HOT: Active* forum members generally gain 5% discount at starbike.com store!
Weight Weenies
* FAQ    * Search    * Trending Topics
* Login   * Register
HOME Listings Blog NEW Articles FAQ Contact About




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 108 posts ] 
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Oct 06, 2010 6:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 10:39 am
Posts: 2349
Perhaps Stella, you should prove yourself RIGHT before others have to prove you WRONG.

Yes, there is nothing wrong with the food you listed per se. However the percentages listed are waaay off.

There is a limit to which the body can use protein. Once cells are at their limit of capacity is reached any additional amino acids in the bodies fluids are deanimated and used for energy and/or stored as fat.

(ie: energy in is still energy in, there is no way around this)

This is kinda basic physiology. May I suggest reading "Textbook of Medical Physiology, 8th Edition, Prof Guyton"? Covers all the basics. I know I use it.

If you like I could go into the synthesis of triglycerides from proteins and how amino acids (component of proteins) can be converted to acetyl-CoA.


But to make it easier for reference: -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketone
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketone_bodies
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketogenesis
http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/ ... ekey=50900
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/414351
http://www.ausport.gov.au/ais/nutrition ... -_how_much
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/c ... /5/S2/1293
http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/content/full/130/4/886

Even if the high protein diets IS NOT harmful it still comes down to energy in vs energy out. No short cuts.

_________________
"Physiology is all just propaganda and lies... all waiting to be disproven by the next study."
"I'm not a real doctor; But I am a real worm; I am an actual worm." - TMBG


Top
 Profile  
 
Posted: Wed Oct 06, 2010 6:20 am 


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 06, 2010 7:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 4:18 am
Posts: 382
Location: Australia
60+ % of calories from protein is preposterous.

Sounds high to me too based on the RDIs.

You'll go into ketosis because your body needs carbs as it's basic, NECESSARY requirements to fuel the cells in your body.

To be best of my knowledge, this statement is untrue. All cells in the body are quite quite happy metabolising fatty acids with the exception of the brain (FAs can't pass through the blood-brain barrier). Ketone bodies are produced in the liver and transported through the blood into the brain where they are incorporated into acetyl-CoA and then fed into the citric acid cycle for normal metabolism. Typically, a short period of adaptation (days, from memory) is required before the brain will happily switch over to ketone metabolism full time.


You don't get enough carbs and you'll just turn that protein into the carb fuel that your body needs... why waste all that energy?

Correct. It's not the waste of energy that's of concern (unless you live in the 3rd world), it's the stress put on the kidneys to clear the increased levels of uric acid. A good reason (along with many others) to keep well hydrated.

Also, that excess protein will not maintain your muscle mass. Protein will not create or maintain muscle. Only weight bearing exercise will.


Actually, this statement has been found to be untrue. REF: Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2010 Feb;42(2):326-37.
Increased protein intake reduces lean body mass loss during weight loss in athletes.

Infants only eat (from mother's milk) 6-8% of calories from protein.

This statement is true.

I'm pretty sure they need WAY more protein than any athlete on this planet.

Per KG of bodyweight, yes. Overall, nope. More information here for people looking: http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/aa040e/AA040E07.htm. My guy feeling, if you excuse the pun, is that infants don't provide a meaningful model for comparison. Macronutrient profiles will (largely) suit what the child needs at that particular time. For example, let's assume that the average 6 month old consumes 900ml of breast milk /24 hour period (http://www.kellymom.com/bf/pumping/milkcalc.html with references provided) and breastmilk contains on average ~70kCal/100ml (http://www.unu.edu/unupress/food/8F174e/8F174E04.htm) and the average 6 month old boy weighed in at 8kg, total ave calorie consumption/24hrs = 630kCal or per kg of body weight, 79kCal/kg of body weight. Let's say that your average joe weighs in at a feathery 80kg, if he ate the equivalent of a baby at 6 months, he'd be consuming 6320kCal per day. Hmmm.

What's my point? The macronutrient needs of an average growing baby is different to that of a fully grown adult who is not growing but has more lean mass to maintain. The 6-8% figure does not give an indication of total calories consumed. Protein needs decrease with age when measured in g/Kg body mass, but body mass increases with age and thus protein consumption will go up (to a point). However, energy requirements are likely to decrease once adulthood is passed and growth has stopped (but muscle mass is still being maintained) thus calories required from CHOs/lipids needed to maintain weight will decrease (so g/kg of protein remains stable whilst the others drop but as a % of total calories consumed, % protein increases.) Obviously, these are generalisations and lifestyle/body composition/genetics will influence actual dietry needs.


Also, I read an article or an interview by an olympic dietician and they say no matter what your sport, exercise/activity level, etc. you shouldn't change your caloronutrient ratio.

You shouldn't change from what? There is plenty of peer reviewed evidence that indicates that 1. there have been changes/evolution in macronutient content of our diets over generations and 2. these changes, in part, are the cause of the obesity/metabolic syndrome epidemic that plagues our western society today (and exercise/activity, lifestye (stress levels) and genetics make up the other components) Nutr Rev. 2010 Apr;68(4):214-31.
I can't remember which specific paper I saw it in but it showed that over the past 50 years, in US diets, protein content had remained somewhat stable, fat levels had actually come down but CHOs, in particular, high GI CHOs, had seen a large increase in consumption. The question is, are we adapted to be consuming all of these high GI CHOs? Looking into our past (pre-agriculture) and what we ate might provide us with some clues about what we're best adapted to be eating. eating.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glycemic_index - references 16/17 are quite interesting.

Whilst calories in vs calories out is largely true (to a point, think caffeine consumption and increases in BRM, for example), consumption of lower GI foods - particularly protein - leads the test subjects feeling fuller for longer and thus reduces the incidence of binge eating (and therefore excessive calorie consumption).

The only thing that changes is calories. They also spent a while doggin' on American's for eating too much protein (the average American eats somewhere in the range of 18-20% of calories from protein).


Eat even 30+ % calories from protein for two months and tell me how you feel after.

If you added that extra 10% at the expense of high GI carbs from your diet, science demonstrates that your body composition/blood work would most likely improve.

I pity the fool who eat low-carb.

100% agreed! The world would be a far less tollerable place without my midnight freezer icecream raids. :beerchug:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 06, 2010 7:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 10:39 am
Posts: 2349
stella-azzurra wrote:
Fortunately 100% of this information can be found on-line rather than dispensed by armchair cyclists on this forum.


Indeed. Fortunately there is the information on the net for people to see and dispel some of the more ridiculous things being suggested. Haven't seen anyone outside a bodybuilding forum recommend anything close to 60% energy intake from protein.

stella-azzurra wrote:
I don't know Tapeworm where do you get your legitimate basis from.


Research. And then referencing it for all to see. Where do you get your info? It seems a bit light on in terms of credibility. Apart from the youtube clips :roll:

stella-azzurra wrote:
So you are saying that a better balance would be 80/10/10 carbs/protein/fat? for people that are over weight?


Yep. As long as their calories expenditure is greater than their intake. No "free ride" with food, even with protein (see above).

stella-azzurra wrote:
And that chicken, fish, legumes, and especially dairy are not optimally healthy food choices?


No one is disputing that these are healthy foods to eat.

stella-azzurra wrote:
what studies have been performed? (by the way 70% of studies are wrong)


Maybe you, given you suggested the outlandish ratio, should prove that the accepted ratios are wrong. As for 70% of studies being wrong... made that one up too?

_________________
"Physiology is all just propaganda and lies... all waiting to be disproven by the next study."
"I'm not a real doctor; But I am a real worm; I am an actual worm." - TMBG


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 06, 2010 1:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 6:35 am
Posts: 5020
Location: New York
First, thank you Illuminate for dispelling some of the BS.

Second, Everything is done in a moderate sense. High protein diets are OK for over some weight people that want to lose weight and get back on track. You don't stay on the high protein diet for long. It is just a time period for you to lose the weight and get back into the exercise regimen without the aid of pills, or manufactured products. Eating natural foods with a higher protein content is the way to go for this instance and there is plenty of literature to back it up.

Third there is information on the net that supports all the diets: high protein diets, low protein diets, high carb diets, high fat diets. Not everyone will be able to achieve their goals through one type of diet. It is a combination of all those diets in a given time period in ones life, plus an elevated exercise program that will allow an individual to achieve their goals. You can say diets are custom per individual in a given time period of life per individual.

Fourth you guys are focusing on the number rather that then the actual theory behind the number.

The bottom line is increase your protein intake while maintaining the accepted caloric intake (1500-2000 cal a day) when you are not active in exercise.

Increase carb intake and lower protein while maintaining the accepted caloric intake (2500-3000 cal a day) when you are active in exercise as a recreational cyclist.

Try different natural foods and see how they affect you based on your body's metabolic rate, how much you exercise, and where you live. Geographic location, the culture you grew up in, play a big role on a person's diet and life style along with what type of friends you have.

Ever look at at the weight thread on here?

_________________
I never took drugs to improve my performance at any time. I will be willing to stick my finger into a polygraph test if anyone with big media pull wants to take issue. If you buy a signed poster now it will not be tarnished later. --Graeme Obree


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 06, 2010 2:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 2:32 am
Posts: 91
All of these no carb, low carb, high protein, low protein diets are an absolute waste of time and more often than not money. If you actually ate healthy foods in decent moderation (within your caloric limitations) there would be absolutely no problem losing weight or sustaining current weight (barring any medical conditions that prevent it).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 06, 2010 3:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 4:18 am
Posts: 382
Location: Australia
The bottom line is increase your protein intake while maintaining the accepted caloric intake (1500-2000 cal a day) when you are not active in exercise.

Increase carb intake and lower protein while maintaining the accepted caloric intake (2500-3000 cal a day) when you are active in exercise as a recreational cyclist
.

If exercising as a recreational/weekend racer, I would be shooting for an ever so slightly more protein in your diet and, as you say, increased carbs for fuel to burn (whilst maintaining your overall calorie intake goals). http://www.ausport.gov.au/ais/nutrition ... -_how_much (ref thanks to TW)

The theory behind this is that exercise puts increased demands on the body which results in adaptation (compensation). These may include repair of muscular microtears, increased enzmye levels (in particular, those pertaining to cellular repair and the attenuation of oxidative stress), repair of connective tissue and increasing of mitochondrial numbers (and plently more). All of these will utilise surplus amino acids floating round in your bloodstream.

Noting that the body does not store/stockpile amino acids (unless you want to delve into muscle catabolism), it makes sense to consider nutritional (protein) timing after training when repair rates are at their fastest (and the glycaemic window is open).

Cheers all - it's beer-o-clock! :beerchug:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 06, 2010 3:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 6:35 am
Posts: 5020
Location: New York
A glass of milk seems to contain the perfect balance of protein/carb/fat for recovery after strenuos exercise. There are substitutes for milk if you are lactose intolerant.

_________________
I never took drugs to improve my performance at any time. I will be willing to stick my finger into a polygraph test if anyone with big media pull wants to take issue. If you buy a signed poster now it will not be tarnished later. --Graeme Obree


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 06, 2010 5:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 9:43 pm
Posts: 2923
Location: Canada
why bother

want to loose weight? Less calories, more exercise. Just eat healthy and balanced while reducing the calorie intake.

+1 for the glass of milk


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 06, 2010 7:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 6:35 am
Posts: 5020
Location: New York
I'm all for it Devinci.

_________________
I never took drugs to improve my performance at any time. I will be willing to stick my finger into a polygraph test if anyone with big media pull wants to take issue. If you buy a signed poster now it will not be tarnished later. --Graeme Obree


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 06, 2010 7:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 4:30 pm
Posts: 1566
Some things I have observed over about 30 years of being an amateur athlete, dietician, and nutritionist:

1. Whatever gets confidently pronounced as "the correct" and "Scientifically proven" information will be modified significantly over the next few years.

2. Regardless of how overwhelmingly true the data becomes for "averaged populations", there will still be significant individual variations. It may or may not apply to YOU and YOUR body and exercise type and goals.

So, you take it all in. Try to corroborate from as many credible sources as you can, and see if it works for you. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Hill advice
PostPosted: Sat Nov 02, 2013 12:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 6:32 pm
Posts: 1
As a lot of people will, I want to improve my hill climbing. I know the simple ideas of losing weight and riding more hills.

But does anyone have a more specific hill rep type plan/idea thei are willing to share.

Thanks.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hill advice
PostPosted: Sat Nov 02, 2013 12:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:54 pm
Posts: 395
Location: Haines, AK - Temporarily
How steep and long are the hills that you're targeting for improvement?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hill advice
PostPosted: Sat Nov 02, 2013 3:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 2:49 pm
Posts: 16
Work on strength and a fluid pedal stroke. For strength ride in the big ring at low cadence, 40-60 rpm, focus on pedaling all through the pedal stroke, try to minimize the dead spot. Do one leg drills, focus on pulling up and pedaling through the dead spots.

An indoor stationary trainer like the Kurt Kinetic is ideal for hill climb training. On the trainer your hill can be as long and hard as you want it to be.

My favorite interval workout is Spinervals 16. I do this one 90% of the time during the winter, it is intended to be a aerobic base builder, the intervals should be done at 10 beats or more below threshold. 10 beats below LT is the sweet spot. I will do 3 different variations 1) as directed in the video, 2) low cadence starting 50x11 and go one gear easier each set and 3) high cadence +10 rpm faster than the video calls for. Every time you get out of the saddle speed up your cadence 10 rpm while standing. Focus on your breathing to keep your heart rate 10 beats below LT.

Spinervals 16
3x30 sec. with 30 sec. rest (big ring x 15 @ 100+ rpm, 140-150% of LT power)
4x5 min. with 1 min. rest (big ring x 15 @ 90 rpm)
4x4 min. with 45 sec. rest (big ring x 21 @ 100 rpm)
4x3 min. with 30 sec. rest (big ring x 23 @ 105 rpm)
4x3 min. with 15 sec. rest (small ring x 15 @ 110 rpm)
3x30 sec. with 30 sec. rest (small ring x 15, 10 sec @ 90 rpm, 10 sec @ 120 rpm, 10 sec @ MAX rpm)

I do Spinervals 2.0 once per week. 2.0 is intended to be a time trial workout.
3x30 sec. with 30 sec. rest (big ring x 15 @ 100+ rpm, 140-150% of LT power)
1 leg drills (big ring x 11 90% effort 1 min per leg x 2 with 15 sec. rest)
3x30 sec. with 15 sec. rest (small ring x 15 @ 120+ rpm)
TT ladder
5 min big ring x 19 @ LT power
1 min. rest
4 min big ring x 17 @ 105% of LT power
50 sec. rest
3 min. big ring x 15 @ 110% of LT power
40 sec. rest
2 min. big ring x 13 @ 115% of LT power
30 sec. rest
1 min big ring x 11 @ 125% of LT power
1 leg drills (big ring x 11 90% effort 1 min per leg x 2 with 15 sec. rest)
3x30 sec. with 15 sec. rest (small ring x 17 @ 130+ rpm)
TT ladder
3 min. big ring x 17 @ 105% of LT power
30 sec. rest
2 min. big ring x 15 @ 115% of LT power
30 sec. rest
1 min big ring x 11 @ 125% of LT power
Sprint set 3x30 sec. with 30 sec. rest
10 sec. big ring x 15 @ 100% effort
10 sec. big ring x 13 @ 100% effort
10 sec. big ring x 11 @ 100% effort


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hill advice
PostPosted: Sat Nov 02, 2013 6:45 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 1:11 am
Posts: 472
Oh goodie... Good tip. Thanks... I know what I need for Christmas... Spinerval dvds

Sent from my cm_tenderloin using Tapatalk


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hill advice
Posted: Sat Nov 02, 2013 6:45 am 


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hill advice
PostPosted: Sat Nov 02, 2013 11:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 2:49 pm
Posts: 16
Spinervals 13 is another good one for when you can't get outside for a long ride on the weekend. It is just under 3 hours long. I think it is harder than a mountain century, at least that is what my legs say. It has some 30 minute reps, low cadence reps, alternating 1 minute standing/seated and high cadence (120+ rpm) work. If I can complete the workout as prescribed in the video I know I am ready to race.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 108 posts ] 
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

   Similar Topics   Author   Replies   Views   Last post 
There are no new unread posts for this topic. Training to improve time on 12K climb

[ Go to page: 1, 2 ]

in Training

sanrensho

28

2564

Fri Aug 15, 2014 10:54 pm

mrfish View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. FS,superlite climbing wheels

in For sale - Pictures are mandatory 22-3-13

freeriderxy

0

438

Fri Oct 17, 2014 6:58 am

freeriderxy View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. How much climbing in the grand tours

in Cycle Chat

basilic

8

824

Tue Aug 26, 2014 5:49 pm

ross View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Shrinking the Gap Between Flat FTP and Climbing FTP

in Training

RyanH

10

978

Mon Aug 18, 2014 6:06 pm

boots2000 View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Climbing in N. Italy, Switzerland, Austria. Where??

[ Go to page: 1, 2 ]

in Cycle Chat

dgasmd

20

1275

Sun Dec 29, 2013 5:47 pm

dogma85 View the latest post


It is currently Mon Dec 22, 2014 9:17 am

All times are UTC + 1 hour




Advertising   –  FAQ   –  Contact   –  Convert   –  About

© Weight Weenies 2000-2013
hosted by starbike.com


How to get rid of these ads? Just register!


Powered by phpBB