How much can exercise combat the effects of junk food?

LiveIsLife

Just wondering what people think, to what extent can exercise mitigate the negative effects of junk food? I eat reasonably healthy breakfast, lunch and dinner, but I go through phases of bingeing on sugar and junk food. I'll still eat decent regular meals, but they'll be interspersed with bars, chocolate, biscuits and even bowls of cereal loaded with sugar if I can't find anything else. I exercise regularly, running and cycling. I'm not trying to lose weight, more concerned with the impact of junk food on my body, especially sugar as it seems the hardest to kick and more and more research seems to be showing its harmful long term effects, particularly on the mind

Darkest Horse

To the extent that the calories ingested are expended during exercise is the simple answer but I think you'll eat junk food at a much greater rate than you can burn it off so it's always an uphill struggle in terms of weight management.

Oryx

In my experience junk food makes me tired and sluggish, and sugar is an addiction, the more you eat the more you want.

In simple terms it is a question of using the calories you eat, but for me anyway I feel better when I eat clean. Exercise doesn't negate the effect that eating junk has on me at all, though it does stop me turning into a blimp.

StickyIcky

You are what you eat. Exercise doesn't make the fact you put junk into your body go away.

Watch HUNGRY FOR CHANGE its a really good documentary.

.ak

It's not just a simple case of burn more calories than you eat, nutrition isn't that black and white.

A lot of fast food is extremely high in simple carbs and saturated fats and heavy in salt. So, it's a case of what will these things actually do to your body, rather than how quickly you can burn off the calories. Simple carbs may be good in some cases, but if you're eating a massive quantity of them it'll spike your insulin levels, too much and your body will store this as energy in forms, and in fat. Saturated fats and salt will effect your cholesterol levels.

That's just a brief overview on some of the things wrong with junk food, the list is endless. You're also not getting your minumum requirements of vitamins and nutritions to keep your healthy, fit and sane.

LiveIsLife

Thats what I'm asking though, how much can exercise counteract the negative effects? I'd imagine someone who eats pizza and burgers everyday but also runs 50 miles a week would be in a better state of health than if they kept the same diet but did no exercise.

Alf Veedersane

LiveIsLife wrote: »

I'd imagine someone who eats pizza and burgers everyday but also runs 50 miles a week would be in a better state of health than if they kept the same diet but did no exercise.

They'll still be ingesting the same crap so I don't know how you think the person who doesn't exercise would be in a better state of health than someone who does.

LiveIsLife

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

They'll still be ingesting the same crap so I don't know how you think the person who doesn't exercise would be in a better state of health than someone who does.

That's the complete opposite of what I've said

Alf Veedersane

LiveIsLife wrote: »

That's the complete opposite of what I've said

So it is. I completely misread it.

.ak

Exercise won't help things like how your organs react to stuff you put into your body.

It's like saying I drink 5 pints of beer every day and a smoke, I also do a load of recreational drugs every weekend. But it's okay, cuz I do 5k everyday.

Okay, so that's a bit hyperbolic, but you get my point. If you're building up cholesterol and other stuff in your organs/heart/etc exercise won't fix that.

Having said that, I'm a believe in treats. You should eat clean for 95% of your diet, but you need to be allowed treats, for sanity and health purposes. Also, if you limit yourself to 5% or something like that you'll ensure your treats are good! i.e; a cheat meal every 2nd sunday, if you only get it every 2nd sunday you won't go down to supermacs and buy a couple of taco chip portions, but might be more inclined to eat a good quality cooked meal that may be considered a cheat, like a good italian meal or chinese etc.

The point is everything is tolerable, within it's limits. Too much of anything can kill you, like your mother might say. So that odd bit of junk food is fine, so long as it's not habitual and often.

I've been on a very strict nutrition plan for the last 6 weeks. After getting over the first couple of weeks my cravings completely subside. In the first week I wanted fish n chips, and I wouldn't usually be that keen on it, but I had the cravings for greasy food....

