Weight-Loss Drugs?

[thebeave]

Exercise is a very important component of weight loss, and I think. it's a myth that exercise makes one hungry. Exercise has actually decreased my appetite and while perhaps some people get hungry if they exercise excessively, I've yet to have a friend who has felt that exercise made them hungry.

https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/weight-loss/basics/diet-and-exercise/hlv-20049483

The key to successful weight loss is developing healthy diet and exercise habits. You may not like those words — diet and exercise. But don't get hung up on them. Diet just means eating healthy, lower calorie meals. Exercise means being more physically active.

Although people appropriately focus on diet when they're trying to lose weight, being active also is an essential component of a weight-loss program. When you're active, your body uses energy (calories) to move, helping to burn the calories you take in with food you eat.

It's very simple. Exercise increases your metabolism and if you keep your eating under control, the combination helps most people lose weight. I'll say it again. We are all different so not everyone will have the same results, but there has been lots of research that suggests that dieting alone isn't a good way to lose weight.

Even my sister who I mentioned before, lost 100 lbs. on Weight Watchers, combined that with a daily walk of a mile or two. I started walking and then doing aerobics when I wanted to lose or maintain a healthy weight. So, let's not play down the importance of exercise when it comes to weight loss or maintenance. Humans used to be far more active than most currently are these days. I think that's pretty obvious to any of us who have been around for a long time.

I confess that I drink carbonated beverages, but I usually limit it to one can of ginger ale a day, unlike some of the women I used to work with who were sadly so addicted to soft drinks that a few confessed to me that they drank as much as two liters or more a day. Sugar can be very addictive for some people. I understand that.

You could very well be right that exercise shifts our metabolism, honestly I don't know. But as for making us hungry I was referring to the immediate loss of calories after we exercise. If you jog for 45 minutes then eat fast food immediately after, the jogging is pretty much moot. This is what most people do.

I'm not going to say that exercise isn't important. Exercising regularly is something everyone should be doing in a normal, routine life (not for weight loss). But if you actually want to lose weight and put most of your focus on exercise, but don't change your eating habits, you'll have a hard time. In the case of your sister, walking a mile or two a day is a pretty normal amount of exercise to get, whether or not you're trying to lose weight. I would hazard a guess that the actual weight loss came from the dieting program, in combination with not being completely sedentary (which isn't normal).

I'm not sure if this is getting across, exercising quite a bit daily is the bare minimum that everyone should be doing just to maintain their weight. Movement, and lots of it, is normal, you don't get a gold star for taking a walk.

Your case is different because it sounds like your exercise habits were pretty extreme. Most people aren't exercising to that extent. But if you're a marathon runner, for example, you're going to have a slender body.

You can start seeing that this is a little more complicated than most people realize. We mostly think of exercise as a pill we're supposed to take, not a part of a normal life.

Yep, its considerably easier to lose the extra pounds by minimizing caloric intake, rather than relying on burning off calories by exercise. I remember hearing years ago how long you have to stay on a treadmill to work off the calories from just a jelly doughnut. I forgot how long exactly, but I remember being stunned that it was such a workout! Work that most people (especially overweight ones) would not have the patience or persistence to complete. Of course exercise is important to maintain overall fitness and health but as a big component of your weight loss plan, its not so great.

 

[southernhybrid]

When I was bedridden in hospital I was told I needed 1700 calories per day to mantain body weight.

When you sharply cut calories you can lose weight initially, but at some point your body goes into an energy conservation mode. The so called plateau in weight loss. You can also start burning muscle mass. Protein and strength exercises are important when losing weight.

Nothing new here that is not in general medical reporting, it makes sense from my experience.

It sounds counter intuitive when losing weight and increasing activity you may have to increase calories to keep losing weight.

For me averaging a pound a week was sustainable. Some weeks more.

You have to find that sweet spot where you are loosing weight without extreme calorie cuts.

Not all calories are the same, counting calories did not work for me. The same calorie rating in different foods does not equate to the same amount of glucose in the blood.

Mostly by trial and erro I got diet adjusted to maintain body weight.

The NIH has a weight loos calculator. Given age, current weight, target weight, and time it estimates your calories per day. You may be surprised.

