Why am I not losing weight?

[screenman]

From what I can find skipping burs off about 600 to 800 calories per hour cycling 400 to 700, so if we take an average say 700 skipping and 550 for cycling then you would need to cycle for 1hour 36 minutes longer to burn off 1lb in fat. Now 3 short sessions of skipping I would find restrictive as in building up to a sweaty state and wanting to shower afterwards, personal hygiene and all that. I would say that you are eating different amounts which is why you are noticeable losing weight with your skipping, doing exercise 3 times per day rather than once will change the way you eat.

I see you recommend brisk walking over cycling for the overweight with bad joints, that flies in the face of any other recommendations I have ever seen, cycling is none weight bearing on the joints or at least far less than walking is so it is unlikely to cause the same amount of damage to the joints.

The dietician is seldom a fitness expert, but good that you have faith in the person none the less.

Please all you people out there who are overweight be very careful skipping as it can damage your joints.

Now if we go to the normalize part, utter rubbish, yes you get fitter and use less calories per effort if that effort remains the same. What will happen is you will produce more watts for the lower heart rate, there will not be a time when you are burning the same amount of calories cycling as you would say sleeping.

 

[ColinJ]

I lose about 1 pound of weight per 100 miles cycled and it doesn't matter how fit or unfit I am, it's just that I do it quicker when I'm fit!

You say that your body adapts to cycling - yes - it gets fit; you need to keep pushing your boundaries. If your body is fit enough to cycle 40 miles at 15 miles per hour without much effort, then cycle 80 miles at 18 mph and see how you get on. When you get used to that, do a 5 hour century ride.

Cycling is very efficient so, yes, gentle cycling doesn't burn many calories. Intense cycling is another matter ... I've done 6 hour rides where my heart rate on the flat averaged well over 155 bpm, and on the hills was more like 175-180 bpm with peaks of 195 bpm. On rides like that, the weight just falls off me.

I agree that intense skipping and running burn more calories than similarly intense cycling but I can't do them because of my dodgy joints. Cycling doesn't cause me any joint pain as long as I use low enough gears and carefully mount and dismount the bike.

 

[Rafreg]

Fully agree with you Lizzy zero carbs will kick start but is not a good long term solution. Again as I said the only way is a proper balanced diet. Simply as that, and only you will know if you are eating correctly

 

[Rafreg]

Also what I think we need to remember is everyone has their own opinions. Now I don't think any opinion is wrong, as everyone is different and response differently to various exercises. Well that's my opinion.

 

[Lizzy]

Not clear what you're saying here - ice skating is good or is not so good? I inline skate a lot and I'd guess it's roughly as effective as cycling (per time, not by distance) with the difference that you can't sit down and your knees are bent more or less all the time.

Mind you, I'm talking about speed skating, and I think from your previous comments you're more into the artistic side?

ahhhhhhhhhhhhh the calculator is there, Most efficient weight loss are the activities where you whole body is mobilised. Personally speaking I loose more per hour ice skating the cycling at say 14 mps. Both pail in comparison to skipping.

If you think about the physics....

A person can life a weight X, but the person clan life X weight more easily using a winch, however by using the winch its gentler on the body, AND it burns less calories. So you can either lift weight X more times OR lift say XX. When a person cycles the bike, gears etc carry and empower your leg muscles. When you skip, run or do any non assisted with suitable vigor you body is put under more stress, and burns more calories.

LOL

So I've been doing an average of 10 hours of working out a week majority being cycling ( skating, ballet and a very little skipping). Average loss per week has been 0.51 lbs (this is on c.1300-1400 calories per day). This week I've again done approximate 10 hours cycling, with an average of 30 mins skipping a day and 4 ballet work outs and some cycling and I've lost 2.9 lbs - which I would expect to reduce each week by that amount, but I do expect it to come off quicker. I have a metabolic issue which makes weight loss really difficult so I do have to go to full on to loose much. c.10 years ago I out on 3 stone very quickly after a bereavement, bought a stationary bike and cycled on it hell for leather for months and also walked home form work which was a bit over an hour, the total reduction in 3 months was something like 3 lbs. Eventually I got savvy and bought a skipping rope, and the weight simply fell off, took about 3 months of skipping ballet to be into a size I'd never been since I was a teenager.

The bottom line is there are more time efficient ways to loose weight than cycling. The Op is about weight loss not basic fitness.

If you want to shrink a cloths size do ballet (or I guess pilates)

 

[screenman]

So where does HR come into this? My wife did pilates for 3 years and put on 5lb, she lost it in 3 weeks following Mydailplate and eating a sensible diet.

 

[Lizzy]

From what I can find skipping burs off about 600 to 800 calories per hour cycling 400 to 700, so if we take an average say 700 skipping and 550 for cycling then you would need to cycle for 1hour 36 minutes longer to burn off 1lb in fat. Now 3 short sessions of skipping I would find restrictive as in building up to a sweaty state and wanting to shower afterwards, personal hygiene and all that. I would say that you are eating different amounts which is why you are noticeable losing weight with your skipping, doing exercise 3 times per day rather than once will change the way you eat.

I see you recommend brisk walking over cycling for the overweight with bad joints, that flies in the face of any other recommendations I have ever seen, cycling is none weight bearing on the joints or at least far less than walking is so it is unlikely to cause the same amount of damage to the joints.

The dietician is seldom a fitness expert, but good that you have faith in the person none the less.

Please all you people out there who are overweight be very careful skipping as it can damage your joints.

Now if we go to the normalize part, utter rubbish, yes you get fitter and use less calories per effort if that effort remains the same. What will happen is you will produce more watts for the lower heart rate, there will not be a time when you are burning the same amount of calories cycling as you would say sleeping.

You need to go to the physo is you have issues over joints, I'm a former nurse for people with dissabilites, so certainly not a physio, but I'm pretty confident cycling is harder on joints than walking.

And no I don't eat less skipping than I do cycling.

You are saying pretty much the same thing, as you get fitter you need to put more in... your body normalise the efforts therefore you have to increase, sometime people don't have more time, or the ability to exert more due to the physicial location. My bro in his haul to Tasmania was cycling 7 hours a day, not saying you do 20 mps on Iranian dirt tracks, but basically the body gets use to it.

Again there are more efficent method of loosing weight,

 

[Lizzy]

So where does HR come into this? My wife did pilates for 3 years and put on 5lb, she lost it in 3 weeks following Mydailplate and eating a sensible diet.

Pilates I've not done but I do ballet are generally nice work outs, and actually fabulous to shrink in size - lots of women have issues where the muscles are far from toned. you can drop a dress size in 10 days with that type of work out. On it's own it shrinks and tightens doesn't burn much in my experience. cycling on top will help with eight loss, but if you wan tot loose it quicker, jogging, running, skipping etc... will help loose lbs.

For many women the right course is to throw out the scales and buy a measuring tap because their goal is to get thing, not to get

the HR thing has very varied advice given, loads of differences on web pages over the most effective method of weight loss. There is a huge difference between fitness, weight and size. HR 'd say is about core fitness

 

[screenman]

Seen the physio, doctor, consultant both NHS and private. I packed up racing 10 years ago and now limit my cycling to only 100 and a bit miles per week.

I am not against your skipping, however this is not good advice for overweight people.

Why would cycling be harder on joints when your bottom carries a lot of your weight compared with walking where your legs/knee's carry it all? I am always curious as to how people think, which is why I ask so many questions.

At the end of the day the success of weight loss is more about self motivation and self control and finding that which works for you, I am yet to try ballet.

Have fun and keep pedaling.

 

[ColinJ]

You need to go to the physo is you have issues over joints, I'm a former nurse for people with dissabilites, so certainly not a physio, but I'm pretty confident cycling is harder on joints than walking.

It isn't if you have a bike that fits you and you use low enough gears!

As you have pointed out several times, a bike supports your body weight. If I am spinning a nice low gear then I am hardly putting any force on my knees and hips - my sit bones are taking a big proportion of my weight. If I use excessively high gears though, yes, those joints do complain.

When walking, the only way you can take the weight off your legs is to use walking poles and even then there is a limit to it. Walking is inherently harder on your joints because of having to support your body weight. Having said that, it is better for your bone density than cycling for exactly the same reason. I do both.

I can't run any more and skipping would kill my hips and knees. I'm still okay with walking as long as I don't scramble over too many rocks or walk down too many steep descents (both of which can hurt). Cycling is fine unless I overgear.

As for the weight loss question. It still boils down to calories in versus calories out. Appetite control may be easier with certain foods than others. Some people have faster metabolisms than others, but if you don't take in the calories you are burning, then you will lose weight. There isn't any question about it.

If somebody puts you on a treadmill for 5 hours a day and only gives you 1,000 calories worth of food plus water, then you will lose weight. You might not lose as much as my skinny fast-burning mate who needs to eat about 5,000 calories a day just to stay skinny, but you will lose weight.

To deny that is to suggest that you have discovered a perpetual motion system within your own body. If you have, then I suggest you get it checked out and patented because you will solve the world's energy crisis and earn yourself a fortune!

 

[Lizzy]

Seen the physio, doctor, consultant both NHS and private. I packed up racing 10 years ago and now limit my cycling to only 100 and a bit miles per week.

I am not against your skipping, however this is not good advice for overweight people.

Why would cycling be harder on joints when your bottom carries a lot of your weight compared with walking where your legs/knee's carry it all? I am always curious as to how people think, which is why I ask so many questions.

At the end of the day the success of weight loss is more about self motivation and self control and finding that which works for you, I am yet to try ballet.

Have fun and keep pedaling.

I don't think skipping is for everyone either, it depends on how healthy/fit the over weight person is. Sometimes you need to work up to it, but there are lots of alternatives, the activities list on the link is a good start point.... At my fattest (not heaviest), I was only able to walk around blocks, but do that lots........ it was only after I'd lost a bit I could pick up intensity. Weirdly enough at my heaviest I have been super fit. go figure. LOL very different.

