3000 miles in 10 months... so Why am I still fat?

[Stephen Harding]

Badger_South wrote:

> On Thu, 20 May 2004 07:31:53 -0400, Stephen Harding
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>I lost close to 15 pounds during a cross country tour. Of
>>course it was fully loaded and there was some serious
>>climbing during the ride, and it took 6 1/2 weeks.
>
> You don't metion your normal weight here, and that's an
> important part of the picture. IOW if you were 165 and
> dropped to 150 that might signify near dangerous
> catabolism.

You know, I don't really know what my "normal" weight is, or
what I "should" weigh for my age and size.

I once read that your high school weight was probably
what you "should" weigh. I am 6'1" and weighed a fairly
steady 155 lbs in HS. I don't believe this little "rule
of thumb" is particularly valid though. You could have
been a fat HS student!

I now weight a fairly steady 185-190, sometimes climbing to
195. I pretty much eat whatever I want in whatever
quantities, and although I consider myself about 10-15
pounds "over weight", it doesn't really show on me. Just
fortunate as to build in that respect I guess.

Figure a long bike tour where I dropped down to 180 would
represent my "optimum" weight. During the tour, I also ate
whatever I wanted in whatever quantities.

But I'm actually now thinking I have to cut back some on the
food. I think losing 10 pounds would be good for me, and
since my normal commuting to work (~25 miles round trip)
doesn't lose weight, I suppose I'll just have to drink more
water instead of Coke. I think that would actually go a long
way in cutting some pounds over a long period.

I am still somewhat awed at the beauty of the design of a
human's physiological processes. The body is so quick to
****** up calories, yet so stingy at spending them. We eat
and drink in a modern age of electronic technology, but
our body's food processing and tastes are still in the
Stone Age!

SMH

 

[David Kerber]

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> Badger_South wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 20 May 2004 07:31:53 -0400, Stephen Harding
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>I lost close to 15 pounds during a cross country tour.
> >>Of course it was fully loaded and there was some serious
> >>climbing during the ride, and it took 6 1/2 weeks.
> >
> > You don't metion your normal weight here, and that's an
> > important part of the picture. IOW if you were 165 and
> > dropped to 150 that might signify near dangerous
> > catabolism.
>
> You know, I don't really know what my "normal" weight is,
> or what I "should" weigh for my age and size.
>
> I once read that your high school weight was probably what
> you "should" weigh. I am 6'1" and weighed a fairly steady
> 155 lbs in HS. I don't believe this little "rule of thumb"
> is particularly valid though. You could have been a fat HS
> student!
>
> I now weight a fairly steady 185-190, sometimes climbing
> to 195. I pretty much eat whatever I want in whatever
> quantities, and although I consider myself about 10-15
> pounds "over weight", it doesn't really show on me. Just
> fortunate as to build in that respect I guess.
>
> Figure a long bike tour where I dropped down to 180 would
> represent my "optimum" weight. During the tour, I also ate
> whatever I wanted in whatever quantities.
>
> But I'm actually now thinking I have to cut back some on
> the food. I think losing 10 pounds would be good for me,
> and since my normal commuting to work (~25 miles round
> trip) doesn't lose weight, I suppose I'll just have to
> drink more water instead of Coke. I think that would
> actually go a long way in cutting some pounds over a
> long period.

If you still want the taste or the caffiene, just switching
to diet could do that for you. My dad used to drink a 6-pack
of Dr. Pepper every day. When he switched to diet Dr. Pepper
about three years ago, he dropped about 40 lbs over the
course of a year without changing anything else in his
lifestyle. Since then, he's gone LC and dropped another 50
lbs in the past year, and still has about 50 to go.

--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in
the newsgroups if possible).

 

[Brent Hugh]

"Doug Cook" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Sick of that fat man in the mirror, I bought some XXL
> cycling clothes, dusted off and tuned up my old Trek, and
> started riding again. Now 10 months and close to 3000
> miles later... I still weigh 274! I mean... come on! 3000
> miles for 5 pounds?!

If you want to feel happier about your situation, you might
read this:

http://www.reutershealth.com/archive/2004/05/18/eline/links-
/20040518elin015.html

Excerpts:

Green's team focused on flow-mediated dilation, which
measures how well the endothelium, the lining of the
blood vessel, acts to keep blood moving by widening the
vessel. . . .

For 8 weeks, participants completed three 1-hour sessions of
aerobic activity and weight training.

At the start of the study, obese adolescents had impaired
endothelial function compared with their lean peers. But
blood vessel function had improved significantly by the end
of the exercise program. . . .

"We believe, on the basis of this and other studies we have
performed, that exercise has a direct and beneficial effect
on artery health, as well as the indirect but beneficial
effect exercise possibly has through decreasing blood lipid
levels, blood sugar and blood pressure," Green said.
----

Although the teens had better artery health and several
other healthy developments, their overall weight did not
change. "But they did experience healthy changes in their
body composition, including increased muscle mass. They also
experienced a decrease in fat around the abdomen. This type
of fat is strongly associated with an increased risk of
cardiovascular disease."

Although this study was done with teenagers, I would bet the
results would apply to anyone, at least to a degree.

--Brent bhugh [at] mwsc.edu www.MoBikeFed.org

 

[Rick Onanian]

On Thu, 20 May 2004 22:48:11 -0600, "Doug Cook"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>My problem is that my aerobelly prevents me from staying
>low. I'm quite limber for a fat man and can get nice a low,
>but I can't breath while I'm down there. The belly bunches
>up and leaves no room for the diaphragm...

Either you want an excessively low position, or your belly
is too big to qualify as aero.

>not to mention the thighs slaps. (now there's an image I
>bet you didn't want in your mind!)

Image? I wish it was only an image. It's an annoying
experience.
--
Rick Onanian

 

[Stephen Harding]

David Kerber wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
>
>>But I'm actually now thinking I have to cut back some on
>>the food. I think losing 10 pounds would be good for me,
>>and since my normal commuting to work (~25 miles round
>>trip) doesn't lose weight, I suppose I'll just have to
>>drink more water instead of Coke. I think that would
>>actually go a long way in cutting some pounds over a
>>long period.
>
> If you still want the taste or the caffiene, just
> switching to diet could do that for you. My dad used to
> drink a 6-pack of Dr. Pepper every day. When he switched
> to diet Dr. Pepper about three years ago, he dropped about
> 40 lbs over the course of a year without changing anything
> else in his lifestyle. Since then, he's gone LC and
> dropped another 50 lbs in the past year, and still has
> about 50 to go.

That's encouraging. I drink *a lot* of Coke. I can down a
liter bottle during the day, every day, so cutting back on
the stuff should go a long way in cutting caloric intake.

But I really just don't like the diet stuff, of any brand.
Something about the taste of fake sugar.

Water is fine...but that brings up other
dietary/physiological issues from what I've read. Too much
water can wash out [water soluble] vitamins and minerals!

Sometimes, I think it was actually better to just deal with
the feast and famine cycle of successful/unsuccessful
mastodon hunts, as in the eating lifestyle of our early
ancestors!

Isn't it strange that a genetic mutation that would make
natural digestion and calorie hording/expenditure less
efficient, might actually end up being a desirable, survival
enhancement in a modern, industrial population?

SMH

 

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <[email protected]>,
Stephen Harding <[email protected]> wrote:

> David Kerber wrote:
>
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > [email protected] says...
> >
> >>But I'm actually now thinking I have to cut back some on
> >>the food. I think losing 10 pounds would be good for me,
> >>and since my normal commuting to work (~25 miles round
> >>trip) doesn't lose weight, I suppose I'll just have to
> >>drink more water instead of Coke. I think that would
> >>actually go a long way in cutting some pounds over a
> >>long period.
> >
> > If you still want the taste or the caffiene, just
> > switching to diet could do that for you. My dad used to
> > drink a 6-pack of Dr. Pepper every day. When he switched
> > to diet Dr. Pepper about three years ago, he dropped
> > about 40 lbs over the course of a year without changing
> > anything else in his lifestyle. Since then, he's gone LC
> > and dropped another 50 lbs in the past year, and still
> > has about 50 to go.
>
> That's encouraging. I drink *a lot* of Coke. I can down a
> liter bottle during the day, every day, so cutting back on
> the stuff should go a long way in cutting caloric intake.

http://www.coca-cola.co.uk/nutrition/coca-cola.asp

Coke: 430 kcal/l. 3000 calories*, as a rule of thumb, makes
for a 1-pound weight loss, so you could expect to lose about
1 pound per week if you simply stopped drinking pop.

