How to cycle for weight loss - Page 3 - Cycling Mob: Road Cycling, Mountain Biking and More

06-05-2004, 03:43 PM

"psycholist" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:c9t7vt$4k91$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
>
>> Daniel,
>
> I see lots of folks who take up cycling for weight loss and never lose
> weight. Frankly, it's not exactly the best choice for weight loss because
> it's a non-weight-bearing activity and most folks who have real jobs can't
> do enough of it, or won't work hard enough at it, to get much benefit.

I agree that most people can't devote racer-like hours to training, and that
many people do not possess the intensity to burn lots of calories cycling.
However, weight-bearing has little effect, I think. The reason people don't
lose weight when they cycle is because they are consuming more calories than
they burn. Didn't we have a 100+ thread about this very subject not long
ago?

> What I've read and what I believe based on years of observing various
> riders, reading tons of stuff, etc. is that you absolutely will not lose
> weight if you don't ride with some intensity ... at least a couple of
times
> a week. There was a long time when the popular theory was that, if you
> spent all your time training in a certain, relatively easy, heart rate
zone,
> you were using fat as your fuel source instead of sugar. Therefore,
staying
> in that range all the time would make you lose fat. Great theory, but I
> never EVER saw that work for anyone.

Because they ate too much. It's easy to do---Powerbars, Gatorade, pre-ride
pasta gorge, post-ride beers and pizza. If they ate at maintenance level
calories and rode like you say, they will lose weight.

> If you want to lose weight on the bike, you have to work HARD on the bike.
> Lots of mile, lots of intervals of intensity, etc.

Long slow distance seems to be the rule. Of course, some Poliquin-type
interval training helps, too. But calories are the key. As bodybuilders say,
"great abs are made in the kitchen".

> I don't have a "real" job. I'm self-employed and have a farm. I have a
> flexible schedule and can ride alot. I get in 250 to 300 miles per week
> pretty much all year round. I don't race, but I do centuries with the
racer
> folks and turn in sub-5 hour rides regularly. That's intensity for this
48
> year old body. I say all that to say this ... even with all those miles
and
> near-race intensity, if I don't eat right, I gain weight. Carbs like
pasta
> can be great fuel before a big ride, but most of the time, if you want to
> lose, you've gotta discipline your diet. I recommend you look at the Zone
> diet and learn its principles. It's not really one of the fad diets. I'm
> not a dietician, but the Zone principles seem to make sense ... balancing
> your fat, protein and carbohydrate intake to keep your blood sugar at
> optimum levels. It's really worked for me.

Good for you. But tricks aside, you cannot escape The Law of Thermodynamics.
If anyone consumes fewer calories than burned, weight loss will occur. The
key is burning fat and not excessive amounts of muscle.

> One last thing. Crosstraining. Bicycling is great, but I find it really
> helps to add a second activity when I want to lose weight. For me, it's
> just walking. As I said, I live on a farm and I simply walk the property
> each morning. It takes about 20 minutes and gets the motor going. For
some
> reason, the addition of a second activity like this really pushes things
> into higher gear for me and I lose weight quickly.

Weight lifting would be ideal. Growing muscle helps to burn fat. Everybody
should strength train, if for no other reason than to maintain bone density.
I don't want to end up a stick-armed old man with great cardio ability. I
want to end up a strong old man with great cardio ability! :-)

