|
There's a bit of misconceptions about metabolic pathways especially "the wall" in exercise.
Basically, the body runs aerobically almost all the time unless it has to. That means the primary energy source for most of the body (aside from ingested carbohydrates) is mobilizing fatty acids for fuel since they can produce the most energy. Hence, why triglycerides are in our blood lipid profiles. Glucose is a primary source of energy (but not the only) for the brain. The body partitions carbs in our diets as fuel if it can, but in the meantime fatty acids are primarily what the body runs on.
When you start to run and get up near your anaerobic threshold your body releases catecholamines like adrenaline, cortisol, growth hormone, etc. to help mobilize both fatty acids from fat stores, and glucose from the liver (as well as some other metabolic processes which will not be named).
Essentially what happens is that the body increases its fat burning and glucose burning activities up until anaerobic threshold. The primary energy source for your body is still fat, but glucose is providing some of the fuel.
Once you surpass anaerobic threshold (which typically does not occur during a long distance race until very far into it a sprint to the end), the body surpresses fat burning slightly and starts to rely on more intramuscular glycogen stores for energy.
So essentially what happens when you run into the wall in a marathon is the glucose stores from intramuscular stores are burned out. The liver can still process glycogen through gluconeogenesis and the cori cycle albeit very slowly. The body is primarily running on the fat that it was continuously burning beforehand, but the "drop" in energy comes from that decrease in glucose.
Compared to your previous pace you can still run the majority of it but it feels like you're out of energy et al. This means that fat is obviously the primary energy source still, except your body doesn't like having only one energy source to run on which shows up in your fatigue.
So basically fat for energy = all the time. It's a misconception that it just kicks in when you hit the wall. The real scenario is that you're being fueled by fat and glucose the whole time... but when you lose the glucose you're just being fueled by fat. So there is a decrease in performance and tiredness.
|
On August 10 2011 06:00 ShaLLoW[baY] wrote:Zyzz died.  RIP. article here
/fit lost their king still mirin!
|
On August 10 2011 06:05 Necosarius wrote:/fit lost their king still mirin!
I think it's odd how I'm legitimately grieving the death of an internet troll I never met, but fuuuuuck, it was hard not to be inspired/mirin'
|
Cardiac arrest at 22... he claimed he was natural, didn't he?
RIP
|
Nope, he was pretty open about riding the bike. Still, from what I know, he got checkups regularly, and would've been quite aware of any pre-existing heart condition he had, so I don't think that's why.. either way, sucks. Still hoping it's just a really distasteful troll :<
edit:@travis below, yeah that's him. _Sy6YxhZZSk, around 3.30 in
|
On August 10 2011 06:07 ShaLLoW[baY] wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2011 06:05 Necosarius wrote:On August 10 2011 06:00 ShaLLoW[baY] wrote:Zyzz died. RIP. article here /fit lost their king still mirin! I think it's odd how I'm legitimately grieving the death of an internet troll I never met, but fuuuuuck, it was hard not to be inspired/mirin'
wait was he the guy who made that hilarious video i watched where he was in an elevator and says "u mad?" to some old lady who was laughing at him
I think he also threw out a "come at me bro" ?
|
|
|
Squat: 185kg 5-5-5-3-5
Press: 76kg 5-5-5-5-6
Deadlift: 195kg x 5 (first time barefoot, awesome)
DB Reverse Flies: 6kg 15-15 (I don't even know why...)
that was a pretty important workout. I have had pretty big confidence-issues during squatting the last week. On the fourth set I nearly lost balance during the 3rd rep and therefore I stopped. That I managed to get 5reps in for the next set feels very good.
Left OHP the same as last week, since I couldn't train it properly because of a pulled muscle, those 5 sets were pretty easy.
Last week deadlifting, I did an inspring 197,5kgx0, which I carrefully avoided positng. The other day I read that in weightlifting shoes with eleveted heels you give up some initial pulling power but have a stronger lockout. And that was quite an eye-opener, because that was exactly what it felt like the weeks before. So today I tried barefoot and loved it. I also realized that since a couple of weeks I did not use any explosive power to get the bar off the floor, so today I combined an explosive start with barefoot lifting, and the result was a very convincing set of 5 at 195kg.
Also, if I want to continue doing Texas Method, I feel I need to give myself at least two days of rest per week. I guess I will just do some long walks on those days, which hopefully will suppress my current exercise addiction (one of the better addictions out there, I must say).
|
On August 10 2011 06:05 Necosarius wrote:/fit lost their king still mirin!
How can you even 'mire when Zyzz is dead?
On August 10 2011 07:17 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2011 06:07 ShaLLoW[baY] wrote:On August 10 2011 06:05 Necosarius wrote:On August 10 2011 06:00 ShaLLoW[baY] wrote:Zyzz died. RIP. article here /fit lost their king still mirin! I think it's odd how I'm legitimately grieving the death of an internet troll I never met, but fuuuuuck, it was hard not to be inspired/mirin' wait was he the guy who made that hilarious video i watched where he was in an elevator and says "u mad?" to some old lady who was laughing at him I think he also threw out a "come at me bro" ?
Yeah that's him. There's a thread about it in general.
|
On August 10 2011 06:02 eshlow wrote:
So basically fat for energy = all the time. It's a misconception that it just kicks in when you hit the wall. The real scenario is that you're being fueled by fat and glucose the whole time... but when you lose the glucose you're just being fueled by fat. So there is a decrease in performance and tiredness.
You sound like you know what you're talking about, so I'll take your word for it. (A great way to vet expertise, I know.) Interesting that "the Wall" might not actually decrease your performance. Still, my target pace will be tough enough on its own. I'll still stick to my race plan, I think.
|
|
|
On August 10 2011 07:35 Bonham wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2011 06:02 eshlow wrote:
So basically fat for energy = all the time. It's a misconception that it just kicks in when you hit the wall. The real scenario is that you're being fueled by fat and glucose the whole time... but when you lose the glucose you're just being fueled by fat. So there is a decrease in performance and tiredness. You sound like you know what you're talking about, so I'll take your word for it. (A great way to vet expertise, I know.) Interesting that "the Wall" might not actually decrease your performance. Still, my target pace will be tough enough on its own. I'll still stick to my race plan, I think.
From reading both your descriptions, there isn't much difference in how you might plan around them though, is there? You decided that you would take in carbohydrates during the race so that you can put off "switching" to fat - all Eshlow is saying is that you were using fat the whole time, just alongside glucose, which you still ran out of. It's the same effect, and I would think it has the same answer?
|
On August 10 2011 07:41 phyre112 wrote:
From reading both your descriptions, there isn't much difference in how you might plan around them though, is there? You decided that you would take in carbohydrates during the race so that you can put off "switching" to fat - all Eshlow is saying is that you were using fat the whole time, just alongside glucose, which you still ran out of. It's the same effect, and I would think it has the same answer?
Right; I just didn't realize I was using fat the whole time. Unless I'm reading Eshlow's post entirely wrong, running out of glycogen doesn't necessarily lead to an automatic decrease in performance; it just feels horrible. I find the idea that you could actually go through "the Wall" without hurting your race time fascinating, but there's no way in hell I'd want to try it on race day.
EDIT: Ok, it turns out I have no idea what I'm talking about. Point is, I'm eatin' me some food during the race.
I don't mean to undermine your motivation, but how is abusing steroids to look pretty and dying at 22 remotely inspiring?
|
On August 10 2011 07:35 Bonham wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2011 06:02 eshlow wrote:
So basically fat for energy = all the time. It's a misconception that it just kicks in when you hit the wall. The real scenario is that you're being fueled by fat and glucose the whole time... but when you lose the glucose you're just being fueled by fat. So there is a decrease in performance and tiredness. You sound like you know what you're talking about, so I'll take your word for it. (A great way to vet expertise, I know.) Interesting that "the Wall" might not actually decrease your performance. Still, my target pace will be tough enough on its own. I'll still stick to my race plan, I think.
Uhh, you should continue with your plan.
What happens is 100% of energy fuel = fat +glucose during aerobic race pace
When you hit the wall the glucose is eliminated so you're only running on fat still which is why you see a decrease in performance.
There is no magical switch from glucose -> fat. It's just fat + glucose -> fat only which is why you can still operate at a decent pace but feel terrible and performance drops a bit.
It's just educational on how energy systems work.
Obviously, you want to avoid from burning only fat so you want to take in simple sugars during the race so you can continue to burn fat + glucose to keep your running pace up
It actually IS possible to eliminate the wall completely... as you may know the elite kenyan/ethiopian runners pretty much speed up in the last couple miles of the marathon and don't hit a wall at all.
But you have to train massively for that over long periods of time where you can up your aerobic sustained vo2max to close to 90%.
In untrained people vo2max for anaerobic threshold is typically around 60%.
|
On August 10 2011 07:51 Bonham wrote:I don't mean to undermine your motivation, but how is abusing steroids to look pretty and dying at 22 remotely inspiring?
I think it's more about starting at nothing, setting a goal for yourself, and achieving it. Achieving it HOW you want to, WHEN you want to, and not giving one thought to what anyone else says about it. Also, Being whoever the fuck you want (you mirin bro?) and doing things you love to, no matter the opinions of society.
|
why is everyone blaming steroids? I dont remember ever hearing of a steroid related death ever...
|
Well steroids are quite bad for your heart. They might not cause the death directly still, not good.
Sad day, RIP Zyzz. He always was an inspiration for me. One of the reasons i started lifting seriously.
Good Night Sweet Prince
|
On August 10 2011 08:35 AoN.DimSum wrote:
why is everyone blaming steroids? I dont remember ever hearing of a steroid related death ever...
Quick google search tells me that they increase risk of heart failure. If you take a known steroid user, add in what is being claimed as an "unknown pre existing condition" then the assumption is that it's the steroids that aggravated the condition, not just that the condition killed him.
I'll second the thought though, I've never heard of a death related to non-reckless steroid use.
|
I believe, if a 22 year old heavy steroid user dies from heart failure, it is pretty naive to assume that it had nothing to do with it. Who knows what exactly he was taking.
|
What likely happened was:
Sauna -> dehydration -> cardiac arrhythmia(s) like atrial fibrillation -> blood clot formed -> MI
Steroid and potentially other drug use probably contributed too... steroids probably to some form of cardiomyopathy involving left ventricle
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
