Just a short post this week, seeing as I wrote so much last time. I'm still pondering over the possible advantages of switching to a diet that is lower in refined grains and contains more of the stuff we used to eat when humans lived in caves and hunted down their dinner. It contrasts so much with the conventional diet wisdom I learnt in my nutrition degree and my natural preference to be vegetarian, but the primal lifestyle still really intrigues me. After a year of feeling burnt out and not making much progress in my training goals, I'm especially drawn to Mark Sissons' idea of combining lots of moving around slowly with short bursts of intense activity and resistance training.
Although the peer-reviewed studies on eating like a caveman still seem to be sparse, more and more research is showing us that refined carbohydrate may be a bigger health villain than saturated fat. Frank Hu, of the Harvard School of Public Health, provided a useful overview in a recent editorial in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. Numerous studies on obesity treatment have shown that carbohydrate-restricted diets can be effective for weight loss and can reduce cardiovascular disease risk factors. While it's clear that we need plenty of carbohydrate to fuel optimal athletic performance, over reliance on post-ride cakes, sugary drinks and chewy sweets may not be doing our health any good at all. Even in vegetarians, it's looking more and more likely that a diet low in processed carbohydrate may be even more heart-healthy than standard high-carb, low fat veggie fayre.
So what does this mean for me? Do I get hypnosis to like meat, try to up my vegetarian protein intake, or simply ignore my curiosity and relax with a cup of tea and slice of cake? In the interests of science, and in the spirit of the old saying "don't knock it until you've tried it", I've decided to conduct a wee experiment in September. It's not very scientific (n=1, possibly 2 if I can rope my husband in; no control), but it should help me to work out what works best for me.
Starting tomorrow, my plan is to try following Mark's primal fitness blueprint and to minimise refined grains and sugar (what, no cake?!?). I'll keep it as simple as that to start with, then review how I feel at the end of the month, and maybe take it a step further, or maybe try something else.
Showing posts with label low carbohydrate. Show all posts
Showing posts with label low carbohydrate. Show all posts
Tuesday, 31 August 2010
Wednesday, 25 August 2010
Do you live in a cave?
As I mentioned in my last post, I'm slightly obsessed with reading. I can spend hours and hours researching random topics, and especially love delving into theories that challenge conventional nutrition and fitness wisdom. An ongoing fascination is low-fat versus low-carbohydrate diets. Initially popularised by the Atkins Diet, a low-carbohydrate diet can be very effective for weight loss, but the vast majority of sports nutrition advice and research concentrates on the importance of a high-carbohydrate, low-fat diet for optimal performance. However, this has recently been challenged through, for example, Loren Cordain's Paleo Diet for Athletes and blogs such as Mark's Daily Apple, which advocate a 'primal' way of living.
I've been vegetarian for over 20 years now with no major health effects, but I do sometimes worry that I'm not getting enough protein, or missing out on key nutrients from meat like iron and zinc. I came across another book by Brendan Brazier, a professional Ironman triathlete who is also a vegan, and decided to compare his Thrive Fitness plan to Mark Sisson's meat-heavy primal blueprint.
Interestingly, there are a lot of similarities between the two plans, once the presence or absence of animal products is set aside. These are the key principles, along with my thoughts:
Thrive Fitness
4 components of vitality:
High return exercise
Brazier seems to focus on quality of training rather than quantity, emphasizing the need to ensure that your programme is effective and that any weaknesses are addressed. He speaks about needing to strip his own swimming training right back to the basics after realising that his technique was inefficient. The book includes a fitness programme based on suspension training and free weights. So far, so sensible.
High net-gain nutrition
The nutrition advice is based on a diet high in nutrient-dense whole foods, which is music to my ears. Brazier's rationale for avoiding animal products is that they are acid-forming. He suggests that the process of buffering to balance the pH of the blood after eating acid-forming foods places undue stress on the body, which leads to inflammation. I wouldn't say that this in itself is enough of a reason to give up meat - eating a range of acid and alkaline-forming foods (vegetables) should balance things out overall. Brazier also advocates eating foods raw as much as possible. This is based on the theory that raw foods contain live enzymes, which are destroyed by cooking. My understanding is that enzymes in food are denatured by stomach acid anyway, and that our bodies can produce all the enzymes we need if we eat a balanced diet. I've hunted for research that supports or refutes the raw food enzyme theory but haven't been able to find anything in a peer-reviewed scientific journal - I would love to learn more about this if anyone has any references or links. My opinion is that the benefits of a diet high in fruit and vegetables come from the vitamins and phytonutrients (many of which can also be reduced by cooking) and their fibre content. I also think that the recipes in the book are a wee bit aspirational - I don't suppose you can get Maca, Salba or Dulse Flakes in Tesco?! Nevertheless, I'm definitely keen to give the recipe for Banana Fig Cinnamon Energy Bar a go.
