Big walks and fat supplies!

Stuart said:

Seriously considered applying to take part in the documentary

recreating the

Quoted message said:

Scott & Amundsen polar jaunts (as noted in a previous post) I could

probably

Quoted message said:

hack the endurance stuff, but was a bit daunted by probably needing a

new

Quoted message said:

wife, job and house on my return!

Amundsen ate his dogs as he went along. Not a bad plan when you thing
about it. If only hill food could carry itself with you...

Quoted message said:

I am a very lean 12 stone at present, I could pile on a couple stone

of

Quoted message said:

blubber, which would be equivalent to a 100000Kcal of prime ready to

burn

Quoted message said:

energy. On a 30 day trip this could supplement what food I did carry

by 3000

Quoted message said:

Kcal per day.

I reckon that 2 stone of integral fat equates to about 4 stone of

food in

Quoted message said:

your sack and that doesn't included the fuel needed to prepare it!

I don't think it's that simple, unfortunately. Otherwise fat people
would only have to stop eating and go for walks to loose weight.
According to the few things I've read on sport nutrition applied to
mountaineering, walking and mountaineering are typically the kind of
activity which are going to burn your fat, being long lasting low
intensity effort (relatively). BUT, to be able to use the fat you
counsiously put on down the chippy, you need a certain level of
carbohydrate in the blood stream (can't remember the exact kind). So
fat reserve alone are not enough, you need to suplement it with carbs
otherwise you end up metabolising your muscles to free energy more
efficiently than with fat alone.
Moreover a lean athlete (ie 10% body fat) does already carry enough
reserve to run something like 20 marathons (can't remember where I got
that figure from but it stuck to my mind), so presumably with adequate
insulation and food suplementation you don't need to pile on the fat
just to save on food to carry.

There are loads of resources on sport nutrition about, I'm suprised you
haven't found anything on the web. Maybe look at food programes for
decathletes as it's probably the mainstream activity that mimic
mountainneering/walking the best. Or adventure racing.
Also read Mark Twight's Extreme alpinism. Although addressed to people
in search of more radical challenges it has a good section on nutrition
in the hills.
Andy Kirkpatrick did a few of food-for-the-hills columns in High over
the last couple of years. Very usefull. Do a search on the planet fear
website...

HTH

A.-

Quoted message said:

I am sure proper studies have been done on this but can't find out

anything

Quoted message said:

on the net, any suggestions!

"Arnaud" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

I don't think it's that simple, unfortunately. Otherwise fat people
would only have to stop eating and go for walks to loose weight.

That is exactly what they should do!

Quoted message said:

According to the few things I've read on sport nutrition applied to
mountaineering, walking and mountaineering are typically the kind of
activity which are going to burn your fat, being long lasting low
intensity effort (relatively). BUT, to be able to use the fat you
counsiously put on down the chippy, you need a certain level of
carbohydrate in the blood stream (can't remember the exact kind). So
fat reserve alone are not enough, you need to suplement it with carbs

I did say the fat would supplement the food you carried, maybe if burning
7000kCal per day 4000 taken as food from your pack with the other 3000 taken
out of you blubber

Quoted message said:

otherwise you end up metabolising your muscles to free energy more
efficiently than with fat alone.
Moreover a lean athlete (ie 10% body fat) does already carry enough
reserve to run something like 20 marathons (can't remember where I got
that figure from but it stuck to my mind),

Very easily fat goes a long way!

silly unrealistic figures but interesting nonetheless

I am 12st 4lb and have 12% body fat (recently measured) therefor I am
effectively carrying 20 pound of fat. this is equivalent to 70,000kCal. If
I burn 10 kCal per minute when running, then a marathon would burn up
1650kCal. therefor theoretically I would have the energy reserves to do 42
marathons, of course it doesn't quite work like that!

Stuart said:

I am 12st 4lb and have 12% body fat (recently measured) therefor I am
effectively carrying 20 pound of fat. this is equivalent to 70,000kCal. If
I burn 10 kCal per minute when running, then a marathon would burn up
1650kCal. therefor theoretically I would have the energy reserves to do 42
marathons, of course it doesn't quite work like that!

Figures I found suggest that that rate of energy burn is associated with
running at about 8km/hr for your body weight. That's 5+hrs for marathon
distance. You appear to be about twice as efficient as usual. Typical
glycogen energy store around 2000kCal so you would also not need to worry
about hitting the wall during the first of your 42 marathons. Apparently;-)

--
Never stand between a fire hydrant and a dog.

Mail john rather than nospam...

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

Quoted message said:

Stuart said:

I am 12st 4lb and have 12% body fat (recently measured) therefor I am
effectively carrying 20 pound of fat. this is equivalent to 70,000kCal.

If

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I burn 10 kCal per minute when running, then a marathon would burn up
1650kCal. therefor theoretically I would have the energy reserves to do

42

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

marathons, of course it doesn't quite work like that!

Figures I found suggest that that rate of energy burn is associated with
running at about 8km/hr for your body weight. That's 5+hrs for marathon
distance. You appear to be about twice as efficient as usual. Typical
glycogen energy store around 2000kCal so you would also not need to worry
about hitting the wall during the first of your 42 marathons.

Apparently;-)

Quoted message said:

I did say the figures were silly and unrealistic, (you snipped them out)
Anyway, waht figures did you find I am intrested, how many calories should
Ibe burning at say 15km/h ? The truth is one full marathon completely wrecks
me for a week let alone doing 20 back to back!

Stuart said:

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

Quoted message said:

Stuart said:

I am 12st 4lb and have 12% body fat (recently measured) therefor I am
effectively carrying 20 pound of fat. this is equivalent to 70,000kCal.

If

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I burn 10 kCal per minute when running, then a marathon would burn up
1650kCal. therefor theoretically I would have the energy reserves to do

42

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

marathons, of course it doesn't quite work like that!

Figures I found suggest that that rate of energy burn is associated with
running at about 8km/hr for your body weight. That's 5+hrs for marathon
distance. You appear to be about twice as efficient as usual. Typical
glycogen energy store around 2000kCal so you would also not need to worry
about hitting the wall during the first of your 42 marathons.

Apparently;-)

Quoted message said:

I did say the figures were silly and unrealistic, (you snipped them out)

I didn't snip the 10kCal/min, which was your suggestion, as far as I can see
;-)

Quoted message said:

Anyway, waht figures did you find I am intrested, how many calories should
Ibe burning at say 15km/h ? The truth is one full marathon completely wrecks
me for a week let alone doing 20 back to back!

Here you go: http://www.brianmac.demon.co.uk/energyexp.htm

The figure of 2000kCal-worth of glycogen storage came from somewhere else,
which I can't find again. It's usually taken as equivalent to the 20-mile
point, suggesting a burn rate of 100kCal/mile. You seemed therefore to be
running 10-minute miles but getting around 26 in 165 minutes.

--
No wanna work. Wanna bang on keyboard.

Mail john rather than nospam...

"Arnaud" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:1103189037.756154.260050
@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

Quoted message said:

Amundsen ate his dogs as he went along. Not a bad plan when you thing
about it. If only hill food could carry itself with you...

When Ray Mears went on a trek with the Masai they took a goat with them.
When they stopped for the night, they killed the goat and ate it.

If we can get a sheep to carry one of these:
http://www.canine-spirit.com/product.asp?strareano=PRODUCTCATEGORY_1
&intelement=6
(or http://tinyurl.com/5xdqz)
it can carry the rest of our kit as well! 🙂

John

Stuart said:

Seriously considered applying to take part in the documentary recreating the
Scott & Amundsen polar jaunts (as noted in a previous post) I could probably
hack the endurance stuff, but was a bit daunted by probably needing a new
wife, job and house on my return!

Anyway, it got me thinking on how to prepare for a trip like that. Would it
be wise to pile on the pounds (FAT) before departing, as I am guessing
carrying fat as a spare tyre would be far more efficient than carrying it as
food on your back or towing it on a sled behind (lets assume no dogs or
ponies are taken on the trip and one has to haul his own food)

I am a very lean 12 stone at present, I could pile on a couple stone of
blubber, which would be equivalent to a 100000Kcal of prime ready to burn
energy. On a 30 day trip this could supplement what food I did carry by 3000
Kcal per day.

I reckon that 2 stone of integral fat equates to about 4 stone of food in
your sack and that doesn't included the fuel needed to prepare it!

I am sure proper studies have been done on this but can't find out anything
on the net, any suggestions!

You might want to look into Ranulph Fiennes' pre-expedition training.
From reading his book I gather he did something very similar to this,
and he's quite successful, so might be worth a bit of research!

One thing that is very important is to increase strength training so
your muscles and joints are used to the extra weight. So I'd be
thinking to accustom yourself to it putting on the weight over, say, 6
months or longer would be safer than a crash eating program.

What calorific value for fat are you using? I always thought it was
3000kCal per pound of fat, but that might be a bit out of date now.

Stuart said:

Seriously considered applying to take part in the documentary recreating the
Scott & Amundsen polar jaunts (as noted in a previous post) I could probably
hack the endurance stuff, but was a bit daunted by probably needing a new
wife, job and house on my return!

Anyway, it got me thinking on how to prepare for a trip like that. Would it
be wise to pile on the pounds (FAT) before departing, as I am guessing
carrying fat as a spare tyre would be far more efficient than carrying it as
food on your back or towing it on a sled behind (lets assume no dogs or
ponies are taken on the trip and one has to haul his own food)

I am a very lean 12 stone at present, I could pile on a couple stone of
blubber, which would be equivalent to a 100000Kcal of prime ready to burn
energy. On a 30 day trip this could supplement what food I did carry by 3000
Kcal per day.

I reckon that 2 stone of integral fat equates to about 4 stone of food in
your sack and that doesn't included the fuel needed to prepare it!

I am sure proper studies have been done on this but can't find out anything
on the net, any suggestions!

You might want to look into Ranulph Fiennes' pre-expedition training.
From reading his book I gather he did something very similar to this,
and he's quite successful, so might be worth a bit of research!

One thing that is very important is to increase strength training so
your muscles and joints are used to the extra weight. So I'd be
thinking to accustom yourself to it putting on the weight over, say, 6
months or longer would be safer than a crash eating program.

What calorific value for fat are you using? I always thought it was
3000kCal per pound of fat, but that might be a bit out of date now.

Quoted message said:

Amundsen ate his dogs as he went along. Not a bad plan when you thing
about it. If only hill food could carry itself with you...

<thinks>

hmm... specially trained rabbits ? If they were broken to the saddle
they could even carry their own gas cartridges...

</thinks>

--
Boo

"Boo" <Boo@spam_me_no_spam.net> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Amundsen ate his dogs as he went along. Not a bad plan when you thing
about it. If only hill food could carry itself with you...

<thinks>

hmm... specially trained rabbits ? If they were broken to the saddle
they could even carry their own gas cartridges...

</thinks>

--
Boo

LOL

Here's something just as daft I often go wild camping / bothying with my
dog, I carry its food!!!

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

Quoted message said:

Stuart said:

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

Quoted message said:

On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 10:09:19 -0000, "Stuart" <[email hidden]> wrote:

>I am 12st 4lb and have 12% body fat (recently measured) therefor I am
>effectively carrying 20 pound of fat. this is equivalent to

70,000kCal.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

If

Quoted message said:

>I burn 10 kCal per minute when running, then a marathon would burn up
>1650kCal. therefor theoretically I would have the energy reserves to

do

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

42

Quoted message said:

>marathons, of course it doesn't quite work like that!

Figures I found suggest that that rate of energy burn is associated

with

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

running at about 8km/hr for your body weight. That's 5+hrs for

marathon

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

distance. You appear to be about twice as efficient as usual. Typical
glycogen energy store around 2000kCal so you would also not need to

worry

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

about hitting the wall during the first of your 42 marathons.

Apparently;-)

Quoted message said:

I did say the figures were silly and unrealistic, (you snipped them out)

I didn't snip the 10kCal/min, which was your suggestion, as far as I can

see

Quoted message said:

;-)

Quoted message said:

Anyway, waht figures did you find I am intrested, how many calories

should

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Ibe burning at say 15km/h ? The truth is one full marathon completely

wrecks

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

me for a week let alone doing 20 back to back!

Here you go: http://www.brianmac.demon.co.uk/energyexp.htm

The figure of 2000kCal-worth of glycogen storage came from somewhere else,
which I can't find again. It's usually taken as equivalent to the 20-mile
point, suggesting a burn rate of 100kCal/mile. You seemed therefore to be
running 10-minute miles but getting around 26 in 165 minutes.

--
No wanna work. Wanna bang on keyboard.

Mail john rather than nospam...

All these figures are open to massive amounts of interpritation. To be quite
honest I don't have a clue how many cals per half hour that I burn. But the
figures given in the web site you suggested don't add up.
Aerobics vigorous = 300 per half hour
running 16km/h = 550 per half hour

now if I can run for 2¾hrs at 16km/h then I am most certainly in the
aerorbic zone!

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

Quoted message said:

Stuart said:

Seriously considered applying to take part in the documentary recreating

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Scott & Amundsen polar jaunts (as noted in a previous post) I could

probably

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

hack the endurance stuff, but was a bit daunted by probably needing a new
wife, job and house on my return!

Anyway, it got me thinking on how to prepare for a trip like that. Would

it

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

be wise to pile on the pounds (FAT) before departing, as I am guessing
carrying fat as a spare tyre would be far more efficient than carrying it

as

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

food on your back or towing it on a sled behind (lets assume no dogs or
ponies are taken on the trip and one has to haul his own food)

I am a very lean 12 stone at present, I could pile on a couple stone of
blubber, which would be equivalent to a 100000Kcal of prime ready to burn
energy. On a 30 day trip this could supplement what food I did carry by

3000

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Kcal per day.

