Exercise for weight GAIN???

Recently I have been meaning to try to implement some sort of exercise routine, but for completely the opposite reason that most people do it. I hate exercise, but I think that is because mainly I have few reasons to think I need to. Mainly I haven't really seen the point, but I have to remind myself that that is only because of the reputation that exercise has nowadays as being a cure for whatever ails ANYONE.

Longevity is not an issue for me, nor is cardio-vascular health, as I normally outdo those I know that are exercisers in terms of wearing out. I went to New York with a friend that is up every day at 6 jogging for an hour, among other people who exercise much more than I do, and I noticed right away that they wore out much faster in the day than I did (in fact they all complained LOUDLY about my sightseeing pace), which was funny to me as an avid partaker of stationery activities primarily.

Anyway, as I have not really ever thought of needing to use exercise to loose weight, and in our culture that is primarily what it is associated with. In fact I have exercised even LESS in the last few years because I haven't felt well in other ways and I have not had any appetite, dropping 20 lbs. When your back kills you you don't FEEL like exercising even though you aren't any less comfortable running than sitting. But the irony is that I think the less active I have become the less I feel like eating, and it tends to be a vicious cycle that way to where I literally have no energy because I don't eat. Today for instance I ate two pieces of fish in addition to my prenatal vitamins, probably loosing some more fat today meaning I will eventually have to force feed myself something like ice cream which I do eventually.

It makes me wonder what exercise does to those that try it as a primary method of weight loss. It is obvious to me that those who rely on exercise without also attempting to modify their diet usually fail. I think that traditionally people blame this on overestimating how many calories that exercise actually burns, which turns out to not be a great amount over what is needed for just primary respiratory purposes.

This makes a lot of sense evolutionarily. More active people probably adjust to how active they are without needing significantly more food intake, or else it would be a lot harder to simply stay alive if you are active, and it turns out that evolution favors active people usually rather than punishing them. Also this can be explained in mathematical terms. I think a lot of people consider non-exercise like sleep or lying there as 0 and jogging as 100 in terms of rate of burning calories but it is probably more like 70 to 100, with simply maintaining bodily functions being a significant percentage of what is necessary, depending on physiology. I have a very high muscle tone naturally without exercise, seriously my muscles are rock hard like a man's so that is probably some part of why I seem to have a high metabolism, and why I probably dropped weight so fast after being unable to support it with eating a lot.

It also is an interesting theory for anyone needing to loose weight. Most people take to the gym or put on jogging shoes this time of year when they have resolved to loose a few, but a lot more effective method in my experience would be mimicking my lifestyle over the past five years. Try to be really really still without doing anything for two weeks, and I swear you won't feel like eating a bite. And since it is really food intake that counts, and exercising not that much more of a burden on the body than simply lying their immobile, I think it would do the trick.

Ever hear of the phrase "working up an appetite?" I think that the concept must be somewhere in folk wisdom even if popular culture has adjusted to the notion that skinny people exercise. Skinny people might, as it eventually becomes very difficult to be active if people are very overweight and usually healthy behavior clusters together, meaning that MOST of the time if someone has gone through the trouble of working out (at least for the purposes of loosing weight) they have also adjusted the amount they eat.

I would be interested if anyone tried it. I am going to be trying the opposite, that is if I can find a way to overcome my great inertia against exercise. People assume that I am not healthy because it is true I have been sick the last few years, but that doesn't mean I am easily fatigued or can't walk or run. Probably my inability to sleep (really my one and only health problem even though it is a serious one and hard to solve, well impossible actually) is related to the fact that I DON'T tire easily and need a whole heck of a lot of activity, more than I feel like performing, before my body feels worn out.

So I am cardio-vascular gold (my genes tend toward people whose tickers need to be stopped because everything else wears out first) and comfort-wise I swear I do even better running than I do just sitting or standing, and up until recently I thought that must be my imagination. But it really does make sense that I actually experience less pain when I am walking or running than when I am stationary. My chiropractor says that is because the muscles need to become rigid when holding the body in a sitting or standing position and they can become more relaxed when maintaining fluid motion.