# Oatmeal doesn't work for me



## xrayjay (Feb 21, 2010)

Not sure if anyone else has this problem with oatmeal, but it just doesn't give me sustained energy. I can use the instant or the stove top 5 minute kind but neither seem to really last very long on my rides. I'm eating about 60 - 90 minutes before my ride so I know it should be digesting at this point. 

Just wondering if anyone else has this same issue?


----------



## jlandry (Jan 12, 2007)

Same here. After eating oatmeal, I'm hungry within 1 hour.


----------



## pretender (Sep 18, 2007)

It's not just what you eat, but the timing:
http://www.hammernutrition.com/hnt/1279/

For me, eating oatmeal an hour before riding would be a recipe for bonking. Better to skip the meal, and take calories on the ride if needed (in the form of gels, blocks, banana, whatever).


----------



## ZoSoSwiM (Mar 7, 2008)

Weird. Oatmeal fills me up for a long time. Maybe you need to add some fruit in with the oatmeal. Maybe a little protein as well to round out the meal.


----------



## nismo73 (Jul 29, 2009)

There's no way I could survive on a bowl of oatmeal and then go for a ride an hour later. I would be starving about a half-hour into the ride...


----------



## rbart4506 (Aug 4, 2004)

In the summer I have a bagel w/PB&J and a coffee...

About 30min later a bowl of instant oatmeal with some dates and cinnamon thrown in...

30-45min later I am on the bike and usually good for about 60-90min before I break out the Cliff bar/gels...

Before I started the oatmeal the cliff bars were coming out at the 60min mark because I was starving...Now it's because I know I need to keep the calorie intake constant...


----------



## petalpower (Aug 10, 2009)

Adding peanut butter helps, but I agree, it doesn't seem ot keep me as full as it once did.


----------



## tjib13 (Aug 11, 2008)

stove top like Quakers or stove top like Bob's Red Mill?
Even if I eat instant oat meal and go sit at my desk I am hungry in an hour, Bob's Red Mill pre ride will keep me fueled up for a bit.


----------



## bmxhacksaw (Mar 26, 2008)

If I ride within two hours of eating I got nothing in the legs until it gets digested. I eat oatmeal with a fried egg on top of it more mornings than not.


----------



## rockdude (Apr 3, 2008)

tjib13 said:


> stove top like Quakers or stove top like Bob's Red Mill?
> Even if I eat instant oat meal and go sit at my desk I am hungry in an hour, Bob's Red Mill pre ride will keep me fueled up for a bit.



+1 on Bob's Red Mill Steel Cut oats


----------



## sdeeer (Aug 12, 2008)

*A true "bonk" and energy*

A true bonk is when your muscle glycogen rate of breakdown is not sufficient to keep up with demand based on work rate, and you start to rely more heavily on fat metabolism. Basically at the point when glycogen debranching becomes limited. Assuming proper glycogen repletion, this typically will not occur until ~2+ hours into exercise depending on work rate (% of max). What many people think is a "bonk" is actually not fuel related, but is due to muscle fatigue/lack of fitness or recovery.

Jeukendrup had guys ride at 58% maximum O2 consumption for 5 hours after an overnight fast (10h) and almost all of them made it atleast 3.5h at that work rate with no food. 










https://jap.physiology.org/content/100/4/1134.full.pdf+html

From a performance standpoint, eating on the bike if exercise is going to last more than 1.5h is crucial if top performance is important after the 1.5h point.

If you are truely "lacking energy" (fuel), then it is your overall diet and not just the pre-ride meal that is causing this to happen. 

If you eat other foods of similar carb and energy composition, do you feel better?


----------



## JohnStonebarger (Jan 22, 2004)

Oatmeal is very nutritious, a good source of soluable fiber, vitamins, minerals, but it's mostly carbs. Any meal of mostly carbs is not going to "stick to your ribs."

Try this: make the oatmeal with milk (whole or low-fat, NOT skim) instead of water, add butter or peanut butter, maybe some walnuts, then whatever else. My guess is all the extra fat and protein will keep you satisfied a lot longer.


----------



## SilasCL (Jun 14, 2004)

What do you normally eat that keeps you fuller? How much oatmeal are you eating? I tend to eat smaller portions of foods such as oatmeal that tell you to cook 1/2 cup per serving than I would with cereal where I can fill up a bowl.


----------



## black_box (Jun 7, 2008)

how many servings do you eat? I'm ~135 lbs (with a bit of an appetite), I typically make a double (1 cup dry oats) and add a banana + some brown sugar.


----------



## SilasCL (Jun 14, 2004)

sdeeer said:


> Jeukendrup had guys ride at 58% maximum O2 consumption for 5 hours after an overnight fast (10h) and almost all of them made it atleast 3.5h at that work rate with no food.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This is interesting stuff. I skimmed through the paper, so correct me if I'm wrong here, but was fat oxidation higher in the water only group than the two sugar groups?


----------



## dot (Mar 4, 2004)

oatsmeal takes volume its volume/energy ratio is very low. oatsmeal has 300-320 kcal/100g, but to consume porridge with 100 or more g of oatsmeal I have to work really hard on it.


----------



## sdeeer (Aug 12, 2008)

SilasCL said:


> This is interesting stuff. I skimmed through the paper, so correct me if I'm wrong here, but was fat oxidation higher in the water only group than the two sugar groups?


yes. Figure 1A.

In the absence of exegenous CHO intake, they had to rely on more endegenous fat during exercise.


----------



## SilasCL (Jun 14, 2004)

sdeeer said:


> yes. Figure 1A.
> 
> In the absence of exegenous CHO intake, they had to rely on more endegenous fat during exercise.


In your opinion, does this lend some credence to the Bicycling magazine weight-loss advice of drink a cup of coffee and head out for 90 minutes first thing in the morning?

Or does it not really matter in the bigger thermodynamic, calories in<calories out argument?


----------



## sdeeer (Aug 12, 2008)

SilasCL said:


> In your opinion, does this lend some credence to the Bicycling magazine weight-loss advice of drink a cup of coffee and head out for 90 minutes first thing in the morning?
> 
> Or does it not really matter in the bigger thermodynamic, calories in<calories out argument?


The very brief answer is not really, BUT......(I will try to keep it simple)

In the grand scheme of things, energy balance is the driving factor in weight loss. Exercising in the fasted state will result in greater fat oxidation during the exercise bout. But you have to eat at some point post exercise. Weight loss is driven by overall energy balance over time and not specifically during the exercise bout. During rest (activites of daily living) fat is the primary source of energy in healthy individuals. For 2+ hours after a meal, the % of oxidation depends on the composition of the meal. It has yet to be shown (that I know of) that burning more fat during an exercise bout increases overall negative fat balance over time. There is a paper that someone posted recently that I have to look at again when I get a chance. I think that is where the article you are refering to is from (originally).

Additionally, the make up nutrient intake can impart changes in weight loss (fat vs. lean) depending on timing and exercise stress. Higher protein diets during negative Energy balance with resistance training tend to maintain lean tissue and result is greater fat loss. 

The conversion of carbohydrates to fat (denovolipogensis) is rather low (2-4% of carbs if I recall correctly). Potentially, if you burn a much greater amount of fat during a workout (by exercising fasted), and then eat a very low fat diet (higher protein and high carb) in negative energy balance, you would have a greater negative fat balance. But that is untested.


----------



## durielk (Jan 8, 2011)

My research seems to point to the fact that you need carbo's to burn fat. Once you run out of carb's, your output tanks because the body cannot convert fat as fast as your using it without carb's to act as a catalyst.

My philosophy has been if your on the bike, eat, you cant workout with out it. Some guys show up for the ride without breakfast and an hour into the ride they are hanging on the back.


----------



## SilasCL (Jun 14, 2004)

sdeeer said:


> The very brief answer is not really, BUT......(I will try to keep it simple)
> 
> In the grand scheme of things, energy balance is the driving factor in weight loss. Exercising in the fasted state will result in greater fat oxidation during the exercise bout. But you have to eat at some point post exercise. Weight loss is driven by overall energy balance over time and not specifically during the exercise bout. During rest (activites of daily living) fat is the primary source of energy in healthy individuals. For 2+ hours after a meal, the % of oxidation depends on the composition of the meal. It has yet to be shown (that I know of) that burning more fat during an exercise bout increases overall negative fat balance over time. There is a paper that someone posted recently that I have to look at again when I get a chance. I think that is where the article you are refering to is from (originally).
> 
> ...


Thanks for the explanation. I've read some stuff about higher protein diets with negative energy balance helping to preserve muscle mass.


----------



## Oxtox (Aug 16, 2006)

I had a bowl oatmeal this morning and it sustained me for several hours...used raw milk, some raisins, a splash of real maple syrup, and a slab of butter.

oh, and there was also a scrambled egg with cheese and salsa, a patty of sausage, half a banana, half an orange, and rye toast with almond butter and cherry preserves.


----------



## Mahatma Kane (Oct 25, 2005)

I'm with you guys, if I eat straight oatmeal I run out of energy on longer rides. What I do is mix in a tablespoon of coconut oil and a tablespoon of chia seeds and I'm good for 3 to 3 1/2 hours on the bike. I use rolled oats cooked on the stovetop, that instant oatmeal has too much sugar and other junk in it.


----------



## xrayjay (Feb 21, 2010)

Thanks for all the responses and glad to know I'm not the only cyclist out there with Oatmealitis. 

To answer some questions that came up: 

I eat stove top Oatmeal with milk and some butter and Splenda. I eat two servings. I also eat two pieces of wheat toast with Peanutbutter. 

My best pre-ride meal is a bowl of Frosted Mini Wheats with Skim milk, a bagel or wheat toast with Peanut Butter and two scrambled eggs. 

I eat 1 - 1.5 hours prior to riding.

I usually take a GU pack about an hour into the ride. 

I feel strongest around 70 minutes into the ride regardless of what I eat. 

I don't carb load the night before (type 2 diabetic so I can't really do that)


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

*Bad research*



durielk said:


> My research seems to point to the fact that you need carbo's to burn fat. Once you run out of carb's, your output tanks because the body cannot convert fat as fast as your using it without carb's to act as a catalyst.


Not really. What is limiting is your ability to burn fat, which is maxed out at around 200 calories per hour (20+ gm/hr). When you run out of carbs (you bonk) then your total caloric burn becomes fat only. 200 calories per hour would limit you to around 12 mph, which in most peoples' book means "your output tanks." 

The old expression is that "fat burns in a glucose fire" but it's not really correct. Your fat burn is relatively constant regardless of effort level, and at higher effort levels you need carbs (converted to sugars) to make up the difference between your total effort and the 200 calories you get from burning fat.

It's all a little more complicated than that, but for the purposes of what you need to know about fueling your ride, explantion this works.


----------



## sdeeer (Aug 12, 2008)

Kerry Irons said:


> Your fat burn is relatively constant regardless of effort level, and at higher effort levels you need carbs (converted to sugars) to make up the difference between your total effort and the 200 calories you get from burning fat..


Can you provide data to support that? From all of the data I have seen, fat oxidation increases with increasing intensity to a point. If you follow the Brooks cross over theory, fat oxidation decrease as carbohydrate oxidation increases to max VO2. 


See figure below from van loon (i think, would have to double check if you would like a ref):










Thread jacked the oatmeal.........


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

*Unsupported*



sdeeer said:


> Can you provide data to support that? From all of the data I have seen, fat oxidation increases with increasing intensity to a point. If you follow the Brooks cross over theory, fat oxidation decrease as carbohydrate oxidation increases to max VO2.
> 
> 
> See figure below from van loon (i think, would have to double check if you would like a ref):
> ...


If you look at your histogram, the combination of fat and FFA is "fairly" constant compared to the change in the total. I'm a little confused by the top effort level because they just say "moderate/high" and we all know there is a BIG difference between moderate and high effort. In a full on sprint, you're probably using hardly any fat or FFA.

