Body Fat %

trickydisco, was it you who re-did those test having done a fair bit of training in between?

at the end of the test I was told I was rubbish at burning fats for fuel

HIIT uses fat to fuel adaptation. Building muscle, for example, requires energy as well as protein. This is where you see people digressing about post-workout “burning” etc.

Reckon there must be something in these two things. I don’t think I’m particularly good at utilising fat for fuel during exercise (and I tend to put on a bit of weight during winter base work). All comes off pretty quickly and I get much leaner as soon as I start introducing more high intensity work, so using fat to fuel some adaptation rather than the training sounds about right.

Either do what Lawnmanmx says about keto (if you are educated enough to do it) or keep your foods high sugar and very low fat only. For the love of God don’t listen to any of these telling you to eat a caloric deficit. Why do you think so many women get fatter once they come off their slimming world ect diets. The caloric deficit is destroying your metabolism. A study put 100 men on 1600 calorie diets and at the end the results were devastating to their bodies. Caloric deficit is starving not dieting.
Also low intensity is better for fat loss simply because you can do it longer. Your body holds I think roughly 700calories worth of glycogen ready to use so once you’ve burnt that off without eating your into fat stores, that’s why it’s better to train on an empty stomach first thing in the morning because it’s already depleted.

People seem to make this more complex than it is.

It is very complicated. Simply saying it’s not doesn’t make it so 🙂

However, IIRC, you did improve your ability to use more fat, via change in diet and exercise, no?

yep. I did. I effectively followed idave/4hour body and did lots of 1 hour sessions with my HR at 140

The coach/tester said my zone 2 level (the zone at which i was utilising the most amount of energy from fats) was 125-144bpm. After 6 months this ‘zone’ was 140-158bpm.

He did talk a lot about trying to make that zone 2 area as big as possible. My v02max wattage was fairly good (okay not cat 1 level) but it was too far apart from my threshold. He was more interested in moving that threshold further up than improving v02max

@TrickyDisco.

Thanks for sharing.
😀

Np.

I’m a world away from that. I was very much into training/diet 4-5 years ago. Doing a few xc races, road races and crits.

Would definitely recommend doing one of these fitness tests as it helped me structure training and drove me to look at my diet.

I know the idave/4 hour body causes a lot of discussion here but it certainly worked for me (dropped 6kg of fat, stopped carb cravings and felt i had more energy) and also 4 other mates who were very sceptical (what do you mean you don’t count calories, I can eat what i want 1 day a week?.. that can’t be right) and it worked for them

calorie deficit? Ok then explain this! I regularly have over 4000+

Sure. You’re hacking the system by keeping insulin levels low… I’ve done that myself. It’s not the only way of doing it and I enjoy eating cake!

Right and wrong, if you want to loose fat, muscle and weight just go on a calorie deficient diet

If you read the links on my post, he gives a way of maintaining/increasing muscle while loosing fat.

I’ve been loosing 0.5kg a week but lifting heavier weights, for the last 2 months.

Eat less on rest days more on workout days, watch your protein levels and account for how much fuel you need for your workout.

I’ve been loosing 0.5kg a week but lifting heavier weights, for the last 2 months.

If you’re relatively new to weight training (or have returned to it) the gains are mainly from neurological adaption (muscle memory) rather than any hypertrophy, so you could be losing muscle mass and still lifting heavier weights.

Nope. Definitely gained muscle. Been pretty consistent for a year..

It is very complicated. Simply saying it’s not doesn’t make it so

The way the body processes and uses food/drink for energy and the way the different energy systems interact is very complicated but the 1st law of thermodynamics is simple. Consume more energy than you use and it gets stored, consume less and you lose weight. The method or internal energy source shouldn’t affect that.

Just had a skinfold test done, turns out I’m estimated 13% bodyfat (total skin fold 50.1mm, which apparently is a better measure), pretty pleased with that, now I just need to work out how to cycle quickly 😆

I know the idave/4 hour body causes a lot of discussion here but it certainly worked for me

It worked very well for me *at first*. Lost 10kg through it and riding.

