The Audio-Talk Cycling thread.

[jack]

https://www.cyclingnews.com/features/sh ... call/?s=08

Mine are on the list ...

PXL_20230924_074945684_copy_1008x756.jpg (109.02 KiB) Viewed 1158 times

[Ray P]

My 'spare' Shimano crankset is an 11-speed 105 so no problem with it.

[Ray P]

This morning I cycled out to Langport to support some friends who were participating in a sprint triathlon - very good event, well organised and supported. The only down side was the damp and very windy weather. I even rode the bike circuit (about 12mles) and recorded a very reasonable average speed of 17.6mph, in spite of the conditions and having already clocked up nearly 20miles getting there.

Anyway, wearing my judgemental hat and displaying my curmudgeonly manner, I couldn't help but note the corrolary to Mike's story from a few posts back - what on earth is the point of spending £5K to 10K on a triathlon bike if you're carrying lots of Kilograms of excess baggage and do these people really think that an aero 'teardrop' helmet will compensate for the drag of their legs, which are 'knees out' because of their gut. Then there are the fools who turned up to ride full disk rear wheels in close on 40mph winds, a danger to themselves and others - I chose to ride my bike with the shallowest rims and I could still feel the wind 'grabbing' them.

Blah, blah, blah...

[shane]

what on earth is the point of spending £5K to 10K on a triathlon bike if you're carrying lots of Kilograms of excess baggage

Don’t be too hard on them, Ray. For years we’ve all been fed the lie that exercise burns off fat. It doesn’t. Generally we burn about 2500 calories a day, and if we burn lots of calories through exercise the body simply shuts down other functions and diverts that energy to the muscles rather than depleting what it regards as essential stored resources.

Strongly recommend everyone to read Chris Van Tulleken’s book “Ultra Processed People”. Incredibly thought-provoking stuff. The food industry is dead keen to promote the idea that exercise reduces fat because it makes them look as though they really care, whereas in truth what we need to do is to stop eating ultra processed food with cheap high-profit artificial ingredients our bodies don’t know how to handle, which is the last thing they want.

[Ray P]

Don’t be too hard on them, Ray. For years we’ve all been fed the lie that exercise burns off fat. It doesn’t.

Based on my own experience I know that exercise, along with a decent diet, burns off fat - I used to weigh about 30Kgs more than I do now and now my BMI and body fat measures are 'healthy'. I work on a rough daily allowance of just under 2000calories without exercise - today I've cycled 50miles and need an extra 1700calories to break even.

But that wasn't really my point, it was more about the thinking that buying an expensive bike will replace putting the work in. No doubt there's a material/status aspect to it but I think the only people that are taken in are themselves. Bah!

[Nick]

But that wasn't really my point, it was more about the thinking that buying an expensive bike will replace putting the work in.

Ahh that good old puritan work ethic again

Based on my own experience I know that exercise, along with a decent diet, burns off fat

That doesn't actually argue against the point though. You could equally say "I know that reading books along with a decent diet, burns off fat"

[shane]

For the sake of brevity I probably over-simplified CvT’s findings. Obviously, exercise is good for you, and if you constantly burn mmore calories than you consume over a long period of time, you will burn fat and get fitter, but for most people doing moderate exercise, or taking up a new fad as I suspect these guys are doing, I doesn’t work.

When I read the book it turned an awful lot of pre-conceived ideas on their heads, but at the same time it just made an awful lot of sense. It’s based on the findings of a lot of well-conducted scientific studies, with particular emphasis on getting to the roots of how those studies are funded. CvT was one of the many pairs of twins who were studied by Tim Spector, whose findings were largely responsible for the current wave of findings about the importance of gut health, It’s all really fascinating stuff!

Have a quick look at this. I know it f doesn’t directly mention the exercise bit, but it’s all part of the same thing. I know it’s the woke lefty Grauniad, but they do have the advantage of not being owned by billionaires who probably have financial interests in the food multinationals.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/ ... SApp_Other

Apologies for the thread drift but it’s something I feel strongly about.

[pre65]

Tim Spector, whose findings were largely responsible for the current wave of findings about the importance of gut health,

You are your gut.

