|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Blair P. Houghton wrote:
|| Rush wrote: ||| The science of fat metabolism. why biking burns fat better than ||| jogging. ||| Fat burning occurs when you are at 65 percent heart rate. 85% is || || Fat burning peaks around 50-85% MRH (pretty big range, isn't it?). || || Above that range, you may find a range where you actually || burn less fat as you go up in total calorie expenditure, || but eventually the calorie expenditure will increase so || high that even the inefficient fat burning uses more fat || than your 50-85% peak. || || But you don't want to ride for an hour at those exertion || levels. It's a mixture of aerobic and anaerobic (no course || is perfectly flat) activity that slowly saps your carbo || stores and your will to exercise just for fun and fitness. || || So yes. 50-65% MRH (or about 50% VO2max) is a very good || and relaxing place to be if you are exercising to reduce || your fat without the pain that high carbohydrate-burning || activity can cause. || if you ride for 4+ hours, you can spend a decent about of time above 85% and a good bit of time below 85%. On a bike you can rest/recover while riding. That's a major advantage of cycling. imo. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
As far as bone loss. After quitting jogging there are more chances of As far as bone loss. After quitting jogging there are more chances of osteoporosis (mainly in women) due to defense mechanisms and adaptation. In cycling I do not know for sure, but should not have such a profound effect. I beg to differ. http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2004pres/20041014.html Says nothing about cycling. Follow the internal link to the full report (especially Chapter 7) and you will find many references to cycling, including ranking its potential benefit for prevention of bone loss vs. other activities. Chris Neary "Science, freedom, beauty, adventu what more could you ask of life? Bicycling combined all the elements I loved" - Adapted from a quotation by Charles Lindbergh |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
OTOH, weight bearing exercises like jogging help prevent bone loss, while
cycling does not. What kind of swimming pool do you cycle in? The Surgeon General begs to differ: http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/librar.../Chapter_7.pdf Chris Neary "Science, freedom, beauty, adventu what more could you ask of life? Bicycling combined all the elements I loved" - Adapted from a quotation by Charles Lindbergh |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Chris Neary wrote:
OTOH, weight bearing exercises like jogging help prevent bone loss, while cycling does not. What kind of swimming pool do you cycle in? The Surgeon General begs to differ: http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/librar.../Chapter_7.pdf One quote from the above site: "The best activities work all muscle groups. Examples include gymnastics, basketball, volleyball, bicycling, and soccer. Swimming, while highly beneficial to many aspects of health, is not a weight-bearing activity and thus does not contribute to increased bone mass." Cycling is lower impact and less weight-bearing than some other forms of exercise, but I didn't see any indication in the above report that it wouldn't still be of some benefit in avoiding bone loss. And cycling in our area with numerous opportunities for significant hill climbing is presumably more weight-bearing than moderate cycling in flatter regions. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
One quote from the above site:
"The best activities work all muscle groups. Examples include gymnastics, basketball, volleyball, bicycling, and soccer. Swimming, while highly beneficial to many aspects of health, is not a weight-bearing activity and thus does not contribute to increased bone mass." Cycling is lower impact and less weight-bearing than some other forms of exercise, but I didn't see any indication in the above report that it wouldn't still be of some benefit in avoiding bone loss. And cycling in our area with numerous opportunities for significant hill climbing is presumably more weight-bearing than moderate cycling in flatter regions. Note that the table on page 176 places stationery cycling in the same category as swimming (The table does not categorize "real" cycling, but I can't think of any reason why it's effect on bone health should be significantly better than stationery cycling). The same characteristics which make swimming and cycling recommended alternatives to running for avoiding overuse-type injuries also make them poor choices for improving bone health. I would say under the most demanding circumstances cycling might be moved up to the next classification "Weight-bearing, non-impact activities", making it the equivalent of *walking* for improving bone health. Cycling inherently does not contain the impact characteristics necessary for it to be considered under the most beneficial classification. From a bone health perspective, is cycling better than doing nothing? YES. Is it the best choice for improving bone health? NO. Probably the best approach is to avoid over-specialization in any one exercise, instead participating in a range of activities for best overall health. Chris Neary "Science, freedom, beauty, adventu what more could you ask of life? Bicycling combined all the elements I loved" - Adapted from a quotation by Charles Lindbergh |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Chris Neary wrote:
One quote from the above site: "The best activities work all muscle groups. Examples include gymnastics, basketball, volleyball, bicycling, and soccer. Swimming, while highly beneficial to many aspects of health, is not a weight-bearing activity and thus does not contribute to increased bone mass." Cycling is lower impact and less weight-bearing than some other forms of exercise, but I didn't see any indication in the above report that it wouldn't still be of some benefit in avoiding bone loss. And cycling in our area with numerous opportunities for significant hill climbing is presumably more weight-bearing than moderate cycling in flatter regions. Note that the table on page 176 places stationery cycling in the same category as swimming (The table does not categorize "real" cycling, but I can't think of any reason why it's effect on bone health should be significantly better than stationery cycling). I'd guess that most stationary cycling is done at a rather low force level at uniform pace. That's quite different from regular cycling where terrain, wind, traffic signals, etc. result in much more varied exertion levels and increased weight-bearing when starting from stops, climbing hills, accelerating, etc. Sure, stationary cycling can include such variations, but it comes naturally with regular cycling, and especially in hilly regions like the SF bay area. The quote at the top which I took from the report makes it clear that regular bicycling is considered to be in a different category than swimming from the standpoint of weight-bearing. The same characteristics which make swimming and cycling recommended alternatives to running for avoiding overuse-type injuries also make them poor choices for improving bone health. I would say under the most demanding circumstances cycling might be moved up to the next classification "Weight-bearing, non-impact activities", making it the equivalent of *walking* for improving bone health. Of course walking is repeatedly cited in the Surgeon General's report as a very beneficial activity. I don't see that having cycling be the equivalent of walking for this purpose should be viewed as a negative. Cycling inherently does not contain the impact characteristics necessary for it to be considered under the most beneficial classification. From a bone health perspective, is cycling better than doing nothing? YES. Is it the best choice for improving bone health? NO. I agree but note that your statement above is quite different from that in your previous post: "OTOH, weight bearing exercises like jogging help prevent bone loss, while cycling does not." Probably the best approach is to avoid over-specialization in any one exercise, instead participating in a range of activities for best overall health. Actually I think you said it best befo "Now the $60K question: Why does it have to be bike riding vs. jogging? Getting more folks to be more active in *any* manner would pay a myriad of dividends." When I look at the list of activities that might be the *best* for retaining bone mass they all tend to be ones that I'd hate doing and which from my past experience lead to joint injuries which then restrict me from other forms of exercise, like bicycling, hiking, kayaking, which I do enjoy. Since I don't have a family history of bone-loss issues I'm not going to be overly concerned that my main activities aren't right up at the top of the list for avoiding such problems. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Note that the table on page 176 places stationery cycling in the same
category as swimming (The table does not categorize "real" cycling, but I can't think of any reason why it's effect on bone health should be significantly better than stationery cycling). I'd guess that most stationary cycling is done at a rather low force level at uniform pace. That's quite different from regular cycling where terrain, wind, traffic signals, etc. result in much more varied exertion levels and increased weight-bearing when starting from stops, climbing hills, accelerating, etc. Sure, stationary cycling can include such variations, but it comes naturally with regular cycling, and especially in hilly regions like the SF bay area. The report is silent as to what they specifically mean by "stationary cycling". If they mean plunking someone down on a stationary bike and grinding away for a set period of time I'd say you're correct. OTOH, if they mean a well-run spin class, my experience is the quality of the workout is right up there with the most strenous training rides. When I look at the list of activities that might be the *best* for retaining bone mass they all tend to be ones that I'd hate doing and which from my past experience lead to joint injuries which then restrict me from other forms of exercise, like bicycling, hiking, kayaking, which I do enjoy. Hiking is on the "Best" list, so you're covered. But I agree, if the choice is between not being active and engaging in in an activity which is not the best for preventing bone loss, it's an easy choice. Since I don't have a family history of bone-loss issues I'm not going to be overly concerned that my main activities aren't right up at the top of the list for avoiding such problems. A number of "mature" women in our cycling club *are* at risk, and they are riding less but doing other activities (hiking, running, and weight lifting) as a result. Chris Neary "Science, freedom, beauty, adventu what more could you ask of life? Bicycling combined all the elements I loved" - Adapted from a quotation by Charles Lindbergh |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Chris Neary wrote:
Note that the table on page 176 places stationery cycling in the same category as swimming (The table does not categorize "real" cycling, but I can't think of any reason why it's effect on bone health should be significantly better than stationery cycling). Cycling on the road, as opposed to a stationary bike, induces vibration, and vibration increases bone density: http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/h...ish_343550.htm -- terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://bike.terrymorse.com/ |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Chris Neary wrote:
||| One quote from the above site: ||| "The best activities work all muscle groups. Examples ||| include gymnastics, basketball, volleyball, bicycling, ||| and soccer. Swimming, while highly beneficial to many ||| aspects of health, is not a weight-bearing activity ||| and thus does not contribute to increased bone mass." ||| ||| Cycling is lower impact and less weight-bearing than ||| some other forms of exercise, but I didn't see any ||| indication in the above report that it wouldn't still ||| be of some benefit in avoiding bone loss. And cycling ||| in our area with numerous opportunities for significant ||| hill climbing is presumably more weight-bearing than ||| moderate cycling in flatter regions. || || Note that the table on page 176 places stationery cycling in the same || category as swimming (The table does not categorize "real" cycling, || but I can't think of any reason why it's effect on bone health || should be significantly better than stationery cycling). || || The same characteristics which make swimming and cycling recommended || alternatives to running for avoiding overuse-type injuries also make || them poor choices for improving bone health. || || I would say under the most demanding circumstances cycling might be || moved up to the next classification "Weight-bearing, non-impact || activities", making it the equivalent of *walking* for improving || bone health. || || Cycling inherently does not contain the impact characteristics || necessary for it to be considered under the most beneficial || classification. I can't get the report for some reason. What are "impact characteristics"? I regulary lift weights and I don't suffer any impact from doing so, even though the activity is weight bearing. || || From a bone health perspective, is cycling better than doing || nothing? YES. || || Is it the best choice for improving bone health? NO. || || Probably the best approach is to avoid over-specialization in any one || exercise, instead participating in a range of activities for best || overall health. Of course. Cycling is great, but it should not be the only exercise people get. || || || Chris Neary || || || "Science, freedom, beauty, adventu what more could || you ask of life? Bicycling combined all the elements I || loved" - Adapted from a quotation by Charles Lindbergh |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Why riding bikes is a better way to lose weight than jogging. | Rush | General | 50 | October 20th 04 08:41 PM |
First road bike: braking? | Alan Hoyle | General | 47 | September 28th 03 11:40 PM |
FAQ | Just zis Guy, you know? | UK | 27 | September 5th 03 10:58 PM |
Riding to get fit and lose weight: any advice? | Doesnotcompute | UK | 20 | July 25th 03 10:28 AM |