iheartbianchi wrote: ↑Fri Apr 02, 2021 5:37 am
Conza wrote: ↑Fri Apr 02, 2021 2:09 am
Absolutely ill-informed. Because when you're fat adapted you get access to the 300,000 calories your body has stored as fat!
you don't need to ingest those amounts. Calories in/out paradigm has long been shattered.
When you have carbs, you impede it's access to those stores.
Glycogen stores? 2k calories.
Hence why non-fat adapted endurance athletes need 30 farking gels, and those that are fat adapted need NONE!
I think it is inaccurate to say that calories in/out paradigm has been shattered. It's generally accurate and a good rule of thumb to follow, unless of course we are trying to rewrite the rules of thermodynamics.
There are training specific twists, which you correctly point out. If you need to consume a ton of gels on a ride, your body is not well adapted to aerobic exercise.
Oh no... it absolutely
is shattered (to those paying attention to reality). The one compartment model is bunk.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EttBlf0DGLc
TL;DR "... and notice here of course we're not breaking any laws of thermodynamics... what is important is the compartmentalisation of energy.. its not the total energy, but where it goes..."
Mr.Gib wrote: ↑Sat Apr 03, 2021 4:19 am
You might be right but damn... I'm eating a fabulous almond croissant while your eating the ass out of some animal. Too chewy for me
Ribeyes, T-Bones, and Sirloin steaks... how's that 3 o'clock crash going for you?
TobinHatesYou wrote: ↑Fri Apr 02, 2021 6:03 am
Don't forget to mention the non-fat adapted endurance athletes are faster. There's a reason why the human body's primary "fuel source" is glycogen.
Not true.
Alcohol has sometimes been called the fourth “macronutrient” as it is metabolized completely differently than carbs, proteins or fats. Alcohol provides 7 calories per gram versus 4 calories per gram for both protein and carbohydrate and 9 for fat. If you give the body all four substances at once (Alcohol, carbs, protein and fat) it will preferentially burn off the alcohol first, then the carbs, then the fat and protein. Does this mean that the body “prefers” alcohol? While I’m sure that all you party animals are thinking “Yes! Yes!”, as Cirrhosis of the liver and alcohol related fatalities will attest, alcohol is toxic. (Now picture me setting the martini down like it’s radioactive – and my liver cheering.)
Since we can all agree that alcohol is toxic, we can safely assume that the body doesn’t burn it first because it prefers it. Rather, it burns it first because your body knows that it has to handle the most toxic substance first. Now, armed with that information, re-ask the question of whether the body burns carbs before proteins and fat because it’s preferred or because it’s toxic. If you’re unsure, to further help you decide, chew on this – alcohol is often called a “super carb”. Also consider that you NEED protein and fat to survive. But you do NOT need carbs to survive.
Mr.Gib wrote: ↑Sat Apr 03, 2021 4:19 am
Think of it as a high-octane race fuel. It's actually more efficient as long as you can replenish it, so I don't see the problem with taking in 60g of carbohydrate every hour. I'll be faster while remaining lean af.
Sure. More oxidative stress. Which is why recovery is so much better/easier when burning fat as fuel (producing ketones). Why pro cycling teams (most of race is aerobic and actually are fairly well fat adapted), started looking to exogenous ketones (not better than body's process).
Efficient at fat burning & aerobic base -> burn more fat & far higher heart rates. Saving glycogen stores for anaerobic / v02 max efforts. Beyond that, process called
gluconeogenesis allows for replenishing glycogen stores. More fat adapted/efficient you are at that, and also doing vo2 work - better it becomes.
Andrew69 wrote: ↑Sat Apr 03, 2021 4:44 am
If youre doing something low intensity for a long period like an Ironman or other all day event, fat adadpted with minimal carbs is fine due to the low rate of glycogen delpetion at low intensities.
But at higher intensities, nope. Doesnt work
I feel better when my carbs are lower and fats higher, and I lift more weight, but on the bike at anything more than Z2-3, I fall into a heap
I would dearly love for HFLC to be the answer to cycling endurance, but it simply isnt
Edit: Being fat adapted and then introducing carbs race day doesnt work either as you simply dont have the adaptation to be able to use the carbs.
Lots of studies showing fat adapted isnt the best thing since sliced bread
I don't think you're fat adapted / fit enough is all. Were you doing interval work as well, for high intensity stuff? Still need to train that system.