Starting out on the road not the gym

Hello,

I am starting to ride my bike partially to work and then catching a bus. I was used to riding a stationary bike in the gym then switched to recumbent and now will try to pair the recumbent bike at the gym with riding to work.

The ride to and from the bus stop is a little over a mile and then when I get to work a couple of blocks each way. At the gym I ride for 40 minutes, rouhgly 7 miles.

My problem is this, although I am new to riding on the road, I seem to have gained thighs and not really lost much else as my muscles have taken the weight away from fat. Although I feel a lot more fit, my clothes haven't really loosened up and in fact my thighs have become so muscular that I am needing to go up a pant size to accomodate them.

I am becoming frustrated and feel like I am doing all of this in vain. The main reason why I work out is to keep healthy and fit, but at the same time am just above my "healthy weight". My stats are 5' 5.5", 132-135 lbs and 24 years old. I have started eating healthier portions and more veggies, drinking almost 5 glasses of water and green tea (together make 5). I get around 6-8 hours of sleep. Help! I'm not going to stop riding because I love the way it makes me feel, but coming from being a teenage of being really thin (same height but a weight between 100-115) I can't take being over 130. My ideal weight is 120-125 but I don't know how.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tiki1682

The main reason why I work out is to keep healthy and fit, but at the same time am just above my "healthy weight". My stats are 5' 5.5", 132-135 lbs and 24 years old. I have started eating healthier portions and more veggies, drinking almost 5 glasses of water and green tea (together make 5). I get around 6-8 hours of sleep. Help! I'm not going to stop riding because I love the way it makes me feel, but coming from being a teenage of being really thin (same height but a weight between 100-115) I can't take being over 130. My ideal weight is 120-125 but I don't know how.

---

I am 5' 5 1/2" too, and my ideal weight is what you weigh right now- 132-135. I still have 10 pounds to lose to get there. ;)
If you ask me 120 is still too thin for someone your height to be.... they would have no muscle. "Ideal weight" should be what you are healthiest at, not what you "think" you look best at. ;) Most young people in their 20's have the idea that thin=healthy, and due to supermodel media brainwashing they see themselves as too heavy when they actually are not at all. Being thin is not a measure of fitness.
Good for you on wanting to be healthy, and getting lots of sleep and eating more veggies! Most people don't get enough sleep at all. Don't forget the carbs and protein though if you want to build muscle and have lots of biking energy. :) :p
Keep doing that good self-loving stuff! :p

Lisa, while I totally support your sentiment I'm going to gently disagree with your rather categorical statement that "120 lbs is too thin for someone 5'5" to be."

I'm 5'6" and currently 125. (FWIW I'm 27). Last summer I was 120 & looked and felt better, and I'm trying to get back down. Between biking, running, swimming and **weight training**, I'm pretty strong and I have some seriously big thighs (my bf and I have a running joke that I beat him up hills b/c my "thigh to weight ratio" is bigger than his, because my thighs are in fact an inch bigger than his. I'm alternately proud and a little mortified by this). I also have decidedly curvy hips/butt and that's where the extra five pounds is right now, and it's not muscle :D . When I was lighter I felt better not because my rear looked a little less jiggly in a bathing suit, but because I felt faster, stronger and more energetic.

I say this only to illustrate that we all have different frames and body types and depending on these factors, women of the same height can be healthy at a very wide range of weights. But I certainly don't mean by sharing this anecdote to encourage a sort of race to the bottom where thinner is always better.

My suggestion to the poster (I'm sorry, I've forgotten your name, promise I'll check after posting and remember next time) is to keep eating healthily (don't "diet"), and to add miles. Cycling burns **around** 40 cals per mile (varies greatly due to speed, wind, bike weight etc), running burns about 100 cals per mile. So if you can work in some longer rides or some runs regularly on weekends or after work, I think you'll start to see some weight loss, along with some gorgeous muscles :D !

Good luck. I think we've all been there (or :o are there).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lisa S.H.

I am 5' 5 1/2" too, and my ideal weight is what you weigh right now- 132-135. I still have 10 pounds to lose to get there. ;)
If you ask me 120 is still too thin for someone your height to be.... they would have no muscle. "Ideal weight" should be what you are healthiest at, not what you "think" you look best at. ;) Most young people in their 20's have the idea that thin=healthy, and due to supermodel media brainwashing they see themselves as too heavy when they actually are not at all. Being thin is not a measure of fitness.
Good for you on wanting to be healthy, and getting lots of sleep and eating more veggies! Most people don't get enough sleep at all. Don't forget the carbs and protein though if you want to build muscle and have lots of biking energy. :) :p
Keep doing that good self-loving stuff! :p

---

Lisa,
Thanks for the positive input. I think that I do have a poor perception of my body image because I have been exposed to fashion media most of my life. Probably doesn't help that I am working in the industry too where people are really thin and really tall. I will keep up at it. Just out of curiosity, do you ever feel like mainstream fashion companies that make clothes try to make people fit into them by being smaller than an average human?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by liza

Lisa, while I totally support your sentiment I'm going to gently disagree with your rather categorical statement that "120 lbs is too thin for someone 5'5" to be."

---

Actually, I said "If you ask me 120 is still too thin for someone your height to be"
which clearly identifies it as my opinion, not as a "categorical statement".

But other than that I agree with everything you said! ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tiki1682

.
... but coming from being a teenage of being really thin (same height but a weight between 100-115) ...

---

That was high school! I don't even want to think what I weighed then. I always say, "it's all downhill after high school" ;)


One point I don't think was addressed is what percentage of those pounds are composed of adipose tissue (fat) compared to lean muscle mass.

This is why I hate to see women get so focused on how much they weigh.

Considering how young you are I know it's going to be a few years before you really feel comfortable and confident enough to simply accept you body as it is, especially because society and the media are so focused on youth and thinness (did anybody see Victoria Beckham? How is that attractive?)
Just continue to stay active and eat right throughout your life. There are other things to worry about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tiki1682

Lisa,
Thanks for the positive input. I think that I do have a poor perception of my body image because I have been exposed to fashion media most of my life. Probably doesn't help that I am working in the industry too where people are really thin and really tall. I will keep up at it. Just out of curiosity, do you ever feel like mainstream fashion companies that make clothes try to make people fit into them by being smaller than an average human?

---

I grew up in the 1950's-70's and there was plenty of fashion media issues then too. For example, girls were made to feel "unclean" about their menstrual cycles, and we were urged by society to spray our private parts with nasty chemical deodorants, refrain from physical activities and flush ourselves out with perfumed douches to somehow become "pure and wholesome" again. Crazy! :eek: :rolleyes:
I have a Woman's Day magazine from the 1960's that describes how you should put a lighter shade of "leg makeup" on the fronts and backs of your legs and a slightly darker shade on the sides of your legs in order to make your legs look thinner. :eek: :eek: Imagine spending all that time on such nonsense! We'd never have any time for biking! ;)

Most women tend to agree that as we get older, we become more interested in living our lives well and less interested in what others think. :p
One thing to keep in mind is that the fashion media is not really interested in either our physical or emotional well being, rather they are primarily interested in getting our money. :cool:

You sound like you have a good head on your shoulders. May you enjoy biking for the rest of your life! (I wish I had not abandoned it for 37 years in between....but hey at least I'm biking again now at 53, and enjoying it even more than i did when I was a kid)

I'm just a fraction over 5'5" and my weight is running around 122-5. But I'm small-boned. I do keep track of my weight but if it is an issue, often it may be better to take measurements rather than weigh.