Think pre biotics and pro biotics to start.

[Ray P]

Ahh that good old puritan work ethic again

No, not really, progression takes commitment and time, there are no (ethical) short cuts.

[That doesn't actually argue against the point though. You could equally say "I know that reading books along with a decent diet, burns off fat"

Except that to loose 30Kgs the things I changed were taking better care over my food intake and exercising more, my reading has remained fairly consistent. I do appreciate the substance of the point Shane was making and do act on it as part of my '...taking care over my food intake', but I was simply saying it isn't that simple/clearcut, nor can we abdicate all responsibility to the food industry.

I've found the Michael Mosley podcasts (on BBC Sounds) and some of his other stuff quite insightful.

[Ray P]

Apologies for the thread drift but it’s something I feel strongly about.

Thanks for the info and no problem. I concur with the gist of what you were saying but was just saying it isn't that simple or absolute.

BTW, my ride today took me out to Somerton, which, IIRC, you know well.

[Nick]

No, not really, progression takes commitment and time, there are no (ethical) short cuts.

You are assuming that they are doing it for the same reason as you. They may just enjoy the nice kit and streachy clothing.

[shane]

nor can we abdicate all responsibility to the food industry.

Indeed. We are ultimately all responsible for our own diet, but the amount of disinformation hurled at us daily is insidious, particularly when food products marketed as health improving are often the worst offenders.

The guidance I take from this is that the main things to avoid are emulsifiers and any type of modified carbohydrate, because these are things that don’t exist in nature and the body gets confused by them. Once you know what to look for it’s easy to spot them on any ingredients list, but they’re almost impossible to avoid.
We’re lucky to live near a brilliant farm shop (part of the Riverford family) where most, but certainly not all, products are OK, but if you do your family food shopping in a Big Six supermarket it’s impossible to avoid them, and shopping our way is not cheap. We spend more than double the national average proportion of income on food which on a small pension is not easy, but it’s so worthwhile. I’m 71, 5’ 11” and 11st 2lb, (180cm and 71kg if you must) and all the exercise I take is a decent length dog walk most days. The other thing of course is that the food is delicious!

[IslandPink]

There are two other factors in all of this -
1. What are/were your parents like ?
2. Prescription drugs

It's surprising how many elderly athletes will tell you how it's all about exercise and a good diet, but when you ask them about their parents they tell you they are both still alive in the late 80's and slim and fit. They don't realise how much genetics take over after the age of 50.

Prescription drugs like sedatives and antidepressants can have a big effect on your ability to control your weight. Nobody wants to take these but they are a necessary evil.

[Ray P]

No, not really, progression takes commitment and time, there are no (ethical) short cuts.

You are assuming that they are doing it for the same reason as you. They may just enjoy the nice kit and streachy clothing.

If that were the case they needn't have paid a non-trivial entry fee for a competitive event...

[jack]

No, not really, progression takes commitment and time, there are no (ethical) short cuts.

You are assuming that they are doing it for the same reason as you. They may just enjoy the nice kit and streachy clothing.

If that were the case they needn't have paid a non-trivial entry fee for a competitive event...

Being fair, they may just have been testing themselves only, i.e. just doing the best they can.

I've not been competitive in any sport for years, but I love organised events where I can just do my thing alongside other sufferers. My half and full marathons were sloooow in the grand scheme of things, but gave me great satisfaction in just getting round the course in a reasonable time for my age group.

Also, by paying for events you feel obliged to do them, so setting a marker in the calendar by which you need to be in the best condition you can be - those milestones give you targets and motivation.

I totally agree that a 10k bike is silly, but for some it makes them believe they can do a bit more - it's their problem, not yours.

It's the same in competitive clay pigeon shooting... I've had the same gun for 20 years - a decent Browning that's been fitted to me (adjusted for my eyesight, arm length etc.) - it cost about £1,200 and is a better gun than I am shot.

I shoot with folk with £20,000+ guns - I (and they) know that once you've paid a certain amount, mechanically the guns are pretty much identical. However, they choose to pay the extra for nice figured wood and hand engraving etc. It's their choice and I won't deride them for that.