The FastDay Forum

I don't think it's lornameg depriving herself of exercise, so much as it's her multiple back operations. Plenty of people here who have similar issues and 5:2 is helping them lose weight.

As I mentioned in my previous post "As long as your health allows it". Yet, just because you can't exercise, you shouldn't downgrade the benefits of exercise and its effects in weight loss.

I believe that exercise is the single most important thing anyone can do to improve their overall health, exceeding even weight loss by significant degrees.

I also believe (know) that exercise, for the average overweight person, is almost irrelevant in the weight loss process.

Weight loss, perhaps, but maintenance is another matter.

I believe that exercise is the single most important thing anyone can do to improve their overall health, exceeding even weight loss by significant degrees.

I also believe (know) that exercise, for the average overweight person, is almost irrelevant in the weight loss process.

Weight loss, perhaps, but maintenance is another matter.

Agreed.

If your TDEE is 2000 and you overeat by 200, you can neutralize the 200 by walking an extra 30 minutes or so (pick your exercise and burn rate). That is much different than having to walk over 8 hours to burn a pound (especially when you have 50 pounds to lose).

I don't think it's lornameg depriving herself of exercise, so much as it's her multiple back operations. Plenty of people here who have similar issues and 5:2 is helping them lose weight.

As I mentioned in my previous post "As long as your health allows it". Yet, just because you can't exercise, you shouldn't downgrade the benefits of exercise and its effects in weight loss.

And my point is that lornameg is asking *because* her health doesn't allow it and she's looking for reassurance that she can still improve her health. And there is plenty of evidence that exercise does not help weight loss. It certainly isn't necessary for weight loss to occur.

You are able and willing to exercise. Good for you. There are many good reasons to do so. Some can't exercise. Some don't want to. It's a personal choice. No one has said that exercise is bad.

Hi lornameg, you certainly shouldn't feel guilty for not exercising if you are unable to exercise. No thinking person would say you should.

For the rest of us without mobility/health issues, it is a little different, I think. I'm 65 years old and am in better shape than I have been in years, partly due to a better diet and pounds lost, but also because I walk fast (to get places) and slow (for the dog) and do zumba several times a week. I plan to be doing the same thing at age 75, God willing.

My husband said that, before, I was starting to walk like a little old lady, slumped over and kind of unsteady on my feet. It was not good! When I caught a glimpse of myself in a mirror or window, I really hated it. Now I walk with confidence and energy because I feel strong and fit, and because I know I look fit. Knowing this, it makes fasting a whole lot easier.

So, count me with those who say that it is more complicated than just calories in, calories out. It is a WOL even more than a WOE.

Well said @bordergirl

I am 63, going on 30. And probably nearly as fit as I was at 45 when I did cycle races! But several operations in between, so I understand mobility issues, too.

@Penny and bordergirl: I'm 72 and like to walk fast, too--I'm lucky to be fit enough for lots of exercise and feel that it keeps me vital and supple.

But I know that some people have mobility issues that prevent much exercise. We can only each do what we can.

Thank you all for taking the time to reply.
I know I will reap all the health benefits with this WOE, if I take the scenic route to weight loss, so be it.
We all do what we can, as has been said, today I aim to swim for 5 minutes longer than usual.....as my granddaughter would say "baby steps, grandma"
Another sunny day in prospect here, hope you all have a good day.

[janeg]

After exercising like a demon and just ' watching what I ate' and being disappointed by no weight loss but being firmer I was told weight loss is
80% 'diet' and 20% exercise.
So I 5:2 'd. My exercise is erratic but I am seeing good results even when I can't exercise.
However, I try not to think of 'exercise' but levels of activity. A walk, a swim, some boogieing about while I'm in the house, along with the 30 day shred (managed it once) and fighting with mad max (AKA rowing) and also HIITing madmax(interval rowing) .
The stuff on NEAT is really interesting and I try to be mindful of that.
SO basically, I feel that 'exercise' can scare people and make them feel bad that they're not doing any, but if you think of 'activity' and include gardening , walking, an extra 5 minutes swimming lormnameg, then you are getting exercise. And it has to help.
Especially for how we feel about ourselves and that, to me, is the biggest benefit.

I find that focusing on calories in / calories out is the most effective way of losing weight (1) because under normal circumstances it is the major factor by far, but (2) because it simplifies and focuses what tends to become far too complicated by adding important but completely separate issues (e.g. how fit are you?)

I've found 5:2 really effective for me, and hadn't really dieted before, but had for example taken up running, believing that was the way to lose weight (it wasn't). I just got completely confused by the bombardment of 'you should join the gym to lose weight' messages, plus all the nuances of 'be careful of dieting, you'll go into starvation mode' and 'this new ABC diet allows you to eat huge amounts of X and lose weight'. None of these is helpful or straightforward in the way 5:2 is, and none helps you integrate a reasonable level eating into normal life - stop exercising or stop eating artichokes (or whatever), and you're stuffed.

I started dieting because I want to get fit for my sport, but am completely separating the diet/weight loss from the exercise/strength work, and I feel so much clearer in my head.

Thanks, Iceskater, that just about sums it up for me..
I know 5:2 is the way forward for me, so onwards!!
Walked 2 kilometers this morning, not a lot I know, the difference was, after all the great replies on this post, I did it cos I wanted to, not out of any feeling of guilt at my indolence
Amazing how a few words can turn things round.
Thank you to all who took the time to answer

The calories in - calories concept is nice and simple, overly simple and often misleading if weight loss is what you're after. Even "weight loss" should of course be replaced by "fat loss", unless your main concern is pain in your knees.

The type of calories you eat affect how many more calories you want, and different types of food are handled differently by your body. When and how you eat also matter.

Also the "calories out" thing matter, but that's an equally complicated matter. I leave that out here.

A nice link closer to the truth, should be complicated enough, http://eatingacademy.com/nutrition/do-calories-matter

Perhaps this quote sums it up..

Conventional wisdom, perhaps better referred to as Current Dogma, says that you gain weight because you eat more than you expend. This is almost true!

To be 100% true, it would read: when you gain weight, it is the case that you have necessarily eaten more than you expended.

Do you see the difference? It’s subtle but very important — arguably more important than any other sentence I will write. The first statement says over-eating caused you to get fat.

The second one says if you got fat, you overate, but the possibility remains that another factor led to you to overeat.