Low carb, high (good) fats diet

rom

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AODfiw3BUfg

http://www.discovery.co.za/email_za/mailers/pdfs/general/noakes.pdf
So what do you think ?
paleo/primal diet ?
dairy/no dairy ?

drquirky

Like crossfit I see all this Paleo stuff as a passing fad but I did my undergrad degree in anthropology so it kind of interests me. So much of it is based on inaccurate, romanticised suppositions about the lifestyles of people in the "Paleo" period. Very very early humans were most likely more predominate foragers and would have eaten a plant based diet- tooth based evidence backs this up. The laughable part about the diet is that it glorifies the eating habits of our ancestors but fails to explain why most of them died before they were 30. While bashing the modern balanced food pyramid the Paleo people ignore evolutionary evidence. Human life spans have increased exponentially and the human race has thrived and a good amount of this is down to refining our diet over time and adapting it to our own specific environment. To quote:

“You simply do not see specific, trans-regional trends in human subsistence in the archaeological record. People can live off everything from whale blubber to seeds and grasses. You want to know what the ideal human diet consists of? Everything. Humans can and will eat everything, and we are remarkably successful not in spite of this fact, but because of it. Our adaptability is the hallmark of the human species. We’re not called omnivores for nothing.”(Dr. Britta Hoyes Paleoethnobotanist)

I guess my point is that the science behind the Paleo diet is pretty shaky at best-From an evolutionary perspective- humans have conquered the planet, increased their lifespan and bred at astonishing rates - and much of this on a grain based diet.

Quote from Dr. Karl Fenst a bioarcheologist from a speech called "That Papya isn't Paleo and Neither are You:

“Nearly every food item you currently eat today has been modified from its ancestral form, typically in a drastic way, ” he began. “The notion that we have not yet adapted to eat wheat, yet we have had sufficient time to adapt to kale or lentils is ridiculous. In fact, for most practitioners of the Paleo Diet, who are typically westerners, the majority of the food they consume has been available to their gene pool for less than five centuries. Tomatoes, peppers, squash, potatoes, avocados, pecans, cashews, and blueberries are all New World crops, and have only been on the dinner table of African and Eurasian populations for probably 10 generations of their evolutionary history. Europeans have been eating grain for the last 10,000 years; we’ve been eating sweet potatoes for less than 500. Yet the human body has seemingly adapted perfectly well to yams, let alone pineapple and sunflower seeds.”

Finally- Barbara King, an anthropologist offers this perspective

http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2011/10/27/141666659/the-paleo-diet-not-the-way-to-a-healthy-future

RayCun

This article is great
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/10/fashion/10caveman.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
(note the article category)

walshb

The world is full of fads. A bit of everything would be my advice. We have evolved to allow us to ingest a bit of everything. Nice article, by the way.

eldiva

tunguska wrote: »

Looks fairly solid rom except for number 1 on your list. If you wanna lose wieght thats fine, but a low carb diet for a runner isnt the way to go. I mean the kenyans eat a high carb diet but are still super lean.
If you cut out all junk food, alcohol, fizzy drinks, processed food and eat clean, trust me, that alone will do the job. Im doing it myself and the body fat just drops off, even if you eat a high carb diet. Plus you feel amazing, you just dont realise how much of a detrimental effect junk food/drink has on your overall sense of weelbeing until you cut them out. So I wouldnt be too fanatical about carb cutting, just knock the processed stuff on the head and see what happens.

There is nothing wrong with a low carb-diet for running. You gain more energy by burning fat than carbs while running. By reducing carb intake and utilising more fat as a fuel source for your steady runs and only use carb as a food source for high intensity exercise ( have to be low GI carbs, so slow buring like sweet potatoe, brown grains), then you would see the weight drop off and an improvement in performance.

Oregano_State

eldiva wrote: »

There is nothing wrong with a low carb-diet for running. You gain more energy by burning fat than carbs while running. By reducing carb intake and utilising more fat as a fuel source for your steady runs and only use carb as a food source for high intensity exercise ( have to be low GI carbs, so slow buring like sweet potatoe, brown grains), then you would see the weight drop off and an improvement in performance.

I'd have to disagree with you there. During running your body primary uses its glycogen (carbohydrate based) stores in the muscles as an energy source, converting fat to energy is too slow to be of use as the primary source, although it does occur.

Fat is burned after your run to replenish your glycogen stores.

drquirky

eldiva wrote: »

There is nothing wrong with a low carb-diet for running. You gain more energy by burning fat than carbs while running. By reducing carb intake and utilising more fat as a fuel source for your steady runs and only use carb as a food source for high intensity exercise ( have to be low GI carbs, so slow buring like sweet potatoe, brown grains), then you would see the weight drop off and an improvement in performance.

Name one world or even national class runner who uses this approach...lol

RayCun

I have to say, much though I enjoy laughing at the 'caveman lifestyle' people above (and enjoy slagging my wife over paleo stuff ), I've gone much more in this direction in the last year. Bread is banned from the house so I eat much less of it (though I'll happily eat sandwiches outside the house), we eat less pasta, less rice, fewer potatoes, and more meat, more other vegetables, more nuts. Partly its just eating less processed food.
Does it work? I don't know, because how do you separate the effects of diet from the effects of training, and the effect of eating less bread from the effect of eating more fruit and nuts? Hasn't killed me yet anyway...

Enduro

drquirky wrote: »

Name one world or even national class runner who uses this approach...lol

The majority of the best ultrarunners I know do this to some extent. This would include a large proportion of the Irish internationals.

drquirky

Enduro wrote: »

The majority of the best ultrarunners I know do this to some extent. This would include a large proportion of the Irish internationals.

Again- I said world or national class runners- no offence but ultra is a novelty sport and does not fit into this definition....

Enduro

drquirky wrote: »

Again- I said world or national class runners- no offence but ultra is a novelty sport and does not fit into this definition....

:rolleyes: oh dear

dario28

drquirky wrote: »

Name one world or even national class runner who uses this approach...lol

Barry Murray - been to his nutrition talks

Have a google , some of his slides are on the net

drquirky

dario28 wrote: »

Barry Murray - been to his nutrition talks

Have a google , some of his slides are on the net

Not sure how many times I'm going to have to repeat this but ULTRA IS HOBBY JOGGING OVER RIDICULOUSLY LONG DISTANCES. Show me a proper runner, running sub 2:20 maras or sub 14 5ks, whatever don't bother highlighting the "Ultra World Championships" simply because it is a fad in the same way that Paleo and crossfit are....

PaulieC

drquirky wrote: »

Not sure how many times I'm going to have to repeat this but ULTRA IS HOBBY JOGGING OVER RIDICULOUSLY LONG DISTANCES. Show me a proper runner, running sub 2:20 maras or sub 14 5ks, whatever don't bother highlighting the "Ultra World Championships" simply because it is a fad in the same way that Paleo and crossfit are....

dario28

drquirky wrote: »

Not sure how many times I'm going to have to repeat this but ULTRA IS HOBBY JOGGING OVER RIDICULOUSLY LONG DISTANCES. Show me a proper runner, running sub 2:20 maras or sub 14 5ks, whatever don't bother highlighting the "Ultra World Championships" simply because it is a fad in the same way that Paleo and crossfit are....

A proper runner ....would ya ever get the fook

drquirky

cambo_gueno wrote: »

TBH not trolling here...I just don't have much time for Ultra- pretty sure I'm allowed to have an opinion

PaulieC

drquirky wrote: »

pretty sure I'm allowed to have an opinion

of course you are allowed have an opinion.

As is everyone else.

jeffontour

Enduro wrote: »

:rolleyes: oh dear

I'd crack open a big bucket of popcorn to watch this one unfold but I don't think it's paleo. So a bag of muck and tree bark will do instead.

Washed down with lashings of fruit juice!

Enduro

jeffontour wrote: »

I'd crack open a big bucket of popcorn to watch this one unfold

Not worth the effort, to be honest. The significance of ultrarunning to the thread so obvious that it just seems a bit trite to spell it out. (And it'd be a shame not to learn from other's wisdom and experience)

eldiva

Oregano_State wrote: »

I'd have to disagree with you there. During running your body primary uses its glycogen (carbohydrate based) stores in the muscles as an energy source, converting fat to energy is too slow to be of use as the primary source, although it does occur.

Fat is burned after your run to replenish your glycogen stores.

That is true. However any runner can train their body to utilise fat as a primary fuel source. By training in a stage of starvation (5-6 hours between last meal and training run or running firat thing in the morning before breakfast) there is little glycogen to fuel.the body therefore the body turns to.the fat stores. This can improve the cross-over concept of fuel stores.
However this priniciple can't be done high intensity sessions as the body does need the glycogen. It does sound extreme but its quite simple. It may not work for everyone but found it worked well for myself

eldiva

drquirky wrote: »

Name one world or even national class runner who uses this approach...lol

Where did I once mention world or national. I just said that a low carb diet can be used by runners throughout their training. And coaches like Bob Seebohar recommend this diet to their athletes. But I wouldn't expect you to know who he is

drquirky

eldiva wrote: »

Where did I once mention world or national. I just said that a low carb diet can be used by runners throughout their training. And coaches like Bob Seebohar recommend this diet to their athletes. But I wouldn't expect you to know who he is

WTF is that post all about- am I supposed to be impressed that you know what some d bag tri coach thinks? You have no idea who I know or don't (not that it matters at all). You are making my point for me- the "low carb" diet is only applicable for people who want to jog really long races- fair enough- I have plenty of respect for the endurance that they achieve I just don't really think its on par w/ serious running so to speak.

Saw your goals on another thread- if you can go sub 16 using a liow carb diet I'll tip my cap to you- but i'm betting you can't.

eldiva

drquirky wrote: »

WTF is that post all about- am I supposed to be impressed that you know what some d bag tri coach thinks? You have no idea who I know or don't (not that it matters at all). You are making my point for me- the "low carb" diet is only applicable for people who want to jog really long races- fair enough- I have plenty of respect for the endurance that they achieve I just don't really think its on par w/ serious running so to speak.

Saw your goals on another thread- if you can go sub 16 using a liow carb diet I'll tip my cap to you- but i'm betting you can't.

As ROM is doing endurance events from 5k to marathon a low-carb diet is applicable to his training. Yes it is more suited to the half marathon/marathon distance but it will benefit the cross-over point/transition for any runner from the 10k distance up regardless of how serious they are.

In relation to my goals, I can't see any reason why they can't be achieved using this diet. If i can't I'll will be the first person to say I got it wrong and that low-carb diet is pointless for 5k-10k runners

tunguska

eldiva wrote: »

That is true. However any runner can train their body to utilise fat as a primary fuel source. By training in a stage of starvation (5-6 hours between last meal and training run or running firat thing in the morning before breakfast) there is little glycogen to fuel.the body therefore the body turns to.the fat stores. This can improve the cross-over concept of fuel stores.
However this priniciple can't be done high intensity sessions as the body does need the glycogen. It does sound extreme but its quite simple. It may not work for everyone but found it worked well for myself

Theres a difference between training in a glycogen depleted state and using a low-carb diet. The kenyans would do their easy runs on empty first thing in the morning, but would replenish with carbs for the rest of the day. I train in a glycogen depleted state myself and I've found it does make a difference to performance....over distances longer than 10k. But to be honest anything below that it doesnt make a dent. Im in 10k training mode right now and the only reason I run on empty in the morning is for convienace, to save time. But glycogen depletion training doesnt automatically mean you're on a low carb diet.

Krusty_Clown

For my part, I don't understand what has changed. Pick up any endurance running book written over the last 20 years and all you will read is carbs, carbs, carbs. How has opinion changed so rapidly? What scientific evidence has been produced that suddenly suggests that everything written and every piece of advice given for the last number of years is flawed?

I understand that scientific research and technological advancements result in more accurate results over time, but we have gone from one extreme to the other, over the last 12 months, with some sports nutritionists espousing low carb diets, while others argue the opposite extreme. I'm not saying a low-carb diet is wrong (I will listen to reason once evidence is provided), but why the sudden turn-about? If you'll pardon the pun, it all seems a bit nuts. Perhaps it doesn't matter a damn what you eat, as long as you eat healthy food in the correct proportions.

robinph

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

... I don't understand what has changed...

New books published that need to be sold probably?

plodder

It's hard to see the point of low-carb diets for distances less than the marathon. Sure you can train the body to rely more on fat burning, but why do it, if you know there is enough glycogen to last the distance? As I understand it, you use more oxygen metabolising fat as compared with glycogen and for shorter distances VO2 is more likely to be the limiting factor.

pconn062

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

For my part, I don't understand what has changed. Pick up any endurance running book written over the last 20 years and all you will read is carbs, carbs, carbs. How has opinion changed so rapidly? What scientific evidence has been produced that suddenly suggests that everything written and every piece of advice given for the last number of years is flawed?

I understand that scientific research and technological advancements result in more accurate results over time, but we have gone from one extreme to the other, over the last 12 months, with some sports nutritionists espousing low carb diets, while others argue the opposite extreme. I'm not saying a low-carb diet is wrong (I will listen to reason once evidence is provided), but why the sudden turn-about? If you'll pardon the pun, it all seems a bit nuts. Perhaps it doesn't matter a damn what you eat, as long as you eat healthy food in the correct proportions.

