Obesity & Exercise, less is more... No

Joined
May 24, 2002
Messages
763
It seems that just like you get what you pay for, what you get out of it is what you put into it.

Kref


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...ve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=14718319

1: Arch Intern Med. 2004 Jan 12;164(1):31-9. Related Articles, Links


Effects of the amount of exercise on body weight, body composition, and measures of central obesity: STRRIDE--a randomized controlled study.

Slentz CA, Duscha BD, Johnson JL, Ketchum K, Aiken LB, Samsa GP, Houmard JA, Bales CW, Kraus WE.

Divisions of Cardiology, Geriatric Medicine, and General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Duke Center for Living, Center for Health Policy Research, Durham, NC 27710, USA. Cris.Slentz@duke.edu

BACKGROUND: Obesity is a major health problem due, in part, to physical inactivity. The amount of activity needed to prevent weight gain is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of different amounts and intensities of exercise training. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial (February 1999-July 2002).Setting and PARTICIPANTS: Sedentary, overweight men and women (aged 40-65 years) with mild to moderate dyslipidemia were recruited from Durham, NC, and surrounding communities. INTERVENTIONS: Eight-month exercise program with 3 groups: (1) high amount/vigorous intensity (calorically equivalent to approximately 20 miles [32.0 km] of jogging per week at 65%-80% peak oxygen consumption); (2) low amount/vigorous intensity (equivalent to approximately 12 miles [19.2 km] of jogging per week at 65%-80%), and (3) low amount/moderate intensity (equivalent to approximately 12 miles [19.2 km] of walking per week at 40%-55%). Subjects were counseled not to change their diet and were encouraged to maintain body weight. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Body weight, body composition (via skinfolds), and waist circumference. RESULTS: Of 302 subjects screened, 182 met criteria and were randomized and 120 completed the study. There was a significant (P<.05) dose-response relationship between amount of exercise and amount of weight loss and fat mass loss. The high-amount/vigorous-intensity group lost significantly more body mass (in mean [SD] kilograms) and fat mass (in mean [SD] kilograms) (-2.9 [2.8] and -4.8 [3.0], respectively) than the low-amount/moderate-intensity group (-0.9 [1.8] and -2.0 [2.6], respectively), the low-amount/vigorous-intensity group (-0.6 [2.0] and -2.5 [3.4], respectively), and the controls (+1.0 [2.1] and +0.4 [3.0], respectively). Both low-amount groups had significantly greater improvements than controls but were not different from each other. Compared with controls, all exercise groups significantly decreased abdominal, minimal waist, and hip circumference measurements. There were no significant changes in dietary intake for any group. CONCLUSIONS: In nondieting, overweight subjects, the controls gained weight, both low-amount exercise groups lost weight and fat, and the high-amount group lost more of each in a dose-response manner. These findings strongly suggest that, absent changes in diet, a higher amount of activity is necessary for weight maintenance and that the positive caloric imbalance observed in the overweight controls is small and can be reversed by a modest amount of exercise. Most individuals can accomplish this by walking 30 minutes every day.
 
I'm disappointed in this study. It showed promise in the design. And some of the results suggest that duration of exercise is more important than intensity regarding weight loss (8.2. vs. 7.0 kilograms for the moderate intensity/high duration vs. high intensity moderate duration groups). But the conclusion says their is no difference. Bottom line, you get more results if you do more.

Kref.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...ve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=12966123

JAMA. 2003 Sep 10;290(10):1323-30. Related Articles, Links


Comment in:
JAMA. 2003 Dec 17;290(23):3069; author reply 3069.
JAMA. 2003 Sep 10;290(10):1377-9.

Effect of exercise duration and intensity on weight loss in overweight, sedentary women: a randomized trial.

Jakicic JM, Marcus BH, Gallagher KI, Napolitano M, Lang W.

