Low carb and endurance running -- results of my experiment

"Ignoramus7876" wrote in message
...
In article , David wrote:
wrote:

[detailed post snipped]

The only trouble is that I was almost always hungry and thinking about
food way too often (a sign of starvation).

Thanks for that post 'i'. I think we all have a much better idea where
you are coming from now.

I am glad that I could accomplish some better understanding.

You know where I stand with regards to low carb diets, but I know what
you mean about 'feeling hungry'. I get that when I treat myself to
things like chips and chocolate... or even just white potatoes, pasta
and rice. I've found that I can eat plenty of carbs though without
having that problem as long as I make sure to stay away from refined
grains and sugary items and try to add a little bit of quality protein
to all (most) of my meals/snacks. My diet includes a lot of fresh fruit
(2-3 per day) and vegetables (another 2-3 per day) along with whole
grains (and *ONLY* whole grains... i get a *LOT* of fiber with
protein coming from nuts, legumes, milk, dairy, soy products and
fish.

The difference between us, then, is that I do not eat grains and
legumes, and eat less dairy. Not a terribly huge difference, when you
merely compare lists of what we eat.

When I stick to that... lots of fruits/veggies... only whole grains...
and the above proteins... and stay away from the chips and chocolate
(not always easy to do... esp. at 3 in the afternoon :P )... I never get
that hungry feeling at all. On days when I stick to that for all three
meals (i.e. I don't have pizza or something for lunch) I feel satisfied
all day without any need or desire to eat between meals at all. It can
take a little more work to eat what is... as a result of my diet
choices... pretty close to a vegetarian diet (I eat a lot of stir fry
and legumes... so there's a little bit of prep)... but it's worth it. I
feel it when I stray.

So, just as you found what works for you, I found what works for me,
in terms of being satisfied, feeling well, and not regaining.

That's my experience anyway. I would guess that my diet is roughly
60/20/20 for carbs/protein/fat.

That's a very stringent low fat diet, are you sure that the ratios are
what you described?

I walk to work every day (about 2.5K one
way)

same thing

and run maybe 10-15K per week these days (I run more in winter).
I'm 5'7", 150 lbs. with about 12% body fat. Three years ago I was 190
lbs... a total couch potato and junk food and fast food junkie.

I run about 10k each week also. Purely to satisfy my addiction, not to
set any records.

i

10K per week? I am not sure that is even a running program.

"Ignoramus7876" wrote in message
...
In article , David wrote:
wrote:

[detailed post snipped]

The only trouble is that I was almost always hungry and thinking about
food way too often (a sign of starvation).

Thanks for that post 'i'. I think we all have a much better idea where
you are coming from now.

I am glad that I could accomplish some better understanding.

You know where I stand with regards to low carb diets, but I know what
you mean about 'feeling hungry'. I get that when I treat myself to
things like chips and chocolate... or even just white potatoes, pasta
and rice. I've found that I can eat plenty of carbs though without
having that problem as long as I make sure to stay away from refined
grains and sugary items and try to add a little bit of quality protein
to all (most) of my meals/snacks. My diet includes a lot of fresh fruit
(2-3 per day) and vegetables (another 2-3 per day) along with whole
grains (and *ONLY* whole grains... i get a *LOT* of fiber with
protein coming from nuts, legumes, milk, dairy, soy products and
fish.

The difference between us, then, is that I do not eat grains and
legumes, and eat less dairy. Not a terribly huge difference, when you
merely compare lists of what we eat.

When I stick to that... lots of fruits/veggies... only whole grains...
and the above proteins... and stay away from the chips and chocolate
(not always easy to do... esp. at 3 in the afternoon :P )... I never get
that hungry feeling at all. On days when I stick to that for all three
meals (i.e. I don't have pizza or something for lunch) I feel satisfied
all day without any need or desire to eat between meals at all. It can
take a little more work to eat what is... as a result of my diet
choices... pretty close to a vegetarian diet (I eat a lot of stir fry
and legumes... so there's a little bit of prep)... but it's worth it. I
feel it when I stray.

So, just as you found what works for you, I found what works for me,
in terms of being satisfied, feeling well, and not regaining.

That's my experience anyway. I would guess that my diet is roughly
60/20/20 for carbs/protein/fat.

That's a very stringent low fat diet, are you sure that the ratios are
what you described?

I walk to work every day (about 2.5K one
way)

same thing

and run maybe 10-15K per week these days (I run more in winter).
I'm 5'7", 150 lbs. with about 12% body fat. Three years ago I was 190
lbs... a total couch potato and junk food and fast food junkie.

I run about 10k each week also. Purely to satisfy my addiction, not to
set any records.

i

10K per week? I am not sure that is even a running program.

"Ignoramus7876" wrote in message
...
In article , David wrote:
wrote:

[detailed post snipped]

The only trouble is that I was almost always hungry and thinking about
food way too often (a sign of starvation).

Thanks for that post 'i'. I think we all have a much better idea where
you are coming from now.

I am glad that I could accomplish some better understanding.

You know where I stand with regards to low carb diets, but I know what
you mean about 'feeling hungry'. I get that when I treat myself to
things like chips and chocolate... or even just white potatoes, pasta
and rice. I've found that I can eat plenty of carbs though without
having that problem as long as I make sure to stay away from refined
grains and sugary items and try to add a little bit of quality protein
to all (most) of my meals/snacks. My diet includes a lot of fresh fruit
(2-3 per day) and vegetables (another 2-3 per day) along with whole
grains (and *ONLY* whole grains... i get a *LOT* of fiber with
protein coming from nuts, legumes, milk, dairy, soy products and
fish.

The difference between us, then, is that I do not eat grains and
legumes, and eat less dairy. Not a terribly huge difference, when you
merely compare lists of what we eat.

When I stick to that... lots of fruits/veggies... only whole grains...
and the above proteins... and stay away from the chips and chocolate
(not always easy to do... esp. at 3 in the afternoon :P )... I never get
that hungry feeling at all. On days when I stick to that for all three
meals (i.e. I don't have pizza or something for lunch) I feel satisfied
all day without any need or desire to eat between meals at all. It can
take a little more work to eat what is... as a result of my diet
choices... pretty close to a vegetarian diet (I eat a lot of stir fry
and legumes... so there's a little bit of prep)... but it's worth it. I
feel it when I stray.

So, just as you found what works for you, I found what works for me,
in terms of being satisfied, feeling well, and not regaining.

That's my experience anyway. I would guess that my diet is roughly
60/20/20 for carbs/protein/fat.

That's a very stringent low fat diet, are you sure that the ratios are
what you described?

I walk to work every day (about 2.5K one
way)

same thing

and run maybe 10-15K per week these days (I run more in winter).
I'm 5'7", 150 lbs. with about 12% body fat. Three years ago I was 190
lbs... a total couch potato and junk food and fast food junkie.

I run about 10k each week also. Purely to satisfy my addiction, not to
set any records.

i

10K per week? I am not sure that is even a running program.

"jt" wrote in message
...
On 18 Sep 2004 18:39:34 GMT, Ignoramus7876
wrote:

In article , Doug Freese wrote:
My real annoyance comes from ignoramus(his name, not mine) trying to do
endurance running on a LC diet. It's like trying to add water to your
gas tank of your car to get more miles per tank of gas. Any eating
regimin that the exercising body rejects for insufficient fuel tells me
it is not healthy.

Doug, what I am trying to demonstrate is that my body does not reject
LC as "insufficient fuel". To do it in a measurable way, I am
considering running a half marathon, all the while without deviating
from my "paleo diet". In fact, you guys got me so worked up that I
will very likely go to the half marathon next week.

Maybe one day I will run a full marathon, like one poster to
alt.support.diet.low-carb did:

No one is saying it can't be done. However if that same individual
was not on a LC diet they would be able to run farther faster.

What boggles the mind is why ignoramus feels the need to disprove every
single distance runner on the planet! For god's sakes, it's like he's saying
'I'm the only person in the entire universe who knows what's right and every
single other living creature is wrong if they don't agree with me'.

It's the most illogical, nonsensical, ridiculous lack of reasoning I have
seen in a long, long time.

Runners eat what they eat BECAUSE IT WORKS. They're not about to change it
because some inbred idiot thinks that all of a sudden runners should switch
to lowcarb.

This is almost as bad as the antifreeze argument he brought up a while ago.
There, I said it.

Martha

"jt" wrote in message
...
On 18 Sep 2004 18:39:34 GMT, Ignoramus7876
wrote:

In article , Doug Freese wrote:
My real annoyance comes from ignoramus(his name, not mine) trying to do
endurance running on a LC diet. It's like trying to add water to your
gas tank of your car to get more miles per tank of gas. Any eating
regimin that the exercising body rejects for insufficient fuel tells me
it is not healthy.

Doug, what I am trying to demonstrate is that my body does not reject
LC as "insufficient fuel". To do it in a measurable way, I am
considering running a half marathon, all the while without deviating
from my "paleo diet". In fact, you guys got me so worked up that I
will very likely go to the half marathon next week.

Maybe one day I will run a full marathon, like one poster to
alt.support.diet.low-carb did:

No one is saying it can't be done. However if that same individual
was not on a LC diet they would be able to run farther faster.

What boggles the mind is why ignoramus feels the need to disprove every
single distance runner on the planet! For god's sakes, it's like he's saying
'I'm the only person in the entire universe who knows what's right and every
single other living creature is wrong if they don't agree with me'.

It's the most illogical, nonsensical, ridiculous lack of reasoning I have
seen in a long, long time.

Runners eat what they eat BECAUSE IT WORKS. They're not about to change it
because some inbred idiot thinks that all of a sudden runners should switch
to lowcarb.

This is almost as bad as the antifreeze argument he brought up a while ago.
There, I said it.

Martha

"jt" wrote in message
...
On 18 Sep 2004 18:39:34 GMT, Ignoramus7876
wrote:

In article , Doug Freese wrote:
My real annoyance comes from ignoramus(his name, not mine) trying to do
endurance running on a LC diet. It's like trying to add water to your
gas tank of your car to get more miles per tank of gas. Any eating
regimin that the exercising body rejects for insufficient fuel tells me
it is not healthy.

Doug, what I am trying to demonstrate is that my body does not reject
LC as "insufficient fuel". To do it in a measurable way, I am
considering running a half marathon, all the while without deviating
from my "paleo diet". In fact, you guys got me so worked up that I
will very likely go to the half marathon next week.

Maybe one day I will run a full marathon, like one poster to
alt.support.diet.low-carb did:

No one is saying it can't be done. However if that same individual
was not on a LC diet they would be able to run farther faster.

What boggles the mind is why ignoramus feels the need to disprove every
single distance runner on the planet! For god's sakes, it's like he's saying
'I'm the only person in the entire universe who knows what's right and every
single other living creature is wrong if they don't agree with me'.

It's the most illogical, nonsensical, ridiculous lack of reasoning I have
seen in a long, long time.

Runners eat what they eat BECAUSE IT WORKS. They're not about to change it
because some inbred idiot thinks that all of a sudden runners should switch
to lowcarb.

This is almost as bad as the antifreeze argument he brought up a while ago.
There, I said it.

Martha

Ignoramus7876 wrote in message ...
....

As I said, I run purely recreationally... Not to accomplish anything.


Then why not just go out and run the 1/2 marathon on your own, why enter a
race?

- Tony

Ignoramus7876 wrote in message ...
....

As I said, I run purely recreationally... Not to accomplish anything.


Then why not just go out and run the 1/2 marathon on your own, why enter a
race?

- Tony

Ignoramus7876 wrote in message ...
....

As I said, I run purely recreationally... Not to accomplish anything.


Then why not just go out and run the 1/2 marathon on your own, why enter a
race?

- Tony

On 2004-09-18, Ignoramus7876 wrote:

For instance, if you want to make a statement like "running makes
everyone slim",

But that wasn't my statement. My statement was that runners maintain a low
weight without dieting because they are active. That is not the same thing
as the proposition you have above.

and then use slim people from a running club to make
your point, you would be using selection bias IF fat people to whom
running does not help, do not join your club. It is that simple.

Even then, it's not much of an argument, because fat people who take up
running generally drop weight pretty quickly.

I suppose you also believe that there are people out there running
30+ miles per week who are fat, and that burning 3,000-10,000
calories does not help people keep slim either. Keep telling
yourself that -- sure, none of the people in my running club were
ever overweight, we all have "fast metabolisms" or something.

I run and walk approximately 25-30 miles per week. It did not help me
in the sense that, even though I am slim, I had to carefully watch how
much I eat, or else I would regain, on my previous diet.

I don't think you ever actually did that experiment. What happens in the
real world is that people who take up exercise but stay inattentive to their
diet still lose weight, though not as quickly.

I can tell you that I was overweight (210lb) before I was running (160 now),
and I'm not "lowcarbing". Perhaps the fact that I'm running 70 miles a week
has something to do with it, but who knows, maybe my metabolism is picking up
as I get older or something ?

Running could, quite conceivably, be a cure-all solution for some
people, and not a solution for other people. For me, it is impractical
to run 70 miles per week. So, in your running club, you'd see people
who either do not have a weight problem to begin with, or those to
whom running helps, but not those to whom running alone does not help.

The impression I have from reading books on exercise physiology, and talking
to people who know this stuff fairly well, is that a regular exercise program
does indeed bring about weight loss.

Even among those who diet, low carb diets are not necessary, as you know.

Donovan, you may be interested that I my path to low carbing was not
the usual path of a fat person who lowcarbs to lose weight easily.

I did lose weight by "eating less and exercising". And it worked well
in the sense that I did lose weight, I became relatively fit, and felt
very good. I ran and walked about 25-30 miles per week.

The only trouble is that I was almost always hungry and thinking about
food way too often (a sign of starvation).

Could be a sign of a lot of things. If you're not losing weight, then it's
not a sign of starvation.

A switch to lowcarbing did not change my level of fitness, weight, or
sense of well being, but, I am no longer hungry and food obsessed.

Reducing the amount of dietary carbohydrate is a major change, it probably
accompanied several other changes.

This is an objective change that is not a "religious delusion". If the

Where you cross the line from diet to religion IMO is where you reach the
point on stubborn refusal to permit even the slightest deviation from the
fine print of the diet even when it seems clear that a deviation is what's
needed. For example, if you had hypoglycemia, and they put you on an IV, would
you try to stop them, because your diet doesn't allow it ? Why not take
carb gels before and during exercise ? Doing so isn't going to make you food
obsessed, and will not subvert what you *claim* are the goals of the diet.
Is the purpose of the diet truly hunger control, or has this diet of yours
become an end in itself ?

My attempt at running a half marathon on LC is a semi-scientific
experiment,

I'd use the term "pseudo-scientific".

to see if a stereotype of LC as being incompatible with long distance
running, is true or not.

It's not, provided that you don't go out of your way to be stupid in your
approach.

I admit that LC may require me to run slower than if I was guzzling sweet
drinks on the way, but, I am interested whether running a 1/2 on LC is at all
possible.

You can live on a low carb diet, but still take carbs during the race. Unless
you're some kind of religious nutjob, that is.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/