A boat full of carbs

ford2600

tailendcharlie wrote: »

These video's reference all the studies your looking for
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6j75BDq6DQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKrl4X5eplg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnXF4qgrg5Q
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWW92sgse6s

Put up the studies

tailendcharlie

AstraMonti wrote: »

LCHF does not say no carb either, it just says low carb, it's a huge difference. No or extremely low carb is for diabetics.

Well you'd be doing them damage if you put them on a LCHF diet:
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/what-causes-insulin-resistance/

tailendcharlie

ford2600 wrote: »

Put up the studies

That will take me a while

ford2600

tailendcharlie wrote: »

That will take me a while

I presume you've read them yourself? If you feel compelled to come on to a thread deling with lchf explaining why we are all killing ourselves?

Just to confirm you do know the how a interventionist clinical trial over a long period differs from a epidemiological study?

Unless they are the former don't bother posting them

tailendcharlie

ford2600 wrote: »

I presume you've read them yourself? If you feel compelled to come on to a thread deling with lchf explaining why we are all killing ourselves?

Just to confirm you do know the how a interventionist clinical trial over a long period differs from a epidemiological study?

Unless they are the former don't bother posting them

Well if studies aren't good enough for you keep believing what you want...................

pprendeville

doyledav wrote: »

Just hit day 25 and I feel great. Never had as much energy and never feel too tired any more. Ill post up some of the sites that I have started to use and they are great. I have a few weddings coming up in the next couple of weeks and one abroad so going to be really difficult to stay clean. Ill post them up tomorrow but just thought that I would touch base.

Could you give some more insight on a training/non-training day in terms of your diet?

AstraMonti

tailendcharlie wrote: »

Well if studies aren't good enough for you keep believing what you want...................

There are studies and "studies". The "studies" that have so far said that meat is dangerous have all been debunked.

tailendcharlie

AstraMonti wrote: »

There are studies and "studies". The "studies" that have so far said that meat is dangerous have all been debunked.

I presume your talking about the china study, which hasn't been debunked.

ford2600

tailendcharlie wrote: »

Well if studies aren't good enough for you keep believing what you want...................

I'm not talking about believes; I'm asking for you to post interventionist clinical trials which prove what you are stating.

You haven't confirmed if you've read the studies in the youtube links you've referenced?

You haven't answered the question if you know the difference between the two study types.

doozerie

tailendcharlie wrote: »

I presume your talking about the china study, which hasn't been debunked.

I have no interest in getting into a debate about the China Study, or about whether diet X is "wrong" while diet Y is "right". I eat what I eat because I find it works well for me, if someone believes I'm misguided/stupid/suicidal in doing so that's fine. There is plenty of room in the world for different opinions.

However, it is one thing to have a different opinion, it's another thing entirely to actively challenge people to defend or justify their dietary choice. If you are going to do the latter then you should really ensure that you have a good solid basis for your arguments. When it comes to the China Study, I'd suggest that you are on extremely shaky ground if you are using that to support your point of view - it is at best inconclusive:

From: https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/the-china-study-revisited/

This is a cautionary tale. It shows how complex issues can be over-simplified into meaninglessness, how epidemiologic data can be misinterpreted and mislead us, and how a researcher can approach a problem with preconceptions that allow him to see only what he wants to see. The China Study was embraced by vegetarians because it seemed to support their beliefs with strong evidence. Minger has shown that that evidence is largely illusory. The issues raised are important and deserve further study by unbiased scientists. At any rate, one thing is clear: the China Study is not sufficient reason to recommend drastic reductions in protein intake, let alone total avoidance of meat and dairy foods.

upthe19th

5 weeks in and going good so far.

A good few benefits observed so far. No muscle cramps anymore during/after races, sleeping better, more relaxed, weight drop and stable weight, better body condition over all, better skin condition and noticeable fat loss.

