High Intensity, Low Volume Training for Optimal Health; Low Dose Caffeine for Mixed Results; Four Commandments of Concomitant Endurance & Strength Training for Max. Gains

It doesn't matter if you want to turn fat into fit, fit into fitter or strong into stronger. Today's SuppVersity science potpourri has something to offer for every physical culturist who is looking for ways to improve his health, performance and physique and for trainers and coaches who work with this challenging clientele.

In view of the fact that the last news-potpourri on appetite related scientific studies was a major success, I thought it may be worth writing another of these long-neglected short-news items. This time about exercise and supplementation, though.

You may already have seen the link to Stuart Philipps latest "Review of Higher Dietary Protein Diets in Weight Loss" with a "A Focus on Athletes" on Facebook. For those of you who have been following the SuppVersity News there's probably little new information in the document, though. When I read the paragraph about optimal protein intakes for maximal muscle retention, I still thought that it may be worth to remind you of the results of the Pasiokos study which clearly suggest that eating more protein is not always going to increase the net protein retention when you are dieting.

You can learn more about protein intake at the SuppVersity

Protein Timing DOES Matter!

5x More Than the FDA Allows!

Protein requ. of athletes

High EAA protein for fat loss

Protein Won't Stop Catabolism

Less Fat, More Muscle!

A fact that brings me back to Philipps' review in which he points out that dieters commonly overlook that any increase in protein intake will go at the expense of either fat or carbohydrate. A "side effect" that could be particularly problematic for athletes, for whom Philipps recommends (just like I do) "to balance the increase in protein consumption with what macronutrient is reduced" (Phillips. 2014). In particular, athletes should "focus on reducing intakes of lipids to allow carbohydrate intakes to achieve performance" (Phillips. 2014).

After this brief introductory interlude, I would like to get to the actual topic at hand, a brief overview of a couple of interesting, but not exactly "full-article worthy" papers from the realms of exercise, nutrition and supplementation:

• Low volume, high intensity the exercise key to perfect health? A recent paper in the latest edition of Sports Medicine reviewed the health benefits of two different low volume exercise regimen: The classic sprint interval training (black spikes in Figure 1) and a HIIT protocol (grey bars in Figure 1).
  
  The researchers from the McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, highlight that the currently available evidence is largely based on short-term interventions. And while long(er)-term interventions would be needed to " to advance our basic understanding of how manipulating the exercise stimulus translates into physiological remodeling" (Gibala. 2014), it can already be said that...

  

  Figure 1: Comparison of the power output (% of VO2peak) during sprint interval training (SIT, black peaks), high intensity interval training (HIIT, grey bars) and moderate intenstity continuous training (MICT, striped box)

  "[f]rom an applied perspective, there is value in trying to establish the minimum ‘dose’ of HIIT or SIT needed to stimulate meaningful improvements in clinical markers that are associated with disease risk.
  
  This is particularly germane given that ‘lack of time’ remains the most commonly cited barrier to regular exercise participation, and considering evidence that suggests that low-volume interval training is perceived to be more enjoyable than MICT." (Gibala. 2014)

  As Gibala et al. point out, there is also evidence that nutritional interventions can influence both acute and chronic adaptations to interval training - with one of my personal favorites, i.e. sodium bicarbonate being the #1 candidate to among the "interval-specific" ergogenics that are currently available on the market (learn why).

  

  Figure 2: Everything works, as long as you pick the right type of exercise for your type.

  Moreover, as suggested by van Loon and Tipton (van Loon. 2013), the significantly greater adaptation efficiency compared to "regular" steady state cardio training has clinical relevance, especially for individuals with severe exercise intolerance.
• Low dose caffeine (200mg) not effective for everyone - A recent study from the University of Guelph found that low doses of caffeine (<3 mg/kg body mass, ~200 mg) can be ergogenic in some exercise and sport situations, but for most athletes they will not alter the peripheral wholebody responses to exercise, or improve vigilance, alertness, and mood and cognitive processes during and after exercise.
  
  

  

  Figure 3: Effects of ingesting no caffeine (0) or 3, 6 or 9 mg/kg body mass of caffeine (dose) on running time to exhaustion at ~85 % of VO2max (Graham. 1995).

  In view of the fact that low dose caffeine regimen are also "associated with few, if any, side effects" (Spriet. 2014), and generally depend on an athletes individual response to caffeine, Lawrence L. Spriet still suggests that athletes should "determine whether the ingestion of ~200 mg of caffeine before and/or during training and competition is ergogenic on an individual basis" (Spriet. 2014); and, assuming that it is, make use of the lowest effective dose, of which the data in Figure 3 clearly indicates that it is not necessarily the one with the lowest performance benefits.
• Science-Based Recommendations for Training to Maximize Concurrent Training - Right from the desk of Keith Baar comes a set of recommendations to maximize the benefits of concomitant training, i.e. combined / sequential endurance and strength training that consists of a set of four tips:
  
  • Do HIIT in the AM: Any high-intensity endurance training sessions should be performed early in the day. Then, a period of recovery of at least 3 h should be given, so that AMPK and SIRT1 activity can return to baseline levels, before resistance exercise is performed. This suggestion is based on the fact that AMPK activity increases rapidly and then returns to baseline levels within the first 3 h after high-intensity exercise (Wojtaszewski. 2000), whereas mTORC1 activity can be maintained for at least 18 h after resistance exercise (Baar. 1999; MacKenzie. 2009).

  • 

    Build 3.2kg of lean mass overnight w/ 40g of casein pre-bed | learn more.

    Drink your whey protein shake right after your strength workout: Resistance exercise should be supported by readily digestible, leucine-rich protein as soon as possible after training to maximize leucine uptake, mTOR recruitment to the lysosome, and protein synthesis.
    
    In view of the fact that Baar recommends to do your RT sessions later in the day, it is also advisable to consume another protein shake right before bed to maximize the synthetic response overnight (learn more).
  • Fully refuel between the morning high-intensity endurance training session and the afternoon strength session: It's not going to reduce the exercise induced increase in AMPK and SIRT1 activation, but will allow you to perform at maximal intensity during your resistance training session later in the day.
    
    As Baar points, out athletes who have to diet during certain phases of their training cycle should make sure to "reserve a portion of the offseason (and short periods in season) exclusively for increasing muscle size and strength and then use higher dietary protein intakes to maintain that muscle mass as the aerobic load increases through the season" (Baar. 2014).
  • If you do low-intensity cardio, do your resistance training right after cardio: To improve the endurance response to lower-intensity endurance training sessions and provide a strong strength stimulus, Baar recommends performing strength training immediately after low-intensity, non-depleting, endurance sessions.
    
    Performing a strength session immediately after a low-intensity endurance session results in a greater stimulus for endurance adaptation than the low-intensity endurance session alone (Wang. 2011) and the low-intensity session will not affect signaling pathways regulating strength gains (Coffey. 2009; Lundberg. 2012; Apró. 2013).
  At first, these rrecommendations may sound somewhat random. If you take a closer look at the long paper, you will yet have to concede that the simple recommendations are based on our current understanding of the molecular response to exercise. In that, they should allow for the maximal adaptive response to both endurance and strength exercise.
  

