Don't confuse afterburn with recovery. If you're damaging yourself (which is what going so hard that you vomit is) then you do spend calories recovering. That being said, my doctor told me I should never work out so hard that I puke.
Plus, I do think that the "afterburn" is true (even though the article said otherwise).
Well, you can think it's true. I won't stop you. You can also believe in Santa Clause.:) I just point out that the data from the metabolic chamber disputes it.
I could go on but people already view CrossFit cultish, so I'll quit before you think I'm TOO crazy.
Yeah, CrossFit is a bit cultish. And it's great for *fitness*, but again you're just not burning enough calories in the workout to make a huge impact in the weight loss part. The secret to CrossFit for weight loss is...bam, The Zone. One of the few eating plans that actually works. From my view they actually get it - they're not telling you the workouts are about losing weight. That's what The Zone is for.
I find the argument compelling, especially since there are so many weight-loss studies that show you can't fight your body's natural tendencies: simple calorie-deficit diets always lead to weight gained back (with a bonus!). Matter is much stronger than mind, especially when that mind is encased in (and maybe a function of) the body's matter.
I think it's something that also ties in with The End of Overeating. The changes in the American diet have caused actual chemical changes within our brains.
the fact that surgically cicumventing your stomach so you can't eat too much works does nothing to disprove exercise as being useful and vital to healthy weight loss.
Again, no it's not, as this study demonstrated. It's good for other reasons - weight loss isn't one of them. If the average 30-min cardio workout takes about 500 calories and if it takes about a 3500 calorie deficit for you to lose a pound then voila even if you go to the gym 7 days a week you're only going to see a loss of one pound.
Exercise is great for health. And losing weight is part of being healthy (if you're overweight). But in general if you're trying to lose weight your workout isn't contributing as much as you think it is. Energy restriction is way more important.
Are you suggesting that the human body somehow violates the laws of thermodynamics? Because that would be much stupider than what you seem to be mocking.
No, I'm suggesting (and this study shows) that exercise plays much less of a role in weight loss than most of the "Internet experts" think it does. The overwhelming majority of energy expenditure comes from BMR + daily activity. That daily trip to the gym just isn't doing that much as far as weight loss goes.
That is, quite possibly, the stupidest thing anyone has ever said on the subject, and in the absence of anything resembling a citation (the article DOES NOT say that or even infer it) the conclusion is that you're talking out of your fat ass.
Uh, sfb, the quote I provided *is* the cite. Push too hard and you burn glycogen, not fat. Duh. That's why they article refers to things liked published charts of recommended "fat-burning" zones for heart rate.
And you didn't read the article either. If you're trying to burn fat then "running your butt off" is counterproductive. That person is burning glycogen, not fat. This is according to people who use actual science (*gasp*) to do things like conduct an experiment to prove a hypothesis and all sorts of crazy things.
Try reading the damn story. The folks who did controlled exercise didn't lose that might weight. Your workouts aren't doing as much as you think they are. (In other words it's almost completely diet.)
Oh, btw, "intense workouts" are counter productive. They don't burn fat. The experts say your heart rate during cardio shouldn't go above 135. Do you have data that disputes that? Feel free to link your peer-reviewed study. Those people going slowly on the treadmill may very well be doing what they're supposed to:
“If you work out at an easy intensity, you will burn a higher percentage of fat calories” than if you work out a higher intensity, Carey says, so you should draw down some of the padding you’ve accumulated on the hips or elsewhere — if you don’t replace all of the calories afterward. To help those hoping to reduce their body fat, he published formulas in The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research last month that detailed the heart rates at which a person could maximize fat burning. “Heart rates of between 105 and 134” beats per minute, Carey said, represent the fat-burning zone. “It’s probably best to work out near the top of that zone,” he says, “so that you burn more calories over all” than at the extremely leisurely lower end.
So those fat people you know probably are working out and still eating poorly. Because guess what: Biggest Loser never shows the diets. Just them being yelled at and abused by some anorexic trainer who probably has "substance abuse issues". People get the wrong message (pressed on them by trainers and gym salesdroids) that it's all exercise. The story also shoots down other myths that the gym faithful like to tell you, like "afterburn". Oh, don't bring up that whole "muscle burns more calories than fat" thing. It's kinda true, but you will never put on enough muscle for it to matter, at least according to the American College for Sports Medicine. So there's another lie your trainer told you.
Instead of chanting a "get to the gym, fattie" mantra it might be more interesting to read something like The End of Overeating by Dr. David A. Kessler and think about ways to encourage people to eat better. I've noticed two things: Americans are fatter than Europeans. America has way more gyms than Europe. Coincidence?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-exercise. I *do* go to the gym. I just opened my eyes to the BS that these barely-trained "experts" were hawking or that they pump at us on TV. If you like going to the gym, cool. If you find it more convenient than riding a bike to work or going for a walk, cool. If you're trying to lose weight then that's cool but take what they tell you with a grain of salt. If you spend 30 minutes doing cardio and you're really big you might have burned 500kcal. Maybe. It's more about health than pure weight loss. If weight loss is your prime motivator then you *really* need to work on your diet. The rest just doesn't matter as much.
Oh, you DIDN'T, you just smugly, sarcastically assumed that something you want to believe, in spite of mounds of evidence against it, was now DEFINITIVELY PROVEN.
Yeah, you have sarcasmfail. But it's ok.
The point: any time the issue of weight loss comes up on the Internet the overall tone of responses from the gibbering masses is something along the lines of: "You're fat cuz you're lazy. Go to the gym, fattie!'
Now the fact of the matter is, as has been proven time and time again (and despite the lies your trainer tells you) that exercise doesn't really help you lose weight - at least not via burning calories. It does have other beneficial health effects but when you see the parade of fatties on Biggest Loser dropping 20lbs in a week it certainly isn't through exercise alone. If it was then severely obese folks getting gastric bypass wouldn't lose weight while lying in bed.
The fact is that guess what: the human body is complicated. Weight loss for some people can be complicated. For some it's not easy. And when folks are dismissive and insulting to people trying to do so they completely aren't helping.
I supposed debating folks on the Internet who like to be complete assholes is pointless but hey we all have our windmills...
But..but...it's just thermodynamics! There's no way that the human body could be a complex organism that adapts to it's environment or anything like that! If you're fat it's because you're lazy! Exercise and you must lose weight! 2nd law says so!
(I'm like a double barrelled shot gun of moral superiority these days!)
If you haven't grown beyond the need to belittle others then you're not morally superior at all. I'd suggest that you're physically healthier and mentally more diseased. Which will make you happier in the long term? Dunno. But I have a guess.
Here they come out of the woodwork, those who like to improve their low self-esteem by bashing on fat people. I'm sure we'll get plenty of quotes of the laws of thermodynamics and the like. Anyone want to place bets?
But while you're sitting on your high horse, you might want to go read something like _The End of Overeating_ so that instead of just assuming fat people are morally inferior you might get a clue about what's *really* going on out there. Just a thought.
He's doing it *without* custom ASICs and without TCAM. TCAM is very expensive. I'm not sure this is faster than CEF or the like, but it may very well be cheaper.
If you have DSL service available, in most areas, there will be a number of competing ISPs who can provide you with DSL service.
In *some* areas. And it's always more expensive.
Again, you still miss the point - broadband is a near monopoly and the ISP could do this if they want. They're already doing similar things by blocking certain apps. If you don't think they could try and force this on users you're just deluding yourself. The sheeple would do it wihtout question.
Look at what happens if someone has a monopoly. The school is your ISP if you live in their dorms. They're asking for unreasonable access to your machine. I'm sure if the RIAA and such put enough pressure on your ISP they'd do the same.
My friend went to Best Buy to get one this morning. Got there @ 9:30 and was 6th in line. Gets in the store and goes to mobile department to find out the 13 they had gotten in were already sold. Smelling a rat he asked where the people buying them were, since they obviously had to be in the store already. He ended up being 20th on the waiting list - so not only had the first 13 been filched already, but somehow another bunch of people had gotten on the list before launch day.
