Carbo loading before a race?

[Terry Morse]

Roger Zoul wrote:

> Your study is talking about greater intensity, which is
> what I'm talking about. If you're racing or trying to
> finish faster, then carbs help. If you're not concerned
> about time, then you don't necessarily need those carbs...

If it's a long duration event, you still should be concerned
about carbs. Muscle glycogen depletion is an issue on any
long ride, even rides done at moderate intensity. Run out of
glycogen on a long ride, and you'll know it.
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://bike.terrymorse.com/
In Excelsis Escendo

 

[Roger Zoul]

Terry Morse wrote:
:: Roger Zoul wrote:
::
::: Terry Morse wrote:
:::::
::::: Actually, the no-carb, etc. diets result in lost
::::: weight because they reduce the number of calories a
::::: person eats daily. Any weight loss diet is essentially
::::: a gimmick to get you to eat fewer calories.
:::
::: Not a gimmick....also, the diets aren't no-carb...
::
:: Yes, a gimmick. All diets are ruses to get people to
:: reduce their calorie intake. It doesn't matter what the
:: diet is called: no-carb, low-carb, low-fat, asparagus,
:: Pritiken, Atkins, South Beach. Nor does it matter what
:: types of food you eat. If you reduce your calorie intake,
:: you lose weight. Plain and simple, even if the $40
:: billion diet industry wants you to think otherwise.

How is eating to normalize blood sugar swings a ruse or a
gimmick? Do you know what these words mean?

www.dictionary.com is your friend...

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

 

[Roger Zoul]

Terry Morse wrote:
:: Roger Zoul wrote:
::
::: Your study is talking about greater intensity, which is
::: what I'm talking about. If you're racing or trying to
::: finish faster, then carbs help. If you're not concerned
::: about time, then you don't necessarily need those
::: carbs...
::
:: If it's a long duration event, you still should be
:: concerned about carbs. Muscle glycogen depletion is an
:: issue on any long ride, even rides done at moderate
:: intensity. Run out of glycogen on a long ride, and you'll
:: know it.

Sure....but if the intensity is not huge, and you take some
carbs as you ride, you can complete. There are people here
who do centurys on
LC....we're talking about carb loading...if you're not doing
a LC diet, you'll likely not even need carb loading if
you rarely go anerobic during your ride....if you're
doing a LC diet, the chances are greater, of course...and
if you want to finish a long ride with a good time -- a
personal best -- then you might have to push it, then pre-
event carb loading along with carbs while riding would be
a very good idea....since your intensity would have to be
greater during the course of a ride.

The bottom line is that the greater intensity you expect,
the greater the impact carb loading will have, especially if
you eat a LC diet...

 

[Drs]

"Roger Zoul" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> DRS wrote:

[...]

>>> Er, no. Weight loss only occurs when energy out > energy
>>> in. The reason Atkins and similar diets work is
>>> primarily because high protein diets suppress appetite
>>> more than other kinds, so even though people are
>>> theoretically allowed to eat as much as they want
>>> (within reason) they simply end up reducing their
>>> calorific intake below their maintenance levels
>>> naturally.
>
> Atkins is not a high protein diet...it is a high fat diet.
> The lack of carbs is what suppresses appetite, not
> protein.

Er, no. It's been clinically demonstrated that it's the high
protein that suppresses the appetite. High fats actually
increase the appetite.

--

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

 

[Drs]

"Roger Zoul" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> DRS wrote:

[...]

>>> Er, no. Weight loss only occurs when energy out > energy
>>> in. The reason Atkins and similar diets work is
>>> primarily because high protein diets suppress appetite
>>> more than other kinds, so even though people are
>>> theoretically allowed to eat as much as they want
>>> (within reason) they simply end up reducing their
>>> calorific intake below their maintenance levels
>>> naturally.
>
> Atkins is not a high protein diet...it is a high fat diet.
> The lack of carbs is what suppresses appetite, not
> protein.

Er, no. It's been clinically demonstrated that it's the high
protein that suppresses the appetite. High fats actually
increase the appetite.

