Performance levels are poor when exercising and following the Atkins diet - why?
 

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/lifea...ning%20Standard

Ask the experts
By Pete Williams, Metro
13 April 2004
Pete Williams, strength and conditioning expert and founder of the exclusive Health Dept, London. (Tel: 020 7486 3386. www.healthdept.co.uk)...

Performance levels are poor when exercising and following the Atkins diet - why?

Lifting weights or training aerobically at moderate to high intensity levels, our primary source of energy is from carbohydrates. The Atkins diet minimises carbohydrate levels, limiting supplies of our necessary body fuel and reducing the body's ability to generate power output. Hence, performance levels appear poor. When carbohydrate levels are low, your body looks for alternative energy sources. Fats are not readily available as a fuel at higher intensities, so the body turns to protein. Using this for energy can result in loss of muscle tissue and reduced metabolic rate. This means you can actually end up putting fat on.

Atkins and hard training are a worrying combination for your health. You are introducing two methods of dramatically increasing the body's acidity levels. This has quite an effect on bone loss, as the body has to release calcium to neutralise the acidity. This is one of the quickest ways to osteoporosis. My advice is to drop the diet.

Whatever! More from "experts" who don't know what they're talking about.

Once again, no evidence, just misguided opinion.

Opinion, opinion, opinion!

Personally, I have found that I now have the energy to exercise and I can perform for more than 20 minutes. :D

I've had no problem lifting weights for an hour, 3 times per week. Those are some awfully hard fat deposits I've developed. :p

I strongly disagree with the original poster. I workout for 20 hours a week (15 cardio and 5 resistence training) mostly high intensity and I am in the best shape of my life after 5 years of ultra-low-carbing. I do 10 century rides each spring and fly by the carb-junkies. The body's main exercise fuel source is fat, that's why we store it so readily. The glucose-burning function (carb-burning) is an emergency "Fight or Flight" response to be used for rare, short bursts of energy. That's why we store so little glycogen in our liver and muscles, it's only our emergency reserve. Most Americans have become soooo out of shape that the only way they can do moderate exercise is by turning to these emergency reserves. Fat-burning is a much more effective and provides much more endurance. Take Stu Mittleman, the low-carb endurance athelete you did a marathon from San Diego to New York in just 56 days, while low-carbing!
JUST SAY NO TO CARBS! and get your body in better shape!

loCarbJ -

We often post articles here that we DISAGREE with in order to get comments and reviews from other members. I rather doubt the poster (MyJourney) agrees with much of that article herself.

Good one! :lol: :lol:

Quote by Low CarbJ: "The glucose-burning function (carb-burning) is an emergency "Fight or Flight" response to be used for rare, short bursts of energy. That's why we store so little glycogen in our liver and muscles, it's only our emergency reserve."

Thats a good point.

I disagree with the article too :-) I just posted it here for discussion. I post both positive and negative

Not that I agree with the article entirely, but I will say that some types of exercise *are* difficult for many people on very low carb levels. Sprinters (which includes HIIT cardio) and lifters are intentionally working their bodies in that 'fight or flight' zone. While some people are able to keep to such a regimen on very low carbs, many others need to go to the 40-100 range. Even Stu Mittleman says that to stay within the fat burning zone, you need to *slow down*, essentially admitting that certain levels of performance require carbs. This doesn't mean one type of performance is essentially superior to the other, but on the other hand, it also doens't mean one type is esssentially less valuable than the other, either. Stu likes to run long distances at a relatively even clip. Cool. Lifters and sprinters like to do something else, and to do that, they often need a slightly different diet. Also cool.

All I'm saying here is be careful not to think too harshly about those who need a few more carbs to do what they like to do. :)

Cheers,

Friday

I find that the only thing that limits what excerises I can do in the gym is my bum. The seats on the machine have no padding on them and after a while it gets uncomfortable. I know I look good with the weight gone, but the padding would be comfortable.

:(

Well, let's face it - how many of us had the "energy" to excersize when we were fat and unhealthy?. I know I didn't, adn I am much more active and healthy now on "low carb" levels!

My experience with my own workout regimen and Ironman marathoners has convinced me that most people do not exercise enough to burn off the carbs they are ingesting.

If you can burn them off, go to it! I don't have time for an intensive routine, like the bicycle racers in the Tour de France, who can burn off a pile of donuts in one day. Bashing low carb diets in this context is ridiculous.

Hmm, you mean if I ride in the Tour de France, I can eat donuts??!! How odd... I actually don't like donuts anymore. :) No attraction. Zero. Zip. Nada. :D Gotta love that. There were times in my life where I'd have sold blood until I was transparent as long as they paid in donuts.

Cheers,

Friday