Diet, Exercise Take Off Equal Pounds

L

Low Cal Gal

New member
Diet, exercise take off equal pounds, study finds
POSTED: 7:06 p.m. EST, January 26, 2007
Story Highlights• Eating less, exercising more equally good at helping take off pounds, study finds
• Research adds to evidence that adding muscle mass does not boost metabolism
• Dieting alone also did not appear to cause loss of muscle mass along with fat


Adjust font size:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- Eating less and exercising more are equally good at helping take off the pounds, U.S. researchers said Friday in a study that challenges many of the popular tenets of the multibillion dollar diet and fitness industry.

Tests on overweight people show that a calorie is just a calorie, whether lost by dieting or by running, they said.

They found there is no way to selectively lose belly fat, for instance, or trim thighs. And their carefully controlled study added to evidence that adding muscle mass does not somehow boost metabolism and help dieters take off even more weight.
"It's all about the calories," said Dr. Eric Ravussin of the Pennington Biomedical Research Center, part of Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge.

"So long as the energy deficit is the same, body weight, fat weight, and abdominal fat will all decrease in the same way."

Ravussin said the study, published in the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, is one of the few done under controlled conditions that can actually demonstrate what happens to a human body while dieting and exercising.

Ravussin's team has been testing volunteers for another reason -- to see whether taking in fewer calories helps people live longer. Strict diets have been shown to help animals from worms to dogs live longer, but it takes longer to study monkeys and humans.

They tested 24 people, 12 who ate a calorie-restricted diet, and 12 who dieted and also exercised five times a week for six months.

The dieters ate 25 percent less than normal, while the exercisers reduced their calorie intake by 12.5 percent and increased their physical activity to lose an extra 12.5 percent in calories.

An additional 10 volunteers acted as controls. All food was provided by the university in carefully measured portions for most of the study.

The volunteers in both groups lost about 10 percent of their body weight, 24 percent of their fat mass, and 27 percent of their abdominal visceral fat. Visceral fat is packed in between the internal organs and is considered the most dangerous type of fat, linked with heart disease and diabetes.

The distribution of the fat on the body was not altered by either approach -- helping prove that there is no such thing as "spot reducing", Ravussin said in a telephone interview.

This suggests that "individuals are genetically programmed for fat storage in a particular pattern and that this programming cannot easily be overcome," he added.

Ravussin has published other studies that also dispute the idea that exercise builds muscle that helps people lose weight.

"If anything, highly trained people are highly efficient, so they burn fewer calories at rest," Ravussin said.

Dieting alone also did not appear to cause the volunteers to lose muscle mass along with fat, Ravussin's team found.

"There is a concept that if you exercise, you are going to lose less of your muscle," he said. But his team found no evidence this is true.

Ravussin believes exercise is crucial to health, however.

"For overall health, an appropriate program of diet and exercise is still the best," he said.

His team found some small suggestion that cutting 25 percent of calories by either diet or diet and exercise might extend life.

"We found that 2 of the biomarkers of aging were improved -- core temperature was 0.4 to 0.5 degrees C less," he said. "Insulin, which has been shown to be a biomarker of aging, was reduced," Ravussin said. That finding was published in the Journal of the American Medical Associaton last April.
Click to expand...

Diet, exercise take off equal pounds, study finds - CNN.com

Emphasis is mine. Thoughts?
 
I find this study quite shocking. I'm chalking it up to an interesting read, but will not stop exercising or weight training because - at least for me - doing these two activities are beneficial to my overall health and DO give my body a better appearance.
 
I think this is all stuff that we already know. I always say, it comes down to simple thermodynamics. Energy. I don't care how you create a deficit, either with food or exercise or some combination of the both, a deficit will always lead to weight loss.

I believe exercise is still very important though, not only for general health, but also for optimization of one's physique. Just losing weight is not a very good goal in my mind. Losing weight, while maintaining awesome health, and looking and feeling great. To obtain this, I think a combination of proper nutrition and exercise programming is necessary.
 
I had just always heard (and I've read it here, too) that dieting without exercising causes one to lose muscle mass. According to this study anyway, that isn't true.
 
Low Cal Gal said:
I had just always heard (and I've read it here, too) that dieting without exercising causes one to lose muscle mass. According to this study anyway, that isn't true.
Click to expand...

Muscle loss does occur. I have not read the study, but I can show you a billion studies that says it does. If there is a caloric deficit, your body is going to make up that deficit ALWAYS by breaking down fats as well as amino acids from your muscles. That is basic physiology. You can sway which side you lose more from, but muscle loss is always going to occur. Some lose so little muscle during a caloric deficit period due to their program being "dialed in" so well that the muscle loss is not detectable, which of course, is ideal.
 
Steve said:
Some lose so little muscle during a caloric deficit period due to their program being "dialed in" so well that the muscle loss is not detectable, which of course, is ideal.
Click to expand...


Specifically since > muscle mass = > calories burned


I think an article of this nature is really good for people who have lead a primarily sedentary lifestyle for a great period of time and have lbs they are wanting to shed. Many people think that to lose weight they HAVE to work out, and while working out is very beneficial in more ways than appearance, incorporating small changes into the daily routine is normally the best option.
 
Just adding my 2 cents. Although it is possible to lose weight just from cutting back calories, your body is going to show it when you lose the weight because you wont be toned and will have more "hangy" skin than someone who worked out! I think i would rather work out and eat less calories BOTH for quicker results and a toner body once I get to my goal!
 
working out is only half of the equation, if you pile up on the calories, you won't see your weight going down.
 
hm

The more lean muscle you have, the more calories you burn a day. ( due to the fact you have to "feed" them.. you don't "feed" fat as fat is an energy reserve not consumer ) It's ideal in a low cal diet to up your fiber and protein. The general rule is carbs and such in the mornings also before workout with protein (carbs take longer to digest when eaten with protein, the science behind this lies in the glycogen nets of proteins which glucose or "simple sugars" gets trapped in). No fats after workouts because this is when your bodys calls for any kind of energy to replenish itself. and no carbs 4 hours or so before bed time.
 
I agree with Jon Jon about the burning calories with muscle. Clearly someone of the same sex weighing say 200 pounds, but one is short and has a high body fat percentage while the other person is taller and is all muscle and very low in body fat, the more muscular person's body needs more fuel (more calories). Muscles are metabolically active, meaning they need fuel (calories) just to sit there and do nothing while fat does not. I took a resting metabolic rate test and it said my metabolism is "higher than normal". I've certainly never been the thin type naturally so I attribute this to weight lifting. I'm no scientist but that's my 2 cents.
 
People overestimate the ability of muscle to burn calories IMO. Sure, it is more metaoblically active than fat. However, I don't find it to be the make it or break it point of fat loss.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top