University of Pittsburgh, Physical Activity and Weight Management Research Center, Pittsburgh, PA 15261, USA. jjakicic@pitt.edu

CONTEXT: A higher duration and intensity of exercise may improve long-term weight loss. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of different durations and intensities of exercise on 12-month weight loss and cardiorespiratory fitness. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized trial conducted from January 2000 through December 2001 involving 201 sedentary women (mean [SD] age, 37.0 [5.7] years; mean [SD] body mass index, 32.6 [4.2]) in a university-based weight control program. INTERVENTION: Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 exercise groups (vigorous intensity/high duration; moderate intensity/high duration; moderate intensity/moderate duration; or vigorous intensity/moderate duration) based on estimated energy expenditure (1000 kcal/wk vs 2000 kcal/wk) and exercise intensity (moderate vs vigorous). All women were instructed to reduce intake of energy to between 1200 and 1500 kcal/d and dietary fat to between 20% and 30% of total energy intake. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Body weight, cardiorespiratory fitness, and exercise participation. RESULTS: After exclusions, 184 of 196 randomized participants completed 12 months of treatment (94%). In intention-to-treat analysis, mean (SD) weight loss following 12 months of treatment was statistically significant (P <.001) in all exercise groups (vigorous intensity/high duration = 8.9 [7.3] kg; moderate intensity/high duration = 8.2 [7.6] kg; moderate intensity/moderate duration = 6.3 [5.6] kg; vigorous intensity/moderate duration = 7.0 [6.4] kg), with no significant difference between groups. Mean (SD) cardiorespiratory fitness levels also increased significantly (P =.04) in all groups (vigorous intensity/high duration = 22.0% [19.9%]; moderate intensity/high duration = 14.9% [18.6%]; moderate intensity/moderate duration = 13.5% [16.9%]; vigorous intensity/moderate duration = 18.9% [16.9%]), with no difference between groups. Post hoc analysis revealed that percentage weight loss at 12 months was associated with the level of physical activity performed at 6 and 12 months. Women reporting less than 150 min/wk had a mean (SD) weight loss of 4.7% [6.0%]; inconsistent (other) pattern of physical activity, 7.0% [6.9%]; 150 min/wk or more, 9.5% [7.9%]; and 200 min/wk or more of exercise, 13.6% [7.8%]. CONCLUSIONS: Significant weight loss and improved cardiorespiratory fitness were achieved through the combination of exercise and diet during 12 months, although no differences were found based on different exercise durations and intensities in this group of sedentary, overweight women.

Publication Types:
Clinical Trial
Randomized Controlled Trial

PMID: 12966123 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE
 
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...ve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=10546695

Effects of intermittent exercise and use of home exercise equipment on adherence, weight loss, and fitness in overweight women: a randomized trial.

Jakicic JM, Winters C, Lang W, Wing RR.

Miriam Hospital, Brown University School of Medicine, Providence, RI 02906, USA. jjakicic@lifespan.org

CONTEXT: Enhancing participation in long-term exercise may translate into improved long-term weight loss in overweight adults. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of intermittent with traditional continuous exercise on weight loss, adherence, and fitness, and to examine the effect of combining intermittent exercise with that using home exercise equipment. DESIGN: Randomized trial from September 1996 through September 1998. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 148 sedentary, overweight (mean [SD] body mass index, 32.8 [4.0] kg/m2) women (mean [SD] age, 36.7 [5.6] years) in a university-based weight control program. INTERVENTIONS: Eighteen-month behavioral weight control program with 3 groups: long-bout exercise (LB), multiple short-bout exercise (SB), or multiple short-bout exercise with home exercise equipment (SBEQ) using a treadmill. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Body weight, body composition, cardiorespiratory fitness, and exercise adherence. RESULTS: Of 148 subjects, 115 (78%) completed the 18-month program. At 18 months, mean (SD) weight loss was significantly greater in subjects in the SBEQ group compared with subjects in the SB group (-7.4 [7.8] kg vs -3.7 [6.6] kg; P<.05). Mean (SD) weight loss for subjects in the LB group (-5.8 [7.1] kg) was not significantly different than for subjects in the SB or SBEQ groups. Subjects in the SBEQ group maintained a higher level of exercise than subjects in both the SB and LB groups (P<.05) at 13 to 18 months of treatment. All groups showed an increase in cardiorespiratory fitness from baseline to 18 months, with no difference between groups. Mean (SD) weight loss at 18 months was significantly greater in individuals exercising more than 200 min/wk throughout the intervention (-13.1 [8.0] kg) compared with individuals exercising 150 to 200 min/wk (-8.5 [5.8] kg) or less than 150 min/wk (-3.5 [6.5] kg) (P<.05). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the LB group, subjects in the SB group did not experience improved long-term weight loss, exercise participation, or cardiorespiratory fitness. Access to home exercise equipment facilitated the maintenance of SB, which may improve long-term weight loss. A dose-response relationship exists between amount of exercise and long-term weight loss in overweight adult women.

