I'm egg-adapted myself.

How awesome is fat though, it is hard to overeat it, but French cultured butter with sea salt crystals really puts this to the test.

In all seriousness though, I'd consider "adapted" as something somebody is comfortable and performant with. Personally, I eat my fatty food, and then I ask things of my body and I get them. Could my peak wattage be 5% higher on carbs? It is possible. Could I tell? Most likely not. Then there is endurance, recovery, rinse and repeat, logistics of nutrition, all of which become ridiculously easier/better.

People absolutely do become adapted.. that has been shown in several studies.. 100%!

This study (link below) was a "cross-over" study... so each person's ability to metabolize fat was essentially a control on themselves.. each participant did BOTH diets with a washout period between and the differences were VERY apparent... previous studies that did less that 4weeks adaptation didn't show these results.. so in addition to the higher cross over point and the higher fat metabolism ratef or those "fat adapted".. this and other studies show there is adatation that happens over some period... minimally 4 weeks..

Half the group did a keto diet (HF) for one month.. other half did high carb diet (HC) for one month... both continued to train.. then there was a washout period.. then they switched and the group that had done HF did HC and group that had done HC did the HF.

Fat and carbs are used as fuel.. protein can be converted to glucose, but only if you are is a starvation state... eating carbs raises insulin and insulin inhibits you body from buring body fat. when you cut out or dramatically lower carbs.. your bodys is now able to use your body fat as fuel and if you maintain this for seems like 4 weeks is the minimum you body starts to up regulate a bunch of enzymes and pathways that allow for faster, more efficient metabolism of fat.. our bodies are very efficient.. not going to produce a bunch of enzymes etc when you never use them 🤷🏾‍♂️

This is not how the body work.. you don't "switch" from fats to carbs.. sitting on your sofa watching Netflix yout body is using carbs as fuel. The crossover point is when more than 50% of your energy starts to come from carbs. So when you are in zone 1 and 2 a smaller portion of the energy comes from carbs.. but you ARE still using carbs in zone 1 and 2.. every zone! When you are in zone 5 & 6.. you are using a ton of fats.. just that more then 50% of your energy is coming from carbs... THERE IS NO SWITCH FROM FAT TO CARBS.. doesn't exist.. it's all a continum.

Edit: that Z2 was from my actual test. RWGPS calculates that as a Zone 4 HR, which fits better with my perceived rate of exertion or whatever that is called.[/QUOTE]




**So this is link to the actual study of the 6x800 study that yeilded the 85% crossover and the as high as 8.5g/min on keto diet.. so you can see study design.. the other link I provided was analysis of this study in comparison to previous studies that didn't allow
Low and high carbohydrate isocaloric diets on performance, fat oxidation, glucose and cardiometabolic health in middle age males

Hey, physiology class was a very long time ago! Like 50 years.

I am looking at my "Effective Fat Burn" chart from my test last month. Total calories from carbohydrates increases steadily from the start to maximum HR and effort. Fat calories peaks around HR of 139 and by max of 163 is zero..

Do keto athletes perform any better than athletes that don't restrict carbohydrates?

The answer appears to be mostly no, and in some ways keto athletes are slower. While they may be able to perform longer at moderate intensities, they fall short at higher intensities that require carbohydrate fuel.

One of the cleanest studies showing the difference is Burke et al 2017, which found the following keto vs. carb:

1. increased fat oxidation
2. reduced exercise economy (speed:O2 consumption)
3. lower race performance

Personally, as an aging endurance cyclist who has a reduced number of performance dials to turn, I want to push my exercise economy as high as I can get it. So for me, keto is a no.

See this is not creative, outside the box thinking... BUT I'm glad we have made progress and you now acknowledge that dietary eating patterns... specifically LC or Ketogenic off the bike can and do indeed influence efficiency and utilization of which macronutrients dominate while on the bike!

Don't get me wrong... I have experienced the dip in high intensity thing and did resort to "carb cycling" (that I'll talk about later).. but it totally allows you to keep doing keto in general, but use carbs strategically...

Now that we understand how some of this works... it REALLY does not have to be an either or... it can be... how can I manipulate these affects to my benefit to eek out more performance?? How can I use keto.. carbs and these affects as a TOOL.. effectively to increase performance..

1. My number one, by a LARGE MARGIN is weight management (and heath really)... the fastest way to increase power to weight ratio and get up those hills faster.. drop a few pounds of fat... 9mths ago I was 165lb... today 125lbs.. just by manipulating my diet (ketogenic) and time-restricted eating (16:8).. but not limiting how much I ate.. I eat until I am full.. but since I'm eating more satiating food (fat and protein) it means I'm not hungry eating less calories... the trick here is manipulate your hormones to your advantage.. reducing calories on high cabohydate/high insulin diet means enduring hunger.. I lost 40lbs... EASILY.. no pain.. no hunger... the lbs essentially just melted off with zero effort or enduring hunger at all.. I could not have done that weight loss on a high carb diet.. hadn't happened in last 20yrs.. baseline weight just kept ratching up every year a lbs or 2... I had visceral fat.. pre-diabetes symtoms, like mid afternoon crashes.. NOW... my body composition is what it was when I was 25 and I feel amazing!!
2. After a 3 months on keto... TO MY AMAZMENT... I realized one day... where I realized that I had forgotten to eat 3hrs into a ride.. that I can do insanely long rides (as long as 4hrs) FASTED from the night before and without any nutrients other than water... zone 2 dipping into zone 3 rides.. my liver just happily chopped up body fat into ketones and doled them out and felt like I could ride at that moderate pace forever! Still amazed that works 😳... but it really does!
3. You can use 1. and 2. to your advantage.. in that in your early season builds where you are going to be doing more endurance riding anyways as a time period/macro cycle where you can reduce your weight down painlessly and without affecting your training at all.. you're doing endurance anyways 🤷🏾‍♂️
4. Carb cycling - I'm correcting some things I know I did wrong to support my keto diet last season, to see how much I can mitigate the lower high intensity performance thing... but.. if it's not fixable... all you have to do is employ "carb cycling" again. In season where you might be doing HIIT sessions, hard group rides.. some racing.. I have found you can in general still maintain a keto diet but if you swap out three meals before that hard session.. you are GOLDEN.. your body makes the adjustments and those limitation disappear... endurance rides.. easy group rides.. just go back to fasted and no calories on ride.. to be sociable on some rides I take a little something at the café.. if a long enough ride it's not going to bump me out of ketosis at all.. and I'm not religious about it.. I use this as a tool!

For the last 30 years of my life ( I am 56 now ) eggs have been my breakfast staple. I eat 6 whole eggs for breakfast daily 7 days per week. But I don't eat them alone, I also love good quality bread so I include a chunk of sourdough bread or dark whole grain rye bread with my eggs. I've gone through a lot of eggs in my life and have no plans of stopping anytime soon.

When it comes to nutrition, I rely on data-confirmed methods and avoid "creative and out of the box thinking".

You'll find high quality, "in the box" recommendations from nutrition scientists like Walter Willett and Christopher Gardner. They both recommend plant-based, whole-food diets with lots of vegetables, fruits, legumes, nuts, and seeds -- and minimal saturated fats, refined carbs, and added sugar.

🤣 OMG... have you looked around? ..these are the 🤡🤡🤡 who's guidance for the past 50 years has resulted in society being awash in a carb induced.. chronic disease.. auto immune disease hellscape!! 🤦🏾‍♂️

...they were... are wrong!!!

“The preeminent nutrition scientists who are actively involved in research, that literally every expert group in the world agrees with, are wrong!!!”

Who is the clown?

These people are biased and CORRUPT!!

:rolleyes:

A clown is someone who says... avoid processed food... EXCEPT "meat" made in a lab by people that send me a cheque every month 🤦🏾‍♂️🤡

Probably nothing better for breakfast than eggs!

I use that heavy whole grain rye bread to lay the scrambled eggs on, it makes it easier to clean the plate too as it soaks up any grease. Sometimes I add cherry tomatoes, like in the pic below, but I always include walnuts as a side for the extra crunch, eggs and walnuts pair really well together.

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...8656112591.jpg

Eggs are great as long as you eat the yolks because that's where all the important nutrients are. Many people are afraid of eating egg yolks because they are misinformed thinking that egg yolks are unhealthy. I find eggs filling, satisfying and very easily digestible and they combine very well with almost any other type of food. I can eat them 30 min before my ride then get on my bike and start riding without any digestive issues. After a breakfast like that I am good for up to 3 hour bike ride without needing to ingest any calories. If my rides are longer than 3 hours I will bring some snacks usually some dried dates and peanut butter or some other real food. I never fuel with sports drinks or energy gels.

While I understand you love studies and charts...

I like to critique studies, charts... look for weaknesses or biases that the testers may have. I'm far from a scientist or researcher - but I apply basic common sense principles when looking thru all of the data, charts and statistics that are attached to these studies...

Common sense on this one, and correct me if I'm wrong - "three week diet intervention".

In my best Philly based voice, using good ole regular person words - 3 weeks ain't enough son.

The majority of studies that I've seen where they attempt to disprove the "keto" athlete don't allow enough time for the athlete to adapt. Keto adaptation in the normal human takes 3 weeks. To train the body to run efficiently on fat for long durations, endurance exercise durations - takes time. Endless time - just like endurance training itself. Results take time. Many hours per week. Week after week, month after month, year after year.

On the other hand, most studies that try and tout "keto" for performance don't include enough high intensity work.

What I've personally found - after nearly 6 years of low carb, or "keto" if you like:
-"keto" allows for seemingly endless energy at low intensity - this isn't really up for debate.
-"keto" allows for a bunch of Z3 work to be completed with only a small amount of carbs needed to supplement.
-higher zones need carbs - this isn't really up for debate. How many carbs - now we have something to discuss. We are not Pogi - we don't put out Pogi power. We don't need Pogi carbs. And this is a trap many Joe Blows fall into - I'm gonna eat like Pogi!!.

I'm going to give a great personal example - a study cohort of 1 duffer rider.

-I did a 2 hour Z3 ride, low tempo at 205-210w+/-. No added carbs for the day - my normal low carb meals. During the ride I ate 2 of those tiny Halloween sized snickers bites - the real tiny ones, like 1/2" squared.
-I maintained the same power, HR and RPE for the entire ride.
-I did a 3 min+/- Z4 effort at the end.

Maybe 30 or 40 total carbs over 2 hours. Just enough to keep the BG's topped off.

I could have stuffed the recommended 60+ grams per hour down my gizzard during the ride, pre ride loaded up, post ride loaded up - and gained what?

Absolutely! Yolks always included!

Some good ol' glycation and added oxidative stress would be two things to be gained!

As you mention, and it was mentioned again here or elsewhere, I can't remember, it'd be cool to have a study with some mixed intensities instead of a consistent pace to exhaustion.

As usual, the discussion eventually descends into the Conspiracy Zone.

People don't eat junk because they were brainwashed by the Big Burger Cabal. People eat junk because it taste good, it's easy to find and relatively cheap. Stores sell it because people buy it. Period.

Not a conspiracy.. wrong incentive structure
 

Both in Pharma and Nutrition research… the only people funding this stuff are industry.. so it’s not even that it’s some big conspiracy or the scientists are corrupt and on the take.. it basically just comes down to business.. economics.. there is only money to study the things that businesses want studied… and that makes sense.. it’s a business.. why WOULD they fund stuff that they can’t make money on or threatens their business?? That wouldn’t make any sense.. no ROI!!

But what about other stuff that has merit or promise but their is no profit to be made.. or would end in upheaval or retooling of industries.. it doesn’t get funded unless businesses see a way to make some money out of it.. again… this makes total sense.. they are a business!!

But this is a huge problem.. because we end up leaving a lot of questions unanswered.. solutions untested.. then people say… well where is the study to prove that? Well it never got funded! Even when people do their own n=1 and have success.. lost weight, lip panels improve.. get off their meds… well that can’t work because there is no study showing that!

There is a recent research study for keto.. it had to be crowd funded.. they basically had to beg people for money so they could do research.. essentially to shut people up when they say.. where is your study? And they are continuing to do that for a follow up.. that is just sad!!

so it’s not about a cabal.. conspiracy.. it’s a screwed, unhelpful incentive structure based on on profit.. because businesses provide the money for research so OF COURSE they will only fund stuff with potential ROI.. because that’s what businesses ARE SUPPOSED TO DO.. but that doesn’t mean this set up is good to move science and human health forward.. it CLEARLY does not.. chronic disease is RAMPANT.. CLEARLY lifestyle changes can prevent a lot of it.. but there is a lot of money in treatments rather than prevention so that’s the research that gets funded.. again.. not conspiracy.. it makes sense.. but it’s not helping us to prevent disease!

Don't conspiracy theories by definition presume secrecy to a certain extent?

There is nothing really secret about it, you can read the ingredients on fake food, the disclosures and funding information in research, etc, OK, perhaps not everything is always out in the open, but it easy to find more information with a bit of search.

Of course. I agree with most of that.

But what is not often included in those studies is that people do not always act rationally. Even if it is not in their best interest. For example, there is not one person on planet earth that believes that smoking is not bad for your health. Or excessive drinking, or not wearing a seatbelt, and on and on. But people still do it.

Just like Nancy Regan's "just say no." Sounds great. Makes sense. Doesn't work.

Re: post 169:
I've been subscribing to JAMA online for many years. A couple years ago they published a study which found that 85% of the nutritional studies they had previously published were flawed by reason of researcher bias, usually employment. They now have almost completely eliminated nutritional studies. Summarizing Terrance, there's just no money in being honest. It's a capitalist economy. OTOH a socialist economy doesn't look that great either. We do the best we can.

Back then I threatened to get some "JUST SAY YES" bumper stickers printed. Never did, too lazy I guess. "NO" goes against the American spirit of adventure.

Just gonna throw this out there... calmly roll a genade into the room 😂

Half of biomedical research studies don’t stand up to scrutiny – and what we need to do about that

I know that there is a push by some organizations to put some light on this, but can't remember the name. For example, there are never negative studies published.

Compounding the problem is that the popular press sees these "studies"/press releases and publishes them with headlines, "New studies show....."
For example, the conventional wisdom, for whatever that is worth (zero) is that caffeine is an aggrevating factor in dementia and Alzheimers. Yesterday I saw a headline, "studies show..." and it was the exact opposite.

I am no where near an expert, but have read a lot of studies through the years (retired dentist) to know how to read the lit. The average schmo has no frikkin idea and the "journalists" who report it are even worse.