nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Diet Vs Safe cycling

BenEadir

Hi guys,

I injured my knee in April. Long story short is I had no aerobic activity of any sort for almost 6 months and put on 7kg's hitting 101kg which for a 46 year old who is just over 6 foot tall is about 15kg overweight so I've been on phase one of the Harcombe Diet for the last two weeks and have lost 7kg. It's a no carb, no caffine, no alcohol and no sugar diet. I basically eat bacon and eggs with salad for breakfast, a tuna salad for lunch and meat/chicken/fish with veg for dinner. I can eat as much as I want but prior to my 40km hilly spin around Enniskerry today I didn't realise the importance of having some stored carbs :eek:

I felt as weak as a mouse the whole way and never got going. Everything was a slog and I was ready to lie down and sleep by the time I got home.

Having now eaten (2 steaks, + steamed veg and a fresh spicy tomato and coriander salsa washed down with 2 litres of water) I feel much better. the legs are like jelly but other than that I'm tired but fine.

I just checked out fatigue on a bike and found this article about "The Bonk" - https://www.ride25.com/cycling-blog/bonking-birds-bees.

Now I'm not saying I had a bad case of the Bonk or even experienced The Bonk but now that I know what can happen if you don't have carbs on board when heading out for a spin I'm wondering what are the "best" carbs people take on board to prepare for a spin and how much do you need to take on? In order to stick with the diet as much as possible whilst still being able to get out for a safe spin I'd rather take on just enough carbs to fuel a 2-3 hour spin via natural sources such as a banana if possible rather than a plate of white pasta.

Any tips/suggestions?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

ford2600

jinkypolly wrote: »

What is being reset and detoxed and how does that work?

Your liver, kidneys and lungs do the detoxing February to December for the most part.

January is for the snakeoil merchants. Complete nonsense but it sells well after Christmas indulgence/guilt sets in

BenEadir

jinkypolly wrote: »

What is being reset and detoxed and how does that work?

Your eating habits are being reset and not consuming caffeine, alcohol, sugar or wheat gives you a detox effect.

I'm on phase one for 2.5 weeks and gone from 101.2kg to 92.9kg without much fuss. I'm enjoying what I eat and I'm eating as much as I want.

Ford2600 seems to think it's snakeoil nonsense but I've lost 8.3kg, given up sugar (for good as I'm no longer missing it at all), eating more veg and salads and I'm actually enjoying the change in food consumption and I'm sleeping really soundly.

I do miss having a few beers and I miss bread but once I hit my target I'll be able to re-introduce a few treats in a more controlled manner and I'll also be back eating carbs etc.

What this diet does for me is provide a structured framework I can live within. If that's nonsense then fair enough.

desertcircus

BenEadir wrote: »

Your eating habits are being reset and not consuming caffeine, alcohol, sugar or wheat gives you a detox effect.

I'm on phase one for 2.5 weeks and gone from 101.2kg to 92.9kg without much fuss. I'm enjoying what I eat and I'm eating as much as I want.

Ford2600 seems to think it's snakeoil nonsense but I've lost 8.3kg, given up sugar (for good as I'm no longer missing it at all), eating more veg and salads and I'm actually enjoying the change in food consumption and I'm sleeping really soundly.

I do miss having a few beers and I miss bread but once I hit my target I'll be able to re-introduce a few treats in a more controlled manner and I'll also be back eating carbs etc.

What this diet does for me is provide a structured framework I can live within. If that's nonsense then fair enough.

There is no such thing as a detox effect. It's utterly fictional. The diet you're following is producing wildly unsustainable and quite possibly medically dangerous weight loss. Medical professionals recommend shooting for weight loss of a pound a week and you're doing more than that in a day: that's not sensible or healthy weight loss by any metric.

And I hate to be the one to tell you this, but that weight will not stay off. Before long you'll be back to your original weight, if not heavier. The diet you're following will not produce sustainable weight loss.

ford2600

BenEadir wrote: »

Your eating habits are being reset and not consuming caffeine, alcohol, sugar or wheat gives you a detox effect.

I'm on phase one for 2.5 weeks and gone from 101.2kg to 92.9kg without much fuss. I'm enjoying what I eat and I'm eating as much as I want.

