Aktins vs Carb-loading

Interesting article. Never read that. I personally feel that
carbs help in long distance cycling and running, but I never
really tried to increase my fat intake instead and would be
willing to give that a try. For me, I can low carb and go 40
or 50 hilly miles on my bicycle and am okay, but after that,
I really am toast. I will give a high fat diet a try on my
next ride over 50 and see. That will be interesting.

As far as carbing up before an endurance event, I don't
think that would ever be wrong. It is proven to work. I
think the article is just brining up another possible way
to go about fueling for a endurance event. I will try it
this weekend. I'll do a 60 or 70 mile ride on a high fat
diet instead.

Enjoy, Curt

"Mark" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I am a neither anti-Atkins nor follower. but i am quite
suprised that lowcarber even consider carb-loading is
totally wrong.

atkins.com28 742445.htmlOpen ↗

any comments? runners and dieters

Mark

I'm quite surprised that anyone would find this article
surprising... considering the source. It's a load of bull...
just like the diet.

(Mark) said:

I am a neither anti-Atkins nor follower. but i am quite
suprised that lowcarber even consider carb-loading is
totally wrong.

atkins.com28 742445.htmlOpen ↗

any comments? runners and dieters

Mark

--
Nova Scotia, Canada

(Mark) said:

I am a neither anti-Atkins nor follower. but i am quite
suprised that lowcarber even consider carb-loading is
totally wrong.

atkins.com28 742445.htmlOpen ↗

any comments? runners and dieters

Mark

Marketing ploy is what I think.

You cannot compair marathon runners and competitive weight
lifters who carb load to your average joe who is dieting.
And you certainly cannot compair them to your average obese
couch potato who isn't used to exercising at all.

Its about as bad as the current gatorade commercial
showing the decreased performance will happen if you
drink just water instead of gatorade. But truth be told,
for the *average* person under normal conditions, water
is just fine.

See, there are indeed studies to prove the point that if the
*average* person carbloads they can actually gain weight.

These companies will take those studies and twist them so
that it makes their product more appealing.

"Mark" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I am a neither anti-Atkins nor follower. but i am quite
suprised that lowcarber even consider carb-loading is
totally wrong.

atkins.com28 742445.htmlOpen ↗

any comments? runners and dieters

As the article said, there's been very little research. My
personal experience has been that, while not a competition
level athlete at any point in my life, my performance in
terms of both intensity and endurance has been notably
better on a relatively high-fat low-carb diet than any other
way of eating. I'd have to caution, however, that it took a
fair amount of time and effort to become adapted to
exercising on a low-carb, Atkins-type diet. A couple months
at least. I doubt that this type of adaptation has ever been
rigorously studied.

I found the book "Slow Burn", by Stu Mittleman, interesting.
Nobody could fault his ability or accomplishments, he may be
one of the best ultramarathoners ever. And his advice is to
train your body to burn fat, not carbs, so you don't "hit
the wall" when your glycogen stores run out. His diet, as
described in the book, isn't as low carb as an Atkins diet,
but it's high in fat ("good fats" especially), relatively
low in carbs, and the carbs he recommends are the unrefined
ones that don't trigger huge insulin spikes. He does not
recommend carb loading, that I know of. What's good for Stu
is good enough for me. Sprinters may have different needs,
however, but the majority of hobby runners, bikers, etc.
seem to be more interested in distance than top speed.

HG

Runners need *more* carbs than the average sedentary Joe.
Doesnt mean you can load up on the highly processed junk
food. The usual advise about lots of veggies, fruit, minimal
sugar, yada, yada, yada still applies.

"curt" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Interesting article. Never read that. I personally feel
that carbs

help in

Quoted message said:

long distance cycling and running,

Help? I'd say mandatory but fat and protein are also
necessary. Only carbs during endurance not allow the best
performance.

Quoted message said:

I will give a high fat diet a try on my next ride over 50
and see. That will be interesting.

