[Use Of Weapons]

_Guns, Germs And Steel_ is emphatically supportive of the case for agriculture leading to increased leisure time and hence the capacity for overproduction and specialisation. It in no way supports the case for the hunter-gatherer lifestyle being easier than that of early farmers.

[gulex]

Macros: You're right. We emphasize vastly different things in the obesity debate. As you say i value evolution as the main argument while you, with good reason, look upon more recent trends. I never meant to say that excercise was not a factor (which i realise now, is actually what i said but not what i meant) what i mean is that it isn't a very important factor. You are ofcourse right than over the last 1000 years our physical activity has decreased (i' presume) - and this has likely caused weight gain. My point is that the correct diet could fix this irrespectively of wether we exercise or not. In effect im saying that exercise will burn carbohydrates, which allows for a greater general consumption without an accompanied weight gain. If we lose the excercise but continually eat alot of carbs we'll get fat. A change in diet would solve this easy piecy. More exercise could do the same thing but i argue for the diet solution because it isn't as time consuming and likely easier to convey to a nation of couch potatoes.
We clearly disagree regarding the ease/hardship of paleolithic life - and we're entitled to our opinions. There is, afterall, no general consensus in the archeological/anthropological community.


That said i actually thought your post was Morgoth's - hence the exasperation and annoyance. Sorry about that. No more posting after 00:00 for me lol.

Concerning Jared Diamond - my post mistakenly suggests that i use him in my argument for the ease of paleolithic life. This is not the case. I cite him as a proponent of the idea that agriculture caused tyranny, disease, starvation.

Morgoth: I don't see how what i referred does not support the thesis i'm proposing - They admit the existence of other factors while stating that nutrition, likely, is the major one. I never denied the existence of other factors. I just said that diet was the obvious main factor. You do agree now that diet is the main factor, no?

This post has been edited by gulex: 23 August 2012 - 03:07 PM

[Use Of Weapons]

I don't think you can legitimately argue that agriculture _caused_ disease and starvation. It created food surpluses, engendered trade, and caused population explosions, which unchecked resulted in those results. But that isn't the fault of agriculture, and to decry it as such is to unfairly downplay the role of human societies in contributing to their own downfall. It's the latter argument that Jared Diamond really supports, more in _Collapse_ than in _Guns, Germs and Steel_.

[JLV]

Also, I'd like to point out that muscles don't come without doing anything. If we're talking healthy weight with little muscle, that's accomplish-able without increasing exercise, it just requires absolute mastery of the diet.

Just like muscular bodies are possible with poor diet, it just requires mastery of weightlifting or other such exercises.

Or, you can go the happy medium, and fix most of your diet, and exercise a decent amount. Then you can look good, feel good, and not kill yourself trying to count calories, plan macros, workout 6 times a week, etc.

[Macros]

I'm fine with my weight and general.physical condition.
If people want to lie up and watch tv that's fine by me too, it just doesn't appeal to me.

I feel taking a wholly dietary approach to weight control is,however, quite reckless with your body.
We're an active species and always have been, suddenly dropping the physical activity is, imo, a bad idea. Weight concerns aside, without using our bodies we open our selves up to other problems by not putting a strain on our bodies on a regular basis. The most obvious is a diminished capacity for any kind of exertion should it become necessary and bones which are lower in density and therefore more brittle.

@gulex we're just going to have to agree to disagree.
If hunter gatherers had all their food handed to them through a drive through window, and they didn't have to chase it, I thi k they would have been rolling through that drive through in no time

[Macros]

Sorry, double post, but this hqs been itching jn the back of my head since this morning.

Quote

My point is that the correct diet could fix this irrespectively of wether we exercise or not. In effect im saying that exercise will burn carbohydrates, which allows for a greater general consumption without an accompanied weight gain. If we lose the excercise but continually eat alot of carbs we'll get fat. A change in diet would solve this easy piecy. More exercise could do the same thing but i argue for the diet solution because it isn't as time consuming and likely easier to convey to a nation of couch potatoes.

I can't agree with this.
If you have to watch your diet minutely to keep the weight down, for most people, you're Doug something wrong.
I'm sure out h&g ancestors ate whatever came along and didn't count calories, they were active and that what balanced out bad diet days (not discounting diet, its clearly a factor)
I refuse to believe people have no need to exercise, and selling the idea that we can to the 'couch potatoes' is a road to ruin

Strength through joy
Hard work will set you free
And various other feel good motivational slogans

[gulex]

Macros, on 23 August 2012 - 10:25 PM, said:

Sorry, double post, but this hqs been itching jn the back of my head since this morning.

Quote

My point is that the correct diet could fix this irrespectively of wether we exercise or not. In effect im saying that exercise will burn carbohydrates, which allows for a greater general consumption without an accompanied weight gain. If we lose the excercise but continually eat alot of carbs we'll get fat. A change in diet would solve this easy piecy. More exercise could do the same thing but i argue for the diet solution because it isn't as time consuming and likely easier to convey to a nation of couch potatoes.

I can't agree with this.
If you have to watch your diet minutely to keep the weight down, for most people, you're Doug something wrong.
I'm sure out h&g ancestors ate whatever came along and didn't count calories, they were active and that what balanced out bad diet days (not discounting diet, its clearly a factor)
I refuse to believe people have no need to exercise, and selling the idea that we can to the 'couch potatoes' is a road to ruin

Strength through joy
Hard work will set you free
And various other feel good motivational slogans

The thing is that counting calories is wholly unneccesary with the right diet. A calorie is not a calorie. Our body metabolizes macronutrients differently. Fat people, eating the correct diet, wouldn't have to either to lose weight. Its really not hard at all. Imo the data just doesn't support the idea that exercise should be a good weight loss tool (again we'll have to agree to disagree) It is, however, good for a range of other things. It builds muscle (strength training ofcourse) it increases insulin sensitivity and a range of other things that i haven't read properly up on. I do strength training and sprinting for these reasons. It is in other words essential for health but not for leanness.

'Hard work will set you free' isn't that a puritan work ethic?

This post has been edited by gulex: 24 August 2012 - 10:53 AM

[Coco with marshmallows]

gulex, on 24 August 2012 - 10:52 AM, said:

Imo the data just doesn't support the idea that exercise should be a good weight loss tool (again we'll have to agree to disagree)

i'm not entirely sure how to take this... surely it's self evident?
or to put it another way, i've never seen a fat sprinter.

granted there are a number of ways to exercise that don't involve losing actively losing weight, but even then they would tend to equate to a transformation of the body, ie you're losing fat and building muscle, but not overall losing weight.

[gulex]

Again i'll emphasize: I''m not saying it DOESN'T cause weight loss. I'm saying its an insignificant amount and the method is ineffective. The main benefits of exercise is imo not weight loss.

[Use Of Weapons]

gulex, on 24 August 2012 - 12:45 PM, said:

Again i'll emphasize: I''m not saying it DOESN'T cause weight loss. I'm saying its an insignificant amount and the method is ineffective. The main benefits of exercise is imo not weight loss.

I don't know why people are being so polite. This is utter garbage, and counter to the findings of all research and the recommendations of any health professional who doesn't have a vested interest in the diet industry.

[amphibian]

gulex, on 24 August 2012 - 10:52 AM, said:

The thing is that counting calories is wholly unneccesary with the right diet. A calorie is not a calorie. Our body metabolizes macronutrients differently. Fat people, eating the correct diet, wouldn't have to either to lose weight. Its really not hard at all. Imo the data just doesn't support the idea that exercise should be a good weight loss tool (again we'll have to agree to disagree) It is, however, good for a range of other things. It builds muscle (strength training ofcourse) it increases insulin sensitivity and a range of other things that i haven't read properly up on. I do strength training and sprinting for these reasons. It is in other words essential for health but not for leanness.

The problem with saying "exercise isn't a good weight loss tool" is that most of the studies that say stuff like this experienced people who ate MORE than they previously had, while exercising.

There's stories of Mark Rippetoe, one of the best no BS fitness and well-being guys in existence, going to a burger joint, ordering a bunch of cheap burgers, throwing away the buns and eating the meat and veggies. He doesn't watch what he eats religiously and he's enormously fit and strong, as well as a very trusted coach.

As always, the Rippetoe wisdom is pity and eminently quotable: http://startingstren...f_Mark_Rippetoe

Quote

You guys that worry about eating clean are actually merely bodybuilders looking for justification for your obsession with abs. You cannot get big and strong on 3000 kcal/day. And you cannot eat 7000/day and eat perfectly "clean".

This post has been edited by amphibian: 24 August 2012 - 01:43 PM

[gulex]

Use of Weapons: Wouw, you just debunked me completely there pal - and you didn't even have to provide a coherent argument - Is it some rhetorical secret you'd, by chance, like to share? or do i really just have to smear people in the midst of a peaceful discussion without reason?

amphibian: I have never heard about this - it could be true. But i suspect that researchers would factor this in, no? it is afterall a pretty obvious factor. Cochrane reviews (an independent study-review site) used to have a metastudy available concluding that weightloss from exercise was 'clinically insignificant' but i cant seem to find it on their site anymore. They must've taken it down for some reason.

http://well.blogs.ny...to-weight-loss/ This article sums up the trouble of losing weight by exercise pretty well (i disagree with their a-calorie-is-a-calorie premise ofcourse) it can be done. But i'd take the diet option any day due to its ease.

[D'rek]

Maybe exercising is easier for some people and dieting is easier for some other people and there really is no general "easier" method?

[Abyss]

MODGOD NOTICE OF BE NICE.
Do not turn the thread into arguing about arguing.

[amphibian]

D, on 24 August 2012 - 06:01 PM, said:

Maybe exercising is easier for some people and dieting is easier for some other people and there really is no general "easier" method?

The best way is to do both.

However, there's a bit of tricks that your own mind/body play upon you when you ramp up the exercise or cut down on the food eaten.

People unused to exercise often eat more than they need to when exercising (although elite athletes almost can't eat enough to keep the muscle weight on due to the strenuous exercise demands) and then think that they're just not losing any weight because nothing's changing.

In the converse, people cutting down their food intake often get lethargic and don't keep up their usual exertion levels, so they don't see/feel changes either.

Your body wants to stay at whatever state it is in now. It will fight you often when you try to change that and do so in subtle ways. The eventual changes also take place over a longer time period than we're really prepared to notice without time lapse pictures and so on. That trickery regarding self-perception and body regulation is probably the biggest cause of the dubious "exercise isn't a great way to lose weight" proposition.

However, all others things the same, exercise is better than diet for being healthier and losing bad weight.

[Abyss]

My $0.02 - it ultimately comes down to finding the balance of diet and exercise that works for the individual.

Since individual metabolisms and body types vary, what works varies between individuals, even before we factor in lifestyle, non-exercise activity level and goals like looking good at the beach, training for an athletic event, dealing with a specific medical issue, etc.

So the various approaches upthread may all work for some people, and some of them may work for most people, but none of them will work for every person.

There's a trainer in Toronto who specializes in fast workouts for busy people. Get in, blast your muscles, get out. 20min average, as often as you can make it to a session. No stretching. None. The 'no stretching' part blows most other trainers minds to the point of some labeling him a danger to his clients. But some of his clients borderline worship him. And some ex-clients think he's a nut. In essence YMMV.

[Macros]

Off topic a second:
YMMV?

[amphibian]

Abyss, on 24 August 2012 - 08:32 PM, said:

There's a trainer in Toronto who specializes in fast workouts for busy people. Get in, blast your muscles, get out. 20min average, as often as you can make it to a session. No stretching. None. The 'no stretching' part blows most other trainers minds to the point of some labeling him a danger to his clients. But some of his clients borderline worship him. And some ex-clients think he's a nut. In essence YMMV.

Unless you are doing dance, grappling, striking or something that needs a high level of flexibility and many, many weird movements, you shouldn't be stretching before a workout.

Stretching after the running or weightlifting, yes, that helps.

[Use Of Weapons]

Gulex: you appear to intend 'weight loss' to mean 'reduction of total body mass, regardless of composition.' Most normal people mean 'reduction in body fat %'. Clearly, exercise is beneficial for the latter. For the former: well, it depends on your starting point.

[gulex]

Use of Weapons: No i do not. I mean fat loss but i dont really see a discussion with you going anywhere to be honest.