Muscle gain? anybody have any facts?

cp005e

You seem to be really on top of your game on this topic songbyrdsweet!

If gaining muscle is impossible on a calorie deficient diet, could you please enlighten me on the benefits of strength training while on a diet? I know that as you gain muscle, your BMR goes up, but does that really effect you if you aren't able to build any muscle?

Sorry if I seem uninformed on the subject, but I find it very confusing. Do you know the answer?

Thanks! :flowerforyou:

I do know the answer...it's discouraging, and even I was surprised when I learned it. I will precede this information by saying that I normally take studies to mean VERY little--but 470 studies over 20 years, plus the principles of physiology, have convinced me.

Okay, so....

There are very few benefits to strength training in a caloric deficit.
It doesn't prevent down-regulation of BMR and it doesn't maintain muscle mass. Although you'll see a TON of sources that say otherwise, it's actually CALORIES, not resistance training, that determine how much muscle mass we lose while we are in a caloric deficit. If our deficit is too big, we lose muscle, and a lot of it, regardless of our strength training.

WHOA. That is really interesting. :noway:

When you say CALORIES, I assume you mean both calories consumed and calories burned?

So do our bodies prefer to burn muscle over fat when we're in a caloric deficit? Or does it depend on other factors - like how big the deficit is, or the activity? I always thought that it didn't really matter too much whether I was exercising in the 'cardio' zone or the 'fat-burning' zone, because I figured if I had a calorie deficit overall, then I might be burning the fat in my sleep if I had already burned what I ate during my cardio. Is that at all accurate? Obviously, most of us here would be wanting to just burn off the fat and leave the nice muscles alone. I'm certainly noticing my muscles more now, so they don't SEEM like they are smaller at all. I guess it might not be as noticeable since the fibers are so small and dense. Is there anything else we can do to minimize muscle loss, if strength training doesn't do it?

Lastly, we can use resistance training to benefit us before a 'cheat'. (This does NOT apply to diabetics or those with insulin resistance). We can eat low-carb for a few days, while doing intense, high-rep lifting sessions and shorter, more intense cardio sessions. This will deplete glycogen. When we cheat with sugary foods, some of those sugars will be used to replenish glycogen instead of being stored as fat. However, this certainly can't be abused, and once you pass the 400 calorie mark or eat foods that are too high in fat, it won't be as effective. This would work if you wanted to splurge on something like light frozen yogurt or pasta, not donuts and full-fat ice cream.

That's interesting, too! You are just a wealth of useful information. :happy:

songbyrdsweet

WHOA. That is really interesting. :noway:

When you say CALORIES, I assume you mean both calories consumed and calories burned?

So do our bodies prefer to burn muscle over fat when we're in a caloric deficit? Or does it depend on other factors - like how big the deficit is, or the activity? I always thought that it didn't really matter too much whether I was exercising in the 'cardio' zone or the 'fat-burning' zone, because I figured if I had a calorie deficit overall, then I might be burning the fat in my sleep if I had already burned what I ate during my cardio. Is that at all accurate? Obviously, most of us here would be wanting to just burn off the fat and leave the nice muscles alone. I'm certainly noticing my muscles more now, so they don't SEEM like they are smaller at all. I guess it might not be as noticeable since the fibers are so small and dense. Is there anything else we can do to minimize muscle loss, if strength training doesn't do it?

When I say calories, I really mean caloric deficit.

Our bodies will utilize anything for energy. We sort of eat ourselves alive, really. Muscle turnover is constant--even if we aren't training, without sufficient calories, we'll need amino acids. When they can be replaced, they are. We do use a great % of fat for energy while resting (~60%), but the rest comes from glucose. That glucose can come from carbohydrates in the diet, glycerol from triglycerides, or some amino acids. Our blood calcium concentration must stay constant, so if it falls and we don't have dietary calcium available, we even have a hormone that will break down our own bones to increase our blood calcium level. Although we never technically reach homeostasis, our bodies will tear themselves down in an attempt to do so. Nothing is really 'preferred'--our bodies will use whatever is available to produce energy.

Working at higher intensities (>85% MHR) will result in a shorter exercise time due to the oxygen debt and lactic acid build up; even marathoners won't maintain a HR higher than that during a race. This type of activity utilizes a great deal of glucose. If you're not depleted, that doesn't matter, and in the end, your caloric deficit will mostly come from fat while you're resting. If you're glycogen-depleted due to fasting or a no/low-carb diet, you'll use some different ways to produce energy (and won't last very long), and it does pose a higher risk of muscle loss (you'll make glucose out of it).

I think working at moderate intensities (75-85% MHR) is really hitting the spot. This can be maintained for a longer period of time, and while you'll still be using a majority of glucose for energy, some fat can be utilized since you're in an aerobic environment. If you can hang out at 75% MHR for an hour, which is definitely doable for a jog, you'll be burning about 30% of calories from fat. Since you'll be burning a lot of calories here from a higher HR, that 30% of fat will be a good deal of calories.

Lower intensities (65-75% MHR) will burn a greater % of calories from fat, but not as many total calories as 75-85%, and still a majority of energy will come from carbohydrates unless you're doing for 90+ minutes. Here you might be looking at a 40-60 split and you'll still get CV benefits.

Under 65%, you'll be burning the greatest % of fat calories, but the lowest number of calories, and you won't be reaping the CV benefits. This would be better for someone with an injury or who couldn't withstand higher intensities.

With any of these methods, what you use during exercise is pretty much a spit in the bucket compared to the rest of your day; your caloric deficit will be filled using mostly fat. However, aerobic exercise does cause the release of cortisol, a stress-related hormone that breaks down muscle mass. It's harder to hold onto if you're in a deficit and doing a lot of CV work; that's just an unfortunate side effect of being active. Aerobic work impedes anaerobic performance (lifting).

If you're eating enough, only about 10% of your total lbs lost will come from muscle, which won't really be noticeable when spread out over the body. You may only notice something like 1/4 of an inch lost. But if you're following a VLCD for an extended period of time, you're looking at a far greater % of muscle and bone loss. So it's easy to prevent more than a small amount of LBM loss by just eating enough.

shorerider

Whatever it was you said SBS--it takes me usually several readings for your posts to sink in but the HR zones stuff is great--thanks! I will have to keep that in mind when doing my cycling. I've often wondered if short fast rides or longer slower ones were better--but it's hard to not go fast!!

You mentioned something about weight training being important for us {ahem} older women because of loss of bone something or other. I didn't understand how weight training can help with bone?

Also, basically what I'm hearing is weight training isn't going to be too much help when in a deficit to lose weight unless it's for bone density (I think that's what you said about us older folks)?

songbyrdsweet

Whatever it was you said SBS--it takes me usually several readings for your posts to sink in but the HR zones stuff is great--thanks! I will have to keep that in mind when doing my cycling. I've often wondered if short fast rides or longer slower ones were better--but it's hard to not go fast!!

You mentioned something about weight training being important for us {ahem} older women because of loss of bone something or other. I didn't understand how weight training can help with bone?

Also, basically what I'm hearing is weight training isn't going to be too much help when in a deficit to lose weight unless it's for bone density (I think that's what you said about us older folks)?

I can understand that! I used to bike a lot, I loved getting a flat road and really booking it hehe!

When you apply force to bone, either through increased weight or impact (like hitting an area repeatedly), it responds by becoming more dense so there's less of a chance for breakage. This is brought about by IGF-1, which is released after GH in response to the lactic acid buildup. It can also be brought about by damage, like tiny cracks or a full break, which will produce repair within hours.

That's right, resistance training doesn't burn a ton of calories, so CV activity is better for burning calories for a deficit. I am not sure whether there will be as great an increase in bone density in a caloric deficit. You'd have to make sure to get in enough calcium with a multivitamin. That's something I'll have to ask one of my prof's about.

shorerider

I can understand that! I used to bike a lot, I loved getting a flat road and really booking it hehe!

When you apply force to bone, either through increased weight or impact (like hitting an area repeatedly), it responds by becoming more dense so there's less of a chance for breakage. This is brought about by IGF-1, which is released after GH in response to the lactic acid buildup. It can also be brought about by damage, like tiny cracks or a full break, which will produce repair within hours.

That's right, resistance training doesn't burn a ton of calories, so CV activity is better for burning calories for a deficit. I am not sure whether there will be as great an increase in bone density in a caloric deficit. You'd have to make sure to get in enough calcium with a multivitamin. That's something I'll have to ask one of my prof's about.

Let me know because I'm not going to do a whole lot of weight training if it's not that beneficial. I take a Multi-vitamin for older woman now and drink at least 3 servings or more of soy milk-so I get plenty of calcium.

