PDA

View Full Version : Humans do not need a lot of food...



kevin1981
2012-Jul-19, 06:34 PM
I have been going to the gym recently as it is something productive to do with my free time and i enjoy the exercise. Naturally i have been thinking about weight loss as i would not mind shifting a few pounds ! I have realized that i could do exercise all day and it would not matter if i ate too much.

I have been watching my calorie intake over the last couple of weeks and have noticed that it does not take a lot of food to get to the recommended daily amount of 2500 calories.

So am i right in thinking that we have all this diverse food to eat these days but don't really need it ? Do Humans not need to eat that much to be able to function ?

If i am not careful i can easily eat over 2500 calories in a day, am i just being greedy ?

Why do men need more calories a day than women ?

Losing weight is actually very, very simple. All we need to do is burn more calories than we take in. So why is it such a hard thing to achieve ?

Just some thoughts of mine, thanks for any reply's :)

Buttercup
2012-Jul-19, 06:42 PM
The more I exercise the hungrier I become. However, it's a chore getting in at least 900 calories per day. I've mentioned struggling with anorexia before, and despite seeing a doctor about it...still an issue. I could "live" on 600 calories per day (...did, for years...) and be okay. I'm a completely different person in this regard; used to live to eat. Now? Food has little true appeal. My mother will ask "What did you have for dinner?" It's still "3 square meals a day" with her. :-\


Why do men need more calories a day than women ?

Muscle mass?

Noclevername
2012-Jul-19, 06:56 PM
Losing weight is actually very, very simple. All we need to do is burn more calories than we take in. So why is it such a hard thing to achieve ?


Our bodies aren't "programmed" to lose weight intentionally; humans come from scavenger stock, genetically almost unchanged from a time when food was scarce and every calorie was precious to our survival. And survival doesn't care what modern standards of beauty are.

redshifter
2012-Jul-19, 07:02 PM
Consider that sugar, salt, and fats were scarce for all of us for the majority of human existance. Now they're available in mass quantities. Protien too. Combine that with the sedentary lifestyles of a lot of folks and no wonder weight loss is such a challenge for some.

Gillianren
2012-Jul-19, 07:19 PM
Why do men need more calories a day than women ?

Because women are usually smaller.

Swift
2012-Jul-19, 08:12 PM
Losing weight is actually very, very simple. All we need to do is burn more calories than we take in. So why is it such a hard thing to achieve ?
Not for me. I have to work pretty hard just to stay constant.

I think a lot of it is metabolism. I think my body actually tries to stay about a constant weight, even if that value is about 20 pounds above what it should be (I've stayed about the same weight for years), and my metabolism adjusts with changing food intakes and calorie burnings. I hit the gym 3 or 4 times a week, do additional hiking on the weekends, but my weight never seems to change. The last time I lost significant weight was when I had the flu a few years ago, lost over 5 pounds in about 10 days, but within a month I was back to where I started.

Unfortunately (I'm half kidding about it being unfortunate) I really love food; I find it one of the great pleasures in life. I don't think I grossly overeat, and I usually eat health, but I do like to eat, and to eat good stuff.

starcanuck64
2012-Jul-19, 10:15 PM
Our bodies aren't "programmed" to lose weight intentionally; humans come from scavenger stock, genetically almost unchanged from a time when food was scarce and every calorie was precious to our survival. And survival doesn't care what modern standards of beauty are.

For some reason I got the image of bears pigging out at a garbage dump when I read this.<smile>

Luckmeister
2012-Jul-20, 03:03 AM
I have been watching my calorie intake over the last couple of weeks and have noticed that it does not take a lot of food to get to the recommended daily amount of 2500 calories.

So am i right in thinking that we have all this diverse food to eat these days but don't really need it ? Do Humans not need to eat that much to be able to function ?

We need a variety of nutrients, therefore a variety of foods.

Ara Pacis
2012-Jul-20, 04:21 AM
It depends on what you eat. I recall an experiment where people were provided with the types of food that were available to early humans, mostly fresh, uncooked veggies and fruit. They spend most of the day sitting around chewing and still didn't manage to consume enough veggies and fruits to get to the appropriate calorie count. Of course, that assumes they could extract those calories from the food well without cooking in the first place. And then there's all the calories spent chewing and moving a high fiber mass through the gut. I can't imagine that having a belly full of fiber and still being low on energy was conducive to amore, which might shed some light on low early population levels. Start adding bugs and small game and we're off to the races.

BTW, I've read that male metaolism is higher per unit muscle mass, so it's not just having more muscle mass.

HenrikOlsen
2012-Jul-20, 11:27 AM
Why do men need more calories a day than women ?
On average men have a higher muscle/fat ratio so on average men burn more calories even at the same weight.

I strongly suspect that a man and a woman of the same weight, same muscle/fat ratio and the same muscle mass will require the same amount of calories.

Perikles
2012-Jul-20, 12:37 PM
On average men have a higher muscle/fat ratio so on average men burn more calories even at the same weight..I think that on average, women have a percentage fat in bodyweight about 5% more than men. I've read recently (on BAUT?) that if we were cold blooded, we would only need 1/30 of our hot-blooded food intake. This suggests that a large part of our intake is burned up just keeping warm, so if fat is more insulating than muscle, this might explain the difference in requirements. But I'm just guessing.

Solfe
2012-Jul-20, 01:53 PM
Funny, I was thinking the opposite about this topic. My boys and I went camping and I consistently watched my younger son out eat me at every meal. He is in the bottom percentile for both height and weight and is often mistaken for a 6 year old; he is 8.

Children, I think, are on that ragged edge where they can play enough that they will lose no matter how much they eat. There isn't enough time for them to both tasks. Merely drinking enough water is bothersome to them.

Adults just aren't that driven, where in lies the my problem: I shop for us so I have to be particularly careful about what actually makes it home. If I ate like my kids... :)

We met a camper from Slovakia and her opinion of the food available at camp was pure amazement. She couldn't believe how much food there was. I agreed with her, camp is exactly like going to Denny's for every meal.

She commented that lunches for campers at home was limited to soup and finger* foods. Her dinners tend to be starchy foods and vegetables. Obviously, I couldn't really catalog a whole countries eating habits in a two hour conversation but it was intriguing and clearly different. (She also made it clear that her camp activities were very different from ours, but that is a story for another time.)


On average men have a higher muscle/fat ratio so on average men burn more calories even at the same weight.

I strongly suspect that a man and a woman of the same weight, same muscle/fat ratio and the same muscle mass will require the same amount of calories.

I am skeptical that there is any difference between men and women; I think it all boils down to lifestyle. My wife is on her feet all day at work and pounds out free weights and aerobics at the gym. I have a nerd job but I walk/jog 3 miles a day. She requires much more food than me everyday. Not exactly scientific but... it seems reasonable to me.

*edit I said "snack foods" at first, but really meant finger foods. Stuff that isn't messy and easy to carry.

HenrikOlsen
2012-Jul-20, 01:58 PM
Kids use food to grow as well as just to exist,

danscope
2012-Jul-20, 04:40 PM
We are all , each one of us constantly building and rebuilding our bones and bodies. It's the quality and quantity of "the Right Stuff"
that we need. Too much of the 'food' put forth for our consumption has any redeeming quality at all.
For starters,.......Throw away your soda. And lose the high fructose corn syrup. You will do better. Lose the aspartame and you will feel better. Eat some green leafy vegetables and maybe you will Live better....and longer.
It takes a little effort to eat well. It always did.
Eat well and prosper.
Dan

R.A.F.
2012-Jul-20, 04:53 PM
Lose the aspartame and you will feel better.

I thought that substance was banned years ago...

Noclevername
2012-Jul-20, 04:56 PM
I thought that substance was banned years ago...

A quick Google finds no signs of it being banned, according to WP it's still on the market under various names.

R.A.F.
2012-Jul-20, 04:59 PM
Huh...did not know that...

...and I'm usually the one doing the google search before posting...I'm "losing it" in my "old age". :)

Gillianren
2012-Jul-20, 06:37 PM
I am skeptical that there is any difference between men and women; I think it all boils down to lifestyle. My wife is on her feet all day at work and pounds out free weights and aerobics at the gym. I have a nerd job but I walk/jog 3 miles a day. She requires much more food than me everyday. Not exactly scientific but... it seems reasonable to me.

In situations where there is a lifestyle difference, that will be more of an issue than a male-female difference. However, this is one of those places where there really is a difference between men and women, all other things being equal.


I thought that substance was banned years ago...

Why should it have been? A few paranoids aside, no one has ever found anything seriously wrong with it.

Ara Pacis
2012-Jul-20, 06:55 PM
On average men have a higher muscle/fat ratio so on average men burn more calories even at the same weight.

I strongly suspect that a man and a woman of the same weight, same muscle/fat ratio and the same muscle mass will require the same amount of calories.

But a different amount of exercise... (http://www.unm.edu/~lkravitz/Article%20folder/genderdifferences.html)

For example, research has shown that abdominal adipocytes are more sensitive to beta receptor stimulation by epinephrine than hip and thigh adipocytes in both men and women (Braun & Horton, 2001). This finding suggests that fat around the abdominal area is easier to mobilize than fat located in the hip and thigh areas. In addition, women tend to have a greater number of alpha receptors in the hip and thigh regions (Blaak, 2001).Also...

Fat Metabolism at Rest
The level of fat metabolism at rest is positively correlated with the size of fat cells in the body, with larger fat cells having a higher lipolytic (causing TG splitting) activity (Blaak, 2001). In earlier research it was hypothesized that women may have a higher resting fat metabolism due to typically higher body fat stores when compared to men. However, recent research has found that resting fat metabolism (adjusted for differences in lean body mass) is actually lower in women than in men (Nagy et al., 1996; Toth et al., 1998). Although the mechanisms are unclear, this finding suggests that a lower resting fat metabolism may contribute to the increased fat storage in women as compared with men.

And...

Gender Differences in Fuel Selection
One of the most common methods used to determine fuel selection is the respiratory exchange ratio (RER). The RER is a numeric index of carbohydrate and fat utilization based on a ratio of carbon dioxide produced to oxygen consumed. A lower RER is an indication of a greater fat metabolism, whereas a higher RER is an indication of a greater carbohydrate metabolism. Current studies show that during low to moderate intensity exercise women maintain a lower RER when compared to men.

ShinAce
2012-Jul-21, 03:34 AM
In situations where there is a lifestyle difference, that will be more of an issue than a male-female difference. However, this is one of those places where there really is a difference between men and women, all other things being equal.

My thoughts exactly.

Might I add that they're called eating 'habits' for a reason. You have to do it consistently to have an effect.

Solfe
2012-Jul-21, 04:04 AM
Why should it have been? A few paranoids aside, no one has ever found anything seriously wrong with it.

Aspartame is my worst nightmare, I get insomnia when I consume products with it. I have never experienced anything like this and have never met anyone who reported the same effect. I find the experience frightening because it isn't that annoying insomnia where you can't fall asleep, for me it is like I don't need to sleep for days. The first time I encountered this effect was from a drink mix and it was actually a product I enjoyed. Of course, this created the problem where I drinking it at night because I couldn't sleep. That was close to the longest week of my life.

I checked online to see if it has this effect on other people but never found anything "solid", just the typical alarm ringing that occurs on the internet. My kids and wife suffer no ill effects when consuming it, so I just make sure I don't eat it.

Noclevername
2012-Jul-21, 04:35 AM
My mother gets migraines wheneever she has anything with aspartame in it. I, who am prone do much more frequent migraines, feel nothing from it.

DoggerDan
2012-Jul-21, 06:08 AM
At one point in my life, I tipped the scales into the obese category. Fortunately, that time in my life was short-lived when I learned that if I exercise hard for about an hour, and do that three times a week, my appetite is not only significantly reduced, my desired tastes change, as well. It also helps to do a variety of different things. I usually bicycle, but sometimes I swim. I also hike a lot, lift weights, and on occasion dust off my gi and spend some time on the mat.

Thus, I agree with kevin1981's "Losing weight is actually very, very simple." I think the problem is that a lot of people think they're "exercising" when they're just going through the motions, usually with a heart rate way too low to do much aerobic good, or with weights but hardly enough to break a sweat. A good workout takes effort, and to work out on a consistent basis takes discipline.

Same thing goes for eating. If you want to lose weight, changing your diet will take effort and discipline, too.

kevin1981
2012-Jul-21, 05:24 PM
Thus, I agree with kevin1981's "Losing weight is actually very, very simple.
In theory it is ! But it does take effort, like you say.


Same thing goes for eating. If you want to lose weight, changing your diet will take effort and discipline, too.
I have been watching what i eat for a few weeks now. I do have the odd chocolate bar but i am trying ! But i hear what you are saying and agree with your post :)

Is it easier and safer for people with fat to lose weight than people without it. Because i am overweight and i have fat, could i eat less, because if i do not eat much my body can use up the excess fat and use it as energy? If i was slim i would not have any excess fat to use.

Are Humans energy efficient creatures as it seems we do not need much food on a daily basis to keep going ?

Also, i read that, as we get older our metabolism slows down so we burn calories slower. Would that mean as we get older we actually need to eat less ? Certainly if we want to lose weight it we would, would'nt it ?

Gillianren
2012-Jul-21, 05:30 PM
Human metabolism is actually quite complicated. Eating less convinces your body that it is starving, so it doesn't want to burn fat. It might need the fat later. What works for one person as far as exercise routine does not always work for other people. And I have to say that I am physically incapable of a lot of exercise, because my knees and back are in such pain so much of the time. I can swim, but only when the pool at my apartment complex is open. Some days, the walk to the mailbox (which I can see from my bedroom window) is excruciating.

Ara Pacis
2012-Jul-21, 10:12 PM
The link I posted also explained a little about why it's harder for people who are overweight to lose the fat due to enzyme action or something.

DoggerDan
2012-Jul-28, 05:34 AM
I have been watching what i eat for a few weeks now. I do have the odd chocolate bar but i am trying ! But i hear what you are saying and agree with your post :)

Good for you! It's all about consistancy, duration, and intensity. Every other day, as in three times a week, is a good schedule. Half an hour to an hour a day, and as for intensity, for aerobics you want to get your hear rate between 80% and 85% of 200-age. For me that's around 140 bpm. For weight/strength training, which is just as important as aerobics, you want to exert yourself enough so that you're mildly sore, but not so sore that normal movement or exercise is troublesome.


Is it easier and safer for people with fat to lose weight than people without it. Because i am overweight and i have fat, could i eat less, because if i do not eat much my body can use up the excess fat and use it as energy? If i was slim i would not have any excess fat to use.

My college roommate is a trainer up in Denver. He told me your body needs sugar in order to efficiently burn fat. What he means is that if you want to burn fat, and you're working out at, say, 500 cals/hr, you'll need some blood sugar in order to ensure you body pullls from fat instead of merely shutting down that resource. He said about 200 cals/hr of simple and complex carbs is enough. He says that without any blood sugar, your body's metabolism hits a wall. He's hiked "a few" 14-ers (as in all of them here in Colorado), and he's hit that wall a few times.

He says that's why they recommend six small meals throughout the day, along with regular cardio and strength training for maximum fitness and weight loss.


Are Humans energy efficient creatures as it seems we do not need much food on a daily basis to keep going ?

I think we can become pretty efficient. I've read somewhere that people in many poorer countries live for years on between 500 and 900 calories per day.


Also, i read that, as we get older our metabolism slows down so we burn calories slower. Would that mean as we get older we actually need to eat less ? Certainly if we want to lose weight it we would, would'nt it ?

My dad kept up a long-running battle with his waistline. He'd always let his belt be his guide, and when it got tight, he'd go for walks after dinner and cut out the cookies. When it got loose he'd skip the walks and eat the cookies. He never really had much of a belly. Something like a 38 inch waist on a 6-foot, 190-lb frame.

When I first began doing some serious exercise long ago, I hated it! I ached, man. My joints were sore, and I felt like crap, but I kept it up, slowly but surely. Over time, my joints ached less. It takes a while to get used to regular exercise, but once you do, it's well worth it. My joints don't hurt at all, now.

Ara Pacis
2012-Jul-31, 10:06 AM
Ugh, exercise. I actually like to be active. But in recent years it seems that as soon as I get a gym membership, I suffer an unrelated injury or illness and can't use it. I's fate, I tells ya. It's so bad now that all I have to do is think about renewing a gym membership and I strain or sprain something or slip a disc.

danscope
2012-Jul-31, 06:30 PM
It's safer to just go for a good, steady walk. Low impact, good exercise.
Walk well and prosper.

Ara Pacis
2012-Jul-31, 10:43 PM
It's safer to just go for a good, steady walk. Low impact, good exercise.
Walk well and prosper.

I do, when it's not over 90 degrees out. So, not much this summer, unfortunately.

Gillianren
2012-Aug-01, 01:14 AM
It's supposed to be 90 here on Saturday, and I will be out standing in someone else's field, alas.

Jeff Root
2012-Aug-01, 02:31 AM
I just saw this thread for the first time, and have only read
the first post and the last. Right about the same time that
Kevin started this thread, I was thinking almost exactly the
same thing. I started walking to cool myself as an alternative
to turning on the air conditioner. Also because I felt nervous
energy that I thought would go away with exercise. And about
the same time, I had some pasta and wanted to get rid of the
excess calories before they could stick to me.

I realized shortly that I could walk for a mile and it probably
burned off only a small fraction of the calories I had just eaten.
I started thinking about comparing the food energy required
to make me go a mile to the energy in gasoline or an electric
battery required to make a (way heavier) car go a mile.

A couple of things I discovered: Although I felt good after the
first few times I did it, walking, even very vigorously and for
more than a mile, is not making the nervous energy go away.
It's as if I didn't do anything, except that my back and my
feet are a bit sore. Well, some leg muscles are sore, too.

I never reach an obvious stopping point. I don't reach a point
where I couldn't keep going. That reminds me of what I read
just a couple of years ago that humans seem to be better at
travelling long distances than most animals. So I just say,
okay that's enough, but my body doesn't really want to stop.
A couple of times I continued pacing back and forth in my
apartment, like a robot.

I definitely feel hotter after I stop walking than while walking.

Although I don't keep track of it, it's pretty clear that my
calorie intake hasn't increased at all to compensate, so I'm
probably losing weight, although I don't need to. I guess I
could keep track of my weight, huh....

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

danscope
2012-Aug-01, 02:44 AM
Dehydration is not your friend. Water is and always will be. And walking is definately the way to go. Low impact is good.
Walk often and prosper.

DoggerDan
2012-Aug-02, 08:15 PM
It's so bad now that all I have to do is think about renewing a gym membership and I strain or sprain something or slip a disc.

Back when I used to eat the all-American diet, I got these kinds of injuries all the time. When I cut out the processed foods and soft drinks, these problems went away.

Two thumbs up to Dan's way of walking! Three times a week I hike around the hills here for at least an hour, sometimes two. I had to work up to that, though, as I wasn't used to doing a lot of walking/hiking. Back in Florida I main rode my bicycle all over town.

I came up with an easy way to work up to it.
Day 1: Walk for 1 minute
Day 2: Walk for 1.5 minutes (50% longer/further)
Day 3: Rest
Day 4: Walk for 1.5 minutes (same as your last walk)
Day 5: Walk for 2.25 minutes
Day 6: Rest
Day 7: Walk for 2.25 minutes
Day 8: Walk for 3.38 minutes
etc.

By the end of the month you'll be walking for an entire hour! At that point, you just repeat it with 30 min, 1 hr, rest, and repeat for good overall health, fitness, and stamina. It's great for weight loss.

Keep walking, Jeff! And yes, Dan - hydration is key!

R.A.F.
2012-Aug-02, 08:18 PM
Back when I used to eat the all-American diet, I got these kinds of injuries all the time. When I cut out the processed foods and soft drinks, these problems went away.

Sounds like conformational bias.

Trebuchet
2012-Aug-03, 12:33 AM
It's supposed to be 90 here on Saturday, and I will be out standing in someone else's field, alas.

Still planning to see you there! Here's hoping it might be a degree or two cooler towards the mountains.

Solfe
2012-Aug-03, 01:28 AM
Sounds like conformational bias.

To me, it sounds like planning meal carefully spilling over into better body care. : )

Ara Pacis
2012-Aug-03, 06:28 AM
Back when I used to eat the all-American diet, I got these kinds of injuries all the time. When I cut out the processed foods and soft drinks, these problems went away.

Two thumbs up to Dan's way of walking! Three times a week I hike around the hills here for at least an hour, sometimes two. I had to work up to that, though, as I wasn't used to doing a lot of walking/hiking. Back in Florida I main rode my bicycle all over town.

I came up with an easy way to work up to it.
Day 1: Walk for 1 minute
Day 2: Walk for 1.5 minutes (50% longer/further)
Day 3: Rest
Day 4: Walk for 1.5 minutes (same as your last walk)
Day 5: Walk for 2.25 minutes
Day 6: Rest
Day 7: Walk for 2.25 minutes
Day 8: Walk for 3.38 minutes
etc.

By the end of the month you'll be walking for an entire hour! At that point, you just repeat it with 30 min, 1 hr, rest, and repeat for good overall health, fitness, and stamina. It's great for weight loss.

Keep walking, Jeff! And yes, Dan - hydration is key!

I don't need to start that slow. When it's cool enough I try to walk 4-5 miles a session several times a week. I should go to the gym, but my wrist hasn't been the same since I fell and injured it last Feb, and then I threw out my back for several days a couple weeks later (which probably saved my life since I might have been killed by a tornado if I hadn't been laid up).

DoggerDan
2012-Aug-04, 07:12 AM
Sounds like conformational bias.

Call it what you will. I'm headed into the hills on a nearly ten-mile trek tomorrow, over elevations ranging from about 7,500 feet to nearly 10,000. I'll have fun, will see some wonderful sights, and will eat my PBJ sandwiches somewhere along the way!

"Confirmation bias is a tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses." (Wikipedia).

This is a case of my nose being wonderfully rubbed into what I refused to believe long ago, in the early 1990s, back when I was falling apart because I ate the wrong things and wasn't getting any exercise. That's when a very good friend turned my life around.

If it were "confirmation bias," I wouldn't be doing what I'm doing today. I'd be doing only that which I could do back in '94, and honestly, that wasn't much.

