Why Exercise is Essential
A recent cover story for Time magazine suggested that when it comes to weight loss, exercise doesn't work. The article, entitled "Why Exercise Won't Make You Thin," contained quotes from experts and researchers and highlighted a number of studies all saying basically the same thing: If you're trying to lose weight, exercise isn't going to help you. The author suggests that exercise stimulates physical hunger, which leads to compensation-people "make up" for the calories burned during a workout either by eating more calories or by moving less afterwards.
Although the author cites several studies to prove his case, I'd have to argue that for every study showing that exercise doesn't work for weight loss, there's at least one study showing the opposite. An important thing to keep in mind when reading about scientific studies is that they have limitations--and the ones mentioned in the Time article were no exception. For instance, some of the studies looked at only a small number of people or they looked at children, not adults. And a big one: Many of these studies look at exercise alone for weight loss. (The LSU study that the author primarily uses to support his appetite-exercise argument did not track participants' diets; the women in the study filled out a questionnaire on what they ate but their actual calorie intake was not measured.) Of course, almost all experts agree: The best way to lose weight and keep it off is with a combination of exercise and diet.
But my main issue with the author's argument is that he looks primarily at low-intensity exercise for weight loss. Indeed, the LSU study is the perfect example; during the six-month study, participants worked out at only 50 percent of their maximum heart rate. In my experience, low levels of exercise can and often do stimulate the appetite in direct relation to calories burned-so the more calories you burn, the more your appetite increases. Not surprisingly, that's exactly what the LSU study found. However, if you work out hard enough (at about 80 percent of your target heart rate), you'll likely still burn more calories than you take in--even if you experience an increase in appetite. (Vigorous exercise is any activity that elevates your heart rate and breathing to the point where you could still carry on a conversation but would prefer not to, and you could maintain your pace for the duration of your workout. Check out How Hard Are You Really Working? for more on gauging exercise intensity.) And if you think about it, the fitter you are, the longer and harder you can work out, which will further increase your calorie burn not only during the session, but throughout the day as well.
I'm not knocking low-intensity exercise--it certainly has its benefits, particularly from a health standpoint. In fact, although there was no significant difference in weight loss or body between the four groups in the LSU study (those who didn't exercise versus those who worked out 72 minutes per week, 136 minutes per week, or194 minutes per week), the researchers did note that all of the exercise participants saw an increase in their fitness level and a decrease in waist circumference, a measurement that's been linked to more than a handful of diseases. Still, when it comes to weight loss, vigorous exercise is key. Of course, you have to build up your endurance and strength-anyone who tries to work out at a vigorous level right from the start will be at risk for injuries, such as strains, sprains, muscle pulls or tears, and more.
Your ultimate goal is to achieve the highest level of fitness that's practical for you, given your lifestyle and any challenges you may face. Start with whatever you can do--if it's walking only 10 or 15 minutes a day, great. After a week or so, try to increase your time by 5 minutes. Keep doing this until you build up to 30 minutes or more. After you've mastered this, try to challenge yourself by picking up the pace a bit or walking a route with more hills. This will help you increase the intensity of your workouts. Soon enough, you'll be hitting this goal and reaping significant benefits--both from a health and weight-loss standpoint.
I've explained that the appetite-exercise link may not be as strong with high-intensity exercise, or that it may not be as big an issue because you're burning a greater amount of calories. It's also worth pointing out that the increase in appetite with activity might not be a problem for everyone. In many studies, researchers find no link between exercise and appetite. This was the case in the LSU study, as well. About 30 percent of those in the highest exercise group (those who worked out 194 minutes per week) and about 53 percent in each of the other two exercise groups (136 minutes per week and 72 minutes per week) were not considered compensators. The researchers explain that either some people are simply not prone to compensation, or they've developed effective coping strategies. A recent study published in the journal The American Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, may explain why some people may not experience this appetite boost: Exercise seems to slow the release of ghrelin, the appetite-stimulating hormone, and increase the release of Peptide YY, a hormone responsible for suppressing appetite, for a total of two hours. The hunger-curbing benefits weren't just evident in blood tests-exercisers also reported that they didn't feel hungry during or immediately after the session. (It could also be that the mood boost people get from activity helps reduce emotional eating; many people tend to turn to food when they're depressed or sad.)
If you do experience an increase in appetite, don't panic. It will likely be only slight and if you work out hard enough, you should still end up with a calorie deficit. And remember, ultimately, you have control over how you manage your hunger. A cup of fresh fruit topped with a little whipped cream can be just as satisfying, and significantly better for you and your weight-loss goals, than an oversized muffin (like the one mentioned in the Time article).
Aside from the slight boost in hunger you may feel after increasing activity, you could potentially fall into two traps--both more psychological than physiological--that trip up many exercisers. The first is thinking that you burned enough calories to afford the ice cream, cupcake or whatever other splurge you allow yourself. But in truth, walking at a moderate pace for 30 minutes burns only about 150 calories. The other issue: Many people feel the need to reward themselves for completing a hard workout. And unfortunately, we're taught from a very early age that food is a viable reward. As a child, you may have received a piece of candy or a cookie for being good. If you aced a test, you may have been treated to an ice cream. This kind of thinking-that if I do something good, I deserve to indulge-becomes ingrained. Of course, we rarely "treat" ourselves to something healthy, like a just-picked peach or a low-fat yogurt mixed with some chopped nuts and fresh berries. No, in our toxic food environment, it's so much easier to find a high-calorie food. But if you can retrain yourself to choose a moderate-calorie, good-for-you splurge, you can circumvent this problem. Better yet, move away from the food-as-reward thinking entirely. There are plenty of other ways to treat yourself that don't involve food; go for a massage, manicure or pedicure or buy yourself a new pair of sneakers or some fitness gear instead.
Finally, the author sums up his arguments with this conclusion: Diet alone is the key to weight loss. I've already listed a number of reasons why exercise is vital to any health or weight-loss program. Besides, there's plenty of research that suggests losing weight through diet alone produces the same appetite-stimulating effects the author attributes to exercise. It's a simple fact that people who lose weight--whether through diet, exercise or a combo of the two-tend to get hungrier. In my experience, exercise helps with this hunger increase because it allows you to eat more calories than you would be able to if you were only dieting and still lose weight. Plus, when you focus on cutting calories only through diet, you end up shedding muscle in addition to fat. As you lose muscle, your resting metabolic rate (the rate at which your body burns calories when you're at rest) drops. On the other hand, exercise helps maintain muscle tissue, which burns more calories than fat. Not only that, but having more muscle often helps people look and feel better. And even if you do manage to peel off the pounds without exercise, it's virtually impossible to keep them off without incorporating some form of physical activity into your routine-this is something that study after study has shown. In fact, according to the National Weight Control Registry, people who lose weight and keep it off do an average of at least 45 minutes of moderate-intensity exercise everyday.
Don't use this article as an excuse to give up on your fitness plan! Stick with exercise and at worst, you'll reap the disease-fighting benefits, which include a reduced risk for heart disease, cancer, diabetes, osteoporosis and more, as well as an increase in self-esteem. And at best, you'll also see a dip in those numbers on the scale. That doesn't sound like a bad deal to me!
http://thebestlife.com
Although the author cites several studies to prove his case, I'd have to argue that for every study showing that exercise doesn't work for weight loss, there's at least one study showing the opposite. An important thing to keep in mind when reading about scientific studies is that they have limitations--and the ones mentioned in the Time article were no exception. For instance, some of the studies looked at only a small number of people or they looked at children, not adults. And a big one: Many of these studies look at exercise alone for weight loss. (The LSU study that the author primarily uses to support his appetite-exercise argument did not track participants' diets; the women in the study filled out a questionnaire on what they ate but their actual calorie intake was not measured.) Of course, almost all experts agree: The best way to lose weight and keep it off is with a combination of exercise and diet.
But my main issue with the author's argument is that he looks primarily at low-intensity exercise for weight loss. Indeed, the LSU study is the perfect example; during the six-month study, participants worked out at only 50 percent of their maximum heart rate. In my experience, low levels of exercise can and often do stimulate the appetite in direct relation to calories burned-so the more calories you burn, the more your appetite increases. Not surprisingly, that's exactly what the LSU study found. However, if you work out hard enough (at about 80 percent of your target heart rate), you'll likely still burn more calories than you take in--even if you experience an increase in appetite. (Vigorous exercise is any activity that elevates your heart rate and breathing to the point where you could still carry on a conversation but would prefer not to, and you could maintain your pace for the duration of your workout. Check out How Hard Are You Really Working? for more on gauging exercise intensity.) And if you think about it, the fitter you are, the longer and harder you can work out, which will further increase your calorie burn not only during the session, but throughout the day as well.
I'm not knocking low-intensity exercise--it certainly has its benefits, particularly from a health standpoint. In fact, although there was no significant difference in weight loss or body between the four groups in the LSU study (those who didn't exercise versus those who worked out 72 minutes per week, 136 minutes per week, or194 minutes per week), the researchers did note that all of the exercise participants saw an increase in their fitness level and a decrease in waist circumference, a measurement that's been linked to more than a handful of diseases. Still, when it comes to weight loss, vigorous exercise is key. Of course, you have to build up your endurance and strength-anyone who tries to work out at a vigorous level right from the start will be at risk for injuries, such as strains, sprains, muscle pulls or tears, and more.
Your ultimate goal is to achieve the highest level of fitness that's practical for you, given your lifestyle and any challenges you may face. Start with whatever you can do--if it's walking only 10 or 15 minutes a day, great. After a week or so, try to increase your time by 5 minutes. Keep doing this until you build up to 30 minutes or more. After you've mastered this, try to challenge yourself by picking up the pace a bit or walking a route with more hills. This will help you increase the intensity of your workouts. Soon enough, you'll be hitting this goal and reaping significant benefits--both from a health and weight-loss standpoint.
I've explained that the appetite-exercise link may not be as strong with high-intensity exercise, or that it may not be as big an issue because you're burning a greater amount of calories. It's also worth pointing out that the increase in appetite with activity might not be a problem for everyone. In many studies, researchers find no link between exercise and appetite. This was the case in the LSU study, as well. About 30 percent of those in the highest exercise group (those who worked out 194 minutes per week) and about 53 percent in each of the other two exercise groups (136 minutes per week and 72 minutes per week) were not considered compensators. The researchers explain that either some people are simply not prone to compensation, or they've developed effective coping strategies. A recent study published in the journal The American Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, may explain why some people may not experience this appetite boost: Exercise seems to slow the release of ghrelin, the appetite-stimulating hormone, and increase the release of Peptide YY, a hormone responsible for suppressing appetite, for a total of two hours. The hunger-curbing benefits weren't just evident in blood tests-exercisers also reported that they didn't feel hungry during or immediately after the session. (It could also be that the mood boost people get from activity helps reduce emotional eating; many people tend to turn to food when they're depressed or sad.)
If you do experience an increase in appetite, don't panic. It will likely be only slight and if you work out hard enough, you should still end up with a calorie deficit. And remember, ultimately, you have control over how you manage your hunger. A cup of fresh fruit topped with a little whipped cream can be just as satisfying, and significantly better for you and your weight-loss goals, than an oversized muffin (like the one mentioned in the Time article).
Aside from the slight boost in hunger you may feel after increasing activity, you could potentially fall into two traps--both more psychological than physiological--that trip up many exercisers. The first is thinking that you burned enough calories to afford the ice cream, cupcake or whatever other splurge you allow yourself. But in truth, walking at a moderate pace for 30 minutes burns only about 150 calories. The other issue: Many people feel the need to reward themselves for completing a hard workout. And unfortunately, we're taught from a very early age that food is a viable reward. As a child, you may have received a piece of candy or a cookie for being good. If you aced a test, you may have been treated to an ice cream. This kind of thinking-that if I do something good, I deserve to indulge-becomes ingrained. Of course, we rarely "treat" ourselves to something healthy, like a just-picked peach or a low-fat yogurt mixed with some chopped nuts and fresh berries. No, in our toxic food environment, it's so much easier to find a high-calorie food. But if you can retrain yourself to choose a moderate-calorie, good-for-you splurge, you can circumvent this problem. Better yet, move away from the food-as-reward thinking entirely. There are plenty of other ways to treat yourself that don't involve food; go for a massage, manicure or pedicure or buy yourself a new pair of sneakers or some fitness gear instead.
Finally, the author sums up his arguments with this conclusion: Diet alone is the key to weight loss. I've already listed a number of reasons why exercise is vital to any health or weight-loss program. Besides, there's plenty of research that suggests losing weight through diet alone produces the same appetite-stimulating effects the author attributes to exercise. It's a simple fact that people who lose weight--whether through diet, exercise or a combo of the two-tend to get hungrier. In my experience, exercise helps with this hunger increase because it allows you to eat more calories than you would be able to if you were only dieting and still lose weight. Plus, when you focus on cutting calories only through diet, you end up shedding muscle in addition to fat. As you lose muscle, your resting metabolic rate (the rate at which your body burns calories when you're at rest) drops. On the other hand, exercise helps maintain muscle tissue, which burns more calories than fat. Not only that, but having more muscle often helps people look and feel better. And even if you do manage to peel off the pounds without exercise, it's virtually impossible to keep them off without incorporating some form of physical activity into your routine-this is something that study after study has shown. In fact, according to the National Weight Control Registry, people who lose weight and keep it off do an average of at least 45 minutes of moderate-intensity exercise everyday.
Don't use this article as an excuse to give up on your fitness plan! Stick with exercise and at worst, you'll reap the disease-fighting benefits, which include a reduced risk for heart disease, cancer, diabetes, osteoporosis and more, as well as an increase in self-esteem. And at best, you'll also see a dip in those numbers on the scale. That doesn't sound like a bad deal to me!
http://thebestlife.com