Th3 Core

>>Harvard nutritionist

Okay, so a registered dietician at a Harvard-affiliated hospital. So she's more of an expert than me, but not like someone who is researching sports nutrition. I didn't pay for the article, but she's focused on a few things

 - added sugars. This one is easy. There are many powders that are single-ingredient. I generally buy just single-ingredient protein supplements.

 - toxic chemicals. That one is tougher. Rice, for example, is notorious for its arsenic content. But that's a recommendation not to eat a lot of rice rather than a recommendation about rice protein (for example). Going organic can help with some chemicals, but arsenic is a function of the soil the crop is grown in (and sometimes a legacy of massive arsenic applications in the past).

She also seems to be focused on people who are *replacing* real food rather than *supplementing* it. A friend was just complaining that for almost a year his wife has only eaten about two meals a week and otherwise just drinks these shakes. That can't be healthy long-term and insofar as the article is addressing those people, I'm sure it's right.

Anyway, a lot of the anti-powder advice is addressed at people who are looking to *replace* meals rather than *supplement* them. I think much better advice comes from your own NHS:

Rick Miller, clinical and sports dietitian from the BDA, has the following advice for gym-goers and bodybuilders who want to take protein supplements:

"A simple change in foods (such as Greek yoghurt in the morning with muesli and fruit, rather than plain breakfast cereal and milk) will help enhance the protein content of a meal.

"After you have taken this step, fill in the gaps with a reputable brand of protein supplement.

https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/healthy-body/body-building-sports-supplements-facts/

Also, I know that you, like me, are trying to balance protein intake with planetary impact. I notice that I can workout all I want and do not put on muscle without protein supplements - so I've recently been trying to force myself to throw down a scoop or two of protein powder each day. It's hardly double-blind, but I feel like my recovery is faster. A few days into that change, I wend for a ten-mile run and felt pretty worked at the end of it, but bounced back quicker than I have been coming back from shorter runs.

My other option would be to eat huge amounts of animal protein, but I prefer not to do that. Protein powders fill in the gap. But they fill the *gap*, they don't replace real food.

REad this though about overuse of supplements. It's scary
https://www.abc.net.au/triplej/programs/hack/how-getting-shredded-on-protein-shakes-can-risk-your-health/8879360

REad this though about overuse of supplements. It's scary
https://www.abc.net.au/triplej/programs/hack/how-getting-shredded-on-protein-shakes-can-risk-your-health/8879360

Crikey!

I skim-read it. The article speaks from an Australian narative, but it is basically the same in the US.   It first talks about a woman who had a rare condition where she couldn't properly handle protein and she died.  Later it talks about someone who had liver problems from getting too much caffeine from the green tee extract in his protein powder.  I think the point of the article is really about how the supplement industry is basically the Wild West.  Both the problems outlined aren't from long term use, more about acute toxicity from bad supplements and/or over use.  You could probably shield yourself from most of the risk by not overdoing them and by sticking to established brands. 

4/4 for me last week

2/3 last week

4/4 gym sessions last week.  I've also been doing sprints with light recovery jogs in the evenings.

Been on a new thing - very slow running. Goes by many names: Low heart rate running, MAF, aerobic threshold (AeT) training. But the general idea is that you are running (or biking or whatever) at a pace that keeps your blood lactate below 2 mMol/liter. Since I don't have a lactate monitor (!!), I use the MAF guideline - 180 minus your age. For me that means keeping my average pulse below 124. Which is basically crawling for me.

The idea is to train your aerobic systems rather than lactate threshold (LT) training that trains LT and VO2 Max, but trains the aerobic system mostly by accident.

LT - increases stroke volume, lactate clearing, that sort of thing. So you can stave off depletion, but you are depleting your glycogen stores and when they are gone, you bonk. It doesn't matter how much lactate training you do, you will bonk if you go far enough.

AeT - basically is increasing mitochondria and, therefore, your ability to tap fat reserves, so you are not depleting your glycogen. So you may experience extreme muscle fatigue, but you don't bonk because your fat reserves always have more fuel than your muscles can sustain.

Anyway, I've recently become aware that the endurance athletes that I admire have been doing this for year and all this time I've basically been running too hard. This goes back to Mark Allen's victory in what is considered the greatest Ironman race ever run where he beat Dave Scott. This came after Allen spent six months doing slow running under the guidance of Phil Maffetone, originator of the MAF system.

Anyway, it's humbling, frustrating, difficult... but I'm really enjoying it.

ketogenic diet?

I have friends who are hardcore keto. My feeling looking at how they eat is that I just like my carbs too much. I'm not willing to give up bread and ice cream to be healthier or a better athlete. As Clint says, "A man's got to know his limitations."

And note that Eliud Kipchoge is not keto or close to it. He eats a lot of whole foods, including grains. Of course, the way he runs, I'm not sure a marathon is even an endurance event anymore.