Protein questions and observations.

Bob M wrote:
:: So, how many people also keep track of protein in addition to carbs?
:: If protein converts to glucose at a 58% clip, then you'd have to
:: keep track of protein AND carbs. However, does protein always
:: convert to carbs? This site seems to indicate that protein is
:: converted to carbs only when there are "too few" carbs:
::
:: http://www.exrx.net/Nutrition/Carbohydrates.html
::
:: See also, which are very detailed:
::
:: http://web.indstate.edu/thcme/mwking/gluconeogenesis.html
:: http://www.rpi.edu/dept/bcbp/molbiochem/MBWeb/mb1/part2/gluconeo.htm
::
:: Thus, it appears that carb intake affects gluconeogenesis
:: (conversion of protein to sugar) -- at a certain level of carb
:: intake, there is no gluconeogenesis; below this level,
:: gluconeogenesis begins. If we are assumed to be eating less than
:: that level of carbs, then it appears that we'd also have to account
:: for protein intake.
::
:: How many people take into account protein amounts in addition to carb
:: amounts?

It seems to be that if your goal is to lose fat, then only thing you really
need is appetite suppression from LC. In that sense, counting protein would
be unnecessary as long as you are indeed getting the appetite suppression
benefits.

If, OTOH, you have BG issues as well, then perhaps eating too much protein
would result in control issues. Frankly, I find it hard to eat too much
protein and I've tried. With me, it mostly comes down to getting enough
protein.

YMMV, of course.

::
:: --
:: Bob in CT

On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 09:42:39 -0500, Roger Zoul <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Bob M wrote:
:: So, how many people also keep track of protein in addition to carbs?
:: If protein converts to glucose at a 58% clip, then you'd have to
:: keep track of protein AND carbs. However, does protein always
:: convert to carbs? This site seems to indicate that protein is
:: converted to carbs only when there are "too few" carbs:
::
:: http://www.exrx.net/Nutrition/Carbohydrates.html
::
:: See also, which are very detailed:
::
:: http://web.indstate.edu/thcme/mwking/gluconeogenesis.html
:: http://www.rpi.edu/dept/bcbp/molbiochem/MBWeb/mb1/part2/gluconeo.htm
::
:: Thus, it appears that carb intake affects gluconeogenesis
:: (conversion of protein to sugar) -- at a certain level of carb
:: intake, there is no gluconeogenesis; below this level,
:: gluconeogenesis begins. If we are assumed to be eating less than
:: that level of carbs, then it appears that we'd also have to account
:: for protein intake.
::
:: How many people take into account protein amounts in addition to carb
:: amounts?

It seems to be that if your goal is to lose fat, then only thing you
really
need is appetite suppression from LC. In that sense, counting protein
would
be unnecessary as long as you are indeed getting the appetite suppression
benefits.

If, OTOH, you have BG issues as well, then perhaps eating too much
protein
would result in control issues. Frankly, I find it hard to eat too much
protein and I've tried. With me, it mostly comes down to getting enough
protein.

YMMV, of course.

That is where it's hard. Supposedly athletes (and I'm hesitant to include
myself in that group) need more protein, and I do find that increased
protein seems to help with recuperation, even for biking. But I'm
wondering if it's possible to go too far into eating too much protein.
Also, if I try to determine the "correct" level of carbs for my amount of
exercise (which will begin to ramp up, once spring gets here), should I
include protein in this equation? Also, maybe one reason why carb loading
before/after exercise works for recuperation is because there would then
be a protein sparing effect (no gluconeogenesis would occur). Anyway,
this year, if I can count calories, I might take into consideration both
carbs and protein to see if I can gauge any type of correlation between
either one or both of these and weight loss.

--
Bob in CT

[cut]

Quoted message said:

Also,
:: maybe one reason why carb loading before/after exercise works for
:: recuperation is because there would then be a protein sparing effect
:: (no gluconeogenesis would occur). Anyway, this year, if I can count
:: calories, I might take into consideration both carbs and protein to
:: see if I can gauge any type of correlation between either one or
:: both of these and weight loss.

Yes. My plan is to delay ramping up distance until later this year, so I
can continue to concentrate on getting the remaining weight gone. Also,
I'll eat carbs during the rides but not after.

