High mileage runners: are you always hungry?

runner39 wrote:

I have been doing 70+/week for the last few years and cannot lose weight, in the last month gained 5lbs, went to nutritionist and said I should be losing weight based on my daily food intake, but gain weight, no idea why?

having sleep problems, always tired, on iron supplement from Dr. because ferritin a little low (in last year ferritin has been - 29,61,47)

training and racing recently has been terrible, no idea why

get your thyroid checked out...it wouldn't hurt.

But in this scenario the person will lose muscle mass because 1) they are in an energy deficit, and 2) there is a negligible provision of dietary protein. Yes, they may gain fat, but they will definitely lose muscle mass (assuming they are not exercising). So, depending on the duration of the energy deficit, they will likely lose overall body mass.

You can't just assume that sugar and fat are the only dietary nutrients involved in body mass maintenance.

I run about 50mpw and have run sub 17min 5k's. I follow a running/eating schedule in 4day blocks. 4 days of high intense training, which I eat 2 big meals and some healthy snacks. The next 4 days, I act like I am on a diet( eat enough calories during the day to maintain) and run lower intensity with a rest day mixed in. This has worked well for me. I eat more when the training is high and less when low. I think you need to coordinate eating with training. The mind/body will get used to this if you stay consistent.

100 mpw and always hungry

Yes. I understand this... I guess I should say "Fat loss" and not simply "weight loss." I tend to use these interchangeably even though they're not equivalent. What I'm getting at is that starving (or operating at a calorie deficit) is not a sustainable approach to FAT LOSS because simply operating at a calorie deficit does not necessarily help you lose fat (although, it could help you lose body weight).

Hi, thanks for explaining your position. I'm finding it really interesting.

So accepting your conclusions what would happen to someone with a daily requirement of 2000kcal eating 2500kcal of protein/fat and zero carbs. Are you suggesting that person would not gain any fat in the medium term? Where would they gain weight?

I am doing about 90 a week and one of the biggest things is to make sure you get a really good mix of carbs and protein within 30 minutes of your runs. The protein will provide the full feeling you need. Throughout the day snack on healthy fats such as nut and nut products that will also provide a full feeling and provide adequate calories.

If you needed 3000 cal and ate 2500 cal you would lose weight, seems pretty simple to me. Would you be more healthy, no, but you would lose weight. YOu are talking short term bud, like for a week. But you cant hold a 500 cal deficit and not lose weight over a period of time.

Weight loss does not equal healthy living but eating less than you need will make you lose weight.

The problem is your metabolism will compensate for a lack of nutrition and your weight loss will level off.

What was the name of the coach who promoted this idea...Van Aaken

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=1150796&page=0

live inspired wrote:

I eat more when the training is high and less when low. I think you need to coordinate eating with training. The mind/body will get used to this if you stay consistent.

I agree with this, also eating before, during, and right after running, vs other parts of the day.

J.R. wrote:

live inspired wrote:

I eat more when the training is high and less when low. I think you need to coordinate eating with training. The mind/body will get used to this if you stay consistent.

I agree with this, also eating before, during, and right after running, vs other parts of the day.

During the run? Apart from eating useless gels how does this work?

Take an apple with you on a run. Eat it. It's fun. I did it one time becaue I was bored.

And the tinfoil hat brigade arrives in a hurray.

DrWatts wrote:

Hi, thanks for explaining your position. I'm finding it really interesting.

So accepting your conclusions what would happen to someone with a daily requirement of 2000kcal eating 2500kcal of protein/fat and zero carbs. Are you suggesting that person would not gain any fat in the medium term? Where would they gain weight?

No problem!

Well, that's a bit tricky when it comes to protein levels because certain amino acids are glucogenic (turned into sugar by the body in the absence of glucose) and thus stimulate an insulin response. I suppose in this case, it would be possible to increase fat. However, if a person is in a state of ketosis (which is not dangerous and often confused with ketoacidosis) then they are burning ketone bodies. The body cannot burn fat directly, so the body converts dietary fat, in the absence of carbohydrate, to ketone bodies. When not used, ketone bodies are lost through respiration, sweat and urination. This is essentially the Atkins Diet (pause for screaming!!!!)... and also the reason why people on low-carb diets may have bad breath. So, you can eat as much fat as you want and you will not gain fat weight. It's really that simple. This is why it's not about calories in v. out. Even if you are living with a calorie "surplus," you will not gain weight because those extra calories not used will simply be gotten rid of. Calories in v. out essentially assumes that the calories have to come out in the form of expended energy. We are not balloons; things that we ingest either become part of us or leave our bodies. The latter point, which seems very simple, is often forgotten/neglected by people when making their arguments. So, if you keep the calories from protein low, and ramp up the fat, you will not be able to gain fat without carbohydrate present.

This is a much more eloquently stated and far-more educated article about what I just said:

I can tell you that I am now always striving to stay in ketosis because I personally feel better mentally and emotionally... this is a realization I came to before doing any research on the mental effects of a ketogenic diet, but the research is now showing that it is essentially a cure (maybe too strong?) for Epilepsy and has disease modifying properties in neurodegenerative disorders such as Alzheimer's and Parkinson's. Some evidence is showing positive effects in the treatment of ADD... which I feel like I had a carb-induced version of my entire life. Eventually, I'd love to be part of a study to find any causative link between sugar consumption and ADD/ADHD. A ketogenic diet (high-fat/low-carb) has also been shown to have mood-stabilizing effects.

I was wondering if anyone could help me with something... I run a lot and I eat a lot just like the rest of you. I don't drink sodas or anything like that, I eat my vegetables yadda yadda. I'm 5'6 right now and I checked this morning and I'm at 107lbs. When summer started I was 116 so obviously i lost weight from running more, but still 116 is pretty lightweight. Anyone know what the hell is wrong with me?

I'd laugh if it wasn't so sad.

[/quote]...the research is now showing that it is essentially a cure (maybe too strong?) for Epilepsy [/quote]

It is too strong. And should be undertaken under a doctor's supervision.

NUTS motha f***a, eat dat shit upp!! High calorie, low in volume so you can eat a lot without feeling full and they have all that healthy fat and what not. I've benn at 100mpw for a bit and find that sweet and salty trail mixes with chocolate and almonds and peanuts and shit help a lot.

It is too strong. And should be undertaken under a doctor's supervision.[/quote]

I'm not sure if you're mocking me... but, if you are, then you can tell the Mayo Clinic, Johns Hopkins and these families that ketogenic diets aren't a cure for epilepsy:

Why don't doctors push for this? 1) They think that they're going to give their patient a heart attack (see earlier posts) and 2) There isn't much money to be made with ketogenic diets that aren't for weight loss purposes. However, there is a lot of money put into researching and prescribing drugs to treat diseases compared to diets to prevent them.

Also, a couple more testimonies here... in fact, the girl in the second video points out benefits that I am seeing as well (although, I don't have epilepsy):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OM6tktZAvxc&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8Zwto8q88U&feature=related

Formal Presentation by Dr. Eric Kossoff:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3tac5Gfd9Q&NR=1

Although these are anecdotal, the research is proving the benefits as well. Our bodies are meant to run on fat... not carbohydrate. Carbohydrate is not necessary even for aerobic performance.

http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/content/pdf/1743-7075-1-2.pdf

Try telling Gatorade that! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

CuriousC wrote:

Our bodies are meant to run on fat... not carbohydrate. Carbohydrate is not necessary even for aerobic performance.

http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/content/pdf/1743-7075-1-2.pdf

Try telling Gatorade that! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

But it is necessary for anaerobic performance. Glycolysis requires glucose. And you can't get glucose from glucogenic amino acids quick enough to sustain glycolytic rates needed for anaerobic performance. . .you need SOME dietary CHO.