Replying to Avatar Keith Mukai

Oh for sure the problem CAN be worked from either or, ideally, both sides (reduced calorie intake, increased calorie burn).

I'm just saying that the effort required and mental resistance is WAY skewed against the calorie burn side. To the point where, Richard Simmons' best efforts be damned, I think it's a losing case to try to make to the average American.

But too few people understand how EASY the reduced calorie intake side can be (it has its own mental resistance -- "not my beloved carbs!" -- and misconceptions -- "I can't live on salads").

I'm just viewing it as a pragmatist. If the goal is fat burn, I just focus on what they're eating.
Avatar
Peter Todd 1y ago

Personally I've always found the mental effort of getting more exercise easier than the mental effort of trying to restrict my diet.

Travelling in Europe and eating "good" food doesn't get me to lose weight if I don't get a bunch of exercise regularly. Being in Canada and consistently exercising with North American crap food does.

The most weight I've ever lost in my life was while cycling to school and work regularly, and eating fast food multiple times a day. I can't out eat regular 50km bike rides.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
Peter Todd 1y ago

I checked, and comparing the week before and after the conference I lost 0.3kg at what is probably the same hydration level, and my Fitbit scale thinks my body fat % went down slightly.

Too small of a difference to actually measure reliably. But probably didn't gain significant weight.