Riding before breakfast question

SBezza

To the OP, I do all my morning commutes without breakfast, and only have water. Unless you have fasted the day before you will have plenty of energy to do the trip.

In the spring and summer, I will do 1.5 hour tempo rides before breakfast without any issues. I just make sure I eat properly each day so I have enough stores to complete the session.

As to whether it helps with fat oxidisation I will leave to the scientists, but it is totally possible.

itboffin

As SBezza said I also do all my morning commutes empty (with coffee) it's about 1hr or 1.15 if i'm being lazy, I've tried eating before riding including a range of different types of food, however for fat burning doing the morning commute on empty worked the best.

The only problem is at the end of my cycle commute I have another 1.30 hrs of train / cycle to the office with no opportunity to eat in between, so I usually end up sitting on the train for an hour staving hungry.

Luckily I take a flask of coffee for the train otherwise I'd go postal and kill everyone

Pokerface

itboffin wrote:

The only problem is at the end of my cycle commute I have another 1.30 hrs of train / cycle to the office with no opportunity to eat in between, so I usually end up sitting on the train for an hour staving hungry.

Why can't you eat on the train?

itboffin

Pokerface wrote:

itboffin wrote:

The only problem is at the end of my cycle commute I have another 1.30 hrs of train / cycle to the office with no opportunity to eat in between, so I usually end up sitting on the train for an hour staving hungry.

Why can't you eat on the train?

Have you tried the food on SW trains?

I tried taking food with me but frankly my rucksack is all ready busting with clothes, laptop, locks, lights etc etc etc

I do partake in the odd jaffa cake and cup of hot choc

P_Tucker

DaveyL wrote:

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.

Interesting stuff - cheers. I didn't spot any factual inaccuracies or embarrassing misspellings therefore this article is fact.

Learning is FUN!

P_Tucker

Pokerface wrote:

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?

If I recall correctly (and this could well be wrong, so I await expert intervention) a man will typically have about 1,500 to 2,500 calories in glycogen in your body, mostly in his muscles but a bit in the liver too. Using this graph I found on the internet:



Let's say you were doing 70% of max HR (which seems reasonable for a "steady" ride) then it's basically 50:50 - so you've got about 3,000 to 5,000 calories to use before you bonk. And you know how many calories per hour you use better than I, but I suspect it's less than 1,000. So to answer your question(s): yes - its entirely possible that you fuelled yourself on a combination of fat and stored glycogen for 3.5 hours at a steady pace.

Attempt the same ride at 85% of FTP and I suspect you'll get a nice understanding of exactly what happens when you run out of glycogen.

Loretta Damage

Thanks for all the interesting and informative posts. I think that I'll give it a go for a few weeks to see if riding on empty increases weight loss. I'll still be training (a mixture of riding, spinning, rowing and weights) in the middle of the day and riding home with long rides on the weekend so its not my only session - just trying to mix it up and find what works for me.

I'll let you know how it goes.

DaveyL

A very timely blog post by Joe Friel:

http://www.joefrielsblog.com/2011/01/be ... urner.html

jonmack

I rode yesterday before breakfast, I didn't necessarily hurt more than my normal evening rides, but I was slightly slower, that could be down to a number of things though.

P_Tucker

DaveyL wrote:

A very timely blog post by Joe Friel:

http://www.joefrielsblog.com/2011/01/be ... urner.html

Joe Friel wrote:

Conclusion. There are four options suggested here to improve your body’s capacity for using fat for fuel (changing genetics isn’t an option – yet). No one knows for sure, as I suspect this has never been studied, but I believe the most effective are your chronic diet and training. I’ll have a bit more to say about training in a few months after I complete my semi-scientific, personal study. Until then I’d suggest that training in zones 2 and 3 are probably the most effective for improving fat utilization through training.

What utter bolleaux. He might as well have started with "I don't know, but here's an unsubstantiated stab in the dark".

DaveyL

You might find that you elicit a more positive response by explaining why you disagree with something, rather than just reaching for that cute little phrase every time.

mclarent

DaveyL wrote:

You might find that you elicit a more positive response by explaining why you disagree with something, rather than just reaching for that cute little phrase every time.

He wouldn't get so many bites though would he...

meanredspider

FWIW, my understanding is that you really need glycogen to burn the fat efficiently. Once the glycogen is depleted, you then struggle to burn any fuel (bonk or The Wall in marathon running).

Again, from my reading (don't have the references to hand), long slow rides (keeping your HR below 70%) will reinforce your body's ability to burn fat during the fast rides.

As for the riding before breakfast thing, I think it fits alongside the "not eating carbs after lunch" thing - I'm not sure how either sit alongside the "calories in - calories out".

After your "fasted" ride in, what do you do: eat breakfast? What happens to that? Then lunch? Then dinner? Surely all of that is stashed away by the body to replace what you just burned. If you burned fat then eat carbs & fats - the fats will just go to replace the fats you just burned, no?

Certainly my experience is that I can ride (or run) harder with food in me. That goes as much for my ride in as it is my ride back. What I do know for sure is that I'll burn more overall calories if I'm riding harder. It really doesn't matter when I take them in - the more I burn, the more weight I'll lose.

Better still, just eat less bad stuff - that's what really works.

P_Tucker

DaveyL wrote:

You might find that you elicit a more positive response by explaining why you disagree with something, rather than just reaching for that cute little phrase every time.

I disagree, clearly, because he admits that he doesn't know the answer, then goes on to guess what he thinks the answer is. I don't know the answer either, but will offer no half-baked theory as to what the answer might be. It's worse in his case because he's a respected coach, so people will eat up his theories as though they were gold plated FACTS.

P_Tucker

meanredspider wrote:

Again, from my reading (don't have the references to hand), long slow rides (keeping your HR below 70%) will reinforce your body's ability to burn fat during the fast rides.

If you can find this I'd be interested to see it.

Even if true, I wonder how this compares in terms of bang for your buck vs increasing your FTP, thus making each absolute intensity relatively easier and thus (presumably) burning relatively more fat at each intensity.

meanredspider

P_Tucker wrote:

If you can find this I'd be interested to see it.
.

Yes - I think the book is at work. It's a training methodology that works on the alternate slow (easy) - fast (hard) training sessions and, interestingly, focuses almost entirely on the slow/easy sessions. The argument, as I remember it, being that
a. You teach your body to make better use of the fat (and we all carry more fat than we need) that carries over to the "hard" sessions
b. You can't sustain daily hard sessions since you deplete your glycogen reserves.
c. All athletic people know how to train hard - teaching them to train "easy" is the difficult bit.

He draws on science to demonstrate his points refering to a number of published papers. The argument seemed to hang together for me - partly because of its relative simplicity. A few of my colleagues who are more savvy than me on the human metabolism (I work on diabetes medical devices) have looked at it and seem to be pretty happy with what he's saying. I don't think he sets out to have a silver bullet, just a more effective way to train.

ut_och_cykla

I think the idea behind long steady rides (LSD) is that the body does respond byincreasing capillary and mitochondrial density as well as increasing the amount/repsonse of exercise enzymes. These changes have been measured scientifically but there is less certainty whether LSD is the best way of becoming a better cyclist.

What happens at the cell level is that it is glucose that is 'burnt' - and this can be made from many sources - but at different 'cost' to the body. Making glucose from fat is a slow process - which is why you have to slow down when you run out of glycogen from riding hard but also why you don't die of glucose shortages to the brain while you sleep!

There is also a body of evidence - anecdotal and more scientific - that the body does adapt to diets rich in certain macro nutrients. Humans exist in vastly differing settings. Inuit indians traditionally ate little or no vegetable carbs - no pasta/rice/bread. Others (eg Hindus in India ) eat little or no animal protein.
So based on this Friels conclusion is probably not far off - but having said that there are many different solutions as we are all slightly different- thank goodness!

Its also important ot remember that even though humans are very adaptable there are upper and lower physiological limits that the body works hard to cope with - food breakdown /absorbtion rates , blood sugar levels etc.

meanredspider

BTW this is the book:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Heart-Monitor-T ... 484&sr=8-1

- you'll see the reviews are pretty good and, despite what at least one reviewer says, it does cover cycling although is focused on running (I bought it to lose weight running - lost 15kg in 15 weeks at exactly a kilo a week - when I started I couldn't run more than 200m without stopping - when I fininshed I was running 11.5k with 100m ascent in under an hour - and I'm too big to be a good runner). The principles, as simple as they are, are the same.

Rapha

P_Tucker wrote:

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.

In order to use fat for energy we need carbohydrates to break down the fat. If we run out of glycogen then we cannot use fat for energy! Thats why carbs are so important during endurance exercise. The body uses fat more predominantly as our glycogen stores decrease to keep them in reserve which in turn makes it feel harder for us to ride at the same pace.

Exercising after an overnight fast will lead to more fat burned if you stay fasted (ie drink water/low cal drink but not glycogen) compared to when you ingest glycogen before or during exercise. You would only lose weight if you consume less than you burn over the whole day. There's lots of research and contradicting information out there. The important thing is finding something that works. For me its mixing it up every few weeks because the body adapts quite quickly so its good to change the routine

meanredspider

Rapha wrote:

. You would only lose weight if you consume less than you burn over the whole day.

And that's kinda the point. Finding a method that allows you to burn MORE of EVERYTHING in total is what really matters for weight loss. And, frankly, it's a whole lot easier to ingest less.

The one way I could see riding fasted in the morning would help me is that I feel less like eating after I've exercised. My concern though is the dip in blood sugars would just leave me feeling lethargic.

ut_och_cykla

meanredspider wrote:

Rapha wrote:

. You would only lose weight if you consume less than you burn over the whole day.

And that's kinda the point. Finding a method that allows you to burn MORE of EVERYTHING in total is what really matters for weight loss. And, frankly, it's a whole lot easier to ingest less.

The one way I could see riding fasted in the morning would help me is that I feel less like eating after I've exercised. My concern though is the dip in blood sugars would just leave me feeling lethargic.

Unless you are suffering from a metabolic disease, your body will quickly rebalance blood sugar levels. Gentle exercise is glycogen sparing and if you ate the day before you will be able to exercise at a low(er) level for quite a while. If you ride too hard your body will struggle and you will feel tired for a short while.

Anonymous

Went mountainbiking yesterday, 3hrs again done on 'empty' with an energy drink a banana and a couple of gels.

Was fine and helps get that calorie deficit...

meanredspider

ut_och_cykla wrote:

Unless you are suffering from a metabolic disease, your body will quickly rebalance blood sugar levels. Gentle exercise is glycogen sparing and if you ate the day before you will be able to exercise at a low(er) level for quite a while. If you ride too hard your body will struggle and you will feel tired for a short while.

TBH I'd rather eat my porridge and banana and take the benefit of that on my ride. It's kinda difficult to take some of my ride easy as it involves some reasonably long steep hills (there's no getting around that here) and I'm really not convinced of the benefit of cycling fasted.

DaveyL

P_Tucker wrote:

DaveyL wrote:

You might find that you elicit a more positive response by explaining why you disagree with something, rather than just reaching for that cute little phrase every time.

I disagree, clearly, because he admits that he doesn't know the answer, then goes on to guess what he thinks the answer is. I don't know the answer either, but will offer no half-baked theory as to what the answer might be. It's worse in his case because he's a respected coach, so people will eat up his theories as though they were gold plated FACTS.

Except it is you, and not Friel, who is presenting Friel's theories as "gold plated FACTS". Go back and read his blog and stop being such a drama queen.

From what I can see, Friel is very open in stating several times that not enough research has been done to answer the question definitively. With that in mind, he identifies several ways in which an effect could be seen, and what that might mean in terms of training.

Rapha

meanredspider wrote:

Rapha wrote:

. You would only lose weight if you consume less than you burn over the whole day.

And that's kinda the point. Finding a method that allows you to burn MORE of EVERYTHING in total is what really matters for weight loss. And, frankly, it's a whole lot easier to ingest less.

The one way I could see riding fasted in the morning would help me is that I feel less like eating after I've exercised. My concern though is the dip in blood sugars would just leave me feeling lethargic.

It really depends on how hard and long you are exercising. Anything up to an hour, maybe hour and a half. If you are exercising for longer, I would start eating/drinking quite regularly.You still want a good intensity (70-75% HR max, no harm going hard every now and then too) to keep the total amount of calories burnt high - you are still using mainly fat at this sort of intensity.

The mistake a lot of people make is that they exercise without breakfast and don't eat straight afterwards. You normally need about 4-500 kcal for breakfast in the first place and if you have exercised for about an hour thats another 6-700 kcal deficit. Therefore, have a recovery drink (get something with carbs/whey protein because whey has the best BCAA rating which helps with muscle growth/recovery and your immune system. Its also very filling so you fill fuller for longer!) straight afterwards to make use of the increased metabolism after exercise and then a mid morning snack after another hour or two. That way you haven't skipped breakfast and you get some energy for the rest of the day but you already have the 500kcal/day deficit you want for controlled weight loss, providing you don't consume more than you expend for the rest of the day.

I hope all that makes sense

P_Tucker

DaveyL wrote:

Except it is you, and not Friel, who is presenting Friel's theories as "gold plated FACTS".

Yes, the whole "utter bolleaux" thing was reverse psychology. Apparently it works - who knew?

DaveyL

P_Tucker wrote:

DaveyL wrote:

Except it is you, and not Friel, who is presenting Friel's theories as "gold plated FACTS".

Yes, the whole "utter bolleaux" thing was reverse psychology. Apparently it works - who knew?

1/10

ADIHEAD

Hey there's a piece on this subject in this month's Cycling Plus. Something to do with setting up your metabolism for the day? Anyone else read it?

P_Tucker

DaveyL wrote:

P_Tucker wrote:

DaveyL wrote:

Except it is you, and not Friel, who is presenting Friel's theories as "gold plated FACTS".

Yes, the whole "utter bolleaux" thing was reverse psychology. Apparently it works - who knew?

1/10

A strong rebuttal. I concede.

Alex_Simmons/RST

Best and most effective way to improve one's utilisation of fats as a fuel at all sub-threshold power levels (both absolute and relative) is to train to lift your power at threshold and to improve our aerobic capacity (VO2max).

One can achieve this in a number of ways. Typically it involves riding at a range of intensities and durations appropriate to your level of fitness, training loads, training history and available training time. Some of the time needs to be spent riding at levels significantly reliant on glycogen as these efforts are high bang for training buck when it comes to eliciting the positive adaptations necessary.

One can also increase the proportion of fats they metabolise by eating a high fat diet. We burn what we eat. But we might go slower as a result and it's not recommended.