As a start to fitness.

311

Hello ,this is probably one of the most genuine posts I've made on boards in a good while.
But it's something thats really bugging me as a person who wants to get fit.

Which is better for initial cardio vascular fitness ,with regards to starting off slowly for somone who hasn't exerted themselves with exercise in a couple of years ?

I think I'm abusing my love of cycling to gain some credit for fitness ,everyone seems to think that walking for me is the best policy at the moment.

Has anyone ever been in my predicament ,jokes aside :P .

Thanks,


Brian.

311

ntlbell

Not sure what you want to hear?

a good solid hour cycling can work off about 600 cals

an hours brisk walks works off about 300 or so?

clear winner in my book

Dirk Gently

one hour every day cycling (actually cycling, not rolling), drink only water and don't eat crap. Post again at the end of October and I bet you'll have lost at least one stone but more important than that you will be much much fitter.

311

I honestly posted expecting people to say walking is better.
I was planning to cycle before i go to work in the morning ,so what you have suggested kind of matches.

maybe if i give it 40 minutes for the first couple of weeks from about 6.30am

Nice one.:)

ntlbell

you could always do both

it's good to give yourself a rest and work different muscles giving others a break

311

I do be shattered in the evening after work ,so the morning is my only hope of getting out and about.
Walking just doesn't cut it for me ,not unless its a pub or a party or something

Thanks for the replies lads

Dirk Gently

yeah morning is good, sets you up for the day and you don't be as drained as when you come home from work. try push towards 1 hour, anything less than 30 mins you wont really see a benefit at all.

311

I will definetly start a routine ,take some weight readings tomorrow and then near the end of october.

Never know ,I might be in the next olympics !!! :pac:























Fixing punctures

Thanks

tunney

Whatever you do if you are coming from a sedentary background, even if you used to be active a good few years ago, get checked out by a doctor.

311

My work means I'm on my feet all day ,I do be exhausted from physical work at the end of the day.

I got checked last year with scans and blood tests. All sound But was told to loose weight though :eek:

bealbocht

if you cycle around a lot .. you will be (more) areobicly (sp??) fit .. if as one of the previous post says... if you "roll" around .. well... its better than doing nothing..but I have done a 70k cycle and I was very tierd after.. , but I was only rolling.. well , a bit more than rolling.. , most of it was on grass and soft ground , I think , if you are cycling.. it is not really the distance.. it is the effort you are putting in.... which is the same for all exercie.. if you are not sweating , and not out of breath.. , you are not getting really fit.. if you clock up lots of miles .. it is good cardio

as I say.. did a 70k cycle.. .. tierd.. , played a game of indoor soccer, lots of short sprints... nearly died...

but if you are like me.. sod walking .. , why walk when you can cycyle... F that , but for fitness.. I suppose... uugh.. cycle up hill .. (oh and ) judge the distance well .. go out far.. and then some.. but remember .. you need to cycle home after...

Actually.. if it is possible for you .. never mind trying to do a cycle here and a cycle there.. if you want to be arobically fit , cycle to work every day... , you will know you are fit.. when you do not need to shower when you get there ( well give or take the distance)

if it is under say.. 10 miles.. you can cycle to work qicker than you can get the bus.... , and you may think the weather sucks.. but really , once you start .... trust me , you will never go back.

niceonetom

i don't think you'll find many walking advocates around here.

cycling can be a great aerobic workout, and a great way of losing weight, but it it's not prefect so if you really want to see big improvements in 'fitness' (by which i'm guessing you mean waist line and flab reduction rather than actual athletic ability) you'd be best to combine cycling with a couple weight sessions a week.

as has been said above cycling is only as effective as the effort you put into it. my weapon of choice for keeping me honest is a HRM. keep your heart rate high in your aerobic zone for 45 minutes a few times a week and go for as long a spin as you can manage at the weekends and you'll see major results. combine with some resistance training and it'll be even better. ease of the beer and chips and bikkies, and miracles may occur.

walking is for old people.

and cycling is a useful of actually getting places too, so build it into your routine and you won't even notice that you're getting fitter.

irishmotorist

What I find much better about cycling than walking is that the scenery changes much faster so that makes it less boring.

With regard to losing weight, I got the same advice a while back myself. While I have been increasing the distances that I'm cycling and my fitness (strength and stamina) has improved, I think diet has made the biggest difference to my gut size. I always keep some apples and bananas on my desk in work and have them at a particular time in the afternoon when I know I'm likely to be getting hungry. I also stopped having 2 dinners a day every day, which was an obvious thing to change once I said it out loud. I had been thinking that with my 1hr commute each way, I needed it, but then I found that having the small lunch and then the fruit in the afternoon, it worked for me. I still have a bit to go, and it's a slower process now that I've lost about 3/4 of a stone, but I'm trying to keep the diet right.

311

Thanks for the sharing the diet and fitness tips:)

You guys are lucky to be able to cycle to work:),I drive around in a van that I need to carry my tools etc. So my only chance during the week is at the crack of dawn.

Redjeep!

I started cycling after Christmas after having been shamed into taking part in a 50km sponsored cycle ride that my village were doing in May. I'd done no exercise for years and was fat and over forty.

I started going out and doing a few miles about 2 or 3 times a week building up the distance so that by May I could do the 50 km without any bother. I've kept going and over the summer (haha) I was doing around 200 km per week and have joined the local cycling club. I did my first 100km sometime around June or July and now regularly do 85km on a Sunday morning.

I've now just bought myself a turbo trainer so that I can carry on cycling indoors over the winter and am doing that 2 or 3 times a week for about an hour. I've also started swimming a couple of times a week as I was looking for something to do in the dark evenings and have been known to go for a run occasionally....

Yes, I've lost weight, although I don't know how much as I never weight myself, but I'm guessing at least a couple of stone. I'm also much fitter than I've been in many years.

I'm not posting this to try and say how good I am, but rather to say that it can be done. I don't know if I'll be able to keep going at this rate of doing some exercise every evening, but even if I cut down I'll still be doing far more than I was a year ago.

The bottom line is if you do enough cycling and cut down on the junk and it will come, especially if you combine it with other exercise (which you'll feel better about as well).

Good luck and let us know how you get on.

littleknown

my mate lost 3stone in 7 months by just cutting out eating crap. as a weekend cyclist myself you really notice the difference in health etc after a month- , i just read today that its one of the highest fat burning exercises there is, up to 800 calories per hour.

Trojan

littleknown wrote: »

up to 800 calories per hour.

Even more than that if my Polar HRM is even remotely accurate.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=57300321&postcount=8

irishmotorist

Here's a general idea of what gets burned off.
http://www.dietandfitnesstoday.com/calories-burned-by.php?search=cycling

Don't forget that if you want to lose weight, your calorie intake needs to be less than your output (marginally and sensibly over a timeframe). Also don't forget that 1 hour including 30 mins uphill is more calories out out than 1 hour on the flat!

311

Cheers for the replies ,I made a start yesterday on the diet.
Some oven baked salmon ,two corn on the cobs with peas, thats all I had yesterday.
Today I had a salad roll at about 12 noon and I'm trying to get to bed early,so when I wake up in the morning I'll be starving and I'll go out on the bike before I have breakfast.

Thomas_S_Hunterson

Sounds like an unhealthy diet.

You need to keep eating a reasonable amount of calories.

311

Sean_K wrote: »

Sounds like an unhealthy diet.

You need to keep eating a reasonable amount of calories.

I'm 18 stone ,I was hoping I could get my body to eat itself:eek::D

Gavin

311 wrote: »

Cheers for the replies ,I made a start yesterday on the diet.
Some oven baked salmon ,two corn on the cobs with peas, thats all I had yesterday.
Today I had a salad roll at about 12 noon and I'm trying to get to bed early,so when I wake up in the morning I'll be starving and I'll go out on the bike before I have breakfast.

I'll assume you're not taking the piss. That's not enough food. Eat normal portions of food and just exercise a reasonable amount. The weight will start to come off. Don't religiously measure yourself every day.

Thomas_S_Hunterson

Your body will adjust to a heavily depleted calorie diet by burning much less of what you eat. Then when you start eating normally again the weight will pile on as you wont metabolize energy quickly, rather just store it as fat.

311

I'm honestly not hungry at the moment ,I'm looking forward to cycling again. What sort of food is essential for cycling ,would carbs from pasta help ?

niceonetom

311 wrote: »

I'm 18 stone ,I was hoping I could get my body to eat itself:eek::D

if you starve yourself your body will fight you all the way. it'll try to hang on to every ounce of fat it can, that's its survival strategy in famine conditions, which is what you're simulating. reduce your calories, sure, and avoid sugars and fats, but do so by having smaller portions spread throughout the day (so your metabolism never bottoms out and goes into starvation mode). eats loads of veg.

basically you want to trick your body into relinquishing its reserves without it really noticing, so it'll take a while, but it'll be more likely to stay off. and if you starve yourself you'll be a miserable bastard too.

if you're exercising on an empty stomach early in the morning keep the exertion level pretty low, you'll have no blood sugar and high intensity stuff will only do you damage without it. low level work is good for fat burning too.

311

Nice one Tom ,thats exactly what I aiming for. Maybe if I eat bananas before I go out in the morning ,that will help.
Thanks again for the replies ,I'll post back in a couple of weeks.

littleknown

i would also highly recommend porridge in the morning as well as someone recommended me before. You need to eat well before you head out otherwise you will struggle quickly.ive been using it the last few weeks and i really noticed the difference. porridge releases energy slowly over time so its ideal plus its as healthy as you get and great for winter and as cheap as...porridge. go flahavans!!

blorg

OK, firstly: It's different for everybody. I would suggest you make sure you have a minimum intake of 1,200 calories per day, and this would be a minimum, not an average. But in my experience, yes, it is possible through relatively gentle cycling to get your body eating itself and getting most of it's energy from fat so that you should not have to replenish with a lot of food. Especially if you are 18 stone.

Ultimately it will be easier to lose weight by looking at your diet but cycling is also valuable.

If you are only talking about doing under an hour I wouldn't see any problem doing it before breakfast, you may well not need to eat at all until after your spin (again depends on the person.) You shouldn't really be doing anything high intensity anyway if you are trying to lose weight, keep it all in the aerobic zone.

HRM is a good idea.

As Tom says watch what you eat and lots of vegetables. It's a good idea to eat stuff that is bulky but has very little in the way of calories and a lot of veg fall into this category (tomatoes, peppers, celery, cucumbers, etc.)

Pasta is good, there is actually very little calorie-wise in a standard portion of pasta (125g) - just make sure you pair it with a low-calorie sauce (e.g. tomato-based and without oil, rather than cream based.)

Soup is good too, you can make hearty filling soups with next to nothing in them calorie-wise.

Drink lots of water.

Bottom line though you need to look at something that is sustainable so look at healthy-eating options that you can keep up for a year or more without feeling hungry or falling off the wagon.

72hundred

blorg wrote: »

Bottom line though you need to look at something that is sustainable so look at healthy-eating options that you can keep up for a year or more without feeling hungry or falling off the wagon.

+1 on this.... actually +2 :pac:

It has to sustainable, ask yourself do you want to be doing this in a year? If you do you know that time is a great multiplier!

Lumen

My opinion - "dieting" by strictly controlling calories in your meals is a waste of time. You'll just end up hating food. Doing exercise to lose weight is the same - do it because you have to (getting from A to or because it's fun.

Definitely cut out (unhealthy) snacks and fried foods (chips/kebabs etc), but eat as much as you want during your meals. Pasta, bread, spuds etc are all good.

Find a way to integrate exercise into your life. For me, it was walking. Two years ago I was about a stone overweight, working from home. I took an office in town, walked for an hour a day to and from the stations, and the weight dropped off.

Now I'm back on the bike, going out for evening and weekend rides with toddler on the back.

Earlier this year I lived in Italy for two months. I was eating three full meals a day, chocolate and snacks before bed, and proper four course feasts at weekends. We didn't have a car, so had to walk everywhere, pushing buggies. I lost about half a stone.

Bottom line: sit on your arse - get fat; walk/cycle - lose weight. Eat what you want, within reason.

kenmc

Something else to consider is moving from white bread/pasta/rice to brown; there are more nutrients in the brown varieties of all of these. And keep an eye on stuff which is labeled 'low fat' cos it often has increased sugar or salt content to add flavour back in.
Also it's no harm to get into the habit of looking at the nutritional info on the side of jars/packets - usually you will find two products with wildly different fat/sugar/salt levels, and it makes sense to take the one with less - you don't have to count every single calorie like this, but just to make yourself aware which products are 'better' than others.
Breakfast cereals are typically laced with sugars, even some of the well known meuslis. Whereas it's a very simple job to make your own meusli if you eat that for breakfast, and you can control what you put into it a bit more.

blorg

Lumen wrote: »

Bottom line: sit on your arse - get fat; walk/cycle - lose weight. Eat what you want, within reason.

I'd have a bit of a different take. This advice works if you are just a bit overweight (and a stone overweight is barely anything) and reasonably active. I've lost around a stone since the start of this year without paying any attention to my diet and eating whatever and as much as I want. I wouldn't have been overweight before I lost it either but it does make going up hills a bit easier

Someone who is 18 stone however is that weight because they routinely eat too much, not just the wrong thing, and as such portion control is very important. If OP "eats as much as he wants" of stuff like potatoes and bread the weight is never going to come off. Counting calories is a useful exercise that educates you as to exactly what is in food; some stuff has a crazy amount of calories in it and other stuff next to nothing. For example, if preparing a pasta sauce- 100g of double cream, contains around 450 calories. By contrast you would have to eat around 2.5kg of tomatoes for the same amount. It is trivially easy to put together a meal that might weigh in at 1,500-2,000 calories or more without really realising it.

Potatoes and bread were a bit of a disaster area in my experience when trying to lose weight; they contain a hell of a lot of calories and portion sizes are very large in this country compared to what you might eat in for example pasta. Obviously boiled is better than fried but when I was trying to seriously lose weight I just dropped them entirely, replacing with pasta. If you previously had a sandwich at lunchtime, have a wrap instead. Those Cuisine de France demi-baguettes have a worrying amount in them even before the filling.

When you have lost the weight, are exercising regularly, and have an idea of what healthy eating choices are- then is the time to "eat what you want."

Lumen

"Someone who is 18 stone however is that weight because they routinely eat too much, not just the wrong thing, and as such portion control is very important."

OK. But imagine you wanted to maintain a weight of 18st, say for an acting role. Would it be possible to maintain that weight whilst exercising properly? The weight would just fall off if you were doing an hour a day on a bike.

There are no fat marathon runners. I've never been able to work out whether this is because running causes weight loss, or because fat people can't run. Causality, correlation and all that.

TinyExplosions

Lumen wrote: »

OK. But imagine you wanted to maintain a weight of 18st, say for an acting role. Would it be possible to maintain that weight whilst exercising properly? The weight would just fall off if you were doing an hour a day on a bike.

There are no fat marathon runners. I've never been able to work out whether this is because running causes weight loss, or because fat people can't run. Causality, correlation and all that.

I think it would be possible, but would take as much effort as losing it (ie, you'd have to see the calories you burned with exercise, and replace them and more to keep the weight on)

There are no fat marathon runners because (I think) they would keep a close eye on what they ate, and every aspect of their diet etc is controlled or helped by a nutritionist. I think (as stated above) the biggest problem is with portion control -we aren't told at any stage in school or anywhere what a correct portion is, so a lot of the time we are eating far more than we have to

bobtjustice

My two cent,

Aim for an hour a day on the bike of actual cycling not rolling along, keep your legs moving as much as possible.
Stretch before and after, or you will be setting yourself up for cramps and ligament trouble.
Plenty of water, 1 and a half - 2 litres a day, 2 litres is tough but it'll make a world of difference.
As a previous poster said, the best way to shift weight is to weight train 2-3 times a week and as much cardio as you can do without killing yourself.

Make sure you enjoy it is the main thing, this shouldn't be a chore for you .

blorg

Running is just fundamentally more difficult from cycling. Unless you are cycling all out (e.g. racing) it will burn more calories per unit of time you put into it, as many as twice as much.

But, it will be substantially more difficult to sustain and comes with a significantly higher risk of injury due to the impacts involved. This is elevated if you are overweight.

In cycling your weight is supported and there is the opportunity to rest frequently- freewheeling, the descent after climbing a hill, etc. You can't rest in a run other than by stopping running (although indeed a run-walk-run pattern is often suggested for first time marathon runners.)

It's easy to cycle in your aerobic zone where fat burning is most efficient for the amount of effort expended. You want to be pushing yourself a bit but not killing yourself either.

This is one of the reasons a HRM is a good idea- it keeps you honest. There are a lot of variables in cycling (wind and gradient being the two key ones) so it is useful if you have a HRM and can log that you spent your hour at an average of 130 or 135BPM, say.

As to whether it would be possible to cycle for an hour a day and remain 18 stone? Sure, and without much difficulty- you could manage this simply by eating a flapjack or two and drinking an energy drink on your spin, with no other change to your diet. Indeed you could cycle for an hour a day and put on weight if you overcompensated.

Cycling an hour a day can burn surprisingly few calories; depends on how fast you are going! The good news is that the heavier you are the more calories you burn during exercise so watch the diet and get out on the bike and you should see good results.

petethedrummer

bobtjustice wrote: »

Stretch before and after, or you will be setting yourself up for cramps and ligament trouble.

Don't stretch cold muscles, warm up first.

jdivision

Lumen wrote: »

Would it be possible to maintain that weight whilst exercising properly? The weight would just fall off if you were doing an hour a day on a bike.

.

Not if you ate the calories to compensate. Also, 18 stone can be fat and 18 stone can be muscle, the difference is everything.

bobtjustice

petethedrummer wrote: »

Don't stretch cold muscles, warm up first.

+1.. I would have thought that was a given but for definate warm up first.

Lumen

jdivision wrote: »

18 stone can be fat and 18 stone can be muscle, the difference is everything.

Robert Cammarelle (Olympic Gold Super Heavyweight) is a little over 14st, so I'd hazard a guess that it's somewhat unlikely in the case of the OP.

irishmotorist

petethedrummer wrote: »

Don't stretch cold muscles, warm up first.

Just wondering how you'd do this, realistically. My commute is just under an hour each way. I don't usually bother stretching for the daily cycle, but should I cycle for 10 mins, hop off and stretch for a few before getting back on the bike again? I sort of thought that gentle stretching (no quick snaps) before the start of a cycle would warm the muscle up as well as loosen it.

petethedrummer

irishmotorist wrote: »

Just wondering how you'd do this, realistically.

I've no idea to be honest. I'm the wrong person to ask. I just know that intense stretching of cold muscles may increase your chances of being injured.

blorg

If you are cycling for under an hour in the aerobic zone I don't think you would need to stretch.

I am no expert on this mind; I have never stretched in my life and don't get cramps cycling. Running can hurt mind.

Again everyone is different but I think you are generally safe doing your daily commute without stretching.

311

Lads ,one thing I forgot to mention and it's kind of bugging me. Drink wise how much drink is acceptable under circumstances like my own.

Given that my diet is and will be nothing like what it was before.

scottreynolds

petethedrummer wrote: »

I've no idea to be honest. I'm the wrong person to ask. I just know that intense stretching of cold muscles may increase your chances of being injured.

I'd stretch when you get home after the night commute. Thats what I do. Its really about keeping the muscles stretched out over time. I'd stretch 3 times a week like this.... well I do.

blorg

311 wrote: »

Lads ,one thing I forgot to mention and it's kind of bugging me. Drink wise how much drink is acceptable under circumstances like my own.

Given that my diet is and will be nothing like what it was before.

If you mean alcohol, reducing is a good idea if you are trying to lose weight; it is inherently very high in calories. Its effect on direct weight gain is debated but it can also tend to promote dodgy eating choices (kebabs, chips, etc.)

Other than that from a pure calorie point of view, swapping beer for wine or spirits with low calorie mixers could be a good idea.

311

blorg wrote: »

it can also tend to promote dodgy eating choices (kebabs, chips, etc.)

Other than that from a pure calorie point of view, swapping beer for wine or spirits with low calorie mixers could be a good idea.

Thanks blorg ,I had a big problem with ordering food late at night.
I've had some wine tonight and normally I'd have had some pizza ordered. But the cycle at 6.30 has me on my toes all the time in the evening ,in a good way mind
The diet calories is well down and counting.

Baguettes are off the menu aswell ,going to try and wrap chicken with lettuce and tomatoe at 12 for the day.

Thanks for the help ,your lifesavers :)

72hundred

311 wrote: »

Lads ,one thing I forgot to mention and it's kind of bugging me. Drink wise how much drink is acceptable under circumstances like my own.

Given that my diet is and will be nothing like what it was before.

Guidelines are:

21 units for male per week
14 units for female per week

For example one pint = 2 units, one spirits shot = 1 unit.

I'd cut this drastically though if you're trying to get fit, 10/12 units would be enough, that's not too restrictive - allowing for something like 2/3 pints on Fri and Sat night.

EDIT: This comes back to earlier topic of compliance... if you enjoy the odd pint, cutting down to zero units a week will probably have an overall negative effect as you might give up the entire effort.

Turbulent Bill

scottreynolds wrote: »

I'd stretch when you get home after the night commute. Thats what I do. Its really about keeping the muscles stretched out over time. I'd stretch 3 times a week like this.... well I do.

I wouldn't stretch before cycling (stretching cold muscles is a bad idea), but you should spin gently for a few minutes when you start to warm up the muscles. Similarly, you should spin gently at the end of a cycle as a warm down. My natural flexibility is poor so I stretch after every cycle, and this is probably a good idea too if you're starting off.