Now I'm like I'll treat myself to brunch on Sundays or something like that. Good for the soul, and I don't get cravings for junk food anymore.

usersame

Id rather be a healthy eating non-exerciser than a junk food exerciser. Look at the pot bellies on AstroTurf pitches, I've mates that play soccer 4 times a week and are still puddings

.ak

Also to answer your question, I would say somebody who doesn't exercise but eats right will be completely more healthier than someone who exercises but doesn't eat properly. Why? Because you don't need to exercise to be healthy. Just walking, talking, working, commuting is often enough for a lot of people, so long as they're not eating a surplus of calories.

Will they be fitter? No, but that's another question.

ch750536

LiveIsLife wrote: »

...to what extent can exercise mitigate the negative effects of junk food?...

Effects of junk food:
Excess calories - work out
Excess salt - drink more water
Excess cholesterol - take more statins :eek:
Missing nutrients - have healthy meal after your burger :eek:*2

Exercise cant do anything about most of the problems junk food causes

Mellor

Considering how exercise can offset junk is really a pointless conversation. It can't, the two are separate issues.
If somebody has a high nutritional and calorific requirement due to intensity of their training, then maybe they get away with some junk to meet their goals. But if you have to ask the question, it doesn't apply to you. You should be even thinking about it unless you know nutrition inside and out.
Just because you go to the gym a couple times a week doesn't mean you have a high requirement. Most people are just showing up and going through the motions. Most people who think they meet that intensity, are kidding themselves imo

LuckyLloyd

Mellor wrote: »

Considering how exercise can offset junk is really a pointless conversation. It can't, the two are separate issues.
If somebody has a high nutritional and calorific requirement due to intensity of their training, then maybe they get away with some junk to meet their goals. But if you have to ask the question, it doesn't apply to you. You should be even thinking about it unless you know nutrition inside and out.
Just because you go to the gym a couple times a week doesn't mean you have a high requirement. Most people are just showing up and going through the motions. Most people who think they meet that intensity, are kidding themselves imo

Hey, I earn my 19 pints, two Burger Kings, one fry up and one Dominoes meal deal for 4 over the weekend thank you very much. I also earn the right to have a total of ~15 hours ****ty sleep between Friday and Monday incase you were wondering.

Eat Big, Drink Big, Train Big (lol, maybe!) imo.

Young Blood

Sometimes eating sugary foods is a necessity during intensive training. I had to do it during marathon training in order to compensate for calories lost. By all means, if you have the time to eat healthier while training as an athlete, do just that, but if you don't, a packet of biscuits is just as good.

MartyMcFly84

I would say for longevity it would be better to do little or low intensity exercise but eat a good nutrient rich diet and sticking within your body maintenance levels.

As mentioned there is a lot of harmful stuff in junk food (hence the name), not just the calorie content. The excessive sugar will mess with your insulin levels and can lead to diabetes to name but one disease caused by poor nutrition.

I get the impression you are asking this question as you kind of want to rationalise what you already know, you have bad eating habits and are hoping people will say "as long as you exercise you will be grand". Eating habits are often life long and can be difficult to break. Do you think you will be able to maintain your current exercise levels 20 or 30 years from now? will you still be eating the same?

Long story short, the sooner you break your current binging habits and sugar addiction the healthier you will be in the long run. Aim to eat well 90-95%% of the time. Processed sugar is empty calories that your body simply does not need, much the same with tobacco. Its something that can be difficult to quit but it can be done with will power and if you really want to do it.

srsly78

If you are an olympic athlete you can get away with it apparently, but these guys need to eat like 10000 calories a day and spend most of their waking time training.

LiveIsLife

MartyMcFly84 wrote: »

I would say you for longevity it would be better to do little or low intensity exercise but eat a good nutrient rich diet and sticking within your body maintenance levels.

As mentioned there is a lot of harmful stuff in junk food (hence the name), not just the calorie content. The excessive sugar will mess with your insulin levels and can lead to diabetes to name but one disease caused by poor nutrition.

I get the impression you are asking this question as you kind of want to rationalise what you already know, you have bad eating habits and are hoping people will say "as long as you exercise you will be grand". Eating habits are often life long and can be difficult to break. Do you think you will be able to maintain your current exercise levels 20 or 30 years from now? will you still be eating the same?

Long story short, the sooner you break your current binging habits and sugar addiction the healthier you will be in the long run. Aim to eat well 90-95%% of the time. Processed sugar is empty calories that your body simply does not need, much the same with tobacco. Its something that can be difficult to quit but it can be done with will power and if you really want to do it.

I wouldn't say I'm trying to rationalise it, I'm aware that I feel worse if I eat poorly, especially when it comes to running and for optimal health you'd need a good diet in conjunction with exercise. I'm just curious as to what extent it can mitigate against some of the negative effects.

To my mind, it would have to mitigate it to some extent. Look at any of the benefits of exercise, it'll give stuff like improved heart health, improving insulin response, lessens depression etc. Even taking weight, exercise can counter weight gain. If you had a person and you were to look at them in a year, they'd presumably be healthier if they exercised regularly in that year than if they remained sedentary?

MartyMcFly84

If you are an olympic athlete you can get away with it apparently, but these guys need to eat like 10000 calories a day and spend most of their waking time training.

Great for 1% of the population with the genes and even less than 1% with the skill and mental focus to make it to the Olympics.

I am sure they would only eat like that for a very short period of their life, you better believe as soon as they cease to train at that level their diets change drastically, or they would become obese pretty quickly.

MartyMcFly84

To my mind, it would have to mitigate it to some extent. Look at any of the benefits of exercise, it'll give stuff like improved heart health, improving insulin response, lessens depression etc. Even taking weight, exercise can counter weight gain. If you had a person and you were to look at them in a year, they'd presumably be healthier if they exercised regularly in that year than if they remained sedentary?

Ok so if two identical twins had the same poor diet. But one exercised a few times a week who would be healthier? Probably the one who did some exercise, but he would not be healthy.

Same if one smoked 20 fags a day and the other smoked 10. Or they both smoked 10 a day but one ran 5k twice a week.

Amalgam

As others have said, it is the effect the Fast food will have on your system, given the nature of it.. 'engineered' to keep you hungry, you're onto a loser.

If you separated the salt/sugar from many processed foods and presented it to someone to lick off of a table surface, with the threat of a dig, there'd be punches flying soon after.

Took weeks for me to lose my salt and sugar craving, now that I barely have salt in my diet, when I do decide to have something fancy, say, bread/quiche from somewhere like Avoca, I find it almost inedible, due to the salt content.

It's only with a break and the gift of hindsight that many folk will realise how messed up their body chemistry is..

Excercise can offset some sins, but if you're doing 30 minutes a day to offset a family sized pizza devoured late in the evening, well.. good luck with that.

Mellor

srsly78 wrote: »

If you are an olympic athlete you can get away with it apparently, but these guys need to eat like 10000 calories a day and spend most of their waking time training.

That's largely a myth.

srsly78

How do you explain Michael Phelps' diet then? Stuffs his face with icecream and pizza while training.

Mellor

srsly78 wrote: »

How do you explain Michael Phelps' diet then? Stuffs his face with icecream and pizza while training.

Like I said, it's a myth. It was a story that appeared in one paper, then got regurgitated around the world.

Michael Phelps wrote:

“I never ate that much. It’s all a myth. I’ve never eaten that many calories. I wish! It’s just too much though. It would be impossible.”

srsly78

He didn't deny eating pizza and icecream tho? Maybe the 10000 calories was an exxageration, what did he actually eat?

edit: I found the interview where he denies eating that much. He says that 12000 was an exxageration, he actually ate 8000-10000

Last_Minute

Eat well the vast majority of the time and get some exercise in during the week, then you can afford to eat whatever you want for 2-3 meals a week be it fish and chips, pizza and not have to worry about weight gain in the slightest.

Yes, junk food does your body no favors but it's just so nice!

Mellor

srsly78 wrote: »

edit: I found the interview where he denies eating that much. He says that 12000 was an exxageration, he actually ate 8000-10000

Link?
Pizza and pasta probably. He'd need carbs. Ice cream, I doubt it.

srsly78

Mellor wrote: »

Link?
Pizza and pasta probably. He'd need carbs. Ice cream, I doubt it.

http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/michael-phelps-ready-for-london-games/

Ri_Nollaig

Last_Minute wrote: »

Eat well the vast majority of the time and get some exercise in during the week, then you can afford to eat whatever you want for 2-3 meals a week be it fish and chips, pizza and not have to worry about weight gain in the slightest.

Yes, junk food does your body no favors but it's just so nice!

This is it.

Once the majority of your diet is good then having the odd treat is going to do no harm, assuming of course it really is "the odd time"

LuckyLloyd

Mellor wrote: »

That's largely a myth.

Mellor wrote: »

Like I said, it's a myth. It was a story that appeared in one paper, then got regurgitated around the world.

On a slightly serious note, it IS possible to make progress with a bad diet imo. Depending on what you define as progress. If you hammer away at a decent program with intensity five days a week then you can gain strength and work capacity despite a bad diet and poor sleep, etc. That's definitely my experience.

Will it be all the progress you can make? Well I'm sure it won't be, and you ain't going to end up sub 15% body fat.

I think talking in extremes is always incorrect however, that's the bottom line. Saying 'you can't make progress with a bad diet' is as silly as saying 'Olympians can eat 10k calories of junk and be ripped specimens of human performance'.

MD1990

You can get stronger on a bad diet. But for sports performance u are nothing eating trash. Some of the claims about Olympic atletes eating 10,000 calories of trash is bs. Surely nobody believes that lol.

LuckyLloyd

MD1990 wrote: »

You can get stronger on a bad diet. But for sports performance u are nothing eating trash. Some of the claims about Olympic atletes eating 10,000 calories of trash is bs. Surely nobody believes that lol.

Define 'Sports Performance'?

MD1990

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Define 'Sports Performance'?

How well u perform at a certain sport. Eating trash is going to hinder it significantly wth Sports that require you to be athletic. Especially sports in which speed is important.

Alf Veedersane

MD1990 wrote: »

How well u perform at a certain sport.

Just playing Devils Advocate but that's vague. Me playing sawker at the level I do is very different to playing in the Premier League.

MD1990

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

Just playing Devils Advocate but that's vague. Me playing sawker at the level I do is very different to playing in the Premier League.

Not really. If u want to be the best u can be no matter what level u are playing at, your diet needs to be good to be at your best in terms of fitness.

srsly78

So can I stuff my face with pizza or not?

GreeBo

usersame wrote: »

Id rather be a healthy eating non-exerciser than a junk food exerciser. Look at the pot bellies on AstroTurf pitches, I've mates that play soccer 4 times a week and are still puddings

I think some peoples definitions of "play soccer" are different that others.

Its pathetically easy to play soccer 4 times a week and never break a sweat, I know people who go to the Gym 4 times a week and all that gets a workout is their mouth and wallet.

desertcircus

Exercising with a bad diet is better than not exercising with a bad diet. How much better is a thorny question and depends on a lot of variables. I sweat profusely during and after exercise, and I'm about 96 kilos, so my diet is saltier and higher in calories than other peoples'. At the moment, I'm doing medium to high intensity training four or five days a week, so there's an argument that I have a window for eating simple carbs in the ninety minutes following each session - but that didn't apply when I played rugby and rarely trained twice within 48 hours.

One thing that rarely gets properly discussed in threads like these, though, is the fact that sticking to a lean, healthy diet - particularly if you exercise enough to have elevated calorie requirements - is awkward, expensive and boring. A can of Spar cola straight after a morning session is 150 calories of pure sugar, it tastes fantastic, it takes about ten seconds to purchase, and it's 45 cent. No healthy option comes anywhere near it for calories per euro, convenience and taste. I can look at the nutritional figures for protein shake smoothies all day long, but they'll always be pricier, more time-consuming and less tasty, so unless I go on a ferocious health kick, I won't be making them.

MD1990

desertcircus wrote: »

Exercising with a bad diet is better than not exercising with a bad diet. How much better is a thorny question and depends on a lot of variables. I sweat profusely during and after exercise, and I'm about 96 kilos, so my diet is saltier and higher in calories than other peoples'. At the moment, I'm doing medium to high intensity training four or five days a week, so there's an argument that I have a window for eating simple carbs in the ninety minutes following each session - but that didn't apply when I played rugby and rarely trained twice within 48 hours.

One thing that rarely gets properly discussed in threads like these, though, is the fact that sticking to a lean, healthy diet - particularly if you exercise enough to have elevated calorie requirements - is awkward, expensive and boring. A can of Spar cola straight after a morning session is 150 calories of pure sugar, it tastes fantastic, it takes about ten seconds to purchase, and it's 45 cent. No healthy option comes anywhere near it for calories per euro, convenience and taste. I can look at the nutritional figures for protein shake smoothies all day long, but they'll always be pricier, more time-consuming and less tasty, so unless I go on a ferocious health kick, I won't be making them.

Not true. You can get protein shakes that taste great,not time consuming or that expensive.

desertcircus

MD1990 wrote: »

Not true. You can get protein shakes that taste great,not time consuming or that expensive.

If you can point me to a protein shake that comes in anywhere near 30c per hundred calories and tastes anywhere near as good as a cold cola, I'll happily buy one and conduct a taste test, and rescind my argument if it compares favourably.

papu

desertcircus wrote: »

If you can point me to a protein shake that comes in anywhere near 30c per hundred calories and tastes anywhere near as good as a cold cola, I'll happily buy one and conduct a taste test, and rescind my argument if it compares favourably.

For example a typical Mass gainer would be around 35-40c per 100Kcals , ~10g protein ~12g Carbs.... much more appealing to me than a can of crappy cheap cola.

MD1990

desertcircus wrote: »

If you can point me to a protein shake that comes in anywhere near 30c per hundred calories and tastes anywhere near as good as a cold cola, I'll happily buy one and conduct a taste test, and rescind my argument if it compares favourably.

http://www.hpnutrition.ie/musclemaxx-high-protein-shake?filter_name=%20protein

€37 for 75 servings (130 calories per serving).

Alf Veedersane

MD1990 wrote: »

Not really. If u want to be the best u can be no matter what level u are playing at, your diet needs to be good to be at your best in terms of fitness.

There's a big range of 'sports performance' where it makes only a small difference. Exhibit A: most junior football matches

srsly78

Exhibit B: darts?

Alf Veedersane

desertcircus wrote: »

One thing that rarely gets properly discussed in threads like these, though, is the fact that sticking to a lean, healthy diet - particularly if you exercise enough to have elevated calorie requirements - is awkward, expensive and boring. A can of Spar cola straight after a morning session is 150 calories of pure sugar, it tastes fantastic, it takes about ten seconds to purchase, and it's 45 cent. No healthy option comes anywhere near it for calories per euro, convenience and taste. I can look at the nutritional figures for protein shake smoothies all day long, but they'll always be pricier, more time-consuming and less tasty, so unless I go on a ferocious health kick, I won't be making them.

Protein isn't that expensive. I can't remember how much it is per serving but it's not far off that cola and purely in terms of taste, I'd rather defecate and vomit in a bucket and drink that before the Spar cola. But that's just me and I'm not being a food Nazi.

Alf Veedersane

srsly78 wrote: »

Exhibit B: darts?

That's an argument for "Is darts a game or a sport?" people.

desertcircus

MD1990 wrote: »

http://www.hpnutrition.ie/musclemaxx-high-protein-shake?filter_name=%20protein

€37 for 75 servings (130 calories per serving).

Right, a taste test it shall be. For one week I'll follow morning exercise with cola, then for the second week I'll follow it with protein shake. Is the linked one a good bet for people who aren't trying to gain muscle, incidentally? I was a loosehead prop until May of this year, and now I'm trying to metamorphose into a triathlete...

Alf Veedersane

desertcircus wrote: »

Is the linked one a good bet for people who aren't trying to gain muscle, incidentally? I was a loosehead prop until May of this year, and now I'm trying to metamorphose into a triathlete...

You won't gain muscle taking it in the same way you won't gain muscle by eating an extra chicken fillet.

desertcircus

desertcircus wrote: »

Right, a taste test it shall be. For one week I'll follow morning exercise with cola, then for the second week I'll follow it with protein shake. Is the linked one a good bet for people who aren't trying to gain muscle, incidentally? I was a loosehead prop until May of this year, and now I'm trying to metamorphose into a triathlete...

Swapped out my usual post-spinning cola for a protein shake this morning - used a shake mix I tried a while ago and didn't finish, just to check that it doesn't have any unwanted effects on my digestive system. It tasted unspeakably bad - not "this isn't as nice as cola", but " this is almost enough to make me gag". Utterly vile. This does not bode well, unless taste differs wildly between brands.

Alf Veedersane

What brand and flavour did you have?

They can differ a lot in terms of taste.