How about before? Last year, I would eat fruit the day before a long
ride. No carbs after? Last year, that's when I ate the most carbs --
immediately after the ride. I think that's the best time (other than
during the ride) to eat carbs, as they seem to not raise my blood sugar
level much if at all. I typically had pancakes immediately after riding
(only long distances, so once per week).

--
Bob in CT

Bob M said:

But I'm wondering if it's possible to go too far into eating too much
protein.

The argument for diabetics eating more carbs than seems reasonable is
the concern of damaging kidneys with too much protein. As far as i can
tell there is no evidence for this unless you already have a damaged kidney.

Bob M wrote:
:: On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 09:42:39 -0500, Roger Zoul
:: <[email hidden]> wrote:
::
::: Bob M wrote:
::::: So, how many people also keep track of protein in addition to
::::: carbs? If protein converts to glucose at a 58% clip, then you'd
::::: have to keep track of protein AND carbs. However, does protein
::::: always convert to carbs? This site seems to indicate that protein
::::: is converted to carbs only when there are "too few" carbs:
:::::
::::: http://www.exrx.net/Nutrition/Carbohydrates.html
:::::
::::: See also, which are very detailed:
:::::
::::: http://web.indstate.edu/thcme/mwking/gluconeogenesis.html
::::: http://www.rpi.edu/dept/bcbp/molbiochem/MBWeb/mb1/part2/gluconeo.htm
:::::
::::: Thus, it appears that carb intake affects gluconeogenesis
::::: (conversion of protein to sugar) -- at a certain level of carb
::::: intake, there is no gluconeogenesis; below this level,
::::: gluconeogenesis begins. If we are assumed to be eating less than
::::: that level of carbs, then it appears that we'd also have to
::::: account for protein intake.
:::::
::::: How many people take into account protein amounts in addition to
::::: carb amounts?
:::
::: It seems to be that if your goal is to lose fat, then only thing you
::: really
::: need is appetite suppression from LC. In that sense, counting
::: protein would
::: be unnecessary as long as you are indeed getting the appetite
::: suppression benefits.
:::
::: If, OTOH, you have BG issues as well, then perhaps eating too much
::: protein
::: would result in control issues. Frankly, I find it hard to eat too
::: much protein and I've tried. With me, it mostly comes down to
::: getting enough protein.
:::
::: YMMV, of course.
:::
::
:: That is where it's hard. Supposedly athletes (and I'm hesitant to
:: include myself in that group) need more protein, and I do find that
:: increased protein seems to help with recuperation, even for biking.
:: But I'm wondering if it's possible to go too far into eating too
:: much protein.

I'm sure it's possible, but I wonder if one can do that if you mainly
concentrate on just eating protein. For example, have you ever tried to pig
out on skinless chicken or turkey breasts or shrimp (cooked low fat)?
Neither have many calories and if you aren't eating much fat, they seem to
be self limiting to some extent.

Also, if I try to determine the "correct" level of
:: carbs for my amount of exercise (which will begin to ramp up, once
:: spring gets here), should I include protein in this equation?

You might find if you up your protein levels you won't need as many carbs.
Seems like lots of LC authors shift carb needs over to protein, due to that
58% conversion factor.

Also,
:: maybe one reason why carb loading before/after exercise works for
:: recuperation is because there would then be a protein sparing effect
:: (no gluconeogenesis would occur). Anyway, this year, if I can count
:: calories, I might take into consideration both carbs and protein to
:: see if I can gauge any type of correlation between either one or
:: both of these and weight loss.

Yes. My plan is to delay ramping up distance until later this year, so I
can continue to concentrate on getting the remaining weight gone. Also,
I'll eat carbs during the rides but not after.

greg said:

Bob M said:

But I'm wondering if it's possible to go too far into eating too much
protein.

The argument for diabetics eating more carbs than seems reasonable is
the concern of damaging kidneys with too much protein. As far as i can
tell there is no evidence for this unless you already have a damaged
kidney.

I was thinking more from a perspective of eating too much protein while
low carbing is equivalent to eating too many carbs. I've had a hard time
gauging how many carbs to eat while still maintaining a certain activity
level. If I could, I'd eat exactly as many carbs as I need in order to
fuel high intensity workouts, and no more than that amount of carbs. I
was just wondering if not only do I have to take into account the carbs
I'm eating but also the protein I'm eating. And note that I don't eat
that many carbs now, because I'm not exercising nearly as much as I'll be
exercising later this year. I already have my goals set for a 63 mile bike
ride in May, followed by at least two centuries (100 miles) this year.

Anyway, most data/information about aerobic activities and lifting weights
espouses high carb intake. For instance, I saw one article that espoused
2-5 grams of carbs per pound of body weight (not lean body weight, either)
per day for training for running. Even at my lightest weight, that would
be over 300 grams of carbs a day. I biked over 100 miles a week last year
and ate nowhere even close to 300 grams a day of carbs.

--
Bob in CT

Bob M wrote:
:: [cut]
:::
::: Also,
::::: maybe one reason why carb loading before/after exercise works for
::::: recuperation is because there would then be a protein sparing
::::: effect (no gluconeogenesis would occur). Anyway, this year, if I
::::: can count calories, I might take into consideration both carbs
::::: and protein to see if I can gauge any type of correlation between
::::: either one or both of these and weight loss.
:::
::: Yes. My plan is to delay ramping up distance until later this
::: year, so I can continue to concentrate on getting the remaining
::: weight gone. Also, I'll eat carbs during the rides but not after.
:::
:::
::
:: How about before? Last year, I would eat fruit the day before a long
:: ride.

I'm working on the theory that long-term low carbers don't really deplete
glycogen levels because since they are more efficient at burning fat, the
glycogen gets saved, to some degree. So, given that, it would only be
necessary to keep the carb levels from becoming depleted during the ride.

:: No carbs after? Last year, that's when I ate the most carbs
:: -- immediately after the ride. I think that's the best time (other
:: than during the ride) to eat carbs, as they seem to not raise my
:: blood sugar level much if at all. I typically had pancakes
:: immediately after riding (only long distances, so once per week).

This was always the tricky part of me. I ate too many carbs after the ride,
IMO. I do enjoy pancakes and that is what I typically ate after riding. But
then I'd eat other stuff, too. Of course, a lot of that was motivated by my
going hypo after riding more than 60 miles or so. The heavy carbs seemed to
help avoid it. But delaying my longer length rides until later summer /
early fall, I hope to avoid the need for those carbs. I plan to concentrate
on riding faster instead of longer. Exactly the opposite of what the books
say, BTW.

::
:: --
:: Bob in CT

On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 11:08:47 -0500, Roger Zoul <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Bob M wrote:
:: [cut]
:::
::: Also,
::::: maybe one reason why carb loading before/after exercise works for
::::: recuperation is because there would then be a protein sparing
::::: effect (no gluconeogenesis would occur). Anyway, this year, if I
::::: can count calories, I might take into consideration both carbs
::::: and protein to see if I can gauge any type of correlation between
::::: either one or both of these and weight loss.
:::
::: Yes. My plan is to delay ramping up distance until later this
::: year, so I can continue to concentrate on getting the remaining
::: weight gone. Also, I'll eat carbs during the rides but not after.
:::
:::
::
:: How about before? Last year, I would eat fruit the day before a long
:: ride.

I'm working on the theory that long-term low carbers don't really deplete
glycogen levels because since they are more efficient at burning fat, the
glycogen gets saved, to some degree. So, given that, it would only be
necessary to keep the carb levels from becoming depleted during the ride.

That sounds like a good theory. I might give that a try, too.

Quoted message said:

:: No carbs after? Last year, that's when I ate the most carbs
:: -- immediately after the ride. I think that's the best time (other
:: than during the ride) to eat carbs, as they seem to not raise my
:: blood sugar level much if at all. I typically had pancakes
:: immediately after riding (only long distances, so once per week).

This was always the tricky part of me. I ate too many carbs after the
ride,
IMO. I do enjoy pancakes and that is what I typically ate after riding.
But
then I'd eat other stuff, too. Of course, a lot of that was motivated
by my
going hypo after riding more than 60 miles or so. The heavy carbs
seemed to
help avoid it. But delaying my longer length rides until later summer /
early fall, I hope to avoid the need for those carbs. I plan to
concentrate
on riding faster instead of longer. Exactly the opposite of what the
books
say, BTW.

I think training harder is good, but you also have to have a few long
rides just to get the body used to the strain of being in the saddle for
so long. Are you going to ride hills?

--
Bob in CT

Bob M wrote:
:: On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 11:08:47 -0500, Roger Zoul

::: This was always the tricky part of me. I ate too many carbs after
::: the ride,
::: IMO. I do enjoy pancakes and that is what I typically ate after
::: riding. But
::: then I'd eat other stuff, too. Of course, a lot of that was
::: motivated by my
::: going hypo after riding more than 60 miles or so. The heavy carbs
::: seemed to
::: help avoid it. But delaying my longer length rides until later
::: summer / early fall, I hope to avoid the need for those carbs. I
::: plan to concentrate
::: on riding faster instead of longer. Exactly the opposite of what
::: the books
::: say, BTW.
:::
::
:: I think training harder is good, but you also have to have a few long
:: rides just to get the body used to the strain of being in the saddle
:: for so long. Are you going to ride hills?

Yes. As you may remember, it was the hills that got me last year, forced me
into the sag wagon twice. So this year, on those same ride events, my goal
is to complete.

I will get in some long rides, though. Maybe something like every other
weekend on Saturday I'll do a long ride (60-85), followed by a short one on
Sunday. On the other weekends, I'll keep the Sat/Sun rides around 50 or so.
That way, I can get almost two weeks of stricter dieting in without a carb
blowout 🙂

On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 12:13:02 -0500, Roger Zoul <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Bob M wrote:
:: On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 11:08:47 -0500, Roger Zoul

::: This was always the tricky part of me. I ate too many carbs after
::: the ride,
::: IMO. I do enjoy pancakes and that is what I typically ate after
::: riding. But
::: then I'd eat other stuff, too. Of course, a lot of that was
::: motivated by my
::: going hypo after riding more than 60 miles or so. The heavy carbs
::: seemed to
::: help avoid it. But delaying my longer length rides until later
::: summer / early fall, I hope to avoid the need for those carbs. I
::: plan to concentrate
::: on riding faster instead of longer. Exactly the opposite of what
::: the books
::: say, BTW.
:::
::
:: I think training harder is good, but you also have to have a few long
:: rides just to get the body used to the strain of being in the saddle
:: for so long. Are you going to ride hills?

Yes. As you may remember, it was the hills that got me last year,
forced me
into the sag wagon twice. So this year, on those same ride events, my
goal
is to complete.

I will get in some long rides, though. Maybe something like every other
weekend on Saturday I'll do a long ride (60-85), followed by a short one
on
Sunday. On the other weekends, I'll keep the Sat/Sun rides around 50 or
so.
That way, I can get almost two weeks of stricter dieting in without a
carb
blowout 🙂

That sounds good. I may also try to up the intensity, although my current
rides have a lot of hills. I was thinking of riding to a hill, then
riding the hill over and over. The only problem is that the two hills
nearest me aren't ideal -- one is freaking brutally steep; the other one
is relatively steep but long.

--
Bob in CT

wombn wrote:
:: On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 09:42:39 -0500, "Roger Zoul"
:: <[email hidden]> wrote:
::
:::
::: If, OTOH, you have BG issues as well, then perhaps eating too much
::: protein would result in control issues.
::
:: I don't think I've ever seen protein affect my bgs much. Not enough
:: to bother tracking it.

Same here, but it might be because of the reason below.

::
::: Frankly, I find it hard to eat too much
::: protein and I've tried. With me, it mostly comes down to getting
::: enough protein.
::
:: same here.
::
:: --
:: -------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------
::
:: If laughter is the best medicine,
:: then kittens should be covered by our health insurance. :-)

Bob M said:

On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 12:13:02 -0500, Roger Zoul <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Bob M wrote:
:: On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 11:08:47 -0500, Roger Zoul

::: This was always the tricky part of me. I ate too many carbs
::: after the ride,
::: IMO. I do enjoy pancakes and that is what I typically ate after
::: riding. But
::: then I'd eat other stuff, too. Of course, a lot of that was
::: motivated by my
::: going hypo after riding more than 60 miles or so. The heavy
::: carbs seemed to
::: help avoid it. But delaying my longer length rides until later
::: summer / early fall, I hope to avoid the need for those carbs. I
::: plan to concentrate
::: on riding faster instead of longer. Exactly the opposite of what
::: the books
::: say, BTW.
:::
::
:: I think training harder is good, but you also have to have a few
:: long rides just to get the body used to the strain of being in
:: the saddle for so long. Are you going to ride hills?

