Observations on Weight Loss
09-01-19, 08:47 PM
#401
Member
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 39
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times
in
9 Posts
Well, hmm, we do Weight Watcher. And we are not overweight nor have ever been overweight. I am 5-10 and 156 pounds. I, every day, pass on all the snacks, sugar soft drinks, beer, pizza, the donuts my boss brought in, the ice cream, chips, chocolate and fast foods and basically starve myself. You cannot exercise away the amount of food/calories most people eat even when they think they are dieting.
09-01-19, 10:03 PM
#402
Full Member
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 490
Bikes: 2022 Priority Coast, 2022 Priority Current
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 175 Post(s)
Liked 137 Times
in
99 Posts
I don't starve myself. I eat about 2000 calories of food a day. I ride my bicycle to work about four times a week. In two months, I have lost 20 lbs. My goal is to lose 100 lbs by next summer. So far my doctors have reduced my insulin levels by 50% since I started bicycling to work. I feel like I have more energy. I used Myfitness pal to monitor what I eat. My health and bicycling seem to be improving. I can maintain speed while climbing hills. I am under medical supervision and work with a nutritionist. Like others have said, stop eating junk food. Eat more fruits and vegatables. I love meat, but have cut down on my portion sizes. Good luck.
09-01-19, 11:13 PM
#403
Junior Member
Regarding GMOs, as someone who used to work on small organic farms, I’ve railed against them for years as they are used as a tool by large industrial food conglomerates to obliterate small farmers and control the food supply. However, misinformed people jumped into the fray saying that GMOs are bad for you, which there is no evidence of, and derailed the conversation losing credibility on our side. So yeah, GMOs are bad for you in a social sense, but health wise, there’s no evidence. Not to mention that everything we eat has been bred into existence by humans. That’s not the exact same thing as genetic modification, but the outcome is similar.
09-01-19, 11:24 PM
#404
Member
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 39
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times
in
9 Posts
I currently reside in the Philippines. I buy bottled water because the stuff coming out of the tap averages around 80 F. If they tried to knock the bacteria down to a safe level it would have enough chlorine you wouldn't need detergent to take the skid marks out of your skivvies. By their standards, all first worlders are filthy rich. That label applies to any country where you flush the toilet with drinkable water.
09-01-19, 11:36 PM
#405
Junior Member
I could see it from that perspective too, living in the USA certainly has its benefits. But what does that have to do with what I was talking about? That is another thing affected by GMO’s, though. Farmers in countries like the Philippines suffer because, for example, in the US there is a huge government subsidy for corn, so those big farm conglomerates are able to grow a bunch of cheap corn and sell the surplus to other countries for less than the local farmers can. The whole thing is messed up
09-02-19, 06:35 AM
#406
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 2,857
Bikes: Road bike, Hybrid, Gravel, Drop bar SS, hard tail MTB
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1218 Post(s)
Liked 298 Times
in
214 Posts
meanwhile the amazon burns, so that first world people can over eat fast food burgers. high calorie low nutrition. with moderation meaning super size.
congrats the fat people are destroying earth.
with the mentality of instead of eating less, just burn it off to lose weight.
if you are active, then eat more.
But to be more active to burn off eating too much... = gluttony. and addiction to food.
congrats the fat people are destroying earth.
with the mentality of instead of eating less, just burn it off to lose weight.
if you are active, then eat more.
But to be more active to burn off eating too much... = gluttony. and addiction to food.
Likes For Happy Feet:
09-02-19, 11:22 AM
#408
Member
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 39
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times
in
9 Posts
meanwhile the amazon burns, so that first world people can over eat fast food burgers. high calorie low nutrition. with moderation meaning super size.
congrats the fat people are destroying earth.
with the mentality of instead of eating less, just burn it off to lose weight.
if you are active, then eat more.
But to be more active to burn off eating too much... = gluttony. and addiction to food.
congrats the fat people are destroying earth.
with the mentality of instead of eating less, just burn it off to lose weight.
if you are active, then eat more.
But to be more active to burn off eating too much... = gluttony. and addiction to food.
Likes For Gorrister:
09-02-19, 11:36 AM
#409
Senior Member
Thread Starter
I'm just a couple of weeks and a handful of workouts into my strength training program. The results are better than I expected. I definitely look and feel significantly better. A significant increase in reps with each workout also at least for my upper body exercises.
I can also see why people give very early into any strength training program. IT IS HARD. It's also a little embarrassing comparing your results to others who have been training consistently for years or even decades. But I try to focus on my own gradual progress instead.
I'm being careful though: just two upper body and two leg workouts a week, and they are relatively short workouts: approximately 6 sets of each to fatigue. I definitely space out the workouts as well.
It seems like I can workout my abs on a more regular basis however, although I'm limiting these workouts to 3x a week for now, max.
Strength and weight resistance training is the foundation for any exercise program, if you are able. Cycling is a nice addition as well, but not as good as walking. Walking uphill is even better.
I've never been able to lose much weight from cycling, even when riding a lot of miles. I was riding close to 200 miles a week at one point, in very hilly terrain. I lost maybe 3 pounds. Then again, I wasn't overweight at that point. 
However, the last couple years I've ridden a lot of miles and didn't lose any weight even though I was approximately 20 pounds overweight during this time. For whatever reason, cycling isn't a great way (for me) to lose weight.
I've had far better results with strength training and walking.
I can also see why people give very early into any strength training program. IT IS HARD. It's also a little embarrassing comparing your results to others who have been training consistently for years or even decades. But I try to focus on my own gradual progress instead.
I'm being careful though: just two upper body and two leg workouts a week, and they are relatively short workouts: approximately 6 sets of each to fatigue. I definitely space out the workouts as well.
It seems like I can workout my abs on a more regular basis however, although I'm limiting these workouts to 3x a week for now, max.
Strength and weight resistance training is the foundation for any exercise program, if you are able. Cycling is a nice addition as well, but not as good as walking. Walking uphill is even better.
I don't starve myself. I eat about 2000 calories of food a day. I ride my bicycle to work about four times a week. In two months, I have lost 20 lbs. My goal is to lose 100 lbs by next summer. So far my doctors have reduced my insulin levels by 50% since I started bicycling to work. I feel like I have more energy. I used Myfitness pal to monitor what I eat. My health and bicycling seem to be improving. I can maintain speed while climbing hills. I am under medical supervision and work with a nutritionist. Like others have said, stop eating junk food. Eat more fruits and vegatables. I love meat, but have cut down on my portion sizes. Good luck.
However, the last couple years I've ridden a lot of miles and didn't lose any weight even though I was approximately 20 pounds overweight during this time. For whatever reason, cycling isn't a great way (for me) to lose weight. I've had far better results with strength training and walking.
Last edited by radroad; 09-02-19 at 11:41 AM.
09-02-19, 11:44 AM
#410
Member
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 39
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times
in
9 Posts
I'm just a couple of weeks and a handful of workouts into my strength training program. The results are better than I expected. I definitely look and feel significantly better. A significant increase in reps with each workout also at least for my upper body exercises.
I can also see why people give very early into any strength training program. IT IS HARD. It's also a little embarrassing comparing your results to others who have been training consistently for years or even decades. But I try to focus on my own gradual progress instead.
I'm being careful though: just two upper body and two leg workouts a week, and they are relatively short workouts: approximately 6 sets of each to fatigue. I definitely space out the workouts as well.
It seems like I can workout my abs on a more regular basis however, although I'm limiting these workouts to 3x a week for now, max.
Strength and weight resistance training is the foundation for any exercise program, if you are able. Cycling is a nice addition as well, but not as good as walking. Walking uphill is even better.
I've never been able to lose much weight from cycling, even when riding a lot of miles. I was riding close to 200 miles a week at one point, in very hilly terrain. I lost maybe 3 pounds. Then again, I wasn't overweight at that point. However, the last couple years I've ridden a lot of miles and didn't lose any weight even though I was approximately 20 pounds overweight during this time. For whatever reason, cycling isn't a great way (for me) to lose weight.
I've had far better results with strength training and walking.
I can also see why people give very early into any strength training program. IT IS HARD. It's also a little embarrassing comparing your results to others who have been training consistently for years or even decades. But I try to focus on my own gradual progress instead.
I'm being careful though: just two upper body and two leg workouts a week, and they are relatively short workouts: approximately 6 sets of each to fatigue. I definitely space out the workouts as well.
It seems like I can workout my abs on a more regular basis however, although I'm limiting these workouts to 3x a week for now, max.
Strength and weight resistance training is the foundation for any exercise program, if you are able. Cycling is a nice addition as well, but not as good as walking. Walking uphill is even better.
I've never been able to lose much weight from cycling, even when riding a lot of miles. I was riding close to 200 miles a week at one point, in very hilly terrain. I lost maybe 3 pounds. Then again, I wasn't overweight at that point.
However, the last couple years I've ridden a lot of miles and didn't lose any weight even though I was approximately 20 pounds overweight during this time. For whatever reason, cycling isn't a great way (for me) to lose weight.I've had far better results with strength training and walking.
09-03-19, 09:08 AM
#412
Newbie racer
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 3,406
Bikes: Propel, red is faster
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1575 Post(s)
Liked 1,569 Times
in
974 Posts
Particularly in the context of ever riding in a group.
A slower runner is typically both less economical (running term) and also heavier. So, a slower runner can likely burn more when going slower than a fast runner. Plus, there's no aero benefit unless you're Eliud K.
On the bike, not so. Aero resistance is non-linear with speed......a person twice as powerful won't be spending half the time to do the same distance. Maybe 2/3 the time. Maybe 3/4. Maybe 80% the time.
I can burn more KJ often in a 45min structured workout session than I do on the 70 minute local A-group hammer ride.
I don't doubt one bit that for many riders, they'd burn more KJ walking than they would riding. Sitting in on a B-group ride is probably only like 75w.
It's just that big numbers impress. Like 4 hours, or 100 miles, or whatever. They can confuse and convey poor information about your actual work load.
Nobody needs to go out and buy a power meter. You should just be aware that miles and hours isn't a great indicator of mechanical work executed.
Likes For burnthesheep:
09-03-19, 02:02 PM
#413
Senior Member
Want to lose weight?
1) Eat more fiber, oats, nuts, and seeds.
2) Get lots of carbs from whole fruits and vegetables because the fiber regulates the absorption of sugars.
3) Shun sweeteners both artificial and non-artificial.
Unless you are stuffing yourself with pasta and bread, the above should send your weight down while allowing you to fill up instead of starve.
1) Eat more fiber, oats, nuts, and seeds.
2) Get lots of carbs from whole fruits and vegetables because the fiber regulates the absorption of sugars.
3) Shun sweeteners both artificial and non-artificial.
Unless you are stuffing yourself with pasta and bread, the above should send your weight down while allowing you to fill up instead of starve.
09-03-19, 02:22 PM
#414
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Think about KJ, not miles or hours.
Particularly in the context of ever riding in a group.
A slower runner is typically both less economical (running term) and also heavier. So, a slower runner can likely burn more when going slower than a fast runner. Plus, there's no aero benefit unless you're Eliud K.
On the bike, not so. Aero resistance is non-linear with speed......a person twice as powerful won't be spending half the time to do the same distance. Maybe 2/3 the time. Maybe 3/4. Maybe 80% the time.
I can burn more KJ often in a 45min structured workout session than I do on the 70 minute local A-group hammer ride.
I don't doubt one bit that for many riders, they'd burn more KJ walking than they would riding. Sitting in on a B-group ride is probably only like 75w.
It's just that big numbers impress. Like 4 hours, or 100 miles, or whatever. They can confuse and convey poor information about your actual work load.
Nobody needs to go out and buy a power meter. You should just be aware that miles and hours isn't a great indicator of mechanical work executed.
Particularly in the context of ever riding in a group.
A slower runner is typically both less economical (running term) and also heavier. So, a slower runner can likely burn more when going slower than a fast runner. Plus, there's no aero benefit unless you're Eliud K.
On the bike, not so. Aero resistance is non-linear with speed......a person twice as powerful won't be spending half the time to do the same distance. Maybe 2/3 the time. Maybe 3/4. Maybe 80% the time.
I can burn more KJ often in a 45min structured workout session than I do on the 70 minute local A-group hammer ride.
I don't doubt one bit that for many riders, they'd burn more KJ walking than they would riding. Sitting in on a B-group ride is probably only like 75w.
It's just that big numbers impress. Like 4 hours, or 100 miles, or whatever. They can confuse and convey poor information about your actual work load.
Nobody needs to go out and buy a power meter. You should just be aware that miles and hours isn't a great indicator of mechanical work executed.
I still ride a lot out of force of habit, especially in the summer when the weather's so pleasant and there's really no reason not to. But walking uphill combined with strength training are superior workouts for sure.
Want to lose weight?
1) Eat more fiber, oats, nuts, and seeds.
2) Get lots of carbs from whole fruits and vegetables because the fiber regulates the absorption of sugars.
3) Shun sweeteners both artificial and non-artificial.
Unless you are stuffing yourself with pasta and bread, the above should send your weight down while allowing you to fill up instead of starve.
1) Eat more fiber, oats, nuts, and seeds.
2) Get lots of carbs from whole fruits and vegetables because the fiber regulates the absorption of sugars.
3) Shun sweeteners both artificial and non-artificial.
Unless you are stuffing yourself with pasta and bread, the above should send your weight down while allowing you to fill up instead of starve.
09-12-19, 12:44 PM
#415
Senior Member
Thread Starter
I attended a lecture earlier this week. All ages in attendance but mainly 40+ adults. The health situation is disastrous. I'm sweatin' 10 to 15 lbs and there were many people in attendance were well over 100 lbs. overweight, probably 200 lbs. overweight. These people literally look like Jabba the hut.
I look extremely skinny compared to people my age and much younger. Even people who are very overweight (at least 35 lbs. overweight) almost look normal in this context.
What's especially strange is that I live in a region with exceptionally mild weather, pretty much year round yet most adults are noticeably and significantly overweight.
I look extremely skinny compared to people my age and much younger. Even people who are very overweight (at least 35 lbs. overweight) almost look normal in this context.
What's especially strange is that I live in a region with exceptionally mild weather, pretty much year round yet most adults are noticeably and significantly overweight.
Last edited by radroad; 09-12-19 at 02:10 PM.
09-12-19, 02:04 PM
#416
Senior Member
I have my own diet philosophy that I posted above. It works for me. I don't count calories and I literally stuff myself with carbs in the morning and frequently in the evening. Starving isn't even remotely part of my diet. Can't really say if a diabetic should be doing what I do, as I'm not a doctor. I can't believe that I'm an anomaly of nature, but I'm probably less genetically prone to weight gain than some. So I suspect that most people could lose weight by eating more fiber and less added sugar without counting calories.
09-12-19, 03:11 PM
#417
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 3,947
Bikes: Trek 1100 road bike, Roadmaster gravel/commuter/beater mountain bike
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2281 Post(s)
Liked 1,710 Times
in
936 Posts
Want to lose weight?
1) Eat more fiber, oats, nuts, and seeds.
2) Get lots of carbs from whole fruits and vegetables because the fiber regulates the absorption of sugars.
3) Shun sweeteners both artificial and non-artificial.
Unless you are stuffing yourself with pasta and bread, the above should send your weight down while allowing you to fill up instead of starve.
1) Eat more fiber, oats, nuts, and seeds.
