well, here's another post to add to the fat debate.
i came across this minor news item that i thought was worthwhile to bring up, since it echoes a lot of things that i've come to believe in recent years:
in brief, the article brings up something that recent nutritional guidelines and medical science have started to argue: fat is not necessarily bad, and it's a mistake to eliminate it from your diet. in fact, the fat-free options for food in some ways are even worse, since they deny your body the ability to absorb nutrients and adjust your biochemistry in ways that harm your metabolic rate and sense of appetite.
i used to believe that fat was generally just bad. like so many other athletes, i had coaches who drummed into me the line that fat--either on me or, under the "you are what you eat" mantra, in my food--was the root of all evil and the scourge of all that was good and noble and right and just in this world. as a result, my nutrition plan often involved an obsessive witch hunt to eradicate all fat from my diet and, by extension, from me.
except that it didn't. if anything, it seemed to make the fat on me more stubborn. worse, it affected how i felt, emotionally and physically, with irritability, despondency, sluggishness, and sometimes outright weakness being chronic states. the result in my performance was decidedly negative.
in recent, years, i've come around to believe that fat has a crucial role to play in our body biochemistry, and that it's unwise and perhaps even dangerous to treat it as categorical anathema. it serves a function in regulating the chemical reactions in the body, and so impacts our metabolism and hormones, and thus influences mental and physical health.
the issue, however, is that there are problems with too much fat just as much as there is with too little fat, and problems with good fats and bad fats. i'll refer to this sample of useful links:
i think the key here is the ancient Greek belief in moderation. we need fat, but in appropriate quantities, and of a type that helps our body's metabolism and hormones operate in ways conducive to mental and physical well-being. which means that we need to break away from a simplistic view of fat as categorically bad, but instead as a more nuanced view of it as a nutrient that has to be understood and consumed in proper amounts and proper form to be useful.
probably not what people who lead busy lives want to hear--more study, more attention, more care. but i can tell you from my own experience that it has made it easier for me to control my body fat, and i've been feeling a lot better. while i certainly won't attribute everything to a change in how i deal with fat, i still think it is a relevant factor. one thing's for sure: ice cream sure tastes better.
just when i thought it was time for a post on nutrition, lo and behold a nutrition topic comes up in the news and makes all the headlines. i'm referencing a slate of media reports referencing a recent Harvard study, all of which allege that the study shows that any amount of red meat in your diet is bad for your health, even to the extent that it shortens your lifespan.
i'm not going to post text from any of these articles, since my perspective here is actually in disagreement with these news reports. it's not that i disagree with the science. it's rather that i disagree with the media commentary and interpretation of the science.
i'll put it this way: i believe in the body of medical science that finds that red meat is a driver of cholesterol, bad fats, and various assorted factors harmful to health. i do not, however, believe that this makes red meat a sole source of harm (which is what i think these media reports are doing). there's issues with many other sources of nutrition, particularly sources of protein. the issue is not red meat alone, but more about the larger composition of your nutrition overall.
i found some useful sources that i think respond directly to the media reports above:
what's interesting is that these articles also reference Harvard studies regarding red meat.
which to me just goes to show that it's not the science or the
scientists that are the issue, but instead the commentary by news media
that are misinterpreting research.
my personal position in light of the opposing viewpoints on red meat? i monitor my red meat intake, but i also monitor all of my protein intake regardless of source, just like i monitor all of my nutritional intake in general.
here's an example that i think illustrates my motivation: red meat is high in cholesterol. but so is shrimp. and eggs. and some forms of vegetables and fruit. so treating red meat as the sole culprit won't solve all your problems. if cholesterol is the concern then it's necessary to watch out for it in all foods.
and that's the principle i think that we really need to remember: we have to be mindful about all of our nutrition, not just a little.
this is a short note to update my previous comments regarding coffee and caffeine. my previous post pretty much stands, but there was an article in this past month's issue of Lava magazine that confirms what i've suspected and which i think may help assuage anyone with lingering questions.
if the link doesn't work, the full text of the article is below. like i said, the article itself doesn't say anything completely new, but it does make it more specific to endurance sports in terms of categorizing how caffeine helps pre-workout, during workout, and post-workout.
i will, however, caution against taking this article or any other similar article as free license to consume caffeine. i want to reiterate my caveats from before to emphasize some issues that qualify the consumption of caffeine by athletes:
caffeine is considered an ergogenic aid (i.e., performance-enhancer) in sports. while viewed as largely innocuous relative to other ergogenic substances, some sports organizations still hold limits to the amount of allowed caffeine. for example, the NCAA (for those of you outside the US, it is the controlling sports organization for major US colleges), bans caffeine concentrations greater than 15 micrograms per milliliter in athlete urine samples--meaning an athlete faces sanctions if they test positive for caffeine in concentrations above that amount (reference: drug free sport). it's important to check for your sport.
caffeine is a diuretic. so it will dehydrate you. you will need to monitor and adjust hydration accordingly.
being a stimulant, caffeine in sufficiently high concentrations can affect your neuro-muscular system, and hence disrupt your sense of physical coordination. you will need to assess how important this is to you and at what levels you can accept the stimulant effect.
having said all this, i'm more than happy to share a morning cup of coffee with you. top o' the morning to ya!
Refill, Please: Caffeine's Performance Benefits Lava Krista Austin July 22, 2011
Here's some good news for all of you who frequent coffee shops after your weekend workouts. Caffeine is a stimulant consumed by approximately 90 percent of the population on a regular basis and is considered to be an ergogenic (performance enhancing) substance. It is by far the most popular drug available and can be found in everything from coffee and tea to chocolate, sodas and energy drinks. Half of all American adults are reported to consume at least 300mg of caffeine a day, and most use it to keep the neurons of the brain firing to get through the work day!
While caffeine can assist you at work, its benefits for your next race are even more promising. Caffeine has been shown to improve muscular performance, decrease the perception of exercise effort, sustain alertness and cognitive function, and increase fat breakdown and carbohydrate oxidation. It has even been shown to enhance recovery by assisting the body as it restores muscle glycogen. Here are four ways your morning best friend can benefit you as an endurance athlete, and especially in races.
1. Increased power output: Caffeine enhances nerve cell activity (how frequently our nerves are firing) which increases muscle power output. By increasing how frequently our nerves are firing, caffeine increases the number of muscle fibers that can be recruited to perform and sustain higher levels of power output. Additionally, regardless of whether you lift weights for muscular endurance or strength and power, caffeine has been shown to increase the muscular work you can generate for the type of lifting you are doing. As a result, greater gains from the weight room can be achieved and hopefully translated onto the racing course.
2. Dopamine production: Our ability to maintain these high levels of muscular performance is even further enhanced by caffeine’s ability to increase dopamine (a substance in the brain) which activates the pleasure centers of the brain. Dopamine helps you sustain alertness and cognitive function; an extremely important benefit for any triathlete-especially in the middle of a long course event when you have to stay motivated.
2. Increased metabolism: Fat mobilization is increased and our body’s ability to use carbohydrates becomes more efficient when ingest these macronutrients with caffeine. This helps keep the energy coming during the many hours of training and especially on race day.
4. Recovery: Caffeine’s role in performance comes full circle by helping to restore muscle glycogen following glycogen-depleting training sessions. Also, ingesting caffeine in the 24-48 hours after a muscle damaging exercise session or race can minimize the pain and muscle tenderness that accompanies this sort of new and novel work for the body. By reducing the amount of pain and soreness, athletes typically can return to training at their desired intensity much sooner following a tough race. How to use caffeine
Everyone responds to caffeine in a different manner so learning your body’s response and optimizing your doses is critical to taking advantage of all its benefits. Often athletes find the benefits of caffeine to be greatest in competition when consuming only the minimal amount necessary for training, and saving the maximal dose for the big day. Timing the right dose of caffeine is the key to optimizing its use.
For training sessions or races that are less than one hour (i.e. that 10k you decided to jump in to keep training fun and stimulate your competitive side) consuming up to 3 milligrams of caffeine per kilogram of body weight will work for most people (see table below). Studies have shown that upwards of 6-10 milligrams per kilogram of body weight can be consumed if caffeine is well tolerated. Regardless of the dose that suits you the best, caffeine is most beneficial when ingested in the hour to 30 minutes before competition. In events longer than one hour, such as long-distance triathlons and marathons, consume your pre-race dose in the hour to 30 minutes before and then add approximately 15-30mg of caffeine every 45 minutes thereafter to sustain the desired effects. The form here doesn’t matter much, and most prefer a variety of caffeine sources throughout a long race including caffeinated gels, sports drinks, flat cola or a pill taken with a non-caffeinated carbohydrate/electrolyte beverage.
For the endurance athlete, caffeine is a promising ergogenic aid that can enhance performance and accelerate recovery. Knowing your body well and learning its response to caffeine will help you identify the optimal dose necessary to benefit your training and competition. So grab your cup of Joe … it’s time to train!
Caffeine content of common products, in milligrams*
Dunkin' Donuts, brewed, 16 oz (480 mL): 143-206
Generic brewed, 8 oz (240 mL): 95-200
Generic brewed, decaffeinated, 8 oz (240 mL): 2-12
Starbucks Espresso, 1 oz (30 mL): 58-75
Starbucks Vanilla Latte, 16 oz (480 mL): 150
Black tea, 8 oz (240 mL): 40-120
Starbucks Tazo Chai Tea Latte, 16 oz (480 mL): 100
Coca-Cola Classic: 35
Diet Coke: 47
Red Bull, 8.3 oz (250 mL): 76
Ben and Jerry's Coffee Heath Bar Crunch, 8 oz (208 g): 84
Hershey's Special Dark Chocolate bar, 1.45 oz (41 g): 31
i'm writing in response to some questions people have posted regarding what i eat. i'm guessing some of you are wondering what i'm doing to maintain my body mass and body fat (for the past year, around 68 kg, or a little over 150 lbs, and 5-6%, respectively), and want to compare notes on the diet and nutrition that's helping me to stay to these numbers. my apologies for taking so long to write things up--there was a lot to discuss, and i feel it's important to give this some attention.
keep in mind that anything i write here should not be taken in isolation, and that body mass and body fat scores are a function of not only what i'm eating, but also my exercise regimen, personal habits, and living patterns (i talked about this in the last post: exercise doesn't make you thin...uh, excuse me?). i should also note that these numbers are not always consistent, and that the average man of my size can gain or lose as much as 5 lbs. in a single day due to food and hydration (or loss thereof). consistent to this range, i've noticed that i tend to fluctuate in a range of about 150-155 lbs. and between 4-7% bodyfat during the course of a year. i attribute this to just natural biological processes, and am happy so long as i stay within a consistent range.
someone suggested in the last post that i give a write-up of the foods i'm eating. i thought about obliging, but then i changed my mind.
the problem for me is that i don't think about my diet and nutrition this way.
i used to for the better part of my life. but at some point in the past few years i switched away from this, partly because it was driving me nuts constraining myself to specific foods day after day after day after miserable day (because you see, i like food, i really like food, as in: i-watch-the-Food-Channel-every-day like food); partly because it was making me neurotic obsessing over the "right" food and identifying "good" food, in ways that made me think of specific foods as being the magic bullet that would address my weight issues (and yes, i did have weight issues); and partly because i just simply didn't have the time to go out and hunt down and locate specific "safe" foods (because they just aren't located everywhere, and invariably are somewhere just far enough away to make it inconvenient to shop while running from school to work to training to errands to family to home to sleep to rise to start the process all over again).
instead, i can tell you how i do think about diet and nutrition now, and how i approach what i eat.
basically, i start with some basic principles:
for endurance athletes, the recommended breakdown of daily carbohydrates/proteins/fats is roughly 70-80%/10-15%/10-15% (i've written about this before. reference: kenyan marathon runners (part 2: diet)). these ratio values are by calories. keep in mind that carbohydrates and proteins have roughly 5-6 calories per gram and fats have roughly 10-12 calories per gram.
for sedentary males of my size, the recommended daily caloric intake is around 2,300-2,500 calories. sedentary means no exercise. but i'm not sedentary, and even on recovery days my metabolic rate is dramatically higher than these recommended caloric intake numbers. however, they do provide useful minimums that i can keep in mind. having said that, i also have a notion of rough maximums; i know that when i'm in the Ironman training cycle my daily caloric intake can shoot as high as 5,000-6,000 calories (and i suspect there have been a few times i reached around 8,000-9,000 calories--those were the days when i just ate and ate and ate and ate and ate and ate...and still felt hungry).
despite the numerical guidelines here, you may want to try and develop a mind-body connection in regards to food. i know this sounds really touchy-feely, but it makes things much easier in terms of maintaining healthy eating habits, particularly in terms of not having to expend mental energy counting calories or measuring portions or choosing foods or timing meals. what i mean is that you want to develop a sensitivity to how you feel in relation to your activities and your eating, so you have an intuitive grasp of what, when, and how you should ingest food. friends have described this as a "zen" approach. i see it as just being more in tune with yourself.
little things add up. a muffin here, a slice of butter there, some extra salad dressing, a little cream, and next thing you know by the end of the day you've taken in enough extra calories to constitute an extra meal. you want to be conscious of just where you are in terms of a total daily caloric and nutrient allotment during the course of any given 24-hour period--this will help you monitor your own food choices.
fats are not all evil. there are good fats and bad fats. good fats are mono-unsaturated fats and poly-unsaturated fats. they are found in things like nuts, fruits, vegetables, and fish--especially if allowed to remain as natural, non-processed foods. bad fats are saturated fats and trans fats. they are found in things like meats and processed foods (if it's packaged or canned or pre-made, it's very likely processed).
carbohydrates are not at all evil. they are sometimes good and sometimes bad and sometimes both. complex carbohydrates have low glycemic indexes, meaning they digest slowly and so release energy gradually over the course of a day--which incidentally moderates your insulin, thereby helping to suppress your appetite and maintain your energy levels. simple carbohydrates have high glycemic indexes, meaning they digest quickly and release energy matching the accompanying insulin spike and resultant post-insulin crash, which generates an increase in appetite and a resulting lethargy and drowsiness. complex carbohydrates are found in brightly colored vegetables (such as chili peppers, spinach, collard greens, mustard greens, broccoli, asparagus, etc.) and whole grains (non-processed, non-refined flours made from wheat, sorghum, bulgar, quinoa, barley, millet, etc.). simple carbohydrates are found in starchy vegetables (such as potatoes, rice, etc.). simple carbohydrates are good when ingested in the 45-60 minute window following a workout, when your body is in desperate need to activate the recovery process. complex carbohydrates are good when ingested outside the 45-60 minute window, when your body needs to restore its normal functions.
proteins are not all evil. in fact, protein itself is not evil. the sources, however, may require some discretion. red meat has more bad fats and bad cholesterol, and white meats have more good fats and good cholesterol. but red meats do hold some useful nutrients (especially some kinds of amino acids) that are difficult (although not impossible) to get from other sources, and so should not be discounted entirely as a food source. and while vegetarian/vegan diets certainly do have legitimacy, meat is a very convenient source of protein. it also seems to help most people feel full, thereby controlling appetite.
calories are not evil. calories are units of energy. if your body is expending a lot of energy, you're going to need to replenish your body with energy. the issue is what kind of calories (i.e., how those calories are distributed by carbohydrates/proteins/fats).
refined or processed foods are bad. very bad. they're short on nutrients. long on calories. meaning that your body can't use them in its recovery and will just store them in its fat reserves...leaving you hungry and still in need to eat more.
nutrients are good. very good. you want nutrient-rich food (i.e., lots of minerals, vitamins, amino acids, etc.) and unrefined or unprocessed foods are higher in nutrients.
eat gradually. it takes time for your body to signal your brain that you are full. if you eat too fast, you overshoot the signal and take in more food than you need. this applies over the course of the entire day. this means that i take in 4-5 smaller meals (as opposed to 3 big ones), each of which i allow 30-60 minutes to ingest.
i use these principles in light of these points:
the ratios of carbohydrates/proteins/fats is not fixed. it depends on what i'm doing that day. for days when i'm doing strength training (i.e., focusing on muscular development), i make a conscious decision to allow more protein into my diet, usually at the expense of fat. for days when i'm doing conditioning training (i.e., building aerobic base or increasing anaerobic capacity), i try to take in more carbohydrates, usually at the expense of both fat and protein. sometimes, especially after particularly long endurance workouts, i'll allow in a little more fat--with a little being around 1-3 percentage points more.
the quantity of calories is not fixed. it depends on what i'm doing that day. i try to keep an eye on the amount of exercise i'm getting, and adjust the caloric values accordingly.
i took the time to develop the intuitive "zen" approach to diet and nutrition, allowing the time (for me, several years) to generally get a feel of what, when, and how to eat to produce results in terms of physical or mental states (whether in training or in recovery).
i took time to develop good eating habits. considering how many years it takes to develop bad eating habits (for most people, their entire life to date), it should be no surprise that it takes some time to develop good eating habits. but over the course of several years, i found it became easier to maintain, since i noticed that my taste buds changed, and that my cravings changed, to the point that i now actually like "healthy" food--for example, i used to crave the taste of vinaigrette dressing on salads, but now i find that i prefer the taste of plain vegetables and fruits and dislike the taste of any kind of salad dressing.
developing an intuitive sense of diet and nutrition, in addition to healthy eating habits, required some work in terms of doing the due diligence to educate myself regarding food. and be warned: food information is not always reliable. in fact, it is rife with distortions, omissions, mislabels, half-truths, and outright lies. things advertised as organic are not. things advertised as whole grains are not. things advertised as nutrient-rich are not. you really sometimes have to do some work to find out the actual nature of the food you're eating--including in terms of things like glycemic index, complex v. simple carbohydrates, good v. bad fats, refined or processed ingredients, or even calories and nutrient breakdown. for example, at one time i got so frustrated with how difficult it was to find unrefined, unprocessed, whole grain carbohydrate sources that i took to just buying oatmeal, because it was the only food whose nutritional labeling i could trust.
i never lost food cravings. i still crave certain kinds of foods. but in the process of improving my diet and nutrition, i found that i retrained my cravings so that i thought about healthy foods as opposed to unhealthy ones. my belief is that your mind generates food cravings because it recognizes certain deficiencies in diet and nutrition, and associates those deficiencies with the foods that compensate for them. however, this association is dependent on the vocabulary of food options you stored in your memory over the course of your life. as a result, a youth of poor eating habits means your mind having to make associations from memories of unhealthy foods. here's a personal example: where before i used to get cravings for bacon (lots of bad fats), which was probably my brain interpreting my body's signals that it needed more fat, i now crave salmon skin (lots of good fats). for me, i believe that people need time to create a new store of healthy food memories, which supplies the brain with a new set of vocabulary from which to make associations regarding what foods can address detected diet and nutrition deficiencies. this takes time, and another reason why it takes some initial effort to develop good eating habits and food intuition.