--

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

 

[Roger Zoul]

DRS wrote:
:: "Roger Zoul" <[email protected]> wrote in message
:: news:[email protected]
::: DRS wrote:
::
:: [...]
::
::::: Er, no. Weight loss only occurs when energy out >
::::: energy in. The reason Atkins and similar diets work is
::::: primarily because high protein diets suppress appetite
::::: more than other kinds, so even though people are
::::: theoretically allowed to eat as much as they want
::::: (within reason) they simply end up reducing their
::::: calorific intake below their maintenance levels
::::: naturally.
:::
::: Atkins is not a high protein diet...it is a high fat
::: diet. The lack of carbs is what suppresses appetite, not
::: protein.
::
:: Er, no. It's been clinically demonstrated that it's the
:: high protein that suppresses the appetite. High fats
:: actually increase the appetite.
::

No, it's been proven that protein can suppress appetite.
That doesn't mean that removing carbs doesn't suppress
appetite. And Atkins is a high-fat diet, so by your logic
those people ought to be having lots of appetite. They don't
because by restricting carbs they eliminate BG swings and
reduce hunger. As a result, they lose weight because the eat
fewer calories.

The benefits of protein come when its time to cease weight
loss. Then you increase carbs, lower fat, and increase
protein a bit. Fat is about twice as dense energy wise as
carbs and protein. So, if you remove one gram of fat from
your diet, you can add 1 gram of carbs and protein. The
extra protein helps with appetite suppression.

 

[Roger Zoul]

DRS wrote:
:: "Roger Zoul" <[email protected]> wrote in message
:: news:[email protected]
::: DRS wrote:
::
:: [...]
::
::::: Er, no. Weight loss only occurs when energy out >
::::: energy in. The reason Atkins and similar diets work is
::::: primarily because high protein diets suppress appetite
::::: more than other kinds, so even though people are
::::: theoretically allowed to eat as much as they want
::::: (within reason) they simply end up reducing their
::::: calorific intake below their maintenance levels
::::: naturally.
:::
::: Atkins is not a high protein diet...it is a high fat
::: diet. The lack of carbs is what suppresses appetite, not
::: protein.
::
:: Er, no. It's been clinically demonstrated that it's the
:: high protein that suppresses the appetite. High fats
:: actually increase the appetite.
::

No, it's been proven that protein can suppress appetite.
That doesn't mean that removing carbs doesn't suppress
appetite. And Atkins is a high-fat diet, so by your logic
those people ought to be having lots of appetite. They don't
because by restricting carbs they eliminate BG swings and
reduce hunger. As a result, they lose weight because the eat
fewer calories.

The benefits of protein come when its time to cease weight
loss. Then you increase carbs, lower fat, and increase
protein a bit. Fat is about twice as dense energy wise as
carbs and protein. So, if you remove one gram of fat from
your diet, you can add 1 gram of carbs and protein. The
extra protein helps with appetite suppression.

 

[Alexander Gilch]

Anyone who makes statements like "It is a know fact..." and
"It is a know proven fact..." has already given up any
reason to be taken seriously. Even if his use of words was
correct, a gratuitous assertion can only be opinion rather
than established fact. This is regardless of what my
grandfather did (he was actually owning grain elevators in
Iowa) and when he needed it, he bought the produce that the
hunter/gatherers in Eastern Iowa ca. 1890/1900s brought in.
This posting is so ludicrous as to warrent ignoring.

A solid breakfast of ham and eggs would get me about 30
miles before the glycogens ran out and the caffeine would
cause an adrenaline surge that would bring on arrhythmia
that would put me down in the middle of the road (I am on a
caffeine-free diet due to this.)

Alexander Gilchrist

 

[Drs]

"Roger Zoul" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> DRS wrote:
>>> "Roger Zoul" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]
>>>> DRS wrote:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>>>> Er, no. Weight loss only occurs when energy out >
>>>>>> energy in. The reason Atkins and similar diets work
>>>>>> is primarily because high protein diets suppress
>>>>>> appetite more than other kinds, so even though people
>>>>>> are theoretically allowed to eat as much as they want
>>>>>> (within reason) they simply end up reducing their
>>>>>> calorific intake below their maintenance levels
>>>>>> naturally.
>>>>
>>>> Atkins is not a high protein diet...it is a high fat
>>>> diet. The lack of carbs is what suppresses appetite,
>>>> not protein.
>>>
>>> Er, no. It's been clinically demonstrated that it's the
>>> high protein that suppresses the appetite. High fats
>>> actually increase the appetite.
>
> No, it's been proven that protein can suppress appetite.
> That doesn't mean that removing carbs doesn't suppress
> appetite. And Atkins is a high-fat diet, so by your logic
> those people ought to be having lots of appetite. They
> don't because by restricting carbs they eliminate BG
> swings and reduce hunger. As a result, they lose weight
> because the eat fewer calories.

It's restricting *simple* carbs that reduces the blood sugar
swings hence insulin levels swings hence hunger and cutting
simple sugars down or even out of your diet entirely will
certainly help. But that's not what you said (I left in what
you said above). Atkins is primarily a high protein diet and
that's why it works.

> The benefits of protein come when its time to cease weight
> loss. Then you increase carbs, lower fat, and increase
> protein a bit. Fat is about twice as dense energy wise as
> carbs and protein. So, if you remove one gram of fat from
> your diet, you can add 1 gram of carbs and protein. The
> extra protein helps with appetite suppression.

If you've done your macronutrient calculations properly you
only change your protein intake in proportion to changing
LBM. Ditto for fats. That means it's your complex carbs
targets which change most between cutting and bulking.

--

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

 

[Roger Zoul]

DRS wrote:
:: "Roger Zoul" <[email protected]> wrote in message
:: news:[email protected]
::: DRS wrote:
::::: "Roger Zoul" <[email protected]> wrote in message
::::: news:[email protected]
:::::: DRS wrote:
:::::
::::: [...]
:::::
:::::::: Er, no. Weight loss only occurs when energy out >
:::::::: energy in. The reason Atkins and similar diets work
:::::::: is primarily because high protein diets suppress
:::::::: appetite more than other kinds, so even though
:::::::: people are theoretically allowed to eat as much as
:::::::: they want (within reason) they simply end up
:::::::: reducing their calorific intake below their
:::::::: maintenance levels naturally.
::::::
:::::: Atkins is not a high protein diet...it is a high fat
:::::: diet. The lack of carbs is what suppresses appetite,
:::::: not protein.
:::::
::::: Er, no. It's been clinically demonstrated that it's
::::: the high protein that suppresses the appetite. High
::::: fats actually increase the appetite.
:::
::: No, it's been proven that protein can suppress appetite.
::: That doesn't mean that removing carbs doesn't suppress
::: appetite. And Atkins is a high-fat diet, so by your
::: logic those people ought to be having lots of appetite.
::: They don't because by restricting carbs they eliminate
::: BG swings and reduce hunger. As a result, they lose
::: weight because the eat fewer calories.
::
:: It's restricting *simple* carbs that reduces the blood
:: sugar swings hence insulin levels swings hence hunger and
:: cutting simple sugars down or even out of your diet
:: entirely will certainly help. But that's not what you
:: said (I left in what you said above). Atkins is primarily
:: a high protein diet and that's why it works.

Atkins is not a high protein diet. That is just plain wrong.
Clearly you have no experience with it and are just talking.

And what exactly are simple carbs? If you consume enough
grams of any digestable carb, you'll get BG swings.

::
::: The benefits of protein come when its time to cease
::: weight loss. Then you increase carbs, lower fat, and
::: increase protein a bit. Fat is about twice as dense
::: energy wise as carbs and protein. So, if you remove one
::: gram of fat from your diet, you can add 1 gram of carbs
::: and protein. The extra protein helps with appetite
::: suppression.
::
:: If you've done your macronutrient calculations properly
:: you only change your protein intake in proportion to
:: changing LBM. Ditto for fats. That means it's your
:: complex carbs targets which change most between cutting
:: and bulking.

Who's talking about cutting and bulking right now? I was
talkng about weight loss and how one eases off that phase on
Atkins..We can go over to MWF to talk about cutting and
bulking

 

[Badger_south]

On Thu, 13 May 2004 09:03:30 -0400, Alexander Gilchrist <[email protected]>
wrote:

>A solid breakfast of ham and eggs would get me about 30
>miles before the glycogens ran out and the caffeine would
>cause an adrenaline surge that would bring on arrhythmia
>that would put me down in the middle of the road (I am on a
>caffeine-free diet due to this.)
>
>Alexander Gilchrist

I think that's atypical for those eating low carb, although
it's good to know your own predilections.

On LC, I have no sensation of 'glycogens running out'
whatsoever. Of course it might take a while to get used to
being on a BDK type diet like Atkins - some ppl get
headaches. I might consume some dilute fruit juice or eat a
couple M&Ms prior to a long fast ride, but that's by design,
not really by need.

-B

 

[Terry Morse]

Roger Zoul wrote:

> Terry Morse wrote:
>> Roger Zoul wrote:
>>
>> Terry Morse wrote:
>>>
>>> Any weight loss diet is essentially a gimmick to get you
>>> to eat fewer calories.
>>
>> Not a gimmick....also, the diets aren't no-carb...
>>
>> Yes, a gimmick. All diets are ruses to get people to
>> reduce their calorie intake. It doesn't matter what the
>> diet is called:
no-carb,
>> low-carb, low-fat, asparagus, Pritiken, Atkins, South
>> Beach. Nor does it matter what types of food you eat. If
>> you reduce your calorie intake, you lose weight. Plain
>> and simple, even if the $40 billion diet industry wants
>> you to think otherwise.
>
> How is eating to normalize blood sugar swings a ruse or a
> gimmick?

How is erecting a strawman going to help you with your
argument?

I stated how diets produce *weight loss*, not how they alter
your blood chemistry. I'll try again to state this as simply
as possible: You can follow a diet designed to regulate
blood sugar, or one that restricts you to whale blubber and
olives. None of the details matter when it comes to weight
loss! They are all inventions that trick you into eating
fewer calories.

> Do you know what these words mean?

Yes, thank you for asking. Can you follow a simple argument?

> www.dictionary.com is your friend...

Two can play the smartass game, here are some definitions:

Ruse: A crafty stratagem; a subterfuge. Gimmick: An
innovative stratagem or scheme employed especially to
promote a project. Invention: A mental fabrication

A program that states "don't eat so damn much, eat a
balanced diet, and exercise more" would not be a
ruse/gimmick/invention. But it wouldn't grab much market
share of that juicy $40 billion, now would it?
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://bike.terrymorse.com/
In Excelsis Escendo

 

[Badger_south]

On Thu, 13 May 2004 09:32:37 -0400, "Roger Zoul" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Atkins is not a high protein diet. That is just plain
>wrong. Clearly you have no experience with it and are
>just talking.
>
>And what exactly are simple carbs? If you consume enough
>grams of any digestable carb, you'll get BG swings.

Clearly you have experience with Atkins, or your
interpretation of it. But I don't understand what you mean
when you say it's not a high protein diet? I think the
dogma is it's a low carb, higher protein, plus moderate
good fat and oils.

OTOH, there are lots of interpretations of it, and some ppl
use it as an excuse to eat lots of fatty food.

It's my impression that most ppl who make it through the
induction phase tend to stay in 'induction', i.e. eating
less than 20 gm of carbs (simple, or complex), partly b/c it
reduces one's desire to eat carbs.

Those who discover they'd been 'carb addicts' are glad to
discover the loss of desire to eat carbs, b/c for them, it
causes them to overeat; they can't just eat one cookie, they
have to eat 10 or the whole bag, etc. To be freed of this
compulsion is wonderful, IMO.

I try and limit the overt fat by trimming meat and keeping
the bacon eating low. Most of the fat I get is from salmon
and other types of fish, or from hamburger, which I try to
get very lean.

Anyway, I think you have to take into account that even
though a person says they are on Atkins, I bet few ppl
follow it rigorously, and just end up cutting the obvious
carbs and eating cheese, meat, eggs and soforth.

I'm of the opinion that I/most ppl eat about twice as much
food as they really need. When I'm really in the zone, I
have salmon twice a day, and cooked whole turkey which I
slice up and portion out. In addition I'll eat eggs, cheese,
snack on nuts, and have a portion of green beans with
supper. But some days, when the appetite is down, I'll
survive easily on a hamburger patty or two. I supplement
with vits and oils, of course. I still drink 2% milk, but
often drop dairy for a while if I'm making a push to lose
the next 10lbs.

The other interesting thing WRT to weight loss is I tend to
lose in 10lb surges. I'll hang out at about 230-240 for a
couple weeks, then have a whoosh and get down into the
220s, and then hang out at 220-230 for a few weeks, and
continue like that. If I look at my graph, occasionally
I'll have about a 5 lb gain just preceeding a dramatic loss
of about 10 lbs.

Anyway, just wondering about your take on it.

Best,

-B

 

[Drs]

"Roger Zoul" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> DRS wrote:

[...]

>>> It's restricting *simple* carbs that reduces the blood
>>> sugar swings hence insulin levels swings hence hunger
>>> and cutting simple sugars down or even out of your diet
>>> entirely will certainly help. But that's not what you
>>> said (I left in what you said above). Atkins is
>>> primarily a high protein diet and that's why it works.
>
> Atkins is not a high protein diet. That is just plain
> wrong. Clearly you have no experience with it and are just
> talking.

Unlike you I actually read the books.

> And what exactly are simple carbs? If you consume enough
> grams of any digestable carb, you'll get BG swings.

I do hope you realise you have just shot your credibility to
bits. "What is a simple carb?" indeed! It's a sugar with one
(monosaccharide) or two (disaccharide) polymerised glucose
molecules. For the record, complex carbs are either
oligosaccharides (3-20 monosaccharide links) and
polysaccharides (10 to thousands of monosaccharide links).
Complex carbs do not cause blood sugar swings.

[...]

>>> If you've done your macronutrient calculations properly
>>> you only change your protein intake in proportion to
>>> changing LBM. Ditto for fats. That means it's your
>>> complex carbs targets which change most between cutting
>>> and bulking.
>
> Who's talking about cutting and bulking right now? I was
> talkng about weight loss and how one eases off that phase
> on Atkins..We can go over to MWF to talk about cutting and
> bulking

Cutting is cutting whether you're a cyclist or a weight-
lifter.

--

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

 

[Badger_south]

On Fri, 14 May 2004 00:33:07 +1000, "DRS" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>I do hope you realise you have just shot your credibility
>to bits. "What is a simple carb?" indeed! It's a sugar with
>one (monosaccharide) or two (disaccharide) polymerised
>glucose molecules. For the record, complex carbs are either
>oligosaccharides (3-20 monosaccharide links) and
>polysaccharides (10 to thousands of monosaccharide links).
>Complex carbs do not cause blood sugar swings.
>
>[...]

I think we should be talking insulin here, and not blood
sugar. Simple carbs can cause a large output of insulin,
complex carbs a more modulated output. This can be a problem
for people who have insulin resistance, and may result in
the nutrients being stored as fat, according to my reading.

-B

 

[Roger Zoul]

Badger_South wrote:
:: On Thu, 13 May 2004 09:03:30 -0400, Alexander Gilchrist
:: <[email protected]> wrote:
::
::: A solid breakfast of ham and eggs would get me about 30
::: miles before the glycogens ran out and the caffeine
::: would cause an adrenaline surge that would bring on
::: arrhythmia that would put me down in the middle of the
::: road (I am on a caffeine-free diet due to this.)

Are you assuming you've been eating a non-low-carb diet
prior to this breakfast? If so, I find that highly unlikely
that you'rd deplete both muscle and liver glycogen unless
you were trying to break some record. I regularly LC and
weight train and I can do 30 miles on NO breakfast and no
carbs. So if a ham and eggs meal in an otherwise non-low-
carb diet affects you this way, I'd say there are other
issues at play.

:::
::: Alexander Gilchrist
::
:: I think that's atypical for those eating low carb,
:: although it's good to know your own predilections.
::
:: On LC, I have no sensation of 'glycogens running out'
:: whatsoever. Of course it might take a while to get used
:: to being on a BDK type diet like Atkins - some ppl get
:: headaches. I might consume some dilute fruit juice or eat
:: a couple M&Ms prior to a long fast ride, but that's by
:: design, not really by need.

You and I differ here. If I really push hard -- that is,
workout really hard in the gym while strictly control carb
intake over a good period of time, and then add in riding a
lot and riding hard, I'll eventually start having low blood
sugar events. I'll start getting all run down....at some
point -- one will need to replenish glycogen stores to keep
working out. It is, to a large degree, a YMMV kind of thing,
but I do believe everyone can reach this point.

