Burning Fat Calories

[Eldrack]

Look up a Carb/Fat burn curve related to heart rate. Then sit at the heart rate max % that gives the highest fat burn. During exersice eat enough carbs to replace those that you are using (or perhaps slightly less). This way you don't bonk (your replacing the carbs) but are still burning away fat.

Second thing is the longer you ride the better. For example I can ride 1 hour on the turbo at 200W or half an hour at 240W. Therefore I burn 66.7% more energy on the hour session. This works as when you double the time your on the bike you don't halve your power output.

In the end it is just a numbers game. If you expend more calories than you eat, you loose weight.

Edit Afterthought: don't go and bonk whatever you do, it is really nasty and you feel **** for days afterwards

 

[gntlmn]

Here's thinking outside the box. I see you guys getting highly technical with various ideas on this thread. The problem is to lose weight without getting the urge to overeat and sabotage our efforts.

Well, I've had great success with this approach. Simply get up in the wee hours of the morning and go for a 3 hour walk as the sun is coming up. When you're done, eat a normal breakfast--absolutely no extra food from the walk. You will burn off 2 pounds a week without feeling any fatigue or hunger. The walk actually energizes you. It helps you to recover (active rest). Actually, I dropped 10 lbs in 3 weeks using this approach because I kept walking many days much longer than 3 hours. It's kind of addictive.

Later in the day, you may do your regular bike training, whatever that happens to be. The walking does not upset your glycogen balance. It's almost completely pure fat loss. You won't get any hungrier than if you kept on sleeping in the morning. In fact, you may find some appetite suppression with this approach. I did.

Let me know who has luck with this. I'd like to hear it. I don't buy that laying flat on your back approach to resting between stages either. I have a feeling you would recover better if you are used to walking and put in a long walk every day, even during the stage races. You don't want to race walk. That'll beat the hell out of you. Walk fairly quickly but not straining. Let me know...

 

[Aaberg]

Nobody here is going to be able to convince Aaberg that he's dead wrong so let him continue to go out and do his "bonk" rides. Sheesh.

Meanwhile, I'm going to go eat some CARBS and get in a couple hours worth of Tempo today.

I suggest you read through my posts once again Doctor Morbius. I have never suggested to do "bonk" rides. This has been emphasized by me in a previous a post also. On the contrary, throughout my posts I have been suggesting that calories burned from glycogen has to be replaced, otherwise you will run into trouble.

The point I have been arguing Doc, is that where the calories are coming from during a training ride does matter. I have said that calories burned from fat are calories that does not have to be replaced, and calories burned from glycogen have to be replaced, otherwise you will run into trouble with your recovery, eventually bonking as you are depleting your glycogen stores. Which is exactly the same as you are suggesting.

Furthermore Doc, it's clear that you haven't read what I wrote three posts above your post. I stated, twice, that I'm accepting what my discussion partners have argued.

Just to remind you, it was frenchyge who wrote that "you don't have to *eat*" to fill up your glycogen stores, "the body will *make* it as part of its normal recovery metabolism", and "no matter what you eat or don't eat, your body will replenish your glycogen supplies from storage".

If you have issues with these statemets I suggest you discuss them with frenchyge.

Maybe next time you should skip five minutes of your tempo training and rather spend them reading posts before writing your own...

 

[mitosis]

As a lurker on this thread in my own right I would like to add one thought to the energy burning debate.

Stored protein (like that in muscles) is not generally used by the body for energy. It is only use by the body for energy as a last resort - when there is almost no other available energy from carbohydrate and none from storage fat.

Amino acids in dietary protein in excess of requirements are deaminated and used for energy or converted to fat.

 

[VaBiker]

you have to stop thinking as "fat" and "glycogen" currency and realize that calories are calories. If you burn enough calories, you will lose weight - simple as that. If you burn a lot of calories in any given workout, you may have used up a lot of glycogen doing so, but will need to replace those calories in general regardless, and with the appropriate meal, you will replace all of the glycogen anyway, so there's no need to worry about "where" it's coming from, only that it's being used.

