2020 paceline weightloss challenge

[Powerful Pete]

What the heck. Weighed myself this morning and

Was in great shape last spring... and am no longer in that condition.

Will be traveling significantly less this year (lots of intercontinental trips, hotels and business meals), and am dedicating myself to improved fitness and lifestyle choices.

Have found that IF works very well with me - I tend to ride ˜4 times a week (30-50km) leaving the house at 4AM and go for long evening walks most days. IF eating only a light breakfast and lunch, and the weight tends to come off rather quickly... Let's see if I am able to stick to it.

Alas, off for a three week work trip to Rome (my hometown!) with much family and work entertaining planned and no access to a bike.

[Clean39T]

Originally Posted by XXtwindad

But that won't sell a lot of books.

THIS x 1,000....

Diet and exercise blogs, books, podcasts, etc. are chockablock with hucksters and snake-oil salespersons.

Move more, eat less. Minimize processed stuff and alcohol. Get sleep. Drink water. Do some weight bearing stuff for your bones. Adjust based on results. It is incredibly simple, just not that easy - because we are humans in a modern world that sells us a million ways to satiate our cravings and assuage our emotional states with junk.....swim against that tide and you'll be fine..

[tuxbailey]

I am in.

I am trying the 16:8 intermittent fasting schedule this year and I will see if I can lose 30 lbs by year's end.

[AngryScientist]

Originally Posted by XXtwindad

1) "slow" movement over hard-charging weekend grindfests. Steady, low impact movement (walking to lunch, taking the stairs) is much more effective than being sedentary all week long and trying to compensate with a century ride.

i would like to visit this point.

if this is true (which i am not second guessing you XX, just for the sake of education here...) - why is it that so many manual labor job working folks are overweight? i take the train in the morning with construction workers, painters, scaffolders, roofers, etc etc - and many of these folks are what i would call overweight.

the jobs they work basically mean they are indeed on their feet and moving all day, every day, often into overtime and into weekends.

based on your point, these people should be better adapted to losing weight than us weekend warrior cyclists, but that does not seem to be the case. i never could understand how, if i were to put roofs on for a week, i would be nearly dead of exhaustion at the end of that week, where as these guys do it and look like they are otherwise in awful physical condition.

is it just a matter of diet then for them?

[teleguy57]

I looked at this thread when it was one page, then at my scale, and thought "crap, I can't put my weight online for all to see." Thought about it some more, and skimming the SS again found I actually have a lot of company almost my exact weight and target so I said to myself "heck, these are people like me. I need all the friends and help I can get..." I'm in.

Trying to think of a way to tweak Clean's freeway graphic -- not sure what my starting point is but I'd be very happy just to get back on the roleur route!

[tuxbailey]

Originally Posted by AngryScientist

is it just a matter of diet then for them?

I think it is the diet. If your lunch is a lot of fast food and you consume a few pints after work every day then it is not easy to lose weight.

[unterhausen]

Originally Posted by teleguy57

I looked at this thread when it was one page, then at my scale, and thought "crap, I can't put my weight online for all to see."

same for me. I found out last summer when I was comparing weight to a friend that it was easier for me to lose weight. But we both got stuck at around 185. Which is a lot better than the 205 now. That much weight is bad for my blood pressure too, I would be a lot better off at 170.

I think the issue I have is that my events can be difficult to recover from. And so I don't do any exercise on too many recovery days. Trying to turn that pattern around.

[XXtwindad]

Originally Posted by AngryScientist

i would like to visit this point.

if this is true (which i am not second guessing you XX, just for the sake of education here...) - why is it that so many manual labor job working folks are overweight? i take the train in the morning with construction workers, painters, scaffolders, roofers, etc etc - and many of these folks are what i would call overweight.

the jobs they work basically mean they are indeed on their feet and moving all day, every day, often into overtime and into weekends.

based on your point, these people should be better adapted to losing weight than us weekend warrior cyclists, but that does not seem to be the case. i never could understand how, if i were to put roofs on for a week, i would be nearly dead of exhaustion at the end of that week, where as these guys do it and look like they are otherwise in awful physical condition.

is it just a matter of diet then for them?

Well, that's a valid question. I would say for the people you're referring to, that, yes, diet is a big factor. What we don't know about the people you're referring to is how fit they are, because the can be two completely different things.

But, in general, I will say that people whose job entails more everyday movement are much more likely to be fit, and probably less overweight, than people who work at a desk job.

There is a famous survey of London bus drivers/ticket takers in the 1960s here:http://www.englishecho.com/london-bu...nd-conductors/

The main findings:

London Double-Decker Buses
The first results Dr. Morris and his team got back were that of the London bus employees. Their data showed that the drivers of double-decker buses had substantially higher cardiovascular disease, adjusted for age, than the conductors, or ticket collectors.

Both bus drivers and conductors earned similar wages and came from the same socio-economic class.

Standing vs. Sitting

The main difference between them was that the drivers sat behind the wheel about 90% of their working day, while the conductors walked up and down the bus aisles, and climbed up and down the stairs joining the upper and lower decks, or about 600 steps in total.

In the 1950s, Dr. Morris extended the study, comparing postal workers who delivered the mail by walking or riding bicycles with the clerks behind the window at the post office and the telephone operators. The results showed that the deliverers had a far lower risk of developing heart disease.

Also, there is a well known health assessment done on the Amish showing them to be much fitter than the average American (even given their full fat food diet) based on the amount of low grade everyday movement they do.
Seen here: https://www.discoverwalking.com/blog...ng-fitness.php

Lastly, I have some personal experience in this. When I graduated from "J" school, I got a job as a copy editor at a paper. Same basic regimen. Only difference was that, for the first time in my life, I was mostly sedentary for eight hours a day. The result? I gained 25 pounds over a course of a year. And a belly to boot. The only time in my life that's happened.

