I’ve been in dietsville since July and am so close to hitting the 50 pound mark that if I got an erection I could poke it. Was 232, about to be 182. At 6’, I wasn’t an epic fatass, but according to science (and Wii Fit) I was obese.
I both share the OP’s question about how people can get that fat, and sort of understand how it could have happened to me.
For me, food was an antidepressant. It made me feel better when I was down in the dumps, which was pretty much always. I couldn’t pass food and not eat it. The same way an alcoholic describes an inability to understand how someone could leave a glass of wine half-empty, I couldn’t understand how someone could be within arm’s reach of food and not eat it. Food tastes good, and makes you feel better for a bit.
Part of my depression came from the fact that I was overweight, and I attended to that depression by eating, which is depressing in itself, which made me eat more. It’s a self-regulating ecosystem of calories.
Eventually I got on real antidepressants, which kind of took over the job from the food. With the meds, food wasn’t making me feel any better about being overweight, and when food lost that power, I could start getting legitimately upset about my weight and motivated to do something about it.
So in that regard, I can imagine that if I didn’t go on antidepressants I might have eaten myself into a scooter. I doubt it, but I can sort of see the imaginary path I would have had to take to get there.
Besides the meds, one of the things that was the biggest help in motivation was becoming a food snob. When I became a beer snob, it became too much work to only drink fancypants beers, so I stopped drinking altogether. When I became a food snob and wouldn’t let myself eat fast food or anything with HFCS, eating crap food became too much work, so I stopped.
I think the people on TLC programs, “Half-Ton Teen” and “My 800 Lb Mom” and “Jesus Christ Look at this Fatty” are all in some kind of depression-related cycle. In the case of the 900-something pound 19 year old that’s been in 4 different shows I’ve seen, it’s quite obvious that the kid’s mother overfeeds him because she needs to feel needed and nurturing.
There’s always some reason people get that big. It’s not just “food tastes good,” otherwise everybody would be 900 pounds. Food’s filling some kind of hole for those people.
It’s irritating when you deliberately read for incomprehension in order to distort my claims and to attempt to make me look like an ass. Though “distorting” barely begins to cover you saying I said that “looking good is the only reason to improve your musculature” immidately after my prior post.
And by “irritating”, I mean that this incredible level of deliberate sladerous bullshit defies the ability to respond to outside the pit.
Note that this was posted in response to me stating that I very likely already had a problem with my knees, so either the person was additionally implying that exercise additionally had curative powers, or they were being deliberately deceptive in order to use the nonsequiter to attempt to dishonestly undercut my postion.
And for natural liposuction, anybody who claims it’s an effective method of weight loss will do.
It was a combination of things, but getting back into softball after a few years out this year did it for me. I ran out to my position in right field and was winded and thought, “Holy shit. I’m tired just running to my position.” Then after a month my legs were killing me so badly I realized I couldn’t possibly play every year without seriously hurting myself, and that was that. 41 pounds off since July 28.
Funny thing is, I never had the “Who’s the fat guy in the mirror?” moment on the way up. But on the way DOWN, I look at pictures of myself in May and think, “Boy oh boy, I’m glad I’m getting away from that.”
begbert2, I try to exercise because even after losing weight from diet alone, I don’t want my thighs too look like a smaller version of her’s. I may be slim, but I’m still pretty flabby. I want to look good in a bathing suit – or hell, just a pair of shorts, or a short skirt!
Despite appearances, I am not opposed to people exercizing. I am opposed to people misrepresenting the effects of exercise in order to sell it to the misinformed masses. There is a difference.
(And for myself, I’m probably just going to keep wearing full-length pants, even in the unlikely event I do ever get to 200lbs. It’s easier. ;))
Good luck with reducing cellulite, but most of the women I know with the worst cases are athletic (including marathon runners). It’s a matter of connective tissues in the lower layers of the skin, after all, not anything to do with body fat.
I can only speak for myself, but if I took a shower one morning and couldn’t see my penis because of my gut I would immediately begin to run laps around the neighborhood. I’d think for most guys that’d be like a klaxon alarm going off.
It won’t do either of us any harm to forget about Rand. But- I wasn’t equating you to her. Our conversation seemed to suggest a contradiction to her. Take it as a compliment.
