3 minutes a day

londonlivvy

I'm convinced I'm a poor responder - I do respond to training, but not nearly as well as others. For example, last year I trained hard (with a coach, 15 hours a week) from Dec to Mar. First sportive (Spring Onion) I beat one of my friends soundly as he'd not trained at all through the winter. Said friend then did a month of training (about 8 hours a week) and thereafter was miles, miles better than me, effectively being my domestique on future sportives together.

So despite seven months of committed training for the Marmotte I only achieved a frankly mediocre time (10h30, or 9h45 if you ignore the descent of glandon). I have now decided to never put myself through that ever again. I shall still ride, for fun, but if I'm to put in that level of commitment (and all I did for six months was work / train / eat / sleep) then frankly, I want results that are a lot more impressive than that!

meanredspider

team47b wrote:

It would depend on whether you tested before breakfast and twice (about 15 minutes apart after breakfast) before you set off on your commute to know whether your blood glucose was going up or down. If the level is high it is possible to drive it higher through exercise. If it was below 100mg/dl you can drive it down to below 70mg/dl (hypo/bonk) thereby triggering a glycogen response from your liver flooding your system and raising BG significantly. I have gone from 160mg/dl to 65mg/dl (hypo level 70mg/dl) in 20 minutes of hard-ish cycling.

I didn't test before I set off but then I'm not diabetic. My natural level sits at around 95mg/dl. I have a bowl of porridge (semi & water), banana and a dash of maple syrup an hour before I set off. I cycle for 50 minutes or so at close to threshold pace (avg HR around 160). I hadn't cycled the day before on the first day. My results were these (timing starts from arriving at my desk - 5 mins after getting off my bike)

Tuesday (0 mins) 209mg/dl (30 mins)147mg/dl (60 mins) 113mg/dl (90 mins) 102mg/dl
Today (0 mins) 115mg/dl (30 mins) 149mg/dl (60 mins) 117mg/dl (90 mins) 96mg/dl

I'm interested in the difference between the 0 mins results and I'm wondering if it's because I depleted my glycogen stores yesterday (this is the basis of a training book I have that suggests you should alternate slow & fast days for this very reason - I may be wrong though)

il_principe

londonlivvy wrote:

I'm convinced I'm a poor responder - I do respond to training, but not nearly as well as others. For example, last year I trained hard (with a coach, 15 hours a week) from Dec to Mar. First sportive (Spring Onion) I beat one of my friends soundly as he'd not trained at all through the winter. Said friend then did a month of training (about 8 hours a week) and thereafter was miles, miles better than me, effectively being my domestique on future sportives together.

So despite seven months of committed training for the Marmotte I only achieved a frankly mediocre time (10h30, or 9h45 if you ignore the descent of glandon). I have now decided to never put myself through that ever again. I shall still ride, for fun, but if I'm to put in that level of commitment (and all I did for six months was work / train / eat / sleep) then frankly, I want results that are a lot more impressive than that!

Either that or your coach wasn't very good...?

MonkeyMonster

Bah... s small proportion. What % we talking? So livvy - your friend - past very good cyclist so a months RE-training brought a level of fitness he had previously back into the game, presuming male too so genetically he'll be ahead there? Even stil it's ALL relative. The genuine non responders I suspect are the sort who will end up never doing exercise because they will never see any gain. Livvy - you just haven't seen as much gain as you wanted to - it's still gain, had you trued that sportive with no training do you honestly think you'd have got anywhere near that time?
Pretty sure livvy you can keep pace with a number of the lads on here. You wouldn't be able to AT ALL if you didn't respond to exercise. You might not be as well suited to cycling as say dhope - he's built for it -tiny thin body frame and huge thigh and calf muscles. But you're not a non-responder. Goonies never say die.

meanredspider

I'm at least a "moderate responder" because I know that if I have a couple of weeks off the bike I'm going to pay for it. That said, I don't feel like I'm ever going to be hyperfit - but I don't know because I've never had the urge to want to find out. On a similar vein, I put on muscle mass very quickly - I know some people, despite silly amounts of training and protein, just don't. In distance cycling I don't think putting on muscle mass is very helpful - the cycling equivalent of a diesel engine.

MonkeyMonster

meanredspider wrote:

I'm at least a "moderate responder" because I know that if I have a couple of weeks off the bike I'm going to pay for it. That said, I don't feel like I'm ever going to be hyperfit - but I don't know because I've never had the urge to want to find out. On a similar vein, I put on muscle mass very quickly - I know some people, despite silly amounts of training and protein, just don't. In distance cycling I don't think putting on muscle mass is very helpful - the cycling equivalent of a diesel engine.

me too, though bizarrely i can put mass on up top but legs have never gone *that* big... I know that when I was "training" for the london to brighton and doing laps of rp every night on the way home - I was good (for me) and the commute was easier and easier - note not "easy" but easier.

londonlivvy

IP - possibly true. Though other friends with the same coach have had much more progress.

MM - Sorry - poor terminology - I'm a moderate / not very good responder! I do respond, but just not as much or as quickly as others. My friend (male) is very much built for cycling with a lean build but he does NOWT over the winter (apart from drinking wine) and yet makes incredible progress in a short amount of time. *Jealous*

il_principe

londonlivvy wrote:

IP - possibly true. Though other friends with the same coach have had much more progress.

MM - Sorry - poor terminology - I'm a moderate / not very good responder! I do respond, but just not as much or as quickly as others. My friend (male) is very much built for cycling with a lean build but he does NOWT over the winter (apart from drinking wine) and yet makes incredible progress in a short amount of time. *Jealous*

Sounds like JonGinge!

meanredspider

I think a good measure of "response" is how "unfit" you get if you stop cycling for a period of time. To get "unfit" you must have developed some level of fitness through exercise. Non-responders can take satisfaction from the fact that training is useless for aerobic fitness!

Clever Pun

Il Principe wrote:

How bloody depressing would it be to discover you're a non-responder? 2 of my colleagues have already decided that they are...

As soon as I saw that I thought.. Another get out clause along with "It's my glands" "I'm not fat I'm big boned"" etc

rickyrider

This sounds like a really interesting programme - will catch it via iplayer hopefully.

It is noticable how people respond very differently to exercise. Years ago I went on a weeks cycling trip to the Brecon Beacons with a mate. At the start of the week I was being whipped as he did more regular riding than me. By the end of the week, I was doing the whipping. I guess that could indidate I'm lucky and am a responder.

I also notice that HIT work makes a huge difference to my fitness

MonkeyMonster

Clever Pun wrote:

Il Principe wrote:

How bloody depressing would it be to discover you're a non-responder? 2 of my colleagues have already decided that they are...

As soon as I saw that I thought.. Another get out clause along with "It's my glands" "I'm not fat I'm big boned"" etc

indeed, sadly that i suspect will be used by many a person until someone at bbc or c4 does an extra program to show actually how small the % is and then that causes controversy and people start claiming it's not their fault and they want compensation and then someone will die from too much HIT and the world will end. Honest.

team47b

Tuesday (0 mins) 209mg/dl (30 mins)147mg/dl (60 mins) 113mg/dl (90 mins) 102mg/dl
Today (0 mins) 115mg/dl (30 mins) 149mg/dl (60 mins) 117mg/dl (90 mins) 96mg/dl

I'm interested in the difference between the 0 mins results and I'm wondering if it's because I depleted my glycogen stores yesterday (this is the basis of a training book I have that suggests you should alternate slow & fast days for this very reason - I may be wrong though)[/quote]

209 is a bit high for a non diabetic! Increased intensity? Could be what you ate the day before, slow release carbs can take hours to affect your results. Probably need to test BG for a week or so to see if this was a one off. Maybe there was a strong headwind today?

It takes about 90 minute of exercise to deplete your glycogen stores, as you probably know, but this can be as low as 20 minutes if it's windy! A healthy diet will restore glycogen stores, but only if you eat correctly within 30 minutes of exercise. Carbs and protein (4 to one ratio). Pizza and beer after a ride will not necessarily replace glycogen as well, so will leave you tired the next day and low in glycogen. Low glycogen levels will suck glucose from your system and lower your BG readings. This feeding window is critical to glycogen re-placement.

I would be interested to see your results for the week as it is good for me to see a comparison to my own figures. For me it's a balance between using up the glucose through exercise and not flooding my system with glycogen which requires me to inject more insulin which will increase fat and increase resistance, viscous circle. I adjust cadence to try keep to burning just blood glucose, good trick if you can do it!

dhope

MonkeyMonster wrote:

You might not be as well suited to cycling as say dhope - he's built for it -tiny thin body frame and huge thigh and calf muscles. But you're not a non-responder. Goonies never say die.

Huh? Wish someone had told my legs this. Still get my arse handed to me regularly on Embankment :oops:
Sounds like an interesting watch though, will catch it on iPlayer this eve

il_principe

Clever Pun wrote:

Il Principe wrote:

How bloody depressing would it be to discover you're a non-responder? 2 of my colleagues have already decided that they are...

As soon as I saw that I thought.. Another get out clause along with "It's my glands" "I'm not fat I'm big boned"" etc

You forgot:

"I maybe fat on the outside, but I'm thin on the inside."

meanredspider

team47b wrote:

209 is a bit high for a non diabetic! Increased intensity? Could be what you ate the day before, slow release carbs can take hours to affect your results. Probably need to test BG for a week or so to see if this was a one off. Maybe there was a strong headwind today?

It takes about 90 minute of exercise to deplete your glycogen stores, as you probably know, but this can be as low as 20 minutes if it's windy! A healthy diet will restore glycogen stores, but only if you eat correctly within 30 minutes of exercise. Carbs and protein (4 to one ratio). Pizza and beer after a ride will not necessarily replace glycogen as well, so will leave you tired the next day and low in glycogen. Low glycogen levels will suck glucose from your system and lower your BG readings. This feeding window is critical to glycogen re-placement.

I would be interested to see your results for the week as it is good for me to see a comparison to my own figures. For me it's a balance between using up the glucose through exercise and not flooding my system with glycogen which requires me to inject more insulin which will increase fat and increase resistance, viscous circle. I adjust cadence to try keep to burning just blood glucose, good trick if you can do it!

Cool - I will keep testing. There's a short-sharp hill I blast up (anaerobically) just at the end of my ride which may account for the sharp peak (as might meter accuracy etc). I tend to ride at around threshold so I'm not clear whether (in the short term) I'm expecting my glucose levels to go up or down. I was feeling really strong yesterday too (so much so that I took the hilliest route home) - I don't know if that's cause or effect.

Do you refer to runsweet.com at all? Looks like an interesting site once you get past all the jargon (technical laguage)

suzyb

Il Principe wrote:

Clever Pun wrote:

Il Principe wrote:

How bloody depressing would it be to discover you're a non-responder? 2 of my colleagues have already decided that they are...

As soon as I saw that I thought.. Another get out clause along with "It's my glands" "I'm not fat I'm big boned"" etc

You forgot:

"I maybe fat on the outside, but I'm thin on the inside."

But apparently that could be the case. Little fat around the organs but a lot just under the skin. That's how I understood it anyway.

I think father has one of those glucose monitors somewhere as he's diabetic. Might have a go at it see what it says as I'm 90% sure I'll end up diabetic.

meanredspider

suzyb wrote:

I think father has one of those glucose monitors somewhere as he's diabetic. Might have a go at it see what it says as I'm 90% sure I'll end up diabetic.

If you can avoid (or postpone) diabeties then I would!

team47b

meanredspider wrote:

suzyb wrote:

I think father has one of those glucose monitors somewhere as he's diabetic. Might have a go at it see what it says as I'm 90% sure I'll end up diabetic.

If you can avoid (or postpone) diabeties then I would!

+1

Diabetes causes high blood sugar, high blood sugar can cause all sorts of health risks, nerve damage/blindness/heart attacks/foot amputation etc etc!

So even without the diabetes as a worry, best to avoid high blood sugar anyway. Blood sugar over about 140mg/dl (before you eat/3 hours after eating) can make you 4 times as likely to get these other health problems.

That's why people need to test their BG often, so that they can adjust their food intake accordingly.

Big boned people should embrace low GI!

suzyb

Father is diabetic so I know what it can do. He never used to be though, afaik it's not heriditary however I have women related issues which added to my bad diet mean I'm heading that way.

meanredspider

suzyb wrote:

Father is diabetic so I know what it can do. He never used to be though, afaik it's not heriditary however I have women related issues which added to my bad diet mean I'm heading that way.

I think there is a heriditary element but I believe it's a male-to-male mechanism.

team47b

My mother was a diabetic, classic diabetic shape.

I'm (a bloke) 55kilos 164cm tall and I am diabetic, I have one older brother and one older sister neither are overweight nor diabetic!

Genetics! How does it work?

kieranb

I haven't seen the programme but anyway I don't exercise for health reasons alone, I do it because I like it. If it was just for health I would probably be able to cut out many hours. How fit could you get doing this level of HIT, run a marathon in under 4 hours? Get a gold standard time in a sportive like the dragon ride?

roger_merriman

I ride becuase i enjoy it, both the commute/road bike and the MTB.

i don't tend to push that hard on the road, bar giving it a blast over the bridges etc.

il_principe

kieranb wrote:

I haven't seen the programme but anyway I don't exercise for health reasons alone, I do it because I like it. If it was just for health I would probably be able to cut out many hours. How fit could you get doing this level of HIT, run a marathon in under 4 hours? Get a gold standard time in a sportive like the dragon ride?

I'd love to see someone try. I predict Epic Fail.

meanredspider

Il Principe wrote:

kieranb wrote:

I haven't seen the programme but anyway I don't exercise for health reasons alone, I do it because I like it. If it was just for health I would probably be able to cut out many hours. How fit could you get doing this level of HIT, run a marathon in under 4 hours? Get a gold standard time in a sportive like the dragon ride?

I'd love to see someone try. I predict Epic Fail.

Yup - I can't see how you'd build adaptions for endurance.

jonny_trousers

mudcow007 wrote:

i ride upwards of 20 miles per day now an still haven't lost any weight at all....granted i think its the fuel you put in is important - more so than the exercise

Absolutely! It's hard for most people to lose weight through moderate exercise alone. Coupled with that, exercise promotes the desire to eat more. I'm afraid it's true for 90% of us that if we want to lose weight the best exercise we can do are fork downs.

rjsterry

meanredspider wrote:

Il Principe wrote:

kieranb wrote:

I haven't seen the programme but anyway I don't exercise for health reasons alone, I do it because I like it. If it was just for health I would probably be able to cut out many hours. How fit could you get doing this level of HIT, run a marathon in under 4 hours? Get a gold standard time in a sportive like the dragon ride?

I'd love to see someone try. I predict Epic Fail.

Yup - I can't see how you'd build adaptions for endurance.

But then it's not intended to improve athletic endurance. My understanding was that the main aim was to improve general health and fitness.

team47b

Absolutely! It's hard for most people to lose weight through moderate exercise alone. Coupled with that, exercise promotes the desire to eat more. I'm afraid it's true for 90% of us that if we want to lose weight the best exercise we can do are fork downs.[/quote]

There's the problem

Try chopsticks?


...with soup