My question after reading all this is this. Why in the world after riding their butt off would anyone want to eat Costco muffins when there are so many better choices out there ? When I used to eat muffins, theyre off my diet now , I would only eat freshly made ones cooked locally and eaten warm just out of the oven. Those made in chains like Costcos scared the dickens out of me once their labels were read. They are a real processed food of high order.

Even locally made muffins are a high calorie low nutrient food loaded with sugar, butter, white flour,some salt, and really dont belong in anyones diet, fat or not , except on rare occasion.

That is so easy for me to do. One word: cheesecake.

Once ate a muffin at a charity ride rest stop, paper and all. Peeled the second one.

I think this is part of the problem when it comes to perception and reality. I find this especially true with those focused solely on weight loss through cycling versus just trying to get faster and stronger on the bike.

Again - just my experience and observation, but most cyclists in it just for weight loss, typically:

A) Typically ride at a lower effort. I think this is due to a couple of reasons. One, having been heavy in the first place, they have been trained to focus on the fat burning zone. While long-slow riding has its merits, it should not be your main riding style.

B) Because they are purely riding for weight loss, they do not push themselves like those who are trying to gain improvements in performance. Any hint of muscle burn, and they will drop into a lower gear. For those trying to improve performance wise, pushing through the muscle burn is part of a training regimen, which just happens to also trigger additional caloric burn. I blame the whole Carmichael training approach, where people began spinning on their bikes at higher RPM's. Applied correctly, and there is a place for this style of riding, but most amateur riders instead stay at the same lower cadence, but now have merely dropped the effort and energy needed to move the bike.

C) All too often, those who take up cycling for weight loss, do not realize that just because you are rolling around on a bike, that it is burning the number of calories they imagine they are burning. How often do you see these people stop mid-ride to take in a view, or coast down a hill.

D) Often those riding purely for weight loss, feed on the bike as if they are training for a race. Honestly, there is NO reason you need a Gu gel for a two hour ride on the bike path. Given the pace and time they are spending on the bike, between the Gu gel and Gatorade they are drinking, they can in some cases consume 1/2 of the calories they might be burning riding. Finally, (and I think this gets to the point about riding), they immediately begin to use riding as an excuse to stop watching their diets.

E) Finally - they do not put in the time or mileage necessary to lose the weight. They see a think cyclist, and do not realize that he/she just got done an 60 - 100 mile ride. They seem to think that most cyclists hit the bike path for an hour, and lost all of that weight.

I repeat, this is not universal, but they are my observations in relation to why so many cyclists end up losing the battle of weight even though they think they have suddenly become active.

I don't want to reignite this debate, but those who like beer have very little trouble doing this. 1000 calories of beer is very easy to consume - and the first 500 makes the second 500 much more difficult to resist.

@VT Biker. Good post, I absolutely agree. People tend to overestimate how much work it takes to cruise around at 10 mph for an hour or two.

I agree. However, another consideration is that for weight loss to be sustained, lasting lifestyle changes have to be made. Riding 50 miles a week at a semi-leisurely pace over time will still result in weight loss (albeit slowly) if combined with a sensible diet. 50 miles a week is roughly 1500 to 2000 calories. Over a year that equates to almost 30 lbs worth of calories. Better to do that and sustain it than go all gung ho, ride 500 miles a month for a couple of months and get burned out and give it up. You're right in that riding 50 miles a week is no excuse to pig out and eat whatever you want.

Now we are ridiculous. Sensible diet + just about anything = sustainable weight loss.

And mega miles + eating everything in sight = weight gain. The (obvious) point was that all else being equal, a modest exercise program is better than nothing and, more on point, better than an ambitious exercise program that can't be sustained and ends up being nothing (see: https://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/29/he...?ref=nutrition). No one should expect to lose 10 lbs a month on such a program, but over a period of years it will assist in weight management. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to justify my own level of riding (over 800 miles for July). But I don't think people who do much less should be dismissed as wasting their time. On the other hand, as pointed out in the previous posts which I agreed with, they should also be realistic about the benefit they will receive.

Some weght gain will be normal and will be muscle gain (lean body mass)

A lot of cyclists don't lose much weight, it is due to amount of carbs people eat and how "natural" biking is, it's pratically as natural for your limbs as walking

The rural Chinese eat on average over 2600 calories per day mosly carbohydates and are very thin . Its the junk and highly processed carbohydates that the average American eats that adds to his waist line. Add to that the ridiculous amount of meat and cheese that is in the SAD and you have an epidemic of obesity.

What is amazing, is that after spending all day with a group of cyclists, you get a little used to the standard body size (i.e. -between 140 - 180 pounds), but almost all lean. Today, the wife and I needed to go to Home Depot and Walmart (I know...please refrain from scolding me) to get some flowers and gardening tools. It was amazing the number of heavy people, and the fact that this is socially accpetable. Entire families overweight, and not a concern in the world by the Parents.

It kind of disgusts me about the United States.

Yeah. And look into their shopping carts-- chips, soda, donuts, pounds of hamburger, white bread..... I don't know how people can live in those bodies.

While what we eat is important I think it's less important than the absolute lack of physical exercise. If people got anywhere near the appropriate amount of exercise it would matter a lot less what they ate. Poor diet does compound the lack of exercise.

I'm in the process of working off 15 years of weight and I'm still "overweight" by 10 pounds or so. Most of the people that I see in wally world are clearly obese by BMI standards if I'm still classified as overweight.

I can sometimes understand adults that are overweight and/or obese, but it really upsets me when I see children that are clearly *very* obese. I've seen children as young as 5 that are, at a minimum, *twice* the weight they should be squeezing their way into a McDonalds behind parents and siblings that are all cardiac patients waiting to happen. Sure my kids love McDonalds too, but it's a treat and my eldest loves the play area as much as the french fries.

Well - as was being discussed on this thread, due to the diets most Americans have, unless families begin to cycle, run, x-country ski for long stretches of time during the weekends, no amount of physical activity is going off-set the calories these people consume. Diet is the most important part of weight loss, and most of these people, even if they begin to walk or ride, chances are, the exertion would not be sufficient to off-set the caloric intake.

This is what angers me. McDonald's, Taco Bell etc.. as a standard part of a childs diet equals child abuse in my opinion. Forget even the fact that this can lead to obesity, but the amount of salt and simple carbs being consumed is horrible. We are literally providing the road map for how to become a 300 pound obese, diabetic with high blood pressure, cholesterol and sleep problems.

I think one follows the other. Fit, active people tend to eat better without having to think about it too much. The active body craves clean fuel. Whereas chips, Mountain Dew and video games seem to go together well.

Great point, and one that is not discussed enough (or even researched enough). There is a link between healthy, active lifestyles and diet which all too often are ignored, and people either focus entirely on diet, or entirely on exercise as a lead-in for health. But I can tell you this, when I am in full cycling season, I crave fresh fruits, salads, and foods that make my body feel better.

However, when I was more sedentary, you begin to crave foods that are more mentally rewarding (i.e. – foods loaded with salt, sugars etc…) which increase serotonin in the brain.

Since an active lifestyle seems to drive a subconscious change in diet, I do wonder whether the additional serotonin benefit from exercise results in the body reducing the need for that jolt to come from food (or an even more complex theory would be that the body, recognizing that exercise is giving it the serotonin boost, then craves foods which will continue to fuel the exercise).

Or – it could be that most people who exercise wear body hugging clothing, and we naturally want to look better in lycra. Kind of the whole nurse/stripper comparison. When you get to wear scrubs all day long, you will naturally eat more since you do not pay a physical or mental image issue if you gain a few. But a stripper – one extra pound is a serious issue.

I feel guilty eating junk food after a good workout. It feels like I wasted the workout if I pig out afterwards. Maybe it is the serotonin, Idk.

On the other hand I love a good cookie after a 3,000+ cal ride

A) It is a 3,000 + calorie ride. It is difficult if you are riding hard to take in enough calories, so when you are done riding, there is a significant caloric deficit.
B) A cookie or a beer after a ride is not going to result in weight gain alone. But if you were to then eat at McDonald's that night, and then a bag of chips later that night and continue this diet day in and day out...you might actually gain weight, even if riding this hard.
C) Again - when you exercise as you do, your appetite and cravings change in general. But long-term, it results in a healthier diet, in part because unlike sitting in front of a television, someone who cycles regularly can feel the performance difference between eating well and eating poorly. Watching television and playing video games…errr not so much.

You deserve it!

The amount of junk in the average American's diet will eventually cause some type of illness no matter how much exercise one does nor no matter how fast that persons metabolism is. The standard American diet with its emphasis on heavy consumtion of animal product [the average American consumes %40 of his calories from same] and heavy use of processed foods [%40+ of total calories] and little consumption of fresh fruits and vegetables [less than %5 of total calories] is likely to lead to CAD, cancer, diabeties autoimmune disease etc. So not being overweight is not necessarily a sign of good health.

Ive spent good money on a Doctor who specializes in nutritional medicine, he is convinced that we are the richest fatest sickess country in history with the biggest budget for medical care. he claims medical costs went up %40 per cent in the the last 10 years yet heart disease cancer diabetes have all gone up too. Were like a nation of sick kings who have eaten all the rich food while sitting on their backsides. . He claims diet comes first followed by robust varied, exercise .

No offense to your doctor, but that claim is not exactly some huge insight as if he is the Oracle. A) We are the richest nation ever....and B) We are the fattest nation on the planet. Seems he is just stating simple facts.

Me, I can't live without a microbrew Porter after a ride like that. About 400 calories. But don't worry - I have a recovery drink first! About 300 calories. Then a bagel on the way home. About 100 calories. Then usually I can hold out until dinner. Normal size dinner. The beer really seems to kill the pain in my legs.

So figure it out: Say a 4 hour ride to burn 3000 calories, so I probably consumed about 600 calories on the ride. Ride that short, I don't need to keep up with the calories. So 600+400+300+100 = about 1/2 the burn, or just right in my book.

These simple facts are overlooked by most Americans and a good portion of the medical profession . Theres little money for doctors who have patients who get healthy on their own by diet and exercise. So pils are the norm. Most patients believe that pills not diet and exercise are the norm so theres a perfectt marriage between the average Amercian and his doctor...

With health care costs going thru the roof its good to find a doctor who wil speak his mind. Most doctors will first give you a pill for your high blood pressure, diabeties, high choloesterol etc, where he says the first prescripton should first be nutritition recognizing the need to put diet, nutrition, exercise and weight management as the forefront of treatment, not some pill[s]. His nutritonal advice is to follow a extremely strict diet so as to attain immediate and substantial weight loss. Unfortunately in a world led to believe theres an answer to most chronic disease in the pills of a bottle from the pharmacy this advice borders on radical in the minds of many doctors.

I was at my regular doctors office this week for a checkup and he really couldnt understand my reluctance to take statins, beta blockers, antiacids and my desire to lose more weight. So maybe my guy is an oracle for stating what should be the obvious.