Anyone do a Dexa scan?
 

I was watching a GCN video where Dan gets a Dexa scan to evaluate body muscle mass, visceral fat, etc. At age (almost) 70 I am not overweight and fairly fit, but can't help that I could do better.

Anyone get one of these scans? How did that change your training and/or diet?

Just interesting or important?

I'm considering it. Knowing bone density would be nice, as we cyclists tend towards low bone density. Comparing it to my scale results could be interesting, too.

Muscle mass isn't that important to me, it's strength and fatigue resistance that matters.

Visceral fat — important for health, maybe worth knowing, although I figure mine should be quite low. This Visceral Fat Calculator says so:

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...e6f0b85810.png

That which gets measured, gets improved.

I am not that concerned about ultimate performance, although that certainly could improve, but also for future potential illness and injury recovery.

DEXA scan is awesome, especially if you are trying to improve something over time, like more muscle mass and less fat. A scale can't measure that. Seeing bone density was very interesting, too.

I had a Dexa scan 10 or so years ago. Yep, low bone density, like most cyclists, even though I weight train, backpack, ski, etc. OTOH, I've never broken a bone. I took Alendronate for 5 years, the limit, but it didn't do much, if anything. The doc didn't mention muscle or fat mass, guess it wasn't interesting to her. I have one of those scales which measures bone, fat, and muscle percentages. I use it every morning when I get up. It's interesting. Everything varies except bone mass.

Which raises an interesting question carbonfiberboy:

What, if anything can I do with the information? My diet and exercise is pretty good, but of course could be better. Whose couldn't? Before I spend $500 for the scan and VO2 Max tests, it is something I am pondering on a cold Sunday evening.

I don't think you'd get much of a return on your money. Mine was ordered by a doctor because I had a syndrome which often was accompanied by low bone density, so it was covered by my insurance. As I said, the treatment didn't seem to be helpful and there's really not much you can do about it. Very common among cyclists. The best thing I got out of it was an instruction to drink a tall glass of milk every day with my lunch. I've been doing that. Trying to maintain a positive calcium balance certainly can't hurt, so to your point, that's my advice. You apparently can't do much better than that. I thought it interesting that the doc did not advise some sort of supplement.

Booked today for next week. Dexa scan for bone density and body composition, RMR/resting metabolic rate and VO2 max test.

Of course I want to increase my performance, but really I am concerned about being ready when the stuff hits the fan, as it does for everyone, eventually. I'll report back.

P.S. My Spotify yearly recap tells me that my musical age is 81. I am hoping that my health age is younger! (I am 69).

Got the Dexa scans and VO2 Max tests done yesterday. Still waiting for the Dexa results. The VO2 Max results are immediate and while I prefer not to share my number because that always results in a number-measuring contest, it was significantly higher than I thought. I also got heart rate zone numbers with power and interestingly, they are way, way higher than Zwift, or what I experience on the road.

I rode today and I am going to throw out the VO2 Max calculated zone numbers and go back to the various online calculators.
For example, their Zone2 was everybody else's Zone 4.
My ride today was spirited enough, but their numbers say Zone 1 the whole time. Maybe, but that is not helpful to me.

Not according to my bathroom scale.

" Medicare Part B generally covers DEXA (bone density) scans for individuals at risk for osteoporosis, usually once every 24 months, if you meet specific criteria like being a woman with estrogen deficiency, having vertebral issues, or taking steroids. Coverage extends to Medicare Advantage (Part C) plans, but you might need to stay in-network, and costs are typically 20% after the Part B deductible unless you have supplemental insurance"

I have a new coach/advisor/robo doc. Meaning, Chat GBT. It is simply amazing!

I put my scan results in and in just a few seconds I got a complete analysis, what is good, what is great and what I could improve upon. Also, a suggested weekly training plan including specific Zwift workouts.

Bottom line, my weight is fine, my aerobics is good but I need more muscle mass. Yea, I figured that.

More muscle mass? Probably not. You probably just need to increase the tone and strength of the muscle you already have.

Are those not correlated? Asking, not arguing.

No. You can strengthen muscle without increasing the number or mass of muscle fibers. That is typically done by lifting a heavier weight for a few reps. If you want to build muscle mass, then typically you lift a lighter weight for a lot of reps. IIRC of course.

Not all of a muscle is used when performing it's function some of it is kept in reserve. Lifting a heavy weight a few times trains that muscle to recruit more of the fibers it already has for the lift. .

Lifting a weight you can do for many reps will have the body increasing the muscle mass but not necessarily increase the weight one can lift.

LMFAO,,,,,,, But so true!!

Yes, it's all about fiber recruitment. Muscle size has a lot to do with calorie intake. It's totally possible to increase strength at the same time one is losing weight - up to a point. Once one has full recruitment, increases will have to come from size increase, the desirability of which will depend on one's sporting goals. IME as long as one lifts several sets with the last rep to near failure, one will improve fiber recruitment, the number of reps desired depending on the strength/endurance balance desired. Rock climbers are perhaps one end of this continuum, up to say 50 reps increasing strength and endurance but not weight. I remember a RAAM winner some years ago being able to leg sled 500 lbs. for 50 reps. There's a goal for you. I've also seen pro body builders sledding enormous weights for 100+ reps. They eat a lot. Working to failure or one rep from failure is the trick, the latter being safer. That's been my practice for many years. I start over every fall, using 3 sets of 12. By summer, I've been using 2 sets of 5, also to near failure, once a week for maintenance - less stress in the gym, more stress on the road.

It's true that you can increase muscle strength through neuromuscular recruitment, but that does not mean that muscle mass is not correlated to strength. It is. More muscle mass produces more strength.

It's also true that you don't need to have a calorie surplus to build muscle. You can still build muscle with balanced calories—or even a slight deficit (~200-300 kcal).

My DEXA scan was just about bone density.

I have osteopenia.

It is true when it comes to over all weight lifted size matters. However there is no correlation to “muscle size and strength”. Many bodybuilders at 350 lbs can’t lift what a 200 lb power lifter can. If you are in the powerlifting scene you understand this. The strongest man to ever live is alive today and about to brake his own record again. He is 450lbs and can deadlift maybe 2.75 x his body weight. There are many smaller guys that can go well over 3x body weight.


You are correct. Building muscle while in a deficit is called recomping. You do this by balancing your macros towards fat and protein and away from carbs, while resistance training. I find it really easy but some find it really hard and end up gaining weight lol.

I have been big and I have been small. Gone both way several times over the years depending on what I am doing. The scan is a great tool to know if there are underlying issues. This allows you to fix them before you get injured.

I am currently 165 down from 198 last year. I have been as big as 220 bulked. I have lifted on and off most of my life. The cycling thing is not my thing but I needed to shift towards more cardio activities and my family rides.

in the end the prescribed life changes if the scan comes back bad are going to be beneficial even if your scan comes back great. Balanced nutrition with proper vitamins and mineral sups. Resistance training once to twice a week focused on volume and core movements. Cycle when you want.

What I am saying is you don’t need the scan to benefit from the lifestyle you would need if the scan comes back with bone loss. Personally I would get a scan at 70 if it’s affordable. Knowing things is not usually bad and leads to better health.

I've asked my PCP twice about whether / would a DEXA scan have any value for me. I've asked what it would cost if insurance covers it and also what if it doesn't. She seems indifferent to my requests, as I haven't yet received an answer to any of my questions. @ ~ 173 #'s, I'll turn 77 in a few weeks.

Generally more active than many males my age, in that l work part-time in a retail hardware store humping freight and stocking products as well as answering customers' questions on a variety of topics. Made a return to biking back in 2023, ride regularly when weather permits (might just ride for the first time this year later today if temps pass 50° like yesterday!) though not competitively.

My annual "wellness" visit's scheduled for 2/24... I'm making plans to push this issue to the front.

I remember flipping a track bike and ramming the olecranon of my elbow up through the humerus. (The orthopedist did a great job, but compared it to sewing Rice Krispies together with wire.) First day in the hospital, a research article popped up to remind me that cyclists have lower bone density than marathon runners.

Don't know whether we race bikes because we have lower bone density or have lower bone density because we race bikes (probably the latter), but I recommend all older (and some younger) cyclists get their bone density measured.

If you want to check the whole body lean mass while you're at it, should be able to work out a deal. None of the companies give the software away and the insurance companies won't pay for it, so usually end up at a research or commercial place. (Remember, the scientists will bargain; the commercial fitness/spa folks will try to make up the $100,000 they blew on the scanner and software..)

I work at a .place that offers them. on our calibrated research machines. I think the fee is ~$100, but I only use the data to keep athletes honest about how much fat they carry ("...but doctor, I'm big boned...") and to prompt a little more effort.

A few times, an unexpectedly high percentage of body fat uncovered a drinking problem, but in general, when it comes to program design, the LBM is not nearly as useful as oxygen uptake, lactate threshold, and for the professionals, muscle fiber typing. (Think about how much muscle Lance Armstrong had to sacrifice - at the advice of many, famously including Eddy Merckx - to set the standard for his era. His percentage of lean mass did not change much and was far less important than change in total mass.)

'nuf said. Ride more, read less.

The good news is you can reverse it, no matter your age. Of course you have to be willing to put in the work, but the benefits are worth it. Quality of life will only go up.