Metabolic Efficiency Diet

chopnatshow

Two weeks ago I began working with a certified Metabolic Efficiency coach.  My goals are to maintain +/- 5 lbs of my race weight, have more energy in the evenings, and adapt to burning body fat instead of carbs while racing.  

So far, the diet removes most carbs, no bread, potatoes, pasta, oats.  Sugar is kept to a minimum.  Fats are good.  Bacon, steak, cheese, fat milk, yogurt, nuts and lots and lots of fruits and vegetables.  

Results to date:  weight is staying in a tight range, energy after 9 PM has noticeably improved.  Does anyone have any experience with this diet strategy?  How about fueling while racing IM's?  Supposedly, I will need far fewer calories once I am adapted.

novaavant

Maybe start here: http://members.endurancenation.us/Forums/tabid/57/aft/15585/Default.aspx

I would also read John's race reports lots of good information there as well.

Mark Roberts

"Metabolic efficiency" is generating a lot of buzz in some circles despite the lack of studies demonstrating its value and a plethora of research demonstrating the value and near necessity of carbs in workouts and in racing. Here are some good articles worth looking at:

http://kropelnicki.com/starvation-workouts/triathlon

http://www.thecorediet.com/blog/the-triathlon-fueling-window/

Matt Fitzgeralds book "Racing Weight" has good information about how to have a high quality diet that utilizes carbs when fueling, training and for recovery and focusing on high quality foods the rest of the time including limiting refine carbs outside of certain times.

Robert Sabo

If your training for an IM, and your like most humans, you will need carbs to race and recover from training. Torborn Sindballe has done some interesting reviews and personal experimentation. My opinion of the literature that I have seen is that while you can train yourself to fat burn more efficiently, it takes a very high fat diet and your high end training (zone 3 and above) will probably suffer. The diets/ lifestyles described above are probably the best compromise for most people that will still support the training we do.

Coach Patrick

x3 That guy has a theory and a vacuum in which you can improve your metabolic efficiency. But your goal is to improve your performance on race day, not metabolism. So I would go your route once you have maxxed out your ability to train and get faster. Go for the easy wins first.

That said, yes to quality food and staying close to race weight.

FWIW my sample of one was low body comp but total fatigue without carbs pre/during/post workout. Would pedal 5 mins and feel as though I had done an FTP test.

YMMV

harrast

My $0.02--I've been training and dropping weight at the same time--a file line to walk. Occasionally I try to push down my weight by not fueling my workouts. Usually this amounts to drinking water instead of Perform. I was doing this for the last few weeks and noticed a significant reduction in my ability to complete difficult workouts. Very frustrating. In fact, I had to start reducing my power on some of my crazy workouts to stand any chance of getting through. I'm a slow learner because it took me a few weeks to realize what was going on. I starting drinking Perform again during my workouts and boom, I hit my workout--even my heart rate was lower. Just a thought.

Paul Takac

I saw this after replying to the other thread: http://http//members.endurancenatio...fault.aspx

So let me elaborate a bit more here. Here’s how I understand things after much reading and researching:

• the human body can utilize two energy pathways: 
  • 1) glycogenic (sugar and carbs) and/or
  • 2) ketogenic (fats or more specifically fatty acids and ketones)
• insulin is the hormone responsible for breaking down glucose (blood sugar) and controlling fat - either storing in adipose tissue or releasing fatty acids
• due to our modern, habitual high intake of carbs and sugars (esp triathletes), we have acclimated to high insulin levels. This results in varying degrees of insulin resistance which could eventually lead to metabolic syndrome or even Type II diabetes.
• strictly limiting carbs for a period of 2-4 weeks (in most individuals) results in a lowering of basal insulin levels and an increase in insulin sensitivity. In compensation, there is an increase in the ketogenic enzymes required for energy utilization
• this is a benefit to athletes in that carbs used strategically during subsequent workouts or races are actually used *more* efficiently and you need less of them. This is because the body has only limited carb storage in the form of glycogen (about 2000 at 4 kcal/gram) and even the leanest person has ample reserves of body fat (tens of thousands of calories at 9 kcal/gm). It also doesn’t hurt for optimizing body composition.

Yes, studies have consistently shown that lower carbs negatively impact performance. BUT these have all been done on athletes (and untrained subjects) who are not ketogenically adapted - that is, they haven’t shifted from primarily sugar-burning to ketone-burning over a 2-4 week window. Once that happens - and there are many studies cited in Volek and Phinney’s book - then the low carb “penalty” disappears and endurance is actually increased. That is what I’ve found with my recent efforts (admittedly 1-2 hours): I start strong and finish strong. And I’m not famished before, during, or after. In short, I’m no longer dependent on sugar or carbs for energy. And If I go longer or need to supplement what glucose my body can produce naturally (through gluconeogenesis of protein), I take in using UCAN - a superstarch blend which exits the stomach quickly (relieving gastric upset) and digest slowly (resulting in a very subdued insulin reaction).

@Mark: BTW, I did look at Jesse’s blogs on Core Diet. I don’t know where he got the 1% benefit thing: that sounds like a total straw man. Also “starvation workouts” are indeed dumb. It’s very clear that non keto-adapted athletes WILL absolutely show a performance decline. Moreover, without a well developed ketogenic energy system, the body WILL catabolize or break down lean muscle protein in order to produce the glucose that is being demanded by elevated insulin levels. As Steve Phinney notes, his only mistake in the original study that set him on this path 20 years ago was that he made the study duration (in highly trained cyclists) far too long (6 weeks vs 2 weeks).

Again, I’m not trying to convert anyone. I’m only trying to articulate the other side of the argument. There are many, many rigorous peer-reviewed studies backing the alternative view. If you're interested, I'd be happy to share but many are cited by Volek and Phinney.

 

I saw this after replying to the other thread:

Any else "Fat Adapted"?

So let me elaborate here too. Here’s how I understand things after researching the topic:

• the human body can utilize two energy pathways: 
  • 1) glycogenic (sugar, carbs) and/or
  • 2) ketogenic (fats or more specifically fatty acids and ketones)
• insulin is the hormone responsible for breaking down glucose (blood sugar) and controlling fat - either storing in adipose tissue or releasing fatty acids
• due to our modern, habitual high intake of carbs and sugars (esp triathletes), we have acclimated to high insulin levels. This results in varying degrees of insulin resistance which could eventually lead to metabolic syndrome or even Type II diabetes.
• strictly limiting carbs for a period of 2-4 weeks (in most individuals) results in a lowering of basal insulin levels and an increase in insulin sensitivity. In compensation, there is an increase in the ketogenic enzymes required for energy utilization
• this is a benefit to athletes in that carbs used strategically during subsequent workouts or races are actually used *more* efficiently and you need less of them. This is because the body has only limited carb storage in the form of glycogen (about 2000 kcal at 4 kcal/gram) and even the leanest person has ample reserves of body fat (tens of thousands of calories at 9 kcal/gm). It also doesn’t hurt for optimizing body composition.

Yes, studies have consistently shown that lower carbs negatively impact performance. BUT these have all been done on folks who are not ketogenically adapted - that is, they haven’t shifted from primarily sugar-burning to ketone-burning over a 2-4 week (on average) window. Once that happens - and there are many, many studies cited in Volek and Phinney’s book - then the low carb “penalty” disappears and endurance is actually increased. That is what I’ve found with my recent efforts (1-2 hours): I start strong and finish strong. And I’m not famished during or afterward. I’m no longer dependent on sugar or carbs for energy. And If I go longer or need to supplement what glucose my body can produce naturally (through gluconeogenesis of protein), I take in using UCAN - a superstarch blend which exits the stomach quickly (relieving gastric upset) and digest slowly (resulting in very limited insulin reaction).

