Training & Nutrition - Big Fat Lies

How about a spirited Friday discussion. All about how we eat to many carbs, and think it's good for us.
I'm not generally a fan of bicycling magazine, but I picked one up at the airport because of this article.
http://www.bicycling.com/article/0,6610,s1-4-21-18998-1,00.html

Discuss.

We all try to eat whatever makes us go. Most of us have figured it out by now. Half a plate of vegetables is a good rule. Pasta before an event is a good rule. IIRC, the USPS team ate pasta almost every night of the Tour. Try doing that on vegetables. Or are we supposed to just drink liquid preparations of various amino acids?

My favorite Lance story: A reporter asked him how he managed to count his calories while training. Lance looked at the guy like he was stupid and said, "It's written on the side of the box!"

So it's easy to get up on a soap box and tell everyone else how to eat. A little harder to kick some serious butt on a long brevet, mountain stage, or 24 hour race. We're all different, TG, and our lives are different. Me, I eat as little fiber as possible on a day when I want to go really hard. If I eat nuts, I'll barf. Etc.

But sure, the article is a good starting point. 14 servings of fruit or veggies/day on normal training days is what I go for. But you have to experiment and see what works for you.

Yeah, I don't eat the carbs before a ride. I tried eating porridge right before a ride and I felt so weak. I turn to heavier foods, like milk, cheese, bagels, eggs, peanut butter. And... eat fruit during the rides in addition to something heavier.

I stay away from the processed things like clif bars 'cause I am too poor to afford 'em. All my spending money goes into the bike.

Yeah, I don't eat the carbs before a ride. I tried eating porridge right before a ride and I felt so weak. I turn to heavier foods, like milk, cheese, bagels, eggs, peanut butter. And... eat fruit during the rides in addition to something heavier.

Milk - 2%
http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/dairy-and-egg-products/71/2
12.3 grams of carbohydrates in 1 cup (4% of daily value)

Cheese - cheddar
http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/dairy-and-egg-products/8/2
2 grams of carbs in 1 cup (1% of DV)

Bagel - oat bran
http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/baked-products/4823/2
30 grams of carbs in 1 bagel (10% of DV)

Peanut Butter - smooth
http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/legumes-and-legume-products/4366/2
6 grams of carbs in 2 tablespoons (2% of DV)

All but the eggs have carbs in them ... especially the bagel!

Milk - 2%
http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/dairy-and-egg-products/71/2
12.3 grams of carbohydrates in 1 cup (4% of daily value)

Cheese - cheddar
http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/dairy-and-egg-products/8/2
2 grams of carbs in 1 cup (1% of DV)

Bagel - oat bran
http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/baked-products/4823/2
30 grams of carbs in 1 bagel (10% of DV)

Peanut Butter - smooth
http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/legumes-and-legume-products/4366/2
6 grams of carbs in 2 tablespoons (2% of DV)

All but the eggs have carbs in them ... especially the bagel!

Its not the absolute value of a given nutrient, but the mix. All of the items you listed offer varying levels of carbs, proteins, and fats. A plate of sphagetti w/ tomato sauce would be probably 80 -90% carbs and very little fat or protein. This kind of meal would generally cause a large insulin spike and subsequent conversion of excess carbs into body fat, even though the total calorie content may not be too excessive. Fat helps delay carbohydrate absorption and therefore can reduce the peak of that insulin spike and may allow more glucose absorption into muscle cells rather than leading to so much fat storage.

Its not the absolute value of a given nutrient, but the mix. All of the items you listed offer varying levels of carbs, proteins, and fats. A plate of sphagetti w/ tomato sauce would be probably 80 -90% carbs and very little fat or protein. This kind of meal would generally cause a large insulin spike and subsequent conversion of excess carbs into body fat, even though the total calorie content may not be too excessive. Fat helps delay carbohydrate absorption and therefore can reduce the peak of that insulin spike and may allow more glucose absorption into muscle cells rather than leading to so much fat storage.

I agree ... I was just pointing out the irony of "I don't eat carbs before a ride" and "I eat bagels".

And a lot of people don't realize that even the protein rich foods, such as peanut butter, still have carbs.

The carbs in cheese is a bit of a stretch though...

i'm aware these foods have carbs...

i meant that if i eat JUST carbs before a ride, like a big bowl of porridge, I don't last long. If I eat something a little heavier like an egg and cheese on a bagel, my stomach is happier.

now having looked at the sources you listed..

milk 244ml:
fat: 5g
carb: 12g
protein: 8g.

cheese 132g:
fat: 44g
carb: 2g
protein: 33g

bagel 57g:
fat: 1g
carb: 30g
protein: 6g

peanut butter 258g:
fat: 130g
carb: 52g
protein: 65g

i didn't mean "i exclusively eat fats and proteins before a ride." Most foods have carbs in them, and I said I don't eat the processed stuff. I think it'd be tough doing a nice long ride living on food like... celery.

peanut butter 258g:
fat: 130g
carb: 52g
protein: 65g

That is quite a bit of peanut butter...

lol, i just followed the link.

For me, the more I figure about my own nutrition and cycling, the more i'm leaning to agree with that article. In my experience, bread, refined sugars, wheat and processed foods tend to mess with my blood sugar levels and lead to up/downs in mood and induce cravings. They can also make me gain unwanted weight (i've never been fat, but it is harder for me to lean down eating bread etc). Bike performance and mental focus is also up/down if my diet isn't as "clean". I don't think everyone is like this though, I know people who can just constantly eat crap and seem to go well all the time.

Nothing really new in the article, but it's well put-together. The trick, of course, is in actually changing your diet!

Nothing surprising in that article except #2 to a small extent. I ride better when I have a nice serving of complex carbs before a ride (oatmeal, whole wheat spaghetti, whole wheat bread, brown rice) but I always make meals a balance of carbs, fat and protein, unless I'm just low on time. So the oatmeal will ideally be balanced out by a couple eggs or some peanut butter, the spaghetti sauce will have some olives/olive oil/cheese/meat, whatever I'm cooking with brown rice will usually have some good fats in it, etc.

That article was a nice change after years of many guidelines that were simply "eat this box of refined sugar." I'm somewhere in between - I eat plenty of carbs, protein, and fat, but I try to eat as natural as possible. I won't be carrying a steak in my jersey pocket any time soon though ;)

I'd be interested to see more details on the recommended diets from Allen Lim and Joe Friel. Before this, all the nutritionists giving the advice about cutting out carbs, they also recommend cutting out cardio. They recommend weight lifting and other workouts that take less than 1 hour. Most cyclists I know aren't going to give up their riding!

meat

beans

water

That article was a nice change after years of many guidelines that were simply "eat this box of refined sugar." I'm somewhere in between - I eat plenty of carbs, protein, and fat, but I try to eat as natural as possible. I won't be carrying a steak in my jersey pocket any time soon though ;)

I'd be interested to see more details on the recommended diets from Allen Lim and Joe Friel. Before this, all the nutritionists giving the advice about cutting out carbs, they also recommend cutting out cardio. They recommend weight lifting and other workouts that take less than 1 hour. Most cyclists I know aren't going to give up their riding!

There seems to be a growing feeling that we tend to over-exercise at too high a heart rate. Suggestions are that the bulk exercise should be done at lower HR's with short, intense bursts of high effort (intervals). I don't know how much of this is "mainstream" v. just junk that comes from the Internet. The world of fitness and exercise is wonderful and varied.

Cyclists seem to some of the worst of the lot. Variable gearing allows us to totally burn out our legs and keep HR's in a moderately high zone for extended periods.

That article is so full of bs and nonsense. It's full of the modern carb-phobia, preaching that the only good carbohydrates are FIBER. Starch is bad, sugar is bad.. that leaves fiber. Have fun getting 55% of your calories from full fiber. Now I know they aren't saying to eat only pure fiber.. but the way they make starch out to be bad is dumb. Starch combined with fiber isn't any worse than sugar combined with fiber (fruit)

Yeah, another "helpful" magazine article... Yeh!

