A lot of people tune in to “The Biggest Loser” and think “why can’t I do that?” or “I want to be on that show!” Other people may be somewhat turned off by the extreme measures that are taken on that show. One thing is for sure, there are many people that are looking for help with weight loss.
There are lots of “weight loss camps” across the country that are targeted to various demographic groups: adults, teenagers, children, women only, etc. Many people find they are able to lose a significant amount of weight when they are in a controlled environment. The problem some people find is that when they are back home, it is difficult to follow the same guidelines as they did when they were at camp.
Green Mountain at Fox Run is a women’s only program that uses a non-diet approach to weight loss and fitness. It has a “retreat” atmosphere, and is located on 26 acres in the Green Mountains of Vermont, overlooking Okemo Mountain. Their weight loss program is spread out over four weeks, with each week building on the previous week’s instruction. Topics include nutrition, behavior change, and fitness. The meals provided in the dining hall cater to many different needs, such as food allergies, heart health, and blood sugar control. When participants leave the retreat, they have learned how to make healthy food choices, as well as have a fitness plan that will fit into their lives. Participants also receive ongoing support via a private discussion board.
One of the great things about Green Mountain is that in addition to weight loss programs in general, they also offer programs specifically for women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) and Type 2 Diabetes.
The PCOS program is either 1 or 2 weeks, with the next one coming up in November. Women with PCOS who are overweight often have a much harder time losing weight than the average person because of the hormonal imbalances they are suffering from. This retreat is a great opportunity to get support from other women who are going through the same issues. It also gives women with PCOS the opportunity to fully understand their diagnosis and attend workshops on topics specifically related to PCOS issues.
The Type 2 Diabetes program is one week (the next one is in September). One of the benefits of this program is getting to meet with a board certified endocrinologist who specializes in diabetes. People who attend this program also get more guidance and support to help them put what they learn about controlling diabetes into action.
For more information, check out their website: Green Mountain at Fox Run
Monday, August 24, 2009
Friday, August 14, 2009
Organic vs Conventional: Which is better?
The debate over whether organic food is more “nutritious” than conventional food rages on. Some of you may have seen some media reports on a recent study out of the UK that appears in the September 2009 issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. This report is a review of 55 studies published between January 1958 and February 2008. These studies looked at levels of 13 nutrients such as vitamin C, phenolic compounds, magnesium, potassium, calcium, zinc, copper, and total soluble solids. These nutrients are vitamins, minerals, and some antioxidants (for example, vitamin C and phenolic compounds are antioxidants).
Why is it important to look at the content of these nutrients in our foods? Because vitamins and minerals support our health in a variety of ways; they are needed for healthy eyes and skin, strong bones, muscle and nerve function, etc. Some vitamins and other substances also act as antioxidants. Antioxidants can prevent or slow down oxidative damage that occurs to our bodies, hence lowering our risk for developing many health problems such as cancer, heart disease, diabetes, etc.
The researchers conducting this review did not find significant differences between conventional produce and organic produce regarding most of these nutrients. They did find that conventional produce had higher levels of nitrogen (likely due to the use of synthetic fertilizers), and organic produce had higher levels of phosphorus and acidity. This in itself is significant because foods high in nitrogen have the potential to turn into cancer causing nitrosamines in the digestive tract, which indicates organic foods are safer in this regard. Higher levels of phosphorus and acidity are protective (phosphorus being a key mineral in bone health, metabolism, as well as nerve and muscle function; acidity aiding in the absorption of various nutrients), also indicating organic foods are a better choice. However, you will notice that you will not see that conclusion reported.
Another thing they fail to emphasize is that this report admits that they did not analyze chemical residue or contaminants. These researchers actually state that herbicides, pesticides, and chemical fertilizers may also affect the chemical content of foods and that in this regard, organic foods likely have an advantage over conventional foods because they do not use these synthetic substances. In addition, because this study looks at conventional farming from over 50 years ago, the results are likely skewed as well because conventional farms in the 1950s were a lot closer to organic farms than they are in this day and age.
This particular review also failed to look at total antioxidant capacity among the nutrients studied. The Organic Center (TOC) conducted a review of these same studies. They found similar results as the UK review for most of those particular nutrients, but they did had very different results regarding phenolic compounds. In addition, the TOC also looked at antioxidant capacity.
In looking at phenolic compounds, the TOC used more rigorous selection criteria and focused on studies that had scientifically valid “matched pairs,” meaning organic and conventional farms that were grown in the same regions, on the same types of soil, using the same types of irrigation systems, harvested at the same time, and grown from the same plant variety were compared (which is why they had different results). Using these criteria, they were able to find 25 matched pairs for comparing phenolic compounds. Of these 25, 18 of the organic crops had higher phenolic compounds while only 6 of the conventional crops had higher phenolic compounds.
Regarding antioxidant capacity, there were 8 matched pairs; seven of the organic crops were higher than the conventional crops. There were also 15 matched pairs for specific antioxidants such as quercetin and kaempferol. Once again a majority the organic crops were higher than the conventional crops.
On average, across all the valid matched pairs, the nutrient levels in organic foods were 25% higher than conventional foods. In addition, the most significant differences were for key antioxidants that average Americans do not consume enough of. This is like saying by eating these organic foods, you are getting the benefit of eating an additional serving of fruits and vegetables daily.
Based on the UK report’s overall conclusion, most of the media outlets are inaccurately reporting that organic food is not any more nutritious than conventional food. This is a clear example of how often media reports will take parts of research and sensationalize it, giving consumers faulty information.
Even if organic foods were not higher in many nutrients than conventional foods, they are definitely lower in pesticide reside, which in itself is a health benefit. Organic farming methods are also more sustainable and therefore better for the environment. Having said that, there are a number of other studies that have come out in the past year (post February 2008, which was the end of the studies reviewed in the UK report) that do show organic foods are higher in many nutrients than conventional foods.
So if you are trying to decide if organic foods are really worth it, I say yes! They are “safer” when it comes to chemical contaminants, better for the environment, and higher in some key nutrients that are extremely beneficial for your health.
Why is it important to look at the content of these nutrients in our foods? Because vitamins and minerals support our health in a variety of ways; they are needed for healthy eyes and skin, strong bones, muscle and nerve function, etc. Some vitamins and other substances also act as antioxidants. Antioxidants can prevent or slow down oxidative damage that occurs to our bodies, hence lowering our risk for developing many health problems such as cancer, heart disease, diabetes, etc.
The researchers conducting this review did not find significant differences between conventional produce and organic produce regarding most of these nutrients. They did find that conventional produce had higher levels of nitrogen (likely due to the use of synthetic fertilizers), and organic produce had higher levels of phosphorus and acidity. This in itself is significant because foods high in nitrogen have the potential to turn into cancer causing nitrosamines in the digestive tract, which indicates organic foods are safer in this regard. Higher levels of phosphorus and acidity are protective (phosphorus being a key mineral in bone health, metabolism, as well as nerve and muscle function; acidity aiding in the absorption of various nutrients), also indicating organic foods are a better choice. However, you will notice that you will not see that conclusion reported.
Another thing they fail to emphasize is that this report admits that they did not analyze chemical residue or contaminants. These researchers actually state that herbicides, pesticides, and chemical fertilizers may also affect the chemical content of foods and that in this regard, organic foods likely have an advantage over conventional foods because they do not use these synthetic substances. In addition, because this study looks at conventional farming from over 50 years ago, the results are likely skewed as well because conventional farms in the 1950s were a lot closer to organic farms than they are in this day and age.
This particular review also failed to look at total antioxidant capacity among the nutrients studied. The Organic Center (TOC) conducted a review of these same studies. They found similar results as the UK review for most of those particular nutrients, but they did had very different results regarding phenolic compounds. In addition, the TOC also looked at antioxidant capacity.
In looking at phenolic compounds, the TOC used more rigorous selection criteria and focused on studies that had scientifically valid “matched pairs,” meaning organic and conventional farms that were grown in the same regions, on the same types of soil, using the same types of irrigation systems, harvested at the same time, and grown from the same plant variety were compared (which is why they had different results). Using these criteria, they were able to find 25 matched pairs for comparing phenolic compounds. Of these 25, 18 of the organic crops had higher phenolic compounds while only 6 of the conventional crops had higher phenolic compounds.
Regarding antioxidant capacity, there were 8 matched pairs; seven of the organic crops were higher than the conventional crops. There were also 15 matched pairs for specific antioxidants such as quercetin and kaempferol. Once again a majority the organic crops were higher than the conventional crops.
On average, across all the valid matched pairs, the nutrient levels in organic foods were 25% higher than conventional foods. In addition, the most significant differences were for key antioxidants that average Americans do not consume enough of. This is like saying by eating these organic foods, you are getting the benefit of eating an additional serving of fruits and vegetables daily.
Based on the UK report’s overall conclusion, most of the media outlets are inaccurately reporting that organic food is not any more nutritious than conventional food. This is a clear example of how often media reports will take parts of research and sensationalize it, giving consumers faulty information.
Even if organic foods were not higher in many nutrients than conventional foods, they are definitely lower in pesticide reside, which in itself is a health benefit. Organic farming methods are also more sustainable and therefore better for the environment. Having said that, there are a number of other studies that have come out in the past year (post February 2008, which was the end of the studies reviewed in the UK report) that do show organic foods are higher in many nutrients than conventional foods.
So if you are trying to decide if organic foods are really worth it, I say yes! They are “safer” when it comes to chemical contaminants, better for the environment, and higher in some key nutrients that are extremely beneficial for your health.
Friday, August 7, 2009
August is Water Quality Month
August is full of unusual “holidays,” including National Catfish Month, National Picnic Month, Peach Month, Water Quality Month, Family Fun Month, and Admit Your Happy Month! Because many of us are suffering from an unusually hot summer, this week I want to focus on Water Quality Month.
While there are many beverages that can quench our thirst, and there are times when we benefit from beverages such as juices, sports drinks, milk, etc. (such as after a hard workout), as well as times when we just want something with flavor to drink, our bodies still need some plain water to help flush out waste products that are formed throughout the day.
I often get asked “How much water should I drink?” The answer is “it depends.” On days that you exercise, you will need to drink more water depending on how much you sweat (see my earlier blog on “Do You Know Your Sweat Rate?”). A good rule of thumb, in general, is to drink until your urine is almost clear (like the color of lemonade as opposed to the color of apple juice).
The next question I usually get asked is “Should I drink bottled water or is tap o.k.?” Now this depends on where your water comes from. The safety and flavor of water will vary from source to source due to different levels of contaminants and naturally occurring minerals (such as calcium, iron, etc, in “hard” water) and whether your water comes from a private well or a public water supplier. If you get your water from a public water company, you can access its water-quality or consumer-confidence report from the local water utility. You can also get more information by calling the EPA's toll-free Safe Drinking Water Hotline at 800-426-4791, or visit their website. The website Campaign for Safe and Affordable Drinking Water also has fact sheets to help you understand these reports.
If your water comes from a private well, you can have it tested. Call your local health department for recommendations or visit the EPA’s website for a listing of certification officers.
Even if your water is safe, many people just don’t like the taste of tap water. You can always filter it to eliminate those “unsavory” flavors, as well as eliminate some potential contaminants. You can either purchase a pitcher that has a filter on it, attach a filter to your faucet, have one mounted under your sink, or even have one that filters water as it comes to your home. If you choose to purchase a filter, make sure it is approved by the National Sanitation Foundation (NSF), Underwriter’s Laboratories (UL), or the Water Quality Association.
If you turn to bottled water for safety, keep in mind that bottled water is often just filtered tap water, so it may not be any “safer,” particularly because in the process of bottling water, there is now another source of potential contamination if good manufacturing processes are not followed. Purchasing bottled water also has a huge toll on the environment. According to the Earth Policy Institute, it takes about 17 million barrels of oil to produce the amount of bottles needed to meet the United State’s demand for bottled water. That’s enough fuel to run over a million cars for a year. There is also the question of how safe those plastic bottles holding water really are. If you absolutely have to buy bottled water, look for the brands that have the NSF certification.
What about carrying water around? Try to store your water in metal canteens or glass. If you have to use plastic, avoid bottles made with BPA, and make sure you don’t leave water sitting in plastic bottles at high temperatures, such as in your car in 105-degree heat! High temperatures may cause “leaching” of chemicals in the plastic into your water.
While there are many beverages that can quench our thirst, and there are times when we benefit from beverages such as juices, sports drinks, milk, etc. (such as after a hard workout), as well as times when we just want something with flavor to drink, our bodies still need some plain water to help flush out waste products that are formed throughout the day.
I often get asked “How much water should I drink?” The answer is “it depends.” On days that you exercise, you will need to drink more water depending on how much you sweat (see my earlier blog on “Do You Know Your Sweat Rate?”). A good rule of thumb, in general, is to drink until your urine is almost clear (like the color of lemonade as opposed to the color of apple juice).
The next question I usually get asked is “Should I drink bottled water or is tap o.k.?” Now this depends on where your water comes from. The safety and flavor of water will vary from source to source due to different levels of contaminants and naturally occurring minerals (such as calcium, iron, etc, in “hard” water) and whether your water comes from a private well or a public water supplier. If you get your water from a public water company, you can access its water-quality or consumer-confidence report from the local water utility. You can also get more information by calling the EPA's toll-free Safe Drinking Water Hotline at 800-426-4791, or visit their website. The website Campaign for Safe and Affordable Drinking Water also has fact sheets to help you understand these reports.
If your water comes from a private well, you can have it tested. Call your local health department for recommendations or visit the EPA’s website for a listing of certification officers.
Even if your water is safe, many people just don’t like the taste of tap water. You can always filter it to eliminate those “unsavory” flavors, as well as eliminate some potential contaminants. You can either purchase a pitcher that has a filter on it, attach a filter to your faucet, have one mounted under your sink, or even have one that filters water as it comes to your home. If you choose to purchase a filter, make sure it is approved by the National Sanitation Foundation (NSF), Underwriter’s Laboratories (UL), or the Water Quality Association.
If you turn to bottled water for safety, keep in mind that bottled water is often just filtered tap water, so it may not be any “safer,” particularly because in the process of bottling water, there is now another source of potential contamination if good manufacturing processes are not followed. Purchasing bottled water also has a huge toll on the environment. According to the Earth Policy Institute, it takes about 17 million barrels of oil to produce the amount of bottles needed to meet the United State’s demand for bottled water. That’s enough fuel to run over a million cars for a year. There is also the question of how safe those plastic bottles holding water really are. If you absolutely have to buy bottled water, look for the brands that have the NSF certification.
What about carrying water around? Try to store your water in metal canteens or glass. If you have to use plastic, avoid bottles made with BPA, and make sure you don’t leave water sitting in plastic bottles at high temperatures, such as in your car in 105-degree heat! High temperatures may cause “leaching” of chemicals in the plastic into your water.
Friday, July 31, 2009
Replacing Glycogen After Exercise
Many athletes have questions about recovery nutrition, and whether or not there is truly a “window” of opportunity to replace glycogen after a workout. The short answer is “yes” there is a definite window when you are best able to replace your body’s depleted glycogen stores. However, there are actually several phases when you can replace your glycogen. Before we get into these phases, some of you may be wondering “what is glycogen?”
Glycogen is the storage form of glucose (and glucose comes primarily from the breakdown of carbohydrates). The liver can store some glycogen, but the majority of our glycogen stores are in our muscles. Every type of workout will use some amount of muscle glycogen, therefore carbohydrate is the nutrient you need to focus on for recovery.
There is a 30 – 60 minute window immediately after hard exercise (lasting an hour or longer) when your muscle glycogen stores are very low and will readily absorb carbohydrate and resynthesize glycogen most rapidly. However, the rate at which your body will resynthesize glycogen remains fairly high for 2 hours after exercise, and is still slightly elevated up to 6 hours after exercise. After 6 hours, glycogen resynthesis slows down dramatically.
How important it is for you to take advantage of the “rapid window” depends on your training schedule. If you are training only once every 24 hours, it is not quite as important for you to eat in this window; you can basically replace your glycogen stores more slowly over the rest of the day. However, if you are going to be training again in 12, 8 or even 4 hours, it is extremely important that you refuel in this rapid window. In this situation, after a hard training session ideally you would consume 0.5 to 0.7 grams of carbohydrate per pound of your body weight in that 30 – 60 minute window. You would consume this same amount of carbohydrate again 2 hours later. The rest of the day you would consume snacks and meals with some carbohydrate depending on your training schedule and total carbohydrate needs.
So what are the best types of carbohydrates to consume to replenish your glycogen stores? Studies have shown that both liquid and solid carbohydrate will adequately refuel the body after exercise. It is possible that higher glycemic index (GI) foods (such as sports nutrition supplements, breads, and cereals) may enhance glycogen synthesis. If you are taking advantage of the rapid window (30 – 60 minutes), you may choose to use high GI foods at that time, and for the rest of the day use a mix of moderate and low GI foods.
Many people have experienced the symptoms of glycogen depletion in a single training session or competition if they have not eaten enough carbohydrate and have “burned” up all of their stores due to the duration of the event (often known as “bonking” or “hitting the wall”). It is possible that many more people have experienced the symptoms of glycogen depletion over a longer period of time without even realizing it. If you consistently under eat carbohydrate and you are doing endurance training, over about one week’s time, you will likely start to feel sluggish, have a “heavy” feeling in your legs, have difficulty increasing your effort (particularly during interval training), and may even have difficulty maintaining your normal intensity and duration of exercise. If you are experiencing these symptoms, it is very likely that your glycogen stores are not being replenished adequately due to chronic under consumption of carbohydrate. So, eat more carbs!
Glycogen is the storage form of glucose (and glucose comes primarily from the breakdown of carbohydrates). The liver can store some glycogen, but the majority of our glycogen stores are in our muscles. Every type of workout will use some amount of muscle glycogen, therefore carbohydrate is the nutrient you need to focus on for recovery.
There is a 30 – 60 minute window immediately after hard exercise (lasting an hour or longer) when your muscle glycogen stores are very low and will readily absorb carbohydrate and resynthesize glycogen most rapidly. However, the rate at which your body will resynthesize glycogen remains fairly high for 2 hours after exercise, and is still slightly elevated up to 6 hours after exercise. After 6 hours, glycogen resynthesis slows down dramatically.
How important it is for you to take advantage of the “rapid window” depends on your training schedule. If you are training only once every 24 hours, it is not quite as important for you to eat in this window; you can basically replace your glycogen stores more slowly over the rest of the day. However, if you are going to be training again in 12, 8 or even 4 hours, it is extremely important that you refuel in this rapid window. In this situation, after a hard training session ideally you would consume 0.5 to 0.7 grams of carbohydrate per pound of your body weight in that 30 – 60 minute window. You would consume this same amount of carbohydrate again 2 hours later. The rest of the day you would consume snacks and meals with some carbohydrate depending on your training schedule and total carbohydrate needs.
So what are the best types of carbohydrates to consume to replenish your glycogen stores? Studies have shown that both liquid and solid carbohydrate will adequately refuel the body after exercise. It is possible that higher glycemic index (GI) foods (such as sports nutrition supplements, breads, and cereals) may enhance glycogen synthesis. If you are taking advantage of the rapid window (30 – 60 minutes), you may choose to use high GI foods at that time, and for the rest of the day use a mix of moderate and low GI foods.
Many people have experienced the symptoms of glycogen depletion in a single training session or competition if they have not eaten enough carbohydrate and have “burned” up all of their stores due to the duration of the event (often known as “bonking” or “hitting the wall”). It is possible that many more people have experienced the symptoms of glycogen depletion over a longer period of time without even realizing it. If you consistently under eat carbohydrate and you are doing endurance training, over about one week’s time, you will likely start to feel sluggish, have a “heavy” feeling in your legs, have difficulty increasing your effort (particularly during interval training), and may even have difficulty maintaining your normal intensity and duration of exercise. If you are experiencing these symptoms, it is very likely that your glycogen stores are not being replenished adequately due to chronic under consumption of carbohydrate. So, eat more carbs!
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Healthy Fish, Healthy Body, Healthy Ocean
We’ve all heard how important it is to include fish in our diet to improve our overall health. However, most of us have also heard we need to be cautious about eating fish because of possible contamination with mercury, PCBs, and other toxins. Throw in ecological “devastation” and it can make choosing to eat fish a daunting task! So what are we to do?
To minimize your risk of consuming fish that have been contaminated with mercury or polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), avoid large fish. Large fish are “longer lived” which is one reason they have higher levels of mercury and PCBs. This would include shark, tilefish, king mackerel, swordfish, and bluefin tuna. Some smaller fish, such as grouper, may also have high levels of toxins.
As far as the health benefits of fish, a major reason why fish is so good for us is because in general it is low in saturated fat (the “bad” fat), and is usually a good source of omega 3 fatty acids (one of the “good” fats). Omega 3 has gotten a lot of press for its anti-inflammatory properties, its ability to lower triglycerides, its anti-clotting factors, as well as a host of other potential benefits. The types of omega 3 fatty acids from “marine” sources tend to be the most readily used by the human body. The type of omega 3 from land plant sources is not as readily used (our bodies have to convert it to the other types before it is efficiently used). Therefore, seafood omega 3 is the most highly recommended.
If you enjoy seafood and want to get the most health benefit out of it, while minimizing your impact on the ocean, develop a relationship with the person selling you fish! This person should be able to answer any questions you have about the fish (where it comes from, if it is farm raised what it is fed, if it is “overfished,” etc.).
Wild fish are usually a safe option. The Marine Stewardship council puts its blue and white logo on fish coming from fisheries that minimize the impact on the environment, keep populations within sustainable levels, and meet all laws of sustainability (local, national, and international). Shopping from fisheries that are certified will minimize your chances of consuming wild fish that have high levels of PCBs. Some examples of “safe” wild seafood include Alaskan salmon, US North Pacific sablefish, and Oregon pink shrimp.
Farmed fish may also be a good option if coming from well-regulated farms. Some examples of good choices include domestic barramundi, rainbow trout, oysters and mussels.
Some domestic shrimp farms are classified as livestock farms and therefore have been able to obtain USDA organic certification. However, the USDA does not offer organic certification for other types of seafood that are classified as aquaculture farms. Keep in mind that you may see an “organic” label on fish that comes from international producers.
To summarize, the following fish are good for you and for the ocean: anchovies, Atlantic mackerel, farmed rainbow trout, farmed oysters, Alaskan or Canadian sablefish, wild Alaskan salmon, sardines, and US farmed shrimp.
To minimize your risk of consuming fish that have been contaminated with mercury or polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), avoid large fish. Large fish are “longer lived” which is one reason they have higher levels of mercury and PCBs. This would include shark, tilefish, king mackerel, swordfish, and bluefin tuna. Some smaller fish, such as grouper, may also have high levels of toxins.
As far as the health benefits of fish, a major reason why fish is so good for us is because in general it is low in saturated fat (the “bad” fat), and is usually a good source of omega 3 fatty acids (one of the “good” fats). Omega 3 has gotten a lot of press for its anti-inflammatory properties, its ability to lower triglycerides, its anti-clotting factors, as well as a host of other potential benefits. The types of omega 3 fatty acids from “marine” sources tend to be the most readily used by the human body. The type of omega 3 from land plant sources is not as readily used (our bodies have to convert it to the other types before it is efficiently used). Therefore, seafood omega 3 is the most highly recommended.
If you enjoy seafood and want to get the most health benefit out of it, while minimizing your impact on the ocean, develop a relationship with the person selling you fish! This person should be able to answer any questions you have about the fish (where it comes from, if it is farm raised what it is fed, if it is “overfished,” etc.).
Wild fish are usually a safe option. The Marine Stewardship council puts its blue and white logo on fish coming from fisheries that minimize the impact on the environment, keep populations within sustainable levels, and meet all laws of sustainability (local, national, and international). Shopping from fisheries that are certified will minimize your chances of consuming wild fish that have high levels of PCBs. Some examples of “safe” wild seafood include Alaskan salmon, US North Pacific sablefish, and Oregon pink shrimp.
