That burger looks effing delicious.
I'm feeling so patriotic now...
by Ze » Tue May 25, 2010 1:53 am
Lolli wrote:If one doesn't eat much, but still moves a lot, what's the lower limit before it becomes dangerous? Does anyone know?
by drpw » Tue May 25, 2010 9:20 pm
Day Hiker wrote:MikeTX wrote:i guess my point is that most people are more sedentary than they think. for most people, weight loss takes sticking to a rigorous exercise program. i believe that if most people focused more on the exercise side of the equation, they could afford to not worry so much about the caloric intake side. the problem is that most people hate exercising, so they try to limit their caloric intake instead. this is just the wrong approach imo.
True stuff. I often see non-handicapped people using the dumbass elevator to go up one floor. WTF.
by IanMcQ » Fri Jul 02, 2010 5:37 pm
by John Duffield » Thu Sep 09, 2010 6:57 pm
Fletch wrote:John Duffield wrote:
God, I love US. Only the United States could think up something like this. Bravo!
Im 6'2", 225 and eat like a horse (3,000 - 4,000 cal/day). I have a desk job, but exercise at least 4x per week. If I stop exercizing, I put on 10 - 25 lbs in about a month. If I maintain my exercise regime for a month, I lose 10 - 25 lbs over the next month. Sort of oscilate (sic) between 215 and 235.
My brother is 6'5", 210 and looks like a greek statue. Kid eats six to eight small meals a day and has an eight pack. Have no idea how he does it. It certainly isn't genetic.
I truly believe your fitness level starts in your head. Your attitude towards life, how positive you are, and how much sleep you get are much more important than what you put in your body. Don't get me wrong, eating is an activity that needs attention and it is certainly necessary to sustain life, but I think we sometimes overestimate the correlation between food and fitness. I say it's more in your head and your heart and less in your stomach or your mouth.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests