[Closed] Diet and Nutritional Advice ???

FFS Barnes, I said it wasn't a sugar, I didn't say it wasn't a glucose polymer! Learn to read!

OK, I mixed up sugar and glucose, but of course normal sugar is 50% glucose and glucose is a sugar and maltodextin is made of glucose, so the distinction, particularly to the metabolism, is minor

molgrips:

Sports drinks are maltodextrin, not sugar. Quite different. And a different effect on the brain too.

Barnes, a polymer made up of a molecule is COMPLETELY different to the molecule on its own!

im intrigued as to the signs that your "carb stores" are getting low and the difference between that, thirst and hunger

im not an elite athlete and never expect to have this problem, but im interested.

you can finish a marathon and still have 60% of your carb stores intact.

funny that....

im intrigued as to the signs that your "carb stores" are getting low and the difference between that, thirst and hunger

My legs feel different if they're actually tired (after a 5 hour ride say) or my carb stores are low (after say one hour's hammering with no energy drink. I pay attention to how I feel.

Of course, I may be incorrectly attributing these sensations but that's the way I have interpreted it so far. The feeling I call 'low energy' goes away if I have a gel or a bar, the feeling I call 'tiredness' does not.

im not an elite athlete and never expect to have this problem

You don't need to be an elite athlete.

you can finish a marathon and still have 60% of your carb stores intact.

I'm sure. I can also tear around for 90 mins and bonk!

why do you solely attribute the bonk to low glycogen stores? bonk is sudden fatigue, or the sensation of fatigue...

Well what I call bonk is when your blood sugar goes low. I suppose others (possibly the entire coaching community 🙂 ) may use it differently...

I've been riding with a few mates who've done the whole white faced confused shakey bit - one gel and some water and they make it home. I assumed that having low glycogen stores was a precursor to this stage.

do you measure your blood sugar levels when exercising?

OK, I mixed up sugar and glucose, but of course normal sugar is 50% glucose and glucose is a sugar and maltodextin is made of glucose, so the distinction, particularly to the metabolism, is minor

That is the king amongst princes of tosh posted on this thread 😆

The whole basis of carb metabolism dynamics is that monosaccharides, disaccharides and polysaccharides are all absorbed, transported and metabolised in different ways.

Glucose utilisation by muscles is still not fully understood, but involves a little bit of physiology (absorption of sugars across gut wall and vascular haemodynamics), quite a bit of endocrinology (production/modulation of glycogenic hormones) and an awful lot of biochemistry (carbohydrate phosphorylation, membrane transporters, kinase activity and cofactor mobilisation).

You can pump all the 'sugar' you want into your body but if your cells don't have the materials to transport and metabolise it you'll get no energy produced, that is why all these 'blood sugar' and 'insulin spike' diatribes are just bullshine.....

.....those with a 'little understanding' of physiology are way out of their depth, and those with 'no apparent understanding' need a lifeboat 🙄

do you measure your blood sugar levels when exercising?

Obviously not, but it'd be interesting. Maybe I could get a diabetic's blood sugar meter for this purpose 🙂

That is the king amongst princes of tosh posted on this thread

Someone's wronger than me? Yess!!

You can pump all the 'sugar' you want into your body but if your cells don't have the materials to transport and metabolise it you'll get no energy produced, that is why all these 'blood sugar' and 'insulin spike' diatribes are just bullshine.....

Interesting. But there is a point when your blood sugar gets low, impairing your ability to ride, and a gel or equivalent fixes it.. surely? But this is opening interesting lines of enquiry for me at least. Must do more reading...

known as 'internet armchair bullsh**e theory'™

(commenting on hilldodgers post)

Well, the [i]debate[/i] still, err.....goes on then ?.

But while it does, I've actually made a start. I don't actually need to lose much weight, but I find this an opportunity to try new things.

Screw arguing, I'm getting busy in the kitchen 😀

Homemade soup for lunch today, stir-fried vegs and fish for dinner. Yum ! 😉

S

known as 'internet armchair bullsh**e theory'™

Aww that's not fair.. all I'm trying to do is answer questions based on what I know/thought I knew and my experience as a rider/trainee.

All the above theory pales into insignificance when you hit 3kms to go with a big Belgian lad who has been suggesting that sex with a chicken is your favourite hobby for the last 10 kms, and who's Mum, Dad, Sister, Aunty and girlfriend are at the finish line expecting their beautiful lad to demonstrate his potential to become the next Eddy Merckx.

Bollocks to glucose metabolism; are you gonna go for a long one?

are you gonna go for a long one?

Fnarr!

Interesting. But there is a point when your blood sugar gets low, impairing your ability to ride, and a gel or equivalent fixes it.. surely?

Yes, but if your muscle cells are not adequately 'equipped' to absorb this sugar it will have less effect than you imagine - it doesn't matter how much coal you shovel on a fire if the kindling is wet or you've got no matches (sorry for dodgy analogy but it's all I can think of)

If 'energy production' by muscles was a simply dependent on blood 'sugar' levels the whole area would have been fully understood a long time back, but as I said earlier, it's way more complex whole body physiology and down to the cellular level.

It's the problem with reductionist science, it doesn't consider the 'organism' as a set of interacting dynamic processes but simply as a set of linear mechanisms.
Biology is still largely 'Newtonian' rather than 'Einsteinian' - simple (and useful) answers to many everyday issues but once you look for a deeper understanding it's just not there (yet)

Along vaugely similar lines to what hilldoger posted, I was sent this link earlier in the week
[url] http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/0394.htm [/url]

monosaccharides, disaccharides and polysaccharides are all absorbed, transported and metabolised in different ways.

is there any evidence for this ? I was under the impression they were all broken down into glucose and fructose in the stomach (or mouth - if you suck a piece of bread a little it will become sweet)

Yes, but if your muscle cells are not adequately 'equipped' to absorb this sugar it will have less effect than you imagine

Of course.. in simple terms we are taught that you can only absorb so much carbs whilst riding. And there's also the debate over carbo-loading.. It would be ridiculously simplistic to suggest that energy production was purely down to blood sugar levels, but you need enough to keep you going obviously. And running out is a major concern when training or racing.

Your point is an interesting one - it would suggest that a holistic approach to training and even weight loss is far better than doing/eating X will have Y effect. That's what I try to achieve by experimenting and listening to my body. I'm sure I'm wrong about my assumptions but overall the idea is to find what works.

I've found that if I manage my diet carefully I can lose weight and get fitter; and that it's far more difficult for me to lose weight and gain power than it is for me to lose weight and gain base fitness and endurance.

Barnes - cellulose is a glucose polymer. It's indigestible by humans and requires feats of gastric engineering for other animals to eat it.

So no, polysacchiarides are not all broken down into glucose 🙂

Barnes - cellulose is a glucose polymer

now you're being silly, we don't use it as food

My point is that polymers can have very different properties to their base molecules. So why assume that they all get broken down and used the same way?

IanMunro - very interesting article. Suggests that if you ride for 4 hours more gently and bonk, it's a different bonk than if you hammer for an hour and bonk.. Hmm..

can we bring ectomorph, endomorph and mesomorph into this 'discussion'

[i]can we bring ectomorph, endomorph and mesomorph into this 'discussion'
[/i]

Never seen them posting on here before, are they related to [i]the[/i] Morph, from take hart ?.

😉

S

So why assume that they all get broken down and used the same way?

because that's what I had read - in exactly the same way all proteins are broken down into amino acids

is there any evidence for this ? I was under the impression they were all broken down into glucose and fructose in the stomach (or mouth - if you suck a piece of bread a little it will become sweet)

Saliva does contain an enzyme specific for starch hydrolysis (amylase), but as little food these days is sucked it plays a minor role.

Most monosaccahrides are produced by the action of pancreatic enzymes in the duodenum, the stomach plays little or no role as it's low pH is not compatible with the action of the enzymes required.

FFS solo,

I just logged in to post that gag and now you've ****ing ruined it.

can we bring ectomorph, endomorph and mesomorph into this 'discussion'

Well that's partly what I was getting at when I said find out what works for you. Cos you'll be one of those three, although I don't think all people in a particular category are the same at all...

All i know is I ride for a bit drink and bit of water, I feel great.

If I ride a lot and stop to enjoy the view, a few jelly babies and some water I also feel great

I always feel better if the sun is shining.

Some energy drinks make we want to vomit, coke rots my teeth.

I also enjoy a jammy dodger on the sofa watching telly after a long ride and sweating a little covered in mud.

I've come last in every event I've ever entered. I have no interest in getting 1.7% more power output due to wearing pink lycra.

But riding my bike makes me feel great...

Stufield, are you implying I'm wrong to be interested in performance?

I just had a look on wiki because I couldn't remember which morph was which. Hadn't realised that these classifications were originally part of a theory that body shape was linked to personality type though.

im happy to be one of those MrSmith, i dont know which one tho

Your point is an interesting one - it would suggest that a holistic approach to training and even weight loss is far better than doing/eating X will have Y effect. That's what I try to achieve by experimenting and listening to my body. I'm sure I'm wrong about my assumptions but overall the idea is to find what works.

Exactly 😉

Change one thing at a time and see what works for you, not some geezer on the internet ! Sure, some common basic principles apply, but it's one area where 'anecdotal evidence' outweighs 'peer reviewed papers' every time.

Most conventional biochemistry (Krebs cycle etc) is based on mashed up bits of animal (aka 'cell free system') in a buffer system providing conditions far from those found in your body - it's all they had in the 50's and at the time it was blo**dy good science done by gifted imaginative individuals.

To understand the fine detail you need to look deeper (in both senses of the word) and most of the peers who review find that unsettling to their established heirachy so it's going to take a while before a new way of thinking is fully expressed....

so it's going to take a while before a new way of thinking is fully expressed....

in the mean time we take comfort from the 'I ride my mtb up hill and down dale then sup on a pint and nosh a pie. never did me any harm.' comments that we read on the internet somewhere.

simonfbarnes - Member
because that's what I had read...

That reminds me of something a student once told me after i told him his essay was wrong - "But it was in a book, so must be right."

Change one thing at a time and see what works for you, not some geezer on the internet ! Sure, some common basic principles apply

Are you referring to me as some geezer on the internet? 🙂

I would suggest though that you need a fairly basic grounding in sports physiology rather than starting from scratch. It seems to help provide a framework within which experiments can work.

Sorry DB 😉

I was just hanging onto this thread to see if anyone else is actually going to/is trying this.

Its only a few weeks, or, if you like it, for the rest of your life.

My challenge is finding up enough recipes that meet the requirement.
I wont be eating the eggs, nor drinking the coffee, but thats still loads of different dishes/meals to try.

S

in the mean time we take comfort from the 'I ride my mtb up hill and down dale then sup on a pint and nosh a pie. never did me any harm.' comments that we read on the internet somewhere.

Of course, enjoy life/cycling how you wish - just don't quote 1950's textbook science to justify it 😉

Gowrie wrote

Well explain the science. Even just describe it briefly. Let's see if he knows something the rest of the medical community doesn't.

It is not true to say that it is unknown in the medical community. The consultant (diabetes specialist) who advised a member of my family on diet, recommended a very similar regime.

I didn't buy the Oz programme BTW as I have taken a consensus of similar ideas and applied them to what suits me and my lifestyle. I would guess that my calorie intake is approx. the same as before as I am eating more but have cut out the crap and am eating more regulary.

I would suggest though that you need a fairly basic grounding in sports physiology rather than starting from scratch. It seems to help provide a framework within which experiments can work.

Possibly, but you run the risk of just doing the same old same old !

Honestly, unless you have access to blood, respiratory, electrophysiological and vascular analysis you're better off keeping a simple food/activity diary and being honest with yourself about what you want to achieve and what lifestyle you're prepared to live to get there.

Many western leisure athletes have access to far more sports physiology based training aids than Olympic standard athletes from less well financed countries and Alf Tupper won races on a bag of chips.............

Ruddy hell hilldodger - I have to agree with your last post.

What about a nice chicken salad sandwich and a bottle of Lucozade? Maybe some regular sips of water? A handful of dried fruit or some sweets? A slice of cake? That kind of formula can keep me going strong all day long..

Any good?

Not very scientific I guess so probably not...

EDIT: a nice bit of granary bread in the sandwich natch...

I've just had a big pile of bacon and egg sarnies with coffee and a fag and feel great.

But it was in a book, so must be right.

not one book, everything I've ever read about digestion - so if you're going to advance a different theory you have to punt some evidence.

I think you need to at least know the difference between base training and speed training, since they are pretty relevant for cyclists who want to do anything other than just ride.

As for the developing nation training thing - sure.. I think it's universally accepted that the best thing for any kind of training is time. All the fancy stuff is just to optimise the training you do, either because you need the elite edge or you want to get the most out of the meagre time you have.

TandemJeremy - Member
Ruddy hell hilldodger - I have to agree with your last post.

:blows kisses to new buddy: 😉

Hilldodger, how come you know the stuff you appear to? 🙂

Hilldodger, how come you know the stuff you appear to?

Educational background and 25+ years of career related knowledge/experience as postdoc biological scientist....

Sweet.

Barnes, a polymer made up of a molecule is COMPLETELY different to the molecule on its own!

yes different while it's being a polymer, but obviously not for long in your stomach if its GI is nearly 100

Maltodextrin as it happens is easily broken down but this is not true of all polysaccharides.

I've just started a topic for all of iDave diet followers... I started today, if anyone else has or wants to know the outcomes its here

http://www.singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/idaves-diet-plan-members

Just for hilldodger

[img] [/img]

is there any evidence for this ? I was under the impression they were all broken down into glucose and fructose in the stomach (or mouth - if you suck a piece of bread a little it will become sweet)

Saliva does contain an enzyme specific for starch hydrolysis (amylase), but as little food these days is sucked it plays a minor role.

Most monosaccahrides are produced by the action of pancreatic enzymes in the duodenum, the stomach plays little or no role as it's low pH is not compatible with the action of the enzymes required.

but isn't that a "non answer" answer ? OK I was wrong about the exact location of the breakdown, as it's not in the stomach, but every reference I've located so far says the intestines only take in monosaccahrides, not disaccharides or polysaccharides...

jeesus. judging by the posts, sounds like you lot need a lot of advice. or just like bickering about advice.

sounds like you lot need a lot of advice

you think a wholesale change to the understanding of carbohydrate metabolism shouldn't be challenged ?

that is why all these 'blood sugar' and 'insulin spike' diatribes are just bullshine.....

in the past I've read that carb digestion is limited to around 300 kCal/h for the average person, which makes me wonder how quickly the blood sugar level could change in response to eating anyway, as it's likely to be rate limited, and moreover, since it's possible for the muscles to consume far more energy than that (300 kCal/h = 350W, or ~70W mechanical output), exercise will put a much heavier strain on sugar regulation than eating...