Re: measurements

[Guest guest]

That's EXACTLY what my situation was. I thought it was fat but it was just soft muscle looking like fat. Now it is looking like firm, healthy muscle (not a six pack but firm). I never knew about the girdle effect but that is great to know, I can use that as incentive for some of my WWs who don't want to exercise! :-)

RE: Re: measurements

You’re right Jen, you can’t spot reduce. But if you don’t work your abs enough, even if there is very little fat there, it will look like fat because the muscle is soft. Strengthening the muscle will tighten it up and make it act like a girdle and squeeze in. It’s a trick we trainers use to help people who want to lose in the belly first too. That girdle effect will squeeze in some of the remaining fat so it seems like you’ve lost it before you actually do.

Tonya

From: exercisevideos [mailto:exercisevideos ] On Behalf Of from MichiganSent: Sunday, May 31, 2009 3:15 AMTo: exercisevideos Subject: Re: Re: measurements

I thought that no one can spot reduce an area such as the abs. I thought that in order to lose the fat around your middle that you have to do cardio to burn off the fat all over the whole body then do core work to shape the muscles. From what I've read in Shape. Self and from online articles, ab fat is usually the last to go. Jen>> >Be careful about the body fat though, your body does need a certain amount of fat in >order to work right. I'm at about 14% and was cautioned by a trainer not to drop any >more, that I was already too far below the 20% recommended for women my age (42).That's interesting. I've never heard such a thing. I was under the impression ,especially with belly fat, it's a bad thing. Not to mention, unattractive.I don't want to be totally without fat, bodybuilderish. I would like to be able to sit without having a layer of fat laying on my lap. I would like to have a six pack (which I'm pretty sure I have but it's hiding behind the belly fat.) Of course, i'd like to know how much of the belly stuff on me is fat vs extra skin. ( I'd been overweight, actually obese, for some time and had two really big babies...9lbs and 9.3lbs, my first was only 7.8 but he didn't have enough room to go and was born with club foot. (all better now, had surgery at 6 months old or he wouldn't of been able to walk.) Yeah, so I was huge!!! And at only 5.3. my skin stretched out to the max!>(which means I'm truly cancer free!!!!!!!! !! 5 year breast cancer survivor!!!! !!) Congratulations! !!!!

No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG - www.avg.comVersion: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.37/2130 - Release Date: 05/31/09 05:53:00

[Guest guest]



Once again, just to sound like a broken record, you also have to eat healthy, in healthy portions... diet is 70-80% of weight loss. That is NOT a comment on what or how much you eat. I don't have a clue about your foods so I'm not commenting, I'm just saying that you keep emphasizing how cardio is going to take care of the weight but cardio is only a very small part of it. Weight training, btw, is super important too because muscle is an active tissue that will burn lots of calories even while you're resting. The more muscle you have, the higher your metabolism. However, just to repeat myself... you still have to make diet a really big priority.

I'm done repeating myself for now.

RE: Re: measurements

I said that you had to do core work which is the entire core in order to strengthen the muscles. I will still need to do a TON of cardio to get rid of these abs. I think I will start doing Power 90's T-100 ab burner on my cardio days. It's shorter and effective. My abs are so weak and they're weaker now since my abdominal hysterectomy so I know it will take a long time to strengthen them. Jen>> >Be careful about the body fat though, your body does need a certain amount of fat in >order to work right. I'm at about 14% and was cautioned by a trainer not to drop any >more, that I was already too far below the 20% recommended for women my age (42).That's interesting. I've never heard such a thing. I was under the impression ,especially with belly fat, it's a bad thing. Not to mention, unattractive.I don't want to be totally without fat, bodybuilderish. I would like to be able to sit without having a layer of fat laying on my lap. I would like to have a six pack (which I'm pretty sure I have but it's hiding behind the belly fat.) Of course, i'd like to know how much of the belly stuff on me is fat vs extra skin. ( I'd been overweight, actually obese, for some time and had two really big babies...9lbs and 9.3lbs, my first was only 7.8 but he didn't have enough room to go and was born with club foot. (all better now, had surgery at 6 months old or he wouldn't of been able to walk.) Yeah, so I was huge!!! And at only 5.3. my skin stretched out to the max!>(which means I'm truly cancer free!!!!!!!! !! 5 year breast cancer survivor!!!! !!) Congratulations! !!!!

No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG - www.avg.comVersion: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.37/2130 - Release Date: 05/31/09 05:53:00

[Guest guest]

,

Fat is responsible for the proper functioning of cell membranes,

skin elasticity, hormone regulation, and transportation of fat soluble

vitamins. So, going too low would probably show up first in lack of skin

elasticity and female issues due to hormone levels being out of whack.

Energy levels and immunity issues could possibly also show up due to the lack

of ability to utilize the fat soluble vitamins A, D, E, and K. Honestly,

though, I wouldn’t worry too much about being underfat as long as you

maintain the essential fat. Professional athletes have a tendency to fall

in that underfat category so much so that my ACE manual actually lists 14-20%

for women as Athletes instead of Underfat. So, at 14% I wouldn’t

worry too much about it, but if you drop below that, add in more calories and good

healthy fats.

As for your scale, the Tanita is the best! Bioelectrical

impedance is the 2nd best form of body composition measurement

behind hydrostatic weighing, which is extremely expensive and usually only

offered at universities and hospitals. I would trust that reading as

accurate. But, know that if it runs on batteries, it will be slightly off

when the battery gets low. Also, Bio-impedance is effected by body water

content so it isn’t accurate within 3 days of your period or if you are

dehydrated.

Tonya

From:

exercisevideos [mailto:exercisevideos ] On

Behalf Of nancydewolf@...

Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2009 4:59 PM

To: exercisevideos

Subject: Re: Re: measurements

AWESOME

EXPLANATION, TONYA!!!!!! I totally get it now!!! Thank you for taking the time

to write that!!!!

New

question... if you're at the underfat level, what kinds of things would you

notice regarding your body not performing at its peak? Would you notice

especially if you have no idea what your body at its peak feels like? Also, do

you know how accurate a Tanita (professional model) scale with the body fat

analyzer feature would likely be? It said I was 14% and I'm wondering how much

that is give or take. I weigh about 109 and am 5' tall (okay, 4' 11 3/4 "

but it is close enough to 5' to call it that for this purpose) and I have seen

at least one other place that my " happy weight " (that's what it said)

is around 114. I've been really happy where I am and less so at 115

but that might be more emotional than physical. I do want to have my body

running in peak condition and optimal health. I know some of this might be

things you can't answer without actually having me in person but if you can

answer any of it, I'd really appreciate it.

-----

Original Message -----

From: Tonya -

To: exercisevideos

Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2009

9:25 AM

Subject: RE: [Exercise

Videos] Re: measurements

Okay, let’s see if this makes more

sense. You know about cars needing oil, right. Ideally, they have

somewhere between 4 and 6 quarts depending on the size of the engine. The

4-6 quarts would be the optimal amount of fat and correlates to the 20%ish mark

of body fat. At that level, both the car and the body run great.

When the car starts burning oil and gets down to 3-5 quarts (again depending on

size, kinda like body fat depends on gender), you might hear a knock in

the engine or a sputter, and when it gets to 1 to 2 quarts, your car

won’t run because the oil isn’t there to do its thing in the

engine. If you drop below the optimal amount of body fat, your body will

still function, but not perform at its peak. That’s Underfat.

If you drop below the essential, things will quit working in the body.

It won’t kill you immediately, just like running out of oil

won’t kill your car immediately. But eventually, you will see the

negative health effects.

Tonya

From:

exercisevideos [mailto:exercisevideos ] On

Behalf Of nancydewolf@...

Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2009 11:44 PM

To: exercisevideos

Subject: Re: Re: measurements

Okay, I get it now. That term " underfat "

threw me. Still does too, what does it mean (besides what the numbers mean, I'm

just talking about the term... I'm a language nut, sorry).

Anyway, now I understand why the trainer seemed

concerned that my body fat (according to the scale which I realize is not as

accurate as other methods) seemed so low and that my weight was too. Meanwhile,

my response was just giddiness! ;-) She suggested I should weigh about 5

or 10 pounds more than I normally do and that if I do have any problems

with my cycle off tamoxifen that I should consider gaining weight (and I'm sure

you can guess how I felt/feel about that particular suggestion). Will talk with

my doc if I do. At this point, it will probably just be perimenopause though!

;-)

Re: Re: measurements

Correct. I took those numbers off of a chart from ISSA. Obviously

the essential fat would be " way underfat " too..LOL... The underfat

would mean that your body would function properly, but still

considered underfat. Whereas if you didn't have the essential fat,

your organs would not function properly. Make sense?

Tonya help out. I am TERRIBLE at trying to explain.... LOL..

Darcy

On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 7:45 PM,

wrote:

> Your " underfat " (meaning not enough fat??) is higher than the

numbers you

> say are right for men or women. I was told around 20% is good for women my

> age (41 at the time I had my body fat checked by a trainer using a

> professional model Tanita scale, not sure if that is very accurate or not,

> just assuming it is but might be wrong).

>

------------------------------------

[Guest guest]

I don't agree with your % of diet/exercise because I still believe to lose weight you have to exercise more than what you eat. I think that the best approach is to watch what you eat AND exercise, not do 80% diet and 20% of exercise. I found some studies say that diet is more important and other studies say exercise is more important. For my own body, when I lost weight before I did it by exercising EVERYDAY and eating healthy EVERYDAY. JMO, Jen>> >Be careful about the body fat though, your body does need a certain amount of fat in >order to work right. I'm at about 14% and was cautioned by a trainer not to drop any >more, that I was already too far below the 20% recommended for women my age (42).That's interesting. I've never heard such a thing. I was under the impression ,especially with belly fat, it's a bad thing. Not to mention, unattractive.I don't want to be totally without fat, bodybuilderish. I would like to be able to sit without having a layer of fat laying on my lap. I would like to have a six pack (which I'm pretty sure I have but it's hiding behind the belly fat.) Of course, i'd like to know how much of the belly stuff on me is fat vs extra skin. ( I'd been overweight, actually obese, for some time and had two really big babies...9lbs and 9.3lbs, my first was only 7.8 but he didn't have enough room to go and was born with club foot. (all better now, had surgery at 6 months old or he wouldn't of been able to walk.) Yeah, so I was huge!!! And at only 5.3. my skin stretched out to the max!>(which means I'm truly cancer free!!!!!!!! !! 5 year breast cancer survivor!!!! !!) Congratulations! !!!!

[Guest guest]

I am eating healthy! Jen>> >Be careful about the body fat though, your body does need a certain amount of fat in >order to work right. I'm at about 14% and was cautioned by a trainer not to drop any >more, that I was already too far below the 20% recommended for women my age (42).That's interesting. I've never heard such a thing. I was under the impression ,especially with belly fat, it's a bad thing. Not to mention, unattractive.I don't want to be totally without fat, bodybuilderish. I would like to be able to sit without having a layer of fat laying on my lap. I would like to have a six pack (which I'm pretty sure I have but it's hiding behind the belly fat.) Of course, i'd like to know how much of the belly stuff on me is fat vs extra skin. ( I'd been overweight, actually obese, for some time and had two really big babies...9lbs and 9.3lbs, my first was only 7.8 but he didn't have enough room to go and was born with club foot. (all better now, had surgery at 6 months old or he wouldn't of been able to walk.) Yeah, so I was huge!!! And at only 5.3. my skin stretched out to the max!>(which means I'm truly cancer free!!!!!!!! !! 5 year breast cancer survivor!!!! !!) Congratulations! !!!!

No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG - www.avg.comVersion: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.37/2130 - Release Date: 05/31/09 05:53:00

[Guest guest]

I didn't realize it was the 2nd best either Tonya. Hmm.. I have a

Tanita body fat scale, but take what it says like a grain of salt.

Where do you put skinfold measurements into this? I thought that was

more accurate?

Darcy

>   Bioelectrical impedance is the 2nd best form of body composition

> measurement behind hydrostatic weighing, which is extremely expensive and

> usually only offered at universities and hospitals.

[Guest guest]

Skinfold measurements would be ranked 3rd. The reason is that they only

measure topical body fat, not the fat around the organs which can be more

dangerous. Usually, I've seen that calipers give a reading of 10-15 percent

lower than the scales, which can be good for the mental outlook, but not

necessarily accurate.

Tonya

Re: Re: measurements

I didn't realize it was the 2nd best either Tonya. Hmm.. I have a

Tanita body fat scale, but take what it says like a grain of salt.

Where do you put skinfold measurements into this? I thought that was

more accurate?

Darcy

>   Bioelectrical impedance is the 2nd best form of body composition

> measurement behind hydrostatic weighing, which is extremely expensive and

> usually only offered at universities and hospitals.

------------------------------------

[Guest guest]

Believe what you like Jen.

Re: Re: measurements

I don't agree with your % of diet/exercise because I still believe to lose weight you have to exercise more than what you eat. I think that the best approach is to watch what you eat AND exercise, not do 80% diet and 20% of exercise. I found some studies say that diet is more important and other studies say exercise is more important. For my own body, when I lost weight before I did it by exercising EVERYDAY and eating healthy EVERYDAY. JMO, Jen>> >Be careful about the body fat though, your body does need a certain amount of fat in >order to work right. I'm at about 14% and was cautioned by a trainer not to drop any >more, that I was already too far below the 20% recommended for women my age (42).That's interesting. I've never heard such a thing. I was under the impression ,especially with belly fat, it's a bad thing. Not to mention, unattractive.I don't want to be totally without fat, bodybuilderish. I would like to be able to sit without having a layer of fat laying on my lap. I would like to have a six pack (which I'm pretty sure I have but it's hiding behind the belly fat.) Of course, i'd like to know how much of the belly stuff on me is fat vs extra skin. ( I'd been overweight, actually obese, for some time and had two really big babies...9lbs and 9.3lbs, my first was only 7.8 but he didn't have enough room to go and was born with club foot. (all better now, had surgery at 6 months old or he wouldn't of been able to walk.) Yeah, so I was huge!!! And at only 5.3. my skin stretched out to the max!>(which means I'm truly cancer free!!!!!!!! !! 5 year breast cancer survivor!!!! !!) Congratulations! !!!!

[Guest guest]



from my original post... "I don't have a clue about your foods so I'm not commenting"

I wasn't and I'm still not so there's nothing to defend yourself against here.

Re: Re: measurements

I am eating healthy! Jen>> >Be careful about the body fat though, your body does need a certain amount of fat in >order to work right. I'm at about 14% and was cautioned by a trainer not to drop any >more, that I was already too far below the 20% recommended for women my age (42).That's interesting. I've never heard such a thing. I was under the impression ,especially with belly fat, it's a bad thing. Not to mention, unattractive.I don't want to be totally without fat, bodybuilderish. I would like to be able to sit without having a layer of fat laying on my lap. I would like to have a six pack (which I'm pretty sure I have but it's hiding behind the belly fat.) Of course, i'd like to know how much of the belly stuff on me is fat vs extra skin. ( I'd been overweight, actually obese, for some time and had two really big babies...9lbs and 9.3lbs, my first was only 7.8 but he didn't have enough room to go and was born with club foot. (all better now, had surgery at 6 months old or he wouldn't of been able to walk.) Yeah, so I was huge!!! And at only 5.3. my skin stretched out to the max!>(which means I'm truly cancer free!!!!!!!! !! 5 year breast cancer survivor!!!! !!) Congratulations! !!!!

No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG - www.avg.comVersion: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.37/2130 - Release Date: 05/31/09 05:53:00

[Guest guest]

I don't think you are understanding totally Jen. Exercise IS surely

important, but it's not the #1 factor in weightloss. Your diet is.

Your diet is 70 - 80% of the equation of fat loss. The other is

exercise. In order to be as healthy as you can be, yes you need both.

IN FACT, speaking of HEALTHY only, it is better to eat a high-fat

diet and to exercise, than it is to eat healthy and not exercise.

That is " to be healthy " , not to lose weight.

Make sense?

Darcy

> I think that the best approach is to watch what you eat AND exercise, not do

> 80% diet and 20% of exercise.   I found some studies say that diet is more

> important and other studies say exercise is more important.

[Guest guest]

Hmm.. I guess I assumed that the ratio of topical fat would also be an

indicator of internal fat as well. So, which method do you use

Tonya? I have lange calipers, but I don't trust myself enough to use

them and get accurate readings. I know it's so easy to be off the

readings.

Darcy

On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 6:13 AM, Tonya -

wrote:

>

> Skinfold measurements would be ranked 3rd. The reason is that they only

> measure topical body fat, not the fat around the organs which can be more

> dangerous.

[Guest guest]

It depends on my mood. When I'm feeling bad and need a good pick me up, I

use the calipers. LOL Usually, I use my scale, though, to be totally

honest with myself and make sure I'm getting the right information so I can

figure my calorie needs and see the results of fat loss from my program.

Tonya

Re: Re: measurements

Hmm.. I guess I assumed that the ratio of topical fat would also be an

indicator of internal fat as well. So, which method do you use

Tonya? I have lange calipers, but I don't trust myself enough to use

them and get accurate readings. I know it's so easy to be off the

readings.

Darcy

On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 6:13 AM, Tonya -

wrote:

>

> Skinfold measurements would be ranked 3rd. The reason is that they only

> measure topical body fat, not the fat around the organs which can be more

> dangerous.

------------------------------------

[Guest guest]

I'd also like to add something to the mix. When I eat nutritious foods

in appropriate amounts, I wake up feeling better, and I'm more likely

to have a quality workout. I feel better throughout the day, and I'm

more likely to go for another walk, or do another activity. My system

doesn't feel gunked up and heavy, and I sleep much, much better. I'm

also more likely to fend off all those little colds and viruses that

come along. Those bugs make you miss workouts. All of this means that

I'll work out more often, and my workouts will kick butt, and I'll be

albe to work out longer without pooping out.

This translates to a much higher calorie burn over time.

> I don't think you are understanding totally Jen.  Exercise IS surely

> important, but it's not the #1 factor in weightloss.  Your diet is.

> Your diet is 70 - 80% of the equation of fat loss.  The other is

> exercise.  In order to be as healthy as you can be, yes you need both.

>  IN FACT, speaking of HEALTHY only, it is better to eat a high-fat

> diet and to exercise, than it is to eat healthy and not exercise.

> That is " to be healthy " , not to lose weight.

>

> Make sense?

>

> Darcy

>

>

>> I think that the best approach is to watch what you eat AND exercise, not do

>> 80% diet and 20% of exercise.   I found some studies say that diet is more

>> important and other studies say exercise is more important.

>

>

> ------------------------------------

>

>

[Guest guest]

Eeeek! I had a skinfold test done with the calipers about 12 years ago and heard that I had about 26% fat... and if that could have been 10-15 percent off... eeek! It was depressing enough just hearing what I did. This was at a gym during one of my many "I'm so committed to exercising, losing weight and getting healthy" phases that each usually lasted about 2 or 3 months. I'm going on 2 1/2 years of mostly consistently working out 3-6 days per week now (with time off for injury and dealing with various garbage this past winter) though!. When the trainer (a different one in a different place) this time used the scale and not the calipers I was curious but didn't ask why, just liked what I heard and hoped it was accurate! :-)

I heard about the fat around the organs for the first time while watching Biggest Loser this season. Sounded very scary and it sounded like many participants really reduced their health risks regarding that layer of fat quite dramatically.

RE: Re: measurements

Skinfold measurements would be ranked 3rd. The reason is that they onlymeasure topical body fat, not the fat around the organs which can be moredangerous. Usually, I've seen that calipers give a reading of 10-15 percentlower than the scales, which can be good for the mental outlook, but notnecessarily accurate.Tonya-----Original Message-----From: exercisevideos [mailto:exercisevideos ]On Behalf Of Darcy LedmanSent: Monday, June 01, 2009 6:29 AMTo: exercisevideos Subject: Re: Re: measurementsI didn't realize it was the 2nd best either Tonya. Hmm.. I have aTanita body fat scale, but take what it says like a grain of salt.Where do you put skinfold measurements into this? I thought that wasmore accurate?DarcyOn Sun, May 31, 2009 at 8:17 PM, <nancydewolfsbcglobal (DOT) net> wrote:> Bioelectrical impedance is the 2nd best form of body composition> measurement behind hydrostatic weighing, which is extremely expensive and> usually only offered at universities and hospitals.------------------------------------

[Guest guest]

LOL about the pick me up!

RE: Re: measurements

It depends on my mood. When I'm feeling bad and need a good pick me up, Iuse the calipers. LOL Usually, I use my scale, though, to be totallyhonest with myself and make sure I'm getting the right information so I canfigure my calorie needs and see the results of fat loss from my program. Tonya-----Original Message-----From: exercisevideos [mailto:exercisevideos ]On Behalf Of Darcy LedmanSent: Monday, June 01, 2009 8:13 AMTo: exercisevideos Subject: Re: Re: measurementsHmm.. I guess I assumed that the ratio of topical fat would also be anindicator of internal fat as well. So, which method do you useTonya? I have lange calipers, but I don't trust myself enough to usethem and get accurate readings. I know it's so easy to be off thereadings.DarcyOn Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 6:13 AM, Tonya -<tonyatrainingwithtonya> wrote:>> Skinfold measurements would be ranked 3rd. The reason is that they only> measure topical body fat, not the fat around the organs which can be more> dangerous.------------------------------------

[Guest guest]

i have found this thread very interesting!! there are many approaches to weight

loss to be sure. imo, a lot of it depends on the metabolism of the individual.

the trick is to find your own formula for success. for me, a person with a

slower metabolism, my diet has to be fairly strict--any extra calories will

result in weight gain--even if i am exercising.