However, my ‘training’ and ‘dieting’ is characterised by periods on and off the wagon, because every time I get into a groove my work circumstances change which means different places to be, different amounts to do and so on. It takes me a while to suss out the new environment each time before I get back on it.

Interestingly though each time, the iDiet has been less effecive. I road loads last summer, but higher intensity, and whilst I got a lot faster and boosted endurance no end (due to fasted riding) I maintained a pretty high weight (for me).

My response to the diet and exercise has changed as I’ve trained and dieted over the years.

the 1st law of thermodynamics is simple

It is, but there are many many variables.

So much happens to the food that goes into your mouth before it gets your your fat and muscle cells, and your energy expenditure is so much more complex than simply how long you spend on the bike, that it is pretty distractingly oversimplistic to keep on about the laws of thermodynamics when talking to training cyclists trying to achieve a racing weight.

the 1st law of thermodynamics is simple

Human body isn’t though. There are so many feedback loops which can change and alter steady state / response to stimulii behaviour.

I’m sure the interactions are complex but I think people are getting in a tiz shooting for minimal gains when they’d be better off using the 20:80 rule.

The food that you eat isn’t simple fuel for a simple machine. It gets broken down into all sorts of chemicals by other chemicals which then are affected by other chemicals that promote the release of other checmicals which affect the body’s different types of cells so that they process the chemicals into other chemicals – some of which are yellow and fatty and heavy, and those cells then secrete other chemicals which affect what they and their neighbours do with their chemicals… then other chemicals affect the chemicals that make up brain cell communications which then affect the bits of the brain that choose what to eat, and also the brain secretes other chemicals that affect all these other cells.. and so on and so on.

There’s no central control unit separating the calories out of food and sending it one way or the other.

I think people are getting in a tiz shooting for minimal gains when they’d be better off using the 20:80 rule

Aye, you know best eh. Who are you again?

I’m at least 10kg over what I’d be happy with for racing. That’s not minimal. It’s a very stubborn 10kg though, for some reason.

centralscrutinizer – Member

The way the body processes and uses food/drink for energy and the way the different energy systems interact is very complicated but the 1st law of thermodynamics is simple. Consume more energy than you use and it gets stored, consume less and you lose weight. The method or internal energy source shouldn’t affect that.

Ah, the 1st law gets a mention. Energy is energy, right. Energy is measured, in this context, in calories. But not all calories are processed by the body in the same way.

The method is effected because the body isn’t a simple engine. You can’t just run the body like an engine for ‘X’ units of time and expect a particular result in energy expenditure. The complexity of the body means you can only alter things within a certain window of operation. Otherwise OP could just measure total fat content of their body. Do the maths and run about, continously, for a few weeks. But its not that simple. We fatigue, there are backround processes for general maintenance and repair, etc, etc.

molgrips – Member

My response to the diet and exercise has changed as I’ve trained and dieted over the years.

Aging will play a part in this. Hormonal response change over time for different reasons including age.

it is pretty distractingly oversimplistic to keep on about the laws of thermodynamics when talking to training cyclists trying to achieve a racing weight.
Yeap.

footflaps – Member

the 1st law of thermodynamics is simple

Human body isn’t though. There are so many feedback loops which can change and alter steady state / response to stimulii behaviour.

Also a good point.

Ultimately the 1st law must be obeyed, but it looks to me ^^ as if a few folk know it’s just not that simple.

Well thats good news.

My skinfold calipers arrived, and I’m 10.5%, on the border of lean/ideal for my age.

Phew

Marvellous. Celebratory sausage roll?

Rather than the variety of different bull’ being spouted by various people, this is what one of the top MTB coaches recommends when it comes to losing weight while still training hard. I’d trust this more than anything else in this thread. I’ve been loosely following the general guidelines since about September/October, along with weights and lots of other training, and my % body fat has dropped below 6%, while putting on 6kg of mass. The info graph picture has got a hell of a lot of useful info and also covers the whole daily protein requirements issue:

Kryton57 – Member

Well thats good news.

My skinfold calipers arrived, and I’m 10.5%, on the border of lean/ideal for my age.

Nice one. I had mine done today by a sport science guy at work, he said really its better just to conentrate on the mm value of all the 8 added up. he didnt know values for cyclists but sugested middle distance runners (as a possible equivalent) are 30-40mm at elite level

Above is pretty much the same as I’ve been following. Great infographic

It appears that useful, relevant information is the best way to shut down a thread. Haha

My favourite thing about this thread is that the OPs question was sorted on p1 and there are still folk arguing about how he could lose more weight on p6.

OP – have you tried adding brickdust to your meals? It stimulates the production of beta-floptase which ‘prickles’ your mitochondria, making you burn divergent ketones instead of turning them to cheese.

stevious – Member
OP – have you tried adding brickdust to your meals? It stimulates the production of beta-floptase which ‘prickles’ your mitochondria, making you burn divergent ketones instead of turning them to cheese.

As anyone in the know will tell you, rather than burn divergent ketones, supplementation of brickdust actually adds to the body’s storage of cheese building blocks, resulting in the condition ‘hyperouthousis’.

It isn’t the divergent ketones you need to worry yourself about. Convergent aldehydes are much worse. You need to cut them out of your diet completely. They are found in bread.

Cereal bars, crisps, bread and shop bought soups..

For goodness sake

Give up now.. You don’t have an effing clue 😆

Try eating some real food

What’s wrong with shop bought soups?

There are some good ones.

What’s wrong with shop bought soups?

There are some good ones.

They cause arguments.

I’ve read the first and last posts of this thread, my guess is that in between it turns out that the scales are rubbish and there has been the usual black and white ‘dietary debate’ where everyone knows best. The OP, meanwhile, will have collapsed and been hospitalised after mainlining organic soup. And Molgrips still has a physiology markedly different from anyone else in the world as he was found in the wreckage of a flying saucer and adopted by a nice old couple from the home counties.

FTW

The diet thing winds me up marginally, yes I’m sure we’d all like to keep our own chickens, grow our own vegetables, grind our own grain and make all our food from our home produced ingredients with no additives etc. Unfortuantely as most of us work, even trying to maintain a training load is difficult enough as well as making all food from scratch. Things like those Covent Garden soups are fine imo

jonba – Member
It isn’t the divergent ketones you need to worry yourself about. Convergent aldehydes are much worse. You need to cut them out of your diet completely. They are found in bread.

You need to make sure that they’re in bread made from dead Head though – you really don’t want the live strain 😯

Breakfast Solutions[/url]

actual lol

This was a very revealing and interesting read, even from a Lay perspective: about how the body adapts to training, dieting, and so on, and why it’s pretty much down to luck of the draw…

Faster by Michael Hutchinson

and there has been the usual black and white ‘dietary debate’ where everyone knows best

yet most are mysteriously 20kg overweight
but its probably underlying muscle from that time they played rugby at school

and just for the protein haterz, last night i had protein pancakes with my dinner, in place of starchy carbs, worked out really nice/well

Aye, you know best eh. Who are you again?

That’s just rude, fella. Is this a case of…

Big hitters on Stw vs mere forumites.*

I’m at least 10kg over what I’d be happy with for racing. That’s not minimal. It’s a very stubborn 10kg though, for some reason.

You admitted it yourself in a similar discussion just before xmas – cakes and desserts and an inability to resist consumption.

*From that other thread

Kryton57 – Member
FTW

Their 365 recipe book is very good.

nickc – Member

This was a very revealing and interesting read, even from a Lay perspective: about how the body adapts to training, dieting, and so on, and why it’s pretty much down to luck of the draw…

Faster by Michael Hutchinson

Just finished reading that after a recommendation on another thread. Great read, both entertaining and interesting, especially for the detail obsessed cyclist.