|
|
CYCLING PERFORMANCE TIPS |
|
|
|
CYCLING PERFORMANCE TIPS |
|
This study compared elite runners to cyclists. Even though the cyclists included weight lifting in their off season training, it did not compensate for the lack of a "jarring" activity. The result? The cyclists, as a group, all had thinner bones than the runners, and more than half of them met medical criteria for low bone mineral density in some portion of their skeleton.
So if you do not regularly cross train, consider adding regular bone-stressing activities to your weekly routine:
As to diet, this blog suggests drinking an extra glass of milk a day isn't the answer and a better strategy might be an increase in the non dairy, high calcium foods in your diet.
Muscle strength peaks between ages 20 and 30, and then, without a regular exercise program, falls off. The increasing weakness is the result of both
Low lean body mass (muscle) is associated with higher all cause mortality at all ages. And if hospitalized, lower muscle mass is associated with an increased risk of complications and longer periods of hospitalization. Taking an active role in maintaining muscle strength will payoff later in life. Higher muscle mass and strength as you enter your 70s and 80s translates into better balance and mobility, a lower risk of falls and fractures, greater independence, and slower cognitive decline.
Focused resistance training will decrease the rate of muscle mass with aging. Twice a week works, three is a bit better. You don't need heavy weights, you are working to maintain muscle and not "bulk up". You should be able to do twenty repetitions but be working hard for number twenty-one. You can use the perceived level of exertion to determine the amount of resistance to use. Judge your effort. It should be "somewhat hard". (More on using a "feeling scale" to set resistance training levels.) Do 20 reps at this level of exertion - which should bring you to the point at which you would normally stop from fatigue.Proper technique is critical to prevent injury.
A study of men, 60 to 72, training with standard muscle resistance exercises, produced strength improvement equal to young adults. Another revealed that a group of 70 year olds, regularly training from age 50, had a muscle mass equivalent to a group of 28 year old students. I thought this NYT article was a nice summary of options and strategies. It shows you can turn things around within 3 months on a 3 times per week resistance training program that includes adequate dietary protein.
But you need more than just focused gym activity for maximum benefit. Studies have shown that sitting for long periods not only blunts the benefits of regular aerobic training (compared with those who reported sitting time less than 4 hours per day with high physical activity level, the group who sat for 8 or more hours per day experienced a 17% higher risk for early death and heart disease) but also blunted muscle cell growth and repair. Researchers found that subjects forced to take a break and walk around every thirty minutes increased the use of dietary protein (amino acids) to grow and repair muscle tissue much more efficiently than when they were only sitting. As a bonus, just two minutes of activity also improved how the body processed dietary carbohydrates (a decrease in insulin resistance).
And don't forget to review you daily protein intake as your muscles need adequate protein to respond to the resistance training. We know that older people absorb protein less efficiently, so you will need at least a 1.5 grams of protein per kilogram body weight per day (120 grams for a 165 pound person)which is higher than the publish RDA in many diet calculators and an amount well above what most older people typically consume.
For maximum muscle sparing benefit, you need both th adequate protein and resistance exercise. Just as exercise without adequate diet protein is less effective for muscle growth, increasing the protein in your diet without resistance exercise will not "force" muscle growth.
The following scenario demonstrates not only the importance of resistance exercise in preserving muscle mass but the benefits from starting now and not putting it off until you are "older" or experiencing the effects of sarcopenia.
First the graph demonstrating the benefit of a muscle preserving routine.
Muscle mass peaks in an athletes 20s and 30s - and then progressively declines as they age. The rate of loss, on average, is 0.5% per year in the 40s, 1-2% after age 50 years, and nearly 3% per year after age 60. But these are just averages and don't take into account those who work to minimize the damage. We know that physically active individuals - especially those doing resistance training - lose significantly less muscle mass and strength per year as they age, making the case for adopting a proactive muscle preserving routine in your 30s to keep a higher baseline as well as slowing the rate of loss.
An average man has from anywhere 77 to 110 lbs of muscle tissue. For this graph let's assume starting with 100 pounds of muscle in his 20s. The numbers in the prior paragraph are averages for muscle loss, but just averages. Studies show that with focused resistance training total muscle mass can be held steady until age 50 (and might actually increase). Let's assume that you can at least halve the average rate of loss if you are visiting the gym a couple times a week.
The scenarios.
A third factor to be considered in the progressive weakness experienced as we age may be a decrease in the maximal contractile force of the muscle.
This study compared the force of individual muscle cell contraction across 3 groups - 80 year old master athletes, a cohort of sedentary peers (also 80 y/o), and a third group of 23 year olds. Although it has been speculated that the regular training of master athletes blunts aging's effects on individual muscle cell performance, the data showed otherwise. "... when contractile force was normalized to cross sectional area ...both older (masters aged) groups did not differ, and the MA (masters) and NA (sedentary) were both approximately 45% weaker compared with younger volunteers."
How can regular exercise blunt this inexorable decrease an individual muscles functioning? Regular exercise minimizes the expected loss of "motor units" (MU), the basic contractile unit in an intact muscle, with aging. The motor unit is a single motor neuron and the several muscle fibers that respond when it is "fired". A single neuron can innervate several muscle cells, so a motor unit is not necessarily limited to a single nerve/muscle fiber but can be a single nerve/multiple cell unit.
This 2010 study revealed that the number of functioning motor units in the tibialis anterior of masters runners (approximately 65 y/o) was comparable to the values in recreationally active young volunteers (approximately 25 y/o), and significantly greater than healthy age-matched controls (approximately 65 y/o). "The estimated number of MU did not differ between masters runners and young, but MU number estimates were lower in the older sedentary group (91 +/- 22 MU) compared with the masters runners (140 +/- 53 MU) and young (150 +/- 43 MU)."
It confirmed that a greater preservation of the number of motor units rather than the functioning of individual contractile muscle cells offers another explanation for a Master Athlete's exceptional athletic performance.
Although the impact of aging on individual cells cannot be stopped, regular exercise provides us a tool to compensate by both maintaining more active muscle motor units and maximizing the size of individual muscle cells. So keep up those intervals and that weight work at the gym.
What about creatine? Two posts on Nutrition Facts are a nice summary of the potential for creatine supplementation in 2023. (post #1 and post #2) A few new recommendations continue to support the use of creatine as a supplement.
I'm sticking with my last recommendation. Creatine appears to be a safe supplement with significant potential for long term benefits at a very small cost. It may diminish the loss of muscle mass with aging as well as improve performance in those athletes involved in intense aerobic as well as resistance exercise.
On the horizon - a muscle fountain of youth? Recent work summarized here suggests we may have found a path to preventing the muscle loss of aging.
Prostaglandin E2 (PGE2), one of several molecules released by muscle tissue in response to the injury and stress of training, appears to play a key role in the recruitment of reparative stem cells and re-establishing nerve/muscle cell connections.
Mice genetically engineered without a receptor for prostaglandin E2 displayed noticeably slower muscle regeneration and injured muscle treated with a single dose of PGE2 experienced accelerated repair and recovery.
As we age, the enzyme 15-hydroxyprostaglandin dehydrogenase (15-PGDH) which degrades prostaglandin E2, increases in muscle tissue, decreasing the effectiveness of PGE2. Blocking 15-PGDH in old mice largely reversed age associated loss of muscle and within a month their muscle fibers looked like those of young mice.
Part of the beneficial effect of PGE2 is via facilitating nerve muscle connections. When older mice were treated with an inhibitor of 15-PGDH (which you will remember limits the effectiveness of PGE2) there was an increase in the nerve muscle connections. The net effect of an improvement in muscle cell repair and the increase in nerve/muscle fiber connections was a 15 - 20 % increase in strength.
A decrease in muscle strength (and mass) begins in our 20s and not even rigorous training will prevent this natural process. But now we have the promise of a fountain of youth for muscles which will decrease the morbidity of sarcopenia in the elderly as well as offering athletes of all ages another tool to maximize their performance.
If you are worried about dementia (another disease more common with aging), regular exercise decreases the risk. This blog post from Dr. Mirkin provides details as well as references. A few excerpts:
Scientists found that during exercise, older mice released an enzyme called GPLD1 from the liver into the bloodstream. This enzyme traveled to the blood vessels in the brain and helped break down a protein called TNAP. TNAP is associated with a weaker, leakier blood brain barrier. They speculated that by reducing TNAP, GPLD1 strengthened the blood brain barrier which in turn tamped down the effects of chronic inflammation.
Another possibility is the effect of a substance called Cathepsin B (CTSB) which is released by exercising muscles and has been shown to increase memory and grow nerves in mice, monkeys and humans (Cell Metabolism, June 12, 2016). Previous studies show that the higher the blood level of CTSB, the greater the improvement in fitness level and memory. Researchers showed that after just one week of exercise, a normal mouse's memory improved dramatically. Mice genetically engineered to be unable to produce CTSB gained no improvement in memory with exercise.
It's never too late to take advantage of the memory benefits of aerobic training. This article documents the neurologic benefits of aerobic training, but similar benefits have been found in the musculoskeletal and cardiovascular systems as well. The study compared 3 groups:
Of note, in a separate study (March 2026, Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry) researchers following more than 1,600 adults for about 12 years, found that people who followed a MIND diet (containing elements of both the Mediterranean and DASH diets) lost gray matter more slowly (by MRI) and had less enlargement of brain ventricles, both of which are signs of brain shrinkage with aging. Even a moderate improvement in diet score was associated with about 20 percent less gray matter loss, roughly equal to the brain aging about 2 to 2.5 years more slowly.
The bottom line is that a few small changes in weekly routine could pay off with significant long-term benefits. A couple of trips to the gym each week, an extra serving of vegetables each night, and adding one meatless meal per week could go a long way toward maintaining a clearer mind as you age.
As summarized by Dr. Mirkin "T-cells recognize foreign proteins on the surface of invading germs and cancers and engage the immune system ....to make antibodies to attach to and kill invading germs and cancer cells. Chemicals called cytokines activate T-cells to remove germs and cancer cells from your body."
He speculates that the weakening of the aging immune system is related to a reduction in thymic activity and the production of T cells, an effect that is blunted in regular cyclists."
The reasons behind the decreases in performance are a combination of 2 factors:
This graph (from The Journal of Applied Physiology) supports both the
"You can slow the loss of muscle fibers with aging, and can enlarge the remaining muscle fibers, by regular resistance exercise, but you cannot replace fibers once they are lost. In one study, older men gained more muscle strength by spending more time (more reps) lifting lighter weights, whereas younger men gained more muscle strength by lifting heavier weights through fewer reps. In younger men, doubling exercise volume (reps x weight per rep) by spending more time lifting weights produced limited added muscle enlargement. In older men, it resulted in much larger muscles and far more strength."
Regular training, stressing the CV and muscular systems will blunt the performance effects of aging and help keep you ahead of your peers.
Even though we have overwhelming data to support the longevity benefits of exercise, a recent study suggested that no more than 20% (and more likely less than 10%) of adults in the US exercise enough to have ameasureable impact on their health and fitness levels.
A dedicated training program effect is so effective that the aging process may be held at bay for up to a decade or more. For any specific age grouping, regular riders are 150% less like to die from all causes than their more sedentary peers.
A results of a study of the relationship between VO2max and longevity reinforced the positive relationship of fitness and overall mortality. Researchers followed 11,530 adults in the UK Biobank for a median of 14 years. Each annual increase of 1 mL/kg/min in estimated VO2max was associated with a 15% lower risk of developing cardiovascular disease and a 34% lower risk of cardiovascular death. And the relationship held in the other direction as well . As fitness declined, cardiovascular risk progressively increased. This graph shows that relationship with those with the largest decline in VO₂max having almost twice the risk of cardiovascular death and those with the largest improvement half the risk.
Why is exercise so effective in blunting the effects of aging? There are multiple possibilities.
To quote from a NYT comment on the paper. Scientists ... "decided ....to complete a full census of almost every molecule that (might) change when we work out. Study participants were "asked ....to complete a standard treadmill endurance test, running at an increasing intensity until exhaustion, usually after about nine or 10 minutes of exercise." Blood was drawn at time 0, immediately after this exertion, and again 15, 30 and 60 minutes later.
The scientists "...measured the levels of 17,662 different molecules. Of these, (the concentrations of) 9,815 - or more than half - changed after exercise, compared to their levels before the workout. Some increased. Others declined. Some gushed immediately after the exercise, then fell away, while others lingered in heightened or lowered amounts for an hour after the workout. The types of molecules ....ranged widely, with some involved in fueling and metabolism, others in immune response, tissue repair or appetite."
The explanation of positive health effects is almost certainly buried in this collection of 9815 organic molecules.
This study, commented on in the New York Times supports the concept of a blood born molecule that can impact the functioning of distant organs and cells.
This process of aging is common to all cells, thus any strategy that delays (or better yet, reverses) the telomere shortening process will extend cell life. This study suggests that aerobic training does just that.
A recent study suggests that aerobic exercise may not only delay telomere shortening, but reverse it!! A real fountain of youth! The study began with 124 non exercisers who were randomized to 4 groups.
To quote: "Researchers ....discovered that an enzyme called SIRT3 that is located inside mitochondria may protect mice brains from loss of their energy supply (Cell Metabolism, November 19, 2015). Normal mice who ran on a spinning wheel increased their levels of SIRT3 in nerve cells, maintained brain function with aging ..... A special group of mice that were genetically engineered to be unable to produce SIRT3 gained no benefit from running on a spinning wheel..... This implies that SIRT3 strengthens brains and that blocking SIRT3 prevents exercise from benefiting brain function."
This graph from a recent study demonstrates the effects of exercise in lowering blood sugar levels - in this case walking immediately after a meal versus waiting just 30 minutes.
We’ve long known that
But this study is solid evidence that time spent lifting weights provides its own independent survival benefit. It shows that greater muscle strength is associated with longer life - even after accounting for aerobic fitness.
Why might that be? The authors suggest that muscle strength is a marker of resilience. Aging is often marked by unpredictable illnesses, hospitalizations, and injuries. Each of these events can trigger rapid muscle loss, disability, and a downward spiral in health. If you start with more muscle - both in mass and quality - you have a larger reserve. In practical terms, you carry a bit more insurance when inevitable health setbacks occur.
Good aerobic fitness remains a cornerstone of healthy aging. But as we focus on improving VO2max, we should not forget the weight room. Building and maintaining muscle adds another layer of protection against the challenges that come with getting older.
Generally, we assume that taking some time off from aerobic activity, and the resulting impact on our metabolism is reversible when we get back to the gym or on the bike. This study suggests it's not so, especially for older adults.
So the old adage "use it or lose it" takes on a new level of significance for older adults in that once they lose it, it may be gone forever no matter what they do. So on that business trip, or family vacation, it is worth taking the time for a 30 to 60 minute daily walk or other activity that will boost your heart rate.
Original NYT article.
Traditionally, cardiac efficiency is measured in a physiology lab with a treadmill and EKG - using METS to quantitate exercise intensity. But there’s a simpler way that all of us can use - a smartwatch. A recently proposed metric, Daily Heart Rate Per Step (DHRPS), divides a person's total steps per day by their average resting heart rate over 24 hours.
Let's compare two people: both take 10,000 steps per day, but one has an average resting heart rate of 80 bpm (a healthy range), while the other’s is 120 bpm. The first person has a DHRPS of 0.008, while the second is at 0.012.
These authors found that people with a higher DHRPS (meaning they take fewer steps per heartbeat) were more prone to Type II diabetes, hypertension, heart failure, stroke, and heart attacks.
The exact number isn't as important as the underlying concept: the better your aerobic fitness and the healthier your cardiovascular system in general. If you want to improve your DHRPS, it is not just a matter of adding more steps per day, but rather begin stressing your heart with short bursts of increased aerobic stress during the say - for example run up, rather than walk, the stairs at home or increase your walking speed periodically on your daily walk.
A recent study published in Science suggests genetics may play a much larger role in longevity than previously believed, with researchers estimating that genetics determines at least half of our allotted lifespan. They feel that earlier studies underestimated the role of genetics as they included large numbers of deaths from infections, accidents, and other outside causes that modern medicine now prevents more effectively. When scientists removed these "extrinsic" causes of death from the analysis, the length of a peron's lifespan that was determined by inherited factors consistently approached 50 percent across multiple different populations.
That does not mean healthy habits no longer matter. Lifestyle, environment, and behavior still account for at least half of one's longevity. But now adoptinf a lifestyle of regular exercise and healthy diet habits shifts away from just living longer to avoiding the chronic diseases that would limit our ability to enjoy those years with friends, family, and grandkids.
These strategies were reinforced in a recent Outside blog article, "Age is irrelevant when it comes to fitness." Several quotes I enjoyed:
But even if you slacked off on those intervals, just keeping to a routine which includes regular aerobic activity will pay off with huge anti-aging dividends. How big? This recently published study provides some insight.
My take aways? Training strategies as you age should include:
Exercise, even small amounts, will improve overall health. A recent study suggested that mini-intervals, just short bursts (20 - 30 seconds) of vigorous intensity activity (quick stair climb; running for a bus) totaling up to as little as 3 minutes/day lowered the risk for major adverse cardiovascular events by almost 50%.
A pooled analysis of more than a half million men and women followed for an average of a dozen years found that maximum health benefit/lowest mortality rates were associated with 90 minutes a day of moderate intensity physical activity.
And for those looking for maximum benefits for minimal time spent, a recent study suggested 11 minutes of high intensity intervals (HIIT) would provide as much of an improvement in VO2max (previously shown to be associated with less chronic disease and mortality) as 5 times as many minutes riding in zone 2 (MICT ~60% VO2max). Graphic.
STEPS
Dr. Greger's blog details the relationship between total steps per day and overall health.
The metric used to calculate weekly amounts of activity in that pooled analysis was a MET. A met (Metabolic Equivalent of Task) is the ratio of the rate at which a person expends energy during the activity to the rate of energy expenditure at rest. And allows comparison of the energy used in differing physical activities. A few examples:
THE BIKING EQUIVALENT OF 10,000 STEPS
90 minutes of brisk walking is 4 mets x 90 min = 360 met-minutes of physical work.
Then calculating the time needed for 360 met-minutes of work riding a bike in Zone 2 would be 360 met-minutes/12 met = 30 minutes of riding.
Thus 10,000 steps = 30 minutes of cycling in Zone 2. So if you cycle 30 minutes a day - or 2 1/2 hours a week - you should be maximizing the health benefits of the week's exercise.
Before leaving the topic, the final question is how frequently does one have to do the 10,000 steps or ride the 30 minutes to gain this benefit? Daily? 4 out of 7 days? The answer is, I think, in these 2 studies:
This article is jargon heavy, but suggests using an RPE type scale (called the FS or "feeling scale") is the best intensity guide for resistance and aerobic training. A regular exercise program involves discomfort. Too much discomfort and commitment can quickly wanes. And this is more of a risk as you age.
For aerobic exercise we have the RPE scale based the perception of how hard we "feel" we are exerting. It correlates well with the objective measures of heart rate or power meter readings. And the study validated using a similar Feeling Scale (FS) (originally described as spanning -5 (I feel very bad) to +5 (I feel very good) with 0 being neutral) to self-regulate exercise intensity.
For resistance exercise, it has been suggested that we aim for an intensity (weight stress) of between 55% and 85% of our personal 1 repetition maximum (1RM). How does that translate into a FS rating for resistance exercise? Using a group of non exercisers, exerting to a level between feeling "good" (+3) to "fairly bad" (-1) matched up with resistance intensity between 55% to 85% of the 1RM.
For aerobic training, the same general relationship applies. An inensity between "good" (+3) and/or "fairly good" (+1) led to cardiovascular improvement.
This table shows the relationship between a traditional 10 point RPE scale and how you feel (although not the specific FS number scale referred to above).
This graph (from) illustrates the importance of fitness (VO2max) in maintaining an independent lifestyle for an additional 10 to 15 years at the end of life. Interval training appears to be the road to the proverbial "fountain of youth".
How can you take advantage of this new information?
But there is a third measure that is often missed. It is not how much force your muscles can produce, but how quickly they can produce it. This is the rate of force development. In simple terms, it is how fast your muscles can turn on and generate force. It matters when you catch yourself after a trip, get up from a chair, or regain your balance. Research shows this ability declines with age, often more than strength itself. In one study, rapid force production dropped by 25 to 64 percent, compared with smaller declines in overall strength. That gap helps explain why falls become more common even in people who still appear strong.
The reason is partly neurological. Your muscles depend on signals from the nervous system to activate quickly. With aging, changes occur in motor units and in the muscle fibers themselves. Fast-twitch fibers, which generate quick and powerful movements, tend to shrink or disappear. The result is slower force production, even if total strength is partly preserved. In practical terms, your muscles still have strength, but cannot access it quickly enough when it matters.
The good news is that this quality is trainable. To maintain or improve it, include movements that emphasize speed. You are not replacing your strength and cardio work, but adding to it. This does not mean reckless jumping. It means controlled, fast efforts. Stand up quickly from a chair. Add small, quick step-ups done with intent. For those who are able, low-volume jumps or medicine ball throws can help. Keep repetitions low, focus on quality, and allow full recovery between efforts. The goal is simple. Train your muscles to fire quickly, not just strongly.
Will it make a difference? There is no large body of direct evidence showing that rate of force development alone predicts longevity the way VO2 max or overall strength does. That said, there is a strong indirect case. Muscle strength is clearly linked to lower mortality. And people who move faster and generate force quickly tend to maintain independence longer, fall less often, and avoid the cascade of injury, hospitalization, and loss of mobility that shortens lifespan.
Strength and cardio have direct evidence for longevity. Force development supports function, balance, and fall prevention, and helps preserve the physical abilities that allow people to stay active, avoid injury, and maintain independence.
Protein needs of older athletes increases with age. The US Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) for protein intake is 0.8 g/kg/day for adults. This may be on the low side for an athlete and was likely developed from nitrogen-balance studies in the "average" young adult. And it is probably too low for older adults who are less efficient in their protein digestion and absorption. It has been speculated that too little dietary protein with a resulting relative protein deficiency, may be an aggravating factor in the loss of muscle mass that accompanies aging.
Taking both aging and activity level into account, this international panel of experts recommended protein intakes of 1.0 - 1.2 g/kg/day for adults 65 years or older, with even higher intakes for those who are more physically active. So for all of us who are riding regularly - even if just with friends on the weekend - it is important to keep an eye on the protein content of our diets.
I have never been a fan of the over response of the paleo diets as the excess red meat protein comes packaged with a significant amount of undesirable fat. There are plenty of non meat sources of protein to add to your diet.
As we age there is also less latitude to skipping a pre-event carbohydrate meal along with an increased sensitivity to major fluid shifts from sweating and inadequate replacement. But aside from these two caveats and a slightly higher daily protein requirement, the general principles of nutrition are exactly the same for all age groups - including vitamin, mineral, and electrolyte replacement as well as the use of ergogenic aids such as diet supplements and unusual food products.
What is a vitamin? According to the dictionary, a group of organic compounds, essential for normal growth and nutrition, which are must be supplied by the diet as they cannot be synthesized by the body.
Ergothioneine is an amino acid - an organic molecule. And it cannot be synthesized by the body. Is it required for normal growth and development. When it's distribution in the body is analyzed, it is found in the highest concentrations in areas that tend to have the highest concentration of free radicals, where it appears to protect against DNA damage and cell death. This finding fulfills the third part of the definition - essential. It is essential to protect cells from free radical damage. No ergothioneine = more rapid cell death.
Although the compound has been known for decades, only recently has a specific cell transporter mechanism been identified. And generally the body has not evolved specific transport mechanisms for unneeded molecules. Even more intriguing is that of a hundred compounds measured in thousands of individuals, the one most often associated with low disease rates was ergothioneine, and higher blood levels were associated with lower risk of heart disease, stroke, and death from all causes put together. As low blood levels have correlated with an increased risk of frailty with aging, it has been dubbed the "longevity vitamin"".
There have been a number of studies associating (just an association, not necessarily cause and effect) mushrooms with better health.
Lifestyle and diet changes after age 60 are more a change in emphasis than additions or deletions to lifelong healthy habits. A couple thoughts - in no specific order.
Spread the protein over the day rather than saving most of your protein for dinner. Aim for 25 to 35 grams of high-quality protein at each meal.
Two or three brief strength-training sessions each week, using weights, resistance bands, or bodyweight exercises, can pay enormous dividends in preserving muscle, independence, and metabolic health.
And this is not about building bulk. A weight that makes the last few repetitions challenging is plenty. My goal is 1 set of 20 reps rather than the muscle mass building several sets of 8 to 10.
Aim for a good breakfast, a more substantial midday lunch, and then a lighter evening meal. My rule of thumb is 75% of the day's calories before 2 PM. For dinner, a salad and perhaps some fish or other protein and minimal (complex) carbohydrates. And avoid eating for 4 hours before going to bed.
The one (and only) supplement I take consistently is creatine monohydrate (5 g/day). It has one of the strongest evidence bases in sports nutrition. While many people think of it as a supplement for young athletes, it may actually be even more valuable as we age because it appears to help slow the loss of muscle associated with aging while supporting muscle mass, strength, and the benefits of resistance training.
There is also emerging evidence that it may have benefits for brain health, although that research is still evolving. I don't consider it a substitute for good nutrition or exercise, but it is one supplement I think is worth considering.
A.If you don't stress the CV system, you will lose aerobic capacity over time. But you can minimize that loss by regular riding - and by pushing yourself. I would consider doing intervals once or twice a week as one part of a program (if you are not now). And that means getting your heart rate up into Zone 4 for you. As to the knees, make sure you have a good fit on the bike, pedals (if you have clips) with good play (like frogs/speedplay), and then keep that RPM between 90 and 100. Don't lug on the hills, or spin too fast - it plays havoc with the knees.
Q. I am 69 years old, female. I ride about 130 miles a week and am
working on interval training and sprinting to get stronger and faster. I ride
a minimum of 20 miles a day. I have osteoarthritis in my back and hands. I don't
take anything for the osteoarthritis and find that cycling is my key to living
with OA and hopefully preventing it from getting worse. Today, I did 4
intervals of 1/2 mile. From a dead start, I was able to ride 18.8 on the 2nd
interval and 18.7 on the 4th. My goal is to ride the 5K and 10K in the
Senior Games in October at 18 mph. On a dead start, I can sprint up to 23 mph
in the first few seconds, but it poops me out quicker and I ride slower, on
the 1/2 mile interval, i.e., 17.7. My question involves maximum heart rate. I
have noticed that my heart rate number is going higher, before I get exhausted,
than a couple of months ago.
A.This question suggested that you may have fallen into a deadly trap in training, the "if a little is good, a lot is better" approach. It is really important to warm up before you do the intervals. If you are not doing so (5 miles or so at a modest pace) you risk injury and, as the CV system is not yet into its rhythm, you won't get maximum benefit from the intervals before feeling fatigued.
I don't see any advantage to a 23 MPH sprint for a few seconds - the whole interval should be at a steady pace you pick. If you can't hold 23 for the full interval, either decrease the interval duration or the speed.
It is really important to take off a few days a week off the bike. I'm not sure what to say about "your MHR going higher" but it is possible this is a sign of overtraining, not ideal training.
And finally, I did get the following question which raises a point I'd like to reemphasize:
Q.It seems your website is mostly designed for much stronger riders than I. Perhaps, you will see the benefit of gearing part of it to someone on my level, although there is a really small percentage of women my age, who have the drive to "push their limits." Presently, I know only one other female with that drive.
A.As to age, if you key your training to your personal max heart rate (less as you age) the general approach to a training program (how you divide up the rides during a week)should be age independent.