So, you nearly nailed it, Solfe, although the exercise came first. Diet second.


I don't need to start that slow. When it's cool enough I try to walk 4-5 miles a session several times a week. I should go to the gym, but my wrist hasn't been the same since I fell and injured it last Feb, and then I threw out my back for several days a couple weeks later (which probably saved my life since I might have been killed by a tornado if I hadn't been laid up).

Yikes! That's a story I'd like to hear!

Gillianren
2012-Aug-06, 03:18 PM
It's confirmation bias because you could be getting better for other reasons. You've gotten better, and you changed your diet/exercise patterns. That might be the reason, but since we have a sample of you, we don't know. You believe that changing diet/exercise can improve your life. You aren't looking at other people who might have had different results. I had a woman this weekend tell me that strengthening certain muscles can remove the need for certain pieces of feminine clothing, because it worked for her. Well, great! But there are a few reasons it wouldn't work for me, and she wouldn't accept that.

ShinAce
2012-Aug-08, 03:12 PM
Of course everyone is different. My strength is cardio. I'll play hockey at the local rink in the winter. On my first day, I play for 30 minutes. Within a week, I can play for 2 hours straight. Even people in shape don't like to play for over 2 hours. Imagine playing tennis for two hours, all out, and then wondering why your partner wants to stop. However, I've always been skinny. In terms of body type, I'm a marathoner.

There are advantages that apply to everyone, I would say. I always felt as if I recover from colds faster when I'm in shape. Exercise brings me energy, a way to relieve stress/anxiety, and even an improved sex life. Yeah, I said it. A day of manual labour makes for better sex.

Gillianren
2012-Aug-08, 03:58 PM
Not when a day of manual labour brings on back spasms and other assorted agonizing pains.

DoggerDan
2012-Aug-09, 03:32 AM
It's confirmation bias because you could be getting better for other reasons.

Nope. Took me a while to learn I needed to be consistent. I'd get better, I'd slack off, I'd get worse, I'd renew my efforts, I'd get better, I'd slack off, I'd get worse...

The you're only varying one variable, and repeatedly reaffirming the same results, it's not confirmation bias. It's simply confirmation.


You aren't looking at other people who might have had different results.

I see. So you're telling me there are people out there who change both diet and exercise to healthy, wholesome patterns and consistently get worse?

If so, I'd argue that whatever they're thinking is healthy or wholesome really isn't. You mentioned "Not when a day of manual labour brings on back spasms and other assorted agonizing pains."

Have you tried easing into it, and engaging in a variety of activities instead of "manual labor" likely to induce repetitive stress injuries, "back spasms and other assorted agonizing pains?"

Just saying there's a huge difference between healthy exercise and self-induced torture, Gillianren.

Gillianren
2012-Aug-09, 05:11 AM
Yes. There are also things like scoliosis and arthritis.

Jeff Root
2012-Aug-09, 05:48 AM
So you're telling me there are people out there who
change both diet and exercise to healthy, wholesome
patterns and consistently get worse?
Some things get worse nomatter what you do.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

39Arterbury
2012-Aug-09, 07:02 AM
To gain weight is very easy thing to do while to lose weight is opposite. Because there are lots of food that are delicious and its good to eat. So you only have to know discipline. You have to control yourself really so that you won't get fat. Exercise is very important.

DoggerDan
2012-Aug-09, 07:52 AM
Some things get worse nomatter what you do.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

Yeah. Like breathing for those who're underwater.

How about the 99.999993636782% rest of us who aren't?

A fact: 10 surprising dangers of vitamins and supplements (http://health.yahoo.net/articles/healthcare/10-surprising-dangers-vitamins-and-supplements).

I drove though the five pages of this report. I did not see any resemblance to the vitamins I take.

I not only feel "fine," but I hiked Pikes Peak on Saturday. Still sore, yes, but I did it, along with a couple hundred other folks who did the same.

I guess what I'm saying in my 50+ years, I've found something that not only works, but kicks behind. If you want to join in until you're in your nineties, welcome aboard. If you want to poo-poo what I've been doing for the last twenty years, sorry, but that's behind us. You're welcome to join us. There's no organization. Just walk. Just ride. Just do anything.

I'm sick and tired of hearing people say, "but I CAN'T wah-hah-ha" when I've encountered hundreds of others who used to say that until they finally realized they really had no excuse, no matter what shape they were in. They COULD walk to their mailbox. They COULD walk to the end of the street, and so on.

And yes, even if you're terminal with cancer. I went on a terminal cancer marathon ride with more than fifty folks about four years ago. Heartbreaking, but they made it. We all made it, even while carrying one another across the finish line. Some of us have since passed away. Others of us have lived. My cancer was "minor" (melanomia, serious, but early recognized and mostly frozen off).

Are you folks starting to get a clue as to where I'm coming from on this issue? I didn't give up. My friends didn't give up, and I don't accept others giving up. When I hear people giving up, I don't cut them a lot of slack. That's my "nice" way of saying "shut up and cover down." Getting off one's behind doesn't take a lot of effort. You do it at least once a day. I'm asking you to double it, no matter how much it hurts.

Every exercise program has a beginning.

DoggerDan
2012-Aug-09, 07:58 AM
Yeah. Like breathing for those who're underwater.

How about the 99.999993636782% rest of us who aren't?

A fact: 10 surprising dangers of vitamins and supplements (http://health.yahoo.net/articles/healthcare/10-surprising-dangers-vitamins-and-supplements).

I drove though the five pages of this report. I did not see any resemblance to the vitamins I take.

I not only feel "fine," but I hiked Pikes Peak on Saturday. Still sore, yes, but I did it, along with a couple hundred other folks who did the same.

