A boat full of carbs

AstraMonti

Nothing much for an update.. but I really can't handle alcohol any more. Last sunday we had some friends over and we drunk quite a bit over dinner .. I was dead and asleep at 8. Yesterday again had 3 glasses of red wine over dinner.. slept at 8.30, woke up at 7:30 like a new man.

ROK ON

I have come to te conclusion that alcohol is something that you train for.

I rarely drink any longer - occasionally have a nice beer, a g&t or a glass of wine or two. If I have any more the result is as you describe - an immediate need to sleep.

Up to a few years ago (pre kids) I would have been a heavy drinker - four maybe five nights a week and absolutely no bother other than hangovers.

The folks that I know that can keep drinking are regular drinkers.
Strange thing is that I have found it so so difficult to give up confectionery but it was easy to give up drink. I could go for months on end without every even tbh king about a drink. Then I may have one.
I can't go for minutes without tbh king about confectionery.
I wonder which is more addictive in either the physical or psychological state - or is it different for different people?

Inquitus

I can't drink for **** when I am exercising alot and watching the calories, went out to a work doo on Fri night and had a couple of beers, a few glasses of wine with dinner and had to exit stage left and get a taxi home at 9pm!

AstraMonti

For the fans of beta alanine:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/24457999/?i=2&from=exercise%2C+performance

In conclusion, chronic beta-alanine supplementation in well-trained cyclists had a very pronounced effect on muscle carnosine concentration and a moderate attenuating effect on the acidosis associated with lactate accumulation, yet without affecting 1-h time-trial performance under laboratory conditions.

Paul Kiernan

Another coffin nail?

ford2600

Paul Kiernan wrote: »

Another coffin nail?

I watched cerealklliersmovie last night.

It's a low budget movie by Donal O'Neill, co founder of the GPA(GAA players union) but more importantly a son to a man with heart disease and nephew of a man who suffered diabetes despite being lean elite athelets who never gained weight and had "healthy" diets. O'Neill embarks on a high fat diet over 28 days.

Tim Noakes features in movie.

Interesting his total cholesterol and LDL went up on diet, but on a further test (presumably Apo B but not stated) his LDL particle size was large and Noakes thought he had the perfect blood profile.

Interestingly for OP and others he only did 8 mins of extreme training, no slow endurance training. Sprints, chin ups and heavy lifts etc.

He got stronger and set pb's at 41.

He started lean 13% or so, but this went down .7% and his waist etc reduced.

AstraMonti

I was trying to put a plan for my training on the bike, but I have not decided yet what I want (=what I ll have time to do). I will only have spare time to do stuff until the end of May, so taking racing seriously is not going to be part of the deal. I can't train for long stuff either as I won't have the luxury of time, altough I do want to take part in a couple of 200s. I think I ll just ride for the fun of it without overcomplicating things, and I might join a couple of sportives.

Tec Diver

ford2600 wrote: »

I watched cerealklliersmovie last night.

It's a low budget movie by Donal O'Neill, co founder of the GPA(GAA players union) but more importantly a son to a man with heart disease and nephew of a man who suffered diabetes despite being lean elite athelets who never gained weight and had "healthy" diets. O'Neill embarks on a high fat diet over 28 days.

Tim Noakes features in movie.

Interesting his total cholesterol and LDL went up on diet, but on a further test (presumably Apo B but not stated) his LDL particle size was large and Noakes thought he had the perfect blood profile.

Interestingly for OP and others he only did 8 mins of extreme training, no slow endurance training. Sprints, chin ups and heavy lifts etc.

He got stronger and set pb's at 41.

He started lean 13% or so, but this went down .7% and his waist etc reduced.

Great movie, I helped get it started on Kickstarter. Its going down really well so far!

ford2600

Tec Diver wrote: »

Great movie, I helped get it started on Kickstarter. Its going down really well so far!

I enjoyed it. Well done on your involvment

Just an observation I thought he should have included more data on before and after, in terms of diet, bloods exercise etc. Maybe a bit of info on Apo B test maybe.

That market looked great!

BabysCoffee

ford2600 wrote: »

I watched cerealklliersmovie last night.

It's a low budget movie by Donal O'Neill, co founder of the GPA(GAA players union) but more importantly a son to a man with heart disease and nephew of a man who suffered diabetes despite being lean elite athelets who never gained weight and had "healthy" diets. O'Neill embarks on a high fat diet over 28 days.

Tim Noakes features in movie.

Interesting his total cholesterol and LDL went up on diet, but on a further test (presumably Apo B but not stated) his LDL particle size was large and Noakes thought he had the perfect blood profile.

Interestingly for OP and others he only did 8 mins of extreme training, no slow endurance training. Sprints, chin ups and heavy lifts etc.

He got stronger and set pb's at 41.

He started lean 13% or so, but this went down .7% and his waist etc reduced.

Cereal Killers is an awesome film! Well worth the fiver to download.

If anyone is thinking of going on an LCHF diet they should definitely watch it
- the trailer is here http://www.cerealkillersmovie.com/

AstraMonti

Hanen't watched it yet, no spoilers :P

Monday went to the gym for another hard session. We did a lot, and I mean a lot of triceps pushups, wide arm pullups and ended with 15mins of non stop 80kg deadlifts and box squatjumps. Two days later my lower back is still sore.

Yesterday I did an hour on the bike, with 1-3mins intervals in climbing.

As for food, I had chicken in a coconut milk sauce with vegs and a fry after the gym, i know, weird combination lol. Unfortunately I 've been a bit naughty with nutella again...

ford2600

Seem to be adapting well to diet. Have restricted fruit very much. Only two pieces in morning now.

After a high fat meal before 12 noon I went 7hrs without food before 45km spin.

No hunger before spin or on bike.

i_surge

Thoughts about the no sugar v no fat study mentioned on sticky bottle? Maybe not enough for adaptation to the diet?

Fathead

Tonight on BBC2 a program you gentleman may be interested in.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03t8r4h

petethedrummer

Will be curious to see how the whole thing is spun.

colm_gti

I know they only done the diet switch for a month and could never have adapted properly, but some interesting findings nonetheless.

Interesting about the muscle loss, certainly noticed that myself. Been a bit lax about my diet of late and am left a bit unsure after this.

I know I certainly FEEL better day-to-day on lchf, but I'm unsure whether its sustainable long term after that. Raised blood sugar and glucose intolerance on lchf is pretty interesting!

BabysCoffee

colm_gti wrote: »

I know they only done the diet switch for a month and could never have adapted properly, but some interesting findings nonetheless.

Interesting about the muscle loss, certainly noticed that myself. Been a bit lax about my diet of late and am left a bit unsure after this.

I know I certainly FEEL better day-to-day on lchf, but I'm unsure whether its sustainable long term after that. Raised blood sugar and glucose intolerance on lchf is pretty interesting!

The fact that he was nearly pre-diabetic was very worrying!!!

I don't want to get diabetes!

Paul Kiernan

colm_gti wrote: »

Raised blood sugar and glucose intolerance on lchf is pretty interesting!

But was he LCHF? I think he was closer to No Carb and maybe that is the issue. All the LCHF research indicates the opposite usually occurs.

Nonetheless I found the whole thing an absolute ballscrushing hammerblow!

Ole Rodrigo

A LCHF diet will usually include lots of vegetables so its not really the same thing as the program. Funnily enough, he finishes with dismissing fad diets while thats exactly what he embarked on himself.

Still, its a thumbs up for a balanced diet. TBH eating is one of the pleasures of cycling and I'd hate to restrict that unnecessarily.

petethedrummer

Agreed with some bits. Disagreed with other bits. And like the others explained they were testing two extremes that noone could actually follow for very long. And my biases are based on my own experiences (obviously).

I was surprised by the cognitive test. I predicted high fat would do better but then it wasn't a very controlled test. My concentration levels are like never before (sample of 1). I think the Swedish memory champion is LCHF (sample of 1).

Not surprised by the hill climb. I think glucose is necessary during shorter duration exercise. How much of that is for the muscles and how much is for the brain I think needs to be teased out. I'd also be curious about the effect of training low carb but racing high carb, it's the approach I am adopting. Even Peter Attia (who is in almost constant ketosis) experiments with sugar during endurance events.

Not surprised by the fasting glucose tolerance test. It's common knowledge that it happens with LCHF. Some would argue it's better to take more readings at hour intervals or do the Ha1c test for a long range blood sugar estimate. To cheat that particular glucose test people just increase their carb intake in the week leading up to it. I do notice a bigger hit from sweet foods, to the point where regular chocolate is almost unpleasantly sweet now. But I don't crave sugar like before and almost never need a pick me up during the day. So am I better or worse of with higher but way fewer blood sugar spikes?

I'd agree with the processed food part. I eat almost none now, though I didn't eat much before. I did eat a lot of brown bread, which I would now consider a processed food. Maybe that should have been obvious. Most of the food we buy should probably only have 1 ingredient. If you only bought solely from the fruit & veg, fish & meat sections of the supermarket, you'd probably never need to ever consider your diet.

I liked the point about it being hard to eat plain sugar. As I've said before on here, from a health point of view you'd probably be better just spooning plain old siucra sugar into your gob than taking gels and sports drinks. They are formulated to make you want to drink more and backed up by dubious "sciency" advertising, worrying you that death is imminent after a yellowy p!ss.

As for the 50:50 sugar/fat hypothesis. I remember Lustig saying something in one of his early presentations about the Fat and Sugar combination. In a later presentations he says it's only sugar. And the twins missed a few examples of highly addictive low fat sugary foods. Soft drinks and fruit juices for instance. Most overweight kids crave these. When McDonald's super-sized, they super sized the high GI carbohydrate portion of the meal because they knew ultimately the customer would be back for more. Same with the free soda refills they do over there. I suppose you could argue that the french fries are an example of the lethal fat and carb combination. Though they're not at the 50:50 ratio.

Anyway I'm not so down on sugar these day, everyone knows you shouldn't eat a lot of it. After many months of self testing I'm with William Davis that wheat is the modern day scourge. That doughnut was mostly wheat! I was 3ish stone heavier in my mid twenties and looking back it was mostly due to an increase in wheat in the form of breads and pasta. It took from Feb to September of last year to convince myself that wheat may not be healthy for me, given the good press it gets.

Balance is important but what the balance is is hard to figure out. I cannot function on the standard food pyramid. I have tested it for 33 odd years and things got progressively worse. And in case anyone thinks I ever said the opposite, I would not argue that people do thrive on very high carb diets. I find that eating nutrient dense food satisfies my hunger better and for longer .....fish, red meat, fatty cuts, liver, healthy oils, butter, eggs, nuts and good quality low GI vegetables with starchy stuff in moderation. That choice of foods leads me into the higher protein and fat range of foods that aren't fortified artificially with vitamins.

And to finish (anyone still reading?), I didn't like the blanket statement at the end that exercise is good for you. Exercise is good for you in the correct dose. And like micro nutrient content of your diet it varies from individual to individual.

Food Nazi Signing off.

AstraMonti

I haven't watched the bbc one yet, but I watched cerealkillers yesterday. I can't understand why his LDL went so much up, even if it was ideal big particles. I can only assume after a lifelong of inflammation your body needs time to adjust to a quadruple amount of fat in your diet. Nevertheless I found it really good and hope it goes viral so many people can benefit from the diet, sugar and wheat is truly the evil here.

ror_74 wrote: »

Still, its a thumbs up for a balanced diet. TBH eating is one of the pleasures of cycling and I'd hate to restrict that unnecessarily.

Careful now with the balanced word, the current food pyramid is a "balanced" diet according to HSE, etc etc

petethedrummer wrote: »

Not surprised by the hill climb. I think glucose is necessary during shorter duration exercise.

Do you mean you need additional glucose or the one in your muscles is enough? For what it's worth in my very intensive gym sessions (1h to 1:30 long) I 've never felt the need to have anything else than water, the same on my intervals on the bike. Anything above 2hours will require me to eat something, but it doesn't have to be glucose, I started eating some pork bits with nuts and seems it's working.

ford2600

I haven't watched the bbc one yet, but I watched cerealkillers yesterday. I can't understand why his LDL went so much up, even if it was ideal big particles. I can only assume after a lifelong of inflammation your body needs time to adjust to a quadruple amount of fat in your diet. Nevertheless I found it really good and hope it goes viral so many people can benefit from the diet, sugar and wheat is truly the evil here.

Mine went up also from 4.0 to 5.4. Phinney and Volek deal with it somewhere in this clip!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFD2q5iqevY

Tec Diver

The article about the doctor twins trying diets was disappointing. The one on low carb only did it for a month. I know when I went LCHF in Feb last year weeks two and three were horrible, like having a headcold and/or hangover for two weeks. After that it kept getting better. Wouldn't go back now.
Have two ultra marathons planned for this year, hoping not to use any sugar/carb food/drink for either.

petethedrummer

AstraMonti wrote: »

Do you mean you need additional glucose or the one in your muscles is enough?

Short answer. I'm not sure. Everything is fine when I am on a lone training spin setting my own pace. If am trying to match someone else's pace things are a bit different.

Sure if you're out on the road this weekend we can discuss things.

Ole Rodrigo

AstraMonti wrote: »

Careful now with the balanced word, the current food pyramid is a "balanced" diet according to HSE, etc etc

Yeah, balanced is often a euphemism for ' I really don't know what advice to give you '

AstraMonti

Just watched the bbc horizon and I am bit annoyed by the first part of it. I think you can't get anything conclusive out of it, mainly because the nutritionist killed the whole concept. Who told her that you can't have vegs in a high fat diet or fruits (berries,etc)? And all the talking about calories based on the normal directions from the HSE? And then what about the rubbish part that you only convert glucose by destroying muscle?

I did like the second part towards the end with donuts as it makes perfect sense to avoid anything that's both high on fat and high on sugar and of course all processed food.

Anyway, the "good" part is that all this is getting publicity so we 're hopefully going to see many more experiments and studies, how many of them will be still inconclusive we have to wait and see!

petethedrummer

AstraMonti wrote: »

I did like the second part towards the end with donuts as it makes perfect sense to avoid anything that's both high on fat and high on sugar and of course all processed food.

Just a thought on the 50:50 Fat/Sugar hypothesis..... Yes, its hard to eat a lot of plain sugar. Yes, its hard to eat a lot of plain fat.

but ...

The food companies have figured out formulas to make people consume sugary drinks excessively that have no added fat.

Have they done the same with Fat? Or is it always necessary to involve sugar to get a person to over indulge on fat.

The sweet spot to create addictive foods may be a 50:50 ratio of the two but that does not directly lead to the conclusion that both are equally to blame for obesity.

petethedrummer

I'm going to go home tonight and mix 1 teaspoon of coconut oil with 1 teaspoon of sugar and see what it tastes like.

According to science, it should be amazing!

Chips Lovell

Hang on, I didn't watch it, but the high fat guy was eating no veg? What was he eating?

DaithiMC

Points I got from the BBC programme

Sugars are beneficial for exertion, as the SKY coach said, if he pushed a diet with a concentration of fat he would not have a job. Granted the guy on the fat diet was not on Paleo type diet, i.e., allowed some sugar from fruit.

Emphasising fat in the diet reduces insulin sensitivity and pushed him towards prediabetes, that was surprising to me. As someone earlier said, you don't want diabetes, many more risk factors come into play for all sorts of chronic conditions. So for those on LCHF, testing glycaemic markers, glucose, Fasted glucose, HbA1c, and if you can find it, fructosamine or glycated albumin may be more important than measuring lipids!

Snacking is where we seem to pick up most of the fat/sugar combined foods so avoid that.

So I'm now thinking is the philosophy of food combining a good idea, i.e. , carbs in the morning, mostly or all from fruit, and through the day become increasingly ketogenic, i.e., when the immediate energy is not needed don't take carbs on.

For weight loss, we still can't beat caloric restriction.

petethedrummer

petethedrummer wrote: »

I'm going to go home tonight and mix 1 teaspoon of coconut oil with 1 teaspoon of sugar and see what it tastes like.

According to science, it should be amazing!

It was terrible but I did eat all of it. Probably would be nice on bread. Don't have any bread though.

ryan_sherlock

DaithiMC wrote: »

So I'm now thinking is the philosophy of food combining a good idea, i.e. , carbs in the morning, mostly or all from fruit, and through the day become increasingly ketogenic, i.e., when the immediate energy is not needed don't take carbs on.

The inverse of that (you won't become ketogenic with that approach) - I have tested my ketones and I do get into ketosis even with 200g of carb in my diet, but the carbs are very much focused around the training (during/directly post) and only when the training load is high (3.5+hrs) - your body, after fasting over night is primed for fat burning, don't kick it out of that with a banana first thing. Have it after (or during) that training.

I didn't find the BBC particularly useful - at least it gets people talking.

Cereal Killers was pretty good.

duffyshuffle

DaithiMC wrote: »

So I'm now thinking is the philosophy of food combining a good idea, i.e. , carbs in the morning, mostly or all from fruit, and through the day become increasingly ketogenic, i.e., when the immediate energy is not needed don't take carbs on.

For weight loss, we still can't beat caloric restriction.

Most of what I've read recently (Kiefer, Bailor...) would be the other way around though, fat and protein or nothing when you wake, then don't have the carbs until you have trained, and try to combine carb and protein or fat and protein. Bulletproof coffee seems to be getting bigger and bigger, I've been drinking it the last few months and love it, high concentrate coconut oil with unsalted butter in coffee for breakfast, then you're not hungry until lunch and then eat veg fat protein, train eat protein and carb. I also get a great mental focus off it! Dave Asprey is the guy behind it!
Bailor's Calorie myth is a great read and I also thought cereal killers was well worth the watch!
I didn't see the bbc doc but have it sky plussed

Also, from bloods my fasting glucose and others were great so it doesn't tally with the prediabetic condition for me at all

duffyshuffle

ryan_sherlock wrote: »

The inverse of that (you won't become ketogenic with that approach) - I have tested my ketones and I do get into ketosis even with 200g of carb in my diet, but the carbs are very much focused around the training (during/directly post) and only when the training load is high (3.5+hrs) - your body, after fasting over night is primed for fat burning, don't kick it out of that with a banana first thing. Have it after (or during) that training.

I didn't find the BBC particularly useful - at least it gets people talking.

Cereal Killers was pretty good.

Have you tried MCT oil in coffee at all?

niceonetom

Seeing as this has become the de facto LCHF thread I hope I'm not stepping on Astra's toes here by asking a question where I feel it's most likely to get answered.

I've been LCHFing for a few months now, getting through winter training on it just fine - I'm able to sustain Z2/Z3 without carbs (or any other on-the-bike food) for 5+ hours. I can do a fairly decent volume of sweetspot too. Short nasty turbo sessions are easily fuelled by muscle glycogen anyway. I use carbs judiciously for recovery but now...

The time is coming now for things to get both nasty and long - threshold stuff. 2x 20mins @LT etc. I'm concerned that trying this with very restricted carbs will lead to excessive pain and diminished returns. I don't want to sacrifice training quality for further fat adaptation.

Have any of you any advice on how to tackle reintroducing carbs in this scenario? I don't know whether to still try to keep carbs low GI (sweet potato maybe) before going out or commit fully to eating sugary stuff, bananas, dates etc. so as to deliberately stimulate an insulin response.

Do you know of any off-the-shelf paleo style energy bars? Something with some carbs but that still allows me to avoid wheat and soy etc.? I know there's the option to make home made stuff but there's always the issue of spoilage/storage there unless you make them very regularly.

ryan_sherlock

duffyshuffle wrote: »

Have you tried MCT oil in coffee at all?

That is so 2012

Yeah - I enjoy the fatty coffee - many a 5hr day in the mountains has been fuelled by it. (and many more work days where I need to concentrate all day)

ryan_sherlock

niceonetom wrote: »

Have any of you any advice on how to tackle reintroducing carbs in this scenario? I don't know whether to still try to keep carbs low GI (sweet potato maybe) before going out or commit fully to eating sugary stuff, bananas, dates etc. so as to deliberately stimulate an insulin response.

Do you know of any off-the-shelf paleo style energy bars? Something with some carbs but that still allows me to avoid wheat and soy etc.? I know there's the option to make home made stuff but there's always the issue of spoilage/storage there unless you make them very regularly.

My approach(depending on what I'm trying to accomplish) is now carbs during by feel (ranging from 0-50g/hr) If the session was long & hard, about 70-120g of carbs directly after (I'm talking 2,500kj+ sessions), maybe a little more fruit a little later and then back to LCHF in the evening. On longer sessions that are hard, I take two bottles on the bike, 1 water, 1 ZipVit extreme (a little protein, mostly carbs, some electrolytes) - I have tested pretty much everything I could try and find this one works very very well - http://www.zipvitsport.co.uk/products/sports-nutrition/during/zv2-energy-drink-extreme-uk.html. Hold off on starting drinking it for the first while.

Bacon and eggs now works for me as well (maybe better) than porridge when I have high intensity work to do.

I make homemade bars and leave them in the freezer. Tesco had a coconut + sugar bar recently - ate quiet a few of them in training

niceonetom

Thanks Ryan. I don't train with power so to some degree I'm working blind here - hard to know whether changes in PE relative to HR indicate an actual decrease in power or just the governor trying to trick/bully me into eating more carb.

Hadn't really considered the bottles - it's a long time since I've used anything but water. You think that high GI sugar is the way to go when you have to have carbs on the bike then? No messing about with complex starches or the like?

ryan_sherlock

niceonetom wrote: »

Hadn't really considered the bottles - it's a long time since I've used anything but water. You think that high GI sugar is the way to go when you have to have carbs on the bike then? No messing about with complex starches or the like?

I would like to play around with things like UCAN but have not yet. As I talked about before, the bottle of ZV is more about fuelling the brain anyway.

Yeah, I use significantly less 'products' than I did a few years ago, BUT, I do think there is still a time and a place for this type of thing in certain situations.

AstraMonti

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Hang on, I didn't watch it, but the high fat guy was eating no veg? What was he eating?

I am not really sure, they didn't go into detail on that, they just said high fat. The nutritionist in the start said that he won't be eating any vegs or fruit, then they showed him with a plate of chicken and broccoli but he didn't touch the vegs, and then with a burger and again he didn't touch the lettuce and tomato. So I am not sure what they were trying to prove.

DaithiMC wrote: »

For weight loss, we still can't beat caloric restriction.

I am not sold on that tbh, it all has with how metabolic for you the calories you are eating are. (this sounds like yoda is talking)

niceonetom wrote: »

Seeing as this has become the de facto LCHF thread I hope I'm not stepping on Astra's toes here by asking a question where I feel it's most likely to get answered.

Please feel free, it's been a great thread because of the contributions!

niceonetom wrote: »

Do you know of any off-the-shelf paleo style energy bars? Something with some carbs but that still allows me to avoid wheat and soy etc.? I know there's the option to make home made stuff but there's always the issue of spoilage/storage there unless you make them very regularly.

Natasha's balls. No, I am not joking lol. I bought them off CSS couple of weeks back. They are essentially cocoa balls, with a bit of vanilla beans, almond butter salt and something else. They taste very earthly so it's not going to be everyones cup of tea.

petethedrummer

ryan_sherlock wrote: »

The inverse of that (you won't become ketogenic with that approach) - I have tested my ketones and I do get into ketosis even with 200g of carb in my diet, but the carbs are very much focused around the training (during/directly post) and only when the training load is high (3.5+hrs) -

Peter Attia posts about this:
http://eatingacademy.com/sports-and-nutrition/ketones-carbohydrates-can-co-exist

And he mentions it during this podcast:
http://vinnietortorich.com/2014/01/angriest-trainer-228-great-dr-peter-attia/

Paul Kiernan

There seems to be a major discrepancy between this conclusion and the glucose levels recorded during the tests (Box Hill climb) with Nigel Mitchell of Sky.

Both subjects were fasted for 12 hours and had done no meaningful exercise during the dieting period. But their glucose levels were almost identical at 4.7 for Chris (Sugar) and 4.8 for Xand (Fat). Certainly not prediabetic levels!

I suspect the final figure of 5.9 is therefore wrong!

I'm more than a bit confused by the other figures from the Box Hill test though. Chris drops to 2.7 in 45 minutes. Can you really bonk from a fully glycogenated state in that time? And the ketone levels are also given, showing that Xand started at 0.4, higher than Chris's 0.1 but nowhere near ketosis (over 1.0, I believe). So it's no wonder he was struggling. Also at the end of the final hard climb (performed near maxHR) Xand's glucose shot back up to 5.1 (from 3.3 earlier). Where did that come from?

AstraMonti

If you are really unfit (which seemed they were) you can bonk in 15mins. I don't think being in a fully glyconegated state means anything if your body doesn't know how to use it. It takes few months to train the body to use the stored energy efficiently.

petethedrummer

Paul Kiernan wrote: »

I suspect the final figure of 5.9 is therefore wrong!

The Reading the sky guy took was after 12 hours fasting + 45 mins exercise. So they should have been about the same. I would have guessed that the sugar twin would be slightly higher.

The Fasted Glucose Tolerance test in the doctors office was after 12 hours fasting and then taking an oral glucose solution. They drank from grey bottles IIRC. It would be expected that the twin who is eating less carbs is going to spike more after taking in some sugar. But to extrapolate long term blood sugar control from 1 isolated reading is wrong headed in my opinion.

In my mid to late 20s I started to have blood sugar problems so I asked my doctor twice or three times to test me for type 2 diabetes. That's the test I got and each time he said everything was fine. Yet I continuously fell asleep after meals with a large carbohydrate content. As they got worse into my 30s I started reduce the carb content and through trial and error was half way to this LCHF diet already by Feb of last year.

My dad has had blood sugar problems for 30 or 40 years but passes that test every time, even now in to his 70's. "slightly raised but ok" was the last comment.

Paul Kiernan

petethedrummer wrote: »

The Reading the sky guy took was after 12 hours fasting + 45 mins exercise.

I don't think so. The readings of 4.7 and 4.8 were at T0, before exercise began. The readings after 45 minutes were 2.7 and 3.3 and were at T1. The chart can be seen at around 35 minutes into the program.

petethedrummer wrote: »

The Fasted Glucose Tolerance test in the doctors office was after 12 hours fasting and then taking an oral glucose solution. They drank from grey bottles IIRC.

I though all the readings given were fasted blood glucose levels. Am I wrong? Any measurements I have ever had were taken fasted and without taking any drinks prior to measurement!

petethedrummer

I actually spend a lot of time programming control or feedback loops. I did 1 this week. And if I took 1 isolated reading in response to a changing input as a signifier of control I would be fired. And these are not complex systems.

petethedrummer

Paul Kiernan wrote: »

I don't think so. The readings of 4.7 and 4.8 were at T0, before exercise began. The readings after 45 minutes were 2.7 and 3.3 and were at T1. The chart can be seen at around 35 minutes into the program.

Fair enough. After 12 hours fasting the sugar guy has effectively been on a low carbohydrate diet for 12 hours. He would be on his way to fat burning mode and burning more keytones. And that probably explains the similar result at that point. after 45 mins of exercise I would have guessed the fat guy would have had the smaller drop. But who knows if they put in the same effort for the 45 mins. Was the power output measured and were both equivalent level cyclists?

Paul Kiernan wrote: »

I though all the readings given were fasted blood glucose levels. Am I wrong? Any measurements I have ever had were taken fasted and without taking any drinks prior to measurement!

The doctor takes a baseline fasted reading. then you take a sugary drink. Then he/she takes a reading approx 5 mins later.

You'll note they give you glucose to measure this. not FAT. because FAT doesn't spike your blood sugar like sugar does.

Paul Kiernan

petethedrummer wrote: »

The doctor takes a baseline fasted reading. then you take a sugary drink. Then he/she takes a reading approx 5 mins later.

I looked at this again and yes, the insulin resistance test is done. However the figure that is quoted as being indicative of prediabetes is a figure of 5.9 (from 5.1 before the diet). This is described as being only 0.2 away from prediabetes. Now the WHO criteria for prediabetes is a fasted glucose level of 6.1 to 6.9 mmol/L so this must be what they're talking about.

So, in conclusion, Xand had a pre-diet level of 5.1 and on the morning of the Box Hill test it was 4.8 so it would appear to have improved in that time!

petethedrummer

Paul Kiernan wrote: »

So, in conclusion, Xand had a pre-diet level of 5.1 and on the morning of the Box Hill test it was 4.8 so it would appear to have improved in that time!

5.1 would have been a FBG test result.
4.8 was just fasted.

Not comparing like with like. No conclusion can be drawn.

AstraMonti

I think they missed other things as well, like their Omega3 to Omega6 ratio. On the high sugar diet that must have been off the charts.