Why no weight loss?

[ColinJ]

(10 x weight[kg]) + (6.25 x height[cm]) - (5 x age[years]) - 161 gives average calories burned in a 24 hour period if at rest.

For women. It's supposed to be (10 x weight[kg]) + (6.25 x height[cm]) - (5 x age[years]) + 5 for men.

That takes into account the typically larger muscle mass of men but it must vary a lot according to how lean or fat you are? The daily energy needs of a 100 kg bodybuilder are surely very different to a 100 kg fat person (me!)?

I'm not sure why age is factored in. Why would a 60 year old use fewer calories to stay alive than an equally fit, identically sized 40 year old? I suppose that cells are not being repaired or replaced as quickly when you are older.

Anyway - according to the calculation, I need about 1,900 calories a day to just sit around accessing CycleChat!

 

[Angelfishsolo]

For women. It's supposed to be (10 x weight[kg]) + (6.25 x height[cm]) - (5 x age[years]) + 5 for men.

That takes into account the typically larger muscle mass of men but it must vary a lot according to how lean or fat you are? The daily energy needs of a 100 kg bodybuilder are surely very different to a 100 kg fat person (me!)?

I'm not sure why age is factored in. Why would a 60 year old use fewer calories to stay alive than an equally fit, identically sized 40 year old? I suppose that cells are not being repaired or replaced as quickly when you are older.

Anyway - according to the calculation, I need about 1,900 calories a day to just sit around accessing CycleChat!

I think you have answered your extremely valid question.

 

[LosingFocus]

2485 cal per day doing nothing... Ive done this wrong I think.

10*173 + 6.25*173 - 5*33 - 161

you weigh 173 kilos?

Same result - If you are 27 stone

Fail. 173lbs.

 

[lulubel]

Let's go back to your first post. I'll assume the calories burned figures from your HRM are correct. I cycle around 100 miles a week, and burn over 4000 cals from cycling alone, so they look pretty close to my figures, considering the other exercise you do.

I started cycling 3 weeks ago and in that time I have done just over 380 miles. I use a heart rate monitor and am burning off a minimum of 6000 calories a week with cycling and gym work (I still do some weights and teach 1 spin class a week) and am watching what I eat (1600 cals a day in the week, 2000 a day at the weekend).

You are consuming (1600*5) + (2000*2) = 12000 calories a week.
You are burning 6000 calories a week.
That leaves you 6000 calories a week to cover your BMR needs and general life. That's 857 calories a day, and is far too low.

If you've been eating significantly under maintenance level for some time (and at a rough guess for your height and weight, maintenance should be around 1900 calories before adding any calories burned through exercise) I would say your body is in starvation mode, and that's why you're not losing weight.

The fact that you also said you're tired and your legs are tired suggests to me that you're not eating enough for the amount of exercise you're doing (unless you know of another explanation, like not getting enough sleep).

For the sake of comparison, I'm 5ft3, 9 stone, burn around 4-5000 calories a week, and eat around 14-15,000 a week (leaving me with a balance of 10,000 or 1428 a day), and I'm losing about half a pound a week.

 

[Klaus]

I started cycling again in early 2010, weighing 85 KG (male - 5'8") - I do regular weekend trips plus occasional short rides during the week. Last month I was down to 84 kg - I am now back to 85 .... didn't really go into it for the weight loss, but I am feeling much fitter now.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Fail. 173lbs.

Fail! The equation calls for weight in Kg - 173kg = 27.2428367stone

 

[amaferanga]

Let's go back to your first post. I'll assume the calories burned figures from your HRM are correct. I cycle around 100 miles a week, and burn over 4000 cals from cycling alone, so they look pretty close to my figures, considering the other exercise you do.

Just because the calories burned figure is similar to yours doesn't make it right!

Almost all HRM based calorie ESTIMATES are probably at best +/-50%.

 

[Crackle]

What about food types? For me, wheat. Eat weight = no weight loss. Spaghetti is OK sometimes.

 

[lulubel]

Just because the calories burned figure is similar to yours doesn't make it right!

And why would that be exactly? I burn around 40 calories a mile, riding in a hilly area. Libby's heavier and slightly taller than me, so even if she's riding in a less hilly area, chances are she's burning the same or more calories per mile, which means her HRM is probably pretty accurate.

However, I do understand your point about HRMs. Many of the cycling computers or GPS devices that include a HRM don't even use heart rate to calculate cals burned - they just use distance and speed.

 

[Libby]

What about food types? For me, wheat. Eat weight = no weight loss. Spaghetti is OK sometimes.

I do have to be careful about food types. I'll have carbs for breakfast (1 or 2 slices of toast), baked potato with beans for lunch and then if I am training in the evening either another slice of bread or 2 rice cakes as soon as I get home and then chicken/fish with salad or veg for dinner. (So in other words limited bread and no carbs after 6 in the evening). If anyone is thinking the calories don't add up, I allow for milk in my coffee and fruit as snacks).

 

[Crackle]

I do have to be careful about food types. I'll have carbs for breakfast (1 or 2 slices of toast), baked potato with beans for lunch and then if I am training in the evening either another slice of bread or 2 rice cakes as soon as I get home and then chicken/fish with salad or veg for dinner. (So in other words limited bread and no carbs after 6 in the evening). If anyone is thinking the calories don't add up, I allow for milk in my coffee and fruit as snacks).

Not a lot there really. I have fruit and yoghurt for breakfast and soup (normally homemade) for lunch. I think that much toast and potato everyday would be detrimental to me losing weight. If I need something chunkier for lunch I'll have humus and cucumber. It just seems to be certain carbs which my body doesn't process. Rice is OK for me.

 

[subaqua]

As has been said Muscle is more dense than fat hence apparent weight status quo. Measure your vital stats and as if they chance. I have dropped two trouser sizes since January,

agreed . I have hit a plateau as far as losing weight is concerned but my trouser size has shrunk again . have gone from tight 42" trousers to 36" being loose and needing a belt .

wife says my legs look damn fine and my backside is better than it ever was. I can cope with staying at 107 Kg if it means i have a waist that small ( I am 6' 2" or 188cm ) and screw whether the chart says i am still obese ! ha

 

[Becs]

Sadly I think it's a function of being fit and a woman

I get really jealous of these people who post on here and say 'I took up cycling 4 months ago and have been commuting 10 miles every day - loving it and I've lost 3 stones in weight' I watch in wonder on training camps as fellow (male, usually) cyclists visibly lose weight while stuffing their faces every night at dinner while I have a piece of fish and a plate of salad and lose not weight in 2 weeks.

This Spring, I've done the Audax qualifying rides over March - June for the Paris-Brest-Paris event. This means half a dozen 200km, 300km, 400km and 600km rides - not to mention rides during the week and on my own at weekends - and, despite watching what I eat (and drink), I have also lost 0kg.

I think the problem is that if you're fit and used to doing a lot of exercise over the long-term, your body becomes very efficient so you don't get the sudden weight loss that newbie exercisers get and you also have to work very hard to lose weight you gained as you reduced your exercise.

So I'm afraid I don't have much joy for you and, if you find the answer, will you let me know. Since I started working from home 10 years ago, thus no daily commute, I've put on about 3 stones Hasn't stopped me cycling but the hills are humungous now

This makes sense, and illustrated by my lab group. The 2 girls that are super fit (one a lot fitter than she looks) find it very hard to lose anything while the less fit types (myself included) can lose 2 -3 pounds a week with careful eating an a bit of exercise ( up to 7 in the first week of "being good"). I also find that while I can cycle 60 to 70 miles at a reasonable pace (14 ish mph) I struggle to jog 5k. When I just cycle I don't lose any where near as much weight as when I jog 2 or 3 times a week, maybe because I'm less adapted to it perhaps?

I also find that reducing (not cutting out - that would be silly) the carbs makes a massive difference for me, even if the total calorie intake stays the same.

 

[Libby]

I think there is definitely something in finding it hard to lose weight when you are reasonably fit. In terms of where I want to be I would not describe myself as fit, but then I am not that bad - I am cycling over 100 miles a week at a mix of paces (on a comfortable ride I am averagng over 15mph). So although I am overweight, my fitness isn't too bad so I guess it will be harder for me to lose weight than someone who has gone from doing nothing. After reading all the replies I have come to the conclusion that I just need to give it time, enjoy my bike and focus on training to be able to take part in some events next year and hope that the weight loss will happen. I do appreciate all the advice - so thanks.

 

[Arsen Gere]

Libby,
I'd give it a couple of months and if its not working for you mix it up with some intervals. I mean hard stuff that will leave your heart above its normal resting pace after an hour or two. These can be on anything, weights, bike, run, swim. Don't let your body get used to it. And measure inches not just weight.
Mrs Gere has a piece of string and uses that as a reference, say round your waist, thighs or whatever. Measuring stuff builds motivation as you don't know what is changing until you measure it, some folks see muscle gain before weight loss and this can be disappointing, but the inches go down before the weight falls off when this starts to happen. Look for your wonderful new muscles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-intensity_interval_training