I guess what I'm saying in my 50+ years, I've found something that not only works, but kicks behind. If you want to join in until you're in your nineties, welcome aboard. If you want to poo-poo what I've been doing for the last twenty years, sorry, but that's behind us. You're welcome to join us. There's no organization. Just walk. Just ride. Just do anything.

I'm sick and tired of hearing people say, "but I CAN'T wah-hah-ha" when I've encountered hundreds of others who used to say that until they finally realized they really had no excuse, no matter what shape they were in. They COULD walk to their mailbox. They COULD walk to the end of the street, and so on.

And yes, even if you're terminal with cancer. I went on a terminal cancer marathon ride with more than fifty folks about four years ago. Heartbreaking, but they made it. We all made it, even while carrying one another across the finish line. Some of us have since passed away. Others of us have lived. My cancer was "minor" (melanomia, serious, but early recognized and mostly frozen off).

Are you folks starting to get a clue as to where I'm coming from on this issue? I didn't give up. My friends didn't give up, and I don't accept others giving up. When I hear people giving up, I don't cut them a lot of slack. That's my "nice" way of saying "shut up and cover down." Getting off one's behind doesn't take a lot of effort. You do it at least once a day. I'm asking you to double it, no matter how much it hurts.

Every exercise program has a beginning.


Yes. There are also things like scoliosis and arthritis.

Yeah, I have both, mild scoliosis and moderate osteoarthritis, along with a significantly more serious bone degeneration related to my occupation.

When are you people going to stop using medical conditions as excuses and start using them as a reason to get off your butts and get with the program? I did a 29-miler (cycling) two months ago, and climbed Pikes Peak two weeks ago.

If I can do it, you can do it! You're going to have to stop using excuses, though. That path leads to death. We all die. My motto is "not today - not while I still breath." I don't know if I'm ambitious enough to take on Everest, but I'm planning on hitting at least one 13-er in the next couple of weekends.

Jens
2012-Aug-09, 09:13 AM
When are you people going to stop using medical conditions as excuses and start using them as a reason to get off your butts and get with the program?

I should start by saying that I basically agree with you that exercise is a good thing, and I'm kind of the same type as you. But somehow you put out a kind of evangelical zeal that I don't think is all that helpful. If people don't want to do what you think they ought to do, is it really that important to you? I think you've made your point quite well, and if people want to make excuses, I don't see it as a big concern. We're all free to make our own choices, non?

HenrikOlsen
2012-Aug-09, 01:48 PM
you people
I have never seen that combination of words used when it wasn't part of an intentional and often ignorant, insult, this is no exception.

Jeff Root
2012-Aug-09, 01:54 PM
Let me rephrase that.

Many things get worse nomatter what you do.

Some things get worse because of what you try to do right.

They buried Gumbacher last week.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

Gillianren
2012-Aug-09, 04:26 PM
You're going to have to stop using excuses, though.

There is a difference between an excuse and an explanation. If I never exercised, I would be using my physical conditions as an excuse. As it is, I exercise in small amounts when I am not already in too much pain to walk. That's an explanation. I can't ride a bike for six blocks without my back seizing up so bad that I have to take Vicodin, because there's no back support. And if I try a recumbent, that's how far I can go before my knees give out. You know nothing of my health problems, and I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you're not a doctor. Why is your opinion more valuable than that of my actual doctor, who would kill me if I tried to climb Pikes Peak?

danscope
2012-Aug-09, 06:30 PM
What he may be saying is that atrophy is not your friend, and that ANY movement is certainly better than no movement. It is true that some people are past a tipping point, such that their risk of injury outweighs any
gain (unless they are particularly careful.... and isn't that why a walker is employed....) .
The point is that we have seen people come back from that tipping point, employing nothing more miraculous
than small improvements to their movement , and perhaps a change in what they drink and eat. But....
no one said it is ever easy. Going slow may be the key. We can only hold out the promise of hope.

Jeff Root
2012-Aug-09, 11:00 PM
Some things get better nomatter what you do.

I've had arthritis (I presume that's what it is) in my left
shoulder since early in 2011. I could still use my left arm
to pull down (like doing chinups), if I was careful, but
couldn't lift any weight up above my head at all. Over
the last six months, though, it has gradually diminished
to the point that it is nearly gone. My left arm is now
obviously weaker than my right, which I didn't suspect
until recently because I couldn't use it to find out.

I did nothing to help it except go easy on it.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

ShinAce
2012-Aug-10, 01:37 AM
When I broke my arm(had a plate screwed in to mend the break), my buddy was telling me how important it was to start exercising the day of the surgery! Seeing as he is a surgeon, I took his advice, but was told by my attending physician to take it easy. Anyways, two weeks of painful stretches and exercises later I go for physio. The physiotherapist sent me home, and I had gone to a private practice since I was insured. She didn't believe that my surgery was 2 weeks before, until she saw the fresh bruising. The old "Whatever you're doing, keep doing it."

Sometimes, no pain no gain is true. Not always though. I know that one first hand. I've got a bad knee that only responds to stretches and strengthening exercises without impact to the joint. If I'm dumb enough to play a soccer game or run on concrete, I end up with a bag of ice before bed for the next week.

Jens
2012-Aug-10, 01:50 AM
Why is your opinion more valuable than that of my actual doctor, who would kill me if I tried to climb Pikes Peak?

I would assume you are perfectly free to ignore his advice and go with that of your doctor.

DoggerDan
2012-Aug-10, 04:03 AM
There is a difference between an excuse and an explanation. If I never exercised, I would be using my physical conditions as an excuse. As it is, I exercise in small amounts when I am not already in too much pain to walk. That's an explanation. I can't ride a bike for six blocks without my back seizing up so bad that I have to take Vicodin, because there's no back support. And if I try a recumbent, that's how far I can go before my knees give out.