> But I really just don't like the diet stuff, of any brand.
> Something about the taste of fake sugar.
>
> Water is fine...but that brings up other
> dietary/physiological issues from what I've read. Too much
> water can wash out [water soluble] vitamins and minerals!

I daresay it's not doing anything the Coke isn't, since Coke
is almost all water. If it really scares you (my gut
instinct is that this concern is silly, especially if you
keep your net fluid intake near where it was), take a
multivitamin.

I drink a lot of orange juice at home, which is barely
better than Coke (~415 kcal/l) but my secret is that I'm
happy drinking it at ridiculously diluted levels (I'll cut
it down until it's a barely-sweet straw-coloured
beverage), which probably cuts the calories to about a
third of normal OJ.

> Sometimes, I think it was actually better to just deal
> with the feast and famine cycle of successful/unsuccessful
> mastodon hunts, as in the eating lifestyle of our early
> ancestors!

The trick is not so much that they starved and gorged, but
that they spent all day chasing mastodons. The active
lifestyle, in my opinion, has a lot more to do with weight
and health than one's diet.

> Isn't it strange that a genetic mutation that would make
> natural digestion and calorie hording/expenditure less
> efficient, might actually end up being a desirable,
> survival enhancement in a modern, industrial population?

Well, I don't want to raise the ugly spectre of another
thread, but there's a big difference between being skinny
and being healthy. The latter is usually better than
obesity, but health benefits (and as Chalo pointed out
elsewhere, lifestyle benefits) accrue to those who do a lot
of exercise, with weight being a lesser factor (I have a
suspicion that an important problem with excess weight is
that it limits the amount and kind of physical activity you
can engage in; I dropped from 190 pounds to 153, and my back
problems magically disapppeared).**

*just in case somebody doesn't know, a "calorie" as we talk
about them in nutrition is technically a kilocalorie, a
calorie being a measure of energy (1 calorie (not
kilocalorie) is defined as the energy to raise the
temperature of 1g of water by 1 degree C). so a kilocalorie
will raise the temperature of a kilogram of water by 1
degree C. That's why in the example above I use "kcal" as an
abbreviation, then immediately refer to "calories" even
though I'm talking about kilocalories. The irony is that a
calorie is a metric measurement, and so is the Joule, the
common measurement used in metric countries (I get
kilojoules on all my cereal boxes, being Canadian). 1 Joule
is the amount of energy needed to move an object with 1
Newton of force a distance of 1 metre.

http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/6b.html

The cool bit is that cyclists normally measure power
(power=work/time) output in Watts (250 W being the benchmark
for a reasonably trained but unprofessional rider), and a
Watt is 1 J/s, so if you measure your food in kilojoules and
your output with a power meter, you can directly equate your
workout into food energy!

A 300 kcal candy bar (pretty typical) is about 1255 kJ, and
if you sustain 250 watts on the bike, it will take you
about 84 minutes on the bicycle to burn up that candy bar.
Punch up your output to 350 W and you can take care of it
in an hour.

Before you freak out, note that normal metabolic activity
(commonly known as being alive) requires thousands of
calories per day on its own. So you don't have to ride 4
hours per day just because you had a big meal.

**Let's not mention that I now suffer from several minor
overuse maladies including routine tenderness in my Achilles
tendons, which makes it much harder for me to do things like
run up and down the 6 flights of stairs at work, something I
often do once or twice per day in the course of my job
(computer labs are on the sixth floor, help desk is on the
0th floor).

--
Ryan Cousineau, [email protected]
http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine/wiredcola/ President, Fabrizio
Mazzoleni Fan Club

 

[David Kerber]

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> David Kerber wrote:
>
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > [email protected] says...
> >
> >>But I'm actually now thinking I have to cut back some on
> >>the food. I think losing 10 pounds would be good for me,
> >>and since my normal commuting to work (~25 miles round
> >>trip) doesn't lose weight, I suppose I'll just have to
> >>drink more water instead of Coke. I think that would
> >>actually go a long way in cutting some pounds over a
> >>long period.
> >
> > If you still want the taste or the caffiene, just
> > switching to diet could do that for you. My dad used to
> > drink a 6-pack of Dr. Pepper every day. When he switched
> > to diet Dr. Pepper about three years ago, he dropped
> > about 40 lbs over the course of a year without changing
> > anything else in his lifestyle. Since then, he's gone LC
> > and dropped another 50 lbs in the past year, and still
> > has about 50 to go.
>
> That's encouraging. I drink *a lot* of Coke. I can down a
> liter bottle during the day, every day, so cutting back on
> the stuff should go a long way in cutting caloric intake.

Sounds like it.

> But I really just don't like the diet stuff, of any brand.
> Something about the taste of fake sugar.

I've found that Diet Dr. Pepper and Diet Pepsi are both
pretty good tasting; I don't like Diet Coke at all.

--
Dave Kerber Fight spam: remove the ns_ from the return
address before replying!

REAL programmers write self-modifying code.

 

[Drs]

"David Kerber" <ns_dkerber@ns_ids.net> wrote in message
news:[email protected]

[...]

> I've found that Diet Dr. Pepper and Diet Pepsi are both
> pretty good tasting; I don't like Diet Coke at all.

When I stopped drinking Coke Coca-Cola Amatil had to lay off
workers. These days I like the Waterford diet flavoured
mineral waters. Only 10kj per 100ml and there's even trace
elements (OK, 5%) of fruit juices!

--

A: Top-posters.
B: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

 

[Kevin]

"Doug Cook" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> The story thus far....
>
> 12 years ago - single, 6'3", 180lbs., hair, and competing
> in citizens class triathlons.
>
> Fast forward to last July... Married, two kids, mortgage,
> no hair, sedentary, 279lbs.
>
> Sick of that fat man in the mirror, I bought some XXL
> cycling clothes, dusted off and tuned up my old Trek, and
> started riding again. Now 10 months and close to 3000
> miles later... I still weigh 274! I mean... come on! 3000
> miles for 5 pounds?!
>
> My fitness level has increased tremendously. I use to
> struggle on 10 mile rides. Now I do at least 3-4 weekday
> rides of 15-30 miles each and one weekend ride for 50-70
> miles - all solo. My computer puts my average speed for
> these rides between 16-18mph depending upon the particular
> ups&downs of the ride. My HRM says my average rate is
> usually right about 75% of max (although that can vary,
> usually on the high side, when the ride has climbing). I
> feel lean and mean while I ride, but when I get home I
> wonder who that fat guy in the mirror is!
>
> I don't diet per se, but I do eat sensibly. The days that
> I've tracked my caloric intake it's usually right between
> 2500 - 3000. One friend who is a "wellness" expert
> suggests I'm not eating *ENOUGH*. Although she readily
> admits she doesn't specialize in athletes ("slovenly couch
> potato" is how she describes her typical client), she says
> that with my activity level my BMR is 5300... as she
> explained it that's the number of calories needed to just
> maintain my weight! Therefore she thinks my body thinks
> it's being starved and refuses to let go of the fat. She
> thinks by eating MORE the body will move away from this
> starvation reflex and start shedding pounds. She also
> suggested riding easy first thing in the morning BEFORE
> breakfast so the body has to switch to fat because the
> glycogen stores will be low (sound like a recipe for the
> BONK to me).
>
> Well, I tried to eat 4000 calories today and about died! I
> felt horrible, stuffed, tired, etc. I tried riding with
> just water (no sport drink), and found myself craving
> sugar after the ride.
>
> Any experts lurking out there that would like to comment?
> Are there any coaching services online that could help
> customize my training to help me lose weight? I can't
> afford to hire a coach.
>
> Any thoughts would be appreciated.

I haven't read the whole thread so I may be repeating
but the human body is highly adaptable. In short, if you
do the same ol' same ol' your body adapts. Vary
intensity, frequency, etc. Always keep the body off
balance in that regard.

 

[Eric]

"Doug Cook" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> The story thus far....
>
> 12 years ago - single, 6'3", 180lbs., hair, and competing
> in citizens class

>
> My fitness level has increased tremendously. I use to
> struggle on 10 mile rides. Now I do at least 3-4 weekday
> rides of 15-30 miles each and one weekend ride for 50-70
> miles - all solo. My computer puts my average speed for
> these rides between 16-18mph depending upon the particular
> ups&downs of the ride. My HRM says my average rate is
> usually right about 75% of max (although that can vary,
> usually on the high side, when the ride has climbing). I
> feel lean and mean while I ride, but when I get home I
> wonder who that fat guy in the mirror is!
>

You may want to think about running your heart that hard if
you are trying to loose weight. Once you get your heartrate
above 40-50%, you start stressing your body and that can
cause it to hoard fat (IIRC). The trick to loosing fat is to
keep it low for long periods. For me, this has always been
difficult, as I like to go fast. However, once I'm warmed
up, my body tends to settle down and I get into a groove
with a HR below 50% on flats.

I recomend you read the book "The Heart Rate Monitor Book."
I learned a lot about all those numbers and just how fit I
really am.

Info from http://www.lias.psu.edu/

Personal Author: Edwards, Sally, 1947- Title: The heart rate
monitor book / by Sally Edwards. Publication info: Port
Washington, N.Y. : Polar CIC : Sacramento, CA
: Fleet Fleet Press, c1992.
Physical descrip: v, 170 p. : ill. ; 22 cm. ISBN: 0963463306

Eric

 

[Matt O'Toole]

Ryan Cousineau wrote:

> I drink a lot of orange juice at home, which is barely
> better than Coke (~415 kcal/l) but my secret is that I'm
> happy drinking it at ridiculously diluted levels (I'll cut
> it down until it's a barely-sweet straw-coloured
> beverage), which probably cuts the calories to about a
> third of normal OJ.

This is what I do too -- put a couple of ounces of OJ in a
tall glass, and fill the rest with water. Or plain water
with a little lemon or lime juice in it. I've always done
this -- even when I was a kid, I didn't like soft drinks
much. I guess I'm lucky -- soda is probably the culprit w/
most fat kids.

Matt O.

 

[Matt O'Toole]

Ryan Cousineau wrote:

> I drink a lot of orange juice at home, which is barely
> better than Coke (~415 kcal/l) but my secret is that I'm
> happy drinking it at ridiculously diluted levels (I'll cut
> it down until it's a barely-sweet straw-coloured
> beverage), which probably cuts the calories to about a
> third of normal OJ.

This is what I do too -- put a couple of ounces of OJ in a
tall glass, and fill the rest with water. Or plain water
with a little lemon or lime juice in it. I've always done
this -- even when I was a kid, I didn't like soft drinks
much. I guess I'm lucky -- soda is probably the culprit w/
most fat kids.

Matt O.

 

[Drs]

"Matt O'Toole" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]

[...]

> kid, I didn't like soft drinks much. I guess I'm lucky --
> soda is probably the culprit w/ most fat kids.

And more:

"Fizzy soft drinks could be responsible for the massive
increase in cancers of the gullet seen in Western nations
over the past 25 years."

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/05/21/10850285-
06745.html

--

A: Top-posters.
B: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

 

[Daniel Crispin]

I used to hate diet beverages too. Now I like them and when
I drink non-diet ones I find them way too sweet.

I agree that Diet Pepsi is the best tasting diet cola. I
have unfortunatelly not been able to find Diet Dr.Pepper but
I hear it is hard to taste the difference with the regular
one. Also Diet Iced Tea from Nestley is really good.