What keeps me in good shape now is primarily low grade movement. I supplement it with body weight exercises and cycling, to be sure. But the main difference between myself and most people is that I'm doing constant low-grade activity.

I'm 100% convinced that the ticket to fighting obesity and being fit is in the amount of time being active the versus the amount of time being sedentary. And avoiding processed food.

Sorry for the long winded answer, but lots of misinformation out there, IMO.

[XXtwindad]

Originally Posted by Clean39T

THIS x 1,000....

Diet and exercise blogs, books, podcasts, etc. are chockablock with hucksters and snake-oil salespersons.

Move more, eat less. Minimize processed stuff and alcohol. Get sleep. Drink water. Do some weight bearing stuff for your bones. Adjust based on results. It is incredibly simple, just not that easy - because we are humans in a modern world that sells us a million ways to satiate our cravings and assuage our emotional states with junk.....swim against that tide and you'll be fine..

This is what I meant to say. I just got tongue-tied. But again, good luck branding common sense.

[Hilltopperny]

Originally Posted by AngryScientist

i would like to visit this point.



if this is true (which i am not second guessing you XX, just for the sake of education here...) - why is it that so many manual labor job working folks are overweight? i take the train in the morning with construction workers, painters, scaffolders, roofers, etc etc - and many of these folks are what i would call overweight.



the jobs they work basically mean they are indeed on their feet and moving all day, every day, often into overtime and into weekends.



based on your point, these people should be better adapted to losing weight than us weekend warrior cyclists, but that does not seem to be the case. i never could understand how, if i were to put roofs on for a week, i would be nearly dead of exhaustion at the end of that week, where as these guys do it and look like they are otherwise in awful physical condition.



is it just a matter of diet then for them?

Having worked in those fields and seeing it first hand it is just poor health in general. The majority smoke cigarettes, eat unhealthy, drink a lot of alcohol(like full cooler in the truck for the drive home) and a lot have drug habits. Some folks are fit as a fiddle, but the majority of them are not.

The other aspect is that outdoor labor in the Northeast doesn’t exist in the winter months so most of us get laid off and typically gain 20% of our own body weight in the months off.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NYCfixie]

One also needs to consider how agri-business and other food corporations have negatively affected the food supply. We are all responsible for what we put in our mouths/bodies and the choices we make but the "healthy" options today are not always affordable and available to everyone especially lower income groups. When those studies were done in the 60s all food was more healthy than it is today.

I always use McDonald's as a reference to make a point. In the 50s/60s, an adult meal with burger, fries, and soda not only had less crap in it (i.e. corn syrup, fillers, potato mash) but was the size of today's kid's happy meal. In these modern times, we are simply eating larger portions of unhealthier food.

Originally Posted by XXtwindad

Well, that's a valid question. I would say for the people you're referring to, that, yes, diet is a big factor. What we don't know about the people you're referring to is how fit they are, because the can be two completely different things.

But, in general, I will say that people whose job entails more everyday movement are much more likely to be fit, and probably less overweight, than people who work at a desk job.

There is a famous survey of London bus drivers/ticket takers in the 1960s here:http://www.englishecho.com/london-bu...nd-conductors/

The main findings:

London Double-Decker Buses
The first results Dr. Morris and his team got back were that of the London bus employees. Their data showed that the drivers of double-decker buses had substantially higher cardiovascular disease, adjusted for age, than the conductors, or ticket collectors.

Both bus drivers and conductors earned similar wages and came from the same socio-economic class.

Standing vs. Sitting

The main difference between them was that the drivers sat behind the wheel about 90% of their working day, while the conductors walked up and down the bus aisles, and climbed up and down the stairs joining the upper and lower decks, or about 600 steps in total.

In the 1950s, Dr. Morris extended the study, comparing postal workers who delivered the mail by walking or riding bicycles with the clerks behind the window at the post office and the telephone operators. The results showed that the deliverers had a far lower risk of developing heart disease.

Also, there is a well known health assessment done on the Amish showing them to be much fitter than the average American (even given their full fat food diet) based on the amount of low grade everyday movement they do.
Seen here: https://www.discoverwalking.com/blog...ng-fitness.php

Lastly, I have some personal experience in this. When I graduated from "J" school, I got a job as a copy editor at a paper. Same basic regimen. Only difference was that, for the first time in my life, I was mostly sedentary for eight hours a day. The result? I gained 25 pounds over a course of a year. And a belly to boot. The only time in my life that's happened.

What keeps me in good shape now is primarily low grade movement. I supplement it with body weight exercises and cycling, to be sure. But the main difference between myself and most people is that I'm doing constant low-grade activity.

I'm 100% convinced that the ticket to fighting obesity and being fit is in the amount of time being active the versus the amount of time being sedentary. And avoiding processed food.

Sorry for the long winded answer, but lots of misinformation out there, IMO.

[RobJ]

uh, are the two numbers under our name supposed to be the target and stretch target?

[RobJ]

Originally Posted by RobJ

uh, are the two numbers under our name supposed to be the target and stretch target?

Ahh, looks like current weight and target. My left column buddy and I have the same deets....

[huck*this]

Is there a certain time of day we should be weighing ourselves? Does it matter?

[JasonF]

Originally Posted by huck*this

Is there a certain time of day we should be weighing ourselves? Does it matter?

For consistency sake, I do it first thing in the morning (Saturdays) after a visit to the loo and before drinking any water.