Hacker News Reader

Comment by brm | Hacker News Reader

why is food always the culprit? what ever happened to just increasing the amount of exercise you do? Michael Phelps seems to be doing ok on 10,000+ calories a day

This also bothers me: "But what’s different about Arthur is, first, he is not selling anything, except for subscriptions to his website."

View on HN

Swimming 6 hours a day is simply not an option for everybody. Besides, even with enough exercise I would imagine that some diets would still make you sick, for example if all you ate were chocolate and ice cream. (Note that I don't advocate the low-carb diet from the article).

The "not selling anything but..." bothered me too, also "Thirdly, he is very smart. His reasoning is immaculate and he knows a lot more than your average doctor or nutritionist." The doctors on TV trying to sell me on chocolate bars also look very smart...

yes I agree that 6 hours is unreasonable, but 90 minutes a couple times a week would probably have people in a lot better fitness than removing all the carbs from their diet. Frankly moving up from the 0 minutes most people get to 30 minutes a couple times a week would be more beneficial to most people than a change in diet.

And if you read the article, you would have seen:

"You must have a playful, intermittent form of exercise. And you must exercise. The benefits are profound. Make it fun, intense according to your own fitness and goals, and brief. Brevity and intensity are keys. Intensity means a little burn in the muscle, not heaving and straining. Brevity means you do not release stress hormones."

He agrees with you.

Because, unless you are very genetically gifted and/or using steroids, there are surprisingly low limits on the amount of exercise you can do and still see gains. After 45 minutes or so cortisol (stress hormone) levels rise and a process called gluconeogenesis sets in - your body begins burning muscle tissue for energy. The net effect of this is to lower your resting metabolic rate, which is what burns most of most people's calories. Which means you can cut back on the calories you consume, train like a madman and still get fatter.

3-4 sessions of 45 minutes per week, at a decent level of intensity, is about right for most people.

Let me get this straight... you're claiming that after 45 minutes of moderately intense cardiovascular exercise, most people begin to see negative fitness effects?

I don't see the phrase moderately intense cardiovascular exercise in my comment. Head on over to t-nation.com and read some of their articles on training.

this explains why marathon runners are so fat.

Heh, you see plenty of fat people at marathons, if you've ever run one, and plenty of 'em finish too.

I've read every article on t-nation, I work out >20 hours a week, and I train for triathlons and marathons.

That being said, your statement is unfounded. If you're LIFTING, and lifting HEAVY, then yes, it doesn't make sense to go for more than 45 minutes, for exactly the reasons you stated.

However, cardio? People will see huge cardio benefits if they run for a long time. There's no "negative fitness effect."

Yes, you may burn muscle, but it's not like you're going to all together stop burning fat. In fact, when you hit glycogen depletion (the 'hitting the wall'), your body will switch energy burning modes entirely, and start burning a TON of fat.

I'm nit-picky about your statement because America, as a whole is in such a crisis. We look for any excuse to get out of exercise. Those idiots at the gym lifting 10 lb weights? Do you really think they're getting a good workout? They're not lifting heavy, and they can go far longer than 45 min doing 7 lb arm curls. What about those on the treadmill, walking for 45 minutes while talking on the cell phone?

As a society, we've become too used to everything being easy- we want an easy job with lots of money, we want to consume everything, and we want to be able to eat what we want, and just have the pounds come off.

Losing weight is hard. It takes discipline and focus. Now, especially in the two weeks of the Olympics, we should be able to collectively get off our fat asses and look at what some Americans have been able to accomplish with a ton of hard work and sacrifice.

Think Michael Phelps works out 45 min a day? All those gymnasts? Tyson Gay? So maybe you should step back, realize there's more to life than T-nation, and look at actual exercise science.

T-Nation is the equivalent of looking at some IT trade magazine talking about Java applets and their Web 2.0 capabilities. Yeah, it can be done. Is it the best tool for the job? No.

Great post.

Most people that go to the gym are mainly trying to look better so those people should be doing heavy lifting. Even most training calls for time with heavy weights. Thus, the 45 minute or so rule. You point out a major caveat: Most people are not going anywhere near their limits. Around 45 minutes of high weight/volume training, one should naturally notice a loss of power not quit prematurely due to a stopwatch.

A (fat) person once told me she heard some advice that one should do cardio at a pace in which one will not experience heavy breathing and still be able to hold a conversation with the person next to them. What's next? Laying in bed as cardio?

Beginner advice: It's better to go out and just do something rather than overthinking it. Look at the people who are skinny, ripped, massive, fast, or whatever your goal is and do what they do. Many people apply premature optimization to working out. Diet matters but guys in prison become huge on three square meals a day. Sets and reps matter but Arnold wrote something to the effect of, "I don't know why beginners worry so much about details. If you are bad at pull ups, do as many pull ups as you can, rest, repeat." The key is to push yourself and measure your progress to make sure you are actually improving.

You don't "Switch" burning modes when you run out of glycogen stores. Your blood sugar drops because you can't process fat into sugar fast enough. You are always burning fat, and when you are running you are burning it pretty much as fast as you can. Thats why cyclists and long distance runners have to eat while they train longer than 1.5hrs to supplement their fat burning because the glycogen stores are out.

But you are not always burning fat, that's the problem. If the body needs energy like right now and it doesn't have glycogen on hand and cortisol levels are elevated, then it will cannibalize muscle. This is the point I was trying to make earlier. Powerade is strictly for amateurs; serious cyclists (et al) are drinking Perpetuum or Spiz, both of which contain BCAAs and other proteins to offset gluconeogenesis.

you can cut back on the calories you consume, train like a madman and still get fatter.

Could you post a link or reference for one example of someone who cut calories and "trained like a madman" and still got fatter?

There's a lot of debate about hormones, metabolism, calorie quality and optimum exercise. However it has still proven difficult to break basic laws of physics.

There's no breaking of the laws of physics involved here. Firstly you are still losing mass in this scenerio - but it is muscle tissue, not fat. Secondly, lower resting metabolic rate manifests itself in forms such as lower body temperature, or general lethargy, so you are burning fewer calories just for maintenance. Your body is a survival machine. If it thinks you are under threat of starvation, it will prioritize fat storage and energy conservation. It will even cut back on your immune system to do so if it thinks starvation is the most immediate threat.

Google for "overtraining" or read the articles on t-nation.com or musclebulletin.com.

I read the first article listed on t-nation.com and it starts up with this poignant observation about olympic swimmers:

"I'm sorry but these dudes look like AIDS patients. Would it kill you to at least get a tan and not remind the world of the Holocaust? And could you butch up the sport a little bit? Because deep down I know the male divers I just saw are in shower right now, naked, loofahing each other's taut athletic bodies... ."

With a bit of literary magic, over the course of 2 pages, we go from the Olympics to colorful commentary about Japan:

"You gotta wonder about the Japanese some times. These are the guys who invented vending machines that distribute soiled panties that you can take home and either use as Dennis Hopper ether masks or make soup with them. And they're the ones who invented underwear that you can wear six days straight by rotating them 120 degrees each day for three days and then turning them inside out and then repeating the underwear carousel thing for another three days. And then there's the bukkake thing, which is kinda disturbing even for a preternaturally open-minded guy like me."

So... I guess thanks for the exercise tips and the obviously credible reference but I think I'll stick with training like a madman and not eating as much.

Well, you've gotta figure out what works for you. This works for me (30% to 20% bodyfat in 6 months and 25% improvement in deadlift and bench press). I'm eating more than I did and exercising less - in terms of time, anyway. Whatever you decide, good luck :-)

Do train like a madman, but not for more than an hour at a time. There are diminishing returns and, sometimes, losses. Weight training is definitely superior to cardio, but you need both.

If you are specifically trying to lose weight, limiting calories is key, but you must eat plenty before and after these madman workouts and then don't eat as much on non-workout days. Just be sure to eat healthy stuff with a good ratio of macro nutrients. If you don't, the training will be more difficult and less effective.

Luckily, your body should be pretty good at telling you when it's hungry. Don't fight it (much). Diet and exercise info is all over the map, but the basics I have mentioned here are more or less undisputed.

Whenever I read t-nation, I'm struck by how self-conscious some of them are about being big. I see little regard for the fact that some sports don't require athletes to have enormous amounts of muscle mass.

It's the same on any site tho'. If you read crossfit.com you'd be struck by how smug they are about being smarter than everyone else about training.

And, say, at technology sites about their methods. (Irony intended.)

I have seen the elitism at Crossfit, but I read the t-nation forums for a few months. They were much more negative than, say, Crossfit.

I rarely look at the forums actually. There is some great content on t-nation once you know what to look for. Their Physique Clinic stuff is brilliant, for example.

Don't worry about the not selling anything bit. It's total nonsense.

He is selling a 4 DVD set for $139.95

I don't agree. Calories are not treated equal and it's not only about staying not-fat eather but also promoting health. Calories are not just some unified fuel that you put in to your system. Your body needs to process different foods differently.

Michael Phelps also swims 120 miles a week. He eats 10,000+ calories a day because that's how much energy he needs to maintain weight and muscle mass.

And it's not healthy long-term. His diet is designed to make him win Olympic gold in his early 20's, not to achieve a long, healthy life. The only reason any swimmers ever live past 40 is that they stop doing this well before 30.

Clearly, when he stops swimming 120 miles a week, he needs to eat less. I doubt that's too much of a problem; some people can listen to what their bodies are telling them and eat accordingly. I can, so I bet an elite athlete can.

But I'm unclear on what you think is terrible for him, long term. His diet or the training? Keep in mind his diet is what his body needs right now. I don't know what you're basing your conclusions on.

Science seems to be showing that your longevity is largely based on your metabolism. It's perhaps less accurate to think of a human's average lifespan in terms of years rather than in terms of calories burned.

Eating and then burning 10k calories a day probably ages you significantly faster than eating and burning 2k calories, possibly even 5x.

Also, most people, including elite athletes, are very poor at listening to their bodies and eating accordingly. There's a lot more to eating than simply being hungry. It's very much a habit. Google around for the psychology of eating, it's actually mind-boggling how complex and deeply rooted in our psyche it is. (Actually, most bodily functions go a lot deeper than we think.)

Ex-athletes are often very overweight specifically for that reason. They stop the exercise but not the eating.

The science I've read on metabolism is based on lab rats/mice, and it's still an open question about if that applies to humans.

I'm very aware that eating has a significant pyschological component, but, again, if you're going to say "ex-atheletes are often very overweight," I'd like to see studies.

Most animals have something like half a billion heartbeats of life. This can be extended to a billion through limiting diet and sex, or basically asceticism.

Humans, on the other hand, have three billion.

It's commonly cited that while athletes' hearts beat faster while exercising, they beat lower the rest of the day, thus giving them fewer beats per year. I'm assuming, though, that most athletes don't swim 6 hours a day + weight train.

You're assuming what I just said is still an open question.

Let's check back in on Phelps in 20 years. If he's lucky, his current lifestyle won't have lasting effects.

On a related note, I met someone who swam for the US team in 1996. I won't name him or his event b/c it'd be mean to identify him, but let's just say the ensuing 12 years have done absolutely horrifying things to his waistline.

When I met him, I thought that there was no way he could be a swimmer!

Ha, yeah. That happens to a lot of athletes. It's a lot easier to stop swimming for 6 hours a day than it is to stop eating whatever the hell you want 6 meals a day.

Also there's a lot of evidence that all of that drastically increased metabolism basically burns years off of their lives.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com