Exercise Vs. Diet - Comments

I think that doing one kind of causes you to do the other. If you exercise a lot, you're not going to waste that eating all the wrong foods. And if you eat the right foods then you have more energy and feel healthier, and are more likely to exercise. But since the title of this article is Exercise vs. Diet, and if I had to choose one, I'd say that diet is more important. It's all about what you put in your body, how much, and when.

Interesting article :) I'm fine with dieting but I'm usually too lazy to exercise :P I definitely agree you need both to be successful

(A diet is defined by what foodstuffs one eats, not the lack of foodstuffs in ones regime).

You make a very valid point: there has to be a combination to obtain optimum weight-loss and a preferable body-shape. However, there are many valid points that you have left out:

1) The average human needs up to 2000 calories to maintain their weight at the current lifestyle typical to the public (on behalf of the UK);
2) A diet as low as 800 calories, if balanced, can be sustained for a relative time but must be combined with toning exercise to display any type of 'definition' (trust me; 800 a day helped me drop 4 stone in 8 months, but I'm still very flabby nonetheless);
3) Counting calories - though efficient - can lead to obsession;
4) Consuming too few calories (less than 1000) can lead to malnutrition and a massive weight rebound, putting on more weight than lost when the diet is over and the calories/fat content is less controlled;
5) A balanced diet is also a significant factor in weight loss/gain, such as cutting carbs (reintroduction can cause weight ballooning), lack of protein, lack of/excess of fat, etc.
6) Everyone is different, due to metabolism, height, gender, build and genetics.

These are important facts and can determine the difference between a healthy weight loss plan/muscle gain plan and a borderline eating disorder.

The combination of both is highly recommended, though it is important to state that heavier people loose weight quicker due to physics, that those who exercise fiercely need to eat more, and that less calories means less energy. Furthermore, from personal experience (1000 cals per day (fatty)), the less calories you eat without doing exercise, the more likely your body is to being exposed to the elements. Your body goes into shock and contracts the blood and heat to your core organs, meaning your extremities (fingers and toes, etc.) are bitter in milder weather. Exercise is imperative for combating this.

Otherwise, a good, well written article. I may have gone too deep into the specifics in my comment, but they are genuine facts and dangers of 'one or the other' weight loss. I found hardly any grammatical/spelling mistakes, except your semi-colons, and found it an enjoyable read. Keep up the writing :)

It's this simple yet there's fattys everywhere. Sad really. I drop weight lots even when I'm bulking.

I've been losing weight consistently and properly for the first time ever, and it's been down to the fact that I've got into the habit of going running at least four times a week. I've got to a point where I'm really motivated to keep going, and because of that, I've found I don't have to worry quite as much about what I eat as I did before. Checking the calories in this, and the fat in that, etc... it's a good idea, but if you're active, it's not the be-all and end-all. Obviously it's important to watch what you eat; I've been snacking far less, and making sure I've been getting a good balance of healthy food, but when you're exercising often and consistently, the odd treat here or there will not ruin your progress in the slightest.

I think to be the healthiest you can possibly be, you really just need both. It shouldn't be one or the other.

I agree with the comment below mine, by November Rain. I must add a few things, though. I make a lot of money on the side editing pieces, so I'm just going to tell you some flaws I saw as I read through:

1) You're using semicolons incorrectly. Two independent clauses are connected with semicolons. Nothing else.
2) Running is not the most calorie burning exercise or even one of them. Running is definitely one of the best know and popular, but not the most calorie burning exercise. Activities like circuit training, kickboxing, dancing, etc... burn three times as many calories as running can.
3) I think you should mention that people weights influences their calorie burning potential.
4) You can abbreviate EPOC, but its first mention needs to be spelled out.
5) Never use pronouns in a piece - e.g. 'you,' 'myself,' etc.

Other than that, I liked the article. I think you could add more details though. The ending felt more like a summary than leading me up to anything in particular, but I think what November Rain said sums all that up. This wasn't an overly flawed piece at all; I enjoyed this article, so please don't take my constructive criticism too harshly.

I think that was a well-written article. You had some good points, but I'd just like to point out that dieting can cause sustainable weight loss, without exercise. The only type of dieting you referenced was crash dieting. Whilst it's a popular method of dieting, it's not the only method.

I mean, I agree with what you said about doing both exercising and dieting, but I think the main reason why dieting isn't sustainable is because people don't realize that crash dieting just doesn't work most of the time. For a diet to be sustainable, you have to sustain it; if you go back to your old eating habits, your old fat will come back to you, too. (In fact, crash diets can make it harder for you to lose weight afterwards, because eating so few calories a day has been said to lower your metabolism.)

I think calorie-counting is a good example of a sustainable "diet", because you're simply eating correct portions for your body. Also, calorie-counting encourages people to eat more healthily because the unhealthiest foods are often the ones with the most calories. But of course, people who calorie-count should learn to do it the proper way; like, if they get hunger pangs when calorie-counting, then they should re-evaluate their eating habits.

Another example's a low-GI diet, though not much research has been done on this yet. However, a study showed that apple-shaped people tend to benefit more from low-GI diets, more so than protein/low-carb diets. And eating low-GI foods is healthier anyway, so it's a diet that can (and should be) sustained.

I'm against protein and low-carb diets because they're unhealthy and not sustainable. Plus, they're torturous! Diets which are liquid-based are the worst, in my opinion; as in, replacing meals with protein shakes and whatnot - seriously? I wouldn't last a week doing so. (I love food too much. D: )

I love how you mentioned the calories burned from certain types of exercise are easily regained, though. That's a point people tend to overlook. :3

Oh, and for people who have really busy schedules, walking 10,000 steps (or more) a day is also a good method of making sure you at least do a little bit of exercise. (Sedentary people tend to walk between 1000 to 3000 steps a day, which is wayy below the recommend amount.) It can help weight loss too (though I remember reading that walking for 30 minutes at, say, 3.5mph would be better than counting your steps throughout the day, it's still better than nothing :3), though of course it depends on the individual and all.

Lol, I ranted a lot. ._. But yeah, just some things I thought I'd point out, just for the heck of it. :3 Good article, though! :)

The body burns a lot of calories per day without even exercising. I lost 7 kilograms lying in a hospital bed for 2 weeks . I've kept it off and I don't exercise bar walking most places (which by any stretch is not a lot of walking). I put it down to naturally not eating much/having a big appetite and the amount of calories my body burns simply by existing/working/being alive. Hooray science.