Sugar v Fat

This has been playing on my mind all night with regards to my marathon training..... am i doing the right thing? i really don't know anymore, am i making it harder on myself and should i be eating carbs when or before training? would it be really bad to say carb load once a week for my long runs and suffer high bg, should i up my carbs in general until after april, I'm struggling to get past the 2 and a half hour stage on my runs and now wondering if this is why, I'm confused as to the best way forward, i wished i hadn't watch it

The insulin response thing is interesting. In simple terms (as I understand it) a persons release of insulin to a meal is not only based on its content but also how much was required by the previous few meals i.e. your body guesses at how much insulin should be released based on the average carb load its been experiencing. This is the reason why you need to eat more than 150g of carbs a day for three days to make an OGTT valid.

Unless you make the perfectly valid (imho) lifestyle choice of a very low carb regime (whatever works for you etc.) you can use your trained insulin response and probably up your carbs somewhat as your pancreas will begin to adjust over a period of days. This is how I've managed to move from roughly 60g / day to 100 to 120g / day. Any more than that then I find I can't cope and my BG's begin to rise regardless of the GI of the carbs etc.

There was also a similar BBC2 program a while back that investigated carb / calorie restriction along with intermittent fasting as a means of anti ageing. In the absence of insulin then other metabolic pathways are blocked or slowed. One is the bodies repair mechanism. In an insulin rich environment the body will replace cells that need mending whereas in an environment like calorie restriction, low carb or IF then the body will repair cells rather than replace. It is the act of cell replacement (i.e. in an insulin rich environment) that very simplistically can be thought of as the ageing process. The program examined the claim that low carb, calories restriction or IF regimes can effectively extend your life.

Brian_H said:

OK modern bread is getting into the same ball-park as cakes and I don't often buy it, but if bread made in traditional ways was available I'd buy it (short shelf life or not).

Click to expand...

Use the Real Bread Finder to locate the bakers nearest to you. Sourdoughs and levens last longer that breads which have risen quickly. A quality sourdough rye will last 5 days without a problem. Real bread goes dry, processed bread goes mouldy.

On the bread subject, I always made my own, mostly sourdoughs made entirely by hand and with long proving times and with a higher than usual proportion of rye flours. It spiked me just as much as Warburtons worst efforts unfortunately, but it kept really well partly because of the amount of olive oil I would put into the dough.

Store bought sliced loaves tend to go mouldy mostly because they are sold in plastic bags, if you buy unsliced in paper bags they dont tend to go mouldy


Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

Andy12345 said:

This has been playing on my mind all night with regards to my marathon training..... am i doing the right thing? i really don't know anymore, am i making it harder on myself and should i be eating carbs when or before training? would it be really bad to say carb load once a week for my long runs and suffer high bg, should i up my carbs in general until after april, I'm struggling to get past the 2 and a half hour stage on my runs and now wondering if this is why, I'm confused as to the best way forward, i wished i hadn't watch it

Click to expand...

Andy,

as a T2 you don't have the same problems as I do, and I can only expand on my pre-diabetic experience.

It is perfectly natural to struggle at 2-2.5 hours, that's the "wall" where you've depleted your circulating and stored glycogen reserves adn you switch to the fat burning mechanism - it's more of a gradual decline in glucose and increase in fat burning, but after that time glucose is down to almost nothing. Fat reserves have a whole load of energy, but it's a slower pathwayand restricts intensity of activity.

My opinion as a well read amateur athlete is
1) carb loading is a load of ********, you can't store that much more that way
2) train your fat metabolism - find an aerobic heart rate and do your endurance training there - 180-age is a good starting point, use a heart rate monitor and stick to it. You will train your body to be more efficient, use fats and keep glycogen reserves slighltly longer, you'll also get faster at lower HR, so that when you need it you'll have a reserve to call on - less time spent in the red zone during training
3) after about 90 minutes start taking on regular small amounts of carbs (can also do it earlier if you want) to keep that circulating glucose up there. At 2.5hrs plus, you can't be comfortably ingesting the same amount of calories as you are using, so don't worry about weight unless you eat it all again afterwards.

Dave

xyzzy said:

Thanks Catherine interesting stuff as always!

Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

Click to expand...

To that list you can also add the fact that they have the lowest longevity rate in north america dying, on average, 10 years earlier than european canadians. They have higher rates of cancer and strokes, but different cancers and different strokes, eg hemorrhagic stroke rather than ischaemic stroke.

Genetic selective advantage in populations is only interested in people being able to live long enough to breed and raise their young. Indeed, increased longevity brings its own problems to the community. Traditional inuit were highly adapted to their environment. They were in Greenland before the Norse came and whilst the Norse lived there. They were also still there when the Norse died of starvation. Does this count as success in evolutionary terms? There are afterall many more people of Norse descent in the world and they have a greater life expectancy.

Whatever conclusions people draw from this programme you have to be aware that it was an experiment by two doctors, one involved in tropical diseases and the other in infectious diseases.

Throughout the programme they made the viewer aware that they knew little about dietary matters and relied on experts to explain what was happening and why. It was a short experiment and not a study as such.

Processed foods have different meanings to some people. You could even say that using a food processor alters the composition of foods as does preparing it. It is the foods that are processed by manufacturers that have to be avoided and I think we all agree with that.

It was interesting and depending on how you control your diabetes may or may not have an impact on you. I wonder if they had done a longer study involving 20 sets of twins over a year if the results would have differed.

I shall not be changing my eating plan.

douglas99 said:

I saw it as to avoid large amounts of sugar, large amounts of fat, and more importantly, to avoid processed foods that combine fat and sugar together.
I didn't really see any great bias, both diets were fairly equal, different good/bad points, but the killer was definitely processed foods.

Click to expand...

I didnt watch the program but if this was the message it conveyed then I see it as being very sensible indeed, in fact my own very successful diet consists of exactly that, avoiding high levels of sugar/carbs, fat and processed foods. Whats not to like.

I really cant see what some people are all so upset about it seems pretty good advice to me.

Everything in moderation

Well I watched it but did not see it as having any relevance to those with diabetes or any other illness I don't think that was the purpose of it. I just saw it as a simple experiment of two healthy guys doing extreme diets for a month and how their bodies reacted.....no one here does the all fat or no carbs diet do they I think we all have a mix of both in varying degrees and that is how we will continue

ElyDave said:

Andy,

as a T2 you don't have the same problems as I do, and I can only expand on my pre-diabetic experience.

It is perfectly natural to struggle at 2-2.5 hours, that's the "wall" where you've depleted your circulating and stored glycogen reserves adn you switch to the fat burning mechanism - it's more of a gradual decline in glucose and increase in fat burning, but after that time glucose is down to almost nothing. Fat reserves have a whole load of energy, but it's a slower pathwayand restricts intensity of activity.

My opinion as a well read amateur athlete is
1) carb loading is a load of ********, you can't store that much more that way
2) train your fat metabolism - find an aerobic heart rate and do your endurance training there - 180-age is a good starting point, use a heart rate monitor and stick to it. You will train your body to be more efficient, use fats and keep glycogen reserves slighltly longer, you'll also get faster at lower HR, so that when you need it you'll have a reserve to call on - less time spent in the red zone during training
3) after about 90 minutes start taking on regular small amounts of carbs (can also do it earlier if you want) to keep that circulating glucose up there. At 2.5hrs plus, you can't be comfortably ingesting the same amount of calories as you are using, so don't worry about weight unless you eat it all again afterwards.

Dave

Click to expand...

Thankyou Dave

3) after about 90 minutes start taking on regular small amounts of carbs (can also do it earlier if you want) to keep that circulating glucose up there. At 2.5hrs plus, you can't be comfortably ingesting the same amount of calories as you are using, so don't worry about weight unless you eat it all again afterwards.

in what form and how many would you say, please?

Dave in your races do you carry any form of drink. I have bought some protein drink arrived couple of days ago with the aim of post my main night work up having a drink to work through the night when l am resting. But was also thinking ahead to the race and wondering about carrying a tub and mix in some mashed banana to work as a fuel l will have a slow time l am not out to race anyone.

Also for a few days been thinking about pre train run and indoor excercise have a banana as a quick kick as l shall work it off not worried about any glucose.

Andy12345 said:

Thankyou Dave

3) after about 90 minutes start taking on regular small amounts of carbs (can also do it earlier if you want) to keep that circulating glucose up there. At 2.5hrs plus, you can't be comfortably ingesting the same amount of calories as you are using, so don't worry about weight unless you eat it all again afterwards.

in what form and how many would you say, please?

Click to expand...

Andy, I tend to vary it.

I like a mix of stuff I can actually eat, I prefer NAKD and 9-bars as they are fairly natural, mooshed dates, fruit, nuts, oats for the first, nuts and seeds for the second, also High-5 bars, oat and fruit based. These are slightly longer chain carbs so more sustaining. You need to keep protein in there as well for longer runs to stop your body cannibalising itself.

I also go with sports drinks and gels - Bike food and High-5 again, by trial end error I've found both to be easy on the stomach. You can sip the drinks over time and get the hydration as well, the gels tend to be a big hit every 20-40 mins depending on size of gel and your needs. These are quicker release.

How much and how often is down to your experimentation. Start with 500ml fluids an hour, vary it based on temperature and how your stiomach reacts. Foods I like to have little and often, maybe every 20-30 minutes, so I've not got masses floating around in my stomach, start with about 250 cal/hr. You need to experiment a bit yourself to work out what you need. When I'm training for a 40 miler I'm working on the basis that I'll be testing BG every 30 mins anyway, so that's my feeding opportunity.

Thankyou, something to work on

sorry for going off topic

Andy12345 said:

This has been playing on my mind all night with regards to my marathon training..... am i doing the right thing? i really don't know anymore, am i making it harder on myself and should i be eating carbs when or before training? would it be really bad to say carb load once a week for my long runs and suffer high bg, should i up my carbs in general until after april, I'm struggling to get past the 2 and a half hour stage on my runs and now wondering if this is why, I'm confused as to the best way forward, i wished i hadn't watch it

Click to expand...

It doesnt have to be all or nothing Andy why not try eating a small portion of low GI - long acting carbs before training and perhaps you will find that you have more energy for longer, there is no need to "carb load" or "suffer high bg" as long as you eat sensibly and work them off with training.

You could perhaps try taking a chocolate bar with you as the fat will effectively slow down the release of carbs from the sugars/chocolate .

Some suggestions
http://www.mediterraneanbook.com/2012/10/16/slow-digesting-carbs/
http://www.americandiabeteswholesale.com/product/slow-acting-carbs-and-low-glycemic-foods_3202.htm
http://www.diabetes.org.uk/Guide-to-diabetes/Managing-your-diabetes/Glycaemic-Index-GI/

Brian_H said:

yes he says ....
"Let me tell you straight up that both of these diets were miserable. I thought I'd got the better deal: I could eat meat, fish, eggs and cheese.
But take away carbohydrates and the joy goes out of meals. And remove all fruit and veg - they all have carbs - and you get constipated. Though I was never hungry, I felt slow and tired, and my breath was terrible."
Very misleading to call it a low carb diet

Click to expand...

I also think that they didn't give it long enough.
I suspect that if the diets had gone on for longer, most of the problems of low carbing[ with green veggies and regular exercise included] would have resolved as he adapted. Certainly, I found to my amazement that after a couple of months on much reduced exercise following my fall, I'd lose much more of my fitness than I actually did. I'm back to hiking, with difficulty, from my boots irritating my damaged ankle. However, I don't seem to have lost much stamina. I carried on low carbing through the time of the healing process. Can't hike in any other footwear, with the ground the way it is.
I am not surprised that the rats did badly on processed foods. One was completely bald [probably bred that way].
No one should be eating the, factory produced, rubbish that's sold as food nowadays.
The fat only twin ate a cheeseburger on a plane. I bet it wasn't a well made artisan cheese. It looked like that awful processed stuff .
I think i'm pretty much Paleo nowadays. It's naturally low carb. Many carb foods in our diets are heavily processed. Breakfast cereals in particular.

Sid Bonkers said:

It doesnt have to be all or nothing Andy why not try eating a small portion of low GI - long acting carbs before training and perhaps you will find that you have more energy for longer, there is no need to "carb load" or "suffer high bg" as long as you eat sensibly and work them off with training.

You could perhaps try taking a chocolate bar with you as the fat will effectively slow down the release of carbs from the sugars/chocolate .

Some suggestions
http://www.mediterraneanbook.com/2012/10/16/slow-digesting-carbs/
http://www.americandiabeteswholesale.com/product/slow-acting-carbs-and-low-glycemic-foods_3202.htm
http://www.diabetes.org.uk/Guide-to-diabetes/Managing-your-diabetes/Glycaemic-Index-GI/

Click to expand...

Thankyou Sid

I've not seen the programme yet and hopefully will catch up tonight.

The two Dr's were on the Steve Wright yesterday but didn't give much away so that they didn't spoil it for the viewers later on, from what I heard and from reading the RT article one was on a high-sugar diet with little or no fat and the other on a zero carb diet, the one on the HS diet said to Steve's that he was binging on breakfast cereals with loads of added sugar in between meals and the other on the ZC diet had eliminated fruit & veg.

Both diets are unrealistic in real terms and would eventually lead to long-term health problems, I'll comment further once I've seen the programme.

What was interesting though was both lost a small amount of weight, originally I predicted high carbs would gain, high fat would lose more.

I'm confused over the beebs evening treat. If they are right then I shouldn't of lost any weight (fat not muscle) and my sugar levels shouldn't of halved. So to do as I was requested , I'm doing myself more harm? Should I just eat ice cream with extra sugar on it and not worry about type 2?

sugartoohigh said:

I'm confused over the beebs evening treat. If they are right then I shouldn't of lost any weight (fat not muscle) and my sugar levels shouldn't of halved. So to do as I was requested , I'm doing myself more harm? Should I just eat ice cream with extra sugar on it and not worry about type 2?

Click to expand...

Only if you missed the program I saw.