paultucker1007 Member

Reads to me like you just want someone to pat you on the head and tell you your plan is brilliant, or say nothing at all. <nothing>

Sure, and I haven't advocated restricting anyone's freedom to do so. My question was, I guess, why do people not self-censure when it should be painfully obvious to them that other than n=1 anecdote, they have nothing to contribute? Further, although you haven't explicitly implied that the following is my view - freedom to…

Only to a marketing person who doesn't understand how to choose an appropriate sample size, I suspect.

Well, I know absolutely nothing about marketing. How interested might you be on my views as to whether TV ads or Search Engine Optimization is the best use of a finite budget?

Oh yes, I agree everyone is and should be free to express an opinion. I too have an opinion, but as I'm not a dietitian, scientist or similar (who would comprise the 200+ better qualified people) I can't imagine why anyone else would be interested in it. Which makes me wonder why I'm posting this. Oh well, live and learn

I'm somewhat confused as to why a marketing manager who confessedly isn't very good at explaining things feels the need to announce his opinion on a public forum. A hundred better qualified people than him have expressed his exact opinion; a hundred better qualified people have expressed a different opinion.

Your Garmin GPS watch is just lovely

Er, if you weigh it before you cook it, use the pre-cooked weight; if you weight after you cook it, use the post-cooked weight. Next up; quantum chromodynamics

I can understand this point of view. For example, when I decided that I needed to post on this thread, I felt that I simply couldn't rely on using a computer that was designed and made with knowledge and processes that I didn't experience myself. Instead of spending some money at my local electronics retailer, I spent 5000…

I simply can't believe that not one scientist, dietician or even (cough) nutritionist has ever thought of running a similar experiment, possibly in a controlled setting with a large group of people. Bravo to the OP for conceiving of something that the rest of humanity overlooked.

Well, I for one look forward to the results of an n=1 non-blinded experiment conducted by someone with no science background and a vested interest in the outcome. I really feel that this will add greatly to the collective knowledge of humanity.

Not really. Most people just go faster and burn more calories, rather than stay at the speed they started at.

How, exactly, will squats and deadlifts reduce the circumference of the OP's thighs? If they do anything at all, they'll make the muscle bigger, the fat will still be there and the circumference will increase.

If you need someone to motivate you, you've already failed

9,469. No alcohol either.

Well, if the clocks go forward, you lose a bit less on that day, and a bit more the following day. And vice versa for when they go back. Obviously.

It comes off at midnight exactly. If you happen to fly over the international date line whilst in deficit, you've wasted that day.

Well, as it happens I have. Strength is not a limiting factor for endurance cycling. I must admit, I'm not quite sure how where I have or have not cycled affects human biology and/or the fundamental laws of the universe - I had no idea I was so powerful. I'm planning to do the Zoncolan in August - do you think this will…

One study isn't conclusive; indeed that study has been criticized for a small sample size, lack of blinding and questionable outcome measures. That isn't to say that strength training definitely doesn't improve cycling economy obviously, just that to the best of my knowledge the studies that support it aren't really…

To a point yes, but increased neuromuscular strength won't help your body transport and use more oxygen.

Practically everyone is a bit too fat to win the Tour, including me. Its hardly an insult.

There are studies that show many things, some of which contradict other studies. The evidence is equivocal, but as I understand it the current preponderance of evidence is that: 1. Strength training almost certainly does not help well-trained endurance cyclists (in fact, the extra weight will likely hinder them on hills)…

Anyone using a 53x21 on a 20% grade is dumb. In realistic situations with appropriate gearing, the limiting factor is almost always the aerobic system.

Strength isn't a limiting factor for (endurance) cycling. If you have enough leg strength to walk upstairs you have enough leg strength to win the Tour de France. What you don't have is the aerobic engine, and you're probably a bit too fat.

No, you're not. You can tell because your weight is about the same.

At 20% fat, cut for a few months then bulk I'd say.

No, its widely known. The non-conversion of carbs to fat, whilst technically true, is somewhat misleading. As I understand it The body will generally use whatever it has to hand to fuel itself (except in extremely high intensity exercise where it requires carbs). So (simplistically) if you're in a calorific surplus, and…

Er, thanks?

There is only one exercise that will target flabby arms: 1. Start with your head upright in the normal position 2. Rotate your head approximately 20 degrees to the left 3. Return to centre 4. Rotate your head approximately 20 degrees to the right 5. Return to centre 6. Repeat approximately 3 times And that's it. Will burn…

Can you see yourself eating that way for the next 20 years? If not, then the answer to your question is no.