BNA Losers Club 2014

I'm not a doctor but… 
Cycling injury, recovery and health issues.
Forum rules
The information / discussion in the Cycling Health Forum is not qualified medical advice. Please consult your doctor.

Re: BNA Losers Club 2014

Postby TheWall » Tue Aug 12, 2014 7:48 am

TheWall wrote:
TheWall wrote:
Almost 40 (aaarrgghhhh!!!!)
192cm
Shot knees so can't run...bike riding it is!
Start 11/6 - 116.6kg
Now 11/7 - 112.7kg.

Matt


Update.

26/7 Big day today....confirmed 2nd day in a row of measuring at 109.9kg (making sure it was no fluke!). 1st time under 110kg in I think about 4 years...

Wahoo!

On a side issue, do people in this thread always check in on the scales at the same time of day? I have picked 1st thing in the morning as it seems like it would be the most consistent measurement time without the interference of food and drink?

Matt


Time for fortnightly/monthly spot check in. Weighed in at 109.5 and I am much fitter than last month with an avge of 200klm plus per week now the norm. Even cranked out a pretty hilly 100klm on Sunday around Noosa and hinterland.

Saw consistently low108's last week so my thinking is that my body is still in recovery from the 100 and it is retaining fluid in this time. Seems to be consistent with others in this thread.

Will revert to the now standardb30-50 klm rides as that seems to be the thing that is working.

We all should be pretty happy with the results listed here and even if the benefits are not showing on the scales all of the time, I reckon the story on the inside of the body would be all good news.

Matt
TheWall
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:51 pm

by BNA » Tue Aug 12, 2014 12:43 pm

BNA
 

Re: BNA Losers Club 2014

Postby casual_cyclist » Tue Aug 12, 2014 12:43 pm

TheWall wrote:Time for fortnightly/monthly spot check in. Weighed in at 109.5 and I am much fitter than last month with an avge of 200klm plus per week now the norm. Even cranked out a pretty hilly 100klm on Sunday around Noosa and hinterland.

A hilly 100 is a great achievement! :D

TheWall wrote:We all should be pretty happy with the results listed here and even if the benefits are not showing on the scales all of the time, I reckon the story on the inside of the body would be all good news.

You are so right about that. I weigh myself out of interest but knowing my belt is getting looser is far more important to me than a number on a scale. Also, 6 weeks ago I struggled to run for a minute. Now I can run 2.5 km. That's big for me because I'm not a natural runner. I'm hoping to do a sub 25 minute 5 km run in September. There is a lot more to life than a number on a scale.
<removed by request>
User avatar
casual_cyclist
 
Posts: 7328
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:41 am
Location: Kewdale

Re: BNA Losers Club 2014

Postby CKinnard » Tue Aug 12, 2014 1:46 pm

some truth in what you say wall. My belt is certainly feelign looser despite the stall in weight loss.
maybe my legs are beefing up. my 20 minute TT interval has improved from ~35kph to 37kph in the last 3 weeks, and I am sustaining 40kph for 6 minutes. And even bought a new pair of jeans today! size 87cm! :)
CKinnard
 
Posts: 176
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: BNA Losers Club 2014

Postby barefoot » Tue Aug 12, 2014 2:56 pm

CKinnard wrote:And even bought a new pair of jeans today! size 87cm! :)


:-(

I've probably told the story somewhere on this forum already about my last jeans buying experience.

If I want jeans that I can pull up over my thighs, I'm looking at size 38. And even then most of them are skin-tight (despite the tag calling them "baggy" or "relaxed fit").

The problem there is that my waist is about 32". 6" is a lot of waistband to haul in with a belt :-(

So... I figured... half the world's population are more prone to having big hips, big thighs, and small waist than the other half. I'm shopping on the wrong wall of the jeans shop.

Turns out... most womens' jeans are also gaping at the waist if they're big enough to fit my hips and thighs :-(

Luckily, Jeans West have a "curve embracer" line, especially for voluptuous girls like me :oops: ... and it turns out, the size 12 is not a bad fit at all :lol:

The downsides are that womens' jeans have a dysfunctional short zip, which is not quite long enough for... ahem... the purpose for which men require jeans to have a zip... , and also that they have stupid little pretend pockets that aren't deep enough to actually store anything in. I'm man enough to wear girly pants, but I'm not going to start carrying a handbag for my keys and phone :x

Anyway, the last few months my girly size 12 jeans are a bit more booty-hugging than they were when I bought them. Hence my participation on this thread.

Check-in: I have dropped pretty quickly from 86kg to 84kg in the first week or so (sustained over a few days in both cases). Probably a bit of residual bleugh leaving my system.

I've started logging food and exercise on MyFitnessPal, calibrated for a 0.5kg/week loss (which gives me about 7000 kJ/day quota). As somebody who has never counted calories before, it's a very useful tool... even just to quantify and take notice of which foods are absolute energy bomb disasters, and how inconsequential other foods are. Immediate action is to load my dinner plate sky-high with non-starchy vegetables, to make up for smaller helpings of yummy meaty saucy things. Shovel the peas and carrots down the hatch first (ho hum), then enjoy the good stuff once I'm almost filled up.

Big shock was one day I was out on the road at lunch, and defaulted to a not-pretending-to-be-healthy-but-not-excessive lunch of a pie and a sausage roll. OMGosh calorie bomb! Way to demolish most of a day's energy quota in one not-very-satisfying hit!

Another surprise has been just how much energy gets absorbed by cycling. Again, noting that I've never counted calories or done any kind of energy balance calculation. I've just believed the conventional wisdom that you exercise for performance and eat for weight. Sure, that's good advice, but it's hard not to see the massive difference in your balance sheet if you drop a 6500 kJ 2-hour early morning bunch ride on top of your default 7000kJ energy budget for a Saturday :lol: .

Now I'm getting the hang of what an energy-balanced day looks like, missing a bike commute - even just my short 6km each way - is a massive blow to my budget. Hard to make up the difference by reducing food intake.

I'm obsessing over it a bit at the moment, which is obviously not going to last, but it's an education process. Helping to work out what a new normal could be, and what it can't be (sausage rolls and CBF commuting days).

tim
User avatar
barefoot
 
Posts: 988
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 10:05 am
Location: Ballarat

Re: BNA Losers Club 2014

Postby CKinnard » Tue Aug 12, 2014 3:23 pm

nice insights Tim. half a kg a week is a good rate to avoid losing strength.
I know a few cyclists that would struggle to get into a normal pair of jeans, due to massive thighs vs waist.

These 87cm jeans are stretch :) but I still measure 97cm around the waist (105cm buttocks, 53cm mid thigh). Obviously the sham of women's fashion and dress sizes has infected men's fashion too. Nevertheless, an 84cm waist is my end goal.

glad you are getting illumined by the MyFitnessPal experience. The science says those who lose weight most successfully, then keep it off, are those who have counted Calories at some stage. Until I did it myself, I really had no idea how much energy was in anything. It can be a pain, but after doing it for a month or so, you should be educated for the rest of yoru life. A massive return on investment imho.

Re your cycling, be careful on the calcs there. Don't know how you are deriving your figures, but I haven't found an app yet that is accurate for energy expenditure on a bicycle. They all overestimate significantly. To get a clearer indication of your net energy burn on the bike, a power meter is the gold standard...or if you use strava, multiply their average watts by 3.6 to get net Calories burned on the bike (and again by 4.2 to get kJ). To include BMR, multiply average watts by 4. Of course, if you don't use a power meter, and draft a lot, you'll over-estimate.
CKinnard
 
Posts: 176
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: BNA Losers Club 2014

Postby casual_cyclist » Tue Aug 12, 2014 3:34 pm

Ahhh... jeans. I got small enough to buy 'skinny' jeans (skinny for me but normal for other people). Problem is that I can barely get them over my calves :lol: Once on, they are fine. I was really lucky the other day to find $4 jeans in Target that are perfect. At that price I got two pairs. One for now and a smaller pair for later.
<removed by request>
User avatar
casual_cyclist
 
Posts: 7328
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:41 am
Location: Kewdale

Re: BNA Losers Club 2014

Postby TonyMax » Tue Aug 12, 2014 3:35 pm

I managed to get in a new pair of suit pants and a couple of pairs of shorts at my best a few months ago, but I didn't do new jeans, and now I pretty much fit into my old ones again :(.
Image
User avatar
TonyMax
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 10:23 am
Location: Northside Canberra

Re: BNA Losers Club 2014

Postby barefoot » Tue Aug 12, 2014 3:52 pm

CKinnard wrote:Re your cycling, be careful on the calcs there. Don't know how you are deriving your figures, but I haven't found an app yet that is accurate for energy expenditure on a bicycle. They all overestimate significantly. To get a clearer indication of your net energy burn on the bike, a power meter is the gold standard...or if you use strava, multiply their average watts by 3.6 to get net Calories burned on the bike (and again by 4.2 to get kJ). To include BMR, multiply average watts by 4. Of course, if you don't use a power meter, and draft a lot, you'll over-estimate.


Indeed.

My Powertap said I put out 1442 kJ on Saturday's ride (somebody let the quick guys get to the front and I suffered like a dog trying to keep up :lol: ). MFP called it ~6500 kJ burnt... as far as I know, the rule of thumb is to assume ~25% efficiency, so it was probably closer to 5800 kJ. So, yeah, I should have corrected MFP. Either way, it's a massive chunk of energy to add to a 7000 kJ baseline "goal". And either way, I didn't come close to scoffing my way through the shortfall. It was a significant energy deficit day, to make up for a few significant energy surplus days :oops:

For commutes... yeah, it probably overestimates. But it doesn't allow for the fact that I'm commuting on a singlespeed, hauling a pannier. Even so, I try to underestimate my commute speed to bring the energy estimate down a bit. Still, 15 minutes each way even at very modest power adds a couple of beers [1] or pizza slices to my daily intake allowance. Or more to the point, takes them out of my allowance if I don't ride to work.

tim

[1] that's one surprise from the MFP database - beer (in moderation) isn't nearly as terrible as I expected it to be. A 586 kJ stubbie of my usual brew has less energy than a glass of full-fat milk. I wouldn't have guessed that.
User avatar
barefoot
 
Posts: 988
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 10:05 am
Location: Ballarat

Re: BNA Losers Club 2014

Postby toolonglegs » Tue Aug 12, 2014 5:11 pm

Feb 26 ... BMI 26
Mar 19 ... BMI 26.1
Aug 12 ... BMI 26
Considering the amount of 7 course degustations going on I am happy to be stable! ... Testing out the chefs vegan talents for another month then I will try and lose some!. Some of them have been rather impressive with their non meat improvising :lol:
Image
User avatar
toolonglegs
 
Posts: 14381
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:49 pm
Location: Somewhere with padded walls and really big hills!

Re: BNA Losers Club 2014

Postby CKinnard » Tue Aug 12, 2014 8:53 pm

barefoot wrote:Indeed.

My Powertap said I put out 1442 kJ on Saturday's ride (somebody let the quick guys get to the front and I suffered like a dog trying to keep up :lol: ). MFP called it ~6500 kJ burnt... as far as I know, the rule of thumb is to assume ~25% efficiency, so it was probably closer to 5800 kJ. So, yeah, I should have corrected MFP. Either way, it's a massive chunk of energy to add to a 7000 kJ baseline "goal". And either way, I didn't come close to scoffing my way through the shortfall. It was a significant energy deficit day, to make up for a few significant energy surplus days :oops:

For commutes... yeah, it probably overestimates. But it doesn't allow for the fact that I'm commuting on a singlespeed, hauling a pannier. Even so, I try to underestimate my commute speed to bring the energy estimate down a bit. Still, 15 minutes each way even at very modest power adds a couple of beers [1] or pizza slices to my daily intake allowance. Or more to the point, takes them out of my allowance if I don't ride to work.

tim

[1] that's one surprise from the MFP database - beer (in moderation) isn't nearly as terrible as I expected it to be. A 586 kJ stubbie of my usual brew has less energy than a glass of full-fat milk. I wouldn't have guessed that.


presume you meant 1442 Calories on Sat's ride. (6000/4.184)
you'll eventually get good at estimating your energy spend based on intensity.
this offers reasonable insight into cycling intensity and Calories burned
http://brisbanebike.blogspot.com.au/201 ... cling.html

yeah beer isn't too bad.....though the problem is stopping at one or two :)

what becomes apparent is the superiority of bulking up most meals with vegetables/salad....25 Cals/cup versus 200 for rice and pasta!
CKinnard
 
Posts: 176
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: BNA Losers Club 2014

Postby barefoot » Tue Aug 12, 2014 9:29 pm

CKinnard wrote:
barefoot wrote:My Powertap said I put out 1442 kJ on Saturday's ride ... MFP called it ~6500 kJ burnt... as far as I know, the rule of thumb is to assume ~25% efficiency, so it was probably closer to 5800 kJ.


presume you meant 1442 Calories on Sat's ride. (6000/4.184)


No, I mean I put out 1442 kJ of work.

http://app.strava.com/activities/177464149

Putting out 1 kJ of work with your legs requires you to burn ~4 kJ of fuel. That's the 25% thing.

As you're alluding, 1 Cal turns out to be about 4 kJ. So putting out 1 kJ of work requires you to burn about 1 Cal of fuel. Which is 4 kJ of fuel.

So, yeah, I put out 1442 kJ, which means I burnt about 1442 Cal of fuel, which is about 5800 kJ of fuel.

I'm an engineer. I prefer not to work in medieval dark-age units like Cal. I have enough desk-head moments at work dealing with stupid American machines that want to measure rotational inertia in slugs instead of kg.m^2. Let's stick with sensible SI units, please :lol:

tim
Last edited by barefoot on Wed Aug 13, 2014 7:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
barefoot
 
Posts: 988
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 10:05 am
Location: Ballarat

Re: BNA Losers Club 2014

Postby CKinnard » Wed Aug 13, 2014 6:52 am

ok, I got you now. you meant energy through the power meter.
I use Calories still because I learned energy content of many foods decades ago, and find it easier to remember a lot of smaller numbers than larger kJ's.
Plus it's easier to multiply watts by 4 to get total Cals, than 16.7 to get kJ :)
Nevertheless, you are right. We're all supposed to be using Si.
My diet consists of 6 grams of seeds in my smoothie, which would be 0.2 ounce...which highlights how inadequate these imperial units are as a food measure.
CKinnard
 
Posts: 176
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: BNA Losers Club 2014

Postby Wakatuki » Wed Aug 13, 2014 4:35 pm

Ok first time poster, in this thread!
I do not know what is going on. I got down to 95kg and looked thin in the face. I am now 101kg and look much better and yet my waist is more toned and my man boobs are down at least two sizes (whatever man boob measurements are taken in!)
Saw a TV show and the guy whose BF was 23% looked more rounded than me. I am ready to take the plunge and get a full scan and see what is really going on. Does anyone know a place local to the Sunshine Coast QLD that they can recommend and is it worth it? EST cost seems to be $99.
User avatar
Wakatuki
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2012 5:15 pm
Location: Qld

Re: BNA Losers Club 2014

Postby moosterbounce » Wed Aug 13, 2014 6:08 pm

Yay me!! Biggest loser this week managing to drop 4kg!! Ok...so I've had flu and am currently on meds for bronchitis. I'll get my appetite back soon no doubt :(
moosterbounce
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 2475
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 8:06 pm
Location: Rivervale WA

Re: BNA Losers Club 2014

Postby tcdev » Thu Aug 14, 2014 3:17 pm

I'm beginning to acknowledge that, after reading this thread (and on advice I've already received in this thread) that I'm going to have to count calories - for a while at least - to sort out my plan. I've been hovering around the same weight for about a month now, despite the fact that I've taken up cycling, and cut out the junk food (or at least, significantly reduced it). I will say that I have also been weight training as well, so I've no doubt added some muscle and shed some fat. The overall trend does appear to be downward - just very, very slowly at this point. Though I should add that this morning is a new low (not counting when sick). I'll keep going until the end of September, and if I haven't seen any significant results, I'll bite the bullet and start counting.

Out of interest, is there any evidence to suggest that cycling is any less effective (or more?) for losing weight around the stomach than other forms of exercise, eg. running? Old wives' tales suggest it's the first to go on, the last to come off - is there any truth to that?

Oh and amen to the jeans problems! I've never been accused of having skinny legs, and even when fit my thighs were too big for most brands of jeans. These days my waist has caught up with them - for now, so I don't even need a belt - so it's not so much of an issue. But when I shed a few kg, I'm sure I'll be needing a new belt, especially considering I'm cycling and doing squats...
2015 Giant XTC Advanced 29er 1
tcdev
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 5:08 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: BNA Losers Club 2014

Postby moosterbounce » Thu Aug 14, 2014 3:37 pm

tcdev wrote:
Out of interest, is there any evidence to suggest that cycling is any less effective (or more?) for losing weight around the stomach than other forms of exercise, eg. running? Old wives' tales suggest it's the first to go on, the last to come off - is there any truth to that?.


I find different people have a tendency to gain in one location first. If I gain weight, it hits the lower half first, yet 2 of my sisters get hit on the top half first. You can't "spot lose" though - it will come off all places, but some hole more fat than others so it appears like it leaves there last.

Well, it does with me anyway.
moosterbounce
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 2475
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 8:06 pm
Location: Rivervale WA

Re: BNA Losers Club 2014

Postby casual_cyclist » Thu Aug 14, 2014 4:14 pm

tcdev wrote:The overall trend does appear to be downward - just very, very slowly at this point.

Can I ask what is wrong with that? Did you put the weight on quickly, or slowly? My best long term results was around a kilogram a month. This sounds low but after a year, that's 12 kg, after 2 years, that's 24 kg. 24 kg for me would take me to below a healthy weight.

tcdev wrote:Out of interest, is there any evidence to suggest that cycling is any less effective (or more?) for losing weight around the stomach than other forms of exercise, eg. running? Old wives' tales suggest it's the first to go on, the last to come off - is there any truth to that?

Exercise isn't really that effective for weight loss. You control your weight with what you eat. That said, I do think that walking does help metabolise fat. In my experience, first to go on, last to come off is true. I first started gaining fat around my belly and I still have that belly fat. There's not much fat anywhere else now.

With the fat burning, if you walk at 25% vO2 max, almost all energy expenditure is from fat. If you run at 65% vO2 max then only 50% of energy expenditure is from fat. So if you walked for an hour at 25% or ran for an hour at 65%, running would burn more fat. However, if you walked for 3 hours at 25% and ran for 1 hour at 65%, the walking would burn more fat. If you have 3 hours to kill, walking at 25% v02 max is a great way to burn some fat. :mrgreen:

http://www.gssiweb.org/Article/sse-59-f ... w-concepts
<removed by request>
User avatar
casual_cyclist
 
Posts: 7328
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:41 am
Location: Kewdale

Re: BNA Losers Club 2014

Postby CKinnard » Fri Aug 15, 2014 8:31 am

moosterbounce wrote:Yay me!! Biggest loser this week managing to drop 4kg!! Ok...so I've had flu and am currently on meds for bronchitis. I'll get my appetite back soon no doubt :(


And that's an interesting phenomenon isn't it?! When sick, how can we all of a sudden lose all sweet/starch/chocolate/ice cream/alcohol cravings that some say are due to a fat gene, endocrine disturbance, lack of leptin, too much ghrelin, a stretched stomach, or insulin resistance?!
CKinnard
 
Posts: 176
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: BNA Losers Club 2014

Postby CKinnard » Fri Aug 15, 2014 8:56 am

re effectiveness of cycling for weight loss, specifically around the waist, I haven't read anything for a year or 2 in this field, but I remember the word was - weight bearing exercise is best, cycling next, swimming last.

an expanded waist line has a high contribution of visceral fat, which is laid down at a greater rate with any form of stress. reduce your stress and waist fat rate of gain slows, or rate of loss accelerates.

when losing weight, yes there's truth in first on last off, though it is not an all or nothing thing. It is just the relative rate of loss from different areas. i.e. I've lost 8kg in the last 10 weeks and am down 3 belt holes around the waist, but have lost more around the neck and chest.

casualcyclist is right in saying exercise is not a reliable form of weight loss. the reason being for many, they increase their energy intake when exercising, or grossly overestimate how much energy exercise burns. To burn a kg of fat a week, you have to exercise at a low intensity (no more than 200 Cals/hr) for over 40hrs of exercise a week. When you exercise at a higher rate, you are burning mostly glucose and glycogen, and will need to increase your intake of carbs, and will struggle more with increased appetite. IME, the best activity for weight loss is go get a hard manual job. There's 40hrs a week of pretty much 100% fat burning. Of course, there's truth in burning more energy at higher exericse intensities (not necessarily fat), but the issue most have with weight loss is calming abnormal cravings. Everyone would benefit from exploring what calms their cravings best.

Personally, my greatest rate of weight loss happened when I went on a meditation course involving no exercise. calming my nervous system calmed my appetite dramatically. I was quite full and content eating no more than 1000 Calories a day.

If you watched ABC's catalyst last night, and next week, you'll learn how our gut flora are heavily implicated in weight gain/loss, and the best thing we can do to get a healthier array of flora, is to eat a diet loaded with way more fruit and vegetables (for the fiber).
CKinnard
 
Posts: 176
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: BNA Losers Club 2014

Postby Wakatuki » Fri Aug 15, 2014 1:54 pm

I find that when I go to the running 5ks and 10ks 2~3 times a week I tone up massively around the middle, the only thing toned from the riding is the legs.
I do a push up, sit up and squat routine on non ride days M,T,T,F, all body weight only. The squats have really helped the inner quads, the groin abductors and the knees. I really should run more I just find it so tedious.
User avatar
Wakatuki
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2012 5:15 pm
Location: Qld

Re: BNA Losers Club 2014

Postby tcdev » Fri Aug 15, 2014 1:56 pm

casual_cyclist wrote:
tcdev wrote:The overall trend does appear to be downward - just very, very slowly at this point.

Can I ask what is wrong with that? Did you put the weight on quickly, or slowly? My best long term results was around a kilogram a month. This sounds low but after a year, that's 12 kg, after 2 years, that's 24 kg. 24 kg for me would take me to below a healthy weight.

The weight has gone on slowly I guess over the last 2+ years, since my daughter was born and I've become less active. Perhaps even a few years before that, my soccer training/playing went from 3-4 times/week to once/week as our team got older and less enthusiastic. I don't mind losing it slowly - conventional wisdom says that's the best way to do it - as long as I don't plateau.

casual_cyclist wrote:Exercise isn't really that effective for weight loss. You control your weight with what you eat. That said, I do think that walking does help metabolise fat. In my experience, first to go on, last to come off is true. I first started gaining fat around my belly and I still have that belly fat. There's not much fat anywhere else now.

With the fat burning, if you walk at 25% vO2 max, almost all energy expenditure is from fat. If you run at 65% vO2 max then only 50% of energy expenditure is from fat. So if you walked for an hour at 25% or ran for an hour at 65%, running would burn more fat. However, if you walked for 3 hours at 25% and ran for 1 hour at 65%, the walking would burn more fat. If you have 3 hours to kill, walking at 25% v02 max is a great way to burn some fat. :mrgreen:

I guess I've got a lot more experimentation (and learning) to do before it clicks with me. All throughout my 20's and early 30's I was doing very intense training (soccer & martial arts & weight training on/off) and although my diet wasn't terrible, I didn't have to worry too much about the odd burger and pizza and I was in very good shape (better than I realised at the time when I go back and look at the photos!) Having said that I do realise that I was probably eating more to refuel from the intense exercise back then, but haven't reduced my portion size when my exercise tapered off.

