Re: 35, 5, and 2

ounce Thu Oct 03, 2013 1:50 pm

BK level dropped today to 0.5, down from yesterday's 1.6. I was at a training class and everyone agreed that a hamburger would be best for lunch. This somewhat progressive burger joint couldn't give me a cheeseburger with lettuce as the buns, even though they had 25 different toppings, 10 different cheeses, and listed 'honey mustard' on the menu but didn't list mayo or mustard. So, I ate the bun, too. I could have also have consumed more protein grams for the day than my body needed, which also negatively impacted the BK level.

I'm just about convinced that if I eat the majority of my carbs in the morning, that it doesn't downwardly affect the next morning's BK level. 25 grams of carbs seems to be my upper limit ingestion amount and 60 grams of protein per day. That's 340 calories with the rest coming from fat. I have 9 pounds of bacon in the freezer. affraid

But, I eat sausage more for breakfast with eggs because I just love bacon too much and it wouldn't last the week. I cook a pound of bacon a week as much for the drippings as the bacon itself. Creamed spaghetti squash with grated nutmeg seems to be the favored dinner item. Sometimes I sub spinach or summer squash for the spaghetti squash. All three have about 5 grams of carbs, individually.

I need to see if a strip of bacon during a long run works for me or against me. I don't think there's a bacon-flavored Clif's or GU or Larabar.

Rest day today and 15 miles is on the schedule for tomorrow.

Mark B Thu Oct 03, 2013 2:47 pm

Astounding that the burger place couldn't give you a bunless option. Oh, do you use ketchup? Because that's a huge sugar bomb. There is very good quality sugar-free ketchup out there, though it can be hard to find. I think it actually tastes better than the sugary stuff.

Dang, that's a lot of bacon. pig

Ever considered jerky as a race food? Hm. I wonder if there's such a thing as bacon jerky... hm.

ounce Thu Oct 03, 2013 3:59 pm

Mark B wrote:Astounding that the burger place couldn't give you a bunless option. Oh, do you use ketchup? Because that's a huge sugar bomb. There is very good quality sugar-free ketchup out there, though it can be hard to find. I think it actually tastes better than the sugary stuff.

Dang, that's a lot of bacon.

Ever considered jerky as a race food? Hm. I wonder if there's such a thing as bacon jerky... hm.

They could've given it to me in bowl of lettuce, like grilled chicken salad. Based on your earlier recommendation, I had already purchased a little bottle (12 oz i think) of Heinz low-sugar ketchup. It has no added sugar and 1 gram of carbs per tbsp. I figure a tomato has to have some natural sugar in it, so that was fine with me. Seems like it was $2.43 and it does taste good enough. See! I read what you write!

That bacon takes up a lot of space, too. I have it right next to about 6-1 lb packages of grass-fed ground beef that was on date closeout price of $3/lb, instead of $8/lb. I also have 6 pounds of link sausage in the regular refrigerator. All of it was a great deal. That offsets the price of the local yard eggs I buy at the farmers market for $4.50 a dozen.

As far as the jerky, I haven't tasted jerky in probably 30 years because it seemed like such a chore to bite any off. Imagine it as a human chew toy. Some people use the pre-cooked bacon you buy at the store because the fat on the bacon doesn't get greasy, as your body warms up the bacon. I can just imagine some of the looks I'll get from other runners, if I whip out some bacon out of my pocket and chew it up. confused

Something to look forward to seeing.

ounce Fri Oct 04, 2013 9:12 am

BK was 1.0, this morning which is up from 0.5 yesterday.

15 miles was on the schedule and the idea was to test out the calves to see if they are as transparent to the user as it was at 10 miles on Wednesday. I also carried 1 strip of bacon for food and to see how my gut reacts.

The first 6 miles were wonderful at a 13:21 pace, then my left calf started to moan, then by mile 10 it was whining pretty good and I finally stopped at mile 12. I'm putting myself on injured reserve for the calf and get it healed. The right calf was fine. It was 75 degrees with a 73 dewpoint.

Throughout that whole first 6, I was so pleased at how the legs were how they were supposed to be under Nutritional Ketosis. And I was really looking forward to the 2nd half to see how much faster I could run it. I did eat half of the bacon at mile 8 and the other half at mile 11. No side effects, no muss, and no fuss. I don't know if it did anything FOR my body, but it didn't do anything against it.

I have a half marathon race on the 27th and a 20 miler on the 12th. I think I'm going to ditch the 20 and just work on healing the calf through box jumps, massages, rest, and smaller distance running. maybe a parking garage or two.

Michele "1L" Keane Fri Oct 04, 2013 11:50 am

Have you tried a massage for the calf? When I've had calf issues, massage seems to help along with rolling on the foam roller and pressing it down on the roller when you find a knot. It hurts like hell, but it works. I do it all the time when my achilles acts up as the calf is usually my issue.

ounce Fri Oct 04, 2013 12:18 pm

Michele,
Yes, I was thinking of getting one next Saturday and I have a foam roller. Even did some quick rolling on it, this morning. What's so really odd about the calf is that it doesn't hurt until I get some miles into a run. Last week, it was both calves. Today, the right calf behaved.

I'm thinking some jump rope, parking garages and short-height box jumping would help it out. Maybe some weighted sled pulling, too.

I sort of think doing the tempos without properly warming up or just plain overused it on tempos caused the muscles strains. It just needs to get toughened up.

I was tickled to death that I had some spring from the calves in the first 6 miles. Thanks, 1L.

ounce Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:04 pm

I rolled my BK level down to 0.4, this morning as a result of a lunch at Chili's I had where I ate the white rice, not much, but that was the culprit more than likely.

My little pain in the left calf evidently is located deep because I don't notice it until I do something like digging my feet into the ground to pull somebody off the ground. So, I think stair climbing would also be a suitable exercise for rehab.

Mark B Sat Oct 05, 2013 2:00 pm

I wouldn't be surprised if the different action of running at tempo speed is what's set your calf muscles off. One thing you may want to try is an exercise called "eccentric heel drops."

Here's a video that explains one way of doing them:

The way I've done them is to have both feet down, slowly lowering the heels with the knees locked until you reach the full extension, then rising back up to where the sole of your foot is parallel with the ground. Do NOT go up on your tip toes.

Do 15 reps, then do 15 more reps with the knees slightly bent. Repeat until you're crying for momma. Yes, this is the sort of exercise that's supposed to hurt like hell. It's commonly used for achilles problems, but I've found it can help other calf issues, as well.

Have fun!

ounce Sat Oct 05, 2013 11:16 pm

Thanks, Mark, I'll find a curb or stairs to execute that. But if I start typing "Mark, *^%$&%$&^$&*&&)(*^$##$$%!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" , don't take it personally.

Penelope Sun Oct 06, 2013 2:54 am

I vote for a massage for the calfs. Have you tried soaking in epsom salt? That can help for muscle aches, too.
Bacon in the middle of a run...wow. I'd never have the bravery to try something so heavy, but glad to hear it's working!

ounce Sun Oct 06, 2013 8:58 am

Penelope wrote:I vote for a massage for the calfs. Have you tried soaking in epsom salt? That can help for muscle aches, too.
Bacon in the middle of a run...wow. I'd never have the bravery to try something so heavy, but glad to hear it's working!

Thanks for coming by the oasis of fatty acids in the ocean of glycogen, Kathy. Appointment is made for the massage on Saturday. And a few minutes ago, I did 2 sets of 15 of dropping the heels off of a stair step to stretch the calf. I did not burn Mark in effigy, afterwards. No pain on the affected calf, but humorously the right calf whined more.

And the bacon was a thin slice of bacon, not thick cut, so we're talking 5 grams or so in weight? If I bring some sausage, then a pattie of sausage would be 50 grams or an eighth of a pound. That would take longer to chew through and I'd probably eat half at one point, then the other half some miles later. But thanks for the idea!

My BK level was 0.7, this morning, up from yesterday's 0.4. Nice that it went up following a Saturday. I don't get as hungry on the weekend, so I skipped lunch.

Our cold front blew through, last night, and it's presently cloudy, 61 degrees with a 47 degree dewpoint and a north wind of 7. If the clouds clear out, tonight's low will be in the 50's!

dot520 Sun Oct 06, 2013 6:32 pm

I read your blog and instead of trying to understand exactly what you're doing, I just accept it and look for the runs. You're such an experiment and when you write of positives in your chemistry , I applaud you though I won't even pretend to get it.

ounce Sun Oct 06, 2013 10:43 pm

Dot, thanks for the wonderful comment.

Basically, I was tired of doing conventional things and it not working. So, I just started thinking "What if..." and Nutritional Ketosis is one of the avenues that I've taken for this year's cycle.

If it works for me and I successfully complete a marathon, I fully expect not to win any converts because it's a pretty radical departure from what we've been told as the "Gold Standard" as Hal would call carbo-loading. And while it might work for a 6 hour marathoner, there's bound to be something wrong with it for the faster runner.

Mark B Sun Oct 06, 2013 11:44 pm

Ooo! A low in the 50s? That's going to feel great! Embrace it while you can!

As for the burning-in-effigy, I'll just watch out for a burning sensation in the soles of my feet. Flame

ounce Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:16 am

Mark B wrote:Ooo! A low in the 50s? That's going to feel great! Embrace it while you can!

As for the burning-in-effigy, I'll just watch out for a burning sensation in the soles of my feet.

And it might be beneficial, as it might be cool that day. Wink

*30*

wk 8 of 22
This morning, my BK level was at 0.2, lower than yesterday, but still a number. And coming off a weekend, any number on that meter is a good number.

The air temperature was 53 degrees with a dewpoint of...well, in Houston, we don't care about dewpoints with temps in the 50's or lower. But for Mark, the dewpoint was 45 degrees. I wore a long sleeved shirt and shorts mainly because I wasn't sure about the wind being there or not. It sure was blowing yesterday.

I haven't uploaded the mile splits, yet, but I was boogeying along. There was a little left calf pain, lower on the leg than the muscle pain, but that's okay. The weather was quite conducive to boogeying, plus tomorrow's low is to be in the 50's again and maybe even Wednesday.

6.66 miles, 1:24:11, 12:39 pace, 133 avg HR, 154 Max HR during mile 1, 1st half pace 12:59 and 2nd half pace 12:19.

1. 13:04, 135 bpm
2. 12:54, 128 bpm
3. 12:59, 130 bpm
4. 12:34, 133 bpm
5. 12:49, 134 bpm
6. 12:14, 134 bpm
7. 11:37 pace, 143 bpm

I found it amazing that 20 degrees cooler and multiple sub-13 miles at a low 130's HR would come to the surface.

Only my shirt and noggin were wet from sweat. Shoes were dry!

Mark B Mon Oct 07, 2013 10:25 am

Ooo! Dry shoes! Congrats.

(Decent pace, too.)

Michele "1L" Keane Mon Oct 07, 2013 11:24 am

Woohoo!!! Even up here I feel the difference when the temps start to dip and the humidity too. Of course, yesterday the race was in Houston weather and you had Cleveland weather - lol. I wish my shoes would dry from Saturday and yesterday - glad I rotate between 4 pairs.

ounce Mon Oct 07, 2013 12:30 pm

Mark B wrote:Ooo! Dry shoes! Congrats.

(Decent pace, too.)

Yeah, and this pair of shoes were the oldest and almost retired pair. And I never got chilled, until I stopped at the water fountain at the turn back point and the cold sweat from the shirt touched my skin. THAT shortened my water stop. The HR seemed relatively low from what I remembered.

If I could get my legs to adapt as fast as my heart, that would be really cool.

Michele \"1L" Keane wrote:Woohoo!!! Even up here I feel the difference when the temps start to dip and the humidity too. Of course, yesterday the race was in Houston weather and you had Cleveland weather - lol. I wish my shoes would dry from Saturday and yesterday - glad I rotate between 4 pairs.

I rotate three pairs and this year. And when they've been sweat-soaked, I make it a point to thoroughly rinse off the shoes in the sink, before setting them out in the sun to dry. That takes a day or day and a half.

I'll have to come check out your race report.

ounce Tue Oct 08, 2013 8:49 am

This morning, the BK level was 0.4, double yesterday's 0.2. Nutritional Ketosis range is 1.0-3.0 and is the target for maintaining the body's commitment to burning fatty acids. I have found by trial and error that as long as I can have a BK level number (as opposed to a reading of "Lo"), my body doesn't lose it's full commitment to burning fatty acids.

In other words, I'm still driving on a paved road. A reading out of Nutritional Ketosis is like driving on the paved shoulder of a road. A one day "Lo" reading means I'm in the grass and it'll take some slowing down and careful navigating not to spin out of control. A few days of "Lo" and I'm in the ditch. But since I'm a four-wheel drive vehicle with a winch, I can pull myself out and slowly get back on track.

I didn't run this morning because my body was just not wanting to do it, so I got another 90 minutes sleep. Yoga tonight, unless it gets cancelled.

ounce Tue Oct 08, 2013 10:41 pm

Would like to report a cholesterol level that was taken on September 28, courtesy of the Blood Center in Houston. I'm a regular platelet donor and one of the perks is a fasting cholesterol taken once a year. Now, one would think that under the low carb/high fat lifestyle I've been on would cause my Tryglycerides, LDL and Total Cholesterol to shoot up. After all, 75-80% of my daily calories are from saturated fat. Further, the way to coronary heart disease is eating a lot of saturated fat and high cholesterol.

So, I read a book on cholesterol, listened to some people on podcasts and believe the HDL number (good cholesterol) and Triglycerides are the most important figures of a Cholesterol test. And the ratio of Triglycerides to HDL should be less than 1:1. The LDL figure (which is a calculated figure, not an actual count) needs to be broken down by another blood test into Pattern A (big 'n fluffy)particles and Pattern B (small) particles. The HDL figure should be >50 and the Triglycerides figure should be <50. The book is called, "The Great Cholesterol Myth" and is available on amazon.

My last cholesterol test by the Blood Center was in April, 2012 or a full 13 months before starting the LC/HF diet. At that time, I was 80% Paleo, but I was still eating bread and a few sweets, but no pizza.

Total Cholesterol - April 20, 2012 177
Total Cholesterol - Sept 28, 2013 230

LDL-C - April 2012 129
LDL-C - Sept, 2013 148

HDL - April 2012 51
HDL - Sept, 2013 69

Triglycerides - April 2012 47
Triglycerides - Sept 2013 53

Triglycerides to HDL Ratio - April 2012 0.92:1
Triglycerides to HDL Ratio - Sept 2013 0.77:1

To your health.

Michael Enright Wed Oct 09, 2013 8:22 am

ounce wrote:Would like to report a cholesterol level that was taken on September 28, courtesy of the Blood Center in Houston. I'm a regular platelet donor and one of the perks is a fasting cholesterol taken once a year. Now, one would think that under the low carb/high fat lifestyle I've been on would cause my Tryglycerides, LDL and Total Cholesterol to shoot up. After all, 75-80% of my daily calories are from saturated fat. Further, the way to coronary heart disease is eating a lot of saturated fat and high cholesterol.

So, I read a book on cholesterol, listened to some people on podcasts and believe the HDL number (good cholesterol) and Triglycerides are the most important figures of a Cholesterol test. And the ratio of Triglycerides to HDL should be less than 1:1. The LDL figure (which is a calculated figure, not an actual count) needs to be broken down by another blood test into Pattern A (big 'n fluffy)particles and Pattern B (small) particles. The HDL figure should be >50 and the Triglycerides figure should be <50. The book is called, "The Great Cholesterol Myth" and is available on amazon.

My last cholesterol test by the Blood Center was in April, 2012 or a full 13 months before starting the LC/HF diet. At that time, I was 80% Paleo, but I was still eating bread and a few sweets, but no pizza.