Anyway, the essential point of the article is that the "quality" of a nutrient cannot be described so simply as a "carb", "fat" or protein. The point being, these are "classes" of foods, not genuine assurances of their relative "healthiness." God am I sick of using "quotes."

Big - azzzz fffinng deal. Old news.

There seems to be a growing feeling that we tend to over-exercise at too high a heart rate. Suggestions are that the bulk exercise should be done at lower HR's with short, intense bursts of high effort (intervals). I don't know how much of this is "mainstream" v. just junk that comes from the Internet. The world of fitness and exercise is wonderful and varied.

Cyclists seem to some of the worst of the lot. Variable gearing allows us to totally burn out our legs and keep HR's in a moderately high zone for extended periods.Do you have any references other than 'feelings'? I find my heart rate stays at a higher, steadier rate while running than cycling. There's no coasting while running.

meat

beans

water


You, eatmyarse, have summed the total!

I would include, for myself, RoundTable to your list. Their buffet is, for me, value indeed.

Me, I eat nothing but pure maltodextrin and highly refined soy protein for breakfast and during my hard rides. Up to say 200k, then my stomach really screams for a nice mini-mart packaged fruit pie, about 750 calories of the most highly refined, artificial stuff known to man or woman, complete with deadly food coloring and preservatives. I'll be on my second slice of pizza when you come in. ;)

That article is so full of bs and nonsense. It's full of the modern carb-phobia, preaching that the only good carbohydrates are FIBER. Starch is bad, sugar is bad.. that leaves fiber. Have fun getting 55% of your calories from full fiber. Now I know they aren't saying to eat only pure fiber.. but the way they make starch out to be bad is dumb. Starch combined with fiber isn't any worse than sugar combined with fiber (fruit)

Umm, you have a misunderstanding of nutrition. "Fiber" is not a carb like you're implying. It's found in every damn non-animal food in it's original state that there is. Therefore, saying 'that leaves fiber' is misleading. Simple to say, it's roughage. You rarely have pure fiber with almost no carbs - psyllium husk, and that's about it.

Oh, by the way, if it's not during or right after a workout, there's no reason to eat fiberless carbs anyway. By that, I mean refined grains, i.e. white bread, white rice, etc. Too much insulin spike.

okay okay, to be fair, here is what i had for my second lunch - a typical meal for me:

Can of Salmon: 213g
341kcal
15g fat
0g carb
40.5g protein

mayo 30ml:
200kcal
22g fat
0g carb
0.2g protein

pita bread 86g:
240kcal
5g fat
42g carbs
8g protein

2 glass milk:
244kcal
10g fat
24g carb
16g protein

Total:
1025 kcal
55 g fat
68g carbs
65g protein

now i'm off to work! have a good one

I would love to see Friel's sources for the age related pH drop, and some studies that changing the macro nutrient content can indeed influence blood pH. We have a fairly complex and efficient buffering mechanism for blood pH. I do agree that huge amounts of carbohydrate and exclusion of fats does not work very well, for me, lean meats, vegetable and fruit and little high starch items has been working pretty well. Energy is good and losing about 2 pounds a week for the last two months.

I would love to see Friel's sources for the age related pH drop, and some studies that changing the macro nutrient content can indeed influence blood pH. We have a fairly complex and efficient buffering mechanism for blood pH. I do agree that huge amounts of carbohydrate and exclusion of fats does not work very well, for me, lean meats, vegetable and fruit and little high starch items has been working pretty well. Energy is good and losing about 2 pounds a week for the last two months.

I don't think he was saying anything at all about changing macronutrient ratios to influence blood pH - I think it was more about eating more fruits and vegetables. Macronutrients plays into it only indirectly.

Umm, you have a misunderstanding of nutrition. "Fiber" is not a carb like you're implying. It's found in every damn non-animal food in it's original state that there is. Therefore, saying 'that leaves fiber' is misleading. Simple to say, it's roughage. You rarely have pure fiber with almost no carbs - psyllium husk, and that's about it.

Oh, by the way, if it's not during or right after a workout, there's no reason to eat fiberless carbs anyway. By that, I mean refined grains, i.e. white bread, white rice, etc. Too much insulin spike.

