Fuelling during a 40 mile hike

[everydayupsanddowns]

I refer you to post number 8 .

As I said… it was what you suggested. 🙂

 

[bulkbiker]

As I said… it was what you suggested. 🙂

" I’m not sure I’d suggest someone just launches into a 40 mile hike and hoped their own ‘reserves’ will be used without adapting first - which I think is what you suggested."

Which is not what I suggested at all.
Post number 8

" OK should be plenty of time to get fat adapted so you can access your energy stores."

Please don't you start going down the misrepresentation of what other people say route.. there are way too many people here doing that already.

 

[everydayupsanddowns]

Sorry! I think it’s just my sentence structure. It probably needs scrapping and starting again

You suggested the OP would need to become fat adapted first, didn’t you?

I said I thought you’d said in order for your strategy to work they would need to be fat adapted (which is what I understood you had suggested).

But that it probably wasn't wise to opt for that strategy without being fat adapted first.

Not sure if that’s making things clearer or more confused!

 

[helli]

Non-keto non-D athletes (well trained) can trigger hypoglycaemia in endurance events if their systems are geared to burning carbs and insufficient are available,

My non-D partner went for an 80km bike ride last weekend. He is slim and fit but would not describe himself as "well trained". After 60km including a fair number of big hills, he wasn't feeling great and took a break. After about 10 minutes, he was feeling better but still "not quite right" so borrowed my meter. His level (after some recovery) was 2.9 mmol/l.
He now has a packet of jelly babies to treat himself the next time he is in need of instant fuelling.

(Sorry, I know this is a little off track. But your comment triggered a reminder of his white face.)

 

[Spathiphyllum]

My non-D partner went for an 80km bike ride last weekend. He is slim and fit but would not describe himself as "well trained". After 60km including a fair number of big hills, he wasn't feeling great and took a break. After about 10 minutes, he was feeling better but still "not quite right" so borrowed my meter. His level (after some recovery) was 2.9 mmol/l.
He now has a packet of jelly babies to treat himself the next time he is in need of instant fuelling.

(Sorry, I know this is a little off track. But your comment triggered a reminder of his white face.)

Your non-diabetic partner is slim-- i.e. not much fat to burn. And he is not accustomed to exercise that is not only prolonged but also high-intensity. He then cycles "60km including a fair number of big hills".

Nuttyneary's situation is the opposite, on all points. He or she is overweight, so has a good deal of fat to burn. And s/he will not be doing any high-intensity exercise-- it's not a race, it's not cycling up big hills, it's just a walk. And s/he is spending over 4 months training for this walk-- s/he's said the walk isn't until 10 September, and s/he is "increasing mileage sensibly working towards it".

So there is practically no risk of Nuttyneary becoming hypoglycaemic.

 

[helli]

Nuttyneary's situation is the opposite, on all points.

I agree - hence my final sentence

(Sorry, I know this is a little off track. But your comment triggered a reminder of his white face.)

I included it for interest. I know often threads drift off course.

 

[Spathiphyllum]

Sorry! I think it’s just my sentence structure. It probably needs scrapping and starting again

You suggested the OP would need to become fat adapted first, didn’t you?

I said I thought you’d said in order for your strategy to work they would need to be fat adapted (which is what I understood you had suggested).

But that it probably wasn't wise to opt for that strategy without being fat adapted first.

Not sure if that’s making things clearer or more confused!

I think there's a risk of some confusion on this thread, between two very different things: on the one hand, whether Nuttyneary should go on a 'keto diet', and on the other hand whether he or she needs to consume additional carbs during his/her long walk(s).

Choosing a 'keto diet' is one thing, and a very abnormal thing. (Abnormal in the strict sense of 'unusual'.) If, having normally eaten lots of carbs, several times a day, every day, you suddenly decide to eat no or hardly any carbs-- and you stick to that all day, every day, for several days or more-- yes, your body will have some trouble adapting.

But nobody needs any particular adaptation for their body to burn fat; practically everyone's body will from time to time be burning fat.

Say you ate a good bit of carbs for lunch at 1pm. Then you don't leave work until 6.30, you're running late for the train and need to get home on time, you're walking really fast to the station and then from the station at the other end to your home-- your body will probably end up burning some fat for that. Or say you ate the same lunch at the same time and then went out to your garden or allotment and did a lot of digging and so on, and lost track of the time and suddenly realised it was half past six; you would probably have burned some fat then too. And so on-- the day you were rushing around and didn't manage to get lunch, the day you had to go straight out before breakfast, etc etc.

And your body does not need any special 'adaptation' for this. If the (non-Type 1) human body were so delicate that we were at risk of keeling over unless we ingested some carbs every couple of hours-- our species would long ere since have become extinct. Instead, we have body fat precisely so that we will not need carbs every few hours, even if we are for example walking a long distance.

Nuttyneary will not need additional carbs for long walks; normal meals will be fine. And in fact additional carbs during this walk would be bad for him/her-- because s/he has said s/he needs to lose weight.

 

[bulkbiker]

Your non-diabetic partner is slim-- i.e. not much fat to burn.

Not quite true.. even extreme athletes have a fair % of body fat.
Around 10% depending on whether they are men or women.
At 7,700 cals per kilo and say 70 kg weight this means that even athletes carry around some 54,000 calories of energy to burn once they can access it.

 

[Deleted member 21371]

When liver glycogen stores fall to low levels, the body will switch regardless of whether you're fat, thin, fat adapted or living on carbs. The liver will increase its reliance on gluconeogenic metabolism to produce glucose from amino acids and glycerol.
It's fine for low impact exercises but the rate of this production is limited and cannot keep pace with the muscles glucose removal from the blood during high impact exercise.
That's why the body gets higher insulin resistance on low carb diets, the body is storing the scant glucose for survival and forcing the other muscles to conserve it.

It's also going to burn muscle mass, which was why I kept up the exercise during the Newcastle Diet, I wanted to exercise my muscles, and try to use fat reserves, and it seemed to work.

Like any none diabetic though, a type 2 will use their glycogen stores during exercise, if a type 2 goes down to 2.9 there is no problem in topping them back up again with a carby snack.
It will be used to replace the reserves, not dumped straight into the bloodstream, (although some will, as the muscles will still be using it)

 

[Deleted member 21371]

Do you carry some spare pounds?

if so try an ultra low carb keto diet to gain access to your stored body fat and use that to fuel you for the walk.

These guys ran 100 mils over a week fasted..

UK Team Completes a 100-mile, five-day Run with no Food - Diet Doctor

Eight runners ran 100 miles in five days without food. They aimed to dispel myths surrounding daily carbs and energy needs.

www.dietdoctor.com

"While knee and joint pain, as well as insomnia, were all common, all of the participants said they felt energetic, clear-headed, and happy with surprisingly little hunger the whole time."
"One of the surprising findings is that most of the participants by the third and fourth day had what would be considered very low blood glucose readings, averaging below 3.0 mmol/L (54 mg/dL) with virtually no symptoms of hypoglycemia.

For example, on the fourth and fifth day, Deakin’s blood glucose averaged 2.7 mmol/L (47 mg/dL). “ I had absolutely no ill effects from this – no headache, no shakes, no fatigue, no dizziness, no hunger pangs, no sweating, etc."

"Again, the participants stressed that no one on the team is advocating that anyone undertake such a project themselves, nor are they advocating that this was an optimal or desirable form of athletic activity."

"Dr. Lake ....... cautioned that others should not try this without medical supervision."
“This project required careful planning over several months and no one in the group intends to repeat it"

Not exactly a recommendation for any of the rest of us in there?

 

[bulkbiker]

Not exactly a recommendation for any of the rest of us in there?

Depends how much you know about your own condition and how much faith you place in medics.
Also as a T1 Dr Lake will I'm sure have been referring to his own condition.