- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Burger and Fries (licensed CC BY SA 2.0 on Flickr by Marc Flores)Value of exercise in fighting obesity a "myth" claim experts
A leading cardiologist says that the notion that exercise can help obese people lose weight is a “myth” and that they should instead be encouraged to eat more healthily. They also say that unhealthy diets, not lack of exercise, are to blame for the obesity epidemic.
The controversial claims are made in an editorial published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, jointly written by London-based Dr Aseem Malhotra, and two other experts, one from South Africa, the other from the United States.
They said that “manipulative marketing” by the food industry undermined government initiatives to combat obesity, and that “vested interests” distorted public health messaging relating to diet and exercise.
But the head of the body that sets health guidelines for England and Wales insists that any attempt to underplay the value of exercise in weight loss is “idiotic.”
The editorial’s authors say that as levels of obesity have soared in the Western world over the past three decades, levels of exercise have remained almost static.
“This places the blame for our expanding waist lines directly on the type and amount of calories consumed,” they assert.
Citing the Lancet global burden of disease programme, they said “poor diet now generates more disease than physical inactivity, alcohol and smoking.”
They also said that PR by the food industry “uses tactics chillingly similar to those of big tobacco” in leading many to believe, incorrectly, “that obesity is entirely due to lack of exercise.”
They added: “It is time to wind back the harms caused by the junk food industry's Public Relations machinery. Let us bust the myth of physical inactivity and obesity. You cannot outrun a bad diet.”
Dr Malhotra told BBC News: "An obese person does not need to do one iota of exercise to lose weight, they just need to eat less.
“My biggest concern is that the messaging that is coming to the public suggests you can eat what you like as long as you exercise. That is unscientific and wrong."
However, the views expressed in the editorial were countered by a number of other experts, who said that exercise, alongside a healthy diet, had a vital role to play in fighting obesity.
But Professor Mark Baker from the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence, which sets guidelines for health in England and Wales and says people should follow "well-balanced diets combined with physical activity" insisted it was "idiotic" to downplay the value of exercise.
And Ian Wright, director general of trade body the Food and Drink Federation, rejected criticism of the food industry’s PR on the subject.
He said: "The benefits of physical activity aren't food industry hype or conspiracy, as suggested. A healthy lifestyle will include both a balanced diet and exercise.
Referring to the editorial, he said: "This article appears to undermine the origins of the evidence-based government public health advice, which must surely be confusing for consumers."
Philip Insall, director of health at the sustainable transport charity, Sustrans, said that in the case of the UK, levels of physical activity had fallen over the past half century and said exercise was vital not just in combating obesity, but a range of other health conditions.
“Whilst going easy on the sugar and consuming a balanced diet is essential to managing obesity and our overall health, playing down the importance of physical activity is a misleading message,” he said. “Both are very important.
“From 1961 to 2005, levels of physical activity in the UK dropped by 20% and if current trends continue, will reduce by more than 35% by 2030.
“As a direct result, diabetes, cancers and many more health disorders are becoming increasingly prevalent.
“The UK Chief Medical Officers recommend 150 minutes per week of physical activity for adults, and 60 minutes a day for children, because this is beneficial to health and helps prevent a whole range of diseases – not just obesity.
“Healthy levels of activity can be built into a person's day much more easily than some might think,” he added.
“Most of us can build activity into our daily routine by choosing to walk or cycle everyday journeys, instead of taking the car or bus.”
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- HalfDanHalfBiscuit 2 hours 24 min ago
Per capita thefts isn't all that useful a metric as it doesn't take into account levels of bike ownership. Cambridge is probably the cycling...
- Critman 3 hours 50 min ago
"30mm outer diameter 18mm inner diameter 13.4mm". Good luck finding a skinny tire.
- Destroyer666 5 hours 18 min ago
Ahem, the recommended lockring is just a common through-axle specific lockring, so nothing Miche specific there, and the required tool for it is an...
- Destroyer666 6 hours 13 min ago
Nonono, not those, but those that have constructed Italian cars and motorcycles that have been driven to hundreds of race and championship...
- RoubaixCube 6 hours 22 min ago
This may well be the case although Im unaware of the brands popularity on their home turf. I used to see them being advertised more in the UK...
- qwerty360 6 hours 52 min ago
Arguably sticking it in a bank account is bad....
- Sredlums 7 hours 51 min ago
I'd counter that those brakes were in fact so inadequate that they eventually developed a whole new type of bicycle that was actually suited for it...
- levestane 7 hours 53 min ago
Unfortunately, Africa is heavily exploited both for resource extraction...
- CitizenSmith 8 hours 19 min ago
There seems to be no support for TOO) now - their email and website are defunct. They are inactive on Facebook. Aftter less than a year the rails...
Add new comment
34 comments
Article now suspended:
http://www.bikebiz.com/news/read/exercise-doesn-t-combat-obesity-study-s...
Strong tweet from Pofessor Tim Noakes today
"Point is you can't control weight with exercise if diet is wrong."
Proponent of the Banting diet goes in on this.
https://twitter.com/ProfTimNoakes/
Started cycling last June. Averaged about 120 miles a week over the summer, bit less in Autumn/ Winter.
Without any conscious change in diet, lost the better part of 10kg in about 6 months. (I say "diet"- not on a diet, my diet in the broader sense is based on the "eat food, mostly vegetables, not too much"- ie avoid processed food, limit sugar and salt and keep an eye on portion size, approach.
Since Xmas, if anything increased the mileage and certainly the intensity of my rides; again no change in diet. Weight has maintained at 68/ 69 kg.
Very unscientific, and of course without any attempt to measure there may have been quite significant changes in calorie intake (though I would be a bit surprised if there had been).
But, with those caveats, interesting that I have, in effect, shed the about 10kg of obvious fat I was carrying, and then plateaued at a lean shape, without any dietary changes.
If you had to choose between diet or exercise, diet will lose weight far more effectively. Do both, however, and the pounds melt away.
When I cycled around the world, I ate like a pig everyday and didn't lose a single pound the entire trip. But when I was home, I watched my diet and barely exercised and still lost weight.
Sometimes you need counter example to prove your point; just spend 3 months in Asia and eat local food *only*. Soups, vegetables, rice etc.. Surprise surprise you will be as fit as ever! So it's not just junk industrial food, it's also Western food; bread, milk, sugar, meat, alcohol ... Industrial Western food is a disaster.
Junk food doesn't food you, it's full of chemicals and pesticides that disorder your very complex organism. Did you notice that, 30 minutes after eating a big mac, you are hungry again? No coincidence there... There are chemicals that trigger your brain to eat again, and again ... Like with cigarettes !
The junk food industry want you to believe you could eat as much of their garbage, as long you exercise! They can be compared to the tobacco industry 50 years ago.
I'm taking great care of what i eat (essentially organic), and commuting around 30+ kilometers a day. Even so, i don't think i'm losing a gram while riding 150+ kilometers a week. I'm just heavily restraining myself from eating more than i need.
The Oatmeal has said all that needs to be said on this subject.
They're not saying exercise doesn't have benefits, it does, a huge amount - and I'd reckon a lot of people here do an awful lot of it! The issue with exercise driven weight loss seems to be two fold :
1. Exercise makes you more hungry (and if you're restricting calories you'll feel rubbish, depressed and lacking in energy as you're starving yourself and relying on willpower over an irresistibly strong instinct urge called "hunger"). The hunger will win.
2. Too many carbs and esp. refined sugar / fructose spikes insulin response, triggering body to rapidly store as fat and doesn't satiate you so you still feel hungry and eat even more. You have huge stores of energy as fat but can't get at them because carb & sugar rich foods dominate your body.
Quit the excess carbs & sugar. Replace with natural fats. Ignite the fat burners and ride all day!
Good read : http://www.amazon.com/Why-We-Get-Fat-About/dp/0307474259
Second that. Too many comments on here still quoting the 'calories in vs calories out' oversimplification; this is not about physics but, rather, biology.
Once you've read 'Why we get fat.' try watching 'Fed Up'; the comparison of fast/processed food and sugar companies with the tobacco companies of thirty years ago is entirely valid.
The report of the research mixes up two things, as I see it.
We've all become heavier on average because we're eating more and not exercising more, on average. Yes, we're being fed food porn all the time, and we have more money to spend on food. So on average we're all heavier.
The report then talks about the obesity epidemic, which is something different. I'll hazard a guess that a properly obese person (BMI>30) eats a ton of food and does no exercise at all. And will have other health or life issues that make it hard to burn off the food they eat.
You need to be quite fit and very motivated to burn enough calories to lose weight, especially if you have a poor relationship with food or a metabolic problem. So the longer lever to lose weight is to eat less, rather than to try to walk off calories at 350 calories/hour every few days. You can eat that much in 5 minutes.
I'd say that if you're an average person, exercise works, but only if you don't reward yourself too much afterwards- people overestimate the calories burned vs food eaten. If you're much heavier than average, diet is where to start.
And there was me thinking that there was no easy way to fitness, and that good exercise and healthy eating were all part of the package.
But, then again, I'm no expert cardiologist.
Portion size a factor. Many years ago I worked at the MRC and a researcher there did some work on this. Basically we are wired to think of something about the size of a biggish bowl as being a full meal. Problem is that used to 300 cals, now if it's a burger it's more like 600+.
It's worth reading the editorial, the headline is obviously a simplification of the argument.
He seems to be making a very specific point, that at the level of society as a whole rather than the individual, we're fatter than we were 30 years ago. Our activity level hasn't changed that much in that timeframe, but our diet has.
He's laying the overwhelming blame on diet, and specifically the growths of sugars, and he's doing so because the food industry has been using our lack of activity as a defense for the medical data.
For an individual, exercise will make a difference to health and your weight. A bad diet will do more harm than the exercise will do good.
I've have also seen quite a bit of medical debunking recently of our gym culture. Someone that leads a relatively sedate life, but works outs at the gym everyday probably gets very little health benefit for their effort.
Cycling however, is still good for you.
Absolutely. The human body has to work quite hard just to stay alive and it consumes quite a lot of energy in doing so. The brain alone consumes about 20% of the total energy expenditure of a person at rest. The brain generates about the same amount of heat as a 9w incandescent bulb and that heat then has to be dissipated by the heart pumping blood through it and the body. This is all going on 24 hours per day.
During that day the average person will expand and contract their lungs about 23,000 times and their heart will beat about 110K times.
It actually amazes me how little food we actually need to perform all the functions necessary to stay alive whilst still maintaining weight.
I very often hear an overweight person complaining about their weight ... and then go on to say "I need to get more exercise". I relatively rarely hear them saying "I need to eat and drink less" instead.
I think many overweight people put such emphasis on their perceived need to exercise that unless they are successful in doing so (which they rarely are) then they don't even bother adapting their dietary regime.
They wrongly believe the exercise to be so essential to their goal of losing weight that it is pointless to even seriously attempt to do so via their diet alone. Even if they actually do some exercise they will then often 'reward' themselves with food and drink treats afterwards, thus destroying most of the gains.
These are the people this report sets out to help. These people really *can* lose weight without doing any significant exercise and they need to be told that.
Nailed it.
If you are theoretically eating 2000 cals a day, and you burn 5000 a week on your bike, thats two and a half days worth of eating you have just negated. Cant tell me that has no impact...
reducing calorie intake is easier than trying to burn calories. Doing both is better still. There is a compound effect of exercise. The more you do it the easier it becomes to burn calories as you can exert yourself for longer and more regularly. Exercise also promotes positivity through release of hormones in many people which also helps them do things like........ dieting.
Seems like they are trying to counter an inaccurate simplification of the problem with another inaccurate simplification.
Basically denial is to blame.....
Its simple math really.
Put fuel in don't use it the fuel accumulates.
Most faster burn more fuel and less stored.
These kind of articles is misleading and damaging.
Its simple math really.
Put fuel in don't use it the fuel accumulates.
Most faster burn more fuel and less stored.
These kind of articles is misleading and damaging.
They are of course right:
Eating just crappy food combined with only moderate exercise won't give you much gain. Great diet and moderate exercise will make you look fantastic.
But as we see highlighted in this article, and I'm sure in other media outlets, the take home message will be:
*Exercise doesn't work so don't bother.*
Which is BS.
My sympathies go out to ya Bigfoz. Being Hypo was crap, not somewhere I ever want to be again (at least mine was caused by medication).
I dread coming out of remission for my hyperthyroidism as it is likely they will kill my thyroid for me, then I have a lifetime of drugs, something I don't fancy!
as an obese person with no thyroid, I can tell you there is a 100% correlation between exercise and my weight. When I train regularly it goes down, when I don't train regularly, it goes up. irrespective of what / how much I eat (and I'm sadly able to gain weight on an 1880 calorie a day diet...). Exercise seems to be the only realistic way for me to regulate my weight.
After my thyroid was treated, I gained 33Kg in 2 years. I've since managed to fight 16off, but I still have a lot of miles to go.
And to cheer you all up, my thyroid problem was caused by a head injury from being cut up by a stopping van. Only good thing was I did £600 damage to his van. The pituitary gland took a hit, overstimulated the thyroid. No cure except turn the thyroid off. (Yes I was wearing a helmet)
For me, if I'm on 1700 calories a day I'll lose weight but feel hungry. If I am on 2700 calories a day and burn 1000 on the bike, I'll feel satisfied, and lose a bit more weight. Make it easy on yourself!
BS.
My advice...move more-eat less...you shall lose weight, Fatso.
What a tag line.
As someone who's suffered from thyroid problems (over and under-active) I can agree with the viewpoint that its not purely about calories.
However, are you seriously telling me that burning an additional 5,000+ calories a week by cycling to work every day and doing long rides at the weekend isn't having any impact on my weight?
I agree that it is mostly diet but to say exercise has no value is false.
I've lost over 5kg since the end of march and while I am staying under 1800 calories a day I imagine the 300+ miles on the bike has something to do it.
I think the most valid point that the study has is to blame the food industry for over-promoting the benefits of exercise - if you're doing 40 minutes in the gym three times a week then that is only going to be about 1200 calories. I'm sure most people wouldn't realise if they're overeating 200 calories a day.
I blame sugar and it's Frankenstein creation, glucose syrup in its many forms
The point which will easily be lost in all of this is that there are fat people that eat badly, but are under the assumption that if they exercise they will banish fat from their bodies despite continuing to badly when really they need to focus on calories expended and calories consumed.
Unfortuantely these people may now focus on the point that 'exercise' does not work.....which is incorrect.
Pages