I am no expert but I agree with this simple explanation. You guys are some intelligent people here and make great points. Sometimes the simplest explanation is the best. I don't have a HRM, I only have a speedometer, and being in touch with the way my body feels. I may get a HRM but I am scared to see my stats lol. All I know is that the more I ride and switch intensities ( 1 day an 8 mile interval ride sprinting from traffic light to traffic light and dodging cars and pedestrians, to a 15 mile "tempo ride" , to a 16mile recovery ride to a 30+ tempo within limits ride) my average speed goes up and my weight goes down and my fitness increases.

 

[jjjtttggg]

#2 If you do not eat after the workout, you will stay glycogen depleted, but....
your body will be in this "fasted" state and will have to produce new glycogen and glucose from other sources already in the body via Gluconeogenesis and/or Glycogenesis. This is where it will take fat and/or protein and convert it *back* to Glucose or Glycogen.

Not asking as an argument, but just as a question. . .

Clearly if you don't eat any carbs your body will have to resort to metabolizing fat (and any protein that may be hanging around). However, I'm under the impression that this would not replenish glycogen stores. Is there in fact a route from fat to stored glycogen, or is it a matter of metabolizing fat for immediate energy (maybe by way of a reconversion to glucose with the working cells, I don't know) until blood-borne glucose becomes available in the blood stream.

Again, I'm not arguing with you. I think you've been dead-on through the entire thread (glycogen will be replaced from what your going to eat anyway, calories are calories, negative balance equals weight loss), but can the body really create stored glycogen from stored fat???

J

 

[Don Shipp]

Not asking as an argument, but just as a question. . .

Clearly if you don't eat any carbs your body will have to resort to metabolizing fat (and any protein that may be hanging around). However, I'm under the impression that this would not replenish glycogen stores. Is there in fact a route from fat to stored glycogen, or is it a matter of metabolizing fat for immediate energy (maybe by way of a reconversion to glucose with the working cells, I don't know) until blood-borne glucose becomes available in the blood stream.

Again, I'm not arguing with you. I think you've been dead-on through the entire thread (glycogen will be replaced from what your going to eat anyway, calories are calories, negative balance equals weight loss), but can the body really create stored glycogen from stored fat???

J

And what concerns me more, can the energy in alchohol be converted to glycogen?

 

[Orange Fish]

but can the body really create stored glycogen from stored fat???

J

Not exactly stored glycogen from stored fat. Glucagon, a fasting hormone is present in higher amounts in between meals, and this hormone stimulates gluconeogenesis. This pathway allows stored fat to be converted back to glucose.

The body really won't create stored glycogen though from stored fat, because we typically will use the stored fat for energy when we're already low on glycogen and blood glucose, so this puts us in a fasting state. The whole idea in a fasting state is to create energy for cellular processes to occur. Glycogen is the storage form of glucose, so essentially, we wouldn't want to make glycogen (a storage form, effectively "storing energy") when we are in a fasted state (i.e. lacking energy). This is the case at night when we go to sleep for however many hours...since we don't have any energy coming in through our diet, our body has to rely on glycogen stores for some cellular functions to occur, but if that was already low for some reason, and our cells needed glucose to function, then we could take some stored fat, convert it back to glucose, and use that glucose that was made from the fat for, say, certain brain functions (or whatever else needs some glucose).

 

[pgagne]

Hi guys,

You will find a very interesting article on this subject just here

http://www.cptips.com/weight.htm

 

[managemysite]

Download the Fitworkout software here http://fitworkout.com
It explains all the zones and will tell you exactly where you need to be to burn fat, calories, etc

 

[MichaelB]

I aint no expert what so ever but it seems to me if we just go nuts on the bike and eat low fat foods to the point where we feel comfortable (not hungry and have plenty of energy) then our fat stores will reduce.

Shitty fatty food tastes quite nice though doesn't it? Its only natural that humans want high calorie food because back in the days of living in caves we never knew how far away the next McDinosaur and Cheese was going to be.

 

[Doctor Morbius]

I suggest you read through my posts once again Doctor Morbius. I have never suggested to do "bonk" rides. This has been emphasized by me in a previous a post also. On the contrary, throughout my posts I have been suggesting that calories burned from glycogen has to be replaced, otherwise you will run into trouble.

The point I have been arguing Doc, is that where the calories are coming from during a training ride does matter. I have said that calories burned from fat are calories that does not have to be replaced, and calories burned from glycogen have to be replaced, otherwise you will run into trouble with your recovery, eventually bonking as you are depleting your glycogen stores. Which is exactly the same as you are suggesting.

Furthermore Doc, it's clear that you haven't read what I wrote three posts above your post. I stated, twice, that I'm accepting what my discussion partners have argued.

Just to remind you, it was frenchyge who wrote that "you don't have to *eat*" to fill up your glycogen stores, "the body will *make* it as part of its normal recovery metabolism", and "no matter what you eat or don't eat, your body will replenish your glycogen supplies from storage".

If you have issues with these statemets I suggest you discuss them with frenchyge.

Maybe next time you should skip five minutes of your tempo training and rather spend them reading posts before writing your own...

I read the posts. They still aren't going to convince me that yours is an optimum way to train for fat metabolism. Especially, when there are so many qualified coaches that state otherwise.

My issue is with the statements in blue that I've highlighted above. If you want to train on the bike at 50% max heart rate for multiple hours per day, which is probably around where you'll need to be to avoid using much glycogen, knock yourself out. You might as well be doing housework for 8 hours a day. In the long run it's still going to be calories out vs calories in no matter how you slice it.

For the record I think the Atkins diet is a bunch of bull too, unless someone wants arteries full of sludge. Americans are for the most part stupid and are always looking for a gimmick or a quick fix so fads diets aren't going to go away.

 

[Lrscpa]

So I'm new to all this. I'm 6' 0", 49 yrs old, and currently weigh 255, down from 300 in the last year. Ideally, I would like to get my weight down in the 210-220 range. I originally took up spinning last fall, which I do 3-4 times/week (for an hour each time). During my spin classes, I burn 800-1000 calories per my heart rate monitor in a spin class at an average rate of 140-145bpm. Plus, I got a 'relaxed' road bike, a Specialized Sequoia, and I try to ride at least 2 other times for about 25-30 miles each. Now that kids' baseball season is over, I hope to ride more.

How can I maximize my weight loss, in the time that I have to ride?

 

[MichaelB]

For the record I think the Atkins diet is a bunch of bull too, unless someone wants arteries full of sludge. Americans are for the most part stupid and are always looking for a gimmick or a quick fix so fads diets aren't going to go away.

Apparently that works by supressing your appetite with all that protein.

 

[Don Shipp]

Americans are for the most part stupid and are always looking for a gimmick or a quick fix so fads diets aren't going to go away.

I think that this remark is unfair. I have met dozens of Americans who are neither fat nor stupid.

 

[Don Shipp]

So I'm new to all this. I'm 6' 0", 49 yrs old, and currently weigh 255, down from 300 in the last year. Ideally, I would like to get my weight down in the 210-220 range. I originally took up spinning last fall, which I do 3-4 times/week (for an hour each time). During my spin classes, I burn 800-1000 calories per my heart rate monitor in a spin class at an average rate of 140-145bpm. Plus, I got a 'relaxed' road bike, a Specialized Sequoia, and I try to ride at least 2 other times for about 25-30 miles each. Now that kids' baseball season is over, I hope to ride more.

How can I maximize my weight loss, in the time that I have to ride?

Make sure that you do not equate "losing weight" with "loosing fat". One of the best ways to lose fat is to increase lean muscle, which is metabolically active, and heavy. So you will look like a Greek God but not be any lighter. With a fad diet or a poor exercise program you can loose a lot of weight but actually look (and feel) worse.
Some time spent resistance training can add muscle, and will also give your body a more balanced look, since even lots of cycling won't add anything to arms, shoulders and chest. Just don't overdo it, recovery time is essential after each exercise session, on or off the bike. Make sure that you are getting enough sleep. (Less late-night TV and stay off the computer, too.)
All that is half the story. Eat sensibly and also be careful what you drink. Alcohol has a lot of calories and too much will negate the benefits of any amount of exercise. Colas contain about 6 spoons of sugar per can, more than you would put in a cup of coffee if you were worried about your waistline, or teeth. I believe that Chinese green tea really helps fat loss as well as being very good for you, and has no calories. The taste takes some getting used to, though.
Food should come from all three groups, do not try to leave anything out. However, processed foods contain way too much fat, sugar and salt so don't eat junk. Fresh food contains vitamins and anti-oxidants.
If you eat and drink sensibly, do some resistance and some cardio, and get enough sleep then you will get fit steadily even if you can't be bothered with heart rate, zones etc. or even calorie counting.

 

[dhk]

I'll put in a plug for moderate daily rides at 60-65% HR. Combined with a restricted carb diet, which avoids high-glycemic starches and sugars, they worked great for me.

My experience is that high-intensity riding creates an appetite/demand for quick glycogen replacement in order to maintain vital blood sugar levels. For me, the key to weight loss was getting the blood sugar stabilized by avoiding all sugar and high-glycemic starches. Believe the body replaces muscle glycogen much more slowly on a restricted carb diet, so that riding hard everyday becomes impossible.

Believe many overweight people can't manage high-glycemic carbs; that's how they got fat in the first place. So, telling them to ride hard, but consume only enough sugar/starch to replace a % of spent glycogen (the rest coming from bodyfat) is a tough prescription.

Besides, if you're 25 lbs above your best weight, don't see much reason to train hard for that final race peak....what's would be the point? Believe it's best to get the weight off first with careful training and diet discipline. Save the hard stuff for when you're down to race weight....it's a lot more fun then anyway.

 

[JTE83]

I'll put in a plug for moderate daily rides at 60-65% HR. Combined with a restricted carb diet, which avoids high-glycemic starches and sugars, they worked great for me.

My experience is that high-intensity riding creates an appetite/demand for quick glycogen replacement in order to maintain vital blood sugar levels. For me, the key to weight loss was getting the blood sugar stabilized by avoiding all sugar and high-glycemic starches. Believe the body replaces muscle glycogen much more slowly on a restricted carb diet, so that riding hard everyday becomes impossible.

I lost 60 lbs in 2 years and I still ate carbs, donuts, candy, pecan pie, carrot cake, or whatever. I did not go on any diet, I just limited my junk food to 350 calories a day and I only drank diet soda. My workout rides were 35 to 54 miles long, and my HR was between 78% to 87% MHR.

People who tell you to bike at 60 - 65% MHR are giving you bad advice. Go for the max fat burn rate at 79% MHR. I would lose up to 3 lbs from a 79% MHR workout. And I've lost 2.6 lbs from a 83% MHR workout too.

And if you're fat biking at 60 - 65% MHR means that you're going 11 mph ? Is that fun or inspiring?

 

[frenchyge]

People who tell you to bike at 60 - 65% MHR are giving you bad advice. Go for the max fat burn rate at 79% MHR. I would lose up to 3 lbs from a 79% MHR workout. And I've lost 2.6 lbs from a 83% MHR workout too.

No you didn't. 2.6 lbs * 3500 cal/pound of fat would mean a 9100 calorie workout. The century ride I did yesterday morning burned an estimated 4400 calories in 5.25 hours.

Be careful about advertising your results in this way as if there is a direct correlation. As I pointed out back when you posted your spreadsheet of results the first time, the calories burned during those rides *did not* justify the amount of weight loss that you measured. Something else was going on, and you shouldn't attribute the weight loss to the HR of your ride or anything else on that sheet.

 

[Doctor Morbius]

I lost 60 lbs in 2 years and I still ate carbs, donuts, candy, pecan pie, carrot cake, or whatever. I did not go on any diet, I just limited my junk food to 350 calories a day and I only drank diet soda. My workout rides were 35 to 54 miles long, and my HR was between 78% to 87% MHR.

People who tell you to bike at 60 - 65% MHR are giving you bad advice. Go for the max fat burn rate at 79% MHR. I would lose up to 3 lbs from a 79% MHR workout. And I've lost 2.6 lbs from a 83% MHR workout too.

Did you calculate that weight loss per ride using an HRM, or was that actual weight loss via digital scales done pre and post ride? I'd be tempted to say that 2.6 - 3.0 lbs from a single workout would be due to water loss.

And if you're fat biking at 60 - 65% MHR means that you're going 11 mph ? Is that fun or inspiring?

Some people are going 11 MPH but there are quite a few that are doing mid-teens at that heart rate.