Irish men and weight

ronano

With the greatest of respect if good kebabs could be got in most places in Ireland we would!

dustyrip

You must be a crap runner I'd burn about 100 calories more than that over 30 minutes on the treadmill. That being said the treamill is the dullest piece of equipment in the world I don't know how anyone can stick it for longer than 10 minutes.

The Heavier you are the more calories you will burn, hence the fact that you would burn 100 calories more than I would in the same time period. This is also a well known fact.

Thornography

dustyrip wrote: »

Yeah of course you will burn calories but if you are trying to loose weight

Key point here,

If your trying to build muscle and keep BMI down the bike is for you.

If you do to much cardio you burn muscle mass too.

I use the bike to burn off small pockets of fat from eating whole fat mayo e.t.c when a shop doesnt have low fat e.t.c this is perfectly fine, if i were to run it`d go away to but it would effect muscle mass also.


Staying on topic, I don't see how people can let themselves go. I mean, Im no brad pitt when it comes to my body, but after putting on a bit of weight has started me on the path to a well chiseled bod. I wana be able to make it to the jacks at the age of 80, instead of being rolled out of bed down a well lubed corridor...

RacoonQueen

dustyrip wrote: »

You must be a crap runner I'd burn about 100 calories more than that over 30 minutes on the treadmill. That being said the treamill is the dullest piece of equipment in the world I don't know how anyone can stick it for longer than 10 minutes.

The Heavier you are the more calories you will burn, hence the fact that you would burn 100 calories more than I would in the same time period. This is also a well known fact.

This is true, however, I doubt you're lighter than me, if you are, you need some SERIOUS help. You just run slowly, I'd run over 4 miles in 30 minutes @ approx 100 calories a mile. I hope this helps.

DirkVoodoo

dustyrip wrote: »

You said 'Of couse you will'.

The first day I joined my gym I asked my Instructor what were the things to avoid if you wanted to reduce your BMI and he was like 'the bike'. People think they are doing great exercise on the bike but your not burning the calories like you would be running on the treadmill. I know, the treadmill is a lot harder, but once you use it a bit you get used to it. If you ever look around the gym, its generally the people who are overweight on the bikes or 'fit' people doing a warm down. This is well known!! I use the treadmill most days and its great for everything really, only my knees hurt sometimes:mad:

This is why a lot of people use a bike to warm up or even exercise on in a gym - it's low impact exercise.

I think you are confusing "energy consumption" and "soreness". You can burn up plenty of fat on a bike if you use a heartrate monitor. I think 60% of your max HR is the optimum fat burning zone.

I also agree with another poster about treadmills, they are not good for your joints and running outside on a more compliant surface like a football pitch is much better, more interesting too.

If you want a "well known fact", the best machine for a good workout in the gym is not your treadmill dustyrip, it's the rowing machine.

Sam Hain

markfla wrote: »

ah right, you're correct about the normal ones I guess, i see loads of people just sauntering along watching fair city and the likes on them in my gym...bit of a waste.
I would have been disappointed if spinning was doing nothing for me as I do be wrecked after it!:D

just like your missus

Ouijaboard

dustyrip wrote: »

You sound like the type that hits the bike and walks on the treadmill? Won't burn calories that way!!

dustyrip wrote: »

Are you serious? Any gym Instructor will tell you to stay away from the bikes. Slow walking on the treadmill and using the bikes will take ages to loose weight. You need to be on the treadmill/Crosstrainer/Swimming.......

What the hell are you talking about dustyrip? The ignorance here is pretty awful, I just had to get involved...its all about effort put in! you can do jumping jacks or skipping or marching on the spot and demolish calories if you put in enough effort.

Why the hate on the bikes from you, try doing HIIT (look it up!) on a fcking exercise bike and tell me you arent fcuked after 20mins.

You can also tell your gym instructor he knows fcuk all!

Handsome Bob

dustyrip wrote: »

Thats very unlikely, and I personally don't believe you. In an average spinning class of 45 mins you can burn up to 450 calories and they are very hard.

The comment you just posted is obviously coming from someone who dosen't know what they are talking about.

Anyone who knows me well will know that I went from 16 to 12 stone, and they will also know how I did it. The bike doesn't lie, you know, because it actually tells you how much you "should" have burnt. Maybe I should have given the bike a smack for wrongly telling me I had burnt 300+ calories.

In general, maybe I don't know what I'm talking about, but I do know what worked for me. I don't have to prove anything to you.

Bonito

LZ5by5 wrote: »

Anyone who knows me well will know that I went from 16 to 12 stone, and they will also know how I did it. The bike doesn't lie, you know, because it actually tells you how much you "should" have burnt. Maybe I should have given the bike a smack for wrongly telling me I had burnt 300+ calories.

In general, maybe I don't know what I'm talking about, but I do know what worked for me. I don't have to prove anything to you.

Stick it to 'em different strokes for different folks

That's people's problem, if they don't see quick results they give up on the gym, sometimes it takes time to find what exercises/machines work for you and your body, if you find it within the first week or two all well and good, if not then keep at it, everyone loves a trier

Lumen

LZ5by5 wrote: »

Anyone who knows me well will know that I went from 16 to 12 stone, and they will also know how I did it. The bike doesn't lie, you know, because it actually tells you how much you "should" have burnt. Maybe I should have given the bike a smack for wrongly telling me I had burnt 300+ calories.

In general, maybe I don't know what I'm talking about, but I do know what worked for me. I don't have to prove anything to you.

Apologies for dragging an initially entertaining AH thread further into geeky territory...

Cycling is a great way to control weight. Cycling at a good pace (i.e. the pace you can sustain for an hour, just) will involve a power output of somewhere between perhaps 150W and 450W (couch potato to pro), which translates to between 540KJ and 1620KJ. Based on fairly well understood metabolic models, this translates to between perhaps 540 and 1620 calories of food energy burned in that (hard) hour.

It is easier for an untrained athlete to sustain a high power output whilst running (than cycling) because it involves moving more parts of your body. However, the main advantage of cycling over running is that it is low stress, so you can (in principle) do it for many hours a week without sustaining an injury. But not in the gym, unless you're a complete robot.

Back on topic, I think one reason why people don't get enough exercise is that they equate fitness with gyms. Proper outdoor sport is actually fun - the health benefits are incidental.

TelePaul

Where is the rule that says overweight Irish guys can't find overweight Irish women unattractive? You're can't help who you're (un)attracted to.

southsiderosie

TelePaul wrote: »

Where is the rule that says overweight Irish guys can't find overweight Irish women unattractive? You're can't help who you're (un)attracted to.

I don't think it's a rule, but it's kind of an annoying double-standard. And it also seems to hold in countries outside of Ireland. But as the original article says, women seem to be pretty forgiving of men who are overweight. Why doesn't this run the other way?

wudangclan

southsiderosie wrote: »

I don't think it's a rule, but it's kind of an annoying double-standard. And it also seems to hold in countries outside of Ireland. But as the original article says, women seem to be pretty forgiving of men who are overweight. Why doesn't this run the other way?

Because women are stimulated by their minds,men by their eyes,apparently.

I has a thing for fatties.
My friends slag me about it.

Lumen

southsiderosie wrote: »

I don't think it's a rule, but it's kind of an annoying double-standard. And it also seems to hold in countries outside of Ireland. But as the original article says, women seem to be pretty forgiving of men who are overweight. Why doesn't this run the other way?

Women have more body fat to start with, so a 20% overweight woman will tend to look fatter than a 20% overweight man. On the flipside, male bodies are fundamentally uglier, fat or thin.

In any case, most fatties (men and women) look fine with their clothes on, as long as the clothes are appropriately chosen, so unless you're speed dating on the beach it's not much of a deal breaker.

TheZohanS

southsiderosie wrote: »

I don't think it's a rule, but it's kind of an annoying double-standard. And it also seems to hold in countries outside of Ireland. But as the original article says, women seem to be pretty forgiving of men who are overweight. Why doesn't this run the other way?

Because this isn't The Ladies Lounge.

OutlawPete

southsiderosie wrote: »

I don't think it's a rule, but it's kind of an annoying double-standard. And it also seems to hold in countries outside of Ireland. But as the original article says, women seem to be pretty forgiving of men who are overweight. Why doesn't this run the other way?

Well, I see alot more guys that are in good shape walking around with overweight women than I see overweight guys walking around with slim in-shape girls, that's for sure.

So I to Irish women are more "unforgiving" seems a little rich to me.