[quote]mertdawg wrote:
So I am not trying to be argumentative here. I wrote some statements that overgeneralized because of haste.
But here is a summary of the points I am interested in, or want to propose:
- If you are not eating peri-workout, then eating pure carbs sans fat, say 100 grams will produce a hormonal effect that will tend to push to overfill glycogen in muscle and liver, or at least “top” it off. If you eat fat, it will tend to raise triglycerides, provide the liver and some other organs with fatty acids for synthesizing fatty acids, and fatty molecules that your cells need, shuttle them to cells, perhaps load intramuscular fat stores, and then adipose, load MCTs into cells for energy, upregulate mitochondria for beta oxidation. If you eat some carbs with some fat, you get generally less of the “carb” response, a generally mild glycogen rebuilding in the muscles, more in the liver, decrease in mobilization of fatty acids from adipose so you can burn up the blood sugar, and if the blood sugar, and also liver sugar (ie fructose) is HIGH the body will start to make some into fatty acids, ie fatty liver, but this is a very small percent, though it adds up over time.
[/quote]
So right now, preworkout (it’s going to be heavy squatting, low reps 1-3 per set) I’m eating a sweet potato that I sliced and sauteed in red palm oil…is that a bad idea because of the mix?
[quote]mertdawg wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]mertdawg wrote:
[quote]infinite_shore wrote:
Yes, except the final part - total insulin secretion for a meal doesn’t seem to be reduced.
(Nice thread btw)[/quote]
OK, OK but still people who tend to combine fat with carbs will tend to maintain higher insulin sensitivity and so over a period of months and years they might have less insulin release from the same standardized meal. ???[/quote]
Fats lower insulin sensitivy. FFAs in the blood lower insulin sensitivy [/quote]
That is important. It looks to me like insulin resistance from fats is acute. Cells reduce glycogen synthesis and glucose oxidation and sensitivity of the cells to insulin drops WHILE the fatty acids are high. This is not the same thing as carb induced LONG TERM insulin resistance, (the cells becoming less receptive to insulin due to, well, receptor down regulation that is continuous, rather than acute.
So the fatty acids are making the cells less sensitive while the FFA’s are high, but they are not altering the cells basic insulin sensitivity that would persist in their absence.
Any evidence that high FFAs cause chronic insulin insensitivity, (beyond the actual period of high FFAs)?
Also the main issue is that fats slow down the entry of carbs into the bloodstream which will diminish the peak blood sugar, which will keep sensitivity higher in the long run (again chronic or lasting changes versus acute).
though I have never had a full and satisfactory explanation as to the difference between the “insulin response” to feeding and insulin resistance. FAts do not raise blood sugar, and so they don’t elicit a strong insulin response from the pancreas.
[/quote]
I would imagine that chronic elevation of FFA could lead to an increased storage of triglycerides within muscle fibers which can lead to insulin resistance.
[quote]AccipiterQ wrote:
I have a question that somewhat relates to all this:
So Mert, for instance I’ve seen you recommend say 180-200g CHO on days when someone exercises with primarily heavy weights and low reps (since that isn’t burning much glycogen) and slightly higher CHO recommendations on days when someone goes with higher reps (or sprints) and taps into glycogen. Are those recommendations NET carbs, or total carbs? So for instance with the 180-200 recommendation, how would getting 35g of fiber per day fit into that; would you bump the recommendation up to 215-235 in that case? [/quote]
For the purpose of your question, fiber is not going be used in glycogenesis or glycolysis so exclude fiber from your total CHO recommendation.
[quote]AccipiterQ wrote:
I have a question that somewhat relates to all this:
So Mert, for instance I’ve seen you recommend say 180-200g CHO on days when someone exercises with primarily heavy weights and low reps (since that isn’t burning much glycogen) and slightly higher CHO recommendations on days when someone goes with higher reps (or sprints) and taps into glycogen. Are those recommendations NET carbs, or total carbs? So for instance with the 180-200 recommendation, how would getting 35g of fiber per day fit into that; would you bump the recommendation up to 215-235 in that case? [/quote]
Yes fiber does not count, and it actually provides FAT calories (yes it is made into short chain fatty acids by bacteria in the gut yielding a maximum of about 1 cal per gram of fiber-but the amount is not great). ACTUALLY what I do is take the total calories, remove the calories from fat and protein, and what’s left over is what I could as carb cals. Divide by 4 to get grams. Or you can bump it up.
[quote]AccipiterQ wrote:
[quote]mertdawg wrote:
So I am not trying to be argumentative here. I wrote some statements that overgeneralized because of haste.
But here is a summary of the points I am interested in, or want to propose:
- If you are not eating peri-workout, then eating pure carbs sans fat, say 100 grams will produce a hormonal effect that will tend to push to overfill glycogen in muscle and liver, or at least “top” it off. If you eat fat, it will tend to raise triglycerides, provide the liver and some other organs with fatty acids for synthesizing fatty acids, and fatty molecules that your cells need, shuttle them to cells, perhaps load intramuscular fat stores, and then adipose, load MCTs into cells for energy, upregulate mitochondria for beta oxidation. If you eat some carbs with some fat, you get generally less of the “carb” response, a generally mild glycogen rebuilding in the muscles, more in the liver, decrease in mobilization of fatty acids from adipose so you can burn up the blood sugar, and if the blood sugar, and also liver sugar (ie fructose) is HIGH the body will start to make some into fatty acids, ie fatty liver, but this is a very small percent, though it adds up over time.
[/quote]
So right now, preworkout (it’s going to be heavy squatting, low reps 1-3 per set) I’m eating a sweet potato that I sliced and sauteed in red palm oil…is that a bad idea because of the mix?
[/quote]
If you are training in the 1-3 rep range, what you eat around a workout doesn’t matter much, as long as you eat well over the next 24 hours. I personally usually do 1-3 rep workouts on just protein and maybe coconut milk. The sets are going to run on 95% ATP/CP which will get replenished from fatty acid oxidation in the cell, as long as you rest a couple minutes between sets.
[quote]AccipiterQ wrote:
[quote]mertdawg wrote:
So I am not trying to be argumentative here. I wrote some statements that overgeneralized because of haste.
But here is a summary of the points I am interested in, or want to propose:
- If you are not eating peri-workout, then eating pure carbs sans fat, say 100 grams will produce a hormonal effect that will tend to push to overfill glycogen in muscle and liver, or at least “top” it off. If you eat fat, it will tend to raise triglycerides, provide the liver and some other organs with fatty acids for synthesizing fatty acids, and fatty molecules that your cells need, shuttle them to cells, perhaps load intramuscular fat stores, and then adipose, load MCTs into cells for energy, upregulate mitochondria for beta oxidation. If you eat some carbs with some fat, you get generally less of the “carb” response, a generally mild glycogen rebuilding in the muscles, more in the liver, decrease in mobilization of fatty acids from adipose so you can burn up the blood sugar, and if the blood sugar, and also liver sugar (ie fructose) is HIGH the body will start to make some into fatty acids, ie fatty liver, but this is a very small percent, though it adds up over time.
[/quote]
So right now, preworkout (it’s going to be heavy squatting, low reps 1-3 per set) I’m eating a sweet potato that I sliced and sauteed in red palm oil…is that a bad idea because of the mix?
[/quote]
So I’d say, no problem. I like to get an extra 30 grams of carbs on low rep days just because of the overall recuperation going on, but it doesn’t have to be right around the workout.
[quote]mertdawg wrote:
[quote]infinite_shore wrote:
Yes, except the final part - total insulin secretion for a meal doesn’t seem to be reduced.
(Nice thread btw)[/quote]
OK, OK but still people who tend to combine fat with carbs will tend to maintain higher insulin sensitivity and so over a period of months and years they might have less insulin release from the same standardized meal. ???[/quote]
Hmm, too simplistic I would say.
[quote]infinite_shore wrote:
[quote]mertdawg wrote:
[quote]infinite_shore wrote:
Yes, except the final part - total insulin secretion for a meal doesn’t seem to be reduced.
(Nice thread btw)[/quote]
OK, OK but still people who tend to combine fat with carbs will tend to maintain higher insulin sensitivity and so over a period of months and years they might have less insulin release from the same standardized meal. ???[/quote]
Hmm, too simplistic I would say.[/quote]
Agree, probably too simplistic, because you can look at it another way. Combining fats and carbs would likely lead to a less of a peak in insulin secretion, but expose insulin receptors to a longer duration of insulin perhaps contributing to insulin resistance.