You can end the thread there. In truth every single person on this forum will perform to their best with a balanced, healthy diet.

menoscemo

pconn062 wrote: »

You can end the thread there. In truth every single person on this forum will perform to their best with a balanced, healthy diet.

No-one is going to disagree with that statement. The debate is over what is healthy (and balanced).

rom

robinph wrote: »

New books published that need to be sold probably?

I would say that sort of thing normally but Tim Noakes would be someone I would take some notice of. It is true though he does have a nutrition book coming out next year. I am currently reading Challenging Beliefs: Memoirs of a Career. He first published a paper on exercise associated Hyponatremia which has changed the advice of everyone in respect to hydration when it comes to endurance events. Now he does say that it does not work for everyone.

menoscemo

Rom you mentioned paleo diet in the other thread. I just watched the video and there is not mention of Paleo. Although there are similarities, Paleo diets are not necessarliy low carb. You can certainly have a paleo style diet that is moderate carbs....that might be more suited to a runner.
I can see the point of a very low carb diet for marathoners and ultra runners but not necessarily for Mile-Half marathon training where you are going to finish the race optimally using only glycogen.

pconn062

menoscemo wrote: »

No-one is going to disagree with that statement. The debate is over what is healthy (and balanced).

I would have thought what defines a healthy balanced diet would have been settled on by now! As Krusty says, what has changed in the last 20 years that we should drastically alter what we eat? Sounds like another fad to me, plenty of fruit, veg, protein, and carbs (the good kind, not processed sugar filled crap) is really all we need. And plenty of water. I have been on a no crappy food (well, within reason) diet for the last six months and have dropped my weight by 8 pounds to 10st 6 (I'm 5' 10), I just ate what I listed above and it worked for me.

menoscemo

pconn062 wrote: »

I would have thought what defines a healthy balanced diet would have been settled on by now! As Krusty says, what has changed in the last 20 years that we should drastically alter what we eat? Sounds like another fad to me, plenty of fruit, veg, protein, and carbs (the good kind, not processed sugar filled crap) is really all we need. And plenty of water. I have been on a no crappy food (well, within reason) diet for the last six months and have dropped my weight by 8 pounds to 10st 6 (I'm 5' 10), I just ate what I listed above and it worked for me.

You might think it is that simple, but you only have to go to the health and nutrition forum to see that a lot of people have no idea what a healthy diet is. Most people think they have a healthy diet and wonder why they are overweight but when asked to list the foods they eat it usually includes high sugar breakfast cereals (special K being the obvious example) copious amounts of bread, very little veg, very little protein (most of which is normally the frozen breaded type). A lot of people think that if they don't eat 6 chocolate bars or packets of crisps a day then their diet is healthy...

plodder

But even for marathoners, I think the conventional advice is to have a higher percentage of carbs in the diet, compared to non athletes. As Tunguska said, doing some sessions while being carb-depleted can be beneficial, but that's a different thing. A lot of marathoners don't eat enough protein on the other hand.

rom

menoscemo: tbh, I am looking more in reducing my carbs specifically bread, pasta, potatoes and see how it effects me. Just looking for what other people think about it all and their experiences.

menoscemo

rom wrote: »

menoscemo: tbh, I am looking more in reducing my carbs specifically bread, pasta, potatoes and see how it effects me. Just looking for what other people think about it all and their experiences.

I have greatly reduced my intake of bread over the years and personally I feel much better (less bloated) for it.

Never really liked pasta personally, but I lived in Italy for a year once and ate a lot of it and put on a load of weight (felt constantly bloated too).
I guess I am mildly wheat intolerant. I feel much better eating rice ..

I personally don't see the problem with potatoes, they are nutrient dense and unprocessed, but as Tunguska said in the other thread, if you want to give them up you should probably eat sweet potato as an alternative.

rom

menoscemo wrote: »

I have greatly reduced my intake of bread over the years and personally I feel much better (less bloated) for it.

Never really liked pasta personally, but I lived in Italy for a year once and ate a lot of it and put on a load of weight (felt constantly bloated too).
I guess I am mildly wheat intolerant. I feel much better eating rice ..

I personally don't see the problem with potatoes, they are nutrient dense and unprocessed, but as Tunguska said in the other thread, if you want to give them up you should probably eat sweet potato as an alternative.