Figure 4: Using the above data on the muscle protein synthetic response to 20g of various types of protein as an example, a recent review of the protein recommendations for the aging population highlights the need for 30-40g of fast digesting protein after workouts (Wall. 2014)

Bottom line: I hope there has been at least something new in today's SuppVersity short-news round-up you found useful. Maybe the overview in Figure 2 helps you determine the optimal exercise protocol for a new client? Maybe the four principles of combined endurance and strength training help you to take your training to the next level? Or, maybe, the reference to the Phillips study made you rethink your own protein intake?

I mean, have you ever thought of determining the optimal protein intake on a "per meal" basis? I always suggest 30g+ of quality high EAA protein (whey, casein, fish, meat, chicken, pea, soy) per meal - that's somewhat more than the 2.5g/meal Phillips suggest but still significantly less than some wanna-be bodybuilders consume in their futile effort to counter the anti-anabolic effects of exercise (learn why this won't work) while compromising their exercise performance by cutting back on fats and more importantly carbohydrates | Comment on Facebook!

References:

• Apró, William, et al. "Resistance exercise induced mTORC1 signaling is not impaired by subsequent endurance exercise in human skeletal muscle." American Journal of Physiology-Endocrinology and Metabolism 305.1 (2013): E22-E32.
• Baar, Keith, and Karyn Esser. "Phosphorylation of p70S6kcorrelates with increased skeletal muscle mass following resistance exercise." American Journal of Physiology-Cell Physiology 276.1 (1999): C120-C127. 
• Coffey, Vernon G., et al. "Consecutive bouts of diverse contractile activity alter acute responses in human skeletal muscle." Journal of applied physiology 106.4 (2009): 1187-1197.
• Graham, T. E., and L. L. Spriet. "Metabolic, catecholamine, and exercise performance responses to various doses of caffeine." Journal of Applied Physiology 78.3 (1995): 867-874. 
• Lundberg, Tommy R., et al. "Aerobic exercise alters skeletal muscle molecular responses to resistance exercise." Medicine and science in sports and exercise 44.9 (2012): 1680-1688.
• Pasiakos, Stefan M., et al. "Effects of high-protein diets on fat-free mass and muscle protein synthesis following weight loss: a randomized controlled trial." The FASEB Journal 27.9 (2013): 3837-3847.
• van Loon, Luc JC, and Kevin D. Tipton. "Concluding Remarks: Nutritional Strategies to Support the Adaptive Response to Prolonged Exercise Training." (2013): 135-141. 
• Wall, et al. "Dietary Protein Considerations to Support Active Aging." Sports Med (2014) 44 (Suppl 2):S185–S194.
• Wang, Li, et al. "Resistance exercise enhances the molecular signaling of mitochondrial biogenesis induced by endurance exercise in human skeletal muscle." Journal of applied physiology 111.5 (2011): 1335-1344.
• Wojtaszewski, Jørgen FP, et al. "Isoform-specific and exercise intensity-dependent activation of 5′-AMP-activated protein kinase in human skeletal muscle." The Journal of physiology 528.1 (2000): 221-226.

A Spooky Workout

Last night I attended a Tri-Shark indoor trainer ride. It was hosted in a local bike store and it was a ton of fun. One of the sharks had worked out a "spooky" Halloween playlist with songs like "The Time Warp" and "Sweet Dreams" by Marilyn Manson (which maybe is spooky to some people, but is just "Tuesday on the way to work" for me most days...maybe I'm spooky?). Another shark made Halloween cupcakes for after the ride. It was a great time of course, but there is a bit more to the story.


So there we were, indoors, peddling and sweating. I was heads down 4 minutes into an interval in my 50x13 when I had a bit of a flash back.

In 2007 I was a light 330 pounds, down from 380 and I started looking for my first outdoor bike. I went around to a few local bike stores in town shopping. One of them was particularly helpful and they started talking to me about how they could build out the back wheel to handle my weight and avoid pinch flats. While I didn't buy a bike from them in the long run, I appreciated their understanding and willingness to help me get on two wheels.

That store in my memory also happened to be my current location. I couldn't help but smile as I remembered that first trip to this store. I was very proud to be here, peddling with these people in this place. Yeah, I'm skinnier and that’s cool, but there is so much more for me to be thankful for in how far I've come. I've learned to overcome setbacks and disappointment, to suffer through pain and persevere, and to live in the moment (ok, I have a lot to learn with that last one still). There are so many other things I've learned about healthy minds and healthy bodies along the way that living this lifestyle has taught me.

It seems appropriate that I was haunted by a memory like this on Halloween, and perhaps almost cliché that I would want to thank my ghosts for chasing me along my path forward.

How To Lose A Couple Hundred Pounds

 Hey everyone, I don't have much time at the moment, but I wanted to get this link up.  Fitness guru, personal trainer, and Ironman triathlete Ben Greenfield interviewed me on his most recent podcast.  I'm a fan of Ben's and I was really honored to be interviewed by him.

The Interview is extremely personal.  It's one thing to write about weight loss, or post some before and after pictures, but to talk about my fears, how I felt, and what life was like before...well, it was hard to talk about and hard to listen to.  It's important though.  Obesity is a problem and it's one we need to talk about.  People need to know that you can live through it.  Anyway, please be sure to give my interview a listen...

How To Lose A Couple Hundred Pounds

A Nice Round Number

I've been hitting 180 pounds on and off for a few weeks now in some less hydrated states, but during my normal morning weigh in this morning the scale informed me I was 180 pounds.

So...that's a nice even 200 pounds lost. Pretty cool!

Before And "In Progress"

It's not easy to share this, or even look at myself at my old weight, but I'm going to be brave and share a before and "In Progress" picture. Not after, not yet, I have a long way to go. I've come pretty far though, 115 lbs to be precise.

Kids, Diet, Exercise, and “Maggie Goes On A Diet”

So, there is this book called “Maggie Goes On A Diet,” according to amazon targeted at kids 4 to 8, about a 14 year old girl that goes on a diet, joins the soccer team, and loses weight.  It’s causing a big stir.  I’m not normally a “blog about the news” kinda blogger, and to be honest, with IM coming up, I have better stuff to do…but this one has been weighing heavily on my conscious (pun totally intended).  I haven’t read the book, so clearly I’m judging a book by its cover.  With that disclaimer, my feelings are mixed on the book.  I dig that Maggie does something fun to be active by joining a soccer team.    I don’t like the idea of Maggie on a diet.  I’m all about talking about the goodness of good foods with kids, but not a fan of talking about the badness of foods, or shame, or guilt…  If only the book was called “Maggie learns about how great eating good things makes you feel.”

