Do you really believe diet is better than exercise?

[Balla]

I wrote a lot here, but if you just want the short version, I put that for y’all.

TLDR: I think exercise is more important for fat loss than dieting. I was in better shape eating fast food and drinking milkshakes while working out everyday than when I ate healthy and worked out less. What do you think?


So I have been struggling with losing weight for a few years; very up and down; made progress and gained some back.

I haven’t been working out a lot because I’ve been busy as shyt, but have tried to focus on my diet and counting calories. Weight loss was not even happening.

So today I realized I only gained weight because I stopped working out hard like I used to.

I ate way worse then compared to how I have in the past few years. I paid no attention to calories at all and had the largest size meals.

Going ham and I barely gained weight.

Only thing different was that I worked out 6 days a week and was extremely active.

I stopped working out and gained so much weight so quickly, even after changing my diet.

So I hear that diet is 80% of weight loss success, but I think exercise is a lot more than 20%. I really believe that it could be half or even more important than diet.

Every time I was in shape it was because of me working out all those days.

Of course I’m not saying that eating unhealthy and working out all the time is good.

I’m just saying that for me I was in the best shape of my life eating what I wanted and exercising 6 days a week compared to eating healthy and working out less.

Of course both are ideal put together, but I really think it’s possible to outwork a bad diet.

 

[The ADD]

Simple answer yes diet is more important

Also based on what you said you were doing two different things. Eating whatever you wanted and working out 6 days a week is much different than limiting calories and not working out. I see what you are saying but by definition they are going to yield different results.

That said “in shape” could mean a lot of things

 

[Balla]

Simple answer yes

Also based on what you said you were doing two different things. Eating whatever you wanted and working out 6 days a week is much different than limiting calories and not working out. I see what you are saying but by definition they are going to yield different results.

That said “in shape” could mean a lot of things

Well my in shape was that people always thought I took roids.

I was trim and had barely any fat on my stomach.

People say I looked like a running back.

Now people give me compliments from time to time, but way less.

Now I look more like a lineman with a gut that kinda sticks out lol.

Like I gotta big gut, but it doesn’t look that bad when I wear a shirt.

But now it’s getting to the point where I can see my gut getting bigger.

 

[The ADD]

Well my in shape was that people always thought I took roids.

I was trim and had barely any fat on my stomach.

People say I looked like a running back.

Now people give me compliments from time to time, but way less.

Now I look more like a lineman with a gut that kinda sticks out lol.

Like I gotta big gut, but it doesn’t look that bad when I wear a shirt.

But now it’s getting to the point where I can see my gut getting bigger.

Yes more activity and more muscle mass can afford you more diet flexibility on a lot of different levels.

Variables change and the reality is that it’s harder to get back level to maintain that level.

 

[G.O.A.T Squad Spokesman]

For fat loss? Absolutely. Not enough cardio in the world to burn off the shyt I would eat everyday if I didn't have to worry about the results of it.

 

[Balla]

For fat loss? Absolutely. Not enough cardio in the world to burn off the shyt I would eat everyday if I didn't have to worry about the results of it.

Not just cardio, I was doing weight lifting, boxing, walking a lot, playing ball, and I was eating at least 3000-3500 calories.

Sweetened drinks probably made the calories go up more because I don’t get full from that.

But I was eating the largest fast food meal, milkshakes, cakes, sweets, etc.

Now I’m barely eating this stuff and trying to count everything and shyt ain’t happening really.

 

[The ADD]

Not just cardio, I was doing weight lifting, boxing, walking a lot, playing ball, and I was eating at least 3000-3500 calories.

Sweetened drinks probably made the calories go up more because I don’t get full from that.

But I was eating the largest fast food meal, milkshakes, cakes, sweets, etc.

Now I’m barely eating this stuff and trying to count everything and shyt ain’t happening really.

But you don’t even know what you were actually eating calories wise so you don’t have enough data.

What is the honest accounting of what you ate in a typical day?

 

[DrDoom]

Diet over exercise wins

 

[Balla]

But you don’t even know what you were actually eating calories wise so you don’t have enough data.

What is the honest accounting of what you ate in a typical day?

You talking about back then or now?

I figured it had to be 3000 because.

For example I would eat McDonald’s for breakfast and that would be 1000.

Their breakfast sandwiches are like 500 a piece and I would eat 2 then a sweet tea.

For lunch I would eat Chinese, McDonald’s, Burger King, Taco Bell, etc.

Taco Bell quesadillas are 500 calories each. I would eat that and a Crunchwrap or some other 500 calorie item, and I would eat tacos as well.

Dinner l, another fast food joint.

I didn’t even add drinks and sweets to the meals either.

I didn’t eat breakfast every single day though, but when I did that’s what I would eat.

Eating fast food and getting up to 3000 calories isn’t hard to guess, each meal is about 1000 cals.

And I was only eating about 2 items off the menu with a large sweet tea.

Now I’m eating around 2000 calories, but there’s days I might slip up and eat a few more, maybe 200-400 more and my weight doesn’t move down much.

I’m just saying that I still feel that I should be losing more weight even if I mess up because I’m still eating a whole 1000 calories less and still working out a little.

With my prior diet I actually was losing weight consistently, but worked out a lot more.

I hope you get what I’m saying.

 

[The ADD]

You talking about back then or now?

I figured it had to be 3000 because.

For example I would eat McDonald’s for breakfast and that would be 1000.

Their breakfast sandwiches are like 500 a piece and I would eat 2 then a sweet tea.

For lunch I would eat Chinese, McDonald’s, Burger King, Taco Bell, etc.

Taco Bell quesadillas are 500 calories each. I would eat that and a Crunchwrap or some other 500 calorie item, and I would eat tacos as well.

Dinner l, another fast food joint.

I didn’t even add drinks and sweets to the meals either.

I didn’t eat breakfast every single day though, but when I did that’s what I would eat.

Eating fast food and getting up to 3000 calories isn’t hard to guess, each meal is about 1000 cals.

And I was only eating about 2 items off the menu with a large sweet tea.

Now I’m eating around 2000 calories, but there’s days I might slip up and eat a few more, maybe 200-400 more and my weight doesn’t move down much.

I’m just saying that I still feel that I should be losing more weight even if I mess up because I’m still eating a whole 1000 calories less and still working out a little.

With my prior diet I actually was losing weight consistently, but worked out a lot more.

I hope you get what I’m saying.

I do but the reality is that it’s all based on estimates. You don’t know what you were doing exactly and it doesn’t sound like you fully know what you are doing now.

Best advice is to count calories for 3 weeks so you can have some type of true data foundation.

 

[G.O.A.T Squad Spokesman]

Not just cardio, I was doing weight lifting, boxing, walking a lot, playing ball, and I was eating at least 3000-3500 calories.

Sweetened drinks probably made the calories go up more because I don’t get full from that.

But I was eating the largest fast food meal, milkshakes, cakes, sweets, etc.

Now I’m barely eating this stuff and trying to count everything and shyt ain’t happening really.

Check out my thread

https://www.thecoli.com/threads/calorie-counting-to-lose-weight.658021/

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

I do but the reality is that it’s all based on estimates. You don’t know what you were doing exactly and it doesn’t sound like you fully know what you are doing now.

Best advice is to count calories for 3 weeks so you can have some type of true data foundation.

Yep all these things. Log every meal in My Fitness Pal and track your weight. That's the only way to really know your burn rate

 

[aSniperJones]

It’s not either-or, it’s both.

Your caloric intake, regardless of the quality of the food, aided in your results. Had you not ate fast food and drank milkshakes your results would have been less impressive.

Not just cardio, weight lifting, boxing, walking a lot, playing ball...

Now I’m eating around 2000 calories, but there’s days I might slip up and eat a few more, maybe 200-400 more and my weight doesn’t move down much.
... I’m still eating a whole 1000 calories less and still working out a little.

It sounds like your activity level isn’t negating, or aiding for that matter, even with 1000 caloric intake loss.

With your limited time and body pre-conditioned to standard weight training [thus resistant to change]; I recommend finding a one hour high intensity style session (i.e. boxing, crossfit, a bootcamp etc.) to attend at least twice a week and weight lifing twice a week, if possible, but definitely don’t miss the intensity courses.

 

[DJ Paul's Arm]

 

[The ADD]

I mean, he ain’t really wrong