Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Weight loss chat

A space to talk openly about weight loss journeys and challenges. Mumsnet hasn't checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. You may wish to speak to a medical professional before starting any diet.

Lowcarb eating and running stamina/energy levels.....

35 replies

toadette · 24/06/2008 17:41

I have started eating low carb today. Plan is to follow it for a week or two before re-introducing some complex carbs (and try to lose my craving for starchy, refined carbs in the process hopefully).

I run between 3.5 and 5 miles twice a week and wondering if the lack of carbs will effect my stamina and energy levels at this distance (especially as I am running a 5k this weekend with a friend and don't want to slow her down!)

Thanks, toadette

OP posts:
toadette · 25/06/2008 14:14

Ah, now that does make sense Orm

OP posts:
dinny · 25/06/2008 14:30

yes, tis true - you need to work less hard than you think to fat-burn - think my optimum fat-burning HR is 120bpm, which for me is a steady jog usually

though can't even get it up that high on X-trainer atm, due to bad back ARGH, sooooo pissed off!

gladders · 25/06/2008 14:37

sorry to be a bore but - if you used that logic, then a long slow marathon would be burning fat from the beginning?

this is not the case - you have to carbo load so that you can burn glycogen for as much as possible of the marathon.

converting to burning fat = hitting the wall which happens after about 20 miles and is extremely painful.

think toadette's links are right and it's all a myth.....

OrmIrian · 25/06/2008 14:39

OK. I must just be very lucky then.

stitch · 25/06/2008 14:40

i was going to post, but orm has already posted,
i wouldnt start the atkins just before the fk race,
the first week energy levels really diminish. and then come back better than ever before, if youpersevers.

gladders · 25/06/2008 14:44

don't think it's luck - longer runs will always burn more calories than short ones?

think the concept of fat burning heart rates is a red herring here?

minorbird · 25/06/2008 14:51

I think athletes monitor heart rate but I suppose thats just for performance related purposes rather than for fat burning! Its a weird one cos in the bodybuilding world (which I dip into) they prefer shorter faster stuff to burn fat... whereas I agree that the longer ones are better - I love to check my garmin after a long one and see 1000 plus calories burnt!!!

toadette · 25/06/2008 14:53

Stitch, how long did it take for your energy to pick back up again?

Think I'm definitely going to leave it until after the 5k. Will do lowGI instead and maybe do the odd spell of lowcarb to speed things up if I know I won't be running for a short period. The low carb plan attracted me because it would curb my snack attacks (can demolish half a packet of biscuits in no time, then lying on sofa an hour or two later feeling sluggish).

OP posts:
43Today · 25/06/2008 14:56

I agree with Toadette's research, it is a myth. And I also agree with OrmIrian that I lose more fat when I do long runs.

I think it's that the total cals burnt during my long runs (say 10k) is much higher than during a shorter run even if I run harder. Obviously a short fast run is harder work, but it can't be twice as hard work as a long slower run..

So if you increase the time you run, even if it's a somewhat slower pace, the likelihood is you burn more calories, and therefore more fat.

Plus I have read somewhere that running is linked to burning of abdominal fat stores specifically. I'll try to find a link if I can.

stitch · 25/06/2008 16:45

started on monday. did a gym workout mondaymorning, then a very slow lethargic walk hom on thursday afternoon. back in the gym on saturday, with a vengeance.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread