Cycling and Fat loss
#76
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,098 Times
in
5,054 Posts
My expert friend Kevin Hall would argue that its easier to consume mass calories when the food is hyper-refined. A 32 ounce big gulp will have about 150 g of carbohydrate, or about 600 calories. To put that in perspective, a normal healthy diet might have about 2500 calories more or less. And you don't get vitamins, fiber, protein, or fat (we need some fat in our diets).
To add another point, consider: your body has about 5 liters of blood. Fasting plasma glucose is about 90 milligrams per deciliter, or about 900mg/liter. So you have about 1350 mg, or a gram and a half of blood suger at fasting conditions. IF you're not diabetic, this goes up to maybe 4 g or so after a meal. So with a Big Gulp one is drinking, in highly absorbable form, about 30-100 times more sugar than your blood can absorb. This is a huge hit. Our bodies can handle this once in a while, but constantly pounding one's metabolism with this stuff is really detrimental. Especially so with high-fructose corn syrup which doesn't stimulate the body to produce insulin as effectively as glucose. Seems to me to be a recipe for "How can I induce overweight and diabetes in my body?"
I don't even drink soft drinks anymore.
To add another point, consider: your body has about 5 liters of blood. Fasting plasma glucose is about 90 milligrams per deciliter, or about 900mg/liter. So you have about 1350 mg, or a gram and a half of blood suger at fasting conditions. IF you're not diabetic, this goes up to maybe 4 g or so after a meal. So with a Big Gulp one is drinking, in highly absorbable form, about 30-100 times more sugar than your blood can absorb. This is a huge hit. Our bodies can handle this once in a while, but constantly pounding one's metabolism with this stuff is really detrimental. Especially so with high-fructose corn syrup which doesn't stimulate the body to produce insulin as effectively as glucose. Seems to me to be a recipe for "How can I induce overweight and diabetes in my body?"
I don't even drink soft drinks anymore.
The problem I'm pointing to is that people think they can consume large quantities of starches and sugars because the source is "natural" or "whole", or the carb is complex, and that somehow those calories and their glycemic effect count less.
I was also responding to a poster who has asserted in the past that people eating too much dried fruit isn't really a problem, and almost nothing is higher in fructose than that. A cup of dried prunes (really a small portion) has 111g of carbohydrate, only 12g of which is fiber.
Likes For Riveting:
#78
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
Rather than attacking my use of an emoji, READ my post critically for it's content, not emojis, style or typos, and understand why that chart is misleading, at best. Then if you have something more cogent to say, please do so. Otherwise don't bother.
PS Food for thought: Pseudo-science is not science. Just because the word science is present, does not make it actually "science".
PPS I do not mean to be insulting or sound arrogant. I do mean to be emphatic. People who practice endurance sports, should be careful about extreme dieting.
When in a state of ketosis, one long hot day on the bike, with or without a little dehydration mixed in, can put a body in an unhealthy state.
If I offended ksryder or anyone else, my apologies. My only goal was to counter the false equivalencies and prevent misunderstandings which that chart promotes.
Ride well, Eric
PS Food for thought: Pseudo-science is not science. Just because the word science is present, does not make it actually "science".
PPS I do not mean to be insulting or sound arrogant. I do mean to be emphatic. People who practice endurance sports, should be careful about extreme dieting.
When in a state of ketosis, one long hot day on the bike, with or without a little dehydration mixed in, can put a body in an unhealthy state.
If I offended ksryder or anyone else, my apologies. My only goal was to counter the false equivalencies and prevent misunderstandings which that chart promotes.
Ride well, Eric
#79
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,098 Times
in
5,054 Posts
I fail to see any false equivalencies in that graphic. It says how these diets work *for weight loss*. Not for health. In that respect, it's completely accurate. They all work by creating a caloric deficit, which, last I checked, is the only scientifically proven way to lose weight outside of surgery and the like.
The keto diet gives faster weight loss at the beginning than other diets, but that effect wears off very quickly. Apparently, people feel so sick on it at the beginning that they just don't want to eat. As people adapt or drop out because they can't adapt, it just has the same or worse crappy success rate as all of the others.
#80
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,229
Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18409 Post(s)
Liked 15,518 Times
in
7,324 Posts
Almost as effective as a frame material thread.
Likes For indyfabz:
#81
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 933
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 535 Post(s)
Liked 463 Times
in
257 Posts
I've seen that graphic before, and I thought the point was to combat the thought that any one of these approaches somehow had some magic by which calories didn't matter. The disgusting awfulness of the keto diet is so obvious that its selling points have to be about the uniqueness of its benefits and wildly overstating its efficacy, which this graphic effectively counters.
The keto diet gives faster weight loss at the beginning than other diets, but that effect wears off very quickly. Apparently, people feel so sick on it at the beginning that they just don't want to eat. As people adapt or drop out because they can't adapt, it just has the same or worse crappy success rate as all of the others.
The keto diet gives faster weight loss at the beginning than other diets, but that effect wears off very quickly. Apparently, people feel so sick on it at the beginning that they just don't want to eat. As people adapt or drop out because they can't adapt, it just has the same or worse crappy success rate as all of the others.
I also think a huge disconnect is what different people call Keto. Personally,I only use the Keto diet info to discover new foods. My diet is really simple,no sugar at all in any form, no grains in any form and no starchy vegetables. I have found this to be very effective in loosing weight.
Now,whether it is good and even necessary for a top athlete to consume lots of carbs is another question entirely to the question that the OP asked and not even in the same context. If the context is loosing weight and using cycling to assist that,then I would still say to cut out all sugar,all grain and as much starch as possible if weight loss is the goal. The goal for a top athlete in a race is totally different and completely irrelevant to the topic.
#82
1/2 as far in 2x the time
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Northern Bergen County, NJ
Posts: 1,746
Bikes: Yes, Please.
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 499 Post(s)
Liked 285 Times
in
222 Posts
I fail to see any false equivalencies in that graphic. It says how these diets work *for weight loss*. Not for health. In that respect, it's completely accurate. They all work by creating a caloric deficit, which, last I checked, is the only scientifically proven way to lose weight outside of surgery and the like.
Alert: This is a load of garbage masquerading as science. While it may be technically accurate to describe them as all working by "creating a caloric deficit", the way this is achieved is NOT the same and has very different potential outcomes, and potential SIDE-EFFECTS, not all of which have been studied in a truly systematic scientific way.
"It says how these diets work *for weight loss*. Not for health. In that respect, it's completely accurate."
NB I acknowlege that it is technically accurate. you say completely... A nit, found.
Do you also fail to see that people looking for information about different methods of weight loss, are concerned about their health, or just choose to ignore it?
I do not see why you choose to point out the chart's technical correctness, while giving this for profit company a pass on ignoring the very different health implications of the diets in their chart. I do not see how that adds to the general understanding of weight loss methods.
You go further in your remarks, to what purpose, I am not sure. I held you no animus. I don't think we have ever interacted before. I even apologized if I sounded rude or arrogant.
I doubt that you are a shill for the company, so why such a snarky tone... "which last I checked..." Ouch.
Check again, perhaps. Hopefully we can recalibrate and start afresh. Best regards, Eric
Last edited by Last ride 76; 07-12-19 at 11:50 AM.
#83
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,098 Times
in
5,054 Posts
I don't know where that info of success or failure comes from and I would doubt that Keto is any less effective than a standard calorie counting diet, and would think it is much more effective especially from my 40 years experience dieting.
I also think a huge disconnect is what different people call Keto. Personally,I only use the Keto diet info to discover new foods. My diet is really simple,no sugar at all in any form, no grains in any form and no starchy vegetables. I have found this to be very effective in loosing weight.
Now,whether it is good and even necessary for a top athlete to consume lots of carbs is another question entirely to the question that the OP asked and not even in the same context. If the context is loosing weight and using cycling to assist that,then I would still say to cut out all sugar,all grain and as much starch as possible if weight loss is the goal. The goal for a top athlete in a race is totally different and completely irrelevant to the topic.
I also think a huge disconnect is what different people call Keto. Personally,I only use the Keto diet info to discover new foods. My diet is really simple,no sugar at all in any form, no grains in any form and no starchy vegetables. I have found this to be very effective in loosing weight.
Now,whether it is good and even necessary for a top athlete to consume lots of carbs is another question entirely to the question that the OP asked and not even in the same context. If the context is loosing weight and using cycling to assist that,then I would still say to cut out all sugar,all grain and as much starch as possible if weight loss is the goal. The goal for a top athlete in a race is totally different and completely irrelevant to the topic.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK499830/
#84
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,098 Times
in
5,054 Posts
Dear sir, you pick at nits. More than that, you pick at nits out of context.
Alert: This is a load of garbage masquerading as science. While it may be technically accurate to describe them as all working by "creating a caloric deficit", the way this is achieved is NOT the same and has very different potential outcomes, and potential SIDE-EFFECTS, not all of which have been studied in a truly systematic scientific way.
"It says how these diets work *for weight loss*. Not for health. In that respect, it's completely accurate."
NB I acknowlege that it is technically accurate. you say completely... A nit, found.
Do you also fail to see that people looking for information about different methods of weight loss, are concerned about their health, or just choose to ignore it?
I do not see why you choose to point out the chart's technical correctness, while giving this for profit company a pass on ignoring the very different health implications of the diets in their chart. I do not see how that adds to the general understanding of weight loss methods.
You go further in your remarks, to what purpose, I am not sure. I held you no animus. I don't think we have ever interacted before. I even apologized if I sounded rude or arrogant.
I doubt that you are a shill for the company, so why such a snarky tone... "which last I checked..." Ouch.
Check again, perhaps. Hopefully we can recalibrate and start afresh. Best regards, Eric
Alert: This is a load of garbage masquerading as science. While it may be technically accurate to describe them as all working by "creating a caloric deficit", the way this is achieved is NOT the same and has very different potential outcomes, and potential SIDE-EFFECTS, not all of which have been studied in a truly systematic scientific way.
"It says how these diets work *for weight loss*. Not for health. In that respect, it's completely accurate."
NB I acknowlege that it is technically accurate. you say completely... A nit, found.
Do you also fail to see that people looking for information about different methods of weight loss, are concerned about their health, or just choose to ignore it?
I do not see why you choose to point out the chart's technical correctness, while giving this for profit company a pass on ignoring the very different health implications of the diets in their chart. I do not see how that adds to the general understanding of weight loss methods.
You go further in your remarks, to what purpose, I am not sure. I held you no animus. I don't think we have ever interacted before. I even apologized if I sounded rude or arrogant.
I doubt that you are a shill for the company, so why such a snarky tone... "which last I checked..." Ouch.
Check again, perhaps. Hopefully we can recalibrate and start afresh. Best regards, Eric
Likes For livedarklions:
#85
Life Feeds On Life
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Hondo,Texas
Posts: 2,143
Bikes: Too many Motobecanes
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4413 Post(s)
Liked 4,524 Times
in
3,026 Posts
Diets don’t work. Best way to go crazy and drive everybody around you nuts. Burn massive calories on the bike and don’t over eat. Push a lawn mower or other chores.
#86
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
Dear sir, you pick at nits. More than that, you pick at nits out of context.
Alert: This is a load of garbage masquerading as science. While it may be technically accurate to describe them as all working by "creating a caloric deficit", the way this is achieved is NOT the same and has very different potential outcomes, and potential SIDE-EFFECTS, not all of which have been studied in a truly systematic scientific way.
"It says how these diets work *for weight loss*. Not for health. In that respect, it's completely accurate."
NB I acknowlege that it is technically accurate. you say completely... A nit, found.
Do you also fail to see that people looking for information about different methods of weight loss, are concerned about their health, or just choose to ignore it?
I do not see why you choose to point out the chart's technical correctness, while giving this for profit company a pass on ignoring the very different health implications of the diets in their chart. I do not see how that adds to the general understanding of weight loss methods.
You go further in your remarks, to what purpose, I am not sure. I held you no animus. I don't think we have ever interacted before. I even apologized if I sounded rude or arrogant.
I doubt that you are a shill for the company, so why such a snarky tone... "which last I checked..." Ouch.
Check again, perhaps. Hopefully we can recalibrate and start afresh. Best regards, Eric
Alert: This is a load of garbage masquerading as science. While it may be technically accurate to describe them as all working by "creating a caloric deficit", the way this is achieved is NOT the same and has very different potential outcomes, and potential SIDE-EFFECTS, not all of which have been studied in a truly systematic scientific way.
"It says how these diets work *for weight loss*. Not for health. In that respect, it's completely accurate."
NB I acknowlege that it is technically accurate. you say completely... A nit, found.
Do you also fail to see that people looking for information about different methods of weight loss, are concerned about their health, or just choose to ignore it?
I do not see why you choose to point out the chart's technical correctness, while giving this for profit company a pass on ignoring the very different health implications of the diets in their chart. I do not see how that adds to the general understanding of weight loss methods.
You go further in your remarks, to what purpose, I am not sure. I held you no animus. I don't think we have ever interacted before. I even apologized if I sounded rude or arrogant.
I doubt that you are a shill for the company, so why such a snarky tone... "which last I checked..." Ouch.
Check again, perhaps. Hopefully we can recalibrate and start afresh. Best regards, Eric
This is a load of garbage masquerading as science.
PS Food for thought: Pseudo-science is not science. Just because the word science is present, does not make it actually "science".
My only goal was to counter the false equivalencies and prevent misunderstandings which that chart promotes.
Call it "picking at nits" if you want, but you're the one who is calling a graphic "garbage" because it doesn't do a deep dive into all of the potential benefits, drawbacks and unknowns of every diet listed - something that is impossible to do given the limited space available for this type of communication. I don't see it has hyping up keto, or any other type of diet, at all. Quite the opposite in fact. To me, the message was always what @livedarklions said:
... I thought the point was to combat the thought that any one of these approaches somehow had some magic by which calories didn't matter. The disgusting awfulness of the keto diet is so obvious that its selling points have to be about the uniqueness of its benefits and wildly overstating its efficacy, which this graphic effectively counters.
P.S. apologies for sounding snarky in my previous post. I do that too often online. It's something I need to work on.
Likes For OBoile:
#87
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,229
Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18409 Post(s)
Liked 15,518 Times
in
7,324 Posts
Carbon fiber frames are dangerous.
Likes For indyfabz:
#88
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,098 Times
in
5,054 Posts
#89
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,229
Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18409 Post(s)
Liked 15,518 Times
in
7,324 Posts
#90
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,098 Times
in
5,054 Posts
#91
Lifelong wheel gazer ...
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Lower US 48
Posts: 346
Bikes: All garage sale finds...
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 72 Post(s)
Liked 36 Times
in
26 Posts
While it has rambled a bit, this has been for me a very informative discussion. Thanks to the OP and others for the contributions.
__________________
Current bikes: Unknown year Specialized (rigid F & R) Hardrock, '80's era Cannondale police bike; '03 Schwinn mongrel MTB; '03 Specialized Hard Rock (the wife's)
Gone away: '97 Diamondback Topanga SE, '97 Giant ATX 840 project bike; '01 Giant TCR1 SL; and a truckload of miscellaneous bikes used up by the kids and grand-kids
Status quo is the mental bastion of the intellectually lethargic...
Current bikes: Unknown year Specialized (rigid F & R) Hardrock, '80's era Cannondale police bike; '03 Schwinn mongrel MTB; '03 Specialized Hard Rock (the wife's)
Gone away: '97 Diamondback Topanga SE, '97 Giant ATX 840 project bike; '01 Giant TCR1 SL; and a truckload of miscellaneous bikes used up by the kids and grand-kids
Status quo is the mental bastion of the intellectually lethargic...
#93
1/2 as far in 2x the time
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Northern Bergen County, NJ
Posts: 1,746
Bikes: Yes, Please.
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 499 Post(s)
Liked 285 Times
in
222 Posts
ok, back to square one...
Out of context? Did you, or did you not say:
When it makes no claim about being scientific, and what statements it does make, are accurate according to the current top scientific beliefs?
The word "science" is not present in that chart. And again, it is factual.
I don't see any false equivalencies. All of these diets achieve weight loss by creating a caloric deficit. In that respect, they are equivalent.
Call it "picking at nits" if you want, but you're the one who is calling a graphic "garbage" because it doesn't do a deep dive into all of the potential benefits, drawbacks and unknowns of every diet listed - something that is impossible to do given the limited space available for this type of communication. I don't see it has hyping up keto, or any other type of diet, at all. Quite the opposite in fact. To me, the message was always what @livedarklions said: IMO, it's a very effective at this, quite the opposite of "garbage".
P.S. apologies for sounding snarky in my previous post. I do that too often online. It's something I need to work on.
When it makes no claim about being scientific, and what statements it does make, are accurate according to the current top scientific beliefs?
The word "science" is not present in that chart. And again, it is factual.
I don't see any false equivalencies. All of these diets achieve weight loss by creating a caloric deficit. In that respect, they are equivalent.
Call it "picking at nits" if you want, but you're the one who is calling a graphic "garbage" because it doesn't do a deep dive into all of the potential benefits, drawbacks and unknowns of every diet listed - something that is impossible to do given the limited space available for this type of communication. I don't see it has hyping up keto, or any other type of diet, at all. Quite the opposite in fact. To me, the message was always what @livedarklions said: IMO, it's a very effective at this, quite the opposite of "garbage".
P.S. apologies for sounding snarky in my previous post. I do that too often online. It's something I need to work on.
Best regards, Eric
Likes For Paul Barnard:
#95
Senior Member
There is no proof that situps can help anybody lose belly fat specifically. It only improves muscle definition.
#96
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,098 Times
in
5,054 Posts
Anyone else encountering this "lose belly fat by drinking cider vinegar" nonsense?
Apparently it has to be expensive cider vinegar. Big surprise.
#97
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Coyote Creek and Orangethorpe, LA/OC
Posts: 16
Bikes: FUJI Transonic SL (2016), BH G6 Pro (2013), BH G5 (2012), BH G5 (2010), Luma RAX (2009) VeloVie Vitesse 300SE (2008), Kuota Kredo (2007), Cannondale CAAD 8 (2005, 2006), Felt F1 (2004), Trek 5200 (2003), Trek 5200 (1994), DiamondBack Master TG (1990)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Cycling (and exercise in general) will help with losing fat, however, you cannot particularly target belly/waist fat. Instead, where your fat loss comes from will be a function of your body type, which you cannot control.
Reducing your belly fat falls under the achievable goal of body fat % reduction, which means burning more calories than you take in, either by eating less calories or increasing your burn rate to create a calorie deficit. There are 3,500 calories per pound of body fat, so if your caloric deficit is 350 a day, you can lose a pound of body fat in 10 days. Keep in mind that may not reflect as weight loss, since you may build heavier muscle in that time, but you'll be getting leaner (lower body fat %).
More help: Biking to Lose Weight
Reducing your belly fat falls under the achievable goal of body fat % reduction, which means burning more calories than you take in, either by eating less calories or increasing your burn rate to create a calorie deficit. There are 3,500 calories per pound of body fat, so if your caloric deficit is 350 a day, you can lose a pound of body fat in 10 days. Keep in mind that may not reflect as weight loss, since you may build heavier muscle in that time, but you'll be getting leaner (lower body fat %).
More help: Biking to Lose Weight
#98
Newbie
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Hi to all, I am a 16 year old and although I do have a good physical shape I would just like to ask if cycling can help with loosing belly/waist fat. I also do upper body/back/core training aswell but Im just looking for an answer if cycling can effectively help with excess fat loss around those areas.
#99
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 17
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Weight loss/Fat loss is controlled 80% by diet. Any exercise will help burn some calories but its almost pointless if your diet is poor.
a 150 lb individual would have to cycle at a moderate pace for 2.5-3 hours just to burn off a big mac, large fries and medium soft drink. - now multiply that kind of eating by 3 meals per day plus snacks and you'd have to be cycling all day long just to make up for it - that is not realistic or even possible for most people.
I lost a large amount of weight 5 years ago (close to 30 lbs) just by changing diet - gave up all processed foods and animal foods - went whole food plant based/low oil and have kept it off since. I was not even working out regularly at the time.
a 150 lb individual would have to cycle at a moderate pace for 2.5-3 hours just to burn off a big mac, large fries and medium soft drink. - now multiply that kind of eating by 3 meals per day plus snacks and you'd have to be cycling all day long just to make up for it - that is not realistic or even possible for most people.
I lost a large amount of weight 5 years ago (close to 30 lbs) just by changing diet - gave up all processed foods and animal foods - went whole food plant based/low oil and have kept it off since. I was not even working out regularly at the time.
#100
Newbie
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: South Carolina low country
Posts: 5
Bikes: 1973 Coventry Eagle, 2016 Mongoose Argus
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Cycling is good for improving metabolism, which helps burn fat,
but removing belly fat wants belly movement, for which yoga can be good.
but removing belly fat wants belly movement, for which yoga can be good.