The Calorie Equation
As an endurance athlete, I am often asked for nutrition advice. My knee-jerk reaction is to remind people that fitness awareness and dietary knowledge are two different things, and I am more of a novice on the latter subject than the former one. My sources of nutrition information would be the same as anyone else's, and I think we should leave the subject matter expertise in that field to the registered dietitians who earned the right to guide us. (One of my favorite quotes is from a friend who has a PhD in Nutritional Biochemistry who sarcastically says she is "so glad that there are so many chiropractors out there these days giving nutritional advice.") Still, although I am not an expert, I am someone who let his fitness spiral out of control (from a sub-5:00 miler weighing 140 lbs in high school to a tired-after-5-minutes walker who tipped the scales at 218 lbs by the time I was 21 years old) before learning to maintain a healthy lifestyle. I think my perspective on this subject places me in the minority, but I will try to explain my position.
There are two sides to the calorie equation: what you consume and what you burn. While 99% of Americans seem fixated on their intake, there is a small group of people who focus more on their fitness goals. It is no surprise that our country is split along those lines. The diet industry is worth billions of dollars to thousands of companies, and most consumers are under the impression that caloric reductions and magic shakes are an easier solution than catalyzing an exercise routine. In my experience of losing 50 pounds, it took a mixture of both strategies, with the fitness side of the equation trumping the nutrition side.
Let's do some simple math. Imagine your body composition, metabolism and activity level dictate that it would take 1,500 calories per day for you to maintain your current weight. Let's say that your goal is to lose one pound (3,500 calories) per week. In order to do that without increasing your activity level, you would have to find a way to reduce your caloric intake by 1/3 to 1,000 calories per day. Take a look at the labels and serving sizes on your favorite (or even your most despised and tasteless) foods. Do you really think it is feasible to maintain those numbers month after month? If you are replacing meals with shakes, your suppressed satiety will make it even more difficult to keep your food calories in the triple digits, especially if you have coworkers, friends or family members who invite you for lunch, dinner and cocktails. Leading a 1,000/day lifestyle might work for a few days, but it generally fizzles to a short-term "fad diet" rather than a lifelong path.
Now, let's look at the other side of the equation. I burn approximately 110 calories per mile when I run. In a light week of running, I log 20-25 miles and in a peak week, I put in 60-70 miles. Cycling, swimming and other aerobic activities also have high rates of caloric burn. Thus, in order for me to cut 3,500 calories per week from my equation without altering the way I eat, I would need to run 32 miles. At a pace of 7:30/mile, we're talking about a mere investment of four hours per week doing something that I already love to do. If I run more than that or supplement with other activities (or if I would rather not lose a pound a week), I can actually raise my caloric intake while maintaining my body weight. Those 32 miles per week would allow me to add 500 calories per day to my diet. As long as I am injury-free, I don't feel the same pressure of denial that I would with a reduced-calorie diet; I actually look forward to continuing my running every week. This lends itself to being more of a long-term lifestyle change than a short-term crash diet.
Thus, the missing ingredient for most people in the calorie equation is fun. Body weight = calories consumed - (calories burned + fun). While the enjoyment of the exercise doesn't have a number attached to it, if you remove it from the formula, the body weight tends to eventually increase. How do we increase the fun in our calorie equation? I'm a big believer in what I call "(s)miles" (or social miles). Working out with friends provides an encouraging social aspect to your routine while also inserting some latent accountability. Even if you simply start the workout with a friend and don't see or talk to each other until you are both finished, knowing that someone else is out there is often enough to keep your effort level where it needs to be. For me, joining a local race club provided the inspiration, friendships and training partners to prod me along from race to race. Even online fitness networks like DailyMile can provide an amateur athlete with the social component and accountability that they need to keep going.
Aside from (s)miles, the other way to ensure you have fun is to choose the right activity in the first place. If you don't enjoy running, why run? There are dozens of other activities that can help you balance your calorie equation. Pick one that you actually like! Keep in mind, though, that fitness becomes more fun as you improve. Even a runner like me hates the first 30-40 miles of every training cycle because I feel slow, lethargic and out of breath. That goes away as your fitness comes along. I used to absolutely hate swimming because I was horrible at it. Now, I look forward to heading down to the pool to log some yards, whether I have people to swim with or not. I actually enjoy swimming more than cycling these days, which is saying a lot, considering how much I have detested the water since I was a child.
So, I'm not saying that I lost 50 pounds by eating everything in sight and simply working out more. I certainly had to balance every part of the equation to make a change. What I am saying is that more Americans should take a look at logging (s)miles instead of hopping from fad diet to fad diet. In a country where 67% of our citizens are overweight or obese, obviously something isn't working. Since the vast majority of them are mostly sedentary, it doesn't take much research to pinpoint the problem. If every American burned just 1,000 more calories per week, I bet our health care costs would plummet and Congress would be able to debate something less controversial.
Comments