2) Get lots of carbs from whole fruits and vegetables because the fiber regulates the absorption of sugars.
3) Shun sweeteners both artificial and non-artificial.
Unless you are stuffing yourself with pasta and bread, the above should send your weight down while allowing you to fill up instead of starve.
09-12-19, 03:14 PM
#418
Senior Member
Likes For fly135:
09-12-19, 06:26 PM
#419
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Springfield, Oregon
Posts: 74
Bikes: Giant and Dyno Roadster
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 33 Times
in
10 Posts
I ended up going from 165 down to 145 in less than 3 weeks, keeping in mind I only eat once a day and ride close to 6 miles a day, unless its a ride into Eugene. Had to start eating breakfast, a bit of junk food and I was good to go. Been at a steady 150 pounds for the last few months. I'm thinking being able to eat as much as I want without gaining any weight is well worth the long bike rides. As long as the weather stays above 40 degrees I'm riding!
09-13-19, 08:44 AM
#421
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 3,947
Bikes: Trek 1100 road bike, Roadmaster gravel/commuter/beater mountain bike
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2281 Post(s)
Liked 1,710 Times
in
936 Posts
Gonna take more than 10 miles on my bike to burn off a meal. If Strava is anywhere near accurate, it says I burn maybe 250 calories after riding 10 miles. That's about a candy bar's worth of calories.
09-13-19, 11:01 AM
#422
Senior Member
I find that the more I exercise the more I tend to eat as well.
The true and tried way of losing weight is to burn more calorie than your consume. Very few ways around it. Not sure of your age but I have found that the older I get, the more difficult to keep the weight off.
The true and tried way of losing weight is to burn more calorie than your consume. Very few ways around it. Not sure of your age but I have found that the older I get, the more difficult to keep the weight off.
Edit: Don't starve yourself. That wrecks your resting metabolism. Just eat a little less. There is ~3500 calories in a pound, so if you reduced your consumption by about 200 calories a day you'd lose about 1 pound every 2.5 weeks. That's a healthy goal and it's gradual enough that it is maintainable and not a severe change to diet. Think long term, not short term.
Edit2: A 20 oz soda is 250 calories. Drink 1 less soda a day. A snickers is 215 calories. Each less sweets (about 1 candy bar equivalent). For breakfast, eat one less egg and one less strip of bacon and for dinner eat one less chicken nugget and 5 less french fries. That combines to be 200-250 calories and isn't really an extreme change.
Last edited by am0n; 09-13-19 at 11:07 AM.
09-13-19, 11:22 AM
#423
HarborBandS
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Chicago Western Suburbs
Posts: 477
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 266 Post(s)
Liked 104 Times
in
57 Posts
The people who keep repeating "calorie deficit" have this 100% correct.
A few years ago (before I got back in to cycling) I lost 30 lbs using a very simple diet, and no cardio exercise whatsoever except for brisk walks with my dog. I just looked at what I would have eaten before my "diet", and substituted a healthier option, or simply had less of what I would have had before. My daily lunch and breakfast meals were pretty routine, so I reduced their calories. And I ate smaller portions at dinner and had fewer desserts. I didn't give up sweets, but set a hard limit of one or two per week, depending on size. I lost 30 lbs in three months, and I never gained it back because I just never went back to my habits of overeating. My cholesterol and blood pressure also improved.
This year I have been doing several rides between 60 and 75 miles, and have a century ride coming up this weekend. Throughout this process of riding my bike more, I have lost maybe 5-7 lbs. My issue on longer rides is that I am afraid to stop eating to avoid the dreaded "bonk". So I really don't create the calorie deficit that I should.
If I'm riding 90 minutes or less, I am perfectly comfortable fasting and relying on glycogen stores for my energy use. So I think I lose more weight doing shorter rides without eating. And then I am also less hungry at the end of the ride and can just eat as I normally would, instead of becoming a ravenous food hunter after a longer ride.
A few years ago (before I got back in to cycling) I lost 30 lbs using a very simple diet, and no cardio exercise whatsoever except for brisk walks with my dog. I just looked at what I would have eaten before my "diet", and substituted a healthier option, or simply had less of what I would have had before. My daily lunch and breakfast meals were pretty routine, so I reduced their calories. And I ate smaller portions at dinner and had fewer desserts. I didn't give up sweets, but set a hard limit of one or two per week, depending on size. I lost 30 lbs in three months, and I never gained it back because I just never went back to my habits of overeating. My cholesterol and blood pressure also improved.
This year I have been doing several rides between 60 and 75 miles, and have a century ride coming up this weekend. Throughout this process of riding my bike more, I have lost maybe 5-7 lbs. My issue on longer rides is that I am afraid to stop eating to avoid the dreaded "bonk". So I really don't create the calorie deficit that I should.
If I'm riding 90 minutes or less, I am perfectly comfortable fasting and relying on glycogen stores for my energy use. So I think I lose more weight doing shorter rides without eating. And then I am also less hungry at the end of the ride and can just eat as I normally would, instead of becoming a ravenous food hunter after a longer ride.
Likes For HarborBandS:
09-13-19, 12:33 PM
#424
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Springfield, Oregon
Posts: 74
Bikes: Giant and Dyno Roadster
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 33 Times
in
10 Posts
One big difference is I ride a 2003 Dyno Roadster Stretch that's 47.7 pounds and 88" long. Twice the weight of most bikes out there in this world
09-13-19, 12:39 PM
#425
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,794
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1027 Post(s)
Liked 325 Times
in
204 Posts
The people who keep repeating "calorie deficit" have this 100% correct.
A few years ago (before I got back in to cycling) I lost 30 lbs using a very simple diet, and no cardio exercise whatsoever except for brisk walks with my dog. I just looked at what I would have eaten before my "diet", and substituted a healthier option, or simply had less of what I would have had before. My daily lunch and breakfast meals were pretty routine, so I reduced their calories. And I ate smaller portions at dinner and had fewer desserts. I didn't give up sweets, but set a hard limit of one or two per week, depending on size. I lost 30 lbs in three months, and I never gained it back because I just never went back to my habits of overeating. My cholesterol and blood pressure also improved.
This year I have been doing several rides between 60 and 75 miles, and have a century ride coming up this weekend. Throughout this process of riding my bike more, I have lost maybe 5-7 lbs. My issue on longer rides is that I am afraid to stop eating to avoid the dreaded "bonk". So I really don't create the calorie deficit that I should.
If I'm riding 90 minutes or less, I am perfectly comfortable fasting and relying on glycogen stores for my energy use. So I think I lose more weight doing shorter rides without eating. And then I am also less hungry at the end of the ride and can just eat as I normally would, instead of becoming a ravenous food hunter after a longer ride.
A few years ago (before I got back in to cycling) I lost 30 lbs using a very simple diet, and no cardio exercise whatsoever except for brisk walks with my dog. I just looked at what I would have eaten before my "diet", and substituted a healthier option, or simply had less of what I would have had before. My daily lunch and breakfast meals were pretty routine, so I reduced their calories. And I ate smaller portions at dinner and had fewer desserts. I didn't give up sweets, but set a hard limit of one or two per week, depending on size. I lost 30 lbs in three months, and I never gained it back because I just never went back to my habits of overeating. My cholesterol and blood pressure also improved.
This year I have been doing several rides between 60 and 75 miles, and have a century ride coming up this weekend. Throughout this process of riding my bike more, I have lost maybe 5-7 lbs. My issue on longer rides is that I am afraid to stop eating to avoid the dreaded "bonk". So I really don't create the calorie deficit that I should.
If I'm riding 90 minutes or less, I am perfectly comfortable fasting and relying on glycogen stores for my energy use. So I think I lose more weight doing shorter rides without eating. And then I am also less hungry at the end of the ride and can just eat as I normally would, instead of becoming a ravenous food hunter after a longer ride.