Fiber is a type of carbohydrate.. There's fiber in honey, really? What I meant by my post was they make starch out to be bad, and sugar out to be bad... what does that leave us to eat? Of course, fiberous foods (which in most cases are vegetables, and fruits, unarguabley healthy).

They fail to mention what is a "starchy" carb. Is a potato starchy? How about if you take something starchy and add fiber? Will it still digest at the same rate? No. How about if you add some fat and protein too? No.
What do you think fruit is? Sugar with fiber, thus it digests slowly.

Clearly you have a misunderstanding of nutrition if you think that refined grains in a mixed meal and fed state will illicit a noticeably different insulin response than a whole grain in the same state, and that it has any effect on fat gain/loss.


I'm not arguing that this article doesn't have a good message: Eat more vegetables and fruits, eat less refined crap. But it lacks scientific backing for it's arguments and reasons for eating more fruits and vegetables. Not to mention if you need 5,000kcal per day and are getting 40% of your calories from fruits and vegetables that is a TON of fiber. Too much fiber can cause a lot of problems, not to mention it'd be very hard to get the appropriate amount of calories in to sustain weight. Is it a good idea for someone looking to lose weight? Sure.

Do you have any references other than 'feelings'? I find my heart rate stays at a higher, steadier rate while running than cycling. There's no coasting while running.


Nope. Read it in a post somewhere around here which is no reference at all.

Personally, I know I can bike for longer periods of time than I was ever able to run. That includes the year I spent running cross-country in HS.

And there's no coasting while biking either:)

What do you think fruit is? Sugar with fiber, thus it digests slowly.

Let's not forget about bananas or avocados though, one being particularly starchy and one being particularly fatty.


Clearly you have a misunderstanding of nutrition if you think that refined grains in a mixed meal and fed state will illicit a noticeably different insulin response than a whole grain in the same state, and that it has any effect on fat gain/loss.


If it's making up a substantial aspect of the meal, then why not? For instance, a meal of pasta and tomato sauce with whole vs. white pasta.

Of course, if we're talking about a steak, some veggies and a small piece of white bread vs. whole wheat, okay, there's probably not much difference in insulin spike there.

how many calories do you consume a day?

Question is open to everyone.

Whenever I check the cereal box, all daily requirement percentages are based on a 2000kcal diet. I find it hard to believe that the average person here on BF lives on a 2000kcal diet. My lunch I described earlier was over 1000kcal. My friends poke fun at me that I eat too much.

how many calories do you consume a day?

Question is open to everyone.

Whenever I check the cereal box, all daily requirement percentages are based on a 2000kcal diet. I find it hard to believe that the average person here on BF lives on a 2000kcal diet. My lunch I described earlier was over 1000kcal. My friends poke fun at me that I eat too much.Beats me. I don't have time to mess around with counting. All I know is 250 cal/hr on the bike. That's really all you have to know. If you're getting fat, eat less or exercise more. A little hunger between meals can be a good thing. If you're not gaining strength, you need to eat more, especially good fats and protein.

Watch that cal/hr thing on your big bike rides. Adhere to it. I find that when I do the 250/hr thing, I count the time off the bike as well as on, IOW elapsed time, not just time on the bike. You're always digesting. Eating is how to finish strong.

how many calories do you consume a day?

Question is open to everyone.

Whenever I check the cereal box, all daily requirement percentages are based on a 2000kcal diet. I find it hard to believe that the average person here on BF lives on a 2000kcal diet. My lunch I described earlier was over 1000kcal. My friends poke fun at me that I eat too much.

I consume roughly 3,000/day, on average.

I wonder who here ever had their insulin tested under different conditions. Without that data, how do you know there's any such thing as an "insulin spike"?

Glycemic index and load.

Glycemic index and load.

which is nonsense because it is tested in a fasted state, in non-mixed meals. It just doesn't apply for people except maybe breakfast if you are eating that food alone.

For your example of pasta with sauce comparing whole wheat vs white... we can only speculate because there have no been tests done. The difference would be a few grams of fiber though.. hardly enough to make a difference in a "spike" in insulin.

That is an interesting concept you speak of, and a position I haven't been much familiar with until now. Usually any criticism I'd meet about GI would be to refer to GL instead. So what, then, do you propose in alternative? Insulin index?

which is nonsense because it is tested in a fasted state, in non-mixed meals. It just doesn't apply for people except maybe breakfast if you are eating that food alone.

For your example of pasta with sauce comparing whole wheat vs white... we can only speculate because there have no been tests done. The difference would be a few grams of fiber though.. hardly enough to make a difference in a "spike" in insulin.

So the first issue is whether there is actually any such thing as an insulin spike. This is unsupported, AFAIK.

The second issue: Even if there is an insulin spike, what evidence supports that a spike is "abnormal" or harmful to a person?

The poor evidence for insulin spikes leads me to believe that it is not a good basis for selecting one's diet.

I wonder who here ever had their insulin tested under different conditions. Without that data, how do you know there's any such thing as an "insulin spike"?

look up "insulin clamp"...there have been numerous studies.
http://ajpgi.physiology.org/cgi/content/abstract/237/3/G214
http://www.gcrconline.org/nursing/Documents/gcrc%20nm%20pt%20farrell/Joslin%20Diabetes%20Braley/Clamp%20PROCEDURE%20with%20RN.pdf
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18949454
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/117978575/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/117978575/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0

look up "insulin clamp"...there have been numerous studies.
http://ajpgi.physiology.org/cgi/content/abstract/237/3/G214
http://www.gcrconline.org/nursing/Documents/gcrc%20nm%20pt%20farrell/Joslin%20Diabetes%20Braley/Clamp%20PROCEDURE%20with%20RN.pdf
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18949454
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/117978575/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/117978575/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0



Not a study with subjects or results--just a description of a medical procedure.
Ditto.
Insulin resistance postdicted stroke in 70 year old men
Cookie problem--can't download web page

Not a study with subjects or results--just a description of a medical procedure.
Ditto.
Insulin resistance postdicted stroke in 70 year old men
Cookie problem--can't download web page


The point is you can look on google...there were 450,000 hits for "insulin clamp". Feel free to look for one that has the specifics of what you are looking for. I'm not that worried about it.

here's one result for a search for "Insulin spike studies"
http://www.wannabebig.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2103112

The point is you can look on google...there were 450,000 hits for "insulin clamp". Feel free to look for one that has the specifics of what you are looking for. I'm not that worried about it.

here's one result for a search for "Insulin spike studies"
http://www.wannabebig.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2103112

My only concern is that very little actually known about the efffects of diet on health and fitness. It's foolhardy to believe any specific reccommendations, IMO. The only advice that makes sense to me is from Michael Pollan:


Eat food
not too much
Most of it plants

My only concern is that very little actually known about the efffects of diet on health and fitness. It's foolhardy to believe any specific reccommendations, IMO. The only advice that makes sense to me is from Michael Pollan:


Eat food
not too much
Most of it plants

ok I agree with that. I'm actually a bit of a fan of the zone diet because it basically is what you just quoted from Mr. Pollan. I don't bother with trying to hit exactly 40, 30, 30....Just 1/2 of the plate are non starchy vegies, and the other half is split between protein and a starch.

ok I agree with that. I'm actually a bit of a fan of the zone diet because it basically is what you just quoted from Mr. Pollan. I don't bother with trying to hit exactly 40, 30, 30....Just 1/2 of the plate are non starchy vegies, and the other half is split between protein and a starch.

+1 Teh Zone Diet is one fo the only published diets that I would try.

The Portion Teller is another book that will teach you to make simple diet choices based on serving size.

I agree the Zone is probably pretty close to what works well... How about this for the carbaholics out there...
Eat food, Not to much, Mostly plants, and nothing that has been genetically bred or altered in the last 500 years. (or nothing that wasn't available to your general racial demographic that long ago)

So for a white euro type that would cut pretty much all potatoes and corn, and wheat would pretty much be replaced with barley and maybe some older type grains like spelt? And sugar would be right out, but I guess I could use honey.

