Cyclists v Tummy fat( Power/weight ratio implications)

General cycling advice ( NOT technical ! )
User avatar
Cugel
Posts: 6325
Joined: 13 Nov 2017, 11:14am

Re: Cyclists v Tummy fat( Power/weight ratio implications)

Post by Cugel »

Mick F wrote:
Cugel wrote: mesomorph (thick boned, large muscled): finger and thumb ends don't meet by a significant gap.
endomorph (pear-shaped with medium bone and muscle size): finger and thumb just meet.
ectomorph (thin bones, long muscled often thin): finger and thumb overlap.
I don't understand this about fingers and thumbs.

Please explain.


Wrap your thumb and forefinger of one hand around the wrist of your other arm.

The doesn't-meet, just-meets or overlaps result is a measurement of the ratio of your bone thickness to bone length. This ratio is an indicator of your body type as described in the meso, endo and ectomorph taxonomy.

Endomorphs and ectomorphs have a greater tendency to accrue excess fat around the waist, including visceral fat around the liver, kidneys and other organs in that region. Mesomorphs tend to put on excess fat proportionally all over their body rather than disproportionally at their waist.

It's claimed by the medical fellows that putting on excess visceral fat is more dangerous to general health than putting fat on all over the body, as visceral fat is associated with the appearance of various ills including cancers, diabetes and heart conditions. In fact, fat is an essential body organ, not least as it stores energy for times of famine but, these days more importantly, because it's the main store for many essential vitamins and trace minerals. But the all-over-the-body kind of fat is said to be healthier than the visceral sort.

So, lads who poses a prominent waist fat but are less fat-clad elsewhere may be in greater danger of developing some illness or other. The medics say it's therefore more important to reduce such belly fat than it is to reduce BMI, for example.

Or so I read.

Cugel
“Practical men who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence are usually the slaves of some defunct economist”.
John Maynard Keynes
User avatar
bigjim
Posts: 3245
Joined: 2 Feb 2008, 5:08pm
Location: Manchester

Re: Cyclists v Tummy fat( Power/weight ratio implications)

Post by bigjim »

I read a comment somewhere from some consultant "If you want to live to 90, don't be thin at 70". Works for me. :)
I've come across very thin people who are waiting for an operation and the docs are waiting for them to put some weight on before they will operate. The body needs the fat in order to aid recovery evidently.
gbnz
Posts: 2909
Joined: 13 Sep 2008, 10:38am

Re: Cyclists v Tummy fat( Power/weight ratio implications)

Post by gbnz »

briansnail wrote:Does any aspiring Biochemist know why/can explain the following ?. Cyclists can be as skinny as skeletons. Excepting the cyclists Achilles heel. Our Tummies. Fat is one fuel supply and tummies the depot..... Enjoy. No one escapes"


Have to say I've a six pack.

It's remarkable that one side effect of starting to do 500+ sit ups' as the minimum during each gym visit since 2016(4-5 visits per week), has been the development of a six pack :? Never used to have a six pack, when I only did a token 50-100 situps' 2-3 occ's per week :?

Though need to get rid of the flab, starting Monday (NB. The final 100 days of 2019). Back to the diet of beans, peas, lentils, white fish et al, banning the sugar and fat.
User avatar
fausto copy
Posts: 2815
Joined: 14 Dec 2008, 6:51pm
Location: Pembrokeshire

Re: Cyclists v Tummy fat( Power/weight ratio implications)

Post by fausto copy »

Mick F wrote:
fausto copy wrote:Edit: my finger and thumb on Cudgels's test are miles apart, so I can proudly say I'm a mesomorph - sounds cool 8)
I still don't get it.

How can your finger and thumb NOT be touching?



You've either got pianist's hands or skinny wrists Mick. :wink:
User avatar
bigjim
Posts: 3245
Joined: 2 Feb 2008, 5:08pm
Location: Manchester

Re: Cyclists v Tummy fat( Power/weight ratio implications)

Post by bigjim »

gbnz wrote:
briansnail wrote:Does any aspiring Biochemist know why/can explain the following ?. Cyclists can be as skinny as skeletons. Excepting the cyclists Achilles heel. Our Tummies. Fat is one fuel supply and tummies the depot..... Enjoy. No one escapes"


Have to say I've a six pack.

It's remarkable that one side effect of starting to do 500+ sit ups' as the minimum during each gym visit since 2016(4-5 visits per week), has been the development of a six pack :? Never used to have a six pack, when I only did a token 50-100 situps' 2-3 occ's per week :?

Though need to get rid of the flab, starting Monday (NB. The final 100 days of 2019). Back to the diet of beans, peas, lentils, white fish et al, banning the sugar and fat.

Well I've got a six pack. Just keep it covered up with some fat. No good getting it cold.
francovendee
Posts: 3408
Joined: 5 May 2009, 6:32am

Re: Cyclists v Tummy fat( Power/weight ratio implications)

Post by francovendee »

Tummy Fat seems to come with age. This was pointed out to me last week when seeing my doctor. I'd mentioned that although I'm not overweight I asked why I have a fat tummy. He walked back to his laptop, read out my birth date, looked at me and said there was nothing he could do to change that. :lol:
User avatar
Cugel
Posts: 6325
Joined: 13 Nov 2017, 11:14am

Re: Cyclists v Tummy fat( Power/weight ratio implications)

Post by Cugel »

francovendee wrote:Tummy Fat seems to come with age. This was pointed out to me last week when seeing my doctor. I'd mentioned that although I'm not overweight I asked why I have a fat tummy. He walked back to his laptop, read out my birth date, looked at me and said there was nothing he could do to change that. :lol:


Over the years I've read various New Scientist articles that, broadly, suggest that the accumulation of too much visceral fat as we age can be reduced by dietary habits. Alas, my memory is not full concerning these various articles but I do seem to recall that the general point was: eat less carbohydrates, especially the refined and sugary type found in processed foods. Eat more whole foods - less/not processed with a greater proportion of fats and proteins, not to mention the various essential vitamins and trace "minerals".

Serious exercise (trying very hard indeed, on a regular basis) was also a factor in keeping down the visceral fat. I try to blow up on at least 5 climbs a week. :-)

Personally I try for this - as far as possible in the world of modern foodstuffs. The closest I come to processed fud is pizza once in a blue moon (and chocolate of the dark kind). In West Wales it's easy to find small producers of many good foodstuffs, though. CIty dwellers will struggle, I imagine, to avoid the not-so-supermarkets and their various packaged goos and slops.

When a racing fellow 271 years ago, I was exactly one stone lighter (12 st rather than my present 13 st). My waist size has increased from 32" to 34" but most of that extra stone is in a slightly thicker layer of body fat all over. There's no tum-bulge. No sixpack either and never has been - apart from once when I went down to 11st 4 llbs, which also produced a period of constant minor illness - colds, styes in the eye and even a couple of warts! I need my body fat, I do. :-)

Cugel
“Practical men who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence are usually the slaves of some defunct economist”.
John Maynard Keynes
User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 56390
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Cyclists v Tummy fat( Power/weight ratio implications)

Post by Mick F »

Cugel wrote:
Mick F wrote:
Cugel wrote: mesomorph (thick boned, large muscled): finger and thumb ends don't meet by a significant gap.
endomorph (pear-shaped with medium bone and muscle size): finger and thumb just meet.
ectomorph (thin bones, long muscled often thin): finger and thumb overlap.
I don't understand this about fingers and thumbs.

Please explain.


Wrap your thumb and forefinger of one hand around the wrist of your other arm.

The doesn't-meet, just-meets or overlaps result is a measurement of the ratio of your bone thickness to bone length.
Not quite meet, or should I say they do, but I have to squeeze hard. Second fingers are easy.

Thanks. I understand now!
Mick F. Cornwall
simonhill
Posts: 5608
Joined: 13 Jan 2007, 11:28am
Location: Essex

Re: Cyclists v Tummy fat( Power/weight ratio implications)

Post by simonhill »

I too was initially confused because I read it as thumb and finger round waist.

Not sure if I was 'seeing' waist cos that was what we were talking about or was there an edit?
Psamathe
Posts: 18963
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Cyclists v Tummy fat( Power/weight ratio implications)

Post by Psamathe »

Cugel wrote:
Mick F wrote:
Cugel wrote: mesomorph (thick boned, large muscled): finger and thumb ends don't meet by a significant gap.
endomorph (pear-shaped with medium bone and muscle size): finger and thumb just meet.
ectomorph (thin bones, long muscled often thin): finger and thumb overlap.
I don't understand this about fingers and thumbs.

Please explain.


Wrap your thumb and forefinger of one hand around the wrist of your other arm.

The doesn't-meet, just-meets or overlaps result is a measurement of the ratio of your bone thickness to bone length. This ratio is an indicator of your body type as described in the meso, endo and ectomorph taxonomy.
....
Or so I read.

I'm uncertain about the different indications about meso, endo or ecto. In my own case my thumb and finger (any finger) will easily overlap round my write which is an indication I'm "ecto". But my shoulders are significantly broader than my hips suggesting I'm endo.