Looking to do similar. I ain't looking to going hardcore because thats one way to fail. If I eat processed carbs they seem to sap my energy. I have to agree the bloated feeling is something that I don't like.
What kind of rice do you eat if any ?

menoscemo

rom wrote: »

Looking to do similar. I ain't looking to going hardcore because thats one way to fail. If I eat processed carbs they seem to sap my energy. I have to agree the bloated feeling is something that I don't like.
What kind of rice do you eat if any ?

Just normal white rice (maybe 2 times a week), it's what most Asians eat. Rice is fairly unprocessed as a carb. Unlike white bread I don't believe that white rice is more processed compared to brown (open to correct on that tbh- but I have seen paleo advocates saying white rice is fine)...

Oregano_State

What are people's thoughts on brown bread?

I like me some brown bread so I do.

Krusty_Clown

menoscemo wrote: »

Just normal white rice (maybe 2 times a week), it's what most Asians eat. Rice is fairly unprocessed as a carb. Unlike white bread I don't believe that white rice is more processed compared to brown (open to correct on that tbh- but I have seen paleo advocates saying white rice is fine)...

Take brown rice. Polish each of the grains, removing the outer nutrients and you've got yourself starchy white rice. Artificially re-add the missing nutrients (Iron, Magnesium, B1, B3) and you've got yourself nutritious white rice. Yum!

rom

Oregano_State wrote: »

What are people's thoughts on brown bread?

I like me some brown bread so I do.

I used to eat 2 slices of it every morning. This stuff was stuff was not a packet one but I got health loaf in the english market from the alternative bread company and froze it. When I stopped eating it. I was able to drop much more weight. I think used to slow down everything. I have lost about a stone since with it being the biggest change to my diet. This is just my personal experience.

menoscemo

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

Take brown rice. Polish each of the grains, removing the outer nutrients and you've got yourself starchy white rice. Artificially re-add the missing nutrients (Iron, Magnesium, B1, B3) and you've got yourself nutritious white rice. Yum!

Yet there are people who contradict that too:

http://nicktumminello.com/2012/04/brown-rice-no-better-than-white-rice/
http://butterbeliever.com/brown-rice-vs-white-rice-which-is-healthy/

Either way, rice is not 'unhealthy' as such no matter what form....

Oregano_State wrote: »

What are people's thoughts on brown bread?

I like me some brown bread so I do.

.
While it ought to be healthier than white (being less processed etc) if you are wheat intolerant it is likely to be worse for you than white for obvious reasons...

Krusty_Clown

menoscemo wrote: »

Yet there are people who contradict that too:

Contradict what? How white rice is made? You polish off the outer husk, in the process removing the nutrients mentioned, and you get white rice. There's no magic. As for the articles you linked - did you read them, or just search for them?

Oregano_State

menoscemo wrote: »

Yet there are people who contradict that too:

While it ought to be healthier than white (being less processed etc) if you are wheat intolerant it is likely to be worse for you than white for obvious reasons...

I'm not wheat intolerant anyway so I think I should be ok with my brown bread sandwiches.

I'm not particularly interested in losing weight, I've noticed that I have lost about 3-4kg since I started training in June, but I haven't been monitoring my weight closely at all.

shels4ever

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yCeFmn_e2c

menoscemo

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

Contradict what? How white rice is made? You polish off the outer husk, in the process removing the nutrients mentioned, and you get white rice. There's no magic. As for the articles you linked - did you read them, or just search for them?

Sorry yeah, no-one is contradicting how brown rice is made. I mean they are contradicting that it is 'healthier' than white.

I freely admitted to being open to correction earlier and hence yes I did google 'brown vs white rice' . However I did read the two articles before posting them.
The main argument is that the brown 'bran' contains a lot of anti nutirents which become more harmful if the rice is stored for a long time ebfore eating (8 months was quoted) where as white rice is good to eat for up to 10 years. This is why Asians have always preferred white rice as they can buy it in bulk and store it......I know I have some 2+year old brown rice in the cupboard so i will have to throw it out when I get home.

However I will agree that most articles agree brown rice is healthier if eaten fresh, but I don't think there is much wrong with white rice either...

wrstan

Fish n chips - the perfect balance of carbs, proteins and fats, you even get a healthy dose of Omega3 thrown in - (well technically it may not be the perfect balance, but it definitely tastes like it)

"I like to run, because I love to eat"

Outside

I used to get the baked potato option at work with various side's. I changed to having a salad, apple and yoghurt or nuts. I realised that I didn't feel anywhere near as "sluggish"/ tired as I did after having lots of potato or rice. So that's what I mostly eat for lunch these days for the very simple reason of how it makes me feel soon after. Maybe it's because I'm eating less for lunch but I don't seem to feel as hungry later on in the afternoon.

Has this got something to do with insulin levels in the body? Would it be correct in saying that lots of carbs causes insulin levels to change, causing a "sugar low" later on making you feel hungry?

wrstan

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

For my part, I don't understand what has changed.

I think the key change is Prof Tim Noakes advocating a low carb diet. He is clearly very influential in the running world, and lots of people (including me, and Rom by the looks of it ) have a lot of time for his views. An important fact that is often underplayed is that he only advocates a low carb diet for people who are carbohydrate intolerant. He does say that a very large proportion of people in the Western world are carb intolerant, and to complicate things further it is not easy to test whether you are carbohydrate intolerant or not. Noakes suggests that it is a form of pre-diabetes which may be triggered by an excess of sugar that has arisen by a huge increase in the amount of corn syrup in the Western diet.

It is interesting though that Noakes is a clear contrarian and loves to take on the conventional wisdom (especially where he feels that it is based on industry sponsored research):
- performance is limited by the central governor not by V02 max
- dangers of over hydration
- low carb diet vs. carbs, carbs and more carbs to fuel performance

Krusty_Clown

menoscemo wrote: »

Sorry yeah, no-one is contradicting how brown rice is made. I mean they are contradicting that it is 'healthier' than white.

I freely admitted to being open to correction earlier and hence yes I did google 'brown vs white rice' . However I did read the two articles before posting them.
The main argument is that the brown 'bran' contains a lot of anti nutirents which become more harmful if the rice is stored for a long time ebfore eating (8 months was quoted) where as white rice is good to eat for up to 10 years. This is why Asians have always preferred white rice as they can buy it in bulk and store it......I know I have some 2+year old brown rice in the cupboard so i will have to throw it out when I get home.

However I will agree that most articles agree brown rice is healthier if eaten fresh, but I don't think there is much wrong with white rice either...

Nobody said that white rice was unhealthy. I reckon the main reason that people choose white rice over brown rice is the fact that brown rice generally takes 30-40 minutes to cook, while most white rice is sold partially pre-cooked. The two links you provided were just a little off the wall though!

The synopsis of the first link (if you can get past Nick Tumminello's Performance University hybrid strength and conditioning - DVD Special Discount Pricing AND 5 FREE Killer Bonus Videos!) is that the risk of a stroke is the same, whether eating white or brown rice. Not sure exactly what that proves. The risk of developing tonsillitis is probably the same too, whether you eat brown or white rice!

The synopsis of the second link, is that bran and fibre are not good for you. Hmm... If that's the case, you had better start looking at other elements of your diet, beyond mere rice. The following are now out of bounds: Avocado, Beans, Broccoli, Brussels sprouts, Cabbage, Carrot, Chick Peas, Eggplant, Greens, Lima beans, Mushrooms, Potato with skin, Pumpkin, Peas, Peppers, Rhubarb, Spinach, Sweet Potatoes, Apples, Avocado, Bananas, Berries, Dried Fruits, Guava, Kiwi, Orange, Pears, Prunes.

Their second argument relates to Phytic acid (which is also present in white rice) and if you want to avoid this particular nugget, you'll have to give up: Linseed, Sesame seeds flour, Almonds, Brazilnuts, Coconut, Hazelnut, Peanut, Walnut, Corn, Oat, Oat Meal, Brown rice, Polished rice, Wheat, Wheat flour, Wheat germ, Whole wheat bread, Beans, pinto, Chickpeas, Lentils, Soybeans, Tofu, Soy beverage, Soy protein concentrate, New potato, Spinach.

I'll stick to my rice, thank you very much (both brown and white in equal proportion!).

RayCun

Noakes seems to make a habit of pushing back too far against conventional wisdom. Though to be fair, I haven't read any of his books, I'm just going on summaries in interviews and articles. He may be more balanced at book length.

I'm sure it's true that most runners could try harder in most races, but Central Governor Theory ends up sounding like determination is everything, fitness is irrelevant. Over-hydration in marathons is a serious problem, and lots of runners are drinking more than they need, but does that mean they should drink as little as Noakes suggests? And on carbs (again, I'm only going on interviews) he seems to switch too easily between talking about carbs, sugar, and processed food, and basically invent a syndrome called 'carb intolerance' that can't be tested for.