I'm 5'6" and 165 lbs. I'm definitely fatter than I should be (waist in wrong place for my body shape, "apple" belly developing, 33 inch waist). If I get back to having a 26-28 inch waist, I'll be a lot healthier. Even if I do get back to a healthier waist measurement, I'll never have a "normal" body shape. A 26" waist puts me at 38" hips or so, and 28" waist puts me at 40" hips. I have curvy calves, solid thighs, and a round butt. And since I'm not a lot over my healthy weight, it's entirely possible for me to lose fat and not lose weight. And really, if I'm 165 and mostly muscle, that's a win :)

I've also been as low as 110, in lifeguard training and the same height. Bad scene. I looked like a concentration camp victim, with a 24" (or less, I was scared to check) waist. Bones jutting out all over is *not* a good look for anyone. Especially not in a racing suit.

It's normal and healthy for your thighs to get bigger when you exercise them. Most pants aren't cut well for any woman's body, and the curvier you are the worse it is. Not that skirts are better... few of them are designed for women who have a real waist *and* real hips at the same time. I've got all these measurements because most off the rack clothes don't fit me, no matter how healthy or unhealthy my weight is :P.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lisa S.H.

Actually, I said "If you ask me 120 is still too thin for someone your height to be"
which clearly identifies it as my opinion, not as a "categorical statement".

But other than that I agree with everything you said! ;)

---

Well, the statement is categorical (regardless of whether or not you explicitly identify the view as your own) because you've applied the characterizations "too thin" and "having no muscle" to an entire category of persons (those 5'5"ish and 120 lbs), without admitting the possibility of exception. There are a lot of folks generally in that category and some of them (me) might object to being thus characterized. (Plus if you saw me, you wouldn't be tempted to call me those things).

However, I'm in complete agreement with the general view that it's much more important to be healthy and strong than it is to be thin.

I'm someone who's never had to worry about my weight. after I started seriously riding my bike I GAINED almost 10 pounds. A lot of it was in my abdomen, but most of it was in my legs. I filled out and my thin legs got
bigger and nicer. As I continued to ride and work out this year, I have lost a couple of those pounds and converted some of the fat to muscles in my shoulders and arms and back. So now I weigh about 122 lbs and i am 5' 3.5"

I think the fashion industry has not a clue as to what a woman should look at. THey use anorexic models to hawk their wares and as you all know the average american is rather overweight, there's a big disconnect there.

So like Lisa, I try not to pay attention!

I think Lisa's response was well-intended, and I agree w/the essence of her posts.

I'm 5'5" and right now, I'm about 120-125lbs. I have a very small frame, but I am muscular (in addition to riding, I row, hike, and lift weights).

To be honest, I feel comfortable anywhere from 120-140lbs. I don't weigh myself--go by which size clothes I'm wearing. Right now, I prefer being on the lower end of my range because I'm faster on the bike and can really power up hills. I love being strong and get a kick out of people making comments about my "guns." LOL. I'm 44 years old, for crying out loud, and I could do more push ups than most of my male coworkers. ;)

When I was running half- and full marathons, I weighed 105-110, and I looked like I was sick.

Weight is a personal thing. The bottom line is that most people don't care about your weight---they care about how you treat others. People will always find a flaw, if they are looking for one. Please yourself, not others, and be healthy!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tiki1682

My problem is this, although I am new to riding on the road, I seem to have gained thighs and not really lost much else as my muscles have taken the weight away from fat.

---

Part of the reason I started cycling was to get fitter - and part of that is losing weight.

I lost no weight in the first year, but my body changed shape - yes my thighs became kind've solid but my dress size went down. I have only seriously started losing weight this year (I'm in my thrid year of cycling).

Your body makes changes but they are not always the ones we proritise, and they don't always happen as quickly as we want. Take heart, the changes you want will happen, you just need to continue being consistent.

I bet your legs are gorgeous!!!! I would kill to have to change my pants because my legs are getting more muscular....That is my goal!!!!!

When I trained for my first half marathon, my hubby was always oogling at my legs and now that my distances are 3-4 miles, my legs aren't as shapely and now I kinda miss that attention. I am hoping I get the same results from riding that you have gotten.

My suggestion is to be proud of how your body is responding to how well you are treating it. Everyone is different it sounds like you are doing a great job being healthy pysically, but I little hard on yourself mentally.

Refocus your picture about yourself. You are a mature, athletic, strong woman.

I'm not crazy about my stretch marks, but they remind me of the two beautiful little girls that made them when they where growing in my belly. I just had to refocus my thinking.

I admire your dedication and accomplishment to diet and exercise.

Tiki, you're body has probably changed in the fat/muscle ratio moreso than weight and cardio wise, you are probably healthier than you were even a year ago. I have weight goals too but for now I'm keeping track of my fat % through my Tanita scale. This measures not only weight, but body fat. It's very encouraging to see that even though my weight hasn't changed much, my body fat is decreasing.

I'm one of those people that lose inches moreso than weight. I can lose 8 lbs and lose a total of 14 inches. :eek: I have a muscular build and have always weighed more than what the average is--but I also had a lower body fat for my height and weight.

The Tanita scale is available at Target, Bed, Bath & Beyond, Linens N Things and other stores. I really like it moreso than a regular scale. :)

I really like the idea of using a combination of how you feel, your performance and your overall health as indicators to your ideal weight. I think weight as a number is so much less important than taking all factors into consideration. So, your ideal weight may be far different than that of someone who is the same height and age - and may even change over time. Bone density and size, muscle mass, athletic performance goals all have bearing on what each person's ideal weight will be. Perhaps as you start working toward your ideal weight, you can gauge how you feel and if your overall performance goals are being met along the way. That way you can work towards a goal that is geared toward how you feel and how you perform and your overall wellness, and not so much a hard and fast number on the scale.

I have gone back and forth with the whole weight issue all my life. And I would be lying if I said I never bought into the idea of an "ideal weight". For most of my life, I have been pretty fit and active, but have at different times carried quite a bit more muscle (tried body building), less muscle (was a professional stunt woman), a lot less muscle (aspirations of being a professional kickboxer) and then a lot less muscle and a lot more fat (combo of aging and a very high stress work environment). Now, at the age of 44, I weigh in the neighborhood of 118 to 120 lbs. (I'm 5'3"). I rarely get on a scale and it makes me laugh when people are shocked to hear that I weigh 120 lbs. I suppose that seems heavy for my size (I'm small boned and have a small frame), but my body fat is around 12%, and my resting HR is about 38 BPM. It's funny because I think a lot of people view my physique as not very attractive. I have muscular legs and arms and I have begun to get pretty vascular. I sometimes notice people staring at me and not necessarily in a good way, but I don't really mind. I think I look just like I want to look, I am fit and strong, and more importantly I feel terrific. So, perhaps try to forget about the number on the scale. Your ideal weight is achieved when you feel great, perform great and are in excellent health.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by liza

Well, the statement is categorical (regardless of whether or not you explicitly identify the view as your own) because you've applied the characterizations "too thin" and "having no muscle" to an entire category of persons (those 5'5"ish and 120 lbs), without admitting the possibility of exception. There are a lot of folks generally in that category and some of them (me) might object to being thus characterized. (Plus if you saw me, you wouldn't be tempted to call me those things).
However, I'm in complete agreement with the general view that it's much more important to be healthy and strong than it is to be thin.

---

It's good to be able to express opinions here, and it's also good to be able to object to them! ;)

I am finding that I carry my weight differently than I did when I was in my early to mid-twenties. And I also care a lot less about what the scale says because I've never been in such good shape. I am 33 years old, 5'6", and about 148 lbs. I wear a size 8 in pants and a small/medium for tops. Here is what fascinates me...when I was in my early 20's, I weighed 130 and I wore a size 8. Now I realize that clothes sizing may have changed somewhat in the last 10 years or so, but if you look at pictures of me then and now, I actually look smaller now. I think I could stand to lose about 10 pounds, but in general, I'm pretty happy with how my body looks. That is definitely not something I would've said when I was in my 20's!

I have a co-worker who is my same height and says she weighs 125. If you put us side-by-side, we look about the same size. Except she has a chest and I don't, and my legs are bigger. That's over 20 pounds difference, so where is my body carrying that weight? My legs aren't THAT much bigger than hers. Interestingly, my mom worked for an OB/GYN for 15 years. She weighed all the patients, and she says she could never accurately guess someone's weight. She said sometimes she'd be shocked that someone weighed so much, or conversely, that they weighed so little. So I guess it's just a very individual thing. I know muscle weighs more than fat, so I'm giving cycling all the credit for my increased weight and apparently descreased size!

I am 5.5, and 147 #'s, and 40 (yikes to age and weight), before I started biking I had lost weight from 180 to 136 ish, then biking (and junk food) returned to my life, along with the 10#'s. I've maintained that 147ish for almost 1 1/2 years. I am very pear shaped, always have been. Was told once by a medical student that I had the perfect birthing hips and I was wasting them by not having any children. I do agree that society pushes the fashion to be pencil thin and the younger folks look up to that and feel they have to look like that to fit in to society. When I was in high school, I so wanted to be pencil thin. Now, I am happy with how I look, okay, I still wouldn't pass up a free trip to the surgeon for some lipo, I will be truthful. Sad though, those models that portray that look smoke and drink caffeine non stop and scant amounts of food all day, probably along with inplants and injections, how is that healthy? Every person has a different body structure, how they carry their weight, and how they perceive themselves. I think if you are getting out there and exercising, feel good about yourself, and are enjoying what you are doing, that should be what really matters.

Oh, to be a size 8 again. Sigh.

I'm 5'8" and weigh 155 or so. I would LOVE to see someone in the fashion industry design clothes that fit MUSCULAR women!

I had high hopes for things like LuluLemon and Athleta and Columbia and REI, since they portray themselves as "sports" clothes first I thought they'd fit over muscles. Uh, no. They fit over skinny lil' butts. Not powerful haunches like mine. Or broad shoulders like mine. And they gap at waists like mine.

I have had good luck with Horny Toad and Ibex, and Levis men's 560 and 501 jeans. And believe it or not, Coldwater Creek.

"Big" thighs are signs of POWER, which our current societal desperate-to-go-back-to-the-good-old-days fixation doesn't value. So fashion isn't going to support it.

Ignore the fanstasy-fixation that surrounds us! Love your power! Honor your biker's thighs!

My $.02 is that you need to learn how to measure your body fat. It's more about measuring your body than what you weigh, what and how much you eat and how you exercise. I would recommend getting calipers to measure your body fat over the digital body fat scales. They'll give you a different reading every time. I did the Body for Life program for four years and had great results.

I'm 5'5 and I weigh about 165. I say that with pride :) Yep, a whopping 165. I used to weigh 211 - then I changed my lifestyle. The biggest change I've made is accepting the fact that I weigh 165 and feeling like that's OK.

I'm not a competitive rider, I don't ride with a group, I ride just for me. I definately gain a few lbs when I have to take a break from riding due to work/family or most recently back injury. I also lose it again as soon as I get back into a regular schedule of riding.

For me, the fact that I eat healthy, that I'm fit (Yep, fit at 165.), I can run, I can breath, my cardio strength constantly surprises me and I know I can hop on a bike and ride for 30 - 50 miles @ 14mph avg speed and feel just fine - THAT's what it's all about :D !!!

Maybe - someday - I'll get down to 150 but who cares if I do or don't. (my lightest weight in my life was 135 and that was with diet and running EVERY DAY - it was exhausting to maintain!) My doc is so proud of me and gives me a big thumbs up every time I see her.

And you know what else? I feel sexy as hell. I'm curvy in all the right places and I love it! Yes - my thighs are disproportionately large and where I carry the remaining extra lbs - but I have sweet muscle definition and did I mention I'm HEALTHY??? LOLOL

42yo - I'm alllll about being healthy!! My vote is thin or not so thin - find a place where you can truly be happy with who you are, as you are. Who cares what other's think? Life's too short ;)

:D

Lady in white-
RIGHT ON! :p :p :p