Rush said you don't know what you're talking about and your hat is looking kind of worn. He suggested I send you a new box of foil.
Woof Woof :) On 5/16/05, Kevin Graeme wrote: > > If you look at caloric intake and output, you make the biggest impact > by simply reducing caloric intake. Most exercise, while fantastic for > the body, doesn't burn enough calories to put the body into enough > deficit to help much. > > For instance, light to moderate weight lifting for an hour burns > something like 300 calories*. An average base metabolism burns about > 2000 calories a day. A recommended daily diet is about 2000 calories, > but in the US we tend to eat about 3000 (and for many closer to 4000) > calories a day. So that gives: > > Input: 3000 > Output: 2300 (base metabolism + moderate weightlifting) > Calorie difference: +700 calories/day > > 1 pound of fat = 3500 calories. So by taking in an extra 700 calories > a day, in 5 days you'll put on a pound. That's right, you'll gain > weight. That 300 calories of lifting weights, curiously enough is > about the same amount of calories as a small order of french fries > with ketchup. Even if you took up a high-calorie burning exercise like > cross-country skiing (1000 calories/hour), you'd still only come out > even. And x-c is work! > > Input: 3000 > Output: 3000 (base 2000 + skiing 1000) > > Now if you drop your caloric intake to the recommended 2000 calories > and do nothing else, you'll break even: > > Input: 2000 > Output: 2000 > Calorie difference: 0. > > Now add moderate exercise (something that burns 200 calories*), and > you'll be at a 200 calorie/day deficit. At that rate you will lose 30 > pounds in 18 months. October 24, 2006 if you start now. > > Of course as I said before, exercise is good for you. I'm sure MT or > Sam or somebody will chime in here and mention something about how > muscle burns calories faster than fat, so raising your fitness raises > your base metabolism. Absolutely. But it takes a long time to get > there. And muscle also weighs more than fat, so if your goal is just > to lose weight then building muscle can make it seem like you're not > making headway. I do completely agree with Sam's recommendation for > low weight, high rep. It does burn fat faster. It also defines instead > of putting on bulk, so if you get sleeker instead of bigger. > > * Calories burned during exercise: > http://www.nutristrategy.com/activitylist4.htm > > (Yes, I know that people are going to nitpick details about calories > for each exercise and base metabolism for different people, etc. But I > stand by the premise that lowering calories consumed is the easiest > and fastest way to move to a deficit. I'm down 60 pounds.) > > -Kevin ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support efficiency by 100% http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:157943 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
