Dieting and Exercise Aren't Effective Fat Loss Tools

Just a quick a analogical preface of sorts....

You’re a truck driver delivering goods in a vehicle that has 2 gas tanks. Your round trip is typically a total of 400 miles and filling up both tanks gets you there and back with a gallon to spare, at which point the gas light comes on. After years and years of long hauls, an enormous problem surfaces. Over the last few trips the gas light has come on 100 miles from your destination.

Upon inspection, you discover each tank to be ¼ full. It then becomes clear to you that the there is a sensor problem. When the 1st tank uses ¾ of its fuel, a malfunction in the sensor causes it to switch prematurely to the 2nd tank. Once the second tank burns 3/4 of its fuel, the malfunctioning sensor then indicates to you that you are extremely low in fuel (1 gallon) and need to fill up.

You go to the mechanic and he says, “Duh! You're putting too much fuel in 'er. Start filling up with less fuel and take your truck out for long drives a couple times a week. That ought to fix ‘er up.”

Say WHAT???

Now…imagine this.

You’ve consistently consumed 2800 calories a day for the past 5 years of your adult life maintaining a slim physique and days chock-full of energy(excluding hungover Saturday mornings). Until….one summer you start relying on morning coffee and that afternoon energy drink just to make it through the work day, and when you get home you’re completely ravenous. And even though your friends tell you that you seem to have gained a few pounds, you deny it. After all, you haven't changed your diet….This changes when you see pictures of yourself shirtless at that 4th of july party.

It becomes clear that you’re storing energy, in the form of fat, instead of burning it, which is weird because you also know that you’ve been eating the same amount of food for the past 5 years. Why would you suddenly, within the past few months, begin to put on so much weight. Something is inhibiting the release of fat from the fat cells.

You visit your doctor and, disregarding the paradox, he says what the vast majority of dietitians, nutritionists and doctors say .. “Son, you need to start watching what you eat. Eat less fat and eat less food in general. Also, join a gym and start playing basketball a couple days a week, or maybe yoga if you're a girly guy. You see, if you eat less and exercise more, the fat will fall right off!”

Say WHAT?????

Back to reality……

A sensor malfunction in the truck was inhibiting the release of fuel from the gas tanks. In humans, it’s quite similar, except it’s a hormone and/or hormone receptor malfunction inhibiting the release of fat from the fat cells.

Doesn’t restricting fuel (dieting) and/or driving the truck frequently (exercise) sound like fallacious reasoning? No! It sounds like complete garbage! Any mechanic suggesting such a remedy clearly has confused cause and effect and should be shot. The fuel tanks aren’t retaining fuel because you’re filling them up too much (eating too much) or driving the truck too little (sedentary); Actually, you’re having to fill up the gas tanks too much (eat so much) because the fuel tanks (fat cells) are retaining fuel (fat).

This backwards logic applies to fat metabolism as well.

The idea of restricting calories by dieting and/or exercising to burn calories for fat loss in obese/overweight patients is fallacious. You’re not retaining fat because you’re consuming too many calories; you’re consuming too many calories because you’re retaining fat. The calories consumed are being forced into the fat cells, disallowing energy to the cells in need. Fat people are literally STARVING at the cellular level. It’s a vicious cycle. Becoming fat makes you eat more, makes you fatter, makes you eat more….and on and on.

Overeating is a symptom, not a cause of obesity

The science supporting this not so PC idea is extremely sound. However, we'll start with the rhetoric revolving around the energy balance side of this argument.

Thermodynamics

Everyone's heard it. Maintaining a caloric deficit will result in fat loss. This can be achieved by consuming less calories than you burn (dieting) or by burning more calories than you consume (exercise). It's based on thermodynamics:

Energy In - Energy Out = Change in energy stores

Sounds good, right? Sure. But there's one glaring problem with this equation. There is no arrow of cause. Because the equation simply states association, it doesn't differentiate between cause and effect. Changes in energy expended can cause a change in energy stores. And it's just as likely that changes in energy stores cause a change in energy expended.

It's quite obvious that skinny people are more active than overweight people, just as it's obvious that overweight people eat more than skinny people (generally). Researchers, however, have always assumed that conscious decisions to exercise or eat less are the driving factors in fat gain/loss. Unfortunately, they've continued to ignore the data...

Self Regulating System

1 pound of body fat is approximately 3500 calories. That's about 30 large apples. So, considering you're weight stable, if you were to eat 1 extra apple per day for the next year, you should gain 1 pound of fat per month. And, conversely, if you were to eat 1 less apple per day, you should lose 1 pound of fat per month. Right? Well, no. Not really.

Most individuals live their adult lives with little fluctuations in body fat. If the above was true, it would take amazing conscious effort to calculate the amount of food we need to maintain a stable fat mass. Luckily, we have a perfect system of hormones coupled with brain regions that are unconsciously devoted to maintaining a stable environment. When this system works correctly, it matches intake and expenditure, resulting in no gain and no loss. This match in energy intake and expenditure is achieved by influencing hunger, heat exchange and movement.



Researchers in an overfeeding experiment fed subjects 50% more calories than their normal consumption for 6 weeks and observed the effects.(1) The subjects gained significant amounts of both fat and lean mass. After the study, the subjects were told to eat whatever they want and they were then observed for 6 more weeks. The results? Most of them showed clear trends of returning back to their weight before the study.

Hormones and The Hypothalamus

Puberty, as Gary Taubes puts it, is a great example of just how backwards the health community has it. When a child hits puberty, they begin growing due to a rush of hormones. As a consequence, the child eats more. Would anyone make the mistake of saying a child's growth is the result of eating too much? Of course not. Is it such a stretch to say that because of a rush of hormones we become fat and then eat more subsequently?

The difference, however, would be that children grow vertically and obese individuals are growing horizontally.....because of hormones.

Animals that have a lesioned ventromedial hypothalamus (VMH) become ravenous and and extremely obese. It was originally thought, and still today is, that the obesity witnessed in these animals was caused by eating too much, which was caused by hyperphagia (excessive hunger). In the 70's and 80's when obesity was quickly becoming a problem, some researchers suggested that ALL obese individuals had a lesioned VMH.

What's really interesting about rats with VMH lesions is that they're hyperphagic, lethargic, sedentary, they stop reproducing and they sleep a lot. These are all signs and symptoms of a starving animal. For some reason, calories were being shuttled into the fat cells instead of being used for fuel. And to adjust, their bodies did everything they could to burn as few calories as possible.

Why would an animal eating so much be starving? Why is it that fat deposition is occurring independently of food intake? Eventually, researchers discovered that VMH lesions cause an extreme insulin response to glucose, which would explain the ravenous hunger and the fat deposition.

Prader-Willi syndrome is a genetic disorder that, like VMH lesions, affects hypothalamus function. Individuals with this syndrome are almost always obese and hyperphagic. However, feed someone with PWS a high-fat, low-carb diet and fat will be released from the cells to be used as fuel and hunger will decrease suggesting the real problem is insulin's influence on fat deposition.

Obese Zucker rats, a fat lab rat, in many experiments have been fed low calorie diets. It's fascinating because in such cases they begin to show signs of starvation, lean body mass (muscles and vital organs) shrinks in size and yet every bit of fat mass stays deposited. In many cases, these rats die obese. Zucker rats are insulin resistant and hyperinsulinemic.

Dieting and Exercise

Changes in energy expenditure resulting from altered body weight.

The director of this study makes an astute observation. Obese individuals react the same as thin people do to caloric restriction. They down regulate metabolism. (this is because fat isn't being released from the cells)

Maintenance of a reduced or elevated body weight is associated with compensatory changes in energy expenditure, which oppose the maintenance of a body weight that is different from the usual weight. These compensatory changes may account for the poor long-term efficacy of treatments for obesity.

A meta-analysis of the effects of calorie restricted diets

Overall, participants lost slightly more weight on the control diets but this was not significantly different from the weight loss achieved through dietary fat restriction and was so small as to be clinically insignificant.

Does physical activity prevent weight gain--a systematic review.

Before new methods to improve exercise adherence are found, the role of prescribed physical activity in prevention of weight gain remains modest.

Food intake and body composition in novice athletes during a training period to run a marathon.

After 18 months of training for a marathon, the male subjects lost 2.5 pounds and the female subjects lost 0. The difference? Women replaced fat with carbohydrates (carbs influence insulin levels).