Body Weight Planner - NIDDK

The Body Weight Planner allows users to make personalized calorie and physical activity plans to reach a goal weight within a specific time period and to maintain it afterwards.

www.niddk.nih.gov

If you are not losing weight and think you should be, then see a specialist not a general practitioner. It could be a number of things. Heart failure and water retention is a big one.

Foods that are very high in fiber aren't absorbed as well as junk food or most other foods. You are right about that. Maybe that's why I can eat so much and not gain weight. I eat junk food and I drink sweet beverages in moderation, but I also eat lots of fruits and vegetables and keep my meat portions very small. We are all different in what works when it comes to our weight, but I've said that already numerous times. Can we agree on that?

 

[bilby]

I remember hearing years ago how long you have to stay on a treadmill to work off the calories from just a jelly doughnut.

I make it around half an hour.

According to the electric Internet, a jelly donut has around 268 Calories (1,120kJ), and a 1km walk at 5km/h (3mph) burns around 1 Calorie per kg of body weight. A 100kg (220lb) person therefore needs to walk 2.68km (1 and two thirds miles) to burn off that snack, which at 5km/h would take a bit more than half an hour. Of course, an obese person might well be a bit more than 100kg, and the heavier you are, the more energy you burn when walking. So around half an hour seems like a good approximation.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

For me, exercise had almost everything to do with it. I think it increased my metabolism to the point where I now have problems with losing weight. That started about 3 years ago when I increased my exercise to 6 or 7 days a week. I'm talking about 30 to 45 minutes of very fast aerobics. My husband also lost weight when he started walking several fast miles every morning with the dogs. Maybe exercise doesn't increase everyone's metabolism but it sure seemed to have done that for me. I lost another 10 lbs about 3 years ago and I wondered if I had cancer. I'm not currently exercising due to having had the recent surgery, but perhaps due to the pain and/or the PT exercises I'm still having to eat about 2500 calories per day or I lose weight. Perhaps my metabolism is permanently increased. But, of course, someone can't eat 12,000 calories a day and expect to lose weight by doing aerobics or walking a few miles a day.

I definitely think it was a factor for me, especially as for me it's not a daily thing. I can burn an extra 1,000 calories on the trail without feeling the urge to eat more that day. Going higher than that I might add half as many extra calories as I'm burning.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Not all calories are the same, counting calories did not work for me. The same calorie rating in different foods does not equate to the same amount of glucose in the blood.

Yeah, our measurements of calories in food aren't accurate. They're based on a bomb calorimeter but that doesn't measure if the body can actually digest them.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I remember hearing years ago how long you have to stay on a treadmill to work off the calories from just a jelly doughnut.

I make it around half an hour.

According to the electric Internet, a jelly donut has around 268 Calories (1,120kJ), and a 1km walk at 5km/h (3mph) burns around 1 Calorie per kg of body weight. A 100kg (220lb) person therefore needs to walk 2.68km (1 and two thirds miles) to burn off that snack, which at 5km/h would take a bit more than half an hour. Of course, an obese person might well be a bit more than 100kg, and the heavier you are, the more energy you burn when walking. So around half an hour seems like a good approximation.

Question--is that 1 calorie per kg-km dependent on speed and is it just body weight or total weight (counting anything you might be carrying)?

 

[steve_bank]

If you walk up a hill the work(energy) done is force*distance. In this case distance is the height of the hill force = m*g, gravity. Total calories burned is wok done plus energy lost in your muscles.

If you run up the hill the work done is the same but you may lose more in the muscles and the motion mechanics is not exactly the same.

When you walk you lift legs against and push up and forward against gravity, work.

When you walk you may warm up from internal losses. When you run you burn more enegy per second and body temperature rises faster.

Calorimitry is one way to measure body efficiency and compare exercises. Stand in a tank of water and work a machine with your hands above the water. You can measure the work done with the machine. The temperture rise of the water gives energy dissipated in your body.

work = heat = energy = Joules

If you lift a 5 pound weight 1 foot or push on an exercise machine against 5 pounds force for 1 foot the work done is the same.

I get a chuckle watcing exercise commercials claiming burning lots of energy and weight loss. It doesn't add up to the estemates for energy per pound or kg of body fat.

 

[Bronzeage]

I can give a testimonial for Ozimpic. I was prescribed it for diabetes as a supplement to insulin and over 6 months lost about 10 pounds. I didn't realize it until my next check up. Then I went on Medicare, which meant Ozympic would cost me a $300 copay. I was given a different drug, but it didn't show the same weight loss results. Apparently Ozympic is now considered more of a weight loss drug, than a diabetes treatment.

Side note. Three months ago, I went back to my old training regimen which is mostly a low carb diet and heavy weight lifting. Over 3 months I have lost a little more than 20 pounds. I has to drastically cut back my insulin intake. Previously, I was taking 70 units to maintain good blood sugar levels, but I was experiencing sugar crashes. I was down to 40 units and I realized I was eating extra to keep my blood sugar up and taking insulin to keep it down. Now I'm taking only the oral medications along with the Ozympic replacement and blood sugar is stable at normal levels. As for the training results, my shirts are tight and my pants are falling off.

 

[bilby]

Not all calories are the same, counting calories did not work for me. The same calorie rating in different foods does not equate to the same amount of glucose in the blood.

Yeah, our measurements of calories in food aren't accurate. They're based on a bomb calorimeter but that doesn't measure if the body can actually digest them.

The difference is tiny. Basically, if you're eating anything that's indigestible but energy rich, then there will be bacteria in your intestines that will be more than happy to digest it for you. If they're high enough up the alimentary canal, that's going to have much the same result as you digesting it yourself; If they are lower down, in the large intestines, this will result in flatulence, diarrhoea, pain, and nausea - basically the symptoms of lactose intolerance, which is probably the commonest instance of people consuming indigestible but energy rich foodstuffs.

Bomb calorimeters give an extremely good measure of bioavailable energy content, for any food that is pleasant and comfortable for you to consume regularly.

 

[bilby]

I remember hearing years ago how long you have to stay on a treadmill to work off the calories from just a jelly doughnut.

I make it around half an hour.

According to the electric Internet, a jelly donut has around 268 Calories (1,120kJ), and a 1km walk at 5km/h (3mph) burns around 1 Calorie per kg of body weight. A 100kg (220lb) person therefore needs to walk 2.68km (1 and two thirds miles) to burn off that snack, which at 5km/h would take a bit more than half an hour. Of course, an obese person might well be a bit more than 100kg, and the heavier you are, the more energy you burn when walking. So around half an hour seems like a good approximation.

Question--is that 1 calorie per kg-km dependent on speed

Yes. It assumes a roughly 5km/h pace; Going faster will burn more energy, and going slower will burn less.

and is it just body weight or total weight (counting anything you might be carrying)?

It would include what you're carrying too - you will obviously burn more energy if you're wearing a backpack full of rocks.

 

[rousseau]

Not all calories are the same, counting calories did not work for me. The same calorie rating in different foods does not equate to the same amount of glucose in the blood.

Yeah, our measurements of calories in food aren't accurate. They're based on a bomb calorimeter but that doesn't measure if the body can actually digest them.

It's more about where they fall on the glycemic index. If you eat 100 grams of chocolate vs 100 grams of whole wheat bread, your body is going to react to the two in a totally different way. The chocolate is more likely to be absorbed as fat (and addictive), the bread isn't.

This is why I tell people that refined sugar is about 90% of the problem for most people. Ice cream, chocolate, donuts and the like are pretty bad for you, and very addictive.

 

[TV and credit cards]

.

I remember hearing years ago how long you have to stay on a treadmill to work off the calories from just a jelly doughnut.

I make it around half an hour.

According to the electric Internet, a jelly donut has around 268 Calories (1,120kJ), and a 1km walk at 5km/h (3mph) burns around 1 Calorie per kg of body weight. A 100kg (220lb) person therefore needs to walk 2.68km (1 and two thirds miles) to burn off that snack, which at 5km/h would take a bit more than half an hour. Of course, an obese person might well be a bit more than 100kg, and the heavier you are, the more energy you burn when walking. So around half an hour seems like a good approximation.

