Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / General / Nutrition / March 2007

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Can I just exercise alone to lose weight without dieting?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Mr. Aje - 14 Mar 2007 19:02 GMT
Can I just exercise alone to lose weight without dieting?

Well, that's an interesting albeit understandable concept; to just do
exercise without worrying about what one eats to lose the pounds.

I mean when one considers the problems with most diets today,
especially with world being filled with tempting foods that overwhelm
our ability to "self-regulate" what we eat, it makes it harder for
that person trying to lose weight

Nonetheless, the reality is that according to Greenway, who is also a
medical advisor for the Jenny Craig weight-loss program, from studies
comparing dieters who don't exercise with dieters who work out:
<b>"Diet is the most efficient way to lose weight."</b> However, he's
quick to add, "Exercise is essential for keeping weight off,
especially as we age".

But, don't sigh in resignation just yet, I have a suggestion.

If you don't want to be obsessed with counting the calories, obsessive
measurements when making meals, making sure you have eaten from 'all
the food groups' etc...

Have you heard of the Mucus-less or Mucus-poor/alkaline diet?

It does comprise of healthy items but one can basically eat the
'right' foods as hunger dictates...on some FEW conditions.

The benefits are that not only does this bring about weight loss
effectively, it gives the added bonus of making one's present
exercises easier to do (with increase in endurance) and rids the body
(namely the colon) of excess debris and weight, thus making the whole
process of a healthy weight loss more efficient and usable.

Furthermore, it's not a 'diet' per-se, it is a lifestyle as its
principles-as elementary and common-sense as they truly are-do have
the tendency to lend themselves to other aspects of one's everyday
life.

I present this suggestion with the understanding that anyone looking
to work out will have <i>some</i> sense of wanting to eat right,
albeit not necessarily obsessively.

So, if you are looking to just do exercise only to lose weight and if
being able to 'eat' without necessarily rationalizing everything is a
goal, well you could give one 'diet' a chance...the Mucus-less Diet.

Here's to improving and improved health

Foras Aje is an independent researcher and co-founder of
BodyHealthSoul LLC.
He invites you to visit his site which features the latest health
news, weblogs and videos on healthy living at http://www.bodyhealthsoul.com
Jeff - 14 Mar 2007 20:57 GMT
> Can I just exercise alone to lose weight without dieting?

What you eat *is* your diet.

<...>

> Foras Aje is an independent researcher and co-founder of
> BodyHealthSoul LLC.

Really? You know so little about health, but you start a health food
company. Scary.
monty1945@lycos.com - 14 Mar 2007 23:00 GMT
No, it's better to eat right and not do strenous "exercise."  You
don't want to liberate polyunsaturated fatty acids, which can cause a
lot of free radical damage.  I have seen several middle aged people do
this, and they go from looking like puffy middle aged people to
looking like old people within a year or so.  Instead, you need to
allow your body to replace the arachidonic acid in its cells with the
natural Mead acid.  I explain how to do this on my free web site.  And
you can eat all kinds of very tasty and satisfying food:

http://groups.msn.com/TheScientificDebateForum-/

These two essays in particular is what you should read first:

http://groups.msn.com/TheScientificDebateForum-/thebestpracticaldietandtheexplan
ationforit.msnw


http://groups.msn.com/TheScientificDebateForum-/okaysowhenisthisdietgoingtokillm
e.msnw


If you are serious, and you have questions, you can ask in the two
forums there - it's all free.
Jeff - 14 Mar 2007 23:10 GMT
> No, it's better to eat right and not do strenous "exercise."  You
> don't want to liberate polyunsaturated fatty acids, which can cause a
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
> If you are serious, and you have questions, you can ask in the two
> forums there - it's all free.

I don't think I would trust this msn group or this monty as far as I can
throw my old mainframe computer.

Polyunsatruated fats are the healthier fats.

You need to find accurate information. The MSN group and monty are not
examples of good information.

You can also discuss this with your doctor or a nutritionist.

Jeff
monty1945@lycos.com - 15 Mar 2007 04:22 GMT
You are suggesting that the dozens of studies I cite, mostly recent
one are incorrect?  Or how about AHA spokesman, Dr. Richard Stein, who
claimed about two years ago that only oxidized LDL will cause "heart
disease?"  Or are you even aware that PUFAs in LDL are easily
oxidized, but SFAs will not be?  Cite your evidence and I'll examine
it.  Where is the molecular-level evidence that supports the notion
that dietary PUFAs are very healthy?  Do you realize that your claim
is not even supported by mainstream nutrition textbooks?  I cite
several passages from such books on my site.  When I was a teenager,
in the 1980s, "polyunsaturated oils" were being touted as the
healthiest oils, but now one mostly hears about "heart healthy
monounsaturates."  Do you know why?  My site explains this.  Do you
understand the difference between a claim and an examination of
experimental findings?  My site explains that as well.

Would you like to take me up on my offer, which is to feed a dozen
rats a diet of 30% canola and fish oil, while another dozen gets fresh
coconut oil istead?  According to you, the coconut-fed rats should die
younger.  If this is so, I will pay for all expenses.  If not, you pay
for all the expenses incurred.

Are you willing to put your assets where your oral cavity is located?
Or are you someone who heard this from a "good friend?"
Jeff - 15 Mar 2007 04:46 GMT
> You are suggesting that the dozens of studies I cite, mostly recent
> one are incorrect?

Oh my! Dozens of studies you cite. Gee whiz.

No, the studies are correct. You're interpretation of them is incorrect.

Jeff
monty1945@lycos.com - 15 Mar 2007 22:10 GMT
Then you want to take me up on my experimental offer, correct?

As to the studies, are you arguing that when a researcher states
clearly that it is the LDL that contains PUFAs that are easily
oxidized, that somehow that should be interpreted as "saturated fat
causes heart attackes?"

The molecular-level evidence is undeniable now, but you can eat your
PUFA-rich diet and see what happens to your body.

As fatty acid researcher, Mary Enig has written:

QUOTE:  ...The American Medical Association at first opposed the
commercialization of the lipid hypothesis and warned that "the anti-
fat, anti-cholesterol fad is not just foolish and futile. . . it also
carries some risk." The American Heart Association, however, was
committed. In 1961 the AHA published its first dietary guidelines
aimed at the public. The authors, Irving Page, Ancel Keys, Jeremiah
Stamler and Frederick Stare, called for the substitution of
polyunsaturates for saturated fat, even though Keys, Stare and Page
had all previously noted in published papers that the increase in CHD
was paralleled by increasing consumption of vegetable oils. In fact,
in a 1956 paper, Keys had suggested that the increasing use of
hydrogenated vegetable oils might be the underlying cause of the CHD
epidemic.11

Stamler shows up again in 1966 as an author of Your Heart Has Nine
Lives, a little self-help book advocating the substitution of
vegetable oils for butter and other so-called "artery clogging"
saturated fats. The book was sponsored by makers of Mazola Corn Oil
and Mazola Margarine. Stamler did not believe that lack of evidence
should deter Americans from changing their eating habits. The
evidence, he stated, " . . was compelling enough to call for altering
some habits even before the final proof is nailed down. . . the
definitive proof that middle-aged men who reduce their blood
cholesterol will actually have far fewer heart attacks waits upon diet
studies now in progress." His version of the Prudent Diet called for
substituting low-fat milk products such as skim milk and low-fat
cheeses for cream, butter and whole cheeses, reducing egg consumption
and cutting the fat off red meats. Heart disease, he lectured, was a
disease of rich countries, striking rich people who ate rich food. . .
including "hard" fats like butter.

It was in the same year, 1966, that the results of Dr. Jolliffe's Anti-
Coronary Club experiment were published in the Journal of the American
Medical Association.12 Those on the Prudent Diet of corn oil,
margarine, fish, chicken and cold cereal had an average serum
cholesterol of 220, compared to 250 in the meat-and-potatoes control
group. However, the study authors were obliged to note that there were
eight deaths from heart disease among Dr. Jolliffe's Prudent Diet
group, and none among those who ate meat three times a day. Dr.
Jolliffe was dead by this time. He succumbed in 1961 from a vascular
thrombosis, although the obituaries listed the cause of death as
complications from diabetes. The "compelling proof" that Stamler and
others were sure would vindicate wholesale tampering with American
eating habits had not yet been "nailed down."

The problem, said the insiders promoting the lipid hypothesis, was
that the numbers involved in the Anti-Coronary Club experiment were
too small. Dr. Irving Page urged a National Diet-Heart Study involving
one million men, in which the results of the Prudent Diet could be
compared on a large scale with the those on a diet high in meat and
fat. With great media attention, the National Heart Lung and Blood
Institute organized the stocking of food warehouses in six major
cities, where men on the Prudent Diet could get tasty polyunsaturated
donuts and other fabricated food items free of charge. But a pilot
study involving 2,000 men resulted in exactly the same number of
deaths in both the Prudent Diet and the control group. A brief report
in Circulation, March 1968, stated that the study was a milestone "in
mass environmental experimentation" that would have "an important
effect on the food industry and the attitude of the public toward its
eating habits." But the million-man Diet Heart Study was abandoned in
utter silence "for reasons of cost." Its chairman, Dr. Irving Page,
died of a heart attack...  UNQUOTE.

Source:  http://www.westonaprice.org/knowyourfats/oiling.html

On the other hand, I am a male in my early 40s now, and I've been
eating a diet rich in non-oxidized cholesterol and saturated fatty
acids, but low in PUFAs, to the point of "essential fatty acid
deficiency."  A recent MRA showed no signs of athersclerotic buildup,
and I've seen only healthy benefits (since 2001).  When, exactly,
should I expect to see "disease" symptoms?
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.