You know there are people who complain about things, complain, WHINE WHINE WHINE...
and there are those who stop whining and stop doing something about it.
Moving on to the latter...
Sunday, November 08, 2009
NOW THEN YOU TELL ME...
From the New York Times:
Phys Ed: Why Doesn’t Exercise Lead to Weight Loss?
By Gretchen Reynolds
Sven Hagolani/Getty Images
For some time, researchers have been finding that people who exercise don’t necessarily lose weight. A study published online in September in The British Journal of Sports Medicine was the latest to report apparently disappointing slimming results. In the study, 58 obese people completed 12 weeks of supervised aerobic training without changing their diets. The group lost an average of a little more than seven pounds, and many lost barely half that.
How can that be? Exercise, it seems, should make you thin. Activity burns calories. No one doubts that.
Phys Ed
“Walking, even at a very easy pace, you’ll probably burn three or four calories a minute,” beyond what you would use quietly sitting in a chair, said Dan Carey, Ph.D., an assistant professor of exercise physiology at the University of St. Thomas in Minnesota, who studies exercise and metabolism.
But few people, an overwhelming body of research shows, achieve significant weight loss with exercise alone, not without changing their eating habits. A new study from scientists at the University of Colorado School of Medicine in Denver offers some reasons why. For the study, the researchers recruited several groups of people. Some were lean endurance athletes; some sedentary and lean; some sedentary and obese. Each of the subjects agreed to spend, over the course of the experiment, several 24-hour periods in a special laboratory room (a walk-in calorimeter) that measures the number of calories a person burns. Using various calculations, the researchers could also tell whether the calories expended were in the form of fat or carbohydrates, the body’s two main fuel sources. Burning more fat than carbohydrates is obviously desirable for weight loss, since the fat being burned comes primarily from body fat stores, and we all, even the leanest among us, have plenty of those.
The Denver researchers were especially interested in how the athletes’ bodies would apportion and use calories. It has been well documented that regular endurance training increases the ability of the body to use fat as a fuel during exercise. They wondered, though, if the athletes — or any of the other subjects — would burn extra fat calories after exercising, a phenomenon that some exercisers (and even more diet and fitness books) call “afterburn.”
“Many people believe that you rev up” your metabolism after an exercise session “so that you burn additional body fat throughout the day,” said Edward Melanson, Ph.D., an associate professor in the division of endocrinology at the School of Medicine and the lead author of the study. If afterburn were found to exist, it would suggest that even if you replaced the calories you used during an exercise session, you should lose weight, without gaining weight — the proverbial free lunch.
Each of Melanson’s subjects spent 24 quiet hours in the calorimeter, followed later by another 24 hours that included an hourlong bout of stationary bicycling. The cycling was deliberately performed at a relatively easy intensity (about 55 percent of each person’s predetermined aerobic capacity). It is well known physiologically that, while high-intensity exercise demands mostly carbohydrate calories (since carbohydrates can quickly reach the bloodstream and, from there, laboring muscles), low-intensity exercise prompts the body to burn at least some stored fat. All of the subjects ate three meals a day.
To their surprise, the researchers found that none of the groups, including the athletes, experienced “afterburn.” They did not use additional body fat on the day when they exercised. In fact, most of the subjects burned slightly less fat over the 24-hour study period when they exercised than when they did not.
“The message of our work is really simple,” although not agreeable to hear, Melanson said. “It all comes down to energy balance,” or, as you might have guessed, calories in and calories out. People “are only burning 200 or 300 calories” in a typical 30-minute exercise session, Melanson points out. “You replace that with one bottle of Gatorade.”
This does not mean that exercise has no impact on body weight, or that you can’t calibrate your workouts to maximize the amount of body fat that you burn, if that’s your goal.
“If you work out at an easy intensity, you will burn a higher percentage of fat calories” than if you work out a higher intensity, Carey says, so you should draw down some of the padding you’ve accumulated on the hips or elsewhere — if you don’t replace all of the calories afterward. To help those hoping to reduce their body fat, he published formulas in The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research last month that detailed the heart rates at which a person could maximize fat burning. “Heart rates of between 105 and 134” beats per minute, Carey said, represent the fat-burning zone. “It’s probably best to work out near the top of that zone,” he says, “so that you burn more calories over all” than at the extremely leisurely lower end.
Perhaps just as important, bear in mind that exercise has benefits beyond weight reduction. In the study of obese people who took up exercise, most became notably healthier, increasing their aerobic capacity, decreasing their blood pressure and resting heart rates, and, the authors write, achieving “an acute exercise-induced increase in positive mood,” leading the authors to conclude that, “significant and meaningful health benefits can be achieved even in the presence of lower than expected exercise-induced weight loss.”
Finally and thankfully, exercise seems to aid, physiologically, in the battle to keep off body fat once it has been, through resolute calorie reduction, chiseled away. In other work by Melanson’s group, published in September, laboratory rats that had been overfed and then slimmed through calorie reduction were able to “defend” their lower weight more effectively if they ran on a treadmill and ate at will than if they had no access to a treadmill. The exercise seemed to reset certain metabolic pathways within the rats, Melanson says, that blunted their body’s drive to replace the lost fat. Similar mechanisms, he adds, probably operate within the bodies of humans, providing scientific justification for signing up for that Thanksgiving Day 5K.
Phys Ed: Why Doesn’t Exercise Lead to Weight Loss?
By Gretchen Reynolds
Sven Hagolani/Getty Images
For some time, researchers have been finding that people who exercise don’t necessarily lose weight. A study published online in September in The British Journal of Sports Medicine was the latest to report apparently disappointing slimming results. In the study, 58 obese people completed 12 weeks of supervised aerobic training without changing their diets. The group lost an average of a little more than seven pounds, and many lost barely half that.
How can that be? Exercise, it seems, should make you thin. Activity burns calories. No one doubts that.
Phys Ed
“Walking, even at a very easy pace, you’ll probably burn three or four calories a minute,” beyond what you would use quietly sitting in a chair, said Dan Carey, Ph.D., an assistant professor of exercise physiology at the University of St. Thomas in Minnesota, who studies exercise and metabolism.
But few people, an overwhelming body of research shows, achieve significant weight loss with exercise alone, not without changing their eating habits. A new study from scientists at the University of Colorado School of Medicine in Denver offers some reasons why. For the study, the researchers recruited several groups of people. Some were lean endurance athletes; some sedentary and lean; some sedentary and obese. Each of the subjects agreed to spend, over the course of the experiment, several 24-hour periods in a special laboratory room (a walk-in calorimeter) that measures the number of calories a person burns. Using various calculations, the researchers could also tell whether the calories expended were in the form of fat or carbohydrates, the body’s two main fuel sources. Burning more fat than carbohydrates is obviously desirable for weight loss, since the fat being burned comes primarily from body fat stores, and we all, even the leanest among us, have plenty of those.
The Denver researchers were especially interested in how the athletes’ bodies would apportion and use calories. It has been well documented that regular endurance training increases the ability of the body to use fat as a fuel during exercise. They wondered, though, if the athletes — or any of the other subjects — would burn extra fat calories after exercising, a phenomenon that some exercisers (and even more diet and fitness books) call “afterburn.”
“Many people believe that you rev up” your metabolism after an exercise session “so that you burn additional body fat throughout the day,” said Edward Melanson, Ph.D., an associate professor in the division of endocrinology at the School of Medicine and the lead author of the study. If afterburn were found to exist, it would suggest that even if you replaced the calories you used during an exercise session, you should lose weight, without gaining weight — the proverbial free lunch.
Each of Melanson’s subjects spent 24 quiet hours in the calorimeter, followed later by another 24 hours that included an hourlong bout of stationary bicycling. The cycling was deliberately performed at a relatively easy intensity (about 55 percent of each person’s predetermined aerobic capacity). It is well known physiologically that, while high-intensity exercise demands mostly carbohydrate calories (since carbohydrates can quickly reach the bloodstream and, from there, laboring muscles), low-intensity exercise prompts the body to burn at least some stored fat. All of the subjects ate three meals a day.
To their surprise, the researchers found that none of the groups, including the athletes, experienced “afterburn.” They did not use additional body fat on the day when they exercised. In fact, most of the subjects burned slightly less fat over the 24-hour study period when they exercised than when they did not.
“The message of our work is really simple,” although not agreeable to hear, Melanson said. “It all comes down to energy balance,” or, as you might have guessed, calories in and calories out. People “are only burning 200 or 300 calories” in a typical 30-minute exercise session, Melanson points out. “You replace that with one bottle of Gatorade.”
This does not mean that exercise has no impact on body weight, or that you can’t calibrate your workouts to maximize the amount of body fat that you burn, if that’s your goal.
“If you work out at an easy intensity, you will burn a higher percentage of fat calories” than if you work out a higher intensity, Carey says, so you should draw down some of the padding you’ve accumulated on the hips or elsewhere — if you don’t replace all of the calories afterward. To help those hoping to reduce their body fat, he published formulas in The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research last month that detailed the heart rates at which a person could maximize fat burning. “Heart rates of between 105 and 134” beats per minute, Carey said, represent the fat-burning zone. “It’s probably best to work out near the top of that zone,” he says, “so that you burn more calories over all” than at the extremely leisurely lower end.
Perhaps just as important, bear in mind that exercise has benefits beyond weight reduction. In the study of obese people who took up exercise, most became notably healthier, increasing their aerobic capacity, decreasing their blood pressure and resting heart rates, and, the authors write, achieving “an acute exercise-induced increase in positive mood,” leading the authors to conclude that, “significant and meaningful health benefits can be achieved even in the presence of lower than expected exercise-induced weight loss.”
Finally and thankfully, exercise seems to aid, physiologically, in the battle to keep off body fat once it has been, through resolute calorie reduction, chiseled away. In other work by Melanson’s group, published in September, laboratory rats that had been overfed and then slimmed through calorie reduction were able to “defend” their lower weight more effectively if they ran on a treadmill and ate at will than if they had no access to a treadmill. The exercise seemed to reset certain metabolic pathways within the rats, Melanson says, that blunted their body’s drive to replace the lost fat. Similar mechanisms, he adds, probably operate within the bodies of humans, providing scientific justification for signing up for that Thanksgiving Day 5K.
Lovely Weekend...
2 hours of swimming, 2 hours of squash, and 2 hours of tennis... Throw in 5 1/2 hours of great wines, yummy food (think roast chicken dipped in chocolate sauce), & wonderful company and it sums up how my great weekend went...
If only it stopped here. I think I hurt my back. Super sharp excruciating pain! Can't walk properly. Haha. Age is catching up on me, no matter how much I try to deny it ;)
But it's ok. It was worth it!
If only it stopped here. I think I hurt my back. Super sharp excruciating pain! Can't walk properly. Haha. Age is catching up on me, no matter how much I try to deny it ;)
But it's ok. It was worth it!
Thursday, November 05, 2009
Fighting the Addiction...
If there's any addiction I really really really really (did I say REALLY) want to break this year, it's my addiction for IM, especially MSN Messenger. I have it on all day, all night, during work, when I'm home, and with my iPhone, ANYWHERE AND EVERYWHERE I go. Even though I don't want to talk to anyone in particular, I just keep on going back to the IM screen again and again, just checking who's on, who's off, and maintaining my linkage to reality.
It's more like "Reality", especially when I perceive it to be more real than the real world I am hanging out in. It simply doesn't make sense that I'm IM-ing online when I'm out with friends. There's a certain lack of respect for the company I'm with. I guess SMS is also not very good, but it's nowhere near as awful as IM-ing when there's company.
At work, IM impedes me from concentrating fully on the job at hand, so that every couple of minutes, I check who's online and send inane messages to people, disturbing them when THEY are trying to concentrate. I mean, it's ok if there's a purpose to the IM, but when I chat for the sake of chatting, it crosses an invisible line...
Ok, now it's November, and I realized it's one of the items on my 2009 New Year Action Plan. The past few days, I've been on leave, and I've staved away from MSN. I'm still on, invisible mostly, but I've at least succeeded in resisting the temptation to just message someone to say hi and nothing else. If there's a reason (genuine catch up after a long absence, asking colleague out for a snack, scheduling a gathering), it's ok, but not chatting for chat's sake.
And I'm going to cut down on MSN usage on weeknights as promised. In fact, it's like a drug; when going cold turkey, it's ultra painful and pointed. After a while, adaptation takes place, the lingering hunger disappears, and you realize the body doesn't need it anymore. Just like my addiction for KFC, I haven't touched it at all this year, and when I passed one today, I felt... nothing. It's incredible what the human mind can mandate the body to feel and react.
