vicarz: (Fat cell (from giantmicrobes.com))
vicarz ([personal profile] vicarz) wrote2008-12-11 09:45 am

(no subject)

Yoinked from gymrats: Diet soda makes you fat!?
The article is a good quick read - not conclusive, but gives an interesting idea: fooling your body only works in the short term; if your body learns to associate sweet taste with no sugar, you fail to have a normal increased metabolism response to real sugar. So when you drink the diet soda, no problem, but then you actually gain more weight when you drink OJ, cranberry (*cough* white-grape), or mocha (*cough* sugar).
Here baby, have some sugar
Sugar? I want sugar, but how do I know this is sugar? Last time you said sugar I didn't get no nuffin. You was up there all tastin and I was down here going "What?" I got all the place all warm and everything ready for the sugar, kept pumping out the sugar for everyone else and then...nuthin.
It's sugar baby, just taste that!
Puh-leez, that's the same bullshit you told me last time. I'm not getting nuthin warm, not sending out no energy, not a thing. I only have so much luvin to give, and just telling me sweet things isn't going to get you any more love - I dun learned my lesson.

I. Love. It. True or not, it's a good excuse for me to ditch diet soda and switch to real stuff. This would explain why I'm able to lose weight while eating chocolate (aka the truffle diet). My body knows it is getting sugar, it is getting sugar, and it reacts accordingly. Lies suck, even to yourself.

This means the same old bad news of course - if you want to eat sweets, you have to watch how much OR overcompensate with exercise (if the theory turns out to be true).

[identity profile] joanarkham.livejournal.com 2008-12-11 03:31 pm (UTC)(link)
Aw, I think it's kind of yummy. But then, I really liked the TAB energy drink so my taste is more than suspect.

I'm not running on the treadmill, just walking/jogging. I'm not a gym rat, just a big squishy person trying to get slightly less squishy.

[identity profile] vicar.livejournal.com 2008-12-11 03:36 pm (UTC)(link)
I think you might qualify - you've spent a lot of time in the gym, used to see you there all the time. You put in a lot of effort and show great discpline, but some of your effort isn't focussed in a way I'd recommend. I'm lazy, really, and highly recommend getting the most bang for your buck. You dedicate so much time already - just changing your program would give you more benefits for the same level of effort, IMHO

[identity profile] joanarkham.livejournal.com 2008-12-11 03:45 pm (UTC)(link)
I pretty much only have 30 minutes a day, right when I get up. My original plan was to supplement that with the personal trainer exercises in the evening, but I've been slacking off since I'm so exhausted by the time I get home.

Think I should do treadmill every other day and alternate with the personal trainer stuff?

[identity profile] vicar.livejournal.com 2008-12-11 04:06 pm (UTC)(link)
It depends what your goals are. You could go faster or up a harder incline and you could work out less time - using more effort during that time. You could also do the treadmill at night - but if you always do the same thing on it then your body will adapt to be as efficient as possible when doing that activity. In other words, you'll burn less calories the more times you do the same exercise.

This is why I'm running faster, doing more inclines, doing different types of exercise, and always increasing the weights I lift. The body adapts quickly so you have to keep "tricking" it.

[identity profile] joanarkham.livejournal.com 2008-12-11 05:09 pm (UTC)(link)
I've been alternating a "hill" program with an "intervals" program and just walking while using the weights. Which seems to not actually be such a good thing.

FWIW, the personal trainer had me working with 5 or 8 pound weights, doing curls and lifts and things. I was just doing them while walking. Perhaps my urge to multitask is counterproductive.
Edited 2008-12-11 17:11 (UTC)