Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 126 to 150 of 154
  1. #126
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    West Coast of Wisconsin
    My Bikes
    2011 Surly LHT 2005 LeMond Zurich
    Posts
    665
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy View Post
    Please let us know when you get your Cat II upgrade.
    who is this 'us' you speak of?

  2. #127
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    West Coast of Wisconsin
    My Bikes
    2011 Surly LHT 2005 LeMond Zurich
    Posts
    665
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    sugar is king baby

    ask any addict on this forum

  3. #128
    Senior Member Moyene Corniche's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    207
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Machka View Post
    I hate to break it to you ... but you're not a tiger. I'm pretty sure you're a primate.
    And an Omnivorous One at that ....
    Ah.... Voila les Cannon ... !!

  4. #129
    Senior Member wolfchild's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Mississauga/Toronto, Ontario canada
    My Bikes
    I have 3 singlespeed/fixed gear bikes
    Posts
    2,554
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by carnivroar View Post
    And you don't even need glycogen for cycling (which is for the most part aerobic), so you can do fine, if not better, on low-carb high-fat, if you are well adapted (which anyone can be).
    While it may be true that human body can adapt to a very low carb diet, it doesn't mean that it's ideal for everybody. Very low carb diets may be ok for people who live sedentary lives.
    Competitive athletes , people who race, people who do HIT training can't go low carb because it would compromise their athletic performance too much. You can not be competitive on a low carb diet. Some people on this forum are competitive and a low carb diet would never work for them...Look at it this way. I've never seen a modern hunter-gatherer compete and win gold at any of the olympic events, triathlons , bike races or any other competitive events.

  5. #130
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    West Coast of Wisconsin
    My Bikes
    2011 Surly LHT 2005 LeMond Zurich
    Posts
    665
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by carnivroar View Post
    This is absolutely not true at all. It amazes me that in this day and age, people still believe that cholesterol and saturated fat are unhealthy. Quite the opposite, they are essential nutrients for good health.

    d).
    Billions of dollars worth of statins flushed down the toilet

  6. #131
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    West Coast of Wisconsin
    My Bikes
    2011 Surly LHT 2005 LeMond Zurich
    Posts
    665
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    please raise your hand if you're a world class athlete

  7. #132
    Senior Member carnivroar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    My Bikes
    NOT a fixie
    Posts
    145
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by wolfchild View Post
    While it may be true that human body can adapt to a very low carb diet, it doesn't mean that it's ideal for everybody. Very low carb diets may be ok for people who live sedentary lives.
    Competitive athletes , people who race, people who do HIT training can't go low carb because it would compromise their athletic performance too much. You can not be competitive on a low carb diet. Some people on this forum are competitive and a low carb diet would never work for them...Look at it this way. I've never seen a modern hunter-gatherer compete and win gold at any of the olympic events, triathlons , bike races or any other competitive events.
    You do not need carbs for endurance training, i.e. long distance cycling. In fact, being adapted to burning fat as the primary source of fuel is much more efficient since, depending on body fat percentage, a human being is able to carry tens of thousands of calories from fat. Glycogen on the other hand is a very limited supply, and once that supply is exhausted, you're doneand need to refuel.

    In my first post in this thread I said that I included more carbs in my diet when I was weight training, because yes, intensive exercise does require muscle glycogen. So we are not disagreeing.
    Last edited by carnivroar; 04-21-14 at 07:20 PM.

  8. #133
    Senior Member carnivroar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    My Bikes
    NOT a fixie
    Posts
    145
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Moyene Corniche View Post
    OK .... You've convinced me that whenever you read a post, you interpret it as what you want to hear, not what is written...
    I didn't get into the positive versus negative cholesterol debate.. I did however say that eating bacon everyday is not an optimal part of nutrition.... As for that link you posted... Quite amusing, i'll be sure to include it in my next team meeting.... Where you gained your info on cholesterol, it's slightly incorrect and if you believe that ingesting large amounts of cholesterol is without cause and effect than OK...
    Inflammatory Foods ... ??? WUT ??? Where do you get this... ?

    Glicogen..?? Tomorrow run your car's gas tank dry and see how that works within the internal combustion mode...
    Glicogen is what muscles use for fuel, ( basically it is sugar for the sake of argument ) without it or for that matter the result of the process which breaks down proteins and carbohydrates and converts them to glycogen then thru an Aerobic process converts glycogen into fuel for muscles.... ( Simple very pedestrian explanation but that will suffice for this discussion... ) our bodies wouldn't move, our brains wouldn't function and we'd sooner or later resemble a long forgotten petrie dish experiment...

    i would suggest that you research what nationally ranked cyclists ( or endurance athletes, the one's who are planning on competing at a world class level ) are fueling themselves with, what they do avoid, what they may on occasion and in moderation consume... You should find a nutritional plan based on optimizing glycogen utilization... While you are at it research Aerobic versus Anaerobic and what that means in terms of performance....

    Sorry but most of the so called " Wonder Diet " the " Get Fit " and the " Reach Your optimal Performance Levels " plans marketed on the webs and in the publications are for the most part nonsense, albeit very lucrative business models ( if somewhat unethical ) aimed at a voluminous ( no puns intended ) sedentary population that thinks they can become world class athlete's in 6 months or less..... I WISH !!! Good Nutrition is fairly simple and fairly complex, contradictory it is but I have yet to race against a Pro 1-2 who ingested Bacon every morning, or who supplied his organism with a low carb / high fat nutritional program... That so called well adapted semi-athlete is the 1st one off the back as soon as the tempo increases... That is if that person can even exit the staging area Porta Johns...

    Thank You for the link.....
    If you cared to google it and do research, like you tell me to do (I have 5 years of experIence in nutrition), then you wouldn't have to ask me "Where do you get this... ?"

    Once again, you do not need glycogen for aerobic exercise (i.e., endurance). Your muscles can burn fat much more efficiently once you adjust to switching to low carb. Glycogen is only absolutely necessary for short, intensive exercises like weightlifting and sprinting.

    Your last paragraph is a classic example of the straw man logical fallacy. completely irrelevant as no one here is arguing in favor of those fad diets, certainly not me. And low carb is not a fad -- low fat on the other hand surely is.
    Last edited by carnivroar; 04-21-14 at 07:30 PM.

  9. #134
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    553
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by wolfchild View Post
    While it may be true that human body can adapt to a very low carb diet, it doesn't mean that it's ideal for everybody. Very low carb diets may be ok for people who live sedentary lives.
    Competitive athletes , people who race, people who do HIT training can't go low carb because it would compromise their athletic performance too much. You can not be competitive on a low carb diet. Some people on this forum are competitive and a low carb diet would never work for them...Look at it this way. I've never seen a modern hunter-gatherer compete and win gold at any of the olympic events, triathlons , bike races or any other competitive events.
    I don't think the hunter gatherers of 10.000 years ago could be competitive at any level. They might have a superior capacity for suffering, but would be no match for the bigger, stronger and faster humans of today. And the only reason there are enough humans to have an athletic competition is because of large scale agriculture, and it's result, plentiful, carbohydrate rich food. I'd go one step farther than that and say that some sports would be nearly impossible without a carbohydrate rich diet.

  10. #135
    Senior Member carnivroar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    My Bikes
    NOT a fixie
    Posts
    145
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by lenA View Post
    Billions of dollars worth of statins flushed down the toilet
    Indeed, because unfortunately our whole medical industry operates on "treat the symptom, not the cause" model.

  11. #136
    Senior Member Moyene Corniche's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    207
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by carnivroar View Post
    If you cared to google it and do research, like you tell me to do (I have 5 years of experIence in nutrition), then you wouldn't have to ask me "Where do you get this... ?"

    Once again, you do not need glycogen for aerobic exercise (i.e., endurance). Your muscles can burn fat much more efficiently once you adjust to switching to low carb. Glycogen is only absolutely necessary for short, intensive exercises like weightlifting and sprinting.

    Your last paragraph is a classic example of the straw man logical fallacy. completely irrelevant as no one here is arguing in favor of those fad diets, certainly not me. And low carb is not a fad -- low fat on the other hand surely is.
    (2nd paragraph) Aerobic exercise is not necessarily endurance, You are lumping very different things in one basket... Glycogen is the result, not the exception to wether or not it is your muscles fuel source.. You are incorrectly inferring that an endurance athlete could just rely on fat stores. What fat stores... ? When your percentage 5% there is not a whole lot of reserves... As far as the analogy of using Glycogen only when sprinting.... That is specifically when Anearobic thresholds are breached, a completely different process of fueling muscles... At this point there is over accumulation of lactic acid, which when reaching a certain level causes a decline in muscle performance... this negative process continues until basically the body begins to shut itself down, thus you slow down...

    (3rd Para. ) I wasn't arguing about Fad diets but rather equating your logic in the same realm... Again you may have 5 years of questionable nutritional study as you say, but I'll take my years of actually racing a bicycle as well as ski racing, in addition to coaching Juniors in both sports and having myself been coached by reputably qualified coaches and nutritionists... I know what it feels like to enter complete depletion in the middle of a 4 hour race... That was certainly not due to low carb high fat intake...

    Your methodology may work on a fixie for 20 miles avrg 15mph, but in a 95 mile hilly road course where at times avrg speed is 30+mph you will not even reach the finish line, or at least not soon enough to either get counted DNF or to be able to continue the next day in a Stage Race..
    Ah.... Voila les Cannon ... !!

  12. #137
    Senior Member eriku16's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    68
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by lenA View Post
    Lot easier then raising grain, making it into flour, cooking it, saving seeds for the next season, fertilizing and watering, and protecting the crop from weather, animals and insects.
    Well, if it was not for ALL that trouble, there would have been no civilization(s).

  13. #138
    covered in cat fur katsrevenge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Willkes-Barre, PA
    My Bikes
    '85 Schwinn World Tourist, 2014 Windsor Kensington 8
    Posts
    403
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    *happily munches popcorn*

    ...what...? Corn has been human grown for roughly 3,000 years!
    We've adapted.
    Just one of those dirty pinko commies some people worry about.

  14. #139
    Senior Member GeorgeBMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    My Bikes
    2012 Trek DS 8.5 all weather hybrid, 2008 LeMond Poprad cyclocross, 1992 Cannondale R500 roadbike
    Posts
    1,828
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by carnivroar View Post
    Can you imagine telling a tiger to eat vegetables so it can live longer? A species thrives in the diet that it evolved on.

    And you're ignoring the fact that cavemen didn't live long because of the harsh environment they lived in, not because of diet.

    I am also of the opinion that if you absolutely must cook/process a food in order to digest it, then you were not designed to eat it. All grains fall into this category.
    And, THAT is the major failing of the Paleo theory...

    Humans did NOT evolve eating a single diet. We ate what was available -- whatever it was and wherever it was. The diet changed by season and by location. Most likely, the warmer it was, the higher the ratio of plant foods and, the colder it was the higher the ratio of animal products (aka "walking bags of protein")...

    The human body evolved to eat and thrive on a wide variety of food stuffs. We never had the killer tools of a tiger nor the digestive system of an herbivore. We had a bit of both...

    But today we have changed the equation the cavemen lived by...

    Cavemen worried about making it through the day, the week or the month. But today, for those who have not yet succumbed to one of the chronic diseases, that is not much of a concern. But what IS a concern are things like:
    -- weight
    -- long term health and well being Particularly the chronic diseases such as heart disease, cancer, dementia, etc...)
    -- energy levels for artificial athletic performances

    The cavemen neither cared about nor thought about any of those things. So why would you use him as a model for today's diet? It is very simply faulty logic.
    --------------------------------------
    bikes: 1992 Cannondale R500, 2012 Trek DS 8.5, 2008 LeMond Poprad

  15. #140
    Senior Member carnivroar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    My Bikes
    NOT a fixie
    Posts
    145
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Moyene Corniche View Post
    (2nd paragraph) Aerobic exercise is not necessarily endurance, You are lumping very different things in one basket... Glycogen is the result, not the exception to wether or not it is your muscles fuel source.. You are incorrectly inferring that an endurance athlete could just rely on fat stores. What fat stores... ? When your percentage 5% there is not a whole lot of reserves... As far as the analogy of using Glycogen only when sprinting.... That is specifically when Anearobic thresholds are breached, a completely different process of fueling muscles... At this point there is over accumulation of lactic acid, which when reaching a certain level causes a decline in muscle performance... this negative process continues until basically the body begins to shut itself down, thus you slow down...