Energy expenditure does not predict weight change in either Nigerian or African American women.

These data suggest that interindividual levels of energy expended during activity do not have a large influence on age-related trends in adiposity. In addition, contrary to expectations, these data suggest that mean activity energy expenditure does not vary substantially between contemporary social groups with low and high prevalences of obesity.

Consuming less calories will typically result in weightloss initially. However, compensatory changes occur and, in the long term, the weight will be regained. Some of the most famous studies in caloric restriction all showed near identical results. These semi-starvation diets would net a fat loss initially and participants would almost always gain the fat back...and more. (not to mention the lack of sexual desire, the psychosis, the depression associated with these semistarvation diets)

Conclusion

What does this all mean? It means your doctor, your dietitian, your personal trainers and your public health authorities have it all wrong. They've confused associations for causes.

Restricting calories, jogging on a treadmill for an hour a day, walking around the block every evening, avoiding bacon and other fats (because they're calorically dense), counting calories......None of these things address the problem at hand. They're addressing the symptoms we see. And unless you fix the problem, which is excessive fat deposition, these things won't make you thin.

If the problem is fat deposition, how do you fix it? You find out what regulates fat deposition. And it just so happens that the hormone insulin regulates fat deposition. Insulin, through the influence of Lipoprotein Lipase, controls what makes you fat.

If you're fat, you're insulin resistant and you have TOO MUCH insulin in your system....which is driving fat storage. The presence of insulin in the blood essentially "locks" the fat in the fat cells. If you maintain a negative caloric balance and still have elevated insulin levels...you'll be starving at the cellular level and hunger will ensue.

Kids don't get fat because they're playing video games all day long. Researchers have found that the kids become fat before they become sedentary. They stop playing as much because they're fat.

Overeating does not cause obesity; obesity causes overeating.

Laziness doesn't lead to obesity; obesity leads to laziness

Active lifestyles don't make you thin; being thin leads to an active lifestyle

Ask yourself, why is obesity so strongly associated with type 2 diabetes? It's not because obesity causes diabetes....it's because both diseases are driven by the same metabolic hormone ... INSULIN.

Sorry for such a long thread. Hopefully I made it easy enough to understand. I tend to ramble on with long threads.

Very interesting thread and right on as far as I'm concerned. Most of my adult life, I was very slender. Sometime after my 40th birthday I put on over 80 lbs in three months. After I hit 200 lbs I became so depressed that I stopped weighing myself. I had not changed my eating habits and rode a bicycle over 10 miles daily for a session at the fitness center. Months later, I found out I had breast cancer. My oncologist said it was the cancer that made my body retain fat. After chemo and radiation, I hoped I could lose the weight, but not so. It has been over 15 years and I still have most of that weight. And now, I have type II adult onset diabetes. And the very first thing they told me was that I have to lose weight. Like I haven't been trying for 15 years. Idiots!

That's a really well-done job OP. Had to read it twice just to make sure I got my head around it, and when I did it seemed really intuitive.

But my question then is -- what is the practical solution? Insulin rises and falls as a response to blood sugar, right? I mean at least that is how I understand it to work. To lose weight then, a person should try to keep the blood sugar stable I would think - does one do that by eating less sugary and carb-intensive foods? Or do I have that wrong
? Any practical tools for applying the theory would be very interesting.

Excellent work Devo,

This explains quite well what happened to me when I started studying Tae Kwon Do. I have always been hyopglycemic. When I started studying TKD, I was 145lbs. and scrawny, but I could eat ANYTHING and not gain a pound, Once I started the intense working out 2-3 times a week, I did not counter the extra energy loss by eating more.. in fact, I ended up eating less for various reasons, including work stress. I gained a goodly chuck of muscle, but also a LOT of fat. I gained 60 lbs overall and went from a 28" waist to a 46" waist.. I have lost a lot of that weight, but still working on it and this gives me more clues as to how to to go about it.

My wife is Type 1 diabetic (juvenile onset - insulin dependant) and we try to keep the carbs low anyway. Looks like a consistant and steady diet at the correct caloric level of high protien and fat and low carbs might help. and *sigh* reduce or give up the coffee.. *sniffle*

Originally posted by jpkmets
That's a really well-done job OP. Had to read it twice just to make sure I got my head around it, and when I did it seemed really intuitive.

But my question then is -- what is the practical solution? Insulin rises and falls as a response to blood sugar, right? I mean at least that is how I understand it to work. To lose weight then, a person should try to keep the blood sugar stable I would think - does one do that by eating less sugary and carb-intensive foods? Or do I have that wrong
? Any practical tools for applying the theory would be very interesting.

Thanks!

And yes, the idea is to avoid foods that either spike insulin and/or sustain high insulin levels. Breads, sugars and pastas.....stuff like that.

Of course, there are other foods that have a negative effect on insulin sensitivity, which will cause hyperinsulinemia. Trans fats being the worst of them.

reply to post by rogerstigers


Say what?

You should check out some of the recent findings in regards to coffee. Turns out....it's good for ya!

I totally agree. Three months ago I went on the Perfect 10 diet and have lost close to 40 pounds. The diet is all about regulating your 10 most important hormones through your diet. Insulin being the most important. You can have any healthy oil you want, butter, olive oil, coconut oil etc, healthy carbs and most vegetables (no potatoes or starchy stuff). Fruit is limited but you can have that too in moderation. Its really easy to stay on too. It is contrary to what most main stream diets are pushing. I feel better than I have in years and my skin looks great. You should check it out it covers most of the stuff in your post.

reply to post by DevolutionEvolvd


Restricting calories and exercise alone will not stimulate weight loss.

You must restrict your intake of high-glycemic foods breads/sugars/soda. Even dried fruit can spike your glycemic index.
Care also must be taken to boost your metabolism. One easy way to do this is to break your meals down into smaller portions, eating often throughout the day so that your digestive system is always warmed up and engaged. Exercise is also tied to metabolism.

A few years ago, I lost over 50 pounds by changing the way I eat and avoiding large meals. That's not to say that one can't feast every now and then. The body can easily compensate for a feast, but changing your daily routine can go a very large way into improving your body.

Dieting is not an effective tool! Well huge calorie deficit diets anyway. We can see this easily when we look at western culture. Never has there been so many fad diets and so many fat/obese people existing concurrently, there seems to be some kind of diet for everything these days. They do not work long term!

The problem is education! People are not educated properly regarding food and nutrition. Most dietitians and doctors recommend high carb, low fat diets, which suits the majority. The problem is most high carb, low fat foods are full of sugar! Especially processed foods! Who here knows about low GI carbs? And the Glycemic index? Very useful!

Lets Take for example milk. You have full fat and skimmed. We have all been taught that fats make you fat so most people will go and by the skimmed milk, but what they don't realize is that the fat which was taken out is replaced with sugar!! Sugar is stored and converts to fat if unused!! The same can be seen everywhere, in all types of foods.

The other problem is physical education! An overweight person might decide to one day lose some weight, so they take up a fitness regime which includes only jogging. Now this person will lose weight but they will only be successful in becoming a lighter version of what they once was, with the same lean mass to fat ratio but a smaller weight! Congratulations you have just destroyed your metabolism! As soon as the person stops running they will become fat again but this time with a higher fat to lean mass ration due to the bodies own defensive mechanisms!

The trick is to shift good quality weight and by that i mean high fat to muscle! Instead of a jogging or cardio only routine people should also be taking up heavy weight lifting which will over time help to keep lean muscle while you burn fat After all a pound of muscle burns 30-50 calories resting while a pound of fat burns 5! Its this kind of information which people do not know and are not taught which is the cause of all the obesity!

So i don't agree with all the above, with the proper knowledge and dedication anyone can stay in shape, no excuses!

I believe one very big overlooked factor in not gaining weight or controlling weight for many Americans is not getting enough sleep. I've read most Americans deprive themselves of sleep. Sleep helps regulate your metabolism and hormones. Not getting enough has adverse effects. I can say that easily enough but it can be a lot harder to put what I say into practice. I do believe diet and exercise help alter your metabolism and insulin reactions. However if you're not getting enough sleep, it might be useless to exercise.

I believe I understand the general point the op is making. However I think there are some fundamental reasons most Americans are fat and many people who live in third world countries aren't nearly as big. We do eat more and I believe we do less physical activity. Physical activity and excessive eating affect hormones I believe. I'm not a big fan of all the artificial extra ingredients in processed foods either. Our hormone system is under attack from trace chemicals in our water, to plastic ingredients in our food containers, and from animal hormones in the meat we eat on top of bad things we do to our bodies such as not getting enough sleep.

reply to post by DevolutionEvolvd


It's also acidic. I think that TOO MUCH coffee is the culprit. No more than 1-2 cups a day is my max. I used to have a bad habit of drinking a pot of coffee a day.

reply to post by clay2 baraka


Of course it will stimulate weight loss, If you eat below your RCI you will lose weight simples.

The problem occurs when the weight lost is mostly muscle mass! If this happens then it decreases your metabolic rate, so eventually that 1000 calorie deficit which was once working will eventually and inevitably stop working and before you know it your eating over your RCI and the viscous circle begins! This sounds exactly what happened to you!

When losing weight you need to keep hold of that muscle to maintain your metab! Lots of PROTEIN and EFA's are the key, Along with a heavy lifting and cardio regime!

Great thread! So I stumbled across a thread in a bodybuilding forum awhile back that said the same thing. I started looking into it and I decided to give a keto diet a try. I still resrict calories (not to a very low extent) but most of my calories come from healthy fats. My breakdown is about 65% fat, 30% protien, and 5% carbs with all the carbs coming from veggies ( because fiber is much needed). All whole foods, no processed junk. Within a week I felt fantastic and I have never had more energy. I previoulsy tried everything to loose about 20 lbs, even restricting calories to 900 a day with no success. I have now been on keto for a month and have lost 12 pounds, it is literally falling off and since kicking sugar out of my diet I am almost never hungry. I have to agree that insulin response is the problem, the typical american diet is a recipie for disaster metabolically. I wish I had known this years ago it would have saved me a lot of time, money, and effort that I expended with no results. I will never go back to my old way of eating. I just cant imagine feeling like a sloth again.

reply to post by DevolutionEvolvd

It all comes down to the consumption of 'engineered edible oils'...
... and how long it takes for a critical mass of cells to be produced by their metabolic products.

Cell membranes are contructed from the products of edible oils...
...if you eat enough good edible oils you produce a critical mass of healthy cell membranes...
...if you eat too much 'engineered food oils' you will eventually produce a critical mass of unhealthy cell membranes.

Healthy cells have soft/slippery cell membranes that allow for the free transfer of sugars and other nutrients.
Unhealthy cells have stiff/sticky cell membranes that inhibit sugars and other nutrients.

All engineered food oils are produced using high temperature and chemical extraction methods...

Healthy oils are 'cold pressed' and produced using low temperature filtration.

Almost all 'vegetable oil' comes from rape seed (Canola)...
...it is a tiny seed that does not easily release its oil without high temperature and chemical methods...
..it is cheap to grow and cheap to produce...
...and is the reason third-world countries have been caught up into the type 2 diabetes epidemic.

Nuts and seed contain good quality oils...
...but these are also damaged by even dry roasting...
...because the high temperature changes the qualities of the oils...
...and can produce 'stiff/sticky' cell membranes.

So it all comes down to what oils, seen and unseen' you are consuming...
...and how long it takes for a critical mass of unhealthy cells to be produced.

The good news is that it can be reversed...
...one person I know was an insulin dependant type 2 diabetic...
...very high sugar readings if untreated...
...removed oil 'engineered food oils' from his kitchen...
...and introduced into his diet 'flax seed oil' and other cold pressed untreated oils...
...and had sugar levels back in the normal range in six months with no other changes in lifestyle.

Read up on the Ketogenic Diet. It avoids Breads, Sugars, Pastas except for on your weekend carb up when you reload lost glycogen from the recent week. You eat at a maintain level all week, you can work out, and then reload on Friday and Saturday. Stick to green vegetables, nuts, fish, meat, and avoid sweets and breads. Fat from a healthy source (example: nuts, meat) is your friend and can be used as energy.

Star and flagged and a big giant THANK YOU. I've had multiple miscarriages. After each one I tend to gain about 20 pounds within two to three weeks. I've gained 70 pounds in the past seven years. My gynecologist, endocrinologist, holistic doctor, and acupuncturist have all given me the same diagnosis: my endocrine system has gone on vacation. Nobody knows when it will be back to work again. Medicine has done nothing. Diet and exercise does next to nothing. A cleanse made things all sorts of worse (bled for 4 months straight afterwards and retained so much water I couldn't see my ankle bones anymore).

Know what the doctors tell me? Lose weight. Eat less and exercise more, they say. This will help, I'm told. Really? Swinging good idea.

Family and friends say the same thing: you should really lose weight. Try this diet, worked for me. Give this exercise program a go, works wonders!

I dodoexercise and eat healthy but nobody believes me because of how I look. So far acupuncture is the only thing that is showing any effects but it takes time and a whole lot of money.

Your post is very refreshing to read. Thank you

What a cop-out OP. This kind of thing does NOTHING to fight the obesity crisis.


Obesity is caused by only 2 things.. Over-nutrition and under-stimulation ( besides rare medical conditions ).

(1) You only need 3 meals a day if you have a very physical job, 2 if you are sitting on your behind all day.

(2) The reason why things get harder to maintain at a certain age is because we are living too long. Our body gets confused after 32 and random things happen with our hormones. It is at that point you have to re-adjust your lifestyle. It is purely ego that stops us from considering this. We think it is our right to live to 80 and carry on as usual.

I am a mortician and have spent the last 6 years working to fight the obesity crisis, and designed practical ideas to help people. Not just "ideas" that help no-one.


Note: If what you said was true, people starving would initially loose weight, then gain some of it back. History has shown this does not happen.

reply to post by Alora


Your particular problem is estrogen overload. It causes weight gain and water retention, right down to the cellular level.

Your body geared up to have a child but then it did not happen. Without the cycle being completed it will stay confused. The only other option is a light estrogen blocker. But you cant take them while trying to get pregnant.

Originally posted by thedeadtruth
What a cop-out OP. This kind of thing does NOTHING to fight the obesity crisis.

Thank you, muscle-man! And this kind of thing addresses the cause of obesity. And, how, exactly, is it a cop-out? Are you trying to say that I'm defending those poor fat people that aren't blessed with your genetics?

Obesity is caused by only 2 things.. Over-nutrition and under-stimulation ( besides rare medical conditions ).

Ok. Then why is it that simply maintaining a negative caloric balance doesn't work in the long-term? Why do certain populations, as I pointed out in the OP, who have little physical activity have the same fat composition as other populations participating in very active lifestyles? And they also consume the same amounts of food....

You're really misunderstanding fat metabolism. Fat cells aren't dump trucks. Excess calories don't just fall in and out as you eat. There are intricate processes that are tightly regulated by hormones and the hypothalamus.

(2) The reason why things get harder to maintain at a certain age is because we are living too long. Our body gets confused after 32 and random things happen with our hormones. It is at that point you have to re-adjust your lifestyle. It is purely ego that stops us from considering this. We think it is our right to live to 80 and carry on as usual.

Say what? Where did you get this idea?

I am a mortician and have spent the last 6 years working to fight the obesity crisis, and designed practical ideas to help people. Not just "ideas" that help no-one.

That's good. I'm glad you want to help people. So do I! But, I must admit, this isn't my crappy idea. This is what the data says. This is what biochemistry says. This is just how we work. So while may have good intentions, you should really stay away from forming your own ridiculous ideas when brilliant men have already done so.

Just so it's clear: Although my anecdotes really mean nothing in this context, I've personally worked with individuals that eat 1 meal a day and consume less than their basal metabolic rate and yet they were quite corpulent (of course, sodas were involved). Many of the guys that I've played basketball with at the gym for the past 5 years were overfat. I'm talking about playing basketball for at least 2 hours, intermittently, 4-6 days a week. And still fat.

Note: If what you said was true, people starving would initially loose weight, then gain some of it back. History has shown this does not happen.

Did you read the OP? I clearly wrote that people starving would initially lose weight, then gain some of it back....once they began eating healthily again. Nice try, though.

reply to post by troubleshooter


Yes...we've had this discussion before. There is evidence that industrial seed oils are indeed contributing to insulin resistance and, subsequently, hyperinsulinemia. I have no doubt about. Thanks for the input.