Page 26 of 37 FirstFirst ... 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 ... LastLast
Results 626 to 650 of 920
  1. #626
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    6,608
    Quote Originally Posted by sethschmautz View Post
    Just logged into training peaks and here is what it shows in the zones area. This seems better to me but I haven't been doing this for very long.

    Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk
    That looks pretty plausible, and is a big difference from what Garmin had. I'll bet this reduces your zone 5 substantially.

  2. #627
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Boulder
    Posts
    6,044
    Quote Originally Posted by Dantheman View Post
    I don't recall seeing much data on reps/sets schemes specifically for bone density. Most of those studies focus hypertrophy/strength/ME. If I had to speculate I would guess that higher weight/lower rep is probably better. But, this is also probably a situation where simply doing anything is far more important than what specific thing you do.
    Heavy is best.
    Jumping and landing is potentially better.

    Lower impact, repetitive stress (like running) is not overly beneficial.
    Running and cutting, like in soccer, is better than straight running. Not quite sure how trail running fits in, but likely the more aggressive the better.

  3. #628
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    3,004
    Quote Originally Posted by XtrPickels View Post
    Lower impact, repetitive stress (like running) is not overly beneficial.
    For some reason almost every study on bone density and running is paywalled, but:

    Runners, male and female, have approximately 40% greater BMD than matched controls:
    https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...bstract/403118

    Premenopausal women runners about 12% greater BMD than sedentary controls:
    https://asbmr.onlinelibrary.wiley.co...bmr.5650040410

    Improvements in BMD once you hit about 15mpw, diminishing (and negative) returns at extreme mileage, cross sectional tib/fib area increases with mileage:
    https://journals.physiology.org/doi/...1992.73.3.1165

    Runners have greater BMD, cyclists reduced:
    https://europepmc.org/article/med/10949001
    "High risers are for people with fused ankles, jongs and dudes who are too fat to see their dick or touch their toes.
    Prove me wrong."
    -I've seen black diamonds!

    throughpolarizedeyes.com

  4. #629
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Boulder
    Posts
    6,044
    Yeah, those are all paywalled. If you like to dig into research, I use a Chrome Extension called "Unpaywalled" (or similar) that automatically looks for accessible versions of articles.

    I think an important caveat is that BMD is not the the best metric of bone strength.

    Fosamax is a prescription medication to increase Bone Mineral Density (BMD). It works by stopping the function of Osteoclasts, which are the bone cells that remove / remodel bone. Because there is less bone removal, bone mineral density increases. This certainly reduces the number of fractures in individuals with osteoporosis, however, fractures still occur and they tend to be catastrophic.

    This is because the main function of Osteoclasts is to shape bone into a strong structure. When you turn these off, it's like randomly nailing boards together to make a house. Sure, with enough you can create a liveable structure, but it will not be as strong (and will use much more material) than a properly framed house by knowledgeable carpenters. Fosamax tends to make bones that are stronger, but more brittle, just like a poorly designed structure might hold the weight of people, but fail because it lacks compliance for high winds or an earthquake.

    This is similar for the increase in Bone Mineral Density seen in repetitive motion sports. The body arranges the bone mineral deposits in a manner that is specific to the repetitive loading that it experiences. Sure, those runners may have increased BMD compared to sedentary controls, however that doesn't help them protect their arm when they trip or their tibia when it twists in a ski-boot with locked down DIN.

    So, is running beneficial to cyclist in regard to BMD? Sure, but if you're doing something specifically to increase your BMD, running isn't the most economical activity.

  5. #630
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    3,004
    Quote Originally Posted by XtrPickels View Post
    Yeah, those are all paywalled. If you like to dig into research, I use a Chrome Extension called "Unpaywalled" (or similar) that automatically looks for accessible versions of articles.
    I use Unpaywall and even it wasn't able to find anything for most of them. It's particularly frustrating when publicly-funded research is paywalled so aggressively.

    Interesting stuff about BMD/osteoclasts/etc. Always fun to learn something new. I'm trying to envision skeletal loading and not seeing how it would be appreciably different between running and deadlifts or squats for tib/fib or spiral fracture injuries. Purely out of mechanistic interest, I'm a huge proponent of lifting heavy for all sorts of benefits and argue with one of my main touring partners regularly about it (who thinks I'm generating net-negative effects by being able to do weighted dips and pull-ups, for example). And I don't even run.
    "High risers are for people with fused ankles, jongs and dudes who are too fat to see their dick or touch their toes.
    Prove me wrong."
    -I've seen black diamonds!

    throughpolarizedeyes.com

  6. #631
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    slc
    Posts
    17,855
    Quote Originally Posted by XtrPickels View Post
    I think an important caveat is that BMD is not the the best metric of bone strength.

    Fosamax is a prescription medication to increase Bone Mineral Density (BMD). It works by stopping the function of Osteoclasts, which are the bone cells that remove / remodel bone. Because there is less bone removal, bone mineral density increases. This certainly reduces the number of fractures in individuals with osteoporosis, however, fractures still occur and they tend to be catastrophic.

    This is because the main function of Osteoclasts is to shape bone into a strong structure. When you turn these off, it's like randomly nailing boards together to make a house. Sure, with enough you can create a liveable structure, but it will not be as strong (and will use much more material) than a properly framed house by knowledgeable carpenters. Fosamax tends to make bones that are stronger, but more brittle, just like a poorly designed structure might hold the weight of people, but fail because it lacks compliance for high winds or an earthquake.

    This is similar for the increase in Bone Mineral Density seen in repetitive motion sports. The body arranges the bone mineral deposits in a manner that is specific to the repetitive loading that it experiences. Sure, those runners may have increased BMD compared to sedentary controls, however that doesn't help them protect their arm when they trip or their tibia when it twists in a ski-boot with locked down DIN.
    Fascinating. Also, I suppose it goes without saying that running isn't going to do squat for BMD and/or bone strength above your waist.

    Quote Originally Posted by bean View Post
    I'm trying to envision skeletal loading and not seeing how it would be appreciably different between running and deadlifts or squats for tib/fib or spiral fracture injuries.
    If I'm understanding Pickles correctly, running is going to build woven bone and lifting is going to create lamellar bone. As to why that difference would occur, based on things I've heard Andy Galpin say I'm guessing it comes down to lifting creating sustained axial loads whereas running is brief transient loads. Squats and deads are also going to load the upper body and not just the lower body the way running does.

    Speaking of Andy Galpin, he's been on Huberman and Peter Attia's podcast recently and the guy is just an absolute fountain of knowledge. Highly recommend checking those out.

  7. #632
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    3,004
    Quote Originally Posted by Dantheman View Post
    Fascinating. Also, I suppose it goes without saying that running isn't going to do squat for BMD and/or bone strength above your waist.
    Some of the studies I found saw increased BMD in the spine and vertebrae in runners.

    A little cursory reading suggests woven bone exists as children and does not really exist in adults outside of injuries and pathologies.
    Last edited by bean; 01-30-2023 at 01:27 PM.
    "High risers are for people with fused ankles, jongs and dudes who are too fat to see their dick or touch their toes.
    Prove me wrong."
    -I've seen black diamonds!

    throughpolarizedeyes.com

  8. #633
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    slc
    Posts
    17,855
    Quote Originally Posted by bean View Post
    Some of the studies I found saw increased BMD in the spine and vertebrae in runners.
    The only abstract you posted that mentioned vertebral BMD was at L5, so still below the waist.

  9. #634
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    3,004
    Quote Originally Posted by Dantheman View Post
    The only abstract you posted that mentioned vertebral BMD was at L5, so still below the waist.
    Still above where the "work" is being done (but about as close as possible barring measuring hips directly), I have to imagine anything supporting any amount of weight would benefit from tens of thousands of loading cycles. Certainly not as ideal as heavy direct loading. I can't find anything other than drug studies looking at cervical and thoracic BMD. Looks like getting on gear helps.
    "High risers are for people with fused ankles, jongs and dudes who are too fat to see their dick or touch their toes.
    Prove me wrong."
    -I've seen black diamonds!

    throughpolarizedeyes.com

  10. #635
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    slc
    Posts
    17,855
    Quote Originally Posted by bean View Post
    Looks like getting on gear helps.
    Who could have guessed!

  11. #636
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    3,004
    I asked our new AI overlord about it and this was the response:

    Quote Originally Posted by ChatGPT
    What is the effect of running on bone density?

    Running can increase bone density by promoting the growth and strengthening of bones, especially in weight-bearing areas such as the legs, hips, and spine. However, excessive or repetitive high-impact running can also lead to stress fractures and decreased bone density. A balanced exercise program that includes both weight-bearing and non-weight bearing activities is recommended for optimal bone health.


    What is the effect size running has on increasing bone density?

    The effect size of running on increasing bone density can vary depending on several factors such as age, gender, genetics, overall physical activity level, and diet. However, research studies have generally found that regular running can result in significant increases in bone density, particularly in weight-bearing bones, such as the hip and spine. The exact magnitude of the effect may range from a 1-2% increase in bone density per year to as much as 6-8% over several years of consistent running. It's important to note that individual results may vary and more research is needed to determine the precise effect size of running on bone density.


    Which research studies are you referring to?

    There have been numerous research studies conducted on the effects of running and other physical activities on bone density. Some examples include:

    "The Effects of Physical Activity on Bone Health in Children and Adolescents" published in the Journal of Bone and Mineral Research in 2011.

    "The Influence of Exercise on Bone Mineral Density in Postmenopausal Women: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials" published in the Journal of Women's Health in 2008.

    "The Effects of Aerobic Exercise Training on Bone Mineral Density in Postmenopausal Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis" published in the Journal of Bone and Mineral Research in 2015.

    These studies and others provide evidence for the positive effects of regular physical activity, including running, on bone density. However, more research is needed to determine the specific effects of running on bone density and the optimal exercise prescription for maintaining and improving bone health.
    "High risers are for people with fused ankles, jongs and dudes who are too fat to see their dick or touch their toes.
    Prove me wrong."
    -I've seen black diamonds!

    throughpolarizedeyes.com

  12. #637
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    slc
    Posts
    17,855
    Quote Originally Posted by bean View Post
    A little cursory reading suggests woven bone exists as children and does not really exist in adults outside of injuries and pathologies.
    Just noticed this edit. Probably not a correct use of woven bone, but Pickles post seems to say that while running will improve BMD and bone strength it's lower quality bone than you'll get from lifting.

  13. #638
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Three-O-Three
    Posts
    15,411
    Here's a "tag-on" question to what I posted a page or two ago regarding splitting up Zone 2 training: how consistent does the riding have to be in Zone 2 for it to be beneficial? For instance, can I go for a regular trail ride at a slower pace and still get the endurance-based benefits? (For example, a 25 mile ride in the mountains where it's typically an hour climb, then a 15-20 min descent, and repeat) How does that compare to a standard road or gravel ride that's 2-3 hours of steady pedaling, and does it matter if the Zone 2 efforts are broken up by descents? Just trying to figure out if I always have to be on the road for Zone 2 / Endurance training, or if I can mix it up with some XC-type riding as well.

  14. #639
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    slc
    Posts
    17,855
    Quote Originally Posted by smmokan View Post
    Here's a "tag-on" question to what I posted a page or two ago regarding splitting up Zone 2 training: how consistent does the riding have to be in Zone 2 for it to be beneficial? For instance, can I go for a regular trail ride at a slower pace and still get the endurance-based benefits? (For example, a 25 mile ride in the mountains where it's typically an hour climb, then a 15-20 min descent, and repeat) How does that compare to a standard road or gravel ride that's 2-3 hours of steady pedaling
    The tricky part of trail riding is not spiking your HR out of Z2 too long/too often. 5:50-9:00 touches on this:


    Quote Originally Posted by smmokan View Post
    does it matter if the Zone 2 efforts are broken up by descents?
    Probably not much if your HR goes down while descending. Personally, if we're talking trail descents I have a hard time not hammering and am probably junk miles-ing myself in the process, but fuck it, that's the fun part of riding and the point of riding is having fun. BHD nails it at 0:55

  15. #640
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    6,257
    Anyone in here using the Basecamp program? My local training group shut down this year (Ride Louder) so I switched to theirs (Tim Cusick/Rebecca Rusch), and it's been... more involved. I'm liking it but man, they have weekends with 2-3 hour trainer rides each day. My max on a trainer (Tacx Neo Bike) is 1.5 hours. I could probably stand 2 hours with a gun to my head, but no way 3.
    I'm so hardcore, I'm gnarcore.

  16. #641
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Tahoe-ish
    Posts
    3,139
    A friend of mine regularly does 5 hours on the trainer. It all depends on whether you're sufficiently motivated to do the work necessary to get the results you want. There is no substitute for long rides.
    ride bikes, climb, ski, travel, cook, work to fund former, repeat.

  17. #642
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    slc
    Posts
    17,855
    Quote Originally Posted by Dantheman View Post
    Speaking of Andy Galpin, he's been on Huberman and Peter Attia's podcast recently and the guy is just an absolute fountain of knowledge. Highly recommend checking those out.
    Self-quoting here in case anyone missed it. Check out these interviews, seriously.

    Quote Originally Posted by climberevan View Post
    A friend of mine regularly does 5 hours on the trainer.
    I can't even fathom that, nuts.

  18. #643
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    SLCizzy
    Posts
    3,553
    Weed and podcasts are my training tip for 1hr+ trainer rides.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  19. #644
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    slc
    Posts
    17,855
    Quote Originally Posted by joetron View Post
    Weed and podcasts are my training tip for 1hr+ trainer rides.
    Obviously, though I'm partial to shows and movies. But, 5 hours? Good God.

  20. #645
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Tahoe-ish
    Posts
    3,139
    Yeah, he's a lunatic. Now 52, he is only doing 2 or 3 of those "extreme" ironman-length triathlons a year. Last year he did Patagoniaman and Swissman, and has done a bunch of others. I climbed Denali with him in 2006, and he's only gotten stronger. Also he works full time as an electrical lineman, often 24h straight through storms.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Screenshot_20230201-092309_Strava.jpeg 
Views:	29 
Size:	38.4 KB 
ID:	445532
    ride bikes, climb, ski, travel, cook, work to fund former, repeat.

  21. #646
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Tahoe-ish
    Posts
    3,139
    Quote Originally Posted by Dantheman View Post
    Self-quoting here in case anyone missed it. Check out these interviews, seriously.
    That series (ongoing) is incredible. Not many people will have the patience to listen to 6x 4 hour episodes of deep diving on weight training, to but I'm certainly learning a lot.

    Ms CE and I are using this new knowledge to design our gym routine to fit with our endurance focus, and many of the principles are easy to apply. Few, hard reps for strength not hypertrophy; few but compound lifts; longer rests between sets (the hardest one for us).

    Most of the weight training programs I've run across are based on at least 3 days a week, however, and frankly we're not willing to give it that, especially as bike season approaches. I'd really like to have a single workout routine that I can do 2x/week and cover all the bases for general strength (more focused on health and injury prevention than specific bike strength). Do you guys think that's reasonable? I've been doing that for the last couple of months and it's fine, but I'm certainly not motivated to also ride 2h on gym days, and it takes close to 2h to do the routine I've come up with, especially with all of the 3+min rests between 5 rep sets.

    While I'm actually at the gym it's tempting to become a gym rat and get super strong, but then I think about what really turns my crank (huge bike rides with insane amounts of climbing) and I think building chest and back muscles makes no sense. Training time (recovery, really) is limited, so we all have to apportion it wisely.
    ride bikes, climb, ski, travel, cook, work to fund former, repeat.

  22. #647
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,486
    5 hours on a trainer is def borderline lunacy (that I fully support).

    But 5 hours at 12mph??? That's wild.

  23. #648
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Tahoe-ish
    Posts
    3,139
    Quote Originally Posted by kathleenturneroverdrive View Post
    5 hours on a trainer is def borderline lunacy that I fully support. But 5 hours at 12mph? I'm genuinely confused by what your buddy is up to.
    On a smart trainer in ERG mode speed is really just a function of gear choice. He's prob just using the small ring bc it's quieter or whatever.

    His average power puts it right in Z2, so he's doing base miles.
    ride bikes, climb, ski, travel, cook, work to fund former, repeat.

  24. #649
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    slc
    Posts
    17,855
    Quote Originally Posted by climberevan View Post
    I'd really like to have a single workout routine that I can do 2x/week and cover all the bases for general strength (more focused on health and injury prevention than specific bike strength). Do you guys think that's reasonable?
    To phrase it as maths, 3x/wk>2x/week>>>0x/wk. You could certainly do a lot worse than 2x/wk.

    Quote Originally Posted by climberevan View Post
    and it takes close to 2h to do the routine I've come up with, especially with all of the 3+min rests between 5 rep sets.
    What's that routine? There's probably some fat to be trimmed there since all you really need to be doing is legs/push/pull. Also, this might be more difficult for you given your job, but you could try the micro workout strategy and get some of your workout done throughout the day, especially upper body stuff.

    Quote Originally Posted by climberevan View Post
    While I'm actually at the gym it's tempting to become a gym rat and get super strong, but then I think about what really turns my crank (huge bike rides with insane amounts of climbing) and I think building chest and back muscles makes no sense.
    Remember, this is also about the long game. Galpin's twin study and the other study he cited of lifelong Norwegian XC skiers is pretty unequivocal--if you don't lift by the time you are collecting Social Security you will have the same amount of muscle and strength as non-exercisers, and maybe even less! Sure, you'll be much more aerobically fit which is super important, but you'll be just as susceptible to dropping below critical strength thresholds if you have an extended period of inactivity due to injury or illness.

    Quote Originally Posted by climberevan View Post
    Training time (recovery, really) is limited, so we all have to apportion it wisely.
    Per Galpin, training for power has a much lower recovery load that training for pure strength, so consider biasing your program in that direction.

  25. #650
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Boulder
    Posts
    6,044
    Quote Originally Posted by Dantheman View Post
    Just noticed this edit. Probably not a correct use of woven bone, but Pickles post seems to say that while running will improve BMD and bone strength it's lower quality bone than you'll get from lifting.
    Only that the stimulus is going to produce an adaptation specific to that stimulus. If the goal is traumatic injury prevention from multiple or disparate modes, then multi-direction loading and / or strength training is better for that benefit.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •