Why it Really Is Harder for Women to Lose Weight

Washington Post ^ | 8/12 | Jennifer Van Allen

[nickcarraway]

You’re not imagining it: There really are differences between the way men and women diet, lose weight and respond to exercise.

Some of the differences stem from biology; other differences are behavioral. But though many of these seem to give men a head start, they shouldn’t be taken to imply that guys have it easy. No matter who you are or where you’re starting, the road to your ideal weight is difficult at best, and confusing for most.

But the information that researchers are unearthing about the differences in the way that men and women lose weight inspires hope that the next generation of weight-loss advice will be more tailored and effective than the generic tips that have gotten Americans no closer to sliding into their dream jeans. (More than a quarter of Americans are obese, according to a May Gallup poll, a number that has been ticking upward for years). Although experts have long insisted that losing weight is simply a matter of burning more calories than you consume, they now say that it’s much more complicated than that.

Exercise and nutrition First, there is the matter of muscles and metabolism. Men tend to have more muscle than women, and because muscle burns more calories than fat, men tend to have a faster metabolism, too — anywhere between 3 to 10 percent higher than women, studies have shown.

And at the gym, that difference just gets exacerbated. Women, worried about bulking up, tend to lift lighter weights and focus more on cardiovascular fitness, while men tend to gravitate toward the kind of heavy lifting that boosts muscle composition and metabolic rate, says Jim White, a Virginia Beach-based nutrition expert and certified personal trainer.

[conservativesister]

I have never heard of carbs needed to burn fat, what can I read to get more info

[MaggiesPitchfork]

Menopause sucks. I went from a 100-lb cutie who could eat everything in sight to a blob. Changing your eating habits is hard. Now I have to get rid of 35-40 pounds (on a 5-foot frame, that’s a LOT!).

[Enterprise]

Thanks for the good information!!!!

[GOP Poet]

bookmark

[ZOOKER]

As long as everyone's throwing out theories, I have one too.

I eat, by my estimation, at least twice as many calories as my spouse.

I work hard, but I never bother to exercise, while she walks daily and works out at the Y.

I grab my lunches wherever I can, too lazy to pack a lunch. Budget's tight so I end up scarfing a lot of greasy fast food. The wife has access to a kitchen and has much better health habits - her diet actually includes vegetables. That's something I can't claim, unless you include French fries.

Despite this, she consistently outweighs me no matter what new diet she's on.

Is it possible that her digestive system is simply more efficient than mine? I take in twice the calories, maybe it just passes right through...

[cloudmountain]

Thanks for the good information!!!!

You're welcome.

[cloudmountain]

I have never heard of carbs needed to burn fat, what can I read to get more info

EXERCISE burns fat. Carbs, with exercise, MELT the fat, liquify it so it, the liquified fat, can be used as fuel. It is a FABULOUS source of energy. Lol. I could run DAYS on my liquified blubber.

One more time: HARD LARD, as is on my hips, won't be used as fuel for exercise until it is liquified/melted. Carbs and exercise liquify my lard...and thus the fat fuels the exercise.
Remember, it takes a minimum of 20 MINUTES to BEGIN to melt the fat. After 30 minutes, all the carbs are gone, having done their fat-melting duty, and from then on--it's all fat burning.

If you have eaten no carbs that day, for some strange reason...then the fat has to be melted by SOMETHING. The body uses muscle to melt the fat and that is the WORST CASE SCENARIO.

Questions? I'll be glad to read them. This stuff was how I made my living.

[dfwgator]

Of course we need carbs. And what is meant by “Low Carb” is simply reducing the amount of carb intake back to the optimum level. But it simply has gone so sky high in recent decades, that it seems like such a radical concept.

[cloudmountain]

The key to weight control, as in any endeavor is self-disicpline.

So true.
It is a good thing to teach children about self-discipline when they are YOUNG and open to it.

However, it is NOT so easy to try to teach it to 75-pounds overweight people who used food all their lives to celebrate, enjoy, feel better, pass the time, etc.

[cloudmountain]

Of course we need carbs. And what is meant by “Low Carb” is simply reducing the amount of carb intake back to the optimum level. But it simply has gone so sky high in recent decades, that it seems like such a radical concept.

True enough.

We all used to be farmers or workers and COULD eat what we wanted. Now we work with our brains and lead PHYSICALLY sedentary lives.

LOL. So now we PAY to get someone to help us exercise.
There never used to be obese poor people--overfed and under worked. Now there are. The world is upside down.

[Gvl_M3]

I have read a modified version of your theory that may be easier to explain.

This is from “Paleo diet for athletes.”

The body has to have a certain amount of carbs to turn on the switch to start burning fat. If there are no carbs, the body tries to hold onto what it has. I don’t remember the exact ratios, but as a cyclist, for a 2-4 hr bike ride, I consume about 30g of carbs before, and every 45min during.

I have a lot more energy for the entire ride and I know the extra 200 calories from the carbs is way offset by the 1500 I burn during a ride.

Might look up the book. Lots of insights and research as to the right amount and when to eat carbs to allow the fat to burn most efficiently.

[nickcarraway]

This stuff is how I made my living.

Jane Fonda is that you?

[cloudmountain]

Jane Fonda is that you?

Lol.

She's in a new TV sitcom this fall, with Martin Sheen and others. Fonda's face is SOOOO thin. THAT has to be cosmetic surgery. Oh well, it's HER face and life, innit?

Jane fonda STARTING THE NEW SERIES, “GRACE & FRANKIE,” WITH LILY TOMLIN, MARTIN SHEEN & SAM WATERSTON.
This was a promo on Fonda's site.

ONE TO MISS!

[nickcarraway]

Wow, isn't that a huge dishonor for her to have to be in a sitcom?

Oh well, it's HER face and life, innit?

I thought you were saying it ISN'T her face.

[a fool in paradise]

LIFESTRONG (Internet) Men had an average of 72.6 pounds of muscle compared to the 46.2 pounds found in women. The men had 40 percent more muscle mass in the upper body and 33 percent more in the lower body.

And yet the bogus Body Mass Index insists that men and women should be of identical ideal body weight to height regardless of the composition of that "weight".

[cloudmountain]

And yet the bogus Body Mass Index insists that men and women should be of identical ideal body weight to height regardless of the composition of that "weight".

What? I'm not sure of what you are saying.
NO BMI requires any kind of sameness with gender or age.
Men and women the same weight if they are the same height? NEVER, in any context. Men are ALWAYS heavier. Their muscles are thicker. Bones are bigger.

From the Internet: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_mass_index

'BMI' provides a simple numeric measure of a person's thickness or thinness, allowing health professionals to discuss overweight and underweight problems more objectively with their patients.
However, BMI has become controversial because many people, including physicians, have come to rely on its apparent numerical authority for medical diagnosis, but that was never the BMI's purpose; it is meant to be used as a simple means of classifying sedentary (physically inactive) individuals, or rather, populations, with an average body composition.

Move more; eat less. It is that simple for most people. The BMI was in vogue YEARS and YEARS ago but now it's just a simple tool that SOME doctors still use.