Drinks are problably what made our nation fat. If you think
about it a lot of people will drink up 2 or 3 per day, and
that will add 1000 calories without you even noticing it.
Cutting that out is the first thing to do when you diet.

According to some you burn off 300-600 Calories per hour
cycling, so not drinking that litre of cola is the
equivalent of cycling for about 2-3 hours. If you do cycle
on top of it you will loose weight that much faster and get
in shape at the same time.

"Stephen Harding" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> David Kerber wrote:
>
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > [email protected] says...
> >
> >>But I'm actually now thinking I have to cut back some on
> >>the food. I think losing 10 pounds would be good for me,
> >>and since my normal commuting to work (~25 miles round
> >>trip) doesn't lose weight, I suppose I'll just have to
> >>drink more water instead of Coke. I think that would
> >>actually go a long way in cutting some pounds over a
> >>long period.
> >
> > If you still want the taste or the caffiene, just
> > switching to diet could do that for you. My dad used to
> > drink a 6-pack of Dr. Pepper every day. When he switched
> > to diet Dr. Pepper about three years ago, he dropped
> > about 40 lbs over the course of a year without changing
> > anything else in his lifestyle. Since then, he's gone LC
> > and dropped another 50 lbs in the past year, and still
> > has about 50 to go.
>
> That's encouraging. I drink *a lot* of Coke. I can down a
> liter bottle during the day, every day, so cutting back on
> the stuff should go a long way in cutting caloric intake.
>
> But I really just don't like the diet stuff, of any brand.
> Something about the taste of fake sugar.
>
> Water is fine...but that brings up other
> dietary/physiological issues from what I've read. Too much
> water can wash out [water soluble] vitamins and minerals!
>
> Sometimes, I think it was actually better to just deal
> with the feast and famine cycle of successful/unsuccessful
> mastodon hunts, as in the eating lifestyle of our early
> ancestors!
>
> Isn't it strange that a genetic mutation that would make
> natural digestion and calorie hording/expenditure less
> efficient, might actually end up being a desirable,
> survival enhancement in a modern, industrial population?
>
>
> SMH

 

[James Calivar]

"Stephen Harding" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> David Kerber wrote:
>
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > [email protected] says...
> >
> >>But I'm actually now thinking I have to cut back some on
> >>the food. I think losing 10 pounds would be good for me,
> >>and since my normal commuting to work (~25 miles round
> >>trip) doesn't lose weight, I suppose I'll just have to
> >>drink more water instead of Coke. I think that would
> >>actually go a long way in cutting some pounds over a
> >>long period.
> >
> > If you still want the taste or the caffiene, just
> > switching to diet could do that for you. My dad used to
> > drink a 6-pack of Dr. Pepper every day. When he switched
> > to diet Dr. Pepper about three years ago, he dropped
> > about 40 lbs over the course of a year without changing
> > anything else in his lifestyle. Since then, he's gone LC
> > and dropped another 50 lbs in the past year, and still
> > has about 50 to go.
>
> That's encouraging. I drink *a lot* of Coke. I can down a
> liter bottle during the day, every day, so cutting back on
> the stuff should go a long way in cutting caloric intake.
>
> But I really just don't like the diet stuff, of any brand.
> Something about the taste of fake sugar.

You get used to it. It takes a few days, but you do get
used to it.

 

[David Kerber]

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> David Kerber <ns_dkerber@ns_ids.net> wrote:
>
> > We evolved eating most anything which nourish us, and
> > that includes wild grains. Why would we have started
> > cultivating grains if we didn't already know they were
> > good to eat? And fruit is one of the major food sources
> > in forested areas. The entire primate family eats lots
> > of both plant and animal materials for food, and that
> > includes humans.
>
> I thought theory was we didn't evolve much brainpower
> until the diet included fish, which contains an oil that
> contributes to brain growth. Then enough brainpower
> developed for mankind to process grains?