@Mark: BTW, I did look at Jesse’s blogs on Core Diet. I don’t know where he got the 1% benefit thing: that sounds like a total straw man. Also, “starvation workouts” are indeed dumb. It’s very clear that studies on non keto-adapted athletes WILL absolutely show a performance decline. Without a well developed ketogenic energy system, the body will catabolize or break down lean muscle protein in order to produce the glucose that is being demanded by elevated insulin levels. As Steve Phinney notes, his only mistake in the study that set him on this path 20 years ago was that he made the study duration (in highly trained cyclists) far too long (6 weeks vs 2 weeks).

Again, I’m not trying to convert anyone. I’m only trying to articulate the other side of the argument.

I saw this after replying to the other thread:

Any else "Fat Adapted"?

So let me elaborate here too. Here’s how I understand things after researching the topic:

• the human body can utilize two energy pathways: 
  • 1) glycogenic (sugar, carbs) and/or
  • 2) ketogenic (fats or more specifically fatty acids and ketones)
• insulin is the hormone responsible for breaking down glucose (blood sugar) and controlling fat - either storing in adipose tissue or releasing fatty acids
• due to our modern, habitual high intake of carbs and sugars (esp triathletes), we have acclimated to high insulin levels. This results in varying degrees of insulin resistance which could eventually lead to metabolic syndrome or even Type II diabetes.
• strictly limiting carbs for a period of 2-4 weeks (in most individuals) results in a lowering of basal insulin levels and an increase in insulin sensitivity. In compensation, there is an increase in the ketogenic enzymes required for energy utilization
• this is a benefit to athletes in that carbs used strategically during subsequent workouts or races are actually used *more* efficiently and you need less of them. This is because the body has only limited carb storage in the form of glycogen (about 2000 kcal at 4 kcal/gram) and even the leanest person has ample reserves of body fat (tens of thousands of calories at 9 kcal/gm). It also doesn’t hurt for optimizing body composition.

Yes, studies have consistently shown that lower carbs negatively impact performance. BUT these have all been done on folks who are not ketogenically adapted - that is, they haven’t shifted from primarily sugar-burning to ketone-burning over a 2-4 week (on average) window. Once that happens - and there are many, many studies cited in Volek and Phinney’s book - then the low carb “penalty” disappears and endurance is actually increased. That is what I’ve found with my recent efforts (1-2 hours): I start strong and finish strong. And I’m not famished during or afterward. I’m no longer dependent on sugar or carbs for energy. And If I go longer or need to supplement what glucose my body can produce naturally (through gluconeogenesis of protein), I take in using UCAN - a superstarch blend which exits the stomach quickly (relieving gastric upset) and digest slowly (resulting in very limited insulin reaction).

@Mark: BTW, I did look at Jesse’s blogs on Core Diet. I don’t know where he got the 1% benefit thing: that sounds like a total straw man. Also, “starvation workouts” are indeed dumb. It’s very clear that studies on non keto-adapted athletes WILL absolutely show a performance decline. Without a well developed ketogenic energy system, the body will catabolize or break down lean muscle protein in order to produce the glucose that is being demanded by elevated insulin levels. As Steve Phinney notes, his only mistake in the study that set him on this path 20 years ago was that he made the study duration (in highly trained cyclists) far too long (6 weeks vs 2 weeks).

Again, I’m not trying to convert anyone. I’m only trying to articulate the other side of the argument.

tim cronk

2 good articles posted by Mark Roberts from Jesse at QT2.... I like his theories behind the Core Diet , although I don't do the applesauce breakfast...

Also recommend Matt Fitzgerald's book "Diet Cults" .....

IMO this fat adapted , metabolic efficiency , ketogenic , carbohydrate-phobia has gotten out of control ! I hope everyone in my AG is on the bandwagon !

Stephanie Hartmann

I took the test last July and started working on becoming more efficient. It's working, but it was a lot of slow slow slow workouts! I don't eat any sugar, I don't eat anything made from or of wheat. I sleep now, it's heaven! I also have no more GI issues. I never could take gels so finding fuel was a challenge. Now it's pretty much UCAN, Vespa, and Quest bars. NUUN for electrolytes. It's fantastic to be off the sugar wagon. I rode 71 miles yesterday on a scoop of UCAN and a quest bar.