Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy

To the contrary, they did consider keto, in fact it made the list for short term weight loss, but didn't make any of the "good diet" lists simply because it's a very unhealthy diet with poor results over the long term. The Standard American Diet didn't make the list either. I've been eating the same Med diet, though minus the dinosaurs and mammals, for over 50 years. I've had very good results, very good health numbers, still skiing bumps, still climbing mountain passes, backpacking, all that good stuff, not that different from 50 years ago, just a bit slower. Time has borne out the diet preferences of the medical societies.

I do full body strength training, but not at the expense of cycling training. With age, one has to stress the muscles more than is necessary for a young person. But burning calories over many hours per week of aerobic exercise while keeping portion sizes down is the way to lose weight. And "aerobic exercise" doesn't mean piddling along or doing rhumba. If your legs aren't hurting after 3 hours on the bike, you should be going harder. Unless of course it's a 10 hour ride, in which case you should be keeping the effort just below the pain threshold for most of the ride.

A caution though: A younger friend of ours, who's been doing rhumba 2 hours/week and thought that meant she was in shape, went snowshoeing and had a cardiac event which put her in the hospital. The doctor said she'd just overworked her heart, which couldn't supply enough blood to keep her tissues alive, just walking uphill on snowshoes. My wife and I had done this same trip the previous week and nothing to it. So work up to aerobic stuff gradually if you haven't been doing it. The heart is the last thing to get into good shape. Skeletal muscles are much more responsive to training.