06-05-2004, 04:47 PM

"Gooserider" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:2Vswc.46566$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].c om...
>
> "psycholist" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> news:c9t7vt$4k91$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> >
> >> Daniel,
> >
> > I see lots of folks who take up cycling for weight loss and never lose
> > weight. Frankly, it's not exactly the best choice for weight loss
because
> > it's a non-weight-bearing activity and most folks who have real jobs
can't
> > do enough of it, or won't work hard enough at it, to get much benefit.
>
> I agree that most people can't devote racer-like hours to training, and
that
> many people do not possess the intensity to burn lots of calories cycling.
> However, weight-bearing has little effect, I think. The reason people
don't
> lose weight when they cycle is because they are consuming more calories
than
> they burn. Didn't we have a 100+ thread about this very subject not long
> ago?
>
>
> > What I've read and what I believe based on years of observing various
> > riders, reading tons of stuff, etc. is that you absolutely will not lose
> > weight if you don't ride with some intensity ... at least a couple of
> times
> > a week. There was a long time when the popular theory was that, if you
> > spent all your time training in a certain, relatively easy, heart rate
> zone,
> > you were using fat as your fuel source instead of sugar. Therefore,
> staying
> > in that range all the time would make you lose fat. Great theory, but I
> > never EVER saw that work for anyone.
>
> Because they ate too much. It's easy to do---Powerbars, Gatorade, pre-ride
> pasta gorge, post-ride beers and pizza. If they ate at maintenance level
> calories and rode like you say, they will lose weight.
>
> > If you want to lose weight on the bike, you have to work HARD on the
bike.
> > Lots of mile, lots of intervals of intensity, etc.
>
> Long slow distance seems to be the rule. Of course, some Poliquin-type
> interval training helps, too. But calories are the key. As bodybuilders
say,
> "great abs are made in the kitchen".
>
> > I don't have a "real" job. I'm self-employed and have a farm. I have a
> > flexible schedule and can ride alot. I get in 250 to 300 miles per week
> > pretty much all year round. I don't race, but I do centuries with the
> racer
> > folks and turn in sub-5 hour rides regularly. That's intensity for this
> 48
> > year old body. I say all that to say this ... even with all those miles
> and
> > near-race intensity, if I don't eat right, I gain weight. Carbs like
> pasta
> > can be great fuel before a big ride, but most of the time, if you want
to
> > lose, you've gotta discipline your diet. I recommend you look at the
Zone
> > diet and learn its principles. It's not really one of the fad diets.
I'm
> > not a dietician, but the Zone principles seem to make sense ...
balancing
> > your fat, protein and carbohydrate intake to keep your blood sugar at
> > optimum levels. It's really worked for me.
>
> Good for you. But tricks aside, you cannot escape The Law of
Thermodynamics.
> If anyone consumes fewer calories than burned, weight loss will occur. The
> key is burning fat and not excessive amounts of muscle.
>
> > One last thing. Crosstraining. Bicycling is great, but I find it
really
> > helps to add a second activity when I want to lose weight. For me, it's
> > just walking. As I said, I live on a farm and I simply walk the
property
> > each morning. It takes about 20 minutes and gets the motor going. For
> some
> > reason, the addition of a second activity like this really pushes things
> > into higher gear for me and I lose weight quickly.
>
> Weight lifting would be ideal. Growing muscle helps to burn fat. Everybody
> should strength train, if for no other reason than to maintain bone
density.
> I don't want to end up a stick-armed old man with great cardio ability. I
> want to end up a strong old man with great cardio ability! :-)
>

I do core strength work. I believe that's important. Weight training, per
se, can actually result in gaining weight. If the goal is strictly weight
loss, I'd opt for some core strength exercises that don't involve much in
the way of weights. You can do a lot with crunches, pushups, chair dips,
etc.

Bob C.