the effort involved in improving diet and nutrition is like a rolling boulder: initially, it takes some level of effort to get the rock rolling, but once you've overcome the initial friction you'll find that things generate momentum, and that as the momentum builds it generates an energy of its own, to the point that it can sustain its own motion without your effort.
i don't constrain my food choices. at least not too much. the only foods that i really categorically avoid are simple sugars, since the body processes them in ways that seem to lead to fat storage. this means i've eliminated the major sources of simple sugars: no candy, no soft drinks, no fruit juices, etc. i also categorically avoid mayonnaise and sour cream, but mostly because i just don't like their taste. it's not a big deal--it turned out to be a minor sacrifice.
moderation is key. in quantity and quality and choice. even if you stray, it will be okay as long as you contain the damage. once you've built up momentum in good diet and nutrition, you'll find that your body has some resilience to bad food, and so you can take in some measure (but not total) accidental (or perhaps even intentional) ingestion of unhealthy foods.
this is all probably more than some of you were expecting, and more than you wanted. i hope that's not the case. this is about as good a summary of my eating as i can make. i don't think so much about the identity of the foods i'm eating (i.e., pot roast versus green bean casserole versus ham sandwich), but more about the value of the foods i'm selecting (i.e., caloric density, nutrient density).
i'll finish by nothing that once i managed to get healthy eating habits, i found that taste, satisfaction of hunger, and nourishment all took care of themselves. trust me, i've found that healthy food can be every bit as tasty and filling as unhealthy food (grilled bell peppers, mushrooms, and onions drizzled with olive oil and garlic? mmmmmmmmmm....), and i just don't have the desire for unhealthy eating anymore. i remember i used to love In-n-Out double-doubles with a large order of fries (In-n-Out is a California thing...if you don't know, suffice it to say it's one of the greatest fast-food burgers joints you'll ever find). i still think about it. but now, whenever i do indulge in them, i find myself completely grossed out and afflicted by several days of indigestion--all of which is enough to make me limit my consumption of In-n-Out to once (at most twice) a year...which is fine, because i think the alternative has turned out much better.
hope that helps. let me know if there's anything else you want to know.
my last post dealt with vegan athlete Rich Roll (reference: getting fit & healthy). i found his story impressive, not just in terms of athletic achievement or personal change, but also because of his adoption of a vegan diet. i'm like so many others who find it hard to associate veganism with sports, given the integral nature of protein into physical recovery and growth. clearly, just based on Rich Roll, veganism isn't so incompatible with athletics.
Rich's story got me thinking about the nature of vegan athletics, and about what it involves in relationship to sports & fitness lifestyle. i've written about vegan/vegetarian athletes before, and found some interesting videos on the subject (reference: videos: vegan & vegatarian athletes), but decided to dig around to see what else i could find on the internet.
turns out that veganism--and also vegetarianism--isn't as uncommon in sports as i thought it was. there's a list of vegan athletes you can check out (reference: vegan/vegetarian athletes). there's even another vegan professional Ironman triathlete (reference: Brendan Brazier). seeing these profiles and their levels of success, it's pretty clear that any perceptions of veganism being incompatible with sports or fitness are pretty much wrong.
from a certain perspective, i guess you can argue that veganism might actually be beneficial to sports and fitness. considering all the dangers of meat products, let alone the ills of the modern diet--e.g., excesses of saturated fats, trans fats, LDL cholesterol, simple sugars, and chemical preservatives, inversely matched with deficiencies in unsaturated fats, HDL cholesterol, natural ingredients, and nutrients, vegan and vegetarian diets seem to avoid elements of the former while offering a better supply of the latter. this would suggest that vegan and vegetarian diets would actually be more conducive to better health and hence better performance.
the catch, of course, is to make sure that a vegan and vegetarian lifestyle gives you what you expect and need for athletic development. you can eat all the vegetables and fruits and give up all the animal products you want, but unless you give your body what it needs you're still going to end up throttling it, or worse, breaking it down.
it's not about the diet, it's about what in it. meaning that you still have to ensure that whatever diet you follow, including vegan or vegetarian, has the requisite ratios of protein, carbohydrates, fats, and vitamins and minerals in adequate quantities to maintain your biochemical processes.
here's a couple of articles discussing vegan athletes i thought were informative:
i'm not vegan or vegetarian. but i have to admit i have given it some thought. and there are times in the training cycle when i definitely develop an aversion to meat and meat products and acquire a craving for vegetables and fruits. it makes me think that my body is telling me what it wants and needs. maybe i should listen to it more.
apart from ugali, there were a few extra observations i had regarding the nutrition of kenyan marathon runners that i made in the previous post (reference: part 1). the article i was discussing also covered a number of other details regarding the diet and training habits that i thought were illuminating. you can look at the full text of the article that i placed in my last post, or go directly to the link:
a number of things that i thought were interesting:
meals: the athletes eat roughly 5 times a day, with 2 light meals (snacks) and 3 larger meals (what we'd consider breakfast, lunch, and dinner), and all spaced roughly 2-3 hours apart...this is roughly in line with the "grazing" concept espoused by a lot of dietitians, medical science, and sports nutritionists that i know, since it seems to 1) help maintain a steady metabolic rate throughout the day, preventing lethargy and sustaining the body's fat-burning and recovery systems, 2) help moderate insulin and blood-sugar levels, controlling appetite and again helping prevent lethargy and supporting fat-burning and recovery, and 3) avoids overwhelming the body's digestive system, which according the endurance sports nutrition references i've used (primarily Joe Friel's Going Long and Gale Bernhardt's Training Plans for Multi-Sport Athletes, both of which i consider to be necessary reading for anyone considering Ironman and half-Ironman distance races) is about 200-300 calories per hour during physical activity, with anything more going into fat storage (where you don't really want it to go) as opposed to muscle rebuilding and glycogen storage (where you want it to go).
caloric distribution: the athletes have a nutrient intake distributed by roughly 76% carbohydrates / 10% protein / 14% fat...this is somewhat consistent, although a little off, the numbers i've read (again, primarily Joe Friel's and Gale Bernhardt's books, as well as various other sources on the internet--see later in this post), which for endurance athletes seem to recommend a distribution of 70-80% carbohydrates / 10-15% protein / 10-15% fat. i was somewhat surprised to see a higher percentage of fat than protein, since i've heard the constant drumbeat of "high body fat bad" for so long from so many coaches, and also since i've always felt envious of all the lean physiques i always see of the elite competitors on the race course. this is giving me cause to reshuffle my thinking on fats (although, i know that there is a difference between "bad" artery-clogging, hip-hugging, butt-jiggling fat and "good" biochemical-reaction-supporting, hormone-regulating fat, but this is the first time i have to consider that my personal aversion to fat may not be so warranted).
sugar: the athletes took in 20% of daily calories from sugar...WOW. i've been constantly reminded soooooo many times by soooooo many people to limit sugar intake, since it induces the insulin spike and crash that leads to increased appetite and resulting temptation to overeat. for me, sugar, along with fat, has always been the devil responsible for high body fat and the evil syndromes of muffin-tops and big butts, and associated slow times and great suffering on race day. but here, it appears that the kenyan athletes consider sugar to be a desirable element in their diet, since it provides a quick source of easily-absorbed energy to fuel physical activity. however, i should note that the article does make it clear that the kenyans consume sugar while still holding to 2 principles: 1) sugar intake does not come at the expense of other necessary nutrients (i.e., vitamins, minerals, fiber, anti-oxidants), and 2) sugar intake does not cause caloric intake to exceed caloric expenditure (one of the fundamental guiding principles of all athletic nutrition).
body size: the athletes average around 5'-9" in height and 129 pounds in weight (!!!)...this was a minor detail in the article, but eye-opening to me. i am 5'-10" and 160 pounds, making me overweight by their standards. which is jarring, since i consider myself pretty lean (right now, my waist size is 29" and my body fat is 7-8%). dropping my body weight to scale down to the dimensions of a kenyan athlete would mean getting to around 140 pounds, which in my current state would mean dropping muscle mass--but this raises the question as to from where? granted, my extra mass is probably from upper-body and core muscles coming from weight training, swimming, and martial arts. i'm reluctant to give any of those up, so i may have to just be happy with the dimensions i currently am (although...i still would like to get the body fat percentage down...).
for additional information about Kenyan runner's nutrition, you can check out:
for purposes of comparison, you can compare their eating habits (eating times, caloric amounts, and proportions) with those recommended for endurance athletes:
all these things above are roughly in line with the recommendations of medical science and sports science for what is deemed necessary for healthy living and peak performance. it goes to show that one is pretty much the same as the other.
still, the details about diet of kenyan marathon runners are still illuminating in terms of what they indicate about perspectives on certain ideas i'd considered as guidelines, and are giving me some food for thought (sorry, bad pun, but i just couldn't resist, just to easy, ha ha ha, yuck yuck yuck...) regarding my own diet habits...maybe it will for you as well.
one of the areas i've been trying to improve is my nutrition, since i've become intensely aware of just how much it affects training and racing. for normal daily physical activity, there's a certain margin of error (or lack of discipline) that you can indulge in with your diet without too much noticeable deterioration in performance. for serious training (and by serious, i mean either competitive racing or any attempt at a longer-distance race like ironmans, half-ironmans, marathons, etc.), however, the margin of error becomes razor-thin, since you are placing such high demands on your body that any waivering in nutrition will result in very noticeable deterioration in performance--enough that it can make the difference between finishing or not finishing at all.
as a result, i've become alert for any information regarding nutrition for sports, particularly endurance sports. any time i come across any substantive news or research or announcement or article on nutrition supporting training and racing, i'll make the effort to check it out and add it to my personal library of wisdom.
one such piece of information was the research done on the nutrition of Kenyan marathon runners. i pretty much idolize these guys, and i'm always curious as to their training methods. which is why when i came across an article on their dietary habits, i just had to find out more. this is the piece (it's a little older, coming out in 2006, but i see it as something that's pretty much constant, and so not time-sensitive):
in case the link doesn't work, i've included the full text of the article at the end of this post.
the big thing that caught my attention--and apparently everybody else in the U.S.--was the description of the major source of carbohydrates for Kenyan marathon runners. according to the article, it's a corn-based product called ugali.
most people involved in endurance athletes are aware of the need for carbohydrates, and not just any carbohydrates, but low-glycemic carbohydrates.
high-glycemic carbohydrates cause a spike in blood sugar, triggering a rise in insulin, which induces the body's fat-storage systems. this is followed by a crash in blood sugar, which induces the body's appetite, which in turn pulls you into eating, and thereby encourages repeating the cycle all over again. the end result is excessive calories, causing excess fat--and, if maintained with more high-glycemic carbohydrates, inadequate anti-oxidants to fight the free radicals impeding your body's recovery and development. high-glycemic carbohydrates are generally considered more appropriate during or immediately after exercise, when your body is in greater need of immediate energy.
low-glycemic carbohydrates, in contrast, don't spike blood sugar levels, but instead tend to have much more moderate, long-term modulations, avoiding the insulin spikes and attendant fat-storage mode and rise in appetite. that, and they also tend to be found in foods with anti-oxidants, thereby aiding to fight free radicals and assist in recovery and development. it is because of this that low-glycemic carbohydrates are viewed as more appropriate for longer-term (i.e., outside of training or racing, or beyond the immediate period after them) post-training or post-racing recovery...which is pretty much most of the time (note that this is yet another reason why endurance sports is considered a lifestyle, and one that strangely enough aligns itself with most doctors' guidelines for a healthy one).
the question, though, is then finding sources of low-glycemic carbohydrates. particularly--given the caloric demands of endurance sports--sources that are 1) cheap, 2) plentiful, 3) easy to make, and 4) satisfying (i.e., filling). it's harder then you think; the wheat (courtesy of all the processing and additional ingredients) used in most bread and pasta is often high-glycemic, contrary to their advertising. it can be quite an effort to find bread, pasta, or anything that is genuinely low-glycemic.
which is why i was intrigued by ugali. judging from the kenyans' performance and training, and even just by looking at their physiques, it seems ugali is a low-glycemic carbohydrate source...and because it's based on corn, it's likely to fulfill the other conditions of being cheap, plentiful, easy to make, and satisfying.
i dug around to find more about ugali, and discovered that it's kind of like grits (yes, grits, as in the southern corn-based porridge so common to the southern U.S.). but ugali is thicker, with a consistency that allows it to be cut into slices, albeit not so much cake or bread-like but more spongy and chewy.
i found a video on how to make ugali from the Chasing KIMBIA Youtube channel (which, by the way, i highly recommend you watch if you want to learn how superior long-distance runners train). you can see ugali for yourself:
i should point out i haven't actually tried making ugali for myself. i'm still trying to find the right kind of cornmeal--although, i've been recently told that it doesn't really matter, since the recipe is so basic that the ingredients will end up producing the same thing anyway. i'm keen to try, so i'm going to try and give it a shot as soon as i can.
i'll let you know how it goes...i'm pretty curious myself.
Eating practices of the best endurance athletes in the world
By Owen Anderson, Ph.D.For Active.com May 16, 2006
It's strange, but true: The nutritional practices of the best endurance athletes in the world have not been carefully studied.
Those "best endurance athletes" are clearly the Kenyan runners. Attempting to verify this fact for you is probably unnecessary, but it can at least be noted that one study found that athletes from just one collection of Kenyans, the Kalenjin tribe, had won approximately 40 percent of all major international middle- and long-distance running competitions in the 10-year period from 1987 to 1997.1
In addition, approximately half of all of the male athletes in the world who have ever run the 10K in less than 27 minutes hail from Kenya. When they're allowed to enter freely, Kenyan athletes dominate road races around the world.
And yet, until now the eating habits of the top-level Kenyan runners haven't been examined in a scientific way, even though the Kenyans' nutritional practices must assuredly represent a key reason for their running success. The person who argues that "If only the Kenyans would eat differently, they could run much faster," would be on flimsy ground. The Kenyans are doing things right when they sit down at the dinner table, or they wouldn't dominate international competitions.
But what is it exactly that they're doing? Are they Zone dieters, followers of the Perricone Promise, adherents of the Atkins Diet, or do they focus on the South Beach eating plan? Do they eat lots of "discredited" carbs or large ladles of lipids? From what foods do they get their seemingly limitless energy for running?
Study specifics
To answer these questions, Yannis Pitsiladis of the International Centre for East African Running Science in Glasgow, Scotland, along with Mike Boit (the Olympic bronze-medal winner from the 1972 Games), Vincent Onywera, and Festus Kiplamai from the Exercise and Sports Science Department at Kenyatta University in Nairobi and the Department of Foods, Nutrition and Dietetics at Egerton University in Njoro, Kenya, recently monitored everything that went into the mouths of 10 elite Kenyan runners over a seven-day period at a training camp near Kaptagat, Kenya.2
This group of Kenyan athletes was truly top-level, including several Olympic medalists and also first-place finishers from the Paris and Athens World Championships.
All 10 runners belonged to the Kalenjin tribe, with five from the Nandi sub-tribe, three from the Keiyo grouping, one Tugen individual, and a Sabaot. Two of the athletes specialized in 1,500-meter running, while the other eight were training for eight- and 12-K cross-country competitions.
The average age of the Kenyans was 21, and mean height was 1.75 meters (~5' 9"), with remarkably little variation in stature (the shortest individual was 1.70 meters, the tallest 1.80 meters, which meant that the smallest and greatest heights were just three percent away from the mean).
As you might expect, the Kenyans were lean, with body weight averaging ~58.6 kilograms (129 pounds) and body fat ranging from about six to 10 percent.
Dietary intakes were measured each day for seven consecutive days in December, when the athletes were reaching peak condition for the Kenyan cross-country season. The Kenyans followed their normal diets and weighed and recorded everything that was consumed (both food and drink); food weighing was accomplished with digital scales. The elite Kenyans were given as much food as they wanted, and they ate five times a day, according to the following plan:
1. Breakfast at 8:00 a.m. 2. Mid-morning snack at 10:00 a.m. 3. Lunch at 1:00 p.m. 4. Afternoon snack at 4:00 p.m.
Supper at 7:00 p.m.Kenyan runners tend to eat a limited variety of foods, and that was certainly the case with these elite athletes. Most of their nutrients came from vegetable sources, and the "staple" edibles were bread, boiled rice, poached potatoes, boiled porridge, cabbage, kidney beans and ugali (a well-cooked, corn-meal paste that's molded into balls and dipped into other foods for flavoring).
Meat (primarily beef) was eaten just four times a week in fairly small amounts (about 100 grams -- 3.5 ounces a day). A fair amount of tea with milk and sugar was imbibed on a daily basis (more on this in a moment).
If you're thinking about heading to a nutritional-supplement store to purchase some performance-enhancing supplements (or you already purchase on a regular basis), bear in mind that the Kenyan runners were not taking supplements of any kind. There were no vitamins, no minerals, no special formulations or miracle compounds, nada. The gold-medal-winning Kenyans adhered to the odd philosophy that regular foods could fuel their efforts quite nicely.
Quality running
The Kenyan runners' training during the seven-day study period was straightforward. The athletes trained mostly as a group, two times a day, with a 6 a.m. run followed by an afternoon run at around 5 p.m. The 6 a.m. run was six to nine miles at varying speeds, including a nice chunk of high-quality running at a pace as high as four minutes per mile.
The afternoon runs usually centered on four to five miles at an easy pace (note that this works out to a weekly total of about 75 miles). Once a week, the two 1,500-meter runners carried out high-speed interval training. A very interesting observation was that each elite Kenyan spent just 1.2 hours per day running, with about 33 percent of this consisting of "quality running." This means that the elite-Kenyans' daily "intake" of quality running was about 23 minutes.
Daily nutrient intake
About 86 percent of daily calories came from vegetable sources, with 14 percent from animal foods. As you might expect, the Kenyan-runners' diets were extremely rich in carbohydrate, with 76.5 percent of daily calories coming from carbs. The Kenyans ate about 10.4 grams of carbohydrate per kilogram of body mass each day, or approximately 4.7 grams per pound of body weight.
An amazing facet of the Kenyans' eating habits was the consistency of this carbohydrate intake: Every 24 hours, the Kenyans took in about 600 grams of carbohydrate, with very little variation from day to day. They were truly stocking their leg muscles with glycogen, giving their sinews the right fuel necessary for the high-intensity training they were conducting -- and avoiding the fatigue which automatically follows on the heels of glycogen wipe-outs.Incidentally, sports-nutrition experts frequently recommend that athletes involved in strenuous training should consume about nine or more grams of carbohydrate per kilogram of body mass per day, so you can see that the Kenyans were truly eating according to current scientific wisdom.
Given such an ample carbohydrate intake and the reliance on vegetable foods, fat intake was bound to be modest, and it was: About 13.4 percent of daily calories came from fat (~46 grams), with 61 percent of these calories coming from milk (Kenyan runners ordinarily place full-cream milk in their tea).
Protein intake amounted to 10.1 percent of all calories and a total of 1.3 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight per day (75 total grams daily). Once again, the Kenyans were fully in line with recommendations of top sports nutritionists, who call for protein intakes of ~1.2 grams per kilogram daily for endurance athletes. About two-thirds of the protein came from plant foods. Water intake was modest (about 1.113 liters per day), and the Kenyans actually tended to drink more tea than water on a daily basis (tea consumption was about 1.243 daily liters).
The foods
As you might expect, ugali furnished about 23 percent of the runners' daily calories; after all, it's the national dish of Kenya. There were some surprises in the dietary data, however. For example, just behind ugali in second place for calorie-provisioning was plain sugar, which provided about one out of every five calories (20 percent) consumed by the Kenyans over the course of the day.
That's right, the vitamin-free, mineral-free, "bad," "simple" carb from which Americans are fleeing was consumed in rather prodigious amounts, about 133.5 grams (534 calories) per day. Similar levels of sugar consumption are sometimes blamed for the rising tide of obesity in the U.S., particularly among young people, but in fact sugar intake provides some key advantages for athletes involved in intense training on a daily basis: After all, the stuff re-stocks muscle-glycogen stores very quickly and effectively.
As long as the rest of the diet is rich in vitamins, minerals, fiber and anti-oxidants (which is the case with the elite Kenyans), and as long as regular exercise is carried out and caloric intake doesn't exceed caloric expenditure (also the case), sugar isn't a bad thing at all. In fact, it can be argued (from the quick-glycogen-replacement standpoint), that sugar is a rather-desirable nutrient (before you send me any angry letters on this topic, please look up the frequencies of type 2 diabetes in Kenya and the U.S.).
In terms of providing calories, the "big-four provisioners" in the Kenyans' diets were:
1. ugali, with 23 percent of total calories 2. sugar, with 20 percent of all calories 3. rice, at 14 percent 4. milk, hitting 13 percent
No other single food provided more than six percent of daily caloric sustenance (bread was at six percent, with potatoes and beans at five percent each).
Milk provided the lion's share of protein, with 28 percent of daily protein grams (and calories), followed by beans, with a respectable 19-percent share, and rice and ugali were neck-and-neck for third and fourth, with 12 and 11 percent of daily protein, respectively. A smaller surprise? Since the Kenyans relied so heavily on full-cream milk as a source of energy and protein, their daily consumption of saturated fat checked in at about 28 grams -- 252 calories out of the daily caloric quota of 3,000 or so.
Other findings
In addition to taking in slightly more than the recommended amounts of carbohydrate and protein for athletes, the Kenyans also used another fundamental principle of sports nutrition to enhance their abilities to train and perform well: They always ate within one hour after workouts. This post-workout period when glycogen re-synthesis rates can be maximized, as long as adequate carbohydrate is provided in the diet (as was the case with the Kenyans). When carbohydrate ingestion is delayed after a training session, lower total intramuscular glycogen levels are often the result. Those Kenyans are smart!
The Kenyan runners' carbohydrate intakes are also higher than those reported in endurance athletes in other countries around the world. As Pitsiladis, Boit, Onywera and Kiplamai pointed out, the carb intake of elite distance runners in the U.S., the Netherlands, Australia and South Africa have been measured at 49 (!), 50, 52 and 50 percent of total calories, respectively, a far cry from the Kenyan total of 76.5 percent.3,4,5,6 The Kenyans appear to be doing a better job of fueling themselves for their high-intensity training, compared with their "peers" in other countries.
This new investigation agrees well with the limited information published about Kenyan-athletes' eating habits in the past. Two previous studies found carbohydrate intake in Kenyans to be about 71 and 75 percent of total calories, with fat and protein consumption similar to the levels observed in the new research. 7,8 This kind of validation and the careful techniques employed in the new study (one of the researchers, for example, stayed with the athletes around the clock while the dietary monitoring was being carried out) indicate that the data is accurate, truly representing elite-Kenyans' eating patterns.
Overall, the Kenyan eating plan has strong similarities to the food-consumption habits of another group of outstanding distance runners -- the Tarahumara Indians of the Sierra Madre Mountains in Mexico. The Tarahumaras are more-noted for their ultra-running capacities, rather than their 10-K performances, so one might expect their diets to be a bit more heavily biased in the direction of fat, but research reveals that about 75 to 80 percent of total daily energy comes from carbohydrate, 12 percent from fat and eight to 13 percent (sound familiar?) from protein. Like the Kenyans, the Tarahumara Indians eat copious quantities of corn meal, along with praiseworthy portions of beans.9
With their high carbohydrate intake, adequate protein ingestion, and perfect timing of meals, the top Kenyan runners are eating optimally -- doing the things at the dinner table which are necessary for them to perform at the world's highest level. We can certainly learn from them and eat in ways which give our muscles the fuel they need to carry out the high-quality workouts which represent our true path to performance improvement.
References "Kenya's Running Tribe," The Sports Historian, Vol. 17 (2), pp. 14-27, 1997 "Food and Macronutrient Intake of Elite Kenyan Distance Runners," International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism, Vol. 14, pp. 709-719, 2004 "Macronutrient Intake of US Athletes Compared with the General Population and Recommendations Made for Athletes," American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 49, pp. 1070-1076, 1989 "Nationwide Survey on Nutritional Habits in Elite Athletes. Part I: Energy, Carbohydrate, Protein, and Fat Intake," International Journal of Sports Medicine, Vol. 10 (1 Supplement), pp. S3-S10, 1989 "Dietary Intakes and Food Use of Groups of Elite Australian Male Athletes," International Journal of Sport Nutrition, Vol. 1 (4), pp. 378-394, 1991 "Dietary Practices of South African Ultradistance Runners," International Journal of Sport Nutrition, Vol. 7, pp. 80-103, 1977 "Food and Macronutrient Intake of Male Adolescent Kalenjin Runners in Kenya," British Journal of Nutrition, Vol. 88 (6), pp. 711-717, 2002 "Nutrition and Body Build: A Kenyan Review," World Rev Nutr Diet, Vol. 72, pp. 218-226, 1993 "The Food and Nutrient Intakes of the Tarahumara Indians of Mexico," American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 32 (4), pp. 9-5-915, 1979
this is actually a bit of a pun (my apologies). apparently Pancake Day is a global analogy of Mardi Gras, both of which (believe it or not) are religious days in the Christian calendar.