Again you miss the point - the reasons the college gives for doing this are reasons that the ISPs could easily give to do the same thing. There are usually 2 broadband options in a given area - the phone company for DSL and the cable company. That's it. So if those two both require you to run some sort of software so that they can "inspect" your computer they can, right? For the same reasons this university gives.
I'm trying to imagine how an ISP would even approach a customer about that "Ok, here's your/24, oh, by the way, you need to install this security agent on all your servers, before their traffic will pass through..."
Because really, every home DSL and Cable customer out there is doing with BGP with their provider using their own ARIN-supplied address space.
It is not at all inconceivable that a Comcast or AT&T or Road Runner or whoever would insist that you can only use them if you install their auth package and hey guess what that package will let them know if it looks like you're illegally sharing files.
Given home some ISPs bend over and let the RIAA cornhole them I would find this more likely from a private ISP than I would from a university.
I mean if you want to get a T1 to your house and happen to have an IP Block + ASN lying around then great. For the rest of it it would require 2 T1s to different ISPs and only then would ARIN give you an ASN and block. And that's a bit much for most folks to handle. Most folks just call they cable company or the phone company and get a self install kit. And guess what, that kit comes with a CD and if they wanted to say it's a condition of the service that you let them scan your box for anything they want then how would you stop them? Especially if *all* of the broadband providers in your area did it?
I wish I had some mod points. I'd either mod you down as stupid, or unfunny. Not sure which you fall under.
This from a guy who has no other point to make but to insult someone. Way to add to the dialogue, stud. Glad to see your "name" is truth in advertising.
Slashdot Mirror
This guy keeps making sure everyone knows he's a CCIE. I gotta wonder...is his ego any smaller than Childs? Unlikely. Extremely.
If his management is the cause, I wonder if he can sue them for negligence?
Yet somehow this man is in office. So perhaps modify the statement "When the people who vote for this wingnut are ready to act like adults..."
I have to say - if one man can hold a whole industry in your country hostage then perhaps something needs to be done to fix that?
Don't confuse afterburn with recovery. If you're damaging yourself (which is what going so hard that you vomit is) then you do spend calories recovering. That being said, my doctor told me I should never work out so hard that I puke.
Plus, I do think that the "afterburn" is true (even though the article said otherwise).
Well, you can think it's true. I won't stop you. You can also believe in Santa Clause. :) I just point out that the data from the metabolic chamber disputes it.
I could go on but people already view CrossFit cultish, so I'll quit before you think I'm TOO crazy.
Yeah, CrossFit is a bit cultish. And it's great for *fitness*, but again you're just not burning enough calories in the workout to make a huge impact in the weight loss part. The secret to CrossFit for weight loss is...bam, The Zone. One of the few eating plans that actually works. From my view they actually get it - they're not telling you the workouts are about losing weight. That's what The Zone is for.
I find the argument compelling, especially since there are so many weight-loss studies that show you can't fight your body's natural tendencies: simple calorie-deficit diets always lead to weight gained back (with a bonus!). Matter is much stronger than mind, especially when that mind is encased in (and maybe a function of) the body's matter.
I think it's something that also ties in with The End of Overeating. The changes in the American diet have caused actual chemical changes within our brains.
the fact that surgically cicumventing your stomach so you can't eat too much works does nothing to disprove exercise as being useful and vital to healthy weight loss.
Again, no it's not, as this study demonstrated. It's good for other reasons - weight loss isn't one of them. If the average 30-min cardio workout takes about 500 calories and if it takes about a 3500 calorie deficit for you to lose a pound then voila even if you go to the gym 7 days a week you're only going to see a loss of one pound.
Exercise is great for health. And losing weight is part of being healthy (if you're overweight). But in general if you're trying to lose weight your workout isn't contributing as much as you think it is. Energy restriction is way more important.
Are you suggesting that the human body somehow violates the laws of thermodynamics? Because that would be much stupider than what you seem to be mocking.
No, I'm suggesting (and this study shows) that exercise plays much less of a role in weight loss than most of the "Internet experts" think it does. The overwhelming majority of energy expenditure comes from BMR + daily activity. That daily trip to the gym just isn't doing that much as far as weight loss goes.
That is, quite possibly, the stupidest thing anyone has ever said on the subject, and in the absence of anything resembling a citation (the article DOES NOT say that or even infer it) the conclusion is that you're talking out of your fat ass.
Uh, sfb, the quote I provided *is* the cite. Push too hard and you burn glycogen, not fat. Duh. That's why they article refers to things liked published charts of recommended "fat-burning" zones for heart rate.
But thanks for playing, seriously.
Get back to me after that last round of hooked on phonics and let me know how it works for you.
And you didn't read the article either. If you're trying to burn fat then "running your butt off" is counterproductive. That person is burning glycogen, not fat. This is according to people who use actual science (*gasp*) to do things like conduct an experiment to prove a hypothesis and all sorts of crazy things.
Try reading the damn story. The folks who did controlled exercise didn't lose that might weight. Your workouts aren't doing as much as you think they are. (In other words it's almost completely diet.)
Oh, btw, "intense workouts" are counter productive. They don't burn fat. The experts say your heart rate during cardio shouldn't go above 135. Do you have data that disputes that? Feel free to link your peer-reviewed study. Those people going slowly on the treadmill may very well be doing what they're supposed to:
So those fat people you know probably are working out and still eating poorly. Because guess what: Biggest Loser never shows the diets. Just them being yelled at and abused by some anorexic trainer who probably has "substance abuse issues". People get the wrong message (pressed on them by trainers and gym salesdroids) that it's all exercise. The story also shoots down other myths that the gym faithful like to tell you, like "afterburn". Oh, don't bring up that whole "muscle burns more calories than fat" thing. It's kinda true, but you will never put on enough muscle for it to matter, at least according to the American College for Sports Medicine. So there's another lie your trainer told you.
Instead of chanting a "get to the gym, fattie" mantra it might be more interesting to read something like The End of Overeating by Dr. David A. Kessler and think about ways to encourage people to eat better. I've noticed two things: Americans are fatter than Europeans. America has way more gyms than Europe. Coincidence?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-exercise. I *do* go to the gym. I just opened my eyes to the BS that these barely-trained "experts" were hawking or that they pump at us on TV. If you like going to the gym, cool. If you find it more convenient than riding a bike to work or going for a walk, cool. If you're trying to lose weight then that's cool but take what they tell you with a grain of salt. If you spend 30 minutes doing cardio and you're really big you might have burned 500kcal. Maybe. It's more about health than pure weight loss. If weight loss is your prime motivator then you *really* need to work on your diet. The rest just doesn't matter as much.
Oh, you DIDN'T, you just smugly, sarcastically assumed that something you want to believe, in spite of mounds of evidence against it, was now DEFINITIVELY PROVEN.
Yeah, you have sarcasmfail. But it's ok.
The point: any time the issue of weight loss comes up on the Internet the overall tone of responses from the gibbering masses is something along the lines of: "You're fat cuz you're lazy. Go to the gym, fattie!'
Now the fact of the matter is, as has been proven time and time again (and despite the lies your trainer tells you) that exercise doesn't really help you lose weight - at least not via burning calories. It does have other beneficial health effects but when you see the parade of fatties on Biggest Loser dropping 20lbs in a week it certainly isn't through exercise alone. If it was then severely obese folks getting gastric bypass wouldn't lose weight while lying in bed.
The fact is that guess what: the human body is complicated. Weight loss for some people can be complicated. For some it's not easy. And when folks are dismissive and insulting to people trying to do so they completely aren't helping.
I supposed debating folks on the Internet who like to be complete assholes is pointless but hey we all have our windmills...
