Excersise vs Genetics

The kilogram calorie is today also called kilocalorie (symbol: kcal). The international standard definition of the term "calorie" (symbol: cal) refers today to the gram calorie; this way, the term kilocalorie can also be interpreted to mean 1000 calories. However, where the term "calorie" is used in nutrition and food labeling, it commonly refers to the kilocalorie.
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calories
 
ysabella said:
I do think exercise is important, but I think fat loss is largely managed in the kitchen, too.
Click to expand...

Interesting ysabellla, but I still don't know what it is in that regards for me . As I have posted here before, my stable weight is 110 kg, but because I play rugby and exercise regularly (lifting heavy weights), regardless of how much alcohol I drink and whatever I eat such as MacDonald’s, Burger King, Wendy's, KFC, lamb flaps or briskets, etc,..., I don't gain extra weights at all and still have a flat tummy. I am not sure why, but perhaps, some nutritionist expert can explain the physiology as I have no clue at all. I suspect that if making regular exercise perhaps make the physiology of the body, to subconsciously regulate itself not to gain extra weight, but I am just making assumptions here.
 
This is just a guess, but I would figure that since you've already got a large body mass (110 kg, you're a big guy), it takes time for you to put on weight that you'll notice.
I'm assuming that you're not weighing yourself every day.

So you binge at McDonald's for a week or two, but then get back to the rugby, or whatever, and soon the weight that you may have put on is gone. So long as you don't either put on too much or take off too much, you're not likely to notice. Espeically if you don't obsess about it.
 
Vagabond said:
Well, I know for a fact if you work out enough you can greatly increase your muscle mass. At 16 I was 90 pounds soaking wet and by 18 from doing 100 pushup every night before bed and working out with weights I had put on nearly 50 pounds of muscle.
Click to expand...

Rereading your statement, you appear to be making more than one assumption. 1) That your body had stopped growing and developing by age 16. 3) That all of your 50-lb gain was in muscle, and that none of it was attributable to further growth. 3) That you are remembering correctly. You also fail to give us any idea of your over-all physique at the time, while simultaneously expecting us to assume that a 16-18 year old knew how to measure and differentiate muscle mass from the rest of his body.

Just exactly what measurements did you make and what records did you keep that allow you to make such an assertion? What would your height/weight gain have been without the claimed exercise, and how do you know? Frankly, the implied assertion that you had stopped growing by age 16 casts a lot of doubt on the rest of your statement; it is just not creditable, and it is the foundation of the rest of what you say.
 
It seems to me that we have to distinguish between two things here. There are all sorts of things that can and will kill you whether or not you exercise. At the same time, there are ways that you can abuse your body that will help these things along. It seems reasonable to figure that if I stay reasonably fit, at least I'll die of what I'm supposed to.

When Eubie Blake said "If I'd known I'd live this long I'd have taken better care of myself," in his 90's it was funny. When David Crosby said it awaiting a liver transplant it was arrogant and stupid.

I am luckier than Hydrogen Cyanide in choice of swimming pools. At ours (small local college pool) we are limited to two persons per lane, which is much more conducive to a steady pace, flip turning, and overall enjoyment. I wish swimming were a good weigh loss regimen, but alas, those of us who are shaped more or less like penguins can still swim pretty fast and far, and still come out of the pool hungry. But in the meantime it makes me feel good, which I hope will be the case whether I die young or old.
 
bruto said:
...I am luckier than Hydrogen Cyanide in choice of swimming pools. At ours (small local college pool) we are limited to two persons per lane, which is much more conducive to a steady pace, flip turning, and overall enjoyment. I wish swimming were a good weigh loss regimen, but alas, those of us who are shaped more or less like penguins can still swim pretty fast and far, and still come out of the pool hungry. But in the meantime it makes me feel good, which I hope will be the case whether I die young or old.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The swimming is what I can do (I can do without anymore aerobic class injuries, thank you very much). Yes, it is annoying that the pools are crowded... but that can add to the overall enjoyment. Most of the people who are at the pool are very congenial, so there is nice social interaction.
 
Interesting ysabellla, but I still don't know what it is in that regards for me . As I have posted here before, my stable weight is 110 kg, but because I play rugby and exercise regularly (lifting heavy weights), regardless of how much alcohol I drink and whatever I eat such as MacDonald’s, Burger King, Wendy's, KFC, lamb flaps or briskets, etc,..., I don't gain extra weights at all and still have a flat tummy. I am not sure why, but perhaps, some nutritionist expert can explain the physiology as I have no clue at all. I suspect that if making regular exercise perhaps make the physiology of the body, to subconsciously regulate itself not to gain extra weight, but I am just making assumptions here.
Click to expand...

The word is 'satiety'. You're lucky in that your body shuts off hunger at about the right amount of calories. Other people's definition of "I eat as much as I want" may be twice the calories, and they gain weight with an identical training regimen. There is no evidence that satiety levels can be manipulated.

For some people, they eat three Oreos and they're done. Others finish the bag as a snack and start thinking about lunch.

There's also the issue of serving size. Without starting a thread about fast food, it should be noted that the serving sizes, calorie-wise, are a little high for even the average person, and, they are *very* high for smaller people. A super-sized meal is almost 2 days of calories for a 5'4" woman. It is about .6 day of calories for a 6' tall active and muscular male. She has to reduce her intake by two thirds to be eating "the same meal". Yet, the woman's stomach is about the same size.

In addition, some people really do have more efficient metabolisms, and two people with the same composition and activity level may have as much as 200Cal/day variance. That'll add up.


This is why "If you exercise, you can eat as much as you want" is bad advice for 90% of the population.
 
Last edited:
Lisa Simpson said:
That is exactly the way I am. Skinny legs, no arse, but I have a spare tire (which I am working to get rid of). Abdominal fat is worse for one's health than is butt/thigh fat.

I'm afraid my badonkadonk will always be a badonkadink.
Click to expand...

Lisa your very lucky! I had to work hard at pilates, and then with a fitness trainer, I found that by working the gluteus maximus and medius gave me better shape. I also worked the transverse, internal obliques the main core stabilisers, and the six pack (rectus abdominis) last. I found the pilates superman exercise a great one for targeting the butt area, also a good exercise for strengthening the lower back.
 
Stuart McGill, who is pretty much THE lower back expert (professor of spine biomechanics at University of Waterloo) says to never, ever do the Superman exercise because it causes hellish disc compression forces.
 
Crossfit.com

You wanna see some skeptics take on the traditional "Cardio is king" "Bodybuilding is prince" ways of thinking.

Try a workout of the day for three weeks and tell me if spacing out on the treadmill for 30-45 minutes is the best way for a female to lose weight!

ST
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom