Gels vs Gatorade

Peter Cole wrote:

From the Gatorade online literature, describing a 1993:
"Following the ACSM roundtable the scientists in attendance issued a consensus
statement which is reprinted below.


Prolonged exercise performance can be impaired by depletion of the body's
energy stores and by disturbances of water and electrolyte balance. The aim of
an oral rehydration solution for use in exercise and sports should be to
optimize the provision of carbohydrate, water, and electrolytes. Water uptake
in the intestine is maximized by hypotonic solutions containing glucose and
sodium, but such solutions may not provide sufficient carbohydrate to optimize
prolonged and intense exercise performance. Alternatively, relatively high
concentrations of carbohydrate will reduce the rate of water absorption and
maximize the supply of carbohydrate.

The addition of different energy sources, including various forms of
carbohydrate and perhaps other substrates, may offer some advantage to human
performance by further stimulating water uptake. Sodium plays an important
role in the stimulation of carbohydrate and water absorption in the intestine,
but less is known about the optimal amount needed for oral-rehydration
solutions.

The absorptive capacity of the intestine is generally adequate to cope with
even the most extreme demands. Intestinal blood flow is reduced in strenuous
exercise, and sustained reductions in blood flow are known to impair
absorptive capacity. At the intensities of exercise that can be sustained for
more than 30 minutes, there appears to be little effect of exercise on
intestinal function. "

******************************************

That seems to be a reasonable synopsis, although I don't think it
contradicts the statements about the use of sugars in "The Endurance
Athlete's Guide to Success". If anything, it seems to agree with it
(low concentration solution promotes absorbtion, high concentration
reduces absorbtion).
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://bike.terrymorse.com/

Andy Coggan wrote:

Terry Morse wrote:

"Fructose, sucrose, glucose and other simple sugars...absorb
poorly, cause wild energy fluctuations, and require excess water
consumption...Complex carbohydrates...are the wisest choice for
endurance athletes, as they allow your digestive system to rapidly
and efficienlty process a greater volume of calories, providing
steady energy." - S. Born, "The Endurance Athlete's Guide to
Suceess", an E-Caps/Hammer Nutrition publication

Granted, this is coming from a company that's trying to sell its own
line of sports nutrition products. Please explain why you think their
reasoning is all wrong.

It's simple: their statement is unsupported by the scientific literature.
For example, see:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...bmed&dopt=Abst
ract&list_uids=6390613

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...bmed&dopt=Abst
ract&list_uids=1936083

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...bmed&dopt=Abst
ract&list_uids=1406206

Okay, one section of the last abstract jumps out:

"No apparent differences exist between glucose, sucrose, or
maltodextrins in their ability to improve performance. Ingesting
fructose during exercise, however, does not improve performance and
may cause gastrointestinal distress."

So you're saying that the choice of carbohydrate doesn't affect
performace, unless it's fructose, which should be avoided. Okay.
What about Born's implied claim that maltodextrin has a higher
calorie content at a given concentration, and thus provides more
fuel at the same water absorption?
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://bike.terrymorse.com/

Andy Coggan wrote:

Terry Morse wrote:

"Fructose, sucrose, glucose and other simple sugars...absorb
poorly, cause wild energy fluctuations, and require excess water
consumption...Complex carbohydrates...are the wisest choice for
endurance athletes, as they allow your digestive system to rapidly
and efficienlty process a greater volume of calories, providing
steady energy." - S. Born, "The Endurance Athlete's Guide to
Suceess", an E-Caps/Hammer Nutrition publication

Granted, this is coming from a company that's trying to sell its own
line of sports nutrition products. Please explain why you think their
reasoning is all wrong.

It's simple: their statement is unsupported by the scientific literature.
For example, see:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...bmed&dopt=Abst
ract&list_uids=6390613

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...bmed&dopt=Abst
ract&list_uids=1936083

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...bmed&dopt=Abst
ract&list_uids=1406206

Okay, one section of the last abstract jumps out:

"No apparent differences exist between glucose, sucrose, or
maltodextrins in their ability to improve performance. Ingesting
fructose during exercise, however, does not improve performance and
may cause gastrointestinal distress."