06-05-2004, 04:47 PM

"Gooserider" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:2Vswc.46566$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].c om...
>
> "psycholist" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> news:c9t7vt$4k91$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> >
> >> Daniel,
> >
> > I see lots of folks who take up cycling for weight loss and never lose
> > weight. Frankly, it's not exactly the best choice for weight loss
because
> > it's a non-weight-bearing activity and most folks who have real jobs
can't
> > do enough of it, or won't work hard enough at it, to get much benefit.
>
> I agree that most people can't devote racer-like hours to training, and
that
> many people do not possess the intensity to burn lots of calories cycling.
> However, weight-bearing has little effect, I think. The reason people
don't
> lose weight when they cycle is because they are consuming more calories
than
> they burn. Didn't we have a 100+ thread about this very subject not long
> ago?
>
>
> > What I've read and what I believe based on years of observing various
> > riders, reading tons of stuff, etc. is that you absolutely will not lose
> > weight if you don't ride with some intensity ... at least a couple of
> times
> > a week. There was a long time when the popular theory was that, if you
> > spent all your time training in a certain, relatively easy, heart rate
> zone,
> > you were using fat as your fuel source instead of sugar. Therefore,
> staying
> > in that range all the time would make you lose fat. Great theory, but I
> > never EVER saw that work for anyone.
>
> Because they ate too much. It's easy to do---Powerbars, Gatorade, pre-ride
> pasta gorge, post-ride beers and pizza. If they ate at maintenance level
> calories and rode like you say, they will lose weight.
>
> > If you want to lose weight on the bike, you have to work HARD on the
bike.
> > Lots of mile, lots of intervals of intensity, etc.
>
> Long slow distance seems to be the rule. Of course, some Poliquin-type
> interval training helps, too. But calories are the key. As bodybuilders
say,
> "great abs are made in the kitchen".
>
> > I don't have a "real" job. I'm self-employed and have a farm. I have a
> > flexible schedule and can ride alot. I get in 250 to 300 miles per week
> > pretty much all year round. I don't race, but I do centuries with the
> racer
> > folks and turn in sub-5 hour rides regularly. That's intensity for this
> 48
> > year old body. I say all that to say this ... even with all those miles
> and
> > near-race intensity, if I don't eat right, I gain weight. Carbs like
> pasta
> > can be great fuel before a big ride, but most of the time, if you want
to
> > lose, you've gotta discipline your diet. I recommend you look at the
Zone
> > diet and learn its principles. It's not really one of the fad diets.
I'm
> > not a dietician, but the Zone principles seem to make sense ...
balancing
> > your fat, protein and carbohydrate intake to keep your blood sugar at
> > optimum levels. It's really worked for me.
>
> Good for you. But tricks aside, you cannot escape The Law of
Thermodynamics.
> If anyone consumes fewer calories than burned, weight loss will occur. The
> key is burning fat and not excessive amounts of muscle.
>
> > One last thing. Crosstraining. Bicycling is great, but I find it
really
> > helps to add a second activity when I want to lose weight. For me, it's
> > just walking. As I said, I live on a farm and I simply walk the
property
> > each morning. It takes about 20 minutes and gets the motor going. For
> some
> > reason, the addition of a second activity like this really pushes things
> > into higher gear for me and I lose weight quickly.
>
> Weight lifting would be ideal. Growing muscle helps to burn fat. Everybody
> should strength train, if for no other reason than to maintain bone
density.
> I don't want to end up a stick-armed old man with great cardio ability. I
> want to end up a strong old man with great cardio ability! :-)
>

I do core strength work. I believe that's important. Weight training, per
se, can actually result in gaining weight. If the goal is strictly weight
loss, I'd opt for some core strength exercises that don't involve much in
the way of weights. You can do a lot with crunches, pushups, chair dips,
etc.

Bob C.

06-05-2004, 04:47 PM

"Gooserider" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:2Vswc.46566$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].c om...
>
> "psycholist" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> news:c9t7vt$4k91$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> >
> >> Daniel,
> >
> > I see lots of folks who take up cycling for weight loss and never lose
> > weight. Frankly, it's not exactly the best choice for weight loss
because
> > it's a non-weight-bearing activity and most folks who have real jobs
can't
> > do enough of it, or won't work hard enough at it, to get much benefit.
>
> I agree that most people can't devote racer-like hours to training, and
that
> many people do not possess the intensity to burn lots of calories cycling.
> However, weight-bearing has little effect, I think. The reason people
don't
> lose weight when they cycle is because they are consuming more calories
than
> they burn. Didn't we have a 100+ thread about this very subject not long
> ago?
>
>
> > What I've read and what I believe based on years of observing various
> > riders, reading tons of stuff, etc. is that you absolutely will not lose
> > weight if you don't ride with some intensity ... at least a couple of
> times
> > a week. There was a long time when the popular theory was that, if you
> > spent all your time training in a certain, relatively easy, heart rate
> zone,
> > you were using fat as your fuel source instead of sugar. Therefore,
> staying
> > in that range all the time would make you lose fat. Great theory, but I
> > never EVER saw that work for anyone.
>
> Because they ate too much. It's easy to do---Powerbars, Gatorade, pre-ride
> pasta gorge, post-ride beers and pizza. If they ate at maintenance level
> calories and rode like you say, they will lose weight.
>
> > If you want to lose weight on the bike, you have to work HARD on the
bike.
> > Lots of mile, lots of intervals of intensity, etc.
>
> Long slow distance seems to be the rule. Of course, some Poliquin-type
> interval training helps, too. But calories are the key. As bodybuilders
say,
> "great abs are made in the kitchen".
>
> > I don't have a "real" job. I'm self-employed and have a farm. I have a
> > flexible schedule and can ride alot. I get in 250 to 300 miles per week
> > pretty much all year round. I don't race, but I do centuries with the
> racer
> > folks and turn in sub-5 hour rides regularly. That's intensity for this
> 48
> > year old body. I say all that to say this ... even with all those miles
> and
> > near-race intensity, if I don't eat right, I gain weight. Carbs like
> pasta
> > can be great fuel before a big ride, but most of the time, if you want
to
> > lose, you've gotta discipline your diet. I recommend you look at the
Zone
> > diet and learn its principles. It's not really one of the fad diets.
I'm
> > not a dietician, but the Zone principles seem to make sense ...
balancing
> > your fat, protein and carbohydrate intake to keep your blood sugar at
> > optimum levels. It's really worked for me.
>
> Good for you. But tricks aside, you cannot escape The Law of
Thermodynamics.
> If anyone consumes fewer calories than burned, weight loss will occur. The
> key is burning fat and not excessive amounts of muscle.
>
> > One last thing. Crosstraining. Bicycling is great, but I find it
really
> > helps to add a second activity when I want to lose weight. For me, it's
> > just walking. As I said, I live on a farm and I simply walk the
property
> > each morning. It takes about 20 minutes and gets the motor going. For
> some
> > reason, the addition of a second activity like this really pushes things
> > into higher gear for me and I lose weight quickly.
>
> Weight lifting would be ideal. Growing muscle helps to burn fat. Everybody
> should strength train, if for no other reason than to maintain bone
density.
> I don't want to end up a stick-armed old man with great cardio ability. I
> want to end up a strong old man with great cardio ability! :-)
>

I do core strength work. I believe that's important. Weight training, per
se, can actually result in gaining weight. If the goal is strictly weight
loss, I'd opt for some core strength exercises that don't involve much in
the way of weights. You can do a lot with crunches, pushups, chair dips,
etc.

Bob C.

06-05-2004, 04:47 PM

"Gooserider" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:2Vswc.46566$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].c om...
>
> "psycholist" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> news:c9t7vt$4k91$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> >
> >> Daniel,
> >
> > I see lots of folks who take up cycling for weight loss and never lose
> > weight. Frankly, it's not exactly the best choice for weight loss
because
> > it's a non-weight-bearing activity and most folks who have real jobs
can't
> > do enough of it, or won't work hard enough at it, to get much benefit.
>
> I agree that most people can't devote racer-like hours to training, and
that
> many people do not possess the intensity to burn lots of calories cycling.
> However, weight-bearing has little effect, I think. The reason people
don't
> lose weight when they cycle is because they are consuming more calories
than
> they burn. Didn't we have a 100+ thread about this very subject not long
> ago?
>
>
> > What I've read and what I believe based on years of observing various
> > riders, reading tons of stuff, etc. is that you absolutely will not lose
> > weight if you don't ride with some intensity ... at least a couple of
> times
> > a week. There was a long time when the popular theory was that, if you
> > spent all your time training in a certain, relatively easy, heart rate
> zone,
> > you were using fat as your fuel source instead of sugar. Therefore,
> staying
> > in that range all the time would make you lose fat. Great theory, but I
> > never EVER saw that work for anyone.
>
> Because they ate too much. It's easy to do---Powerbars, Gatorade, pre-ride
> pasta gorge, post-ride beers and pizza. If they ate at maintenance level
> calories and rode like you say, they will lose weight.
>
> > If you want to lose weight on the bike, you have to work HARD on the
bike.
> > Lots of mile, lots of intervals of intensity, etc.
>
> Long slow distance seems to be the rule. Of course, some Poliquin-type
> interval training helps, too. But calories are the key. As bodybuilders
say,
> "great abs are made in the kitchen".
>
> > I don't have a "real" job. I'm self-employed and have a farm. I have a
> > flexible schedule and can ride alot. I get in 250 to 300 miles per week
> > pretty much all year round. I don't race, but I do centuries with the
> racer
> > folks and turn in sub-5 hour rides regularly. That's intensity for this
> 48
> > year old body. I say all that to say this ... even with all those miles
> and
> > near-race intensity, if I don't eat right, I gain weight. Carbs like
> pasta
> > can be great fuel before a big ride, but most of the time, if you want
to
> > lose, you've gotta discipline your diet. I recommend you look at the
Zone
> > diet and learn its principles. It's not really one of the fad diets.
I'm
> > not a dietician, but the Zone principles seem to make sense ...
balancing
> > your fat, protein and carbohydrate intake to keep your blood sugar at
> > optimum levels. It's really worked for me.
>
> Good for you. But tricks aside, you cannot escape The Law of
Thermodynamics.
> If anyone consumes fewer calories than burned, weight loss will occur. The
> key is burning fat and not excessive amounts of muscle.
>
> > One last thing. Crosstraining. Bicycling is great, but I find it
really
> > helps to add a second activity when I want to lose weight. For me, it's
> > just walking. As I said, I live on a farm and I simply walk the
property
> > each morning. It takes about 20 minutes and gets the motor going. For
> some
> > reason, the addition of a second activity like this really pushes things
> > into higher gear for me and I lose weight quickly.
>
> Weight lifting would be ideal. Growing muscle helps to burn fat. Everybody
> should strength train, if for no other reason than to maintain bone
density.
> I don't want to end up a stick-armed old man with great cardio ability. I
> want to end up a strong old man with great cardio ability! :-)
>

I do core strength work. I believe that's important. Weight training, per
se, can actually result in gaining weight. If the goal is strictly weight
loss, I'd opt for some core strength exercises that don't involve much in
the way of weights. You can do a lot with crunches, pushups, chair dips,
etc.

Bob C.

06-05-2004, 04:47 PM

"Gooserider" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:2Vswc.46566$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].c om...
>
> "psycholist" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> news:c9t7vt$4k91$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> >
> >> Daniel,
> >
> > I see lots of folks who take up cycling for weight loss and never lose
> > weight. Frankly, it's not exactly the best choice for weight loss
because
> > it's a non-weight-bearing activity and most folks who have real jobs
can't
> > do enough of it, or won't work hard enough at it, to get much benefit.
>
> I agree that most people can't devote racer-like hours to training, and
that
> many people do not possess the intensity to burn lots of calories cycling.
> However, weight-bearing has little effect, I think. The reason people
don't
> lose weight when they cycle is because they are consuming more calories
than
> they burn. Didn't we have a 100+ thread about this very subject not long
> ago?
>
>
> > What I've read and what I believe based on years of observing various
> > riders, reading tons of stuff, etc. is that you absolutely will not lose
> > weight if you don't ride with some intensity ... at least a couple of
> times
> > a week. There was a long time when the popular theory was that, if you
> > spent all your time training in a certain, relatively easy, heart rate
> zone,
> > you were using fat as your fuel source instead of sugar. Therefore,
> staying
> > in that range all the time would make you lose fat. Great theory, but I
> > never EVER saw that work for anyone.
>
> Because they ate too much. It's easy to do---Powerbars, Gatorade, pre-ride
> pasta gorge, post-ride beers and pizza. If they ate at maintenance level
> calories and rode like you say, they will lose weight.
>
> > If you want to lose weight on the bike, you have to work HARD on the
bike.
> > Lots of mile, lots of intervals of intensity, etc.
>
> Long slow distance seems to be the rule. Of course, some Poliquin-type
> interval training helps, too. But calories are the key. As bodybuilders
say,
> "great abs are made in the kitchen".
>
> > I don't have a "real" job. I'm self-employed and have a farm. I have a
> > flexible schedule and can ride alot. I get in 250 to 300 miles per week
> > pretty much all year round. I don't race, but I do centuries with the
> racer
> > folks and turn in sub-5 hour rides regularly. That's intensity for this
> 48
> > year old body. I say all that to say this ... even with all those miles
> and
> > near-race intensity, if I don't eat right, I gain weight. Carbs like
> pasta
> > can be great fuel before a big ride, but most of the time, if you want
to
> > lose, you've gotta discipline your diet. I recommend you look at the
Zone
> > diet and learn its principles. It's not really one of the fad diets.
I'm
> > not a dietician, but the Zone principles seem to make sense ...
balancing
> > your fat, protein and carbohydrate intake to keep your blood sugar at
> > optimum levels. It's really worked for me.
>
> Good for you. But tricks aside, you cannot escape The Law of
Thermodynamics.
> If anyone consumes fewer calories than burned, weight loss will occur. The
> key is burning fat and not excessive amounts of muscle.
>
> > One last thing. Crosstraining. Bicycling is great, but I find it
really
> > helps to add a second activity when I want to lose weight. For me, it's
> > just walking. As I said, I live on a farm and I simply walk the
property
> > each morning. It takes about 20 minutes and gets the motor going. For
> some
> > reason, the addition of a second activity like this really pushes things
> > into higher gear for me and I lose weight quickly.
>
> Weight lifting would be ideal. Growing muscle helps to burn fat. Everybody
> should strength train, if for no other reason than to maintain bone
density.
> I don't want to end up a stick-armed old man with great cardio ability. I
> want to end up a strong old man with great cardio ability! :-)
>

I do core strength work. I believe that's important. Weight training, per
se, can actually result in gaining weight. If the goal is strictly weight
loss, I'd opt for some core strength exercises that don't involve much in
the way of weights. You can do a lot with crunches, pushups, chair dips,
etc.

Bob C.

06-05-2004, 04:53 PM

On Sat, 05 Jun 2004 20:30:33 +0000, Warren Block wrote:

> Daniel Crispin <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>
>> I am wondering if there is an easy way to dose my efforts toward
>> weight loss. I could buy a HRM but I have already spent 600$ on my
>> bike this month and would like to stop spending for a while.
>

Most of the previous posts have been to the point, but numerically (and
approximately),

Weight loss = (Calories out - calories in) / 3500.

If you push on the bike, rather than just cruising, you might burn 500
calories / hr. But it would still take about seven hours of pedaling to
burn off one pound of fat, assuming no change in diet. This is why you
have to watch it in the kitchen, too, since it is not too difficult to add
back a few hundred calories a day with the pasta, energy bars, etc., etc.
It doesn't take much, unfortunately...

The moral: if you want to be a bit more scientific about it, try actually
adding up the calories. Then you can find out where they came from and
where they went (and if you're not losing weight, why they didn't went).

Cheers, and happy pedaling. At least we have fun while we struggle...

06-05-2004, 04:53 PM

On Sat, 05 Jun 2004 20:30:33 +0000, Warren Block wrote:

> Daniel Crispin <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>
>> I am wondering if there is an easy way to dose my efforts toward
>> weight loss. I could buy a HRM but I have already spent 600$ on my
>> bike this month and would like to stop spending for a while.
>

Most of the previous posts have been to the point, but numerically (and
approximately),

Weight loss = (Calories out - calories in) / 3500.

If you push on the bike, rather than just cruising, you might burn 500
calories / hr. But it would still take about seven hours of pedaling to
burn off one pound of fat, assuming no change in diet. This is why you
have to watch it in the kitchen, too, since it is not too difficult to add
back a few hundred calories a day with the pasta, energy bars, etc., etc.
It doesn't take much, unfortunately...

The moral: if you want to be a bit more scientific about it, try actually
adding up the calories. Then you can find out where they came from and
where they went (and if you're not losing weight, why they didn't went).

Cheers, and happy pedaling. At least we have fun while we struggle...

06-05-2004, 04:53 PM

On Sat, 05 Jun 2004 20:30:33 +0000, Warren Block wrote:

> Daniel Crispin <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>
>> I am wondering if there is an easy way to dose my efforts toward
>> weight loss. I could buy a HRM but I have already spent 600$ on my
>> bike this month and would like to stop spending for a while.
>

Most of the previous posts have been to the point, but numerically (and
approximately),

Weight loss = (Calories out - calories in) / 3500.

If you push on the bike, rather than just cruising, you might burn 500
calories / hr. But it would still take about seven hours of pedaling to
burn off one pound of fat, assuming no change in diet. This is why you
have to watch it in the kitchen, too, since it is not too difficult to add
back a few hundred calories a day with the pasta, energy bars, etc., etc.
It doesn't take much, unfortunately...

The moral: if you want to be a bit more scientific about it, try actually
adding up the calories. Then you can find out where they came from and
where they went (and if you're not losing weight, why they didn't went).

Cheers, and happy pedaling. At least we have fun while we struggle...

06-05-2004, 04:53 PM

On Sat, 05 Jun 2004 20:30:33 +0000, Warren Block wrote:

> Daniel Crispin <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>
>> I am wondering if there is an easy way to dose my efforts toward
>> weight loss. I could buy a HRM but I have already spent 600$ on my
>> bike this month and would like to stop spending for a while.
>

Most of the previous posts have been to the point, but numerically (and
approximately),

Weight loss = (Calories out - calories in) / 3500.

If you push on the bike, rather than just cruising, you might burn 500
calories / hr. But it would still take about seven hours of pedaling to
burn off one pound of fat, assuming no change in diet. This is why you
have to watch it in the kitchen, too, since it is not too difficult to add
back a few hundred calories a day with the pasta, energy bars, etc., etc.
It doesn't take much, unfortunately...

The moral: if you want to be a bit more scientific about it, try actually
adding up the calories. Then you can find out where they came from and
where they went (and if you're not losing weight, why they didn't went).

Cheers, and happy pedaling. At least we have fun while we struggle...