The dumpy runner chick is a well-documented phenomenon. Fatties and their sympathizers constantly screech about how active they are, so the surplus weight must be genetics. Well, it seems science has solved the mystery.
Chicks who train for a marathon don't lose weight because their training isn't as intense as they think it is.
http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2015/10/on-...-gain.html
Basically, running isn't a very effective weight loss strategy, especially for women who don't put any effort into their running. But maybe the women are getting fitter, which would mean less fat and more muscle?
There goes that excuse. Fatties think that any movement beyond a purely sedentary lifestyle equals 'training for a marathon,' which would entitle them to eat like they've gone a week without sustenance. They undertrain and overeat, and then wonder why they're still fat.
And now you know why every 5k you've ever seen is full of fatties.
Chicks who train for a marathon don't lose weight because their training isn't as intense as they think it is.
http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2015/10/on-...-gain.html
Quote:Quote:
She conducted a small, simple pilot study, limited to her group of 64 charity runners, comparing their weight before starting the training program to their weight after completing it. About 11 percent of them did lose weight, but just as many gained weight (and of those who gained, 86 percent were women). But for the remaining 78 percent, their weight stayed almost exactly the same, even after three months of running four days a week.
Her results aren’t published yet, but they echo those of a 1989 study in which Danish researchers took 18 months to train a small group of sedentary people — 18 men and nine women — to run a marathon. By race day, the men had lost an average of five pounds. For the women, on the other hand, “no change in body composition was observed,” the researchers write. “This idea that you’re going to run a marathon and the pounds are going to melt away is not realistic,” Kennedy said. She’s currently coaching a group of high-school runners, and she and her co-director have a sad little joke: “You train for the marathon, and then you do the weight-loss program afterward.”
Basically, running isn't a very effective weight loss strategy, especially for women who don't put any effort into their running. But maybe the women are getting fitter, which would mean less fat and more muscle?
Quote:Quote:
Sadly, the marathon weight gain isn’t likely a result of increased muscle mass, Kennedy said. Instead, the reason this happens has more to do with psychology than physiology, with much of it stemming from a misunderstanding of the purpose of exercise.
There goes that excuse. Fatties think that any movement beyond a purely sedentary lifestyle equals 'training for a marathon,' which would entitle them to eat like they've gone a week without sustenance. They undertrain and overeat, and then wonder why they're still fat.
Quote:Quote:
For one, research suggests that most people assume they’re exercising harder than they actually are. Last year, a team of Canadian scientists published a study in which they asked their volunteers to run on a treadmill at what they felt was an easy pace and then pick it up to a vigorous one — with vigorous defined as increasing their heart rate to somewhere between 77 and 93 percent of its full capacity. The majority of the participants did just fine at estimating the easy pace, but not so for the vigorous one; most of them didn’t even increase their heart rate to 75 percent.
And this overestimation may be something novice marathoners are especially likely to do, most of whom are encouraged to adopt the “just finish” goal; it’s about getting the miles done and getting across the finish line, not running at any particular pace. That may mean they’re running a lot slower than they’re capable. “I don’t mean this in any derogatory way, but marathoning has really become accessible for everyone — which is amazing and wonderful,” Kennedy said. “But just because you cross the finish line doesn’t mean you were running at a really vigorous pace seven days a week … You’re so focused on going far, so you’re not necessarily doing a vigorous run.” Additionally, running a marathon sounds like a really impressive, intimidating goal — and, on the one hand, it is. But “if you really start to look at a lot of the novice training programs, people are running three or four days a week — it’s not an overly aggressive workout schedule. Even if you’re not training for a marathon, going to the gym three or four times a week — that’s not that out of the ordinary.” And this, by the way, is assuming that you actually do every single workout on your training plan.
Beyond that, the entire idea that the purpose of exercise must be to lose weight — to pay a penance for the junk you’ve consumed — is not ultimately a very useful one. “It helps with mental health, it helps with so many things, but we focus so much on weight loss,” Kennedy said. “We make exercise overwhelmingly annoying. You need to do it, but you should find joy in it, because, my goodness, it’s doing so many good things for you.” In fact, thinking of physical activity in terms of weight loss tends to backfire, anyway. In one study published last year by Cornell University’s Brian Wansink, people who were told to take a two-kilometer “exercise walk” ended up consuming 124 percent more M&Ms afterward than those who were told they were taking a “scenic walk.” You’d be better off thinking of exercise as something to be enjoyed, in other words, rather than something to be suffered through.
And now you know why every 5k you've ever seen is full of fatties.