So you're saying that the choice of carbohydrate doesn't affect
performace, unless it's fructose, which should be avoided. Okay.
What about Born's implied claim that maltodextrin has a higher
calorie content at a given concentration, and thus provides more
fuel at the same water absorption?
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://bike.terrymorse.com/

Terry Morse wrote:

What about Born's implied claim that maltodextrin has a higher
calorie content at a given concentration, and thus provides more
fuel at the same water absorption?

Never mind, I see that you answered this further down the thread.
Thanks.

Are there any benefits to maltodextrin over sucrose/glucose, such as
maintaining blood glucose levels for a longer time? This might make
it preferable as a pre-race fuel.
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://bike.terrymorse.com/

Terry Morse wrote:

What about Born's implied claim that maltodextrin has a higher
calorie content at a given concentration, and thus provides more
fuel at the same water absorption?

Never mind, I see that you answered this further down the thread.
Thanks.

Are there any benefits to maltodextrin over sucrose/glucose, such as
maintaining blood glucose levels for a longer time? This might make
it preferable as a pre-race fuel.
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://bike.terrymorse.com/

On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 08:34:17 -0700, Terry Morse
wrote:

Peter Cole wrote:

"Terry Morse" wrote

Granted, this is coming from a company that's trying to sell its own
line of sports nutrition products. Please explain why you think their
reasoning is all wrong.

I think you answered your own question.

Not good enough. Arguments still must be refuted or validated,

I made an argument based on succesful practice and you denounced it by
claiming the people with that experience don't know about nutrition.
It seems you have two different standards depending on which side of
the discussion the evidence is on.

JT

On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 08:34:17 -0700, Terry Morse
wrote:

Peter Cole wrote:

"Terry Morse" wrote

Granted, this is coming from a company that's trying to sell its own
line of sports nutrition products. Please explain why you think their
reasoning is all wrong.

I think you answered your own question.

Not good enough. Arguments still must be refuted or validated,

I made an argument based on succesful practice and you denounced it by
claiming the people with that experience don't know about nutrition.
It seems you have two different standards depending on which side of
the discussion the evidence is on.

JT

On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 18:10:32 GMT, "Peter Cole"
wrote:


Pretty much says that if you're dehydrated, you want to stick to hypotonic
solutions at the expense of getting behind on carbs. If not, you can have more
carbs. Doesn't sound very difficult. If you're dehydrated, drinking a Coke
will still give you a boost from carbs, but may make you thirstier, an
indication that you'll have a short-term net plasma drop, but you'll
eventually absorb the water in it. It's common to lose your appetite when
dehydrated, and to lose your thirst with salt depletion, it's just your body's
way of communicating priorities.

Thank you. This is very helpful and, I think, supports my assertion
that strong sugar solutions like Extran can be useful if the rider is
drinking a lot. Something Morse denouncd.

JT

On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 18:10:32 GMT, "Peter Cole"
wrote:


Pretty much says that if you're dehydrated, you want to stick to hypotonic
solutions at the expense of getting behind on carbs. If not, you can have more
carbs. Doesn't sound very difficult. If you're dehydrated, drinking a Coke
will still give you a boost from carbs, but may make you thirstier, an
indication that you'll have a short-term net plasma drop, but you'll
eventually absorb the water in it. It's common to lose your appetite when
dehydrated, and to lose your thirst with salt depletion, it's just your body's
way of communicating priorities.

Thank you. This is very helpful and, I think, supports my assertion
that strong sugar solutions like Extran can be useful if the rider is
drinking a lot. Something Morse denouncd.

JT

I know it makes me look like a petty asshole, but I've got to repost
this, which was written earlier this this thread by someone else:

"Everything I've described is the state of the art when it comes to
nutrition for the endurance athlete. Dozens of studies have looked
at these issues, in the lab and out. What you have described is
nonsense."

JT