Wednesday 15 June 2016

"Eat less and move more": really not that simple(s)



I haven’t posted here for a while. Partly this is because I’ve realised that whilst I cook a lot of different things I do have a small-ish repertoire of mid-week regulars, most of which I’ve already talked about here. I’ve also switched my fast days to be a single meal in the evening and, at 500 calories, this meal is pretty much ‘normal’; whilst this is more convenient (no researching 250-300 calorie meals) it also means I have nothing to post about (no researching 250-300 calorie meals)! However after my last post I did draft a rant about diet and exercise expectations. Said rant sat on my computer waiting for me to cook, and photograph, one fast and one non-fast meal to include with it, that never happened. So I’m posting the rant now… 


Can we talk about how difficult it all this diet/exercise/healthy is?


No, I haven’t fallen into the chocolate mud cake of self-pity (haven’t fallen into any cake at all, unfortunately), what I mean is a refutation of those people who comment below the line on any article about rising obesity levels or the UK’s sugar tax (the BBC is a prime source for this). Their comments always seem to read ‘Just eat less and move more, simples’.


If using the phrase ‘simples’ hadn’t been enough for me to hate them with a fiery passion then the substance of their comment would do the job. If it really is that simple then why is there a global, billion-dollar diet industry? Why are there personal trainers, nutritionists and about 3 million people like me trying to figure out what works for them and blogging about it. Eating less and moving more is the way to lose weight in the same way that getting paid more and spending less is the sure way to be less poor; it’s so reductive as to be completely useless as advice.


Sometimes below the line commentators are slightly more thoughtful, giving a nod to the complexities of diet and exercise (and to my eternal relief, not using inanities like ‘simples’). Sample comment: ‘Just cook meals yourself from whole foods and do a mix of cardio and resistance training’ (this is a typical comment left under a Guardian story describing a new diet and fitness programme or extoling the wonders of this month’s superfoods). It’s good advice and would probably work, but by beginning it with the word ‘just’ the commenter has still revealed that they have the empathy of a mosquito.


I think there are three main limiting factors (with substantial crossover between them) on people’s ability to follow a healthy lifestyle:

  • Time
  • Money
  • Inclination



Let’s start with time. Exercising takes time, cooking takes time. I think I normally spend about six and three-quarter hours exercising in a week and probably another two to three hours travelling to and from exercising/showering afterwards etc… cooking takes up another  five to nine hours a week I’d guess. If I had a job that demanded longer hours, if I had children, hey, probably if I cleaned my own house or had a longer commute, I wouldn’t have that kind of time. Undoubtedly I could do all my exercise close to home, I could do time-efficient high intensity stuff, and I could just eat grilled chicken breast with steamed vegetables every night but I can’t imagine anything worse (see also inclination). What if someone who doesn’t have the time I do, also can’t imagine anything worse?


Cost: Having paid for a batch of riding lessons and a batch of yoga classes in one week recently, the cost of exercise has been at the forefront of my mind. Given, I live in a very expensive city, but I’ve just done some quick calculations and I’m on to spend the equivalent of a third of my total salary my first year out of university on exercise this year, and that’s not including any equipment or the feeding of my unfortunate lululemon addiction – woah! I have expensive tastes; I take horse riding, do Bikram yoga and find that having a personal trainer twice a week is about the only way I’m going to lift. Some of the cost is accounted for by convenience (see time) for example I’ve included there the cost of a gym at work as well as the club in my village. Eating well is expensive too I think though I’m not about to fill my trolley with chicken nuggets and ready meals one week to be able to do a comparison (I think it would probably be cheaper though).


My third limiting factor, inclination, is connected to both the first two. I’m lucky in that I have an enormous inclination to cook. I love, rather than begrudging, the hours a week I spend in my kitchen. I suspect that if the time and/or the money I had available was reduced, I would still make cooking from scratch a priority. 


Although I know some people do, I don’t love exercise. I consider it important, by a process of elimination I have identified activities I enjoy doing that count as exercise (and the great thing about that is that when you’re used to exercising six days a week and suddenly can’t get to a planned class you’re dependent enough on your endorphin boost to drag your butt out for a run). If my available cash and time were slashed, would I go for a run three days a week and brave the intimidating weights rooms at the gym without the emotional pacifier of a personal trainer on the other three days? I’d love to say yes but in all honesty, probably not. Running doesn’t feel good, and I feel stupid and self-conscious in the weights room without someone to tell me what to do. 


That’s my rant over. I am looking to start posting more regularly so fingers crossed I think of something to talk about; any suggestions gratefully received :-)