Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 51 to 60 of 60

Thread: Lsd.

  1. #51
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    8,472
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bacciagalupe View Post
    2) Reynolds is better at this than a lot of her fellow journalists.
    3) There is also a long-standing tradition of people who dislike hearing counter-intuitive claims, and will refuse to accept the results.
    Which "results" described by the same blog are OK to refuse?

    The problem is that that single blog posting is incomplete and, thus, misleading (you were mislead). It's sloppy to draw broad conclusions from a single blog post!

    Here are four entries from the same blog that suggest that exercise is significantly helpful for weight control.

    http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/0...e-you-overeat/

    “Responsiveness to food cues was significantly reduced after exercise,” says Todd A. Hagobian, a professor of kinesiology at California Polytechnic who oversaw the study, published last month in The Journal of Applied Physiology. “That reduction was spread across many different regions of the brain,” he continues, “including those that affect liking and wanting food, and the motivation to seek out food.” Though he didn’t follow the volunteers after they’d left the lab to see whether they might have headed to an all-you-can-eat buffet on days they exercised, on questionnaires they indicated feeling much less interested in seeking out food after exercise than after rest.
    The same blog contradicts one claim.

    Quote Originally Posted by reynolds
    And as another provocative new study of brain activity after exercise found, some overweight, sedentary people respond to exercise by revving their food-reward systems, not dampening them.
    So, obese people might respond differently.

    http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/0...ep-us-healthy/
    Quote Originally Posted by reynolds
    A newly discovered hormone produced in response to exercise may be turning people’s white fat brown, a groundbreaking new study suggests, and in the process lessening their susceptibility to obesity, diabetes and other health problems.
    It lessesns susceptibility to obesity.

    http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/1...in-the-family/

    Quote Originally Posted by reynolds
    By most estimates, about 65 percent of people of European or African descent and perhaps 44 percent of Asians carry some version of the FTO gene....It found that physical activity, even in small doses, may subvert genetic destiny <of people who have the “fat mass and obesity-associated” gene>.
    It "may" counteract the effect of a gene that 65% of Europeans and Africans have.

    http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/1...with-exercise/

    Quote Originally Posted by reynolds
    But several new studies promote a simple and effective response: Run or walk from the buffet. Even if you’ve already overindulged, the studies suggest, exercise can lessen or reverse the unwelcome consequences.
    It helps with reducing weight!
    Last edited by njkayaker; 08-25-13 at 12:42 PM.

  2. #52
    Professional Fuss-Budget Bacciagalupe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    6,338
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by njkayaker View Post
    * Talking about obese people
    Not all the studies are done on obese people. In the Nov 2009 Reynolds article, one study she discussed is on obese people; the second study is on people who are athletic and lean, sedentary and lean, sedentary and obese.


    No idea how much or what exercise they are doing.
    If you really need that detail, read the study. Ms Reynolds linked it for your convenience.


    7 pounds in 12 weeks is not "nothing".
    When you're discussing someone who is obese, it's pretty small.


    It provides detail about one study.
    Actually, it's two studies -- and there are lots of others. If you want a more in-depth discussion, you can read Ms Reynolds' book (The First 20 Minutes). Or, hit Pubmed, or the library, etc.


    All sorts of problems yet you make this overly broad conclusion....
    My wording is brief -- but the core isn't wrong. Losing weight is ultimately a calorie game, and exercise won't help much in terms of losing weight. You have to control your eating.

    And while I did omit how low-intensity exercise burns fat faster, as already noted a good contemporary training plan will include 80% low-intensity and 20% high-intensity. That's plenty of time and work to burn off some of that fat.


    There are significant benefits to exercise in relation to not being obese.
    1) There are lots of really unhealthy ways to lose weight.
    2) There are lots of ways to lose weight in the short term, that don't work in the long term.
    3) There are lots of indications that being slightly overweight actually isn't bad for your health (as opposed to being obese).
    4) If you exercise properly, you will have lots of health and emotional benefits that have nothing to do with "losing weight."


    Exercise alone might not be enough for "large" weight losses but it still could be quite useful (including doing other things) to prevent and maintain weight loss.
    Not if you wind up using it as an excuse to eat like a horse -- or, if exercising encourages you to eat like a horse.


    So, to lose weight, you have to eat less than you burn (no one is arguing against that). It's kind of obvious.
    I think you'd be surprised how many people don't actually understand that. Or, through no fault of their own, vastly overestimate how many calories they are burning during exercise.


    How many obese marathon runners are there?
    Are we talking about the elite runners, who precisely control their diets? Or are we talking about the average Jane and Joe, who are overweight and enjoy running? (As in, I see lots of heavy people running.)


    http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/exercise/SM00109
    So your response to a journalist who has spent a few years reading all the research is... a web page at the Mayo Clinic? That has no information or research, just a statement that you need to burn 3500 calories to lose 1 pound? That does not discuss the effectiveness of various strategies, or potential effects of exercise on appetite or food choice? Good call.

  3. #53
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    8,472
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bacciagalupe View Post
    Are we talking about the elite runners, who precisely control their diets? Or are we talking about the average Jane and Joe, who are overweight and enjoy running? (As in, I see lots of heavy people running.)
    1) We don't know exactly what population any particular study result pertains to. 2) Your impression of the number of heavy people running (not knowing how much they run) isn't objective.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bacciagalupe View Post
    And while I did omit ...
    You (and that one blog post) "omitted" a few things.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bacciagalupe View Post
    In the Nov 2009 Reynolds article, one study she discussed is on obese people; the second study is on people who are athletic and lean, sedentary and lean, sedentary and obese.
    She has at least four postings that contradict the broad claim in the blog you linked to.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bacciagalupe View Post
    My wording is brief -- but the core isn't wrong. Losing weight is ultimately a calorie game, and exercise won't help much in terms of losing weight. You have to control your eating.
    She has at least four postings that contradict this broad claim.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bacciagalupe View Post
    Actually, it's two studies -- and there are lots of others. If you want a more in-depth discussion, you can read Ms Reynolds' book (The First 20 Minutes).
    She has at least four postings that contradict this broad claim.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bacciagalupe View Post
    So your response to a journalist who has spent a few years reading all the research is..
    She has at least four postings that contradict this broad claim.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bacciagalupe View Post
    1) There are lots of really unhealthy ways to lose weight.
    2) There are lots of ways to lose weight in the short term, that don't work in the long term.
    3) There are lots of indications that being slightly overweight actually isn't bad for your health (as opposed to being obese).
    4) If you exercise properly, you will have lots of health and emotional benefits that have nothing to do with "losing weight."
    There are significant benefits to exercise in relation to weight control (as described in Reynolds blog). (#3 could be true for a certain population and not generally).
    Last edited by njkayaker; 08-25-13 at 01:00 PM.

  4. #54
    Professional Fuss-Budget Bacciagalupe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    6,338
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by njkayaker View Post
    Here's another Reynolds blog posting that contradicts some of the claims in the first reference or qualifies it as being (possibly) specific to overweight/sedentary people!
    Uh, no, the two articles are consistent.

    Article #1 cites studies on how weight loss is ultimately a calorie game. Article #2 discusses research which indicates that exercise may encourage people to eat foods that are higher in fats and sugars.


    The problem is that that single blog posting is incomplete....
    OK then. Next time, I'll write a 200 page essay, for a web forum, on any scientific claim I post.

    Or, I can let the journalist in question defend herself....

    "...It is important to somehow get the message out that if you do not control your eating habits, if you do not cut calories, exercise almost never leads to weight loss by itself. And thatís especially true for women. Itís really unfair. But exercising does seem to stimulate the appetite more in women than it does in men. Itís not uncommon at all for women who join marathon-training groups to gain weight. And that can be really discouraging. What is important to understand is if you are taking in fewer calories than you are burning you will lose weight. And once youíve reached the weight you want to maintain, exercise has been shown to be the best way to maintain a reasonable weight. It does help your body essentially reset its sense of how much you should weigh and it stops producing as many appetite hormones."

    Hopefully, that will clear up most of what you are perceiving as inconsistencies.

    And of course, not every study is going to agree. But so far, the preponderance of evidence suggests that the common conception that "you'll lose weight if you exercise" is not correct.


    It's sloppy to draw broad conclusions from a single blog post!
    Dude? This is a web forum, not a peer-reviewed journal.

    And I'm not drawing my information from a single post, but from a larger web of reading. The article was a pretty basic summary of a few points of data.

  5. #55
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    8,472
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bacciagalupe View Post
    Dude? This is a web forum, not a peer-reviewed journal.
    It's sloppy to draw broad conlusions from a single blog post!

    That's true for web forums too.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bacciagalupe View Post
    And of course, not every study is going to agree. But so far, the preponderance of evidence suggests that the common conception that "you'll lose weight if you exercise" is not correct.
    There's a "preponderance" of evidence that indicates that the following (it's not the same claim as above) is false.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bacciagalupe View Post
    Actually, exercise doesn't wind up helping much with weight loss. (http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/1...ght-loss/?_r=0)
    Last edited by njkayaker; 08-25-13 at 01:08 PM.

  6. #56
    Professional Fuss-Budget Bacciagalupe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    6,338
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    *sigh*

    Article 1/2012 discusses how exercise may convert white fat (bad) to brown fat (good). The title is a bit misleading, since the study does NOT suggest that "exercise helps you lose weight." A quote from the article:

    "Why, for instance, if exercise increases levels of irisin and irisin increases the bodyís stores of energy-burning brown fat, does exercise so rarely produce significant weight loss? The mice injected with irisin lost little weight. On the other hand, Dr. Spiegelman notes, they resisted weight gain, even on a high-fat diet, and their blood sugar levels remained stable. So it would seem that exercise, through the actions of irisin, can render you healthy, if not svelte."


    Article 11/23/2011 discusses how exercise might mitigate one particular gene which might increase the risk of obesity by 12%. It is not saying that "exercise helps you lose weight." She's trying to suggest that if your family is heavy, that does not guarantee that you will be heavy as well.


    Article 11/12/2011 points out how people who exercise are likely to gain less weight from the Holiday Binge than people who do not exercise. Again, the point is that once you've got the better dietary habits down, exercise can help you control weight.

    So yeah, it's fairly consistent. I guess you actually have to read the articles, rather than the titles and/or cherry-pick sentences, to figure that out....

  7. #57
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    8,472
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bacciagalupe View Post
    Article 1/2012 discusses how exercise may convert white fat (bad) to brown fat (good). The title is a bit misleading, since the study does NOT suggest that "exercise helps you lose weight." A quote from the article:
    I believe people with more brown-fat tend to be less obese. That's one reason why brown fat is "good".

    Quote Originally Posted by Bacciagalupe View Post
    Article 11/12/2011 points out how people who exercise are likely to gain less weight from the Holiday Binge than people who do not exercise. Again, the point is that once you've got the better dietary habits down, exercise can help you control weight.
    No, not entirely.

    Quote Originally Posted by reynolds
    But several new studies promote a simple and effective response: Run or walk from the buffet. Even if you’ve already overindulged, the studies suggest, exercise can lessen or reverse the unwelcome consequences.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bacciagalupe View Post
    She's trying to suggest that if your family is heavy, that does not guarantee that you will be heavy as well.
    If you exercise!

    Quote Originally Posted by Bacciagalupe View Post
    misleading,
    It is misleading to focus on just "weight loss". The issue is also "keeping it off".

    Thus, it's "weight loss and control".
    Last edited by njkayaker; 08-25-13 at 01:21 PM.

  8. #58
    blt
    blt is offline
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    207
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Null66 View Post
    Hills are natures intervals.
    This is important to keep in mind. LSD has benefits, but those of us who ride long distances that include hills get interval training in, whether we are trying or not.

    A ride to my parents' house is 35 miles one way, elevation gain of 1568 feet and elevation loss of 628 feet. Right now, it takes me about 3 1/2 hours to do it. Normally I take public transit back home, with a couple of 10-15 minute rides to get to the train and to get home from the train.

    I make no conscious effort to do anything but ride steady, at a pace which many around here would consider slow, but I'm an old man at 53, so I'm happy to go slow. But the effort is anything but steady. There are 2 pretty good climbs that take me about 25 minutes each, and neither is a steady climb, so effort increases and there are stretches in those climbs where effort is pretty serious. There are other short relatively easy climbs along the way, but those get my heart rate up for a brief period. When I know I need to speed up to time a signal light correctly, I will speed up, sometimes significantly, and nice short burst that gets the heart rate up. I don't do this because I am wanting some kind of interval training. If I don't speed up, then my effort still won't be steady, because I'll be stopped. And indeed, there are times when I am stopped at a light, and my effort briefly goes down to nothing.

    I've got plenty of other routes I typically take, from 35-60 miles, and all are the same in that the hills, and occasionally the stoplights, mean my effort is not steady, without me putting any effort into making my pace be something other than steady. Ride long and slow on routes that include hills, and the effort will not be steady, because, as you say, hills are nature's intervals.

    Although the hills have the benefit of increasing my heart rate, unfortunately, the nasty hills decrease my miles per hour AND decrease my smiles per hour. I haven't yet figured out how to smile through a long nasty climb. And while I might be inclined to smile during the fast descents, I try to avoid it, because I really hate it when the bugs get in my mouth.

  9. #59
    Senior Member Null66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Garner, NC 27529
    My Bikes
    Built up DT, 2007 Fuji tourer (donor bike, RIP), 1995 1220 Trek
    Posts
    1,282
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by blt View Post
    This is important to keep in mind. LSD has benefits, but those of us who ride long distances that include hills get interval training in, whether we are trying or not.

    A ride to my parents' house is 35 miles one way, elevation gain of 1568 feet and elevation loss of 628 feet. Right now, it takes me about 3 1/2 hours to do it. Normally I take public transit back home, with a couple of 10-15 minute rides to get to the train and to get home from the train.

    I make no conscious effort to do anything but ride steady, at a pace which many around here would consider slow, but I'm an old man at 53, so I'm happy to go slow. But the effort is anything but steady. There are 2 pretty good climbs that take me about 25 minutes each, and neither is a steady climb, so effort increases and there are stretches in those climbs where effort is pretty serious. There are other short relatively easy climbs along the way, but those get my heart rate up for a brief period. When I know I need to speed up to time a signal light correctly, I will speed up, sometimes significantly, and nice short burst that gets the heart rate up. I don't do this because I am wanting some kind of interval training. If I don't speed up, then my effort still won't be steady, because I'll be stopped. And indeed, there are times when I am stopped at a light, and my effort briefly goes down to nothing.

    I've got plenty of other routes I typically take, from 35-60 miles, and all are the same in that the hills, and occasionally the stoplights, mean my effort is not steady, without me putting any effort into making my pace be something other than steady. Ride long and slow on routes that include hills, and the effort will not be steady, because, as you say, hills are nature's intervals.

    Although the hills have the benefit of increasing my heart rate, unfortunately, the nasty hills decrease my miles per hour AND decrease my smiles per hour. I haven't yet figured out how to smile through a long nasty climb. And while I might be inclined to smile during the fast descents, I try to avoid it, because I really hate it when the bugs get in my mouth.
    Those sound like some pretty cool rides!
    I hope the conditions are marvelous, like low/no traffic and sunsets and things.

    I've started commuting to work 1 day a week (we have showers!)... It's 23 there > 24 back. I find that i make the best time by easing up the hills. Basically sit-n-spin, cause I was blowing out... condition has improved significantly.

    Complicating that though is that I quit a BP med (not recommending, but I was barely over the line to consider lower as better and it may have been causing hair loss)... Anyway w/in a week sustainable cadence went up by 10! I had a bad reaction to lipitor (lost 20lbs off my dead lift max in a month)... Again, I was barely a candidate for it anyway. And a bad reaction to another BP med. so very open to the idea that maybe the chems weren't for me.

    I hope to one day enjoy some of the hills, but for now, I'll settle for a truce.

  10. #60
    Senior Member Mycoalson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    78
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by blt View Post
    This is important to keep in mind. LSD has benefits, but those of us who ride long distances that include hills get interval training in, whether we are trying or not.

    A ride to my parents' house is 35 miles one way, elevation gain of 1568 feet and elevation loss of 628 feet. Right now, it takes me about 3 1/2 hours to do it. Normally I take public transit back home, with a couple of 10-15 minute rides to get to the train and to get home from the train.

    I make no conscious effort to do anything but ride steady, at a pace which many around here would consider slow, but I'm an old man at 53, so I'm happy to go slow. But the effort is anything but steady. There are 2 pretty good climbs that take me about 25 minutes each, and neither is a steady climb, so effort increases and there are stretches in those climbs where effort is pretty serious. There are other short relatively easy climbs along the way, but those get my heart rate up for a brief period. When I know I need to speed up to time a signal light correctly, I will speed up, sometimes significantly, and nice short burst that gets the heart rate up. I don't do this because I am wanting some kind of interval training. If I don't speed up, then my effort still won't be steady, because I'll be stopped. And indeed, there are times when I am stopped at a light, and my effort briefly goes down to nothing.

    I've got plenty of other routes I typically take, from 35-60 miles, and all are the same in that the hills, and occasionally the stoplights, mean my effort is not steady, without me putting any effort into making my pace be something other than steady. Ride long and slow on routes that include hills, and the effort will not be steady, because, as you say, hills are nature's intervals.

    Although the hills have the benefit of increasing my heart rate, unfortunately, the nasty hills decrease my miles per hour AND decrease my smiles per hour. I haven't yet figured out how to smile through a long nasty climb. And while I might be inclined to smile during the fast descents, I try to avoid it, because I really hate it when the bugs get in my mouth.

    I'm really glad you posted this. Although your riding conditions sound nice and challenging to me, my riding conditions are different. Things around here are pretty flat, and there are some nice rolling hills I've actually ridden, that I've not been back to, despite having a good work out and being able to ride another hour or so...for the very reasons you mention.

    I am looking to ride that razor's edge between having a good time riding, enjoying the outdoors, but having a good work out with it.

    Your approach sounds similar to my own.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •