Who's this everyone person you're talking about? Any exercise will tear down/damage muscle mass if the exercise is intense enough, but cycling "eating away" at fat and muscle...makes it sound like such a negative thing.

True, cycling will use fat as a substrate for energy production, so that could be considered "eating away" at the fat. At low intensities, your body will preferentially use fat as a fuel, but that use of fat will diminish more as you increase the intensity. With long, especially ultra-endurance, events, you will have a breakdown of muscle mass (i.e. protein contributing to energy production) due to damage and fuel utilization.

The actual breaking down of muscle is good because as long as you're recovering properly, you will build and repair muscle...this is what makes you stronger, bigger, etc. But if you're only cycling, it's highly doubtful that you'll see an increase in muscle mass, or even a large loss in muscle mass due to damage or tearing down of muscle, because of the nature of the sport. To really produce more muscle, strength train in the gym.

I think people are forgetting something.
The human body stores fat in a number of ways.

One is what we normally think of, the subcutaneous fat. We can pinch it, and it's what generally pokes out and make us look flabby.

Another way the body stores fat is inside muscles.
This makes muscles look bigger, but also makes them softer.

Exercise promoting fat loss will eat away at that fat as well, making the muscles shrink visually, but the muscle mass doesn't necessarily decrease.
This is also part of the reason why muscle size is a poor indicator of strength.

Right on. Intramuscular triglyceride (fat) stores are very important because that's what the body uses at lower intensities. So exercise that promotes fat loss will use those intramuscular stores of fat, but the actual muscle mass most likely won't decrease.

If you don't take in enough calories to maintain the level of muscle, you will "eat muscle" since your body is seeking nourishment and energy. It's the old CAL in vs CAL out conundrum. Furthermore, if you don't train your arms/upper body for an increase in muscle mass, you will not increase muscle mass in your arms/upper body, obviously.

When I was heavily into weight lifting, I'd eat about 15,000 calories a day. I mean, I would have to eat and eat and eat -- a lot and often. I'd eat so much that my stomach was pretty much as big as it would go that it was bordering on uncomfortable. I knew when it was at that point, my muscles would grow and recover the best from whatever I could throw at them. Carborama -- dried fruits, grains, fruit, peanut butter, cereals, pasta & red sauce. I'd pretty much avoid fatty stuff since there's so much fat in food already. You'd be surprised how little protein you need, too. I was shooting for around 70% carb, 20% protein and 10% fat (since you can't avoid it). You still need fat, though, just not as much as is out there.

I mean you have the EAT. A LOT. You know those cafeteria trays? I would cover the whole tray two layers deep with food, then go back for more -- for one meal. All you can eat restos are your friend.
Now that I don't weightlift, I'm about 50lbs lighter and could stand to lose another 10-15 at my current muscle mass.

Scientific nerd rant:
I'd suggest a physiology course for anyone who is curious about the general behaviour of the human body for various stimuli. It's better than any training guide in my opinion since it gives you the basic concepts of what a body under stress will require or do (eg, blood sugar, muscle building, cardiovascular capacity, etc..). Once you have that, then the training guide will be even more helpful since you now the real reasons behind their suggestions.

Don't forget, pound for pound, muscle burns more calories at rest than fat does.

15 000 kcal a day just isn't sensible. I'm sure you gained muscle mass like crazy, but you must've put on a LOT of fat.
I know that some of the guys in the world's strongest man contests eat between 8000 and 10 000, and that's probably a bit too much even for them.

Eating moderately but frequently is better than eating large amounts a few times a day, if you take in the same amount of energy.

Nope, no fat whatsoever. I had very good definition. It was a matter of getting the right mix of calories and working out appropriately. 6 days/week in the gym lifting for 1.5 hours with no "BS breaks" in between sets or even exercises. I rotated 3-4 workouts of similar muscle groups to get it going quickly and effieciently.

Quite simply, muscle is "killed" (broken-down) when nutrients, in particular protein, is not available in sufficient amounts to become the bodies primary source for amino acids necessary to repair the damage incurred while bicycling.

So, to build muscle, one must first damage the muscle tissue in a controlled fashion (as is done through proper excercise and then follow-up with providing the body a sufficient source of protein (carb too) nutrition such that the body does not look to itself for the means to repair the damage.

How and when to supply the protein to your body can be a whole discussion in and of itself.

N.

I am a large 16 yr old mtn biker and i used to ride year round. the colder the day the more i would eat but when i rode i would eat a 3000 calorie breakfast and eat another 2700-4000 calories. i was above 310lbs and i dropped to 290 over 4 months and i still ate on average 6200 calories a day. then again i would get up and ride at 6:00 in the am and face the 15-49 below weather and when i left school the sun would be just setting so it all worked out

When protein is metabolized for energy, it is broken down into amino acids. The body will not switch to using protein as its primary energy source unless the exercise is intense and long enough to deplete the body of sufficient stores of carbohydrate (in the forms of muscle glycogen and blood glucose) and not sufficiently use fat as a substrate. If protein is used for energy during exercise, it will compromise up to around 8% at the most of total energy contribution, which is not a lot, and not pimary.


Right on.

Well put TRIRMK. My expertise lies in understanding how your body responds to insufficient and sufficient amounts and quality of protein. I for one, would not and do not advocate ANYONE looking to protein for energy although it does have the potential to be used as such.

It's primary use is in the construction and repair of cells. The human body is in a struggle between maintaining an Anabolic environment (Nitrogen rich) that supports growth and repair OR what I feel I am hearing so much of by looking at posts in this forum - a Catabolic environment, which occurs in the midst of depletion and is counter productive, results in lower metabolic rates, and noticeable frustration amongst the general population.

- N.

Ah...Now I know why those riding shorts don't look near as good on me as they did on the model in the cataloge.

Hi Kelly,
If you will workout on some specific part only you will notice that part muscular and as legs are involves on cycling mos so you will notice cyclist have great muscular body.

the loss of muscle mass in bicycling is illusory, IMO. bicyclists, and especially pro bicyclists, have minimum body fat, most of us don't.

when we lose fat, usually the first to go is sub-cutaneous fat., the fat between the skin and the muscle. you know, that stuff that is often called flab. but as we lose more weight we begin to lose fat that is stored above the kidneys and in the liver, then inter/intra muscular fat. it, for the most part, doesn't look flabby, but does increase the apparent size of our muscles. when we start losing that, and pro road cyclists don't have much, our muscles begin to get smaller, but as someone has mentioned, a test of strength will show that the smaller size does not indicate less strength.

You guys realize this is an 8 yr old zombie thread.

Unless you're < 6% body fat, you're not using your muscles for fuel. Also, fat does not "turn into muscle." You burn the fat and grow the muscles.

no i didn't. i just read the last post. sadly, i'm still nursing scars from the last time this happened! not to mention that my post was redundant.

the easiest answer is....

When we ride we all burn a ton of calories! the biggest problem is muscle loss is due to not eating enough after rides so that you dont end the day in with a negative calorie intake. Ive calculated based on my everyday activities on how much I need to eat per day and broke that in how much consists of carbs, protein and fats. I do the gym 3 days a week and try to ride 2 to 3 days a week (wish I could ride to work everyday but not possible since I need to wear a suit everyday) On gym days I shoot for around 2200 calories while on bike days I may jump that up to 3500 depending on how long and hard I ride. If you end in the negative for calories then your body goes into survival mode and will start to eat away muscle and thats how when you lose your arms and chest.

im with you on this... There is a difference between being HUGE and cut. most guys that want to get bigger tend to go on a "bulking phase" where we up our daily calorie intake to anywhere from 800 to and extra 3 thousand calories a day. Then whe you hit your desired weight you start "cutting" by dropping a few hundred calories at a time. I laugh at the guys at the gym that talk about how huge they are but they have this huge gut because they eat so much and do zero cardio.

As an example Manny Pacquiao puts in 6000 a day and Michael Phelps does about 10k a day

Working out 6 days a week does nothing for you. The only way your muscles getting bigger is by rest. 3-4 days a week at the gym is plenty

Hi can i just ask a Question about damage to the muscle i have been Diabetic for many years and started cycling recently to help with circulation and because of this i have started off with a E/bike but intend to progress to a normal none E/bike but i would really like to know is when i pedal and the muscle pain in my legs begin, should i stop and rest or try to keep going or will this cause muscle damage .

Is the pain you are feeling just soreness from the muscles not used to being worked? It's not unusual for new riders to have muscle stiffness and soreness when they are trying to get into shape.

I don't know what type of pain you are having, but part of the process of increasing fitness is the repeated process of breaking down muscles and then having them rebuild stronger as they recover.

In your case if you have existing issues with circulation in your legs you might want to consult a doctor. Also you could try contacting someone from Team Type I, a diabetic racing team. They have some reasonable info on their website: https://www.teamtype1.org/

Cycling won't eat away muscle mass unless you are running a caloric deficit that requires your body to use lean tissue for fuel. I came from a heavy resistance training background and when I began doing a lot of cycling I did lose muscle size, especially in the upper body, but not due to increased cycling, but rather because of decreased resistance training(weight lifting). My thighs and calves are actually as big or bigger and better defined than when I was doing a lot of weight work. Your body adapts to the demands you put on it. I know quite a few athletes who do both cardiovascular and heavy resistance training and carry plenty of both upper and lower body mass.

Hypertrophy and atrophy is the simplest answer. When you use certain muscles they get bigger (legs and biking), when you dont use certain muscles they get smaller (arms, very little use while biking)

Chris Carmichael says:
https://www.cbass.com/Carbs_Athletes.htm

Also see:
DOES DOING AEROBIC EXERCISE BURN MUSCLE?
https://www.livestrong.com/article/39...e-burn-muscle/

One loses protein if one does not replace what one burns. Simple as that. My long ride drink mix is 15% whey protein for that reason. I have protein in my breakfast before a ride and about 20% protein in my recovery drink and following recovery meal. My arm and thigh measurements change very little during the season, maybe 1/2" at the most.