Cycled loads for two and abit months and I didn't lose weight

[Riverman]

then I didn't cycle much at all for two months, very little exercise and lost a stone.

Maybe the weight loss was delayed? lol

Also how stupid is BMI. According to this I'm obese if I'm around 90kg but I'm normal weight if I'm 55kg.

I think the general rule for BMI for men is that if you're borderline then go with the least of the extremes.

 

[phil_hg_uk]

I cycle all the time and I havent lost a single pound in the last 2 years, so far in the last month and a half I have even done two 100 Mile rides and yes you guessed it not lost nowt.

Its just not fair I tell you.

 

[Riverman]

I keep telling myself that it doesn't matter really if I don't lose weight in the short term. The most important thing is that cycling is doing my body, particularly my heart, a great deal of good.

how heavy and how tall are you phil?

I know people will lambast me for saying this but I'm convinced weight loss is so much more about diet than it is about exercise.

I'm told on here that eating below your recommended calorie intake can damage your organs but why then do doctors approve of 500 per day calorie diets available in pharmacies for people that are obese?

I mean I was technically obese according to BMI but they were still willing to let me go on it. I'm not obese anymore according to BMI, weh hey..

 

[phil_hg_uk]

I am 5' 7 and I weigh around 13 Stone.

I find that the more I cycle the more I eat so its a never ending circle.

But my fitness is much better since I stopped smoking in Jan 2008 after 30 years I have gone from just about been able to do a circuit of my home town with numerous stops along the way in a couple of hours, which is approx 15 miles, to doing 50+ mile rides regularly and a couple of 100 milers this year and I often do the same circuit of my hone town on an evening in around an hour none stop no problem.

 

[SavageHoutkop]

I know people will lambast me for saying this but I'm convinced weight loss is so much more about diet than it is about exercise.

There was an interesting article in TIME magazine a short while back with that same conclusion.

And on BMI, I'm technically underweight but always have been and hopefully always will be! (no, I'm not a size zero either...)

 

[jimboalee]

There are books, and there are on-line calculators telling us how many calories we use doing this thing called 'cycling'.

Don't be fooled.

In publishing any figures, the author always OVERESTIMATES or even includes a 'safety margin' to avoid a law suit where the deceased's relatives sue the author claiming the poor fellow was following the guidelines in the book and he died as a result.


Cycling, as we know, is VERY efficient. I defy anyone to tell me a more efficient way of getting from one place to another.

A reasonably fit fella can ride a bike for an hour without needing anything more than replacement for the lost water and minerals through exhaling and sweating.

Two hours and maybe a banana or choccy muffin.

Three hours and some 'carbo loading' needed to be done OR a big breakfast before the ride.

Over four hours and serious stuff on MS excel is recommended.

OP
If your sorties are less than two hours, are you feeding for the 'text book' calorific expenditure?
If you are, don't.
Resist the "munchies" and your body will cope with the drain by shifting some fat.

 

[Kirstie]

Whether you lose weight directly as a result of cycling depends upon your work rate. Exercise for a long time at around 60% of max (ie without really breaking a sweat and getting out of breath) and you will burn fat; Higher than that will increase aerobic and anaerobic capacity but you won't automatically lose weight - diet comes into play here. You may even gain weight by increasing muscle mass.

Also, when you increase fitness through cycling, you increase your metabolism, and a higher metabolic rate can stick around for a while (for me it's about 3 weeks) even if you decrease the amount you exercise. This means that you won't store excess sugars as fat - they all get metabolised.

So if you stop exercising after a two month period of cycling you'll maybe lose weight because (a) your muscle mass decreases and ( you still have a higher metabolic rate and so metabolise all of your food.

 

[beancounter]

Three hours and some 'carbo loading' needed to be done OR a big breakfast before the ride.

Over four hours and serious stuff on MS excel is recommended.

On Sunday morning I did 72 miles in just under 5 hours on 3 small cereal bars. No breakfast.

This is what you have to train yourself to do to lose weight cycling, imo. Your body will lose the fat if you train it to do so.

bc

 

[jay clock]

Also how stupid is BMI. According to this I'm obese if I'm around 90kg but I'm normal weight if I'm 55kg.