Cite? You are simply wrong on this point. No offense.
I can’t prove it I admit. But having some affinity for running and watching her kind of overflow for a minute, that is what it seemed like to me. Keep in mind she’s logging 20 miles every day, and I’m not exactly Tom Brady either. Meh, disregard if you prefer. At least admit you weren’t there.
Yes you can hurt yourself, it is true. In my own experience, let’s see, I have been running for 4 years and have hurt myself exactly once, at the very very beginning and before I had proper shoes. Yoinked my AT band. Other than that, a blister here and there is all, and really not even those anymore.
I wouldn’t say it is a case of ‘pursuing’ the runner’s high. It is a nice experience to get out in the sun and stretch out my legs even without it, take a look at the land and the people as it goes past. My sinuses clear out (the effect of happy chemicals other than endorphins) and my muscles wake up and thank me for a couple days afterward. I sometimes get a very distinct sensation of my own heartbeat, especially when it is time to sleep (which puts me out), very pleasant, and yet I am less prone to get tired the rest of the time. The high part isn’t pink elephants or unreality. I get seemingly immune to sadness, I don’t stress about things, I don’t know, I’m just pretty happy and feel good. Running was a way to get fit and increase my physical ability and I came to like it for itself- I never set out specifically to lose weight.
Anyway, I was hoping you would notice this line from the article:
See, lots of ways to get the same effect! I really wouldn’t agree that you need to get to the point of ‘damage’- my regular run seems to do it and that has become an almost casual activity. On one occasion it reached a trancendental kind of level after an all-uphill race, but I wasn’t hurt then either, just totally wiped out.
Religion!? Wha? When I was really going for it, yes, my diet changed. It happened consciously. But understand, I was moving into a high-carbohydrate diet, the exact opposite of that Atkin’s all-protein stuff they recommend to dieters. If anything it was more fattening.
Dude. I had spent the last 7-10 years steadily putting on 50-60 lbs. I started running and within maybe 18 months, probably less, I weighed less than I did before gaining weight. I don’t know how to prove it to you, but I tell you I ate more the whole time I was training hard, and even today I still think I eat a little more than before. I never gave up beer. I never really eschewed those burritos as big as your head or pizzas. But yes I did spend some time eating a lot of yams and chicken and rice, noodles and this sort of thing. But in large quantities. Again, I wasn’t trying to lose weight at all, it just followed the fitness hobby. Now if I actually was trying to diet for weight loss I would spend $20 on the biggest vat of pickles I could find and make sure to eat at least 5 a day. There are 5, 10 calories max even in the big ones, fill you up and they’re tasty and crunchy. But I didn’t do anything like that.
Well, I did get a big thrill out of tracking my progress and I’m proud that I did complete the marathon after all (even though it was stupid), but I really wouldn’t compare it to buying a car. I’m not very materialistic in that way though.
I say ‘bad rap’ because you are soooo skeptical about its effectiveness. I got trim and fit (though not, I would like to stress, special) specifically and exactly through exercise, without ever caring for weight loss. I suppose there is a sense of accomplishment there too, leaving me feel like I could move on to conquer other things (which I have), though I’d demolished plenty of obstacles before- maybe that is just the way I am.
Yeah, more credit than you think it deserves. You haven’t really experienced it. Hmm, I’m no taller, I might be less likely to get lung cancer or heart disease I suppose. I’m trying to tell you dude, it gives you a semi-permanent natural high, as you put it. Burn my house down though and I’m sure I’ll still take it hard, if that is what you mean.
I think I am. This is all measurable real-world stuff! Ok, the subjectivism is not easy to measure, but some cognitive effects are measurable and they check out. Improved fitness? Absolutely measurable. And keep in mind, humans are specially evolved in only so many things: Brains. Thumbs. Running. (other animals can’t do it like humans). It is what we are evolved to do. We’re physical animals. Being physical gives us a charge. Maybe someone else can help me out on this point.
Not saying this is the case, but sometimes people get disillusioned about ‘exercise’ and become embittered to it, and instead of saying “exercise didn’t work for me” they become this savage exercise hater and try disprove tens of thousands of peer reviewed studies wrong because they pushed themselves too hard and got burnt out, or they give it a half-hearted try and don’t see immediate results.
You first - the idea that endorphins (the proposed mechanism for the Runner’s High) keep floating around in the system for days after being generated is both unlikely and, as best I can tell, completely unsupported by evidence. Including the wiki you quoted.
Note that I’m not disputing that y’all are happy people, or that people who are chronic exercisers have been noticed as being happy people. However there’s no reason to believe that this is a biological effect of the exercise. The switch to a schedule with notable amounts of regular exercise inevitably involves a change in lifestyle, and would seem probable to provide regular experiences of achieving goals and experiencing personal accomlishment. Unlike endorphins, which as best I can tell don’t last that long, these facts can explain happy runners - but they are NOT biological effects.
“But this means that if you take up extreme exercise, that you’ll be happy!”, you might say. My response: not so fast. You’re forgetting correlation and causation. Professional basketball players tend to be tall, but that doesn’t mean that basketball makes people tall. And similarly, it might be the case that there are people who don’t experience happiness from exercise - and that they self-select for the most part out of the group who regularly exercise. Which means that you cannot extrapolate from your own experience to others in this matter, at least not without further data.
And as I’ve mentioned, my approach to goals and failure seems unlikely to contribute to satisfaction from any activity that involves very slow progress. Which leads me to strongly suspect that what works for you in this regard simply would not work for me.
And a passionate theist sees God in everything (well, everything good, anyway). People have a tendency to concoct explanations that conform to their worldview and experience and beliefs.
Personally, if I was a world famous awesome star medal-winning runner, I’d be happy even if I was pumped with anti-endorphines and had a head cold.
Heh, and ironically, my experience is that this sunday I hurt my back while reading. It was sufficiently painful that I could only get two hours of sleep that night. (According to the chiropractor, I did it to myself by lying on my front propped up on my elbows; this arched my back too much and held it in that position too long. Sounds plausible to me.)
Does this relate much to burning your body out through excessive exercise that pushes limits too far because you ignore them because you’re having an actual endorphine-based runner’s high? Not really. But I thought it would be mildly amusing to note that this experience hasn’t done much to convince me that I have the right sort of body for yoga.
And I hope that you’ll notice this line from the article, which immidiately follows the one you quoted:
I have no doubt that you’re a happier person now - heck, aside from the running you told me you took control and improved various other aspects of your life as well! Of course you’re happier! But I remain dubious that you are correctly assigning blame for all the good things you’ve experienced. Especially with regard to biological causes for your happiness. And as noted in the quote, I’m not the only one who’s dubious about this either.
And if you’re getting transcendental, you’re probably meditating while running. Not surprising; it’s a pretty rhythmic activity if you’re not staggering around in pain like I do.
I meant religious-style belief, mate, the mis-assignment of credit for things based on erroneous assumptions about their probable causes. You know, like blaming exerceise-generated endorphines for effects that last three days.
And if you weren’t counting calories and tracking before and after, you’re going to be hard pressed to prove to anyone, even yourself, that you did not change your diet when you changed your lifestyle.
As for pickles, they’re okay, and I have added them to my snack list since this diet thing, but I’m not that fond of them. (They do keep forever, though, which is a plus. I have to buy the blasted broccoli every third day.)
Buying a car works for some people. So does exercise, for other people. But it wouldn’t be reasonable for me to assert that you would get happiness from buying a car, and it wouldn’t be reasonable for you to assert that I would get happiness from exercising. 'Specially with that whole endorphine thing not seeming to pan out the way you think it does.
People swear to me that religion gives a semi-permanent natural high, too. My acting theory is, it’s all in their heads - and not in the endorphines in there, either.
Whoa whoa whoa - now you are spouting religion. We can tell because you’re diverging wildly from observable facts. Numerous animals kick humanity’s collective asses with regard to running; not just cheetahs, but pretty darned near anything that even approaches our mass, from dogs to deer to rhinos to elephants. Seriously - this is reality here we’re talking about.
The fact is that humans are not evolved to run. We’re evolved to stand and reach and grab things - those thumbs you mentioned. We’re evolved to stop and think. And maybe to watch saturday morning cartoons. But one thing we can be certain of is that running was not a primary factor that was selected for in our evolutionary development. Because if it was, we could actually outrun things. (Like, specifically, predators.)
Serously, you’re trying to conform all of reality to your preconceptions, regardless of how obviously reality doesn’t match up. When I see this, my gut reaction is “everything this guy says about his subject of belief should be taken with two dumptruck loads of salt”. So yeah. Best bring cited facts, or settle for stating opinions as opinions. One or the other.
I wanna see these “thousands of peer reviewed studies”. What are they studying? I don’t think I’ve ever said exercise has no effects on a person; I may have an opinion, but I’m not ignoring reality here. I simply dispute specific claims, like that exercise is a good way to lose weight (especially if you increase your eating of big burritos and pizzas while doing it, as Try2B has claimed), or that exercise above a certain intensity creates a biologically-based high that lasts two or three days.
Which is to say, I am disillusioned about exercise - and I see value in dispelling the illusions, too. Some of the claims about the magical effects of exercise are really out there.
None go so far as to say exercise is a good way to lose weight, but I’m not claiming that. You made a specific statement in this thread in which exercise had no benefits. Also not claiming anything about runners high lasting 2-3 days.
Strawman much? Do you really think by disproving those two things, you prove that exercise has no medical benefits?
Please do - but make sure that it’s not me saying that it has no benefits that I care about, and that it’s not me saying that it has no benefits that are sufficient to instill in me a desire to do it. Becuase if that’s all that I am saying, then this post here accusing me of attacking a strawman is itself the definition of a strawman.
(It may also help to keep an eye on what I’m reponding to - if a person says, “exercise provides great weight loss benefits” and I responded, “Exercise does not have those benefits!”, then that wouldn’t count either.)
((I will note further that I can’t swear I have never said anything that could be construed as a complete disparagement of exercise, especially if taken out of context. I can get hyperbolic at time. However, I have stated my position clearly several times recently and it accepts that there are various effects to “sufficient amounts of” exercise that some people might find compelling. If you have to ignore these recent posts in order to argue against a handful of specific past ones, you are still building a strawman, just with slightly less ephemeral straw.))
Ok, I scoured through and guess the only citable point was that somebody else accused you of saying exercise has no benefits at all.
Your addendum is valid of course, I have no interest in running a marathon, and for similar reasons (though mostly me being lazy, marathons are hard). So perhaps my arguments seem a strawman, but I wasn’t trying to convince you that you should exercise, only that it does have significant health benefits (though only if you always continue to do exercises…).
My only point is to defend that exercise does have proven health benefits (as much as you can “prove” with studies), not that they are significant enough you HAVE to do them no matter what. If you aren’t arguing against that, then I’m not really debating you. I’m not interested in bashing strawmen, and the only reason it may seem I was, is due to my ignorance on your stance.
I’m not claiming that there is a constant endorphin rush that lasts for days. There are actually other chemicals released, like epinephidrine (sp?) which also have cognitive as well as biological effects, but I’m not claiming that those are necessarily having a direct effect for 3 days either. I’m reporting from the field here; properly you should be trying to figure out how to substantiate my honest reporting through science. How can reduced stress really be measured? Lifted mood? Better sleep? Ongoing body pleasure? Joie de vivre? I don’t know the answers to these, but it is in fact what I am reporting.
There isn’t really any accomplishment to going out for a casual run- it is a routine act. I think this alone shoots your theory that it is some kind of accomplishment glow.
Who knows, maybe there is a self-selection going on in that I am the ‘type of person’ who gets happy from exercise. But this is a weight thread. Mimic my marathon training regime and I will bet you money you will lose weight. Do you disagree?
But if you’re expecting instant results (from anything), then I think you are probably the one being unrealistic. Maybe meth is the right choice for you after all.
Failure? How do you fail at exercise? I sense some digging in of the heels here.
It is just numbers. You don’t confuse those with God, do you? If you’re a Phythagorean or something, please say so.
I had some time on my hands and did quite a lot of running for a while there. Perhaps 6 months of it involved plenty of 2+ hr runs (when I was still curious how far I could take it, I ramped it up to 180+ minutes at a stretch). Trying that hard required me to take a day off afterward, so a lowball estimate would be 120 minutes every other day. Eyeball guesstimate for someone my size is that a 2 hour run burns 1500 calories, so 3.5*1500=5250 calories a week. Keep that up over six months, with a ramp-up before and then mostly joyrunning ever since, let me ask you: exactly what am I going to eat to pick up those kind of calories every week?
Arithmetic, not God. Others have been fooled before you however.
Ok.
Going back to yoga again. For one, I don’t think I’ve been clear that the meditation effects are a different animal from the ‘biological’ mood effects of running (see, I even used quotes!).
For two, you’d have to do yoga to get a body good for doing yoga. It is a process.
For three, in a further attempt to convince you that you don’t know what you’re talking about on this subject- guess which pose the instructors insist is the most difficult pose in the practice? Take a second and imagine what you think that might be. The answer is this one: corpse pose. It is the one at the end where you do nothing and think nothing. Is that the one you guessed? No? Are you sure you’re prepared to promote an opinion without any experience of this?
I don’t assign all the good things I’ve experience to running, but only the ones that apply to running.
I’m not trying to claim that it is the only way to be happy either. I think you could be happy without ever running, if that is what you’re worried about. But! There is a marked effect there, and again, without experience I don’t see how you can have such strong opinions. We’re not talking about reading verse xyz and realizing such and such about the Godhead. We’re talking about a measurable physical action.
You’ve heard of cause and effect?
I know the difference from experience. That isn’t what it was.
You’re narrowing my point to just the endorphin effects. But, what kind of science can I throw at you? Epithemeus tossed literally 2+ million links at you, and you still seem unimpressed.
Again, we’re talking about 5000+ extra calories burned per week. It isn’t hard to undereat that, even without any effort. Maybe you’ll tell me how.
Fair enough on the car bit.
The endorphin thing: dude, the researches did before and after brain scans of the relevant areas. They’re peer-reviewed scientists. Even if it isn’t the endorphins, are you still denying that it is something caused by the running?
Don’t confuse me with those guys. Puh-leeze. And unlike religion, you could test this yourself. Your whole position though is a series of defenses against doing just that. You’ll say you have tried it, I know, but I’m talking about lighting a fire under your own ass.
I’m talking about endurance running. Sure, cheetas go faster, other animals can run well enough. But humans actually are supreme when it comes to distance running. Our bodies are dramatically more efficient than other animals. Pound for pound animals are stronger in the immediate moment, but they burn up all their juice long before a (fit) human has to quit. Look into it!
Of course if you mistake my point for something else, yah then of course I’m wrong.
But we are. I’ll try to find a link if I can. The Dawn of Time guys survived by exhausting their prey. Among other things of course, it isn’t The Only Thing.
These are post-conceptions. I didn’t have these ideas until I tried to get fit, and later looked into it a little.
Epithemeus provided a ton of links. Personally, I’m not a peer-reviewed scientist. But if I didn’t get lean and strong through all the exercise, how did I do it? Starving myself to strength and ability? Really???
Maybe we should start out with your list of which of my claims are magical.
Hmm. What arithmetic are you using? At 100 lbs, I burn about 63 calories per mile (on a flat surface), adjusted to subtract the number of calories I would be burning anyway if I was sitting on the couch. It takes me about 30 minutes to run 3 miles (my usual length), for a total expenditure of under 200 calories, or one medium-sized cookie (if I ate them).
Since you asked - I drink a pint of heavy cream, 1600 calories, daily (in addition to 3 meals per day). It wouldn’t be hard for me to stay out of caloric deficit were I to burn this much through exercise!
This is my version of running a marathon. You totally know I’m doing it for the biochemical effects of arguing a point in debate.
And you’re missing the point - I’m not saying that these things aren’t happening, I’m stating that these are not biological effects. And that you’re incorrectly assigning full credit to the physical effects exercise. You can’t argue against this by pointing out that effects happen.
The reason why the source of the effects matters is, if it’s a physical effect of exercise, then it would happen to me if I hated myself enough to subject myself to that kind of treatment. But if it’s pscyhological, then that may not be the case. I do not admire runners, do not see a shred of value in the difference between “thin” and “fit”, and am vaguely repelled by the idea of being ‘ripped’. Based on this, I strongly suspect that running would never do a thing for me psychologically speaking - at least not anything good anyway.
Not at all - what would happen if you didn’t run for a while? You’d start to feel slothful, and lazy, and guilty, right? Hence the “wearing off”. And as for the sustained state of happiness, you like the idea if yourself as a fit athlete, so when you maintain a lifestyle that you see as consistent with your preferred self-image, you like yourself better, and are thus happier.