Cycling moves your leg joints in very specific ways that other work out don't. Also ergonomic issue spring up with saddle height and bike adjustments far more common than most non equipment based activities. I believe jogging is pretty hard and skipping also.... ice skate I believe is much gentler, at least you see the septogenerians there in quiet times. If you have joint issues you ought to always seek a physio, or I'm sure NHS direct can also advise at the end of the phone.

Motivation really is about what works for you, never done the whole weight loss club in a public way (sometimes done online - but more to motivate others). I weight (have fancy scales that pretend they know how much muscle etc - not convinced) but also measure. I want to be a smaller size as much as i want to be light, hence when the scales wont budge I sometimes loose inches.

Think the discussion is valuable.

 

[Lizzy]

When walking, the only way you can take the weight off your legs is to use walking poles and even then there is a limit to it. Walking is inherently harder on your joints because of having to support your body weight. Having said that, it is better for your bone density than cycling for exactly the same reason. I do both.


I can't run any more and skipping would kill my hips and knees. I'm still okay with walking as long as I don't scramble over too many rocks or walk down too many steep descents (both of which can hurt). Cycling is fine unless I overgear.

If you have specific health issues, then the physio is the right call point (or NHS direct if you are having trouble getting to see a physio).

High efficient weight loss methods aren't available to you (through physical injury or lack of mobility) then look at the next best, which may well be spin classes for your conditions. Various water sports are also good for people who have joint issues, ie the water resistance is gentle on the joints but taught enough on the muscles. Your physio ought to be able to advise on the most efficient weight loss method for your bodies conditions.

 

[Glover Fan]

You need to go to the physo is you have issues over joints, I'm a former nurse for people with dissabilites, so certainly not a physio, but I'm pretty confident cycling is harder on joints than walking.

My wife IS a Physio and says you are wrong.

 

[ColinJ]

If you have specific health issues, then the physio is the right call point (or NHS direct if you are having trouble getting to see a physio).

I call it a gene problem[sup]1[/sup], not a health problem! My family suffer from osteoarthritis and I seem to be following in my father's footsteps. Both his hips went in his 50s. Fortunately, I spend most of my time in front of a computer rather than doing hard physical work so I'm not damaging my hips as quickly as he damaged his.

Keeping my weight down is the most important thing I can do to protect my joints, together with avoiding the activities which hurt them, and doing more of the ones that don't.

High efficient weight loss methods aren't available to you (through physical injury or lack of mobility) then look at the next best, which may well be spin classes for your conditions.

The highly efficient weight loss methods of taking in fewer calories and vigorous cycling are both available to me. I have done many one day rides taking off over a pound of body fat. I'm not talking fluid losses here. I've come back from rides weighing 7 pounds less than when I set off because I haven't been able to get enough fluids in, but when I'm fully rehydrated, a 1.0-1.5 pound loss remains. I've lost an inch off my waist in one day!

Various water sports are also good for people who have joint issues, ie the water resistance is gentle on the joints but taught enough on the muscles.

I actually like swimming but haven't done it for years. I only do breast stroke and the kick action gets to my hips. I would be okay with the crawl leg action, but I never mastered the breathing technique. I might give it a go some time.

The reason why I am 3 stone overweight is because I drink too much beer, simple as that. If I ride my bike frequently and get plenty of walks in, I easily lose 2+ pounds a week. When I tried really hard, I was losing 3-4 pounds a week but I felt that was excessive, probably not healthy.

I can put weight on quickly but also lose it quickly so I must be one of those people with a very predictable metabolism. My body does exactly what you'd expect it to do - it stores surplus calories as fat but easily burns fat when required to.

[sup]1[/sup]It's not all bad news though - both sides of my family tend to live well into their 80s, 90s, or even 100s!


[sup]
[/sup]

 

[Baggy]

I actually like swimming but haven't done it for years. I only do breast stroke and the kick action gets to my hips. I would be okay with the crawl leg action, but I never mastered the breathing technique. I might give it a go some time.

When I recently saw a physio due to my knee woes she suggested swimming but advised me not to swim breast stroke as it would twist the bit of the knee I was trying to recuperate - she suggested I combine breast stroke arm movements with crawl kicking. In the end I didn't bother, as I hate swimming!

She was of the opinion that as long as your biomechanics and position are ok, cycling is pretty good for your joints.

Whilst I agree there are quicker of losing weight than cycling, I'd never argue that it's a bad way to lose weight if you enjoy it. Even though I've cycled regularly for 8 years if I up the mileage, even at low intensity, the weight comes off.

FWIW my brother was a bike courier for 10 years, riding approx 400 miles per week. I don't think he ever "normalised"! as Lizzy puts it - if he didn't stuff his face he lost weight as well as inches! As mentioned up thread I think this is where intensity comes into it - courier work is high intensity so has a high burn rate.