Interesting Factoid # 228

[Prisoner A]

"During exercise, your muscles use a metabolic priority system
for generation of energy. This is particularly true during
aerobic exercise. First, carbohydrate is used, then fat, then
protein. Because of the tremendous stress that resistance
training puts on the muscles, the metabolic priority system
gets ignored. When cortisol is released, it causes a breakdown
of protein, carbohydrate, and fat...."

-- from "Nutrient Timing" (2004)

Implications:

Cardio is the best for burning fat, best for weight-loss,
given that carbs and fats are utilized first. (Protein isn't
tapped as a resource until about an hour of cardio, according
to another passage in the book.) This debunks the myth
propagated in weight-lifting circles that even a
resistance-exclusive program can promote weight loss.

Remaining Questions:

How, exactly, does this metabolic priority system get thrown
off track by the intense conditions created by serious
weight-lifting?

[Taka]

On Dec 15, 11:51 pm, Prisoner at War
<prisoner_at_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "During exercise, your muscles use a metabolic priority
> system for generation of energy. This is particularly true
> during aerobic exercise. First, carbohydrate is used, then
> fat, then protein. Because of the tremendous stress that
> resistance training puts on the muscles, the metabolic
> priority system gets ignored. When cortisol is released, it
> causes a breakdown of protein, carbohydrate, and fat...."
>
> -- from "Nutrient Timing" (2004)
>
> Implications:
>
> Cardio is the best for burning fat, best for weight-loss,
> given that carbs and fats are utilized first. (Protein isn't
> tapped as a resource until about an hour of cardio,
> according to another passage in the book.) This debunks the
> myth propagated in weight-lifting circles that even a
> resistance-exclusive program can promote weight loss.
>
> Remaining Questions:
>
> How, exactly, does this metabolic priority system get thrown
> off track by the intense conditions created by serious
> weight-lifting?

As you said cortisol may be the factor. But keep in mind that
during serious weightlifting the muscles get really damaged,
so the protein may not be released for energy but simply
because some myofibrils/ polynuclear cells are bursting open.
This also releases the "good" prostaglandins such as PGF2a
which throw the tissue into anabolic state soon after ceasing
exercise (you can feel it as the well known doms;
interestingly this doesn't cause systemic inflammation in
contrast to the situation when fat cells are bursting open
from the excess of carbs). Help it with some insulin and good
sleep (hGH, IGF-1) and you get results never seen in aerobic
training. IMO cardio is mainly useful for circulation to help
transporting nutrients including oxygen throughout the body.
To loose fat you need to eat fat in place of carbohydrates.
If the body feels you are excessively burning fat during
cardio it makes every effort to build reserves of it for the
next time.

Taka

[Prisoner A]

On Dec 16, 12:23 am, Taka <taka0...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> As you said cortisol may be the factor.

Perhaps, but I'm wondering exactly how this "metabolic
priority system" gets screwed up under the intense conditions
of resistance exercise. Cortisol is released during aerobic
exercise, too, but it's noted by that book that resistance
exercise is what screws up the carb- fat-protein order. Well,
exactly what's happening, biochemically?? How does the brain
follow the usual order for aerobic exercises but scrambles
things up when it comes to resistance exercises??

> But keep in mind that during serious weightlifting the
> muscles get really damaged, so the protein may not be
> released for energy but simply because some myofibrils/
> polynuclear cells are bursting open. This also releases the
> "good" prostaglandins such as PGF2a which throw the tissue
> into anabolic state soon after ceasing exercise (you can
> feel it as the well known doms;

What?? DOMS, by definition, is a delayed reaction...doesn't
sound like "soon after ceasing exercise" to me...besides, they
think it's the micro-tears in muscle fiber that causes DOMS.

> interestingly this doesn't cause systemic inflammation in
> contrast to the situation when fat cells are bursting open
> from the excess of carbs). Help it with some insulin and
> good sleep (hGH, IGF-1) and you get results never seen in
> aerobic training. IMO cardio is mainly useful for
> circulation to help transporting nutrients including oxygen
> throughout the body.

The body does that already. Cardio makes it more
efficient, but that efficiency only means anything under
conditions of aerobic exercise. At rest, it really doesn't
matter how efficient your breathing is -- it's when at
work that it matters.

Like having a quantum computer to run...e-mail. You really
don't need all that "shazzam"...only if you're doing something
graphics- intensive, say, like ray-tracing or something....

> To loose fat you need to eat fat in place of carbohydrates.
> If the body feels you are excessively burning fat during
> cardio it makes every effort to build reserves of it for
> the next time.

The body will always want to hold onto fat stores. That's not
the point, which is that as far as exercise goes, cardio means
fat-burning and not protein-burning, like the popular
weight-lifting myth goes. With aerobic exercise, preference is
given to using carbs, then fat, and finally protein (and that
last resource only gets tapped at around the one-hour mark).

> Taka

[Shava_x]

On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 06:51:09 -0800, Prisoner at War wrote:

>
> "During exercise, your muscles use a metabolic priority
> system for generation of energy. This is particularly true
> during aerobic exercise. First, carbohydrate is used, then
> fat, then protein. Because of the tremendous stress that
> resistance training puts on the muscles, the metabolic
> priority system gets ignored. When cortisol is released, it
> causes a breakdown of protein, carbohydrate, and fat...."
>
> -- from "Nutrient Timing" (2004)
>
>
> Implications:
>
> Cardio is the best for burning fat, best for weight-loss,
> given that carbs and fats are utilized first. (Protein isn't
> tapped as a resource until about an hour of cardio,
> according to another passage in the book.) This debunks the
> myth propagated in weight-lifting circles that even a
> resistance-exclusive program can promote weight loss.
>
> Remaining Questions:
>
> How, exactly, does this metabolic priority system get thrown
> off track by the intense conditions created by serious
> weight-lifting?

The "metabolic priority system" does not get thrown off track
by resistance training. Lifting weights is, by its nature, a
short duration, anaerobic activity. Even very "intense"
resistance training is characterized by relatively short bouts
of high intensity activity followed by a recovery period. As a
result, it uses anaerobic energy systems, which only 'burn'
carbohydrates.

The idea that resistance training on its own can lead to
reductions in body fat is not entirely false. Muscle is
primarily where fats gets 'burned'. Adding muscle will
increase a person's metabolic rate. And, resistance training
burns calories, where ever they may come from, thus helping to
eliminate excess calories. So, it is possible to loose fat by
lifting weights. But, it is not necessarily the most effective
way to reduce body fat.

[Taka]

On Dec 16, 10:51 pm, Prisoner at War
<prisoner_at_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Dec 16, 12:23 am, Taka <taka0...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > As you said cortisol may be the factor.
>
> Perhaps, but I'm wondering exactly how this "metabolic
> priority system" gets screwed up under the intense
> conditions of resistance exercise. Cortisol is released
> during aerobic exercise, too, but it's noted by that book
> that resistance exercise is what screws up the carb-
> fat-protein order. Well, exactly what's happening,
> biochemically?? How does the brain follow the usual order
> for aerobic exercises but scrambles things up when it comes
> to resistance exercises??

Cortisol causes protein catabolism, there is definitely more
cortisol produced during weightlifting than during a "gentle
fat only burning" jogging. The endorphins can perhaps
counteract it.

> > But keep in mind that during serious weightlifting the
> > muscles get really damaged, so the protein may not be
> > released for energy but simply because some myofibrils/
> > polynuclear cells are bursting open. This also releases
> > the "good" prostaglandins such as PGF2a which throw the
> > tissue into anabolic state soon after ceasing exercise
> > (you can feel it as the well known doms;
>
> What?? DOMS, by definition, is a delayed
> reaction...doesn't sound like "soon after ceasing
> exercise" to me...besides, they think it's the micro-tears
> in muscle fiber that causes DOMS.

Micro-tears in muscle fibers = cellular damage =
prostaglanding release (and protein release) = DELAYed
perception inflammatory response. If you catch the cold it's
also too late when you really start feeling it down the
throat ...

> > interestingly this doesn't cause systemic inflammation in
> > contrast to the situation when fat cells are bursting open
> > from the excess of carbs). Help it with some insulin and
> > good sleep (hGH, IGF-1) and you get results never seen in
> > aerobic training. IMO cardio is mainly useful for
> > circulation to help transporting nutrients including
> > oxygen throughout the body.
>
> The body does that already. Cardio makes it more efficient,
> but that efficiency only means anything under conditions of
> aerobic exercise. At rest, it really doesn't matter how
> efficient your breathing is -- it's when at work that it
> matters.

It's not the breathing, it's the increased circulation which
brings the nutrients to all parts of the body and cleans up
the waste products of metabolism including torn muscle fibers.
If you don't move the circulation is not sufficient, see e.g.
the "economy class syndrome" during long haul flights ...

> Like having a quantum computer to run...e-mail. You really
> don't need all that "shazzam"...only if you're doing
> something graphics- intensive, say, like ray-tracing or
> something....
>
> > To loose fat you need to eat fat in place of
> > carbohydrates. If the body feels you are excessively
> > burning fat during cardio it makes every effort to build
> > reserves of it for the next time.
>
> The body will always want to hold onto fat stores.

Yes, but to a different degree given by the current "setpoint"
which is obviously different in endomorph and exomorph types.
The setpoint can be influenced by dietary changes such as the
yo yo dieting effect etc. Also imprinted genetically. The body
fat stores are primarily maintained by the dietary
carbohydrates. All carbs go to fat unless your glycogen stores
are depleted (only in the morning and after training session).

> That's not the point, which is that as far as exercise
> goes, cardio means fat-burning and not protein-burning,
> like the popular weight-lifting myth goes. With aerobic
> exercise, preference is given to using carbs, then fat, and
> finally protein (and that last resource only gets tapped at
> around the one-hour mark).

I think it's the same with weightlifting, protein is not used
for energy as long as you have some glycogen left. Some
protein may be released, however, due to the abovementioned
muscle damage.

Taka

[Prisoner A]

On Dec 16, 8:02 pm, Shava_X
<voodopeo...@rocketNOSPAMmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> The "metabolic priority system" does not get thrown off
> track by resistance training.

But he said it did -- the author is the longtime chairman of
kinesiology at Texas University, and an actual researcher in
this field, too!

> Lifting weights is, by its nature, a short duration,
> anaerobic activity. Even very "intense" resistance training
> is characterized by relatively short bouts of high
> intensity activity followed by a recovery period. As a
> result, it uses anaerobic energy systems, which only 'burn'
> carbohydrates.

Well, that's precisely what I was wondering! What's the
mechanism whereby protein is burned for fuel -- and why should
it be tapped first during anaerobic activity but last during
aerobic activity?

I'm just reading his book all over again now, having forgotten
a lot of the details, so maybe he covers it later on...but
it's not something that seems immediately sensible, that a
"metabolic priority system" should get screwed up by one kind
of physical effort but not another.

> The idea that resistance training on its own can lead to
> reductions in body fat is not entirely false. Muscle is
> primarily where fats gets 'burned'. Adding muscle will
> increase a person's metabolic rate. And, resistance training
> burns calories, where ever they may come from, thus helping
> to eliminate excess calories. So, it is possible to loose
> fat by lifting weights. But, it is not necessarily the most
> effective way to reduce body fat.

All true -- this is what makes so-called "spot shaping"
possible (not spot reducing, mind you, but spot shaping). But
I've actually heard it said that cardio is not necessary at
all if you lift intensely, so I just wanted to put to rest
that myth.

[Prisoner A]

On Dec 17, 1:50 am, Taka <taka0...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Cortisol causes protein catabolism, there is definitely more
> cortisol produced during weightlifting than during a "gentle
> fat only burning" jogging. The endorphins can perhaps
> counteract it.

I should note that there may be two "kinds" of protein we need
to distinguish here: muscle protein and dietary protein. I
don't know if there is actually such a difference, or what it
might mean, but perhaps we should pause to consider it all.

Also, just what is the purpose of endrophins?

> Micro-tears in muscle fibers = cellular damage =
> prostaglanding release (and protein release) = DELAYed
> perception inflammatory response. If you catch the cold it's
> also too late when you really start feeling it down the
> throat ...

Ah, thanks for the elaboration.

> It's not the breathing, it's the increased circulation which
> brings the nutrients to all parts of the body and cleans up
> the waste products of metabolism including torn muscle
> fibers. If you don't move the circulation is not sufficient,
> see e.g. the "economy class syndrome" during long haul
> flights ...

We may be talking past one another here. I was simply reacting
to your contention that cardio is mainly useful for improving
circulation: there's no point to improved circulation if you
don't do cardio! Otherwise, your circulation is just fine
(barring factors like disease and obesity).

> Yes, but to a different degree given by the current
> "setpoint" which is obviously different in endomorph and
> exomorph types. The setpoint can be influenced by dietary
> changes such as the yo yo dieting effect etc. Also imprinted
> genetically. The body fat stores are primarily maintained by
> the dietary carbohydrates. All carbs go to fat unless your
> glycogen stores are depleted (only in the morning and after
> training session).

Yes, yes, but for all body types, the body will want to hold
onto fat stores.

Thus (I was saying), I don't know about your "eat fat to lose
fat" thesis. I've heard it before, and I realize that there
are so-called good fats, but I'm not sure weight-loss means
ingesting fat any more than it does avoiding all fat.

BTW, I've always wondered: why would the body need an daily
intake of fat, anyway, if it's already got its own??

> I think it's the same with weightlifting, protein is not
> used for energy as long as you have some glycogen left. Some
> protein may be released, however, due to the abovementioned
> muscle damage.

Hmm...well, I certainly hope you're right!

But then, in that case, there would be no need for the kind of
supplementation advised by that book, which prescribes protein
shakes before, during, and after exercise! (I found out later
that the co- author of the book is affiliated somehow with the
company that makes the Accelerade sports drink.)

Do you supplement at all?

> Taka

[Taka]

On Dec 18, 1:15 am, Prisoner at War
<prisoner_at_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Yes, yes, but for all body types, the body will want to hold
> onto fat stores.

My point was that the body prefers using carbohydrates to fat
for energy. So if you give it no carbs it has no choice but
use the fat. To compensate for the calories you replace carbs
with fat. All calories from protein is not a good idea and the
dietary fat gets passed through the adipose tissue anyway
before it's used for energy.

Have you seen the page about a new "Super Size Me" movie?
http://livinlavidalocarb.blogspot.com/

> Thus (I was saying), I don't know about your "eat fat to
> lose fat" thesis. I've heard it before, and I realize that
> there are so-called good fats, but I'm not sure weight-loss
> means ingesting fat any more than it does avoiding all fat.

When ingesting fat without carbs the body "learns" to use it
for energy efficiently. Also human brain can run on ketone
bodies instead of sugar ...

> BTW, I've always wondered: why would the body need an daily
> intake of fat, anyway, if it's already got its own??

Some "experts" will tell you that you need the Essential Fatty
Acids (EFAs) which the body cannot synthesize on its own. IMO
you need fat to absorb other essential nutrients like vitamins
and we have evolved on mostly staturated fat diet so the GI
system needs it for proper functioning (e.g. gall bladder
needs it to inject the waste products into the intestine).

> > I think it's the same with weightlifting, protein is not
> > used for energy as long as you have some glycogen left.
> > Some protein may be released, however, due to the
> > abovementioned muscle damage.
>
> Hmm...well, I certainly hope you're right!
>
> But then, in that case, there would be no need for the
> kind of supplementation advised by that book, which
> prescribes protein shakes before, during, and after
> exercise! (I found out later that the co- author of the
> book is affiliated somehow with the company that makes the
> Accelerade sports drink.)
>
> Do you supplement at all?

I used to supplement with EFAs what was a BIG mistake ... Now
I take only some vitamins/multi to counteract the stress of
living in a big city.

Taka

[Prisoner A]

On Dec 18, 12:19 am, Taka <taka0...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> My point was that the body prefers using carbohydrates to
> fat for energy.

Oh, okay, I certainly know that to be the case.

> So if you give it no carbs it has no choice but use the
> fat. To compensate for the calories you replace carbs with
> fat. All calories from protein is not a good idea and the
> dietary fat gets passed through the adipose tissue anyway
> before it's used for energy.

???

> Have you seen the page about a new "Super Size Me"
> movie?http://livinlavidalocarb.blogspot.com/

LOL! Here's a more direct link to the trailer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LgBLQIJEcbE

> When ingesting fat without carbs the body "learns" to use it
> for energy efficiently. Also human brain can run on ketone
> bodies instead of sugar ...

But presumably the body has fat already (which is why we're
dieting in the first place)...why would you ingest more fat
when it's *that* fat you already have that you're trying to
get the body to burn???

> Some "experts" will tell you that you need the Essential
> Fatty Acids (EFAs) which the body cannot synthesize on its
> own. IMO you need fat to absorb other essential nutrients
> like vitamins and we have evolved on mostly staturated fat
> diet so the GI system needs it for proper functioning (e.g.
> gall bladder needs it to inject the waste products into the
> intestine).

Really?? I thought fat was fat...didn't realize there were
"essential" fats the way there are "essential" proteins....

> I used to supplement with EFAs what was a BIG mistake ...

Um...what happened?

> Now I take only some vitamins/multi to counteract the stress
> of living in a big city.

Stress of living in a big city??? Doesn't simply working out
get rid of that??

> Taka

So there's no metabolic priority system?? That book,
written by the long-time head of kinesiology at Texas
University, is wrong???

[Taka]

On Dec 19, 4:15 am, Prisoner at War
<prisoner_at_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> But presumably the body has fat already (which is why we're
> dieting in the first place)...why would you ingest more fat
> when it's *that* fat you already have that you're trying to
> get the body to burn???

It's not easy to thrive just on protein. Excessive nitrogen
may be a problem and stress the kidneys, liver etc. But you
are right, you can do it the hard way such as during famine
... I guess some dietary fat helps sparing the protein in
muscle. If the body has to mobilize its deep fat stores it
would also take some muscles with it (cortisol effect).

> > Some "experts" will tell you that you need the Essential
> > Fatty Acids (EFAs) which the body cannot synthesize on its
> > own. IMO you need fat to absorb other essential nutrients
> > like vitamins and we have evolved on mostly staturated fat
> > diet so the GI system needs it for proper functioning
> > (e.g. gall bladder needs it to inject the waste products
> > into the intestine).
>
> Really?? I thought fat was fat...didn't realize there were
> "essential" fats the way there are "essential" proteins....

So welcome to the Mead acid club ... (you can search for it on
the sci.med.nutrition newsgroup) But seriously it seems that
Omega-6 fats are needed for growing muscles via the
damage-repair cycles, it's a prostaglandin signaling thing. I
am a fan of the theory that body doesn't need any dietary
"essential" unsaturated fats (PUFAs) because it can make its
own which are more stable and optimal. But there is not just
enough evidence that this is indeed the case especially in
activities like bodybuilding where you need massive action of
the immune system for tissue repair.

> > I used to supplement with EFAs what was a BIG mistake ...
>
> Um...what happened?

IBS, osteoarthritis etc. I believe it was due to too much
Omega-3 which are strong inhibitors of the Omega-6 action as
well as the possible Mead acid action ...

> > Now I take only some vitamins/multi to counteract the
> > stress of living in a big city.
>
> Stress of living in a big city??? Doesn't simply working out
> get rid of that??

It doesn't get you out of the polluted air and EMF fields ...

> > Taka
>
> So there's no metabolic priority system?? That book, written
> by the long-time head of kinesiology at Texas University, is
> wrong???

There are many "long-time heads" and other "experts" in the
nutrition science who get it plain wrong or lie to get more
money. I don't think the body will use preferentially fat if
it has some carbs available in any exercise but I am not any
division head ...

Taka

[Prisoner A]

On Dec 19, 11:33 am, Taka <taka0...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> It's not easy to thrive just on protein. Excessive nitrogen
> may be a problem and stress the kidneys, liver etc.

The conventional wisdom seems to be that adequate hydration
counteracts any adverse effects of increased nitrogen.

> But you are right, you can do it the hard way such as
> during famine ... I guess some dietary fat helps sparing
> the protein in muscle.

Hmm...I wonder....

> If the body has to mobilize its deep fat stores it would
> also take some muscles with it (cortisol effect).

Yeah, that's what I heard, too.

> So welcome to the Mead acid club ... (you can search for it
> on the sci.med.nutrition newsgroup) But seriously it seems
> that Omega-6 fats are needed for growing muscles via the
> damage-repair cycles, it's a prostaglandin signaling thing.
> I am a fan of the theory that body doesn't need any dietary
> "essential" unsaturated fats (PUFAs) because it can make its
> own which are more stable and optimal. But there is not just
> enough evidence that this is indeed the case especially in
> activities like bodybuilding where you need massive action
> of the immune system for tissue repair.

Ack, so much rocket science...it's hard to avoid fat anyway, I
don't think I'll worry about it....

> IBS, osteoarthritis etc. I believe it was due to too much
> Omega-3 which are strong inhibitors of the Omega-6 action as
> well as the possible Mead acid action ...

Wow, glad you're all right now!

> It doesn't get you out of the polluted air and EMF
> fields ...

I suppose I've not ever been out of polluted air or EMF fields
to know what the difference would be like....

> There are many "long-time heads" and other "experts" in the
> nutrition science who get it plain wrong or lie to get more
> money. I don't think the body will use preferentially fat if
> it has some carbs available in any exercise but I am not any
> division head ...

Well, I think his contention was, specifically, that protein
gets utilized before carbs and/or fat, during anaerobic
exercise sometimes.

The co-author is somehow affiliated with Pacific Laboratories,
which has something to do with Accelerade.

> Taka

[Kaz Kylhek]

On Dec 17, 8:15 am, Prisoner at War
<prisoner_at_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Yes, yes, but for all body types, the body will want to hold
> onto fat stores.
>
> Thus (I was saying), I don't know about your "eat fat to
> lose fat" thesis. I've heard it before, and I realize that
> there are so-called good fats, but I'm not sure weight-loss
> means ingesting fat any more than it does avoiding all fat.
>
> BTW, I've always wondered: why would the body need an daily
> intake of fat, anyway, if it's already got its own??

The reason you need an intake of fat is due to the difficulty
mobilizing your own fat. The leaner you are, the less fat you
can mobilize.

According to the paper ``A limit on the maximum energy
transfer rate from the human fat store in hypophagia''.

According to this, a pound of stored fat will give you at
most around 31 calories in a day. Since there are about
3500 calories in that pound, this represents only 0.8% of
what is stored.

This explains why fat loss is difficult, and progressively
more so the leaner you get. Moving the fat out of storage is
hard, not burning
it.

A big fat slob can mobilize a lot of calories from his fat
stores, but someone already quite lean (and vigorously active)
needs to get it from the diet.

[Doug Freyb]

Prisoner at War <prisoner_at_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Taka <taka0...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thus (I was saying), I don't know about your "eat fat to
> lose fat" thesis. I've heard it before, and I realize that
> there are so-called good fats, but I'm not sure weight-loss
> means ingesting fat any more than it does avoiding all fat.

It's how low carbing works - Dietary carbs directly cause
insulin release which pushes fat towards storage. Dietary
fats indirectly cause glucagon release which pushes fat out
of storage. Except presence of insulin suppresses glucagon
release. So to pull fat out of storage turn down dietary
carbs enough that insulin is too low to prevent glucagon (at
which point lower is no longer better) then eat enough
protein to handle essential needs, then have fat for the rest
of your calories.

> BTW, I've always wondered: why would the body need an daily
> intake of fat, anyway, if it's already got its own??

Fat is made from fatty acids. There are many types of fatty
acids. The body can create and store saturated fatty acids,
but polyunsaturated fatty acids are needed to build cell
membranes so those types are essential.

Note that there are various types of essential fatty acids and
the mixture of types matters. Taka addressed this point with
what can happen if you get them extremely skewed in
percentages. Eating food rarely triggers such problems.

[Prisoner A]

On Dec 19, 4:03 pm, Kaz Kylheku <kkylh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> The reason you need an intake of fat is due to the
> difficulty mobilizing your own fat. The leaner you are, the
> less fat you can mobilize.

That could make sense...so does that mean that a "really" fat
person can safely cut out all (or, say, like 90%) fat from his
or her diet?

> According to the paper ``A limit on the maximum energy
> transfer rate from the human fat store in hypophagia''.
>
> According to this, a pound of stored fat will give you at
> most around 31 calories in a day.

Come again??

> Since there are about 3500 calories in that pound, this
> represents only 0.8% of what is stored.

???

> This explains why fat loss is difficult, and progressively
> more so the leaner you get.

I thought the reason was 'cause the body prefers fat over
muscle, as muscle uses up too many calories even when
inactive, which is important under conditions of scarcity
(i.e., a lean physique), from an evolutionary POV....

> Moving the fat out of storage is hard, not burning
> it.

What's the difference between "moving fat out of storage" and
"burning fat"??

> A big fat slob can mobilize a lot of calories from his fat
> stores, but someone already quite lean (and vigorously
> active) needs to get it from the diet.

Okay, so "a big fat slob" can totally (or 90%-ly) forego fat
in his/ her diet, then?

[Prisoner A]

On Dec 19, 5:43 pm, Doug Freyburger <dfrey...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>
>
> It's how low carbing works - Dietary carbs directly cause
> insulin release which pushes fat towards storage. Dietary
> fats indirectly cause glucagon release which pushes fat out
> of storage. Except presence of insulin suppresses glucagon
> release. So to pull fat out of storage turn down dietary
> carbs enough that insulin is too low to prevent glucagon (at
> which point lower is no longer better) then eat enough
> protein to handle essential needs, then have fat for the
> rest of your calories.

Um, I'm curious, since you seem well-versed in these
matters...what about the finding that a ~4:1 carb-protein
drink before, during, and after exercise helps with muscle and
strength gains?? Apparently those are the only times where an
insulin spike doesn't cause fat gains, but rather increased
protein synthesis....

> Fat is made from fatty acids. There are many types of fatty
> acids. The body can create and store saturated fatty acids,
> but polyunsaturated fatty acids are needed to build cell
> membranes so those types are essential.

Okay, so there really does exist EFAs, "essential" in the
same sense that certain proteins are "essential" -- the body
needs them daily, but cannot manufacture on its own, and thus
must come from diet...so even a morbidly obese person
(500-pounder, say) would still need to ingest (certain kinds
of) fat?? Wow...!!

> Note that there are various types of essential fatty acids
> and the mixture of types matters. Taka addressed this point
> with what can happen if you get them extremely skewed in
> percentages. Eating food rarely triggers such problems.

Interesting...thanks for the confirmation of Taka's
observations.

[Alric Kneb]

Prisoner at War <prisoner_at_war@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:9ee3a984-dcac-
4369-899e-2cc4b85cf15e@l32g2000hsh.googlegroups.com:

> Um, I'm curious,

I'm bi-curious too. Want to hookup? Call me cutie.

Alric Knebel
(228) 432-0131

[Shava_x]

On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 07:58:47 -0800, Prisoner at War wrote:

> On Dec 16, 8:02 pm, Shava_X
> <voodopeo...@rocketNOSPAMmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> The "metabolic priority system" does not get thrown off
>> track by resistance training.
>
> But he said it did -- the author is the longtime chairman of
> kinesiology at Texas University, and an actual researcher in
> this field, too!
>
>> Lifting weights is, by its nature, a short duration,
>> anaerobic activity. Even very "intense" resistance
>> training is characterized by relatively short bouts of
>> high intensity activity followed by a recovery period. As
>> a result, it uses anaerobic energy systems, which only
>> 'burn' carbohydrates.
>
> Well, that's precisely what I was wondering! What's the
> mechanism whereby protein is burned for fuel -- and why
> should it be tapped first during anaerobic activity but last
> during aerobic activity?
>
> I'm just reading his book all over again now, having
> forgotten a lot of the details, so maybe he covers it later
> on...but it's not something that seems immediately sensible,
> that a "metabolic priority system" should get screwed up by
> one kind of physical effort but not another.
>
>> The idea that resistance training on its own can lead to
>> reductions in body fat is not entirely false. Muscle is
>> primarily where fats gets 'burned'. Adding muscle will
>> increase a person's metabolic rate. And, resistance
>> training burns calories, where ever they may come from,
>> thus helping to eliminate excess calories. So, it is
>> possible to loose fat by lifting weights. But, it is not
>> necessarily the most effective way to reduce body fat.
>
> All true -- this is what makes so-called "spot shaping"
> possible (not spot reducing, mind you, but spot shaping).
> But I've actually heard it said that cardio is not necessary
> at all if you lift intensely, so I just wanted to put to
> rest that myth.

If that is what the author put, then the author is just plain
wrong. given His credentials, i can only speculate that He was
trying to simplify things and did a poor job.

The mechanism my which protein is tapped for fuel is call
gluconeogenesis. It is the process whereby protein is turned
into glucose. It is not very efficient, and that is why
protein is tapped as a fuel source *Last*.

[Prisoner A]

On Dec 21, 5:29 pm, Shava_X
<voodopeo...@rocketNOSPAMmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> If that is what the author put, then the author is just
> plain wrong. given His credentials, i can only speculate
> that He was trying to simplify things and did a poor job.
>
> The mechanism my which protein is tapped for fuel is call
> gluconeogenesis. It is the process whereby protein is turned
> into glucose. It is not very efficient, and that is why
> protein is tapped as a fuel source *Last*.

Well, his claim is that resistance training involves such
intensity that this metabolic priority system gets ignored. I
almost imagine some office assistant so suddenly swamped with
work that the phone goes unanswered! Perhaps resistance
training is so intense that, inefficient as protein
utilization may be, it's not tapped last, but tapped first
because the brain goes haywire -- ?!

Or maybe protein gets tapped near-simultaneously with carbs
and fat, so it's no longer last, but practically first,
because the "call to arms" is so dire (due to the intensity
of resistance training) that everyone answers all at once,
men, women, and children, so to speak (that is, protein,
carbs, and fat)....