[Sohcahtoa82]

> This is such a myth and I have no idea where it's coming from.

For people that are merely trying to lose weight, it's effectively true. When you're out of shape, you won't have the strength or endurance to exercise long and hard enough to actually burn significant calories.

For athletes that are running marathons or doing powerlifting, yes, it's certainly false. Massive bodybuilders that are already deadlifting hundreds of pounds will have massive diets because lifting that much weight takes significant energy.

But someone like me, with a BMI of 36, I can't outrun a bad diet. I go to the gym, set the treadmill at 5 mph, and I'm completely gassed after 3 minutes or 1/4 mile and have to slow down to 3 mph to recover. I'll go back and forth, but after about 20 minutes, I've gone about 1.3 miles, my legs are stiff and my ankles are sore because jogging at 240 lbs means high impact. Meanwhile, I've only burned probably ~100 calories. Not enough to offset the bad diet.

Given enough time of my routine, sure, my endurance might go up. Eventually I can do it longer, and maybe then I can start outrunning the bad diet. But that's going to take a long time.

Easier to just cut carbs.

[r_p4rk]

Powerlifting does not take as many calories as you'd think. In fact, lifting in general is surprisingly easy on the calorie requirement, so most powerlifters and bodybuilders incorporate cardio as part of their routine. You will burn a lot more calories by walking 10,000 steps a day for 1 month than you would doing an intense lifting session each day.

The reason you're probably thinking as to why lifters eat a huge amount is precisely because they're already large and muscular. Just 5% less bodyfat at the same weight results in roughly 200 more calories at maintenance for someone that is around 93kg.

[ch4s3]

A vigorous weightlifting workout for an hour will burn about 400kcal[1], which is roughly equivalent to walking 10k steps depending on your body weight. Another way to think of this is 100 minutes of brisk walking will round out to about 400kcal.

You don't really burn more calories walking, it's just easy to do and fit in around other things.

[1] https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/323922#calculating...

[r_p4rk]

Weird hill to die on - 400 is probably the top end for a super heavy day at a higher bodyweight - maybe deadlift primary and squat secondary day? Walking for 10,000 steps will every day will certainly burn more calories.

Regardless, people who lift aren’t eating more just because they burn a couple of hundred calories 2-5 times a week.

[jaco6]

You’re wrong about that, look up videos of strongmen and bodybuilder meals/eating routines. The 2 hour workouts at the top of these fields are very calorie intensive.

[cthalupa]

Bodybuilders eat a lot in the offseason because they're on tons of drugs and trying to maximize the amount of lean mass they can put on, and they eat more in general because when you have 100lb+ more muscle than the average person you have a significantly higher base metabolic rate. You can go on a variety of PED related forums and find IFBB pro's posting food logs, etc., and see that these crazy eating routines are limited to certain parts of the year, and even then have been falling out of favor - the 'lean bulk' for pros is more popular than ever.

Very few IFBB pros are working out in 2 hour sessions, either. Coaches understand junk volume way better now and know that a lot of the work being done previously just wasn't providing much muscle growth stimulus after a certain point. Most are spending <8 hours in the gym each week in general.

The top of the bodybuilding field is not eating a ton of food because of their lifting routines burning a bunch of calories.

[audinobs]

I have lifted for 30+ years and something very un-intuitive with powerlifting is the optimal weight class for a height is extremely high.

If you are 5'10" you are pound for pound stronger at 240 than at 198. 198 will be dominated by someone who is shorter otherwise.

You are also much stronger the more you weigh, period. Strongman are eating so much to keep their weight up, not because they are burning so many calories while working out.

Even the most intense prowler workout that will make an untrained person puke their guts out is easy to out eat.

It is easiest to see with a contest bodybuilding diet. Even a 250lb bodybuilder who is doing a ton of working out is basically eating nothing. The body is incredibly efficient at holding on to weight. If it wasn't, humans would have starved to death a long time ago.

[theodric]

My anecdata:

- a year of busting my ass on the bike almost daily: -15kg

- a year of restricting calories to ~1200/day and not doing much else: -40kg

- 2 years of sitting in my apartment being afraid of COVID and drinking too much: +50kg

Conclusion: booze is a really great way to put on a lot of weight quickly

[reverendsteveii]

my anecdata aligns with yours. A year of cardio every day and resistance 6 days a week bought me no weight loss, 2 years of limiting myself to 1800 cals/day on top of that stripped me of 25% of my body weight.

[darkwater]

Cool, but being physically active is not just to lose weight but to gain health. Your heart works more, your lungs work more, they develop a bit more, putting more oxygen in your body and the effects compound over time. So if you can, do both: control calories intake and exercise.

[reverendsteveii]

I did exactly that, and I thought I made that clear in my original comment but maybe I was unclear. With that being said, this article is about drivers of obesity so weight control is sort of the topic du jour itt.

[brailsafe]

All impressive numbers, but it seems like the move would be to keep doing #1 while being slightly less restrictive about #2 and just as restrictive about #3, which will eventually leave you not just lighter, but with a good level of fitness if you aren't already there. It's way easier to keep excess weight off and feel great about it if you're practicing athletics of some sort regularly

[ch4s3]

If you're drinking beer or wine it is certainly very calorie dense. You're looking at 208 kcal per pint of beer or 123 kcal for a 5oz pour of wine. A pound of fat takes about 3,500 excess calories, or 16 pints of beer. So if you drink 2 a day all else equal you could gain nearly 1 lb a week.

[audinobs]

This is just pointless ceteris paribus because genetics are the biggest variable.

If someone has a predisposition to diabetes they can't drink alcohol and hold things ceteris paribus because of the way alcohol effects the liver and then effects insulin.

Insulin sensitivity gets worse, blood sugar is all over the place and then the person is on a rollover-coast of over consuming calories to try to stabilize blood sugar.

IMO your post is why almost all dieting advise is just complete oversimplified nonsense. Meaningless ceteris paribus linear combinations that mostly add up to a non-reality for a non-linear complex system. It is a way for people to pick and chose what they want to be true.

[ch4s3]

Did you mean to reply to me? I'm simply pointing out that beer is calorie dense.

[throwawaylaptop]

Another thing you can do is one day of regular calories, and one day of zero. You still average to 1200 a day, but I think it's better for you for several reasons you can look into if interested.

[nottorp]

This is why you should walk to the pub instead of drinking at home...

[arealaccount]

[ throws out the protein powder ]

[reverendsteveii]

I'm 5'6", 165lbs, I bike 6-8 miles every day and do resistance training 6 days/week. I also have limited myself to 1800 cals/day and at least 130g protein. For two years I was biking 6-8 miles every day, doing resistance training and maintaining 210lbs which, at my height, is bordering on clinical obesity. If you could be healthy just by training and eating what you want I would have done it twice.

[hermitcrab]

I don't understand how you wouldn't lose weight. Are you sure the 1800 kcals is accurate. Are you including what you drink?

[reverendsteveii]

Oh no, I lost weight when I was on the 1800kcal. it was when I was working out what I intuitively feel like is a lot more than most people but still eating what I wanted that I didn't lose weight, which anecdotally fits with the premise of the article.

[tpm]

Your bike ride is too short to lose weight.

[reverendsteveii]

it's not though, because I lost 25% of my weight

[tpm]

"For two years I was biking 6-8 miles every day, doing resistance training and maintaining 210lbs"

[9rx]

"I'm 5'6", 165lbs, I bike 6-8 miles every day"

[tpm]

But he only lost weight after limiting caloric intake, even though he was biking every day before that too. My point was we shouldn't expect losing weight with such short rides, the body will use muscle and liver reserves for that and only with much longer rides start burning fat from adipose cells.

[neilv]

Did you pause the the jogging until in better shape, to avoid causing lasting damage?

Maybe try an elliptical, rowing erg, bike, or swimming?