 

[Roger Zoul]

Badger_South wrote:
:: On Thu, 13 May 2004 09:32:37 -0400, "Roger Zoul"
:: <[email protected]> wrote:
::
::: Atkins is not a high protein diet. That is just plain
::: wrong. Clearly you have no experience with it and are
::: just talking.
:::
::: And what exactly are simple carbs? If you consume enough
::: grams of any digestable carb, you'll get BG swings.
::
:: Clearly you have experience with Atkins, or your
:: interpretation of
:: it. But I don't understand what you mean when you say
:: it's not a high protein diet? I think the dogma is
:: it's a low carb, higher protein, plus moderate good
:: fat and oils.

It's not a high protein diet simply bacause the greatest
percentage of calories on Atkins comes from fat. The diet
may seem higher percentage wise in protein, but those who
follow it correctly end up eating the same total amount of
protein but a reduced amount of carbs. A calorie deficit has
to come from some place, and it doesn't typically come from
not eating fat.

I've been on a LC diet from October 2001, and I track my
food intake in fitday.com, so I know where my calories come
from. Also, since I weight train and carb up, I also know
first hand what causes appetite suppression and what
simulates my appetite. I've played around with protein
levels, fat levels, and carb levels. It is definitely the
lack of carbs that results in the appetite suppression, and
the notion that fat simulates appetite is just garbage, ime.

BTW, I've lost 130 lbs on low carb.

::
:: OTOH, there are lots of interpretations of it, and some
:: ppl use it as an excuse to eat lots of fatty food.
::

Well, once you remove teh carbs, eating fatty foods is not
harmful, provided one isn't eating excess calories.

:: It's my impression that most ppl who make it through the
:: induction phase tend to stay in 'induction', i.e. eating
:: less than 20 gm of carbs (simple, or complex), partly b/c
:: it reduces one's desire to eat carbs.

Many do that, however, it is not wise....one is much more
likely to be successful on Atkins if you move to phase two,
rather than staying on induction. There is no good reason to
stay below 20 gms of carbs for longer than the two weeks
recommended to break carb addition and to root out other
food problems.

Those who do that are not really doing Atkins -- they're
doing their own thing.

::
:: Those who discover they'd been 'carb addicts' are glad to
:: discover the loss of desire to eat carbs, b/c for them,
:: it causes them to overeat; they can't just eat one
:: cookie, they have to eat 10 or the whole bag, etc. To be
:: freed of this compulsion is wonderful, IMO.

Agreed...

::
:: I try and limit the overt fat by trimming meat and
:: keeping the bacon eating low. Most of the fat I get is
:: from salmon and other types of fish, or from hamburger,
:: which I try to get very lean.

I eat a lot of fish...and don't eat bacon...and don't go out
of my way to eat fatty meats. however, I also don't go out
of my way to avoid sat fat now and again. I do eat nuts from
time to time, but find that I have to limit them as I have a
strong tendency to overeat them. It is easy to consume too
many calories very quickly with nuts.

::
:: Anyway, I think you have to take into account that even
:: though a person says they are on Atkins, I bet few ppl
:: follow it rigorously, and just end up cutting the obvious
:: carbs and eating cheese, meat, eggs and soforth.

I would not disagree with that....but those foods are very
high in fat, which result in the diet getting most of its
calories from fat, not protein.

::
:: I'm of the opinion that I/most ppl eat about twice as
:: much food as they really need. When I'm really in the
:: zone, I have salmon twice a day, and cooked whole turkey
:: which I slice up and portion out. In addition I'll eat
:: eggs, cheese, snack on nuts, and have a portion of green
:: beans with supper. But some days, when the appetite is
:: down, I'll survive easily on a hamburger patty or two. I
:: supplement with vits and oils, of course. I still drink
:: 2% milk, but often drop dairy for a while if I'm making a
:: push to lose the next 10lbs.
::

Track your intake on fitday for a week. You'll see.

:: The other interesting thing WRT to weight loss is I tend
:: to lose in 10lb surges. I'll hang out at about 230-240
:: for a couple weeks, then have a whoosh and get down into
:: the 220s, and then hang out at 220-230 for a few weeks,
:: and continue like that. If I look at my graph,
:: occasionally I'll have about a 5 lb gain just preceeding
:: a dramatic loss of about 10 lbs.

That is very common...it is reported often over in asdlc.

 

[Roger Zoul]

DRS wrote:
:: "Roger Zoul" <[email protected]> wrote in message
:: news:[email protected]
::: DRS wrote:
::
:: [...]
::
::::: It's restricting *simple* carbs that reduces the blood
::::: sugar swings hence insulin levels swings hence hunger
::::: and cutting simple sugars down or even out of your
::::: diet entirely will certainly help. But that's not what
::::: you said (I left in what you said above). Atkins is
::::: primarily a high protein diet and that's why it works.
:::
::: Atkins is not a high protein diet. That is just plain
::: wrong. Clearly you have no experience with it and are
::: just talking.
::
:: Unlike you I actually read the books.

But you have little understanding.

::
::: And what exactly are simple carbs? If you consume enough
::: grams of any digestable carb, you'll get BG swings.
::
:: I do hope you realise you have just shot your credibility
:: to bits. "What is a simple carb?" indeed! It's a sugar
:: with one (monosaccharide) or two (disaccharide)
:: polymerised glucose molecules. For the record, complex
:: carbs are either oligosaccharides (3-20 monosaccharide
:: links) and polysaccharides (10 to thousands of
:: monosaccharide links). Complex carbs do not cause blood
:: sugar swings.

Give some examples of these complex carbs...actual food
items.....again, if you eat enough, you'll get swings.

::
:: [...]
::
::::: If you've done your macronutrient calculations
::::: properly you only change your protein intake in
::::: proportion to changing LBM. Ditto for fats. That means
::::: it's your complex carbs targets which change most
::::: between cutting and bulking.
:::
::: Who's talking about cutting and bulking right now? I was
::: talkng about weight loss and how one eases off that
::: phase on Atkins..We can go over to MWF to talk about
::: cutting and bulking
::
:: Cutting is cutting whether you're a cyclist or a weight-
:: lifter.

No, cutting has a specific meaning to those interested in
bodybuilding. Beyond that, the term is seldom used.

 

[Drs]

"Badger_South" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> On Fri, 14 May 2004 00:33:07 +1000, "DRS"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I do hope you realise you have just shot your credibility
>> to bits. "What is a simple carb?" indeed! It's a sugar
>> with one (monosaccharide) or two (disaccharide)
>> polymerised glucose molecules. For the record, complex
>> carbs are either oligosaccharides (3-20 monosaccharide
>> links) and polysaccharides (10

Correction: oligosaccharides have 3-9 monosaccharide links.

>> to thousands of monosaccharide links). Complex carbs do
>> not cause blood sugar swings.
>>
>> [...]
>
> I think we should be talking insulin here, and not blood
> sugar. Simple carbs can cause a large output of insulin,
> complex carbs a more modulated output.

That is true, and it is a crucial distinction Roger
failed to make.

> This can be a problem for people who have insulin
> resistance, and may result in the nutrients being stored
> as fat, according to my reading.

The issue here is hunger. When you intake simple sugars they
get quickly into the blood steam with a corresponding
insulin increase. Because the glucose is quickly delivered
to the recipient cells the insulin levels fall away quickly.
This is the so-called insulin spike and it's why you feel
hungry so soon after eating foods high in sugars. Complex
carbs do not generate this sort of response so you tend to
feel sated longer. Since Atkins and similar diets reduce
intake of simple sugars to zero or close enough they
eliminate this form of appetite creation. That they are high
protein diets means they are appetite suppressing as well.
This has been clinically demonstrated. (It's been known for
a long time that Atkins works but more recently independent
testing has shown that much of his theorising was not even
close - it works fundamentally because people on it simply
eat less, albeit without their realising it).

--

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

 

[Badger_south]

On Fri, 14 May 2004 01:28:26 +1000, "DRS" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>(It's been known for a long time that Atkins works but more
>recently independent testing has shown that much of his
>theorising was not even close - it works fundamentally
>because people on it simply eat less, albeit without their
>realising it).

Most ppl I know on this diet realize it cuts hunger. That's
why I use it.

In addition, I like eating protein.

Of course I 'like' eating carbs, but would rather not. After
you go through 'induction', the desire to eat carbs (for me)
disappears.

This is a crucial point, IMO. Eating carbs can act like a
drug, possibly getting you hooked on the 'high' which is
probably an endorphin-like reaction. So in addition to the
hunger, you keep eating to try and modulate your mood.
Comfort food, etc.

-B