A single day will not tell you much as your system does
not react that fast. OTOH I do a quasi-fat load a few days
before a long race. By quasi I would eat some evil
pasta(busting Atkins' ludicrous balls) but have it in
olive oil.

Quoted message said:

As far as carbing up before an endurance event, I don't
think that

would

Quoted message said:

ever be wrong. It is proven to work. I think the
article is just

brining

Quoted message said:

up another possible way to go about fueling for a
endurance event. I

will

Quoted message said:

try it this weekend. I'll do a 60 or 70 mile ride on a
high fat diet instead.

What is important is that a pure carb load with little
protein and fat is not ideal yet many people still blindly
do it. It's always a case of balance.

For those low carb folks, by carbs, I'm not talking
about simple carbs like junk food but yummy corn,
potatoes, etc etc etc.

-DougF

Hannah Gruen wrote in message <2javm8Fvik52U1@uni-
berlin.de>...

Quoted message said:

"Mark" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I am a neither anti-Atkins nor follower. but i am quite
suprised that lowcarber even consider carb-loading is
totally wrong.

atkins.com28 742445.htmlOpen ↗

any comments? runners and dieters

As the article said, there's been very little research. My
personal experience has been that, while not a competition
level athlete at any

point

Quoted message said:

in my life, my performance in terms of both intensity and
endurance has

been

Quoted message said:

notably better on a relatively high-fat low-carb diet than
any other way of eating. I'd have to caution, however, that
it took a fair amount of time

and

Quoted message said:

effort to become adapted to exercising on a low-carb, Atkins-
type diet. A couple months at least. I doubt that this type
of adaptation has ever been rigorously studied.

I found the book "Slow Burn", by Stu Mittleman,
interesting. Nobody could fault his ability or
accomplishments, he may be one of the best ultramarathoners
ever. And his advice is to train your body to burn fat,

not

Quoted message said:

carbs, so you don't "hit the wall" when your glycogen
stores run out. His diet, as described in the book, isn't
as low carb as an Atkins diet, but it's high in fat ("good
fats" especially), relatively low in carbs, and the carbs
he recommends are the unrefined ones that don't trigger
huge insulin spikes. He does not recommend carb loading,
that I know of. What's good for Stu is good enough for me.
Sprinters may have different needs, however, but the
majority of hobby runners, bikers, etc. seem to be more
interested in distance than top speed.

I too have experimented with low-carb diets, and have read
"Slow Burn". The indisputable fact is that it takes less
oxygen to produce the same amount of energy for carbohydrate
fuel vs. fat, so for performance over shorter distances
(marathon or less), you cannot attain your best performance
without lots of carbohydrates.

There has been research suggesting that there is a type of
fat storage within the muscles and that eating certain types
of fats (mid-chain triglycerides) will aid in all kinds of
endurance performance. This is because the body is always
burning both fat and glucose when exercising, even at a high
intensity. This is why its good to have some fat in your
diet and not to worry too much about it - its healthy to eat
and burn fat as well as carbs.

The body type and metabolism of each person is different,
and what worked for Stu Mittleman probably will not work for
most people. I tried it for 6 months and I was unable to
exercise as I had before. My body never adapted to being
happy with a very restricted carbohydrate diet, especially
for exercise. People with a predominance of slow-twitch
muscles may have more success. I have alot of fast-twitch.

This all being said, there are health reasons to control
each of the macro foods. If you eat too much or too little
protien there are consequences. If you eat too much or too
little or the wrong kinds of fats there are consequences.
Likewise if you eat too much or too few carbohydrates, or
eat high glycemic carbs at the wrong time - there are also
consequences. By eating sugar and refined grains all the
time surely many americans develop pre-diabetic syndrome and
cause health problems. This is true of athletes too.

