PDA

View Full Version : Nerd Report: keto diets and dietary fat


Elzinator
April 26th 04, 01:33 PM
Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
etc).

The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
1641-1645

Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
Fats in Ketogenic Diets.

Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.

Roger Zoul
April 26th 04, 01:51 PM
Elzinator wrote:
:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
:: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
:: etc).
::
:: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
:: 1641-1645
::
:: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
:: Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
::
:: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.

How about an abstract, at least?

Roger Zoul
April 26th 04, 01:51 PM
Elzinator wrote:
:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
:: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
:: etc).
::
:: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
:: 1641-1645
::
:: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
:: Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
::
:: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.

How about an abstract, at least?

Roger Zoul
April 26th 04, 01:51 PM
Elzinator wrote:
:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
:: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
:: etc).
::
:: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
:: 1641-1645
::
:: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
:: Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
::
:: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.

How about an abstract, at least?

Wayne S. Hill
April 26th 04, 02:07 PM
Roger Zoul wrote:

> Elzinator wrote:
>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never
>:: 'assume')

Hey, you science types may not 'assume', but we engineers
'assume' all the time.

The result isn't surprising, but it's good to see this studied
(considering the drivel from Atkins types that there's something
magic about low-carb).

>:: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal
>:: evidence (lipid profiles, etc).
>::
>:: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol.
>:: 89, No. 4 1641-1645
>::
>:: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus
>:: Polyunsaturated Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
>::
>:: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.
>
> How about an abstract, at least?

The abstract can be viewed by searching the title in Pub-Med:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PubMed/

--
-Wayne

Wayne S. Hill
April 26th 04, 02:07 PM
Roger Zoul wrote:

> Elzinator wrote:
>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never
>:: 'assume')

Hey, you science types may not 'assume', but we engineers
'assume' all the time.

The result isn't surprising, but it's good to see this studied
(considering the drivel from Atkins types that there's something
magic about low-carb).

>:: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal
>:: evidence (lipid profiles, etc).
>::
>:: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol.
>:: 89, No. 4 1641-1645
>::
>:: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus
>:: Polyunsaturated Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
>::
>:: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.
>
> How about an abstract, at least?

The abstract can be viewed by searching the title in Pub-Med:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PubMed/

--
-Wayne

Wayne S. Hill
April 26th 04, 02:07 PM
Roger Zoul wrote:

> Elzinator wrote:
>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never
>:: 'assume')

Hey, you science types may not 'assume', but we engineers
'assume' all the time.

The result isn't surprising, but it's good to see this studied
(considering the drivel from Atkins types that there's something
magic about low-carb).

>:: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal
>:: evidence (lipid profiles, etc).
>::
>:: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol.
>:: 89, No. 4 1641-1645
>::
>:: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus
>:: Polyunsaturated Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
>::
>:: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.
>
> How about an abstract, at least?

The abstract can be viewed by searching the title in Pub-Med:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PubMed/

--
-Wayne

John HUDSON
April 26th 04, 02:12 PM
On 26 Apr 2004 05:33:46 -0700, (Elzinator)
wrote:

>Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
>but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
>etc).
>
>The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
>1641-1645
>
>Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
>Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
>
>Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.

Oh Joy!!

I've sent my secretary scurrying out to get me a copy. Now I have
something to read before turning out the light tonight; all to look
forward to!!

Thanks Elzi!! ;o)

John HUDSON
April 26th 04, 02:12 PM
On 26 Apr 2004 05:33:46 -0700, (Elzinator)
wrote:

>Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
>but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
>etc).
>
>The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
>1641-1645
>
>Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
>Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
>
>Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.

Oh Joy!!

I've sent my secretary scurrying out to get me a copy. Now I have
something to read before turning out the light tonight; all to look
forward to!!

Thanks Elzi!! ;o)

John HUDSON
April 26th 04, 02:12 PM
On 26 Apr 2004 05:33:46 -0700, (Elzinator)
wrote:

>Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
>but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
>etc).
>
>The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
>1641-1645
>
>Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
>Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
>
>Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.

Oh Joy!!

I've sent my secretary scurrying out to get me a copy. Now I have
something to read before turning out the light tonight; all to look
forward to!!

Thanks Elzi!! ;o)

the tree by the river
April 26th 04, 02:15 PM
In article >,
Roger Zoul > wrote:
>Elzinator wrote:
>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
>:: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
>:: etc).
>::
>:: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
>:: 1641-1645
>::
>:: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
>:: Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
>::
>:: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.
>
>How about an abstract, at least?

Ketogenic diets (KDs) are used for treatment of refractory epilepsy and
metabolic disorders. The classic saturated fatty acid-enriched (SAT) KD
has a fat:carbohydrate plus protein ratio of 4:1, in which the predominant
fats are saturated. We hypothesized that a polyunsaturated fat-enriched
(POLY) KD would induce a similar degree of ketosis with less detrimental
effects on carbohydrate and lipid metabolism. Twenty healthy adults were
randomized to two different weight-maintaining KDs for 5 d. Diets were
70% fat, 15% carbohydrate, and 15% protein. The fat contents were 60 or
15% saturated, 15 or 60% polyunsaturated, and 25% monounsaturated for
SAT and POLY, respectively. Changes in serum beta-hydroxybutyrate, insulin
sensitivity (S(I)), and lipid profiles were measured. Mean circulating
beta-hydroxybutyrate levels increased 8.4 mg/dl in the POLY group
(P = 0.0004), compared with 3.1 mg/dl in the SAT group (P = 0.07).
S(I) increased significantly in the POLY group (P = 0.02), whereas total
and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol increased significantly in the SAT
group (both P = 0.002). These data demonstrate that a short-term POLY KD
induces a greater level of ketosis and improves S(I), without adversely
affecting total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, compared with a
traditional SAT KD. Thus, a POLY KD may be superior to a classical SAT
KD for chronic administration.

--
soc.singles FAQ [ Nyx Net, free ISP ] Misc.Fitness.Weights page
www.trygve.com/ssfaq.html [ http://www.nyx.net ] www.trygve.com/mfw.html
today's special feature: seamlessly tileable lunchmeat webpage backgrounds
http://www.trygve.com/web_deli.html

the tree by the river
April 26th 04, 02:15 PM
In article >,
Roger Zoul > wrote:
>Elzinator wrote:
>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
>:: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
>:: etc).
>::
>:: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
>:: 1641-1645
>::
>:: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
>:: Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
>::
>:: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.
>
>How about an abstract, at least?

Ketogenic diets (KDs) are used for treatment of refractory epilepsy and
metabolic disorders. The classic saturated fatty acid-enriched (SAT) KD
has a fat:carbohydrate plus protein ratio of 4:1, in which the predominant
fats are saturated. We hypothesized that a polyunsaturated fat-enriched
(POLY) KD would induce a similar degree of ketosis with less detrimental
effects on carbohydrate and lipid metabolism. Twenty healthy adults were
randomized to two different weight-maintaining KDs for 5 d. Diets were
70% fat, 15% carbohydrate, and 15% protein. The fat contents were 60 or
15% saturated, 15 or 60% polyunsaturated, and 25% monounsaturated for
SAT and POLY, respectively. Changes in serum beta-hydroxybutyrate, insulin
sensitivity (S(I)), and lipid profiles were measured. Mean circulating
beta-hydroxybutyrate levels increased 8.4 mg/dl in the POLY group
(P = 0.0004), compared with 3.1 mg/dl in the SAT group (P = 0.07).
S(I) increased significantly in the POLY group (P = 0.02), whereas total
and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol increased significantly in the SAT
group (both P = 0.002). These data demonstrate that a short-term POLY KD
induces a greater level of ketosis and improves S(I), without adversely
affecting total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, compared with a
traditional SAT KD. Thus, a POLY KD may be superior to a classical SAT
KD for chronic administration.

--
soc.singles FAQ [ Nyx Net, free ISP ] Misc.Fitness.Weights page
www.trygve.com/ssfaq.html [ http://www.nyx.net ] www.trygve.com/mfw.html
today's special feature: seamlessly tileable lunchmeat webpage backgrounds
http://www.trygve.com/web_deli.html

the tree by the river
April 26th 04, 02:15 PM
In article >,
Roger Zoul > wrote:
>Elzinator wrote:
>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
>:: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
>:: etc).
>::
>:: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
>:: 1641-1645
>::
>:: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
>:: Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
>::
>:: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.
>
>How about an abstract, at least?

Ketogenic diets (KDs) are used for treatment of refractory epilepsy and
metabolic disorders. The classic saturated fatty acid-enriched (SAT) KD
has a fat:carbohydrate plus protein ratio of 4:1, in which the predominant
fats are saturated. We hypothesized that a polyunsaturated fat-enriched
(POLY) KD would induce a similar degree of ketosis with less detrimental
effects on carbohydrate and lipid metabolism. Twenty healthy adults were
randomized to two different weight-maintaining KDs for 5 d. Diets were
70% fat, 15% carbohydrate, and 15% protein. The fat contents were 60 or
15% saturated, 15 or 60% polyunsaturated, and 25% monounsaturated for
SAT and POLY, respectively. Changes in serum beta-hydroxybutyrate, insulin
sensitivity (S(I)), and lipid profiles were measured. Mean circulating
beta-hydroxybutyrate levels increased 8.4 mg/dl in the POLY group
(P = 0.0004), compared with 3.1 mg/dl in the SAT group (P = 0.07).
S(I) increased significantly in the POLY group (P = 0.02), whereas total
and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol increased significantly in the SAT
group (both P = 0.002). These data demonstrate that a short-term POLY KD
induces a greater level of ketosis and improves S(I), without adversely
affecting total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, compared with a
traditional SAT KD. Thus, a POLY KD may be superior to a classical SAT
KD for chronic administration.

--
soc.singles FAQ [ Nyx Net, free ISP ] Misc.Fitness.Weights page
www.trygve.com/ssfaq.html [ http://www.nyx.net ] www.trygve.com/mfw.html
today's special feature: seamlessly tileable lunchmeat webpage backgrounds
http://www.trygve.com/web_deli.html

Lyle McDonald
April 26th 04, 02:35 PM
Elzinator wrote:

> Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
> but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
> etc).
>
> The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
> 1641-1645
>
> Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
> Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
>
> Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.

A ****ed up study. note

a. epileptic children
b. short study duratino (1 week?)
c. compared absurdly extreme diets (something like 60% poly to 60% sat)

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 26th 04, 02:35 PM
Elzinator wrote:

> Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
> but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
> etc).
>
> The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
> 1641-1645
>
> Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
> Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
>
> Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.

A ****ed up study. note

a. epileptic children
b. short study duratino (1 week?)
c. compared absurdly extreme diets (something like 60% poly to 60% sat)

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 26th 04, 02:35 PM
Elzinator wrote:

> Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
> but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
> etc).
>
> The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
> 1641-1645
>
> Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
> Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
>
> Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.

A ****ed up study. note

a. epileptic children
b. short study duratino (1 week?)
c. compared absurdly extreme diets (something like 60% poly to 60% sat)

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 26th 04, 02:35 PM
the tree by the river wrote:

> In article >,
> Roger Zoul > wrote:
>
>>Elzinator wrote:
>>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
>>:: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
>>:: etc).
>>::
>>:: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
>>:: 1641-1645
>>::
>>:: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
>>:: Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
>>::
>>:: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.
>>
>>How about an abstract, at least?
>
>
> Ketogenic diets (KDs) are used for treatment of refractory epilepsy and
> metabolic disorders. The classic saturated fatty acid-enriched (SAT) KD
> has a fat:carbohydrate plus protein ratio of 4:1, in which the predominant
> fats are saturated. We hypothesized that a polyunsaturated fat-enriched
> (POLY) KD would induce a similar degree of ketosis with less detrimental
> effects on carbohydrate and lipid metabolism. Twenty healthy adults were
> randomized to two different weight-maintaining KDs for 5 d. Diets were
> 70% fat, 15% carbohydrate, and 15% protein. The fat contents were 60 or
> 15% saturated, 15 or 60% polyunsaturated, and 25% monounsaturated for
> SAT and POLY, respectively. Changes in serum beta-hydroxybutyrate, insulin
> sensitivity (S(I)), and lipid profiles were measured. Mean circulating
> beta-hydroxybutyrate levels increased 8.4 mg/dl in the POLY group
> (P = 0.0004), compared with 3.1 mg/dl in the SAT group (P = 0.07).
> S(I) increased significantly in the POLY group (P = 0.02), whereas total
> and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol increased significantly in the SAT
> group (both P = 0.002). These data demonstrate that a short-term POLY KD
> induces a greater level of ketosis and improves S(I), without adversely
> affecting total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, compared with a
> traditional SAT KD. Thus, a POLY KD may be superior to a classical SAT
> KD for chronic administration.

Repeating myself

1. epileptic children
2. 5 days(!)
3. absurd dietary extremes

Zero relevance if you ask me.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 26th 04, 02:35 PM
the tree by the river wrote:

> In article >,
> Roger Zoul > wrote:
>
>>Elzinator wrote:
>>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
>>:: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
>>:: etc).
>>::
>>:: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
>>:: 1641-1645
>>::
>>:: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
>>:: Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
>>::
>>:: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.
>>
>>How about an abstract, at least?
>
>
> Ketogenic diets (KDs) are used for treatment of refractory epilepsy and
> metabolic disorders. The classic saturated fatty acid-enriched (SAT) KD
> has a fat:carbohydrate plus protein ratio of 4:1, in which the predominant
> fats are saturated. We hypothesized that a polyunsaturated fat-enriched
> (POLY) KD would induce a similar degree of ketosis with less detrimental
> effects on carbohydrate and lipid metabolism. Twenty healthy adults were
> randomized to two different weight-maintaining KDs for 5 d. Diets were
> 70% fat, 15% carbohydrate, and 15% protein. The fat contents were 60 or
> 15% saturated, 15 or 60% polyunsaturated, and 25% monounsaturated for
> SAT and POLY, respectively. Changes in serum beta-hydroxybutyrate, insulin
> sensitivity (S(I)), and lipid profiles were measured. Mean circulating
> beta-hydroxybutyrate levels increased 8.4 mg/dl in the POLY group
> (P = 0.0004), compared with 3.1 mg/dl in the SAT group (P = 0.07).
> S(I) increased significantly in the POLY group (P = 0.02), whereas total
> and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol increased significantly in the SAT
> group (both P = 0.002). These data demonstrate that a short-term POLY KD
> induces a greater level of ketosis and improves S(I), without adversely
> affecting total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, compared with a
> traditional SAT KD. Thus, a POLY KD may be superior to a classical SAT
> KD for chronic administration.

Repeating myself

1. epileptic children
2. 5 days(!)
3. absurd dietary extremes

Zero relevance if you ask me.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 26th 04, 02:35 PM
the tree by the river wrote:

> In article >,
> Roger Zoul > wrote:
>
>>Elzinator wrote:
>>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
>>:: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
>>:: etc).
>>::
>>:: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
>>:: 1641-1645
>>::
>>:: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
>>:: Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
>>::
>>:: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.
>>
>>How about an abstract, at least?
>
>
> Ketogenic diets (KDs) are used for treatment of refractory epilepsy and
> metabolic disorders. The classic saturated fatty acid-enriched (SAT) KD
> has a fat:carbohydrate plus protein ratio of 4:1, in which the predominant
> fats are saturated. We hypothesized that a polyunsaturated fat-enriched
> (POLY) KD would induce a similar degree of ketosis with less detrimental
> effects on carbohydrate and lipid metabolism. Twenty healthy adults were
> randomized to two different weight-maintaining KDs for 5 d. Diets were
> 70% fat, 15% carbohydrate, and 15% protein. The fat contents were 60 or
> 15% saturated, 15 or 60% polyunsaturated, and 25% monounsaturated for
> SAT and POLY, respectively. Changes in serum beta-hydroxybutyrate, insulin
> sensitivity (S(I)), and lipid profiles were measured. Mean circulating
> beta-hydroxybutyrate levels increased 8.4 mg/dl in the POLY group
> (P = 0.0004), compared with 3.1 mg/dl in the SAT group (P = 0.07).
> S(I) increased significantly in the POLY group (P = 0.02), whereas total
> and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol increased significantly in the SAT
> group (both P = 0.002). These data demonstrate that a short-term POLY KD
> induces a greater level of ketosis and improves S(I), without adversely
> affecting total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, compared with a
> traditional SAT KD. Thus, a POLY KD may be superior to a classical SAT
> KD for chronic administration.

Repeating myself

1. epileptic children
2. 5 days(!)
3. absurd dietary extremes

Zero relevance if you ask me.

Lyle

Hugh Beyer
April 26th 04, 05:07 PM
Lyle McDonald > wrote in
:

> the tree by the river wrote:
>
>> In article >,
>> Roger Zoul > wrote:
>>
>>>Elzinator wrote:
>>>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
>>>:: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid
>>>:: profiles, etc).
>>>::
>>>:: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
>>>:: 1641-1645
>>>::
>>>:: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
>>>:: Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
>>>::
>>>:: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.
>>>
>>>How about an abstract, at least?
>>
>>
>> Ketogenic diets (KDs) are used for treatment of refractory epilepsy and
>> metabolic disorders. The classic saturated fatty acid-enriched (SAT) KD
>> has a fat:carbohydrate plus protein ratio of 4:1, in which the
>> predominant fats are saturated. We hypothesized that a polyunsaturated
>> fat-enriched (POLY) KD would induce a similar degree of ketosis with
>> less detrimental effects on carbohydrate and lipid metabolism. Twenty
>> healthy adults were randomized to two different weight-maintaining KDs
>> for 5 d. Diets were 70% fat, 15% carbohydrate, and 15% protein. The fat
>> contents were 60 or 15% saturated, 15 or 60% polyunsaturated, and 25%
>> monounsaturated for SAT and POLY, respectively. Changes in serum
>> beta-hydroxybutyrate, insulin sensitivity (S(I)), and lipid profiles
>> were measured. Mean circulating beta-hydroxybutyrate levels increased
>> 8.4 mg/dl in the POLY group (P = 0.0004), compared with 3.1 mg/dl in
>> the SAT group (P = 0.07). S(I) increased significantly in the POLY
>> group (P = 0.02), whereas total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol
>> increased significantly in the SAT group (both P = 0.002). These data
>> demonstrate that a short-term POLY KD induces a greater level of
>> ketosis and improves S(I), without adversely affecting total and
>> low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, compared with a traditional SAT
>> KD. Thus, a POLY KD may be superior to a classical SAT KD for chronic
>> administration.
>
> Repeating myself
>
> 1. epileptic children

No, 20 healthy adults.

> 2. 5 days(!)
> 3. absurd dietary extremes
>
> Zero relevance if you ask me.

Is there no carryover from a very extreme situation to a more moderate
situation? If, in a very-high fat diet, it is shown to matter whether the
fat is saturated or polyunsaturated, can we make *no* extrapolation to a
more normal amount of fat in the diet?

Hugh


--
Help! My myofibrillar material is disorganized!

Hugh Beyer
April 26th 04, 05:07 PM
Lyle McDonald > wrote in
:

> the tree by the river wrote:
>
>> In article >,
>> Roger Zoul > wrote:
>>
>>>Elzinator wrote:
>>>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
>>>:: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid
>>>:: profiles, etc).
>>>::
>>>:: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
>>>:: 1641-1645
>>>::
>>>:: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
>>>:: Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
>>>::
>>>:: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.
>>>
>>>How about an abstract, at least?
>>
>>
>> Ketogenic diets (KDs) are used for treatment of refractory epilepsy and
>> metabolic disorders. The classic saturated fatty acid-enriched (SAT) KD
>> has a fat:carbohydrate plus protein ratio of 4:1, in which the
>> predominant fats are saturated. We hypothesized that a polyunsaturated
>> fat-enriched (POLY) KD would induce a similar degree of ketosis with
>> less detrimental effects on carbohydrate and lipid metabolism. Twenty
>> healthy adults were randomized to two different weight-maintaining KDs
>> for 5 d. Diets were 70% fat, 15% carbohydrate, and 15% protein. The fat
>> contents were 60 or 15% saturated, 15 or 60% polyunsaturated, and 25%
>> monounsaturated for SAT and POLY, respectively. Changes in serum
>> beta-hydroxybutyrate, insulin sensitivity (S(I)), and lipid profiles
>> were measured. Mean circulating beta-hydroxybutyrate levels increased
>> 8.4 mg/dl in the POLY group (P = 0.0004), compared with 3.1 mg/dl in
>> the SAT group (P = 0.07). S(I) increased significantly in the POLY
>> group (P = 0.02), whereas total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol
>> increased significantly in the SAT group (both P = 0.002). These data
>> demonstrate that a short-term POLY KD induces a greater level of
>> ketosis and improves S(I), without adversely affecting total and
>> low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, compared with a traditional SAT
>> KD. Thus, a POLY KD may be superior to a classical SAT KD for chronic
>> administration.
>
> Repeating myself
>
> 1. epileptic children

No, 20 healthy adults.

> 2. 5 days(!)
> 3. absurd dietary extremes
>
> Zero relevance if you ask me.

Is there no carryover from a very extreme situation to a more moderate
situation? If, in a very-high fat diet, it is shown to matter whether the
fat is saturated or polyunsaturated, can we make *no* extrapolation to a
more normal amount of fat in the diet?

Hugh


--
Help! My myofibrillar material is disorganized!

Hugh Beyer
April 26th 04, 05:07 PM
Lyle McDonald > wrote in
:

> the tree by the river wrote:
>
>> In article >,
>> Roger Zoul > wrote:
>>
>>>Elzinator wrote:
>>>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
>>>:: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid
>>>:: profiles, etc).
>>>::
>>>:: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
>>>:: 1641-1645
>>>::
>>>:: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
>>>:: Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
>>>::
>>>:: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.
>>>
>>>How about an abstract, at least?
>>
>>
>> Ketogenic diets (KDs) are used for treatment of refractory epilepsy and
>> metabolic disorders. The classic saturated fatty acid-enriched (SAT) KD
>> has a fat:carbohydrate plus protein ratio of 4:1, in which the
>> predominant fats are saturated. We hypothesized that a polyunsaturated
>> fat-enriched (POLY) KD would induce a similar degree of ketosis with
>> less detrimental effects on carbohydrate and lipid metabolism. Twenty
>> healthy adults were randomized to two different weight-maintaining KDs
>> for 5 d. Diets were 70% fat, 15% carbohydrate, and 15% protein. The fat
>> contents were 60 or 15% saturated, 15 or 60% polyunsaturated, and 25%
>> monounsaturated for SAT and POLY, respectively. Changes in serum
>> beta-hydroxybutyrate, insulin sensitivity (S(I)), and lipid profiles
>> were measured. Mean circulating beta-hydroxybutyrate levels increased
>> 8.4 mg/dl in the POLY group (P = 0.0004), compared with 3.1 mg/dl in
>> the SAT group (P = 0.07). S(I) increased significantly in the POLY
>> group (P = 0.02), whereas total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol
>> increased significantly in the SAT group (both P = 0.002). These data
>> demonstrate that a short-term POLY KD induces a greater level of
>> ketosis and improves S(I), without adversely affecting total and
>> low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, compared with a traditional SAT
>> KD. Thus, a POLY KD may be superior to a classical SAT KD for chronic
>> administration.
>
> Repeating myself
>
> 1. epileptic children

No, 20 healthy adults.

> 2. 5 days(!)
> 3. absurd dietary extremes
>
> Zero relevance if you ask me.

Is there no carryover from a very extreme situation to a more moderate
situation? If, in a very-high fat diet, it is shown to matter whether the
fat is saturated or polyunsaturated, can we make *no* extrapolation to a
more normal amount of fat in the diet?

Hugh


--
Help! My myofibrillar material is disorganized!

Elzinator
April 26th 04, 06:36 PM
Lyle McDonald > wrote in message >...
> the tree by the river wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > Roger Zoul > wrote:
> >
> >>Elzinator wrote:
> >>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
> >>:: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
> >>:: etc).
> >>::
> >>:: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
> >>:: 1641-1645
> >>::
> >>:: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
> >>:: Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
> >>::
> >>:: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.
> >>
> >>How about an abstract, at least?
> >
> >
> > Ketogenic diets (KDs) are used for treatment of refractory epilepsy and
> > metabolic disorders. The classic saturated fatty acid-enriched (SAT) KD
> > has a fat:carbohydrate plus protein ratio of 4:1, in which the predominant
> > fats are saturated. We hypothesized that a polyunsaturated fat-enriched
> > (POLY) KD would induce a similar degree of ketosis with less detrimental
> > effects on carbohydrate and lipid metabolism. Twenty healthy adults were
> > randomized to two different weight-maintaining KDs for 5 d. Diets were
> > 70% fat, 15% carbohydrate, and 15% protein. The fat contents were 60 or
> > 15% saturated, 15 or 60% polyunsaturated, and 25% monounsaturated for
> > SAT and POLY, respectively. Changes in serum beta-hydroxybutyrate, insulin
> > sensitivity (S(I)), and lipid profiles were measured. Mean circulating
> > beta-hydroxybutyrate levels increased 8.4 mg/dl in the POLY group
> > (P = 0.0004), compared with 3.1 mg/dl in the SAT group (P = 0.07).
> > S(I) increased significantly in the POLY group (P = 0.02), whereas total
> > and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol increased significantly in the SAT
> > group (both P = 0.002). These data demonstrate that a short-term POLY KD
> > induces a greater level of ketosis and improves S(I), without adversely
> > affecting total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, compared with a
> > traditional SAT KD. Thus, a POLY KD may be superior to a classical SAT
> > KD for chronic administration.

Thanks for posting the abstract. My original post was uploaded before
I intended.

> Repeating myself
>
> 1. epileptic children
> 2. 5 days(!)
> 3. absurd dietary extremes
>
> Zero relevance if you ask me.

Wrong.

Subjects were adults ~23 yo
They were healthy subjects, not epileptic.
The diet was eucaloric.
It was investigating short-term (5 days) which does have relevance for
CKD.
No more absurd than many of the other diets out there. I've seen
people derive 50% of their calories from saturated fats when doing
keto diets.

They chose 5 days because of "constraints of the first-year medical
student curriculum." So what if most of the metabolic effects of keto
diets occur ~4 days. The fact that a short-term keto diet with the two
different types of fats elicited noticable changes on lipid profiles
is of interest to those who use a CKD.

A keto diet containing primarily PUFAs rather than SF used by healthy
adults is applicable.

Elzinator
April 26th 04, 06:36 PM
Lyle McDonald > wrote in message >...
> the tree by the river wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > Roger Zoul > wrote:
> >
> >>Elzinator wrote:
> >>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
> >>:: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
> >>:: etc).
> >>::
> >>:: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
> >>:: 1641-1645
> >>::
> >>:: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
> >>:: Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
> >>::
> >>:: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.
> >>
> >>How about an abstract, at least?
> >
> >
> > Ketogenic diets (KDs) are used for treatment of refractory epilepsy and
> > metabolic disorders. The classic saturated fatty acid-enriched (SAT) KD
> > has a fat:carbohydrate plus protein ratio of 4:1, in which the predominant
> > fats are saturated. We hypothesized that a polyunsaturated fat-enriched
> > (POLY) KD would induce a similar degree of ketosis with less detrimental
> > effects on carbohydrate and lipid metabolism. Twenty healthy adults were
> > randomized to two different weight-maintaining KDs for 5 d. Diets were
> > 70% fat, 15% carbohydrate, and 15% protein. The fat contents were 60 or
> > 15% saturated, 15 or 60% polyunsaturated, and 25% monounsaturated for
> > SAT and POLY, respectively. Changes in serum beta-hydroxybutyrate, insulin
> > sensitivity (S(I)), and lipid profiles were measured. Mean circulating
> > beta-hydroxybutyrate levels increased 8.4 mg/dl in the POLY group
> > (P = 0.0004), compared with 3.1 mg/dl in the SAT group (P = 0.07).
> > S(I) increased significantly in the POLY group (P = 0.02), whereas total
> > and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol increased significantly in the SAT
> > group (both P = 0.002). These data demonstrate that a short-term POLY KD
> > induces a greater level of ketosis and improves S(I), without adversely
> > affecting total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, compared with a
> > traditional SAT KD. Thus, a POLY KD may be superior to a classical SAT
> > KD for chronic administration.

Thanks for posting the abstract. My original post was uploaded before
I intended.

> Repeating myself
>
> 1. epileptic children
> 2. 5 days(!)
> 3. absurd dietary extremes
>
> Zero relevance if you ask me.

Wrong.

Subjects were adults ~23 yo
They were healthy subjects, not epileptic.
The diet was eucaloric.
It was investigating short-term (5 days) which does have relevance for
CKD.
No more absurd than many of the other diets out there. I've seen
people derive 50% of their calories from saturated fats when doing
keto diets.

They chose 5 days because of "constraints of the first-year medical
student curriculum." So what if most of the metabolic effects of keto
diets occur ~4 days. The fact that a short-term keto diet with the two
different types of fats elicited noticable changes on lipid profiles
is of interest to those who use a CKD.

A keto diet containing primarily PUFAs rather than SF used by healthy
adults is applicable.

Elzinator
April 26th 04, 06:36 PM
Lyle McDonald > wrote in message >...
> the tree by the river wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > Roger Zoul > wrote:
> >
> >>Elzinator wrote:
> >>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
> >>:: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
> >>:: etc).
> >>::
> >>:: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
> >>:: 1641-1645
> >>::
> >>:: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
> >>:: Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
> >>::
> >>:: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.
> >>
> >>How about an abstract, at least?
> >
> >
> > Ketogenic diets (KDs) are used for treatment of refractory epilepsy and
> > metabolic disorders. The classic saturated fatty acid-enriched (SAT) KD
> > has a fat:carbohydrate plus protein ratio of 4:1, in which the predominant
> > fats are saturated. We hypothesized that a polyunsaturated fat-enriched
> > (POLY) KD would induce a similar degree of ketosis with less detrimental
> > effects on carbohydrate and lipid metabolism. Twenty healthy adults were
> > randomized to two different weight-maintaining KDs for 5 d. Diets were
> > 70% fat, 15% carbohydrate, and 15% protein. The fat contents were 60 or
> > 15% saturated, 15 or 60% polyunsaturated, and 25% monounsaturated for
> > SAT and POLY, respectively. Changes in serum beta-hydroxybutyrate, insulin
> > sensitivity (S(I)), and lipid profiles were measured. Mean circulating
> > beta-hydroxybutyrate levels increased 8.4 mg/dl in the POLY group
> > (P = 0.0004), compared with 3.1 mg/dl in the SAT group (P = 0.07).
> > S(I) increased significantly in the POLY group (P = 0.02), whereas total
> > and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol increased significantly in the SAT
> > group (both P = 0.002). These data demonstrate that a short-term POLY KD
> > induces a greater level of ketosis and improves S(I), without adversely
> > affecting total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, compared with a
> > traditional SAT KD. Thus, a POLY KD may be superior to a classical SAT
> > KD for chronic administration.

Thanks for posting the abstract. My original post was uploaded before
I intended.

> Repeating myself
>
> 1. epileptic children
> 2. 5 days(!)
> 3. absurd dietary extremes
>
> Zero relevance if you ask me.

Wrong.

Subjects were adults ~23 yo
They were healthy subjects, not epileptic.
The diet was eucaloric.
It was investigating short-term (5 days) which does have relevance for
CKD.
No more absurd than many of the other diets out there. I've seen
people derive 50% of their calories from saturated fats when doing
keto diets.

They chose 5 days because of "constraints of the first-year medical
student curriculum." So what if most of the metabolic effects of keto
diets occur ~4 days. The fact that a short-term keto diet with the two
different types of fats elicited noticable changes on lipid profiles
is of interest to those who use a CKD.

A keto diet containing primarily PUFAs rather than SF used by healthy
adults is applicable.

Elzinator
April 26th 04, 06:47 PM
"Wayne S. Hill" > wrote in message >...
> Roger Zoul wrote:
>
> > Elzinator wrote:
> >:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never
> >:: 'assume')
>
> Hey, you science types may not 'assume', but we engineers
> 'assume' all the time.

That's what's wrong with you fysics-types and related fields: you
assume too much :)

Elzi's Law No. 2: Never assume.


> The result isn't surprising, but it's good to see this studied
> (considering the drivel from Atkins types that there's something
> magic about low-carb).

I has suspected such many years ago. I found this most interesting
considering that it was also a eucaloric diet and only 5 days, but a
hypocaloric diet may change this.

Although, according to testimony that has been offered by those who
have had baseline lipid profiles and several weeks into a keto diet,
HDL may decrease somewhat (or not change) with high PUFA intake, but
LDL consistantly decreases as well. Watching the ratio is important.

Overall, my TG and cholesterol levels always decrease with a lowcarb
diet (not specifically keto), but HDL doesn't improve much (but LDL
decreases, so ratio remains acceptable). Many others have reported
similar patterns. Nice to see this in a study even with a short-term
diet. (my lipid tests have always been after several weeks
post-starting a lowcarb diet). Actually, I expected lipid profiles to
be much worse during the first week or so after starting a keto diet.

Elzinator
April 26th 04, 06:47 PM
"Wayne S. Hill" > wrote in message >...
> Roger Zoul wrote:
>
> > Elzinator wrote:
> >:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never
> >:: 'assume')
>
> Hey, you science types may not 'assume', but we engineers
> 'assume' all the time.

That's what's wrong with you fysics-types and related fields: you
assume too much :)

Elzi's Law No. 2: Never assume.


> The result isn't surprising, but it's good to see this studied
> (considering the drivel from Atkins types that there's something
> magic about low-carb).

I has suspected such many years ago. I found this most interesting
considering that it was also a eucaloric diet and only 5 days, but a
hypocaloric diet may change this.

Although, according to testimony that has been offered by those who
have had baseline lipid profiles and several weeks into a keto diet,
HDL may decrease somewhat (or not change) with high PUFA intake, but
LDL consistantly decreases as well. Watching the ratio is important.

Overall, my TG and cholesterol levels always decrease with a lowcarb
diet (not specifically keto), but HDL doesn't improve much (but LDL
decreases, so ratio remains acceptable). Many others have reported
similar patterns. Nice to see this in a study even with a short-term
diet. (my lipid tests have always been after several weeks
post-starting a lowcarb diet). Actually, I expected lipid profiles to
be much worse during the first week or so after starting a keto diet.

Elzinator
April 26th 04, 06:47 PM
"Wayne S. Hill" > wrote in message >...
> Roger Zoul wrote:
>
> > Elzinator wrote:
> >:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never
> >:: 'assume')
>
> Hey, you science types may not 'assume', but we engineers
> 'assume' all the time.

That's what's wrong with you fysics-types and related fields: you
assume too much :)

Elzi's Law No. 2: Never assume.


> The result isn't surprising, but it's good to see this studied
> (considering the drivel from Atkins types that there's something
> magic about low-carb).

I has suspected such many years ago. I found this most interesting
considering that it was also a eucaloric diet and only 5 days, but a
hypocaloric diet may change this.

Although, according to testimony that has been offered by those who
have had baseline lipid profiles and several weeks into a keto diet,
HDL may decrease somewhat (or not change) with high PUFA intake, but
LDL consistantly decreases as well. Watching the ratio is important.

Overall, my TG and cholesterol levels always decrease with a lowcarb
diet (not specifically keto), but HDL doesn't improve much (but LDL
decreases, so ratio remains acceptable). Many others have reported
similar patterns. Nice to see this in a study even with a short-term
diet. (my lipid tests have always been after several weeks
post-starting a lowcarb diet). Actually, I expected lipid profiles to
be much worse during the first week or so after starting a keto diet.

Lyle McDonald
April 26th 04, 07:10 PM
Elzinator wrote:
> Lyle McDonald > wrote in message >...
>
>>the tree by the river wrote:
>>
>>
>>>In article >,
>>>Roger Zoul > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Elzinator wrote:
>>>>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
>>>>:: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
>>>>:: etc).
>>>>::
>>>>:: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
>>>>:: 1641-1645
>>>>::
>>>>:: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
>>>>:: Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
>>>>::
>>>>:: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.
>>>>
>>>>How about an abstract, at least?
>>>
>>>
>>>Ketogenic diets (KDs) are used for treatment of refractory epilepsy and
>>>metabolic disorders. The classic saturated fatty acid-enriched (SAT) KD
>>>has a fat:carbohydrate plus protein ratio of 4:1, in which the predominant
>>>fats are saturated. We hypothesized that a polyunsaturated fat-enriched
>>>(POLY) KD would induce a similar degree of ketosis with less detrimental
>>>effects on carbohydrate and lipid metabolism. Twenty healthy adults were
>>>randomized to two different weight-maintaining KDs for 5 d. Diets were
>>>70% fat, 15% carbohydrate, and 15% protein. The fat contents were 60 or
>>>15% saturated, 15 or 60% polyunsaturated, and 25% monounsaturated for
>>>SAT and POLY, respectively. Changes in serum beta-hydroxybutyrate, insulin
>>>sensitivity (S(I)), and lipid profiles were measured. Mean circulating
>>>beta-hydroxybutyrate levels increased 8.4 mg/dl in the POLY group
>>>(P = 0.0004), compared with 3.1 mg/dl in the SAT group (P = 0.07).
>>>S(I) increased significantly in the POLY group (P = 0.02), whereas total
>>>and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol increased significantly in the SAT
>>>group (both P = 0.002). These data demonstrate that a short-term POLY KD
>>>induces a greater level of ketosis and improves S(I), without adversely
>>>affecting total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, compared with a
>>>traditional SAT KD. Thus, a POLY KD may be superior to a classical SAT
>>>KD for chronic administration.
>
>
> Thanks for posting the abstract. My original post was uploaded before
> I intended.
>
>
>>Repeating myself
>>
>>1. epileptic children
>>2. 5 days(!)
>>3. absurd dietary extremes
>>
>>Zero relevance if you ask me.
>
>
> Wrong.
>
> Subjects were adults ~23 yo
> They were healthy subjects, not epileptic.

My mistake, I saw that they were giving them the epilepsy diet (4:1) and
assumed it was epileptic kiddies. Which still makes it irrelevant to
fat loss keto diets because they are set up totally differently.

> The diet was eucaloric.
> It was investigating short-term (5 days) which does have relevance for
> CKD.
> No more absurd than many of the other diets out there. I've seen
> people derive 50% of their calories from saturated fats when doing
> keto diets.

and:
a. you want to be insulin resistant on a diet

b. being insulin resistant is irrelevant WHEN YOU AREN'T EATING ANY
****ING CARBOHYDRATES IN THE FIRST PLACE! You reverse insulin
resistance prior to the carb-load by consuming a small amount of high GI
carbs and training so don't throw that at me.

>
> They chose 5 days because of "constraints of the first-year medical
> student curriculum." So what if most of the metabolic effects of keto
> diets occur ~4 days. The fact that a short-term keto diet with the two
> different types of fats elicited noticable changes on lipid profiles
> is of interest to those who use a CKD.
>
> A keto diet containing primarily PUFAs rather than SF used by healthy
> adults is applicable.

60% PUFA is unhealthy as **** and you know it.

and this study doesn't adress what would happen if the diet is 15-20%
PUFA and the rest sat. Or half and half. Or any other combination.

Hence, irrelevant.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 26th 04, 07:10 PM
Elzinator wrote:
> Lyle McDonald > wrote in message >...
>
>>the tree by the river wrote:
>>
>>
>>>In article >,
>>>Roger Zoul > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Elzinator wrote:
>>>>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
>>>>:: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
>>>>:: etc).
>>>>::
>>>>:: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
>>>>:: 1641-1645
>>>>::
>>>>:: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
>>>>:: Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
>>>>::
>>>>:: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.
>>>>
>>>>How about an abstract, at least?
>>>
>>>
>>>Ketogenic diets (KDs) are used for treatment of refractory epilepsy and
>>>metabolic disorders. The classic saturated fatty acid-enriched (SAT) KD
>>>has a fat:carbohydrate plus protein ratio of 4:1, in which the predominant
>>>fats are saturated. We hypothesized that a polyunsaturated fat-enriched
>>>(POLY) KD would induce a similar degree of ketosis with less detrimental
>>>effects on carbohydrate and lipid metabolism. Twenty healthy adults were
>>>randomized to two different weight-maintaining KDs for 5 d. Diets were
>>>70% fat, 15% carbohydrate, and 15% protein. The fat contents were 60 or
>>>15% saturated, 15 or 60% polyunsaturated, and 25% monounsaturated for
>>>SAT and POLY, respectively. Changes in serum beta-hydroxybutyrate, insulin
>>>sensitivity (S(I)), and lipid profiles were measured. Mean circulating
>>>beta-hydroxybutyrate levels increased 8.4 mg/dl in the POLY group
>>>(P = 0.0004), compared with 3.1 mg/dl in the SAT group (P = 0.07).
>>>S(I) increased significantly in the POLY group (P = 0.02), whereas total
>>>and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol increased significantly in the SAT
>>>group (both P = 0.002). These data demonstrate that a short-term POLY KD
>>>induces a greater level of ketosis and improves S(I), without adversely
>>>affecting total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, compared with a
>>>traditional SAT KD. Thus, a POLY KD may be superior to a classical SAT
>>>KD for chronic administration.
>
>
> Thanks for posting the abstract. My original post was uploaded before
> I intended.
>
>
>>Repeating myself
>>
>>1. epileptic children
>>2. 5 days(!)
>>3. absurd dietary extremes
>>
>>Zero relevance if you ask me.
>
>
> Wrong.
>
> Subjects were adults ~23 yo
> They were healthy subjects, not epileptic.

My mistake, I saw that they were giving them the epilepsy diet (4:1) and
assumed it was epileptic kiddies. Which still makes it irrelevant to
fat loss keto diets because they are set up totally differently.

> The diet was eucaloric.
> It was investigating short-term (5 days) which does have relevance for
> CKD.
> No more absurd than many of the other diets out there. I've seen
> people derive 50% of their calories from saturated fats when doing
> keto diets.

and:
a. you want to be insulin resistant on a diet

b. being insulin resistant is irrelevant WHEN YOU AREN'T EATING ANY
****ING CARBOHYDRATES IN THE FIRST PLACE! You reverse insulin
resistance prior to the carb-load by consuming a small amount of high GI
carbs and training so don't throw that at me.

>
> They chose 5 days because of "constraints of the first-year medical
> student curriculum." So what if most of the metabolic effects of keto
> diets occur ~4 days. The fact that a short-term keto diet with the two
> different types of fats elicited noticable changes on lipid profiles
> is of interest to those who use a CKD.
>
> A keto diet containing primarily PUFAs rather than SF used by healthy
> adults is applicable.

60% PUFA is unhealthy as **** and you know it.

and this study doesn't adress what would happen if the diet is 15-20%
PUFA and the rest sat. Or half and half. Or any other combination.

Hence, irrelevant.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 26th 04, 07:10 PM
Elzinator wrote:
> Lyle McDonald > wrote in message >...
>
>>the tree by the river wrote:
>>
>>
>>>In article >,
>>>Roger Zoul > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Elzinator wrote:
>>>>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
>>>>:: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
>>>>:: etc).
>>>>::
>>>>:: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
>>>>:: 1641-1645
>>>>::
>>>>:: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
>>>>:: Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
>>>>::
>>>>:: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.
>>>>
>>>>How about an abstract, at least?
>>>
>>>
>>>Ketogenic diets (KDs) are used for treatment of refractory epilepsy and
>>>metabolic disorders. The classic saturated fatty acid-enriched (SAT) KD
>>>has a fat:carbohydrate plus protein ratio of 4:1, in which the predominant
>>>fats are saturated. We hypothesized that a polyunsaturated fat-enriched
>>>(POLY) KD would induce a similar degree of ketosis with less detrimental
>>>effects on carbohydrate and lipid metabolism. Twenty healthy adults were
>>>randomized to two different weight-maintaining KDs for 5 d. Diets were
>>>70% fat, 15% carbohydrate, and 15% protein. The fat contents were 60 or
>>>15% saturated, 15 or 60% polyunsaturated, and 25% monounsaturated for
>>>SAT and POLY, respectively. Changes in serum beta-hydroxybutyrate, insulin
>>>sensitivity (S(I)), and lipid profiles were measured. Mean circulating
>>>beta-hydroxybutyrate levels increased 8.4 mg/dl in the POLY group
>>>(P = 0.0004), compared with 3.1 mg/dl in the SAT group (P = 0.07).
>>>S(I) increased significantly in the POLY group (P = 0.02), whereas total
>>>and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol increased significantly in the SAT
>>>group (both P = 0.002). These data demonstrate that a short-term POLY KD
>>>induces a greater level of ketosis and improves S(I), without adversely
>>>affecting total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, compared with a
>>>traditional SAT KD. Thus, a POLY KD may be superior to a classical SAT
>>>KD for chronic administration.
>
>
> Thanks for posting the abstract. My original post was uploaded before
> I intended.
>
>
>>Repeating myself
>>
>>1. epileptic children
>>2. 5 days(!)
>>3. absurd dietary extremes
>>
>>Zero relevance if you ask me.
>
>
> Wrong.
>
> Subjects were adults ~23 yo
> They were healthy subjects, not epileptic.

My mistake, I saw that they were giving them the epilepsy diet (4:1) and
assumed it was epileptic kiddies. Which still makes it irrelevant to
fat loss keto diets because they are set up totally differently.

> The diet was eucaloric.
> It was investigating short-term (5 days) which does have relevance for
> CKD.
> No more absurd than many of the other diets out there. I've seen
> people derive 50% of their calories from saturated fats when doing
> keto diets.

and:
a. you want to be insulin resistant on a diet

b. being insulin resistant is irrelevant WHEN YOU AREN'T EATING ANY
****ING CARBOHYDRATES IN THE FIRST PLACE! You reverse insulin
resistance prior to the carb-load by consuming a small amount of high GI
carbs and training so don't throw that at me.

>
> They chose 5 days because of "constraints of the first-year medical
> student curriculum." So what if most of the metabolic effects of keto
> diets occur ~4 days. The fact that a short-term keto diet with the two
> different types of fats elicited noticable changes on lipid profiles
> is of interest to those who use a CKD.
>
> A keto diet containing primarily PUFAs rather than SF used by healthy
> adults is applicable.

60% PUFA is unhealthy as **** and you know it.

and this study doesn't adress what would happen if the diet is 15-20%
PUFA and the rest sat. Or half and half. Or any other combination.

Hence, irrelevant.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 26th 04, 07:11 PM
Elzinator wrote:

> "Wayne S. Hill" > wrote in message >...
>
>>Roger Zoul wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Elzinator wrote:
>>>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never
>>>:: 'assume')
>>
>>Hey, you science types may not 'assume', but we engineers
>>'assume' all the time.
>
>
> That's what's wrong with you fysics-types and related fields: you
> assume too much :)
>
> Elzi's Law No. 2: Never assume.
>
>
>
>>The result isn't surprising, but it's good to see this studied
>>(considering the drivel from Atkins types that there's something
>>magic about low-carb).
>
>
> I has suspected such many years ago. I found this most interesting
> considering that it was also a eucaloric diet and only 5 days, but a
> hypocaloric diet may change this.
>
> Although, according to testimony that has been offered by those who
> have had baseline lipid profiles and several weeks into a keto diet,
> HDL may decrease somewhat (or not change) with high PUFA intake, but
> LDL consistantly decreases as well. Watching the ratio is important.

This happens in all studies of hypocaloric keto diets irrespective of
the fat quality.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 26th 04, 07:11 PM
Elzinator wrote:

> "Wayne S. Hill" > wrote in message >...
>
>>Roger Zoul wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Elzinator wrote:
>>>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never
>>>:: 'assume')
>>
>>Hey, you science types may not 'assume', but we engineers
>>'assume' all the time.
>
>
> That's what's wrong with you fysics-types and related fields: you
> assume too much :)
>
> Elzi's Law No. 2: Never assume.
>
>
>
>>The result isn't surprising, but it's good to see this studied
>>(considering the drivel from Atkins types that there's something
>>magic about low-carb).
>
>
> I has suspected such many years ago. I found this most interesting
> considering that it was also a eucaloric diet and only 5 days, but a
> hypocaloric diet may change this.
>
> Although, according to testimony that has been offered by those who
> have had baseline lipid profiles and several weeks into a keto diet,
> HDL may decrease somewhat (or not change) with high PUFA intake, but
> LDL consistantly decreases as well. Watching the ratio is important.

This happens in all studies of hypocaloric keto diets irrespective of
the fat quality.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 26th 04, 07:11 PM
Elzinator wrote:

> "Wayne S. Hill" > wrote in message >...
>
>>Roger Zoul wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Elzinator wrote:
>>>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never
>>>:: 'assume')
>>
>>Hey, you science types may not 'assume', but we engineers
>>'assume' all the time.
>
>
> That's what's wrong with you fysics-types and related fields: you
> assume too much :)
>
> Elzi's Law No. 2: Never assume.
>
>
>
>>The result isn't surprising, but it's good to see this studied
>>(considering the drivel from Atkins types that there's something
>>magic about low-carb).
>
>
> I has suspected such many years ago. I found this most interesting
> considering that it was also a eucaloric diet and only 5 days, but a
> hypocaloric diet may change this.
>
> Although, according to testimony that has been offered by those who
> have had baseline lipid profiles and several weeks into a keto diet,
> HDL may decrease somewhat (or not change) with high PUFA intake, but
> LDL consistantly decreases as well. Watching the ratio is important.

This happens in all studies of hypocaloric keto diets irrespective of
the fat quality.

Lyle

Roger Zoul
April 26th 04, 07:43 PM
Lyle McDonald wrote:
:: Elzinator wrote:
::: Lyle McDonald > wrote in message
::: >...
:::
:::: the tree by the river wrote:
::::
::::
::::: In article >,
::::: Roger Zoul > wrote:
:::::
:::::
:::::: Elzinator wrote:
:::::::: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never
:::::::: 'assume')
:::::::: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid
:::::::: profiles,
:::::::: etc).
::::::::
:::::::: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89,
:::::::: No. 4 1641-1645
::::::::
:::::::: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus
:::::::: Polyunsaturated
:::::::: Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
::::::::
:::::::: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.
::::::
:::::: How about an abstract, at least?
:::::
:::::
::::: Ketogenic diets (KDs) are used for treatment of refractory
::::: epilepsy and
::::: metabolic disorders. The classic saturated fatty acid-enriched
::::: (SAT) KD
::::: has a fat:carbohydrate plus protein ratio of 4:1, in which the
::::: predominant
::::: fats are saturated. We hypothesized that a polyunsaturated
::::: fat-enriched (POLY) KD would induce a similar degree of ketosis
::::: with less detrimental
::::: effects on carbohydrate and lipid metabolism. Twenty healthy
::::: adults were
::::: randomized to two different weight-maintaining KDs for 5 d. Diets
::::: were 70% fat, 15% carbohydrate, and 15% protein. The fat contents
::::: were 60 or 15% saturated, 15 or 60% polyunsaturated, and 25%
::::: monounsaturated for
::::: SAT and POLY, respectively. Changes in serum
::::: beta-hydroxybutyrate, insulin
::::: sensitivity (S(I)), and lipid profiles were measured. Mean
::::: circulating
::::: beta-hydroxybutyrate levels increased 8.4 mg/dl in the POLY group
::::: (P = 0.0004), compared with 3.1 mg/dl in the SAT group (P = 0.07).
::::: S(I) increased significantly in the POLY group (P = 0.02),
::::: whereas total
::::: and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol increased significantly
::::: in the SAT
::::: group (both P = 0.002). These data demonstrate that a short-term
::::: POLY KD
::::: induces a greater level of ketosis and improves S(I), without
::::: adversely
::::: affecting total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, compared
::::: with a
::::: traditional SAT KD. Thus, a POLY KD may be superior to a
::::: classical SAT
::::: KD for chronic administration.
:::
:::
::: Thanks for posting the abstract. My original post was uploaded
::: before
::: I intended.
:::
:::
:::: Repeating myself
::::
:::: 1. epileptic children
:::: 2. 5 days(!)
:::: 3. absurd dietary extremes
::::
:::: Zero relevance if you ask me.
:::
:::
::: Wrong.
:::
::: Subjects were adults ~23 yo
::: They were healthy subjects, not epileptic.
::
:: My mistake, I saw that they were giving them the epilepsy diet (4:1)
:: and
:: assumed it was epileptic kiddies. Which still makes it irrelevant to
:: fat loss keto diets because they are set up totally differently.
::
::: The diet was eucaloric.
::: It was investigating short-term (5 days) which does have relevance
::: for
::: CKD.
::: No more absurd than many of the other diets out there. I've seen
::: people derive 50% of their calories from saturated fats when doing
::: keto diets.
::
:: and:
:: a. you want to be insulin resistant on a diet
::
:: b. being insulin resistant is irrelevant WHEN YOU AREN'T EATING ANY
:: ****ING CARBOHYDRATES IN THE FIRST PLACE! You reverse insulin
:: resistance prior to the carb-load by consuming a small amount of
:: high GI
:: carbs and training so don't throw that at me.
::
:::
::: They chose 5 days because of "constraints of the first-year medical
::: student curriculum." So what if most of the metabolic effects of
::: keto
::: diets occur ~4 days. The fact that a short-term keto diet with the
::: two
::: different types of fats elicited noticable changes on lipid profiles
::: is of interest to those who use a CKD.
:::
::: A keto diet containing primarily PUFAs rather than SF used by
::: healthy
::: adults is applicable.
::
:: 60% PUFA is unhealthy as **** and you know it.
::
:: and this study doesn't adress what would happen if the diet is 15-20%
:: PUFA and the rest sat. Or half and half. Or any other combination.
::
:: Hence, irrelevant.

Damn -- when you and Elzi disagree, how in the **** am I supposed to learn
anything?

Dammit, Jim, I'm an engineer, not a KetoMaster.

Roger Zoul
April 26th 04, 07:43 PM
Lyle McDonald wrote:
:: Elzinator wrote:
::: Lyle McDonald > wrote in message
::: >...
:::
:::: the tree by the river wrote:
::::
::::
::::: In article >,
::::: Roger Zoul > wrote:
:::::
:::::
:::::: Elzinator wrote:
:::::::: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never
:::::::: 'assume')
:::::::: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid
:::::::: profiles,
:::::::: etc).
::::::::
:::::::: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89,
:::::::: No. 4 1641-1645
::::::::
:::::::: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus
:::::::: Polyunsaturated
:::::::: Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
::::::::
:::::::: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.
::::::
:::::: How about an abstract, at least?
:::::
:::::
::::: Ketogenic diets (KDs) are used for treatment of refractory
::::: epilepsy and
::::: metabolic disorders. The classic saturated fatty acid-enriched
::::: (SAT) KD
::::: has a fat:carbohydrate plus protein ratio of 4:1, in which the
::::: predominant
::::: fats are saturated. We hypothesized that a polyunsaturated
::::: fat-enriched (POLY) KD would induce a similar degree of ketosis
::::: with less detrimental
::::: effects on carbohydrate and lipid metabolism. Twenty healthy
::::: adults were
::::: randomized to two different weight-maintaining KDs for 5 d. Diets
::::: were 70% fat, 15% carbohydrate, and 15% protein. The fat contents
::::: were 60 or 15% saturated, 15 or 60% polyunsaturated, and 25%
::::: monounsaturated for
::::: SAT and POLY, respectively. Changes in serum
::::: beta-hydroxybutyrate, insulin
::::: sensitivity (S(I)), and lipid profiles were measured. Mean
::::: circulating
::::: beta-hydroxybutyrate levels increased 8.4 mg/dl in the POLY group
::::: (P = 0.0004), compared with 3.1 mg/dl in the SAT group (P = 0.07).
::::: S(I) increased significantly in the POLY group (P = 0.02),
::::: whereas total
::::: and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol increased significantly
::::: in the SAT
::::: group (both P = 0.002). These data demonstrate that a short-term
::::: POLY KD
::::: induces a greater level of ketosis and improves S(I), without
::::: adversely
::::: affecting total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, compared
::::: with a
::::: traditional SAT KD. Thus, a POLY KD may be superior to a
::::: classical SAT
::::: KD for chronic administration.
:::
:::
::: Thanks for posting the abstract. My original post was uploaded
::: before
::: I intended.
:::
:::
:::: Repeating myself
::::
:::: 1. epileptic children
:::: 2. 5 days(!)
:::: 3. absurd dietary extremes
::::
:::: Zero relevance if you ask me.
:::
:::
::: Wrong.
:::
::: Subjects were adults ~23 yo
::: They were healthy subjects, not epileptic.
::
:: My mistake, I saw that they were giving them the epilepsy diet (4:1)
:: and
:: assumed it was epileptic kiddies. Which still makes it irrelevant to
:: fat loss keto diets because they are set up totally differently.
::
::: The diet was eucaloric.
::: It was investigating short-term (5 days) which does have relevance
::: for
::: CKD.
::: No more absurd than many of the other diets out there. I've seen
::: people derive 50% of their calories from saturated fats when doing
::: keto diets.
::
:: and:
:: a. you want to be insulin resistant on a diet
::
:: b. being insulin resistant is irrelevant WHEN YOU AREN'T EATING ANY
:: ****ING CARBOHYDRATES IN THE FIRST PLACE! You reverse insulin
:: resistance prior to the carb-load by consuming a small amount of
:: high GI
:: carbs and training so don't throw that at me.
::
:::
::: They chose 5 days because of "constraints of the first-year medical
::: student curriculum." So what if most of the metabolic effects of
::: keto
::: diets occur ~4 days. The fact that a short-term keto diet with the
::: two
::: different types of fats elicited noticable changes on lipid profiles
::: is of interest to those who use a CKD.
:::
::: A keto diet containing primarily PUFAs rather than SF used by
::: healthy
::: adults is applicable.
::
:: 60% PUFA is unhealthy as **** and you know it.
::
:: and this study doesn't adress what would happen if the diet is 15-20%
:: PUFA and the rest sat. Or half and half. Or any other combination.
::
:: Hence, irrelevant.

Damn -- when you and Elzi disagree, how in the **** am I supposed to learn
anything?

Dammit, Jim, I'm an engineer, not a KetoMaster.

Roger Zoul
April 26th 04, 07:43 PM
Lyle McDonald wrote:
:: Elzinator wrote:
::: Lyle McDonald > wrote in message
::: >...
:::
:::: the tree by the river wrote:
::::
::::
::::: In article >,
::::: Roger Zoul > wrote:
:::::
:::::
:::::: Elzinator wrote:
:::::::: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never
:::::::: 'assume')
:::::::: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid
:::::::: profiles,
:::::::: etc).
::::::::
:::::::: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89,
:::::::: No. 4 1641-1645
::::::::
:::::::: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus
:::::::: Polyunsaturated
:::::::: Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
::::::::
:::::::: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.
::::::
:::::: How about an abstract, at least?
:::::
:::::
::::: Ketogenic diets (KDs) are used for treatment of refractory
::::: epilepsy and
::::: metabolic disorders. The classic saturated fatty acid-enriched
::::: (SAT) KD
::::: has a fat:carbohydrate plus protein ratio of 4:1, in which the
::::: predominant
::::: fats are saturated. We hypothesized that a polyunsaturated
::::: fat-enriched (POLY) KD would induce a similar degree of ketosis
::::: with less detrimental
::::: effects on carbohydrate and lipid metabolism. Twenty healthy
::::: adults were
::::: randomized to two different weight-maintaining KDs for 5 d. Diets
::::: were 70% fat, 15% carbohydrate, and 15% protein. The fat contents
::::: were 60 or 15% saturated, 15 or 60% polyunsaturated, and 25%
::::: monounsaturated for
::::: SAT and POLY, respectively. Changes in serum
::::: beta-hydroxybutyrate, insulin
::::: sensitivity (S(I)), and lipid profiles were measured. Mean
::::: circulating
::::: beta-hydroxybutyrate levels increased 8.4 mg/dl in the POLY group
::::: (P = 0.0004), compared with 3.1 mg/dl in the SAT group (P = 0.07).
::::: S(I) increased significantly in the POLY group (P = 0.02),
::::: whereas total
::::: and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol increased significantly
::::: in the SAT
::::: group (both P = 0.002). These data demonstrate that a short-term
::::: POLY KD
::::: induces a greater level of ketosis and improves S(I), without
::::: adversely
::::: affecting total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, compared
::::: with a
::::: traditional SAT KD. Thus, a POLY KD may be superior to a
::::: classical SAT
::::: KD for chronic administration.
:::
:::
::: Thanks for posting the abstract. My original post was uploaded
::: before
::: I intended.
:::
:::
:::: Repeating myself
::::
:::: 1. epileptic children
:::: 2. 5 days(!)
:::: 3. absurd dietary extremes
::::
:::: Zero relevance if you ask me.
:::
:::
::: Wrong.
:::
::: Subjects were adults ~23 yo
::: They were healthy subjects, not epileptic.
::
:: My mistake, I saw that they were giving them the epilepsy diet (4:1)
:: and
:: assumed it was epileptic kiddies. Which still makes it irrelevant to
:: fat loss keto diets because they are set up totally differently.
::
::: The diet was eucaloric.
::: It was investigating short-term (5 days) which does have relevance
::: for
::: CKD.
::: No more absurd than many of the other diets out there. I've seen
::: people derive 50% of their calories from saturated fats when doing
::: keto diets.
::
:: and:
:: a. you want to be insulin resistant on a diet
::
:: b. being insulin resistant is irrelevant WHEN YOU AREN'T EATING ANY
:: ****ING CARBOHYDRATES IN THE FIRST PLACE! You reverse insulin
:: resistance prior to the carb-load by consuming a small amount of
:: high GI
:: carbs and training so don't throw that at me.
::
:::
::: They chose 5 days because of "constraints of the first-year medical
::: student curriculum." So what if most of the metabolic effects of
::: keto
::: diets occur ~4 days. The fact that a short-term keto diet with the
::: two
::: different types of fats elicited noticable changes on lipid profiles
::: is of interest to those who use a CKD.
:::
::: A keto diet containing primarily PUFAs rather than SF used by
::: healthy
::: adults is applicable.
::
:: 60% PUFA is unhealthy as **** and you know it.
::
:: and this study doesn't adress what would happen if the diet is 15-20%
:: PUFA and the rest sat. Or half and half. Or any other combination.
::
:: Hence, irrelevant.

Damn -- when you and Elzi disagree, how in the **** am I supposed to learn
anything?

Dammit, Jim, I'm an engineer, not a KetoMaster.

ShaneOttawa
April 26th 04, 09:01 PM
Lyle McDonald > wrote:
> A ****ed up study. note
>
> a. epileptic children
> b. short study duratino (1 week?)
> c. compared absurdly extreme diets (something like 60% poly to 60% sat)
>
> Lyle


What causes this? Are studies conducted for legit narrow, specific
reasons and then the results taken extrapolated too much by casual
observors? Or are the studies just ****ed up?

ShaneOttawa
April 26th 04, 09:01 PM
Lyle McDonald > wrote:
> A ****ed up study. note
>
> a. epileptic children
> b. short study duratino (1 week?)
> c. compared absurdly extreme diets (something like 60% poly to 60% sat)
>
> Lyle


What causes this? Are studies conducted for legit narrow, specific
reasons and then the results taken extrapolated too much by casual
observors? Or are the studies just ****ed up?

ShaneOttawa
April 26th 04, 09:01 PM
Lyle McDonald > wrote:
> A ****ed up study. note
>
> a. epileptic children
> b. short study duratino (1 week?)
> c. compared absurdly extreme diets (something like 60% poly to 60% sat)
>
> Lyle


What causes this? Are studies conducted for legit narrow, specific
reasons and then the results taken extrapolated too much by casual
observors? Or are the studies just ****ed up?

Will Brink
April 26th 04, 09:26 PM
In article >,
(Elzinator) wrote:

> Lyle McDonald > wrote in message
> >...
> > the tree by the river wrote:
> >
> > > In article >,
> > > Roger Zoul > wrote:
> > >
> > >>Elzinator wrote:
> > >>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
> > >>:: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
> > >>:: etc).
> > >>::
> > >>:: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
> > >>:: 1641-1645
> > >>::
> > >>:: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
> > >>:: Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
> > >>::
> > >>:: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.
> > >>
> > >>How about an abstract, at least?
> > >
> > >
> > > Ketogenic diets (KDs) are used for treatment of refractory epilepsy and
> > > metabolic disorders. The classic saturated fatty acid-enriched (SAT) KD
> > > has a fat:carbohydrate plus protein ratio of 4:1, in which the
> > > predominant
> > > fats are saturated. We hypothesized that a polyunsaturated fat-enriched
> > > (POLY) KD would induce a similar degree of ketosis with less detrimental
> > > effects on carbohydrate and lipid metabolism. Twenty healthy adults were
> > > randomized to two different weight-maintaining KDs for 5 d. Diets were
> > > 70% fat, 15% carbohydrate, and 15% protein. The fat contents were 60 or
> > > 15% saturated, 15 or 60% polyunsaturated, and 25% monounsaturated for
> > > SAT and POLY, respectively. Changes in serum beta-hydroxybutyrate,
> > > insulin
> > > sensitivity (S(I)), and lipid profiles were measured. Mean circulating
> > > beta-hydroxybutyrate levels increased 8.4 mg/dl in the POLY group
> > > (P = 0.0004), compared with 3.1 mg/dl in the SAT group (P = 0.07).
> > > S(I) increased significantly in the POLY group (P = 0.02), whereas total
> > > and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol increased significantly in the
> > > SAT
> > > group (both P = 0.002). These data demonstrate that a short-term POLY KD
> > > induces a greater level of ketosis and improves S(I), without adversely
> > > affecting total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, compared with a
> > > traditional SAT KD. Thus, a POLY KD may be superior to a classical SAT
> > > KD for chronic administration.
>
> Thanks for posting the abstract. My original post was uploaded before
> I intended.
>
> > Repeating myself
> >
> > 1. epileptic children
> > 2. 5 days(!)
> > 3. absurd dietary extremes
> >
> > Zero relevance if you ask me.
>
> Wrong.
>
> Subjects were adults ~23 yo
> They were healthy subjects, not epileptic.
> The diet was eucaloric.
> It was investigating short-term (5 days) which does have relevance for
> CKD.
> No more absurd than many of the other diets out there. I've seen
> people derive 50% of their calories from saturated fats when doing
> keto diets.
>
> They chose 5 days because of "constraints of the first-year medical
> student curriculum." So what if most of the metabolic effects of keto
> diets occur ~4 days. The fact that a short-term keto diet with the two
> different types of fats elicited noticable changes on lipid profiles
> is of interest to those who use a CKD.
>
> A keto diet containing primarily PUFAs rather than SF used by healthy
> adults is applicable.

Seems to me it finds more or less what most diet studies find and we
already know: high intakes of sat fat in the diet, keto or otherwise,
is often bad for blood lipid profiles suggesting a mixture of poly,
mono, and sat lipids in the diet is best regardless of what % fat makes
up in the diet. I don't personally think a 60% poly diet would be a good
idea over long periods of time.

--
Will Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/

Will Brink
April 26th 04, 09:26 PM
In article >,
(Elzinator) wrote:

> Lyle McDonald > wrote in message
> >...
> > the tree by the river wrote:
> >
> > > In article >,
> > > Roger Zoul > wrote:
> > >
> > >>Elzinator wrote:
> > >>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
> > >>:: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
> > >>:: etc).
> > >>::
> > >>:: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
> > >>:: 1641-1645
> > >>::
> > >>:: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
> > >>:: Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
> > >>::
> > >>:: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.
> > >>
> > >>How about an abstract, at least?
> > >
> > >
> > > Ketogenic diets (KDs) are used for treatment of refractory epilepsy and
> > > metabolic disorders. The classic saturated fatty acid-enriched (SAT) KD
> > > has a fat:carbohydrate plus protein ratio of 4:1, in which the
> > > predominant
> > > fats are saturated. We hypothesized that a polyunsaturated fat-enriched
> > > (POLY) KD would induce a similar degree of ketosis with less detrimental
> > > effects on carbohydrate and lipid metabolism. Twenty healthy adults were
> > > randomized to two different weight-maintaining KDs for 5 d. Diets were
> > > 70% fat, 15% carbohydrate, and 15% protein. The fat contents were 60 or
> > > 15% saturated, 15 or 60% polyunsaturated, and 25% monounsaturated for
> > > SAT and POLY, respectively. Changes in serum beta-hydroxybutyrate,
> > > insulin
> > > sensitivity (S(I)), and lipid profiles were measured. Mean circulating
> > > beta-hydroxybutyrate levels increased 8.4 mg/dl in the POLY group
> > > (P = 0.0004), compared with 3.1 mg/dl in the SAT group (P = 0.07).
> > > S(I) increased significantly in the POLY group (P = 0.02), whereas total
> > > and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol increased significantly in the
> > > SAT
> > > group (both P = 0.002). These data demonstrate that a short-term POLY KD
> > > induces a greater level of ketosis and improves S(I), without adversely
> > > affecting total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, compared with a
> > > traditional SAT KD. Thus, a POLY KD may be superior to a classical SAT
> > > KD for chronic administration.
>
> Thanks for posting the abstract. My original post was uploaded before
> I intended.
>
> > Repeating myself
> >
> > 1. epileptic children
> > 2. 5 days(!)
> > 3. absurd dietary extremes
> >
> > Zero relevance if you ask me.
>
> Wrong.
>
> Subjects were adults ~23 yo
> They were healthy subjects, not epileptic.
> The diet was eucaloric.
> It was investigating short-term (5 days) which does have relevance for
> CKD.
> No more absurd than many of the other diets out there. I've seen
> people derive 50% of their calories from saturated fats when doing
> keto diets.
>
> They chose 5 days because of "constraints of the first-year medical
> student curriculum." So what if most of the metabolic effects of keto
> diets occur ~4 days. The fact that a short-term keto diet with the two
> different types of fats elicited noticable changes on lipid profiles
> is of interest to those who use a CKD.
>
> A keto diet containing primarily PUFAs rather than SF used by healthy
> adults is applicable.

Seems to me it finds more or less what most diet studies find and we
already know: high intakes of sat fat in the diet, keto or otherwise,
is often bad for blood lipid profiles suggesting a mixture of poly,
mono, and sat lipids in the diet is best regardless of what % fat makes
up in the diet. I don't personally think a 60% poly diet would be a good
idea over long periods of time.

--
Will Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/

Will Brink
April 26th 04, 09:26 PM
In article >,
(Elzinator) wrote:

> Lyle McDonald > wrote in message
> >...
> > the tree by the river wrote:
> >
> > > In article >,
> > > Roger Zoul > wrote:
> > >
> > >>Elzinator wrote:
> > >>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
> > >>:: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
> > >>:: etc).
> > >>::
> > >>:: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
> > >>:: 1641-1645
> > >>::
> > >>:: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
> > >>:: Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
> > >>::
> > >>:: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.
> > >>
> > >>How about an abstract, at least?
> > >
> > >
> > > Ketogenic diets (KDs) are used for treatment of refractory epilepsy and
> > > metabolic disorders. The classic saturated fatty acid-enriched (SAT) KD
> > > has a fat:carbohydrate plus protein ratio of 4:1, in which the
> > > predominant
> > > fats are saturated. We hypothesized that a polyunsaturated fat-enriched
> > > (POLY) KD would induce a similar degree of ketosis with less detrimental
> > > effects on carbohydrate and lipid metabolism. Twenty healthy adults were
> > > randomized to two different weight-maintaining KDs for 5 d. Diets were
> > > 70% fat, 15% carbohydrate, and 15% protein. The fat contents were 60 or
> > > 15% saturated, 15 or 60% polyunsaturated, and 25% monounsaturated for
> > > SAT and POLY, respectively. Changes in serum beta-hydroxybutyrate,
> > > insulin
> > > sensitivity (S(I)), and lipid profiles were measured. Mean circulating
> > > beta-hydroxybutyrate levels increased 8.4 mg/dl in the POLY group
> > > (P = 0.0004), compared with 3.1 mg/dl in the SAT group (P = 0.07).
> > > S(I) increased significantly in the POLY group (P = 0.02), whereas total
> > > and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol increased significantly in the
> > > SAT
> > > group (both P = 0.002). These data demonstrate that a short-term POLY KD
> > > induces a greater level of ketosis and improves S(I), without adversely
> > > affecting total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, compared with a
> > > traditional SAT KD. Thus, a POLY KD may be superior to a classical SAT
> > > KD for chronic administration.
>
> Thanks for posting the abstract. My original post was uploaded before
> I intended.
>
> > Repeating myself
> >
> > 1. epileptic children
> > 2. 5 days(!)
> > 3. absurd dietary extremes
> >
> > Zero relevance if you ask me.
>
> Wrong.
>
> Subjects were adults ~23 yo
> They were healthy subjects, not epileptic.
> The diet was eucaloric.
> It was investigating short-term (5 days) which does have relevance for
> CKD.
> No more absurd than many of the other diets out there. I've seen
> people derive 50% of their calories from saturated fats when doing
> keto diets.
>
> They chose 5 days because of "constraints of the first-year medical
> student curriculum." So what if most of the metabolic effects of keto
> diets occur ~4 days. The fact that a short-term keto diet with the two
> different types of fats elicited noticable changes on lipid profiles
> is of interest to those who use a CKD.
>
> A keto diet containing primarily PUFAs rather than SF used by healthy
> adults is applicable.

Seems to me it finds more or less what most diet studies find and we
already know: high intakes of sat fat in the diet, keto or otherwise,
is often bad for blood lipid profiles suggesting a mixture of poly,
mono, and sat lipids in the diet is best regardless of what % fat makes
up in the diet. I don't personally think a 60% poly diet would be a good
idea over long periods of time.

--
Will Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/

elzinator
April 27th 04, 02:12 AM
On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 16:26:45 -0400, Will Brink wrote:

>Seems to me it finds more or less what most diet studies find and we
>already know: high intakes of sat fat in the diet, keto or otherwise,
>is often bad for blood lipid profiles suggesting a mixture of poly,
>mono, and sat lipids in the diet is best regardless of what % fat makes
>up in the diet.

Agreed.
> I don't personally think a 60% poly diet would be a good
>idea over long periods of time.

I don't either. Not sure if it would be harmful short-term, though.


Bioinformatics:
"What is a sheep; only millions of little bits of sheepness
whirling around and doing intricate convolutions inside the
sheep? What else is it but that?"
-Flann O'Brien, "The Third Policeman"

elzinator
April 27th 04, 02:12 AM
On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 16:26:45 -0400, Will Brink wrote:

>Seems to me it finds more or less what most diet studies find and we
>already know: high intakes of sat fat in the diet, keto or otherwise,
>is often bad for blood lipid profiles suggesting a mixture of poly,
>mono, and sat lipids in the diet is best regardless of what % fat makes
>up in the diet.

Agreed.
> I don't personally think a 60% poly diet would be a good
>idea over long periods of time.

I don't either. Not sure if it would be harmful short-term, though.


Bioinformatics:
"What is a sheep; only millions of little bits of sheepness
whirling around and doing intricate convolutions inside the
sheep? What else is it but that?"
-Flann O'Brien, "The Third Policeman"

elzinator
April 27th 04, 02:12 AM
On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 16:26:45 -0400, Will Brink wrote:

>Seems to me it finds more or less what most diet studies find and we
>already know: high intakes of sat fat in the diet, keto or otherwise,
>is often bad for blood lipid profiles suggesting a mixture of poly,
>mono, and sat lipids in the diet is best regardless of what % fat makes
>up in the diet.

Agreed.
> I don't personally think a 60% poly diet would be a good
>idea over long periods of time.

I don't either. Not sure if it would be harmful short-term, though.


Bioinformatics:
"What is a sheep; only millions of little bits of sheepness
whirling around and doing intricate convolutions inside the
sheep? What else is it but that?"
-Flann O'Brien, "The Third Policeman"

elzinator
April 27th 04, 02:30 AM
On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 13:10:36 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>Elzinator wrote:
>> Lyle McDonald > wrote in message >...
>>
>>>the tree by the river wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>In article >,
>>>>Roger Zoul > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Elzinator wrote:
>>>>>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
>>>>>:: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
>>>>>:: etc).
>>>>>::
>>>>>:: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
>>>>>:: 1641-1645
>>>>>::
>>>>>:: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
>>>>>:: Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
>>>>>::
>>>>>:: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.
>>>>>
>>>>>How about an abstract, at least?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Ketogenic diets (KDs) are used for treatment of refractory epilepsy and
>>>>metabolic disorders. The classic saturated fatty acid-enriched (SAT) KD
>>>>has a fat:carbohydrate plus protein ratio of 4:1, in which the predominant
>>>>fats are saturated. We hypothesized that a polyunsaturated fat-enriched
>>>>(POLY) KD would induce a similar degree of ketosis with less detrimental
>>>>effects on carbohydrate and lipid metabolism. Twenty healthy adults were
>>>>randomized to two different weight-maintaining KDs for 5 d. Diets were
>>>>70% fat, 15% carbohydrate, and 15% protein. The fat contents were 60 or
>>>>15% saturated, 15 or 60% polyunsaturated, and 25% monounsaturated for
>>>>SAT and POLY, respectively. Changes in serum beta-hydroxybutyrate, insulin
>>>>sensitivity (S(I)), and lipid profiles were measured. Mean circulating
>>>>beta-hydroxybutyrate levels increased 8.4 mg/dl in the POLY group
>>>>(P = 0.0004), compared with 3.1 mg/dl in the SAT group (P = 0.07).
>>>>S(I) increased significantly in the POLY group (P = 0.02), whereas total
>>>>and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol increased significantly in the SAT
>>>>group (both P = 0.002). These data demonstrate that a short-term POLY KD
>>>>induces a greater level of ketosis and improves S(I), without adversely
>>>>affecting total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, compared with a
>>>>traditional SAT KD. Thus, a POLY KD may be superior to a classical SAT
>>>>KD for chronic administration.
>>
>>
>> Thanks for posting the abstract. My original post was uploaded before
>> I intended.
>>
>>
>>>Repeating myself
>>>
>>>1. epileptic children
>>>2. 5 days(!)
>>>3. absurd dietary extremes
>>>
>>>Zero relevance if you ask me.
>>
>>
>> Wrong.
>>
>> Subjects were adults ~23 yo
>> They were healthy subjects, not epileptic.
>
>My mistake, I saw that they were giving them the epilepsy diet (4:1) and
>assumed it was epileptic kiddies. Which still makes it irrelevant to
>fat loss keto diets because they are set up totally differently.
>
>> The diet was eucaloric.
>> It was investigating short-term (5 days) which does have relevance for
>> CKD.
>> No more absurd than many of the other diets out there. I've seen
>> people derive 50% of their calories from saturated fats when doing
>> keto diets.
>
>and:
>a. you want to be insulin resistant on a diet

Possibly for a segment of the population. Not for T2 diabetics.

>b. being insulin resistant is irrelevant WHEN YOU AREN'T EATING ANY
>****ING CARBOHYDRATES IN THE FIRST PLACE! You reverse insulin
>resistance prior to the carb-load by consuming a small amount of high GI
>carbs and training so don't throw that at me.

Ooohhhh, did I **** you off? Regardless, for some people, especially
in the obese population, this may be an issue. They typically have
very poor baseline lipid profiles. Another situation is diabetics for
instance who HAVE TO CONSUME SOME CARBS.

>> They chose 5 days because of "constraints of the first-year medical
>> student curriculum." So what if most of the metabolic effects of keto
>> diets occur ~4 days. The fact that a short-term keto diet with the two
>> different types of fats elicited noticable changes on lipid profiles
>> is of interest to those who use a CKD.
>>
>> A keto diet containing primarily PUFAs rather than SF used by healthy
>> adults is applicable.
>
>60% PUFA is unhealthy as **** and you know it.

Is it, though, short-term? I don't know that. Do you?

>and this study doesn't adress what would happen if the diet is 15-20%
>PUFA and the rest sat. Or half and half. Or any other combination.

True, it doesn't.

>Hence, irrelevant.

Whatever.


Bioinformatics:
"What is a sheep; only millions of little bits of sheepness
whirling around and doing intricate convolutions inside the
sheep? What else is it but that?"
-Flann O'Brien, "The Third Policeman"

elzinator
April 27th 04, 02:30 AM
On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 13:10:36 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>Elzinator wrote:
>> Lyle McDonald > wrote in message >...
>>
>>>the tree by the river wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>In article >,
>>>>Roger Zoul > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Elzinator wrote:
>>>>>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
>>>>>:: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
>>>>>:: etc).
>>>>>::
>>>>>:: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
>>>>>:: 1641-1645
>>>>>::
>>>>>:: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
>>>>>:: Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
>>>>>::
>>>>>:: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.
>>>>>
>>>>>How about an abstract, at least?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Ketogenic diets (KDs) are used for treatment of refractory epilepsy and
>>>>metabolic disorders. The classic saturated fatty acid-enriched (SAT) KD
>>>>has a fat:carbohydrate plus protein ratio of 4:1, in which the predominant
>>>>fats are saturated. We hypothesized that a polyunsaturated fat-enriched
>>>>(POLY) KD would induce a similar degree of ketosis with less detrimental
>>>>effects on carbohydrate and lipid metabolism. Twenty healthy adults were
>>>>randomized to two different weight-maintaining KDs for 5 d. Diets were
>>>>70% fat, 15% carbohydrate, and 15% protein. The fat contents were 60 or
>>>>15% saturated, 15 or 60% polyunsaturated, and 25% monounsaturated for
>>>>SAT and POLY, respectively. Changes in serum beta-hydroxybutyrate, insulin
>>>>sensitivity (S(I)), and lipid profiles were measured. Mean circulating
>>>>beta-hydroxybutyrate levels increased 8.4 mg/dl in the POLY group
>>>>(P = 0.0004), compared with 3.1 mg/dl in the SAT group (P = 0.07).
>>>>S(I) increased significantly in the POLY group (P = 0.02), whereas total
>>>>and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol increased significantly in the SAT
>>>>group (both P = 0.002). These data demonstrate that a short-term POLY KD
>>>>induces a greater level of ketosis and improves S(I), without adversely
>>>>affecting total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, compared with a
>>>>traditional SAT KD. Thus, a POLY KD may be superior to a classical SAT
>>>>KD for chronic administration.
>>
>>
>> Thanks for posting the abstract. My original post was uploaded before
>> I intended.
>>
>>
>>>Repeating myself
>>>
>>>1. epileptic children
>>>2. 5 days(!)
>>>3. absurd dietary extremes
>>>
>>>Zero relevance if you ask me.
>>
>>
>> Wrong.
>>
>> Subjects were adults ~23 yo
>> They were healthy subjects, not epileptic.
>
>My mistake, I saw that they were giving them the epilepsy diet (4:1) and
>assumed it was epileptic kiddies. Which still makes it irrelevant to
>fat loss keto diets because they are set up totally differently.
>
>> The diet was eucaloric.
>> It was investigating short-term (5 days) which does have relevance for
>> CKD.
>> No more absurd than many of the other diets out there. I've seen
>> people derive 50% of their calories from saturated fats when doing
>> keto diets.
>
>and:
>a. you want to be insulin resistant on a diet

Possibly for a segment of the population. Not for T2 diabetics.

>b. being insulin resistant is irrelevant WHEN YOU AREN'T EATING ANY
>****ING CARBOHYDRATES IN THE FIRST PLACE! You reverse insulin
>resistance prior to the carb-load by consuming a small amount of high GI
>carbs and training so don't throw that at me.

Ooohhhh, did I **** you off? Regardless, for some people, especially
in the obese population, this may be an issue. They typically have
very poor baseline lipid profiles. Another situation is diabetics for
instance who HAVE TO CONSUME SOME CARBS.

>> They chose 5 days because of "constraints of the first-year medical
>> student curriculum." So what if most of the metabolic effects of keto
>> diets occur ~4 days. The fact that a short-term keto diet with the two
>> different types of fats elicited noticable changes on lipid profiles
>> is of interest to those who use a CKD.
>>
>> A keto diet containing primarily PUFAs rather than SF used by healthy
>> adults is applicable.
>
>60% PUFA is unhealthy as **** and you know it.

Is it, though, short-term? I don't know that. Do you?

>and this study doesn't adress what would happen if the diet is 15-20%
>PUFA and the rest sat. Or half and half. Or any other combination.

True, it doesn't.

>Hence, irrelevant.

Whatever.


Bioinformatics:
"What is a sheep; only millions of little bits of sheepness
whirling around and doing intricate convolutions inside the
sheep? What else is it but that?"
-Flann O'Brien, "The Third Policeman"

elzinator
April 27th 04, 02:30 AM
On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 13:10:36 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>Elzinator wrote:
>> Lyle McDonald > wrote in message >...
>>
>>>the tree by the river wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>In article >,
>>>>Roger Zoul > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Elzinator wrote:
>>>>>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never 'assume')
>>>>>:: but never demonstrated other than anecdotal evidence (lipid profiles,
>>>>>:: etc).
>>>>>::
>>>>>:: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 4
>>>>>:: 1641-1645
>>>>>::
>>>>>:: Differential Metabolic Effects of Saturated Versus Polyunsaturated
>>>>>:: Fats in Ketogenic Diets.
>>>>>::
>>>>>:: Brian S. Fuehrlein, Michael S. Rutenberg, et al.
>>>>>
>>>>>How about an abstract, at least?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Ketogenic diets (KDs) are used for treatment of refractory epilepsy and
>>>>metabolic disorders. The classic saturated fatty acid-enriched (SAT) KD
>>>>has a fat:carbohydrate plus protein ratio of 4:1, in which the predominant
>>>>fats are saturated. We hypothesized that a polyunsaturated fat-enriched
>>>>(POLY) KD would induce a similar degree of ketosis with less detrimental
>>>>effects on carbohydrate and lipid metabolism. Twenty healthy adults were
>>>>randomized to two different weight-maintaining KDs for 5 d. Diets were
>>>>70% fat, 15% carbohydrate, and 15% protein. The fat contents were 60 or
>>>>15% saturated, 15 or 60% polyunsaturated, and 25% monounsaturated for
>>>>SAT and POLY, respectively. Changes in serum beta-hydroxybutyrate, insulin
>>>>sensitivity (S(I)), and lipid profiles were measured. Mean circulating
>>>>beta-hydroxybutyrate levels increased 8.4 mg/dl in the POLY group
>>>>(P = 0.0004), compared with 3.1 mg/dl in the SAT group (P = 0.07).
>>>>S(I) increased significantly in the POLY group (P = 0.02), whereas total
>>>>and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol increased significantly in the SAT
>>>>group (both P = 0.002). These data demonstrate that a short-term POLY KD
>>>>induces a greater level of ketosis and improves S(I), without adversely
>>>>affecting total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, compared with a
>>>>traditional SAT KD. Thus, a POLY KD may be superior to a classical SAT
>>>>KD for chronic administration.
>>
>>
>> Thanks for posting the abstract. My original post was uploaded before
>> I intended.
>>
>>
>>>Repeating myself
>>>
>>>1. epileptic children
>>>2. 5 days(!)
>>>3. absurd dietary extremes
>>>
>>>Zero relevance if you ask me.
>>
>>
>> Wrong.
>>
>> Subjects were adults ~23 yo
>> They were healthy subjects, not epileptic.
>
>My mistake, I saw that they were giving them the epilepsy diet (4:1) and
>assumed it was epileptic kiddies. Which still makes it irrelevant to
>fat loss keto diets because they are set up totally differently.
>
>> The diet was eucaloric.
>> It was investigating short-term (5 days) which does have relevance for
>> CKD.
>> No more absurd than many of the other diets out there. I've seen
>> people derive 50% of their calories from saturated fats when doing
>> keto diets.
>
>and:
>a. you want to be insulin resistant on a diet

Possibly for a segment of the population. Not for T2 diabetics.

>b. being insulin resistant is irrelevant WHEN YOU AREN'T EATING ANY
>****ING CARBOHYDRATES IN THE FIRST PLACE! You reverse insulin
>resistance prior to the carb-load by consuming a small amount of high GI
>carbs and training so don't throw that at me.

Ooohhhh, did I **** you off? Regardless, for some people, especially
in the obese population, this may be an issue. They typically have
very poor baseline lipid profiles. Another situation is diabetics for
instance who HAVE TO CONSUME SOME CARBS.

>> They chose 5 days because of "constraints of the first-year medical
>> student curriculum." So what if most of the metabolic effects of keto
>> diets occur ~4 days. The fact that a short-term keto diet with the two
>> different types of fats elicited noticable changes on lipid profiles
>> is of interest to those who use a CKD.
>>
>> A keto diet containing primarily PUFAs rather than SF used by healthy
>> adults is applicable.
>
>60% PUFA is unhealthy as **** and you know it.

Is it, though, short-term? I don't know that. Do you?

>and this study doesn't adress what would happen if the diet is 15-20%
>PUFA and the rest sat. Or half and half. Or any other combination.

True, it doesn't.

>Hence, irrelevant.

Whatever.


Bioinformatics:
"What is a sheep; only millions of little bits of sheepness
whirling around and doing intricate convolutions inside the
sheep? What else is it but that?"
-Flann O'Brien, "The Third Policeman"

elzinator
April 27th 04, 02:30 AM
On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 13:11:24 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>Elzinator wrote:
>
>> "Wayne S. Hill" > wrote in message >...
>>
>>>Roger Zoul wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Elzinator wrote:
>>>>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never
>>>>:: 'assume')
>>>
>>>Hey, you science types may not 'assume', but we engineers
>>>'assume' all the time.
>>
>>
>> That's what's wrong with you fysics-types and related fields: you
>> assume too much :)
>>
>> Elzi's Law No. 2: Never assume.
>>
>>
>>
>>>The result isn't surprising, but it's good to see this studied
>>>(considering the drivel from Atkins types that there's something
>>>magic about low-carb).
>>
>>
>> I has suspected such many years ago. I found this most interesting
>> considering that it was also a eucaloric diet and only 5 days, but a
>> hypocaloric diet may change this.
>>
>> Although, according to testimony that has been offered by those who
>> have had baseline lipid profiles and several weeks into a keto diet,
>> HDL may decrease somewhat (or not change) with high PUFA intake, but
>> LDL consistantly decreases as well. Watching the ratio is important.
>
>This happens in all studies of hypocaloric keto diets irrespective of
>the fat quality.

Not necessarily. I've talked to a few who have continued to have high
and/or unfavorable lipid levels. The question is how much of that is
attributable to genetics (familial
hypercholesterolemia/triglyceridemia).


Bioinformatics:
"What is a sheep; only millions of little bits of sheepness
whirling around and doing intricate convolutions inside the
sheep? What else is it but that?"
-Flann O'Brien, "The Third Policeman"

elzinator
April 27th 04, 02:30 AM
On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 13:11:24 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>Elzinator wrote:
>
>> "Wayne S. Hill" > wrote in message >...
>>
>>>Roger Zoul wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Elzinator wrote:
>>>>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never
>>>>:: 'assume')
>>>
>>>Hey, you science types may not 'assume', but we engineers
>>>'assume' all the time.
>>
>>
>> That's what's wrong with you fysics-types and related fields: you
>> assume too much :)
>>
>> Elzi's Law No. 2: Never assume.
>>
>>
>>
>>>The result isn't surprising, but it's good to see this studied
>>>(considering the drivel from Atkins types that there's something
>>>magic about low-carb).
>>
>>
>> I has suspected such many years ago. I found this most interesting
>> considering that it was also a eucaloric diet and only 5 days, but a
>> hypocaloric diet may change this.
>>
>> Although, according to testimony that has been offered by those who
>> have had baseline lipid profiles and several weeks into a keto diet,
>> HDL may decrease somewhat (or not change) with high PUFA intake, but
>> LDL consistantly decreases as well. Watching the ratio is important.
>
>This happens in all studies of hypocaloric keto diets irrespective of
>the fat quality.

Not necessarily. I've talked to a few who have continued to have high
and/or unfavorable lipid levels. The question is how much of that is
attributable to genetics (familial
hypercholesterolemia/triglyceridemia).


Bioinformatics:
"What is a sheep; only millions of little bits of sheepness
whirling around and doing intricate convolutions inside the
sheep? What else is it but that?"
-Flann O'Brien, "The Third Policeman"

elzinator
April 27th 04, 02:30 AM
On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 13:11:24 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>Elzinator wrote:
>
>> "Wayne S. Hill" > wrote in message >...
>>
>>>Roger Zoul wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Elzinator wrote:
>>>>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never
>>>>:: 'assume')
>>>
>>>Hey, you science types may not 'assume', but we engineers
>>>'assume' all the time.
>>
>>
>> That's what's wrong with you fysics-types and related fields: you
>> assume too much :)
>>
>> Elzi's Law No. 2: Never assume.
>>
>>
>>
>>>The result isn't surprising, but it's good to see this studied
>>>(considering the drivel from Atkins types that there's something
>>>magic about low-carb).
>>
>>
>> I has suspected such many years ago. I found this most interesting
>> considering that it was also a eucaloric diet and only 5 days, but a
>> hypocaloric diet may change this.
>>
>> Although, according to testimony that has been offered by those who
>> have had baseline lipid profiles and several weeks into a keto diet,
>> HDL may decrease somewhat (or not change) with high PUFA intake, but
>> LDL consistantly decreases as well. Watching the ratio is important.
>
>This happens in all studies of hypocaloric keto diets irrespective of
>the fat quality.

Not necessarily. I've talked to a few who have continued to have high
and/or unfavorable lipid levels. The question is how much of that is
attributable to genetics (familial
hypercholesterolemia/triglyceridemia).


Bioinformatics:
"What is a sheep; only millions of little bits of sheepness
whirling around and doing intricate convolutions inside the
sheep? What else is it but that?"
-Flann O'Brien, "The Third Policeman"

Will Brink
April 27th 04, 01:40 PM
In article >,
elzinator > wrote:

> On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 16:26:45 -0400, Will Brink wrote:
>
> >Seems to me it finds more or less what most diet studies find and we
> >already know: high intakes of sat fat in the diet, keto or otherwise,
> >is often bad for blood lipid profiles suggesting a mixture of poly,
> >mono, and sat lipids in the diet is best regardless of what % fat makes
> >up in the diet.
>
> Agreed.

Then it's an interesting if not "no duh" study of little real use.

> > I don't personally think a 60% poly diet would be a good
> >idea over long periods of time.
>
> I don't either. Not sure if it would be harmful short-term, though.

I doubt it would be harmful short term, but why bother?

>
>
> Bioinformatics:
> "What is a sheep; only millions of little bits of sheepness
> whirling around and doing intricate convolutions inside the
> sheep? What else is it but that?"
> -Flann O'Brien, "The Third Policeman"

--
Will Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/

Will Brink
April 27th 04, 01:40 PM
In article >,
elzinator > wrote:

> On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 16:26:45 -0400, Will Brink wrote:
>
> >Seems to me it finds more or less what most diet studies find and we
> >already know: high intakes of sat fat in the diet, keto or otherwise,
> >is often bad for blood lipid profiles suggesting a mixture of poly,
> >mono, and sat lipids in the diet is best regardless of what % fat makes
> >up in the diet.
>
> Agreed.

Then it's an interesting if not "no duh" study of little real use.

> > I don't personally think a 60% poly diet would be a good
> >idea over long periods of time.
>
> I don't either. Not sure if it would be harmful short-term, though.

I doubt it would be harmful short term, but why bother?

>
>
> Bioinformatics:
> "What is a sheep; only millions of little bits of sheepness
> whirling around and doing intricate convolutions inside the
> sheep? What else is it but that?"
> -Flann O'Brien, "The Third Policeman"

--
Will Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/

Will Brink
April 27th 04, 01:40 PM
In article >,
elzinator > wrote:

> On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 16:26:45 -0400, Will Brink wrote:
>
> >Seems to me it finds more or less what most diet studies find and we
> >already know: high intakes of sat fat in the diet, keto or otherwise,
> >is often bad for blood lipid profiles suggesting a mixture of poly,
> >mono, and sat lipids in the diet is best regardless of what % fat makes
> >up in the diet.
>
> Agreed.

Then it's an interesting if not "no duh" study of little real use.

> > I don't personally think a 60% poly diet would be a good
> >idea over long periods of time.
>
> I don't either. Not sure if it would be harmful short-term, though.

I doubt it would be harmful short term, but why bother?

>
>
> Bioinformatics:
> "What is a sheep; only millions of little bits of sheepness
> whirling around and doing intricate convolutions inside the
> sheep? What else is it but that?"
> -Flann O'Brien, "The Third Policeman"

--
Will Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/

Will Brink
April 27th 04, 01:41 PM
In article >,
(ShaneOttawa) wrote:

> Lyle McDonald > wrote:
> > A ****ed up study. note
> >
> > a. epileptic children
> > b. short study duratino (1 week?)
> > c. compared absurdly extreme diets (something like 60% poly to 60% sat)
> >
> > Lyle
>
>
> What causes this? Are studies conducted for legit narrow, specific
> reasons and then the results taken extrapolated too much by casual
> observors? Or are the studies just ****ed up?

They are often all of the above.

--
Will Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/

Will Brink
April 27th 04, 01:41 PM
In article >,
(ShaneOttawa) wrote:

> Lyle McDonald > wrote:
> > A ****ed up study. note
> >
> > a. epileptic children
> > b. short study duratino (1 week?)
> > c. compared absurdly extreme diets (something like 60% poly to 60% sat)
> >
> > Lyle
>
>
> What causes this? Are studies conducted for legit narrow, specific
> reasons and then the results taken extrapolated too much by casual
> observors? Or are the studies just ****ed up?

They are often all of the above.

--
Will Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/

Will Brink
April 27th 04, 01:41 PM
In article >,
(ShaneOttawa) wrote:

> Lyle McDonald > wrote:
> > A ****ed up study. note
> >
> > a. epileptic children
> > b. short study duratino (1 week?)
> > c. compared absurdly extreme diets (something like 60% poly to 60% sat)
> >
> > Lyle
>
>
> What causes this? Are studies conducted for legit narrow, specific
> reasons and then the results taken extrapolated too much by casual
> observors? Or are the studies just ****ed up?

They are often all of the above.

--
Will Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/

Lyle McDonald
April 27th 04, 04:31 PM
elzinator wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 13:10:36 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:


>>>The diet was eucaloric.
>>>It was investigating short-term (5 days) which does have relevance for
>>>CKD.
>>>No more absurd than many of the other diets out there. I've seen
>>>people derive 50% of their calories from saturated fats when doing
>>>keto diets.
>>
>>and:
>>a. you want to be insulin resistant on a diet
>
>
> Possibly for a segment of the population. Not for T2 diabetics.

nonsense. you know as well as I do that lowcarb diets improve things
for T2 diabetics. Guess what, the reduction in insulin and increase in
FFA makes them insulin resistant. BFD. I assure you that you are
increasing relative IR when you reduce carbs, due to an increase in
blood FFA levels. It doens't matter b/c your carb intake is low. And
b/c you're training regularly.

For a long-term lowcarb diet, IR is an irrelevancy: no carbs means no
issue with IR in the first place.

now, there is an issue when folks on such a diet reintroduce carbs:
there is a well known short-term 'diabetogenic' effect of starvation and
low-carb diets. Folks on CKd's experience this to some degree:
hyperinsulinemia coupled with BG crashes.

>
>>b. being insulin resistant is irrelevant WHEN YOU AREN'T EATING ANY
>>****ING CARBOHYDRATES IN THE FIRST PLACE! You reverse insulin
>>resistance prior to the carb-load by consuming a small amount of high GI
>>carbs and training so don't throw that at me.
>
>
> Ooohhhh, did I **** you off?

Nope, making a point for the slow of comprehension.

There is this huge issue about the FFA mediated insulin resistance that
occurs with lowcarb diets.

And how do they usually tst such? With an oral glucose tolerance test.
Yeah, no doubt, give someone on a lowcarb diet 75 grams of glucose and
they are IR. But so what? If they aren't eating carbs, being IR is
irrelevant.

>>60% PUFA is unhealthy as **** and you know it.
>
>
> Is it, though, short-term? I don't know that. Do you?
>
No, I don't.
But nobody follows a diet for 5 days.

And you can't generalize this to a CKD, both the carb up, the repetitive
nature and everything else change the dynamics.

Hence, from a real-world perspective, this study is irrelevant.


>>Hence, irrelevant.
>
>
> Whatever.

I note that you throw this out whenever you know you're wrong but can't
admit it. You did it in the training freuquency discussion that you and
I had the other weekend: I was right, you were wrong, rather than admit
it, you told me "Whatever."

So, err, whatever.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 27th 04, 04:31 PM
elzinator wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 13:10:36 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:


>>>The diet was eucaloric.
>>>It was investigating short-term (5 days) which does have relevance for
>>>CKD.
>>>No more absurd than many of the other diets out there. I've seen
>>>people derive 50% of their calories from saturated fats when doing
>>>keto diets.
>>
>>and:
>>a. you want to be insulin resistant on a diet
>
>
> Possibly for a segment of the population. Not for T2 diabetics.

nonsense. you know as well as I do that lowcarb diets improve things
for T2 diabetics. Guess what, the reduction in insulin and increase in
FFA makes them insulin resistant. BFD. I assure you that you are
increasing relative IR when you reduce carbs, due to an increase in
blood FFA levels. It doens't matter b/c your carb intake is low. And
b/c you're training regularly.

For a long-term lowcarb diet, IR is an irrelevancy: no carbs means no
issue with IR in the first place.

now, there is an issue when folks on such a diet reintroduce carbs:
there is a well known short-term 'diabetogenic' effect of starvation and
low-carb diets. Folks on CKd's experience this to some degree:
hyperinsulinemia coupled with BG crashes.

>
>>b. being insulin resistant is irrelevant WHEN YOU AREN'T EATING ANY
>>****ING CARBOHYDRATES IN THE FIRST PLACE! You reverse insulin
>>resistance prior to the carb-load by consuming a small amount of high GI
>>carbs and training so don't throw that at me.
>
>
> Ooohhhh, did I **** you off?

Nope, making a point for the slow of comprehension.

There is this huge issue about the FFA mediated insulin resistance that
occurs with lowcarb diets.

And how do they usually tst such? With an oral glucose tolerance test.
Yeah, no doubt, give someone on a lowcarb diet 75 grams of glucose and
they are IR. But so what? If they aren't eating carbs, being IR is
irrelevant.

>>60% PUFA is unhealthy as **** and you know it.
>
>
> Is it, though, short-term? I don't know that. Do you?
>
No, I don't.
But nobody follows a diet for 5 days.

And you can't generalize this to a CKD, both the carb up, the repetitive
nature and everything else change the dynamics.

Hence, from a real-world perspective, this study is irrelevant.


>>Hence, irrelevant.
>
>
> Whatever.

I note that you throw this out whenever you know you're wrong but can't
admit it. You did it in the training freuquency discussion that you and
I had the other weekend: I was right, you were wrong, rather than admit
it, you told me "Whatever."

So, err, whatever.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 27th 04, 04:31 PM
elzinator wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 13:10:36 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:


>>>The diet was eucaloric.
>>>It was investigating short-term (5 days) which does have relevance for
>>>CKD.
>>>No more absurd than many of the other diets out there. I've seen
>>>people derive 50% of their calories from saturated fats when doing
>>>keto diets.
>>
>>and:
>>a. you want to be insulin resistant on a diet
>
>
> Possibly for a segment of the population. Not for T2 diabetics.

nonsense. you know as well as I do that lowcarb diets improve things
for T2 diabetics. Guess what, the reduction in insulin and increase in
FFA makes them insulin resistant. BFD. I assure you that you are
increasing relative IR when you reduce carbs, due to an increase in
blood FFA levels. It doens't matter b/c your carb intake is low. And
b/c you're training regularly.

For a long-term lowcarb diet, IR is an irrelevancy: no carbs means no
issue with IR in the first place.

now, there is an issue when folks on such a diet reintroduce carbs:
there is a well known short-term 'diabetogenic' effect of starvation and
low-carb diets. Folks on CKd's experience this to some degree:
hyperinsulinemia coupled with BG crashes.

>
>>b. being insulin resistant is irrelevant WHEN YOU AREN'T EATING ANY
>>****ING CARBOHYDRATES IN THE FIRST PLACE! You reverse insulin
>>resistance prior to the carb-load by consuming a small amount of high GI
>>carbs and training so don't throw that at me.
>
>
> Ooohhhh, did I **** you off?

Nope, making a point for the slow of comprehension.

There is this huge issue about the FFA mediated insulin resistance that
occurs with lowcarb diets.

And how do they usually tst such? With an oral glucose tolerance test.
Yeah, no doubt, give someone on a lowcarb diet 75 grams of glucose and
they are IR. But so what? If they aren't eating carbs, being IR is
irrelevant.

>>60% PUFA is unhealthy as **** and you know it.
>
>
> Is it, though, short-term? I don't know that. Do you?
>
No, I don't.
But nobody follows a diet for 5 days.

And you can't generalize this to a CKD, both the carb up, the repetitive
nature and everything else change the dynamics.

Hence, from a real-world perspective, this study is irrelevant.


>>Hence, irrelevant.
>
>
> Whatever.

I note that you throw this out whenever you know you're wrong but can't
admit it. You did it in the training freuquency discussion that you and
I had the other weekend: I was right, you were wrong, rather than admit
it, you told me "Whatever."

So, err, whatever.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 27th 04, 04:32 PM
elzinator wrote:

> On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 13:11:24 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>
>>Elzinator wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Wayne S. Hill" > wrote in message >...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Roger Zoul wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Elzinator wrote:
>>>>>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never
>>>>>:: 'assume')
>>>>
>>>>Hey, you science types may not 'assume', but we engineers
>>>>'assume' all the time.
>>>
>>>
>>>That's what's wrong with you fysics-types and related fields: you
>>>assume too much :)
>>>
>>>Elzi's Law No. 2: Never assume.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>The result isn't surprising, but it's good to see this studied
>>>>(considering the drivel from Atkins types that there's something
>>>>magic about low-carb).
>>>
>>>
>>>I has suspected such many years ago. I found this most interesting
>>>considering that it was also a eucaloric diet and only 5 days, but a
>>>hypocaloric diet may change this.
>>>
>>>Although, according to testimony that has been offered by those who
>>>have had baseline lipid profiles and several weeks into a keto diet,
>>>HDL may decrease somewhat (or not change) with high PUFA intake, but
>>>LDL consistantly decreases as well. Watching the ratio is important.
>>
>>This happens in all studies of hypocaloric keto diets irrespective of
>>the fat quality.
>
>
> Not necessarily. I've talked to a few who have continued to have high
> and/or unfavorable lipid levels. The question is how much of that is
> attributable to genetics (familial
> hypercholesterolemia/triglyceridemia).

Note choice of words 'all STUDIES'. is there individual variance and
folks who don't respond as such? Yes.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 27th 04, 04:32 PM
elzinator wrote:

> On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 13:11:24 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>
>>Elzinator wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Wayne S. Hill" > wrote in message >...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Roger Zoul wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Elzinator wrote:
>>>>>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never
>>>>>:: 'assume')
>>>>
>>>>Hey, you science types may not 'assume', but we engineers
>>>>'assume' all the time.
>>>
>>>
>>>That's what's wrong with you fysics-types and related fields: you
>>>assume too much :)
>>>
>>>Elzi's Law No. 2: Never assume.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>The result isn't surprising, but it's good to see this studied
>>>>(considering the drivel from Atkins types that there's something
>>>>magic about low-carb).
>>>
>>>
>>>I has suspected such many years ago. I found this most interesting
>>>considering that it was also a eucaloric diet and only 5 days, but a
>>>hypocaloric diet may change this.
>>>
>>>Although, according to testimony that has been offered by those who
>>>have had baseline lipid profiles and several weeks into a keto diet,
>>>HDL may decrease somewhat (or not change) with high PUFA intake, but
>>>LDL consistantly decreases as well. Watching the ratio is important.
>>
>>This happens in all studies of hypocaloric keto diets irrespective of
>>the fat quality.
>
>
> Not necessarily. I've talked to a few who have continued to have high
> and/or unfavorable lipid levels. The question is how much of that is
> attributable to genetics (familial
> hypercholesterolemia/triglyceridemia).

Note choice of words 'all STUDIES'. is there individual variance and
folks who don't respond as such? Yes.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 27th 04, 04:32 PM
elzinator wrote:

> On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 13:11:24 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>
>>Elzinator wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Wayne S. Hill" > wrote in message >...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Roger Zoul wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Elzinator wrote:
>>>>>:: Finally, a study on a topic that had been suspected (never
>>>>>:: 'assume')
>>>>
>>>>Hey, you science types may not 'assume', but we engineers
>>>>'assume' all the time.
>>>
>>>
>>>That's what's wrong with you fysics-types and related fields: you
>>>assume too much :)
>>>
>>>Elzi's Law No. 2: Never assume.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>The result isn't surprising, but it's good to see this studied
>>>>(considering the drivel from Atkins types that there's something
>>>>magic about low-carb).
>>>
>>>
>>>I has suspected such many years ago. I found this most interesting
>>>considering that it was also a eucaloric diet and only 5 days, but a
>>>hypocaloric diet may change this.
>>>
>>>Although, according to testimony that has been offered by those who
>>>have had baseline lipid profiles and several weeks into a keto diet,
>>>HDL may decrease somewhat (or not change) with high PUFA intake, but
>>>LDL consistantly decreases as well. Watching the ratio is important.
>>
>>This happens in all studies of hypocaloric keto diets irrespective of
>>the fat quality.
>
>
> Not necessarily. I've talked to a few who have continued to have high
> and/or unfavorable lipid levels. The question is how much of that is
> attributable to genetics (familial
> hypercholesterolemia/triglyceridemia).

Note choice of words 'all STUDIES'. is there individual variance and
folks who don't respond as such? Yes.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 27th 04, 04:33 PM
Roger Zoul wrote:

> Lyle McDonald wrote:

> :: and this study doesn't adress what would happen if the diet is 15-20%
> :: PUFA and the rest sat. Or half and half. Or any other combination.
> ::
> :: Hence, irrelevant.
>
> Damn -- when you and Elzi disagree, how in the **** am I supposed to learn
> anything?
>

simple: she's bigger/stronger than I am, hence she is right (not saying
much, I'm a scrawny ass endurance athlete again, I couldn't lift the
sunday paper much less squat it right now).

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 27th 04, 04:33 PM
Roger Zoul wrote:

> Lyle McDonald wrote:

> :: and this study doesn't adress what would happen if the diet is 15-20%
> :: PUFA and the rest sat. Or half and half. Or any other combination.
> ::
> :: Hence, irrelevant.
>
> Damn -- when you and Elzi disagree, how in the **** am I supposed to learn
> anything?
>

simple: she's bigger/stronger than I am, hence she is right (not saying
much, I'm a scrawny ass endurance athlete again, I couldn't lift the
sunday paper much less squat it right now).

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 27th 04, 04:33 PM
Roger Zoul wrote:

> Lyle McDonald wrote:

> :: and this study doesn't adress what would happen if the diet is 15-20%
> :: PUFA and the rest sat. Or half and half. Or any other combination.
> ::
> :: Hence, irrelevant.
>
> Damn -- when you and Elzi disagree, how in the **** am I supposed to learn
> anything?
>

simple: she's bigger/stronger than I am, hence she is right (not saying
much, I'm a scrawny ass endurance athlete again, I couldn't lift the
sunday paper much less squat it right now).

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 27th 04, 04:33 PM
ShaneOttawa wrote:

> Lyle McDonald > wrote:
>
>>A ****ed up study. note
>>
>>a. epileptic children
>>b. short study duratino (1 week?)
>>c. compared absurdly extreme diets (something like 60% poly to 60% sat)
>>
>>Lyle
>
>
>
> What causes this? Are studies conducted for legit narrow, specific
> reasons and then the results taken extrapolated too much by casual
> observors? Or are the studies just ****ed up?

Yes.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 27th 04, 04:33 PM
ShaneOttawa wrote:

> Lyle McDonald > wrote:
>
>>A ****ed up study. note
>>
>>a. epileptic children
>>b. short study duratino (1 week?)
>>c. compared absurdly extreme diets (something like 60% poly to 60% sat)
>>
>>Lyle
>
>
>
> What causes this? Are studies conducted for legit narrow, specific
> reasons and then the results taken extrapolated too much by casual
> observors? Or are the studies just ****ed up?

Yes.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 27th 04, 04:33 PM
ShaneOttawa wrote:

> Lyle McDonald > wrote:
>
>>A ****ed up study. note
>>
>>a. epileptic children
>>b. short study duratino (1 week?)
>>c. compared absurdly extreme diets (something like 60% poly to 60% sat)
>>
>>Lyle
>
>
>
> What causes this? Are studies conducted for legit narrow, specific
> reasons and then the results taken extrapolated too much by casual
> observors? Or are the studies just ****ed up?

Yes.

Lyle

Donovan Rebbechi
April 27th 04, 07:44 PM
In article >, Lyle McDonald wrote:

> simple: she's bigger/stronger than I am, hence she is right (not saying
> much, I'm a scrawny ass endurance athlete again, I couldn't lift the
> sunday paper much less squat it right now).

How's that going anyway ? The endurance weenie stuff that is, not the heavy
singles with the Sunday paper.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

Donovan Rebbechi
April 27th 04, 07:44 PM
In article >, Lyle McDonald wrote:

> simple: she's bigger/stronger than I am, hence she is right (not saying
> much, I'm a scrawny ass endurance athlete again, I couldn't lift the
> sunday paper much less squat it right now).

How's that going anyway ? The endurance weenie stuff that is, not the heavy
singles with the Sunday paper.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

Donovan Rebbechi
April 27th 04, 07:44 PM
In article >, Lyle McDonald wrote:

> simple: she's bigger/stronger than I am, hence she is right (not saying
> much, I'm a scrawny ass endurance athlete again, I couldn't lift the
> sunday paper much less squat it right now).

How's that going anyway ? The endurance weenie stuff that is, not the heavy
singles with the Sunday paper.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

Roger Zoul
April 28th 04, 05:06 PM
Lyle McDonald wrote:
:: elzinator wrote:
::: On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 13:10:36 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:
::
::
::::: The diet was eucaloric.
::::: It was investigating short-term (5 days) which does have
::::: relevance for CKD.
::::: No more absurd than many of the other diets out there. I've seen
::::: people derive 50% of their calories from saturated fats when doing
::::: keto diets.
::::
:::: and:
:::: a. you want to be insulin resistant on a diet
:::
:::
::: Possibly for a segment of the population. Not for T2 diabetics.
::
:: nonsense. you know as well as I do that lowcarb diets improve things
:: for T2 diabetics. Guess what, the reduction in insulin and increase
:: in FFA makes them insulin resistant. BFD. I assure you that you are
:: increasing relative IR when you reduce carbs, due to an increase in
:: blood FFA levels. It doens't matter b/c your carb intake is low.
:: And b/c you're training regularly.
::
:: For a long-term lowcarb diet, IR is an irrelevancy: no carbs means no
:: issue with IR in the first place.
::
:: now, there is an issue when folks on such a diet reintroduce carbs:
:: there is a well known short-term 'diabetogenic' effect of starvation
:: and low-carb diets. Folks on CKd's experience this to some degree:
:: hyperinsulinemia coupled with BG crashes.
::
:::
:::: b. being insulin resistant is irrelevant WHEN YOU AREN'T EATING ANY
:::: ****ING CARBOHYDRATES IN THE FIRST PLACE! You reverse insulin
:::: resistance prior to the carb-load by consuming a small amount of
:::: high GI carbs and training so don't throw that at me.
:::
:::
::: Ooohhhh, did I **** you off?
::
:: Nope, making a point for the slow of comprehension.
::
:: There is this huge issue about the FFA mediated insulin resistance
:: that occurs with lowcarb diets.
::
:: And how do they usually tst such? With an oral glucose tolerance
:: test. Yeah, no doubt, give someone on a lowcarb diet 75 grams of
:: glucose and they are IR. But so what? If they aren't eating carbs,
:: being IR is irrelevant.
::
:::: 60% PUFA is unhealthy as **** and you know it.
:::
:::
::: Is it, though, short-term? I don't know that. Do you?
:::
:: No, I don't.
:: But nobody follows a diet for 5 days.
::
:: And you can't generalize this to a CKD, both the carb up, the
:: repetitive nature and everything else change the dynamics.
::
:: Hence, from a real-world perspective, this study is irrelevant.
::
::
:::: Hence, irrelevant.
:::
:::
::: Whatever.
::
:: I note that you throw this out whenever you know you're wrong but
:: can't admit it. You did it in the training freuquency discussion
:: that you and I had the other weekend: I was right, you were wrong,
:: rather than admit it, you told me "Whatever."
::
:: So, err, whatever.

No, Lyle....your comprehension was slow....When Elzi says "Whatever" she's
saying "Okay, I'm wrong, but if you don't leave it alone, I'm going to kick
your whimpy little ass."

You'd better get that figured out quick, dood.

::
:: Lyle

Roger Zoul
April 28th 04, 05:06 PM
Lyle McDonald wrote:
:: elzinator wrote:
::: On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 13:10:36 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:
::
::
::::: The diet was eucaloric.
::::: It was investigating short-term (5 days) which does have
::::: relevance for CKD.
::::: No more absurd than many of the other diets out there. I've seen
::::: people derive 50% of their calories from saturated fats when doing
::::: keto diets.
::::
:::: and:
:::: a. you want to be insulin resistant on a diet
:::
:::
::: Possibly for a segment of the population. Not for T2 diabetics.
::
:: nonsense. you know as well as I do that lowcarb diets improve things
:: for T2 diabetics. Guess what, the reduction in insulin and increase
:: in FFA makes them insulin resistant. BFD. I assure you that you are
:: increasing relative IR when you reduce carbs, due to an increase in
:: blood FFA levels. It doens't matter b/c your carb intake is low.
:: And b/c you're training regularly.
::
:: For a long-term lowcarb diet, IR is an irrelevancy: no carbs means no
:: issue with IR in the first place.
::
:: now, there is an issue when folks on such a diet reintroduce carbs:
:: there is a well known short-term 'diabetogenic' effect of starvation
:: and low-carb diets. Folks on CKd's experience this to some degree:
:: hyperinsulinemia coupled with BG crashes.
::
:::
:::: b. being insulin resistant is irrelevant WHEN YOU AREN'T EATING ANY
:::: ****ING CARBOHYDRATES IN THE FIRST PLACE! You reverse insulin
:::: resistance prior to the carb-load by consuming a small amount of
:::: high GI carbs and training so don't throw that at me.
:::
:::
::: Ooohhhh, did I **** you off?
::
:: Nope, making a point for the slow of comprehension.
::
:: There is this huge issue about the FFA mediated insulin resistance
:: that occurs with lowcarb diets.
::
:: And how do they usually tst such? With an oral glucose tolerance
:: test. Yeah, no doubt, give someone on a lowcarb diet 75 grams of
:: glucose and they are IR. But so what? If they aren't eating carbs,
:: being IR is irrelevant.
::
:::: 60% PUFA is unhealthy as **** and you know it.
:::
:::
::: Is it, though, short-term? I don't know that. Do you?
:::
:: No, I don't.
:: But nobody follows a diet for 5 days.
::
:: And you can't generalize this to a CKD, both the carb up, the
:: repetitive nature and everything else change the dynamics.
::
:: Hence, from a real-world perspective, this study is irrelevant.
::
::
:::: Hence, irrelevant.
:::
:::
::: Whatever.
::
:: I note that you throw this out whenever you know you're wrong but
:: can't admit it. You did it in the training freuquency discussion
:: that you and I had the other weekend: I was right, you were wrong,
:: rather than admit it, you told me "Whatever."
::
:: So, err, whatever.

No, Lyle....your comprehension was slow....When Elzi says "Whatever" she's
saying "Okay, I'm wrong, but if you don't leave it alone, I'm going to kick
your whimpy little ass."

You'd better get that figured out quick, dood.

::
:: Lyle

Roger Zoul
April 28th 04, 05:06 PM
Lyle McDonald wrote:
:: elzinator wrote:
::: On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 13:10:36 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:
::
::
::::: The diet was eucaloric.
::::: It was investigating short-term (5 days) which does have
::::: relevance for CKD.
::::: No more absurd than many of the other diets out there. I've seen
::::: people derive 50% of their calories from saturated fats when doing
::::: keto diets.
::::
:::: and:
:::: a. you want to be insulin resistant on a diet
:::
:::
::: Possibly for a segment of the population. Not for T2 diabetics.
::
:: nonsense. you know as well as I do that lowcarb diets improve things
:: for T2 diabetics. Guess what, the reduction in insulin and increase
:: in FFA makes them insulin resistant. BFD. I assure you that you are
:: increasing relative IR when you reduce carbs, due to an increase in
:: blood FFA levels. It doens't matter b/c your carb intake is low.
:: And b/c you're training regularly.
::
:: For a long-term lowcarb diet, IR is an irrelevancy: no carbs means no
:: issue with IR in the first place.
::
:: now, there is an issue when folks on such a diet reintroduce carbs:
:: there is a well known short-term 'diabetogenic' effect of starvation
:: and low-carb diets. Folks on CKd's experience this to some degree:
:: hyperinsulinemia coupled with BG crashes.
::
:::
:::: b. being insulin resistant is irrelevant WHEN YOU AREN'T EATING ANY
:::: ****ING CARBOHYDRATES IN THE FIRST PLACE! You reverse insulin
:::: resistance prior to the carb-load by consuming a small amount of
:::: high GI carbs and training so don't throw that at me.
:::
:::
::: Ooohhhh, did I **** you off?
::
:: Nope, making a point for the slow of comprehension.
::
:: There is this huge issue about the FFA mediated insulin resistance
:: that occurs with lowcarb diets.
::
:: And how do they usually tst such? With an oral glucose tolerance
:: test. Yeah, no doubt, give someone on a lowcarb diet 75 grams of
:: glucose and they are IR. But so what? If they aren't eating carbs,
:: being IR is irrelevant.
::
:::: 60% PUFA is unhealthy as **** and you know it.
:::
:::
::: Is it, though, short-term? I don't know that. Do you?
:::
:: No, I don't.
:: But nobody follows a diet for 5 days.
::
:: And you can't generalize this to a CKD, both the carb up, the
:: repetitive nature and everything else change the dynamics.
::
:: Hence, from a real-world perspective, this study is irrelevant.
::
::
:::: Hence, irrelevant.
:::
:::
::: Whatever.
::
:: I note that you throw this out whenever you know you're wrong but
:: can't admit it. You did it in the training freuquency discussion
:: that you and I had the other weekend: I was right, you were wrong,
:: rather than admit it, you told me "Whatever."
::
:: So, err, whatever.

No, Lyle....your comprehension was slow....When Elzi says "Whatever" she's
saying "Okay, I'm wrong, but if you don't leave it alone, I'm going to kick
your whimpy little ass."

You'd better get that figured out quick, dood.

::
:: Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 29th 04, 01:27 AM
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:

> In article >, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>
>
>>simple: she's bigger/stronger than I am, hence she is right (not saying
>>much, I'm a scrawny ass endurance athlete again, I couldn't lift the
>>sunday paper much less squat it right now).
>
>
> How's that going anyway ? The endurance weenie stuff that is, not the heavy
> singles with the Sunday paper.

Well, still mainly doing a lot of 'similar' cardio work (bike and
stairmaster), skating drills are mostly technical. So I can't honestly
gauge skating performance yet per se (that cycle starts in a few weeks).

But power outputs (both max and sustainable over varying time periods
ranging from 2 to 40 minutes) on the bike and stairmaster (don't laugh,
hot chicks hang out on the stairmaster you iron lifting freaks) continue
to go up almost linearly. My program is very intensity based, low
volume, based around some research from the 70's, I'm probably training
maybe 4-5 hours/week total (recall that my events last 15-40 minutes or
so). My body seems to respond to it better than to LSD stuff, dunno why.

A typical week:
Monday: warmups + 5X2'/2' intervals at VO2 max pace. This is usually
accompoanied by an increase in the power I'm using.

Tuesday: warmups to 30-40 minutes at the highest wattage I can sustain.
LT work basically. This is a grueling workout, lately I give myself a
1 minute rest break at the 20' mark (I have to reset the machine anyhow).

Wed: has recently become warmups + 2X8'/4' at the highest sustainable
power output for the entire period (this workout ****ing hurts). About
40 watts below Monday workload.

Thu: repeat Tue

Fri: 3-4X3'/3' intervals at Vo2 max at the same workload as Monday. When
I can accomplish this, I bump the workload on the following Monday.

Sat: Repeat Tue
Sun: off

there are also 2-3 technical/skating workouts in there somewhere. All
intervals are done on the bike, all threshold workouts on the Stairmaster.

Lyle

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 29th 04, 01:27 AM
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:

> In article >, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>
>
>>simple: she's bigger/stronger than I am, hence she is right (not saying
>>much, I'm a scrawny ass endurance athlete again, I couldn't lift the
>>sunday paper much less squat it right now).
>
>
> How's that going anyway ? The endurance weenie stuff that is, not the heavy
> singles with the Sunday paper.

Well, still mainly doing a lot of 'similar' cardio work (bike and
stairmaster), skating drills are mostly technical. So I can't honestly
gauge skating performance yet per se (that cycle starts in a few weeks).

But power outputs (both max and sustainable over varying time periods
ranging from 2 to 40 minutes) on the bike and stairmaster (don't laugh,
hot chicks hang out on the stairmaster you iron lifting freaks) continue
to go up almost linearly. My program is very intensity based, low
volume, based around some research from the 70's, I'm probably training
maybe 4-5 hours/week total (recall that my events last 15-40 minutes or
so). My body seems to respond to it better than to LSD stuff, dunno why.

A typical week:
Monday: warmups + 5X2'/2' intervals at VO2 max pace. This is usually
accompoanied by an increase in the power I'm using.

Tuesday: warmups to 30-40 minutes at the highest wattage I can sustain.
LT work basically. This is a grueling workout, lately I give myself a
1 minute rest break at the 20' mark (I have to reset the machine anyhow).

Wed: has recently become warmups + 2X8'/4' at the highest sustainable
power output for the entire period (this workout ****ing hurts). About
40 watts below Monday workload.

Thu: repeat Tue

Fri: 3-4X3'/3' intervals at Vo2 max at the same workload as Monday. When
I can accomplish this, I bump the workload on the following Monday.

Sat: Repeat Tue
Sun: off

there are also 2-3 technical/skating workouts in there somewhere. All
intervals are done on the bike, all threshold workouts on the Stairmaster.

Lyle

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 29th 04, 01:27 AM
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:

> In article >, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>
>
>>simple: she's bigger/stronger than I am, hence she is right (not saying
>>much, I'm a scrawny ass endurance athlete again, I couldn't lift the
>>sunday paper much less squat it right now).
>
>
> How's that going anyway ? The endurance weenie stuff that is, not the heavy
> singles with the Sunday paper.

Well, still mainly doing a lot of 'similar' cardio work (bike and
stairmaster), skating drills are mostly technical. So I can't honestly
gauge skating performance yet per se (that cycle starts in a few weeks).

But power outputs (both max and sustainable over varying time periods
ranging from 2 to 40 minutes) on the bike and stairmaster (don't laugh,
hot chicks hang out on the stairmaster you iron lifting freaks) continue
to go up almost linearly. My program is very intensity based, low
volume, based around some research from the 70's, I'm probably training
maybe 4-5 hours/week total (recall that my events last 15-40 minutes or
so). My body seems to respond to it better than to LSD stuff, dunno why.

A typical week:
Monday: warmups + 5X2'/2' intervals at VO2 max pace. This is usually
accompoanied by an increase in the power I'm using.

Tuesday: warmups to 30-40 minutes at the highest wattage I can sustain.
LT work basically. This is a grueling workout, lately I give myself a
1 minute rest break at the 20' mark (I have to reset the machine anyhow).

Wed: has recently become warmups + 2X8'/4' at the highest sustainable
power output for the entire period (this workout ****ing hurts). About
40 watts below Monday workload.

Thu: repeat Tue

Fri: 3-4X3'/3' intervals at Vo2 max at the same workload as Monday. When
I can accomplish this, I bump the workload on the following Monday.

Sat: Repeat Tue
Sun: off

there are also 2-3 technical/skating workouts in there somewhere. All
intervals are done on the bike, all threshold workouts on the Stairmaster.

Lyle

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 29th 04, 01:28 AM
Roger Zoul wrote:

> Lyle McDonald wrote:
> :: elzinator wrote:

> :: I note that you throw this out whenever you know you're wrong but
> :: can't admit it. You did it in the training freuquency discussion
> :: that you and I had the other weekend: I was right, you were wrong,
> :: rather than admit it, you told me "Whatever."
> ::
> :: So, err, whatever.
>
> No, Lyle....your comprehension was slow....When Elzi says "Whatever" she's
> saying "Okay, I'm wrong, but if you don't leave it alone, I'm going to kick
> your whimpy little ass."
>
> You'd better get that figured out quick, dood.

considering that Elzi gripes about individuals who are unable to admit
they are wrong, she better get the **** over it herself. Well, unless
she wants to be guilty of the same hypocrisy she criticises.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 29th 04, 01:28 AM
Roger Zoul wrote:

> Lyle McDonald wrote:
> :: elzinator wrote:

> :: I note that you throw this out whenever you know you're wrong but
> :: can't admit it. You did it in the training freuquency discussion
> :: that you and I had the other weekend: I was right, you were wrong,
> :: rather than admit it, you told me "Whatever."
> ::
> :: So, err, whatever.
>
> No, Lyle....your comprehension was slow....When Elzi says "Whatever" she's
> saying "Okay, I'm wrong, but if you don't leave it alone, I'm going to kick
> your whimpy little ass."
>
> You'd better get that figured out quick, dood.

considering that Elzi gripes about individuals who are unable to admit
they are wrong, she better get the **** over it herself. Well, unless
she wants to be guilty of the same hypocrisy she criticises.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 29th 04, 01:28 AM
Roger Zoul wrote:

> Lyle McDonald wrote:
> :: elzinator wrote:

> :: I note that you throw this out whenever you know you're wrong but
> :: can't admit it. You did it in the training freuquency discussion
> :: that you and I had the other weekend: I was right, you were wrong,
> :: rather than admit it, you told me "Whatever."
> ::
> :: So, err, whatever.
>
> No, Lyle....your comprehension was slow....When Elzi says "Whatever" she's
> saying "Okay, I'm wrong, but if you don't leave it alone, I'm going to kick
> your whimpy little ass."
>
> You'd better get that figured out quick, dood.

considering that Elzi gripes about individuals who are unable to admit
they are wrong, she better get the **** over it herself. Well, unless
she wants to be guilty of the same hypocrisy she criticises.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 29th 04, 01:33 AM
Lyle McDonald wrote:

> Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
>> In article >, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>>
>>
>>> simple: she's bigger/stronger than I am, hence she is right (not
>>> saying much, I'm a scrawny ass endurance athlete again, I couldn't
>>> lift the sunday paper much less squat it right now).
>>
>>
>>
>> How's that going anyway ? The endurance weenie stuff that is, not the
>> heavy singles with the Sunday paper.
>
>
> Well, still mainly doing a lot of 'similar' cardio work (bike and
> stairmaster), skating drills are mostly technical. So I can't honestly
> gauge skating performance yet per se (that cycle starts in a few weeks).
>
> But power outputs (both max and sustainable over varying time periods
> ranging from 2 to 40 minutes) on the bike and stairmaster (don't laugh,
> hot chicks hang out on the stairmaster you iron lifting freaks) continue
> to go up almost linearly. My program is very intensity based, low
> volume, based around some research from the 70's, I'm probably training
> maybe 4-5 hours/week total (recall that my events last 15-40 minutes or
> so). My body seems to respond to it better than to LSD stuff, dunno why.
>
> A typical week:
> Monday: warmups + 5X2'/2' intervals at VO2 max pace. This is usually
> accompoanied by an increase in the power I'm using.
>
> Tuesday: warmups to 30-40 minutes at the highest wattage I can sustain.
> LT work basically. This is a grueling workout, lately I give myself a
> 1 minute rest break at the 20' mark (I have to reset the machine anyhow).
>
> Wed: has recently become warmups + 2X8'/4' at the highest sustainable
> power output for the entire period (this workout ****ing hurts). About
> 40 watts below Monday workload.
>
> Thu: repeat Tue
>
> Fri: 3-4X3'/3' intervals at Vo2 max at the same workload as Monday. When
> I can accomplish this, I bump the workload on the following Monday.
>
> Sat: Repeat Tue
> Sun: off
>
> there are also 2-3 technical/skating workouts in there somewhere. All
> intervals are done on the bike, all threshold workouts on the Stairmaster.

Oh yeah, every 3rd or 4th week, I'm burnt and take an unloading week,
cutting the volume and intensity way back.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 29th 04, 01:33 AM
Lyle McDonald wrote:

> Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
>> In article >, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>>
>>
>>> simple: she's bigger/stronger than I am, hence she is right (not
>>> saying much, I'm a scrawny ass endurance athlete again, I couldn't
>>> lift the sunday paper much less squat it right now).
>>
>>
>>
>> How's that going anyway ? The endurance weenie stuff that is, not the
>> heavy singles with the Sunday paper.
>
>
> Well, still mainly doing a lot of 'similar' cardio work (bike and
> stairmaster), skating drills are mostly technical. So I can't honestly
> gauge skating performance yet per se (that cycle starts in a few weeks).
>
> But power outputs (both max and sustainable over varying time periods
> ranging from 2 to 40 minutes) on the bike and stairmaster (don't laugh,
> hot chicks hang out on the stairmaster you iron lifting freaks) continue
> to go up almost linearly. My program is very intensity based, low
> volume, based around some research from the 70's, I'm probably training
> maybe 4-5 hours/week total (recall that my events last 15-40 minutes or
> so). My body seems to respond to it better than to LSD stuff, dunno why.
>
> A typical week:
> Monday: warmups + 5X2'/2' intervals at VO2 max pace. This is usually
> accompoanied by an increase in the power I'm using.
>
> Tuesday: warmups to 30-40 minutes at the highest wattage I can sustain.
> LT work basically. This is a grueling workout, lately I give myself a
> 1 minute rest break at the 20' mark (I have to reset the machine anyhow).
>
> Wed: has recently become warmups + 2X8'/4' at the highest sustainable
> power output for the entire period (this workout ****ing hurts). About
> 40 watts below Monday workload.
>
> Thu: repeat Tue
>
> Fri: 3-4X3'/3' intervals at Vo2 max at the same workload as Monday. When
> I can accomplish this, I bump the workload on the following Monday.
>
> Sat: Repeat Tue
> Sun: off
>
> there are also 2-3 technical/skating workouts in there somewhere. All
> intervals are done on the bike, all threshold workouts on the Stairmaster.

Oh yeah, every 3rd or 4th week, I'm burnt and take an unloading week,
cutting the volume and intensity way back.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 29th 04, 01:33 AM
Lyle McDonald wrote:

> Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
>> In article >, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>>
>>
>>> simple: she's bigger/stronger than I am, hence she is right (not
>>> saying much, I'm a scrawny ass endurance athlete again, I couldn't
>>> lift the sunday paper much less squat it right now).
>>
>>
>>
>> How's that going anyway ? The endurance weenie stuff that is, not the
>> heavy singles with the Sunday paper.
>
>
> Well, still mainly doing a lot of 'similar' cardio work (bike and
> stairmaster), skating drills are mostly technical. So I can't honestly
> gauge skating performance yet per se (that cycle starts in a few weeks).
>
> But power outputs (both max and sustainable over varying time periods
> ranging from 2 to 40 minutes) on the bike and stairmaster (don't laugh,
> hot chicks hang out on the stairmaster you iron lifting freaks) continue
> to go up almost linearly. My program is very intensity based, low
> volume, based around some research from the 70's, I'm probably training
> maybe 4-5 hours/week total (recall that my events last 15-40 minutes or
> so). My body seems to respond to it better than to LSD stuff, dunno why.
>
> A typical week:
> Monday: warmups + 5X2'/2' intervals at VO2 max pace. This is usually
> accompoanied by an increase in the power I'm using.
>
> Tuesday: warmups to 30-40 minutes at the highest wattage I can sustain.
> LT work basically. This is a grueling workout, lately I give myself a
> 1 minute rest break at the 20' mark (I have to reset the machine anyhow).
>
> Wed: has recently become warmups + 2X8'/4' at the highest sustainable
> power output for the entire period (this workout ****ing hurts). About
> 40 watts below Monday workload.
>
> Thu: repeat Tue
>
> Fri: 3-4X3'/3' intervals at Vo2 max at the same workload as Monday. When
> I can accomplish this, I bump the workload on the following Monday.
>
> Sat: Repeat Tue
> Sun: off
>
> there are also 2-3 technical/skating workouts in there somewhere. All
> intervals are done on the bike, all threshold workouts on the Stairmaster.

Oh yeah, every 3rd or 4th week, I'm burnt and take an unloading week,
cutting the volume and intensity way back.

Lyle

elzinator
April 29th 04, 01:46 AM
On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 10:31:30 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>elzinator wrote:
>> On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 13:10:36 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>
>
>>>>The diet was eucaloric.
>>>>It was investigating short-term (5 days) which does have relevance for
>>>>CKD.
>>>>No more absurd than many of the other diets out there. I've seen
>>>>people derive 50% of their calories from saturated fats when doing
>>>>keto diets.
>>>
>>>and:
>>>a. you want to be insulin resistant on a diet
>>
>>
>> Possibly for a segment of the population. Not for T2 diabetics.
>
>nonsense. you know as well as I do that lowcarb diets improve things
>for T2 diabetics. Guess what, the reduction in insulin and increase in
>FFA makes them insulin resistant. BFD. I assure you that you are
>increasing relative IR when you reduce carbs, due to an increase in
>blood FFA levels. It doens't matter b/c your carb intake is low. And
>b/c you're training regularly.
>
>For a long-term lowcarb diet, IR is an irrelevancy: no carbs means no
>issue with IR in the first place.
>
>now, there is an issue when folks on such a diet reintroduce carbs:
>there is a well known short-term 'diabetogenic' effect of starvation and
>low-carb diets. Folks on CKd's experience this to some degree:
>hyperinsulinemia coupled with BG crashes.
>
>>
>>>b. being insulin resistant is irrelevant WHEN YOU AREN'T EATING ANY
>>>****ING CARBOHYDRATES IN THE FIRST PLACE! You reverse insulin
>>>resistance prior to the carb-load by consuming a small amount of high GI
>>>carbs and training so don't throw that at me.
>>
>>
>> Ooohhhh, did I **** you off?
>
>Nope, making a point for the slow of comprehension.
>
>There is this huge issue about the FFA mediated insulin resistance that
>occurs with lowcarb diets.
>
>And how do they usually tst such? With an oral glucose tolerance test.
>Yeah, no doubt, give someone on a lowcarb diet 75 grams of glucose and
>they are IR. But so what? If they aren't eating carbs, being IR is
>irrelevant.
>
>>>60% PUFA is unhealthy as **** and you know it.
>>
>>
>> Is it, though, short-term? I don't know that. Do you?
>>
>No, I don't.
>But nobody follows a diet for 5 days.
>
>And you can't generalize this to a CKD, both the carb up, the repetitive
>nature and everything else change the dynamics.
>
>Hence, from a real-world perspective, this study is irrelevant.
>
>
>>>Hence, irrelevant.
>>
>>
>> Whatever.
>
>I note that you throw this out whenever you know you're wrong but can't
>admit it. You did it in the training freuquency discussion that you and
>I had the other weekend: I was right, you were wrong, rather than admit
>it, you told me "Whatever."

Excuse****ing me. I use "whenever" when it's obvious to me that
there's any further sensible and reasonable discussion is useless
because either the other person is obstinately set in their opinions
and unwilling to consider another point of view, or they are morons.

The other discussion you refer to was a misunderstanding on my part
WHICH I ****ING TOLD YOU!

So **** you.


Bioinformatics:
"What is a sheep; only millions of little bits of sheepness
whirling around and doing intricate convolutions inside the
sheep? What else is it but that?"
-Flann O'Brien, "The Third Policeman"

elzinator
April 29th 04, 01:46 AM
On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 10:31:30 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>elzinator wrote:
>> On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 13:10:36 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>
>
>>>>The diet was eucaloric.
>>>>It was investigating short-term (5 days) which does have relevance for
>>>>CKD.
>>>>No more absurd than many of the other diets out there. I've seen
>>>>people derive 50% of their calories from saturated fats when doing
>>>>keto diets.
>>>
>>>and:
>>>a. you want to be insulin resistant on a diet
>>
>>
>> Possibly for a segment of the population. Not for T2 diabetics.
>
>nonsense. you know as well as I do that lowcarb diets improve things
>for T2 diabetics. Guess what, the reduction in insulin and increase in
>FFA makes them insulin resistant. BFD. I assure you that you are
>increasing relative IR when you reduce carbs, due to an increase in
>blood FFA levels. It doens't matter b/c your carb intake is low. And
>b/c you're training regularly.
>
>For a long-term lowcarb diet, IR is an irrelevancy: no carbs means no
>issue with IR in the first place.
>
>now, there is an issue when folks on such a diet reintroduce carbs:
>there is a well known short-term 'diabetogenic' effect of starvation and
>low-carb diets. Folks on CKd's experience this to some degree:
>hyperinsulinemia coupled with BG crashes.
>
>>
>>>b. being insulin resistant is irrelevant WHEN YOU AREN'T EATING ANY
>>>****ING CARBOHYDRATES IN THE FIRST PLACE! You reverse insulin
>>>resistance prior to the carb-load by consuming a small amount of high GI
>>>carbs and training so don't throw that at me.
>>
>>
>> Ooohhhh, did I **** you off?
>
>Nope, making a point for the slow of comprehension.
>
>There is this huge issue about the FFA mediated insulin resistance that
>occurs with lowcarb diets.
>
>And how do they usually tst such? With an oral glucose tolerance test.
>Yeah, no doubt, give someone on a lowcarb diet 75 grams of glucose and
>they are IR. But so what? If they aren't eating carbs, being IR is
>irrelevant.
>
>>>60% PUFA is unhealthy as **** and you know it.
>>
>>
>> Is it, though, short-term? I don't know that. Do you?
>>
>No, I don't.
>But nobody follows a diet for 5 days.
>
>And you can't generalize this to a CKD, both the carb up, the repetitive
>nature and everything else change the dynamics.
>
>Hence, from a real-world perspective, this study is irrelevant.
>
>
>>>Hence, irrelevant.
>>
>>
>> Whatever.
>
>I note that you throw this out whenever you know you're wrong but can't
>admit it. You did it in the training freuquency discussion that you and
>I had the other weekend: I was right, you were wrong, rather than admit
>it, you told me "Whatever."

Excuse****ing me. I use "whenever" when it's obvious to me that
there's any further sensible and reasonable discussion is useless
because either the other person is obstinately set in their opinions
and unwilling to consider another point of view, or they are morons.

The other discussion you refer to was a misunderstanding on my part
WHICH I ****ING TOLD YOU!

So **** you.


Bioinformatics:
"What is a sheep; only millions of little bits of sheepness
whirling around and doing intricate convolutions inside the
sheep? What else is it but that?"
-Flann O'Brien, "The Third Policeman"

elzinator
April 29th 04, 01:46 AM
On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 10:31:30 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>elzinator wrote:
>> On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 13:10:36 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>
>
>>>>The diet was eucaloric.
>>>>It was investigating short-term (5 days) which does have relevance for
>>>>CKD.
>>>>No more absurd than many of the other diets out there. I've seen
>>>>people derive 50% of their calories from saturated fats when doing
>>>>keto diets.
>>>
>>>and:
>>>a. you want to be insulin resistant on a diet
>>
>>
>> Possibly for a segment of the population. Not for T2 diabetics.
>
>nonsense. you know as well as I do that lowcarb diets improve things
>for T2 diabetics. Guess what, the reduction in insulin and increase in
>FFA makes them insulin resistant. BFD. I assure you that you are
>increasing relative IR when you reduce carbs, due to an increase in
>blood FFA levels. It doens't matter b/c your carb intake is low. And
>b/c you're training regularly.
>
>For a long-term lowcarb diet, IR is an irrelevancy: no carbs means no
>issue with IR in the first place.
>
>now, there is an issue when folks on such a diet reintroduce carbs:
>there is a well known short-term 'diabetogenic' effect of starvation and
>low-carb diets. Folks on CKd's experience this to some degree:
>hyperinsulinemia coupled with BG crashes.
>
>>
>>>b. being insulin resistant is irrelevant WHEN YOU AREN'T EATING ANY
>>>****ING CARBOHYDRATES IN THE FIRST PLACE! You reverse insulin
>>>resistance prior to the carb-load by consuming a small amount of high GI
>>>carbs and training so don't throw that at me.
>>
>>
>> Ooohhhh, did I **** you off?
>
>Nope, making a point for the slow of comprehension.
>
>There is this huge issue about the FFA mediated insulin resistance that
>occurs with lowcarb diets.
>
>And how do they usually tst such? With an oral glucose tolerance test.
>Yeah, no doubt, give someone on a lowcarb diet 75 grams of glucose and
>they are IR. But so what? If they aren't eating carbs, being IR is
>irrelevant.
>
>>>60% PUFA is unhealthy as **** and you know it.
>>
>>
>> Is it, though, short-term? I don't know that. Do you?
>>
>No, I don't.
>But nobody follows a diet for 5 days.
>
>And you can't generalize this to a CKD, both the carb up, the repetitive
>nature and everything else change the dynamics.
>
>Hence, from a real-world perspective, this study is irrelevant.
>
>
>>>Hence, irrelevant.
>>
>>
>> Whatever.
>
>I note that you throw this out whenever you know you're wrong but can't
>admit it. You did it in the training freuquency discussion that you and
>I had the other weekend: I was right, you were wrong, rather than admit
>it, you told me "Whatever."

Excuse****ing me. I use "whenever" when it's obvious to me that
there's any further sensible and reasonable discussion is useless
because either the other person is obstinately set in their opinions
and unwilling to consider another point of view, or they are morons.

The other discussion you refer to was a misunderstanding on my part
WHICH I ****ING TOLD YOU!

So **** you.


Bioinformatics:
"What is a sheep; only millions of little bits of sheepness
whirling around and doing intricate convolutions inside the
sheep? What else is it but that?"
-Flann O'Brien, "The Third Policeman"

elzinator
April 29th 04, 01:54 AM
On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 19:28:20 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>Roger Zoul wrote:
>
>> Lyle McDonald wrote:
>> :: elzinator wrote:
>
>> :: I note that you throw this out whenever you know you're wrong but
>> :: can't admit it. You did it in the training freuquency discussion
>> :: that you and I had the other weekend: I was right, you were wrong,
>> :: rather than admit it, you told me "Whatever."
>> ::
>> :: So, err, whatever.
>>
>> No, Lyle....your comprehension was slow....When Elzi says "Whatever" she's
>> saying "Okay, I'm wrong, but if you don't leave it alone, I'm going to kick
>> your whimpy little ass."
>>
>> You'd better get that figured out quick, dood.
>
>considering that Elzi gripes about individuals who are unable to admit
>they are wrong, she better get the **** over it herself. Well, unless
>she wants to be guilty of the same hypocrisy she criticises.

What the ****!?!??!
What is your ****ing problem?

Because I don't ****ing agree with you that the study is "totally
irrelevant"? My opinion differs from yours and that makes me "wrong"?

You're being an ****ing asshole!




Bioinformatics:
"What is a sheep; only millions of little bits of sheepness
whirling around and doing intricate convolutions inside the
sheep? What else is it but that?"
-Flann O'Brien, "The Third Policeman"

elzinator
April 29th 04, 01:54 AM
On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 19:28:20 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>Roger Zoul wrote:
>
>> Lyle McDonald wrote:
>> :: elzinator wrote:
>
>> :: I note that you throw this out whenever you know you're wrong but
>> :: can't admit it. You did it in the training freuquency discussion
>> :: that you and I had the other weekend: I was right, you were wrong,
>> :: rather than admit it, you told me "Whatever."
>> ::
>> :: So, err, whatever.
>>
>> No, Lyle....your comprehension was slow....When Elzi says "Whatever" she's
>> saying "Okay, I'm wrong, but if you don't leave it alone, I'm going to kick
>> your whimpy little ass."
>>
>> You'd better get that figured out quick, dood.
>
>considering that Elzi gripes about individuals who are unable to admit
>they are wrong, she better get the **** over it herself. Well, unless
>she wants to be guilty of the same hypocrisy she criticises.

What the ****!?!??!
What is your ****ing problem?

Because I don't ****ing agree with you that the study is "totally
irrelevant"? My opinion differs from yours and that makes me "wrong"?

You're being an ****ing asshole!




Bioinformatics:
"What is a sheep; only millions of little bits of sheepness
whirling around and doing intricate convolutions inside the
sheep? What else is it but that?"
-Flann O'Brien, "The Third Policeman"

elzinator
April 29th 04, 01:54 AM
On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 19:28:20 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>Roger Zoul wrote:
>
>> Lyle McDonald wrote:
>> :: elzinator wrote:
>
>> :: I note that you throw this out whenever you know you're wrong but
>> :: can't admit it. You did it in the training freuquency discussion
>> :: that you and I had the other weekend: I was right, you were wrong,
>> :: rather than admit it, you told me "Whatever."
>> ::
>> :: So, err, whatever.
>>
>> No, Lyle....your comprehension was slow....When Elzi says "Whatever" she's
>> saying "Okay, I'm wrong, but if you don't leave it alone, I'm going to kick
>> your whimpy little ass."
>>
>> You'd better get that figured out quick, dood.
>
>considering that Elzi gripes about individuals who are unable to admit
>they are wrong, she better get the **** over it herself. Well, unless
>she wants to be guilty of the same hypocrisy she criticises.

What the ****!?!??!
What is your ****ing problem?

Because I don't ****ing agree with you that the study is "totally
irrelevant"? My opinion differs from yours and that makes me "wrong"?

You're being an ****ing asshole!




Bioinformatics:
"What is a sheep; only millions of little bits of sheepness
whirling around and doing intricate convolutions inside the
sheep? What else is it but that?"
-Flann O'Brien, "The Third Policeman"

Larry Hodges
April 29th 04, 02:04 AM
"elzinator" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 10:31:30 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:
> >elzinator wrote:
> >> On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 13:10:36 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:
> >
> >
> >>>>The diet was eucaloric.
> >>>>It was investigating short-term (5 days) which does have relevance for
> >>>>CKD.
> >>>>No more absurd than many of the other diets out there. I've seen
> >>>>people derive 50% of their calories from saturated fats when doing
> >>>>keto diets.
> >>>
> >>>and:
> >>>a. you want to be insulin resistant on a diet
> >>
> >>
> >> Possibly for a segment of the population. Not for T2 diabetics.
> >
> >nonsense. you know as well as I do that lowcarb diets improve things
> >for T2 diabetics. Guess what, the reduction in insulin and increase in
> >FFA makes them insulin resistant. BFD. I assure you that you are
> >increasing relative IR when you reduce carbs, due to an increase in
> >blood FFA levels. It doens't matter b/c your carb intake is low. And
> >b/c you're training regularly.
> >
> >For a long-term lowcarb diet, IR is an irrelevancy: no carbs means no
> >issue with IR in the first place.
> >
> >now, there is an issue when folks on such a diet reintroduce carbs:
> >there is a well known short-term 'diabetogenic' effect of starvation and
> >low-carb diets. Folks on CKd's experience this to some degree:
> >hyperinsulinemia coupled with BG crashes.
> >
> >>
> >>>b. being insulin resistant is irrelevant WHEN YOU AREN'T EATING ANY
> >>>****ING CARBOHYDRATES IN THE FIRST PLACE! You reverse insulin
> >>>resistance prior to the carb-load by consuming a small amount of high
GI
> >>>carbs and training so don't throw that at me.
> >>
> >>
> >> Ooohhhh, did I **** you off?
> >
> >Nope, making a point for the slow of comprehension.
> >
> >There is this huge issue about the FFA mediated insulin resistance that
> >occurs with lowcarb diets.
> >
> >And how do they usually tst such? With an oral glucose tolerance test.
> >Yeah, no doubt, give someone on a lowcarb diet 75 grams of glucose and
> >they are IR. But so what? If they aren't eating carbs, being IR is
> >irrelevant.
> >
> >>>60% PUFA is unhealthy as **** and you know it.
> >>
> >>
> >> Is it, though, short-term? I don't know that. Do you?
> >>
> >No, I don't.
> >But nobody follows a diet for 5 days.
> >
> >And you can't generalize this to a CKD, both the carb up, the repetitive
> >nature and everything else change the dynamics.
> >
> >Hence, from a real-world perspective, this study is irrelevant.
> >
> >
> >>>Hence, irrelevant.
> >>
> >>
> >> Whatever.
> >
> >I note that you throw this out whenever you know you're wrong but can't
> >admit it. You did it in the training freuquency discussion that you and
> >I had the other weekend: I was right, you were wrong, rather than admit
> >it, you told me "Whatever."
>
> Excuse****ing me. I use "whenever" when it's obvious to me that
> there's any further sensible and reasonable discussion is useless
> because either the other person is obstinately set in their opinions
> and unwilling to consider another point of view, or they are morons.
>
> The other discussion you refer to was a misunderstanding on my part
> WHICH I ****ING TOLD YOU!
>
> So **** you.
>
>
> Bioinformatics:
> "What is a sheep; only millions of little bits of sheepness
> whirling around and doing intricate convolutions inside the
> sheep? What else is it but that?"
> -Flann O'Brien, "The Third Policeman"


Elzi, you're pretty hot when you talk like this, you womanimal you.
Umm...you like Toby Keith? Dinner at my place? Cocktails?

-Larry

Larry Hodges
April 29th 04, 02:04 AM
"elzinator" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 10:31:30 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:
> >elzinator wrote:
> >> On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 13:10:36 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:
> >
> >
> >>>>The diet was eucaloric.
> >>>>It was investigating short-term (5 days) which does have relevance for
> >>>>CKD.
> >>>>No more absurd than many of the other diets out there. I've seen
> >>>>people derive 50% of their calories from saturated fats when doing
> >>>>keto diets.
> >>>
> >>>and:
> >>>a. you want to be insulin resistant on a diet
> >>
> >>
> >> Possibly for a segment of the population. Not for T2 diabetics.
> >
> >nonsense. you know as well as I do that lowcarb diets improve things
> >for T2 diabetics. Guess what, the reduction in insulin and increase in
> >FFA makes them insulin resistant. BFD. I assure you that you are
> >increasing relative IR when you reduce carbs, due to an increase in
> >blood FFA levels. It doens't matter b/c your carb intake is low. And
> >b/c you're training regularly.
> >
> >For a long-term lowcarb diet, IR is an irrelevancy: no carbs means no
> >issue with IR in the first place.
> >
> >now, there is an issue when folks on such a diet reintroduce carbs:
> >there is a well known short-term 'diabetogenic' effect of starvation and
> >low-carb diets. Folks on CKd's experience this to some degree:
> >hyperinsulinemia coupled with BG crashes.
> >
> >>
> >>>b. being insulin resistant is irrelevant WHEN YOU AREN'T EATING ANY
> >>>****ING CARBOHYDRATES IN THE FIRST PLACE! You reverse insulin
> >>>resistance prior to the carb-load by consuming a small amount of high
GI
> >>>carbs and training so don't throw that at me.
> >>
> >>
> >> Ooohhhh, did I **** you off?
> >
> >Nope, making a point for the slow of comprehension.
> >
> >There is this huge issue about the FFA mediated insulin resistance that
> >occurs with lowcarb diets.
> >
> >And how do they usually tst such? With an oral glucose tolerance test.
> >Yeah, no doubt, give someone on a lowcarb diet 75 grams of glucose and
> >they are IR. But so what? If they aren't eating carbs, being IR is
> >irrelevant.
> >
> >>>60% PUFA is unhealthy as **** and you know it.
> >>
> >>
> >> Is it, though, short-term? I don't know that. Do you?
> >>
> >No, I don't.
> >But nobody follows a diet for 5 days.
> >
> >And you can't generalize this to a CKD, both the carb up, the repetitive
> >nature and everything else change the dynamics.
> >
> >Hence, from a real-world perspective, this study is irrelevant.
> >
> >
> >>>Hence, irrelevant.
> >>
> >>
> >> Whatever.
> >
> >I note that you throw this out whenever you know you're wrong but can't
> >admit it. You did it in the training freuquency discussion that you and
> >I had the other weekend: I was right, you were wrong, rather than admit
> >it, you told me "Whatever."
>
> Excuse****ing me. I use "whenever" when it's obvious to me that
> there's any further sensible and reasonable discussion is useless
> because either the other person is obstinately set in their opinions
> and unwilling to consider another point of view, or they are morons.
>
> The other discussion you refer to was a misunderstanding on my part
> WHICH I ****ING TOLD YOU!
>
> So **** you.
>
>
> Bioinformatics:
> "What is a sheep; only millions of little bits of sheepness
> whirling around and doing intricate convolutions inside the
> sheep? What else is it but that?"
> -Flann O'Brien, "The Third Policeman"


Elzi, you're pretty hot when you talk like this, you womanimal you.
Umm...you like Toby Keith? Dinner at my place? Cocktails?

-Larry

Larry Hodges
April 29th 04, 02:04 AM
"elzinator" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 10:31:30 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:
> >elzinator wrote:
> >> On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 13:10:36 -0500, Lyle McDonald wrote:
> >
> >
> >>>>The diet was eucaloric.
> >>>>It was investigating short-term (5 days) which does have relevance for
> >>>>CKD.
> >>>>No more absurd than many of the other diets out there. I've seen
> >>>>people derive 50% of their calories from saturated fats when doing
> >>>>keto diets.
> >>>
> >>>and:
> >>>a. you want to be insulin resistant on a diet
> >>
> >>
> >> Possibly for a segment of the population. Not for T2 diabetics.
> >
> >nonsense. you know as well as I do that lowcarb diets improve things
> >for T2 diabetics. Guess what, the reduction in insulin and increase in
> >FFA makes them insulin resistant. BFD. I assure you that you are
> >increasing relative IR when you reduce carbs, due to an increase in
> >blood FFA levels. It doens't matter b/c your carb intake is low. And
> >b/c you're training regularly.
> >
> >For a long-term lowcarb diet, IR is an irrelevancy: no carbs means no
> >issue with IR in the first place.
> >
> >now, there is an issue when folks on such a diet reintroduce carbs:
> >there is a well known short-term 'diabetogenic' effect of starvation and
> >low-carb diets. Folks on CKd's experience this to some degree:
> >hyperinsulinemia coupled with BG crashes.
> >
> >>
> >>>b. being insulin resistant is irrelevant WHEN YOU AREN'T EATING ANY
> >>>****ING CARBOHYDRATES IN THE FIRST PLACE! You reverse insulin
> >>>resistance prior to the carb-load by consuming a small amount of high
GI
> >>>carbs and training so don't throw that at me.
> >>
> >>
> >> Ooohhhh, did I **** you off?
> >
> >Nope, making a point for the slow of comprehension.
> >
> >There is this huge issue about the FFA mediated insulin resistance that
> >occurs with lowcarb diets.
> >
> >And how do they usually tst such? With an oral glucose tolerance test.
> >Yeah, no doubt, give someone on a lowcarb diet 75 grams of glucose and
> >they are IR. But so what? If they aren't eating carbs, being IR is
> >irrelevant.
> >
> >>>60% PUFA is unhealthy as **** and you know it.
> >>
> >>
> >> Is it, though, short-term? I don't know that. Do you?
> >>
> >No, I don't.
> >But nobody follows a diet for 5 days.
> >
> >And you can't generalize this to a CKD, both the carb up, the repetitive
> >nature and everything else change the dynamics.
> >
> >Hence, from a real-world perspective, this study is irrelevant.
> >
> >
> >>>Hence, irrelevant.
> >>
> >>
> >> Whatever.
> >
> >I note that you throw this out whenever you know you're wrong but can't
> >admit it. You did it in the training freuquency discussion that you and
> >I had the other weekend: I was right, you were wrong, rather than admit
> >it, you told me "Whatever."
>
> Excuse****ing me. I use "whenever" when it's obvious to me that
> there's any further sensible and reasonable discussion is useless
> because either the other person is obstinately set in their opinions
> and unwilling to consider another point of view, or they are morons.
>
> The other discussion you refer to was a misunderstanding on my part
> WHICH I ****ING TOLD YOU!
>
> So **** you.
>
>
> Bioinformatics:
> "What is a sheep; only millions of little bits of sheepness
> whirling around and doing intricate convolutions inside the
> sheep? What else is it but that?"
> -Flann O'Brien, "The Third Policeman"


Elzi, you're pretty hot when you talk like this, you womanimal you.
Umm...you like Toby Keith? Dinner at my place? Cocktails?

-Larry

Peter Allen
April 29th 04, 02:14 PM
"Lyle McDonald" > wrote in message
...
> Well, still mainly doing a lot of 'similar' cardio work (bike and
> stairmaster), skating drills are mostly technical. So I can't honestly
> gauge skating performance yet per se (that cycle starts in a few weeks).
>
> But power outputs (both max and sustainable over varying time periods
> ranging from 2 to 40 minutes) on the bike and stairmaster (don't laugh,
> hot chicks hang out on the stairmaster you iron lifting freaks) continue
> to go up almost linearly. My program is very intensity based, low
> volume, based around some research from the 70's, I'm probably training
> maybe 4-5 hours/week total (recall that my events last 15-40 minutes or
> so). My body seems to respond to it better than to LSD stuff, dunno why.

Not that I'm an expert, but isn't the point of LSD that you get used to
doing a lot of work so you have the endurance to do more high-intensity
stuff later on? (and if you need technique, then you improve a lot doing the
LSD)

> A typical week:
> Monday: warmups + 5X2'/2' intervals at VO2 max pace. This is usually
> accompoanied by an increase in the power I'm using.
>
> Tuesday: warmups to 30-40 minutes at the highest wattage I can sustain.
> LT work basically. This is a grueling workout, lately I give myself a
> 1 minute rest break at the 20' mark (I have to reset the machine anyhow).
>
> Wed: has recently become warmups + 2X8'/4' at the highest sustainable
> power output for the entire period (this workout ****ing hurts). About
> 40 watts below Monday workload.
>
> Thu: repeat Tue
>
> Fri: 3-4X3'/3' intervals at Vo2 max at the same workload as Monday. When
> I can accomplish this, I bump the workload on the following Monday.
>
> Sat: Repeat Tue
> Sun: off
>
> there are also 2-3 technical/skating workouts in there somewhere. All
> intervals are done on the bike, all threshold workouts on the Stairmaster.

I'd assume from the above that your races tend to be more like bike road
races than timetrials?

apart from that:
1) you're not doing anything like a recovery pace anywhere - matter of
choice, I suppose, but those do help me - unless you're doing your technical
work at that sort of level?
2) you are going to get overtrained if you try to do that continuously. You
might want to throw in a week with the intervals replaced by technical stuff
every month or so?

What sort of power outputs are you getting, anyway?

Peter (not good for intervals, but can manage 388W for 30' on a bike _if_
you believe the exercise bike monitor)

Peter Allen
April 29th 04, 02:14 PM
"Lyle McDonald" > wrote in message
...
> Well, still mainly doing a lot of 'similar' cardio work (bike and
> stairmaster), skating drills are mostly technical. So I can't honestly
> gauge skating performance yet per se (that cycle starts in a few weeks).
>
> But power outputs (both max and sustainable over varying time periods
> ranging from 2 to 40 minutes) on the bike and stairmaster (don't laugh,
> hot chicks hang out on the stairmaster you iron lifting freaks) continue
> to go up almost linearly. My program is very intensity based, low
> volume, based around some research from the 70's, I'm probably training
> maybe 4-5 hours/week total (recall that my events last 15-40 minutes or
> so). My body seems to respond to it better than to LSD stuff, dunno why.

Not that I'm an expert, but isn't the point of LSD that you get used to
doing a lot of work so you have the endurance to do more high-intensity
stuff later on? (and if you need technique, then you improve a lot doing the
LSD)

> A typical week:
> Monday: warmups + 5X2'/2' intervals at VO2 max pace. This is usually
> accompoanied by an increase in the power I'm using.
>
> Tuesday: warmups to 30-40 minutes at the highest wattage I can sustain.
> LT work basically. This is a grueling workout, lately I give myself a
> 1 minute rest break at the 20' mark (I have to reset the machine anyhow).
>
> Wed: has recently become warmups + 2X8'/4' at the highest sustainable
> power output for the entire period (this workout ****ing hurts). About
> 40 watts below Monday workload.
>
> Thu: repeat Tue
>
> Fri: 3-4X3'/3' intervals at Vo2 max at the same workload as Monday. When
> I can accomplish this, I bump the workload on the following Monday.
>
> Sat: Repeat Tue
> Sun: off
>
> there are also 2-3 technical/skating workouts in there somewhere. All
> intervals are done on the bike, all threshold workouts on the Stairmaster.

I'd assume from the above that your races tend to be more like bike road
races than timetrials?

apart from that:
1) you're not doing anything like a recovery pace anywhere - matter of
choice, I suppose, but those do help me - unless you're doing your technical
work at that sort of level?
2) you are going to get overtrained if you try to do that continuously. You
might want to throw in a week with the intervals replaced by technical stuff
every month or so?

What sort of power outputs are you getting, anyway?

Peter (not good for intervals, but can manage 388W for 30' on a bike _if_
you believe the exercise bike monitor)

Peter Allen
April 29th 04, 02:14 PM
"Lyle McDonald" > wrote in message
...
> Well, still mainly doing a lot of 'similar' cardio work (bike and
> stairmaster), skating drills are mostly technical. So I can't honestly
> gauge skating performance yet per se (that cycle starts in a few weeks).
>
> But power outputs (both max and sustainable over varying time periods
> ranging from 2 to 40 minutes) on the bike and stairmaster (don't laugh,
> hot chicks hang out on the stairmaster you iron lifting freaks) continue
> to go up almost linearly. My program is very intensity based, low
> volume, based around some research from the 70's, I'm probably training
> maybe 4-5 hours/week total (recall that my events last 15-40 minutes or
> so). My body seems to respond to it better than to LSD stuff, dunno why.

Not that I'm an expert, but isn't the point of LSD that you get used to
doing a lot of work so you have the endurance to do more high-intensity
stuff later on? (and if you need technique, then you improve a lot doing the
LSD)

> A typical week:
> Monday: warmups + 5X2'/2' intervals at VO2 max pace. This is usually
> accompoanied by an increase in the power I'm using.
>
> Tuesday: warmups to 30-40 minutes at the highest wattage I can sustain.
> LT work basically. This is a grueling workout, lately I give myself a
> 1 minute rest break at the 20' mark (I have to reset the machine anyhow).
>
> Wed: has recently become warmups + 2X8'/4' at the highest sustainable
> power output for the entire period (this workout ****ing hurts). About
> 40 watts below Monday workload.
>
> Thu: repeat Tue
>
> Fri: 3-4X3'/3' intervals at Vo2 max at the same workload as Monday. When
> I can accomplish this, I bump the workload on the following Monday.
>
> Sat: Repeat Tue
> Sun: off
>
> there are also 2-3 technical/skating workouts in there somewhere. All
> intervals are done on the bike, all threshold workouts on the Stairmaster.

I'd assume from the above that your races tend to be more like bike road
races than timetrials?

apart from that:
1) you're not doing anything like a recovery pace anywhere - matter of
choice, I suppose, but those do help me - unless you're doing your technical
work at that sort of level?
2) you are going to get overtrained if you try to do that continuously. You
might want to throw in a week with the intervals replaced by technical stuff
every month or so?

What sort of power outputs are you getting, anyway?

Peter (not good for intervals, but can manage 388W for 30' on a bike _if_
you believe the exercise bike monitor)

Lyle McDonald
April 29th 04, 06:48 PM
Peter Allen wrote:

> "Lyle McDonald" > wrote in message
> ...

>>But power outputs (both max and sustainable over varying time periods
>>ranging from 2 to 40 minutes) on the bike and stairmaster (don't laugh,
>>hot chicks hang out on the stairmaster you iron lifting freaks) continue
>>to go up almost linearly. My program is very intensity based, low
>>volume, based around some research from the 70's, I'm probably training
>>maybe 4-5 hours/week total (recall that my events last 15-40 minutes or
>>so). My body seems to respond to it better than to LSD stuff, dunno why.
>
>
> Not that I'm an expert, but isn't the point of LSD that you get used to
> doing a lot of work so you have the endurance to do more high-intensity
> stuff later on? (and if you need technique, then you improve a lot doing the
> LSD)

That's one goal of it (seemed to be a key to the Lydiard approach) but
LSD has other physiological benefits. Recent research (and the
empirical evidence taht came before it, hi Roger) is showing that high
intensity develops the same qualities better. You simply have to have
the base of training.

Which I spent the 10 or so months before this phase doing.

When I get into more formal skating (instead of just drills), I'll begin
with an LSD phase for exactly teh reason you state: technique (and
economy) and the rest. Important to get that established before I do
higher intensity stuff.


>>there are also 2-3 technical/skating workouts in there somewhere. All
>>intervals are done on the bike, all threshold workouts on the Stairmaster.
>
>
> I'd assume from the above that your races tend to be more like bike road
> races than timetrials?

In-line speed skating is closer to a bike time trial: some pack stuff,
breakaways, that sort of thing. Of course, at the 10k distance (my
preferred distance but there are scant few races), it's more or less an
all out sprint, since it's only 15-20 minutes long (you can readily
maintain LT or a little above for that time period). For half or full
marathon, I would expect more bike racing tactics but I haven't raced
one of those before.

Long track ice speed skating (what I actaully want to do) is essentially
a time trial even though there is another guy on the track.

>
> apart from that:
> 1) you're not doing anything like a recovery pace anywhere - matter of
> choice, I suppose, but those do help me - unless you're doing your technical
> work at that sort of level?

Help you in what sense?

My overal volume is fairly low, I get one full day off per week. I'm
recovering and improving just fine.

> 2) you are going to get overtrained if you try to do that continuously. You
> might want to throw in a week with the intervals replaced by technical stuff
> every month or so?

In a followup post, I mentioned that every 3rd or 4th week, I deload.
Usually 3-4 hours of fairly moderate intensity stuff (15-160 HR or even
140-150) across 3-4 workouts.

in the original study taht I based this off of, they tortured teh
subehcts for 10 weeks without a break. All made continuous linear
progress. All were also relatively untrained at the outset. As well,
all quit the study when it was over. Putting in a deloading week seems
like prudent insurance for me, both physically and mentally since having
to go more or less all out every day can get to be a grind. So when my
legs just feel burnt, tired all the time, what feels like low grade
inflammation, I take a week to recover.

>
> What sort of power outputs are you getting, anyway?
>
> Peter (not good for intervals, but can manage 388W for 30' on a bike _if_
> you believe the exercise bike monitor)

What do you weigh, I think you're heavier than me.
On the bike (Lifecycle and who knows how accurate the powermeter is) I'm
pusing 343 for short intervals, about 300 for long intervals. The
Stairmaster seems to consistently be higher than the bike, claiming 290
or so for 40 minutes. Nothing fantastic but I've still got a bunch more
weeks of this to keep pushing it up. I also need to find out what some
average power output for skaters are, I certainly feel that I have a
higher fitness level than when I was competing before and I was fairly
competitive then (with terrible technique). So I am optimistic about
competition later this year.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 29th 04, 06:48 PM
Peter Allen wrote:

> "Lyle McDonald" > wrote in message
> ...

>>But power outputs (both max and sustainable over varying time periods
>>ranging from 2 to 40 minutes) on the bike and stairmaster (don't laugh,
>>hot chicks hang out on the stairmaster you iron lifting freaks) continue
>>to go up almost linearly. My program is very intensity based, low
>>volume, based around some research from the 70's, I'm probably training
>>maybe 4-5 hours/week total (recall that my events last 15-40 minutes or
>>so). My body seems to respond to it better than to LSD stuff, dunno why.
>
>
> Not that I'm an expert, but isn't the point of LSD that you get used to
> doing a lot of work so you have the endurance to do more high-intensity
> stuff later on? (and if you need technique, then you improve a lot doing the
> LSD)

That's one goal of it (seemed to be a key to the Lydiard approach) but
LSD has other physiological benefits. Recent research (and the
empirical evidence taht came before it, hi Roger) is showing that high
intensity develops the same qualities better. You simply have to have
the base of training.

Which I spent the 10 or so months before this phase doing.

When I get into more formal skating (instead of just drills), I'll begin
with an LSD phase for exactly teh reason you state: technique (and
economy) and the rest. Important to get that established before I do
higher intensity stuff.


>>there are also 2-3 technical/skating workouts in there somewhere. All
>>intervals are done on the bike, all threshold workouts on the Stairmaster.
>
>
> I'd assume from the above that your races tend to be more like bike road
> races than timetrials?

In-line speed skating is closer to a bike time trial: some pack stuff,
breakaways, that sort of thing. Of course, at the 10k distance (my
preferred distance but there are scant few races), it's more or less an
all out sprint, since it's only 15-20 minutes long (you can readily
maintain LT or a little above for that time period). For half or full
marathon, I would expect more bike racing tactics but I haven't raced
one of those before.

Long track ice speed skating (what I actaully want to do) is essentially
a time trial even though there is another guy on the track.

>
> apart from that:
> 1) you're not doing anything like a recovery pace anywhere - matter of
> choice, I suppose, but those do help me - unless you're doing your technical
> work at that sort of level?

Help you in what sense?

My overal volume is fairly low, I get one full day off per week. I'm
recovering and improving just fine.

> 2) you are going to get overtrained if you try to do that continuously. You
> might want to throw in a week with the intervals replaced by technical stuff
> every month or so?

In a followup post, I mentioned that every 3rd or 4th week, I deload.
Usually 3-4 hours of fairly moderate intensity stuff (15-160 HR or even
140-150) across 3-4 workouts.

in the original study taht I based this off of, they tortured teh
subehcts for 10 weeks without a break. All made continuous linear
progress. All were also relatively untrained at the outset. As well,
all quit the study when it was over. Putting in a deloading week seems
like prudent insurance for me, both physically and mentally since having
to go more or less all out every day can get to be a grind. So when my
legs just feel burnt, tired all the time, what feels like low grade
inflammation, I take a week to recover.

>
> What sort of power outputs are you getting, anyway?
>
> Peter (not good for intervals, but can manage 388W for 30' on a bike _if_
> you believe the exercise bike monitor)

What do you weigh, I think you're heavier than me.
On the bike (Lifecycle and who knows how accurate the powermeter is) I'm
pusing 343 for short intervals, about 300 for long intervals. The
Stairmaster seems to consistently be higher than the bike, claiming 290
or so for 40 minutes. Nothing fantastic but I've still got a bunch more
weeks of this to keep pushing it up. I also need to find out what some
average power output for skaters are, I certainly feel that I have a
higher fitness level than when I was competing before and I was fairly
competitive then (with terrible technique). So I am optimistic about
competition later this year.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 29th 04, 06:48 PM
Peter Allen wrote:

> "Lyle McDonald" > wrote in message
> ...

>>But power outputs (both max and sustainable over varying time periods
>>ranging from 2 to 40 minutes) on the bike and stairmaster (don't laugh,
>>hot chicks hang out on the stairmaster you iron lifting freaks) continue
>>to go up almost linearly. My program is very intensity based, low
>>volume, based around some research from the 70's, I'm probably training
>>maybe 4-5 hours/week total (recall that my events last 15-40 minutes or
>>so). My body seems to respond to it better than to LSD stuff, dunno why.
>
>
> Not that I'm an expert, but isn't the point of LSD that you get used to
> doing a lot of work so you have the endurance to do more high-intensity
> stuff later on? (and if you need technique, then you improve a lot doing the
> LSD)

That's one goal of it (seemed to be a key to the Lydiard approach) but
LSD has other physiological benefits. Recent research (and the
empirical evidence taht came before it, hi Roger) is showing that high
intensity develops the same qualities better. You simply have to have
the base of training.

Which I spent the 10 or so months before this phase doing.

When I get into more formal skating (instead of just drills), I'll begin
with an LSD phase for exactly teh reason you state: technique (and
economy) and the rest. Important to get that established before I do
higher intensity stuff.


>>there are also 2-3 technical/skating workouts in there somewhere. All
>>intervals are done on the bike, all threshold workouts on the Stairmaster.
>
>
> I'd assume from the above that your races tend to be more like bike road
> races than timetrials?

In-line speed skating is closer to a bike time trial: some pack stuff,
breakaways, that sort of thing. Of course, at the 10k distance (my
preferred distance but there are scant few races), it's more or less an
all out sprint, since it's only 15-20 minutes long (you can readily
maintain LT or a little above for that time period). For half or full
marathon, I would expect more bike racing tactics but I haven't raced
one of those before.

Long track ice speed skating (what I actaully want to do) is essentially
a time trial even though there is another guy on the track.

>
> apart from that:
> 1) you're not doing anything like a recovery pace anywhere - matter of
> choice, I suppose, but those do help me - unless you're doing your technical
> work at that sort of level?

Help you in what sense?

My overal volume is fairly low, I get one full day off per week. I'm
recovering and improving just fine.

> 2) you are going to get overtrained if you try to do that continuously. You
> might want to throw in a week with the intervals replaced by technical stuff
> every month or so?

In a followup post, I mentioned that every 3rd or 4th week, I deload.
Usually 3-4 hours of fairly moderate intensity stuff (15-160 HR or even
140-150) across 3-4 workouts.

in the original study taht I based this off of, they tortured teh
subehcts for 10 weeks without a break. All made continuous linear
progress. All were also relatively untrained at the outset. As well,
all quit the study when it was over. Putting in a deloading week seems
like prudent insurance for me, both physically and mentally since having
to go more or less all out every day can get to be a grind. So when my
legs just feel burnt, tired all the time, what feels like low grade
inflammation, I take a week to recover.

>
> What sort of power outputs are you getting, anyway?
>
> Peter (not good for intervals, but can manage 388W for 30' on a bike _if_
> you believe the exercise bike monitor)

What do you weigh, I think you're heavier than me.
On the bike (Lifecycle and who knows how accurate the powermeter is) I'm
pusing 343 for short intervals, about 300 for long intervals. The
Stairmaster seems to consistently be higher than the bike, claiming 290
or so for 40 minutes. Nothing fantastic but I've still got a bunch more
weeks of this to keep pushing it up. I also need to find out what some
average power output for skaters are, I certainly feel that I have a
higher fitness level than when I was competing before and I was fairly
competitive then (with terrible technique). So I am optimistic about
competition later this year.

Lyle

Donovan Rebbechi
April 29th 04, 07:02 PM
In article >, Peter Allen wrote:
> "Lyle McDonald" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Well, still mainly doing a lot of 'similar' cardio work (bike and
>> stairmaster), skating drills are mostly technical. So I can't honestly
>> gauge skating performance yet per se (that cycle starts in a few weeks).
>>
>> But power outputs (both max and sustainable over varying time periods
>> ranging from 2 to 40 minutes) on the bike and stairmaster (don't laugh,
>> hot chicks hang out on the stairmaster you iron lifting freaks) continue
>> to go up almost linearly. My program is very intensity based, low
>> volume, based around some research from the 70's, I'm probably training
>> maybe 4-5 hours/week total (recall that my events last 15-40 minutes or
>> so). My body seems to respond to it better than to LSD stuff, dunno why.
>
> Not that I'm an expert, but isn't the point of LSD that you get used to
> doing a lot of work so you have the endurance to do more high-intensity
> stuff later on?

One thing I found with my training is that cycling volume actually brings on
"undertraining" symptoms during the peak phase. My program went roughly like
this:
phase 1: 6 weeks base (40-50mpw)
phase 2: 6 weeks early quality: mostly LT work and anaerobic reps (50mpw).
phase 3: 6 weeks VO2 max intervals (60mpw).
phase 4: 6 weeks sharpening (40-50mpw)

The low volume in the early phase was largely because I was building milage and
coming back after injury -- next cycle milage will start at about 50 and get to
60-70 in phase 2. Even in these early phases (1,2) I was doing 2hrs xtraining
a week, so in terms of time it was more like 60mpw+ up to the end of phase 3.

Anyway, I'm a few weeks into the fourth phase, and after a temporary drop in
performance during phase 3, my pace appears to have shot through the roof.
The usual overtraining symptoms -- sluggishness/heavy legs, reduction in pace
on long runs, reduced sex drive etc -- I'm getting the opposite of all of them.

Not sure that I agree about LSD work helping technique/economy. At least in
the running world, the prevailing belief is that the best economy-specific
training is to do fast anaerobic reps (because it pushes you fast enough that
you need to be efficient). My understanding is that it's been shown that race
pace running (for long races like marathons) and slow running aren't as
effective for this.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

Donovan Rebbechi
April 29th 04, 07:02 PM
In article >, Peter Allen wrote:
> "Lyle McDonald" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Well, still mainly doing a lot of 'similar' cardio work (bike and
>> stairmaster), skating drills are mostly technical. So I can't honestly
>> gauge skating performance yet per se (that cycle starts in a few weeks).
>>
>> But power outputs (both max and sustainable over varying time periods
>> ranging from 2 to 40 minutes) on the bike and stairmaster (don't laugh,
>> hot chicks hang out on the stairmaster you iron lifting freaks) continue
>> to go up almost linearly. My program is very intensity based, low
>> volume, based around some research from the 70's, I'm probably training
>> maybe 4-5 hours/week total (recall that my events last 15-40 minutes or
>> so). My body seems to respond to it better than to LSD stuff, dunno why.
>
> Not that I'm an expert, but isn't the point of LSD that you get used to
> doing a lot of work so you have the endurance to do more high-intensity
> stuff later on?

One thing I found with my training is that cycling volume actually brings on
"undertraining" symptoms during the peak phase. My program went roughly like
this:
phase 1: 6 weeks base (40-50mpw)
phase 2: 6 weeks early quality: mostly LT work and anaerobic reps (50mpw).
phase 3: 6 weeks VO2 max intervals (60mpw).
phase 4: 6 weeks sharpening (40-50mpw)

The low volume in the early phase was largely because I was building milage and
coming back after injury -- next cycle milage will start at about 50 and get to
60-70 in phase 2. Even in these early phases (1,2) I was doing 2hrs xtraining
a week, so in terms of time it was more like 60mpw+ up to the end of phase 3.

Anyway, I'm a few weeks into the fourth phase, and after a temporary drop in
performance during phase 3, my pace appears to have shot through the roof.
The usual overtraining symptoms -- sluggishness/heavy legs, reduction in pace
on long runs, reduced sex drive etc -- I'm getting the opposite of all of them.

Not sure that I agree about LSD work helping technique/economy. At least in
the running world, the prevailing belief is that the best economy-specific
training is to do fast anaerobic reps (because it pushes you fast enough that
you need to be efficient). My understanding is that it's been shown that race
pace running (for long races like marathons) and slow running aren't as
effective for this.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

Donovan Rebbechi
April 29th 04, 07:02 PM
In article >, Peter Allen wrote:
> "Lyle McDonald" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Well, still mainly doing a lot of 'similar' cardio work (bike and
>> stairmaster), skating drills are mostly technical. So I can't honestly
>> gauge skating performance yet per se (that cycle starts in a few weeks).
>>
>> But power outputs (both max and sustainable over varying time periods
>> ranging from 2 to 40 minutes) on the bike and stairmaster (don't laugh,
>> hot chicks hang out on the stairmaster you iron lifting freaks) continue
>> to go up almost linearly. My program is very intensity based, low
>> volume, based around some research from the 70's, I'm probably training
>> maybe 4-5 hours/week total (recall that my events last 15-40 minutes or
>> so). My body seems to respond to it better than to LSD stuff, dunno why.
>
> Not that I'm an expert, but isn't the point of LSD that you get used to
> doing a lot of work so you have the endurance to do more high-intensity
> stuff later on?

One thing I found with my training is that cycling volume actually brings on
"undertraining" symptoms during the peak phase. My program went roughly like
this:
phase 1: 6 weeks base (40-50mpw)
phase 2: 6 weeks early quality: mostly LT work and anaerobic reps (50mpw).
phase 3: 6 weeks VO2 max intervals (60mpw).
phase 4: 6 weeks sharpening (40-50mpw)

The low volume in the early phase was largely because I was building milage and
coming back after injury -- next cycle milage will start at about 50 and get to
60-70 in phase 2. Even in these early phases (1,2) I was doing 2hrs xtraining
a week, so in terms of time it was more like 60mpw+ up to the end of phase 3.

Anyway, I'm a few weeks into the fourth phase, and after a temporary drop in
performance during phase 3, my pace appears to have shot through the roof.
The usual overtraining symptoms -- sluggishness/heavy legs, reduction in pace
on long runs, reduced sex drive etc -- I'm getting the opposite of all of them.

Not sure that I agree about LSD work helping technique/economy. At least in
the running world, the prevailing belief is that the best economy-specific
training is to do fast anaerobic reps (because it pushes you fast enough that
you need to be efficient). My understanding is that it's been shown that race
pace running (for long races like marathons) and slow running aren't as
effective for this.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

Lyle McDonald
April 29th 04, 07:11 PM
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:

> Not sure that I agree about LSD work helping technique/economy. At least in
> the running world, the prevailing belief is that the best economy-specific
> training is to do fast anaerobic reps (because it pushes you fast enough that
> you need to be efficient). My understanding is that it's been shown that race
> pace running (for long races like marathons) and slow running aren't as
> effective for this.

Maybe not economy but for a sport as technically demanding as skating
(as compared to running or cycling), a lot of low intensity volume work
is necessary, at least in the initial phases of training. Kind of like
swimmers who routinely do what seems an excessive amount of
low-intensity work, mainly to hone technical patterns. Sprinters to
tempo work (sprints at ~75% of max speed) for the same reason.

Skating involves a movement pattern that is far away from anything
'normal' in human locomotion (every society runs and cycling isn't too
far off from tha movement wise): you're pushing sideways to generate
forward thrust and there are all kinds of weight shifts and **** going on.

Ingraining good motor patterns at slow speeds is a key (IMO) to overall
good performance. When I have that technique developed at slow speeds,
I can work on repetitions at faster paces to improve things there.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 29th 04, 07:11 PM
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:

> Not sure that I agree about LSD work helping technique/economy. At least in
> the running world, the prevailing belief is that the best economy-specific
> training is to do fast anaerobic reps (because it pushes you fast enough that
> you need to be efficient). My understanding is that it's been shown that race
> pace running (for long races like marathons) and slow running aren't as
> effective for this.

Maybe not economy but for a sport as technically demanding as skating
(as compared to running or cycling), a lot of low intensity volume work
is necessary, at least in the initial phases of training. Kind of like
swimmers who routinely do what seems an excessive amount of
low-intensity work, mainly to hone technical patterns. Sprinters to
tempo work (sprints at ~75% of max speed) for the same reason.

Skating involves a movement pattern that is far away from anything
'normal' in human locomotion (every society runs and cycling isn't too
far off from tha movement wise): you're pushing sideways to generate
forward thrust and there are all kinds of weight shifts and **** going on.

Ingraining good motor patterns at slow speeds is a key (IMO) to overall
good performance. When I have that technique developed at slow speeds,
I can work on repetitions at faster paces to improve things there.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 29th 04, 07:11 PM
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:

> Not sure that I agree about LSD work helping technique/economy. At least in
> the running world, the prevailing belief is that the best economy-specific
> training is to do fast anaerobic reps (because it pushes you fast enough that
> you need to be efficient). My understanding is that it's been shown that race
> pace running (for long races like marathons) and slow running aren't as
> effective for this.

Maybe not economy but for a sport as technically demanding as skating
(as compared to running or cycling), a lot of low intensity volume work
is necessary, at least in the initial phases of training. Kind of like
swimmers who routinely do what seems an excessive amount of
low-intensity work, mainly to hone technical patterns. Sprinters to
tempo work (sprints at ~75% of max speed) for the same reason.

Skating involves a movement pattern that is far away from anything
'normal' in human locomotion (every society runs and cycling isn't too
far off from tha movement wise): you're pushing sideways to generate
forward thrust and there are all kinds of weight shifts and **** going on.

Ingraining good motor patterns at slow speeds is a key (IMO) to overall
good performance. When I have that technique developed at slow speeds,
I can work on repetitions at faster paces to improve things there.

Lyle

Donovan Rebbechi
April 29th 04, 07:34 PM
In article >, Lyle McDonald wrote:

> That's one goal of it (seemed to be a key to the Lydiard approach) but
> LSD has other physiological benefits. Recent research (and the
> empirical evidence taht came before it, hi Roger) is showing that high
> intensity develops the same qualities better. You simply have to have
> the base of training.
>
> Which I spent the 10 or so months before this phase doing.

This is a perfect example of how training programs get misinterpreted --
someone posts a week out of the schedule, and it's assumed that this is
training that is followed year-round.

Anyway, how does your current weekly schedule fit into your overall plan ? I
recall that this was preceded by what you posted earlier on which was a mix of
low intensitty base work, some intervals and some heavy compounds with weights.
I take it you're going to do N weeks of some sort of sharpening involving more
specific work possibly followed by a taper before the big races come up ?

Don't know about other sports, but in the running world, there seems to be at
the very least widespread agreement that training via some periodised approach
is the way to go. Requires more discipline, but I'm convinced that it's the way
to go.

Both Lydiard and Daniels (who is similar to Lydiard but more theory-laden)
advocate base building, followed by an escalation of quality work followed by
peaking. There's a popular myth that Lydiard training involves jogging 100
miles a week year round, but this viewpoint is not born out by his writings
or his actual training programs. The reason Lydiard was considered somewhat
radical is that he had 800m-mile runners (like Snell) doing high base volume.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

Donovan Rebbechi
April 29th 04, 07:34 PM
In article >, Lyle McDonald wrote:

> That's one goal of it (seemed to be a key to the Lydiard approach) but
> LSD has other physiological benefits. Recent research (and the
> empirical evidence taht came before it, hi Roger) is showing that high
> intensity develops the same qualities better. You simply have to have
> the base of training.
>
> Which I spent the 10 or so months before this phase doing.

This is a perfect example of how training programs get misinterpreted --
someone posts a week out of the schedule, and it's assumed that this is
training that is followed year-round.

Anyway, how does your current weekly schedule fit into your overall plan ? I
recall that this was preceded by what you posted earlier on which was a mix of
low intensitty base work, some intervals and some heavy compounds with weights.
I take it you're going to do N weeks of some sort of sharpening involving more
specific work possibly followed by a taper before the big races come up ?

Don't know about other sports, but in the running world, there seems to be at
the very least widespread agreement that training via some periodised approach
is the way to go. Requires more discipline, but I'm convinced that it's the way
to go.

Both Lydiard and Daniels (who is similar to Lydiard but more theory-laden)
advocate base building, followed by an escalation of quality work followed by
peaking. There's a popular myth that Lydiard training involves jogging 100
miles a week year round, but this viewpoint is not born out by his writings
or his actual training programs. The reason Lydiard was considered somewhat
radical is that he had 800m-mile runners (like Snell) doing high base volume.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

Donovan Rebbechi
April 29th 04, 07:34 PM
In article >, Lyle McDonald wrote:

> That's one goal of it (seemed to be a key to the Lydiard approach) but
> LSD has other physiological benefits. Recent research (and the
> empirical evidence taht came before it, hi Roger) is showing that high
> intensity develops the same qualities better. You simply have to have
> the base of training.
>
> Which I spent the 10 or so months before this phase doing.

This is a perfect example of how training programs get misinterpreted --
someone posts a week out of the schedule, and it's assumed that this is
training that is followed year-round.

Anyway, how does your current weekly schedule fit into your overall plan ? I
recall that this was preceded by what you posted earlier on which was a mix of
low intensitty base work, some intervals and some heavy compounds with weights.
I take it you're going to do N weeks of some sort of sharpening involving more
specific work possibly followed by a taper before the big races come up ?

Don't know about other sports, but in the running world, there seems to be at
the very least widespread agreement that training via some periodised approach
is the way to go. Requires more discipline, but I'm convinced that it's the way
to go.

Both Lydiard and Daniels (who is similar to Lydiard but more theory-laden)
advocate base building, followed by an escalation of quality work followed by
peaking. There's a popular myth that Lydiard training involves jogging 100
miles a week year round, but this viewpoint is not born out by his writings
or his actual training programs. The reason Lydiard was considered somewhat
radical is that he had 800m-mile runners (like Snell) doing high base volume.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

Peter Allen
April 30th 04, 01:34 AM
"Lyle McDonald" > wrote in message
...
> Peter Allen wrote:
> >>there are also 2-3 technical/skating workouts in there somewhere. All
> >>intervals are done on the bike, all threshold workouts on the
Stairmaster.
> >
> >
> > I'd assume from the above that your races tend to be more like bike road
> > races than timetrials?
>
> In-line speed skating is closer to a bike time trial: some pack stuff,
> breakaways, that sort of thing.

That's a road race. (but you mistyped, I'd guess)

> Of course, at the 10k distance (my
> preferred distance but there are scant few races), it's more or less an
> all out sprint, since it's only 15-20 minutes long (you can readily
> maintain LT or a little above for that time period).

Yes, but at >30kph you've got to have a lot of air drag benefit going on, so
(at least from a cyclist's POV) the right thing to do is to sit up the ass
of whoever's in the lead then outsprint him over the last 500m when he's
knackered and you're not. (simplified)

> For half or full
> marathon, I would expect more bike racing tactics but I haven't raced
> one of those before.
>
> Long track ice speed skating (what I actaully want to do) is essentially
> a time trial even though there is another guy on the track.
>
> >
> > apart from that:
> > 1) you're not doing anything like a recovery pace anywhere - matter of
> > choice, I suppose, but those do help me - unless you're doing your
technical
> > work at that sort of level?
>
> Help you in what sense?

It seems to get rid of soreness fairly well. Nothing more than that, really.

> My overal volume is fairly low, I get one full day off per week. I'm
> recovering and improving just fine.
>
> > 2) you are going to get overtrained if you try to do that continuously.
You
> > might want to throw in a week with the intervals replaced by technical
stuff
> > every month or so?
>
> In a followup post, I mentioned that every 3rd or 4th week, I deload.
> Usually 3-4 hours of fairly moderate intensity stuff (15-160 HR or even
> 140-150) across 3-4 workouts.

Yes - sorry. Posted before reading that.

> >
> > What sort of power outputs are you getting, anyway?
> >
> > Peter (not good for intervals, but can manage 388W for 30' on a bike
_if_
> > you believe the exercise bike monitor)
>
> What do you weigh, I think you're heavier than me.
> On the bike (Lifecycle and who knows how accurate the powermeter is) I'm
> pusing 343 for short intervals, about 300 for long intervals. The
> Stairmaster seems to consistently be higher than the bike, claiming 290
> or so for 40 minutes. Nothing fantastic but I've still got a bunch more
> weeks of this to keep pushing it up. I also need to find out what some
> average power output for skaters are, I certainly feel that I have a
> higher fitness level than when I was competing before and I was fairly
> competitive then (with terrible technique). So I am optimistic about
> competition later this year.

Right now, 74kg; the 30' was done at 71.5kg (approaching a peak a couple of
months ago). I'm not entirely sure it's accurate, though, gym monitors being
what they are. I should have a flat course 25 mile TT result to play with in
a couple of days, which I'll try plugging into a speed-to-power guesser.

Peter

Peter Allen
April 30th 04, 01:34 AM
"Lyle McDonald" > wrote in message
...
> Peter Allen wrote:
> >>there are also 2-3 technical/skating workouts in there somewhere. All
> >>intervals are done on the bike, all threshold workouts on the
Stairmaster.
> >
> >
> > I'd assume from the above that your races tend to be more like bike road
> > races than timetrials?
>
> In-line speed skating is closer to a bike time trial: some pack stuff,
> breakaways, that sort of thing.

That's a road race. (but you mistyped, I'd guess)

> Of course, at the 10k distance (my
> preferred distance but there are scant few races), it's more or less an
> all out sprint, since it's only 15-20 minutes long (you can readily
> maintain LT or a little above for that time period).

Yes, but at >30kph you've got to have a lot of air drag benefit going on, so
(at least from a cyclist's POV) the right thing to do is to sit up the ass
of whoever's in the lead then outsprint him over the last 500m when he's
knackered and you're not. (simplified)

> For half or full
> marathon, I would expect more bike racing tactics but I haven't raced
> one of those before.
>
> Long track ice speed skating (what I actaully want to do) is essentially
> a time trial even though there is another guy on the track.
>
> >
> > apart from that:
> > 1) you're not doing anything like a recovery pace anywhere - matter of
> > choice, I suppose, but those do help me - unless you're doing your
technical
> > work at that sort of level?
>
> Help you in what sense?

It seems to get rid of soreness fairly well. Nothing more than that, really.

> My overal volume is fairly low, I get one full day off per week. I'm
> recovering and improving just fine.
>
> > 2) you are going to get overtrained if you try to do that continuously.
You
> > might want to throw in a week with the intervals replaced by technical
stuff
> > every month or so?
>
> In a followup post, I mentioned that every 3rd or 4th week, I deload.
> Usually 3-4 hours of fairly moderate intensity stuff (15-160 HR or even
> 140-150) across 3-4 workouts.

Yes - sorry. Posted before reading that.

