Two things are confuddling me...

Dudess

1. The message that it seems to be ok to drastically reduce carbs. I heard a nutritional expert on the radio recently saying: "If you were stranded on a desert island for six months and you had zero protein, you would die; if you were stranded on a desert island for six months and you had zero fats, you would die; if you were stranded on a desert island for six months and had zero carbs but enough of the above, you would be absolutely fine."
Why then is the widest layer of the food pyramid comprised of carb-rich food?
What about ketosis and the other nasty things I hear about?
Note: these are just questions, not statements. I don't know much about the area.

2. Exercise or diet? I know the modification of both is required for weight loss, but I pick up information indicating one is more effective than the other. But which one? I've heard remarks like "it's 40% diet, 60% exercise", then people saying it's actually diet that's the priority, exercise follows.
But what if your diet is generally low-cal and healthy but you allow yourself a couple of plain biccies and a cup of tea in the evening; if you're doing a good deal of exercise daily (e.g. a ten-mile cycle) wouldn't that make a good dent in the excess cals from the biccies anyway?

Gah, I'm all in a muddle!

g'em

Dudess wrote: »

"If you were stranded on a desert island for six months and you had zero protein, you would die; if you were stranded on a desert island for six months and you had zero fats, you would die; if you were stranded on a desert island for six months and had zero carbs but enough of the above, you would be absolutely fine."

This is by and large true.

Dudess wrote:

Why then is the widest layer of the food pyramid comprised of carb-rich food?

The quick answer? The original Pyramid was funded by the American Crop Protection Agency. A newer, less biassed pyramid has been written and supported by the FDA that promotes greater quantities of good fats and veg in the diet.

Dudess wrote:

What about ketosis and the other nasty things I hear about?

Ketosis is the mechanism by which our bodies use fats instead of carbs for energy. There's nothing inherently wrong with it, but it has some ansty side-effects: bad breath, diarrhoea, fuzzy head etc. There IS a dangerous condition called ketoacidosis which can develop in those with type 1 diabetes, and is confused with normal ketosis. The body usually avoids this state by producing insulin, but people with type 1 diabetes are unable to produce insulin. Even most people with type 2 diabetes who inject insulin usually produce enough insulin of their own to prevent ketoacidosis.

Dudess wrote:

2. Exercise or diet?

Number 1 priority = diet. Simple as. You can compensate for short-comings in your diet by exercising hard, but at the end of the day what goes into your gut dictates how healthy you are more than any other factor.

That doesn't mean to say that exercise isn't important, just that diet is more so.

justsomebloke

Dudess wrote: »

2. Exercise or diet? I know the modification of both is required for weight loss, but I pick up information indicating one is more effective than the other. But which one? I've heard remarks like "it's 40% diet, 60% exercise", then people saying it's actually diet that's the priority, exercise follows.
But what if your diet is generally low-cal and healthy but you allow yourself a couple of plain biccies and a cup of tea in the evening; if you're doing a good deal of exercise daily (e.g. a ten-mile cycle) wouldn't that make a good dent in the excess cals from the biccies anyway?

Ok I am going to skip question 1 as i don't want to get into a debate

So question 2. For me the biggest thing to weight loss is diet. For Exercise to be the main factor you would probably need to be nearly at an elite level other then that it is easier to cut out the amount of calories from your diet then to get them through excess exercise.

However this brings it to the point where is just losing weight what you want to do. Most people, bar aesthetic reasons, want to lose weight to be healthier, but to be truly healthy is weigh loss enough no you need to exercise.

That all said the true trick is finding what works for you. For some people it will be more exercise then diet but for others they will have to pay more attention to their diet then there exercise regime. So if it works for you run with it, if not it is time for a change

Dudess

g'em wrote: »

The original Pyramid was funded by the American Crop Protection Agency.

You can compensate for short-comings in your diet by exercising hard, but at the end of the day what goes into your gut dictates how healthy you are more than any other factor.

Well I'm focusing specifically on weight loss - is diet what will ultimately get the weight off even if you're doing all the exercise in the world?

rubadub

Dudess wrote: »

2. Exercise or diet? I know the modification of both is required for weight loss,

You could just do one, both is recommended and normally easier. To lose 1lb per week you want a deficit of ~500kcal per day. I find it easier to eat 250kcal less and exercise 250kcal more, I also think it is less stressful on the system than either burning 500kcal more, or eating 500kcal less.

Dudess wrote: »

but I pick up information indicating one is more effective than the other. But which one? I've heard remarks like "it's 40% diet, 60% exercise", then people saying it's actually diet that's the priority, exercise follows.

Depends on the purpose. I think it is easier to have a horrendous diet than a horrendouse lack of exercise. If a man sits around all day he might only burn 2000kcal. It would be recommended he might get 500kcal exercise per day too. So he is 500kcal under his recommended amount. Now it is far easier to be ingesting over 500kcal of food surplus to your requirements. There is a limit to how much energy you can expend via exercise per day, you could not run a marathon everyday for a week, yet you could probably eat the amount a marathon would burn each day surplus to requirements.

If somebody is really big their basal requirments, a 30stone man could be 5000kcal per day, these people can still survive on harsh extremes like lipotrim eating 500kcal per day, so they have a deficit of 4500kcal. While asking a 30stone man to exercise 9 hours to burn 4500kcal is not feasible- so in his case diet is a relatively bigger deficit to aim for (though 500kcal a day is not advisable except in extreme cases, just using figures to exagerrate).

Some people do not have time for exercise so eating less is easier. Some like their food too much so working out is easier. A balance of what suits YOU works best.

mack1

Dudess wrote: »

Well I'm focusing specifically on weight loss - is diet what will ultimately get the weight off even if you're doing all the exercise in the world?

No, not exactly - it IS possible to eat poorly and lose weight, simply put, burn more kcals that you ingest and you lose weight.

But as has been said, it's not the optimal way of doing things, it's not very healthy either!

g'em

Dudess wrote: »

Well I'm focusing specifically on weight loss - is diet what will ultimately get the weight off even if you're doing all the exercise in the world?

Assuming that:
1) you want to lose weight in the healthiest way possible (health in this case means taking a holistic approach, that is your diet will be conducive to maintaining proper and optimal functioning of ALL your organ systems)
2) you want to lose weight and keep it off (weight in this case assumes that fat is being lost and not muscle or a combination of the two)
3) you're doing an "average" amount of exercise and not participating in gruelling endurance training/ high intensity sports

Yes.

slemons

g'em wrote: »

This is by and large true.


The quick answer? The original Pyramid was funded by the American Crop Protection Agency. A newer, less biassed pyramid has been written and supported by the FDA that promotes greater quantities of good fats and veg in the diet.


Ketosis is the mechanism by which our bodies use fats instead of carbs for energy. There's nothing inherently wrong with it, but it has some ansty side-effects: bad breath, diarrhoea, fuzzy head etc. There IS a dangerous condition called ketoacidosis which can develop in those with type 1 diabetes, and is confused with normal ketosis. The body usually avoids this state by producing insulin, but people with type 1 diabetes are unable to produce insulin. Even most people with type 2 diabetes who inject insulin usually produce enough insulin of their own to prevent ketoacidosis.


Number 1 priority = diet. Simple as. You can compensate for short-comings in your diet by exercising hard, but at the end of the day what goes into your gut dictates how healthy you are more than any other factor.

That doesn't mean to say that exercise isn't important, just that diet is more so.

thats an absolutely brilliant post, and very well written. Thanks g'em

t-ha

Well g'em answered #1 - just look at where the original food pyramid came from!
I would like to add to this though, that just because we can survive on no carbs, doesn't mean we should or that it is the best way to survive! People respond to/metabolise food differently, and that goes for fats aswell as carbs. Some people will do better on very low carb diets than others. Personally (and I've given no-carb approaches a very fair go IMO) I can't really tolerate the no-carb approach. I'm trying to write up a PhD and train for MMA at the same time and no carbs leaves me lacking both in concentration and endurance. I've heard & read all the various arguments for why that shouldn't happen - but all I can go on is my own experiences and that is that I do best with a certain level of carbohydrates in my diet. There's a sweet-point & I'd suggest that everyone finds what that is for themselves.

As for exercise v's diet, if you're taking about weight management only then don't listen to any percentages as they are all meaningless and won't apply to everyone anyway. First off, how much exercise do you do/are you willing or likely to do each week? Now ask yourself what your diet should be given your lifestyle? If your exercise for the week is low/moderate in terms of fat busting, then obviously your diet is going to be a very big part of keeping you slim & trim. If your weekly exercise allows it, then you can probably afford to relax it a bit. I guess I'm just repeating what has been written already, but my basic point is this - most people have a good idea how much they'll do on a given week (i.e. I go for a run two days a week, play an indoor soccer game on Wednesdays etc.) and because of time constraints and so on it's not neccessarily as easy to vary it as diet, so just adjust until you find what's working for you.