Baby steps. Don't go six blocks. Start with a block, three times a week. Work up to doing it a couple of times a day.


You know nothing of my health problems, and I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you're not a doctor.

I'm not even an exercise physiologist. I am, however, an NBFE-certified personal trainer.


Why is your opinion more valuable than that of my actual doctor, who would kill me if I tried to climb Pikes Peak?

Why in the world would you jump to such a ridiculous conclusion that I in any way whatsoever recommended you try climbing Pikes Peak? That's utterly absurd, Gillianren, and a red herring argument, as well.

As I see it, you have two choices.

You can start with what you can. Go easy. By all means consult your doctor, but if your doctor is telling you to do nothing, I'd get a second opinion. But be consistent. Keep working at it. Or you can skip all that and give up.

Only one road leads to improvement. My point is the only reason I was able to climb Pikes Peak is because I took the road leading to improvement. It wasn't easy, but it most certainly can be done. That is, unless you insist it can't be done. At that point, you're absolutely right - it can't.

HenrikOlsen
2012-Aug-10, 11:35 AM
Why in the world would you jump to such a ridiculous conclusion that I in any way whatsoever recommended you try climbing Pikes Peak? That's utterly absurd, Gillianren, and a red herring argument, as well.
How about reading your own words:

I did a 29-miler (cycling) two months ago, and climbed Pikes Peak two weeks ago.

If I can do it, you can do it!

wd40
2012-Aug-10, 01:10 PM
Typical 1000 calorie British breakfasts

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/37/Full_Ulster_fry.jpg/200px-Full_Ulster_fry.jpg


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d0/Irish_breakfast.jpg/200px-Irish_breakfast.jpg


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/de/Stoke_newington_breakfast_1.jpg/200px-Stoke_newington_breakfast_1.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/13/Scottish_breakfast.jpg/220px-Scottish_breakfast.jpg

Such a breakfast was good in the days when a heavy manual worker would have burnt off 1000 calories already by midday.

But for today's sedentary man, such a breakfast pends a big belly and a likely attenuated lifespan, unless he does without lunch!

Perikles
2012-Aug-10, 01:37 PM
Typical 1000 calorie British breakfastsThose are 1000 calorie breakfasts, but are you saying that these are typical breakfasts for British people? What percentage of the population in the UK actually eat these kinds of breakfast every day, in your opinion?

Noclevername
2012-Aug-10, 01:44 PM
By all means consult your doctor, but if your doctor is telling you to do nothing, I'd get a second opinion.... Or you can skip all that and give up.


If I never exercised, I would be using my physical conditions as an excuse. As it is, I exercise in small amounts when I am not already in too much pain to walk.

So she's already doing something, not nothing.

Ara Pacis
2012-Aug-10, 06:50 PM
Such a breakfast was good in the days when a heavy manual worker would have burnt off 1000 calories already by midday.

But for today's sedentary man, such a breakfast pends a big belly and a likely attenuated lifespan, unless he does without lunch!

And what percentage of required daily calories is that?

Ara Pacis
2012-Aug-10, 06:52 PM
I'm not even an exercise physiologist. I am, however, an NBFE-certified personal trainer.

So, you're admitting that you're an industry shill and/or have a profit motive for what you're saying?

DoggerDan
2012-Aug-10, 09:22 PM
How about reading your own words:

You're missing the other words I've shared with Gillianren, about my own dismal physical condition years ago.


So she's already doing something, not nothing.

You're missing the point, Noclevername. She said she only exercises when she's not in pain. Put on your learning caps for a moment, folks as I'm going to talk about two things about which I know a good deal, and which have a direct bearing on this discussion: Pain and Enabling.

There are two types of pain. The first type is that which accompanies a physical injury, which we initially treat by immobilization and supportive therapy (splint, cast, sutures, and meds to control pain and infection). It's temporary, and once the patient begins healing, they usually bounce back, but not always, which is where physical therapy comes into play.

The second type of pain is that which accompanies a physical disability. The latter can be the result of a many diseases and conditions, but it can also be the result of years without proper nutrition and exercise, as well as a combination of the two. Even degenerative joint disease can be somewhat to largely overcome by proper diet and exercise.

I know this not only as licensed trainer, but because that's one of the two things I was diagnosed with years ago, and that's what I overcame. The other was a condition related to decompression injury. You don't think I didn't experience pain while clawing my way out of my conditions? Of course I did -- every day. You don't think guys who've been blown out of humvees, some with missing limbs, don't experience pain as they work their way back to life? Of course they do -- every day.

Pain is normal during recovery from physical disabilities. It is not a valid reason not to exercise, although it may be a valid reason to switch to a different form of exercise, of which there are many people can do on a $0 budget in the comfort of their own homes. If doing one thing causes you too much pain, switch to something else. Whatever you do, do something. As I like to tell my clients, "Do, or do not - there is no try," but I add "giving up is not an option."

And now a word on enabling:

A few years back I was working with a man in his sixties who'd been in a car wreck about five years earlier. He really wanted to get back into shape, but since his accident he'd not driven at all, or done much of anything, as his wife did everything for him, including "protecting" him any time he did anything which caused him pain. His physical pain was her emotional pain. They were clearly co-dependent, and she refused to leave his side, even in the gym.

Turns out I couldn't work with him at all, not because of him, but because of her. Every time he experienced pain she'd butt in and say things like "You musn't over-do it" and "I think that's enough for today."

They came sporadically, so little progress was made, and then I didn't see him for close to a year. He showed up one day looking better that I'd seen him. Turns out his wife died, so he had to start taking care of himself again. Just that was more physical activity than he'd been getting, and by the time he returned, he was driving again.

Although his pain was real, the result of injuries sustained in his car accident, his wife was enabling his sedentary ways and undermining his recovery because she kept coming to his "rescue" every time he experienced pain. Instead of helping him, however, she was hurting him. With her out of the way, he began the road to a full recovery. By the end of the year he was lifting weights at all stations, some more than others. He'd returned to swimming, something he'd done in high school, was walking every day, and beginning to work at more competitive endeavors involving what we call "explosive motion," something required for healthy bones and joints, as well as optimum muscle tone and coordination. By the end of the year his level of pain was no longer chronic. It was the same as the average person in good health. He did have a couple of motions about which he needed to be careful, but he was 95% as opposed to the 10% to 20% he'd been before.

The one thing I learned from my own disabilities is that disability is a mindset. If you choose to remain disabled, you will be. If you choose the path of recovery, you will recover.

http://i1232.photobucket.com/albums/ff373/findleyd24/Recovery.jpg


So, you're admitting that you're an industry shill and/or have a profit motive for what you're saying?

How, exactly, might I have any "profit motive" while posting to an online message forum without advertising my services? Will you admit your comment is ludicrous and unworthy of a response? (even though I responded anyway) It's like pulling the Hitler card and a reverse appeal to authority all rolled into one.

Noclevername
2012-Aug-10, 10:04 PM
You're missing the point, Noclevername. She said she only exercises when she's not in pain.

What she actually said was she exercises until she's in too much pain to walk. Without knowing her pain threshold, we can't judge just how much that is.

Jim
2012-Aug-10, 10:45 PM
So, you're admitting that you're an industry shill and/or have a profit motive for what you're saying?

A bit uncalled for, don't you think? Don't speculate on his motives.

Gillianren
2012-Aug-10, 11:57 PM
What she actually said was she exercises until she's in too much pain to walk. Without knowing her pain threshold, we can't judge just how much that is.

Well, until or unless. I will note that I just this week got my very first handicapped placards for those days when the walk into a store (or, more often, back after shopping) is too much. My pain threshold keeps going up, but unfortunately, that's just a sign that the pain keeps getting worse and I keep on going anyway.

DoggerDan
2012-Aug-11, 12:14 AM
What she actually said was she exercises until she's in too much pain to walk. Without knowing her pain threshold, we can't judge just how much that is.

Point conceded, Noclevername, and you're right - we can't, and shouldn't judge. Walking, however, is but one form of exercise. As I've mentioned, "there are many [forms of exercise] people can do on a $0 budget in the comfort of their own homes." There's an axiom among trainers: "Exercise increases pain temporarily but reduces pain in the long run." Most of us know this as "no pain, no gain," but I dislike the term as it can lead people to overexercise to the point of unrecoverable damage. You'll always have some slight damage when you exercise, but that's how you body knows to rebuild those areas of tissue and bone into stronger than before.

Jens
2012-Aug-11, 01:29 PM
My pain threshold keeps going up, but unfortunately, that's just a sign that the pain keeps getting worse and I keep on going anyway.

I didn't know they measure that. When you say that your pain threshold goes up, does that mean that your doctor is administering a pain test and that you become more insensitive to the needle or whatever as time goes on?

ShinAce
2012-Aug-11, 04:39 PM
Actually, they do. It's not very medical, since pain is poorly understood. It goes like this: "On a scale of 1 to 10, how much does it hurt?". Give drugs, repeat. Pain has got to be the most common problem seen by surgeons.

Ara Pacis
2012-Aug-11, 06:38 PM
Actually, they do. It's not very medical, since pain is poorly understood. It goes like this: "On a scale of 1 to 10, how much does it hurt?". Give drugs, repeat. Pain has got to be the most common problem seen by surgeons.

I dunno if I'd call that a change in the pain threshold of a person, although it may be a reduction in the pain sensation and it's delivery to the brain. Or maybe that's the same thing. I know that a few times I've been in pain and on opiates I could still feel the pain, I just didn't care about it anymore.

ShinAce
2012-Aug-12, 02:48 AM
In all honesty, I was just trying to keep the thread from going into a sidetrack as a result of what I consider to be an insensitive comment.

At any rate, three seconds of google scholar did find:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC435000/
http://jpet.aspetjournals.org/content/72/1/74.short (rats)
http://www.painjournalonline.com/article/S0304-3959(02)00330-5/abstract

What any of this has to do with diet is beyond me. So without further ado, back to our regularly scheduled program... perhaps.

Jens
2012-Aug-13, 12:12 AM
In all honesty, I was just trying to keep the thread from going into a sidetrack as a result of what I consider to be an insensitive comment.

Do you mean my question? I didn't think it was insensitive. I'm genuinely interested in medical issues, and was simply wondering how they measure it.

HenrikOlsen
2012-Aug-13, 07:57 AM
I didn't know they measure that. When you say that your pain threshold goes up, does that mean that your doctor is administering a pain test and that you become more insensitive to the needle or whatever as time goes on?
They use an Ouchometer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qenzQaXM6Pw), the main problem is to find volunteers to calibrate it all the way to "Stepping on a Stonefish". Note that it's a YouTube clip, with tongue thoroughly in cheek and with Billy Connolly so NSW language.

More seriously though, yes it's a very subjective, test as it's basically a repeated application of pain and asking how bearable it is.

Gillianren
2012-Aug-13, 03:41 PM
I haven't had a scientific test, but when I stepped on a pin the other day and it went a quarter-inch into my toe, it hurt far less than it used to! What I meant was more along those lines. The same stimulus hurts less now than it did when I was younger. I'm getting used to a certain level of pain, and it takes longer before I'll resort to taking anything for it.