# Do you require fewer calories as you get fitter?



## Globalti (16 Apr 2012)

Does being fit reduce your calorific requirement as the body becomes more efficient?

I ask because it seems to become more and more difficult to control the waistline as I become fitter. That said, I suppose it may also be because as you age and testosterone levels diminish you have more of a tendency to put on fat.


----------



## black'n'yellow (16 Apr 2012)

exercise increases your need to replace calories - but the trick is not to over-do it, while replacing with the right kind of food. Riding a bike is no substitute for a good, controlled diet, unfortunately...


----------



## Manonabike (16 Apr 2012)

In theory the more muscle you have the more calories you burn while exercising. Muscle tissue uses calories and fat doesn't.

I wonder if you hit the wall with your exercise routine. If you do the same routine for a while your body will get used to it and will not burn as much calories. Best thing to do is to change things.... I used to do sessions very fast but shorter or slower but much longer.

If you burn say 250 kcal in one hour of cycling when you are 15 stones (to say something) then you will burn less calories in one hour of cycling when you are 12 stones for example.


----------



## black'n'yellow (16 Apr 2012)

your effort level also influences the amount of calories burnt - not just the duration. It's wrong to simply say that someone lighter would burn less calories for the same duration.


----------



## PK99 (16 Apr 2012)

Globalti said:


> Does being fit reduce your calorific requirement as the body becomes more efficient?
> 
> I ask because it seems to become more and more difficult to control the waistline as I become fitter. That said, I suppose it may also be because as you age and testosterone levels diminish you have more of a tendency to put on fat.


 
there is certainly a tendency to over eat when fit- especially if you avoid eating straight after exercise. 
Hard outing + no recovery snack = carbohydrate cravings later

My routine after a tough ride is a glass of milk with mashed banana as soon as I get in and a tuna or peanut butter sandwich after my shower


----------



## HLaB (16 Apr 2012)

I'm no dietician but now I'm fitter I think I can go longer/faster on the same calories, it just makes the cake taste sweeter  The body still needs calories and probably the same if not more to sustain a higher level, iirc Mark Beumont required an enormous amount of calories for his round the world. Somewhere, there'll be the correct balance of intake/output for you and what you want to achieve but I can't really can't comment there.


----------



## screenman (16 Apr 2012)

Theory has it that you need less calories the lighter you are, it seemed to keep my weight loss going.


----------



## amaferanga (16 Apr 2012)

Manonabike said:


> If you burn say 250 kcal in one hour of cycling when you are 15 stones (to say something) then you will burn less calories in one hour of cycling when you are 12 stones for example.


 
This is wrong. It comes down to power output. The fitter you get, the higher your power should get, so provided you are cycling at the same RPE then the higher the calorie burn.

Maybe you're getting confused with BMR - fatter you are the higher your BMR (by about 250kCal in your 12 stone/15 stone example).


----------



## Globalti (16 Apr 2012)

My question concerns calorie use while sedentary while being very fit. I based it on the idea that daily life (stairs, walking, etc) uses less calories if you are fit.

I certainly find two-week business trips to Africa much less tiring now that I'm fitter.


----------



## black'n'yellow (16 Apr 2012)

Power burns calories - not 'fitness'. You should not need to replace any calories after walking up the stairs, if that's what you mean - your regular meal intake should take care of that.


----------



## machew (16 Apr 2012)

However an 18st man will use more calories walking up the same set of stairs then a 16st man


----------



## amaferanga (16 Apr 2012)

machew said:


> However an 18st man will use more calories walking up the same set of stairs then a 16st man


 
Not necessarily though if the 16 stone man does it quicker  

Same with cycling - Pro cyclist burn way more calories per hour when racing than some 18 stoner riding at 10mph.


----------



## ColinJ (16 Apr 2012)

machew said:


> However an 18st man will use more calories walking up the same set of stairs then a 16st man


But Globalti said 'fitter' not 'thinner'. He isn't fat and I remember him saying that he never has been.


----------



## Manonabike (16 Apr 2012)

amaferanga said:


> This is wrong. It comes down to power output. The fitter you get, the higher your power should get, so provided you are cycling at the same RPE then the higher the calorie burn.
> 
> Maybe you're getting confused with BMR - fatter you are the higher your BMR (by about 250kCal in your 12 stone/15 stone example).


 
Assuming the same speeds, same terrain then that is correct. Sorry I didn't make it more clear.... I wasn't counting on some people being so.....


----------



## fossyant (18 Apr 2012)

You've all missed it. 

It's AGE. Fitter or not, as you age you tend to put weight on easier. Just harder to keep it off. Anyone over 30 look out.


----------



## ColinJ (18 Apr 2012)

fossyant said:


> You've all missed it.
> 
> It's AGE. Fitter or not, as you age you tend to put weight on easier. Just harder to keep it off. Anyone over 30 look out.


I don't know how much of that is inevitable. I think a lot of it is due to the fact that people tend to become less active as they get older. 

It's the same for fitness - people used to talk about an inevitable steep decline beyond 35-40 but there are plenty of people showing that the decline need not be anywhere near that steep if you work hard to stay fit. Obviously a good 25 year old rider will beat a good 65 year old but a great 65 year old would possibly beat a good 25 year old! 

There are some riders in their 70s who go under the hour for a 25 mile TT, something which many of us will never achieve at any age!


----------



## fossyant (18 Apr 2012)

I know from personal experience, it's been harder to keep the weight off since I was 30.  It's come back down again since my late 30's but I quickly yoyo back up a few kg's - I know having 12 days off the bike over Easter, eating and drinking has piled a few kg's on. It will be off though within the month, just in time for another two weeks eating and drinking. Oh well.


----------



## ColinJ (18 Apr 2012)

I suppose it is easier to hold on to muscle mass when you have a young man's testosterone level! With more muscle, you'd naturally be burning more energy and so would keep weight off more easily.

I still think that if an older man like me worked hard enough to keep the muscles though, then the weight would be easy to keep off. I can put on weight quickly, but if I could be bothered to make the effort, I could lose 2-3 pounds a week.

Ah - I am agreeing with you! As we age, we will lose muscle unless we work at not losing it, and if we do lose muscle mass then our metabolisms slow and we pile on the fat.


----------



## VamP (18 Apr 2012)

It definitely gets harder to get trim when you get older. I used to get to my racing weight just by training - no dieting limitations - in my twenties. Now, in the forties, I have to watch what I eat like a hawk.

I don't think my muscle mass is any different now, than it was in my twenties though. I just think my metabolism has slowed up, and my energy conversion efficiency has improved.

Wait, I have a new theory, I enjoy food a lot more now than I did back then


----------



## HLaB (19 Apr 2012)

So far I'm bucking the age/weight thing. I was never heavy but when I left school, 20years ago I was 11&1/2 stone, when I was living in Ireland about 10 years later (drinking more) my peak was somewhere around 10&1/2 stone and now in my mid 30's I weigh 9&1/2 to 10stone (I'm far more active).


----------



## fossyant (19 Apr 2012)

HLaB said:


> So far I'm bucking the age/weight thing. I was never heavy but when I left school, 20years ago I was 11&1/2 stone, when I was living in Ireland about 10 years later (drinking more) my peak was somewhere around 10&1/2 stone and now in my mid 30's I weigh 9&1/2 to 10stone (I'm far more active).


 
No you are a bean pole !


----------



## srw (20 Apr 2012)

HLaB said:


> So far I'm bucking the age/weight thing. I was never heavy but when I left school, 20years ago I was 11&1/2 stone, when I was living in Ireland about 10 years later (drinking more) my peak was somewhere around 10&1/2 stone and now in my mid 30's I weigh 9&1/2 to 10stone (I'm far more active).


Some people get on your wick...

I am currently, at the age of late youth (make of that what you will) the lightest I have ever been as an adult. When I got married, 19 years ago, I lost about a stone to get to the weight I am now (see signature).


----------



## Andrew_Culture (25 Apr 2012)

My appetite has certainly risen since I've started the very feeble six miles to work and back each day, but I've also cut out a lot of questionable foods. My brother in law is a fast marathon runner goes at food like the government are going to start taxing it, er, 'more'.


----------



## smutchin (25 Apr 2012)

amaferanga said:


> the fatter you are the higher your BMR (by about 250kCal in your 12 stone/15 stone example).


 
True, but AIUI a 15 stone slob will have a lower BMR than a 15 stone bodybuilder.

d.


----------

