jack4640

How many calories does one burn holding moronic theories about caloric expenditure?

galoisien

Physical exercise like swimming and running never seems to affect my weight ever, only stamina and muscle firmness, which AFAIK are issues quite unrelated to weight.

GoldShadow

Actually, cardiovascular activity (ie, running and swimming) are the best way to lose weight. It has to be combined with a good diet, of course.

galoisien

But I've never lost weight that way.

It feels good, and it builds stamina, but that's it.

burgler09

and it keeps you in shape. you can bet your little brain exercies aren't going to do that. or keep your weight down for that matter

1of42

That is, purely as a matter of fact, totally and blatantly incorrect. I have a number of friends who eat in that region daily, and because of their ridiculous metabolisms maintain a normal weight (or in one friend's case, almost too low a weight). It is uncommon yes, but not impossible for people to eat that much and maintain weight.

hops_scout

The people actually doing so, though, are probably MORE rare than the pro basketball player.

Wrong again. I'd much rather carry 30 pounds of muscle than carry that same 30 pounds in fat. Weight and BMI really aren't the greatest tools to measure "healthy." Remember, "don't judge a book by its cover."

jack4640

You're not doing enough of it. Or, you're burning fat and building muscle, which keeps your weight the same (or even increases it) but makes you more "toned" (you mentioned muscle firmness - there is no such thing, what's happening is that there is less fat around the muscle so it feels more firm).

Weight is a terrible measure of fitness. Only wrestlers trying to qualify for a weight class ever need to "lose weight." The other %99.9 of people want a change in body composition (fat-muscle proportion), which can involve gaining weight, since muscle weighs more than fat. Often it does involve the loss of body weight, but weight loss in itself is not the goal.

I thought so too, but I googled it and it looks like lots of people (mountain bikers, serious athletes etc.) burn calories in that range. Fit people burn a lot more calories just sitting around, and I'd guess that once you add substantial levels of exercise, calorie expenditure can hit 8000. But nobody has a metabolism that naturally can go through 8,000 calories as a resting rate - that's impossible.

departed

It really depends on your metabolism. If you can eat that much and stay fit why not? I'd love to have your metabolism genes. I have horrible metabolism so I really have to watch what I eat. This is coming from someone who has lost over 50 pounds in a year.

tdanielle

galoisien you make me laugh. High five for most entertainig thread for awhile.

galoisien

What's that supposed to mean?

tdanielle

No no no it wasnt an insult! You got me actually thinking whether or not thinking had a significant effect on calorie burn, and it was entertainingly written

Panglossian

So lets take this 'theory' to it's logical conclustion; in fact, we even have a perfect community that actually embraces it! All those supergenius 'Orientals' that everyone talks about are, mostly, fairly thin people. Thus, you can assume that all the die-hard thinking they partake in at those scientific institutes back home is helping them maintain such low body weights. Surely?

Or is it the fact that most of them don't have enough food, eat mostly rice based products, and engage in back-breaking manual labor for most of the week? Nah, it can't be the physical activity, it's the MENTAL activity.

Son of Opie

People of Asian decent are statistically more likely to have higher amounts of salivary amylase, an enzyme that breaks down sugar.

galoisien

I assume this was satire in the other direction, because rice is pretty carbohydrate-packed.