My question is it better to..?

My mom and sister thinks since I ran for half-an-hour than eat a **** load makes it defeat the purpose of running, does it? Or is it better than not running at all and eating a **** load? Cause that is my argument haha :D

2 Answers

Relevance
  • Blah
    Lv 6
    9 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    Well of course running and eating a ton is better than not running and still eating a ton. xP But it still kind of makes the run pointless, as you'll gain the calories back that you burned but at least you won't be gaining so many calories as you would without running at all, lol.

    So, you should try to not eat as many calories as you burned, that way the run not pointless.

  • 9 years ago

    Eating counts way more calories than exercising. Luckily we metabolize 1500-2000 calories a day just by being alive. Eating does not defeat the purpose of exercise--apples to oranges. You still reap the benefits of exercise no matter what you eat. Sadly, your 30 minute run was more cardio than the average American exercises. It was good for your heart and your blood pressure.

    However, eating junk food does raise blood pressure and make you gain empty (non-nutritional) calories and fat, reversing /some/ of the effects of dieting. Although your sister is technically incorrect, I certainly can't blame her for pressuring you to eat healthier.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.