because i have been in weight watchers since the fall and have lost weight i can

say that the percentage given for a ratio of weight loss and exercise is

probably a well researched conclusion (since they have been collecting info

since the 1960's).

stacey

[Guest guest]

Hi,

Throwing in my non-expert advice - I agree that diet is (unfortunately) the largest part of weight loss By 'diet" I mean eating an appropriate number of calories that results in a calorie deficit (if you wish to lose weight). Basically, you have to take less calories than you need in to your body in order to lose weight. Most exercise sessions burn only a couple of hundred calories which is, for most of us, not even one meal per day. Unless you are a professional athlete who trains for hours a day you still need to be super careful w/ what you eat and, be sure to create a calorie deficit if you wish to lose weight. To further complicate things - we all are different metabolically - so what may create a calorie defiicit (in terms of number of calories consumed) for one, may not create one for someone else A lot of it is trial and error.

And, I do agree, to be healthy you need to watch both what you eat (quality), how many calories you consume (quantity) and get plenty of regular exercise.

Donna

> I think that the best approach is to watch what you eat AND exercise, not do> 80% diet and 20% of exercise. I found some studies say that diet is more> important and other studies say exercise

is more important.

[Guest guest]

kelly,

you look great!! your body is amazing!! don't worry about your belly (i am the

mother of 4)--it is only one part of you:)

stacey

[Guest guest]

" A. M. " wrote:

>

> I'd also like to add something to the mix. When I eat nutritious foods

> in appropriate amounts, I wake up feeling better, and I'm more likely

> to have a quality workout. I feel better throughout the day, and I'm

> more likely to go for another walk, or do another activity. My system

> doesn't feel gunked up and heavy, and I sleep much, much better. I'm

> also more likely to fend off all those little colds and viruses that

> come along. Those bugs make you miss workouts. All of this means that

> I'll work out more often, and my workouts will kick butt, and I'll be

> albe to work out longer without pooping out.

>

I will second that! Knock on wood, but I didn't get sick all winter! (Except for

the new years hangover. lol. I can laugh now.)

But that is so true. I might have gotten the start of a cold, like a scratchy

throat but it would be gone the next day and that was it. I attribute it, to the

healthy eating, exercise and the right nutrition!

[Guest guest]

I believe it makes a huge difference!

>>

>

>

> I will second that! Knock on wood, but I didn't get sick all winter! (Except

for the new years hangover. lol. I can laugh now.)

>

> But that is so true. I might have gotten the start of a cold, like a scratchy

throat but it would be gone the next day and that was it. I attribute it, to the

healthy eating, exercise and the right nutrition!

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> ------------------------------------

>

>

[Guest guest]

I just don't know why all of you insist on putting a percentage of what has to be done to lose weight. If I only exercise 3 days a week for 30 minutes AND have a calorie deficet I will not lose that much weight or any at all. If I have a calorie deficet AND exercise 30 to 60 minutes 5 or 6 days a week I will lose more weight because I'm burning more calories.

You can always exercise more (if you have the time) but you can't cut your calories down to say 1,000 a day and still lose weight. If I did that I might gain weight because my body would go into starvation mode.

I don't think you guys read all of my posts because I said that I'm doing BOTH - eating healthy (with a calorie deficet) AND exercising.

There are other reasons to exercise besides weight loss. I'm tired of some people on here getting on my case because I talk about doing cardio exercise...DUH this is an exercise site specifically a video exercise site. I mean how many times do I have to say that I'm eating healthy!

By the way, I've cut way down on my diet coke consumption!

Jen > I think that the best approach is to watch what you eat AND exercise, not do> 80% diet and 20% of exercise. I found some studies say that diet is more> important and other studies say exercise is more

important.

[Guest guest]

Weight watchers focuses on dieting not exercising. I think that it's necessary to do both to have lasting weight loss.

JMO,

Jen

Subject: Re: measurementsTo: exercisevideos Date: Monday, June 1, 2009, 9:09 AM

i have found this thread very interesting! ! there are many approaches to weight loss to be sure. imo, a lot of it depends on the metabolism of the individual. the trick is to find your own formula for success. for me, a person with a slower metabolism, my diet has to be fairly strict--any extra calories will result in weight gain--even if i am exercising. because i have been in weight watchers since the fall and have lost weight i can say that the percentage given for a ratio of weight loss and exercise is probably a well researched conclusion (since they have been collecting info since the 1960's).stacey