diet v exercise

[deeplybaffled]

I have a nasty feeling that one won't really work without the other.
And whilst I'm not fantastic at either, exercise comes more naturally to me than only eating healthy stuff, alas.
am about to re start 30 day shred again post holiday break, but suspect that alone may not be enough to get me from a size 14 to a 12, dammit.
so can anyone advise as to the relative importance of diet and exercise - and suggest any modest diet tips that I can incorporate into day to day life? I know myself too well to believe that wholesale diet changes to lentils and brown rice will be sustained:(
thank you!

Good point Fascicle and interesting article thanks, apparently sitting down for more than 2.5 hours per day is especially associated with obesity.

Still here and finding it all really interesting, especially the dials and money analogies, which is a new way for me to look at it. Fear I may be one of the group trying to
Out exercise a not great diet:(
It's not dreadful, but a combination of long working hours and laziness /limited cooking enthusiasm meansthat I have quite a lot of food that is processed inthat it goes from freezer to oven to mouth, rather than being prepared from scratch.
So a few quick meals that don't require lots of ingredients or time might be a good way to break that cycle.
Exercise wise, I play competitive league badminton once or twice a week and will be restarting the 30 day shred soon. I do make efforts to walk rather than drive where possible within time constraints and try to get the incidental exercise, but any other tips would be much appreciated.
And will have a look at myfitness pal - thank you!

It is possible to lose weight through exercise alone. I have lost maybe 1 ½ stone of fat in the last couple of years (I weigh one stone less than I did to start with but have gained a significant amount of muscle, so I reckon I have converted at least half a stone of fat into muscle).

However:

1. I eat healthily anyway. Very little processed food and lots of fresh vegetables. The only thing I changed was to drop my portion size, as this was what had caused me to put on the excess weight.

2. I was not hugely over weight to start with. I have gone from a size 12 back down to a trim size 10.

3. The weight has come off slowly over about 2 years. I dropped half a stone in about 6 months this year when I intensified my training.

4. I do a lot of exercise. I have been training for triathlon this year, so cycling for 7-9 hours per week (including commuting to work), running for 1 to 1 ½ hrs, and swimming for 1 to 1 ½ hrs.

5. Because I have been burning around 6,000 - 8,000 extra calories a week, I do take on more than 2,000 per day, either by simply eating more, or by using energy supplements. It is not possible to train hard for 9+ hours per week without providing your body with extra fuel. This includes using energy supplements that are high in readily accessible sugars and carbohydrates.

So what I think this shows for you is that yes, it is possible to lose weight whilst eating a diet high in sugar and processed carbohydrate (whether in the form of cake and convenience food, or in the form of energy supplements) but you have to do a serious amount of exercise to counter it. The simplest and easiest way to lose weight is to look at your diet first: to eat healthy, non-processed, low GI foods in reasonable proportions. Doing exercise will get your metabolism working faster, and will motivate you to eat healthier, but will not on its own counter eating badly.

To go into the science of it a little more (and I have to say my knowledge is fairly rudimentary so I am happy to be corrected by anyone more knowledgeable), is that your body stores reserves of energy in the form of glycogen in your liver. This provides enough readily-accessible energy for around about an hour's worth of vigorous activity. If you do just an hour's exercise and then stop, you will need to replenish those stores of energy. It is really quite hard work for the body to break down fat to replenish those stores, and it finds it much easier to replenish them from the food you eat. If the next meal that you eat contains plenty of sugars and readily accessible processed carbohydrates, then the body finds it easy to replenish its energy stores. It has to work much harder (and therefore actually use energy/calories) to break down complex carbohydrates and proteins, and harder still to break down body fat.

If you are only exercising 2-3 times a week, burning maybe 300-400 calories a time, and you are eating a sugary diet high in processed carbohydrate, then your body will replenish its energy stores almost exclusively from your diet and won't start breaking down your body fat at all.

My Spin instructor has went from teaching 14 classes per week to just 4 (now has a full time job that isn't fitness-related) and still ate the same. She's put on half a stone in a month!

Glycogen is stored in the liver and the muscles, the amount stored varies, very active people will store more-it's one of the ways the body adapts to exercise.

I'm pretty sure most people store more than an hours worth of glycogen!

I think it's not much more though, maybe 90 minutes or so? The most I can run without feeling like I'm going to die is about 2 and a half hours, 2 is really nice but I feel like I need fuel from then. I just haven't worked out what yet. Not spewy gels that's for sure.

(that's in a fasted state)

Yes, I didn't phrase that very clearly. What I meant is that the body (depending on various personal factors) stores enough glycogen to sustain about an hour's worth of vigorous activity. After an hour - 90 mins or so, your energy levels will be depleted to the extent that you will not be able to maintain the same intensity of exercise without needing to take on more fuel. You won't be running on empty, but you won't be at full power either.

The point I was trying to make is that if you are exercising for an hour or less at a time you don't need any additional fuel/calories/energy supplements/cake.

Mitchy - what gels have you tried? I know that some people find them really unsettling on your stomach, so it is worth giving a few different brands a go until you find one that suits.

I think it depends what you're used to, I generally have my last meal at midnight then hit the gym at 2pm the following day for 45 minutes of weights an hour of cardio and an hours walking to get there and back.

