Wouldn't it be great if Taubes was right and you could sit your lazy flat-ass even flatter without having to worry to miss a chance of losing weight? |
So, if exercise will only help you lose weight, if you don't fully compensate for the exercise induced extra-energy expenditure, the obvious and important question is: What determines to which extent the extra-energy that's consumed by your muscles during physical activity is compensated for?
If you exercise too much and don't compensate you are steering towards the Athletes Triad.
- Firstly, the overall mean energy compensation was 18% ± 93% - This may suggest that the average subject lost weight, but with a margin from -75% to 111% that's far from significant. And still, on average, the data indicates that exercise does not make those who get off the sofa and move their a$$ more hungry (one has to keep in mind, though, that not all of the studies allowed their subjects to eat as much as they wanted; in some cases where the energy compensation is negative, the subjects were simply required to diet)
- The analyses indicated that 48% of the variance of energy compensation is explained by the interaction between initial fat mass, age and duration of exercise interventions. The scientists even came up with an equation to determine the energy compensation in % for young and old individuals, respectively:
What both equations have in common is the fact that a constant coefficient is divided by the duration in days. In other words: The longer people exercise, the more they compensate, the lower the exercise-induced energy deficit.
Warning! You must not forget, that the duration and extent of an energy deficit will also determine the degree of "metabolic shutdown", or, as I prefer to say, "metabolic compensation" that will occur in form of a reduction of your resting metabolic rate. If you take this into account, a dietary compensation of 80% after say 40 weeks may well fully compensate the remaining energy deficit which has melted away due to the metabolic slowdown.
- It's also interesting to take a look at the more complex graphs of a model that includes the other two previously mentioned parameters: Age and fat mass at the beginning of the study.
- Sex, frequency, intensity and dose of exercise energy expenditure were not significant predictors of energy compensation. This is a bit surprising, as previous studies had suggested that women may be a bit more susceptible to exercise induced overeating (=overcompensation) than men, and that HIIT may less prone to cause people to compensate for the extra-energy they burnt than longer duration steady state exercise, but obviously these effects haven't been consistently observed in the studies the scientists reviewed.
Always hungry? Can't lose weight? "Train more and eat more" (to maxi-mize your energy flux) could be the solution, says study on the influence of energy flux on appetite and metabolic rate while dieting | read more |
This appears to be specifically true for those who are already normal-weight or old. For these individuals the data in Figure 1 clearly indicates that even in the "most productive" early weeks of an exercise regimen, any potential exercise-induced weight loss is stalled by an increase in food intake which (over-)compensates the extra increase in energy expenditure due to an increase in physical activity.
Speaking of which: Eventually, you do not exercise to be able to eat more (if you're still doing that you're a moron with an eating disorder and it's your fault you don't see those abs you keep asking me about in emails and messages on facebook), but rather to make sure that the weight you lose is fat, not muscle. If you keep that in mind when you're designing your workouts and diet plans you can easily avoid most of the fallacies of "losing weigh" | Comment on Facebook!
- Riou, Marie-Ève, et al. "Predictors of Energy Compensation during Exercise Interventions: A Systematic Review." Nutrients 7.5 (2015): 3677-3704.