Total Cholesterol - April 20, 2012 177
Total Cholesterol - Sept 28, 2013 230

LDL-C - April 2012 129
LDL-C - Sept, 2013 148

HDL - April 2012 51
HDL - Sept, 2013 69

Triglycerides - April 2012 47
Triglycerides - Sept 2013 53

Triglycerides to HDL Ratio - April 2012 0.92:1
Triglycerides to HDL Ratio - Sept 2013 0.77:1

Glad to hear it's working! I'm always interested in your posts, but know so little about these things (and my HDL is quite good, so my doc tells me not to focus much on cholesterol levels anyway) I'm never quite sure what to say!
I hope your low-carb training and plan work well.

To your health.

ounce Wed Oct 09, 2013 8:49 am

Thanks, Michael, for the kind words. For your doctor to not focus on cholesterol levels means he's open to new thoughts and because of that, I would be thrilled and think he's a keeper.

It's hard for a medical doctor not to think that everything can't be fixed pharmacologically (prescription pad), because that's what they were taught. And people want a quick fix, "GIVE ME A PILL TO TAKE!!" And a lot of the information on medications is given by the medication's sales rep, so there's a bonus/profit motivation there, too, that has to be excised.

Michele "1L" Keane Wed Oct 09, 2013 1:21 pm

So are those numbers considered good? or bad? (probably not the correct terminology). Mine are so very different which is why I am wondering;

Total Cholesterol: 246
HDL: 152
LDL: 86
Triglycerides: 42

TC:HDL Ratio: 1.62

LDL:HDL Ratio: 0.57

I've been told that my "good " cholesterol is very high and my "bad" cholesterol is fine, so I am good, but they are directly opposite to what you are reporting.

ounce Wed Oct 09, 2013 1:37 pm

Michele \"1L" Keane wrote:So are those numbers considered good? or bad? (probably not the correct terminology). Mine are so very different which is why I am wondering;

Total Cholesterol: 246
HDL: 152
LDL: 86
Triglycerides: 42

TC:HDL Ratio: 1.62

LDL:HDL Ratio: 0.57

I've been told that my "good " cholesterol is very high and my "bad" cholesterol is fine, so I am good, but they are directly opposite to what you are reporting.

Stellar, Michele. Simply stellar. "Total Cholesterol" for ANYONE is a worthless number, in and of itself. And you've made the correct ratio calculations, too. I guess your blood pressure is in the 105/50 range? Don't let any doctor say your 246 is bad or that you need a statin.

I'll check the book to see if there is an upper limit on HDL. Well done, Michele!!!

I don't know if a HDL of 152 is too high, but I'll look in the book.

nkrichards Wed Oct 09, 2013 7:38 pm

ounce wrote:
Michele \"1L" Keane wrote:So are those numbers considered good? or bad? (probably not the correct terminology). Mine are so very different which is why I am wondering;

Total Cholesterol: 246
HDL: 152
LDL: 86
Triglycerides: 42

TC:HDL Ratio: 1.62

LDL:HDL Ratio: 0.57

I've been told that my "good " cholesterol is very high and my "bad" cholesterol is fine, so I am good, but they are directly opposite to what you are reporting.
Stellar, Michele. Simply stellar. "Total Cholesterol" for ANYONE is a worthless number, in and of itself. And you've made the correct ratio calculations, too. I guess your blood pressure is in the 105/50 range? Don't let any doctor say your 246 is bad or that you need a statin.

I'll check the book to see if there is an upper limit on HDL. Well done, Michele!!!

I don't know if a HDL of 152 is too high, but I'll look in the book.

Interesting...I just got my numbers back yesterday.

I was extremely proud of my HDL of 70. I've never heard of an HDL over 100!

Dr. was upset when my total was 241 with HDL of 79 two years ago. I ignored his concerns as I was so pleased with the HDL level...it was in the 30's before I started running. Smile

He was much happier with a total of 190 with HDL of 70 this time.

I've never paid much attention to the Triglycerides but maybe I should...mine are 89.

I'll have to get a copy of the book you mentioned when things slow down a bit around here.

Thanks for starting an interesting discussion.

Sponsored content