Interesting about the walking. In 2008 I travelled to NYC & Europe for 8 weeks for my honeymoon and we walked absolutely everywhere. Some days we walked from dawn to dusk. We also ate as cheaply as possible (small portions), and when I look at photos from the 1st day, and the last days of the trip, the difference is quite remarkable! :shock:
2015 Giant XTC Advanced 29er 1
tcdev
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 5:08 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: BNA Losers Club 2014

Postby tcdev » Fri Aug 15, 2014 2:04 pm

CKinnard wrote:re effectiveness of cycling for weight loss, specifically around the waist, I haven't read anything for a year or 2 in this field, but I remember the word was - weight bearing exercise is best, cycling next, swimming last.

I've always liked weightlifting for the multiple benefits it offers. Been doing it on/off for the last 20 years, and trying to make it a permanent part of my lifestyle for the last 6-7 years. A combination of a few injuries, plus some lack of discipline, plus the birth of our 1st child, has meant that I'm not quite there yet, but at least now I find myself ramping it up again. It's generally a slow process on the way back from a lengthy lay-off, but this time around I have to take it even slower since my last injury was a disc bulge. Still, good to see that the combination of weights and cycling is up there! :D

CKinnard wrote:If you watched ABC's catalyst last night, and next week, you'll learn how our gut flora are heavily implicated in weight gain/loss, and the best thing we can do to get a healthier array of flora, is to eat a diet loaded with way more fruit and vegetables (for the fiber).

Thanks for the heads-up!
2015 Giant XTC Advanced 29er 1
tcdev
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 5:08 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: BNA Losers Club 2014

Postby casual_cyclist » Fri Aug 15, 2014 3:35 pm

tcdev wrote:Interesting about the walking. In 2008 I travelled to NYC & Europe for 8 weeks for my honeymoon and we walked absolutely everywhere. Some days we walked from dawn to dusk. We also ate as cheaply as possible (small portions), and when I look at photos from the 1st day, and the last days of the trip, the difference is quite remarkable! :shock:

As a broke, carless, uni student, eating one meal a day and walking up to 3 hours a day, I lost 30 kg in 3 months. Of course after that I got a job and put it all back on with interest :x

The reason I don't rate exercise for weight loss is that I run, ride and walk. I do some exercise every day but I'm not losing a scrap of weight. It's the food. That's why I think food is by far the most important side of the equasion. I'm eating pretty modestly and I am active but no weight loss. I guess I would have to be a lot more strict if I wanted to lose.

Don't get me wrong, exercise is great and you should exercise every day. Just don't think you can eat too much then burn off the extra calories through exercise. In my experience it doesn't work like that.
<removed by request>
User avatar
casual_cyclist
 
Posts: 7328
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:41 am
Location: Kewdale

Re: BNA Losers Club 2014

Postby casual_cyclist » Fri Aug 15, 2014 3:38 pm

Fatty friday weight in: 94 kg.

Fitty friday check in: my best exercise achievement for the week was to run 570 metres in 2:30 at a pace of 4:20 min/km.


-- fitty friday, because my achievements can't be defined by a number on a scale.
<removed by request>
User avatar
casual_cyclist
 
Posts: 7328
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:41 am
Location: Kewdale

Re: BNA Losers Club 2014

Postby barefoot » Fri Aug 15, 2014 4:15 pm

casual_cyclist wrote:The reason I don't rate exercise for weight loss is that I run, ride and walk. I do some exercise every day but I'm not losing a scrap of weight. It's the food.


Yah, but you try and see what happens if you change nothing except to drop the exercise.

On the same food intake... you'll get huge.

My check-in: I didn't weigh last night, but the previous two nights were 83kg.

I've dropped 4kg in 2 weeks.

Eeek.

I don't expect this momentum to continue. I realise it's not all fat.

But I'm running pretty solid energy deficits on MFP, especially on riding days where I don't think I could eat enough for a balance if I tried (short of falling into old habits of giant choc chip cookies for lunch dessert and multiple chocolate box runs through the afternoon).

Interesting project so far :-D

tim
User avatar
barefoot
 
Posts: 988
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 10:05 am
Location: Ballarat

PreviousNext

Return to Cycling Health

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ratt



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