Results 626 to 650 of 920
-
01-28-2023, 09:28 AM #626
-
01-29-2023, 09:58 AM #627
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.
-
01-30-2023, 06:31 AM #628Registered User
- Join Date
- Feb 2007
- Location
- Colorado
- Posts
- 3,004
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
-
01-30-2023, 10:07 AM #629
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.
-
01-30-2023, 10:29 AM #630Registered User
- Join Date
- Feb 2007
- Location
- Colorado
- Posts
- 3,004
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
-
01-30-2023, 11:56 AM #631
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.
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.
-
01-30-2023, 12:49 PM #632Registered User
- Join Date
- Feb 2007
- Location
- Colorado
- Posts
- 3,004
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
-
01-30-2023, 01:28 PM #633
-
01-30-2023, 01:39 PM #634Registered User
- Join Date
- Feb 2007
- Location
- Colorado
- Posts
- 3,004
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
-
01-30-2023, 01:51 PM #635
-
01-30-2023, 01:56 PM #636Registered User
- Join Date
- Feb 2007
- Location
- Colorado
- Posts
- 3,004
I asked our new AI overlord about it and this was the response:
Originally Posted by ChatGPT"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
-
01-30-2023, 03:02 PM #637
-
01-30-2023, 03:19 PM #638
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.
-
01-30-2023, 03:31 PM #639
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:
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
-
01-30-2023, 04:57 PM #640
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.
-
01-30-2023, 06:38 PM #641one of those sickos
- 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.
-
01-31-2023, 08:34 PM #642
-
01-31-2023, 09:09 PM #643
Weed and podcasts are my training tip for 1hr+ trainer rides.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
-
02-01-2023, 10:02 AM #644
-
02-01-2023, 10:26 AM #645one of those sickos
- 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.
ride bikes, climb, ski, travel, cook, work to fund former, repeat.
-
02-01-2023, 10:39 AM #646one of those sickos
- Join Date
- Oct 2005
- Location
- Tahoe-ish
- Posts
- 3,139
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.
-
02-01-2023, 11:43 AM #647Registered User
- 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.
-
02-01-2023, 12:00 PM #648one of those sickos
- Join Date
- Oct 2005
- Location
- Tahoe-ish
- Posts
- 3,139
ride bikes, climb, ski, travel, cook, work to fund former, repeat.
-
02-01-2023, 12:13 PM #649
To phrase it as maths, 3x/wk>2x/week>>>0x/wk. You could certainly do a lot worse than 2x/wk.
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.
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.
Per Galpin, training for power has a much lower recovery load that training for pure strength, so consider biasing your program in that direction.
-
02-01-2023, 12:54 PM #650
Bookmarks