most of us in the U.S. are familiar with the Christian religious observance of Lent, which is the 40-day period marking the death and burial of Jesus leading into the celebration of Easter marking his resurrection as the Son of God (reference: Wikipedia: Lent). and many more of us in the U.S. (including heathens, pagans, and assorted agnostics alike) are very much aware of Mardi Gras (or Carnaval), which is the bacchanalian blow-out party held to vent personal vices before Ash Wednesday, which is the start of Lent.
but few (including me) were aware that internationally Shrove Tuesday (the day of Mardi Gras) is also Pancake Day. marked this year as February 5, 2008, Pancake Day is traditionally supposed to be the last opportunity to use up eggs, milk, and sugar, since during Lent only plain foods are supposed to be consumed as an expression of piety (reference: Wikipedia: Shrove Tuesday).
i should note that personally this is only academically interesting.
truth be told, i have to confess (another pun, ha ha, i know, sorry...just too easy) that all i really care about is that one of my favorite foods actually has an international holiday tied to it. and the fact that it's considered holy is undeniable proof that there...is...a...god...
as an endurance sport athlete, i spend countless hours engaged in endless physical activity burning untold numbers of calories. and i mean burn. at the paces i use in training, swimming burns 900-1500 kcal (normal calories) per hour, biking burns 600-1200, and running burns 800-1500 (reference: Centers for Disease Control, Cool Nurse, Nutri Strategy, Outside Online). and i'm doing these activities during workouts that go over 2-3 hours on average, with 1 hour at the minimum and 6 (or sometimes 7) hours at the maximum.
some of my friends and i once did a rough tally of the average number of calories burned per day during Ironman training. i think we came up with something on the order of 4,000-5,000 calories. considering that the recommended daily caloric consumption for an average sedentary male in my age group is 2,400 calories (reference: Health.gov), that means that i'm taking in roughly 2x as much food as the average guy.
the running joke my buddies and i have is that this is the real reason people do Ironman: so you can go out and eat whatever you want, and still lose weight. as one of my friends observed: "weight loss plan? oh i've got a great weight loss plan. it's called Ironman."
thing is, it's not as much a joke as you'd think.
as strange it may sound, it's actually kind of hard to consume 4,000-5,000 calories a day. seriously. it is. especially nutrient-dense ones with the right composition of carbohydrates, proteins, fats, and acids and minerals necessary to sustain a regular schedule of high-volume aerobic and anaerobic activity. even with 6 meals a day, i find myself struggling to find enough of the right foods. sometimes, i find myself just getting sick of eating--my jaw starts to hurt, i get nausea thinking about food, and i just get mentally fatigued thinking about the need to find food to deal with my hunger.
which is why you invariably start looking for the one thing most blubbery, chubby, chunky, fat Americans are trying to avoid: high-caloric density food.
like pancakes.
pancakes.
pancakes.
P-A-N-C-A-K-E-S.
awwwwwwwwwwwwww yeah, baby!!!
with all their buttery, syrupy, yeasty, shortening-packed griddled goodness.
talk about calories...and all wrapped up in lovey wuvvy waves of sweetness, too!
and don't even tell me that they're fattening, and artery-clogging, and just plain bad for my health. cuz. i. just. do. not. care. if pancakes are bad, baby girl, then you might as well close the gates of heaven, cuz i know where i'll be going!
i cannot begin to tell you the number of times that i have dreamed about pancakes during the course of a long swim, long bike, or long run. the look of pancakes, looking at you, calling your name. the smell of pancakes, wafting with the aroma of batter frying on the pan, luring you forth from bed. the feel of pancakes, fluffy and oh soooooooooo soooooooft. the taste of pancakes, melting smooth and sweet and buttery in your mouth, just aching to be matched with your morning coffee.
oh my god. it's better than sex.
and all this time i thought i was the only one.
but now i know i'm not.
here's some great sites dedicated to pancakes (including, of course, recipes):
i have a special fondness in my heart for the last one--plättar. it's the first pancake i ever had, and holds a special spot in the fond memories of my youth in Sweden. i still make trips to the cafe' in Ikea stores just for a taste. and just to really reprazent the Swedish nation, i should give you: http://www.ica.se/FrontServlet?s=mat_recept&state=recept&receptid=292828
of course, now as an adult, my worldly awareness and culinary sophistication has grown with my growth in cultural cosmopolitanism, and so i'm now happy to get any pancakes of any kind, and can appreciate each one as a reflection of the best aspects of their respective culture.
which reminds me...i did a 6-hr. bike ride today, and it was hard (courtesy of a strong headwind blasting the wrong way down some really nice hills). it made me really am hungry. and some pancakes would be really good right about now...
some of my friends in athletics are either vegan or vegetarian. in some ways, it puts them at a disadvantage relative to other athletes, particularly in terms of locating sources of protein and useful oils & fats--i mean, a disadvantage in the sense that they have to put in extra work to learn where they can get the daily amount of each required for an active athlete (it's not something most people are taught in the course of growing up). in other ways, however, it actually puts them at an advantage in the sense that vegan and vegetarian diets eliminate a lot of the junk food that surprisingly permeates so many athlete diets.
i wrote in my previous post on nutrition that you'd be surprised at how poor the diets of most athletes are. part of it is laziness, part of it is arrogance, part of it is random paroxysms of disciplinary breakdown, and part of it is just self-indulgence and self-reward for perceived (or even real) sufferings and deprivations of training and racing. regardless, i commented then that my personal experience has been that the people you would most commonly associate with good nutrition are often the people with the worst nutrition altogether.
i am not vegan, nor am i vegetarian. i love meat. LOVE meat. meeeeeeeaaaaaaat!!! mmmmmmmmmmmm!!! yummy!!!
but i have to admit, i do respect my vegan and vegetarian friends. not just because of the adherence to their personal convictions, and not just because they are holding themselves to a diet much more innocuous to the planet than mine, but also because they are maintaining a nutrition regimen far more in keeping with the ideals of what constitutes healthy eating.
good for them...now let me have my elk meat and buffalo steak in peace--and can you pass the A1 steak sauce while you're at it? thanks. that's lovely.
but in support of my vegan & vegetarian athlete friends, i present 2 Youtube videos about vegan & vegetarian athletes (so that you know you're not alone):
note: observe carl lewis' comments about the nutrition of his athlete friends. you can see that he saw/sees the same thing i do: athletes tend to have the worst nutrition.
![[Valid Atom 1.0]](valid-atom.png "Validate my Atom 1.0 feed")