Efficient sleep
I agree that this is hugely important in terms of both recovery from exercise and weight management.
Uncomplementary stress reduction
Brazier recommends that we avoid low-nutrition foods, breathing polluted air and worrying. Some of these are obviously unavoidable, but the principle does make sense.
Primal blueprint
10 rules:
Eat lots of animals, insects and plants
Hang on a minute... insects? Mind you, I think I've ingested a fair few insects myself this summer through open mouthed bike rides and runs. Glad to know they might be good for my health. Alongside a diet based around meat and fish, Sisson recommends that we eliminate grains, sugars, trans- and hydrogenated fats. On closer inspection, the diet isn't as wildly different to standard healthy eating recommendations as I initially thought. Around 1.1-2.2g of protein per kg body weight per day is similar to standard recommendations for athletes. This is attainable for most people, including vegetarians, without having to go out and hunt down a buffalo. The main difference between the two plans is the proportions of carbohydrate and fat in the diets. The primal plan is based on how our caveman ancestors ate, before processed grains were available. Naturally their diets were higher in saturated fat and vegetables, but contained much less carbohydrate overall. Sisson suggests that we should consume a maximum of around 150g carbohydrate per day, from fruit and vegetables, which is considerably lower than the approx 250g in current UK recommendations. The remainder of the diet is made up of fat, which we're used to being told to avoid. The underlying principle is that carbohydrate causes our bodies to release insulin, encouraging fat synthesis, while eating a high fat diet encourages our bodies to become more efficient at burning fat for fuel and conserving our glycogen stores. I agree that a diet high in refined and processed carbohydrates isn't optimal, but so far the balance of research suggests that high fat diets are detrimental to sports performance.
Move around a lot at a slow pace
Sisson seems to be quite anti-running and recommends that the bulk of our physical activity is low-level hiking, cycling and such like. He suggests 2-5 hours per week at a heart rate of 55-75% of our maximum. While this is more than the majority of the population currently do, it pretty much rules out spin classes and tempo runs for people like me who enjoy working hard. Hmm.
Lift heavy things
Like the Thrive plan, resistance training is an important component. This involves 2-3 circuit sessions a week, focused on body weight exercises like push ups and pull ups. I can handle that. And I definitely want to give the shoulder press push up a try.
Run really fast once in a while
A weekly session of very short sprints, e.g. 6 x 50m. This doesn't seem like very much compared to most training plans that are running or triathlon focused. According to Sisson, you can do this little training and still be ready to run a marathon at a day or two's notice. This contrasts markedly with the balance of evidence, which seems to suggest that more training is generally better, especially where distance running and cycling are concerned. But, in the interests of science, I'm willing to give it a go and see if it works.
Get lots of sleep
Again, I can't argue with that.
Play
And who doesn't like to have fun?
Get some sunlight every day
I wholeheartedly agree that getting out and about in the fresh air is vital, not just for your Vitamin D levels, but your whole sense of well-being.
Avoid trauma
I'll try.
Avoid poisonous things
Like Brazier's stresses, this includes environmental pollutants, but Sisson also includes sugar and processed foods. I wouldn't go as far as to describe them as poison, but yes they're worth cutting down on.
Use your mind
I think this can apply to learning new things, but also being conscious of your mind and body, looking after them and resting when you need to.
Overall, although I would say that I was initially sceptical of both these plans, they both contain some really useful advice and are definitely worth a read. Just follow some of the advice with a pinch of (low sodium?) salt, especially the bits where both authors plug their own expensive supplements.
My own opinion is that we can get everything we need by eating a wide range of foods - focusing on fruit, vegetables, good quality protein (whether veggie or meat) and whole grains. There's no compelling evidence that grains are bad for us and, in fact, some of them (wheat and quinoa being good examples) contain high levels of protein. My diet downfall has to be my love of sugary things, rather than the fact that I'm a vegetarian. And as for the iron, I know I can get enough from veggie sources if I plan my diet properly. So I won't be scoffing steak any time soon, but I will keep trying to go easy on the iron inhibiters. I'm still managing to avoid my favourite drink, but there have been one or two tea-lapses.
I've been vegetarian for over 20 years now with no major health effects, but I do sometimes worry that I'm not getting enough protein, or missing out on key nutrients from meat like iron and zinc. I came across another book by Brendan Brazier, a professional Ironman triathlete who is also a vegan, and decided to compare his Thrive Fitness plan to Mark Sisson's meat-heavy primal blueprint.
Interestingly, there are a lot of similarities between the two plans, once the presence or absence of animal products is set aside. These are the key principles, along with my thoughts:
Thrive Fitness
4 components of vitality:
High return exercise
Brazier seems to focus on quality of training rather than quantity, emphasizing the need to ensure that your programme is effective and that any weaknesses are addressed. He speaks about needing to strip his own swimming training right back to the basics after realising that his technique was inefficient. The book includes a fitness programme based on suspension training and free weights. So far, so sensible.
High net-gain nutrition
The nutrition advice is based on a diet high in nutrient-dense whole foods, which is music to my ears. Brazier's rationale for avoiding animal products is that they are acid-forming. He suggests that the process of buffering to balance the pH of the blood after eating acid-forming foods places undue stress on the body, which leads to inflammation. I wouldn't say that this in itself is enough of a reason to give up meat - eating a range of acid and alkaline-forming foods (vegetables) should balance things out overall. Brazier also advocates eating foods raw as much as possible. This is based on the theory that raw foods contain live enzymes, which are destroyed by cooking. My understanding is that enzymes in food are denatured by stomach acid anyway, and that our bodies can produce all the enzymes we need if we eat a balanced diet. I've hunted for research that supports or refutes the raw food enzyme theory but haven't been able to find anything in a peer-reviewed scientific journal - I would love to learn more about this if anyone has any references or links. My opinion is that the benefits of a diet high in fruit and vegetables come from the vitamins and phytonutrients (many of which can also be reduced by cooking) and their fibre content. I also think that the recipes in the book are a wee bit aspirational - I don't suppose you can get Maca, Salba or Dulse Flakes in Tesco?! Nevertheless, I'm definitely keen to give the recipe for Banana Fig Cinnamon Energy Bar a go.
Efficient sleep
I agree that this is hugely important in terms of both recovery from exercise and weight management.
Uncomplementary stress reduction
Brazier recommends that we avoid low-nutrition foods, breathing polluted air and worrying. Some of these are obviously unavoidable, but the principle does make sense.
Primal blueprint
10 rules:
Eat lots of animals, insects and plants
Hang on a minute... insects? Mind you, I think I've ingested a fair few insects myself this summer through open mouthed bike rides and runs. Glad to know they might be good for my health. Alongside a diet based around meat and fish, Sisson recommends that we eliminate grains, sugars, trans- and hydrogenated fats. On closer inspection, the diet isn't as wildly different to standard healthy eating recommendations as I initially thought. Around 1.1-2.2g of protein per kg body weight per day is similar to standard recommendations for athletes. This is attainable for most people, including vegetarians, without having to go out and hunt down a buffalo. The main difference between the two plans is the proportions of carbohydrate and fat in the diets. The primal plan is based on how our caveman ancestors ate, before processed grains were available. Naturally their diets were higher in saturated fat and vegetables, but contained much less carbohydrate overall. Sisson suggests that we should consume a maximum of around 150g carbohydrate per day, from fruit and vegetables, which is considerably lower than the approx 250g in current UK recommendations. The remainder of the diet is made up of fat, which we're used to being told to avoid. The underlying principle is that carbohydrate causes our bodies to release insulin, encouraging fat synthesis, while eating a high fat diet encourages our bodies to become more efficient at burning fat for fuel and conserving our glycogen stores. I agree that a diet high in refined and processed carbohydrates isn't optimal, but so far the balance of research suggests that high fat diets are detrimental to sports performance.
Move around a lot at a slow pace
Sisson seems to be quite anti-running and recommends that the bulk of our physical activity is low-level hiking, cycling and such like. He suggests 2-5 hours per week at a heart rate of 55-75% of our maximum. While this is more than the majority of the population currently do, it pretty much rules out spin classes and tempo runs for people like me who enjoy working hard. Hmm.
Lift heavy things
Like the Thrive plan, resistance training is an important component. This involves 2-3 circuit sessions a week, focused on body weight exercises like push ups and pull ups. I can handle that. And I definitely want to give the shoulder press push up a try.
Run really fast once in a while
A weekly session of very short sprints, e.g. 6 x 50m. This doesn't seem like very much compared to most training plans that are running or triathlon focused. According to Sisson, you can do this little training and still be ready to run a marathon at a day or two's notice. This contrasts markedly with the balance of evidence, which seems to suggest that more training is generally better, especially where distance running and cycling are concerned. But, in the interests of science, I'm willing to give it a go and see if it works.
Get lots of sleep
Again, I can't argue with that.
Play
And who doesn't like to have fun?
Get some sunlight every day
I wholeheartedly agree that getting out and about in the fresh air is vital, not just for your Vitamin D levels, but your whole sense of well-being.
Avoid trauma
I'll try.
Avoid poisonous things
Like Brazier's stresses, this includes environmental pollutants, but Sisson also includes sugar and processed foods. I wouldn't go as far as to describe them as poison, but yes they're worth cutting down on.
Use your mind
I think this can apply to learning new things, but also being conscious of your mind and body, looking after them and resting when you need to.
