Does walking burn fat?

Ted_Hutchinson

Lunar_Eclipse wrote: »

I haven't looked at your links, but I think the overall message is interesting to say the least.

Well I really do urge you to follow those links and try to understand what the overall message is.

To lose weight it's simply a case of exerting more calories (ie energy) than are being consumed;

If that were true then I would not have lost weight last year. Every single day I consume MORE calories than my body NEEDS but I was LOSING weight and all the while NOT EXERCISING.
Sure I may have been eating fewer calories than previously as I now don't have hunger cravings as a result of the high/low swings in glucose/insulin levels. But I was and am still consuming more calories daily than required for my BMR. It simply is NOT the case that calories have to be restricted or energy has to be expended in order to lose weight. I did neither and arrived at my target weight at a steady sensible rate of 2.25lbs lost each week.

Additionally one can harness the power of digestic tricks to enhance the weight loss, eg Atkins diet,

Atkins is not a trick. It works by reducing the unnecessary and unnatural carbohydrate intake that is the root of weight gaining and fat storage. I found it wasn't necessary for me to go the lengths of counting carbs or of having an induction period.
I think changing to using coconut oil (high in medium Chain Tryglicerides, was a big help. I'm sure others will find correcting vitamin D/iodine/magnesium insufficiency states may also be advantageous to them. But ensuring your body has those foods/vitamins/minerals our Human DNA evolved to function best with is certainly not a trick. It is simply common sense.

Ted_Hutchinson

Lunar_Eclipse wrote: »

Whilst it's great that you are enjoying good weight loss on your diet, you are sounding a bit brain washed! It is not the only way to lose weight and maintain a healthy body.

But recognizing the fact that human DNA evolved without access to refined carbohydrates or industrially made such as corn, soybean, safflower and sunflower oil, and everything that contains them is simply common sense.

Why eat those foods that make your body store fat when they aren't necessary for human health.?

Ask any farmer how do they fatten stock before slaughter?

Why make it hard for yourself when there is a simple natural healthy solution available?

If it was as simple as you say then the fact that people are exercising more and eating less fat would be reflected in the obesity statistics and they would should ever lower levels.
The reverse is true.
The more low fat foods we eat the more obese we become.
If we increase the amount of exercise in schools we do not find that extra exercise reflected in low obesity levels.

The people who are brainwashed are those who state dogmatically they know the answer but cannot provide the scientific research that supports their argument.
It only takes an hour to understand the gist of Taubes
The Quality of Calories: What Makes Us Fat and Why Nobody Seems to Care

Lunar_Eclipse

Ted_Hutchinson wrote: »

If that were true then I would not have lost weight last year. Every single day I consume MORE calories than my body NEEDS but I was LOSING weight and all the while NOT EXERCISING.

If you are now consuming more calories than you did at a heavier weight, you must either be using these diet tricks (the word is in italics for exactly the reason you mention!:D) or you have significantly boosted your metabolic rate so your system is working much more efficiently. Having said that it is virtually impossible to consume as many calories on a new healthy diet lighter on processed carbs and heavier on protein, than a previous diet loaded with carbs and sugar in the form of junk food and/or alcohol.

I know the science behind the diets (which work, along with many others), but I fail to agree that exercise is not a good way forward. And my own experience is that excerise does help one to lose fat. Is that really what those links suggest?

Lunar_Eclipse

Ted_Hutchinson wrote: »

Why eat those foods that make your body store fat when they aren't necessary for human health.?

I agree with you, but I don't think it's the only way to stay slim and healthy. One can look beyond Western society for the evidence.

Our Eastern neighbours have always consumed lots of rice, but they did not generally get obese like the rest of us. Why? Because they never consumed excessive calories and have generally continued living an active lifestyle compared to those raised in the West.

Critically, just because people are exercising more (at gyms etc) does not mean they are burning more calories because they are more active. Because we are NOT! As a society, we are much less active than one and two generations ago. An hour in the gym three times a week does not compensate for the significant increase in calories eaten and decrease in energy used in cleaning a house, walking miles each way to school or work etc. All four of my Grandparents were really slim, as most (educated/'wealthy' perhaps?) OAP's today are. They ate practically nothing! Have you looked at portion sizes OAP's eat recently? They're tiny. We'd all lose loads of weight on them (and starve!)

And yes, don't get me started on the sugar loaded low fat foods; what a joke they are.

Ted_Hutchinson

Lunar_Eclipse wrote: »

If you are now consuming more calories than you did at a heavier weight, you must either be using these diet tricks (the word is in italics for exactly the reason you mention!:D) or you have significantly boosted your metabolic rate so your system is working much more efficiently.

I am not consuming more calories than I did before. But I am eating more calories than by body requires for BMR.

I object to your use of the word trick as it implies deception, cunning or a joke.

You are not tricking your body by lowering your blood glucose level and keeping it low.

There is no deception or cunning. Simply an understanding for the science of insulin that you appear to be eith in denial about or have failed to comprehend.

I know the science behind the diets (which work, along with many others), but I fail to agree that exercise is not a good way forward.

Then I am sure you will be able to find good scientific studies lasting over a year that show that simply increasing exercise is an effective way of losing weight and keeping it off?

I am not against anyone walking or indulging in any amount of enjoyable exercise. I have repeatedly made the point the exercise is good for the brain and the heart.
I am against misleading people. As there is little or no evidence to show exercise is an effective way for long term weight control, it is fundamentally deceptive, misleading and basically dishonest to keep associating exercise with weight loss.

It is far easier and far healthier to stop eating those foods that oblige your body to raise insulin as raised insulin levels are associated with weight gain. Why do you think Diabetics using insulin have a problem with fat accumulation?

eslick

Ted_Hutchinson wrote: »

As your brain and heart both function better when they have access to fat it's simply is misguided to think a diet without saturated fat is healthy.
I don't think you have yet watched the videos here

The fallacy of this arguement is that it fails to take account of the fact that your body adapts to the demands upon it and will adjust it's metabolic rate in line with the exercise and calories available so eventually you will find that more and more exercise is required to achieve the same status quo.

By reducing those foods that make you hungry and require your body to burn glucose and store fat you save your body the hassle of having to work off the surplus calories. Because you don't have the hunger cravings you don't have a problem with snacking or having to resist the temptation to eat, and by not raising insulin the natural ketone burning system is allowed to operate for more hours during the day and night hence the stored calories in fat cells are released and used as fuel.

Do by all means carry on with your daily brisk walking. It will indeed be excellent for your heart and brain, but so to is ensuring your brain gets the fuel it evolved to function best with.
Why do you think human breast milk is a high source of saturated fat and Medium chain tryglicerides if it isn't to ensure optimum nutrition for the developing brain?
There is an excellent series of videos about Alzheimer's here and one thing that struck me as I watched them is the consumption of carbohydrates amongst those most affected by this dreadful condition.
For more information study
Mother Natures Brain Fuel and the rest of the blogs on Dr McCleary's site.

ok get it you dont believe me but hey I can live with that. on the fat side, should added that its low fat and not no fat

Ted_Hutchinson

Lunar_Eclipse wrote: »

Our Eastern neighbours have always consumed lots of rice, but they did not generally get obese like the rest of us. Why? Because they never consumed excessive calories and have generally continued living an active lifestyle compared to those raised in the West.

I don't think you are right to equate rice with wheat.
Read this Grains and Human Evolution

Ted_Hutchinson

eslick wrote: »

ok get it you dont believe me

No you've misunderstood. I do believe you think just increasing the walking you do will counter act the carbohydrate content of your diet. I believe you will in time discover that you cannot keep up this vicious spiral of counterbalancing bad food choices with extra exercise. I think it's more sensible to cut out those foods that cause fat accumulation that way you avoid the need for excessive amounts of unnecessary exercise.

but hey I can live with that.

But probably for a shorter lifespan than you would anticipate, so I am sorry you don't understand that Wheat is not a healthy food and you could save yourself a lot of time and energy by reducing your intake But I can live more healthily with that.,

on the fat side, should added that its low fat and not no fat

I've increased my fat content, particularly butter, cream, lard and coconut oil. If you want your brain to function well then low fat is not the way to go. Show me a scientific study showing low fat is healthy and I'll show you a corrupt scientist.

Look again at the original Ancel Keys research. and you will see how our health professionals have been duped.

becky_rtw

OKay there are two things here

Fat loss
Weight loss

They are not the same...walking burns more fat than running, running burns more calories - it depends what you want...

If you want to walk - which is great for your health as well, lovely in the summer and relaxing - then do so at a pace where you are slightly out of breath (this has been mentioned already) - you will burn some calories and some fat, overall this is a great way to get into exercise for everyone as its load bearing, but less joint wearing that running or other impact exercise

Depending on how much you do and how much you eat you will lose weight - it may happen very slowly but you didnt put weight on overnight so its a very good way to go

If you want to lose lots of weight then you need to burn more calories so you'll need to up the level of you heart rate (this shows you are burning lots of calories) and get really out of breath - running is good for this - you burn about 100 calories a mile (no wonder Paula Radcliffe is so tiny ), however - you'll build muscle and eat more (your body will need the fuel) and you'll find it very tough to get started with running and can get injured if you dont take it easy to start with.

Best advice - start with walking and if you feel it isnt happening fast enough then look at higher impact exercise.

Its possible to lose weight this way but you have to create a net calorie deficit of quite a bit but its good for you, and its fun and free

If you want any more help pop over to the running thread or try the exercise thread in the arms or the coach to 5k running thread on here - someone will be able to help

(no idea about Vitamin D or low carb diets or any of that - but I started running and eat more and lost a stone and a half and OH has lost 4 stone...)

Lunar_Eclipse

Ted_Hutchinson wrote: »

I don't think you are right to equate rice with wheat.
Read this Grains and Human Evolution

I didn't; but AFAIK rice is a carbohydrate (and I mentioned carbs).