Bru: I checked out the active no carb website and though its mostly inactive (ironic?) I did find some decent discussion, though nothing completely groundbreaking.
I found a study showing that keto adaptation improved the cardio ability of sedentary cyclists after 6 weeks and no training on a pure keto diet, even after wearing a backpack to add on the weight that they lost during the diet period. 6 other trained cyclists showed an non-significant increase on the same keto-diet
.
http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/content/1/1/2
I then found this in the article
Quote:
which subjective performance was reasonably restored except for their sprint capability, which remained constrained during the period of carbohydrate restriction
|
Quote:
Therapeutic use of ketogenic diets should not require constraint of most forms of physical labor or recreational activity, with the one caveat that anaerobic (ie, weight lifting or sprint) performance is limited by the low muscle glycogen levels induced by a ketogenic diet, and this would strongly discourage its use under most conditions of competitive athletics.
|
This is really discouraging, but this is just a conjecture, no actual science was even done here to prove anything.
I have found another article (
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/pi...8&blobtype=pdf).
In this study they had their subjects do relatively intense leg extension lifts at 60% max. One leg had twice the starting glycogen as the other. Each person performed this leg exercise until exhaustion twice for each leg. The first time for each leg had a non-significant difference in the time til exhaustion. The second time through, the higher glycogen leg went significantly longer, but its conclusions were that..
Quote:
The present study gives a clear answer to the question of whether initial muscle glycogen content and the glycolytic rate are coupled in intense short-lasting exercise.
Glycolysis, neither as a peak rate, nor as total contribution of energy during the exercise, is a function of above-normal muscle carbohydrate storage. Further, this relates both to its 'aerobic' and 'anaerobic' usage. The bulk of data in the literature
on man are in line with our findings.
|
It also said that 80-90% of the total anaerobic energy came from creatine phosphate stored in the muscles. This is good news for me and perhaps shuts the door on the controversy on whether its that important for me to have vast supply of glycogen. I am fairly certain on a 0-carb diet that I do infact still have a good amount of glycogen and that it is just not used for any kind of endurance once keto-adapted, only fat is.
But, my main goal is to be VERY explosive and be able to compete at a high level at the major sports. 'Explosion' correlates very highly with success at any major sport.
I have read elsewhere that glycogen is indeed used as the second source of energy during intense activity. Its like a sliding scale - the more intense the activity the more glycogen will be used and the higher chance its the limiting factor. Creatine phosphate though, seems to still be the number one factor everywhere I look, though it is very close when you say need to do a couple extremely heavy power cleans.
Now, as for me. Last time at the gym I had my first 'reversal of strength'. Two weeks ago I benched 10x225...just barely getting the last rep up. Yesterday I only managed 9.5. I was very disappointed. I've held tightly to my diet and exercise routine and had seen improvements EVERY single time I had gone for the last 2 months. I think I am being a little harsh on myself because I did 3x245 next, one more rep than I did two weeks ago. I also had increased my incline by 3 reps just 4 days ago and one week ago I increased my dumb bell bench by 3-5 pounds or so. I just really don't want this diet and scheme to fail. Also, I think endurance lifts (which I consider a set of 10 to be) have more variability than max lifts and this could be a reason as well.
Also, I am not sure I have lost that much fat, which is somewhat of a disappointment. I think I look a little more defined (not positive though) and weigh just right around the same amount. My body fat machine says I am the same. I have eaten a ton during this period not paying attention to calories. Perhaps I need to lighten the load to get my fat mobilized. Perhaps I am just putting too much dietary fat to use.
Would our bodies evolved and adapted such mechanisms that although meat is the preferred source of nutrition that carbs would be needed to do high-intense activities? Did early man feast on fruit in the morning in order to have extra energy to kill during the daily hunt?
I think its too early to tell and one 'bad' day is not nearly enough evidence to assume that a small amount of fruit is necessary for optimal growth. I have also yet to actually start a cardio program, though I think I am going to be doing high intensity sprint intervals soon, to check on my sprinting capability. I also haven't played much actual sports which is the main reason I have wanted to get into this program. I think these two things added in time will determine if I do need to incorporate carbs into the diet.
So again, can meat be so good for you, yet hinder one aspect of every day life, intense athletic movements?