Ford2600 seems to think it's snakeoil nonsense but I've lost 8.3kg, given up sugar (for good as I'm no longer missing it at all), eating more veg and salads and I'm actually enjoying the change in food consumption and I'm sleeping really soundly.

I do miss having a few beers and I miss bread but once I hit my target I'll be able to re-introduce a few treats in a more controlled manner and I'll also be back eating carbs etc.

What this diet does for me is provide a structured framework I can live within. If that's nonsense then fair enough.

Detoxing/reseting is marketing nonsense. It is an easy sell, throw in some wish washy "superfood" nonsense and off you go.

I've no doubt you've lost 8.3kgs in 2.5 weeks; most overweight people who switch to low carb will do that. It's mainly fluid loss, carbs need more fluid than protein or fat.

It's fat you want to lose? 8.3kgs of fat is circa 64,000 cals or so. Do you think you've lost that, it's 3,500 calorie deficit a day btw(about what you'd burn on a 175km cycle)

Low carb may suit you, but educate yourself on how your body works, pitfalls of any diet choices etc or else you may get in trouble. Atkins etc has been around a long time, learn the hard way if you want but there is plenty good information out there.

I've never seen quick fixes work with diet. Educate yourself see what works for you, see how you feel rather than blindly following some "diet plan" and all the best.

After 18 months eating low carb(I didn't have weight to lose) my main guidline is just getting more plants into my diet. Typically my plate is 75% veg, with the protein/fat taking up a small section of plate but most of the calories.

Best of luck

Jawgap

BenEadir wrote: »

Phase one of The Harcombe Diet (quick summary here http://www.goodtoknow.co.uk/wellbeing/539591/the-harcombe-diet) is about hitting the detox reset button ......

That's your first problem - you cannot 'detox' your body.

www.senseaboutscience.org/pages/debunking-detox.html

BenEadir

desertcircus wrote: »

There is no such thing as a detox effect. It's utterly fictional. The diet you're following is producing wildly unsustainable and quite possibly medically dangerous weight loss. Medical professionals recommend shooting for weight loss of a pound a week and you're doing more than that in a day: that's not sensible or healthy weight loss by any metric.

And I hate to be the one to tell you this, but that weight will not stay off. Before long you'll be back to your original weight, if not heavier. The diet you're following will not produce sustainable weight loss.

I see a bet coming on

Lot's of people would disagree with you BTW, see http://www.goodtoknow.co.uk/wellbeing/539591/the-harcombe-diet

I chose this diet (not as an after Xmas guilt thing but last October BTW) on the recommendation of a 55 year old friend who is very fit and healthy and has been living by it for years. Yes the first phase is a bit dramatic but as you adjust to a sustainable day to day diet you maintain and in some cases continue to lose marginal amounts of weigh if you wish.

I guess my crystal ball isn't as effective as yours, I'll just have to wait and see what happens but I'll stay positive and try not to be knocked off course by the naysayers.

If you think you can you can and if you think you can't you can't.

Jawgap

It sounds like I'm about the same age as the OP (give or take a year).

I spent most of last year off the bike because of injury and illness (nothing major, just enough to stop me from going more than about 20km without spending time in agony afterwards).

Since before Christmas I've been steadily building back up and since the start of the year I've dumped 4.8 kg (as of this morning).

It didn't take faddy diets - just common sense.......porridge with dried fruit for brekkie, make my own lunches (so I know what's in them precisely), cut out most red meat and replaced it with some chicken and lots of fish, plenty of fruit and veg.......kept the Friday night 'takeaway' but now have sushi instead of a Chinese and have Sunday brunch as a treat.

Aside from building back up saddle time, I've been doing a lot of swimming, and long stints on the cross-trainer.

desertcircus

BenEadir wrote: »

I see a bet coming on

Lot's of people would disagree with you BTW, see http://www.goodtoknow.co.uk/wellbeing/539591/the-harcombe-diet

I chose this diet (not as an after Xmas guilt thing but last October BTW) on the recommendation of a 55 year old friend who is very fit and healthy and has been living by it for years. Yes the first phase is a bit dramatic but as you adjust to a sustainable day to day diet you maintain and in some cases continue to lose marginal amounts of weigh if you wish.

