Riding before breakfast question

Loretta Damage

I've been reading alot recently in various publications & training websites about riding for 30-45 minutes pre-breakfast as a method of getting some weight off. This suits me as my commute is around 40 mins. Obviously, no soilids before the ride but is it ok to get some water on board before I head out?

Cheers, Phil.

Pokerface

Loretta Damage wrote:

Is it ok to get some water on board before I head out?

Absolutely. Especially in the form of coffee!

P_Tucker

Why no solids? Unless you are absolutely hammering into work, breakfast rolling around your stomach won't kill you.

Pokerface

P_Tucker wrote:

Why no solids? Unless you are absolutely hammering into work, breakfast rolling around your stomach won't kill you.

http://medicmagic.net/exercise-before-b ... aster.html


*Studies* show it helps burn fat faster. I'm sure Alex or Jim will be along shortly to explain why it's a myth. But at least there is some research done on it.

"In his study of bicycle athletes it is known that despite an empty stomach causes decrease in performance, but the amount of fat which is burned is much more that average."

Soni

Loretta Damage wrote:

I've been reading alot recently in various publications & training websites about riding for 30-45 minutes pre-breakfast as a method of getting some weight off. This suits me as my commute is around 40 mins. Obviously, no soilids before the ride but is it ok to get some water on board before I head out?

Cheers, Phil.

I've been training this way and have managed to reduce my weight from 18.2 - 14.11 stone.

Take a look at my thread here:-

http://www.sketchymtb.co.uk/Blah.pl?m-1290642333/s-0/

Some disagree with this type of training, however it works for me and i've more importantly reduced my blood pressure significantly.

sampras38

I don't think 30-40 minutes on the bike pre-breakfast is going to do you any harm, especially if you're not really hammering it. There is a slight mis-conception that the body turns to fat for it's energy sources on an empty stomch but this is only partly true. The body will, to a point, but it will also use muscle as energy too.

How much will depend on the individual and various other factors but in the main your body will use both muscle and fat as energy.

Personally I've never really understood why people do exercise on an empty stomach. Surely they can stomach a banana or some orange juice for a little energy. You're only talking about 100 calories in a banana fgs..

Richa1181

I've read things in the past saying that you burn more fat exercising first thing in the morning due to lower levels of insulin in the blood (which apparently slows down fat breakdown later in the day) but I've never done particularly well on dawn rides. Anything that could be called proper exercise is beyond me at that time of the day so I'd rather leave it until after lunch when I know I can get a quality workout in without passing out

DaveyL

The insulin comment seems to be correct - though I think it is *increased* levels. I'm currently working my way through Asker Jeukendrup's "Sports Nutrition: from Lab to Kitchen" and I definitely recommend it - covers a wide range of topics related to nutrition and recovery.

In it you'll find discussion of insulin (released on consumption of carbohydrate) suppressing fat oxidation during exercise. And also some work by Keith Baar on training in a glycogen depleted state. e.g. http://www.nutrifit.co.uk/Conference_bh ... 20high.pdf which may help promote building the biochemical "machinery" for fat oxidation.

However... I'd say that whether you do this type of training depends on (1) your goals (if they are "endurance" events, i.e. where glycogen stores are a limiter) and (2) How much time you have to train.

The reason for this is more work by Jeukendrup, which seems to show that the maximum amount of fat you can burn is around 0.5-0.6 grams per minute. Meaning that you are going to have to do a hell of a lot of training there to burn off a lot of fat. So I think it is better to look upon your training as just contributing to your overall calorie deficit you'll need if you want to shift weight, rather than looking to these sessions to burn fat per se.

Although they may improve fat-burning capability (important for stored glycogen-limited events), as Alex often says, raising your threshold power will also do this. Nonetheless, if you have time, maybe you can do both. This year I'm going to try and schedule my steady 60-90 min rides to be fasted, for example. But for harder sessions I will try to do them later in the day or after a breakfast.

DaveyL

sampras38 wrote:

Personally I've never really understood why people do exercise on an empty stomach. Surely they can stomach a banana or some orange juice for a little energy. You're only talking about 100 calories in a banana fgs..

Quite. It is only about 100 calories. If you have enough stored glycogen for a good ~2000 kcal worth of exercise, and an hour at 200 Watts burns ~700 kcal, is there much point taking on an extra 100 kcal for a short ride?

sampras38

Richa1181 wrote:

I've read things in the past saying that you burn more fat exercising first thing in the morning due to lower levels of insulin in the blood (which apparently slows down fat breakdown later in the day) but I've never done particularly well on dawn rides. Anything that could be called proper exercise is beyond me at that time of the day so I'd rather leave it until after lunch when I know I can get a quality workout in without passing out

Yeah, this is a bit of a mine and there are so many conflicting opinions. I think that generally you can work out on an empty stomach for a short while, or for example a commute to work, but anything more strenuous and I really don't see the point. As I said above, a banana is 100 calories and will give you a boost.

I personally couldn't train properly on an empty stomach and really don't see the point in running your body so low of glycogen. You really only have 1.5 to 2 hrs of glycogen on a full tank anyway.

Anonymous

I do all my long rides on empty, I just eat after the first hour (a little sooner if it's a hard start) and then every hour after that. Did 50 miles yesterday no probs on 'empty', did a hilly 75 mile sportive last year too, just had a banana right at the start.

Richa1181

What's your average speed Napolean? I can do about 20 miles at a reasonable pace but if I try to do anything intensive without a good meal I just fall over.

I think an intensive workout later in the day will burn off more fat than a half hearted morning run for me. When it comes to sportives I end up taking on about 3 good meals worth over 100 miles

Anonymous

Depends on who I'm with, terrain, wind, weather etc etc. I don't look at average speed due to this.

If I eat anything big within about 2hrs of an event, I fail. 3hrs is my optimum.

If it's a race or an interval session I'll try and get a meal in first though.

fish156

I'd heard that one theory behind fasted training was to get the body efficient when using stored energy as a fuel. The idea being that when competing you simply can't replace energy at the rate you're using it, so need as many fuel sources as possible to fall back on.

Or is this just another myth? :roll:

DaveyL

Well your body uses a mix of fat and carbohydrate when cycling, the ratio of which depends upon the intensity - higher intensity, higher % carbohydrate.

Even people with 4-5% body fat have an essentially unlimited supply of fat to fuel their exercise.

Most people, when their glycogen (carbohydrate) stores are fully topped up, have about 2000 kcal worth of carbohydrate fuel. The glycogen is stored in the liver and in the muscles.

Riding along at a moderate pace (for your average trained cyclist) of ~200 Watts burns 700 kcal an hour. Given most people can only tolerate taking in around 90 g of carbs an hour (60 g glucose plus 30 g fructose) then that provides 360 kcal. So you can see, that cycling at higher intensity, or for longer, is going to eat into your glycogen stores.

In events where you need to take on board carbohydrate because you don't have enough stored glycogen to fuel the whole effort, being able to burn as much fat as possible (i.e raising the %fat in that fat:carb fuel ratio) is desirable, to spare your glycogen stores.

The fasted training method has been put forward as one way to achieve this. Training at high intensities (i.e raising your threshold power) also does this (adds mitochondrial density - i.e. the enzymatic "engines" that burn fat and produce energy).

Richa1181

I believe in stored energy for sure, eating well for a couple of days before a big ride helps me a lot in terms of endurance. I can do a night of track racing and even intensive interval training and be fine the next day but on sportives or epic days out it takes me a few days to recover properly. Not due to muscle fatigue (I know that feeling very well) but due to being empty of fuel. That must be stored energy in action no?

jibberjim

You would have to be staggeringly unfit (since glycogen storage is something that increases as you get fitter), or deliberately have not eaten since a previous hard workout the night before to not be able to ride for 40 minutes at any intensity and it be a problem. And no drinking water won't make any difference to the insulin response.

I don't see at all though how it's going to help shift weight any more than a 40 minute ride at another time, indeed because you're going to be running your glycogen pretty low (not that low likely depending on how fit you are but possibly pretty low if it was a hard 40 minutes) then you may be hungrier and likely eat more. (Hunger isn't really understood but it seems likely that low liver glycogen levels increases it.)

Which substrate you burn makes no difference to weight loss.

P_Tucker

Pokerface wrote:

P_Tucker wrote:

Why no solids? Unless you are absolutely hammering into work, breakfast rolling around your stomach won't kill you.

http://medicmagic.net/exercise-before-b ... aster.html


*Studies* show it helps burn fat faster. I'm sure Alex or Jim will be along shortly to explain why it's a myth. But at least there is some research done on it.

"In his study of bicycle athletes it is known that despite an empty stomach causes decrease in performance, but the amount of fat which is burned is much more that average."

I must admit I've not heard of this one before. However, whether true or not, that article does not inspire confidence:

However, if we eat just before exercise, the body does not have a reserve of carbohydrates. So what is burned is the fat.

Factually wrong. Your body, as we all know, does have a store of glycogen in the muscles and liver IIRC.

But other experts rate, the fat burning does not mean much for people who are trying to loose weight.

Okay, anyone who doesn't know the difference between "loose" and "lose" is not worthy of our attention. Do you have anything written by someone with a brain?

Pokerface

Loads of studies on the issue out there. I didn't write any of them, nor do I particularly subscribe to any of them, regardless of how good or bad the english in them is. :roll:

P_Tucker

Pokerface wrote:

Loads of studies on the issue out there. I didn't write any of them, nor do I particularly subscribe to any of them, regardless of how good or bad the english in them is. :roll:

The poor English is a minor issue compared to my first point, which is, technically speaking, utter bolleaux.

CarbonCopy

Tucker ease up on being so an*l if your not insulting peaple with learning difficulties your picking on peaple for the bad grammer.And always using the lords name in vein.
And no i aint religious nor is my grammer any good.You do right some interesting stuff though if thats any consolation. :roll:

P_Tucker

I haven't picked on any forum member for bad grammar. AFAIK Pokerface didn't write the article to which he linked.

I'll use the "lords" name is any way I see fit thanks.

Pokerface

I think the theory is that without EXTRA carbs in your system from breakfast, any exercise you do will still burn off glycogen stores, but once they are gone, will need to look elsewhere for fuel. If you haven't topped up in the morning, then it may get the fuel from fat.

Of course, this may just be from muscle fat. And the length of time you have to exercise to deplete existing stores will depend on how much you ate to replenish them the night before.


Personally I just find that I lose energy really quickly after about an hour if I don't eat breakfast before a ride.

CarbonCopy

P_Tucker wrote:

I haven't picked on any forum member for bad grammar. AFAIK Pokerface didn't write the article to which he linked.

I'll use the "lords" name is any way I see fit thanks.

Fair do`s Tucker but lay off peaple with learning disabilties.

P_Tucker

But we'll have to concede it would be quite a special effort from the OP to burn through all his/her stored carbs on a 40 minute commute. I agree with jibberjim - as I understand it it's calories in minus calories out - I'd have to see some well-written research by actual scientists to convince me otherwise.

Pokerface

I don't think there's any doubt about the calories in/out thing.

But once you burn through your glycogen stores - where does your energy come from after that? And do you use ONLY glycogen stores for fuel (until they run out, etc)? Don;t know the answers to this...

DaveyL

P_Tucker wrote:

But we'll have to concede it would be quite a special effort from the OP to burn through all his/her stored carbs on a 40 minute commute. I agree with jibberjim - as I understand it it's calories in minus calories out - I'd have to see some well-written research by actual scientists to convince me otherwise.

Then maybe try "The effect of pre-exercise carbohydrate feedings on the intensity that elicits maximal fat oxidation", Achten and Jeukendrup, J. Sports Sci., 2003, 21 (12), 1017.

And blame any typos therein on the editors.

P_Tucker

Pokerface wrote:

I don't think there's any doubt about the calories in/out thing.

But once you burn through your glycogen stores - where does your energy come from after that? And do you use ONLY glycogen stores for fuel (until they run out, etc)? Don;t know the answers to this...

You use a mixture of fat and glycogen pretty much all the time - it's just the proportions that change - the harder you go, the more carbs you burn.

Once all your glycogen is gone, you use only fat - a phenomenon commonly known as the bonk - and as we all know this is the least fun thing in the world, as you go about 12mph flat out.

DaveyL

P_Tucker wrote:

Once all your glycogen is gone, you use only fat - a phenomenon commonly known as the bonk - and as we all know this is the least fun thing in the world, as you go about 12mph flat out.

And no-one is advocating that.

Have a look at the Keith Baar link I provided earlier (since you are looking for recommendations for articles by scientists) and see what level of depletion he recommends where you might start seeing beneficial effects.

Pokerface

SO - I rode for 3.5 hours today at a steady pace (19MPH avg on mostly flat roads). I had one bottle of water which I didn't finish. I didn't have loads of carbs last night or this morning.

I managed the entire ride at the same pace.


So - did my glycogen stores last me the whole way? Or did I just fail to bonk? Or did I get the energy I needed from fat without bonking?

jibberjim

Pokerface wrote:

So - did my glycogen stores last me the whole way?

Yep. How long they last is related to how hard you're going, you weren't going hard enough to exhaust them in 3.5 hours. Nothing unusual about that.