RE: Ketogenic Diets for Endurance Athletes

[Guest guest]

Gene,

> Belief is different than the

> observable fact that

> > most of the champions in Sport are carb eaters.

>

> But you have acknowledged that the great majority of athletes

> believe that high carb diets are better for athletic

> performance, and that this believe is related to the fact

> that they use such a diet. So ultimately we are discussing belief.

> >

I don't see how belief really matters in any substantive way in the face of

the result -- which is victory for carbies.

I'm not sure that there is much left of value to debate on this issue as we

all seem to understand where each other stands and none of it can be proven.

It will be interesting to observe as time passes what direction all of this

goes.

I will tell the story of how I came to my conclusion about carb burners

being faster though. Certainly not any kind of proof of anything but it

will illustrate the shift in my thinking. I remembered this all last night

while I was watching the replay of the Tour. It all actually started for me

during a segment that OLN did during last year's Tour in which they

interviewed Lance's nutritionist. I remember being offended and revolted by

the high carb orthodoxy and the way that they were pushing sugar. I had

many of the same thoughts that have been expressed by everyone who is

arguing counter to my position in this particular discussion. It was a

couple of days later that I realized that it was pretty humorous of me to

suppose that I actually knew better than Lance and his cadre of the best

advisers in the world as to what foods fuel him properly. That was the

beginning of the shift. An acknowledgement that theory is inconsequential

in the face of result and that my level of knowledge is much less than those

with whom he is working.

None of that means that I still don't wonder all of the same issues that

have been discussed here. Nor does it mean that his advisers are correct.

Would Lance do better on high fat if he lasted long enough to get through

the transition? Would the paradigm change if high fat became accepted?

Etc. Of course those questions can not yet be known. But, in general, it

appears to me that the results we see daily are strong and that most likely

carb burners are faster and stronger than fat burners in most sporting

events.

Enough said.

Unfortunately this is all of the computer time I have for today as we are

preparing to leave for central Virginia to attend the Polyface Farm Field

Day tomorrow. Then a Sunday visit to Monticello before returning home.

Ron

[Guest guest]

Ron-

>I don't see how belief really matters in any substantive way in the face of

>the result -- which is victory for carbies.

I'm not sure I'm going to be able to continue this conversation, because I

have a great deal of difficulty in maintain an even keel in the face of

blatant and persistent irrationality. But I'll try one last time.

First, it is a logical fallacy to look at successful people and assume that

they must be doing everything right and that if you just imitate them,

you'll be successful too. Successful athletes are often successful IN

SPITE of their training regimen, not because of it, because they have such

superior genes. (Or if you prefer, because their genes are so extremely

well-suited to their particular athletic pursuits.) If it makes a

difference to you, you don't have to accept this just because I'm saying

it, even though it should be obvious. Plenty of well-respected people say

it too.

I'm reminded of an article I read once about a bodybuilder who was

incredibly muscular and particularly respected for his enormous

calves. (I'll say right now I don't intend to reopen the " is a bodybuilder

an athlete " can of worms. Call bodybuilders leptons and you won't get an

argument from me.) The author, a doctor who owned a gym and wrote a book

advocating Super-Slow training (I lost the URL, unfortunately) theorized

that this bodybuilder had the double-muscle gene, BTW. Anyway, one day the

bodybuilder's identical twin brother showed up. The brother never did a

minute's weight training in his whole life, but he was even more

muscular. His calves, in particular, were substantially bigger and more

magnificent (by bodybuilder lights, anyway) than his brother's. IOW, all

the bodybuilding brother's extensive training accomplished was to BREAK

DOWN some of his calf muscle, but because his genes were so extraordinary

(double-muscle or not) he still had enormous calves.

Second, you're completely discounting the way medical and specifically

dietary orthodoxy has shaped the world. Just about NOBODY out there is

eating a really healthy diet, so already athletes are being selected

largely for how well they can (temporarily) withstand the ravages of modern

foods. Further, many people who are physiologically suited to high-fat

eating are getting taken out of the running before we ever find out what

they're capable of because those people tend to be harmed most and earliest

by modern foods and dietary orthodoxy. And just as importantly, most

athletes are not driven to educate themselves to the maximum possible

degree on health and physiology and diet. They rely on other people to

advise them -- as you mention Lance Armstrong does.

And third, your assumption that those advisor types, and in fact all of

athlete-centered orthodoxy, must be right because athletes following those

programs are winning, is hopelessly naive. Even discounting the fact that

many, many potential athletes are being taken out of the running because

their health is being destroyed by modern foods, even discounting the fact

that there has been NO COMPETITION between low-carb and high-carb athletes

because there are just about no low-carb athletes to be found, look at any

other sphere of human activity and try to tell me with a straight face that

orthodoxy must be right because why else would it have become

orthodoxy? In particularly, I'd like you to direct your attention to the

cholesterol theory of heart disease and the worship and endless promotion

of statins. Do some doctors advocate putting statins in our drinking water

because statins just work and therefore must embody the right approach? Do

some doctors actually say they're going to take statins for the rest of

their lives whether or not they " need " them because statins work and

therefore must embody the right approach? Have authorities been shoving

this low-fat garbage down our throats for decades because it actually

improves our health? If not -- if, as surely you must, you agree that

they're all mistaken -- then why assume that the athletic domain is special

and different?

>It all actually started for me

>during a segment that OLN did during last year's Tour in which they

>interviewed Lance's nutritionist. I remember being offended and revolted by

>the high carb orthodoxy and the way that they were pushing sugar. I had

>many of the same thoughts that have been expressed by everyone who is

>arguing counter to my position in this particular discussion. It was a

>couple of days later that I realized that it was pretty humorous of me to

>suppose that I actually knew better than Lance and his cadre of the best

>advisers in the world as to what foods fuel him properly. That was the

>beginning of the shift. An acknowledgement that theory is inconsequential

>in the face of result and that my level of knowledge is much less than those

>with whom he is working.

Blind faith in the wisdom of authorities and institutions is exactly what

got us into this fix in the first place.

Well, that and a lot of corruption on the part of many of the authorities

and institutions.

-

[Guest guest]

> Hi ,

>

> > My client I mentioned in a previous post is a very competitive surfer

> > and--more or less--will eat only food I prepare, despite having a

> > family. He is *extremely* lean and has been eating a high-fat,

> > low-carb diet for a few years now. One day I looked at him and said,

> > " muscle wasting " , which was confirmed quickly with blood tests. He's

> > eating lots more carbs now.

>

> Huh. Very interesting. Some truth to metabolic typing perhaps?

>

> Ron

The opposite can be true as well. High carb diet wasted my muscles.

Wanita

[Guest guest]

> The opposite can be true as well. High carb diet wasted my muscles.

Wanita,

Oh, I don't doubt it. I have lately learned how very individual are

our dietary needs. My confusion re: why not all good foods work

for--and even damage some--people is finally at rest.

What I've learned about myself is that I was displaying extreme and

even somewhat rigid thinking, influenced by, among other things, this

list.

The client is hardly eating high carb, but merely adequate amounts to

provide ready energy to burn so his poor body doesn't resort to using

his own LBM. He does not store fat--likely doesn't optimally digest

it--so he didn't have a ready supply to use as fuel.

I also cut back on the amount of fermented foods he was eating, as

they increase fire and it was the high metabolic fire in the muscle

tissue literally burning him up.

B.

/flame on

[Guest guest]

> > The opposite can be true as well. High carb diet wasted my muscles.

>

> Wanita,

> Oh, I don't doubt it. I have lately learned how very individual are

> our dietary needs. My confusion re: why not all good foods work

> for--and even damage some--people is finally at rest.

>

> What I've learned about myself is that I was displaying extreme and

> even somewhat rigid thinking, influenced by, among other things, this

> list.

>

> The client is hardly eating high carb, but merely adequate amounts to

> provide ready energy to burn so his poor body doesn't resort to using

> his own LBM. He does not store fat--likely doesn't optimally digest

> it--so he didn't have a ready supply to use as fuel.

>

> I also cut back on the amount of fermented foods he was eating, as

> they increase fire and it was the high metabolic fire in the muscle

> tissue literally burning him up.

> B.

>

> /flame on

Been meaning to get back to you on my not being the true lean vata

type for most of my life except for that muscle wasting, lowest weight

time in my life since 5th grade. Am 5-2 and was 118 lbs then. Am 122

lbs. now but it's totally different and a weight I've never been able

to maintain. Rest of the time 128-140 was where I couldn't deviate

from. Imbalance always from getting high strung, not pitta's

snippyness or kapha's stuckness. 60-80 gms. carbs is what works for

me.

Wanita

[Guest guest]

> Been meaning to get back to you on my not being the true lean vata

> type for most of my life except for that muscle wasting, lowest weight

> time in my life since 5th grade. Am 5-2 and was 118 lbs then. Am 122

> lbs. now but it's totally different and a weight I've never been able

> to maintain. Rest of the time 128-140 was where I couldn't deviate

> from. Imbalance always from getting high strung, not pitta's

> snippyness or kapha's stuckness. 60-80 gms. carbs is what works for

> me.

Wanita,

Vata-type is not lean in the way of low body fat with underlying solid

LBM but " light " through-and-through; insubstantial. A defining

feature is an inability to build mass without considerable effort and

definitely needing aid in digestion/absorption to get there.

An example would be a petite Vietnamese adult, built so slight you

wonder how they find clothing.

Or an older, frail and bird-like, woman prone to osteoporosis.

Joyce Carol Oates comes to mind. Ric Ocasek.

These are extremes used to illustrate pure vata constitution. Each

person expresses a unique configuration.

Getting high-strung meaning anxiety? That's tricky. Vata imbalances

are endemic because of these rapid-moving times and concomitant

abundance of electronic communication. I myself am strong kapha

constitution but was whacked out of my mind with vata-derangement.

Pitta is not necessarily expressed as snippy, but can be driven,

fiercely intelligent (and always seeking more and more knowledge, esp.

late at night) competitive, ruthless. My client is predominantly

pitta--not a vata--and it is that high pitta--pushing vata into the

muscle tissue--which caused the wasting. Huh?

Likewise, kapha is not always " stuck " when imbalanced, but emotional

and clingy with people and/or things, (could pass as high-strung at

times)sad and possibly overwhelmed by her compassion for the suffering

in this world.

More depends on--here we go--the state of consciousness: clear, active

or heavy.

The three doshas are really waste products. A body in balance

produces just the right amount and burns them cleanly. A body in

imbalance is going produce insufficiently and/or leave excess.

B.

[Guest guest]

Uh oh, you've got a trojan in my computer, haven't you? It's 2.15 am

and after being woken up at 1.30 by banging outside, and being driven

out of bed, I'm fiercely seeking more knowledge by catching up on some

posts. Well, since I was up, and just for a few mins to wind down

again, I just was driven to the computer .........

Looking more and more like Pitta, not Vata.....

Deb

On 7/25/05, downwardog7 <illneverbecool@...> wrote:

> Pitta is not necessarily expressed as snippy, but can be driven,

> fiercely intelligent (and always seeking more and more knowledge, esp.

> late at night) competitive, ruthless.

> B.