But..but...it's just thermodynamics! There's no way that the human body could be a complex organism that adapts to it's environment or anything like that! If you're fat it's because you're lazy! Exercise and you must lose weight! 2nd law says so!
Oh, wait...
(I'm like a double barrelled shot gun of moral superiority these days!)
If you haven't grown beyond the need to belittle others then you're not morally superior at all. I'd suggest that you're physically healthier and mentally more diseased. Which will make you happier in the long term? Dunno. But I have a guess.
Here they come out of the woodwork, those who like to improve their low self-esteem by bashing on fat people. I'm sure we'll get plenty of quotes of the laws of thermodynamics and the like. Anyone want to place bets?
But while you're sitting on your high horse, you might want to go read something like _The End of Overeating_ so that instead of just assuming fat people are morally inferior you might get a clue about what's *really* going on out there. Just a thought.
He's doing it *without* custom ASICs and without TCAM. TCAM is very expensive. I'm not sure this is faster than CEF or the like, but it may very well be cheaper.
If you have DSL service available, in most areas, there will be a number of competing ISPs who can provide you with DSL service.
In *some* areas. And it's always more expensive.
Again, you still miss the point - broadband is a near monopoly and the ISP could do this if they want. They're already doing similar things by blocking certain apps. If you don't think they could try and force this on users you're just deluding yourself. The sheeple would do it wihtout question.
Look at what happens if someone has a monopoly. The school is your ISP if you live in their dorms. They're asking for unreasonable access to your machine. I'm sure if the RIAA and such put enough pressure on your ISP they'd do the same.
Go to a sprint store. Call 'em first thing tomorrow morning.
The huge majority of the stock went to sprint-branded retails stores -- not Radio shack, wal-mart, or best buy.
I suggested that, but he wants to do the rebate instantly, not have to mail it in (which we all know usually doesn't work).
My friend went to Best Buy to get one this morning. Got there @ 9:30 and was 6th in line. Gets in the store and goes to mobile department to find out the 13 they had gotten in were already sold. Smelling a rat he asked where the people buying them were, since they obviously had to be in the store already. He ended up being 20th on the waiting list - so not only had the first 13 been filched already, but somehow another bunch of people had gotten on the list before launch day.
Way to go BB. You're as slimy as ever.
Again you miss the point - the reasons the college gives for doing this are reasons that the ISPs could easily give to do the same thing. There are usually 2 broadband options in a given area - the phone company for DSL and the cable company. That's it. So if those two both require you to run some sort of software so that they can "inspect" your computer they can, right? For the same reasons this university gives.
I'm trying to imagine how an ISP would even approach a customer about that "Ok, here's your /24, oh, by the way, you need to install this security agent on all your servers, before their traffic will pass through..."
Because really, every home DSL and Cable customer out there is doing with BGP with their provider using their own ARIN-supplied address space.
It is not at all inconceivable that a Comcast or AT&T or Road Runner or whoever would insist that you can only use them if you install their auth package and hey guess what that package will let them know if it looks like you're illegally sharing files.
Given home some ISPs bend over and let the RIAA cornhole them I would find this more likely from a private ISP than I would from a university.
I mean if you want to get a T1 to your house and happen to have an IP Block + ASN lying around then great. For the rest of it it would require 2 T1s to different ISPs and only then would ARIN give you an ASN and block. And that's a bit much for most folks to handle. Most folks just call they cable company or the phone company and get a self install kit. And guess what, that kit comes with a CD and if they wanted to say it's a condition of the service that you let them scan your box for anything they want then how would you stop them? Especially if *all* of the broadband providers in your area did it?
Just like faulty computer security creates a pubic worm infection hazard.
So you would have no complaints if your ISP instituted a similar policy?
And then what if they decided to extend the right to access any file on your system to 3rd parties, like the RIAA?
I wish I had some mod points. I'd either mod you down as stupid, or unfunny. Not sure which you fall under.
This from a guy who has no other point to make but to insult someone. Way to add to the dialogue, stud. Glad to see your "name" is truth in advertising.