A few days ago I watched a video of a popular tactical training personality responding to critics who question his expertise because he is overweight. He said he is fat because the pain of the wear and tear on his body and serious injuries sustained over his twenty year career in the military in special operations prevented him from being physically active for a period of time. I have tremendous respect for this individual and for everybody who has served with honor in the militaries of the United States and its allies and I’m sure he believes what he is saying, however he is mistaken. He didn’t get fat because he was less active, he got fat because he ate too much.
Contrary to popular belief and fitness industry marketing claims, your body weight and composition is not largely determined by your level of physical activity. According to a 2013 article on the role of activity in obesity risk in the International Journal of Epidemiology, “…energy expenditure in activity appears to be playing no role in either causing or moderating the obesity epidemic…” Instead, they claim, the problem had more to do with a reduction in both the cost of and the time required to obtain and/or prepare food. In other words people don’t get fat because they’re inactive or lazy, they get fat because they eat too much.
While higher levels of activity result in increased calorie expenditure the amount is often grossly overestimated and doesn’t have nearly the effect on body weight or body composition claimed in the marketing of exercise gadgets and group “cardio” classes. Increased physical activity may even indirectly contribute to weight gain for some people because it tends to increase appetite. If you are not strictly controlling your diet this increase in hunger coupled with the quick and easy availability of high calorie food can work against your efforts to improve or maintain your body composition. You absolutely can not out-exercise a bad diet.
Just because someone is unable to maintain a high level of physical activity due to injuries or physical limitations does not mean they are doomed to be fat. They may have to eat fewer calories than more active people, but if their activity is limited their appetite will also be lower. I’ve trained paraplegics, stroke victims, people with a variety of joint and spine problems, and even one woman who had survived a plane crash, and every single one of them who ate properly was able to lose fat and keep it off without increasing their level of activity outside of their workouts. It takes discipline and effort to do it, but if you value your health and appearance achieving and maintaining a healthy body composition is possible and absolutely worth it.
Doug McGuff performs TSC compound row on a RenEx iMachine. Photo courtesy of RenEx
Although it may seem hopeless for those with injuries or joint or neurological conditions which make movement difficult or painful, it is often possible to exercise effectively and with little or no pain using Ken Hutchins’ timed static contraction (TSC) protocol. TSC is an isometric protocol consisting of timed contractions of gradually increasing intensity against an immovable resistance source. Since the resistance is immovable the force encountered is determined by the subject’s effort, and can provide exactly the right amount of resistance regardless of whether they are very weak or very strong. Since there is no movement it is less irritating to many joint conditions and since little coordination is required it can be performed by people with neurological conditions or injuries impairing motor control. The subject can safely stop the exercise at any time without the risk of dropping a heavy weight or movement arm. If you aren’t fortunate enough to live near a facility with the RenEx iMachines you can still perform TSC exercises for all the major muscle groups using equipment which is commonly available in gyms or easily and inexpensively made.
Regardless of your physical condition if you can voluntarily contract your muscles you can and should exercise. Regardless of your level of physical activity if you have a high body fat percentage you can and should restrict your calorie intake. Think of your physical limitations as obstacles to overcome rather than excuses not to try, and make a commitment to becoming as fit and healthy as you can be.
References:
Amy Luke and Richard S Cooper. Physical activity does not influence obesity risk: time to clarify the public health message. Int. J. Epidemiol. (2013) 42 (6): 1831-1836 doi:10.1093/ije/dyt159
Comments on this entry are closed.
Hi!
To begin with; The matter is more what your friend eats, rather than how much.
To make a long story short, he would reduce weight if he minimized he´s intake of carbohydrates and other sugarsources. That´s because sugar triggers Insulin wich is our bodys fatstoring hormone nr 1. If he switched to more fatintake instead (good sources ofcourse), no Insulin triggering and thereby no fatstoring (via the liver).
A calorie is NOT a calorie, depending on where it comes from, regarding the results of weightgaining.
My profession is to help diabetics and other people suffering from the metabolic syndrome, where you can count in a lot of the overweighted ones. The results of lowcarb highfat diet are stunning in almost every case. And the weightloss is often very rapid.
That in turn makes the body hormonally normalized over time and my strategy is to include H.I.T. training after about eight weeks, so that the body adapts and then your friend probably would get more out of this fantastic type of exercises.
Keep up the good spirit, Drew 🙂
Ulf
Hey Ulf,
I used to think this, but most research shows the relative intake of carbohydrate versus fat calories has little effect on weight loss, and it is primarily a matter of calorie restriction. Some people are able to lose weight rapidly with carbohydrate restriction because it results in them reducing overall food intake. I guarantee if you fed someone nothing but fat and protein but their average calorie intake exceeded their expenditure they’d gain weight, and if you fed someone nothing but carbohydrate but their average calorie intake was below their expenditure they’d lose weight. For every example of someone who has lost a lot of fat on a low carb diet you will find examples of people who lost a lot of fat on higher carb diets. Ellington Darden’s fat loss books are full of people who got amazing results eating a diet consisting of about sixty percent carbohydrate.
Some people may respond better to lower carbohydrates, some higher, but overall fat loss has a lot more to do with calories.
I personally found that having no “beliefs” attached to food can help. Basically, if my weight is already in normal range and I look suboptimal aesethically, I focus on doing HIT regularly and don’t change diet, because protein intake is pretty much adequate anyway and as long as quality is decent…many of my extremely fit friends never changed/cared about diet, and you’d find even fruit juice, ice cream and cereal in their menu, as well as “real food”, but they lift and I suspect they stop eating at just the right amount of “satiety” precisely because they never feared about “not enough protein” or “forbidden foods”.
Ondrej,
It is important to keep in mind some people are able to do this because they have a higher metabolic rate and/or an appetite that is better balanced to their energy expenditure. This is not the case for everybody, however, and those who need to lose fat will do so more effectively by monitoring and restricting food intake.
It helps to eat a higher amount of foods that are more satiating due to hormonal effects or volume relative to calories, but nothing edible needs to be “forbidden”, just not eaten in excess. I have pizza or chimichangas a few times a month and it hasn’t hurt my progress, because I keep track of it and adjust the rest of my food intake on those days accordingly.
Does that change any of your diet advice from older posts? Do you still recommend a Paleo style diet?
Hey Flavian,
It doesn’t change it much, I still think the majority of a person’s food should come from vegetables, meat, fish, eggs, fruit, nuts, and healthy fats, and the intake of things like most grains, legumes, vegetable oils, and heavily processed foods loaded with sugar and trans fats should be minimized. I just don’t recommend any specific macronutrient ratio, or either a low-carb or high-carb diet. I recommend starting with a moderate carb intake and adjusting up or down based on individual response.
People are led to believe that a lot of the health problems that they suffer when they are overweight can be solved by going on a special diet or by cardio of some kind.
What they fail to understand is that the health problems are as a result of them being overweight, not because their diet or the fact they aren’t running enough.
Yes, the diet is what got them fat in the first place, but being fat is the problem.
You see it all the time. Person is fat with health problems. Goes on a diet (which loses them a bunch of weight) and does a load of running (which does nothing but damage their ankles, knees, hips and spine) and the health problems go away.
They attribute this to the running and herald it as some panacea, telling everyone they meet that it’s the best thing ever.
Fact is their health has improved because the reduced their bodyfat percentage from 45% to 15%, regardless of how they did it (hint: it was the calorie restriction and not the running).
So if HIT and a simple calorie restricted diet (not necessarily low carb) can lose someone that weight whilst saving them time and joint health, then that’s the best way to to do it.
The best diet is the one you can stick to long term. If that isn’t low carb, then fair enough.
This post is awesome, thanks Drew. Really glad there’s at least one person out there (you) who can give us the straight scoop on this. I STILL see misinformation on this issue ALL the time in national media from supposed health experts. Keep it coming.
Thanks Billy,
Considering the massive amount of fat loss misinformation and myths out there it’s no wonder so many people have difficulty losing fat, and it doesn’t help they’re constantly being lied to by people trying to sell them “fat burning” supplements and workout videos and “spot reducing” gadgets.
Sounds like your friend might be caught in the pleasure trap. I highly recommend the book The Pleasure Trap by psychologist Doug Lisle, PhD to understand this trap. Basically, in people like this, the nervous system registers very high energy density foods (regardless of their macronutrient composition) as (in my words) a “jackpot” via a strong dopamine response. Some people get addicted to this dopamine response and can’t “cut down” or “eat smaller portions” of those very rich foods any more than an alcoholic can just cut down on portion sizes of alcoholic beverages. For these people, foods having a high energy density from either fat or sugar, enhanced with salt, are the dope, and they have to go dope-free in a controlled environment to break out of the pleasure trap, just as in alcohol or drug withdrawal. Here’s a TedX talk Dr. Lisle gave: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jX2btaDOBK8
Thanks Don,
I will share this with him. I think it will help him.
I’ve met people who pay monthly gym memberships for the sole purpose of “burning extra calories”. This is a very misguided idea since they could simply not eat the extra calories in the first place and this philosophy is promoted by people who really should know better. The purpose of exercise should be to develop and maintain muscle tissue cardio vascular efficiency and mobility/flexibility. Try getting this concept across to people who have been fed all the misinformation and hype from the exercise industry. Great article Drew, this site is and oasis of sanity in a crazy world.
Hey John,
This is part of the reason gyms and studio owners perpetuate the belief that people need to exercise to burn calories. It keeps the members and clients coming back.
Hi Drew,
For many elite athletes when they are in full competition most would be on strict calorie controlled diets. What I have noticed that with many elite athletes, after ceasing their chosen field of activity a large number greatly increase their body fat percentage, for some athletes they could be considered obese.
I think a lot of people have difficulty admitting that they are eating too much probably more so for an athlete who had spent many years in a strict and controlled environment of an athletes life. Than they attribute the reason why they have gotten fat as they are not exercising as much. The athlete thinks that by simply by doing a few exercises they can lose the weight that they have gained.
If they do lose the excess body fat than then somewhere along the line they attribute this to some sought of fad diet or some exercise gadget that someone pays them to advertise.
What I have also noticed that most athletic programs including the military elite are based upon high explosive movements that can’t be sustained for a person life time. Most of these high explosive training programs are what causes the person chronic injuries that eventually stops them from exercising.
But I suppose that it is also hard to admit that a physical training program that you followed blindly for twenty years that made you an “elite” is now contributing to serious injuries.
But HIT safe, effective and efficient exercise doesn’t sell?
Hey Steven,
I agree that the military needs to reexamine it’s physical training programs. The traditional calisthenics and bodyweight exercises are effective when done with a high level of effort but they also take their toll on the body. Something like Project Kratos would be equally effective but easier on the joints, but might be harder to teach and instruct with very large groups.
Drew,
Yeah I have to agree with you, I served 20 plus years in the special operations world proudly in our military and I can attest to numerous annoying injuries along the way. After retiring I went gung ho into the chronic cardio thing, a severe foot injury put me out of commission for nearly six months. No gym time, certainly no running, yes i gained a few extra pounds but they came from a more relaxed diet. I got a handle on the diet and slowly returned to my same weight as before. Not a scientist or physician but I know if I eat more than my body needs on a consistent basis I will gain body fat.
Thanks for your work and research, just recently purchased your Kratos Protocol course, excellent resource…
Hey Ralph,
Thank you for your service, and for your feedback, and please let me know if you’ve got questions after reading Project Kratos.
Hi Drew,
Let’s say there’s someone who has a 9 to 5 job with sedentary lifestyle and no physical activity like workouts. If he is already eating a calorie amount of around 1300-1500 per day. Is it safe to further reduce calories in order to lose fat?? or the only option that’s left for him is increasing the physical activity somehow?
Hey Bhanu,
Whether that many calories is too little depends on the size of the person and how much fat they have to lose. If he’s actually eating that many calories he should be losing fat, and if he isn’t I would suspect he’s either not weighing or measuring correctly and grossly underestimating his calorie intake. He wouldn’t need to increase general activity, but he should be strength training to maintain lean body mass. A lot of my clients have busy jobs, some working upwards of twelve hours a day spent sitting or driving, and this hasn’t prevented them from losing fat. Usually, when a client isn’t losing fat it’s simply because they are not monitoring and restricting their food intake.
Great post Drew. Hard lesson for many to hear, especially a former carbophobe like myself. I find the food reward ideas make much more sense (similar to what Don mentioned). Reducing food reward, increasing nutrient density, and narrowing the feeding window have proved very helpful in making calorie intact more easy to regulate naturally.
Also, I was inspired by your post about the quad blaster to make a simple version using a door, a board, and since tie down straps. It’s fantastic, and perhaps the best quad exercise I’ve ever done. You can click my name for a quick video showing it. I’ve since dropped any weight, as I find bodyweight with good form is more than enoug. Thanks for the tip!
Hey Bryce,
I will check that out. I’ve found an even simpler way to accomplish this that requires no leg restraint. The most difficult part of sissy squats for most people is maintaining balance because they’re up on the balls of their feet. I found by supporting the heels throughout the movement using the heel raise step on the UXS I was able to easily maintain my balance while performing hands-free full-range sissy squats. If anyone is interested I’ll post a video.
Drew,
I’d be interested in your setup, as I am one of those people who struggles to take sissy squats to failure due to feelings of instability. It fails technically, not muscularly, if that makes sense. Not so with the quad blaster.
Hey Bryce,
I’ll record and post a video later. It can be done easily using the TSC hip belt squat platform I built.
Drew – I’ll throw in a vote for that video!
I’d like to see comparison between regular HIT training plus no “scheduled” activity vs regular HIT plus brisk walking for 30 minutes on off days or something. What effect would this have on apetite when it’s not very high intensity activity. Any client results?
Hey Ondrej,
A moderate amount of low intensity activity may not have much effect on appetite, but it would not be necessary for fat loss and can be counterproductive. On page 125 of Living Longer Stronger Ellington Darden compared data from studies performed by Wayne Westcott which involved people using a combination of HIT and “cardio” or only “cardio” with his fat loss studies using only HIT, which used similar diets. Over a ten week period, the average results were as follows:
Diet and “Cardio”: 3.2 pounds of fat lost, 0.3 pounds of muscle lost
Diet, “Cardio”, and Strength Training: 10 pounds of fat lost, 2 pounds of muscle gained
Diet and Strength Training: 18.1 pounds of fat lost, 2.4 pounds of muscle gained
The group that only did “cardio” had the worst results, and the group that did “cardio” along with their strength training had worse results than the group that did only strength training.
Thanks Drew…folks who avoid HIT, and instead opt for steady state “cardio”, are plodding along in a kind of fool’s paradise (Body By Science page 36). They have bought into this idea that they are gaining an aerobic benefit from steady state exercise. Again, Body By Science page 21…”The 1st problem is the belief that the aerobic metabolic pathway can in fact be isolated from the rest of metabolism. The reality is that metabolism is an uninterrupted whole that is intrinsically tied together.” I can’t count how much scientific evidence points to HIT as the best way to improve overall health. Hopefully, this individual will eventually come around…good luck.
Hey George,
Any activity which places sufficient demand on the muscles is going to place demand on all the metabolic pathways which provide energy for contraction, either during the activity or while making up for the oxygen debt afterwards. Since this can be accomplished with proper strength training much more safely and efficiently it makes no sense for people to do steady state activity or so-called “cardio” for this purpose.
Larry Vickers no? He’ll make things worse with that crossfit horsesh!t, especially already carrying injuries. HIT and becoming a accustomed to portion control is the only way. Food easily becomes medication for those in pain, physical or emotional.
Hey Couch Athlete,
Yes, Larry Vickers is going to make things much worse for himself doing CrossFit. He needs to exercise, but with a body as beat up as his he ought to be doing HIT and using either a slow, controlled repetition speed or doing timed static contractions.
Drew,
I’m currently in a cutting phase; lower carbs and salt, etc. for the next few days.
A lot of the information I’m reading says to avoid going to “failure” because excessive muscle damage interferes with the glycogen repletion on show day.
Curious to know you’re thoughts on this?
*I know Mike Mentzer took several days recovery before show time, but I assume he pumped up before hitting the stage like everyone else. I can’t imagine it was to failure just for a pump?
Thanks in advance!
Hey Ben,
Going to failure will not interfere with glycogen depletion, but not going to failure will compromise the effectiveness of your workouts.
Exercises performed for the sake of pumping do not need to be done to failure, since the goal is simply to force more fluid into the muscles and not to stimulate strength and size increases. Being of lower intensity, they also would not make much of a demand on recovery.
I really appreciate this, Drew. Thank you!
I’ll have to download your Getting Ripped book again.
Hey Ben,
You’re welcome. If you don’t have the copy you purchased previously let me know and I can have another sent, since the original download link will have expired.
Here’s the link if anyone else wants to see it: http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/42/6/1831.full.pdf+html