Eating carbs in-ride and weight loss

[yello]

Do you think a HRM would be essential to make sure you stay in lower intensities to maximise metabolism retraining?

Not essential but it would certainly make life simpler. Decathlon have some affordable HRMs.

 

[yello]

yello, your wind measurement argument is ridiculous. Wind is measured by the speed at which the air is moving, not by the amount of weight it can move.

Hurrah! You see my point, even if not in the manner I intended. Yes, it IS ridiculous!

1st law of thermodynamics - energy can never be created or destroyed, it can only change form

And biological systems adhere to the laws of thermodynamics do they? I think the mechanics are somewhat different. But this is straying.

Lulubel, I'm of the opinion that you cannot not see what I am saying. I don't know why that is and neither do I wish to hazard a guess. Suffice to say, I'm not going to go further down this line because, frankly, I think I'm wasting my energies

 

[T.M.H.N.E.T]

It's got to the stage now where people are talking about things they know nothing about by talking about unrelated things they know nothing about. A spade is a spade,it isn't a spoon thats 100x the size it needs to be.

My head hurts..

 

[Lien Sdrawde]

Decathlon have some affordable HRMs.

I can vouch for that - 14 of our Great British pounds. I'm using it daily now, and cant believe the control needed to stay in 'Zone 1' - and I can only manage that on the turbo.... you've no chance of doing it out on a road ride. Get one and you'll see what I mean.
At least the top end of 'Zone 2' feels like your achieving something - i'm sticking with it though as my girdle is noticably less tight already.
Neil.

 

[MattHB]

I just splashed out a bit and went for the garmin one thatll pair with my ANT+ iphone pack so cyclemeter can track everything, itll be really interesting to see the stats.

£30 well spent I hope!!

 

[yello]

It's got to the stage now where people are talking about things they know nothing about by talking about unrelated things they know nothing about.

That's a bit unkind, if you don't mind me saying. I think it's natural for people to want to talk about what they understand, so will naturally try to draw the discussion towards that - even if it's not directly related. I have no problem with that, it's up to the other(s) to pull the discussion back... if they can be bothered

A spade is a spade,it isn't a spoon thats 100x the size it needs to be.

Semantics dear boy, semantics....

My head hurts..

Mine too! But I like that sometimes, tells me I've been using my noodle!

 

[MattHB]

I think its all fascinating but complex. There are so many variables involved, but that just makes it more interesting.

 

[T.M.H.N.E.T]

That's a bit unkind, if you don't mind me saying. I think it's natural for people to want to talk about what they understand, so will naturally try to draw the discussion towards that - even if it's not directly related. I have no problem with that, it's up to the other(s) to pull the discussion back... if they can be bothered


Semantics dear boy, semantics....



Mine too! But I like that sometimes, tells me I've been using my noodle!

Not unkind at all,true would be closer. The entire point of the original question got buried in walls of unrelated drivel,mostly posted by yourself to be bluntly honest. You've spent all this time trying to be different and convincing yourself that you're right.
ps: I wasn't intending to address anyone directly until this point. So please understand I am not attempting personal attacks or anything

Here it is to refresh memories:

Does taking on carbs in-ride reduce potential fat loss?

If so is it better to avoid long rides where you need to refuel and stick to shorter rides which won't use up stored glycogen? Or is it more efficient to ride longer and rely on the metabolism overdrive which carries on after you stop?

Or am I misunderstanding the whole yard of cake?

It's really simple. If you eat more than you burn,then the point of exercising in the first place is wasted. At the same time,if you're out for 2 hours and starting to feel sluggish 60k from home,why wouldn't you consume enough carbs to get you back home without "hitting the wall"?

For example:The HIGH5 gel in front of me @ 30ml is worth 20g carbs and 5g sugar - 80 cals per gel and 3 recommended per hour.

Pace wouldn't need to be too high to burn 240 cals off per hour so the energy although quick release,would very much be used. Same goes if you eat 6 fig rolls @60cals each half way through a ride,the energy content will be metabolised.Obviously if you are stopping for buckets of chicken at KFC 1k from home then there is another issue entirely.
-------------------------
If you have 2 hours in which to ride,short intense ride which is not only more time efficient but heavier strain on your cardiovasular system is the way to go.

If you have 4 hours, long steady is the way to go. The net expenditure is the same but CV system is in better shape for endurance.

Better is a matter of time and personal preference.

 

[lulubel]

And biological systems adhere to the laws of thermodynamics do they? I think the mechanics are somewhat different. But this is straying.

Lulubel, I'm of the opinion that you cannot not see what I am saying. I don't know why that is and neither do I wish to hazard a guess. Suffice to say, I'm not going to go further down this line because, frankly, I think I'm wasting my energies

Um ... everything adheres to the laws of thermodynamics. They're not laws like the one that says you're not allowed to help yourself to other people's belongings (for example) that it's possible to break. They're not rules. They're just phrases that describe the way the physical world works. That's why it says "energy can never be created or destroyed" not "energy should never be created or destroyed" or "energy must never be created or destroyed". It isn't possible to break them, no matter how much you might like to. (If it was possible to break the laws of thermodynamics, we could solve most of the world's problems.)

The reason I can't see what you're saying is because very little of what you're saying makes any sense.

 

[MattHB]

As yello is so far the only one to understand my original point that probably means that I don't make sense either!

 

[lulubel]

I understood your original point, Matt. I just didn't agree with your argument as it related to weight loss. yello has gone off on some very wild tangents.

 

[T.M.H.N.E.T]

As did I,I think I even explained it a bit. Oh well

 

[MattHB]

I understood your original point, Matt. I just didn't agree with your argument as it related to weight loss. yello has gone off on some very wild tangents.

I wasnt stating that it was possible, only asking if it was possible to retrain ones system to favour fat burn.

 

[lulubel]

I wasnt stating that it was possible, only asking if it was possible to retrain ones system to favour fat burn.

OK. Yes, it is. That's what distance runners do with their long, slow training runs. At low levels of effort, your body naturally burns a higher percentage of fat relative to carbohydrate, and the more you practice doing that, the better your body gets at it. Then you start introducing short periods of harder effort (but not too much harder) amongst your long, slow efforts and your body gradually learns to incorporate that into the fat burning regime. As time goes on, you find your body will increase the amount of stored fat it uses relative to glycogen (stored carbohydrate), and you can go faster for longer.

That's a very, very brief explanation.

But, as I've already said, unless you've got time to ride for a few hours every day, shorter, faster rides, done more often, are better for weight loss.

 

[lukesdad]

Sorry ld, I missed this. I have to be careful how I answer this since it appears to be as divisive as helmets or mp3 players

I'm not promoting it as such. What people do is their own call.

However, I've read in many places that it is possible to coach your body to burn fat in preference to carb and it is something (as an idea) that interests me. At lower intensity levels, I think it is indeed possible and I think I do it. The problem comes at higher levels of effort - and I mentioned upstream the need to compromise on this one. That said, it appears to be possible to push the line between the two a little though, which is what the piece on interluekin-6 suggests. That is, to train your muscles to perform at a higher intensity on mainly fat stores.

I can and have on many occaissions rode all day at low intensity, with zero carb intake,with no problems. I have ridden at higher intensity for considerably shorter periods and had big problems. The problem is identifying at what level of intensity the line is drawn. Once you step accross that line you are going to need to start fuelling yourself pretty quickly. Fat alone IMO will not be able to do this quickly enough.Can you train your body to do this ? Once again in IMO doubtfull, at least to the extent required to produce the energy needed for high sustained intensitys.