My Early Lessons On Food

I think I was 8 or 9?  Third grade.  There was this little store not far from my house, it was called Mitchell’s.  We’d go there and it was a common treat for me to get a candy bar when we did.   Eventually I came to expect the candy bar, it was habit.  Not such a great habit for the fat kid, a hat I had been wearing since grade 2 at the time.  So anyway, I’m standing in the kitchen.  Today is different.  Mom is turning over the Hershey bar in my hands, and pointing at the nutritional information.  She pointed out that the bar had over 200 calories in it, which seemed to upset her.  I didn’t really know why.  She was upset with me for wanting it, but handed it to me anyway.  I was…I guess ashamed.  Eating the candy made me feel better.  Calories, chocolate bars, nutritional information, shame for disappointing my parents, comfort in food.  This was my first lesson in nutrition.

I was not quite 10 for my next lesson.  It was 1986, I know because I remember “Walk Like an Egyptian” by the Bangles on the radio…odd the things that stick in a kid’s head.  Yup, still the fat kid.  I’m not sure why, but my parents decided to introduce me to exercise.  The next thing I remember is running around the soccer field at Garnsey Park in Joliet, IL, near the house I grew up in.  Dad told me my butt was sticking out when I ran…which was very true, and something I still struggle with…but it made me feel even more terrible at the time, since I had no idea how to fix it.  I couldn’t keep up.  I eventually just walked.    Running wasn’t fun, but it was clear that it wasn’t supposed to be.  It was punishment, for being fat.   This was my first lesson in exercise. 

Parenting and Healthy Living

So, now I have a 7 year old.  He does not have a weight problem, and I’m hoping to teach him things now that will keep that from happening later.  But it’s hard.  I had a weight problem.  I have a food addiction.  He sees my struggle with food every day.  Just like my early lessons were heavily based on my parents relationship with food.  I hope what I teach him will help prepare him to make healthy choices.  I hope the example I’m setting is a good one. 

 I think I’ve got the exercise thing down.  William and I run together regularly, and the fun always comes first.  If he walks, I walk.  If he sprints, I do.  We've done a 5k together, and he won his age group.  To William, running is fun.  Running makes us feel good.   We run just for the joy of running.  The only relationship we have between running and food is the idea that eating good things helps us run even faster. 

Food is harder.  At mom’s house there are poptarts for breakfast.  At Dad’s house those aren’t available.  He isn’t totally sure why.  We always want a chocolate chip cookie, but we only get one sometimes.  Cookies are a sometimes food, but he isn’t totally sure why.  We try to eat veggies with every meal, but French Fries aren’t veggies at Dad’s house.  Confusion.  But then, I hear him say stuff like  “Dad, this has good calories for me.”   Last night we were talking about where to go for dinner, and he said “I don’t care, what works best for your calories,” which is something he would hear in our house a lot as I struggle to balance the daily energy needs of an endurance athlete with the structure I put in place to keep the fat guy I was at bay.   It’s the reality of my life, but in a way it breaks my heart to hear him say it.  I hate that he has to live in a world where food is carefully measured, weighed, and evaluated.  It’s a world tanted by my demons. 

So, I guess I’m glad that Maggie learned to play soccer and eat healthy food.  I’m sad she changed based on her bad feelings about herself and I don’t think that really works as a sole reason for change, at least it never did for me.  Clearly, food and exercise are topics that we need to teach our children about as parents.  We have to lead the way for them.  Childhood Obesity is at 17% now.  It’s a problem and it’s time to wake up. 

But for the 4-8 year olds out there, and for the rest of us too, I think we’d do well to keep the message positive.   Eating well and exercising are great things, not punishments or restrictions to how we live. 

High Water Mark

Sorry for the lack of updates, I've honestly been way too busy to blog lately. So here's the story for now:The Chicago Oly is on 8/30, which is 12 days away. I have been training ALOT. In fact, last week was the high water mark of said training. Last week’s training looked like this:

Monday: Bike 23 Miles

Tues: Ran 4.65 Miles AM / Swam 1500M PM

Wed: Ran 2 Miles Noon / Swam 2800M Open Water

Thurs: Ran 6.01 Miles

Fri: Off

Sat: Bike 42.5 Miles

Sun: Ran 7.27 Miles

Total Swim: 4300M

Total Bike: 65.5 M

Total Run: 20 M

Total Training Hours: 10

Here is the thing about training 10 hours a week though. It isn't really 10. Add in all the time you spend going to and from the pool/pond, bike maintenance time, recovery time, etc and this becomes a major time commitment. While this was the high volume week for my current plan, it will be "just another week" in a 70.3 plan, which makes me nervous about taking things to the next level in 2010. We will see about that, but the September Mattoon half ironman is a strong possibility at this point.

Another trick to maintaining this level of training is getting enough nutrition and sleep. If you mess up either (or both) of those you might keep it together for a day, but you won't keep it together for a week... I've found that one out the hard way. I'm almost there though... One more week and triathlon season 1 will be at a close. I'm very much looking forward to November's half marathon. The running focus will be great for me, the intensity will be much lower, and cutting back to 6 workouts a week will feel like heaven. Just trying to hold it together a little longer at this point…

Just Another Morning Run

Monday Morning. 5:00 AM. I stumble out of bed, put my running shoes on, and get ready to go. I'm moving on instinct and duty, hoping the desire to run will come. I quickly eat a banana, and make my way out the door. It's freezing, dark, and deathly quiet. My GPS beeps on and locks onto some satellites and I'm off.

This is what it is to be a triathlete. Race day isn't where you find glory; it's on the average every day runs. I do it when I don't feel like it, when it's hot, when it's cold, when it's dark. I did it the day I got divorced, the day I lost my house, and the days when every bit of hope seemed gone from the world.

5:30 AM. The sun is rising and I'm about half way through my run. I feel good. Really good. I'm glad to be out running this morning, because it means I'll be able to fit in a full swim work out and weights tonight. The hardest part of training for multisport is that there are more workouts to do than there are times to workout.

5:40 AM. The sunrise is really amazing. My thoughts are never far away from Lana, but I take a mental note of how beautiful the world is, and wish that she was here with me. She so deeply appreciates the beauty of the world around us, which is one of the many things I admire about her. I smile at this realization, and hope that, since she can't be here, she is warm and safe in bed and is feeling just how loved and cherished she is. I grin again, knowing I'm very lucky to have her in my life... Training is meditative and provides an opportunity to have some time to yourself to clear your mind, and reflect on your life. My body comes back healthier, but possibly more importantly, so does my mind. Every time I train I'm swimming, biking, and running towards the person I was meant to be.

6:00 AM. I'm back at home in time for a shower and breakfast. Maybe this was just another morning run, but there is nothing mundane about it. Every training run is an event, and they're all important.

Check Up

One of my least favorite things to do is go to the doctor. Unfortunately I had to go a few days ago. I wasn't looking forward to it...

When I got there I did the normal weight/vitals stuff and then waited for the doctor. The doctor did his normal doctor stuff, and then, with a huge smile, shook my hand. He told me that what I did was pretty unusual and a very big deal, and pointed out that my heart rate was as low at rest as any athlete he has ever seen (at 60 as I sat on the table, which was high for me), my blood pressure was exactly where it should be (124/70), and I had lost about 60 pounds since my last visit.

