I know the team have been looking at a nutrition based podcast and have had Matt Fitzgerald on in the past I found this really useful. However like many TR users, I am sure, I could do with getting leaner and shedding some timber. Off the back of Coach Chads recommendation I purchased “the obesity code by Dr Jason Fung” very insightful and I can see why he recommended/likes it.
I went a step further and purchased his fasting book but unfortunately it seems to be aimed more at “non athletes” although he, and other research I ha e done, suggests this is more than possible. There are also a lot of high level athletes who have successfully used OMAD (one meal a day) whilst training. Rhonda Rousy and a Japanese Olympic gymnast who’s name escapes me, by all accounts.
I have seen videos where Dr. Fung discusses his strategies via Skype and thought it would make a great podcast that could be tailored towards fasting ATHLETES like the TR community.
At the end of the day fasted rides can play a big pert in training, especially in the winter.
my take (and apologies in advance, if I do any criticism here it won’t be about you!) is that while IF appears to work (I’ve been interested in some elements of that approach), I’ve been on some forums elsewhere where certain people get all-in and somewhat dogmatic in their evangelizing that a lot of what I believe to be pseudo-science gets mixed in to the benefits of IF.
Based on meta reviews I’ve seen, IF really doesn’t yield different results than the standard caloric reduction in dieting. And I think that’s a key to this diet/nutrition stuff, a lot of it works, and it’s hard to say any one thing is better than another.
I would like to see this explored further, i have followed the similar discovery route as @candyman27 - after using a calorie deficit approach for some time but my weight decline stopped, my efforts not so hot and actually started to gain fat… now has to be said with a hot summer my booze intake was not so controlled and i trained less but my mileage was up and overall cal was a deficit each week… so the issue i wanted to address was how to loose ‘some’ weight whilst holding my current FTP - what i decided to do after much reading was focus on less sugar carbs types overall when not training and do the 5:2 IF following Micheal Mosley (600 cals on IF days)… i experienced some interesting results along with a few challenges, but i was successful… i shifted 7lbs and after a few weeks can do light train (gym, run) on IF days and eat for my workouts and now CX races… so seems to have worked out… had to tweak a few workouts, mess with days etc (PS: beta on calendar helped loads)… so i think it merits further discussion
It is not about how much you eat, it is mostly about what you eat.
I can suggest to use MyFitnessPal app and enter your data. It will give you back all the macros you need (fat, protein, carbs). As long as you hit those or below, you will lose weight.
When it comes to fasted training, what I read is, it is not recommended. You can train right after you break your fast with even a banana.
I used to IF and I fast during Ramadan. IF did not work for me. I saw a doctor and I shifted to 6 times a day. The only important thing is either I stay with macros or below.
I fast during Ramadan with only one meal. I get my meal right after sunset. I really lose weight but I also lose strength even I train right after.
Your body needs fuel. You cannot push engine without fuel. But you need to premium octane to extend your engine’s life. Same applies for your body.
I feel you may have simplified the point a little and hence support the idea to explore further and of course all have a personal view, whether thats the theory or whats folks have put into practice. I feel it should be about the balance, the right quantity of the right foods in the right ratios, everyone will have different body mass and individual needs will be different, fasted training can be as simple as first thing in morning (16 hours since last meal) the exercise you do whilst fasted should be different, as I suggested you continue to feed your main workouts (i prefer end of day)… general calorie deficit was not working for me any more, the point i am linking to is weight loss and for health (age mid 50’s) , whilst maintaining not driving an increase in FTP…
@hubcyclist, did not take offence to your post. I think u make some valid points. A lot (but not all) of these so called experts, especially the utube experts, are usually trying to promote their agenda and they always usually charge for u to be able to “find the magic cure”. That having been said, what I did like about Dr. Fungs book is that is was all backed up with scientific study data.
Multiple studies that indicated that IN THE LONG TERM caloric deficit “diets” don’t work and that people gain the weight back and more 99% of the time. The theory to fasting seems to be more about controlling insulin which is one of the major factors in weight gain.
That having been said as @Thebigred and @timpenylong have indicated…everyone is different and what works for one may not work for another. Counting calories, macros etc does not work for me…I am trying fasting along with cutting out sh*t junk food and excess sugar. So far it seems to be having positive effects.
I suppose what I am trying to get the TR guys to do is put some good info out there that people can then do with what they see fit. They have already done “the endurance diet - Matt Fitzgerald” thing so another methodology would be an interesting topic to cover as Dr. Fung also seems to lean towards the LCHF side of things.
Oh man, this can be a can of worms :). I’m interested in the performance side of nutrition. I’d still like to get Fitzgerald on and talk about the endurance diet, last time we talked about motivation.
I think we’ve covered LFHC enough. We don’t recommend it for performance unless you’re an ultra endurance runner or a RAAM racer.
I’ve also seen other people say that they are on a caloric deficit and not losing weight…that’s not possible. Calories in - calories out (including calories not absorbed). People might have problems staying negative and it might impact their basal metabolic rate but it’s the law of thermodynamics; your body obeys!
BMR is the critical variable in the “calories in - calories out” formula for weight loss. BMR shifts, and in caloric deficit situations it can and probably will shift lower to maintain homeostasis. E.g. lower body temperature, reduced cognitive function, hair and toe nail growth, lower respiration, etc…; all of these things are involved in the calories out side of the equation.
This said, I still adhere to the basic equation of calories in - calories out to achieve/explain weight fluctuations…albeit, I now have a much richer understanding of the metabolic systems involved and the impact that the quality and refinement of food can play on the hormonal systems involved in weight gain/loss.
@Nate_Pearson, whilst I hate to disagree with u, by all accounts the calorie reduction strategy does not work LONG TERM as the body eventually adjusts to the lower calorie intake by slowing the metabolism. That is why over time you get the diminishing returns and some people even put weight back on. This is covered in Dr. Fungs book which I am sure coach @chad can tell you about. I am not a doctor/scientist but the way it was explained in the book made sense to me. That’s why he says it’s more about insulin control.
Would love Matt Fitzgerald to be on a podcast again but certainly think that maybe also getting Dr. Fung on either the same podcast or a separate one would be a great idea to get another option.
If coach @chad recommends Dr. Fungs book then I would suggest the information Would be well worth listening to.
You always lose weight if you consume a calorie deficit. Where that deficit lies can change depending on your metabolic rate, and that can vary based on a lot of things. If you want to lose weight, eat less and move more. The method you choose to help you lose weight can be anything (vegan, keto, IF, paleo, LFHC, organic only, whatever) but all of these diets mainly help you to reduce body weight by generating a calorie deficit, if you find one is easier to maintain than the others then that is the “best” diet for you.
All that matters is CICO. The studies show that eventually people put weight back on show that they no longer maintain that because they are human beings. It takes effort to be the best version of yourself physically and you lose focus of that.
Definitely. No one talks about the “diet after the diet”. People get to a target weight then go back to eating the way they did before their diet and pile it back on. Sustainable lifestyle changes are what take the weight off and keep it off. What is sustainable is an entirely personal thing.
This is so much fat logic. Your BMR is a function of your body mass. As your weight decreases the amount of calories that you need to maintain a weight decreases. If you have a constant calorie deficit you will have a constant weight loss. Eating less than you expend is literally the only way to lose weight.
So, I think we are all agreed that weight loss / weight gain is the difference between calories expended vs calories absorbed. I think the key point the OP is trying to make here is “Are there things that can influence calories expended and calories absorbed?”:
Calories expended = calories through exercise plus calories through resting metabolic rate. Are there things that materially change the resting metabolic rate, I think is the interesting part of this question, which I’d be interesting in hearing.
Calories absorbed = calories pulled out of food whilst ingested minus anything that passes through that is not absorbed. Again are there things that influence this?
Although I’m interested in the debate, the main thing from my own personal perspective is figuring out the right lifestyle changes / life conditions that I need to generate in order to stick to a sensible calorie deficit to hit a more sensible target weight for myself.
There is a HUGE debate with a lot of conflicting evidence supporting or disproving each diet and the benefits each have on various functions of your body. Like you said, the main thing is working out what works for you.
A great example of the debate is the recent podcast episodes from Joe Rogan, numbers 1175 and 1176. Each expert has wildly differing preferences, and each have their own evidence of why their approach is better than the others. Worth a listen.
In my experience you can be successful with IF and a high quality fat diet if you periodize your diet to match your training AND it can help repair a damaged metabolic system. A bit of background - while training for nationals in 2017, I wanted to be quick and light, so for 6 months I targeted a 300 kCal deficit. I performed well at nats, but in the process of calorie resreiction I damaged my BMR as measured in the lab. I reached out to the TR guys and coach Chad pointed me to Dr. Fung’s work. Taking IF and high fat into consideration, I was able to ‘repair’ my metabolic system over the fall/winter. Basically, your body will create glycogen out of high quality food and you can perform endurance workouts well - until you deplete those glycogen stores (about 2000 kCal depending on your muscle mass). To extend rides beyond that, you need to be consuming carbs while riding in anticipation of that depletion. This works well for ‘endurance’ Z2/LT 1 type rides all season long. For higher intensity rides less than 90 minutes, this can also work. However, I feel periodizing your diet to your phase of training us beneficial = more carbs for late build phase and peaking - especially on bike to figure our race day nutrition. I don’t think one ‘diet’ can work all year long unless you train the same way all year ling. I am headed in today to re-establish metabolic markers (BMR, DEXA, etc.) so I can follow up if you would like. Disclaimer - I am 46 y.o. so this may/may not apply to younger athletes
@Nate_Pearson and to everyone else who has posted on this thread please take the time to view this utube video of Dr. Fung. It’s 40 mins long but IMHO well worth the view as itr explains that the eat/move more weight loss strategy (CICO) DOES NOT WORK IN THE LNG TERM. Yes, it does works in the short term BUT NOT LONG TERM.
This blew a lot of my preconceived ideas out of the water. Unfortunately most if not all of the info is based around “normal, non athletes” hence why I believe getting this guy on a podcast (or at least TR reaching out to him) to try and see if his info would be the same for “endurance athletes” would be a very interesting and informative show
If someone can prove that #1 is not true then the energy crisis is over, everything that we know in the world has changed and we now have perpetual motion.
The First Law of Thermodynamics
The first law of thermodynamics, also known as Law of Conservation of Energy, states that energy can neither be created nor destroyed; energy can only be transferred or changed from one form to another. For example, turning on a light would seem to produce energy; however, it is electrical energy that is converted.
Point #2 is up for debate and will have a huge individual factor to it.
.