I've never heard that fish theory (and it seems a little
fishy to me), but the connection between diet, tool use
and brain growth is a subject of huge argument among
anthropologists. The plurality of opinion seems to be that
the brain growth really accelerated when we became able to
walk upright, freeing the hands to be more efficient food-
gathering and tool-using appendages, both of which
improved our nutrition intake. There is no consensus on
the subject, though.

--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in
the newsgroups if possible).

 

[David Kerber]

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> David Kerber wrote:
> :: In article <[email protected]>,
> :: [email protected] says...
> ::
> :: ...
> ::
> ::::: FWIW, you don't have to go anaerobic to deplete your
> ::::: muscle glycogen. Simply riding at a lower cadence
> ::::: with the same power output will accelerate the
> ::::: depletion rate. Glycogen usage is tied to muscle
> ::::: effort.
> :::
> ::: Er, riding at a lower cadence with high power output
> ::: (like going uphill in a high gear or going very fast
> ::: on a flat in high gear) is the same thing as going
> ::: anaerobic. Anaerobic activity is what uses sugar for
> ::: fuel.
> ::
> :: Which is another way of saying the EXACT same thing.
>
> EXACT same thing as what? My point was that you generally
> do have to go anerobic to deplete muscle glycogen.

Oops, I read too fast. But you don't need to go anaerobic to
burning muscle glycogen; that's the primary fuel for all short-
term muscle use. If you are burning it anaerobically, it
produces lactic acid (the "burn"), but if you burn it
aerobically, it produces CO2, which your blood carries away
much faster.

--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in
the newsgroups if possible).

 

[Terry Morse]

David Kerber wrote:

> Roger Zoul wrote:
> >
> > My point was that you generally do have to go anerobic
> > to deplete muscle glycogen.

Which is incorrect.

>
> Oops, I read too fast. But you don't need to go anaerobic
> to burning muscle glycogen; that's the primary fuel for
> all short-term muscle use. If you are burning it
> anaerobically, it produces lactic acid (the "burn"), but
> if you burn it aerobically, it produces CO2, which your
> blood carries away much faster.

Which is correct. I have a good overview article here:
Allen et al, "Limits to human performance caused by
muscle fatigue", Physiology News, Issue 53. It lists the
energy sources for muscles, and how long they last at
maximal effort:

ATP 2-3 sec phosphcreatine 10-20 sec glycogen (anaerobic)
2-3 min glycogen (aerobic) 30-60 min fat long time

Another interesting tidbit from the article: the lactic acid
theory of muscle fatigue is losing support.

http://tinyurl.com/3hgzd

--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://bike.terrymorse.com/

 

[Pbwalther]

>Well, for much of human history people were lean indeed on
>a diet of
> > >complex carbs, mainly in the form of grains,
> > >vegetables and very little animal protein. It is quite
> > >easy to have a diet like that and be quite lean.
> > humans only started eating grains when we learned to
> > cultivate. we did not evolve eating grains.
>
>
>But how long has cultivation been around? This is not a new
>technology or anything and the planet wasnt overall fat a
>100 to 200 years ago.
>
>
Cultivation is believed to have started near the fertile
crescent. I believe that it happened about 7,000 years ago.
Cultivation spread from that place and in some cases, like
mesoamerica, it seems to have been discovered independently.

 

[Badger_south]

On Tue, 25 May 2004 07:20:28 -0700, Terry Morse <[email protected]> wrote:

>ATP 2-3 sec phosphcreatine 10-20 sec glycogen (anaerobic)
>2-3 min glycogen (aerobic) 30-60 min fat long time
>
>Another interesting tidbit from the article: the lactic
>acid theory of muscle fatigue is losing support.
>
>http://tinyurl.com/3hgzd

Cool. Possibly unrelated, but sounding the same <g>, is that
for training level, they still consider quick testing of
blood from the ear lobe as the standard for training
load/intensity, last time I heard.

Here's a pretty neat article on that:

http://www.cuttingedgeworldwide.com/ergo-labthefacts.html

For Lactic Acid theory of muscle fatigue we're talking local
muscle failure

For Lactate levels we're talking over all endurance and
power and speed.

Thus the 'sound the same, but different' quip. Sometimes it
gets confusing, heh.

-B