Exercise has numerous benefits, but weight loss might not be one of them. Jeffrey Isaac Greenberg 5+/Alamy
Engaging in regular exercise is extremely beneficial for overall health; however, it may not effectively lead to weight loss. Recent studies provide compelling evidence explaining this phenomenon.
While individuals who up their exercise routine often burn extra calories, weight loss usually doesn’t align with the caloric expenditure expected. A meta-analysis of 14 trials indicates that our bodies often compensate by reducing energy expenditure in other activities.
Notably, the compensatory effects are pronounced when one combines reduced caloric intake with increased exercise, effectively negating the hoped-for weight loss benefits of physical activity. In simpler terms, while dietary restrictions can lead to weight loss, increasing exercise alongside dieting may yield minimal additional benefits.
“The real challenge here is that when you combine exercise and dieting, the body compensates more aggressively,” explains Herman Pontzer of Duke University, North Carolina. “Exercise is still beneficial, but weight loss isn’t guaranteed.”
In his research on the Hadza hunter-gatherers of Tanzania, Pontzer found that despite their high activity levels, they did not expend more energy than sedentary individuals. This led him to propose, back in 2015, that our bodies may have evolved to conserve energy through reduced expenditure when faced with increased physical activity.
Although some studies support this compensation theory, not all experts agree. Pontzer and fellow researcher Eric Trexler at Duke have examined existing studies that were designed for other purposes, ensuring their analysis was unbiased. They analyzed 14 trials involving around 450 participants—small due to the rigorous methods needed to monitor total energy expenditure.
Their findings revealed an average energy expenditure increase of only one-third of expectations based on increased physical activity levels. For instance, if a person’s workout routine burns an additional 200 calories daily, these trials reported an overall increase of only about 60 kilocalories.
Interestingly, the results varied significantly. Those who maintained their caloric intake saw about half of the expected increase in total energy expenditure, while individuals who increased their physical activity while reducing their caloric intake often did not observe any significant changes. “They’re exercising 200 calories a day but seeing no tangible results,” Pontzer noted.
The type of exercise also plays a crucial role; compensation predominantly occurs during aerobic activities like running. In contrast, strength training appears to result in greater-than-expected energy expenditure. For example, individuals who burn an extra 200 calories from weightlifting tend to increase their total energy expenditure by approximately 250 calories per day.
However, Pontzer advises caution in interpreting these findings, as energy expenditure measurement during weight training can be challenging. He hypothesizes that weightlifters may deplete energy while repairing and building muscle tissue.
Initially, Pontzer believed the type of exercise might be negligible, but he now finds the insights exciting as they reveal unrecognized aspects of energy compensation. Despite the gains in muscle, weightlifting participants exhibited minimal fat loss, indicating it may not be a practical approach for weight loss.
So, why does an increase in aerobic exercise not lead to expected increases in energy expenditure? This analysis suggests that the body compensates by reallocating energy expenditures across various systems. For instance, the resting metabolic rate, particularly during sleep, can decrease with increased aerobic activity.
“Our body adjusts how different organ systems function post-exercise,” Pontzer says. “Understanding these changes could provide insights into how exercise benefits different individuals unequally.”
While Pontzer’s findings provide support for energy compensation, skeptics remain. Researcher Dylan Thompson from the University of Bath emphasizes the results of a meta-analysis suggesting aerobic exercise does not significantly affect resting metabolic rates.
Additionally, there might be critical research limitations, as pointed out by Javier Gonzalez, also at the University of Bath. For example, additional exercise might replace other daily activities like gardening, which could account for the lack of increased energy expenditure.
Nevertheless, Pontzer asserts that some studies effectively rule out this possibility, as compensation effects have also been documented in animal studies, corroborating human findings. Nonetheless, Thompson and Gonzalez argue for the necessity of more rigorous studies. “We require meticulously designed randomized controlled trials involving humans,” Thompson concludes.
Topics:
Source: www.newscientist.com