Yes. As you may remember, it was the hills that got me last year,
forced me
into the sag wagon twice. So this year, on those same ride events,
my goal
is to complete.

I will get in some long rides, though. Maybe something like every
other weekend on Saturday I'll do a long ride (60-85), followed by a
short one on
Sunday. On the other weekends, I'll keep the Sat/Sun rides around 50
or so.
That way, I can get almost two weeks of stricter dieting in without a
carb
blowout 🙂

That sounds good. I may also try to up the intensity, although my
current rides have a lot of hills. I was thinking of riding to a
hill, then riding the hill over and over. The only problem is that
the two hills nearest me aren't ideal -- one is freaking brutally
steep; the other one is relatively steep but long.

Sounds like great training ground. Ride them until they are easy. Maybe
done ride them repeatedly, at least at first, but several times a week. Over
time, they'll be cake.

wombn said:

Roger Zoul said:

wombn wrote:
:: On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 09:42:39 -0500, "Roger Zoul"
:: <[email hidden]> wrote:
::
:::
::: If, OTOH, you have BG issues as well, then perhaps eating too much
::: protein would result in control issues.
::
:: I don't think I've ever seen protein affect my bgs much. Not
:: enough to bother tracking it.

Same here, but it might be because of the reason below.

The book Protein Power recommends a huge amount of protein. I
remember tying to eat that much and just couldn't take it. Somewhere
around the last few bites of that whole can of tuna (mixed with spices
and stuff) I started gagging.

Yeah. Seems a bit odd to gag on protein food to me.

I follow Protein Power and find their protein estimate to be very low. I
typically eat at least double what they recommend for someone my size. And
I'm not eating full cans of tuna, although I don't think that's a large
amount.

on Tue, 08 Mar 2005 22:11:21 -0800, wombn <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

I thought I'd get used to eventually, but I never did.

-----
Bev

Roger Zoul said:

The problem is, though, if you try to eat mostly protein foods, then getting
the grams up there while holding calories in check is tricky.

That's the beauty of protein shakes. I don't think i could affordably
eat enough protein otherwise.

Bev-Ann wrote:
:: I follow Protein Power and find their protein estimate to be very
:: low. I typically eat at least double what they recommend for
:: someone my size. And I'm not eating full cans of tuna, although I
:: don't think that's a large amount.

The Protein Power Life Plan book recommends that I eat, at minimum, 120 g of
protein a day. I'd find it hard to eat twice that.

I could, OTOH, eat an entire can of tuna by itself.

The problem is, though, if you try to eat mostly protein foods, then getting
the grams up there while holding calories in check is tricky.

::
:: on Tue, 08 Mar 2005 22:11:21 -0800, wombn
:: <[email hidden]> wrote:
::
::: I thought I'd get used to eventually, but I never did.
::
:: -----
:: Bev

IMHO, Atkins diet works, because it is so energy inefficient.
The body uses Ketone as the major energy source which is a half way by product
and it costs lots of energy to produce only Keytone..
AND you can lose Keytone anytime through lung or urine. No wonder they keep
asking us to drink lots of water.

On the Atkins web site, they keep reminding us to eat ENOUGH FAT.
Apparently, enough fat eating can balance out "protein -> carb" conversion
process.

Also, eat enough fat prevent us from eating too much food and too much
protein.

Still, carb is the perfect food source for extreme exercise.
A bottle of sugar water can keep you going for miles and it is extremely
energy efficient.

IMHO, Atkins diet is better for slower pace exercises.
We need more researches on this topic.

