and gaining weight.

It’s also way easier to just not eat the calories in the first place. A bag of potato chips or a tbsp of nut butter on a rice cake is roughly the equivalent of 15 minutes of running.

Everyone should exercise and move but if it’s for weight loss diet is the way

alexey-salmin OP
This may be true for real obesity and overeating, but for normal people who just want to lose 5-10 kilos I never saw a diet alone work. They don't eat chips or rice cakes in the first place, their body is in a reasonably healthy equilibrium.

But when you eat less, you just burn less. In the end you're constantly hungry and irritable, you go through all this crap to lose weight and lose none, which doesn't help with the mood either.

At least sport makes you feel good. Dieting without exercise seems to me more like a shortcut into nuthouse.

maccard
5-10kg overweight is anywhere from 10-20% over - that’s actually a lot.

And I used those as examples of snacks that people might have. For people who are looking to drop a few kg, portion control is the key thing. My parents idea of a serving of pasta is “what fits in the plate we’re serving it on” - people who eat healthy and think “I’ll have the avocado salad” and don’t realise the avocado itself is the same calories as the morning roll they skipped and that’s before you add the dressing.

> In the end you're constantly hungry and irritable, you go through all this crap to lose weight and lose none, which doesn't help with the mood either.

You need to eat less than you use to lose weight, whether that’s with or without exercise. Part of losing weight is getting used to what is actual hunger and what is “craving/hormone/comfort” eating. If you don’t do that, you’ll fail even harder when you start exercising because the feelings are mega intense.

I think he's saying you'll compensate by eating more.

Walking might be a better choice but no matter what you do you still need to control the intake of calories.

maccard
Yeah - walking solidly for an hour is going to max out at about 250 calories (unless you start hill walking or adding extra weight). A latte (not even a Starbucks-y sugary one) is about the same amount of calories.

You should walk. It’s really good for you. But skipping the coffee break at the end will have more of an impact on your weight than the walk itself.

theshrike79
People (try to) run too fast by default. I blame movies and media.

The best way to "run" is actually kind of a springy hop at about a brisk walking speed. This is what the actual pros do outside of competitions to build endurance.

AstroBen
Getting into cycling actually has me about to stop intermittent fasting. I go out and can burn 1200 calories in a few hours and that's hard to make up with an 8-hour eating window unless I want to start eating a bunch of junk food. Not trying to lose any more weight
rkomorn
Cycling 10-12 hours a week (and going pretty hard at it thanks to the many hills in the Bay Area) let me eat just about everything I wanted while still losing weight.

If you have the time and enjoy it, there's no better way to be able to stuff yourself silly.

zihotki
You can't outrun a bad diet
pointlessone
100 km is like 12 hours. Probably much more if you’re just starting. 2h/day is quite a commitment.
theshrike79
Related Oatmeal comic about long-distance running: https://theoatmeal.com/comics/running
peterldowns
"Try running 50+ miles a week in order to eat more" is an insane suggestion.
alexey-salmin OP
Why? Not that it's universally applicable, but if it works for you then why not.

This item has no comments currently.