0bc176844623a6e5187ca527adb96328
0

What about exercise makes it so healthy?

by (18)
Updated November 18, 2014 at 4:11 AM
Created June 11, 2014 at 9:45 PM

What is it about exercise that makes it healthy?

Cf08ad26759fdd206a2c9f9385080a57
1005 · June 12, 2014 at 7:42 PM

It just seems to me like males who engaged in physical activity in the past would have eaten more than 2,000 calories and that number seems a bit low to make a person "obese" by todays standards. I'm seeing prisoners of war eating a diet of 2400-2800 calories for sedentary activities to 4,300 calories for hard labor.

Medium avatar
10234 · June 12, 2014 at 7:39 PM

Continuing paleot, I exercise to maintain 165 lbs weight and have been successful at this for 7 years. Any counting error on calories-in is compensated with enough calories-out exercise to prevent weight regain.

Medium avatar
10234 · June 12, 2014 at 7:32 PM

paleot when you take my age into consideration my BMR (sleeping metabolism) is only 1540. Without question I undercount my food, but more like -10-20%, not 50%. Part of the reason I got fat is that I was still eating the same amount at age 60 as I was at age 30, in spite of steadily becoming less active as I aged. I never lumberjacked but I cut a lot of firewood and built a house when I was younger. That's a lot different than sleepwalking with my fingers on this iPhone.

Cf08ad26759fdd206a2c9f9385080a57
1005 · June 12, 2014 at 6:53 PM

Looking at jobs from 100 years back, I'm seeing carpenters / mechanics at 3,000 kcal and lumberjacks / miners / heavy workers at 5,000. In 1910 the medical authorities of the British army tested a 12mi march with full equipment on a ration of 3100 calories. It was found that this would not keep the men in condition, so it was repeated with 4100 calories, which just about met their requirements, but in their opinion, 4,500 - 5,000 calories would be required to meet ordinary field service conditions. 2,000 is listed as a man in bed, haha. Perhaps you're underestimating your intake?

Medium avatar
0 · June 12, 2014 at 3:34 PM

Yup. :) Wise you are, grasshopper. Me, I'm just a wisearse.

Medium avatar
10234 · June 12, 2014 at 3:32 PM

Here's the history of the 2000 calorie RDA

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2011/08/...

My personal experience is that if I'm sedentary I maintain weight at 10x my body weight, which is about 1600-1700 calories. [If I were 30 years younger that would probably be 1800-1900 calories per Harris Benedict]. So unless I exercise I would become seriously overweight eating 2000 calories. In reality I eat 2300-2400 - but this balances off against 700-1000 calories per day of exercise, and I maintain my 165 lb weight.

06bf7b92d77f1ac1d8e3dc9d539d8254
1649 · June 12, 2014 at 3:18 PM

"A male diet used to be 2000 calories a day… this diet will make most males overweight" Really? Where do you get such "facts." When was "used to be"? 2000 calories today, for an average size, mostly sedentary male, is probably the right amount.

96440612cf0fcf366bf5ad8f776fca84
17329 · June 12, 2014 at 5:13 AM

Did you mean this?

http://www.amazon.com/Spark-Revolutionary-Science-...

0bc176844623a6e5187ca527adb96328
18 · June 12, 2014 at 3:41 AM

I'm sorry, I don't understand your answer; could you elaborate?

Cf08ad26759fdd206a2c9f9385080a57
1005 · June 12, 2014 at 12:24 AM

2,000 calories seems low to me. I'm looking at ~1950 kcal as a basal rate for sitting in a chair all day. With a mere 15m of a cycling and a few days of lifting, it's 2,500 kcal needed to avoid losing weight. Clicking the construction worker tab bumps me up around 2,800 kcal, and doubling down on exercise is over 3,000 kcal. With strict tracking, I want to say Attia was doing 4,000-4,500 kcal/d, with ~3,800 kcal required to maintain. At 2,000 calories + a lot of physical work, I think it would be difficult to stay above 8% body fat and keep hormones up. http://imgur.com/0Yi9XXH,Rn7DmSk

3ce6a0d24be025e2f2af534545bdd1d7
26182 · June 11, 2014 at 11:15 PM

I think that is mostly right. There's a yin/yang thing going on. But my point is that we did not evolve to exercise. We evolved to be active. We created an environment where being active is not rewarded (I.e. Most desk jobs pay better/ have more stability than the active jobs -- think programmer vs factory worker). Thus exercise is necessary to counter-act the sedentary nature.

0bc176844623a6e5187ca527adb96328
18 · June 11, 2014 at 10:26 PM

Thanks @cdone. My highschool literature teacher taught us that every action we take in the next 10 years will dramatically effect the rest of our lives. He then told us that doing nothing was a choice/action. Similarly it seems that you're saying that physical inactivity is an action and that choosing inactivity is bad for us rather than physical activity being good for us. Or more simply put, exercise is Good because it means you aren't choosing to be inactive and inactivity causes disease.

  • Total Views
    444
  • Recent Activity
    Cf08ad26759fdd206a2c9f9385080a57
  • Last Activity
    161D AGO
  • Followers
    4

Get Free Paleo Recipes Instantly

3 Answers

Medium avatar
0
0 · June 12, 2014 at 3:13 AM

"spark" on amazon

A word to the wise is sufficient

0bc176844623a6e5187ca527adb96328
18 · June 12, 2014 at 3:41 AM

I'm sorry, I don't understand your answer; could you elaborate?

96440612cf0fcf366bf5ad8f776fca84
17329 · June 12, 2014 at 5:13 AM

Did you mean this?

http://www.amazon.com/Spark-Revolutionary-Science-...

Medium avatar
0
10234 · June 11, 2014 at 10:25 PM

1. Exercise is the only significant tool you have to increase your metabolism. A male's diet used to be 2000 calories a day, predicated on a lot of physical work. This diet will make most males overweight or obese at today's low level of exercise. if you want to eat more than a bare minimum of food you need to move.

2. Personally, exercise doubled my HDL level. My bloodstream lipids have been shifted in a positive direction for cardiovascular health.

3. If your heart stopped exercising you'd be dead. Our other muscles should be used the same way: involuntarily, without a thought, nearly continuously while we're awake.

Medium avatar
10234 · June 12, 2014 at 7:32 PM

paleot when you take my age into consideration my BMR (sleeping metabolism) is only 1540. Without question I undercount my food, but more like -10-20%, not 50%. Part of the reason I got fat is that I was still eating the same amount at age 60 as I was at age 30, in spite of steadily becoming less active as I aged. I never lumberjacked but I cut a lot of firewood and built a house when I was younger. That's a lot different than sleepwalking with my fingers on this iPhone.

Cf08ad26759fdd206a2c9f9385080a57
1005 · June 12, 2014 at 12:24 AM

2,000 calories seems low to me. I'm looking at ~1950 kcal as a basal rate for sitting in a chair all day. With a mere 15m of a cycling and a few days of lifting, it's 2,500 kcal needed to avoid losing weight. Clicking the construction worker tab bumps me up around 2,800 kcal, and doubling down on exercise is over 3,000 kcal. With strict tracking, I want to say Attia was doing 4,000-4,500 kcal/d, with ~3,800 kcal required to maintain. At 2,000 calories + a lot of physical work, I think it would be difficult to stay above 8% body fat and keep hormones up. http://imgur.com/0Yi9XXH,Rn7DmSk

Medium avatar
10234 · June 12, 2014 at 7:39 PM

Continuing paleot, I exercise to maintain 165 lbs weight and have been successful at this for 7 years. Any counting error on calories-in is compensated with enough calories-out exercise to prevent weight regain.

06bf7b92d77f1ac1d8e3dc9d539d8254
1649 · June 12, 2014 at 3:18 PM

"A male diet used to be 2000 calories a day… this diet will make most males overweight" Really? Where do you get such "facts." When was "used to be"? 2000 calories today, for an average size, mostly sedentary male, is probably the right amount.

3ce6a0d24be025e2f2af534545bdd1d7
0
26182 · June 11, 2014 at 10:02 PM

Wrong question. The right question, what about living a sedentary lifestyle makes it so unhealthy: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC285752...

Exercise is the solution to prevent sedentary lifestyle. And the data is pretty clear, some is good, more is better. The threshold for too much activity is quite high for humans. However to prevent injury one must slowly increase their activity. But with proper rest and recovery it is almost impossible to exercise too much.

0bc176844623a6e5187ca527adb96328
18 · June 11, 2014 at 10:26 PM

Thanks @cdone. My highschool literature teacher taught us that every action we take in the next 10 years will dramatically effect the rest of our lives. He then told us that doing nothing was a choice/action. Similarly it seems that you're saying that physical inactivity is an action and that choosing inactivity is bad for us rather than physical activity being good for us. Or more simply put, exercise is Good because it means you aren't choosing to be inactive and inactivity causes disease.

3ce6a0d24be025e2f2af534545bdd1d7
26182 · June 11, 2014 at 11:15 PM

I think that is mostly right. There's a yin/yang thing going on. But my point is that we did not evolve to exercise. We evolved to be active. We created an environment where being active is not rewarded (I.e. Most desk jobs pay better/ have more stability than the active jobs -- think programmer vs factory worker). Thus exercise is necessary to counter-act the sedentary nature.

Answer Question

Login to Your PaleoHacks Account

Get Free Paleo Recipes