I can only comment on my own observations and reactions to the diet. Overall so far its been great. I like it and it suits me. Maybe its not for everyone, but it really works for me and that's all that matters.

I have learnt a lot in the last 5 weeks and continue to. With 7 weeks more to go I am looking at a longterm conversion already, time will tell.

pprendeville

upthe19th wrote: »

5 weeks in and going good so far.

A good few benefits observed so far. No muscle cramps anymore during/after races, sleeping better, more relaxed, weight drop and stable weight, better body condition over all, better skin condition and noticeable fat loss.

I can only comment on my own observations and reactions to the diet. Overall so far its been great. I like it and it suits me. Maybe its not for everyone, but it really works for me and that's all that matters.

I have learnt a lot in the last 5 weeks and continue to. With 7 weeks more to go I am looking at a longterm conversion already, time will tell.

Pictures, we want pictures. Otherwise I refuse to believe.

upthe19th

pprendeville wrote: »

Pictures, we want pictures. Otherwise I refuse to believe.

The world is not ready for that level of disclosure......

pprendeville

Ah good aul Mrs. Moore. Didn't know she was on the aul keto diet.

ford2600

upthe19th wrote: »

I can only comment on my own observations and reactions to the diet. Overall so far its been great. I like it and it suits me. Maybe its not for everyone, but it really works for me and that's all that matters..

Best of luck.

Your 100% right it's not for everyone. I seem to run good on it but I seem to be very flexible in regards to macro breakdown. Others seem to run very well on it.

The answer to why some people adapt well is really interesting but it doesn't seem to be asked or discussed much.

pprendeville

I'm on day 16 of the diet. Have basically remained same weight, body fat, body type (think spare tire) but don't feel like I did when I was on more carbs, feel healthier (I know it's a bland word but that's the way I feel) and don't get hunger pangs. No major drop in weight either due to loss of water during initial few days although I'm drinking about 3-4L per day, not sure if that's good or bad, probably good. Average intake of carbs at about 50g for those 15 days so that will be cut back little by little again due to being a little on high side. On a ratio of about 60-25-15 fat-protein-carbs. Yesterday was 75-20-5%/172-103-27g

Was expecting more so I had my diet analysed and I was told I was eating too frequently, possibly have a slow metabolism. So I'm trying to just spread out my meals and consume that little bit less, 3 meals per day is the plan. Hopefully when I get back training the adaptations will be more evident. Will be a month off the bike next week due to exams.

Anyone in the same boat as me or got any pointers?

sann

Hi All.
I have been following this thread with great interest over the last few months and would have a interest in the theory and teachings of nutritionalist Barry Murray.
Recently I have been sticking fairly rigidly to the lchf way of eating. For me it works very well, although it does also have it's disadvantages. Examples being when I try and train with our club racers. Without the high carb pre training meal and the high sugar energy bars I struggle with the high intensity stuff.
I am still learning and on days I know I am going with the racers I will up the carbs a bit.
I have been eating lchf with about 3 months now.
Advantages. Weight loss. Better muscle definition. Improved sleep. Never hungry.
Disadvantages. Struggled with high intensity training for the first few weeks. Lack of energy and poor mood in the first month.
Today I woke at 8, had a 2 egg omelette. Went out with 2 bottles of water and a banana.
Did 110k solo with 1000m of climbing with a 28.5 average.
Very happy with this and I hope it means I'm at least a lot of the way of being fat adapted.
Won't work for everyone but that's my own brief summary and In general I am glad I made the decision to switch to lchf.

ford2600

Apologies in advance for boring lads senseless about food!

Just a note on a 400km ride on Saturday. 17h 40 total time on bike with just under 16h pedalling.

While I think calorie counting is a blind alley, at least without carefully consideration of macros and micros, I did it for Saturday for an experiment.

According to Strava 7,500 calories used on bike. (Pinch of salt of course, do I add maintenance calories to that?)

Skipped breakfast and between fruit, offal meat eggs and 500 ml sports drink and a snickers I consumed 1950 calories by finish.

Felt really good at end. I kept eating a little even though not hungry for last 150km, however my body didn't want me putting food in. Despite feeling perfect nuts, banana and snickers caused me to gag. Nothing other than Drisheen causes a similar reaction. I never have got that before. No idea why

How do make half a leg of lamb disappear? Do what I did Saturday and see what happens on Sunday :-)

AstraMonti

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11029975

mp31

AstraMonti wrote: »

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11029975

So eating extra calories (regardless of whether they are fat or carbs) will put on the same amount of weight i.e. the calories in/calories out approach to weight loss applies to both high fat and high carb diets.

This is confusing as the main impression I got from high fat diets was that you didn't need to count calories and just ate what you wanted to eat (as long it was fat based) and the weight would come down.

OleRodrigo

I think the point is that energy from food is energy from food, it doesn't matter what type of food, if there is surplus requirements it will be stored as fat. High fat food is satiating, so your not likely to eat too much. High carb food can spike blood pressure giving you the impression you are hungry when its just blood sugar going up and down, causing you to take in more calories.

Also, when its comes to fat burning, foods with a high GI ( Simple carbs ) will slow down the fat burning process, so you could eat X amount if calories with those and not notice much weight reduction, where as the same amount of calories in high fat could see more weight reduction, because the fat burning process has not been impacted.

ford2600

http://sigmanutrition.com/episode65

Not really what was asked but with anything and nutrition it's complicated; not everybody is the same.

In the podcast he refers to overfeeding studies, where subjects are deliberately ovefed; if calories in/calories out is correct each subject will gain the same amount of weight. However increasing calories ingested increases expenditure of calories but this increase varies between subjects across a spectrum.

Also if calories are restricted the calories burned is also reduced. One side of the equation has an effect on the other.

I'm not sure, on a calorie basis that fat is more satiating but protein for me certainly is. If you look at weight training their emphasis on a cut is normally a high protein diet with carbs and fats fairly moderate.

HFLC seems to work well for lots of obese people, whether it is always the HFLC element of diet or the fact they go for an appalling diet comprising of a lot of processed foods and junk to a clean diet I'm not certain.

The whole leptin, hypothalamus, cortisol side of things is overlooked for most part in dieting but an emphasis on a clean diet, reducing stress, good sleep and exercise probably assists with those elements even if we don't fully understand why

AstraMonti

A friend is asking me for a nutritionist as he doesn't have time to research it himself (aka lazy fecker). Any recommendations for dublin based nutrionists?

ford2600

AstraMonti wrote: »

A friend is asking me for a nutritionist as he doesn't have time to research it himself (aka lazy fecker). Any recommendations for dublin based nutrionists?

Trying to drop a few ponds or for specific athletic goal?

My dog calls himself a nutrionists...:) AFAIK not a protected term but dietitian is.

AstraMonti

Just to drop weight, hopefully with incorporating some exercise. LOL at your dog Well.. you know what I am looking for anyway :P

ryan_sherlock

A note on one of the things I have found to be a magical elixir - bone broth (one of the (many) ways I make it) super simple & hard to mess up!

http://ryansherlock.blogspot.ie/2015/06/making-super-simple-bone-broth-stock.html

ford2600

ryan_sherlock wrote: »

A note on one of the things I have found to be a magical elixir - bone broth (one of the (many) ways I make it) super simple & hard to mess up!

http://ryansherlock.blogspot.ie/2015/06/making-super-simple-bone-broth-stock.html

Have you tried roasting bones? Get beef shin bones cut to 3"/4" lengths. Salt them and roast at about 200 for 20 mins.

Very rich but add it at end stews etc, salads or heaven forbid roasted potatoes!

Had a two starter lunch in Crawford in Cork lately, roasted bones with salad and sourdough and lamb kidneys.

Bony cuts of slow cooked lamb stew has that flavour you mention also.

The sad/funny thing is the tastiest/most nutritious cuts like neck/shoulder of lamb, shin beef, organ meet is really cheap and bones often free. Rib eye/ filet etc are expensive because they are convenient and scarce.

I grew up eating our own beef and never heard saw of filet/rib eye etc until I left home. Other than Sunday roast a a very occasional steak the yearly slaughtered heifer was almost entirely stewed or minced. Aberdeen Angus to before it was cool! They have small heads which makes calfing easier for new cows.

Beat that for trivia @doozerie :-)

ford2600

AstraMonti wrote: »

Just to drop weight, hopefully with incorporating some exercise. LOL at your dog Well.. you know what I am looking for anyway :P

@Astra did your work colleague have any luck with dietician?

Other than eat clean, get all his nutrients from whole food, match carbs to activity level(if he doesn't want to eat like us cult members ), lift some weights and some cardio what else is there to it.

The hard bit is changing habits and making new ones, support is probably more important there.

Sigmanutrition.com and dominicmunenly.com are two decent sites.

If he is time poor and stressed that's not going to help him either; western lifestyle is as much the problem as western diet

upthe19th

upthe19th wrote: »

5 weeks in and going good so far.

A good few benefits observed so far. No muscle cramps anymore during/after races, sleeping better, more relaxed, weight drop and stable weight, better body condition over all, better skin condition and noticeable fat loss.

I can only comment on my own observations and reactions to the diet. Overall so far its been great. I like it and it suits me. Maybe its not for everyone, but it really works for me and that's all that matters.

I have learnt a lot in the last 5 weeks and continue to. With 7 weeks more to go I am looking at a longterm conversion already, time will tell.

12 weeks completed with good results overall.

A brief 2 day break from LCHF to mark the end of the study and now I'm back on the bandwagon.

Aim is to continue with LCHF as, for me personally, the effects have been very beneficial.

kennyb3

Care to be more specific? In terms of 'good overall results' and 'very beneficial'. Sound like more cycling code such as 'going well'

AstraMonti

So I am getting close to two years of trying out lchf. In this time there have been times that I was very strict on keeping a lchf diet, times that I was loosely on a lchf diet and times that I wasn't paying too much attention. I 've taken 4 blood tests on these two years and when I was on a strict diet the results were the best. Althouth the cholesterol levels were elevated for a normal gp all the rest were much better. The more I went to carbs the worst my results became while cholesterol was "improving".

Apart from waist and weight loss there was nothing different on how I felt after I got used to it. I 've concluded that my body can digest and process anything on the same way like a pig. It's just needs fuel, it doesn't really care how it will take it. Even on strict lchf with zero to low carbs I had no issues on the bike or in the gym lifting heavy or busting my ass on cardio with HR close to 200. At the moment I am trying to keep it as lchf as possible just because it's healthier and it's what makes sense.

upthe19th

kennyb3 wrote: »

Care to be more specific? In terms of 'good overall results' and 'very beneficial'. Sound like more cycling code such as 'going well'

Yeah, fair point.

It was strict LCHF and I kept to it rigidly. Averaged about 10 hours total training per week between gym, intervals, endurance and racing. Averaged 2 races a week, league and open. Performance in races was better, one win, one place and the rest were top 20 for the most part.

I haven't got the full summary back yet but the rough figures on body comp look like this:

- Body weight from 80.2kg to 76.5kg, with a lowest weight of 75.3kg
- Lean muscle increase of somewhere between 1 - 1.5kg, not sure of exact figure again.
- Body fat (dexa scan) between week 0 and week 6 reduced from 14.4% to 13.1%
- Body fat (dexa scan) between week 7 and week 12 reduced from 13.1% to 9.8%

ford2600

upthe19th wrote: »

Yeah, fair point.

