The Distance Dilemma: Why Long Runs Aren’t The Fast Track To Fat Loss

Xfitguy wrote:

Riiiiiight wrote:

Thanks for that. This guys is more real and inspirational than all of the full of themselves

He also packed on most of the weight he lost. He is back to 240 lbs right now. How inspirational.

7/10. Quality trolling here. Did not go for the usual crossfit BS about oxidation and hypotheticals about who you would want building a levee out of sandbags to stop flood water.

The guy in the video is still in shape:

Distance running is not a superior form of exercise. Distance running is a sport. Most of the people who take distance running seriously are competitors, either against the local/regional/national talent or against themselves to hit PRs and drop time barriers. The big advantage of being a distance runner is that you do not have to worry about body image the way crossfitters do. Distance runners are all skinny and generally ectomorphs. We have spouses and significant others who are not shallow chippees who only want to be seen with a guy who stretches out his Ed Hardee shirt with his juiced up muscles and wears lots of product in his hair. As Pre would put it, distance running is a gift. It is one of the most fundamental expressions of our physical form.

Thanks for the suggestions! I do actually attempt the real pull-ups, but I am still only at the point where it's not so much pull-up but grab bar and hang on for about 10-15 seconds, so I supplement with assisted. But goal is to get to where I can actually complete the unassisted pull-ups. Upper body strength a work in progress.

Random woman runner wrote:

Thanks for the suggestions! I do actually attempt the real pull-ups, but I am still only at the point where it's not so much pull-up but grab bar and hang on for about 10-15 seconds, so I supplement with assisted. But goal is to get to where I can actually complete the unassisted pull-ups. Upper body strength a work in progress.

Just do the downwards portion of the pullup until you can do one rep. In other words - jump up and slowly lower yourself until fully extended.

Runner and Lifter wrote:

Random woman runner wrote:

Thanks for the suggestions! I do actually attempt the real pull-ups, but I am still only at the point where it's not so much pull-up but grab bar and hang on for about 10-15 seconds, so I supplement with assisted. But goal is to get to where I can actually complete the unassisted pull-ups. Upper body strength a work in progress.

Just do the downwards portion of the pullup until you can do one rep. In other words - jump up and slowly lower yourself until fully extended.

Is this really the best way for people who can't do 1 pull-up to proceed?

I tell my wife to use the assisted pull-up machine with a weight that allows her to complete 3 sets of 8. In the last few months the amount of assistance has reduced by ~10 kg, so it seems to be working.

The gym is down the long pathway to the left.

I would like to hear any sound reasoning on why doing assisted pull-ups for reps is inferior to doing a real pull-up without assistance? That just flies in the face of reason, especially for someone who can't even do 3 pull-ups.

If you don't like crossfit, this is the most hilarious website... it's a crossfit guy that rails on crossfit. The dude is just rude to crossfit...

See, runners don't lose fat by running...

2010:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30404885@N05/5073634801/

2012:

http://www.ocregister.com/sections/printer/photo/?id=350493&pic=16

oops.

Xfitguy_the_real_one wrote:

See, runners don't lose fat by running...

2010:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30404885@N05/5073634801/

2012:

http://www.ocregister.com/sections/printer/photo/?id=350493&pic=16

oops.

You know that this proves my point. She looked better in 2010. She may have lost some fat but you can clearly see that she also lost muscle.

Xfitguy_the_real_one wrote:

See, runners don't lose fat by running...

2010:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30404885@N05/5073634801/

2012:

http://www.ocregister.com/sections/printer/photo/?id=350493&pic=16

oops.

Xfitguy wrote:

Yes but look at your before/after pictures - they both look the same.

oops again.

Xfitguy wrote:

Ok then why are 80% of runners at your typical 5k event overweight?

Same reason 80% of gymgoers at your local gym are overweight.

Because the muffin and latte they have afterwards contain twice as many calories as the 300-odd they burned in the race.

just to defend the op, the gays spend a lot of time lifting weights, and they tend to be pretty thin. I think he has some good points. he must, because of the gays.

el retardo muscleheads wrote:

The gym is down the long pathway to the left.

Are you sure?

I went down the path to the left, but I fell in the lake!

I have to admit I thought this article is all BS. But then I looked at the before and after pictures and I have to admit - it's rare that you see a similar success story with just running and there seem to be hundreds from lifting. Impressive.

Xfitguy_the_real_one_1 wrote:

Xfitguy_the_real_one wrote:

See, runners don't lose fat by running...

2010:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30404885@N05/5073634801/

2012:

http://www.ocregister.com/sections/printer/photo/?id=350493&pic=16

oops.

You know that this proves my point. She looked better in 2010. She may have lost some fat but you can clearly see that she also lost muscle.

Hey Dummy. You thread title says "....Runs aren't Fast Track to FAT loss".

7/10

lol a miscer leaked into LRC

you big dummy wrote:

Hey Dummy. You thread title says "....Runs aren't Fast Track to FAT loss".

Yes, it took her 2 years, that's a long time. And she lost a lot of muscle, too. Would have probably had more success with throwing in some lifting.

The funny thing is just simple statistics say that all those people in the before and after profiles will be fat again in about a year.

joho wrote:

Here is a study that came out last year on fat loss. It was interesting in that it was specific to types of fat. It found that aerobic exercise was more effective at reducing subcutaneous abdominal fat.

http://ajpendo.physiology.org/content/early/2011/08/10/ajpendo.00291.2011.abstract

Here is a link to the NPR article written on the study.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2011/08/26/139971417/jogging-fights-beer-belly-fat-better-than-weights?ps=sh_sthdl

So I read the first and last page of this thread (which was started by a troll) and after reading this article have a major flaw in it to point out. The article doesn't say if the interventions burned about the same number of calories each. If running 12 miles a week burns over 1,200 calories (100+any extra because they're fat) then the lifting intervention needs to burn as many calories so that each intervention is equal. The only way to lose fat is to burn more than you take in.