I guess my crystal ball isn't as effective as yours, I'll just have to wait and see what happens but I'll stay positive and try not to be knocked off course by the naysayers.

If you think you can you can and if you think you can't you can't.

What would a dietician or medical professional disagree with me on? You've clearly decided this diet is for you and that you're not going to be "knocked off course by the naysayers", but you asked about how the diet you're on impacts on your ability to cycle 40 kilometres. Unsurprisingly, swearing off all carbohydrates and losing a heap of fluid has pretty terrible effects on your ability to exercise.

Is there a shred of data on the number of people who've tried this diet in total as against the number who've managed sustained weight loss on it? Without hard data like that, all we can realistically assess is that this diet is the same as all the others and 90+% of people using it will put the weight back on.

Lastly: the fact that someone you know is doing well on a given diet tells you virtually nothing about whether it'll work for you. I lost ten kilos between August and November last year, and kept it off over Christmas, but my diet is abysmal: the weight loss and reduced resting heart rate are the result of a big upswing in the amount of training I do.

You don't need a gimmicky nonsense diet to lose weight: just watch your portion sizes, eat less garbage and exercise more than you did.

desertcircus

Also: if a bet is made and you successfully keep the weight off, I'm starting the Gambler's Weight Loss Plan.

BenEadir

desertcircus wrote: »

Unsurprisingly, swearing off all carbohydrates and losing a heap of fluid has pretty terrible effects on your ability to exercise.

It's funny that the "no carbs" bit, which is a temporary phase lasting between 5 days and 3 weeks (I'm going for the 3 weeks) is what everyone seems to be focused on rather than the (hopefully) years of healthier eating (including carbs) the diet promotes post the initial "no carbs" phase.

I started this thread as I didn't appreciate the the effect no carbs would have on me when out for a spin. I've learned a lot and won't be going for a spin again without having had some carbs the previous day and a good brekkie of porridge and eggs beforehand with a banana in my jersey in case I need it.

This time next week the "no carbs" phase will be over and I'll be back to a more balanced diet sans sugar and sans 90% of the bread I used to eat. If that's a gimmick or nonsense to some who have a better understanding of nutrition than I fair enough but for me the results are both real and impressive and most important of all sustainable.

Hi Ho

Yes, I think 'detox' is an unfortunate term and I'd be inclined to run away from anything with that in the description too.

'Dependency' might be a better term, but even that isn't too good.

For example, we can have a dependency on 'caffeine' and 'sugars' (of the highly-refined type) and 'alcohol'. Going off those probably isn't 'detox', but it can leave people feeling crappy until the body adjusts ('detoxes'!!??)

What the 'diet' is giving him is better food with the structure he says he needs, so there seems to be noting wrong with either of those, as long as he supplements a little with good quality carbs when needed for the bike.
The rate of weight loss does seem a bit excessive though.

Hi Ho

BenEadir wrote: »

... I've learned a lot and won't be going for a spin again without having had some carbs the previous day and a good brekkie of porridge and eggs beforehand ....

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater ... easy rides of up to two hours with no breakfast can be got used to pretty quickly, but not every day of course, and only for the easy rides.

BenEadir

Hi Ho wrote: »

Yes, I think 'detox' is an unfortunate term and I'd be inclined to run away from anything with that in the description too.

'Dependency' might be a better term, but even that isn't too good.

For example, we can have a dependency on 'caffeine' and 'sugars' (of the highly-refined type) and 'alcohol'. Going off those probably isn't 'detox', but it can leave people feeling crappy until the body adjusts ('detoxes'!!??)

I don't disagree, I'm probably using the term "detox" a bit flippantly. Phase one is just about cutting out all the crap and carbs for between 5 days and 3 weeks. Once your body gets used to not having loads of sugar, caffine, alcohol, white flour, bad carbs etc I describe as a detox which I guess is incorrect but there is definitely some sort of cleansing going on or at least your body is getting a bit of a break from having to process so much rubbish out of the system.

Hi Ho wrote: »

The rate of weight loss does seem a bit excessive though.

And not something which will continue much longer. I'd like to get to 90kg but I've committed to a max of 3 weeks on the "no carbs" phase which will be pulled back a couple of days as I want to go on a long hard (for me) spin on Saturday so I'll start eating spuds on Friday and have a porridge and egg breakfast on Saturday to make sure I have some reservoir of carbs for the spin.

route66

Jawgap wrote: »

It sounds like I'm about the same age as the OP (give or take a year).

I spent most of last year off the bike because of injury and illness (nothing major, just enough to stop me from going more than about 20km without spending time in agony afterwards).

Since before Christmas I've been steadily building back up and since the start of the year I've dumped 4.8 kg (as of this morning).

It didn't take faddy diets - just common sense.......porridge with dried fruit for brekkie, make my own lunches (so I know what's in them precisely), cut out most red meat and replaced it with some chicken and lots of fish, plenty of fruit and veg.......kept the Friday night 'takeaway' but now have sushi instead of a Chinese and have Sunday brunch as a treat.

Aside from building back up saddle time, I've been doing a lot of swimming, and long stints on the cross-trainer.

There are many reasons why people won't follow Jawgap’s diet:

There are no cool words or phrases to describe it: "Common sense" V's "detox reset button" - no contest
The scientific approach lets the side down because it doesn't allow for rapid, sustainable weight loss (unless you opt for amputation)
Changing your lifestyle is boring whereas "keep carbs and protein separated" sounds like a very interesting idea
The common sense approach - the one that works - is too difficult

Unfortunately, the only way to lose weight properly involves pain, time and changed attitudes. But could you make any money out of that? Can you see it:

The "Eat less and exercise more diet" is taking the world by storm!

The 3 phases in my diet would be are:

Sort yourself out
Get used to it
Continue doing it

It worked for me when I stopped smoking. The problem with food is that you have to keep eating and I find regulation - rather than elimination - really difficult.

harringtonp

Surprised at the negativity of comments about the OP's diet and the sudden weight loss.

I read the diet plan and it seemed sensible enough to me, it may be a copy of something else, there may be several other similar diets out there, but at the end of the day it is not a starvation diet, has sounds basic principles (from the bit of reading I've done elsewhere) and it is at least a plan. Like training on a bike, almost any plan is way better than no plan.

I'd imagine it is far healthier than what the OP was eating/drinking before and so what if there are no carbs for a short while and he has to adjust exercise accordingly. CAVEMAN didn't have access to all different sorts of food at the same time so I don't see how it is that unhealthy.

At 101kg my primary aim would be to lose weight.. and keep it off, I wouldn't be too concerned about training until the kgs were more manageable.

As regards previous people on diets putting weight back on again, I suspect that is a lot to do with motivation. If somebody is big, loses weight, gets into cycling and gets the buzz from it, chances are they'll be motivated to keep it off and I know quite a few Mamils who have done that.

Jawgap

Neolithic people didn't live long enough to develop diet related diseases........

12 sprocket

Instead of the quick fix approach a more moderate and patient approach could yield the same results with less physical and psychological strain...

what the weight loss industry is worth is very interesting http://www.marketsandmarkets.com/PressReleases/global-market-for-weight-loss-worth-$726-billion-by-2014.asp

BenEadir

12 sprocket wrote: »

what the weight loss industry is worth is very interesting http://www.marketsandmarkets.com/PressReleases/global-market-for-weight-loss-worth-$726-billion-by-2014.asp

I would refer to that as the "obesity industry" rather than the weight loss industry. Where there is demand (whether justified by medical advice or modern day size zero type peer pressure) there will always be a supply of different solutions offered. If there was no obesity in the first place there would be no weight loss industry.

Anyway, having just completed a Spin class during my lunch hour I'm tucking into a tuna salad. Who said losing weight couldn't be fun?

rtmie

BenEadir wrote: »

Anyway, having just completed a Spin class during my lunch hour I'm tucking into a tuna salad. Who said losing weight couldn't be fun?

Do you mind me asking where you did the spinning class, if it was city centre. I'd be interested in PAYG spin a couple of lunchtimes a week

Anyone used these or have an opinion?

Jawgap

rtmie wrote: »

Do you mind me asking where you did the spinning class, if it was city centre. I'd be interested in PAYG spin a couple of lunchtimes a week

Anyone used these or have an opinion?

The gym at Trinity has spinning classes (early morning, lunchtime and evening) and non-members are allowed participate. Think it's about a tenner per session.

BenEadir

rtmie wrote: »

Do you mind me asking where you did the spinning class, if it was city centre.

Not city centre I'm afraid, Westwood Leopardstown.

desertcircus

It might be a bit out of your way, but Swan in Rathmines charges 6.50 for spinning classes. Bikes are pretty new, with watt meters and SPD pedals.

harringtonp

Actually I for one would be interested if the OP kept us up to date on progress with for example a weekly report on weight, phase of diet he is in and how training is.

BenEadir

harringtonp wrote: »

Actually I for one would be interested if the OP kept us up to date on progress with for example a weekly report on weight, phase of diet he is in and how training is.

Happy to give it a go Padraig,

Here's my Phase One weight loss to date:

My long term target weight is 85kg. This is the recommended weight to a) manage my blood pressure and b) keep as little weight as possible going through my injured knee which I need to do to put off the inevitable knee replacement for as many years as possible.

So far I've lost just over 9kg in just less than 3 weeks. I've 4 more days to go in Phase One so hope to hit the 10KG mark by Monday morning.

After that the challenge (which I fully recognise) will be to stabilise my weight and continue a long slow loss until I hit 85kg. In addition to the diet I've upped my exercise regime (partly as a result of having more energy carrying less weight) and partly because I have a very strict regime of exercises and weights to do to build up the strength in my left leg (particularly my glutes) so the pain I have in my knee when walking will be minimised and I can avoid knee replacement surgery.

I'm hoping a combination of a more sustainable diet (with carbs) in Phase Two and Three along with increased exercise will enable me to settle into a more sustainable and healthier lifestyle. I'll still have a few beers and the odd sausage but overall I'm committed to a much more natural i.e. non processed diet with sugar and white flour totally cut out.

I guess time will tell. I may well hit a wall and just throw the towel in but I'm going to give it a good shot as the alternative is I turn into a fat middle aged man with no energy, a beer gut and either a permanent limp or an artificial knee. There's motivation for ya!!

BTW, this might help explain the way this diet works after the first "detox" (I know I know!!) phase:-

desertcircus

What's the scientific basis for segregating carbs and fats?

BenEadir

desertcircus wrote: »

What's the scientific basis for segregating carbs and fats?

There you go - http://bit.ly/1wpUvrb

If the info on the Livestrong website or carbsanity blogspot isn't helpful perhaps the question should be:-

"What's the scientific basis for combining carbs and fats?

Leroy42

BenEadir wrote: »

Here's my Phase One weight loss to date:

Not going to get into the debate here as I really don't have sufficient real knowledge to be able to play a part, but I know what works for me.

Anyway, whatever the pros and cons of the program you are on

that is some serious results you are getting a big well done to you. Almost 10kgs in 3 weeks in great going.

Keep it up

Jawgap

Leroy42 wrote: »

.........

Not going to get into the debate here as I really don't have sufficient real knowledge to be able to play a part, but I know what works for me.

Anyway, whatever the pros and cons of the program you are on

that is some serious results you are getting a big well done to you. Almost 10kgs in 3 weeks in great going.

Keep it up

Almost 10% weight loss in 3 weeks?

Sincerest success in your endeavours OP but I'd suggest looking at your rate of loss and giving some consideration as to whether it's a healthy rate - even if it will slow in the next few weeks.

ford2600

Jawgap wrote: »

Almost 10% weight loss in 3 weeks?

Sincerest success in your endeavours OP but I'd suggest looking at your rate of loss and giving some consideration as to whether it's a healthy rate - even if it will slow in the next few weeks.

There will be significant fluid loss due to restricting carbohydrate.

OP seems to miss that point

mickydcork

My approach to weight loss - take in less calories than you use during the week.

As for nutrition - everything in moderation.

Works for me.