Is there a difference in effectiveness between "intake vs exercise" deficit?

Technically, a 500 cal deficit should be a 500 cal deficit, no matter how you get it. But my question is...is it? Maybe the best is to aim for 250 of each? I have no idea!

What do you think?

IMO a deficit is a deficit.  The amount your body burns just to survive + the amount you burn in exercise - caloric intake = deficit.

That being said it is important that you get regular exercise and eat a balanced healthy diet.

The difference, I think, will be in your end result.  Both will make you lose weight, but assuming you're doing only one or the other, if you only focus on exercise, I think you'd definition/have a more lean physique after the weight loss than you would if you focused only on diet.  But as lynnmm said, diet + exercise is the best route.

Well, it is easier for me to input my food and feel that I have a pretty good idea how much I ate than to walk for an hour and know how much I burned -- how fast was I really going, how far did I walk, etc.  So, although I think exercise is key to a healthy lifestyle, I don't really adjust my calorie intake each day based on how much I exercised.  I just set my activity level at "light", decide on a calorie intake that is about 500 less, and figure that if I have a heavy workout day it will all come out in the wash.  But then, I am not an athlete and don't ever burn enough to kick me into too high a deficit.

Over the past 3 months my deficit has averaged about 700 (based on weight lost), so I figure that I burn about 200 extra in exercise beyond "light" per day, on average, so my total deficit is still in a healthy range.

A 500 calorie deficit is going to lead to the same amount of weight loss no matter how you achieved said deficit.  That being said, the compositon of the weight lost (how much from fat vs how much from lean tissue) can be affected by the type of exercise you do and the type of food you eat.

The deficit caused by exercise alone will probably be easier to do, and it may result in raising your metabolism, allowing you to burn more at rest.  And it is good for you in so many ways!

A deficit caused by cutting food risks lowering your metabolism and, as floggingsully said, losing muscle.

Original Post by puh8suwrux:

The deficit caused by exercise alone will probably be easier to do, and it may result in raising your metabolism, allowing you to burn more at rest.  And it is good for you in so many ways!

A deficit caused by cutting food risks lowering your metabolism and, as floggingsully said, losing muscle.

This. I think deficits created by exercise are easier to maintain (because you can still eat a lot, and get in a wider variety of nutritious food). That said I'm also an advocate of eating clean - no processed junk, just lots of fruit and veges, wholegrains, protein and some fat.

You can't out-train a bad diet, but if you exercise you can eat healthily - but more of it.