I believe I've benefited from trying low carb eating because
overall its made my diet more healthy and balanced. Now I
certainly eat plenty of carbs, though probably less than
previously, but I'm not longer addicted to starches the way
I was before. I eat my favorite high glycemic snacks after
exercise because that is when the body will most efficiently
process them into glycogen. The rest of the time I try to
eat balanced meals, and I always do a carbo load the day
before long runs, but I try to eat more complex carbs most
of the time.

The point about trying to avoid a hyper-elevated blood sugar
all day long is a very good point that all people can
benefit from learning about. To me this should be the legacy
of the controlled carb diets -- a healthy understanding that
all 3 macro food groups have their benefits and limits.

- Tony

Quoted message said:

HG

On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 14:21:21 GMT, Tony <qtrader2@(remove)hotmail.com>

Quoted message said:

Hannah Gruen wrote in message <2javm8Fvik52U1@uni-
berlin.de>...

Quoted message said:

"Mark" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I am a neither anti-Atkins nor follower. but i am quite
suprised that lowcarber even consider carb-loading is
totally wrong.

atkins.com28 742445.htmlOpen ↗

any comments? runners and dieters

As the article said, there's been very little research.
My personal experience has been that, while not a
competition level athlete at any

point

Quoted message said:

in my life, my performance in terms of both intensity and
endurance has

been

Quoted message said:

notably better on a relatively high-fat low-carb diet
than any other way of eating. I'd have to caution,
however, that it took a fair amount of time

and

Quoted message said:

effort to become adapted to exercising on a low-carb, Atkins-
type diet. A couple months at least. I doubt that this
type of adaptation has ever been rigorously studied.

I found the book "Slow Burn", by Stu Mittleman,
interesting. Nobody could fault his ability or
accomplishments, he may be one of the best
ultramarathoners ever. And his advice is to train your
body to burn fat,

not

Quoted message said:

carbs, so you don't "hit the wall" when your glycogen
stores run out. His diet, as described in the book, isn't
as low carb as an Atkins diet, but it's high in fat
("good fats" especially), relatively low in carbs, and
the carbs he recommends are the unrefined ones that don't
trigger huge insulin spikes. He does not recommend carb
loading, that I know of. What's good for Stu is good
enough for me. Sprinters may have different needs,
however, but the majority of hobby runners, bikers, etc.
seem to be more interested in distance than top speed.

I too have experimented with low-carb diets, and have read
"Slow Burn". The indisputable fact is that it takes less
oxygen to produce the same amount of energy for
carbohydrate fuel vs. fat, so for performance over shorter
distances (marathon or less), you cannot attain your best
performance without lots of carbohydrates.

There has been research suggesting that there is a type of
fat storage within the muscles and that eating certain
types of fats (mid-chain triglycerides) will aid in all
kinds of endurance performance. This is because the body
is always burning both fat and glucose when exercising,
even at a high intensity. This is why its good to have
some fat in your diet and not to worry too much about it -
its healthy to eat and burn fat as well as carbs.

The body type and metabolism of each person is different,
and what worked for Stu Mittleman probably will not work
for most people. I tried it for 6 months and I was unable
to exercise as I had before. My body never adapted to
being happy with a very restricted carbohydrate diet,
especially for exercise. People with a predominance of
slow-twitch muscles may have more success. I have alot of
fast-twitch.

This all being said, there are health reasons to control
each of the macro foods. If you eat too much or too little
protien there are consequences. If you eat too much or too
little or the wrong kinds of fats there are consequences.
Likewise if you eat too much or too few carbohydrates, or
eat high glycemic carbs at the wrong time - there are also
consequences. By eating sugar and refined grains all the
time surely many americans develop pre-diabetic syndrome
and cause health problems. This is true of athletes too.

I believe I've benefited from trying low carb eating
because overall its made my diet more healthy and
balanced. Now I certainly eat plenty of carbs, though
probably less than previously, but I'm not longer addicted
to starches the way I was before. I eat my favorite high
glycemic snacks after exercise because that is when the
body will most efficiently process them into glycogen. The
rest of the time I try to eat balanced meals, and I always
do a carbo load the day before long runs, but I try to eat
more complex carbs most of the time.

The point about trying to avoid a hyper-elevated blood
sugar all day long is a very good point that all people
can benefit from learning about. To me this should be the
legacy of the controlled carb diets -- a healthy
understanding that all 3 macro food groups have their
benefits and limits.

- Tony

Quoted message said:

HG

I've also been experimenting with long bike rides and
lifting weights. While I think that some carbs seem to be
necessary at times, the amount of carbs is quite confusing.
For instance, last year I slowly decreased the amount of
carbs I take in during my bike rides. Now, I typically take
in about 10-20 grams an hour for rides that are over 2
hours. Before, I was taking in a lot more. I also will have
a recuperation meal after a long bike ride, and leave it at
that, whereas before I would have a "recuperation day" of
high carb eating. I've also tried to do carb loading with
fruits and vegetables as opposed to bread, pasta, etc. I've
ridden as far as 70 miles on way fewer carbs than
"recommended".

Plus, I exercise -- at most -- five days a week. For me,
it's relatively easy to get all the carbs I need by eating
low carb. This might change if I was a "real" athlete and
exercised more than that.

--
Bob in CT Remove ".x" to reply

I know this ...when I am low carbing on days that I lift I
my bench press ( and all my other lifts) is about 20lbs LESS
than when I have some carbs before working out or through
the day. I usually try and eat some fruit for breakfast or
have a low-carb smoothie w/ some fruit added to it. even
having 20 grams of carbs extra help a great deal.

Alok "Mark" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I am a neither anti-Atkins nor follower. but i am quite
suprised that lowcarber even consider carb-loading is
totally wrong.

atkins.com28 742445.htmlOpen ↗

any comments? runners and dieters

Mark

"Doug Freese" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"curt" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Interesting article. Never read that. I personally feel
that carbs

help in

Quoted message said:

long distance cycling and running,

Help? I'd say mandatory but fat and protein are also
necessary. Only carbs during endurance not allow the best
performance.

I always eat enough protein, but when carbing before a
long ride, I cut back on fat. The reason being is that fat
is said to slow down carbs into the system and has a
negative effect.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I will give a high fat diet a try on my next ride over
50 and see. That will be interesting.

A single day will not tell you much as your system does
not react that fast. OTOH I do a quasi-fat load a few days
before a long race. By quasi I would eat some evil
pasta(busting Atkins' ludicrous balls) but have it in
olive oil.

Not sure if I can agree with a single day ride will not tell
me much. I think it will. I will be on LC and then the day
before I will load up on good fats and during the ride I
will eat more fat and see how that goes, instead of eating
carbs a day or two prior. If a 50 mile isn't long enough, I
will bump it up to 70 or more, just to see how it goes.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

As far as carbing up before an endurance event, I don't
think that

would

Quoted message said:

ever be wrong. It is proven to work. I think the article
is just

brining

Quoted message said:

up another possible way to go about fueling for a
endurance event. I

will

Quoted message said:

try it this weekend. I'll do a 60 or 70 mile ride on a
high fat diet instead.

What is important is that a pure carb load with little
protein and fat is not ideal yet many people still blindly
do it. It's always a case of balance.

See above.

Curt

Quoted message said:

For those low carb folks, by carbs, I'm not talking about
simple carbs like junk food but yummy corn, potatoes, etc
etc etc.

-DougF

Mark said:

I am a neither anti-Atkins nor follower. but i am quite
suprised that lowcarber even consider carb-loading is
totally wrong. atkins.com28Open ↗
742445.html any comments? runners and dieters

To me the problem is actual carb-loading by people who
really know what it is doesn't much resemble people who read
the words in a magazine article think it means. Much like
people who read in a magazine article that Atkins is low
carb so they imagine eating no veggies. The reality and the
uneducated guess don't bear much resemblence:

Quoted message said:

The Myth of Carb-Loading

As opposed to the actual carb-loading as practiced by
knowledgible folks.

Quoted message said:

You've probably heard of marathoners and other elite
athletes inhaling gargantuan amounts of pasta before big
endurance events, often referred to as carb-loading ...

See, inhaling gargantuan amounts of pasta isn't what carb
loading really is. Folks who take it seriously do the
calculations to figure out what portion size to have, and it
is far smaller than "gargantuan".

So Atkins is opposed to the myth not to the reality. The
reality involves a carefully calibrated amount of carbs.
Funny thing, but the reality of Atkins involves carefully
calibrated amounts of carbs!

Folks on Atkins find their CCLL (their custom personal level
for loss) by finding the point they fall out of ketosis.
Loss is best just barely in ketosis not deep into ketosis.
The body has defenses against going deeply into dietary
changes, so Atkins is a method to find the point of least
defenses. Here's the key - Folks who start a new exercise
program and keep at it consistantly discover that their CCLL
goes up. And it goes up by an amount that can be carefully
calibrated to match their exercise efforts. If this sounds
like carb loading to you, there's a good reason for
it. Atkins does it's increased carbs averaged over the week
based on exercise averaged over the week. Carb loading
does it's increased carbs once based on exercise once.
Same thing different time to average across.

"Bob in CT" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

I've also been experimenting with long bike rides and
lifting weights. While I think that some carbs seem to be
necessary at times, the amount of carbs is quite
confusing. For instance, last year I slowly decreased the
amount of carbs I take in during my bike rides. Now, I
typically take in about 10-20 grams an hour for rides that
are over 2 hours. Before, I was taking in a lot more. I
also will have a recuperation meal after a long bike ride,
and leave it at that, whereas before I would have a
"recuperation day" of high carb eating. I've also tried to
do carb loading with fruits and vegetables as opposed to
bread, pasta, etc. I've ridden as far as 70 miles on way
fewer carbs than "recommended".

Plus, I exercise -- at most -- five days a week. For me,
it's relatively easy to get all the carbs I need by eating
low carb. This might change if I was a "real" athlete and
exercised more than that.

I appreciate the comments from both you and Tony, and I
think Tony is probably right when he said that the effect of
a relatively low-carb diet may vary a lot from person to
person. I've heard the fast twitch vs. slow twitch thing
before. That's likely valid, but I think there are also
likely a whole host of other factors that determine the best
diet for an individual who wants to maximize his/her
performance.

Bob, you and I are contending with significant insulin
resistance, I think, and that does add a whole new level of
complexity to the equation. Regardless of the oxygen factor,
elevated insulin probably tends to interfere with the
processes that fuel the muscle cells, perhaps overriding
most of the benefit of using more carbs to provide more
glucose. Since there is a lot of individual variation in how
our endocrine systems function, what works best for one
person may not work for another. Which means we'll just need
to experiment to find what works best.

However, I know from personal experience that just taking a
try or two with higher fat/lower carb levels won't tell
much... it requires a long period of adaptation...
exercising and diet.

HG

[email hidden] (rick++) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Runners need *more* carbs than the average sedentary Joe.
Doesnt mean you can load up on the highly processed junk
food. The usual advise about lots of veggies, fruit,
minimal sugar, yada, yada, yada still applies.

I wrote a nice long response to this that was blown out by
Google...I even quoted the papers...but it's gone so now you
get this...

So here's my response:

1. 5 or 6 people is at the best preliminary research
(nutrition is sooo bad about these type of study
designs). The research supporting carb loading is older
but 3 times as many folks were used (a, b & c).

2. When you are only using 5 folks, you have to compile
result together from many studies to have any
significance. The review by Hargreaves in the Journal of
Sports Science shows there is little effect in fat
loading for both sprint and low/slow (70% effort)
activities (d).

3. Note that nobody is talking about the high protein/low
carb diet that Atkins recommends. Both experimental
groups have at least 50% of their calories from carbs.
And in my opinion, the diets are very low protein (14% at
the most). (e)

4. Generally, I was not completely surprised by the results.
Fat is good energy for long activities. Hasn't this been
common wisdom for a long time? You have more
calories/gram (9 for fat vs. ~4.5 for carbs/protein) so
it makes sense that you can go longer before becoming
exhausted.

I'm not sure about the VO2 max gains because I still don't
understand this measure well enough. Oxygen production is
measured right? As I understand it, fat oxidation requires
more oxygen. So if instead of measuring oxygen used by just
the Kreb cycle (assuming aerobic) they are also actually
measuring oxygen production by fat oxidation to glycerols
and then Kreb cycle utilization. This seems like an
incorrect measure in this case because you are not comparing
apples to apples. Some measure of muscle glycogen (i.e. how
much energy is getting to the muscles) seems like it would
be more correct and maybe more relevant. ***Note, I have
enough biochem background to be dangerous...so someone stop
me if I'm way off base here about VO2 max.***

(a)ncbi.nlm.nih.govquery.fcgiOpen ↗
ve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=7928859
(b)ncbi.nlm.nih.govquery.fcgiOpen ↗
ve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=8609825
(c)ncbi.nlm.nih.govquery.fcgiOpen ↗
ve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=8514712
(d) ncbi.nlm.nih.govquery.fcgiOpen ↗
eve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=14971431
(e)atkins.com11 534846.htmlOpen ↗

[email hidden] (Mark) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

I am a neither anti-Atkins nor follower. but i am quite
suprised that lowcarber even consider carb-loading is
totally wrong.

atkins.com28 742445.htmlOpen ↗

any comments? runners and dieters

Mark

I would put myself in the same boat on Atkins but I'd never
do it myself***.

I'm always amused by research that is conducted on 5 or 6
folks. This is far, far too common in nutrition (and likely
explains why official advice is always changing) and is the
case in both of the linked articles.

It's also important to note that none of these people are on
a carb restricted diet. All groups have at least 30% carbs
and fairly low protein consumption (12%). The question is
one of carb/fat ratios not carb/protein.

Overall, I'm not surprised by the research. People with more
fat in their diet can run longer. Makes sense because fat is
usually thought of a long term energy source. Think about
the women running the 6 hour marathons...or women that
successfully swim the channel.

So, if everyone only studies 6 people, somebody has to come
together and put 3 or 4 articles in obscure journals
together into a worthwhile review. Here's nice review from
Hargreaves in the "Journal of Sports Science" on carb
loading and fat loading compare:

ncbi.nlm.nih.govquery.fcgiOpen ↗
db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=14971431

And here's a link to an older review by Hegle in the journal
"Sports Medicine":

ncbi.nlm.nih.govquery.fcgiOpen ↗
db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=11103848

The last sentence wraps it up well: However, in most cases
muscle glycogen storage is compromised, and although muscle
glycogen breakdown is diminished to a certain extent, this
is probably part of the explanation for the lack of
performance enhancement after adaptation to a fat-rich diet.

So my interperatation is you see the same or decreased
performance despite an increase in some physiological
factors. This is because the high fat diet compromises
muscle glycogen stores.

Now, if you start with 3 times as many folks in your study,
you might have more statistically significant results. Check
out this old but statistically valid research by Bosch from
the "Journal of Applied Physiology":

ncbi.nlm.nih.govquery.fcgiOpen ↗
db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=8514712

Another good one from Bosch in "Metabolism" about why you
carb load the night before and not just right before:

ncbi.nlm.nih.govquery.fcgiOpen ↗
db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=8609825

***And finally, my $0.02 as a sprinter. On a carbo starve
diet to prep for loading (no simple or complex sugars but
lots and lots of protein and fat), I had to swim a race and
then had to swim an unexpected second race.

I warmed up for the first for 45 minutes (typical wu) and
then raced the 200m butterfly. One of the more painful
races in my memory, so I followed it with a long cool down
(20+ min).

Then I was informed that I had to swim the 400m IM. I had to
return to the water to warm-up/count strokes for turns and
swam for only about 15 minutes with a focus on slowly
warming up all the muscles.

Then I raced the 400m IM. This would be the most painful
race I ever experienced. By the end of the first 50, I
was seeing red (happens when all blood vessels are
dilated due to extertion). At the 300 mark, I was
experiencing mild hallucinations (believed I was still
far from the wall up until the moment I smacked my hands
into it). Short "blink outs" (like a black out but
quicker) occurred during my final
100. I had to be assisted from the pool because I did not
have the upper body strength to get out of the water
(assistance is common after a marathon but not after a
3 minute race).

That experience is the reason why I won't do Atkins. It's
not that I don't think he's on the right track with
increased protein consumption. And I don't think my
experience is common or representative of the diet. It's
just that even thinking about a high protein/high fat diet
gives me flashbacks of that race.

~becca

Seems to me that Power Gel made Carb-loading less of a
factor.

The real loading is training that gets the muscle storing
increasing amounts of gylcogen.

Gleshna

Overheard at 2004 ESA Northeastern Regional Surf Contest:

"F%&*, I got beaten by a guy from the Great Lakes!"

"Becca" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

That experience is the reason why I won't do Atkins. It's
not that I don't think he's on the right track with
increased protein consumption. And I don't think my
experience is common or representative of the diet. It's
just that even thinking about a high protein/high fat diet
gives me flashbacks of that race.

You weren't adapted to anywhere near that level of exertion
without your stored glycogen. People just starting a reduced-
carb diet will often experience the same sort of thing in
the first weeks. Adaptation occurs gradually, and probably
more so in some individuals than others.

Humans are able to pretty much thrive on all sorts of
diets, from fat and protein-rich hunting-based diets to
primarily starch and vegetable-based fare. Pleistocene man
in northern areas likely had to spend large parts of the
year existing primarily on what he could hunt. In order to
hunt effectively it is unlikely that he would not have been
able to run efficiently on this type of diet, which would
definitely be restricted in carbohydrates. The thing is,
however, that we adapt to the food in our environment. If
we've been eating a lot of carbs all our life and suddenly
change over to something like the Pleistocene hunter's
diet, we're not immediately going to be able to go out and
run down the mastodon (or modern exercise equivalent). It
will take many weeks or months for most of us to get to
that point.

HG

Becca said:

***And finally, my $0.02 as a sprinter. On a carbo starve
diet to prep for loading (no simple or complex sugars but
lots and lots of protein and fat), I had to swim a race
and then had to swim an unexpected second race.

Key words above - sprinter and starve-diet-to-prep.

Hannah G covered the adaptation time issue. It takes about a
month at low carbs for the body to adjust and you were only
doing it for a few days. Far too short a time to make the
adjustment to see the benefits. There's an asymetry in the
timing that makes people not understand what's going on -
The human body can take a month or so at low carb to make
its long term adjustment and end up with improved athletic
performance, but the human body can take a day or so at high
carb to make its short term adjustment and end up with
improved athletic performance.

I'll cover the sprinter aspect. Low carbing benefits
endurance a lot more than strength. Slow twitch fiber burns
a lot more fat compared to fast twist fiber that burns a
lot more carb. Given the fat to carb balance of low carb
eating, low carbing favors slow twitch so it favors
marathons over sprints, low weigh many rep over high weight
few rep, and all other comparisons of endurance sports vs
strength sports. Sprinters have no call to try low carbing
because of that.

Now let's consider a marathoner and that asymetry of
adjustment times. The marathon is designed so no human can
run one competively and still have glygogen stores at the
end. To make it to the finish line of a marathon a person
must burn more fat than carbs, and that's why marathon
training is different in kind than shorter run training.
Because the adjustment to low carb takes a month or so, a
marathoner should train on a low carb diet for a long time.
Build up to it gradually. Because the adjustment to a high
carb diet takes a day or so, a marathoner should carb-up
before a race in a way that doesn't trigger a metabolic
shift. That means a single carb-up under 24 hours before the
race. That carb-up can fill the muscles with glycogen as
much as possible without stopping the fat burning
metabolism. Tricky balancing act to pull it off.

Woud such a strategy help a sprinter at all? Doubtfull.
Sprints use more fast twitch fiber and less slow twitch
fiber so sprints benefit from having more carbs not less.

Hannah Gruen said:

As the article said, there's been very little research.

Also, the first half of the article is not even relevant to
the issue of 'carbo-loading'... which is what the article is
supposed to be about! The article starts out with:

"When it comes to enhancing performance, filling up with
carbs may not be as beneficial as some think. Here's why. On
low-fat and low-calorie diets..."

Huh?! Ummm... how did we make the quantum leap from eating
carbs (say 60%) to 'low-fat, low calorie'?! Who said
anything about 'low-fat, low calorie'?! I don't know of any
athletes that would recommend a low calorie diet for
training and racing!! And we all know the importance of
having fat in your diet. That paragraph then goes on to talk
about the importance of protein. Again... who said protein
wasn't important?! Who said that having a standard 55-60%
carb diet means you don't eat any protein?! And by the
way... their example about eating a bagel for breakfast and
a salad for lunch... well... if that bagel was whole wheat
(10g of protein) and eaten with a couple of tablespoons of
peanut butter (14g of protein)... and if that salad was a
spinich salad (spinich is 50% protein)... that girl got MORE
than enough protein for her "45 minutes on the stair
climbing machine"!

The next paragraph goes on about restricting calories.
WTF? Again... who said anything about low calories?! How
do they make the leap from being non-Atkins to restricting
calories?! And if you're supposed to be arguing against
"carbo-loading"... the word "loading" does not exactly
imply low calorie!

The third paragraph says people need fat in their diet.
Ummm... Duh. This article goes on and on about things which
have nothing whatsoever to do with a standard diet or 'carbo-
loading'... then at the end they throw in a few ancient
studies about the benefit of fat that requires "More
scientific research". Whatever.

The Atkins people are so full of [censored] it's not even funny.
Tell you what... next marathon you run... load up on steak
and eggs for breakfast the morning of the race and tell me
how you perform.

--
Nova Scotia, Canada

"David" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

This article goes on and on about things which have
nothing whatsoever to do with a standard diet or 'carbo-
loading'... then at the end they throw in a few ancient
studies about the benefit of fat that requires "More
scientific research". Whatever.

The Atkins people are so full of [censored] it's not even funny.
Tell you what... next marathon you run... load up on steak
and eggs for breakfast the morning of the race and tell me
how you perform.

David, in context of this thread your points are well taken.
I think the initial confusion is that the original article
was written in context of support/information for dieters,
specifically low-carb dieters. As a low-carber I can't tell
you how many times I've read that it is impossible to run,
bike, whatever on a low-carb diet, that you "need" a lot
more carbs to perform these activities. Sometimes even well-
meaning people have this idea because they tried to go for
their usual run, or ride, on the second week of Atkins
induction and found themselves unable to perform. They don't
understand that adaptation takes many weeks. I think that's
the point the article was trying to counter, although
perhaps not that effectively.

I don't think anyone is going to do a marathon on a very low
carb diet, low-carber or not. The way people handle their
diet is just going to vary a lot depending on their
individual physiology and endocrine function. It's just that
for people like me, very insulin resistant, cutting back on
carbs on a day-to-day basis has really enhanced my ability
and endurance. Your mileage probably *will* vary... a lot.

HG