Training & Nutrition - Gatorade Deceived me!!

Actually it's more of my stupidity than Gatorade Deceiving me however today I looked at the label of a gatorade bottle, I don't know if I've just never looked at one before or chose to ignore it but while looking at the ingredients I saw....HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP!!!! How can this be? I mind as well be drinking soda. I use this stuff religiously while training and now I'm thinking it's been hurting my weight loss progress. BAH!! I also use the powder, and it seems to be better...they use dextrose instead of HFCS, why couldn't they use dextrose in the bottles as well?? I actually thought the powder used Maltodextrin but was wrong on that as well? I guess I don't know what to say, I always assumed that Gatorade, with the exception of how much sugar they have in it was somewhat healthy...but it's just as healthy as soda!!! How could they have done this and advertise that Gatorade is for athletes?

it also rots your teeth.. pretty bad stuff :( too bad i like it so much

When you're exercising for more than 90 minutes or so, your body needs quick energy. I don't think it makes much difference if it gets that energy from HFC or sucrose or fructose (though the latter can cause stomach upset). If it's really an issue, buy the powdered Gatorade.

It all depends:
We did this 3000 mile tour at 120 miles/day. Gatorade, Milkshakes, Steak and potatoes were an integral part of our diet. The result? We feel great and loose no weight.
Now I am doing only 50 mile/day. Gatorade and Ice-cream will cause weight gain.
As simple as that.

GatorAde is meant to replenish electrolytes and provide carbs. I don't think it's ever been represented as a diet drink. HFCS is a source of carbs to give your body energy during exertion, so then it's good, but it's not good for just drinking otherwise. I've never seen a GatorAde advertisement featuring people sitting on their asses, so I think they have their marketing down OK.

They have thier marketing down. Many folks are convinced that they need to drink Gatorade to mow the lawn.

Did you notice what the Tour riders drink? Water. Food bags sometimes have a small can of Coke.

No "sports drinks". What does that tell you?

Az

They have thier marketing down. Many folks are convinced that they need to drink Gatorade to mow the lawn.

Did you notice what the Tour riders drink? Water. Food bags sometimes have a small can of Coke.

No "sports drinks". What does that tell you?

Az

They do use sport drinks sometimes. When they drink water they eat SEVERAL gels (but they waste a lot instead of squeezing out every bit).

Actually it's more of my stupidity than Gatorade Deceiving me however today I looked at the label of a gatorade bottle, I don't know if I've just never looked at one before or chose to ignore it but while looking at the ingredients I saw....HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP!!!! How can this be? I mind as well be drinking soda. I use this stuff religiously while training and now I'm thinking it's been hurting my weight loss progress. BAH!! I also use the powder, and it seems to be better...they use dextrose instead of HFCS, why couldn't they use dextrose in the bottles as well?? I actually thought the powder used Maltodextrin but was wrong on that as well? I guess I don't know what to say, I always assumed that Gatorade, with the exception of how much sugar they have in it was somewhat healthy...but it's just as healthy as soda!!! How could they have done this and advertise that Gatorade is for athletes?

It doesn't matter. It all gets converted to glucose. If your not losing weight, perhaps you shouldn't drink so much of it. Unless you're riding more than a couple hours, you only need water anyway. BTW, I often drink regular cola during 200+ Km rides. It's a good cheap source of calories at a convenience store. Eat something salty with it and you get plenty of electrolytes. You don't really need special food to ride a bike.

Maltodextrine is a weak complex carbohydrate that gets quickly converted to glucose. It allows manufacturers to control the sweetness while still providing the target calorie level. Gatorade doesn't use maltodextrine probably for two reasons. First, it's harder to dissolve into cold water than other surgars, and second because gatorade is intended to be a fairly sweet beverage.

When you're exercising for more than 90 minutes or so, your body needs quick energy. I don't think it makes much difference if it gets that energy from HFC or sucrose or fructose (though the latter can cause stomach upset). If it's really an issue, buy the powdered Gatorade.

+1.

If you can tolerate it *and* you can drink enough of it, the fructose won't cause a problem. I personally find it hard to drink enough gatorade.

They *could* use sucrose in the premix gatorade, but it would cost more than HFCS, so they don't.

Yes, the powdered Gatorade uses dextrose (glucose) powder and sucrose (table-sugar). The reason the pre-mixed drink uses HFCS is that it's cheap and is delivered in liquid form, making mixing liquid Gatorade very easy. In actual use, I wouldn't worry about HFCS too much. As long as you burn it all off, you'll be fine. Excess amounts while sedentary may be a concern, but that's teh same for all the other foods as well.

If I was to drink Gatorade, I'd buy the power and mix it at double-strength in order to get the necessary carb-calories & electrolytes to water-ratio that I need to take in each hour. This makes it way, way too sweet. So I prefer Cytomax at 2x and eating regular food with water.

It all depends:
We did this 3000 mile tour at 120 miles/day. Gatorade, Milkshakes, Steak and potatoes were an integral part of our diet. The result? We feel great and loose no weight.
Now I am doing only 50 mile/day. Gatorade and Ice-cream will cause weight gain.
As simple as that.

Steak. Mmmmmmmmmmmm... I should reward myself tonight.

I was reading Running Times magazine last night. There's an article on page 18 about how a 2:1:1 of glucose, fructose, sucrose, absorbs 1.6(?) times faster than plain glucose alone. It's due to different cofactors being involved in absorption.

Danno: I've missed you around here :)

Hammer Nutrition also claims their stuff (made with maltodextrin) absorbes at a higher rate. There's no question their stuff is much less sweet, which is more of a factor on longer, harder rides. I just wonder about the other claims. It all seems like sales marketing to me.

Yeah there was an article in Bicycling magazine that also had an article on sucrose/fructose/maltodextrin, but don't remember it giving the ratios, but the mixture provided up to 2 times the absorption rate of just one of the energy sources on its own. Something about the mixture causes the body to absorb it faster. I wonder how long it will take for someone to come out with a drink with the mixture.

Also, most of the training info I've read says when your training there's nothing wrong with fructose drinks, just that on longer rides many people can't stomach them that well.

My main problem with Gatorade is that it tastes waaay too sweet, and it pretty bad affect on the teeth. I tried Gu2O recently and I like it so far. Even during hard efforts I can stomach it. Which I can't say about gatorade.

In actual use, I wouldn't worry about HFCS too much. As long as you burn it all off, you'll be fine. Excess amounts while sedentary may be a concern, but that's teh same for all the other carbs as well.

I'm not sure about that. The fact that fructose is converted to glucose in your liver and HCFS contains a lot of it makes me wonder about the needless strain on one's liver when there's lots of other sweeteners available. Especially considering how much we already take in that requires the liver to go the extra mile. Converting lots of fructose in the liver also makes a lot of building blocks available for the creation of lipids which can contribute to high triglycerides, and the evidence so far makes this seem more of a problem for men than women.

If all you're taking in is the occasional Gatorade, I agree that it's probably not a big deal, but it's in so many different food products. Depending on where you shop, you can't escape it. I'm not completely paranoid about it the way some people are, but I just don't think too much fructose is a good idea for the human body, and HFCS contains too much by virtue of its make-up.

I'm not sure about that. The fact that fructose is converted to glucose in your liver and HCFS contains a lot of it makes me wonder about the needless strain on one's liver when there's lots of other sweeteners available. Especially considering how much we already take in that requires the liver to go the extra mile. Converting lots of fructose in the liver also makes a lot of building blocks available for the creation of lipids which can contribute to high triglycerides, and the evidence so far makes this seem more of a problem for men than women.

If all you're taking in is the occasional Gatorade, I agree that it's probably not a big deal, but it's in so many different food products. Depending on where you shop, you can't escape it. I'm not completely paranoid about it the way some people are, but I just don't think too much fructose is a good idea for the human body, and HFCS contains too much by virtue of its make-up.

it is only a strain if you drink it while NOT exercising.

HFCS is 1.5 times sweeter than cane sugar, so they use less of it to sweeten the drink.
hence, cheaper.

HFCS is not poison or bad for you -if you use it while riding-. if you use it off the bike
then you are straining your pancreas and liver too much if you drink more than 8oz.

it is only a strain if you drink it while NOT exercising.

HFCS is 1.5 times sweeter than cane sugar, so they use less of it to sweeten the drink.
hence, cheaper.

HFCS is not poison or bad for you -if you use it while riding-. if you use it off the bike
then you are straining your pancreas and liver too much if you drink more than 8oz.

Back up your stats, please?


HFCS is roughly half glucose and half fructose...just like sucrose (well, what sucrose very rapidly breaks down into).

We go through this "OMG!!!111one HFCS IS TEH BAD 4 U!!!" routine about once a month but no one cares to listen to fact, science, and logic. It's no better or worse for you than regular sugar.

Back up your stats, please?


HFCS is roughly half glucose and half fructose...just like sucrose (well, what sucrose very rapidly breaks down into).

We go through this "OMG!!!111one HFCS IS TEH BAD 4 U!!!" routine about once a month but no one cares to listen to fact, science, and logic. It's no better or worse for you than regular sugar.

Yep. And people blaming their weight problem on the type of sugar, as opposed to the amount of sugar, they consume will stay overweight until they reconize the real problem.

it is only a strain if you drink it while NOT exercising.

HFCS is 1.5 times sweeter than cane sugar, so they use less of it to sweeten the drink.
hence, cheaper.

HFCS is not poison or bad for you -if you use it while riding-. if you use it off the bike
then you are straining your pancreas and liver too much if you drink more than 8oz.

So you're saying that the liver does not convert fructose into glucose if you are exercising? Where is it getting converted into glucose if not the liver? Does some other organ of the body produce fructokinase when we exercise? What organ is that?

So you're saying that the liver does not convert fructose into glucose if you are exercising? Where is it getting converted into glucose if not the liver? Does some other organ of the body produce fructokinase when we exercise? What organ is that?


no I am not saying that,

I am saying generally, it causes too much of an insulin dump and recovery process
which is fine and dandy, but it is better to drink water and eat food instead of sugary
beverages if you ain't working out hard.

when working out hard, muscles take glucose out of blood without need for
insulin to trigger it. the pancreas and endocrine system runs better when
less pure glucose is ingested during rest

Back up your stats, please?

"Sweet" is subjective, it can have no stats to back it up. It's not a claim about calories. Just from a bottom line perspective the American Consumer probably backs up the fact that HFCS is swetter to the average taste bud than anything else. This allows food manufacturers to use less and still get the super sickly sweet sweetness that so many of our off-the-shelf foods have.

For our purposes, presumably to deliver calories to your stomach as peacefully as possible, the sweeter something is the harder it's going to be to take when mixed at exercise-required levels. This is why I see the maltodextrin-based drinks eventually gaining popularity with most endurance athletes. It's incredibly not sweet.


We go through this "OMG!!!111one HFCS IS TEH BAD 4 U!!!" routine about once a month but no one cares to listen to fact, science, and logic. It's no better or worse for you than regular sugar.

Once a month? That infrequently?

"Sweet" is subjective, it can have no stats to back it up. It's not a claim about calories. Just from a bottom line perspective the American Consumer probably backs up the fact that HFCS is swetter to the average taste bud than anything else. This allows food manufacturers to use less and still get the super sickly sweet sweetness that so many of our off-the-shelf foods have.
You're probably making the mistake that many do and mixing up (pure) fructose with HFCS. They're not the same. Pure fructose is...well, 100% fructose molecules. It is indeed a lot sweeter than sugar. HFCS on the other hand is about half glucose molecules, half fructose molecules. Sugar (sucrose) molecules are composed of one fructose molecule and one glucose molecule which rapidly break down into their components. I can't see how that would make either one significantly "sweeter" than the other.

Manufacturers use HFCS because it's *cheaper* than cane sugar, not because it's sweeter. The fact that it's in solution also makes it easier to mix into certain food types, i.e. liquids and gels.


For our purposes, presumably to deliver calories to your stomach as peacefully as possible, the sweeter something is the harder it's going to be to take when mixed at exercise-required levels. This is why I see the maltodextrin-based drinks eventually gaining popularity with most endurance athletes. It's incredibly not sweet.
It's not sweetness that's the issue. It's fructose specifically, which by itself or in inordinate quantities relative to glucose, can inhibit gastric emptying. You don't want slower gastric emptying when you're exercising; you need to get it into your bloodstream as quickly as possible.


There is some substance to the concern over *pure* fructose when exercising; it's why pure fruit juice drinks are not recommended. Pure fructose is not absorbed as quickly and doesn't provide the "quick energy" as glucose. But actually what's interesting is that sucrose (glucose + fructose) or glucose polymers + fructose are apparently absorbed faster than pure glucose, which may be in part why many maltodextrine-based drinks and gels frequently have added fructose...yeah, read the labels. People read "high FRUCTOSE corn syrup", not really understanding what it is, and jump to the conclusion that it's awful for you and so on.

But if you would learn a little bit about what HFCS actually is, and a little bit about how your body works, you will understand what I said before: it's no worse or better for you than sugar (there is probably some room for debate on that topic but I'm not going to take it up here).

But actually what's interesting is that sucrose (glucose + fructose) or glucose polymers + fructose are apparently absorbed faster than pure glucose, which may be in part why many maltodextrine-based drinks and gels frequently have added fructose...yeah, read the labels. People read "high FRUCTOSE corn syrup", not really understanding what it is, and jump to the conclusion that it's awful for you and so on.

But if you would learn a little bit about what HFCS actually is, and a little bit about how your body works, you will understand what I said before: it's no worse or better for you than sugar (there is probably some room for debate on that topic but I'm not going to take it up here).

I'm not debating the relative merits of HFCS/sucrose/fructose. I agree with everything you said. My above post was clarifying something another person said, perhaps errantly and not terribly well thought out. I'm sure you're right about cheapness being the main factor in why HFCS is used. As a rule, I don't eat any of that stuff when not exercising. I'm sure I don't comply 100% but in general any refined sugar is not part of my daily diet.

I read the Bicycling Magazine article recently that said recent research shows a 2:1 maltodextrin:sucrose mix actually absorbes faster than anything by itself. Sucrose is nothing more than simple table sugar, correct? I'm going to start mixing my own sports drink beginning with this weekend's rides. After this past weekend's 24 hour race, I cannot take Accelerade nor Gatorade any longer.

A little pre-planning and you don't need to be too concerned about the speed of absorption of either water or carbohydrate. If you eat and drink early and often, you keep the pipeline filled, so to speak, and there's a constant influx of nutrition. If you wait until you are on the edge of heat exhaustion or bonking, then you need to be concerned with how fast you can get fluid and calories into your system.

A little pre-planning and you don't need to be too concerned about the speed of absorption of either water or carbohydrate. If you eat and drink early and often, you keep the pipeline filled, so to speak, and there's a constant influx of nutrition. If you wait until you are on the edge of heat exhaustion or bonking, then you need to be concerned with how fast you can get fluid and calories into your system.

My goal is oriented more towards endurance MTB racing. I can road ride forever and never have these problems (not really, but comparatively). But when you get a lot of hours off-road, it multiples everything tremendously. Margins for error start to become chasms, and chasms become canyons.

Not to throw a curve ball into this thread, but I have checked several liquid Gateraids and it appears like some have and some do not have HFC's. It appears like some of the darker Gateraids have it, but my lime ones do not.

Well this thread has turned pretty "ripe.". The best part is about all the "articles" that have been read, but nobody seems to know what any of it means.

Ok, so there's are different sugars, and different people, mix carefully for best results.

HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP!!!! How can this be? I mind as well be drinking soda. I use this stuff religiously while training and now I'm thinking it's been hurting my weight loss progress.
Weight loss is a calorie game, period. As long as you use more calories in a day than you take in, you will lose weight. It is irrelevant whether Gatorade uses high fructose corn syrup, or dextrose, or brown rice syrup or what have you. All that matters is the number of calories.

Regardless, the rules of thumb are 500-750ml of water, and 250 calories (preferably carbs) and a little sodium, for every hour on the bike. If I recall correctly, energy drinks will get the glucose into your system a little faster than an energy bar.



I always assumed that Gatorade, with the exception of how much sugar they have in it was somewhat healthy...but it's just as healthy as soda!!! How could they have done this and advertise that Gatorade is for athletes?
It's an energy drink, not a diet soda. It provides fuel while you're exercising, and it does that tolerably well. Considering that the alternative to taking in calories while riding is bonking, I'd say it's fairly healthy....

Weight loss is a calorie game, period. As long as you use more calories in a day than you take in, you will lose weight. It is irrelevant whether Gatorade uses high fructose corn syrup, or dextrose, or brown rice syrup or what have you. All that matters is the number of calories.

I agree on the weight loss, but what about eating better? Is evapoated cane juice better that HFCS?

Cliff Bar Electrolyte Replacement Drink
Ingredients:Organic Brown Rice Syrup Solids, Organic Evaporated Cane Juice, Citric Acid, Salt, Natural Flavors, Colored with Turmeric and Caramel Color, Dipotassium Phosphate, Dicalcium Phosphate, Magnesium Oxide, Green Tea Extract (Decaffeinated).

Contains 92% Organic Ingredients

http://www.clifbar.com/eat/eat.cfm?location=shot&id=303

One thing that helps in these types of analyses is to examine your own thought processes. There's a two-step process that occurs:

1. data-acquisition: looking at the facts such as a 750ml drink contains 250 calories. That's measurable and quantitative and indisputable.

2. interpretation of the data follows next and is subjective and variable based upon the individual and their criteria. This is where good, bad, healthy, or not healthy comes in. I try to leave out this step always and look at only #1

Ok, let's move on...


HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP!!!! How can this be? I mind as well be drinking soda. I use this stuff religiously while training and now I'm thinking it's been hurting my weight loss progress.As Bacciagalupe mentioned, weight-loss all comes down to the bottom-line of calories-in vs. calories-out. If we examine the data itself, a bottle of Gatorade with 300-calories is the same as two sodas, or two slices of bread or a small plate of pasta. Once all these foods are digested, they become 300-calories of glucose in your bloodstream, your body has no idea what KIND of food provided this glucose.

The stumbling-block is that the next step of interpretation of "healthy" or "not healthy" or "good" or "bad" comes in. The actual reality of 300-calories of glucose in your bloodstream is neither healthy or bad, it's just "300-calories of glucose in your bloodstream". Again, you have to examine the data, let's say a 3000-calorie/day quota. If you've already eaten 3000-calories total already today and you were to drink/eat in that extra 300-calories from Gatorade, 2-sodas or a plate of pasta, you WILL gain weight, so in this case, it's "bad". However, if you've only eaten 2000-calories today, then that 300-calories from will leave you with a calorie-deficit, so in this case, it's "good" because you will lose weight. Conversely, if you are not trying to lose weight, then this calorie-deficit is "bad".

Food in itself is not "good" or "bad", it's how you use it. I've lost weight on fast-food diets full of grease, as well as on "healthy" vegan diets, or on high-carb or high-protein diets, and I've also GAINED weight on those exact same foods as well. It comes down to calories-in vs. calories-out in ALL cases.

BTW - "eating better" is again a #2 interpretation of the data facts (#1). Evaporated cane-sugar is the exact same stuff as table-sugar (sucrose), just not as refined and purified. Once it's absorbed through your intestines, it's 50/50 glucose/fructose and has the same effect as slices of bread or pasta with some fruit. Same with honey, same stuff as table-sugar, although you get some extra flavoring from honey & cane-sugar that's not present in the more-refined table-sugar (which is typically made from sugar-cane or beets).

---------------------------------
an aside note on HFCS 55%/45% fructose/glucose does have some different metabolic results than regular sugar 50/50 fruc/glu, but not much. You'll have to take in 667-calories of Gatorade or soda to have the same insulin/leptin-response to feel as full and satiated as eating 300-calories of bread or pasta. This is where it's implicated in weight-gain. But in terms of energy-content and weight-management, 300-calories of HFCS is exactly the same as 300-calories of sugar, bread or pasta.

While weight loss does come down to calories in/out, there needs to be a focus on proper nutrition as well. You have to be pragmatic when you look at these issues. If your diet leaves you entirely deficient in any one of fat/carbs/protein/water/minerals/vitamins, eventually your body will yearn for that deficient element so much you'll break down, and more than likely binge, after which you will be hard pressed to go back to the original diet.

I don't entirely subscribe to the "a calorie is a calorie" adage. But for the most part it works very well for weight loss (sorta like classical physics) as well as the ever-important sustainability in any weight loss program.

Yes, of course you have to eat a well-balanced diet to get all your nutrients. But malnutrition is a rarity nowadays and most people sufficient micronutrients. It's the abundance of macronutrients that throws us over the edge of obesity.

Not all calories are equal in how they pile on as body-fat, that's true. Some foods have much higher calorie-density than others. If you eat a block of cheese that 80% fat, 98% of that fat is converted directly to body-fat with minimal processing. Whereas carbs & proteins must undergo a lengthy conversion process and lose move of their energy content in the process; only 40% of a carb's calories ends up as body-fat. So you can easily eat a block of cheese and gain 1/2-lb instantly (same goes for greasy, creamy sauces). Conversely, in order to gain that same amount of weight with carbs, you'd have to eat an entire loaf of bread, much harder to do. :)

Interesting.

Ok this is off the "line" of the conversation but what isn't these days? So here goes. I've read 2 interesting things recently, neither of which I can source so it makes linking and cross-linking difficult. The first is that excess carbs do not actually get stored as body fat. The problem is that constantly eating carbs turns off you body's "fat burning switch" so to speak, and the fat you eat never gets burned. Essentially you spike your blood sugar constantly which is where your body turns for energy.

The other item may have come from Friel's philosophy, which is that if you eat a slightly higher fat ratio your body will get used to using fat as fuel, and you will then become more reliant on fat for energy. This would be of particular interest to the endurance athlete, to be sure.

Not sure if I buy either. I didn't care enough to research either item, since they both sort of lean towards imbalanced diets, which I'm not interested in. I probably should do more research before I post anything but I figure it's just food for thought.

Yes, of course you have to eat a well-balanced diet to get all your nutrients. But malnutrition is a rarity nowadays and most people way sufficient micronutrients. It's the abundance of macronutrients that throws us over the edge of obesity.

Not all calories are equal in how they pile on as body-fat, that's true. Some foods have much higher calorie-density than others. If you eat a block of cheese that 80% fat, 98% of that fat is converted directly to body-fat with minimal processing. Whereas carbs & proteins must undergo a lengthy conversion process and lose move of their energy content in the process; only 40% of a carb's calories ends up as body-fat. So you can easily eat a block of cheese and gain 1/2-lb instantly (same goes for greasy, creamy sauces). Conversely, in order to gain that same amount of weight with carbs, you'd have to eat an entire loaf of bread, much harder to do. :)

Some would disagree with your last sentence due to the issue of "satiety". I think this helps to explain why some folks can be successful on Atkins - they feel "sated" more quickly with fats and stop eating sooner, so their total caloric intake is reduced.

Of course, it varies for everyone and even from food to food. I have no problem bringing home half of a steak or other entree from a restaurant...but, put a bowl of high-fat salted nuts in front of me, and they'll be gone before you (or I) know it. :(

While weight loss does come down to calories in/out, there needs to be a focus on proper nutrition as well. You have to be pragmatic when you look at these issues. If your diet leaves you entirely deficient in any one of fat/carbs/protein/water/minerals/vitamins, eventually your body will yearn for that deficient element so much you'll break down, and more than likely binge, after which you will be hard pressed to go back to the original diet.

I don't entirely subscribe to the "a calorie is a calorie" adage. But for the most part it works very well for weight loss (sorta like classical physics) as well as the ever-important sustainability in any weight loss program.

While proper balanced nutrition is important, the calories consumed during most bike rides are in addition to one's normal food consumption. during the bike ride, we are generally not trying to meet our recommended daily intake of various vitamins, minerals, fiber, etc. Those things should be consumed during regular meals. On the bike, we are concerned primarily with water, carbohydrate, and sodium.

yes, the micronutrients are catalysts, they don't actually get consumed much with metabolism. Regardless of activity level, vitamins & minerals don't get used up much more. However, the macronutrients, water & carbs are used up in relation to activity. And salt is sweated away at 600-1000mg per hour, so it too needed to be replenished.

While proper balanced nutrition is important, the calories consumed during most bike rides are in addition to one's normal food consumption. during the bike ride, we are generally not trying to meet our recommended daily intake of various vitamins, minerals, fiber, etc. Those things should be consumed during regular meals. On the bike, we are concerned primarily with water, carbohydrate, and sodium.

Indeed. My comments were intended for a wider nutritional spotlight than just the bike, as weight loss encompasses your entire diet, not just your bike diet.

I used to drink Gatorade all the time on my rides.... then I plateau'd with my weight loss. I lost about 45 pounds since last June cycling and then I couldn't lose more. I ride about 200 miles a week on average. So now I train harder, go further and only drink water on my rides UNTIL my second hour of training where I'll buy a Gatorade and another water. Since I've done that two weeks ago, I've lost 4-5 more pounds. I think because it was so hot here in Texas I was drinking so much Gatorade that I was having a hard time burning off the calories. Pn a 4 hour ride I'd drink 4-6 Gatorades.... (laughs). That's alot of calories, plus my regular meals.