Overall, although I would say that I was initially sceptical of both these plans, they both contain some really useful advice and are definitely worth a read. Just follow some of the advice with a pinch of (low sodium?) salt, especially the bits where both authors plug their own expensive supplements.
My own opinion is that we can get everything we need by eating a wide range of foods - focusing on fruit, vegetables, good quality protein (whether veggie or meat) and whole grains. There's no compelling evidence that grains are bad for us and, in fact, some of them (wheat and quinoa being good examples) contain high levels of protein. My diet downfall has to be my love of sugary things, rather than the fact that I'm a vegetarian. And as for the iron, I know I can get enough from veggie sources if I plan my diet properly. So I won't be scoffing steak any time soon, but I will keep trying to go easy on the iron inhibiters. I'm still managing to avoid my favourite drink, but there have been one or two tea-lapses.
Monday, 13 April 2009
Are carbs evil?
Whilst browsing B's cycling magazines, I came across an(other) article about the potential benefites of a reduced carbohydrate diet. Apparently, Team Garmin-Slipstream are following a modified version of The Zone, designed to reduce inflammation and promote recovery. This is controversial given that for years athletes have been advised to get most of their energy from carbohydrate. Brands like Lucozade and Gatorade have been built on a mountain of scientific evidence that backs the importance of carbohydrate for athletic performance.
The people at Cycling Weekly seem to have really bought into the idea that a different way of eating - focusing on protein, vegetables, fruit and nuts for most of the day whilst continuing to use sports drinks immediately before, after and during training - could be optimal for reducing inflammation and promoting recovery. I'm not convinced by Dr Loren Cordain and Joe Friel's Paleo Diet - eat like our ancestors, who foraged for seeds and berries, barbecued the occasional buffalo... then popped down to their local supplement store for a few energy gels and a jumbo tub of whey protein(?) -but I can see the potential benefit of limiting refined carbohydrates like white bread, cereals and processed sugary drinks in favour of whole-grains, lean protein, essential fats and, of course, lots of fruit and vegetables.
Surely it's all about balance. It has got me thinking though - a quick scan of our cupboards flagged up our over-reliance on carbs: bread, bagels, cereal, oat bars, potatoes, pasta and juice. I've spoken before about not eating enough protein and wonder if my carb (over)loading could be one of the reasons why my injuries seem to take so long to recover from. Could it be possible that a move away from the traditional focus on carbohydrate could be beneficial for sport? I guess the jury is still out - until now, much of the research on reduced-carbohydrate diets has focused on treating obesity.
A recent article in the New England Journal of Medicine indicated that over 2 years, diets containing a range of proportions of carbohydrate versus protein were all similarly effective in reducing weight and risk factors for diabetes and heart disease - they key appeared to be limiting overall energy intake. The authors suggest that diet composition should be tailored to suit individual and cultural preferences.
I could never cut out carbohydrates completely. I couldn't even ban them after 5pm (what's that all about?). But I'm starting to think about experimenting with shifting the balance a bit. I'll certainly be watching how Team Garmin-Slipstream get on in this year's Tour de France.
The people at Cycling Weekly seem to have really bought into the idea that a different way of eating - focusing on protein, vegetables, fruit and nuts for most of the day whilst continuing to use sports drinks immediately before, after and during training - could be optimal for reducing inflammation and promoting recovery. I'm not convinced by Dr Loren Cordain and Joe Friel's Paleo Diet - eat like our ancestors, who foraged for seeds and berries, barbecued the occasional buffalo... then popped down to their local supplement store for a few energy gels and a jumbo tub of whey protein(?) -but I can see the potential benefit of limiting refined carbohydrates like white bread, cereals and processed sugary drinks in favour of whole-grains, lean protein, essential fats and, of course, lots of fruit and vegetables.
Surely it's all about balance. It has got me thinking though - a quick scan of our cupboards flagged up our over-reliance on carbs: bread, bagels, cereal, oat bars, potatoes, pasta and juice. I've spoken before about not eating enough protein and wonder if my carb (over)loading could be one of the reasons why my injuries seem to take so long to recover from. Could it be possible that a move away from the traditional focus on carbohydrate could be beneficial for sport? I guess the jury is still out - until now, much of the research on reduced-carbohydrate diets has focused on treating obesity.
A recent article in the New England Journal of Medicine indicated that over 2 years, diets containing a range of proportions of carbohydrate versus protein were all similarly effective in reducing weight and risk factors for diabetes and heart disease - they key appeared to be limiting overall energy intake. The authors suggest that diet composition should be tailored to suit individual and cultural preferences.
I could never cut out carbohydrates completely. I couldn't even ban them after 5pm (what's that all about?). But I'm starting to think about experimenting with shifting the balance a bit. I'll certainly be watching how Team Garmin-Slipstream get on in this year's Tour de France.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)