Exercise Might Not Help Lose Weight

[Alx]

10 minutes ago, pganapathy said:

 

I know that I am going to seem defensive in my response, but I am telling you what I saw with my eyes every day for 4 years.  A slim girl at 5 foot nothing who ate all her meals with us, eating as much as classmates of mine who were 6 foot 4 and around a 100 odd KG in weight.  She was probably 50 kg at best.  And she never gained weight.  It isn't like she was anorexic and threw up her food or that she played an extra amount of sports.  I admit she was an exception, but the only explanation is that her metabolism was off the charts, rather than everybody else in that school had low metabolism and we all gained weight, or maintained a much higher weight, when eating a similar amount of food.

I definitely stand by my statement that metabolism can make a huge difference under certain conditions.

I am 100% certain you were not with all of them all the time weighing all their meals. What you saw was just a part of the reality.

Also if were talking kids here up to 16 yo even the 6'4 ones rarely weigh 100 kilos. 

IF what you are saying was actually what was happening and these kids were eating 2600 calories and she was even at 4k calories which is less than what you are claiming there is no way this was due to metabolism. She either has an eating disorder, not able to utilize nutrition properly or another medical condition. Being this extreme however it would not go undiagnosed.

 

Outsiders perspectives are rarely correct:

Ive been in both high and low metabolism groups, atleast by outside estimation. When I was a kid I was often told how lucky I was to not put on weight with all the candy I was eating. We had a school project where we tracked all our calories for a week and guess what I was on the low end despite being 6'3. I was essentially replacing a lot of my meals at home by drinking skim milk.

When I got older and started going to the gym my colleques were amazed how I could gain weight by eating so little compared to female coworkers literally half my size. Again when we counted calories from our daily eating I was coming in at 3500+ and they were in the 2000 range.

Perspective.

[Big Lex]

I did a very unscientific and quick search of scientific literature on this....

I believed that there is likely almost no variation in BMR between individuals...it is linked to body mass and that's basically it. 

I was wrong; there is some variation in experimental studies. 

Meaning....even if you account for differences in muscle/lean mass, fat mass, etc. etc., some people burn more calories just staying alive than others. 

What causes the variation is not known, but the amount of variation is still quite small. As an example, one study of 150 subjects found a difference of 2.5x in BMR. One person's was roughly 1000 kcal/day, and the other's was 2500 kcal/day. They estimated that about 65% of this difference could be attributed to their difference in body composition and other factors. But basically as much as 20% of this difference was unexplained. 

So 20% of 250% is 50%....so there could be a range of 50% difference in metabolism among people, but I would assume this would comprise people across the entire bell curve distribution of BMRs. For people within 1 or 2 SD of the mean, our metabolic rates would be basically the same, or differing by very small amounts. 

Most of the calories used in metabolism are thought to be involved in maintaining fluid balance, meaning preserving the osmolar composition of intracellular and extracellular fluids and electrolytes. Proton pumps, sodium/potassium exchange pumps, etc. Cool. 

[Shorty]

5 hours ago, pganapathy said:

 

I definitely stand by my statement that metabolism can make a huge difference under certain conditions.

You may. But you still don't know anything about her metabolism. You knew a girl who was slim. That's it.

[Vinsk]

37 minutes ago, Shorty said:

You may. But you still don't know anything about her metabolism. You knew a girl who was slim. That's it.

It’s most likely a combination of many things and certainly not just metabolism anyway. Let’s face it..no matter how hard some may train…they’ll never look like Ronnie Colman. This is how many supplements and other products are sold. Cindy Crawford isn’t beautiful because of her products. Her daughter is proof of that.

[Shorty]

19 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

It’s most likely a combination of many things and certainly not just metabolism anyway. 

"Metabolism" is a term that people use to appear knowledgeable about something they know zero about.

"My metabolism is shot"

"He's got a really fast metabolism"

"Apparently her metabolism is through the roof"

It seems strange to me that we have a thread where people seem to be learning that if you drink cola and eat transfats and have a high carb diet, walking to the bus stop doesn't lead to weight loss.

Almost as insane as threads where people talk about how they prepare for a round of golf and what they eat during a round to avoid "fatigue"  whilst riding in a cart in mild weather.

The people who sell products like Powerade (Coca Cola - fancy that) should be ashamed. In 99.99% of cases - the exception being running through the desert in a heatwave, water is fine. And it has 0 calories. You have parents thinking that juniors playing soccer need this garbage.

Edited July 15, 2021 by Shorty

[saevel25]

On 7/15/2021 at 5:22 PM, Vinsk said:

It’s most likely a combination of many things and certainly not just metabolism anyway. Let’s face it..no matter how hard some may train…they’ll never look like Ronnie Colman. This is how many supplements and other products are sold. Cindy Crawford isn’t beautiful because of her products. Her daughter is proof of that.

I found an interesting podcast called the Huberman Lab. Where is goes somewhat into the biochemistry or biomechanics of things to see if there are any ways for us to do things to optimize things like sleep, learning, weight loss, etc... 

He cited a few studies were they showed that people who tend to eat what ever they want, also tend to be fidgety. Meaning, they don't sit idle much. Not that they go for walks all the time, or exercise all the time, but the extra high frequency movements through out the day can cause them to burn anywhere from 800-2500 calories. 

I just think it is hard to peg down the calories burned part of the equation versus calories eaten. 

[billchao]

33 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

He cited a few studies were they showed that people who tend to eat what ever they want, also tend to be fidgety. Meaning, they don't sit idle much.

Interesting. I don’t think I have ever thought of random movements throughout the day as part of caloric burn but it makes sense.

[iacas]

References for my debate with Gary Taubes on The Joe Rogan Experience

and

Why Sugar Did Not Cause the Obesity Epidemic

---

Sugar has been blamed for causing the obesity epidemic by many ‘experts’, but Dr. Layne Norton explains why it’s unlikely sugar caused the obesity crisis

[saevel25]

Yea, I’ve kinda of been off the sugar hate train for a while.

[GolfLug]

I listened to Dr. Norton's interview/podcast last year on IIRC, Huberman. Worth listening and yes, demonizing HFCS or sugars in general as independent agents of obesity is at best misinformed. But from a dependent risk perspective the easiest thing for me to remember as a good reason to control sugar intake is that those who tend to have high sugar intake also tend to have high caloric intake. 

Outside of genetic factors and type of calories to an extent, in general, caloric surplus continues to be a singularly consistent factor in determining how overweight you are going to. I don't care if you fast for 16-18 hours. or any other time-managed eating. You can only eat so much before you start storing more than you will ever use. 

[p1n9183]

Is all about the balance between calories consumed / digested vs calories burned though the day.
The best way to lose weight is to keep your mouth shut! eat less. Consume less calories than your body needs and you will loose weight eventually. Slowly but surely.
Off course you can ad extra workout to your day to burn more calories but it's a lot easier to avoid eating that 2nd burger than going out to run an hour or more to burn it.

I went from 75 kilos down to 63 in 1 year just because I wasn't able to eat without pain. In that year I didn't exercise at all in that period, I was feeling bad every day. It was all about not eating enough. 
2 years later I regained all my weight, just because I started eating more because I was feeling better. Also in that period I started to hit the gym and play more golf. Burned a lot more calories but also eat a LOT more food. 

Fast and slow metabolism is a thing but is just an excuse to quit. If you have a slow metabolism and you want to lose weight is going to be harder for you to lose weight than a person that have fast metabolism, but is possible if you really commit to it. 

Bonus track... the bigger the muscles, the more calories they burn during the day even when they are resting. So lifting weight while dieting is better than dieting with cardio. 

 

What is real in a diet? The ideal number is to eat 500 calories less than you burn per day.
In 2 week you will be 7000 calories down. That equals to 1 kilo or 2 pounds.
So the idea is to loose 2 kilos / 4 pounds a months... it seams to little but over a year is a whopping 24 kilos / 48 pounds. Remember... if you commit to loose way Slowly but surely you will lose weight. Never believe when someone try's to sell you, that you can loose 20 pounds in one month. Is not possible or healthy. 

Another thing when you start to diet is don't get discouraged if after a week you stop going down in weight, even you start to go up. is normal, when you start to diet, you normally loose a couple pounds in water, yes that water is from water retention from your previous diet. 
Just keep on grinding and you will keep loosing weight eventually.

Also worth pointing out, the body always tends to stay the same. If your weight is 100 and you start a diet, you body is going to notice that the calories intake is been dramatically reduced, so in order to keep you at 100 kilos is going to slow down your metabolism in order for you to burn less calories. Eventually this is not going to be enough and you will start to loose weight but your body is not going to make it easy on you.   

 

[iacas]

3 hours ago, p1n9183 said:

What is real in a diet? The ideal number is to eat 500 calories less than you burn per day.
In 2 week you will be 7000 calories down. That equals to 1 kilo or 2 pounds.

When you're quite overweight, you burn more calories just existing than someone much thinner just existing, so it's easier to lose more weight more quickly, too. A very large person can lose 10-12 pounds in three weeks without being unhealthy about rapid weight loss. If you weigh 170 and want to weigh 160, though, you should take your time getting down there.

[saevel25]

23 hours ago, iacas said:

When you're quite overweight, you burn more calories just existing than someone much thinner just existing, so it's easier to lose more weight more quickly, too.

Can confirm. I lost like 80+ lbs in about 3 years after college. I was probably near the 300-lb range at some point in life. It is always very fast at the start. 

On 1/22/2025 at 3:42 PM, p1n9183 said:

What is real in a diet? The ideal number is to eat 500 calories less than you burn per day.
In 2 week you will be 7000 calories down. That equals to 1 kilo or 2 pounds.
So the idea is to loose 2 kilos / 4 pounds a months... it seams to little but over a year is a whopping 24 kilos / 48 pounds. Remember... if you commit to loose way Slowly but surely you will lose weight. Never believe when someone try's to sell you, that you can loose 20 pounds in one month. Is not possible or healthy. 

You should take its as a % of your body weight. 5% of a 400-lb person is 20-lbs, 5% of a 180-lb person is 9-lbs. 

Losing 20-lbs for a 400-lb person is healthy, but it might not be healthy for a 180-lb person. 

On 1/22/2025 at 3:42 PM, p1n9183 said:

Another thing when you start to diet is don't get discouraged if after a week you stop going down in weight, even you start to go up. is normal, when you start to diet, you normally loose a couple pounds in water, yes that water is from water retention from your previous diet. 
Just keep on grinding and you will keep loosing weight eventually.

It all depends how you are tracking things. I recommend weighting yourself at the same time every day or every other day. I like in the morning before you drink any water.

Water weight is substantial. Like, 3-5 lbs can be lost during an hard workout. You can lose 3lbs of water weight over night through respiration. 

As long as you are seeing a downward trend (negative slop) to the curve over a few months then what you are doing is working, even though you may gain weight one day but then lose weight over the next 3-4 days. 

 

[p1n9183]

I agree with you both, the bigger you are it's going to be easier to lose weight. We are 70/80% water. So loosing water weight is a big part in dieting. You can loose a lot of weight during an intense workout the same way you can retain a lot of water after a big salty meal.
Weight yourself naked every morning before doing anything an pick an average of the week and look at the trend of the month. If you are not going down in weight then add a couple more exercise to the week or reduce 500 calories for you daily diet. 

The key is patience, it took you years to pack a little extra weight. It's going to take you years to cut them off, that's way most people don't succeed. A magic pill / diet / routine is not going to make it happen a couple weeks before summer. 
 

[saevel25]

1 hour ago, p1n9183 said:

If you are not going down in weight then add a couple more exercise to the week or reduce 500 calories for you daily diet. 

I think calorie counting is good to learn how much to eat. It is tough to know how much you are burning every day. The best way, and it takes longer, is trial and error. Just keep cutting until you see that downward trend (over the course of months) in the weight. 

Make some life choices. Do you want to drink your calories (soda's, beer, wine, etc...). This could be a huge calorie savings. Eat more foods that keep you feeling full longer. More fiber, protein, whole foods. Stay away from highly processed foods. I can make a BIG bowl of pasta that doesn't touch 800 calories. You eat one burger from Wendy's and its over 1000. It isn't about what type of food makes you gain or lose weight, but certain foods make it more difficult to hit the calorie deficit. 

I would say the best diets are Mediterranean or Blue Zone diets. 

 

[Ty_Webb]

The way that I see this works is that your metabolic rate varies with your weight. If you weigh 150 lbs, your maintenance rate might be 1,800 calories a day. If you weigh 300 lbs, that might be 3,000 calories a day. I suspect that most people have a typical amount of calories that they consume in a given day. If that's 3,000 a day then eventually you're going to hit 300 lbs and stay there. If you want to get down to 150 lbs, then you need, long-term, to be eating 1,800 calories a day. That would have you losing roughly 2.5 lbs per week to begin with, but once you're half way there, it's more like 1.25 lbs and the last few lbs might take a few months. You can eat less than 1,800 calories and you'll get there faster. But if you go back to 3,000 calories a day then you're going to head back up to 300. Only way to stay at 150 is to stay at 1,800 calories/day. Or you spend 45 minutes a day on the treadmill and make that 2,000 calories. Hard to get around that though. 

[saevel25]

 

48 minutes ago, Ty_Webb said:

The way that I see this works is that your metabolic rate varies with your weight. If you weigh 150 lbs, your maintenance rate might be 1,800 calories a day. If you weigh 300 lbs, that might be 3,000 calories a day.

Depends on the person. Metabolic rates can vary in the thousands of calories per day from the low to the high end.

[Ty_Webb]

19 hours ago, saevel25 said:

 

Depends on the person. Metabolic rates can vary in the thousands of calories per day from the low to the high end.

I think BMR is pretty consistent given your body weight (lean body mass probably).