I’ve actually been on exercise equipment. They have calorie counters on them. I recommend avoiding all forms of stationary equipment (bikes, treadmills, rowers) if possible. It is boring to the point of being depressing to exert so much energy moving your legs and get absolutely nowhere.
But any form of activity will do. For me it’s working around the house. Gardening will get the job done. Beyond the activity itself burning calories, it’s very difficult to take in calories while engaged in your activity of choice.
It’s the down time in the evening that does me in. Food is constantly on my mind in the evening. I know I’m not hungry but it is such an engrained habit that I cannot break. I quit smoking but I cannot quit this. I’d love to get my hands on a weight loss drug. I doubt the VA authorizes it but I’ll try that and then my civilian insurer. I’m of the age where I’m wondering how many more years of physical exertion I have left. My excess weight will decide.
Being on deployment in the navy I learned that I needed both physical exertion and low caloric intake to lose weight. One without the other simply maintained my current weight. I also learned that for my muscle mass, 170-175 pounds is ideal for me. I’m so far away from that.

 

[steve_bank]

I can give a testimonial for Ozimpic. I was prescribed it for diabetes as a supplement to insulin and over 6 months lost about 10 pounds. I didn't realize it until my next check up. Then I went on Medicare, which meant Ozympic would cost me a $300 copay. I was given a different drug, but it didn't show the same weight loss results. Apparently Ozympic is now considered more of a weight loss drug, than a diabetes treatment.

Side note. Three months ago, I went back to my old training regimen which is mostly a low carb diet and heavy weight lifting. Over 3 months I have lost a little more than 20 pounds. I has to drastically cut back my insulin intake. Previously, I was taking 70 units to maintain good blood sugar levels, but I was experiencing sugar crashes. I was down to 40 units and I realized I was eating extra to keep my blood sugar up and taking insulin to keep it down. Now I'm taking only the oral medications along with the Ozympic replacement and blood sugar is stable at normal levels. As for the training results, my shirts are tight and my pants are falling off.

I went from insulin to oral meds to normal blood sugar.

I don't do heavy lifting, I go up to 25lb dumbbells. Most days.

After a while I was pushing my blood sugar too low.

For me a stationary bike is the nest exercise machine. If my blood sugar is up 10 minutes on the bike and it is cumming down.

20-30 minutes on the bike mid evening keeps my blood sugar low in the morning. Usually mid 80s.

I went through a lot of test strips and finger pricking to map out my daily blood sugar and correlate blood sugar with exercise and diet.

 

[southernhybrid]

Sadly, Medicare isn't the panacea that some people think it is. There are lots of medications that M/care doesn't cover or the copay is so high, that it's unaffordable for most people. It's good to see that some of you who have diabetes have found a way to maintain a healthy blood sugar and I assume A1C.

 

[Bronzeage]

I can give a testimonial for Ozimpic. I was prescribed it for diabetes as a supplement to insulin and over 6 months lost about 10 pounds. I didn't realize it until my next check up. Then I went on Medicare, which meant Ozympic would cost me a $300 copay. I was given a different drug, but it didn't show the same weight loss results. Apparently Ozympic is now considered more of a weight loss drug, than a diabetes treatment.

Side note. Three months ago, I went back to my old training regimen which is mostly a low carb diet and heavy weight lifting. Over 3 months I have lost a little more than 20 pounds. I has to drastically cut back my insulin intake. Previously, I was taking 70 units to maintain good blood sugar levels, but I was experiencing sugar crashes. I was down to 40 units and I realized I was eating extra to keep my blood sugar up and taking insulin to keep it down. Now I'm taking only the oral medications along with the Ozympic replacement and blood sugar is stable at normal levels. As for the training results, my shirts are tight and my pants are falling off.

I went from insulin to oral meds to normal blood sugar.

I don't do heavy lifting, I go up to 25lb dumbbells. Most days.

After a while I was pushing my blood sugar too low.

For me a stationary bike is the nest exercise machine. If my blood sugar is up 10 minutes on the bike and it is cumming down.

20-30 minutes on the bike mid evening keeps my blood sugar low in the morning. Usually mid 80s.

I went through a lot of test strips and finger pricking to map out my daily blood sugar and correlate blood sugar with exercise and diet.

I probably should have used the word 'intense" instead of heavy. My routine, whether with free weights or machine is to start with a weight I can with perfect form, 10 reps. Rest 1 minute and do 10 more, then repeat. If I can do all 30 reps, the next work out is bumped up 5 pounds. If I can't do all reps, I drop down 5 pounds and continue the set. The goal is to exhaust the muscle.

I don't have any scientific evidence for this, but this was my regimen back in my Chippendale days. My A1C stayed in the good range and I maintained training weight, without any real diet restrictions. I think Chippendale days are long gone, but I's getting the results I need now.

 

[steve_bank]

Sounds similar to what I do.

I started with 5 pounds in a wheel chair in a nursing home.

When I got to assisted living I got 5,10,15,20,25 pound weights. When 5 pounds got easy I'd start with 10 pounds and go back down to 5 in a workout. Worked up to 25 pounds.


I have 30 pound weights but that doesn't do me anything to work up to it.

A backpack full of groceries could weigh 20 pounds. So moving 20 pounds without a lot of effort was my target.

Along with weights I have a step platform and a bike I got at a thrift store for $20 5 years ago.

An exercise I and others in my building do is climb a flight of stairs, walk across to the other stair well and go up another floor. Turn aroud and go back the same way. From the basement there are 6 flights of stairs.

 

[bilby]

I recommend avoiding all forms of stationary equipment (bikes, treadmills, rowers) if possible. It is boring to the point of being depressing to exert so much energy moving your legs and get absolutely nowhere.

I couldn't agree more. I have never used a gym; If I am going to walk, run, or cycle, I would like to see some trees, sunshine, dogs, and wildlife while I am doing it, thanks.

Of course it helps that I live in a place where rain is uncommon and temperatures are generally pleasant for at least nine months out of twelve.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If you walk up a hill the work(energy) done is force*distance. In this case distance is the height of the hill force = m*g, gravity. Total calories burned is wok done plus energy lost in your muscles.

If you run up the hill the work done is the same but you may lose more in the muscles and the motion mechanics is not exactly the same.

The number was given for walking a distance, not for walking uphill. The energy expended on lifting is generally a small portion of the total energy expended.

When you walk you lift legs against and push up and forward against gravity, work.

When you walk you may warm up from internal losses. When you run you burn more enegy per second and body temperature rises faster.

Definitely. The faster I am moving the less I want to wear/want cooler temperatures. I consider ideal hiking weather to be about 65F--not a temperature that would be all that comfortable while sedentary.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I remember hearing years ago how long you have to stay on a treadmill to work off the calories from just a jelly doughnut.

I make it around half an hour.

According to the electric Internet, a jelly donut has around 268 Calories (1,120kJ), and a 1km walk at 5km/h (3mph) burns around 1 Calorie per kg of body weight. A 100kg (220lb) person therefore needs to walk 2.68km (1 and two thirds miles) to burn off that snack, which at 5km/h would take a bit more than half an hour. Of course, an obese person might well be a bit more than 100kg, and the heavier you are, the more energy you burn when walking. So around half an hour seems like a good approximation.

Question--is that 1 calorie per kg-km dependent on speed

Yes. It assumes a roughly 5km/h pace; Going faster will burn more energy, and going slower will burn less.

Can you point me at more details?

and is it just body weight or total weight (counting anything you might be carrying)?

It would include what you're carrying too - you will obviously burn more energy if you're wearing a backpack full of rocks.

Of course it would--I was questioning whether the relationship was linear. Your backpack has no metabolic load, your body does. Counting photographic gear (by far the best way to see wildlife is to forget your camera) I typically hike with 20% of bodyweight--does that mean 20% more calories? And do fitness trackers actually figure this out or do they just work with the weight you enter? (Obviously, for basal metabolism the entered age/weight is being used.)

 

[steve_bank]

When you walk you are lifting weight, body weight.

Force of gravity is F=mass*acceleration = Newtons = body wight * g = kg*9.8m/s^2.

Even if you are walking slowly you are lifting one foot off the ground and your whole body comes up slightly as you move forward.

If you have a 50 pond pack as you step momentarily your body weight plus pack weifht is on one foot/leg as the loaded knee flexes.

That is why using two walking sticks when carrying a hevy pack takes load of the legs ad puts some of it on your arms.

You burn more calories standing still with a pack than without. Your muscles are costantly flexing to keep you upright.

Analytically it would require working out a work integral across your body for the walking motion. Work = ʃ Eˑdl.