That’s my theory. What’s yours? Running generates long-lasting happy-drugs?
If I mimic just the running, and return to my old habit of eating lots and lots and lots of processed food and snacks? Keeping in mind I’d have to eat more per-hour when I’m not running, to make up for the time wasted on the track, and undoubtedly would due to being hungrier from the workout?
I not only wouldn’t lose weight, I’d gain all that I’ve currently lost back, without doubt. (This is of course ignoring the high likelihood that I would be physically incapable of your regime, with my bones and even my current weight.)
For a quick shot of happy, I prefer legos or anime, mostly. (Though meth might be cheaper…)
You fail at exercise by having any kind of standard, and not making it. “Be this good.” “Be this fast.” “Be this strong.” “Improve this much.”
Not very zen, I know, but some of us look for observable metrics by which to measure progress, and it’s a short short step from having a metric, to making goals against that metric - and from there, it’s possible to fail to meet those goals. (For example, at the moment I’m failing at dieting. I should have crossed 260 weeks ago.)
Keeping in mind that your numbers have already been severely disputed, how much exactly is 5250 calories a week? Well, it’s 750 calories a day. Which is like, four cookies. Wow, that’s like a whole thanksgiving dinner right there! Who could possibly eat that much. :rolleyes:
Prior to my diet, I wasn’t counting calories, but based on rough estimates I probably averaged about two thousand calories of snacks a day. Without feeling like I was particularly stuffing myself. 5250 calories a week is nothing.
For one, there may be more than one way to meditate, with different effects. The mind is a large and complicated place.
For two, the debate about wether everyone can get a yogariffic body is impossible to prove, since I will say that people are different from each other and you will claim that people are just at different levels of development (and that, by corollary, everything that an olympic athelete can do could be done by anyone if they weren’t such lazy-asses.)
For three, all you’ve done is prove that yoga isn’t all about exercise, and there’s a meditation aspect to it too, which is considered harder. Which isn’t impressive since we’ve already agreed upon meditation being part of yoga (in fact, the only part you consider interesting). And unless you’re hoping to show that all of yoga is physically as easy or easier as lying motionless on your back, you haven’t shown that I’m ignorant of anything except irrelevent trivia.
Sure. You’ve heard of correlation doesn’t equal causation?
meditayto, meditahto.
Probably since arguing by link overload is unimpressive argument.
I can eat an extra ten thousand calories a week without trying. You ever heard of potato chips? They sell them in nice big bags.
Yay!
Endorphines exist. They are short term pain relief. They have dick-all to do with your constant happy mood.
If you’re going to cite scientists, it helps if they’re talking about the same thing you’re talking about.
I could try eating shit myself too, but honestly I think that an analytical approach to the evidence is sufficient to show to a reasonable degree of certainty that it’s not gonna taste good, regardless of what people might say.
And “lighting a fire under your ass” is an entire lifestyle change, and you’re blaming the benefits on just one part of it. That’s like taking your car in for a tuneup and crediting the replaced windsheild wipers for the increase in gas mileage.
meara helped you out:
Have you read those links? “Consider the fact that some 334,000 people ran marathons in the United States last year, and then try getting an antelope to run 26 miles, or a chimp, for that matter.” Yeah, right, and try getting me to run 26 miles either for that matter! This is a joke. Cobbled excuse for science biased towards a preconcieved notion. Similar efforts have concluded that we evolved from fish-men.
And then using your preconceptions based on your anecdotal experience, you found an explanation that seemed satisfying and seemed to fit your set of experiences, and latched onto that.
Similar thinking shows that bad people get struck by lightning. You don’t figure this out until after a few people get hit, of course…
Tons of links thrown at you at once are like tons of ninjas thrown at you at one - the more there are, the weaker they all are. This goes times six orders of magnitute if the links are dumped out without summations or explanations.
And don’t move goalposts. Starving doesn’t make you strong, starving makes you thin. Exercise makes you strong, and I never said it didn’t. (You have to be thin before you can be lean, though.)
Let’s stick with the “running gives you a chemical high lasting days” and “5250 cals/week = unstoppable weight loss”. That should be fine for a start.