I reckon that 2 stone of integral fat equates to about 4 stone of food in
your sack and that doesn't included the fuel needed to prepare it!

I am sure proper studies have been done on this but can't find out

anything

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

on the net, any suggestions!

You might want to look into Ranulph Fiennes' pre-expedition training.
From reading his book I gather he did something very similar to this,
and he's quite successful, so might be worth a bit of research!

One thing that is very important is to increase strength training so
your muscles and joints are used to the extra weight. So I'd be
thinking to accustom yourself to it putting on the weight over, say, 6
months or longer would be safer than a crash eating program.

What calorific value for fat are you using? I always thought it was
3000kCal per pound of fat, but that might be a bit out of date now.

Ranulph Fiennes ....... On his crossing of antartica he talked of slowly
turning skelatel as they were burning far more energy than they could eat.

I was using 3500kCal per pound, this works out at 770kCal/100g so is ball
park ish!

"Boo" <Boo@spam_me_no_spam.net> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Amundsen ate his dogs as he went along. Not a bad plan when you thing
about it. If only hill food could carry itself with you...

<thinks>

hmm... specially trained rabbits ? If they were broken to the saddle
they could even carry their own gas cartridges...

</thinks>

--
Boo

better still take a Cat

"Stuart" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

I was using 3500kCal per pound, this works out at 770kCal/100g so is ball
park ish!

I think it's usually quoted as more like 900 kcal/100g.

The message <[email hidden]>
from "Stuart" <[email hidden]> contains these words:

Quoted message said:

All these figures are open to massive amounts of interpritation. To be quite
honest I don't have a clue how many cals per half hour that I burn. But the
figures given in the web site you suggested don't add up.
Aerobics vigorous = 300 per half hour
running 16km/h = 550 per half hour

Quoted message said:

now if I can run for 2¾hrs at 16km/h then I am most certainly in the
aerorbic zone!

Readers with long memories will recall that I have in the past referred
to the work of Gordon Waddell in the early 60s. Having dug out the
original articles again (learning from experience I never put them away
last time around) I find that his figure for climbing steeply is close
to the 'aerobics vigorous' above. The full range is given below. I know
the research is 40 years old but the science behind it was relatively
simple and looks as though it has stood the test of time.

Activity Energy Expenditure (Kcals)
per min per 30 min

Sitting 1.5 45
Manual work 6-10 180-300
Walking on flat roads 6.5 195
Walking cross-country
- descent 7 210
- level 8.5 255
- climbing steeply 11 330

Probably explains why I have never been able to run. Climbing steeply
for any length of time knackers me, :-)

--
Roger Chapman so far this year 139 summits
New - 110 (Marilyns 14, Sweats 5, Outlying Fells 98)
Repeats - 29 (Marilyns 11, Sweats 21, Wainwrights 16, Outlying Fells 2)

Just dropping in
[Polar expedition snip]

Try the Scott Polar research Institute in Cambridge ;-). You might
also check out this year's Christmas lectures by Professor Peck of
same.

I have seen a talk on said subject given by Peck. As far as I can
remember the food was tinned cheese, pasta, sardines, peanuts, dried
peas, raisins, chocolate and vitamin tablets. You are helped by the
ready supply of DIY water en route.

Clear skies
Sarennah

On 16 Dec 2004 01:23:57 -0800, "Arnaud" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

I don't think it's that simple, unfortunately. Otherwise fat people
would only have to stop eating and go for walks to loose weight.

Correct. And your point is?

--
York Alpine Club - http://www.yorkalpineclub.org.uk
Recent Photos - http://climbing.me.uk
Old Photos - http://www.simon-caldwell.co.uk
My Brother's Photos - http://www.caldwellcreations.co.uk

My point: If you're fat, and you stop eating suddenly, you're body will
anticipate a period of starvation which will make it, instead of
starting to spend the fat you want to loose, save it for the moment it
really needs it to sustain vital functions. As I said above the fat
metabolisation requires a certain level of carbohydrate in the blood
steam so stopping brutaly food intake will not help in any constructive
manner. So your muscles will degrade first because they're not vital.
So you will loose weight but feel very [censored], probably fall ill and
certainly regain it at the first whiff of chip you get.
Crash diets are the last thing advised to overweight people.

HTH

A.-

On 20 Dec 2004 01:29:16 -0800, "Arnaud" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Crash diets are the last thing advised to overweight people.

Fair enough. But in general, all they need to do is *cut down* on
eating and exercise more, everything else is an excuse.

--
York Alpine Club - http://www.yorkalpineclub.org.uk
Recent Photos - http://climbing.me.uk
Old Photos - http://www.simon-caldwell.co.uk
My Brother's Photos - http://www.caldwellcreations.co.uk