Nutrition and 4+ hrs rides

[Wyatt Earp]

Energy from the kidneys? You will have to explain that please.

Humans also don't have "huge amount of stored carbohydrates". Riding at anything approaching race pace, even trained and conditioned athlete's carbohydrate stores will be depleted after about 2 hours.

 

You clearly didn't read well did you, I carefully mention not going at "race pace" because for most people race pace is going flat-out (aka) going anaerobic .

 

Unless you are sitting on 9% or less body fat, you have more than enough carbohydrates sitting in fat that your body can metabolise.

Carbohydrates are the easiest to break, this is how you get in to the "fat burning zone" as some call it.

Cellular respiration.

 

Going anaerobic you bypass all that and start taking glucose from the kidneys, this is a great supply of energy , but alas not enough.

What happens when that tank runs empty ?

 

(I could of course be sucking all this from my backside, I am not a medical person)

[P.A.K.]

4+ hours on the bike aren't suppose to be at'race pace' if race pace = anaerobic pace

[Wyatt Earp]

Just for interest sake.

 

And I will add this, carbo-loading the night before an event , I find it laughable.

 

If your diet provides more carbohydrates than you need to produce this amount of stored calories in the form of glucose and glycogen in your cells, blood, muscles, and liver, the excess will be converted to fat. And that’s how your pasta ends up on your hips.

[Wyatt Earp]

4+ hours on the bike aren't suppose to be at'race pace' if race pace = anaerobic pace

 

Unfortunately that is the ONLY language that 80% of cyclists know.

They are a hunk and chunk of lactic acid from the first 30 minutes and onwards.

Edited September 30, 2013 by Wyatt Earp

[Sharkie 2]

 

 

You clearly didn't read well did you, I carefully mention not going at "race pace" because for most people race pace is going flat-out (aka) going anaerobic .

 

Unless you are sitting on 9% or less body fat, you have more than enough carbohydrates sitting in fat that your body can metabolise.

Carbohydrates are the easiest to break, this is how you get in to the "fat burning zone" as some call it.

Cellular respiration.

 

Going anaerobic you bypass all that and start taking glucose from the kidneys, this is a great supply of energy , but alas not enough.

What happens when that tank runs empty ?

 

(I could of course be sucking all this from my backside, I am not a medical person)

Perhaps the liver and not your kidneys?

[Wyatt Earp]

Perhaps the liver and not your kidneys?

 

As far as I understand the kidney as well as the liver, yet through exercise we receive it from the kidney area.

(I could be very wrong here, but that is how it was explained to me)

[Sniffie]

You clearly didn't read well did you, I carefully mention not going at "race pace" because for most people race pace is going flat-out (aka) going anaerobic .

 

Unless you are sitting on 9% or less body fat, you have more than enough carbohydrates sitting in fat that your body can metabolise.

Carbohydrates are the easiest to break, this is how you get in to the "fat burning zone" as some call it.

Cellular respiration.

 

Going anaerobic you bypass all that and start taking glucose from the kidneys, this is a great supply of energy , but alas not enough.

What happens when that tank runs empty ?

 

(I could of course be sucking all this from my backside, I am not a medical person)

Few things:

"Race pace" implies going as fast as your conditioning allows for the duration of the race. This could be a 1 hour cross country race or a 12 hour baviaans.

Even if you only have single digit body fat percentages you still have enough energy stored as fat to complete a number of marathon type of events at an aerobic pace,if and only if you are fat adapted.

Carbohydrates don't "sit in fat" Carbs is carbs and fat is fat.

You still did not explain the "energy from the kidneys" part.

Glucose from the kidneys? This is another new concept for me.

[Wyatt Earp]

Few things:

"Race pace" implies going as fast as your conditioning allows for the duration of the race. This could be a 1 hour cross country race or a 12 hour baviaans.

1.Even if you only have single digit body fat percentages you still have enough energy stored as fat to complete a number of marathon type of events at an aerobic pace,if and only if you are fat adapted.

2.Carbohydrates don't "sit in fat" Carbs is carbs and fat is fat.

You still did not explain the "energy from the kidneys" part.

Glucose from the kidneys? This is another new concept for me.

 

1. First you say earlier.

 

Humans also don't have "huge amount of stored carbohydrates".

 

Now you say the same thing.

 

2.Don't expend the excess of carbohydrates you consume, and will be stored as body fat.

 

As for the "race pace" explanation, I don't get it, you either ride aerobic or anaerobic.

 

The glucose in the kidneys and liver you can go and study for yourself.

[TopFuel]

1. First you say earlier.

 

 

Now you say the same thing.

 

2.Don't expend the excess of carbohydrates you consume, and will be stored as body fat.

 

As for the "race pace" explanation, I don't get it, you either ride aerobic or anaerobic.

 

The glucose in the kidneys and liver you can go and study for yourself.

 

Very small amounts of glycogen (storage form of glucose) is stored in the kidneys. The liver and muscle are the main storage point of glycogen, which is converted to glucose in sympathetic states (like exercise) into glucose.

 

Fat is not converted into glucose directly, but is broken down into glycerol and free fatty acids which can feed into the energy production metabolic pathway. Which is why you get a fat burning effect from exercise, because you are mobilising fat stored to produce energy.

 

A single digit body fat percentage does not exclude a person from using fat as an energy source, and no, you dont need to be fat "primed". It is a natural, physiological function of the body to breakdown fat to produce energy. Nothing that you have to train it to do.

 

Anaerobic respiration is not tolerable for extended periods. It is an extremely inefficient process that produces unwanted byproducts. You absolutely cannot spend more than an hour above your lactate threshold/anaerobic threshold, your body cannot meet the metabolic demands + lactate buildup will force you to slow down.

 

Wyatt, by going anaerobic, you dont start taking glucose from anywhere (and if it were from somewhere, the kidneys would be low down on the list). You are continuously mobilising glucose into the blood stream through gluconeogenesis, a metabolic pathway that occurs in the liver (mostly). Anaerobic respiration occurs when there is not sufficient oxygen available to act as the final electron acceptor in the metabolic pathway. Thus the metabolic pathways are shifted in order to produce the required ATP (which is really what your body needs) and this is done via an extremely inefficient process called anaerobic respiration.

 

Carbohydrate loading has been proven to increase muscle glycogen stores. So no, there is definitely a point to carboloading, as glycogen stores are what is mobilised during the increased metabolic state of exercise.

 

Anything else I missed?

[TopFuel]

Anaerobic respiration is not tolerable for extended periods. It is an extremely inefficient process that produces unwanted byproducts. You absolutely cannot spend more than an hour above your lactate threshold/anaerobic threshold, your body cannot meet the metabolic demands + lactate buildup will force you to slow down.

 

Probably even less than that.

[tunariaan]

try Hammer Perpeteum for the 3hour plus rides

[Wyatt Earp]

Very small amounts of glycogen (storage form of glucose) is stored in the kidneys. The liver and muscle are the main storage point of glycogen, which is converted to glucose in sympathetic states (like exercise) into glucose.

 

Fat is not converted into glucose directly, but is broken down into glycerol and free fatty acids which can feed into the energy production metabolic pathway. Which is why you get a fat burning effect from exercise, because you are mobilising fat stored to produce energy.

 

A single digit body fat percentage does not exclude a person from using fat as an energy source, and no, you dont need to be fat "primed". It is a natural, physiological function of the body to breakdown fat to produce energy. Nothing that you have to train it to do.

 

Anaerobic respiration is not tolerable for extended periods. It is an extremely inefficient process that produces unwanted byproducts. You absolutely cannot spend more than an hour above your lactate threshold/anaerobic threshold, your body cannot meet the metabolic demands + lactate buildup will force you to slow down.

 

Wyatt, by going anaerobic, you dont start taking glucose from anywhere (and if it were from somewhere, the kidneys would be low down on the list). You are continuously mobilising glucose into the blood stream through gluconeogenesis, a metabolic pathway that occurs in the liver (mostly). Anaerobic respiration occurs when there is not sufficient oxygen available to act as the final electron acceptor in the metabolic pathway. Thus the metabolic pathways are shifted in order to produce the required ATP (which is really what your body needs) and this is done via an extremely inefficient process called anaerobic respiration.

 

Carbohydrate loading has been proven to increase muscle glycogen stores. So no, there is definitely a point to carboloading, as glycogen stores are what is mobilised during the increased metabolic state of exercise.

 

Anything else I missed?

 

Pretty much the way I understand it all, but where do you tap from when you go anaerobic ?

My question regarding this, and brining this in to the discussion is because whether we like it or not, that is the ONLY zone the majority of people know.

 

They don't ride sensibly, start of in the anaerobic zone, feel flat, recover a little and go straight back to doing it again.

They ride till they can go no more.

Then one has to hear "I was right up there, but not sure what went wrong" "I must be eating wrong" "maybe I did not carbo load enough" "I just had a bad day" and many more.

 

Thus I said the body needs to be trained, nothing was said about being "fat primed"

I still think that if you have a lower body fat percentage, you might stand a greater risk of running near empty if your on the bike nutrition is not enough.

 

As I said, too much anaerobic riders out there, not feeding the muscle enough oxygen , and I used the term "they are a hunk and chunk of lactic acid"

 

But here is what I would like to know and needs explained to me, when you go anaerobic, and you have depleted the muscles, stripped the body from the necessary oxygen it needs, where does one then try and tap the energy from ?

[P.A.K.]

Carbo loading is only useful if your glycogen stores are depleted from exercise.

 

FOR most of us weekend warriors, our glycogen stores aren't depleted before a race because we didn't train the day or 2 before a race AND most people's normal diets contain enough carbs.

[Wyatt Earp]

Probably even less than that.

 

Which is pretty much what I have been going on about.

That is why I don't subscribe to hard training.

I do believe that many don't understand and listen to their bodies.

They simply go at it like a bull in a china shop.

[Sniffie]

I agree that it is a natural, physiological function of the body to breakdown fat to produce energy, but we as modern westernized humans are neglecting this form of energy production. First of all we don't go hungry for extended periods of time like our hunter gatherer fore fathers were forced to. Secondly our diet changed in a big way since the advent of agriculture some 10 000+ years ago. Due to the availability of carb rich grains the percentage of carbs in the diet went way up. The roots, shoots, berries and wild fruit that formed part of the hunter gatherer's diet had a low carb content compared with the commercial fruit of today.

 

If you page through the LCHF thread on the hub you will see that "fat adaption" is for real as experienced by a lot of hubbers.

 

 

What Does It Mean to Be Fat-Adapted?

http://i247.photobucket.com/albums/gg158/MDA2008/MDA%202011/fat-adapted.jpgWhen describing someone that has successfully made the transition to the Primal way of eating I often refer to them as “fat-adapted” or as “fat-burning beasts”. But what exactly does it mean to be “fat-adapted”? How can you tell if you’re fat-adapted or still a “sugar-burner”? I get these and related questions fairly often, so I thought I’d take the time today to attempt to provide some definitions and bring some clarification to all of this. I’ll try to keep today’s post short and sweet, and not too complicated. Hopefully, med students and well-meaning but inquisitive lay family members alike will be able to take something from it.

As I’ve mentioned before, fat-adaptation is the normal, preferred metabolic state of the human animal. It’s nothing special; it’s just how we’re meant to be. That’s actually why we have all this fat on our bodies – turns out it’s a pretty reliable source of energy! To understand what it means to be normal, it’s useful examine what it means to be abnormal. And by that I mean, to understand what being a sugar-dependent person feels like.

A sugar-burner can’t effectively access stored fat for energy. What that means is an inability for skeletal muscle to oxidize fat. Ha, not so bad, right? I mean, you could always just burn glucose for energy. Yeah, as long as you’re walking around with an IV-glucose drip hooked up to your veins. What happens when a sugar-burner goes two, three, four hours without food, or – dare I say it – skips a whole entire meal (without that mythical IV sugar drip)? They get ravenously hungry. Heck, a sugar-burner’s adipose tissue even releases a bunch of fatty acids 4-6 hours after eating and during fasting, because as far as it’s concerned, your muscles should be able to oxidize them (PDF). After all, we evolved to rely on beta oxidation of fat for the bulk of our energy needs. But they can’t, so they don’t, and once the blood sugar is all used up (which happens really quickly), hunger sets in, and the hand reaches for yet another bag of chips.

A sugar-burner can’t even effectively access dietary fat for energy. As a result, more dietary fat is stored than burned. Unfortunately for them, they’re likely to end up gaining lots of body fat. As we know, a low ratio of fat to carbohydrate oxidation is a strong predictor of future weight gain.

A sugar-burner depends on a perpetually-fleeting source of energy. Glucose is nice to burn when you need it, but you can’t really store very much of it on your person (unless you count snacks in pockets, or chipmunkesque cheek-stuffing). Even a 160 pound person who’s visibly lean at 12% body fat still has 19.2 pounds of animal fat on hand for oxidation, while our ability to store glucose as muscle and liver glycogen are limited to about 500 grams (depending on the size of the liver and amount of muscle you’re sporting). You require an exogenous source, and, if you’re unable to effectively beta oxidize fat (as sugar-burners often are), you’d better have some candy on hand.

A sugar-burner will burn through glycogen fairly quickly during exercise. Depending on the nature of the physical activity, glycogen burning could be perfectly desirable and expected, but it’s precious, valuable stuff. If you’re able to power your efforts with fat for as long as possible, that gives you more glycogen – more rocket fuel for later, intenser efforts (like climbing a hill or grabbing that fourth quarter offensive rebound or running from a predator). Sugar-burners waste their glycogen on efforts that fat should be able to power.

Being fat-adapted, then, looks and feels a little bit like the opposite of all that:

A fat-burning beast can effectively burn stored fat for energy throughout the day. If you can handle missing meals and are able to go hours without getting ravenous and cranky (or craving carbs), you’re likely fat-adapted.

A fat-burning beast is able to effectively oxidize dietary fat for energy. If you’re adapted, your post-prandial fat oxidation will be increased, and less dietary fat will be stored in adipose tissue.

A fat-burning beast has plenty of accessible energy on hand, even if he or she is lean. If you’re adapted, the genes associated with lipid metabolism will be upregulated in your skeletal muscles. You will essentially reprogram your body.

A fat-burning beast can rely more on fat for energy during exercise, sparing glycogen for when he or she really needs it. As I’ve discussed before, being able to mobilize and oxidize stored fat during exercise can reduce an athlete’s reliance on glycogen. This is the classic “train low, race high” phenomenon, and it can improve performance, save the glycogen for the truly intense segments of a session, and burn more body fat. If you can handle exercising without having to carb-load, you’re probably fat-adapted. If you can workout effectively in a fasted state, you’re definitely fat-adapted.

Furthermore, a fat-burning beast will be able to burn glucose when necessary and/or available, whereas the opposite cannot be said for a sugar-burner. Ultimately, fat-adaption means metabolic flexibility. It means that a fat-burning beast will be able to handle some carbs along with some fat. A fat-burning beast will be able to empty glycogen stores through intense exercise, refill those stores, burn whatever dietary fat isn’t stored, and then easily access and oxidize the fat that is stored when it’s needed. It’s not that the fat-burning beast can’t burn glucose – because glucose is toxic in the blood, we’ll always preferentially burn it, store it, or otherwise “handle” it – it’s that he doesn’t depend on it. I’d even suggest that true fat-adaptation will allow someone to eat a higher carb meal or day without derailing the train. Once the fat-burning machinery has been established and programmed, you should be able to effortlessly switch between fuel sources as needed.

There’s really no “fat-adaptation home test kit.” I suppose you could test your respiratory quotient, which is the ratio of carbon dioxide you produce to oxygen you consume. An RQ of 1+ indicates full glucose-burning; an RQ of 0.7 indicates full fat-burning. Somewhere around 0.8 would probably mean you’re fairly well fat-adapted, while something closer to 1 probably means you’re closer to a sugar-burner. The obese have higher RQs. Diabetics have higher RQs. Nighttime eaters have higher RQs (and lower lipid oxidation). What do these groups all have in common? Lower satiety, insistent hunger, impaired beta-oxidation of fat, increased carb cravings and intake – all hallmarks of the sugar-burner.

It’d be great if you could monitor the efficiency of your mitochondria, including the waste products produced by their ATP manufacturing, perhaps with a really, really powerful microscope, but you’d have to know what you were looking for. And besides, although I like to think our “cellular power plants” resemble the power plant from the Simpsons, I’m pretty sure I’d be disappointed by reality.

No, there’s no test to take, no simple thing to measure, no one number to track, no lab to order from your doctor. To find out if you’re fat-adapted, the most effective way is to ask yourself a few basic questions:

• Can you go three hours without eating? Is skipping a meal an exercise in futility and misery?
  
• Do you enjoy steady, even energy throughout the day? Are midday naps pleasurable indulgences, rather than necessary staples?
  
• Can you exercise without carb-loading?
  
• Have the headaches and brain fuzziness passed?
  

Yes? Then you’re probably fat-adapted. Welcome to normal human metabolism!

A quick note about ketosis:

Fat-adaption does not necessarily mean ketosis. Ketosis is ketosis. Fat-adaption describes the ability to burn both fat directly via beta-oxidation and glucose via glycolysis, while ketosis describes the use of fat-derived ketone bodies by tissues (like parts of the brain) that normally use glucose. A ketogenic diet “tells” your body that no or very little glucose is available in the environment. The result? “Impaired” glucose tolerance and “physiological” insulin resistance, which sound like negatives but are actually necessary to spare what little glucose exists for use in the brain. On the other hand, a well-constructed, lower-carb (but not full-blown ketogenic) Primal way of eating that leads to weight loss generally improves insulin sensitivity.

 

 

 

Read more: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/what-does-it-mean-to-be-fat-adapted/#ixzz2gRHh6alY

['Dale]

I use Hammer Perpeteum, water and real food on 4 hr rides+

 

Also check out Allen Lim's recipes for race fuel that some PROs often use.

Real lekka stuff.

 

I avoid gels and excessively sweet things to avoid the energy spikes. Might use it for the final hour cos I love jelly babies.