On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 08:28:17 -0500, "Bob M" <[email hidden]> wrote:

=>So, how many people also keep track of protein in addition to carbs? If
=>protein converts to glucose at a 58% clip, then you'd have to keep track
=>of protein AND carbs. However, does protein always convert to carbs?
=>This site seems to indicate that protein is converted to carbs only when
=>there are "too few" carbs:
=>
=>http://www.exrx.net/Nutrition/Carbohydrates.html
=>
=>See also, which are very detailed:
=>
=>http://web.indstate.edu/thcme/mwking/gluconeogenesis.html
=>http://www.rpi.edu/dept/bcbp/molbiochem/MBWeb/mb1/part2/gluconeo.htm
=>
=>Thus, it appears that carb intake affects gluconeogenesis (conversion of
=>protein to sugar) -- at a certain level of carb intake, there is no
=>gluconeogenesis; below this level, gluconeogenesis begins. If we are
=>assumed to be eating less than that level of carbs, then it appears that
=>we'd also have to account for protein intake.
=>
=>How many people take into account protein amounts in addition to carb
=>amounts?

Moon Shooter said:

IMHO, Atkins diet works, because it is so energy inefficient.

No, because you eat less.

Quoted message said:

The body uses Ketone as the major energy source

Only for the first couple of weeks. Then the body adapts
and uses mostly FFAs for fuel.

Quoted message said:

AND you can lose Keytone anytime through lung or urine.

Only insignificant amounts.

Quoted message said:

No wonder they keep asking us to drink lots of water.

No, because LCing is a diuretic. That, and most people don't
drink enough water anyway.

Quoted message said:

On the Atkins web site, they keep reminding us to eat ENOUGH FAT.
Apparently, enough fat eating can balance out "protein -> carb"
conversion process.

Eating fat makes you feel full longer, keeping you from overeating.
It is also the easiest way to keep your calorie levels from getting
too low and causing adaptation (i.e. metabolism slowdown, which can
lead to various problems).

Also, IMHO providing dietary fat does two things: (1) encourages fat
burning hormones (chicken and egg problem), and (2) spares the small
amount of generated carbs (made from protein) to be used for those few
organs that require small amounts of carbs.

Quoted message said:

Still, carb is the perfect food source for extreme exercise.
A bottle of sugar water can keep you going for miles and it is extremely
energy efficient.

If you're going for *miles* it's not extreme exercise. Extreme
exercise is something like sprinting, or lifting heavy weights.

DJ Delorie said:

Moon Shooter said:

IMHO, Atkins diet works, because it is so energy inefficient.

No, because you eat less.

Quoted message said:

The body uses Ketone as the major energy source

Only for the first couple of weeks. Then the body adapts
and uses mostly FFAs for fuel.

Quoted message said:

AND you can lose Keytone anytime through lung or urine.

Only insignificant amounts.

Quoted message said:

No wonder they keep asking us to drink lots of water.

No, because LCing is a diuretic. That, and most people don't
drink enough water anyway.

Quoted message said:

On the Atkins web site, they keep reminding us to eat ENOUGH FAT.
Apparently, enough fat eating can balance out "protein -> carb"
conversion process.

Eating fat makes you feel full longer, keeping you from overeating.
It is also the easiest way to keep your calorie levels from getting
too low and causing adaptation (i.e. metabolism slowdown, which can
lead to various problems).

Also, IMHO providing dietary fat does two things: (1) encourages fat
burning hormones (chicken and egg problem), and (2) spares the small
amount of generated carbs (made from protein) to be used for those few
organs that require small amounts of carbs.

Quoted message said:

Still, carb is the perfect food source for extreme exercise.
A bottle of sugar water can keep you going for miles and it is extremely
energy efficient.

If you're going for *miles* it's not extreme exercise. Extreme
exercise is something like sprinting, or lifting heavy weights.

No, it's high heart rate stuff for aerobics that needs the carbs. I think
another reason that low carb works is because of vegetables. The "food
pyramid" is based on [censored] food, and vegetables (which certainly should not
be above pasta on the food pyramid) are ignored. Low fat simply means
that you can eat low fat and that's it, whereas they need to place more
emphasis on vegetables and also to say that sugar is bad for you. Why
don't we see "sugar kills" instead of "fat kills"?

--
Bob in CT