Tom wrote:
:: "Roger Zoul" <
[email protected]> wrote in message
:: news:
[email protected]...
::: Tom wrote:
::::: "Bev-Ann" <
[email protected]> wrote in message
::::: news
[email protected]...
:::::: You also need more protein on LC since a lot of the protein you
:::::: eat is being converted to carbs for energy. Your body converts
:::::: protein before converting fat. If you eat only enough protein
:::::: to sustain energy for normal activities, you won't have anything
:::::: left to replenish your muscles during exercise and won't be able
:::::: to maintain and rebuild your muscle tissue.
:::::: This is the philosophy of the Protein Power Lifeplan which is the
:::::: LC plan I follow. The OP might consider picking up the book at
:::::: his local library.
:::::
::::: Here is a summary of the book.
:::::
http://www.lowcarb.ca/atkins-diet-and-low-carb-plans/protein-power.html
:::::
::::: I've never read the book. At the bottom of the page, it
::::: explains how weight training can improve your caloric requirement
::::: to maintain the new muscle. Does your book say that the body's
::::: prefered fuel order is carbs, protein, and lastly fat?
:::
::: Lots of folks say this. However, I think it is an incorrect
::: statement. Just because the body will go after first and metabolize
::: carbs quickly doesn't mean carbs are the body's "preferred" fuel.
::: It could very well mean that the body finds carbs toxic (especially
::: too many), so it does its best to get rid of them quickly.
::: Obviously, intense exercise provides a place for them to go.
::
:: That sounds reasonable to say that even though carbs may be
:: burned more readily, it may not be the prefered fuel. Based on what
:: bev was saying, I couldn't figure how more protein would be needed
:: because it was being converted to glucose for fuel, since protein is
:: more likely to be used for repairing tissue and would be highly
:: wastful in the conversion to fuel. Fat would be the main source and
:: protein(in muscle tissues) would be spared. Perhaps she meant that
:: dietary protein would be more readily available for fuel?
I think that's what she meant. Also, protein requirements are generally
higher for active people (ie, athletes) and for sedentary folks.
::
:::
:::
::: I realize that at any time
::::: there are a mixture of all being used. Why would the body
::::: catobolize muscle tissue before fat in an absence of carbs?
:::
::: I think it does so only when too little dietary protein is
::: available. Protein is needed for building new issue, etc, so it
::: does more than simply supply energy.
::
:: Yes, which shouldn't be a problem on a lo-carb diet. Usually
:: protein is slightly increased, and fat more so.
Exactly.
::
:::
::: If that were true,
::::: then exercise would not be recommended because there is a little
::::: bit of muscle breakdown that occurs after weight training. And if
::::: protein was the next prefered fuel, a person would waste away.
::::: Under what conditions does the body start prefering fat as fuel? \
:::
::: Again, I think it's incorrect to list the preferred fuels like
::: this. The body needs to be able to metabolize protein to repair
::: itself, so it will do so as needed. Fat is generally needed
::: strictly as an energy source and the body will go to it to support
::: certain types of functions and certain organs (like the heart -
::: since carbs can be depleted quickly, if the heart were to rely on
::: carbs one could get into trouble very quickly).
::
:: Yes. Fat would be the fuel on lo-carb not protein. I just wanted
:: clarification about why anyone would think that protein conversion
:: to fuel would be the preference in the absense of carbs. Some of
:: that would happen, but it definitely wouldn't be primary. As you are
:: also pointing out, that the order of preference should not be
:: carb,fat,protein, because it was thought that carbs were prefered
:: because they burn first. New research indicates that fat is the
:: prefered fuel. It's like saying that alcohol is prefered because it
:: burns first before carbs. Just because it is burned up faster, does
:: not mean it is prefered.
Exactly. However, this isn't what is typically heard thereabouts. I've
heard it so many times that carbs are the body's preferred fuel.
::
:::
::: I didn't realize 'til now that the Eades recommend HIIT! Good for
::: them! Definitely a plan I can get behind.
::
:: I don't know what protein power rcommends, but from what I have
:: been reading, Short duration workouts in high intensity works best
:: in aerobic as well as weight training.
In general, weight training is automatically an interval workout....while
you're lifting HR gets pushed up, and inbetween movements it drops. "Heavy
workouts" (as in lifting heavy) drive HR up higher than "lighter workouts."
However, with aerobics, we were taught for a long time to do long steady
movement at a heart rate which made "fat" burning optimal. However, such an
activity might not burn that many calories. In fact, the metabolic kick of
typical "fat-burning aerobics" lasts for about 5 mins after the activity.
So the main benefit as far as dieting is concerned is from the calories you
burn *during* exercise. However, if you mix low intensity "aerobic" activity
with high intensity activity (ie, intervals) you get a much greater lasting
"metobolic kick" in the time period after the workout (which, BTW, is what
happends in weight training). So, given equal amounts of time in each, high
intensity interval training (HIIT) will result in greater calories burned
(assuming its done right). Research suggests much greater fat burn, too.
http://www.wsu.edu/~strength/hiit.htm
http://www.cbass.com/FATBURN.HTM
My weight training workouts
:: now are mainly brief, high intensity with compound exercises, and on
:: a schedule of Mon,Fri,Wed, then repeat. Basically 6 workouts in 2
:: weeks, alternating each week as either 2 weight training and 1
:: aerobic, or 2 aerobic and 1 weight training. I jog, swim, ride bike,
:: or walk on the other MFW that I am not lifting. In the spring, I'm
:: going to increase the intensity of the aerobic, but shorten the
:: duration. Apparently you don't have to run for long periods of time
:: for aerobic fitness. Shorter duration jogging with wind sprints
:: accomplishes the same results.
Interesting. I generally weight train 3x per week and do cardio as much as
possible. Sometimes after a lifting session and most times on the days in
between. Bike riding happens on the weekends during season. I don't do
HIIT every cardio session -- especially when I'm feeling drained from low
carb and low calorie eating -- like right now.
:::
:::
:::
:::::
:::::
::::::
:::::: on Wed, 05 Jan 2005 04:34:36 GMT, "Tom" <
[email protected]>
:::::: wrote:
::::::
::::::: Hi John. If you are trying to lose weight, it may be difficult
::::::: to gain mass if your overall calories are too low. It is much
::::::: easier to gain muscle mass when you are eating more than you
::::::: need. I had no problems making some strength gains while I was
::::::: losing weight. I found that I didn't have the energy for
::::::: running while I was losing weight, but if you can, than do so.
::::::: I just walked for 1/2 to 1 hour on the days I wasn't weight
::::::: training. If you feel you can do more, go for it. If you are
::::::: exercising and eating enough protein your body will tend to
::::::: want to keep it's muscles and use more fat for energy.
::::::
:::::: -----
:::::: Bev