He told me he was relocating and wished me luck. On the way out of the office I shook his hand again, and told him good luck in his new position. He stopped me by the nurses station and announced "this gentleman has lost 195 pounds with just diet and exercise." The entire office stopped, and patients, nurses, and other health care type workers all applauded me. It was a little embarassing, but very cool. It beats a prostate exam any day... :)

Bulking Done Right: What Can the Latest 100 Day +1,000 Kcal/day Overfeeding Study Tell Us About How Baseline Fitness, Fatness, Hormones & More Affect the Outcome

Bulking!? What is it that will keep the veins popping, the waist circumference level and your muscle growing? It is your basal metabolic rate? Your body fat level? Your muscle mass? Your fiber type composition? Or maybe your cardio-respiratory fitness?

If you have listened to the latest installment of the Science Round Up you will know that there is very practical reason why you want to avoid "classic dirty bulking", with an increased formation of body fat: the accompanying changes to the structure of your adipose organ - the increase in adipopocyte number and thus the touted reason for the future weight problems (listen to the show to learn more). But let's phase it a certain degree of "overfeeding" is actually necessary to make gains, so the question, which factors there are to predict the changes in body composition and body energy in response to chronic overfeeding is a question that's of equal importance for the lean physical culturist as it is for the obese child of the fast food generation. And you know what? This is exactly the question a soon-to-be-published paper by scientist from the Pennington Biomedical Research Center and the Laval University is dealing with.

Twin power vs. heterogenity

As Bouchard, Tchernof and Tremblay rightly point out, "human heterogeneity in the response to the much described “obesogenic environment” created by affluent societies represents a critical aspect of the obesity epidemic" (Bouchard. 2013) And while this is certainly right it is, from a scientist's perspective, a huge problem. After all, we want to study the influence of a given parameter in isolation.

Twin studies can provide us with pairs of subjects where these inter-individual differences are minimized and while the focus of previous observational studies has been on the hitherto more or less fruitless and above all practically 100% irrelevant (what does it help you to know that you are "at risk" of getting obese) identification of genotype-overfeeding interaction, Bouchard et al. are

"[...]taking advantage of the extensive panel of pre-overfeeding traits to investigate the most parsimonious predictors of the gains in body mass, FM, FFM, and total body energy (BE), with a particular focus on the partitioning of the energy gains between adipose and lean tissues." (Bouchard. 2013)

The goal is to identify biomarkers of body composition changes in response to chronic overfeeding may allow us to develop new hypotheses about the endogenous (genetic) and environmental causes of human heterogeneity in the response to chronic overfeeding.

Figure 1: Factors that predispose to weight & fat gain on a caloric surplus (adapted from Bouchard. 2013)

In a previously published paper, the researchers have already reported that their subjects, 24 young lean men (12 pairs of identical twins) exhibited individual differences in body weight and composition gains in response to a standardized 353 MJ (84 000 kcal) overfeeding protocol over 100 days

"The mean (+SD) gains in fat mass (FM) and fat-free mass (FFM) were 5.4+1.9 kg and 2.7+1.5 kg for a total body energy (BE) gain of 221+75 MJ representing 63% of the energy surplus consumed." (Buchard. 2013)

In this follow up publication, Buchard et al. were now taking a closer look at the most important baseline correlates of these overfeeding-induced changes with the aim of identifying biomarkers of the response.

"From 16 to 8% body fat" a cross-fitesque training-style may be right for those with high baseline fitness (learn more).

"The subjects were studied eight at a time (four pairs of twins) over a period of 18 months. Subjects were housed in a closed section of a dormitory on the campus of Laval University 24-hour supervision.

Each subject stayed in the unit for 120 days, which included a 14-day baseline observation period, a 3-day pre-overfeeding testing period, a 100-day experimental overfeeding treatment, and a 3-day post-overfeeding testing period." (Buchard. 2013)

Unfortunately, the subjects daily energy expenditure was highly limited, as they were "kept sedentary" except for a supervised 30min walk, over the whole study period, in the course of which their body weight was measured daily, while their body density was assessed on three occasions from a series of underwater weighing tests.

An "intermittent overfeed" protocol

The actual overfeeding protocol comprised a 6-day binge with 1,000 extra kcal per day that was followed by a backlash to the calculated maintenance level on day 7. Thus, subjects overfed during 84 of the 100 day experimental phase.

• the total excess energy intake was 84 000 kcal
• the macronutrient ratio as 15/35/50% for protein, fat and carbs

With the latter certainly not being representative of your diet (at least I would hope so), this is sign #2 (remember: the first part was the non-existent physical activity) that we are dealing with a study targeting the average American and not the extra-ordinary SuppVersity reader and Super Human Radio listener who are spread all across the globe.

Suggested Read: "If You Go 'High Carb', You Better Go Really High! Seven Meals/Day, More than 800g of Carbs, Less Than 50g of Fat & 1000kcal Over Maintenance and Still 'Lean Gains'!" A previous study would suggests: The major downside to the diet the twins were following was the low protein and not the high carbohydrate intake, of which I am sure some of you are now freakin' out in the usual, "But Gary told us that carbs make you fat"-mania

So, while it is obvious that a study on the same subjects, but with different macronutrient ratios (like a lower vs. higher carb intake) and/or an additional exercise component would have told us more about how you can channel your gains into the right direction, I would say that there is more than enough evidence of the superiority of

• a higher protein intake (30g+ of a high EAA protein source w/ every full meal, 15-20g of protein with snacks),
• the usefulness of a sane carbohydrate intake (low GL instead of low carb),
• the avoidance of a skewed n6-PUFA to other dietary fat intake, and 
• an intense, but not overexerting workout routine with a focus on heavy compound lifts, a minimal amount of HIIT and the occasional very low intensity (walking on a treadmill steady state cardio)

when you are about to go on a lean bulk (you overall energy surplus should not exceed 15% in the beginning; and you should go higher only, if this does not bring about any changes).

Now, talking about the study would be pointless, if the only thing to take away from the experiment were recommendations based on papers that were discussed in previous blogposts, right? So what are the new insights this study brings to the table, then?

• Total, not relative, increases in calorie intakes matter: First of all, it is kind of surprising that the changes in body composition did not depend on the pre-overfeeding levels of body weight, FM, BE, and daily caloric intake. In other words, for these lean healthy men, the changes the scientists observed were almost fully determined by the absolute increase in energy consumption - irrespective of how lean they were and even more surprisingly irrespective of whether those 1,000kcal extra were a surplus of 30% or 40% of their baseline energy intakes.
• Muscle has a "repartitioning effect": Contrary to the fat mass, which did not correlate with changes in any of the measured parameters, the scientists observed a statistically significant inverse correlation between the amount of muscle, the subjects were carrying on their frames and the changes in the lean-to-fat mass ratio (r=-0.41; p=0.05) - this means: the more muscle the guys had to begin with the more muscle and less fat they were gaining in response to the 1,000 extra kcal they were consuming.
• RMR and food induced thermic effects don't influence the total gains, but... While neither the resting metabolic rate, nor the thermic effect of food influenced the changes in body weight, FM, FFM, or BE, the thermic effects in the 4h after a meal had a significant and highly beneficial effect on the ratio of muscle to fat, the subjects gained (clear-cut evidence in favor of a high(er) protein diet yielding better results).

• 

  Learn about the fallacies of the training in the "fat burning" zone and why burning fat for fuel does not equate fat loss (read more)

  The respiratory quotient (RQ) did not matter: As a SuppVersity reader you know that the influence of the ratio of carbohydrates to fats, described by the RQ (with an RQ = 1 telling you that someone burns exclusively glucose) on your efforts to cut body fat, is totally overblown. The finding that
  

  "[t]here was no correlation between RQ during the RMR measurement and at various time points of the TEM test with the overfeeding-induced gains in body weight, FM, FFM, or BE." (Bouchard. 2013)

  is perfect evidence that this is also, or I guess I'd better say, "even more so" the case when you are bulking.
• Fitness is a negative predictor of fat gains: In view of the fact that a high VO2max correlates with higher mitochondrial capacities (and often higher muscle mass) it is not surprising that "VO2max per kilogram of body weight was negatively correlated with the gains in body weight,
  FM, and BE, with coefficients ranging from -0.41 to -0.49, all p<0.05" (Bouchard. 2013); and that the overfeeding-induced increases in fat mass relate to those in lean mass were negatively related to baseline VO2max per kilogram of body weight and the maximum O2pulse (r=-0.43; p<0.05)
• A high(er) count of type I fiber count protects against fat gains: In line with the previously mentioned negative correlation between fitness (endurance type) and fat gains, there was a strong trend for the proportion of type I fibers in the vastus lateralis muscle to correlate negatively with (r = -0.40) with fat gains. Accordingly, the oxidative potential of the skeletal muscle, the scientists quantified by assessing the maximal activity of OGDH (Alpha-ketoglutarate dehydrogenase is an enzyme that's involved in the oxidative process by which the citric acid cycle converts fats to energy) in a muscle homogenate, was negatively correlated with the gains in FM, as well as in the FM–to-FFM ratio. According to Bouchard, et al. these correlations ranged from -0.42 to -0.48 (p<0.05).

• 

  Fiber composition of bodybuilders, recreational lifters, endurance rowers and sedentary control; determined via myosin heavy chain (MHC) isoform content of the triceps brachii muscle (data adapted from Jurimäe. 1997; figure originally published as part of the Intermittent Thoughts on Building Muscle)

  A high glycolytic muscle activity predisposes to fat gains: While being a good "fat oxidizer", i.e. someone who is not necessarily oxidizing more fat than glucose, but has the ability to burn fat effectively (high type 1 fiber count, high OGHD activity, see bullet point above) is a plus, the opposite effects were observed in those twins who had a high(er) ratio of PFK to OGDH muscle enzyme activities, which indicates that their muscles have a high glycolytic relative to oxidative potential. Remember: While people with many exclusively fast-twitch type IIb fibers, would fall into this category, bodybuilders don't - they do in fact have an abundance of metabolically flexible type IIx and type I muscle fibers (see figure on the right)
• Thyroid hormones don't matter that much: While they can make all the difference when you are cutting, the basline TSH levels and the subjects response to a TRH challenge (this is test to evaluate, whether the pituitary response to the hormone that will trigger TSH release is normal) did not influence total weight gain, body fat or fat free mass gains. It should be said, though that all subjects were euthyroid and obviously not overtraining (learn why this matters)... well, there is one thing that did show a correlation though: Although it's not quite clear what the implications are, the early 30-45min TSH response during the TRH challenge was correlated positively with the fat mass to fat free mass gains. In other words, the more pronounced the spike in TSH, the more likely you'll gain fat, not muscle. Without seeing the corresponding thyroid response this could yet mean either that the thyroid is sluggish to react, so that the negative feedback takes longer to occur, or that the opposite is the case and a HPTA that produces larger spikes in thyroid metabolism is to blame for the increased propensity for fat gain.
• Plasma glucose and insulin don't matter: We are approaching the end of the list and I have to admit that this is one of the things that kind of surprised me. In the end, the non-significant influence of both basal, as well as glucose stimulated increases in blood glucose and insulin levels had no effect on the overfeeding-induced changes in body weight, fat mass and fat free mass does confirm that "the fattening hormone" and the purported reason "why we are fat" is not an issue for those of us who are lean and healthy and whose body easily manages his glucose levels just the way it is supposed to be.
• The restless ones don't get muscular: The fact that high baseline norepinephrine levels showing a significant negative association (r = -0.41) with increases in fat-free mass should remind you of something I want to scream at 50% of the people emailing me questions like "What happens if I eat another gram of carbs extra?" I can tell you if you are stressing out about these 100% irrelevant details all the time this and the corresponding constant psychological stress is going to do more harm to your progress than eating 200g of carbs extra, folks... but I guess those of you for whom this is an important message will continue to ignore this. So keep freaking out that you missed your macros by a blueberry, today - obviously you must be enjoying it more than the beautiful things in life.
• Leptin and the rest of the hormonal pack: With a positive associated with the changes in body weight and fat mass gains the "fat hormone" (actually it's an adipokine, but since a "hormone" is a signaling molecule produced by an organ and the adipose tissue is imho an organ, it would be valid to call it a hormone), leptin, appears to be a fattening. On the other hand, higher baseline leptin levels are usually the result of higher baseline body fat mass and since fat begets fat, the latter is probably the common determinant. Leptins "good" cousin adiponectin, but also ghrelin and even IGF and hGH were totally void of pro- or anti-obesogenic effects.

Now that you are in the know about how where you are starting from, i.e. how fat you are, how fit you are, how muscular you are, what you muscle structure looks like, etc. a question arises and this question is...

Suggested read: "Building LEAN Muscle Starts With Losing UNHEALTHY Fat" and what you'll have to do first will depend on where are you on the fat/muscle mass (FFMI = weight/height[in m]² from ) continuum from "ripped bodybuilder" to "sumo wrestler" (learn more)

What are the implications: Well, I guess some of you may have expected the usual "eat this", and the notorious "don't eat that", when you read the title of today's SuppVersity article and... be honest (!) - I have already answered this question and told you that a 1,000kcal surplus would be too much for 99% of you to start out with.

When it comes to filter out a conclusion from the parameters the scientists evaluated, however, I still owe you a comprehensive bottom line  And if you wanted me to formulate it as short and concise as possible it's: Get healthy, fit and lean first, bulk 2nd. Your results will depend on it.

Are You Still Burning Calories or Already Losing Fat? Study Shows: 5x15 Min HIIT Reduce Body Fat & Improve Fitness Twice as Effectively as 5x40min of Classic Cardio

Image 1: The number of women striving to be strong & sexy is still too skinny.

Despite the fact that the slogan "strong is the new sexy" has become increasingly popular, as of late, my personal experience tells me that women are particular resistant to suggestions, let alone well-meant advice to drop "classic cardio" training all-together. Against that background the data from a study that has been published in the latest issue of the Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, as convincing as it may be, is probably no more than another drop in the bucket, but hey... if there is only one women who's mental bucket is already chock-full it may be the one drop that will eventually make it spill over ;-)

"But didn't they lose more weight with classic cardio!"

What happens if you take 60 female overweight (BMI>25kg/m² and body fat >30%) university students and tell them they got to lose weight? Well, I guess, 45 will run to the next best newsdealer get their Shape, let alone Cosmopolitan and start starving themselves according to the latest diet fat from Hollywood, while the remainder will do just the same, except that they combine the starving with some "healthy" cardiovascular exercise in the mythical "fat burning zone". Now the former, i.e. the starvation diet, was not an option for any of the 60 Chinese women, as the design of the 12-week trial required them to maintain their regular diets, the latter, and even the walking or running in the "fat burning zone" was not really part of the experimental conditions the women were randomly assigned to:

• moderate intensity continuous training (MICT): 40min of jogging or walking at 50% of the individual VO2max 
• high intensity interval training (HIIT): 5x3min of running at 85%VO2max with 3min of active rest between the high intensity bouts
• sedentary control: no exercise at all

The exercise was performed on an outdoor track five times a week for a total of 12 weeks an elicited (remember: in the absence of any dietary interventions or restrictions!) pretty astonishing results in - and this must be said for the sake of fairness - both groups.

Figure 1: Changes in body composition and fitness parameters compared to baseline (Sijie. 2012)

If you take a closer look at the data in figure 1 it is yet evident that the 15min of HIIT exercise were not only less time-consuming, they also produced more pronounced and, what's even more important, more favorable changes in body composition, i.e. a greater reduction body fat percentage and waist-to-hip ratio, greater retention in lean mass (as evident from more pronounced fat loss in the presence of slightly lower reductions in BMI) and statistically significantly more pronounced improvements in cardiovascular fitness (VO2Max and ventilatory threshold) - exactly those domains, which should (but have never been) the domain of "cardiovascular" exercise ;-)

Not just for Chinese overweight women: Another recently published study by Astorino et al. confirms that the HIIT induced beneficial effects on VO2max are not restricted to otherwise sedentary, obese subjects, but will also occur in active, young men and women (age and body fat = 25.3 ± 4.5 years and 14.3 ± 6.4%). And that despite the fact that the subjects in the Astorino study performed only two sessions per week (4-6x 30s wingate tests = all out cycling followed by 5min active recovery) and the total duration of the study was no longer than three weeks (Astorino. 2012). In this context it is also worth mentioning that Ciolac et al. were able to show that young women with high familial risk for hypertension also derive greater benefits in terms of cardiovascular health improvements from aerobic interval vs. classic aerobic training (Ciolac. 2011).

Lose weight or lose fat? Look sick or look good? Burn calories or burn body fat? LISS or HIIT?

Despite all obvious limitations of this study it should thus be obvious that "cardio", regardless of whether you do it to improve your physique or overall fitness, must neither be time consuming nor should it be conducted in the "fat burning zone". Those of you who have been following the Step By Step Guide to Your Own Workout (specifically the Fat Loss Example Routine), will yet be aware that this does not imply that you must never perform "classic" low intensity steady state cardio. As a means of recreational activity on your off days, 20-30 minutes on a treadmill may actually help you recover from the "real" training sessions which will bring about those adaptation (fat loss and muscle gain) even women should be striving for if their focus is to improve the way they look and feel about their bodies.

A note on the right type of HIIT for you: If you compare the HIIT protocol in the Astorino to the HIIT protocol in the Sije study, it is pretty obvious that we are dealing with an all-out short burst approach (Astorino) vs. an high intensity longer burst approach (Sijie). In order to find the right HIIT protocol for you, you will have to reconsider your current training status and goals - with the general rule being: The fitter you are the more you should tend towards the shorter all-out bursts, because here, outside your comfort zone, is where the magic of adaptation happens. The more body fat you are still carrying, the more you should tend to longer high intensity bouts.

References:

1. Astorino TA, Allen RP, Roberson DW, Jurancich M. Effect of high-intensity interval training on cardiovascular function, VO2max, and muscular force. J Strength Cond Res. 2012 Jan;26(1):138-45
2. Ciolac EG, Bocchi EA, Greve JM, Guimarães GV. Heart rate response to exercise  and cardiorespiratory fitness of young women at high familial risk for hypertension: effects of interval vs continuous training. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil. 2011 Dec;18(6):824-30. Epub 2011 Feb 28.
3. Sijie T, Hainai Y, Fengying Y, Jianxiong W. High intensity interval exercise training in overweight young women. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2012 Jun;52(3):255-62.

Swim, Bike, Run, Eat: Chocolate Banana Brick Smoothie

This is one of my favorite smoothie recipes...


1 large banana
.25 cups uncooked old fashioned oats
1 tbsp honey

2 tbsp dark cocoa powder
1 scoop of chocolate protein powder (I like gold standard extreme milk chocolate)
1 cup skim milk
1 cup of ice
2 cups of spinach (you won't taste it.

Mix in smoothie like fashion and enjoy.  Depending on the workout, you may want to double up the oats (but probably not the honey...too sweet!) or add some peanut butter. 

Macros-
Calories:  470
Fat 3.15g
Carbs 78.76
Protein: 37.78
Fiber 6.9g
Sodium 228.4mg

Micros-

When you run a lot you have a lot of time to think about stuff to put in your recovery smoothies.   Here's what I think about this one. 

This is all about recovery!  In my very uneducated opinion, in addition to carbs and protein you should also try to recover with foods that will assist in balancing the various things that can get out of wack through big amounts of exercise.  That really comes down to sodium, potassium, calcium, and magnesium as I understand it.

You can hide a bit more NaCl in this if you want it, but there is a fair bit in it already.  The banana is going to help you on board potassium.  Together your body can use these to keep the sodium/potassium pumps in your cells pumping...

Calcium and magnesium are pretty important too.  Beyond just building strong bones, calcium helps your muscles fire and magnesium helps them relax.  Short on either one?  Cramps.  Milk is about the best source of calcium you can find.  Spinach and Oats are both a great source of magnesium. 

Spinach also gets you a ton of various vitamins and minerals, some iron, phytonutrients for those free radicals you just made, and all kinds of other good stuff! 

In The News

Well, this is pretty exciting!  My story was published in the local newspaper.  I really appricate the folks at the pantagraph, they did a really great job capturing my story and taking some really great pictures!

Here it is:  Pantagraph Article

50%

Yesterday I reached another significant weight loss milestone.

When I started getting my life back under control in 2007, my weight was somewhere over 380 pounds. Yesterday morning I weighed 189 pounds, which means I've lost over half of my total body weight. I'm quite literally half the man I used to be. :)

I still have plenty of weight to lose, and the pounds get harder and slower as I approach my ideal weight. I'm very happy to be where I am though, and have begun shifting my focus from being smaller to being faster at all three sports, eating right, eating enough, and letting the weight loss stuff work itself out on it's own.

More HMB Free Acid Science: Now It's Also Good For High Intensity Interval Training (HIIT) Says the Latest Sponsored Trial W/Out Calcium HMB Control in Young Men & Women

I still believe HMB is better suited for HIIT full body workouts than for cycling or running - regardless of whether it's the calcium or free acid form, by the way.

It should be obvious that it was the Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, where I hit onto a very recent study by Edward H Robinson et al. (2014), a study the purpose of which it was to examine the effect of β-hydroxy-β-methylbutyric free acid (HMBFA) and cycle ergometry HIIT on maximal oxygen consumption (VO2peak), ventilatory threshold (VT), respiratory compensation point (RCP) and time to exhaustion in college-aged men and women." (Robinson. 2014).

That's not just quite a mouthful, and - this is where it becomes interesting - nothing that has not previously been studied in a comparable scenario with regular HMB (we will get back to why this is a problem in the conclusion).

You can learn more about HMB at the SuppVersity

HMB + Over- reaching = WIN

HMB, ATP, Gylcogen

HMB Pre- or Post-Workout

Does HMB Block Fat Loss?

HMB For Muscle Quality?

HMB Blocks Muscle Damage

Apropos scenario, what we are dealing with, here, is a double-blind, placebo-controlled design study, in the course of which all participants,  34 healthy men and women (Age: 22.7 ± 3.1 yrs ; VO2peak: 39.3 ± 5.0 ml/kg) who had volunteered to participate completed a series of tests prior to and following treatment (A peak oxygen consumption test was performed on a cycle ergometer to assess VO2peak, Tmax, VT, and RCP. ). 26 of the participants had been randomly assigned into either a placebo (PLA-HIIT) or 3 g per day of HMBFA (BetaTor™) (HMBFA-HIIT) group. The rest, eight participants served as sedentary controls (CTL) - well, as sedentary as college aged boys and girls usually are ;-) The participants who had been randomized to the exercise groups (PLA-HIIT and HMBFA-HIIT) completed 12 HIIT (80-120% maximal workload) exercise sessions consisting of 5–6 bouts of cycling at a work to rest ratio 2:1 - that's 2 minutes of all out cycle vs. 1 minute of total rest.

Figure 1: Changes in body composition in response to sitting around (control) and HIIT with (HMBFA-HIIT) and without (HMBFA-PLACEBO) supplementing 3g of the free acid form of HBM (Robinson. 2014)

The body composition of the participants, which was "identical" (within statistical margin) before the study, was measured with dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) and the changes in fitness parameters were determined in a 2nd exercise test.

BetaTor™? Yes, this is the first official supplement with free acid form HMB: Being produced by Metabolic Technologies Inc (Ames, IA), it contains 1 gram of β-hydroxy-β-methylbutyrate in the free acid form, reverse osmosis water, a de-bittering agent, orange flavor, stevia extract, and potassium carbonate. At least that's what the full-text of the study at hand says. A study of which I don't have to tell you that it was obviously funded by Metabolic Technologies.

Against that background it's quite astonishing that the control group lost 10% of their total fat mass, right? Well, in view of the fact that this change was not significant, someone probably has been dieting here - not very successful, considering the absence of improvements in body fat %, by the way.

Figure 2: Time to exhaustion, respiratory compensation point (RCP) and power at respiratory compensation point (PRCP) in 34 healthy college-aged men and women after sitting around (CTL) or doing HIIT with (HMBFA-HIIT) or without the (PLA) the provision of 3g of the free acid form of β-hydroxy-β-methylbutyrate per day (Robinson. 2004)

Now you may argue that the absence of changes in body composition is awkward considering the significant improvements in time to exhaustion, the respiratory compensation point (RCP) and the power at respiratory compensation point (PRCP), which are all indicative of significant improvements in physical fitness (see Figure 2).

"The Fallacy of Working out To Burn Calories" | learn more

On the other hand, you as student of the SuppVersity should know that intense exercise alone won't make the love-handles go away. Unless you are also "working out in the kitchen", i.e. making changes to your diet, you are only spinning your wheels; and that in spite of the fact that "The Fallacy of Working Out To "Burn Calories" comes hand in hand with the surprising ability of exercise to shut down the carb cravings | learn more.

In essence, it's thus not the fact that the subjects didn't lose weight / body fat, but rather the absence of significant effects of the shiny new free acid form β-hydroxy-β-methylbutyrate (HMBFA) supplement on the exercise induced improvements in metabolic fitness you could consider disappointing before you've had another look at the data in Figure 3.

Question? What's the mechanism, here? Answer: Nobody knows. Most scientists speculate that HMB dampens the muscle damage, reduces the need for compensation and will thus increase the degree of overcompenation, though.

Figure 3 depicts the VO2peak obtained during graded exercise test, the power at ventilatory threshold (PVT) and the amount of air the subjects were gasping at this ventilatory Threshold (VT) and here - actually somewhat to my surprise - the supplement did what I suppose the producer is soon going to promise: It resulted in greater changes inVO2 peak, PVT and VT than HIIT alone.

Figure 3: Changes (% of baseline) in VO2peak, peak power, the power at ventilatory threshold (PVT) and the amount of air the subjects were gasping at this ventilatory Threshold (VT) obtained during graded exercise test (Robinson. 2014)

What I have to say, though, is that I am still a bit disappointed that similar benefits were not observed for the peak power, for which the changes in the placebo group (PLA-HIIT) were actually more significant (p = 0.018) than those in the HMBFA-HIIT group (p = 0.04) which were "just" significant.

Overall, the beneficial effects the researchers from the Institute of Exercise Physiology & Wellness, and the Institute of Exercise Physiology & Wellness at the University of Central Florida observed in their recent trial are more flattering for the 2:1 HIIT cycling protocol than they are for the provision of 3g of the free acid from of β-hydroxy-β-methylbutyrate (HMBFA). Still, the fact that a supplement you would rather associate with strength- than endurance / fitness gains actually had beneficial effects in this high intensity interval training (HIIT) scenario is interesting. As interesting as the fact that it had these benefits in the absence of increases in peak power, which would have been what I would have expected to happen.

Unlike Wilson's recent resistance training study (learn more), neither the study protocol nor the results of the study at hand are HMB-FA specific.

Apropos interesting, as mentioned before Lamboley et al. have already examined the effect of 5 weeks on 3g of "classic" calcium-bound Ca-HMB on changes inVO2max, VT and respiratory compensation point (RCP) in physically-active college students who performed a high intensity interval spring program on a 1% inclinen treadmilll thrice per week and experienced similar increases in maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max +8.4% for PLA and +15.5% for CaHMB) and the respiratory-compensation point (+8.6% for PLA and +13.4% for Ca-HMB). Unlike the previously discussed effects of overreaching by Wilson et al. (2014 | learn more), both design and outcome of the study at hand in no way "HMBFA specific".

Against that background it appears unlikely that there wouldn't have been identical improvements in a CaHMB-HIIT group in the study at hand if Robinson et al. had decided to have a "regular HMB" control group. Practically speaking, this means: Before we don't have a study that supports the superiority of the free acid (HMBFA) over the calcium-bound form of β-hydroxy-β-methylbutyrate (CaHMB) in a HIIT scenario, you should have the price determine what form of HMB you buy if increases in VO2max are what you are looking for.

References:

• Lamboley, Cédric RH, Donald Royer, and Isabelle J. Dionne. "Effects of β-Hydroxy-β-Methylbutyrate on Aerobic-Performance Components and Body Composition in College Students." International journal of sport nutrition & exercise metabolism 17.1 (2007).
• Wilson, Gabriel J., et al. "The effects of 12 weeks of beta-hydroxy-beta-methylbutyrate free acid supplementation on muscle mass, strength, and power in resistance-trained individuals: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study." European Journal of Applied Physiology (2014) | learn more  in a previous SuppVersity article

F=M*A

Ok, It's time for a physics problem.

Q: A 200 (91Kg) pound runner is running at 7 Mph (3.3 m/s) before he collides with a 2 year old child whose moron negligent parent isn't watching them while they wander around the track, where they shouldn't be anyway...

How much force is absorbed by the child when he darts out in front of the runner?

A:
F = m * a
F= 91Kg * 3.3 m/s
F=300.3N

Force required to fracture a skull: Variable, but as little as 73N.

So, here's my point... DO NOT let your toddlers play on a track. You might as well let them play in traffic! If they dart out and chase a ball under a runners feet, they could seriously die.

New Weight Loss Goal

Setting milestone goals has been a great way for me to stay motivated with weight loss.

My next "milestone" is a little different. I'm setting it for 190 pounds. I know, that's only 9 more pounds, so it isn't much of a long term goal, but it does mark the point where I will have lost 50% of my body weight.

To make it just a little more complicated, I'm going to try to achieve this number in no less than 5 weeks. Longer is okay, but I need to slow my weight loss down a little bit, as my rapid weight loss has come at the cost of some muscle mass, which is something I don't need during triathlon season.

Mission Accomplished.

Q: What do you get if you take my heaviest body weight, subtract an entire Lance Armstrong, and a large frozen turkey?

A: My body weight today!!!



When I started doing this whole weight loss thing I had so far to go that I decided to break it up into chunks and set intermediate goals for myself.

My first goal was to get to 330 pounds. That was a big deal because that was the max weight most scales could measure.

My next goal was 299. I had two big reasons to hit this number. Reason 1, it was a nice to be in the 200s. Reason 2, I could finally paddle a kayak without swamping it. As it turned out, I still swamped the kayak (very embarrassing!) but I was under 300 when I did it! I rewarded myself with kayaking lessons.

My next big goal was 260. When I hit that number I rewarded myself with my Giant OCR2, which was my first road bike. I was officially a biker, and really proud to count myself as a "roadie," which is cyclist slang for someone that rides skinny wheels.

The entire time I was checking off these goals though, I was always saying in the back of my head "if I ever manage to get to 200...I'm getting myself something REALLY good."

That day finally came this Thursday. I finally hit 200 pounds. That's 180 pounds of total weight loss.

And I rewarded myself with a brand new Cervelo P1!!!


Here it is...with zero miles on it!

For you bike people, here are some of it's vital stats:

Frame/Fork/Seatpost: Cervelo TT
Bar-ends: DuraAce
Derailleurs: Ultegra SL
Drive Train: FSA Compact / Ultegra 12-23 / Ultegra Chain / FSA BB
Cockpit: Visiontech (FSA)
Wheels: Shimano R-500 Aero





It was a little cold and very windy out, but there is no power in the 'verse that is going to stop me from taking that first ride!



Finally here I am taking a warm up lap before hitting route 66 to put some real miles on it. There is no question that this bike was built to race. It's fast! I remember being about 10 miles out, holding on to the aeros being a little scared of how fast I was going. I peeked over at my Garmin 305 and saw I was cruising at 25.6 Mph, with only a little bit of a tail wind. I'm really looking forward to some calm days to find out what I can average in a TT, but i have a feeling I'm going to gain about 2 Mph with this bike. But beyond that...it just feels great. It feels like success...

My next goal? Well, more on that later...

VO2max Testing

One way of assessing fitness is with a number called VO2max.  The higher your VO2max, the more intensely you can exercise, and in general the VO2max of someone that is well conditioned is higher than someone who isn't in such great shape.

Ok, but what is VO2max? 

VO2max is the maximum amount (in milliliters) of oxygen that a person can use in one minute, per kilogram of body weight.  Brian Mac explains it in depth on his website, so if you want to know more that's where I'd suggest you go. 

Why do I care what my VO2max is?

The primary purpose for the fitness assessments I've been doing in this year's preseason is the establishment of a baseline of fitness.  I want to be able to repeat this tests at later dates and refer back to them so that I can evaluate how well my training is going.  Quantifiable metrics are the name of the game here.

Additionally, a more accurate VO2max will allow me to more accurately estimate my calories burnt in gym sessions with my Polar HRM, and that should hopefully help with my nutrition.

Polar HRMs use a secret sauce for calorie burn estimation, but it is thought to have once resembled this polynomial (although now Polar uses resting HR as a variable and that isn't expressed below):

Let C = KCals and weight = the person's weight in Kgs.

Men: C/min = (-59.3954 + (-36.3781 + 0.271 x age + 0.394 x weight + 0.404 x VO2max + 0.634 x HR))/4.184
Women: C/min = (-59.3954 + (0.274 x age + 0.103 x weight + 0.380 x VO2max + 0.450 x HR)) / 4.184

So clearly, the amount of calories your HRM reports burnt is rather dependant on VO2max.  

Estimating VO2max

So, outside of lab testing, how can you accurately estimate your VO2max?

There are quite a few ways, however the one I chose based on the environment I had available was the Balke VO2max test.

You can read about the testing protocol in detail at the above link, but essentially it's very simple.  Run around a track as fast as you can for 15 minutes and record your distance.  You're supposed to use a 400m track, and my track was 9 laps/mile (roughly 179m/lap).  In 15 minutes, running as fast as I could, I covered 3168 meters. 

Using this formula:  (((Total distance covered ÷ 15) - 133) × 0.172) + 33.3 gives me a result of 46.75 mls/kg/min VO2max

How accurate is this number?  Well it's probably good enough to set my heart rate to, and additionally as long as I repeat this exact test in the future it will serve as a measure of improvement to some degree.  According to Mac's website the correlation between this number and  actual VO2max is high as well.  

Estimating Caloric Burn

What does this mean for my energy expenditure estimations?  Well, the default setting on my HRM is a VO2max of 36, which would be about the norm for a non athletic 30-39 female, which is perhaps a safe bet for the typical Polar F6 consumer, but I believe it was causing my HRM to grossly under report calories burnt for me.  

For example, I recently did a bike ride averaging 150 W for 60 minutes.  Assuming 22% efficiency, which is conservative at best, that would indicate a calorie burn of:

150W = 150 J/s

3600 seconds * 150 J = 540 KJ / 4.184 (conversion rate between KJ and KCals) = 129 KCals

129 KCals / .22 (22% efficient, yeah I wish I was that good...) = 586 Calories burnt.  However in this same time frame my Polar F6 was reporting about 286 Calories burnt.  

I'm expecting that my new and more accurate VO2max will greatly improve the estimated calories burnt, but we will find out when I bike tonight...