Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg)
Reload this Page >

Oh crap. Hope this study is wrong

Notices
Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg) Looking to lose that spare tire? Ideal weight 200+? Frustrated being a large cyclist in a sport geared for the ultra-light? Learn about the bikes and parts that can take the abuse of a heavier cyclist, how to keep your body going while losing the weight, and get support from others who've been successful.

Oh crap. Hope this study is wrong

Old 01-29-16, 03:53 AM
  #1  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 1,825
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 401 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Oh crap. Hope this study is wrong

Why you exercise so much -- and still can't lose weight - CNN.com

Essentially it says when you exercise you hit a plateau with regards to calories burnt and no matter how much more you work out you won't burn more calories.
Inpd is offline  
Old 01-29-16, 07:34 AM
  #2  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Central PA
Posts: 4,843

Bikes: 2016 Black Mountain Cycles Monster Cross v5, 2015 Ritchey Road Logic, 1998 Specialized Rockhopper, 2017 Raleigh Grand Prix

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 374 Post(s)
Liked 15 Times in 11 Posts
Utter crap. How can there be a point at which you're exercising and not burning calories? It defies the laws of thermodynamics.

Then I read the article and saw "Fitbit" and realized we're not dealing with actual science here.
dr_lha is offline  
Old 01-29-16, 07:42 AM
  #3  
Senior Member
 
vinnyvincent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 322
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Yeah what a load of garbage. SO I guess at some point your body just starts running on magic? And people wonder why obesity is such a problem in America
vinnyvincent is offline  
Old 01-29-16, 07:46 AM
  #4  
Senior Member
 
CliftonGK1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 11,375

Bikes: '08 Surly Cross-Check, 2011 Redline Conquest Pro, 2012 Spesh FSR Comp EVO, 2015 Trek Domane 6.2 disc

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times in 6 Posts
There is a plateau point, but it doesn't work like what the article is describing.
As you gain fitness, your body increases efficiency, so there comes a point where your current caloric intake versus your current level of exercise will balance out and you will stop losing weight.
If that point is not your current goal weight, you need to either decrease caloric intake or increase the level of exercise to continue losing weight.
__________________
"I feel like my world was classier before I found cyclocross."
- Mandi M.
CliftonGK1 is offline  
Old 01-29-16, 08:13 AM
  #5  
Senior Member
 
DMC707's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Norman, Oklahoma
Posts: 5,390

Bikes: Too many to list

Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1764 Post(s)
Liked 1,121 Times in 744 Posts
Your body becomes very efficient at steady state aerobic exercise like cycling as well . So they (who's they?-- i dont know). say that you need to shake things up with periodic shorter bursts of anaerobic activity (intervals) , and strength training along with tryin to figure out what you need to put in your cake hole besides cake. Meal frequency, lots of small meals, eating more essential fats - it can all drive a sane person bananas

i've heard this advice before many times and still have a hard time implementing it.
DMC707 is offline  
Old 01-29-16, 08:32 AM
  #6  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Central PA
Posts: 4,843

Bikes: 2016 Black Mountain Cycles Monster Cross v5, 2015 Ritchey Road Logic, 1998 Specialized Rockhopper, 2017 Raleigh Grand Prix

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 374 Post(s)
Liked 15 Times in 11 Posts
Be aware of course that news articles talking about science often completely misinterpret what the scientists are saying. I've written plenty of press releases and have been interviewed about my research, and the results got completely mangled when they ended up in print. Journalists never ask the scientists involved to read what they have written before publication. It's all very frustrating.
dr_lha is offline  
Old 01-29-16, 09:38 AM
  #7  
Senior Member
 
McBTC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 3,888

Bikes: 2015 22 Speed

Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1543 Post(s)
Liked 51 Times in 39 Posts
You mean, no matter how little you eat or how much you exercise you can't get your body into a caloric deficit because it knows you're trying to lean it out and starts shutting down normal bodily functions and even if you kick the pedals of a bike around a few times your metabolic rate slows to almost nothing to conserve mass and you just slowly turn into a cold lump of fat giving off fetid gas? I think that's a myth.
McBTC is offline  
Old 01-29-16, 10:23 AM
  #8  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 5,428

Bikes: Cervelo RS, Specialized Stumpjumper FSR Pro, Schwinn Typhoon, Nashbar touring, custom steel MTB

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by CliftonGK1
There is a plateau point, but it doesn't work like what the article is describing.
As you gain fitness, your body increases efficiency, so there comes a point where your current caloric intake versus your current level of exercise will balance out and you will stop losing weight.
If that point is not your current goal weight, you need to either decrease caloric intake or increase the level of exercise to continue losing weight.
Which is exactly what this article says. Anyone who thinks otherwise needs to go back and read it again...
sstorkel is offline  
Old 01-29-16, 10:27 AM
  #9  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 38,545

Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter

Mentioned: 139 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5703 Post(s)
Liked 2,432 Times in 1,345 Posts
Utter nonsense.

However, you do get more efficient over time, so the ratio of calories burnt to the effort made decreases. However it never goes to where you don't burn more with more exercise.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site

An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.

Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.

“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN

WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FBinNY is offline  
Old 01-29-16, 11:15 AM
  #10  
Senior Member
 
vinnyvincent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 322
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I think the real problem with "why am I still gaining weight when I am exercising" is Americas addiction to junk food. Everyone is looking for an easy way out or a short cut so they can continue eating massive amounts of garbage, but somehow still be slim and healthy.

People put way to much emphasis on exercise when diet plays a much bigger role.
vinnyvincent is offline  
Old 01-29-16, 11:27 AM
  #11  
Old bikes, Older guy
 
Senior Ryder 00's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Fiscal Conservative on the Lefty Coast - Oregon
Posts: 872

Bikes: A few modern, Several vintage, All ridden when weather allows.

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 250 Post(s)
Liked 159 Times in 111 Posts
Originally Posted by vinnyvincent
I think the real problem with "why am I still gaining weight when I am exercising" is Americas addiction to junk food. Everyone is looking for an easy way out or a short cut so they can continue eating massive amounts of garbage, but somehow still be slim and healthy.

People put way to much emphasis on exercise when diet plays a much bigger role.
+1
__________________
Remember: Real bikes have pedals.
...and never put a yellow tail on a Red, White and Blue kite!
Senior Ryder 00 is offline  
Old 01-29-16, 11:59 AM
  #12  
Senior Member
 
indyfabz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,059
Mentioned: 210 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18320 Post(s)
Liked 15,299 Times in 7,231 Posts
Originally Posted by dr_lha

Then I read the article and saw "Fitbit" and realized we're not dealing with actual science here.
The article actually takes issue with things like Fitbit:

"And if you think you can necessarily rely on your Fitbit or other device to tell you how many calories you burned, think again: We probably burn proportionally fewer calories as we exercise above a certain level of intensity.

"'Activity monitors are going to be wrong at predicting energy expenditure because they aren't incorporating this adaptation,' Pontzer said."
indyfabz is offline  
Old 01-29-16, 12:05 PM
  #13  
Senior Member
 
indyfabz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,059
Mentioned: 210 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18320 Post(s)
Liked 15,299 Times in 7,231 Posts
Originally Posted by sstorkel
Which is exactly what this article says. Anyone who thinks otherwise needs to go back and read it again...
+1. And comprehend it this time.

With that said, it is arguably poorly worded in at least one place:

"The most active people hit a plateau and did not burn any more calories than their less-active peers."

I guess I can see how, in this quick scroll and read era we live it, someone could take that to mean that at some point you stop burning calories when you exercise. But reading the article as a whole, that is not what is being suggested.
indyfabz is offline  
Old 01-29-16, 12:11 PM
  #14  
Senior Member
 
GravelMN's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Rural Minnesota
Posts: 1,604
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 75 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Poor study with very limited parameters. To exert force requires energy which in terms of human nutrition is measured in calories burned. It is true that your basal metabolism (the amount of energy you need just to stay alive) is fairly constant and for individuals with low to moderate activity levels accounts for a very significant portion of their daily caloric burn. It is also true that nutrition (including calories consumed) has a huge impact on body composition. On the flip side, the greater the volume of work performed (physical activity) the greater the caloric expenditure. There may be some efficiency issues between individuals, but for a given individual, the more work you do, the more calories you burn, period.

Study be damned, if you burn more calories than you consume, you will lose weight, it is physiologically impossible to do otherwise as energy cannot be created, it can only change form. If the potential energy from your food = the kinetic energy of work performed, your fat stores will remain constant (notice I didn't say weight as weight can also include water/electrolyte issues). If our potential energy < the kinetic energy then additional potential energy from your glycogen and fat stores will be tapped and your fat stores will be depleted. The inverse is also true, that if your potential energy > the kinetic energy exerted, your body will store the excess as glycogen and fat.
GravelMN is offline  
Old 01-29-16, 12:18 PM
  #15  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Central PA
Posts: 4,843

Bikes: 2016 Black Mountain Cycles Monster Cross v5, 2015 Ritchey Road Logic, 1998 Specialized Rockhopper, 2017 Raleigh Grand Prix

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 374 Post(s)
Liked 15 Times in 11 Posts
Originally Posted by indyfabz
+1. And comprehend it this time.

With that said, it is arguably poorly worded in at least one place:

"The most active people hit a plateau and did not burn any more calories than their less-active peers."

I guess I can see how, in this quick scroll and read era we live it, someone could take that to mean that at some point you stop burning calories when you exercise. But reading the article as a whole, that is not what is being suggested.
To be fair, I just read Inpd's summary and then quick scrolled through the article.

But as I said after, I take any report on scientific research in the mainstream media as being either grossly misinterpreted or wrong. These articles don't really deserve my attention, nor can I be bothered to try to read between the lines to figure out what they really mean.

If I was really bothered about this research, I'd read whatever paper they had published.

The science may be great. Science reporting on the whole, sucks.
dr_lha is offline  
Old 01-29-16, 12:29 PM
  #16  
Senior Member
 
Jarrett2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: DFW
Posts: 4,126

Bikes: Steel 1x's

Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 632 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
I ran into this last year. I was riding like a mofo, but my weight stagnated over the whole year on the same diet. I had lost 152 lbs. doing riding the bike and counting calories, but it suddenly stopped and plateaued. I tried to compensate by riding harder and more frequently, which just wore my body down but had no effect on my weight. I was stumped until I started doing some reading into the ideas like this.

This year I changed it up a bit. Cleaned up the diet, started lifting more weights and riding a whole lot less and the weight is starting to come off again.

At this point, I'm of the mind that successful weight loss is:

80% (or more) Diet
15% Resistance Training
5% Cardio Exercise

In the process of losing weight, I fell in love with cycling thinking that it allowed me to become health AND lose weight at the same time. I feel that is no longer true. Its great for health benefits and its also fun to do, so I will keep doing it for fun, just at a moderate pace now. But I'm no longer going to attempt to use it for weight loss by going harder, faster, further on the bike as that is a waste of time, imo.
Jarrett2 is offline  
Old 01-29-16, 12:42 PM
  #17  
Senior Member
 
andr0id's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,522
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1422 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times in 5 Posts
It might be time to shift that standard public health message: To lose weight, simply exercise more.
"We would say that 'If you want to lose weight, you probably ought to focus on changing your diet and watching how much you eat.'
This much is certainly true.

The average person cannot burn up enough calories at the typical low intensity level they choose to burn off any significant amount of excess weight. And then they "reward" themselves for exercising with a snack that get you back to no deficit for the day.


The EXERCISE MORE to lose weight campaign is largely driven by the food industry that does NOT want you to eat less or spend less on food.
andr0id is offline  
Old 01-29-16, 12:47 PM
  #18  
Senior Member
 
indyfabz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,059
Mentioned: 210 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18320 Post(s)
Liked 15,299 Times in 7,231 Posts
Originally Posted by dr_lha
To be fair, I just read Inpd's summary and then quick scrolled through the article.
Take anything Inpd posts with a 50 lb. bag of rock salt.
indyfabz is offline  
Old 01-29-16, 12:49 PM
  #19  
Senior Member
 
andr0id's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,522
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1422 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times in 5 Posts
Originally Posted by GravelMN

Study be damned, if you burn more calories than you consume, you will lose weight, it is physiologically impossible to do otherwise as energy cannot be created, it can only change form. If the potential energy from your food = the kinetic energy of work performed, your fat stores will remain constant (notice I didn't say weight as weight can also include water/electrolyte issues). If our potential energy < the kinetic energy then additional potential energy from your glycogen and fat stores will be tapped and your fat stores will be depleted. The inverse is also true, that if your potential energy > the kinetic energy exerted, your body will store the excess as glycogen and fat.
You are right, but most people cycle their glycogen store endlessly and that's why they have such a hard time losing fat.

To lose fat, you must burn off your glycogen in your liver and muscles and not replenish it. When it doesn't have easy sugar to burn, your body will eventually start to burn fat. Your body will hate this and make you hungry, hungry, hungry for sugar. After a week or so of eating protein and green vegetables, the cravings will stop and you will start to lose fat. Very few people are willing to really cut sugar and starchy carbs for any length of times. Add to that the fact that people are told to replenish carbs when exercising and they stay fat forever.
andr0id is offline  
Old 01-29-16, 01:13 PM
  #20  
Senior Member
 
Jarrett2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: DFW
Posts: 4,126

Bikes: Steel 1x's

Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 632 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by andr0id
To lose fat, you must burn off your glycogen in your liver and muscles and not replenish it. When it doesn't have easy sugar to burn, your body will eventually start to burn fat.
I don't think that's accurate. If it were true, there would be no bonking. People would just do high intensity exercise for a long enough duration to get passed burning glycogen and into fat burning. So riding longer and harder would be better for weight loss. But we've shown that doesn't work.

Instead, what we find is you ride hard and your body burns off all of its glycogen in an attempt to maintain the energy level. Either you replenish the glycogen as you go or you bonk once you've emptied your glycogen stores. Anyone that's ridden or attempted a century knows this process.

Piling on more and more glycogen via carbs tells your body to continue storing fat as glycogen is the active fuel preference to maintain the high intensity fuel demands. So you feel as if you need copious amounts of carbs to keep the cycle going, which you do.

Alternatively, if you ride slow and easy and keep your heart rate down, your body opts to burn fat before diving into the glycogen stores. At that point, you can start to lower your carb intake in your diet while slow transitioning to fat as the primary fuel preference and begin losing weight in the process.

Which basically breaks out to:
Rider harder/faster, eat tons of carbs, don't lose weight
Ride slower/easier, eat fewer carbs, lose weight

Last edited by Jarrett2; 01-29-16 at 01:19 PM.
Jarrett2 is offline  
Old 01-29-16, 01:18 PM
  #21  
Senior Member
 
Drew Eckhardt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Mountain View, CA USA and Golden, CO USA
Posts: 6,341

Bikes: 97 Litespeed, 50-39-30x13-26 10 cogs, Campagnolo Ultrashift, retroreflective rims on SON28/PowerTap hubs

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 550 Post(s)
Liked 325 Times in 226 Posts
Originally Posted by DMC707
Your body becomes very efficient at steady state aerobic exercise like cycling as well .
Not really. Measured cycling efficiency varies over a narrow range from about 20 to 25% net, with increased efficiency at higher outputs.

So they (who's they?-- i dont know). say that you need to shake things up with periodic shorter bursts of anaerobic activity (intervals) , and strength training along with tryin to figure out what you need to put in your cake hole besides cake.
You just need to exercise "enough" relative to what you eat.