All that said, my comments were in reponse to the "glucose is a catalyst for burning fat" comment, and hopefully qualified enough to be roughly right


----------



## durielk (Jan 8, 2011)

So, your proposing the first graph & research demonstrates that to get maximum power, muscle benefit, and fat reduction one does not have to eat before a ride. That if I am going to do a 7000 ft elevation 17 mile climb, no need to eat and that I am better off not eating or it doesn't make any difference? The plotting of water on this graph is confusing, I am assuming it is just there for reference & really doesn't have any glucose element in it as the description on the vertical scale.

Another is proposing with the second graph illusrates that fat is used at a even proportion during exertion, regardless whether carbs are ingested or not. I think this graph just illustrates that once anaerobic activity starts, your running on muscle glycogen. This graph does not have any time element in it that illustrates the changes due to the work being done to the system over time.

My question is, if carbs are ingested, what energy block do they augment or sustain; the plasma FFA or glucose? 

From my experience, I could probably do a 2 hr ride without eating, but if it was a 4 hr ride I would be in trouble.


----------



## humble (Nov 23, 2007)

I stay away from the instant oatmeals, and even the big brands, which I believe are highly processed and likely (I'm not an expert) have a higher glysimic (spelling) index than plain oats, meaning they get processed by your body and stored away in fat faster. 

I use a Mueslix mix, which is cookable - Swiss Family - (no sugar) or I make my own using oatmeal (such as Red Mill) nuts, figs, whatever is handy. I also usually add yellow lentils sometimes, for protein, they take about as long to cook as the steel cut oatmeal I also add. Rather than milk, I mix in yogurt and fresh fruit.

I stay away from sugar substitutes, I use honey or grade b maple syrup and pureed berries to sweeten the gruel up.

I eat an hour or so before riding.

/h


----------



## black_box (Jun 7, 2008)

durielk said:


> So, your proposing the first graph & research demonstrates that to get maximum power, muscle benefit, and fat reduction one does not have to eat before a ride. That if I am going to do a 7000 ft elevation 17 mile climb, no need to eat and that I am better off not eating or it doesn't make any difference? The plotting of water on this graph is confusing, I am assuming it is just there for reference & really doesn't have any glucose element in it as the description on the vertical scale.
> 
> Another is proposing with the second graph illusrates that fat is used at a even proportion during exertion, regardless whether carbs are ingested or not. I think this graph just illustrates that once anaerobic activity starts, your running on muscle glycogen. This graph does not have any time element in it that illustrates the changes due to the work being done to the system over time.
> 
> ...


I think the first graph you're referring to is measuring glucose levels in the blood. Lower glucose level = less energy in the blood available for the muscles. There is always some level of glucose, but it varies with exercise and whether you are ingesting any carbs. In that graph, each athlete effectively woke up in the morning (no breakfast) and got on the bike then rode for 5 hours. They did not eat anything during that 5 hours, but they did have a beverage for each test. Test 1: 5 hrs with just water, Test 2: water+glucose, Test 3: water+glucose+fructose (in a 2:1 ratio). This was after determining the power level that they should use for each test.

As you can see, the water group did not complete the 5 hours. Also, in the paper they state that the water and water+glucose group had a reduction in their cadence towards the end (I'm assuming this means their power output dropped). The water+glucose+fructose group generally maintained their cadence. Keep in mind, these tests were all at a constant power (58% of their Vo2max if I remember right). They may have burned out faster if the exercise intensity was higher.

The 2nd graph shows that muscle glycogen is always used, but at different rates depending on your exertion level. If carbs are ingested, the plasma glucose (from the previous figure) would be maintained over time.

I'm used to riding with only water and my results track the water graph pretty well, a gradual reduction in my speed over time until I'm out of muscle glycogen and hit a wall, where my speed drops to 12-13mph. That's usually at 2:15 or so. I'll have to experiment with food or sports drinks this year.


----------



## durielk (Jan 8, 2011)

sdeer states "Jeukendrup had guys ride at 58% maximum O2 consumption for 5 hours after an overnight fast (10h) and almost all of them made it atleast 3.5h at that work rate with no food. " 

But from what black box states, his statement is incorrect.... They were drinking glucose & fructose, which is "food" I believe. 

So when your on a ride you need to eat or you are going to suffer and bonk..period. Whether you eat oatmeal or pine needles or drink goat's milk, you will need it if you expect to train and build muscle & fitness. I don't see the point of this whole thread highjack.


----------



## black_box (Jun 7, 2008)

durielk said:


> sdeer states "Jeukendrup had guys ride at 58% maximum O2 consumption for 5 hours after an overnight fast (10h) and almost all of them made it atleast 3.5h at that work rate with no food. "
> 
> But from what black box states, his statement is incorrect.... They were drinking glucose & fructose, which is "food" I believe.
> 
> So when your on a ride you need to eat or you are going to suffer and bonk..period. Whether you eat oatmeal or pine needles or drink goat's milk, you will need it if you expect to train and build muscle & fitness. I don't see the point of this whole thread highjack.


each athlete also did a test with only water, that's what the water line is for. Each test was supposed to go to 5 hours, but on average they bonked at ~3.5 hours on water alone and could not complete the full 5. 3.5 hours may seem like a long time, and it is, but 7 of the 8 were iron man athletes with times under 10:30 (I think that's what I read) and the 8th was an elite national cyclist.


----------



## durielk (Jan 8, 2011)

Well, there is a big difference between making "it" and putting in a good workout. Also those guys are way out of my league. 

If you were targeting an endurance race where food is not available, I guess that would be a good training program, but for general riding, I think it is ridiculus.


----------



## tober1 (Feb 6, 2009)

It just turns me into a bag of hot wind


----------



## tarwheel2 (Jul 7, 2005)

Steel-cut oats will keep me full much longer than regular Quaker instant oats. However, when I make steel-cut oats, I usually add some chopped nuts (pecans, almonds) as well as dried fruit.


----------



## sdeeer (Aug 12, 2008)

Kerry Irons said:


> If you look at your histogram, the combination of fat and FFA is "fairly" constant compared to the change in the total. I'm a little confused by the top effort level because they just say "moderate/high" and we all know there is a BIG difference between moderate and high effort. In a full on sprint, you're probably using hardly any fat or FFA.
> 
> All that said, my comments were in reponse to the "glucose is a catalyst for burning fat" comment, and hopefully qualified enough to be roughly right


Fat oxidation increases in g/min as exercise intensity increases until about 55-65% of maxmal aerobic effort. Carbohydrate oxidation also increases (g/min) but the increases is of greater magnitude with increasing intensity. The top effort in that figure is 75% of watt max which is approximatly equal to threshold. Maximal aerobic effort is not much higher than that. And, yes, sprints are highly reliant on glycolysis for ATP and minimal (if any fat, a point that is still somewhat underdebate).

The figure below is the Brooks crossover model. It show fat and carb oxidation as a percent.

All of these figures are posted from data conducted in fasted atheletes. Ingestion of food totally chages the oxidation profile and metabolism. Basicly, you burn what the charts show when fasted, but the contribution of IMTGs, glycogen, blood glucose, and FFAs depends on the blood/meal state during exercise.









Another thing to note (for others) is the higher intensity burns less fat, but more total calories, leading to a greater negative energy balance due to exercise. And Energy balance is the driving factor in weight loss. 

And I am not convinced that fat oxidation is 0% at maximal effort. Fat (acetyl CoA from fat) is still available as is oxygen. There is evidence that CPT1 is inhibited by the drop in pH at these intensites, but not fully blocked.......


----------



## durielk (Jan 8, 2011)

All these graphs are great, but who rides without eating? These graphs do not apply to anyone, no one riding their bike on the weekend, during the week, up a hill, down a hill, on a training ride or in any type of road or M bike race. 
These graphs only apply to track racers & criterium racers.


----------



## sdeeer (Aug 12, 2008)

durielk said:


> All these graphs are great, but who rides without eating? These graphs do not apply to anyone, no one riding their bike on the weekend, during the week, up a hill, down a hill, on a training ride or in any type of road or M bike race.
> These graphs only apply to track racers & criterium racers.


You totally missed the point. We were arguing specific points. Such as what "is" and "is not" a "bonk". The amount of fat you burn at a given intensity. Etc. 

If you have specific questions, go ahead and post them. 

And, many people do ride fasted. The benefit and drawbacks are a different arguement.

And a final point. The one graph was to support my point about fat oxidation at a given intensity. The cross over graph furthers that point. And the 5 h graph illustrates what a bonk is (to an extent) and that you can ride fasted (assuming glycogen repletion prior to exercise) for 3.5+ hours in zone 2.


----------



## durielk (Jan 8, 2011)

OK, still does not apply to anyone training above level 2, which for me, I do on a couch.

Thanks for posting the graphs, so for all the big bikers out there..... They can ride without eating for 3.5 hours without bonking, as long as they don't pedal much, go up a hill, join a spirited club ride, or a typical training ride.


----------



## dkilburn (Aug 1, 2009)

*Oatmeal*

Oatmeal, a winter morning meal? I've never tried it in the spring / summer. I make a cup of oatmeal with milk and add frozen mixed berries or Trader Joe's golden raisins & dried cranberries. Will try the oatmeal in the spring / summer. Thanks for the charts.


----------



## Hughsdad (Jan 21, 2011)

Interesting graphs and discussion, but way above my unscientific head. What works for me & what I have most mornings: oatmeal with yoghurt, peanut butter, an egg or two, or maybe some whey, and lots of fresh fruit. 90 minutes after that, I can be on the bike and last for about 2 hours before I need a bar or banana.


----------



## sdeeer (Aug 12, 2008)

durielk said:


> OK, still does not apply to anyone training above level 2, which for me, I do on a couch.
> 
> Thanks for posting the graphs, so for all the big bikers out there..... They can ride without eating for 3.5 hours without bonking, as long as they don't pedal much, go up a hill, join a spirited club ride, or a typical training ride.


Are you just being difficult or do you really not understand? I am leaning toward the latter as shown by pretty much all of your posts in the thread. They all lack an understanding of A) the point of the figure; and B) the other data in the figure/reference paper and how that can be applied to all athletes.

One of my main points (that you seem to keep missing) is that people do not know what a true bonk actually is. For example, you eat breakfast (containing carbohydrates) and then ride for 2 hour (a spirited club ride of 42 miles with up hills and down hills) and you think you "bonk" in the last 20 minutes. Unless you are not eating enough carbohydrates and total energy chronically (likely more than just the day before), you likely just were not fit enough. Even fasted, (again assuming that you are glycogen replete the night before) you can ride this same ride fasted. The last 30 minutes will be harder as the reliance on fat metabolism increases and plasma glucose concentration drops, but you will not bonk. Continuing this higher pace to 2.5+ hours will lead to a true bonk, when muscle glycogen is too low to maintain glycolysis at a rate to sustain work intensity. And muscle glycogen content is not gone when you bonk. In simple terms, it is stored like a tree with large branches. When those branches get very short, they need a different enzyme to cut off the individual glucose molecules. The bonk tends to occurs when all you have left is many little stubs of glycogen that take longer to liberate. It takes a long time to fully run out of glycogen.

So what is the benefit of riding fasted to "big bikers and little bikers"? Not much. The figures are examples of metabolic occurances during exercise. You can't add in all to food, different intensities, etc. to one study without knowing what happens in the baseline (fasted) state. 

A final point. There are carbohdrate receptors in the mouth that have been shown to activate a center in the brain that makes you able to feel better at a higher work rate. So when you eat (or even mouth rinse) carbs on the bike, you may feel better imediately due to these receptors. Look up carbohydrate mouth rinsing and exercise. 

The entire issues is complicated by feel, perceived exertion, and actual substrate (metabolic) usage. 

Got it now???


----------



## durielk (Jan 8, 2011)

OK, we have moved beyond "oatmeal". I am trying not to be antagonistic (although **** happens), but explore your reasoning and truth. I am not a physican or done much research in this field. I agree that some may misuse the term "bonk", but I usually just let it go.

Let us explore your description a little more.
You state that after 42 miles & 2 hours we wind down and although we did not bonk, we cannot maintain contact with the leaders. What is exactly happening here? I don't think muscles suddenly cannot work, if a lion would show up and start chasing you, you would probably be able to accelorate again. 
I am guessing that the lactate (or other proper term) has risen to an unacceptable levels due to the body function not being able to clear it? With a little breather, the levels are reduced and one is able to re-attack all the fellow stragglers.


----------



## mttopslapshot (Feb 7, 2007)

I've been mixing quinoa with my oatmeal at a 50/50 mix and adding a banana and honey. Tastes great and adds a nearly perfect protein source to balance the carbs.


----------



## Ghost234 (Jun 1, 2010)

1 bowl of oatmeal (usually 3 packets of quaker) and 1 scoop of whey is enough to last me a good 3 hours of riding. I can usually go 5 hours without eating before I really start to suffer. I do get hungry about a 1/2 hour into it, but I am ALWAYS HUNGRY so I don't worry about it. I haven't bonked since June when I did an epic 700km week. 

I also never drink gatorade or use any sugar/salt in my drinks. My performance doesnt seem to really suffer oddly enough.


----------



## onlineflyer (Aug 8, 2005)

I typically have stove-top oatmeal with a handful of chopped walnuts or pecans, blueberries and banana about an hour before riding. This generally hold me for a few hours. Mid ride (30 - 40 miles), I have a fruit bar snack and enjoy a Cliff shot on the ride home. Oatmeal by itself does not do the job.


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

*Fat burn rate*



sdeeer said:


> Fat oxidation increases in g/min as exercise intensity increases until about 55-65% of maxmal aerobic effort. Carbohydrate oxidation also increases (g/min) but the increases is of greater magnitude with increasing intensity. The top effort in that figure is 75% of watt max which is approximatly equal to threshold. Maximal aerobic effort is not much higher than that. And, yes, sprints are highly reliant on glycolysis for ATP and minimal (if any fat, a point that is still somewhat underdebate).
> 
> And I am not convinced that fat oxidation is 0% at maximal effort. Fat (acetyl CoA from fat) is still available as is oxygen. There is evidence that CPT1 is inhibited by the drop in pH at these intensites, but not fully blocked.......


Interesting that if you convert the numbers on the graph, fat burn is 270 +/- 50 calories per hour over the range of say 30-80% of max power. Not constant, but even though the % of calories from fat is dropping, the total calories doesn't change that much. 

Does the fact that these subjects are fasted significantly influence fat metabolism? IOW, does it shift to higher fat metabolism because there is less carbohydrate available? I have read the "200 calories per hour from fat metabolism" several places, and these numbers are significantly higher. Maybe it also depends on training adaptation?

Agree that it would be highly unlikely for fat metabolism to completely shut down at maximal effort. More likely is that it is hard to measure since the duration of that effort is pretty short.


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

*Running on empty*



durielk said:


> Let us explore your description a little more.
> You state that after 42 miles & 2 hours we wind down and although we did not bonk, we cannot maintain contact with the leaders. What is exactly happening here? I don't think muscles suddenly cannot work, if a lion would show up and start chasing you, you would probably be able to accelorate again.
> I am guessing that the lactate (or other proper term) has risen to an unacceptable levels due to the body function not being able to clear it? With a little breather, the levels are reduced and one is able to re-attack all the fellow stragglers.


At 2 hours without eating, your glycogen stores are running low. Not empty, but low. The net effect is that your muscles are not getting fueled as well. Lactic acid is fuel, not a performance inhibitor. Taking a breather allows your body to bring more fuel up so you can go again, but not for long. If you rode at a slow enough pace, you could go for many hours without food because your body could get most of it's energy from fat metabolism. At higher intensities, you're burning through your glycogen stores and the end is in sight. Consistent studies have shown that performance begins to drop off in the 90-120 min range if you are not taking on food.


----------



## durielk (Jan 8, 2011)

Hey, I'm not bonking, I eat. I did bonk once, it was bad. I noticed I was stronger rider after the bonk. But that was when wasn't so trained. I think most riders know when they "bonk" and are not confused. If I can't keep up, I don't need some silly excuse.


----------