That is an interesting concept you speak of, and a position I haven't been much familiar with until now. Usually any criticism I'd meet about GI would be to refer to GL instead. So what, then, do you propose in alternative? Insulin index?

I don't understand why people are so concerned with trying to manipulate their hormones in the first place. Whenever you eat anything insulin will rise. The bigger the meal, the more insulin. I'm pretty sure, that whether a carbohydrate is digested more slowly (less of an insulin "spike") or faster... the net insulin released in response will be the same in the end (given = amount of carbohydrates,calories) So... why does it really matter???

I suggest people forget any kind of list and look at foods for their nutrient value. True, generally lower GI foods are a bit more nutrient dense, but that doesn't mean you should follow it blindly. Silly to avoid russet potatoes because there is a lot of starch in them, yet say sweet potatoes are OK, when you could have a bit less of russet potatoes + broccoli, instead of a bit more sweet potatoes and have just about = amounts of fiber,starch,calories. (not to mention russet potatoes are loaded with nutrients just like sweet potatoes)

Well, so far as I know, the argument against high GI and Gl foods isn't that more total insulin is released, it's that more is released in a shorter period of time (like you said). This is bad because the insulin spike becomes a quick insulin drop, which (as far as I know, correct me if I'm wrong) makes one "crash" and can lead to a craving for more food to get the insulin levels back up.

Well, so far as I know, the argument against high GI and Gl foods isn't that more total insulin is released, it's that more is released in a shorter period of time (like you said). This is bad because the insulin spike becomes a quick insulin drop, which (as far as I know, correct me if I'm wrong) makes one "crash" and can lead to a craving for more food to get the insulin levels back up.

Yes it would create larger blood glucose swings IF they were eaten alone in a fasted state, that's all we can really draw from GI. We can only speculate from the data what relevance it has to normal life/habits.

Often times though people think that something that is higher GI will store more fat on it's own, because of the "spike" of insulin that it would seem to cause.

That article is so full of bs and nonsense. It's full of the modern carb-phobia, preaching that the only good carbohydrates are FIBER. Starch is bad, sugar is bad.. that leaves fiber. Have fun getting 55% of your calories from full fiber. Now I know they aren't saying to eat only pure fiber.. but the way they make starch out to be bad is dumb. Starch combined with fiber isn't any worse than sugar combined with fiber (fruit)

this basically what i was wondering too....

i think we all know fruit is good for you, and i eat several pieces of fruit a day.

but, fruit has quite a bit of sugar - is it really that much better for you (once you've eaten several pieces in a day, and thus gotten enough of whatever vitamins, fiber, antioxidants etc. that you need) than, say a piece of whole wheat toast?

the article basically seems to say that you should get carbohydrates from "fruit and vegetables" - but there's only so many potatoes i can eat..., green vegetables (of which i eat quite a bit) have basically no carbohydrates, so if i follow the article's advice..., most of my carbohydrate would be sugar - sure, it would be from fruit, but i'm not sure that's better than my whole wheat bread.

this basically what i was wondering too....

i think we all know fruit is good for you, and i eat several pieces of fruit a day.

but, fruit has quite a bit of sugar - is it really that much better for you (once you've eaten several pieces in a day, and thus gotten enough of whatever vitamins, fiber, antioxidants etc. that you need) than, say a piece of whole wheat toast?

the article basically seems to say that you should get carbohydrates from "fruit and vegetables" - but there's only so many potatoes i can eat..., green vegetables (of which i eat quite a bit) have basically no carbohydrates, so if i follow the article's advice..., most of my carbohydrate would be sugar - sure, it would be from fruit, but i'm not sure that's better than my whole wheat bread.

There is nothing wrong with sugar. In the end, your body breaks down complex carbohydrates into glucose too. The reason sugar is often thought of as "bad" is because it is often added to foods and these foods generally have low nutritional value. Sugar itself has 0 nutritional value; but when wrapped in a fruit with tons of nutrients (and fiber), there is nothing to worry about really.

That is my issue with the article. They make starch out to be the devil, which is an over-simplification and leads people to avoid things like potatoes in all cases; when combined with a good fiber source, they can be perfectly fine by their standards that they draw from.