I accept it's a balance of factors not a single indicator and it's a number of indications to suggest body type but on two of the indicators (wrist and shoulder/hips) I'm at opposite ends of the classification.

Ian
User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 56390
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Cyclists v Tummy fat( Power/weight ratio implications)

Post by Mick F »

We also had the thread some few years back about being an "ape".
Do your outstretched arms and hands to your fingertips measure more than your overall height?

I'm an ape.
Mick F. Cornwall
thelawnet
Posts: 2736
Joined: 27 Aug 2010, 12:56am

Re: Cyclists v Tummy fat( Power/weight ratio implications)

Post by thelawnet »

tummy fat is surely a male thing, rather than a cyclist thing
User avatar
bigjim
Posts: 3245
Joined: 2 Feb 2008, 5:08pm
Location: Manchester

Re: Cyclists v Tummy fat( Power/weight ratio implications)

Post by bigjim »

thelawnet wrote:tummy fat is surely a male thing, rather than a cyclist thing

Not really
One of the strongest riders in my club has a good old belly on him. On a bike your belly hangs so probably not the best exercise for it. Running you can feel your belly moving and working.
User avatar
Cugel
Posts: 6325
Joined: 13 Nov 2017, 11:14am

Re: Cyclists v Tummy fat( Power/weight ratio implications)

Post by Cugel »

Psamathe wrote:
Cugel wrote:
Mick F wrote:I don't understand this about fingers and thumbs.

Please explain.


Wrap your thumb and forefinger of one hand around the wrist of your other arm.

The doesn't-meet, just-meets or overlaps result is a measurement of the ratio of your bone thickness to bone length. This ratio is an indicator of your body type as described in the meso, endo and ectomorph taxonomy.
....
Or so I read.

I'm uncertain about the different indications about meso, endo or ecto. In my own case my thumb and finger (any finger) will easily overlap round my write which is an indication I'm "ecto". But my shoulders are significantly broader than my hips suggesting I'm endo.

I accept it's a balance of factors not a single indicator and it's a number of indications to suggest body type but on two of the indicators (wrist and shoulder/hips) I'm at opposite ends of the classification.

Ian


These body types are just one perspective that might be useful when observing the larger-scale physical characteristics of human bodies. They're not very scientific although they can be used to determine likely additional characteristics to the main features of bone length-thickness ratio and other skeletal proportions, as well as the inclination to easily gain muscle or fat (or not to) etc..

Many people are a bit of a mixture of two of these types - which would tend to indicate that the types are, to some extent, arbitrary divisions.

But there does does seem to be a correlation between some the body-type features. Mesomorphs easily gain muscle, have a strong skeleton and therefore finds it easier to become athletic in various ways. Endomorphs easily gain fat and find it harder to gain muscle without gaining fat too. Ectomorphs really struggle to gain any kind of weight ....etc..

There does seem to be some sort of correlation between these body-type indicators and the greater or lesser tendency to develop visceral fat in dangerous quantities. Ectomorphs and endomorphs develop it most easily. Mesomorphs have a lesser tendency but will do so if they allow the approach of obesity. Some ectomorphs apparently remain very thin-looking yet develop dangerous amounts of visceral fat. The bulging tum is, for them, something of a danger signal.

Or so I read.

Cugel
“Practical men who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence are usually the slaves of some defunct economist”.
John Maynard Keynes
User avatar
Cugel
Posts: 6325
Joined: 13 Nov 2017, 11:14am

Re: Cyclists v Tummy fat( Power/weight ratio implications)

Post by Cugel »

thelawnet wrote:tummy fat is surely a male thing, rather than a cyclist thing


It's a human thing. Females can be similarly classified, with some body types moire easily developing the bulging tums via visceral fat.

Females have an overall variation in shape from that of otherwise similar males, though, which can often emphasis any endomorph (pear-shaped) features because all women tend to have wider hips and smaller rib cages compared to males with similar body types.

Various kinds of physical training, though, can reduce some of the meso, endo and ectomorphic features of an individual, male or female.

The ladywife is an ectomorph, with very slim wrists and ankles; long slim arms and legs; a very small waist. But via a lot of swimming, fell running and (just lately) cycling, her muscle size has increased, making her limbs look a bit less slim. Her shoulders also look wider because of the development of her upper back muscles. Her bottom looks slightly larger because of the development of her glutes from cycling. She still looks obviously ectomorph but with, now, a touch of the meso too.

If she gains significant weight (which she rarely does) it all appears as a stomach bulge. She would look no different elsewhere than when lighter in weight.

Cugel
“Practical men who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence are usually the slaves of some defunct economist”.
John Maynard Keynes
Post Reply