24 Hours of Fat Burning From Exercise? article

http://www.webmd.com/fitness-exercise/news/20 090528/24-hours-of-fat-burning-from-exercise? page=1

so according to this article, should you not eat after or before working out?  I didn't get the message and the objective of it.

I don't think that article said anything we didn't already know.  It's calories in vs. calories out.  There wan't any new information.  It wasn't trying to tell us that we should or shouldn't eat before or after excercise.  It just said that if people aren't watching what they eat, they will tend to eat back all the calories they burned through excercise.

What dolphinclick said. I only read the first page briefly, but as far as I could tell, it was looking at endurance exercise - the afterburn from weight lifting (and HIIT, I believe) is greater than that from steady state cardio.

This is a pretty wonky article - like, they are misinterpreting their own study from what I can tell. I don't think the writer understands the study AT all for instance partitioning and post-exercise trauma would counter what they are claiming.

This is a pretty wonky article - like, they are misinterpreting their own study from what I can tell. I don't think the writer understands the study AT all - for instance partitioning and post-exercise trauma would counter what they are claiming.

Here is some good science.

I don't think there is any thing in the article that users of CC don't already know.  They found that you have to eat fewer calories than you burn to lose weight:

"The findings shouldn't discourage people from exercise, Melanson says, but rather inspire them to become more realistic about "calories in, calories out" -- and to expend more than they take in if they are trying to lose weight and body fat."

It is true that some people think that if they exercise they can eat anything they want and still lose weight but of course they can't.  You can't "out train" calories in > calories out. 

The article also indirectly points out that the "Fat Burning Zone" is a misunderstood concept by many dieters.  Burning fat is not the point of exercise.  Burning calories is the point along with all of the other health benefits you get from being active.

dolphinclick, i kind of though the same too, it's just about balancing calories regardless when you eat them, to not exceed more intake than you are burning off, but then it goes on about the effect of burning fat after you eat and before you eat and that had me going what's the direct point is.

legaleli, i agree it's incoherent.

honestly, i never thought that exercise would have a fat burning effect aftermath, exercise will only burn the calories as long as you are working out and that's it.  But weight lifting will still have your metabolism on fire, but only for brief period and the effect isn't strong enough to counter their calories you take in anyway.

WELLLL...I go on the advice of The Doctors tv show.  They said to eat 2-3 hours before exercise and then to eat again within an hour after exercising.  I try to eat 2 1/2 hrs. before I do my Pilates routine.  And then I eat some complex (low) carbs about 45 to 55 minutes after I finish. Fortunately, the main reason I do Pilates, anyway, is pain relief. I find that I'm more flexible and my Fibromyalgia and degenerated discs in my lower back don't bother me as much...as long as I do Pilates every day. (In my living room, of course.)