It was strict LCHF and I kept to it rigidly. Averaged about 10 hours total training per week between gym, intervals, endurance and racing. Averaged 2 races a week, league and open. Performance in races was better, one win, one place and the rest were top 20 for the most part.

I haven't got the full summary back yet but the rough figures on body comp look like this:

- Body weight from 80.2kg to 76.5kg, with a lowest weight of 75.3kg
- Lean muscle increase of somewhere between 1.5 - 2kg, not sure of exact figure again.
- Body fat (dexa scan) between week 0 and week 6 reduced from 14.4% to 13.1%
- Body fat (dexa scan) between week 7 and week 12 reduced from 13.1% to 9.8%

9.8% is pretty lean. World of difference with 14%.

At a guess your getting lot of comments on your appearance; they probably went from complementary to a mix of jealous/concern around 12%.

Well done and best of luck with rest of it

upthe19th

ford2600 wrote: »

9.8% is pretty lean. World of difference with 14%.

At a guess your getting lot of comments on your appearance; they probably went from complementary to a mix of jealous/concern around 12%.

Well done and best of luck with rest of it

Thank you kindly.

Yes, the difference was like night and day.

The comments landed for the most part on the concern side. Plenty of slagging about turning into a lollipop-head, doing myself harm, being wreckless, irresponsible with my health, not needing to lose weight, losing too much weight, etc, etc.

Tbh I took some slack from a lot of angles but do I care, not a bit.

ford2600

upthe19th wrote: »

Thank you kindly.

Yes, the difference was like night and day.

The comments landed for the most part on the concern side. Plenty of slagging about turning into a lollipop-head, doing myself harm, being wreckless, irresponsible with my health, not needing to lose weight, losing too much weight, etc, etc.

Tbh I took some slack from a lot of angles but do I care, not a bit.

You have to remember that being lean is heading towards being abnormal the way society is getting fatter. TBH I knocked a bit of fun out of it, but I never went under 12%, I think my wife, sisters and sister in law would probably get together and force feed me if i hit 9%!

High fat seems to really suit you, for me after two years on LCHF I'm not sure it really matters for me whether it LCHF, isocalorific or HC as long as food quality is good i.e. for HC source would be fruit, leafy greens, potatoes incl sweet, beetroots etc etc

Taking pasta, rice, bread of the plate forced me to think about other food sources. As a result my veg intake is huge, I'd doubt there is many vegetarians eating more veg than me. There seems to be almost universal agreement that more veg is good.

It's also led to me eating foods which are almost free but really tasty and really nutrient dense liver, homemade stock, bone marrow, bony fatty lamb cuts etc

As part of the WIT are you doing a HIIT session every day? That put me off tbh, time and no turbo or any interest in turbo!

upthe19th

Its a combination of high fat suiting me and high carb not suiting.

Sugar and carb has an adverse effect on my muscles with regard to cramping. I didnt suffer from one cramp over the 12 week study regardless of the activity. Also my sleep greatly improved.

The HIIT training was not every day for the study, only 3 sessions per week. I spread them as evenly as possible for the most part to allow for recovery in between.

tommy_tucker

AstraMonti wrote: »

it's what makes sense.

Could you elaborate on why it makes more sense to you, i'm interested in how people arrive at this conclusion.

ford2600

tommy_tucker wrote: »

Could you elaborate on why it makes more sense to you, i'm interested in how people arrive at this conclusion.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=95457741&postcount=640

You have asked all this before....

Carb the fcuk up, we get it thanks.

tommy_tucker

ford2600 wrote: »

[
You have asked all this before....

Carb the fcuk up, we get it thanks.

No idea what your talking about, i'm thinking of getting in LCHF.

ford2600

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=95723681&postcount=26

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=95857074&postcount=7

Apologies, easy mistake to make.

tommy_tucker

ford2600 wrote: »

Apologies, easy mistake to make.

i eat a well balanced diet, with alot of carbs because i cycle, i wondering why people go to this diet, i can't fully justify it in my head, how do your muscles get glycogen if you in no carbs? or can you make glycogen from fats??

ford2600

The body has two main fuel sources, fat and glucose/glycogen.

At very high heart rates, for me north of 160 then my body will predominately choose glycogen. Below that on long spins(and I mean long) with an average heart rate of 130-140 including stops I'll get by mainly from bodyfat.

On a 400km ride( I posted here on details) I burned circa 8000 calories and consumed less than 2000 total for day. That would be typical. I expect to do the same tomorrow on a 300km ride. No breakfast, and no food until circa 150 or so and very little therafter.

That is probably independent of diet though, more to do with avoiding carbs than drive your blood sugar through the roof rather than avoiding carbs, rice/sweet potatoe good fizzy orange/kit kat bad kinda gig. Also fasted training will force your body to adapt, starting small of course.

Why would you bother?

* Most people would get in bother on long distance stuff suffer when trying to digest and exercise at the one time. Two very seperate hormonal systems look after both, they often don't get on well together. Same reason your might get indigestion while eating your dinner in middle of row or work stress for example.
* Saves time on long rides
* Convenient as fcuk for early morning starts, bed to bike in 15mins including coffee
* A racing guy on A4 for certain and probably A3 distance could probably around with next to nothing to eat, saves bringing a gel back up. Longer races would probably need some sugar I would think? If you can eat 3 gels and hour and whistle dixie then you don't need to concern yourself maybe

Away from bike, it gives great freedom in choosing when to eat. I'll go a full day out on site with just water rather than eat some convenient junk from a cafe/spar of wherever. I've travelled for 24hrs without eating without any real hunger.
If you don't subcontract out your food prep you have total control over what you eat. I'll still eat occasionally in cafe etc and I won't say no to cake at my nephew birthday, one doesn't need to inflict a personal lifestyle choice on others; in pretty boring for most anyhow.

Hope that helps, read rest of thread some good links to it. BTW Anthony Colpo thinks HFLC is bollix if you want balance to arguement. He also thinks that red meat being bad is bollix so you might be a bit conflicted there

Good luck

Edit: It's all be done before, like most thing..

A former RAAM winner in the 1980's from the USA cycled 170 miles without any food or drink to settle a bet. Pretty sure Pittsburg was a start or end point but can't remember rider's name

EDIT 2: Some people go even lower with carbs to go into Ketosis, where body breaks down fat into ketones and uses them to power exercise AND the brain(brain uses circa 600 calories of sugar a day and on a per kilo basis is a ridiculously high energy consumer, that along with the unique pain of human childbirth allowed us down out of the trees so I suppose we shouldn't complain. I don't bother with ketosis, I'm just illustrating how adaptable the human body is to food source

Bambaata

Good post ford2600. Im eager to try this when this season ends (mid September) to see how it goes for a few months so have this log followed! Im reluctant to change much whilst in peak season but hope October to December allow for a good chance to trial it

OleRodrigo

Speaking of adaption, here's an interesting article on water fasting. Proper fasting that is, no food at all for the fasting period - just water. After the first 2/3 days, the body uses up all glyocen and then goes in to producing ketones ( for anything up to 60 days )

I did it myself for 12 days. A fascinating life experience but not something that's easy to work into your daily life unless you have time off or attend a dedicated retreat. It also took several weeks to build back power but I felt very good afterwards nontheless.

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/jul/11/jeanette-winterson-why-i-fasted-11-days

ford2600

OleRodrigo wrote: »

Speaking of adaption, here's an interesting article on water fasting. Proper fasting that is, no food at all for the fasting period - just water. After the first 2/3 days, the body uses up all glyocen and then goes in to producing ketones ( for anything up to 60 days )

I did it myself for 12 days. A fascinating life experience but not something that's easy to work into your daily life unless you have time off or attend a dedicated retreat. It also took several weeks to build back power but I felt very good afterwards nontheless.

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/jul/11/jeanette-winterson-why-i-fasted-11-days

@OleRodrigo when did you do your partial Lenten campaign?!

How bad was hunger or was it only at start? Did you feel weak? Did you exercise at all? Mrs OleRodrigo complain about your ketone breath?

I know Peter Attia used to do 100km cycles at a decent pace after 24hrs fasted but after days of not eating I assume your body is more reluctant to burn calories.

OleRodrigo

ford2600 wrote: »

@OleRodrigo when did you do your partial Lenten campaign?!

How bad was hunger or was it only at start? Did you feel weak? Did you exercise at all? Mrs OleRodrigo complain about your ketone breath?

I know Peter Attia used to do 100km cycles at a decent pace after 24hrs fasted but after days of not eating I assume your body is more reluctant to burn calories.

It was 2009. Felt hungry the first 2 days but then it goes until you finish. I didnt exercise as such, just walking, and that was quite slow. The author of the article mentioned going to the gym, however that is slightly misleading as it suggests it doesn't affect your strength but it certainly does. As you point out, the less calories you burn the better.

No she didn't, nor did I although occasionally I felt nauseous. I went into work for the whole duration, nobody noticed anything. Although I wasn't hungry I did think about food and what I was going to cook when it was over. It was very pleasant. Mentally I felt sharp.

I broke it after 12 days with rice, vegetables and chicken with ginger in small portions ( the stomach shrinks quite a lot ). I had lost about a stone and a half. It took two weeks for my normal strength to return, I was out of breath on short cycles during that time, but aside from that I felt good.

MediaMan

Interesting and somewhat scary article in VeloNews about the cumulative affect on your heart of too much exercise accumulated over the years:
http://velonews.competitor.com/cycling-extremes. The thesis is that it impacts primarily on heart muscle health and also increase the risk of atrial fibrillation.

The more you ride, the harder you ride, the faster you ride, the better athlete you might become today. But over decades of exertion, the myocardial cells of the heart begin to simply fall apart, and you’re left with an unhealthy ticker. Or so these new studies suggest. When you’re 20, or even 30, this can lead to acute reversible injuries — temporary damage that can be relieved with correct rest. In a 50-year-old, repeated hard doses of the sport you love, the rides you cherish — since complete recovery doesn’t occur as efficiently — could be leading to accelerated ageing, or hypertrophy — in layman’s terms, a stiff muscle in your chest. That probably wasn’t what you were looking for when you bought your last bike.

In this analysis, there seems to be no clear measure as to what constitutes "too much" - rather that it is individual, genetically determined, etc.

Joe Friel has referred to the article in his blog: http://www.joefrielsblog.com/2015/08/a-fib-and-the-master-endurance-athlete.html and has referred to this post by a heart doc who is quoted in the velonews article: http://www.drjohnm.org/2014/05/exercise-over-indulgence-and-atrial-fibrillation-seeing-the-obvious/

The tenuous link between all this and low-carb / paleo is that Mark Sisson has been a a long critic of what he calls "chronic cardio": http://www.marksdailyapple.com/the-evidence-continues-to-mount-against-chronic-cardio/

Much of our cycling would fit into that "chronic cardio" category.

Anyway, I'm not planning to stop cycling just yet. I think that as I age, keeping the long spins at moderate/low intensity, and the hard efforts short and relatively infrequent is wise in my case anyway. Would be very interested in what others think about this topic and if anyone has pointers to other research in this area, whether supporting these findings or contradicting them.

DaithiMC

OleRodrigo wrote: »

Speaking of adaption, here's an interesting article on water fasting. Proper fasting that is, no food at all for the fasting period - just water. After the first 2/3 days, the body uses up all glyocen and then goes in to producing ketones ( for anything up to 60 days )

I did it myself for 12 days. A fascinating life experience but not something that's easy to work into your daily life unless you have time off or attend a dedicated retreat. It also took several weeks to build back power but I felt very good afterwards nontheless.

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/jul/11/jeanette-winterson-why-i-fasted-11-days

I have been following this research for about four years now and practice a version of the 5:2 - my version, eat breakfast and nothing else for 24 hours. I believe that the version of 5:2 where you break the fast into two 300 calorie meals does not bring the same benefits. I am most interested in the anti-inflammatory effects brought about by reductions in IGF-1 and other pro-inflammatory cytokines. My experience - on the day of the fast, after work I would go for an extended commute cycle and feel great (30-40km @ ca. 26-28kph). If I did the same cycle the next day I am exhausted. I am not sure if that is the effect of the fast or the exercise, probably both. On my off-fast days I don't change my diet and sometimes do tend to overeat - I think that's as much psychological as physical, i.e., I know I will be fasting so barter with myself that going the extra cals won't matter! I do about 6-8 200km+ rides each year and lots of 100km+ rides and have very little fear of bonking so long as the pace is not sustained intensity.

I have seen all the effects reported, loss of weight, adipose fat mostly, reduction in cholesterol (I was on the high side of "normal"), good A1c and glucose numbers etc. I notice smelly breath around 5pm everyday as the acetone production from the utilisation of ketone bodies kicks in so some ketosis is starting in the first day.

I would be interested to try a full 3-4 day fast and see how that goes. I also know that when I kicked this off my mood swings were not good and I have over time become more mindful of them so just go for a walk or try to distract myself though I don't notice them so much these days. Its become a way of life for me, though I will admit that I do bring a sugary bottle on evenings that I race and will also have some pasta for lunch. The high intensity workout from racing is not compatible I found, i.e., you bonk after an hour of intensity.

I think the usual warnings apply - fasting is just that, stay hydrated, stay aware of yourself, i.e., if you become dizzy, stop. I think the most ridiculous thing I have seen are recipe books for Fasting diets - that should be a one page book! I also think that taken slowly, i.e., one day for a few months, then two days, then extending it, is a better idea than going straight in, its more sustainable and by the time you get to doing two/three days a week you are much more aware of how you should feel without food. If anyone offers to charge you something around a fasting lifestyle be deeply suspicious - its supposed to be free!

AstraMonti

Mentally I find it very hard to that as a cycle, I enjoy eating to not eat

On other news, I just managed a 130cm box jump today in the gym. I 've no idea where I can use this, probably in parkour or something

ford2600

Fasting experiment

While travelling last week, with the usual very early starts, airports and our delightful array of convenience foods, I decided it was a good time to try a bit of fasting.

24hr completely fasted followed by two days with just a light evening meal, circa 800-1000(That may not fit into the normal range of light, but I very often consume big meals, often with 100g of added fat between coconut oil, butter and olive oil along with a plate of food which needs side panels:))

Not my first time doing a 24hr fast, and I find it really easy with remarkably very little hunger, good energy etc.

Over the following two days felt fine with no energy problems etc.

Following a return to normal eating for one day, I tackled a 300km pernament of Saturday, with the usual fasted start etc. Felt fine, tired at end, but at a guess that is as much due to my habit of stopping very little; including toilet breaks, food stops, minor mechanical, ferry crossing etc I was stopped for just over an hour.

Appetite wasn't funny on Sunday and Monday but back to normal then.

Weighed myself yesterday, 83kgs, exact same as I was before i started fast last week, and almost exactly my weight for the last 20 years. Whatever control systems that set appetite, bodyfat level, energy etc work really well for me. It probably the least looked at area in terms of tackling obesity but the one that makes most sense to me, especially in younger people before real damage is done.

Recently did a long distance 2 day charity event with club; the dietary choices of about half the lads on group was an eye opener. The brainwashing by High 5 etc really works, 14hr days powered almost entirely by sugar. I just kept my mouth shut. The lads who just ate normal food and kept sugar to a minimum where the guys who seemed stronger and fresher as the days went on.