Frequent eating is overrated IMO, I seem to run better on empty

I was trying the high5 ones because they are the sponsor of the marathon I'm preparing for, so it made sense, plus I bought a massive box at special promotional discount so I could persevere (sip them more slowly maybe? they go down ok but suddenly come up about a mile later!) have been having random other gastric crises on and off so it's not just them

am gradually trying to do almost all of my runs, even the longer ones, in a fasted state as this is supposed to condition your body to use stray bits of fat instead - do you think that's true? (question is to all experts here!)

Also, afaik as glycogen reserves get lower fat is broken down to be burnt as fuel.

Most people have enough stored fat to go for quite some time. ..otherwise we'd all drop dead after a couple of days fasting!

Consuming food whilst exercising surely just diverts blood to your digestive system when you need it all to be in your muscles.

I thought it was best to carb load in the days before hand rather than refuel in flight

no you have to, I don't know of anyone running marathons and ultramarathons without taking fuel on board

my 'coach' (friend but he is coaching me and will pace me during the event) eats pizza and sandwiches while he is running but he runs very very very long distances (100km and up)

you still act like a carbicidal maniac the rest of the time, as far as I can tell, but I don't know if it is possible or desirable to run very long distances without any stuff on the way? the elites have their own special sugary drinks made for them don't they, and mortals seem to use jelly babies and stuff

Oh yeah for events like that I understand that you'd need to!
I couldn't cope, I have terrible indigestion and need to rest for a couple of hours after even small amounts of food.

I do like jelly babies though :o

Mitchy - I suggest you try some other brands as I have heard of lots of people finding their stomach rejects high5. I use Torq products, which are a bit pricier than some other brands but they have less artificial crap and I find them very digestible. They are not overly sweet either.

With regards to the nutrition whist exercising, I am not a marathon runner so I don't know if there is anything specific to that as a discipline, but I do cycle on a weekly basis for 3-4 hours at a fairly high intensity.

What I have leant from various experts in sport nutrition is that it is better to fuel your long-distance events, even if losing weight is one of your goals. You simply cannot sustain a high level of intensity for more than 90 mins or so without taking on fuel. You will be unable to work as hard, and so you won't be working at the same fat-burning intensity. You will take longer to recover if you don't fuel as you go along, so if you are training several times a week, you will again be unable to work at as high an intensity on each subsequent workout.

Your body takes quite some time to break down fat to use as fuel, and it will not be able to do so in meaningful amounts whilst you are exercising. It certainly can't do so at a sufficient rate to fuel intense exercise. The 'burning' of body fat happens in the recovery period whilst you are still in a calorie deficit from your exercise.

If you are aiming for weight loss at the same time as doing a very demanding sport, you are much better off aiming for a slow and steady loss than anything dramatic. You might think "excellent, I have burned 1,500 calories today, I will lose a shed load of fat" but if you do that several times a week you will end up seriously weakening your body and making yourself unable to train properly, if at all. You are better off aiming for a deficit of no more than maybe 500 calories (inexact figure, I might correct this when I find my book that I seem to have mislaid) per session, so you can keep working hard, recovering well, and training hard again the next session.

am sure cycling is pretty much the same sort of thing, maybe harder on the knees but same energy needs?

in non running life it suits me to eat loads of tiny meals, suits my tummy anyway - am finding the how much to eat and what and when along with the how much to run and when quite challenging. run less and eat more definitely helped so my experience agrees with you, just needs fine tuning!

Thistle, thanks for taking the time to explain all that, very interesting!
(I'm wondering what the book is...the one that you seem to have mislaid? )

was it a Matt Fitzgerald one? you sound a bit like him :)

Um, I don't think so! Who he?

It is actually a small handbook produced by the guys at Torq, but it explains in detail the science behind their energy and recovery products. I was having real problems at the beginning of this summer with lactic pains in my legs right from the beginning of a training session. I followed their advice on fuelling more during rides and using recovery products and it definitely helped me to be able to train harder and more consistently.

he is always writing stuff about this sort of thing, collating all the evidence so far etc

I followed his Racing Weight thing and now look like a bone

matt fitzgerald

I always exercise in a fasted state these days (not marathon or similar training through!) and have found I'm losing body fat quicker than when I exercised soon after eating. I'm another whose digestion suits frequent and long rests from food though.

I just had a look at the Torq website and their discussion of the panorama programme about sports supplements.

it all seems pretty reasonable but I'm always a bit skeptical of science when it's presented by a company with a product or service to sell.

Of course I shouldnt knock it unless I've tried it and since I get indigestion from drinking water I dont expect I will be trying it anytime soon :o

I completely agree about the scepticism of companies with something to sell suzanne, but I do think these guys are pretty genuine. As I said, earlier this year I had real problems with pains in my legs and cramps and I emailed them to ask for some advice. They sent me a completely personalised response and although they were of course recommending their products, they didn't just say "You need to take ALL of our products ALL of the time" but said "this will help with this bit of your training program but there is no need to use this other thing unless you are doing XYZ".

I don't work for them BTW!

I have just thought to recommend something that my friend swears by for intense training sessions rather than gels. It only works if you like the stuff but she always trains with a slice of marzipan in her pocket. She cuts slices off a big block and pinches pieces off whenever she needs a boost. She says it is good for keeping a bit in your cheek and sucking it slowly - might be worth trying if your gut doesn't like too much in one go, and hugely cheaper than gels too!