I overheard some ladies talking yesterday and instructing their kids not to get in the ocean. Here are two of their reasons: 1) they just had lunch and lady said you'll get cramps, you can't swim for an hour, and 2) your face will turn to scales while food is in your stomach.
Later, a young woman was advising me on my newest problem, leg cramps, and she told me it was impossible for me to get leg cramps because I wasn't sprinting. She said that leg cramping is caused from dehydration and only a person who sprints will get dehydrated; not distance people, so she suggested I see a doctor.
We all know these are pretty ridiculous, have you overheard anyone advising others about "their myths?" The people making these comments were from England.
I guess it is just that you eat more than you spend while swimming. But you tone your muscles and look better. Here is the deal: swimming will make you lose weight, but it takes too much time if you are not in it full time or as a student, college whatever. Running or weights or cycling on the other hand takes less time to spend more energy. I lost once 12 pounds true weight over a two week period walking up and down mountains for a minimum 10 to a maximum 25 miles every day. A couple of months later I got it all back. Walking will make you lose weight, if you walk about 6 hours a day. billy fanstone
P.S. The lipo thing, it is done in your arm pits and areas around, when you are doing *** surgery. They even lipo suck you in the back. I am talking from a perspective of someone who is participating actively in this activity by making sure no pain is felt during all this lipo sucking away.
The whole problem with swimming doesn't drop weight and running (insert your favorite here) does is that people generally don't compare comparable workouts. You walked 10 to 25 hours on mountain trails. it probably took you 3 to 8 hours. If you were to swim continuously for the same time period for two weeks, you would have lost weight and probably about the same amount of weight. (Of course your skin would have looked like prunes probably.)
Some of the things I would suggest contribute to the myth:
1) Most people don't understand that swimming a workout is a whole lot different than just swimming. We had a health program here at work that tracked exercise and attempted to convert it to a common denominator - walking steps. The conversion was ridiculous. Running an 8 minute mile got you more than swimming for 5 minutes even if you did 500 yards in that time because they didn't differentiate effort. I will give then credit though, they did differentiate strokes although I have no idea where they got their data.
2) When someone starts swimming they are more likely not to see a drop in weight than a runner because of the nature of the sport. The swimmer will be using muscles in the upper body that are not used much and can gain significant muscle mass (which is denser than the fat they are using). A person who takes up walking or moderate running is doing something they naturally do on a daily basis so the potential for rapid increase in muscle mass is lower. Hence they see the loss in weight more quickly.
The problem with the myth is that it is answering the wrong question: can a sport make me loose weight. The real question should be something like: can a sport make me healthier and more fit. Swimming can definitely do that.
Leo
I guess it is just that you eat more than you spend while swimming. But you tone your muscles and look better. Here is the deal: swimming will make you lose weight, but it takes too much time if you are not in it full time or as a student, college whatever. Running or weights or cycling on the other hand takes less time to spend more energy. I lost once 12 pounds true weight over a two week period walking up and down mountains for a minimum 10 to a maximum 25 miles every day. A couple of months later I got it all back. Walking will make you lose weight, if you walk about 6 hours a day. billy fanstone
P.S. The lipo thing, it is done in your arm pits and areas around, when you are doing *** surgery. They even lipo suck you in the back. I am talking from a perspective of someone who is participating actively in this activity by making sure no pain is felt during all this lipo sucking away.
The whole problem with swimming doesn't drop weight and running (insert your favorite here) does is that people generally don't compare comparable workouts. You walked 10 to 25 hours on mountain trails. it probably took you 3 to 8 hours. If you were to swim continuously for the same time period for two weeks, you would have lost weight and probably about the same amount of weight. (Of course your skin would have looked like prunes probably.)
Some of the things I would suggest contribute to the myth:
1) Most people don't understand that swimming a workout is a whole lot different than just swimming. We had a health program here at work that tracked exercise and attempted to convert it to a common denominator - walking steps. The conversion was ridiculous. Running an 8 minute mile got you more than swimming for 5 minutes even if you did 500 yards in that time because they didn't differentiate effort. I will give then credit though, they did differentiate strokes although I have no idea where they got their data.
2) When someone starts swimming they are more likely not to see a drop in weight than a runner because of the nature of the sport. The swimmer will be using muscles in the upper body that are not used much and can gain significant muscle mass (which is denser than the fat they are using). A person who takes up walking or moderate running is doing something they naturally do on a daily basis so the potential for rapid increase in muscle mass is lower. Hence they see the loss in weight more quickly.
The problem with the myth is that it is answering the wrong question: can a sport make me loose weight. The real question should be something like: can a sport make me healthier and more fit. Swimming can definitely do that.
Leo