Wish me luck for the last two months, so that I can curb this addiction, instill a renewed discipline, and embrace fully the real, vibrant, analog, delicious world!
It's more like "Reality", especially when I perceive it to be more real than the real world I am hanging out in. It simply doesn't make sense that I'm IM-ing online when I'm out with friends. There's a certain lack of respect for the company I'm with. I guess SMS is also not very good, but it's nowhere near as awful as IM-ing when there's company.
At work, IM impedes me from concentrating fully on the job at hand, so that every couple of minutes, I check who's online and send inane messages to people, disturbing them when THEY are trying to concentrate. I mean, it's ok if there's a purpose to the IM, but when I chat for the sake of chatting, it crosses an invisible line...
Ok, now it's November, and I realized it's one of the items on my 2009 New Year Action Plan. The past few days, I've been on leave, and I've staved away from MSN. I'm still on, invisible mostly, but I've at least succeeded in resisting the temptation to just message someone to say hi and nothing else. If there's a reason (genuine catch up after a long absence, asking colleague out for a snack, scheduling a gathering), it's ok, but not chatting for chat's sake.
And I'm going to cut down on MSN usage on weeknights as promised. In fact, it's like a drug; when going cold turkey, it's ultra painful and pointed. After a while, adaptation takes place, the lingering hunger disappears, and you realize the body doesn't need it anymore. Just like my addiction for KFC, I haven't touched it at all this year, and when I passed one today, I felt... nothing. It's incredible what the human mind can mandate the body to feel and react.
Wish me luck for the last two months, so that I can curb this addiction, instill a renewed discipline, and embrace fully the real, vibrant, analog, delicious world!
Wednesday, November 04, 2009
Great Living Through Gratefulness
Just read a book, Thanks: How Practicing Gratitude Can Make You Happier by Robert A Emmons. Though there's quite alot of religious overtures for a strictly theoretical discussion, it has a very interesting point: That being grateful can really increase the amount of happiness one has in life.
According to the book, people generally have a set point of happiness that's decided at birth. If you're a generally sad person, even when you win the lottery and marry the most wonderful person, pretty soon, you'll ADAPT and get back to your set point of happiness. Ditto for vice versa ;) But apparently, if you exercise gratitude, you adjust that set point of happiness higher, and STAY happier even with adaptation.
There have been many instances that instead of showing gratitude, I complain and nit-pick, "in the name of progress", so that things can be better. If somebody cooks for me, I comment on the food quality, instead of appreciating the effort spent on the food-making process. If someone provides me with assistance, I am thankful, but sometimes it's more procedural rather than sincere, and worse, I discount the effort and think that it's supposed to be part of their job.
Also, alot of people and cultures dislike practicing gratitude as it can be viewed as indebtitude. I can empathize with that concept; Some rather owe no one, and achieve independent living, than count on the favor of others. I have encountered so many people like that in the course of my life...
Anyway, I'm going to try to practice what I've read, and see how it will impact me. The best recommendation of the book is to start a gratitude journal, detailing daily of the things I'm grateful for. Going to be kinda private so won't be written here. ;)
Alrighty, I'm grateful to those who have spent the time reading my thoughts. Thanks!
According to the book, people generally have a set point of happiness that's decided at birth. If you're a generally sad person, even when you win the lottery and marry the most wonderful person, pretty soon, you'll ADAPT and get back to your set point of happiness. Ditto for vice versa ;) But apparently, if you exercise gratitude, you adjust that set point of happiness higher, and STAY happier even with adaptation.
There have been many instances that instead of showing gratitude, I complain and nit-pick, "in the name of progress", so that things can be better. If somebody cooks for me, I comment on the food quality, instead of appreciating the effort spent on the food-making process. If someone provides me with assistance, I am thankful, but sometimes it's more procedural rather than sincere, and worse, I discount the effort and think that it's supposed to be part of their job.
Also, alot of people and cultures dislike practicing gratitude as it can be viewed as indebtitude. I can empathize with that concept; Some rather owe no one, and achieve independent living, than count on the favor of others. I have encountered so many people like that in the course of my life...
Anyway, I'm going to try to practice what I've read, and see how it will impact me. The best recommendation of the book is to start a gratitude journal, detailing daily of the things I'm grateful for. Going to be kinda private so won't be written here. ;)
Alrighty, I'm grateful to those who have spent the time reading my thoughts. Thanks!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)