October 16, 2007
Cycling Worse Than Running For Bones
Bicycling is not the way to slow down declines in bone mineral density.
The researchers measured bone mineral density in 43 competitive male cyclists and runners ages 20 to 59. Findings of the study included:
The cyclists had significantly lower bone mineral density of the whole body, especially of the lumbar spine, compared to runners.
63 percent of the cyclists had osteopenia of the spine or hip compared with 19 percent of the runners.
Cyclists were seven-times more likely to have osteopenia of the spine than the runners.
Get out there and pound some pavement.
Why the negative title? It seems to me that a better title would have been "Running Better than Cycling for Bones." (As a triathlete, I do both.)
Don't "get out there and pound pavement", get out there and lift weights! You get the same (or better) bone density benefits, without destroying your knees.
Not those pink dumbbells, either. Heavy weights, compound movements, like squats, deadlifts, presses three times per week. If you want or need "cardio", add a circuit-training session or two.
And running worse than cycling for joints. I wonder if we couldn't just subject our bones to ultrasound an hour a day, or some such?