Publication Types:
Clinical Trial
Randomized Controlled Trial

PMID: 10546695 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE
 
My biggest issue with studies is that they are incapable of calculating body fat accurately. I used to be a personal trainer (yeah yeah, I know) and a track a field coach at an all girls high school :p

During my PT work I came across a bunch of people in the same work, but a few of them had worked very hard in lab tests trying to calculate body fat. Here is an idea of some of the stuff they did.

Used calipers on a cadaver and measured the BF% then used the electronic method. They then dunked them in a water tank to dtermine their volume and did a lot of 'jiggery pokery' math to determine BF%. Finally they performed an autopsy, or rather a cutting and scraping exercise. They took all the visible fat off the body and weighed it. None of the four methods used were anywhere near each other or accurate. The conclusion of the experiment was simple, look in the mirror.

When you embark on any training regimen there are many changes. From increased bone density, more blood, greater muscle mass, greater amounts of Glycogen stored (and for every extra gram of glycogen stored there is a couple of grams of water chemically bonded to it). So, while you feel like you are not losing weight, you arn't. You are losing fat though (providing you follow a proper diet to support complete recovery and growth)

People get hung up on weight, it the fat % that should be the concern as a pound of Lead looks a lot less than a pound of Balsa wood. Another misconception is to just cut back radically on food. This in and of itself will guarantee 'weight loss' but in following this method you lose about one pound of lean calorie burning tissue for every two pounds of fat. The net result is weight loss and a severe lessening of your ability to burn calories (lean tissue has a certain caloric requirement to function, fat does not). Now, when you stop this restricted diet you eat some thing you ate before (lets say 100 cals) you will now put on more weight (allowing for identical life style compared to before the diet) because you have reduced your LBM (Lean Body Mass) and thus your ability to burn calories. When you finally get back to the pre diet weight you will actually be fatter than before as your BF% will be higher.

Top and bottom, there is no easy way to drop weight unless you are really Ectomorphic. Drop the unecessary fats and up the proteins. Resistance training to increase muscle first then 30+ mins of light aerobic stuff like cycling to burn fat. Dont do it the other way as you will be just burning Glycogen for the first 20 mins or so. A way to help with the fat burning is to exercise aerobically first thing in the morning when you are in a glycogen depleted state. Caffeine will enhance this so if you have a couple of cups (Black no sugar) and cycle it will help.

Water. The universal solvent in the body, a properly hydrated body (properly hydrated means wanting to pee every 90 mins) is one of the easiest ways to lose fat. A properly hydrated body allows for optimal function. Dehydration leads to stress on the heart (pumping grease instead of water is a good analogy) signals from the brain travel easier, thinking is easier as both motor and neuro functions rely on electricity, and high resistance due to blood viscosity will only hamper them.

Damn I didnt expect to waffle on so long lol.
 
Krefcenz said:
Effects of intermittent exercise and use of home exercise equipment

Note that "intermittent" means intervals, not "exercise for a couple of weeks, take a few months off, then do a couple weeks again".
No smilie because that really happens.
 
Temper said:
...

Top and bottom, there is no easy way to drop weight unless you are really Ectomorphic. Drop the unecessary fats and up the proteins. Resistance training to increase muscle first then 30+ mins of light aerobic stuff like cycling to burn fat. Dont do it the other way as you will be just burning Glycogen for the first 20 mins or so. A way to help with the fat burning is to exercise aerobically first thing in the morning when you are in a glycogen depleted state. Caffeine will enhance this so if you have a couple of cups (Black no sugar) and cycle it will help.

Water. The universal solvent in the body, a properly hydrated body (properly hydrated means wanting to pee every 90 mins) is one of the easiest ways to lose fat. A properly hydrated body allows for optimal function. Dehydration leads to stress on the heart (pumping grease instead of water is a good analogy) signals from the brain travel easier, thinking is easier as both motor and neuro functions rely on electricity, and high resistance due to blood viscosity will only hamper them...

For all reading, this is excellent advice.

BTW, you forgot to mention that two gin martinis with olives in the evening is part of the complete program. :p
 
Back
Top