    (3rd Para. ) I wasn't arguing about Fad diets but rather equating your logic in the same realm... Again you may have 5 years of questionable nutritional study as you say, but I'll take my years of actually racing a bicycle as well as ski racing, in addition to coaching Juniors in both sports and having myself been coached by reputably qualified coaches and nutritionists... I know what it feels like to enter complete depletion in the middle of a 4 hour race... That was certainly not due to low carb high fat intake...

    Your methodology may work on a fixie for 20 miles avrg 15mph, but in a 95 mile hilly road course where at times avrg speed is 30+mph you will not even reach the finish line, or at least not soon enough to either get counted DNF or to be able to continue the next day in a Stage Race..
    I'll say it again. You do not need to rely on glycogen for low-intensity exercise.

    A healthy human has anywhere from 10% to 20% body fat. Obviously, if you have a 5% body fat, you're either staving to death or are an elite athlete (who are not examples of good health).

    And give me a break, 30+mph on a 95 mile hilly road? That's downright impossible and only shows your lack of better arguments.

    I may not be a good example, sure, but that doesn't disprove my claim. See:



    And let me repeat in case I wasn't clear enough. I'm talking about low-intensity, endurance activity.

    I used to be a powerlifter and have squatted 405lbs for 3 reps three years ago. Those types of exercises do require glycogen stores, so I was eating more carbs at that time. Usually from white rice because it's easily digestible and doesn't contain gluten.
    Last edited by carnivroar; 04-22-14 at 09:21 AM.

  16. #141
    Senior Member Moyene Corniche's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    207
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by carnivroar View Post
    I'll say it again. You do not need to rely on glycogen for low-intensity exercise.

    A healthy human has anywhere from 10% to 20% body fat. Obviously, if you have a 5% body fat, you're either staving to death or are an elite athlete (who are not examples of good health).

    And give me a break, 30+mph on a 95 mile hilly road? That's downright impossible and only shows your lack of better arguments.

    I may not be a good example, sure, but that doesn't disprove my claim. See:



    And let me repeat in case I wasn't clear enough. I'm talking about low-intensity, endurance activity.

    I used to be a powerlifter and have squatted 405lbs for 3 reps three years ago. Those types of exercises do require glycogen stores, so I was eating more carbs at that time. Usually from white rice because it's easily digestible and doesn't contain gluten.
    5-to -10% body fat does not mean one is starving or for that matter unhealthy... Meb Keflezighi just won the men's Boston Marathon yesterday in 2:08:37, and Rita Jeptoo won the women's in 2:18:57. neither are unhealthy or have their fat percentage above 10%...
    Again you are just citing assumptions....

    As far as 30+mph on a 95 mile race.... Sorry but I have been in Pro 1-3 races where the pace was non-stop ( and I did say that 30mph was an average but not always the average, sometimes slower and other times faster ....
    This years Pro race Milan to San Remo was won in 6:55:56 .....That is a race of 298 KM or around 189 miles give or take... Which is about 30mph on average speed... Very doable..

    A lot of misconceptions in the Attia and Phinney pieces... In a race the pace is never one constant, it increases or decreases over a wide range.
    The reason we consume nutrients during a race is so that we don't deplete reserves, this theory that you can ride continuously and not run out of fuel is not credible. The studies you cited are not from accredited sports physiologists, or for that matter even from accredited peer review.

    I'll grant you that there is a difference between " endurance activities " and we were discussing cycling on this thread, not weight lifting which requires a completely different set of parameters, most definitely not performing close to an anaerobic threshold or over that threshold for extended periods with repeated durations...

    Proper Nutrition is much more than just cherry picking the latest buzz methodology..... White Rice... That's full of nutrients...

    I'm Done ......
    Ah.... Voila les Cannon ... !!

  17. #142
    Senior Member carnivroar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    My Bikes
    NOT a fixie
    Posts
    145
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Moyene Corniche View Post
    5-to -10% body fat does not mean one is starving or for that matter unhealthy... Meb Keflezighi just won the men's Boston Marathon yesterday in 2:08:37, and Rita Jeptoo won the women's in 2:18:57. neither are unhealthy or have their fat percentage above 10%...
    Again you are just citing assumptions....

    As far as 30+mph on a 95 mile race.... Sorry but I have been in Pro 1-3 races where the pace was non-stop ( and I did say that 30mph was an average but not always the average, sometimes slower and other times faster ....
    This years Pro race Milan to San Remo was won in 6:55:56 .....That is a race of 298 KM or around 189 miles give or take... Which is about 30mph on average speed... Very doable..

    A lot of misconceptions in the Attia and Phinney pieces... In a race the pace is never one constant, it increases or decreases over a wide range.
    The reason we consume nutrients during a race is so that we don't deplete reserves, this theory that you can ride continuously and not run out of fuel is not credible. The studies you cited are not from accredited sports physiologists, or for that matter even from accredited peer review.

    I'll grant you that there is a difference between " endurance activities " and we were discussing cycling on this thread, not weight lifting which requires a completely different set of parameters, most definitely not performing close to an anaerobic threshold or over that threshold for extended periods with repeated durations...

    Proper Nutrition is much more than just cherry picking the latest buzz methodology..... White Rice... That's full of nutrients...

    I'm Done ......
    Are you not able to understand simple logic? I said either starving OR an elite athlete. Clearly the examples you mentioned are elite athletes.

    Cycling 30 mph average for that long is way beyond most people's abilities, if not downright impossible (I have been googling, but can't find an example). Therefore, that falls under elite athletes which have a different nutrition requirement than the general population and regular cyclists.

    "this theory that you can ride continuously and not run out of fuel is not credible"

    Depends who who you are talking about. The human body was built to withstand long periods of time without eating by using energy from stored body-fat. This energy can be used to fuel low-intensity, endurance type exercises.

    Here's a study done on that, which agrees with everything I said so far:

    http://www.biomedcentral.com/content...3-7075-1-2.pdf

    As for white rice being void of nutrients, that's absolutely true. Fortunately I never relied on carbs for nutrients because meat and vegetables provide all nutrients the human body needs. And I only ate that when I was weight training.

  18. #143
    just another gosling Carbonfiberboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Everett, WA
    My Bikes
    CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
    Posts
    8,577
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by carnivroar View Post
    I'll say it again. You do not need to rely on glycogen for low-intensity exercise.

    A healthy human has anywhere from 10% to 20% body fat. Obviously, if you have a 5% body fat, you're either staving to death or are an elite athlete (who are not examples of good health).

    And give me a break, 30+mph on a 95 mile hilly road? That's downright impossible and only shows your lack of better arguments.

    I may not be a good example, sure, but that doesn't disprove my claim. See:



    And let me repeat in case I wasn't clear enough. I'm talking about low-intensity, endurance activity.

    I used to be a powerlifter and have squatted 405lbs for 3 reps three years ago. Those types of exercises do require glycogen stores, so I was eating more carbs at that time. Usually from white rice because it's easily digestible and doesn't contain gluten.
    You're getting pushback because this forum is called "Training and Nutrition" and is a part of BikeForums. It's supposed to be about bicycling and the training and nutrition to support the goals of bicyclists. It's not a fad diet forum that's run by some guy who's pushing a pet theory to make money by selling his books.

    The vast majority of people who visit and post here are interested in furthering their bike performance. The nutritional aspects of performance on the bike have been studied extensively and are well known. Your posts are at variance with everything that is known about performance on the bike, or athletic performance in any sport for that matter.

    My wife and I, total age 133, just did an 87 mile ride with 3000' climbing, 70 miles of it upwind, with an average of 15.3. Which is nothing, nothing at all, mediocre performance. Corniche is correct, average speeds on long, hilly road courses have exceeded 30 mph. Average speed for the entire Tour de France has exceeded 25 mph.

