Prof Tim Noakes' U-turn on Carbohydrates

[covie]

To the guys not eating before a race - is that what the diet prescribes? How long a race would you have to eat something for breakfast?

 

realistically to have benefit from eating before a race, you need to eat at least 3 hours before the race, i dont know many people that eat at5am to start racing at 8am

[HappyMartin]

I have a question regarding intensity on this diet.

 

As I said earlier in this thread I tried the diet and struggled with it. What killed me was riding at high intensity. As i understand it converting fat into a usable fuel provides am almost endless supply of energy but would that not work at lower intensity levels.

 

As an example I did the jacaranda on Saturday. My time was 03:19 for the 114km so not great but at my age (51) it was pretty hard. I spent 1:16 with a HR between 170 and 189 and 5 minutes over 190. I was not able to do this on the low carb diet. My gut feel is high GI fuel is allowing these kinds of efforts.

 

Am I wrong about this? Anyone have any experience with this?

[covie]

Its obviously a debate, but if you look at Joe Friel "author and top US, national and olympic coach" He has had many atheletes won Nationals, and has achieved olympic success with the paleo diet which is essentially basically the same thing, He has however adapted the diet to include loads of carbs once you have done high intensity workouts (for recovery purposes)

 

And to maintain anaerobic levels has more to do with training yourself to function at that intensity than it has to do with carb utlization. Very few people train properly and spend way to little time in Zone 1/2 on easy rides, or zones 4-5a/b for high intensity training. We tend to gravitate to a moderate training functioning mainly in Zone 3 becuase on slow easy training rides we go to hard, and on hard training rides we are fatigued by not taking the easy rides easy. Hence most people train aerobic capacity but hardly any anearobic capacity.

Edited October 22, 2012 by covie

[Jaco-fiets]

Its obviously a debate, but if you look at Joe Friel "author and top US, national and olympic coach" He has had many atheletes won Nationals, and has achieved olympic success with the paleo diet which is essentially basically the same thing, He has however adapted the diet to include loads of carbs once you have done high intensity workouts (for recovery purposes)

 

That would be the same approach as the target keto diet then (TKD). Acc to this you can consume carbs before and after training (not huge amounts obviously)

[dracs]

Sorry if this is already covered, but how do you know if you are carb resistent? Similarly someone said earlier they are carb-sensitive - how do you know that and is that opposite of carb resistent then? Is there a test or is it anecdotal?

Edited October 22, 2012 by dracs

[Topwine]

Sorry if this is already covered, but how do you know if you are carb resistent? Similarly someone said earlier they are carb-sensitive - how do you know that and is that opposite of carb resistent then? Is there a test or is it anecdotal?

 

Being carb resistant and carb sensitive is basically the same thing. It means your body is not as efficient anymore in making use of carbohydrates. It's applicable to all humans, since childhood, although the signs might not be as pronounced in early life or all people. With age, or really excess carb / sugar intakes, the signs begin to emerge and worsen. Signs are overweight, obesity, high fasting blood sugar levels, 2 hour after meal BG levels, continuous cravings, high and low energy level swings, ales, losing eyesight, memory loss , etc

[Topwine]

Another good read on nutritional ketosis, or being in a keto adapted state. This guy has been living a low carb diet for a long time without being keto adapted, and only recently started the experiment to being fully in a state of ketosis.

 

http://livinlavidalowcarb.com/blog/jimmy-moores-n1-experiments-nutritional-ketosis-day-91-120/15560

[andydude]

Being carb resistant and carb sensitive is basically the same thing. It means your body is not as efficient anymore in making use of carbohydrates. It's applicable to all humans, since childhood, although the signs might not be as pronounced in early life or all people. With age, or really excess carb / sugar intakes, the signs begin to emerge and worsen. Signs are overweight, obesity, high fasting blood sugar levels, 2 hour after meal BG levels, continuous cravings, high and low energy level swings, ales, losing eyesight, memory loss , etc

 

This is where I differ a bit, hence my previous post of 50% people being CR (carb resistant). From a good article which also gives some background where he explains it's not his (prof noakes) diet and which you all can read - http://www.health24.com/fitness/Diet_Supplements/16-481-512,73175.asp

 

Second the reason why this eating plan has been so extraordinarily effective in my case is because it matches precisely my particular biological needs, perhaps because like Mr Banting, my lineage is from England. In brief I inherited from my father and his lineage, a predisposition to develop adult-onset diabetes because I am what is known as “carbohydrate resistant” (CR) and hence “pre-diabetic”. My biology is such that I am unable effectively to clear from my bloodstream, the breakdown product of ingested carbohydrate, glucose. As a result my pancreas must over-secrete the hormone, insulin, one of whose normal functions is to direct the glucose from the bloodstream into the liver and muscles.

 

The yet to be answered question is: How many South Africans who are unhappy with the effects of their dietary choices on their bodies, share this same biology? If it is a majority, then there are many, many South Africans who will benefit from “banting”. If it is a minority, then relatively few will benefit. Since most South Africans are already eating diets high in carbohydrates, especially those that are refined, my bias is to believe that many might benefit from this eating plan.

 

However those who can metabolise carbohydrates efficiently and who have always been lean despite eating a high carbohydrate diet may not benefit in any way from this eating plan. I would not advise any athlete who is lean and quite happy with his or her weight and performances to change to this eating plan since it might not make a difference and might even be detrimental.

[Topwine]

This is where I differ a bit, hence my previous post of 50% people being CR (carb resistant).

 

Andy, being "lean" does not equate being healthy. Half of all people dying from heart disease are not fat ! Thus being lean, does not mean you are necessarily carb tolerant. Myself was always being classified as lean and "healthy", although I had high cholesterol and exercised regularly.

 

I have said the degrees of carb tolerance varies between people, and also with your age. Two big degrees of freedom there to allow for a wide variety.

 

However, the science seem to indicate that humans all have a degree of intolerance, the manifestation of this might just be hidden or the signs and degree not the same in every one.

 

See this article and research on children of 5 years old :

 

Children as young as five are suffering heart damage caused by obesity, a study has found.

Their blood pressure is 40 per cent higher than that of healthy youngsters and they have up to nine times more cholesterol in their blood.

Oxford academics warn that even at this age, their arteries have become lined with fatty deposits so their hearts have to work harder to pump blood.

A study of nearly 50,000 five to 15-year-olds found the hearts of obese children were enlarged compared with those of youngsters who were a healthy weight.

And the blood pressure and cholesterol of some was already so high that unless they change their lifestyles, they could be 40 per cent more likely to die from a heart attack or stroke in adulthood.

 

Read more: http://www.dailymail...l#ixzz2A15nDDWZ

 

Also autopsies done on dead american soldiers during the vietnam war found signs of atheroschlerosis in the veins of 18 - 20 year young boys, but none in the veins of the vietnamese.

 

The evidence is out there. People just chose to ignore it.

Edited October 22, 2012 by Topwine

[andydude]

I understand what you're saying, Topwine, but the prof is very clear that he can't say that everybody is CR and therefore he can't say everybody should follow the diet. Evolution is also involved here in that different people evolved differently, depending on their circumstances. As far as I'm concerned, it's not about carbs in general then according to the study, but obviously about specific carbs and eating lots of refined carbs and sugar (in the form of sweet drinks, processed foods, etc.) and that's made quite a difference in adults in kids during the last 50 years.

 

An interesting articles that speaks to grains (with and without gluten) actually being toxic - http://scdlifestyle.com/2012/04/the-toxic-truth-about-gluten-free-food-and-celiac-disease/

['Dale]

interesting thread.

 

awesome input, topwine

Edited October 22, 2012 by Puncheur

[andydude]

In your graph, instead of "invention of agriculture" I could put "invention of high fructose corn syrup".

[Topwine]

In your graph, instead of "invention of agriculture" I could put "invention of high fructose corn syrup".

 

...which started with the invention of agriculture. It isn't just HFC syrup that is the problem. There is lots of Fructose in fruit as well. Eat too much, and you have the same problem. Agriculture made the availability of fruit plentifull .

Edited October 22, 2012 by Topwine

[dracs]

Being carb resistant and carb sensitive is basically the same thing. It means your body is not as efficient anymore in making use of carbohydrates. It's applicable to all humans, since childhood, although the signs might not be as pronounced in early life or all people. With age, or really excess carb / sugar intakes, the signs begin to emerge and worsen. Signs are overweight, obesity, high fasting blood sugar levels, 2 hour after meal BG levels, continuous cravings, high and low energy level swings, ales, losing eyesight, memory loss , etc

Ja so a lot of that is qualitative and subject to interpretation - except for fasting blood sugar levels (and BG levels - what are those?)

On the blood glucose my tests have always been in the normal range though don't recall exact numbers. I'm kind of with Andy on this - I'm intrigued but this is a big lifestyle change and I wouldn't want to go down the road without knowing that 1. I am really an ideal candidate, and 2. I need to do a lot more research first...

[Topwine]

Ja so a lot of that is qualitative and subject to interpretation - except for fasting blood sugar levels (and BG levels - what are those?)

On the blood glucose my tests have always been in the normal range though don't recall exact numbers. I'm kind of with Andy on this - I'm intrigued but this is a big lifestyle change and I wouldn't want to go down the road without knowing that 1. I am really an ideal candidate, and 2. I need to do a lot more research first...

 

I dont see a lot of "interpretation" in being overweight or obsese. BMI calculations do a very good job of that. As for the others, only you know the truth. I forgot to mention erectile dysfunction as "one of the signs" as well. No interpretation needed there as well.

 

I continue to do more research and read every day on this subject. Still did not prevent me from experimenting for 2 months now. Had no negatives so far, in fact, just the opposite in many instances.

[Topwine]

 

On the blood glucose my tests have always been in the normal range though don't recall exact numbers.

 

Just for interest sake, what do you regard as "normal" BG (blood glucose) levels ?