This sounds worng

If you are 1.63m (5'4") and weigh 55 kg you are at the low end of BMI (20-25 is 'normal'). If you are 90kg then you are close to 34 which is well into the obese range

If you are 1.77m (5'9") then 90 is overweight (not obese) and 55kg is severely underweight

Assuming that at 90kg you only just hit the obese range, then you must in fact be 1m73, and 55kg is still fairly severely underweight

I am not being critical as a natural skinny, but BMI is quite a good all round measure. I was 33.5 am now 27.5 but very fit and muscly - it is well recognised that muscly people can be healthy with a slightly higher BMI. Having said that I could lose some flab around the waist and lovehandles and that would take me below 25.

 

[jimboalee]

On Sunday morning I did 72 miles in just under 5 hours on 3 small cereal bars. No breakfast.

This is what you have to train yourself to do to lose weight cycling, imo. Your body will lose the fat if you train it to do so.

bc

Beancounter,

What you have done is improve the flow of blood which is carrying nutrients and oxygen to your muscles.
You have also increased the flow of blood around your subcutaneous adipose. One follows the other.

This is what's called 'Fitness'.

'The ability to provide nutrients and oxygen to the working muscles over a sustained period of time'.

Do fitter people get less hungry on long bike rides?

IMHO, yes.

 

[BigSteev]

This weeks Cycling Weekly (Sept 17) has an article about how BMI is a crock of .... when dealing with more active people.

 

[beancounter]

This weeks Cycling Weekly (Sept 17) has an article about how BMI is a crock of .... when dealing with more active people.

I think BMI is perfectly applicable to the majority of people, although obviously not to muscle-bound athletes like weight lifters, body builders or rugby players (for example).

BMI tells me I'm about half a stone over my ideal weight for my height and (having already lost nearly two stone) that looks and feels exactly right.

bc

 

[jimboalee]

BMI is a load of s***.

http://www.fitnessassist.co.uk/products/Slimguide-Skinfold-Caliper-%2d-SLI001.html

The instruction book has charts for several methods, but...

With a bit of clever maths and a 3rd order polynomial, you can get a quite accurate reading using three accessible points. Tricep ( bingo wings ), Bicep and SupraIlliac.

Now the REAL problem is finding a sensible recommendation for the fat% you SHOULD be... to calc how overfat you are versus your age.
If you use recommendations from British sources, you will be more overfat than recommendations sourced from the USA.

 

[viniga]

[FONT=&quot]

then I didn't cycle much at all for two months, very little exercise and lost a stone.

Maybe the weight loss was delayed? lol

Also how stupid is BMI. According to this I'm obese if I'm around 90kg but I'm normal weight if I'm 55kg.

I think the general rule for BMI for men is that if you're borderline then go with the least of the extremes.

You lost weight but from which area? Body fat or muscle? Muscle weighs more than fat for the same mass. If you stop exercising muscles they get smaller and guess what.. you lose weight.

BMI is useful but is less useful for athletes because it does not take body composition into account.

Trying to lose weight whilst maintaining performance is tricky as any calorific starvation will result in the loss of both muscle and fat. It might be possible to move the ratio more in the favour of losing fat by, eating less fat, eating more protein and exercising the muscles whilst aiming to lose no more than 0.5kg per week.

I found this book very accessible on the subject: The Complete Guide to Sports Nutrition: How to Eat for Maximum Performance by Anita Bean. Don't let the title put you off it has lessons for all abilities.

Finding the exact calorie intake required for weight loss/gain is the tricky bit, any formulas are starting points only.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Hope this helps,[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Viniga
[/FONT]

 

[Browser]

I am 6ft 5in tall and trying to drop below my maximum BMI weight of 15 stone (currently 15st 7lb). Those last 7lbs are proving hard to shift but I can see where they are (slight 'bingo wings' and waist). What I have noticed is a loss of body fat due to disciplining myself not to eat late at night, not to snack between meals or, if I do, munch on fruit or raw veg (good for the digestion!). I have wondered whether the BMI charts are cobblers as I have increased muscle mass since re-starting cycling to work and lost fat, and none of the BMI calculators take this into account.
There is no panacaea for losing weight, despite any stories or claims of 'magical' losses by various people. It takes effort and long-term discipline to shift the flab, so sort yourself out an end goal e.g. new clothes/bike, holiday, pair of tight Speedo's for the beach if you're a bloke (yes, I am kidding!) or whatever will motivate you.