Farmed fish may also be a good option if coming from well-regulated farms. Some examples of good choices include domestic barramundi, rainbow trout, oysters and mussels.
Some domestic shrimp farms are classified as livestock farms and therefore have been able to obtain USDA organic certification. However, the USDA does not offer organic certification for other types of seafood that are classified as aquaculture farms. Keep in mind that you may see an “organic” label on fish that comes from international producers.
To summarize, the following fish are good for you and for the ocean: anchovies, Atlantic mackerel, farmed rainbow trout, farmed oysters, Alaskan or Canadian sablefish, wild Alaskan salmon, sardines, and US farmed shrimp.
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Do You Know Your Sweat Rate?
Now that we are smack dab in the middle of summer, there is no escaping the heat. For those of you who are exercising outdoors, it is extremely important that you stay well hydrated. Why does this matter? Because becoming dehydrated can have significant negative impacts on your performance. It can also lead to painful cramps, fainting, and heat exhaustion.
A general rule of thumb is to make sure that your urine is very pale yellow (almost clear) through out the day. However, note that if you are taking a high dose of B vitamins, the first few times you urinate after taking these vitamins your urine will likely be a very bright yellow. This does not mean you are dehydrated, it merely indicates that you are excreting “excess vitamins” that your body cannot use.
Many athletes will become dehydrated in competition because they often forget to drink enough fluids during their event. The longer the event, the higher the risk of becoming dehydrated. This can happen in training as well, particularly if the athlete has to carry their own fluids.
How do you avoid becoming dehydrated while training, as well as in competition? First of all, make sure you are well hydrated before you start exercising. This means just before you begin training or competition, your urine should be very pale yellow.
The next step is to hydrate according to your sweat rate. How do you know what your sweat rate is? There is a fairly easy way to calculate this. Pick a day when you can train for at least an hour in conditions similar to what you would normally be training in. Weigh yourself in the nude and record your weight. Proceed to run/cycle/swim, etc. for an hour or longer. Keep track of how much fluid you drank while you were working out. Try to avoid urinating immediately after your workout. After completing your workout, dry yourself off as much as possible then re-weigh yourself, again in the nude. Now subtract your post-workout weight from your pre-workout weight and add the weight of the fluids you drank. Divide this number by the amount of time you trained and you have your sweat rate. Remember that 16 ounces equals one pound.
Here is an example: Jack weighs 165 pounds prior to his workout. He then goes and runs for 1.5 hours, during which time he drank 16 ounces of water (or 1 pound). He gets home and weighs himself again. He is down to 163 pounds. His sweat rate is (165 – 163 ) + 1 divided by 1.5 hours or 2 pounds per hour.
This means Jack needs to drink 32 ounces of fluid per hour when he is working out. If he does not, he is going to have to make sure he replaces this much fluid as soon as possible afterward.
If you regularly compete in completely different conditions than you train in, it is helpful to try to mimic those conditions at least once for the purposes of calculating your sweat rate to guide your hydration needs for competition.
A general rule of thumb is to make sure that your urine is very pale yellow (almost clear) through out the day. However, note that if you are taking a high dose of B vitamins, the first few times you urinate after taking these vitamins your urine will likely be a very bright yellow. This does not mean you are dehydrated, it merely indicates that you are excreting “excess vitamins” that your body cannot use.
Many athletes will become dehydrated in competition because they often forget to drink enough fluids during their event. The longer the event, the higher the risk of becoming dehydrated. This can happen in training as well, particularly if the athlete has to carry their own fluids.
How do you avoid becoming dehydrated while training, as well as in competition? First of all, make sure you are well hydrated before you start exercising. This means just before you begin training or competition, your urine should be very pale yellow.
The next step is to hydrate according to your sweat rate. How do you know what your sweat rate is? There is a fairly easy way to calculate this. Pick a day when you can train for at least an hour in conditions similar to what you would normally be training in. Weigh yourself in the nude and record your weight. Proceed to run/cycle/swim, etc. for an hour or longer. Keep track of how much fluid you drank while you were working out. Try to avoid urinating immediately after your workout. After completing your workout, dry yourself off as much as possible then re-weigh yourself, again in the nude. Now subtract your post-workout weight from your pre-workout weight and add the weight of the fluids you drank. Divide this number by the amount of time you trained and you have your sweat rate. Remember that 16 ounces equals one pound.
Here is an example: Jack weighs 165 pounds prior to his workout. He then goes and runs for 1.5 hours, during which time he drank 16 ounces of water (or 1 pound). He gets home and weighs himself again. He is down to 163 pounds. His sweat rate is (165 – 163 ) + 1 divided by 1.5 hours or 2 pounds per hour.
This means Jack needs to drink 32 ounces of fluid per hour when he is working out. If he does not, he is going to have to make sure he replaces this much fluid as soon as possible afterward.
If you regularly compete in completely different conditions than you train in, it is helpful to try to mimic those conditions at least once for the purposes of calculating your sweat rate to guide your hydration needs for competition.
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Do You Know Where Your Food Comes From ?
Wow, I can’t believe it is already July! Where did the month of June go? This weekend we will be celebrating our nation’s Independence. For a lot of people, that means days off from work, cook outs, going to the lake or beach, and generally spending time with family and friends. I hope we can all take some time out of our festivities to remember those who have paid the price (and are still paying the price) for the freedoms we enjoy.
As Americans, we enjoy many advantages that a lot of people around the world do not. One of these “advantages” is an abundant food supply. However, as with all things, sometimes too much of a “good thing” can be bad.
Our nation has really gotten away from the traditional small farm model; most of our food is now supplied by giant industrial food companies such as Monsanto. Because of this, a lot of us no longer know anything about our food: how it is grown, how it is harvested, and if you are a meat eater, what the animals you are eating are fed, how they are housed, how they are slaughtered, etc. This lack of knowledge can create huge problems, particularly when outbreaks of food borne illness (or food poisoning) occur. The larger the supply chain, the harder it is to figure out who caused the contamination.
When you buy locally, you know who your farmer is. By knowing your farmer, you can very often “tour” the farm and see for yourself how the food is produced, harvested, and brought to market. This knowledge can really put your mind at ease because you know firsthand who is handling your food. An added benefit of buying locally is that your food stays fresh longer, without unnecessary preservatives. When you buy locally, often produce will last for 2 weeks or longer; when you buy it in the grocery store, it has already been “traveling” for many days (or weeks) as it is being processed, which is why it will often go bad in your refrigerator within a few days.
If you are on the fence about buying food locally, I would encourage you to do some research on your own. There is a great movie that has just been release nationwide called “Food Inc.” This movie is all about our nation’s food supply, including the effects on farmers, consumers, and the environment. For more information on this movie, and to see if it is showing near you, check out http://www.foodincmovie.com/about-the-film.php
As Americans, we enjoy many advantages that a lot of people around the world do not. One of these “advantages” is an abundant food supply. However, as with all things, sometimes too much of a “good thing” can be bad.
Our nation has really gotten away from the traditional small farm model; most of our food is now supplied by giant industrial food companies such as Monsanto. Because of this, a lot of us no longer know anything about our food: how it is grown, how it is harvested, and if you are a meat eater, what the animals you are eating are fed, how they are housed, how they are slaughtered, etc. This lack of knowledge can create huge problems, particularly when outbreaks of food borne illness (or food poisoning) occur. The larger the supply chain, the harder it is to figure out who caused the contamination.
When you buy locally, you know who your farmer is. By knowing your farmer, you can very often “tour” the farm and see for yourself how the food is produced, harvested, and brought to market. This knowledge can really put your mind at ease because you know firsthand who is handling your food. An added benefit of buying locally is that your food stays fresh longer, without unnecessary preservatives. When you buy locally, often produce will last for 2 weeks or longer; when you buy it in the grocery store, it has already been “traveling” for many days (or weeks) as it is being processed, which is why it will often go bad in your refrigerator within a few days.
If you are on the fence about buying food locally, I would encourage you to do some research on your own. There is a great movie that has just been release nationwide called “Food Inc.” This movie is all about our nation’s food supply, including the effects on farmers, consumers, and the environment. For more information on this movie, and to see if it is showing near you, check out http://www.foodincmovie.com/about-the-film.php
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
