FuturePundit: Cycling Worse Than Running For Bones

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.

By Randall Parker at 2007 October 16 05:44 PM Aging Exercise Studies | TrackBack

Comments

Rob C said at October 17, 2007 07:08 AM:

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.)

Doug M said at October 17, 2007 12:48 PM:

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.

Brett Bellmore said at October 18, 2007 08:44 AM:

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?