Priorities!...

The foundations for successful riding

Re: Priorities!...

Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Tue Apr 14, 2009 1:29 pm

Fat loss comes about through a sustained calorie deficit.
User avatar
Alex Simmons/RST
Expert
 
Posts: 3437
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm

by BNA » Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:09 pm

BNA
 

Re: Priorities!...

Postby twizzle » Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:09 pm

Alex Simmons/RST wrote:Fat loss comes about through a sustained calorie deficit.


But there must be a metabolic rate tie-in, otherwise people would have consistent weigh loss for given input/output. Before my knees played up two years ago, I was consistently knocking off 1kg/week. Now I have to starve myself & kill myself to achieve the same results - and I HATE feeling hungry all the time. But, when I started racing (once or twice a week), even though the total k's were around the same or slightly less I started losing weight again... a consistent .5kg/week for about six weeks. Now there's a break from racing, I'm back to about .2kg - .25kg/week.

Shiteloads of references on the net about Human Growth Hormone triggered by lactic acid production. Not scientific, however.
I ride, therefore I am.
...real cyclists don't have squeaky chains...
User avatar
twizzle
 
Posts: 6382
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:45 am
Location: Taking a break.

Re: Priorities!...

Postby toolonglegs » Tue Apr 14, 2009 3:31 pm

Not sure exactly what Lactic Acid training is...but I feel like I go lactic all the time :roll: .Yes I know that weight loss is very simple in theory...eat slightly less than your daily needs and your body will convert fat to make up the difference.But everybody knows in practice it is never that simple.Like I have said my metabolism seems to be very slow.If I train very hard or long I do have to eat alot to recover...if racing / performance wasn't important I think I could drop weight pretty quickily...one thing I do notice is if I train late afternoon / early evening and don't eat a huge dinner I really lose weight quickily.I noticed this a lot when training 2 or 3 nights a week at Homebush in winter...maybe I need to concentrate on keeping my metabolism a bit higher at night and get back to a 45 minute walk before bed.I will get there...just taking longer than i hoped!.
Image
User avatar
toolonglegs
 
Posts: 14385
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:49 pm
Location: Somewhere with padded walls and really big hills!

Re: Priorities!...

Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Tue Apr 14, 2009 3:56 pm

twizzle wrote:
Alex Simmons/RST wrote:Fat loss comes about through a sustained calorie deficit.


But there must be a metabolic rate tie-in, otherwise people would have consistent weigh loss for given input/output. Before my knees played up two years ago, I was consistently knocking off 1kg/week. Now I have to starve myself & kill myself to achieve the same results - and I HATE feeling hungry all the time. But, when I started racing (once or twice a week), even though the total k's were around the same or slightly less I started losing weight again... a consistent .5kg/week for about six weeks. Now there's a break from racing, I'm back to about .2kg - .25kg/week.

Shiteloads of references on the net about Human Growth Hormone triggered by lactic acid production. Not scientific, however.

sounds more like you were simply burning more calories while racing, and probably eating less calories as well.
unless you are measuring accurately both the supply and demand side, you are just speculating.

at ~ 9kcal/gram of body fat, 250 grams of body fat =~ 2250kcal over a week (320kcal/day), which isn't hard to eat (or drink). 1 beer is half of that.
User avatar
Alex Simmons/RST
Expert
 
Posts: 3437
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm

Re: Priorities!...

Postby twizzle » Tue Apr 14, 2009 4:13 pm

And the other thing to consider is that the energy value of food is calculated by burning a sample in an sealed oxygen environment and calculating how much energy is released by measuring the temperature increase in the environment : there is no accurate picture of how this equates to food intake in the human body. Obviously pure fat or pure sugar is going to be absorbed really well, but what's a muesli bar really worth?
I ride, therefore I am.
...real cyclists don't have squeaky chains...
User avatar
twizzle
 
Posts: 6382
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:45 am
Location: Taking a break.

Re: Priorities!...

Postby Nobody » Tue Apr 14, 2009 6:31 pm

I may as well add to the speculation by saying that until the intensity increased in my exercise, I didn't lose much/any weight. Like others, I believe that intense exercise is an appetite modifier.

If I really want to lose weight I avoid bread and sugar. Appears to work for me.

Edit: Spelling correction.
Last edited by Nobody on Tue Apr 14, 2009 11:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Nobody
 
Posts: 6640
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Priorities!...

Postby Ant. » Tue Apr 14, 2009 8:45 pm

twizzle wrote:And the other thing to consider is that the energy value of food is calculated by burning a sample in an sealed oxygen environment and calculating how much energy is released by measuring the temperature increase in the environment : there is no accurate picture of how this equates to food intake in the human body. Obviously pure fat or pure sugar is going to be absorbed really well, but what's a muesli bar really worth?

Incorrect.
Nutritional labels quote the metabolic energy of the food, not the raw energy.
Cervélo R3
Cervélo P3C
BT Blade
Ant.
 
Posts: 758
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 8:34 am
Location: Perth

Re: Priorities!...

Postby Ant. » Tue Apr 14, 2009 8:52 pm

twizzle wrote:Shiteloads of references on the net about Human Growth Hormone triggered by lactic acid production. Not scientific, however.

Exercise, excitement, trauma, acute hypoglycaemia (bonking) all trigger growth hormone secretion (the latter being quite potent).


But remind me... what does growth hormone have to do with this, really?
Cervélo R3
Cervélo P3C
BT Blade
Ant.
 
Posts: 758
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 8:34 am
Location: Perth

Re: Priorities!...

Postby drubie » Tue Apr 14, 2009 11:00 pm

Nobody wrote:I may as well add to the speculation by saying that until the intensity increased in my exercise, I didn't lose much/any weight. Like others, I believe that intense exercise in an appetite modifier.

If I really want to lose weight I avoid bread and sugar. Appears to work for me.


Or switch exclusively to brown bread and wholemeal pasta and avoid refined wheat and sugar.

The only other thing that tore weigh off me in the past other than racing was the rowing machine at the gym. 15 minutes of that at a high setting for 6 weeks, five days a week was like carving chunks of fat off my own carcass in pain terms. It worked though. And, unlike swimming, didn't seem to come with the muscle bulking effect that TLL sees when he swims (me too - swimming for inefficient swimmers like me is basically a long weights session or it seems like it).
So we get the leaders we deserve and we elect, we get the companies and the products that we ask for, right? And we have to ask for different things. – Paul Gilding
but really, that's rubbish. We get none of it because the choices are illusory.
User avatar
drubie
 
Posts: 4617
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 10:12 am
Location: New England

Re: Priorities!...

Postby twizzle » Wed Apr 15, 2009 8:15 am

Ant. wrote:
twizzle wrote:And the other thing to consider is that the energy value of food is calculated by burning a sample in an sealed oxygen environment and calculating how much energy is released by measuring the temperature increase in the environment : there is no accurate picture of how this equates to food intake in the human body. Obviously pure fat or pure sugar is going to be absorbed really well, but what's a muesli bar really worth?

Incorrect.
Nutritional labels quote the metabolic energy of the food, not the raw energy.


I never said 'Nutritional labels'. However, you are fairly correct - the labels show estimated calorie value. Read the bit about the five official five official ways to estimate the caloric content of food products. The basis for the numbers starts with a bomb calorimeter. The rest is educated guesswork. And, from personal experience, if your digestive enzymes aren't up to scratch - it's all meaningless anyway, as you can't convert the food into simple sugars for absorption.
I ride, therefore I am.
...real cyclists don't have squeaky chains...
User avatar
twizzle
 
Posts: 6382
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:45 am
Location: Taking a break.

Re: Priorities!...

Postby twizzle » Wed Apr 15, 2009 9:11 am

Ant. wrote:
twizzle wrote:Shiteloads of references on the net about Human Growth Hormone triggered by lactic acid production. Not scientific, however.

Exercise, excitement, trauma, acute hypoglycaemia (bonking) all trigger growth hormone secretion (the latter being quite potent).


But remind me... what does growth hormone have to do with this, really?


You obviously know a fair bit about this, so you should probably be telling us.

But I think this sums it up for everyone else.

And I just did some poking around looking for the article on the 'eight second sprint, twelve seconds recovery' (see article quoted here), and the key is supposed to be Catecholamine. And there was me thinking it was related to driving yourself lactic with over-the-top sprinting... :roll:

Edit: HGH link changed to something less commercial.
Last edited by twizzle on Thu Apr 16, 2009 10:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
I ride, therefore I am.
...real cyclists don't have squeaky chains...
User avatar
twizzle
 
Posts: 6382
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:45 am
Location: Taking a break.

Re: Priorities!...

Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Wed Apr 15, 2009 12:14 pm

twizzle wrote:But I think this sums it up for everyone else.

Not for me it doesn't. :shock:

1. It's doping* to use such a product
2. We already burn mostly fat when sleeping or indeed during activity up to light to moderate exercise levels (we don't need extra HGH to do what our body already does naturally)
3. The fuel substrate used is irrelevant, it's total calories that matter
4. It makes no mention of potential undesireable side effects of using HGH

* as defined by WADA and as applied to our sport

Looking for these short cuts is really just the wrong way.
Train to get fit
Eat to get lean
Recover well

It's a hard sport, so be preapred for some hard work.

Metabolic disorders aside - but these are rare.

As an example of silly logic, since we burn what we eat, then if you want to "burn" more fat, then eat more fat ('cause that's what'll happen).
User avatar
Alex Simmons/RST
Expert
 
Posts: 3437
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm

Re: Priorities!...

Postby twizzle » Wed Apr 15, 2009 12:34 pm

Alex Simmons/RST wrote:
twizzle wrote:But I think this sums it up for everyone else.

Not for me it doesn't. :shock:

1. It's doping* to use such a product
2. We already burn mostly fat when sleeping or indeed during activity up to light to moderate exercise levels (we don't need extra HGH to do what our body already does naturally)
3. The fuel substrate used is irrelevant, it's total calories that matter
4. It makes no mention of potential undesireable side effects of using HGH

* as defined by WADA and as applied to our sport

Looking for these short cuts is really just the wrong way.
Train to get fit
Eat to get lean
Recover well

It's a hard sport, so be preapred for some hard work.

Metabolic disorders aside - but these are rare.

As an example of silly logic, since we burn what we eat, then if you want to "burn" more fat, then eat more fat ('cause that's what'll happen).


Doh! We aren't talking about doping, we are talking about effects of deliberately going lactic in training!
I ride, therefore I am.
...real cyclists don't have squeaky chains...
User avatar
twizzle
 
Posts: 6382
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:45 am
Location: Taking a break.

Re: Priorities!...

Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Wed Apr 15, 2009 5:33 pm

twizzle wrote:Doh! We aren't talking about doping, we are talking about effects of deliberately going lactic in training!

Hmmm. Well why post a link to an ad for HGH products?
I see nothing there about hard efforts on a bike and impact on metabolism.
User avatar
Alex Simmons/RST
Expert
 
Posts: 3437
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm

Re: Priorities!...

Postby twizzle » Wed Apr 15, 2009 8:35 pm

Alex Simmons/RST wrote:
twizzle wrote:Doh! We aren't talking about doping, we are talking about effects of deliberately going lactic in training!

Hmmm. Well why post a link to an ad for HGH products?
I see nothing there about hard efforts on a bike and impact on metabolism.


Because it gave (IMO) a concise answer to Ant's question :
But remind me... what does growth hormone have to do with this, really?


Some people can lose weight and gain muscle without any effort at all. There's a guy I ride with who only started riding again in October after six years off the bike, and went from struggling in E grade to kicking ass in B grade over the summer, lost ~10kg, and developed some of the biggest leg muscles I've ever seen - and he does around the same training K's that I do. Meanwhile, TLL and myself put in thousands of K's (TLL more so)... to stay pretty much where we were (weight). There is obviously more to it than just calories in/out. I'm not trying to cheat, I'm trying to work out if I can get back to the 1kg-per-week without starving myself and feeling dead all the time.
I ride, therefore I am.
...real cyclists don't have squeaky chains...
User avatar
twizzle
 
Posts: 6382
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:45 am
Location: Taking a break.

Re: Priorities!...

Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Wed Apr 15, 2009 9:10 pm

twizzle wrote:Some people can lose weight and gain muscle without any effort at all. There's a guy I ride with who only started riding again in October after six years off the bike, and went from struggling in E grade to kicking ass in B grade over the summer, lost ~10kg, and developed some of the biggest leg muscles I've ever seen - and he does around the same training K's that I do. Meanwhile, TLL and myself put in thousands of K's (TLL more so)... to stay pretty much where we were (weight). There is obviously more to it than just calories in/out. I'm not trying to cheat, I'm trying to work out if I can get back to the 1kg-per-week without starving myself and feeling dead all the time.

And that probably because:
- he eats fewer calories than you, and/or
- his basal metabolic rate is higher than yours (higher calories out), and/or
- his kms are harder than yours (higher calories out)

It's still calorie balance that results in fat gain/loss over the course of a period of time.

Attempting to drop 1kg / week is, IMO/E, not a sensible plan. Half that at the most would be better.

Slow changes are generally better as they indicate the in/out balance is sustainable and generally means the habits formed are easier to maintain and only minor adjustments are needed to move back into a calorie balance (rather than wild swings in food intake).
User avatar
Alex Simmons/RST
Expert
 
Posts: 3437
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm

Re: Priorities!...

Postby lemmiwinks » Wed Apr 15, 2009 9:38 pm

twizzle wrote:I'm not trying to cheat, I'm trying to work out if I can get back to the 1kg-per-week without starving myself and feeling dead all the time.


Bicycling Australia Jan/Feb 2009 page 78 Lose Five Kilos in Four Weeks. You could try that if you're keen (looked like a royal PITA to me but I'm not very committed), has a training and meal plan for the whole shebang. You can read it online though I don't know how much trouble/expense it is to register.
"...for many people your life is not worth the effort it takes to pay attention or the extra few seconds they may need to wait before they can safely get around you."-BikeSnobNYC
User avatar
lemmiwinks
 
Posts: 1249
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 8:34 am
Location: Northern Tablelands NSW

Re: Priorities!...

Postby twizzle » Thu Apr 16, 2009 11:23 am

lemmiwinks wrote:
twizzle wrote:I'm not trying to cheat, I'm trying to work out if I can get back to the 1kg-per-week without starving myself and feeling dead all the time.


Bicycling Australia Jan/Feb 2009 page 78 Lose Five Kilos in Four Weeks. You could try that if you're keen (looked like a royal PITA to me but I'm not very committed), has a training and meal plan for the whole shebang. You can read it online though I don't know how much trouble/expense it is to register.


I have the mag - I put it into the starvation diet category. Well - for me it would be starvation, for some of the weedy 70kg riders it might be more than they currently eat.
I ride, therefore I am.
...real cyclists don't have squeaky chains...
User avatar
twizzle
 
Posts: 6382
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:45 am
Location: Taking a break.

Re: Priorities!...

Postby drubie » Thu Apr 16, 2009 11:52 am

Alex Simmons/RST wrote:
Slow changes are generally better as they indicate the in/out balance is sustainable and generally means the habits formed are easier to maintain and only minor adjustments are needed to move back into a calorie balance (rather than wild swings in food intake).


I'd agree habits are important - there are lots of changes you can make to the average diet that don't seem like starvation but still reduce the overall amount of calories you eat. I think where a lot of people make mistakes is in thinking the health food section of the local supermarket has decent food in it. I don't exactly know when carob slathered biscuits and gluten free cakes became health food per-se, but the local Woolies in infested with that junk that has the same (or worse) number of calories than the rubbish it's substituting for.

However, If you're overweight, I think there's something to be said for a shortish period of faster weight loss as it can help your exercise efforts by making it not quite so unpleasant and making harder efforts more attainable and working on some goals so it makes it easier to transition to a period of calorie balance as your exercise requirements are not quite so onerous. Once you've reached that level of performance, it (to me) becomes easier to eat better as you realise the importance of better quality fuel as a component of your cycling and the achievement of "rewards" like a better average speed or smoking somebody who beat you last time.
So we get the leaders we deserve and we elect, we get the companies and the products that we ask for, right? And we have to ask for different things. – Paul Gilding
but really, that's rubbish. We get none of it because the choices are illusory.
User avatar
drubie
 
Posts: 4617
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 10:12 am
Location: New England

Re: Priorities!...

Postby Ant. » Fri Apr 17, 2009 2:42 pm

twizzle wrote:
Alex Simmons/RST wrote:
twizzle wrote:Doh! We aren't talking about doping, we are talking about effects of deliberately going lactic in training!

Hmmm. Well why post a link to an ad for HGH products?
I see nothing there about hard efforts on a bike and impact on metabolism.


Because it gave (IMO) a concise answer to Ant's rhetorical question :
But remind me... what does growth hormone have to do with this, really?


Some people can lose weight and gain muscle without any effort at all. There's a guy I ride with who only started riding again in October after six years off the bike, and went from struggling in E grade to kicking ass in B grade over the summer, lost ~10kg, and developed some of the biggest leg muscles I've ever seen - and he does around the same training K's that I do. Meanwhile, TLL and myself put in thousands of K's (TLL more so)... to stay pretty much where we were (weight). There is obviously more to it than just calories in/out. I'm not trying to cheat, I'm trying to work out if I can get back to the 1kg-per-week without starving myself and feeling dead all the time.

Incorrect, there is not more to it than calories in/out, some people just do a worse job at estimating what they burn and what they put in.
(However, there is more to going from E grade to B grade over summer than just weight loss :wink: )

Also, see what I done above? 8)
Cervélo R3
Cervélo P3C
BT Blade
Ant.
 
Posts: 758
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 8:34 am
Location: Perth

Re: Priorities!...

Postby lemmiwinks » Fri Apr 17, 2009 3:17 pm

twizzle wrote:
lemmiwinks wrote:Bicycling Australia Jan/Feb 2009 page 78 Lose Five Kilos in Four Weeks. You could try that if you're keen (looked like a royal PITA to me but I'm not very committed), has a training and meal plan for the whole shebang. You can read it online though I don't know how much trouble/expense it is to register.


I have the mag - I put it into the starvation diet category.


Me too!
"...for many people your life is not worth the effort it takes to pay attention or the extra few seconds they may need to wait before they can safely get around you."-BikeSnobNYC
User avatar
lemmiwinks
 
Posts: 1249
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 8:34 am
Location: Northern Tablelands NSW

Re: Priorities!...

Postby toolonglegs » Fri Apr 17, 2009 5:06 pm

I suppose you must bear in mind that my waist has gone from 98cm to 92cm while weight hasn't changed over the winter.
Image
User avatar
toolonglegs
 
Posts: 14385
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:49 pm
Location: Somewhere with padded walls and really big hills!

Re: Priorities!...

Postby toolonglegs » Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:59 pm

Eat late....gain weight!
Train late,eat little...lose weight faster than you can imagine!!!.

My new moto :lol:
Image
User avatar
toolonglegs
 
Posts: 14385
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:49 pm
Location: Somewhere with padded walls and really big hills!

Re: Priorities!...

Postby goneriding » Mon May 04, 2009 2:08 pm

There is a theory that for people who struggle to lose are burning the wrong thing. A friend of mine has a diet (from a Naturopath) that, funnily enough, is one that is very high in fat (e.g. Brie, double cream etc) and little else. The theory being that he is training his body to burn fat rather than whatever else it is that he is burning instead.

This is all he consumes for a week and this causes him to drop significant weight. You can only do this for a week at a time and you cannot train hard whilst doing this.

He swears by it.

Might be something to look into. It would be very tough in France to find Brie though :D
Image
User avatar
goneriding
 
Posts: 2240
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2007 3:14 pm
Location: Strathfield

Re: Priorities!...

Postby sogood » Mon May 04, 2009 2:16 pm

toolonglegs wrote:I seriously have to feel like I am starving myself to lose weight...oh well..thems the breaks.

If that's what it takes to loose weight, then so be it, make yourself feel like you've been starved. The fact remains, your present diet is not putting you in negative caloric balance hence no weight loss. So HTFU and feel the hunger! :mrgreen:
Bianchi, Ridley, Montague, GT, Garmin and All things Apple :)
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.
User avatar
sogood
 
Posts: 16934
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

PreviousNext

Return to Training

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users



Popular Bike Shops
Torpedo 7 Torpedo7 AU
Ground Effect Ground Effect NZ
Chain Reaction Cycles CRC UK
Wiggle Wiggle UK
Ebay Ebay AU

“Bicycles BNA Twitter
“Bicycles BNA Facebook
“Google+ BNA Google+
“Bicycles BNA Newsletter

> FREE BNA Stickers
> BNA Cycling Kit