    Be that as it may, our crappy performance was only possible because we each ate over 1000 calories of carbs during the ride, with more carbs before and after. I was burning about 400 calories/hour for over 5 hours. Real Riders would be burning closer to 700 calories/hour. I believe maximum fat calories that well-trained humans my size can burn is around 160/hour.

    So two things wrong with not eating carbs: no glycogen and no carb fuel = no performance, not even at my mediocre level. The numbers are not there, no matter what your fantasy is.

    As I've said before, if you want to make extraordinary claims on this forum, post your palmares. Me: double imperial century in under 12 hours, 400k in under 15 hours, hilly 200k in under 8 hours, RAMROD (10,000', 154 miles) in 9-1/2 hours, and all that by a mediocre rider in his late 50s and early 60s. And I'm not making any extraordinary claims. I just eat what is normally recommended for endurance cycling. BTW, my blood lipids were described by my doctor this year as "Perfect." Your cycling palmares?

    It's all about results, both for performance and health, which are pretty much the same thing.

    Your not being a good example in fact does disprove your claim.

  19. #144
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    West Coast of Wisconsin
    My Bikes
    2011 Surly LHT 2005 LeMond Zurich
    Posts
    665
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Cynthia Kenyon, another one of those quacks on the Nobel Prize short list follows

    "a low glycemic index diet similar to the Atkins diet[4] and the South Beach Diet.[5]

    No desserts. No sweets. No potatoes. No rice. No bread. No pasta. When I say ‘no,’ I mean ‘no, or not much,’ she notes. Instead, eat green vegetables. Eat the fruits that aren't the sweet fruits, like melon. Bananas? Bananas are a little sweet. Meat? Meat, yes, of course. Avocados. All vegetables. Nuts. Fish. Chicken. That's what I eat. Cheese. Eggs. And one glass of red wine a day.[6]
    But the diet is unproven, she cautions, and she's not recommending it for all. Nevertheless, she's pleased with its performance for her. 'I have a fabulous blood profile. My triglyceride level is only 30, and anything below 200 is good.'[6]
    You have to eat something, and you just have to make your best judgment. And that's my best judgment. Plus, I feel better. Plus, I'm thin—I weigh what I weighed when I was in college. I feel great —you feel like you're a kid again. It's amazing.["

  20. #145
    Senior Member carnivroar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    My Bikes
    NOT a fixie
    Posts
    145
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy View Post
    You're getting pushback because this forum is called "Training and Nutrition" and is a part of BikeForums. It's supposed to be about bicycling and the training and nutrition to support the goals of bicyclists. It's not a fad diet forum that's run by some guy who's pushing a pet theory to make money by selling his books.

    The vast majority of people who visit and post here are interested in furthering their bike performance. The nutritional aspects of performance on the bike have been studied extensively and are well known. Your posts are at variance with everything that is known about performance on the bike, or athletic performance in any sport for that matter.

    My wife and I, total age 133, just did an 87 mile ride with 3000' climbing, 70 miles of it upwind, with an average of 15.3. Which is nothing, nothing at all, mediocre performance. Corniche is correct, average speeds on long, hilly road courses have exceeded 30 mph. Average speed for the entire Tour de France has exceeded 25 mph.
    Your calling it a "fad diet" only shows you don't know anything about low-carb and possibly have zero experience with it. Resorting to calling it a pet-theory is childish.

    Quote Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy View Post
    Be that as it may, our crappy performance was only possible because we each ate over 1000 calories of carbs during the ride, with more carbs before and after. I was burning about 400 calories/hour for over 5 hours. Real Riders would be burning closer to 700 calories/hour. I believe maximum fat calories that well-trained humans my size can burn is around 160/hour.

    So two things wrong with not eating carbs: no glycogen and no carb fuel = no performance, not even at my mediocre level. The numbers are not there, no matter what your fantasy is.
    I have already shown that this is not true. Many times. Glycogen is only necessary for intense training. Cycling, at the level in which many of us perform, is not intense, therefore can be primarily supplied by body-fat stores. I have posted the study confirming this in the link above; it's all there, proven.

    About the 160/hour thing: that's a ridiculous claim. According to this calculator, How Many Calories Do You Burn Cycling? | Bicycling Magazine, I burn 680 calories/hr on my typical ride (14-15 mph, 150 lbs body weight). Considering I only eat < 50 grams of carbs per day, those calories are all coming from fat.

    Quote Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy View Post
    As I've said before, if you want to make extraordinary claims on this forum, post your palmares. Me: double imperial century in under 12 hours, 400k in under 15 hours, hilly 200k in under 8 hours, RAMROD (10,000', 154 miles) in 9-1/2 hours, and all that by a mediocre rider in his late 50s and early 60s. And I'm not making any extraordinary claims. I just eat what is normally recommended for endurance cycling. BTW, my blood lipids were described by my doctor this year as "Perfect." Your cycling palmares?

    It's all about results, both for performance and health, which are pretty much the same thing.
    My results are irrelevant because I have already backed up my claims with sources and better examples. The only reason I don't have impressive results to show is because I simply haven't had the chance to try. I did do about 40 miles last summer without having breakfast and only ate 2 boiled eggs midway through the ride (only because it was a group ride and I didn't want to be the only one not eating). I will do an 80 mile this summer (on an SS, too) and I expect to be just fine, because so far I have been.

    Performance and health are absolutely not the same thing. Elite athletes do need a different diet, but they are not the epitome of health.

    Finally,

    Quote Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy View Post
    Your not being a good example in fact does disprove your claim.
    This is absolutely not true, and it's a logical fallacy to dismiss an argument based solely on the speaker's example (I can give you the exact name of the fallacy when I get home and look in my logic book). I have already given plenty of examples and sources backing up my claims, anyway. You're the one who's ignoring it.

    Here's a low-carb marathon runner: http://www.thelivinlowcarbshow.com/s...low-carb-diet/ Very well known guy in this community.

    Read this, and the comments: http://www.drperlmutter.com/long-dis...high-fat-diet/
    Last edited by carnivroar; 04-22-14 at 03:27 PM.

  21. #146
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    West Coast of Wisconsin
    My Bikes
    2011 Surly LHT 2005 LeMond Zurich
    Posts
    665
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yes we all want to improve our performance, however our baselines are all different as well as which decade we draw our nutritional information from.

  22. #147
    Administrator CbadRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    On the bridge with Picard
    My Bikes
    Specialized Allez, Specialized Sirrus
    Posts
    5,843
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Let's stay on the Op's topic and not turn this into an argument about dietary preferences. A new thread can be started for that.
    Quote Originally Posted by toddles View Post
    So Tom only hires people that are nutty? Is part of the requirement to be a moderator on this site is that you have to be nuts??
    Forum Guidelines *click here*

  23. #148
    Senior Member trigger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    514
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Back to the OP and the need for resistance training to meet body composition goals.

    There's a book (and iPhone app by the same name) called You Are Your Own Gym that gives a host of great body weight exercises, including a whole section on working the core - no tools needed. The book is good stuff. Nothing earth-shattering or new, but all explained very well and with decent training plan ideas in the back. The app has videos of the exercises if you've not done them before.

    Lifting just your bodyweight can be very! effective, builds functional strength, and seems to be in-line with paleo principles if indeed that matters to the OP (I'm kind of unclear on all of that by now).

  24. #149
    Senior Member wolfchild's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Mississauga/Toronto, Ontario canada
    My Bikes
    I have 3 singlespeed/fixed gear bikes
    Posts
    2,554
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    TRX suspension trainer is also a fantastic tool for building strength, toning up and developing a strong core.. You don't even need gym membership. You can use that thing almost anywhere. If you can master controlling your own bodyweight through different exercises then you will be strong and well toned up. If bodyweight exercises become too easy then there are many ways of making them more challenging, example would be adding a weighted vest or even a small backpack filled with some weight plates.

  25. #150
    Uninformed Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Union County, NJ
    Posts
    971
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I really like body weight exercises for building lean muscle. Pull ups are my go to. Because there are so many variations, you can get a great complete upper body/core workout with just a pull up bar. I use the TRX system only slightly, but really like it for variations on body weight routines.


    I've also really been enjoying jumping rope. Great addition to a cardio workout.

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •