Nice find even with n = 11 and recreational means what again?

nom nom nom

don't forget EPO is slimming.


oh yeah...i went there

Well, you’ve changed the goalpost. I understand what you are saying in your original post and even agree in some aspects but fact is, there are no studies to support your statement:

It's not because of the megamiles run - cyclists routinely put in more calories burned than runners of similar ability, but the impact per stride is so high in running that even leisurely runs cause a significant baseline metabolic acceleration.

I’d love to see a controlled study where caloric expenditure is accounted for on an untrained, recreational (?), and elite population to see the effects of training on basal metabolism. You over stepped with your statement above.

Dont' disagree here. Heavy folks exist in every sport.

But like it or not the penalty for being heavy (or fat) in running is much more significant than cycling, even on hillfest courses. This is again, extremely well known in triathlon.

And the fatter you get in running, the harder you work and the more calories you burn to maintain the same speed, even on flats and downhills.

Exactly right.
Cyclists are so fearful of energy depletion during a ride that they have started this obscene exercise to continually take in calories while riding, then take in more post exercise to replenish any depleted stores, all of course following a pre ride meal to stock up on calories. Ridiculous. The human body can endure....a lot. It can even, gasp, no way, go for 180 minutes without fluid intake or caloric intake and get this, even survive the trial.
This nation has become a country of fat pigs unrelentingly stuffing food in their mouths 12 hours a day. It is just crazy. I have a patient who is 38 years of age and weighs 725 pounds. She will be in a nursing home for the rest of her life. No endocrine causes, no tumors in her brain. She simply starts eating at 7 am and does not stop until she goes to bed. Every day.
Guess who pays for her food. Yup, you and I.

Yup.

You're a big boy, you can type, do it yourself if interested. The worlds at your fingertips on the internet.

1. Don’t believe it. And TBH, most med research methodology is wanting.
2. Not a big boy.
3. Ornery: clavicle mending at the time.

Well I did not mean a big boy in a derogatory sense. Broken clavicles suck. And yes, most research period leaves a lot to be desired. I will never forget a wise professor telling me after I smugly spouted off some literature to support my point, " D'ont ever forget, 50 % of research is just pure bull ****"

^Haha, true.

Okay, back to the trainer...

More likely it's because running is a self-selected sport that weeds out the fatties before they even start. It's not easy for overweight people to run.

I've heard of resistance training increasing baseline metabolic rate due to muscle hypertrophy but not endurance sports, high impact or not. I think you just made that up

If you run- it will hurt, you will expend a fair to a lot of calories. If you cycle you must make the effort to work. Too easy to coast along on nothingness. BUT, when you do work, you can keep it up for a lot longer being freed of the force of gravity slamming your body with every step. That's why I like cycling I can go all out for a much, much longer period of time.

Self-selection or not, there is the weight-bearing aspect of it significantly increases the difficulty as well as muscle strain for any new runner compared to a new cyclist of comparable ability.

If you honestly believe that a nonweight bearing activity like recreational easy cycling is equivalent to comparable effort recreational easy running in terms of calorie burn and adaptation to the training, you're free to believe that.

Again, you don't need to have detailed peer reviewed studies for this sort of obvious stuff. I might as well ask for peer reviewed studies proving decisively that increased weight makes climbing on a bike harder. It's hard to find those studies - because it's so obvious.

Body types............simply put! I have said this so many times about most of us here. We are for the most part avid cyclist that are here posting and not pro......simply put. We don't get custom meals that are high in calories to aid in putting back what we lost but at the same time short on fats so we add weight. We don't ride the miles they do in a day simply put. Most of the folks here which I would say about 99% are just average joes and josies cycling for fun and fitness but not to the degree of anywhere near pro status.

Now there will be a few here to throw rocks because I insulted their fra-gile feelings because they think they are something they are not. Well, so be it. But mostly folks of all body types exist here and are AVERAGE at best!

Don't be fooled by a guy that has weight................they can outrun you! And I have gone against thinnies that quite honestly can run faster than they bike. So the good thing is cycling is for any body type which is great. It is a relatively non-impact exercise and is better for you than running.

Enjoy................

agree absolutely.

You're getting awfully vague with the term 'calorie burn'. I agree most runners burn calories at a higher rate than most cyclists (although the numbers for competitive athletes would be very similar for equivalent duration races) while exercising. What's not obvious is that the effect lasts for more than an hour or so after exercise. Sure you might get an extra 30-60 Cals of expenditure but there there isn't any evidence that one's resting metabolic rate increases due to running.

If weight bearing exercise was so stressful I would expect to see some muscle hypertrophy which doesn't happen for distance runners.

Yep ... too much of that!

Strava usually says I burn around 1000 calories an hour, I assume thats overestimating by about 300 calories or so. All I know is that when I get home I am competely exhausted and feel terrible for 2 hours or so. I think I need to eat more on the bike, I usually eat 200 to 300 calories during a 2 or 3 hour ride. And I lose weight when I don't want to. I thought cycling would grant me larger thighs?

That's an overestimation of about 500 calories.

Chances are you feel terrible because you haven't been drinking enough water, not because you haven't been eating enough.

Seems I got my answer. It's not that cycling is an ineffective exercise option, it's the eating habits of cyclists. I had no idea cyclists were such pigs. I'll keep to riding a lot and be sure to not join the crowd who eat 1000 calories after biking 800 calories. It is hard to keep to a diet, and I don't mean any ****** weight watchers, calorie counting, no gluten stupid diet people latch onto to blame for their own laziness of not hitting the gym. But just sticking to what I buy at the grocery and not buying candy, snacks etc whenever I'm waiting around somewhere near a convenience store, or snacking while browsing forums / watching movies.

The picture Massbike uses on their website to promote cycling, sausage.



Never did marathons, but for 10K-15K races I ate only a banana and some orange juice before. Didn't realize cyclists ate so much!

+1

People are afraid of that feeling of hunger. The moment their stomachs feel a little bit empty, they've got to soothe them with food. But it's OK to feel hungry ... nothing bad is going to happen if you feel hungry for an hour or so.

If you want to lose weight through any physical exercise including cycling you have to up the pace. Cycling at a comfortable speed just gives you a aerobic workout. You have to push the limits, raise the heartbeat, feel the burn, and remember no pain no gain to enter the anerobic stage that burns fat.

Obviously not a runner!!!

This is a good point. Anyone who wants to call themselves a runner always keeps this in mind, run, not jog. Cycling is definitely tough if I always keep pushing myself to keep to a high cadence and not coast. I don't use computers whether running or cycling, I set a distance and then try to complete that distance fast as I can.

Agreed. Never seen a decent fat runner, nevermind a good runner. When I see a fat runner finish a local 5K road in 17 minutes, then I'll admit, fatties can run. 5K Cross in 17, then I'll be absolutely amazed. And of course 17 minutes is not a great performance, just saying, if a fat/chubby can run 5K in 17, then that will change my view on running. I just don't think it's possible. The stress on the knees and back running at that pace with that weight, I don't see it happening.

Cycling only burns off approx. 500 calories per hour. If sitting around doing nothing burns 1500 calories or less, and a person gets up and cycles for 1 hour a day, that's a total of 2000 calories burned (or less) per day.

If that person eats 2200 calories ... or 2500 calories ... or 3000 calories or more ... that person is going to gain weight even though they are cycling for 1 hour per day.


You say "I still don't understand why they would be so fat if they are cycling so much" but my question is ... are they cycling that much?



[HR][/HR]
There was a recommendation several years ago that people should do 90 minutes a day of moderate exercise ... not necessarily 90 minutes all at once as in a bicycle ride or jog, but 90 minutes throughout the day as a part of an active lifestyle.

For example: 15 minute walk to work + 15 minute walk after work + 30 minute walk at lunch + 30 minute bicycle ride after work ... or 30 minute walk at lunch + 60 minute bicycle ride after work ... or 15 minute walk at lunch + 15 minutes walking around getting groceries + 30 minutes playing ball with the kids in the park + 30 minutes on the trainer.

The recommendation encouraged people to do things like taking the stairs, parking some distance from where you want to go and walking, walking or riding a bicycle instead of driving, getting outside and playing with the kids instead of sitting in front of the TV, etc. and of course it also recommended taking up an activity such as cycling, running, swimming, weightlifting, etc.

But there was such an outcry against the idea of doing 90 minutes of exercise a day that you don't hear much about it anymore. Instead you hear the benefits of doing 30 minutes of exercise a day ... or 1 hour 3 times a week ... or 10 minutes a day.
[HR][/HR]


And with regard to the running, it's a good idea to mix it up and do a variety of things.