> >
> > What sort of power outputs are you getting, anyway?
> >
> > Peter (not good for intervals, but can manage 388W for 30' on a bike
_if_
> > you believe the exercise bike monitor)
>
> What do you weigh, I think you're heavier than me.
> On the bike (Lifecycle and who knows how accurate the powermeter is) I'm
> pusing 343 for short intervals, about 300 for long intervals. The
> Stairmaster seems to consistently be higher than the bike, claiming 290
> or so for 40 minutes. Nothing fantastic but I've still got a bunch more
> weeks of this to keep pushing it up. I also need to find out what some
> average power output for skaters are, I certainly feel that I have a
> higher fitness level than when I was competing before and I was fairly
> competitive then (with terrible technique). So I am optimistic about
> competition later this year.

Right now, 74kg; the 30' was done at 71.5kg (approaching a peak a couple of
months ago). I'm not entirely sure it's accurate, though, gym monitors being
what they are. I should have a flat course 25 mile TT result to play with in
a couple of days, which I'll try plugging into a speed-to-power guesser.

Peter

Lyle McDonald
April 30th 04, 03:10 PM
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:

> In article >, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>
>
>>That's one goal of it (seemed to be a key to the Lydiard approach) but
>>LSD has other physiological benefits. Recent research (and the
>>empirical evidence taht came before it, hi Roger) is showing that high
>>intensity develops the same qualities better. You simply have to have
>>the base of training.
>>
>>Which I spent the 10 or so months before this phase doing.
>
>
> This is a perfect example of how training programs get misinterpreted --
> someone posts a week out of the schedule, and it's assumed that this is
> training that is followed year-round.

Yup. And I did a 2 month standard base period (moderate to high volume
at 82-88% of tested LT HR) prior to my extended intensity phase. I
don't feel that I got any benefit out of it. No improvement in submax
or max power outputs and outside of maybe conditioning me for the higher
intensity stuff, it was 2 months of wasted time. Then again, after you
have a certan level of LSD/base training, doing more isn't going to
really improve much physiologically except maybe your work capacity.
YOu can boost the VO2/performance of elite athletes by 5% with 3 weeks
of quality training, which is about 5% more than you could get with
months of LSD training.

>
> Anyway, how does your current weekly schedule fit into your overall plan ? I
> recall that this was preceded by what you posted earlier on which was a mix of
> low intensitty base work, some intervals and some heavy compounds with weights.
> I take it you're going to do N weeks of some sort of sharpening involving more
> specific work possibly followed by a taper before the big races come up ?

I try to get 2-3 skate technical workouts in per week (on a fairly even
spacing so Mon-thu or Mon-Fri if I do 2, etc). For the early part of
the year, these were indoors. Mainly because I'm a wimp who hates cold
weather, also because I needed to fix some technical errors. Recently,
weather permitting, I have moved the tech work outdoors to get some time
on my skates.

I had to drop weight lifting completely, it wasn't fitting into my
overall schedule (was tiring me out too much for the more important
stuff) and I felt like my time was better spent on more specific stuff.
After reading some recent stuff (the book Peak Performance by Hawley
and Burke), I'm questioning my long-held belief about the role of
strength trainnig for endurance athlete performance: it appears to
mainly help less skilled athletes with little benefit to elites.

I do some high rep muscular endurance conditioning (high rp bodyweight
squats, abs and low back) after technical work.

Ironic note department: yes, that means I'm not even weight lifting
right now, it's the longest time frame I've gone without lifting in
about 15 years. The irony is that, as someone not lifting, my lesbains
are the only ones at the gym I'm training them at making any progress at
all: A gets stronger by the week, P is going to demolish her
bodybuilding show. I'm the non-weight lifting strength coach.

>
> Don't know about other sports, but in the running world, there seems to be at
> the very least widespread agreement that training via some periodised approach
> is the way to go. Requires more discipline, but I'm convinced that it's the way
> to go.

Absolutely and I set up my overall plan prior to starting it. I
actually decided to double periodize my training. The first phase was
more of a long general preparation phase (recall that I was away from
endurance sports for 5 years so I was starting from a lot of scratch
here): technical skate work coupled with general training to raise
aerobic/anaerobic capacity as high as I can take it (that's where I'm
currently at). I have a few more weeks of this type of training (maybe
one more mesocycle after this one is over), then a 2 week
regeneration/transition phase.

Then I start skate training in earnest, instead of the majority of my
training being bike/SM work, it'll reverse: mostly skating with some
addittional work on the other pieces as needed. To reinforce good
technique, I'll probably start with a classic base type of phase, higher
volume at moderate intensities. Then VO2 max intervals, then LT
intervals (I think a short to long approach is better, at least for my
type of event: build speed at short distances and increase the distance
you can maintain it for; I think I've been reading too much sprint
theory). I've targeted one main in-line skate race this year (August)
but my eventual goal is to do long-track ice which is a winter sport
with an Oct to Mar racing season. So a lot of my training is geared
towards that time frame. The cycle I'm finishing up now is more or less
the secon half of the last year's cycle, it was just truncated so I used
it for general prep. then I've got a more traditional cycle building to
a racing season that runs from Oct-March.

>
> Both Lydiard and Daniels (who is similar to Lydiard but more theory-laden)
> advocate base building, followed by an escalation of quality work followed by
> peaking. There's a popular myth that Lydiard training involves jogging 100
> miles a week year round, but this viewpoint is not born out by his writings
> or his actual training programs. The reason Lydiard was considered somewhat
> radical is that he had 800m-mile runners (like Snell) doing high base volume.

I have read Daniels but not Lydiard yet. My undersatnding is that
Lydiard did the high volume mainly to prepare athletes for the quality
work to come. It wasn't volume for volume's sake so much as volume to
prepare them for quality later down the road.

I think there are also some significant differences between running,
cycling, skating, swimming in some of these regards. You've got the
impact issue to consider with running that doesn't apply to the other
sports so much: I think you need eithre more base conditioning or less
(and less frequent) quality work with running compared to the others.

A friend in town was a collegiate swimmer and they went hard every day
twice a day for weeks on end. Yeah, they'd go stale and then they'd
taper and just get faster and faster but they still did it. He points
out that you don't have the impact issue, the low efficienciy makes it
hard to burn out the CNS, etc. So they can get away with that level of
work and be ok. Such an approach would probably kill a runner. A
cyclist might get away with it for a while.

BTW, a book you might want to check out is "Distance Running" by Robert
Lyden. Nothing 'new' in any real sense but some interesting ways of
conceptualizing training and I like how he sets up the weekly schedules.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 30th 04, 03:10 PM
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:

> In article >, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>
>
>>That's one goal of it (seemed to be a key to the Lydiard approach) but
>>LSD has other physiological benefits. Recent research (and the
>>empirical evidence taht came before it, hi Roger) is showing that high
>>intensity develops the same qualities better. You simply have to have
>>the base of training.
>>
>>Which I spent the 10 or so months before this phase doing.
>
>
> This is a perfect example of how training programs get misinterpreted --
> someone posts a week out of the schedule, and it's assumed that this is
> training that is followed year-round.

Yup. And I did a 2 month standard base period (moderate to high volume
at 82-88% of tested LT HR) prior to my extended intensity phase. I
don't feel that I got any benefit out of it. No improvement in submax
or max power outputs and outside of maybe conditioning me for the higher
intensity stuff, it was 2 months of wasted time. Then again, after you
have a certan level of LSD/base training, doing more isn't going to
really improve much physiologically except maybe your work capacity.
YOu can boost the VO2/performance of elite athletes by 5% with 3 weeks
of quality training, which is about 5% more than you could get with
months of LSD training.

>
> Anyway, how does your current weekly schedule fit into your overall plan ? I
> recall that this was preceded by what you posted earlier on which was a mix of
> low intensitty base work, some intervals and some heavy compounds with weights.
> I take it you're going to do N weeks of some sort of sharpening involving more
> specific work possibly followed by a taper before the big races come up ?

I try to get 2-3 skate technical workouts in per week (on a fairly even
spacing so Mon-thu or Mon-Fri if I do 2, etc). For the early part of
the year, these were indoors. Mainly because I'm a wimp who hates cold
weather, also because I needed to fix some technical errors. Recently,
weather permitting, I have moved the tech work outdoors to get some time
on my skates.

I had to drop weight lifting completely, it wasn't fitting into my
overall schedule (was tiring me out too much for the more important
stuff) and I felt like my time was better spent on more specific stuff.
After reading some recent stuff (the book Peak Performance by Hawley
and Burke), I'm questioning my long-held belief about the role of
strength trainnig for endurance athlete performance: it appears to
mainly help less skilled athletes with little benefit to elites.

I do some high rep muscular endurance conditioning (high rp bodyweight
squats, abs and low back) after technical work.

Ironic note department: yes, that means I'm not even weight lifting
right now, it's the longest time frame I've gone without lifting in
about 15 years. The irony is that, as someone not lifting, my lesbains
are the only ones at the gym I'm training them at making any progress at
all: A gets stronger by the week, P is going to demolish her
bodybuilding show. I'm the non-weight lifting strength coach.

>
> Don't know about other sports, but in the running world, there seems to be at
> the very least widespread agreement that training via some periodised approach
> is the way to go. Requires more discipline, but I'm convinced that it's the way
> to go.

Absolutely and I set up my overall plan prior to starting it. I
actually decided to double periodize my training. The first phase was
more of a long general preparation phase (recall that I was away from
endurance sports for 5 years so I was starting from a lot of scratch
here): technical skate work coupled with general training to raise
aerobic/anaerobic capacity as high as I can take it (that's where I'm
currently at). I have a few more weeks of this type of training (maybe
one more mesocycle after this one is over), then a 2 week
regeneration/transition phase.

Then I start skate training in earnest, instead of the majority of my
training being bike/SM work, it'll reverse: mostly skating with some
addittional work on the other pieces as needed. To reinforce good
technique, I'll probably start with a classic base type of phase, higher
volume at moderate intensities. Then VO2 max intervals, then LT
intervals (I think a short to long approach is better, at least for my
type of event: build speed at short distances and increase the distance
you can maintain it for; I think I've been reading too much sprint
theory). I've targeted one main in-line skate race this year (August)
but my eventual goal is to do long-track ice which is a winter sport
with an Oct to Mar racing season. So a lot of my training is geared
towards that time frame. The cycle I'm finishing up now is more or less
the secon half of the last year's cycle, it was just truncated so I used
it for general prep. then I've got a more traditional cycle building to
a racing season that runs from Oct-March.

>
> Both Lydiard and Daniels (who is similar to Lydiard but more theory-laden)
> advocate base building, followed by an escalation of quality work followed by
> peaking. There's a popular myth that Lydiard training involves jogging 100
> miles a week year round, but this viewpoint is not born out by his writings
> or his actual training programs. The reason Lydiard was considered somewhat
> radical is that he had 800m-mile runners (like Snell) doing high base volume.

I have read Daniels but not Lydiard yet. My undersatnding is that
Lydiard did the high volume mainly to prepare athletes for the quality
work to come. It wasn't volume for volume's sake so much as volume to
prepare them for quality later down the road.

I think there are also some significant differences between running,
cycling, skating, swimming in some of these regards. You've got the
impact issue to consider with running that doesn't apply to the other
sports so much: I think you need eithre more base conditioning or less
(and less frequent) quality work with running compared to the others.

A friend in town was a collegiate swimmer and they went hard every day
twice a day for weeks on end. Yeah, they'd go stale and then they'd
taper and just get faster and faster but they still did it. He points
out that you don't have the impact issue, the low efficienciy makes it
hard to burn out the CNS, etc. So they can get away with that level of
work and be ok. Such an approach would probably kill a runner. A
cyclist might get away with it for a while.

BTW, a book you might want to check out is "Distance Running" by Robert
Lyden. Nothing 'new' in any real sense but some interesting ways of
conceptualizing training and I like how he sets up the weekly schedules.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 30th 04, 03:13 PM
Peter Allen wrote:

> "Lyle McDonald" > wrote in message
> ...

>>In-line speed skating is closer to a bike time trial: some pack stuff,
>>breakaways, that sort of thing.
>
>
> That's a road race. (but you mistyped, I'd guess)

D'oh! Yes, mistyped. Bike road race. Short one.


> Yes, but at >30kph you've got to have a lot of air drag benefit going on, so
> (at least from a cyclist's POV) the right thing to do is to sit up the ass
> of whoever's in the lead then outsprint him over the last 500m when he's
> knackered and you're not. (simplified)

More or less correct, however.

>>>1) you're not doing anything like a recovery pace anywhere - matter of
>>>choice, I suppose, but those do help me - unless you're doing your
>
> technical
>
>>>work at that sort of level?
>>
>>Help you in what sense?
>
>
> It seems to get rid of soreness fairly well. Nothing more than that, really.

Yeah, I will occasionally put in a short recovery type workout as a
second workout of the day. Usually, I'm just burnt by Saturday after 6
days of high intensity training. Mentally and physically exhausted.
Day off on Sun and I feel fine by Mon. I should probably go for a walk
or swim or something on Sun but I have it programmed in my mind as a day
off and I take it as a day off. I also make sure to eat a little more
on the weekends, which seems to help with recovery.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
April 30th 04, 03:13 PM
Peter Allen wrote:

> "Lyle McDonald" > wrote in message
> ...

>>In-line speed skating is closer to a bike time trial: some pack stuff,
>>breakaways, that sort of thing.
>
>
> That's a road race. (but you mistyped, I'd guess)

D'oh! Yes, mistyped. Bike road race. Short one.


> Yes, but at >30kph you've got to have a lot of air drag benefit going on, so
> (at least from a cyclist's POV) the right thing to do is to sit up the ass
> of whoever's in the lead then outsprint him over the last 500m when he's
> knackered and you're not. (simplified)

More or less correct, however.

>>>1) you're not doing anything like a recovery pace anywhere - matter of
>>>choice, I suppose, but those do help me - unless you're doing your
>
> technical
>
>>>work at that sort of level?
>>
>>Help you in what sense?
>
>
> It seems to get rid of soreness fairly well. Nothing more than that, really.

Yeah, I will occasionally put in a short recovery type workout as a
second workout of the day. Usually, I'm just burnt by Saturday after 6
days of high intensity training. Mentally and physically exhausted.
Day off on Sun and I feel fine by Mon. I should probably go for a walk
or swim or something on Sun but I have it programmed in my mind as a day
off and I take it as a day off. I also make sure to eat a little more
on the weekends, which seems to help with recovery.

Lyle

John HUDSON
April 30th 04, 03:29 PM
On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 09:10:18 -0500, Lyle McDonald
> wrote:

>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
>> In article >, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>>
>>
>>>That's one goal of it (seemed to be a key to the Lydiard approach) but
>>>LSD has other physiological benefits. Recent research (and the
>>>empirical evidence taht came before it, hi Roger) is showing that high
>>>intensity develops the same qualities better. You simply have to have
>>>the base of training.
>>>
>>>Which I spent the 10 or so months before this phase doing.
>>
>>
>> This is a perfect example of how training programs get misinterpreted --
>> someone posts a week out of the schedule, and it's assumed that this is
>> training that is followed year-round.
>
>Yup. And I did a 2 month standard base period (moderate to high volume
>at 82-88% of tested LT HR) prior to my extended intensity phase. I
>don't feel that I got any benefit out of it. No improvement in submax
>or max power outputs and outside of maybe conditioning me for the higher
>intensity stuff, it was 2 months of wasted time. Then again, after you
>have a certan level of LSD/base training, doing more isn't going to
>really improve much physiologically except maybe your work capacity.
>YOu can boost the VO2/performance of elite athletes by 5% with 3 weeks
>of quality training, which is about 5% more than you could get with
>months of LSD training.
>
>>
>> Anyway, how does your current weekly schedule fit into your overall plan ? I
>> recall that this was preceded by what you posted earlier on which was a mix of
>> low intensitty base work, some intervals and some heavy compounds with weights.
>> I take it you're going to do N weeks of some sort of sharpening involving more
>> specific work possibly followed by a taper before the big races come up ?
>
>I try to get 2-3 skate technical workouts in per week (on a fairly even
>spacing so Mon-thu or Mon-Fri if I do 2, etc). For the early part of
>the year, these were indoors. Mainly because I'm a wimp who hates cold
>weather, also because I needed to fix some technical errors. Recently,
>weather permitting, I have moved the tech work outdoors to get some time
>on my skates.
>
>I had to drop weight lifting completely, it wasn't fitting into my
>overall schedule (was tiring me out too much for the more important
>stuff) and I felt like my time was better spent on more specific stuff.
> After reading some recent stuff (the book Peak Performance by Hawley
>and Burke), I'm questioning my long-held belief about the role of
>strength trainnig for endurance athlete performance: it appears to
>mainly help less skilled athletes with little benefit to elites.
>
>I do some high rep muscular endurance conditioning (high rp bodyweight
>squats, abs and low back) after technical work.
>
>Ironic note department: yes, that means I'm not even weight lifting
>right now, it's the longest time frame I've gone without lifting in
>about 15 years. The irony is that, as someone not lifting, my lesbains
>are the only ones at the gym I'm training them at making any progress at
>all: A gets stronger by the week, P is going to demolish her
>bodybuilding show. I'm the non-weight lifting strength coach.
>
>>
>> Don't know about other sports, but in the running world, there seems to be at
>> the very least widespread agreement that training via some periodised approach
>> is the way to go. Requires more discipline, but I'm convinced that it's the way
>> to go.
>
>Absolutely and I set up my overall plan prior to starting it. I
>actually decided to double periodize my training. The first phase was
>more of a long general preparation phase (recall that I was away from
>endurance sports for 5 years so I was starting from a lot of scratch
>here): technical skate work coupled with general training to raise
>aerobic/anaerobic capacity as high as I can take it (that's where I'm
>currently at). I have a few more weeks of this type of training (maybe
>one more mesocycle after this one is over), then a 2 week
>regeneration/transition phase.
>
>Then I start skate training in earnest, instead of the majority of my
>training being bike/SM work, it'll reverse: mostly skating with some
>addittional work on the other pieces as needed. To reinforce good
>technique, I'll probably start with a classic base type of phase, higher
>volume at moderate intensities. Then VO2 max intervals, then LT
>intervals (I think a short to long approach is better, at least for my
>type of event: build speed at short distances and increase the distance
>you can maintain it for; I think I've been reading too much sprint
>theory). I've targeted one main in-line skate race this year (August)
>but my eventual goal is to do long-track ice which is a winter sport
>with an Oct to Mar racing season. So a lot of my training is geared
>towards that time frame. The cycle I'm finishing up now is more or less
>the secon half of the last year's cycle, it was just truncated so I used
>it for general prep. then I've got a more traditional cycle building to
>a racing season that runs from Oct-March.
>
>>
>> Both Lydiard and Daniels (who is similar to Lydiard but more theory-laden)
>> advocate base building, followed by an escalation of quality work followed by
>> peaking. There's a popular myth that Lydiard training involves jogging 100
>> miles a week year round, but this viewpoint is not born out by his writings
>> or his actual training programs. The reason Lydiard was considered somewhat
>> radical is that he had 800m-mile runners (like Snell) doing high base volume.
>
>I have read Daniels but not Lydiard yet. My undersatnding is that
>Lydiard did the high volume mainly to prepare athletes for the quality
>work to come. It wasn't volume for volume's sake so much as volume to
>prepare them for quality later down the road.
>
>I think there are also some significant differences between running,
>cycling, skating, swimming in some of these regards. You've got the
>impact issue to consider with running that doesn't apply to the other
>sports so much: I think you need eithre more base conditioning or less
>(and less frequent) quality work with running compared to the others.
>
>A friend in town was a collegiate swimmer and they went hard every day
>twice a day for weeks on end. Yeah, they'd go stale and then they'd
>taper and just get faster and faster but they still did it. He points
>out that you don't have the impact issue, the low efficienciy makes it
>hard to burn out the CNS, etc. So they can get away with that level of
>work and be ok. Such an approach would probably kill a runner. A
>cyclist might get away with it for a while.
>
>BTW, a book you might want to check out is "Distance Running" by Robert
>Lyden. Nothing 'new' in any real sense but some interesting ways of
>conceptualizing training and I like how he sets up the weekly schedules.

I wonder if you would care to expand on that contribution Lyle, or at
least the fascinating bits all about you?

HAGWE!

TFIF!! ;o)

John HUDSON
April 30th 04, 03:29 PM
On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 09:10:18 -0500, Lyle McDonald
> wrote:

>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
>> In article >, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>>
>>
>>>That's one goal of it (seemed to be a key to the Lydiard approach) but
>>>LSD has other physiological benefits. Recent research (and the
>>>empirical evidence taht came before it, hi Roger) is showing that high
>>>intensity develops the same qualities better. You simply have to have
>>>the base of training.
>>>
>>>Which I spent the 10 or so months before this phase doing.
>>
>>
>> This is a perfect example of how training programs get misinterpreted --
>> someone posts a week out of the schedule, and it's assumed that this is
>> training that is followed year-round.
>
>Yup. And I did a 2 month standard base period (moderate to high volume
>at 82-88% of tested LT HR) prior to my extended intensity phase. I
>don't feel that I got any benefit out of it. No improvement in submax
>or max power outputs and outside of maybe conditioning me for the higher
>intensity stuff, it was 2 months of wasted time. Then again, after you
>have a certan level of LSD/base training, doing more isn't going to
>really improve much physiologically except maybe your work capacity.
>YOu can boost the VO2/performance of elite athletes by 5% with 3 weeks
>of quality training, which is about 5% more than you could get with
>months of LSD training.
>
>>
>> Anyway, how does your current weekly schedule fit into your overall plan ? I
>> recall that this was preceded by what you posted earlier on which was a mix of
>> low intensitty base work, some intervals and some heavy compounds with weights.
>> I take it you're going to do N weeks of some sort of sharpening involving more
>> specific work possibly followed by a taper before the big races come up ?
>
>I try to get 2-3 skate technical workouts in per week (on a fairly even
>spacing so Mon-thu or Mon-Fri if I do 2, etc). For the early part of
>the year, these were indoors. Mainly because I'm a wimp who hates cold
>weather, also because I needed to fix some technical errors. Recently,
>weather permitting, I have moved the tech work outdoors to get some time
>on my skates.
>
>I had to drop weight lifting completely, it wasn't fitting into my
>overall schedule (was tiring me out too much for the more important
>stuff) and I felt like my time was better spent on more specific stuff.
> After reading some recent stuff (the book Peak Performance by Hawley
>and Burke), I'm questioning my long-held belief about the role of
>strength trainnig for endurance athlete performance: it appears to
>mainly help less skilled athletes with little benefit to elites.
>
>I do some high rep muscular endurance conditioning (high rp bodyweight
>squats, abs and low back) after technical work.
>
>Ironic note department: yes, that means I'm not even weight lifting
>right now, it's the longest time frame I've gone without lifting in
>about 15 years. The irony is that, as someone not lifting, my lesbains
>are the only ones at the gym I'm training them at making any progress at
>all: A gets stronger by the week, P is going to demolish her
>bodybuilding show. I'm the non-weight lifting strength coach.
>
>>
>> Don't know about other sports, but in the running world, there seems to be at
>> the very least widespread agreement that training via some periodised approach
>> is the way to go. Requires more discipline, but I'm convinced that it's the way
>> to go.
>
>Absolutely and I set up my overall plan prior to starting it. I
>actually decided to double periodize my training. The first phase was
>more of a long general preparation phase (recall that I was away from
>endurance sports for 5 years so I was starting from a lot of scratch
>here): technical skate work coupled with general training to raise
>aerobic/anaerobic capacity as high as I can take it (that's where I'm
>currently at). I have a few more weeks of this type of training (maybe
>one more mesocycle after this one is over), then a 2 week
>regeneration/transition phase.
>
>Then I start skate training in earnest, instead of the majority of my
>training being bike/SM work, it'll reverse: mostly skating with some
>addittional work on the other pieces as needed. To reinforce good
>technique, I'll probably start with a classic base type of phase, higher
>volume at moderate intensities. Then VO2 max intervals, then LT
>intervals (I think a short to long approach is better, at least for my
>type of event: build speed at short distances and increase the distance
>you can maintain it for; I think I've been reading too much sprint
>theory). I've targeted one main in-line skate race this year (August)
>but my eventual goal is to do long-track ice which is a winter sport
>with an Oct to Mar racing season. So a lot of my training is geared
>towards that time frame. The cycle I'm finishing up now is more or less
>the secon half of the last year's cycle, it was just truncated so I used
>it for general prep. then I've got a more traditional cycle building to
>a racing season that runs from Oct-March.
>
>>
>> Both Lydiard and Daniels (who is similar to Lydiard but more theory-laden)
>> advocate base building, followed by an escalation of quality work followed by
>> peaking. There's a popular myth that Lydiard training involves jogging 100
>> miles a week year round, but this viewpoint is not born out by his writings
>> or his actual training programs. The reason Lydiard was considered somewhat
>> radical is that he had 800m-mile runners (like Snell) doing high base volume.
>
>I have read Daniels but not Lydiard yet. My undersatnding is that
>Lydiard did the high volume mainly to prepare athletes for the quality
>work to come. It wasn't volume for volume's sake so much as volume to
>prepare them for quality later down the road.
>
>I think there are also some significant differences between running,
>cycling, skating, swimming in some of these regards. You've got the
>impact issue to consider with running that doesn't apply to the other
>sports so much: I think you need eithre more base conditioning or less
>(and less frequent) quality work with running compared to the others.
>
>A friend in town was a collegiate swimmer and they went hard every day
>twice a day for weeks on end. Yeah, they'd go stale and then they'd
>taper and just get faster and faster but they still did it. He points
>out that you don't have the impact issue, the low efficienciy makes it
>hard to burn out the CNS, etc. So they can get away with that level of
>work and be ok. Such an approach would probably kill a runner. A
>cyclist might get away with it for a while.
>
>BTW, a book you might want to check out is "Distance Running" by Robert
>Lyden. Nothing 'new' in any real sense but some interesting ways of
>conceptualizing training and I like how he sets up the weekly schedules.

I wonder if you would care to expand on that contribution Lyle, or at
least the fascinating bits all about you?

HAGWE!

TFIF!! ;o)

Peter Allen
May 2nd 04, 04:30 PM
"Peter Allen" > wrote in message
...
> Right now, 74kg; the 30' was done at 71.5kg (approaching a peak a couple
of
> months ago). I'm not entirely sure it's accurate, though, gym monitors
being
> what they are. I should have a flat course 25 mile TT result to play with
in
> a couple of days, which I'll try plugging into a speed-to-power guesser.

The 25 TT result was 58:14, which per the
www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm site translates to 316W.

(that is based on a proper tri bike, whereas I'm riding a fairly crappy road
bike with tri-bars and not a brilliant aero position, so I'll be slightly
better than 316W, but the gym monitor is definitely wrong)

The winner did 52:01; that's >420W per the same calculator. He's lighter
than me, too...

Peter

Peter Allen
May 2nd 04, 04:30 PM
"Peter Allen" > wrote in message
...
> Right now, 74kg; the 30' was done at 71.5kg (approaching a peak a couple
of
> months ago). I'm not entirely sure it's accurate, though, gym monitors
being
> what they are. I should have a flat course 25 mile TT result to play with
in
> a couple of days, which I'll try plugging into a speed-to-power guesser.

The 25 TT result was 58:14, which per the
www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm site translates to 316W.

(that is based on a proper tri bike, whereas I'm riding a fairly crappy road
bike with tri-bars and not a brilliant aero position, so I'll be slightly
better than 316W, but the gym monitor is definitely wrong)

The winner did 52:01; that's >420W per the same calculator. He's lighter
than me, too...

Peter

Smith
May 4th 04, 03:28 PM
On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 19:54:17 -0500, elzinator
> wrote:
>
>You're being an ****ing asshole!
>

That would be "You're being a ****ing asshole!"

"an" would work before "asshole".

(cause this is MFW and we're supposed to be antagonistic little ****s,
even when we are helpful)

"Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence;
supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without
fighting." - Sun Tzu

Smith
May 4th 04, 03:28 PM
On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 19:54:17 -0500, elzinator
> wrote:
>
>You're being an ****ing asshole!
>

That would be "You're being a ****ing asshole!"

"an" would work before "asshole".

(cause this is MFW and we're supposed to be antagonistic little ****s,
even when we are helpful)

"Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence;
supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without
fighting." - Sun Tzu

Seth Breidbart
May 11th 04, 03:52 AM
In article >,
Lyle McDonald > wrote:

>But nobody follows a diet for 5 days.

I'd have guessed that most people do.

At least, when they originally intended to follow it for 3 months.

Seth
--
Of course, common logic fails to hold up here on mfw, as a general rule
of thumb. -- Lyle McDonald