UKC

Some of you may remember this topic:

http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=638531&v=1#x8277289

Well, today I achieved the goal of the whole exercise, which was to climb my first French 7a route outdoors without ripping any tendon pulleys (or incurring any other injuries). My previous best was 6c, in 2008.

The chosen route was Raw Deal in Wave sector at Cheddar Gorge. Worked the route yesterday, pretty successfully, and fell off the top move. Got back on it today and did it third try.

Feels like it's been a long time coming and a lot of holistic effort, not just in losing weight loss.

To say I am psyched would be a massive understatement!!! Read more here:

https://wordpress.com/post/ketogenicdiary.wordpress.com/212

In reply to trailertrash:

Great job and interesting that a keto diet helped you reach your goal.

Seems like keto is becoming really popular amongst climbers at the moment. I know more and more people who are on ketogenic diets.

In reply to trailertrash:

BTW I don't know if you realize it but your blog requires a login and password just to view it. Not a good way to attract visitors.

In reply to stp:
In my excitement I posted the link to the admin page, sorry...

https://ketogenicdiary.wordpress.com/

In reply to trailertrash:

Nice blog and well done on the 7a!

I've been on a keto diet as well. Not lost as much as you - only about 5kg - but the weight loss really helps with the climbing. I redpointed my first 7b+ and I'm second in my local bouldering league.

I've started running recently and I'm struggling a bit with that and the diet. I don't feel very fat adapted, possibly because every few weeks I cave and eat a pizza or similar, so I just feel really bonked when I run. I thought I might try a targeted diet so I can eat some carbs before a run and see how that goes. Or it might just be that I'm crap at running and that's why I feel so tired!!

In reply to trailertrash:

Well done. Raw deal is a great climb, and regardless how soft everyone says it is, it doesn't climb itself. And clipping the lower off is desperate. Nice one

In reply to zimpara:


Nice backhanded compliment, there.

In reply to climbingpixie:

I also find running hard, as if the warmup takes longer, but if I push through it's actually easier than before. Just me...

In reply to climbingpixie:

A whole pizza will probably mess you up, yes. I find I can go to 100g of carbs once a fortnight or 75g once a week and remain fat-adapted. 100g and I have a bad day the next day.

In reply to trailertrash:

Well done on the weight loss and the 7a tick.

You said when you started that your fat percentage was 22% of 80kg = 17.6kg.

You are now 70kg but you haven't said what your current fat % is - ie is all the weight loss from fat loss ?

In reply to ukb shark:

Thanks very much :O)

I don't have fat % reading scales anymore, and I'm not convinced of the accuracy of the home ones anyway. The ones I has were all over the place, all the time. I know I have gained upper body muscle mass, but overall: I just couldn't tell you, I'm sorry. If I come across some fat % scales I'll let you know. It would be interesting, for sure. Based on past experience I would say I'm now about 9-10%, but it's a guess. Skin fold test on suprailiac fat pad is 12mm.

That gives me an idea...I've got some vernier callipers in the cupboard. I'll just do a run of skin fold tests.

Chest 4mm
Midaxilliary 4m
Suprailiac 11mm
Abdominal 12mm
Thigh 7mm
Tricep 6.5mm
Subscapular 8mm

http://www.free-online-calculator-use.com/skin-fold-test.html

9.43%. How about that. 6.7kg of fat. So I probably lost ~11kg of fat and gained about 1.5kg of muscle.

In reply to trailertrash:
Net loss of 10.5 kg is a great achievement.

Now for the long-term learning for all of us, how about in one year -- 25 July 2017 -- again post your current body weight and body fat.

Thanks.

In reply to trailertrash:

That's an impressive outcome. I think my scales are reasonably consistent and accurate at measuring fat. I've had good results too on a less strict very low carb diet.

Are you going to permanently stick with it to maintain this body comp / mass?

In reply to trailertrash:

Hi trailertrash,

Thanks for your blog which I've found really useful. If you have a minute, can you explain what you mean by 'fat adapted'? Is this different to simply being in ketosis? If yes, how do you tell if you're fat adapted or not?

Congratulations on achieving your 7a goal.

Cheers,

Gareth

In reply to ukb shark:

I am not sure. I need to do further research on the long term health consequences.

In reply to gw3285:
Hi Gareth

Thanks very much.

Yes that's what 'fat-adapted' means.

I used to use Ketostix, commercially available urine test strips. They give you an idea of the concentration of ketosis by-products in your urine. Actually they tell you if you are excreting ketones. Technically if you are excreting ketones you are probably eating too much fat, as you should be eating the right amount to feed yourself and no more, so no spare ketones excreted in your urine. Or that's how I understand it.

Anyway, they are useful for getting to grips with it all, but after a while you get used to telling where you are at without them: general feeling, urine odour, and frankly, if you're sticking to the macronutrient ratios, your body doesn't have much choice but to be in ketosis....

In reply to kenr:

What long term learning do you hope to derive from this kenr?

In reply to trailertrash:

Whether people really stick to such diets?

In reply to ukb shark:


Wow. To think you were mocking me back in 2008 ish for promoting higher-fat/lower carb, and ketogenic diets! I recall the phrase 'paradigm changing genius' or some such.....

In reply to Shani:



If I recall correctly it was the Paleolithic / Paleo Diet you were hawking at the time. The notion that a diet was based on what Caveman were supposed to have eaten is still ludicrous in my book.

As it happens it turned out to be a right sort of formula for the wrong sorts of reasons. Consequently I'm not having you re-badging the Paleo Diet so you can take full credit.

In reply to trailertrash:



Here's an interesting start for you - New Scientist magazine recently published a couple of articles with some evidence that this sort of diet can reverse diabetes!

www.newscientist.com/article/mg23030772-000-unhealthy-advice/
www.newscientist.com/article/mg23030771-600-carb-your-enthusiasm-are-bread-pasta-and-spuds-making-you-fat/

In reply to ukb shark:

Ah yes. Here we are.

http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=321646&v=1#x4746386

"Paleo" is/was just a heuristic for the kinds of food to aim for. I don't think I ever claimed we could know what a caveman would eat (geography and seasonality means there could never be a single 'paleo' diet and also paleo isn't necessarily low carb).

But higher fat, lower carb, ketosis etc... were all principles I was talking about because they worked for me a decade ago (and still do).

The dietary principles you now espouse show a significant departure from your Stow advice however you badge it.

In reply to Shani:

Fair point. I'll eat my words - they are low cal.

You are a paradigm shifter of great foresight.

In reply to ukb shark:


Well, I've also moved on from what was admittedly a bit of a low-carb fixture and am happy to acknowledge as such.

Perhaps a bit of low carb humbled crumble for us both to digest here?

Targeted Ketogenic Diets seem to give the best of all worlds but formal research is lagging on this one so you'll have to trust my paradigm shifting foresight.

Hope your climbing is going well.
C.

In reply to trailertrash:

Low carb/high protein may be effective for short term weight loss - but what about your long-term health and actual enjoyment of food. I've found restricting animal protein and simply reducing portion sizes to be effective for me. Listening to some podcast of Neil Gresham saying that he has bacon, eggs and spinach for breakfast made me cringe - unappetising imo and surely unhealthy.

Excerpt from "Putting the Balance Back in Diet", Cell 161, March 26, 2015:

In a systematic review of human dietary studies (Pedersen et al., 2013), it was concluded that longterm, high-protein, low-carbohydrate diets and increased mortality are associated.
In addition, long-term, high-protein, high-fat and low-carbohydrate diets increased the risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Consistent with this notion, Fung and colleagues (Fung et al., 2010) reported that high-protein, low-carbohydrate diets were associated with increased mortality over 20–26 years in the Nurses’ Health Study and the Health Professionals’ Follow-up Study. Similar results linking low-carbohydrate, high protein diets with increased mortality and/or cardiovascular disease have been reported in the Swedish Women’s Health and Lifestyle cohort (Lagiou et al., 2012; Lagiou et al., 2007) and the Greek cohort of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (Trichopoulou et al., 2007). These studies have specifically reported the balance of two macronutrients, protein and carbohydrate, and consistently indicate that lowcarbohydrate,
high-protein diets increase mortality. Such conclusions are consistent with results in animals where the balance of macronutrients, rather than the intake amount of either, is a key determinant
of lifespan, and that diets with high carbohydrate and low-protein were associated with increased lifespan and improved cardiometabolic outcomes in late life (Lee et al., 2008; Solon-Biet
et al., 2014). These conclusions are indirectly supported by associations between increased mortality and low-carbohydrate diets in humans (Noto et al., 2013) and a recent study showing increased
mortality and cancer on high-protein diets (Levine et al., 2014).

In reply to Paulos:

You find bacon & eggs unappetizing for breakfast? Really?

There is a large body evidence showing that ketosis is fine as is a high(er) protein diet (not at the exclusion of other macros). Animal models are limited in application to human physiology.

I'm not really interested in a battle of google fu save to say that bread & particularly cereals for breakfast are a VERY modern and western-centric creation.

In reply to Paulos:

Ketogenic diets are not high protein, protein intake must be kept moderate. Protein can be metabolised into glucose by the liver preventing ketosis and fat adaption - thusly not achieving the insulin inhibiting effect that a ketogenic diet brings which in fact prevents (or even puts into remission) type 2 diabetes.

In reply to Nick Harvey:

I think it is stretching it to say a keto diet isn't high protein. You are right that a strict keto diet should fall in a band. Following the keto calculator here http://keto-calculator.ankerl.com/ my consumption should be about 112g of protein a day. That strikes me as high

In reply to ukb shark: I guess its arguing semantics - I'd say that's moderate, and is only what you'd be recommended to eat on any diet if you were exercising a bit - it can't be more that 20% of your energy intake. That is different from a high protein diet where you were actively trying to get a big chunk of your energy from protein.

In reply to ukb shark:
From my readings about 1.5-2g PRO per kg of lean bodymass would be higher PRO. Over that would be high protein although depends who you ask.

As a broad goal I aim for the 2g products kg LBM which the NHS would consider high (IIRC). I think it's quite modest for an active 40-something.

In reply to Shani:

*Protein, not 'products'! Damn autocorrect.

In reply to Shani:

2g of protein per kg is high. That's above recreational bodybuilder and in line with pros. They are most definitely on a high protein/ medium fat/ low carb diet.
I doubt the NHS recommend anywhere near this amount (I could be wrong), but that number is under debate even in the body building/ power athletes world as being too much. There's only so much you can metabolise, and those calories could be better used elsewhere.

In reply to La benya:


It's really not. It is highER, but not high. Don't forget this is per kg of LEAN body mass. There are good reasons to adjust this figure either up or down depending if cutting of bulking etc... And if older, there's good reason to consume more protein than generally recommended. Protein is also quite satiating so can curb hunger. I'll spare you the details of the Protein Leverage Hypothesis.

In reply to Shani:

I disagree. 2g is very very high in any diet. Could you link to anything that suggests that level or higher? Everything I've read has suggested that as an absolute upper limit for power athletes and too much for most people.
There are also a lot of reasons to eat less protein than recommended. Just like anything it's weighing the pros and cons. It might be satiating, so is fibre.
Why would you say older people require more protein?

In reply to La benya:
As a start I'd recommend this article. Notice they talk about g per kg of bodyweight whereas I was talking about the lower figure of LEAN body mass. Again 2g per kg of lean body mass for an active adult isn't high.

http://examine.com/nutrition/how-much-protein-do-i-need-every-day/

In reply to Shani:

You and I drew very different conclusions from that 'article'! It basically concluded that every protein range has been recommended somewhere, higher 'doses' haven't been studied that extensively and 'don't seem to have negative affects', and may have 'additional minor benefits'.
Not really a glowing recommendation.
Several times it mentions above 1.7 as a 'high dose'.
It also mentions a reason for high protein diets being useful for weight loss being that it facilitates a calorie deficit, which isn't necessary a good thing for a mixed energy system sport like climbing (good if you're obese though).
I have yet to be convinced.
As I said, in the bodybuilding world, 2g is the max any paper/ article would suggest. And those guys are the best at preserving lean muscle while shredding fat, and they are solely interested in the power aspect of activity. Climbing would require more carbs simply due to its nature (unless maximal bouldering only).

In reply to La benya:

I know Martin Berkhan at Leangains recommends over 1.5-2g per kg of LBM so certainly not all bodybuilders agree with you.

However I'm open to being convinced. Got any papers to link to.

In reply to La benya:

A talk by Alan Aragon (whose AAR publications are highly regarded), in which he tables PRO recommendations in research. They've tended to increase in recent years, more so against FFM (like I do), than total bodyweight.

youtube.com/watch?v=KnCJJD4ior0&

From the Helms paper Aragon refers to:

"Protein needs for energy-restricted resistance-trained athletes are likely 2.3-3.1g/kg of FFM scaled upwards with severity of caloric restriction and leanness. (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24092765)."

I swore not to get in to Google Fu but NCBI has several recent papers supporting well over 2g protein per kg of bodyweight (not lean body mass, which would be lower). You might be right as I don't really read BB stuff. I'm not wedded to my idea and I'm reflecting on my thinking behind it. I've various social media feeds that have provided links to papers over the years and I don't save the links, so I may be wrong. No point us arguing over semantics - so my goal of 2g per kg of lean body mass may be 'high' but I know people who go higher.

For me I like its satiating effects and it fits in well with a TKD, where calorie intake has high variance between rest and training days.

In reply to Shani:

Sorry but I think this recent high protein 'fad' is detrimental to public health and the environment. 0.8g/kg or 45-50g protein is sufficient for normal adult who isn't growing without going into amino acid deficit. Climbing isn't about muscle, building strong fingers/soft tissue surely doesn't need much protein.

If you feel you must eat a lot of protein - try keep it vegetable-based (for health and environmental reasons).
A major study was published yesterday (https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/08/160801113654.htm): "High animal protein intake associated with higher, plant protein with lower mortality rate"...The largest study to examine the effects of different sources of dietary protein found that a high intake of proteins from animal sources -- particularly red meats -- was associated with a higher mortality rate, while a high intake of protein from plant sources was associated with a lower risk of death.

In reply to Paulos:

The mortality rate is connected to high consumption of read meat mainly because historically that has gone hand in hand with a poor diet overall. That isn't what is being discussed here; a highly controlled, high protein diet. Animal protein is vastly superior for muscle growth/ repair than plant protein. They don't have the same amino profiles, not to mention things like creatine is only found in red meat (and supps). Even the prevailing thinking behind saturated fats is being challenged in controlled diets (ie. they aren't bad if you're excluding sugar/ carbs).

climbing may not be about muscle growth, but the demands of a semi serious training regeime would certainly demand an increased level of protein for recovery and training adaptions.

Youre right though, 'public' health would be at risk following a diet designed for performance athletes and people looking to reduce bodyfat % to way below 'normal' levels. but thats self evident, no? mainly becasue they cant be trusted not to eat high levels of protein AND continue to eat carbs/ shite.

In reply to Shani:

Theres always differing opinions, i had just never heard yours before, so it was quite interesting. For me, eating nearly 250g of protein a day would be hard work!

I had a crack at a keto diet for 3 weeks (just long enough to get adapted)... i lost 5kg (86-81) which i thought was impressive, but i couldnt cope with the level of consistency required for the diet to work. i also didnt notice the weight loss from my bodyfat % (eye balling in the mirror), and at 9%ish anyway i would have assumed 5kg of fat loss to have been noticable, which made me think it was either water or muscle, so i wasnt that keen to carry on.

In reply to Paulos:




People through the term 'fad' around but it is quite exceptional that you'd try to denigrate the latest research on this matter as faddish. I have posted here in response to climbers who are following several hours of intense training a week with a goal of increasing body composition. Perhaps they are not high level in athletic terms but to recommend an 80kg guy (with about 70kg LBM), aim for a total of 140g a day (all rough figures), I don't think is harmful or dangerous and have yet to see evidence otherwise.

Animal protein is both more bioavailable and complete, unlike vegetable protein, and I have no wish to trough down piles of plant matter to achieve optimal levels.

You environmental claim for vegetarianism is also specious and vague. Yes, factory farmed meat can be damaging, but as a locavore who eats predominantly ethically raised meat from pastured (and so bio-diverse land), I am more than happy to put my diet up against a vegetarian who eats out of season foods flown in from exotic places, or grown in greenhouses. Vegetarianism pushes the killing to where it can't be seen. Show me a ploughed field and i will show you some land with VERY low biodiversity, managed by chemical fertilizers and pesticides which wash off in to the watercourse.

Now to the article to which you link: "More careful analysis revealed that the association of animal protein intake with an elevated mortality risk only applied to participants with at least one factor associated with an unhealthy lifestyle -- being either obese or underweight, heavy alcohol consumption, a history of smoking, or physical inactivity. In fact, the association disappeared in participants with a healthy lifestyle."

In reply to La benya:

Bloody heck - how much do you weigh? - and are you sure that is LEAN body mass? I am about 83kg and so around 72kg lean bodymass. I'd aim for around 140g protein a day which is a couple of tins of fish at lunchtime (mackerel/sardines/tuna) and a large steak or some chicken in the evening. Add in the protein from milk in coffee/tea, and the protein in potatoes, bananas, eggs, cheese and nuts etc... and it isn't too hard to reach.


Try a targeted ketogenic diet! But the thing is, if you find any diet hard - then you are unlikely to stick to it. I wouldn't say I am that strict, but compared to what I see people around me eating, I guess I conform to it. This, I'd say, is simply out of habit - so it is easy for me.

In reply to Shani:

I'm not sure i know what you mean by targeted keto diet, so ill have a read up. my understanding was it is very easy to move out out ketosis, so sticking ridgidly to the macros was essential... and im basically lazy with food prep.
high protein, med fat, low carb is much more simple to get right, and for lazy people its easy. i dont find it hard to stick to diets beause of lack of will power, its simple laziness. when i was hitting the gym to put on weight i found it easy to stick to a diet for two years, becasue there was no thought behind it (meat and veg).

i weigh 86-88 kg @ 9% bf. so lean would be 79kg, multiplied by 3 is 237 (a little exaggeration at 250g, what with visceral fat), but yeah, i would struggle to eat/ afford/ stomach 230g of protein. 140g-160g as you say would be more palatable.

In reply to La benya:

There are several variations but I use a TKD where I eat more CHO on a training day than a rest day. I'm not sure how deeply I get in to ketosis with this approach but along with IF, it means I stay pretty lean throughout the year with no real effort and can eat the odd bit of junk food with no problem.

I am in no way strict about all this. I cannot be arsed with counting macros and just use a rough guide on protein requirements (as above) but with emphasis on unprocessed foods (so most vegetarian foods - the pies, bakes, pasties and TVP type stuff is a no-no).

I emphasise fatty foods on a rest day whilst cutting back on CHO, and vice versa on a training day. As a general rule I eat twice a day and will tweak the CHO at lunchtime to achieve the change in CHO (so I eat potatoes at lunch on a training day and no potatoes - but, say avocado, on a rest day). I have some CHO with every evening meal with the family - so my eating pattern looks pretty 'normal' to them. I am at a stage where I can trust my appetite to guide me.

You sound like you are on the ball with this. Aiming for 150g would seem appropriate from your stats! GL with your training goals - but at 9%bf you don't need it!