|
goldblum
6,800 posts
36 months
|
Yep.
Lack of exercise leads to..heart disease,various unpleasant cancers (not that any are pleasant)diabetes,premature aging and mortality,atherosclerosis,osteoporosis..it goes on and on.
|
|
|
Lost_BMW
10,650 posts
45 months
|
goldblum said: There are many more risk factors for mortality and disease associated with a sedentary lifestyle than any single one of the other health/lifestyle habits.
I've just completed an extremely boring Health Screening module for my degree. Recently, an expert on a Radio 4 programme said that, in terms of the risk of someone becoming diabetic, he'd favour the overweight man who exercised regularly not to get it over someone on weight or lighter who didn't exercise.
|
|
|
goldblum
6,800 posts
36 months
|
Yep,if you want to live a long a healthy life you best start exercising now.As LBMW has pointed out you can still be overweight but as soon as you start physical activity the risk of certain diseases starts to decrease.
|
|
|
GBDG
814 posts
23 months
|
If you watched the panorama program "The truth about exercise" that was on a while ago (the one where all your fat friends resolved to do 20 seconds a day exercise, before they gave up a week later, not before acting smug about how you 'waste' hours in the gym).
The most interesting thing they touched upon was the impact that physical activity had on the bodies ability to process food, particularly fat. They did an experiment where he ate a full English on two days. One day he was inactive, the other he went for a long walk before eating. The results were quite amazing, on the active day his blood fat level was significantly lower.
|
|
|
theshrew
1,509 posts
53 months
|
goldblum said: .What is the cause No.1 cause of obesity? It's lack of exercise. Having a mouth bigger than your ar*se hole
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
theshrew
1,509 posts
53 months
|
GBDG said: If you watched the panorama program "The truth about exercise" that was on a while ago (the one where all your fat friends resolved to do 20 seconds a day exercise, before they gave up a week later, not before acting smug about how you 'waste' hours in the gym).
The most interesting thing they touched upon was the impact that physical activity had on the bodies ability to process food, particularly fat. They did an experiment where he ate a full English on two days. One day he was inactive, the other he went for a long walk before eating. The results were quite amazing, on the active day his blood fat level was significantly lower. Yeah i watched that was quite shocking about the fat. I dont really think that the tiny bit of a work out is really that good. In my own opinion all that was showing is that some people are just pretty lean without doing anything or watching what they eat. Others like myself just have to look at a bag of chips and you put 3 stone on. My thoughts are if im working out im giving my body the best chance to be healthy + you get the added weight loss.
|
|
|
Hoofy
47,972 posts
151 months
|
|
|
Hoofy
47,972 posts
151 months
|
theshrew said: Others like myself just have to look at a bag of chips and you put 3 stone on. See when you post this, I imagine you're obese but your recent pics suggest the opposite. Do you have any "before" and "after" pics?
|
|
|
theshrew
1,509 posts
53 months
|
Hoofy said: See when you post this, I imagine you're obese but your recent pics suggest the opposite. Do you have any "before" and "after" pics? No not got any before pics well not of my body. The photo in the other thread was taken at the time and lost 95% of what i have when that was taken. Ive not found it hard its more of having to be very carefull of what i eat. As i didnt eat that bad before tbh when i was a big chodder lol. Played about with intake etc for a month or so and ive started to loose again now but very slowly.
|
|
|
goldblum
6,800 posts
36 months
|
GBDG said: If you watched the panorama program "The truth about exercise" that was on a while ago (the one where all your fat friends resolved to do 20 seconds a day exercise, before they gave up a week later, not before acting smug about how you 'waste' hours in the gym).
The most interesting thing they touched upon was the impact that physical activity had on the bodies ability to process food, particularly fat. They did an experiment where he ate a full English on two days. One day he was inactive, the other he went for a long walk before eating. The results were quite amazing, on the active day his blood fat level was significantly lower. This is not new information but for once sensationalism on TV has done some good.I've heard a number of people talk about it.The fact is that it's easier to lose weight by doing exercise than by dieting.There are metabolic effects that occur as a direct result of exercise,ie at moderate-highish levels of maximal heart rate is where maximum fat oxidation occurs.But even at walking pace with Hr = 100 bpm triglycerides are still broken down by enzymes (I'm simplifying here to keep you reading!)Triglyceride (3 fatty acid,1 glycerol) is the fat stored in fat cells. The fatty acid molecule is too large to pass through the cell wall into the bloodstream without an enzyme (lipase)which,when energy is needed,is activated and splits the fat molecule which is then free to enter the bloodstream.Muscle lipase (LPL) activity increases with the volume of aerobic training.Therefore someone who is fit can derive more energy requirements from fat than an unfit person.
|
|
|
Halb
17,870 posts
52 months
|
I was quietly surprised (but also at the same time expecting it) at the amount of fat reduction after the extreme exercise.
The method in the show used (was it tabata?) the 20 second intensity, then 20 second rest? Repeat thrice.
Are the gaps necessary? Say one tries to get a good time on the rower for 500 metres? That would have the same effect?
|
|
|
goldblum
6,800 posts
36 months
|
If the exercise is too intense you will start to struggle for breath,fat oxidation will drop off as you become anaerobic,but you will still burn calories..Interval training is certainly good for fitness but it's better for race training as the point of it is to extend the period of time you can run for anaerobically ie very fast,and train the body in order to extend it..Interval training (called HIIT by non runners,as if they've just invented it  ). The other thing is that unless you're fit you won't actually be able to go very fast for very long! So..in order to burn fat at the optimum rate the exercise you're doing should leave you able to breathe easily or talk to the person next to you as you are exercising.If you go too fast you do not get enough oxygen as you struggle for breath and fat oxidation drops off.LA production also inhibits lipase action btw.
|
|
|
Halb
17,870 posts
52 months
|
The 'fat burning area' found in Long Slow Distance training? So the there is a maximum benefit area where the oxygen levels need to be right (not too fast to deplete it from the body?) where fat is the best fuel for the body, and if one pushes it and the body need more oxygen where does the energy come? Still same place but the duration will be less as the body shuts down with less oxygen? Also, what is your job? 
|
|
|
goldblum
6,800 posts
36 months
|
Halb said: Say one tries to get a good time on the rower for 500 metres? That would have the same effect? It's possible but unlikely as you would be heaving to breathe after a few seconds,unless you're a monster rower? Don't forget that for the sake of the programme they were training for chemical effect,you won't lose weight doing what they did.  lol
|
|
|
Smitters
530 posts
26 months
|
theshrew said: So how many cals were you on ? And how many now ?
Ive upped mine ( not sure how many and have noticed a slight loss again ) Tell you what though since ive been eating more trying to up them ive never felt so hungry lol I was at 85kg, with a sedentary job plus specific exercise and was on a net 1200 cal. That's to say eating, say 2000, but burning 800. I'm now at 75kg. My joints always suffered, so the extreme diet approach to weight-loss was initially necessary to reduce risk of injury, but as the weight loss has allowed more impact-based exercise (read running and long distance walking) I can burn more calories per hour and exercise for longer, so find it much easier to achieve a net calorie goal. I'm now hitting about 2000 net, overfuelling the day/night before really big training days and being mindful on rest days of proper refuelling but not over-eating. It's made a massive difference to my mood, that's for sure. goldblum said: It wasn't meant to be.I'm just trying to make a point about weightloss in a roundabout manner,aware that some on here might have strong opposing views,and avoid having to reference papers,journals etc.
Here's an interesting fact..What is the cause No.1 cause of obesity? It's lack of exercise. I'm with you. I guess in simplified terms it's easy to do catchy soundbytes, but it's really a chicken and egg situation. You could argue that people who are obese got there through either a perfect diet and zero exercise, or a poor diet and plenty of exercise, but neither extreme would be true and it would always be somewhere on a sliding scale between those points. And that's before you get into genetics, twin studies and so on. I'd always be up for reading journals/papers - I research for a living (albeit rocks), but I'm well aware that rather like the internet, for every paper that says A is a controlling factor in B, there is another paper or article that says quite the opposite. The letters after name just make the bickering appear higher brow. Smitters BSC, SSC
|
|
|
Halb
17,870 posts
52 months
|
goldblum said: It's possible but unlikely as you would be heaving to breathe after a few seconds,unless you're a monster rower? Don't forget that for the sake of the programme they were training for chemical effect,you won't lose weight doing what they did. lol Something I forgot to add to the question. I asked because I was interested in the fat burning 'status' of the body afterwards. They mentioned and I have heard before that the HIIT burns fat for days after, or keeps your body in that 'mode'? (I'm pulling words out of the air here ). Now I exhausted myself completely on the rower on Monday (teeth hurt, felt lightheaded, took 10 mins plus to recover properly etc), now that was pretty high intense so I was wondering if that would also have the same effect, I would guess yes, and the only reason that the gaps are needed is to ensure you hit 100% because most people couldn't go at 100% for long?
|
|
|
Smitters
530 posts
26 months
|
Halb said: The 'fat burning area' found in Long Slow Distance training? So the there is a maximum benefit area where the oxygen levels need to be right (not too fast to deplete it from the body?) where fat is the best fuel for the body, and if one pushes it and the body need more oxygen where does the energy come? Still same place but the duration will be less as the body shuts down with less oxygen? Also, what is your job? In simple terms, as I understand it, you've got two main pots of energy for endurance exercise, fat and glycogen. At lower intensities, your body targets glycogen and fat, with a lower percentage focus on glycogen, whereas higher intensities preferentially targets glycogen over fat. Glycogen runs out much more quickly as the body can only store so much. Running out is what's know as bonking/hitting the wall, so a refuelling strategy is essential in any situation where you're exercising at a rate, or for a period of time where you will deplete your glycogen stores. The classic theory for marathoners was to steadily increase your long slow run so as to train your body to burn fat preferentially. Quite how this is perceived now I'm not sure and everything above is no doubt a vast simplification. PH points for the first person who adequately analogises it with a hybrid car...
|
|
|
goldblum
6,800 posts
36 months
|
Halb said: The 'fat burning area' found in Long Slow Distance training? So the there is a maximum benefit area where the oxygen levels need to be right (not too fast to deplete it from the body?) where fat is the best preferred fuel for the body, and if one pushes it and the body need more oxygen where does the energy come? Still same place but the duration will be less as the body shuts down with less oxygen? Also, what is your job? Yes(but the effect is there on shorter runs as well),Yes,the anaerobic system ie anaerobic glycolysis (glycogen stored in muscles and the liver) but this won't last for long.. 2 mins-ish when you'll be forced to slow down by the muscles need for oxygen. I work in the exercise industry as a trainer to MAs,lifters and runners. I've done MAs for 25 years,been a PT for 15 and run 7 clubs.Also currently studying at MMU.In fact supposed to be writing an essay now but have been busy procrastinating and chatting with you lot, lol.
|
|
|
GBDG
814 posts
23 months
|
So day one on the ultimate WLS. No shaking so far, energy feels up and focus is good. Feel a little bit more clammy than usual, although it's quite warm in the office. My resting heart rate has rocketed to almost 50bpm!  I've not eaten much so far today, and I would usually be starving by this time, so possibly having positive effect on appetite, which is nice.
|
|
|
deadmau5
2,090 posts
49 months
|
GBDG said: So day one on the ultimate WLS. No shaking so far, energy feels up and focus is good. Feel a little bit more clammy than usual, although it's quite warm in the office. My resting heart rate has rocketed to almost 50bpm! I've not eaten much so far today, and I would usually be starving by this time, so possibly having positive effect on appetite, which is nice. That's strange! I had shakes and sweating but no effect at all on appetite.
|
|
