Our valued sponsor

Exercise versus eating

tongyun

Offshore Agent
Mar 3, 2009
132
0
16
Visit site
Just read a report that says eating is more important than exercise, but exercise is still beneficial. For example, running a mile burns about 150 calories for a man so to lose a pound, you'd have to run a marathon. However, by cutting back on calories, you can lose weight faster. What do you think?
 
I'm a little more on the 'path of least resistance' side, so I would prefer to eat less than exercise more. That snickers will taste good for about three minutes, but it would take almost an hour of heavy exercise to burn it off. I'd rather not eat it.
 
tongyun said:
Just read a report that says eating is more important than exercise, but exercise is still beneficial. For example, running a mile burns about 150 calories for a man so to lose a pound, you'd have to run a marathon. However, by cutting back on calories, you can lose weight faster. What do you think?
I think if you are living a natural life with a diet including a proper balance of all essential constituents, there is no need of any exercise. You can find it in villages where peoples are less prone to diseases and ailments due to their healthy and natural diet.
 
Assume you wont eat, then you won't be able to do exercise you will simply not have the energi for it.
 
If you don't exercise, all your bones and muscles will get weak. Then there will be no point in dieting. With every fall, you'll be breaking bones. Exercise is very important and the more exercise you do now, the more comfortable old-age will you experience. :)
 
Actually it should be a balance of both. I have friend who eats like there is no tomorrow and also exercises to keep himself fit and healthy. So I think it should be both dude!!
 

Latest Threads