With cycling at a recreational pace only good for 25 Calories / mile that can be a lot.

I think 6 hours a week of riding is a minimum to be in OK shape, 10 to be in good shape. Greg LeMond and Connie Carpenter agree on the 10 hours a week.

Meal frequency, lots of small meals, eating more essential fats - it can all drive a sane person bananas
Eat when you get hungry. Only eat enough to be sated 30 minutes after the last bite, going back for seconds and even thirds when you guess wrong.

More protein provides longer lasting satiety so the calorie count which goes with that is lower. I cook a few pounds of boneless skinless chicken thighs at the beginning of each week and package 4-6oz portions in cling wrap so that's convenient.

Simple.

Add extra food when you get too thin, noting that medical doctors' definition is far past where co-workers tell you to eat a donut.

Last edited by Drew Eckhardt; 01-29-16 at 01:35 PM.
Drew Eckhardt is offline  
Old 01-29-16, 01:18 PM
  #22  
Senior Member
 
andr0id's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,522
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1422 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times in 5 Posts
Originally Posted by Jarrett2
I don't think that's accurate. If it were true, there would be no bonking. People would just do high intensity exercise for a long enough duration to get passed burning glycogen and into fat burning. So riding longer and harder would be better for weight loss. But we've shown that doesn't work.

Instead, what we find is you ride hard and your body burns off all of its glycogen in an attempt to maintain the energy level. Either you replenish the glycogen as you go or you bonk once you've emptied your glycogen stores. Piling on more and more glycogen via carbs tells your body to continue storing fat as glycogen because it is the active fuel preference. So you feel as if you need copious amounts of carbs to keep the cycle going, which you do.

Alternatively, if you ride slow and easy and keep your heart rate down, your body opts to burn fat before diving into the glycogen stores. At that point, you can start to lower your carb intake in your diet while slow transitioning to fat as the primary fuel preference and begin losing weight in the process.

Which basically breaks out to:
Rider harder/faster, eat tons of carbs, don't lose weight
Ride slower/easier, eat fewer carbs, lose weight
You have to become fat adapted.
Six Steps to Fat Adaptation for Athletes | Nourish Balance Thrive
andr0id is offline  
Old 01-29-16, 01:23 PM
  #23  
Senior Member
 
ColaJacket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 1,892

Bikes: Fuji Sportif 1.3 C - 2014

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by andr0id
This much is certainly true.

The average person cannot burn up enough calories at the typical low intensity level they choose to burn off any significant amount of excess weight. And then they "reward" themselves for exercising with a snack that get you back to no deficit for the day.


The EXERCISE MORE to lose weight campaign is largely driven by the food industry that does NOT want you to eat less or spend less on food.
Well, to be honest, it is probably also driven by the exercise industry that wants you to spend more time and money on exercise.

But wait, this article says that it can be hard to count your Calories, also.

GH
ColaJacket is offline  
Old 01-29-16, 01:24 PM
  #24  
Senior Member
 
Jarrett2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: DFW
Posts: 4,126

Bikes: Steel 1x's

Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 632 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by andr0id
We're saying the same thing I think aside from the idea of completely burning through glycogen before you can burn fat.

"Glucose is virtually the sole fuel for the human brain, except during prolonged starvation. The brain lacks fuel stores and hence requires a continuous supply of glucose. It consumes about 120 g daily"

Each Organ Has a Unique Metabolic Profile - Biochemistry - NCBI Bookshelf
Jarrett2 is offline  
Old 01-29-16, 08:10 PM
  #25  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: SGV So Cal
Posts: 883

Bikes: 80's Schwinn High Plains, Motobecane Ti Cyclocross

Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 108 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 30 Times in 21 Posts
Originally Posted by Jarrett2
The brain lacks fuel stores and hence requires a continuous supply of glucose. It consumes about 120 g daily"

Each Organ Has a Unique Metabolic Profile - Biochemistry - NCBI Bookshelf
Unless you are a member of the press and therefore have a much lower cranial glucose requirement.
TGT1 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.