Forums: Climbing Information: General:
"Real food" vs "Just calories"
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for General

Premier Sponsor:

 
First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All


bustloose


Nov 8, 2010, 11:24 AM
Post #26 of 48 (1764 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 10, 2003
Posts: 489

Re: [spikeddem] "Real food" vs "Just calories" [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

spikeddem wrote:
tradrenn wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
tradrenn wrote:
aerili wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
I'm only going to address the water vs coke issue. Caffeine is a diuretic.
Well, the physiologists are disagreeing on that theory now.

Would you have a link for that ?

There's a link in the second reply in this thread for what you seek.

Looks like Coke is sponsoring them.

That's what I thought at first glance, but it seems more like Coke is just referencing the study. The study itself seemed to be independent of any suspect funding.

Go look up what Dr. Colgan has to say about caffeine and performance. in essence he notes that all tests on caffeine and athletics are done with couch potatoes, not true athletes which greatly skews the findings.
He suggests that the diuretic effect of caffeine in normal doses will have no effect on a properly hydrated athlete. He also notes that you will receive no performance benefits from normal doses of caffeine, especially if you intake caffeine regularly.


kachoong


Nov 8, 2010, 11:26 AM
Post #27 of 48 (1761 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 22, 2004
Posts: 15304

Re: [bustloose] "Real food" vs "Just calories" [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

bustloose wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
tradrenn wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
tradrenn wrote:
aerili wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
I'm only going to address the water vs coke issue. Caffeine is a diuretic.
Well, the physiologists are disagreeing on that theory now.

Would you have a link for that ?

There's a link in the second reply in this thread for what you seek.

Looks like Coke is sponsoring them.

That's what I thought at first glance, but it seems more like Coke is just referencing the study. The study itself seemed to be independent of any suspect funding.

Go look up what Dr. Colgan has to say about caffeine and performance. in essence he notes that all tests on caffeine and athletics are done with couch potatoes, not true athletes which greatly skews the findings.
He suggests that the diuretic effect of caffeine in normal doses will have no effect on a properly hydrated athlete. He also notes that you will receive no performance benefits from normal doses of caffeine, especially if you intake caffeine regularly.

You'd be surprised how good for you couch potatoes are. With the skin is supposedly better.


bustloose


Nov 8, 2010, 12:31 PM
Post #28 of 48 (1741 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 10, 2003
Posts: 489

Re: [kachoong] "Real food" vs "Just calories" [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

kachoong wrote:
bustloose wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
tradrenn wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
tradrenn wrote:
aerili wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
I'm only going to address the water vs coke issue. Caffeine is a diuretic.
Well, the physiologists are disagreeing on that theory now.

Would you have a link for that ?

There's a link in the second reply in this thread for what you seek.

Looks like Coke is sponsoring them.

That's what I thought at first glance, but it seems more like Coke is just referencing the study. The study itself seemed to be independent of any suspect funding.

Go look up what Dr. Colgan has to say about caffeine and performance. in essence he notes that all tests on caffeine and athletics are done with couch potatoes, not true athletes which greatly skews the findings.
He suggests that the diuretic effect of caffeine in normal doses will have no effect on a properly hydrated athlete. He also notes that you will receive no performance benefits from normal doses of caffeine, especially if you intake caffeine regularly.

You'd be surprised how good for you couch potatoes are. With the skin is supposedly better.

provided you bake them instead of deep fry of course!


jt512


Nov 8, 2010, 12:37 PM
Post #29 of 48 (1739 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21904

Re: [K-Tanz] "Real food" vs "Just calories" [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

K-Tanz wrote:
High fructose corn syrup is burned especially fast . . .

No it isn't.

In reply to:
. . . and will spike things like insulin faster than table or "real" sugar.

No it won't. If by "real" sugar you mean sucrose, then I would expect the insulin response of high fructose corn syrup and "real" sugar to be similar.

Jay


jt512


Nov 8, 2010, 12:51 PM
Post #30 of 48 (1729 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21904

Re: [spikeddem] "Real food" vs "Just calories" [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

spikeddem wrote:
theextremist04 wrote:
From my endurance mountain biking background, eating food that tastes good is really important. But try to find balance- PB&J is good, Poptarts, Snickers, etc. instead of just pure sugar.

How is a Snickers balanced? What's keeping it off the "pure sugar" side?

Well, it's 44% fat.

Jay


bearbreeder


Nov 8, 2010, 12:59 PM
Post #31 of 48 (1721 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [seatbeltpants] "Real food" vs "Just calories" [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

just eat .... dont worry about it too much as long as you get enough carbs and protein

its not like yr going out for a multiweek expedition anyways

when yr burning 4000-5000 calories a day or more ,,,, the bigger danger is not eating or hydrating enough


jt512


Nov 8, 2010, 1:08 PM
Post #32 of 48 (1714 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21904

Re: [bustloose] "Real food" vs "Just calories" [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

bustloose wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
tradrenn wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
tradrenn wrote:
aerili wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
I'm only going to address the water vs coke issue. Caffeine is a diuretic.
Well, the physiologists are disagreeing on that theory now.

Would you have a link for that ?

There's a link in the second reply in this thread for what you seek.

Looks like Coke is sponsoring them.

That's what I thought at first glance, but it seems more like Coke is just referencing the study. The study itself seemed to be independent of any suspect funding.

Go look up what Dr. Colgan has to say about caffeine and performance. in essence he notes that all tests on caffeine and athletics are done with couch potatoes, not true athletes which greatly skews the findings.

I don't know who Dr. Colgan is, but if he said that then he doesn't know what he is talking about. There have been dozens of studies of the effect of caffeine on well-trained to elite athletes.

That said, where do most climbers fall on the couch-potato–true-athlete continuum, anyway.

Jay


Partner happiegrrrl


Nov 9, 2010, 12:09 PM
Post #33 of 48 (1631 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 4660

Re: [jt512] "Real food" vs "Just calories" [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

To the OP - Tucjer Tech, who puts up routes in JTree, in a swami, has never pulled any snack from his pack other than cans of beer, from what I have witnessed. Whiskey Mike, a local Gunkie, seems to subsist on ...whiskey...and pretzels and Twizzler licorice, and he leads 10's.

If you're into the concept of maximizing performance and nutrition is one of the tools, that's fine(and then yeah...maybe soda and chips isn't the best plan). But it seems to me plenty of climbers have gone pretty far with not such a focus on food....


bustloose


Nov 9, 2010, 12:31 PM
Post #34 of 48 (1620 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 10, 2003
Posts: 489

Re: [jt512] "Real food" vs "Just calories" [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jt512 wrote:
bustloose wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
tradrenn wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
tradrenn wrote:
aerili wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
I'm only going to address the water vs coke issue. Caffeine is a diuretic.
Well, the physiologists are disagreeing on that theory now.

Would you have a link for that ?

There's a link in the second reply in this thread for what you seek.

Looks like Coke is sponsoring them.

That's what I thought at first glance, but it seems more like Coke is just referencing the study. The study itself seemed to be independent of any suspect funding.

Go look up what Dr. Colgan has to say about caffeine and performance. in essence he notes that all tests on caffeine and athletics are done with couch potatoes, not true athletes which greatly skews the findings.

I don't know who Dr. Colgan is, but if he said that then he doesn't know what he is talking about. There have been dozens of studies of the effect of caffeine on well-trained to elite athletes.

That said, where do most climbers fall on the couch-potato–true-athlete continuum, anyway.

Jay

I promise you Jay, that he knows what he is talking about. But i refuse to argue it with you, for obvious reasons


sbaclimber


Nov 9, 2010, 1:01 PM
Post #35 of 48 (1606 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 21, 2004
Posts: 3118

Re: [bustloose] "Real food" vs "Just calories" [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

bustloose wrote:
jt512 wrote:
bustloose wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
tradrenn wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
tradrenn wrote:
aerili wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
I'm only going to address the water vs coke issue. Caffeine is a diuretic.
Well, the physiologists are disagreeing on that theory now.

Would you have a link for that ?

There's a link in the second reply in this thread for what you seek.

Looks like Coke is sponsoring them.

That's what I thought at first glance, but it seems more like Coke is just referencing the study. The study itself seemed to be independent of any suspect funding.

Go look up what Dr. Colgan has to say about caffeine and performance. in essence he notes that all tests on caffeine and athletics are done with couch potatoes, not true athletes which greatly skews the findings.

I don't know who Dr. Colgan is, but if he said that then he doesn't know what he is talking about. There have been dozens of studies of the effect of caffeine on well-trained to elite athletes.

That said, where do most climbers fall on the couch-potato–true-athlete continuum, anyway.

Jay

I promise you Jay, that he knows what he is talking about. But i refuse to argue it with you, for obvious reasons
I don't know (or care) what Jay thinks about this guy or your opinion of him, but one look at his website makes me 100% skeptical of anything he might have to say convinces me that is only trying to sell me something....Pirate

Edit for clarification Wink

I suspect there is *plonk* about to be heard...


(This post was edited by sbaclimber on Nov 9, 2010, 1:06 PM)


spikeddem


Nov 9, 2010, 1:06 PM
Post #36 of 48 (1599 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319

Re: [sbaclimber] "Real food" vs "Just calories" [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

sbaclimber wrote:
bustloose wrote:
jt512 wrote:
bustloose wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
tradrenn wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
tradrenn wrote:
aerili wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
I'm only going to address the water vs coke issue. Caffeine is a diuretic.
Well, the physiologists are disagreeing on that theory now.

Would you have a link for that ?

There's a link in the second reply in this thread for what you seek.

Looks like Coke is sponsoring them.

That's what I thought at first glance, but it seems more like Coke is just referencing the study. The study itself seemed to be independent of any suspect funding.

Go look up what Dr. Colgan has to say about caffeine and performance. in essence he notes that all tests on caffeine and athletics are done with couch potatoes, not true athletes which greatly skews the findings.

I don't know who Dr. Colgan is, but if he said that then he doesn't know what he is talking about. There have been dozens of studies of the effect of caffeine on well-trained to elite athletes.

That said, where do most climbers fall on the couch-potato–true-athlete continuum, anyway.

Jay

I promise you Jay, that he knows what he is talking about. But i refuse to argue it with you, for obvious reasons
I don't know (or care) what Jay thinks about this guy or your opinion of him, but one look at his website makes me 100% skeptical of anything he might have to say convinces me that is only trying to sell me something....Pirate

Edit for clarification Wink

I suspect there is *plonk* about to be heard...

And a +1


silascl


Nov 9, 2010, 1:08 PM
Post #37 of 48 (1598 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 14, 2006
Posts: 225

Re: [bustloose] "Real food" vs "Just calories" [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

bustloose wrote:
jt512 wrote:
bustloose wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
tradrenn wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
tradrenn wrote:
aerili wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
I'm only going to address the water vs coke issue. Caffeine is a diuretic.
Well, the physiologists are disagreeing on that theory now.

Would you have a link for that ?

There's a link in the second reply in this thread for what you seek.

Looks like Coke is sponsoring them.

That's what I thought at first glance, but it seems more like Coke is just referencing the study. The study itself seemed to be independent of any suspect funding.

Go look up what Dr. Colgan has to say about caffeine and performance. in essence he notes that all tests on caffeine and athletics are done with couch potatoes, not true athletes which greatly skews the findings.

I don't know who Dr. Colgan is, but if he said that then he doesn't know what he is talking about. There have been dozens of studies of the effect of caffeine on well-trained to elite athletes.

That said, where do most climbers fall on the couch-potato–true-athlete continuum, anyway.

Jay

I promise you Jay, that he knows what he is talking about. But i refuse to argue it with you, for obvious reasons

Not to be pedantic, but the claim you've made, that there are no studies on the effects of caffeine in true athletes is dead wrong. I reference such a study halfway down the first page of this thread.


hafilax


Nov 9, 2010, 1:18 PM
Post #38 of 48 (1589 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 11, 2007
Posts: 3025

Re: [silascl] "Real food" vs "Just calories" [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

IIRC, caffeine aids in converting fat into energy.


jt512


Nov 9, 2010, 2:58 PM
Post #39 of 48 (1569 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21904

Re: [bustloose] "Real food" vs "Just calories" [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

bustloose wrote:
jt512 wrote:
bustloose wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
tradrenn wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
tradrenn wrote:
aerili wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
I'm only going to address the water vs coke issue. Caffeine is a diuretic.
Well, the physiologists are disagreeing on that theory now.

Would you have a link for that ?

There's a link in the second reply in this thread for what you seek.

Looks like Coke is sponsoring them.

That's what I thought at first glance, but it seems more like Coke is just referencing the study. The study itself seemed to be independent of any suspect funding.

Go look up what Dr. Colgan has to say about caffeine and performance. in essence he notes that all tests on caffeine and athletics are done with couch potatoes, not true athletes which greatly skews the findings.

I don't know who Dr. Colgan is, but if he said that then he doesn't know what he is talking about. There have been dozens of studies of the effect of caffeine on well-trained to elite athletes.

That said, where do most climbers fall on the couch-potato–true-athlete continuum, anyway.

Jay

I promise you Jay, that he knows what he is talking about. But i refuse to argue it with you, for obvious reasons

Nice innuendo: "for obvious reasons." The only obvious reason you don't want to "argue" is that you're been caught dead wrong and have no argument to make.

You can make all the promises you want, but you've already demonstrated one of two things: Dr. Whats-his-name doesn't know what he's talking about (or he just lies), or you've misrepresented what he said. Like I said, there are dozens of studies of the effect of caffeine intake on athletic performance in highly trained athletes; and anybody who says otherwise is either grossly misinformed or lying.

Jay


bustloose


Nov 10, 2010, 12:55 PM
Post #40 of 48 (1516 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 10, 2003
Posts: 489

Re: [silascl] "Real food" vs "Just calories" [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

silascl wrote:
bustloose wrote:
jt512 wrote:
bustloose wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
tradrenn wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
tradrenn wrote:
aerili wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
I'm only going to address the water vs coke issue. Caffeine is a diuretic.
Well, the physiologists are disagreeing on that theory now.

Would you have a link for that ?

There's a link in the second reply in this thread for what you seek.

Looks like Coke is sponsoring them.

That's what I thought at first glance, but it seems more like Coke is just referencing the study. The study itself seemed to be independent of any suspect funding.

Go look up what Dr. Colgan has to say about caffeine and performance. in essence he notes that all tests on caffeine and athletics are done with couch potatoes, not true athletes which greatly skews the findings.

I don't know who Dr. Colgan is, but if he said that then he doesn't know what he is talking about. There have been dozens of studies of the effect of caffeine on well-trained to elite athletes.

That said, where do most climbers fall on the couch-potato–true-athlete continuum, anyway.

Jay

I promise you Jay, that he knows what he is talking about. But i refuse to argue it with you, for obvious reasons

Not to be pedantic, but the claim you've made, that there are no studies on the effects of caffeine in true athletes is dead wrong. I reference such a study halfway down the first page of this thread.

yes, i should have qualified that this comes from older literature. you have pointed out that there has been more recent research done on the subject, i have not ever looked for it. the point is that points he makes are still valid, and i would imagine that they are in line with recent studies on the effects of caffeine and performance.

and jay, you can just f*ck off, for obvious reasons.


sbaclimber


Nov 10, 2010, 1:00 PM
Post #41 of 48 (1512 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 21, 2004
Posts: 3118

Re: [bustloose] "Real food" vs "Just calories" [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

bustloose wrote:
silascl wrote:
bustloose wrote:
jt512 wrote:
bustloose wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
tradrenn wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
tradrenn wrote:
aerili wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
I'm only going to address the water vs coke issue. Caffeine is a diuretic.
Well, the physiologists are disagreeing on that theory now.

Would you have a link for that ?

There's a link in the second reply in this thread for what you seek.

Looks like Coke is sponsoring them.

That's what I thought at first glance, but it seems more like Coke is just referencing the study. The study itself seemed to be independent of any suspect funding.

Go look up what Dr. Colgan has to say about caffeine and performance. in essence he notes that all tests on caffeine and athletics are done with couch potatoes, not true athletes which greatly skews the findings.

I don't know who Dr. Colgan is, but if he said that then he doesn't know what he is talking about. There have been dozens of studies of the effect of caffeine on well-trained to elite athletes.

That said, where do most climbers fall on the couch-potato–true-athlete continuum, anyway.

Jay

I promise you Jay, that he knows what he is talking about. But i refuse to argue it with you, for obvious reasons

Not to be pedantic, but the claim you've made, that there are no studies on the effects of caffeine in true athletes is dead wrong. I reference such a study halfway down the first page of this thread.

yes, i should have qualified that this comes from older literature. you have pointed out that there has been more recent research done on the subject, i have not ever looked for it. the point is that points he makes are still valid, and i would imagine that they are in line with recent studies on the effects of caffeine and performance.

and jay, you can just f*ck off, for obvious reasons.
...and yet another example of a spectacularly flawed understanding of how science works....
Anyone could still claim that the sun revolves around the earth is still a "valid" point if they choose to ignore the "more recent" research....Crazy

Edit: what's the max number of sub-quotes? Tongue


(This post was edited by sbaclimber on Nov 10, 2010, 1:01 PM)


jt512


Nov 10, 2010, 1:02 PM
Post #42 of 48 (1509 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21904

Re: [bustloose] "Real food" vs "Just calories" [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (5 ratings)  
Can't Post

bustloose wrote:
silascl wrote:
bustloose wrote:
jt512 wrote:
bustloose wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
tradrenn wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
tradrenn wrote:
aerili wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
I'm only going to address the water vs coke issue. Caffeine is a diuretic.
Well, the physiologists are disagreeing on that theory now.

Would you have a link for that ?

There's a link in the second reply in this thread for what you seek.

Looks like Coke is sponsoring them.

That's what I thought at first glance, but it seems more like Coke is just referencing the study. The study itself seemed to be independent of any suspect funding.

Go look up what Dr. Colgan has to say about caffeine and performance. in essence he notes that all tests on caffeine and athletics are done with couch potatoes, not true athletes which greatly skews the findings.

I don't know who Dr. Colgan is, but if he said that then he doesn't know what he is talking about. There have been dozens of studies of the effect of caffeine on well-trained to elite athletes.

That said, where do most climbers fall on the couch-potato–true-athlete continuum, anyway.

Jay

I promise you Jay, that he knows what he is talking about. But i refuse to argue it with you, for obvious reasons

Not to be pedantic, but the claim you've made, that there are no studies on the effects of caffeine in true athletes is dead wrong. I reference such a study halfway down the first page of this thread.

yes, i should have qualified that this comes from older literature. you have pointed out that there has been more recent research done on the subject, i have not ever looked for it. the point is that points he makes are still valid, and i would imagine that they are in line with recent studies on the effects of caffeine and performance.

and jay, you can just f*ck off, for obvious reasons.

That was completely uncalled for.

Jay


hafilax


Nov 10, 2010, 1:06 PM
Post #43 of 48 (1504 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 11, 2007
Posts: 3025

Re: [seatbeltpants] "Real food" vs "Just calories" [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I think that good food will help you recover better especially the next day but you might not feel much difference the day of. If you struggle to eat real food while climbing then empty calories are probably better than none. Some sugar post climb should help a bit with glycogen replenishment.

real food > just calories > nothing


sspssp


Nov 11, 2010, 1:35 PM
Post #44 of 48 (1439 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 1731

Re: [spikeddem] "Real food" vs "Just calories" [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

spikeddem wrote:
I'm only going to address the water vs coke issue. Caffeine is a diuretic. Your coke isn't hydrating you.

So when I spent three weeks traveling abroad and drank nothing but coke out of a can, I actually died of dehydration and I have been in hell ever since (chained to a keyboard/internet).


sspssp


Nov 11, 2010, 1:39 PM
Post #45 of 48 (1437 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 1731

Re: [seatbeltpants] "Real food" vs "Just calories" [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

seatbeltpants wrote:
when i am climbing though i essentially just try to consume water, carbs, and a bit of other stuff during the day. i find that i eat more if i want to eat what i bring, so instead of pure water fresh sprung from a virgin mountain, i drink coke. instead of an organic rye sandwich with wild ham and free range mustard, i eat a packet of corn chips and a chunk of salami.

is this actually so bad?

I find it hard to eat enough calories, especially in really warm or cold conditions. I agree totally that bringing stuff, that you might not want as part of your permanent diet, that you enjoy more can help.

I can understand those who claim that downing a liter of soda and a chocolate bar will lead to a sugar crash. But for me, low sugar is a problem. I find sipping sugary drinks over the course of the day helps me stay active/energetic. Although I usually go sports drink like gatorade.

I don't know about you, but I drink so much coffee that the caffeine in a coke is irrelevant.


bill413


Nov 11, 2010, 5:27 PM
Post #46 of 48 (1403 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 19, 2004
Posts: 5674

Re: [sspssp] "Real food" vs "Just calories" [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

sspssp wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
I'm only going to address the water vs coke issue. Caffeine is a diuretic. Your coke isn't hydrating you.

So when I spent three weeks traveling abroad and drank nothing but coke out of a can, I actually died of dehydration and I have been in hell ever since (chained to a keyboard/internet).

Well, there's your proof right there.


onceahardman


Nov 11, 2010, 5:59 PM
Post #47 of 48 (1394 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 3, 2007
Posts: 2493

Re: [bustloose] "Real food" vs "Just calories" [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

In reply to:
and jay, you can just f*ck off, for obvious reasons.

I agree, this was completely uncalled for. If you want to argue nutrition or exercise physiology as it relates to caffeine, have at it. Defend the science.

When you instead argue ad hominem,or "against the man", you make a logical error. This weakens the rest of your point.

Likewise, when you "appeal to authority" without being familiar with the literature.

I'm not saying you have to "like" Jay, I'm saying you have poorly defended your opinion.


theguy


Nov 11, 2010, 6:47 PM
Post #48 of 48 (1378 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 13, 2004
Posts: 469

Re: [jt512] "Real food" vs "Just calories" [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jt512 wrote:
That was completely uncalled for.

Jay

Since the last post bemoaning the current state of the site, the tone seems to have improved, and I think I have to give much of the credit to Jay, since he had been responsible for much of the tone prior to that post.

So I believe Jay's right: let's encourage current good behaviour, rather than tar people for past bad behaviour, particularly when the tarring itself exemplifies that sort of behaviour.

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Climbing Information : General

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook