- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Study of Biggest Losers finds that the body wants and will fight to be Fat
Posted on 5/3/16 at 11:14 am to mouton
Posted on 5/3/16 at 11:14 am to mouton
quote:
The Barkley Marathons
that is less of an ultra and more of an adventure/endurance/obstacle race
people are not running that for time or to win, but just to finish
1
Posted on 5/3/16 at 11:17 am to Dire Wolf
quote:
most of the runners you see are like me and just do it for exercise. Maybe run a half or full every now and then.
Most people just aren't in great shape, no matter what your preferred work out is.
Yep 100% right. Lack of nutritional knowledge or will to follow a proper diet is the biggest reason for this imo
Posted on 5/3/16 at 11:17 am to Salmon
Gotcha. I do not know much about Ultra races other than I know there is one run in the Mojave . I recently watched the Barkley Marathon documentary and found it very interesting.
Posted on 5/3/16 at 11:20 am to mouton
Posted on 5/3/16 at 11:23 am to Salmon
I have also read a few articles recently about ultra runners using marijuana to aid in their training. I have actually tried it a few times on my runs and damn if it doesn't work!! Much much better endurance and I was able to really get lost in my stride. 
Posted on 5/3/16 at 11:27 am to mouton
quote:
have also read a few articles recently about ultra runners using marijuana to aid in their training. I have actually tried it a few times on my runs and damn if it doesn't work!! Much much better endurance and I was able to really get lost in my stride
During the Louisiana half-marathon I saw a wookie looking dude taking rips off his "e-cig" during the race. He burned me a few miles into it so I don't know if he kept it up
Posted on 5/3/16 at 11:28 am to Winkface
quote:
LINK
Interview with a local obesity researcher about the study. Most of yall will hate what she has to say.
SO Wink I read the interview and the NY times piece which speaks about Leptin and its role. Do you not agree that reverse dieting after the show to allow leptin levels to reset would have been a much smarter approach?
Or that training for pure weight loss instead of BF% loss caused many of the problems that are affecting the former contestants metabolism? I mean its very clear as a season progresses that the contestants are losing extreme amounts of muscle, sometimes looking like they are almost losing as much muscle as they are fat. Do you not see a problem with this and did DR Ryan not see a big problem with the data based on these factors?
DO ya'll not take into the account these types of things before releasing studies like this that essentially are making excuses for those that are overweight instead of finding ways to help hormones like leptin stay high while dieting?
Please don't take it as an attack on the researchers or the study because it isn't. I was simply wondering what all goes into something like this before it is released.
Posted on 5/3/16 at 11:32 am to mouton
quote:
90 plus mile races.
What in the frickity frick! I feel bad for not continually doing a mile. I should feel bad but that is beside the point.
Posted on 5/3/16 at 11:35 am to Hu_Flung_Pu
quote:
What in the frickity frick! I feel bad for not continually doing a mile. I should feel bad but that is beside the point.
this is how I feel. Honestly to get me to do more than a a 200meter "sprint" would be an act of congress. If I am going to run a mile their better be a dog chasing me or something.
Posted on 5/3/16 at 11:40 am to lsu777
quote:
wait what? 90 mile race?!!!! WTF why would somebody want to do this to themselves??? Jesus christ that sounds absolutely horrible.
I can't see myself ever doing this. But in my experience so far with triathlon (still really new to it), it's as addictive as you seeing gains in the weight room. You run 5 miles, you want to beat that 10 mile mark. It's not really that hard on you once you are in shape (I'm talking of 5 - 10 mile runs, not a marathon, that's always hard). I started triathlon because I like riding my bike and it seemed like a good experience. I thought I might do a sprint and Olympic. Then I trained and realized a half iron man was easily attainable. Now my mind is on that. Same as a guy wanting to bench 315.
Plus it has a lot to do with that zone training I was referencing. You build to a place where your body can just keep running. You push to hard and you'd bonk out, but if you can stay in that zone, you can go a long way. The limiting factor is your muscles and joints. Build that up, and you can make that 100 mile race (I'll never do that). I ran 6 miles last night and as soon as the sweat dried, it felt like I didn't do anything. I didn't overuse my energy supply.
Also helps that I live in The Woodlands and there is an Ironman event here. There are A Lot of locals who train. In regards to your comment of how many people actually look that fit, it's a lot. Swimming helps that though. Your shoulders, triceps, and back continue to get tasked during your workouts.
Posted on 5/3/16 at 11:47 am to Salmon
Posted on 5/3/16 at 11:47 am to lsu777
quote:
You will not build a good physique nor be strong by running long distance. You will be wasting time on an inefficient exercise. Realize that although we are the best animal in the history of the world at running long distance, we evolved sprinting and killing food. Eating large meals and then going long times without really eating and only snacking on berries and the such. Again we put forth 100% effort, ate like a king and rested for long periods without eating. Sound familiar?
Surely much of what you write is hyperbole?
My perspective is that of a retired elite (not Olympic qual class) distance guy. I knew very few elite runners with 10% body fat. The old wisdom was every pound equaled 2 seconds a mile. I stayed as light as I could. In season I usually had 4% or so with 6-8% being the offseason norm. I refused to lift weights because I didn't want the muscle mass. This was an ignorant position.
As I aged I learned I needed to lift in order to counteract muscle imbalances caused by all the miles. In my 40's I lifted light weights for a couple of seasons. I raced about 5-8 lbs heavier and my 5k times improved by 15-20 seconds despite aging. So, I recommend doing both.
Beyond that I was always very strong for my size - more of a miler build than a marathoner. I would not discount aerobic fitness in calculating practical strength. I may not be able to throw a hay bale as many times as a weight lifter, but I believe I could move a lighter weight far longer because I never fatigued aerobically. But that's an opinion based on practical experience not research.
At the end of the day chicks dig muscles. Some like meat heads, some like lean runner types, BUT they all love the endurance of an aerobically fit guy. I just happen to believe running gets you there better than lifting.
Posted on 5/3/16 at 11:48 am to KG6
I think that eventually, small intestine reduction surgery needs to be advanced in the medical world. Less small intestine = less calorie intake. Eat the same, take in less energy, be skinny, right?
Posted on 5/3/16 at 11:49 am to KG6
quote:
In regards to your comment of how many people actually look that fit, it's a lot. Swimming helps that though. Your shoulders, triceps, and back continue to get tasked during your workouts.
I think he was solely referring to distance runners not those who do/train for triathalons.
Posted on 5/3/16 at 11:51 am to lsu777
I'm not sure you quite understand how research like this works. This was a longitudinal cross-sectional study and not a clinical trial. It was not the aim of the study or the paper to do what is ideal. There is no problem with the data. The data is what it is. Their goal was to examine it and report what it showed. It is also not their goal to tell the show what they should or should not do. They saw what is an excellent source of data and took advantage of it. They did mention that they did not find significant difference in hormone levels but the study was not powered to detect these.
What you are saying goes into the discussion section of the paper. That is where you can point out things that could possibly change the results. I think Dr. Ryan is trying to convey the message that a lot of people are too focused on looks. Looks does not always equal health. I have a feeling they probably left out a lot of what she said in that interview but none of what she said is incorrect, imo. You have to also realize that most research studies are not truly meant for the general public. I don't think any of those authors intend the paper to be an "excuse" for overweight or obese people.
What you are saying goes into the discussion section of the paper. That is where you can point out things that could possibly change the results. I think Dr. Ryan is trying to convey the message that a lot of people are too focused on looks. Looks does not always equal health. I have a feeling they probably left out a lot of what she said in that interview but none of what she said is incorrect, imo. You have to also realize that most research studies are not truly meant for the general public. I don't think any of those authors intend the paper to be an "excuse" for overweight or obese people.
Posted on 5/3/16 at 11:55 am to runningdog
quote:
I usually had 4% or so with 6-8% being the offseason norm.
You sure about that?
Posted on 5/3/16 at 12:00 pm to mouton
That is why I differentiated that I do swim. I realize it's not a typical benefit seen in running. And most swims are HIIT at the base of the set.
But, not everyone is looking to be swole. As many girls that go after the muscle bound guy, there are those that see the douche stereotype. Not everyone wants to look like that. I have nothing against it (for the most part), just take offense when someone acts like they are better or their method is better because they get bigger arms. Not everyone cares. Me having less muscle per calorie burned in a workout is no big deal to me. Being muscular is not my end game. In fact I never even cared to lose weight, just a good side effect. I'm looking to increase speed in shorter events and endurance in long events. In any case, the whole point is its a very good way to lose weight and the lifestyle keeps it off.
But, not everyone is looking to be swole. As many girls that go after the muscle bound guy, there are those that see the douche stereotype. Not everyone wants to look like that. I have nothing against it (for the most part), just take offense when someone acts like they are better or their method is better because they get bigger arms. Not everyone cares. Me having less muscle per calorie burned in a workout is no big deal to me. Being muscular is not my end game. In fact I never even cared to lose weight, just a good side effect. I'm looking to increase speed in shorter events and endurance in long events. In any case, the whole point is its a very good way to lose weight and the lifestyle keeps it off.
Posted on 5/3/16 at 12:02 pm to Winkface
quote:
I'm not sure you quite understand how research like this works. This was a longitudinal cross-sectional study and not a clinical trial. It was not the aim of the study or the paper to do what is ideal. There is no problem with the data. The data is what it is. Their goal was to examine it and report what it showed. It is also not their goal to tell the show what they should or should not do. They saw what is an excellent source of data and took advantage of it. They did mention that they did not find significant difference in hormone levels but the study was not powered to detect these.
What you are saying goes into the discussion section of the paper. That is where you can point out things that could possibly change the results. I think Dr. Ryan is trying to convey the message that a lot of people are too focused on looks. Looks does not always equal health. I have a feeling they probably left out a lot of what she said in that interview but none of what she said is incorrect, imo. You have to also realize that most research studies are not truly meant for the general public. I don't think any of those authors intend the paper to be an "excuse" for overweight or obese people.
No i didn't misunderstand it, its what I figured it was. I was just hoping I was wrong lol and it wasn't simply a look at those contestants in a vacuum with no regards on how they get to where they were.
and although it was not meant as an excuse one look at the NYT article comments proves it is and will be used as that.
Posted on 5/3/16 at 12:08 pm to runningdog
quote:
Surely much of what you write is hyperbole?
My perspective is that of a retired elite (not Olympic qual class) distance guy. I knew very few elite runners with 10% body fat. The old wisdom was every pound equaled 2 seconds a mile. I stayed as light as I could. In season I usually had 4% or so with 6-8% being the offseason norm. I refused to lift weights because I didn't want the muscle mass. This was an ignorant position.
As I aged I learned I needed to lift in order to counteract muscle imbalances caused by all the miles. In my 40's I lifted light weights for a couple of seasons. I raced about 5-8 lbs heavier and my 5k times improved by 15-20 seconds despite aging. So, I recommend doing both.
Beyond that I was always very strong for my size - more of a miler build than a marathoner. I would not discount aerobic fitness in calculating practical strength. I may not be able to throw a hay bale as many times as a weight lifter, but I believe I could move a lighter weight far longer because I never fatigued aerobically. But that's an opinion based on practical experience not research.
At the end of the day chicks dig muscles. Some like meat heads, some like lean runner types, BUT they all love the endurance of an aerobically fit guy. I just happen to believe running gets you there better than lifting.
please tell me one thing I was wrong about. Sure I can be a real arse sometimes and was with the whole "pussies" comment but nothing I said was wrong. In fact every single thing I said can be backed up by science and real world case studies.
quote:
At the end of the day chicks dig muscles. Some like meat heads, some like lean runner types, BUT they all love the endurance of an aerobically fit guy. I just happen to believe running gets you there better than lifting.
thats fine you believe this, but the data does not back this up at all.
quote:
My perspective is that of a retired elite (not Olympic qual class) distance guy. I knew very few elite runners with 10% body fat. The old wisdom was every pound equaled 2 seconds a mile. I stayed as light as I could. In season I usually had 4% or so with 6-8% being the offseason norm. I refused to lift weights because I didn't want the muscle mass. This was an ignorant position.
you were not 4%. Bodybuilders are 4% when on stage. This significantly effects performance and if for some reason you were that low, well then you aren't a very smart runner. You might have thought you were that low, but you were not.
4% is so rare its not even funny. Hell most bodybuilders are more than this on stage. A true 4% is a unicorn especially in natural trainies.
Now the 6-8% is absolutely within the norm. But I stand by my statement that despite having low bf% the vast majority of long distance runners have to muscle tone and are not muscular at all. atleast imo. But if you think 155% @ 6' while being 6% bf is muscular than we will never agree.
Posted on 5/3/16 at 12:12 pm to Kujo
As many people have pointed out in here, the way they lost weight is absurd, and that grapefruit, bread and low-fat chicken crap is a strong indicator to me that these people have no idea what a proper diet looks like. (Most don't as we've been told fat is bad for so many decades.)
I stopped running and cycclinf almost a year ago due to knee injury. I realized I was gaining significant weight as a result. I started focusing on diet and better exercises. Lost 25 lbs in no time. More importantly, lost a pants size and visceral fat. Not doing more exercise--actually less. Swimming has been key. And eating more fat, so i am not hungry afterward. And as you know, I'm in my 40s, with the attendant challenges I didn't face at all up until about 30.
My food cravings are much more emotional than they are biological, especially beer!
That article really was depressing, but not for this reasons it tried to portray.
I stopped running and cycclinf almost a year ago due to knee injury. I realized I was gaining significant weight as a result. I started focusing on diet and better exercises. Lost 25 lbs in no time. More importantly, lost a pants size and visceral fat. Not doing more exercise--actually less. Swimming has been key. And eating more fat, so i am not hungry afterward. And as you know, I'm in my 40s, with the attendant challenges I didn't face at all up until about 30.
My food cravings are much more emotional than they are biological, especially beer!
That article really was depressing, but not for this reasons it tried to portray.
This post was edited on 5/3/16 at 12:14 pm
Page 14 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News