B
Badger_south
Guest
On 25 May 2004 13:19:52 GMT, [email protected] (Pbwalther) wrote:
>Well Scientic American had an article quite a few years
>back about a "real" starvation diet. That was no food at
>all and for months on end. They people's metabolic rates
>sank to extremely low levels.
>
>Now I bet that if you test people, some folks would lower
>their rates in response to almost any decrease in calories
>ingested and other people would not. The problem here is
>that measuring metabolic rate is pretty tricky and it is
>not convenient at all. I doubt that anyone has done it.
>
>>But, I think the caloric benefits of exercise vis-a-vis
>>weight loss are overstated
>
>It depends on what you mean by overstated. I recall reading
>somewhere that the occupation that had the highest known
>rate of caloric expenditure per day was being an old manual
>tool lumberjack and the calories burned per day were in
>excess of 10,000.
Good post. I have also heard some anecdotal comments about
an old manual tool lumberjack. One guy went out to try
various professions and couldn't hang with them for even an
hour, IIRC...
Metabolic rates seem like something that would be hard to
measure, and unless you are in a special sealed room
(everything measured in and out, including watervapor, food,
temp, etc.) then you might miss something when doing the
calorie calc and body weighing. Not sure how they measure
metabolism, though, just babbling. <g>
I tend to remain 'revved up' and heated up and jazzed for a
couple hours after exercising, incl weight training,
jogging, biking, swimming, or combo of those. I lose weight
quickly when not jamming in the cake and pie and pizza and
beer, regardless of what I'm doing activity wise.
-B
>Well Scientic American had an article quite a few years
>back about a "real" starvation diet. That was no food at
>all and for months on end. They people's metabolic rates
>sank to extremely low levels.
>
>Now I bet that if you test people, some folks would lower
>their rates in response to almost any decrease in calories
>ingested and other people would not. The problem here is
>that measuring metabolic rate is pretty tricky and it is
>not convenient at all. I doubt that anyone has done it.
>
>>But, I think the caloric benefits of exercise vis-a-vis
>>weight loss are overstated
>
>It depends on what you mean by overstated. I recall reading
>somewhere that the occupation that had the highest known
>rate of caloric expenditure per day was being an old manual
>tool lumberjack and the calories burned per day were in
>excess of 10,000.
Good post. I have also heard some anecdotal comments about
an old manual tool lumberjack. One guy went out to try
various professions and couldn't hang with them for even an
hour, IIRC...
Metabolic rates seem like something that would be hard to
measure, and unless you are in a special sealed room
(everything measured in and out, including watervapor, food,
temp, etc.) then you might miss something when doing the
calorie calc and body weighing. Not sure how they measure
metabolism, though, just babbling. <g>
I tend to remain 'revved up' and heated up and jazzed for a
couple hours after exercising, incl weight training,
jogging, biking, swimming, or combo of those. I lose weight
quickly when not jamming in the cake and pie and pizza and
beer, regardless of what I'm doing activity wise.
-B