The reason I'd rather not invest time/energy in weight training unless of great benefit is that every time I have done it in the past, I saw either a weight gain or a plateau immediately afterwards that seemed to last "like FOREVER" {in best Valley Girl voice }. As I mentioned to you in a PM, I can't do that much upper body anyway because of my screwed shoulder, and don't do legs that much because the cycling seems to be really taking care of that; so really did more core-based weight machines than anything. But, as I said, the results with the scale were always very discouraging!

songbyrdsweet

I can understand that! I used to bike a lot, I loved getting a flat road and really booking it hehe!

When you apply force to bone, either through increased weight or impact (like hitting an area repeatedly), it responds by becoming more dense so there's less of a chance for breakage. This is brought about by IGF-1, which is released after GH in response to the lactic acid buildup. It can also be brought about by damage, like tiny cracks or a full break, which will produce repair within hours.

That's right, resistance training doesn't burn a ton of calories, so CV activity is better for burning calories for a deficit. I am not sure whether there will be as great an increase in bone density in a caloric deficit. You'd have to make sure to get in enough calcium with a multivitamin. That's something I'll have to ask one of my prof's about.

Let me know because I'm not going to do a whole lot of weight training if it's not that beneficial. I take a Multi-vitamin for older woman now and drink at least 3 servings or more of soy milk-so I get plenty of calcium.

The reason I'd rather not invest time/energy in weight training unless of great benefit is that every time I have done it in the past, I saw either a weight gain or a plateau immediately afterwards that seemed to last "like FOREVER" {in best Valley Girl voice }. As I mentioned to you in a PM, I can't do that much upper body anyway because of my screwed shoulder, and don't do legs that much because the cycling seems to be really taking care of that; so really did more core-based weight machines than anything. But, as I said, the results with the scale were always very discouraging!

Okay, I will definitely find out. My gut is telling me that it would still help with bone density because building bone is far different from building muscle tissue, so don't stop yet! :bigsmile: I certainly don't want you to hurt your shoulder though.
You'll see a gain with lifting for the same reason you see if after a looooong bike ride and carb ingestion--glycogen.

cmriverside

Song -

I was so proud of myself for actually following along and understanding your abbreviations! (Remember, we aren't in school.....) but what is VLCD?

Thanks for all your knowledge-sharing!

Cheryl-still-waiting-for-baby-pictures.

:glasses:

songbyrdsweet

Song -

I was so proud of myself for actually following along and understanding your abbreviations! (Remember, we aren't in school.....) but what is VLCD?

Thanks for all your knowledge-sharing!

Cheryl-still-waiting-for-baby-pictures.

:glasses:

Oh sorry lol....sometimes it get too lazy to type it all out hehe :blushing: VLCD is very-low-calorie-diet.

Okay okay I'll get some baby pictures lol! :laugh:

cmriverside

Oh sorry lol....sometimes it get too lazy to type it all out hehe :blushing: VLCD is very-low-calorie-diet.

Okay okay I'll get some baby pictures lol! :laugh:

thanks, rat-mom. I have dolphin-baby picture.

songbyrdsweet

Oh sorry lol....sometimes it get too lazy to type it all out hehe :blushing: VLCD is very-low-calorie-diet.

Okay okay I'll get some baby pictures lol! :laugh:

thanks, rat-mom. I have dolphin-baby picture.

Do you have dolphins?? :happy:

Poison5119

:flowerforyou: bumping it so i can read it later!!!!

shorerider

Okay, I will definitely find out. My gut is telling me that it would still help with bone density because building bone is far different from building muscle tissue, so don't stop yet! :bigsmile: I certainly don't want you to hurt your shoulder though.
You'll see a gain with lifting for the same reason you see if after a looooong bike ride and carb ingestion--glycogen.

I take it easy with the shoulder and know when "enough is enough." Yeah, glycogen :grumble: UGH! Need it but hate it!

I was also curious, and maybe you can check with your profs, how being Type 2 Diabetic (non-insulin dependent) impacts all that glycogen storage, usage, etc. Does it make it worse, less effective for my body, is there something I could do as a diabetic to limit the dramatic increase in weight after a long ride, etc.? I have nothing online to do with this--at least in regards to Type 2--and it's frustrating. So maybe your profs might know???

lotusfromthemud

OK, now I'm back in the questioning.

So, I'm essentially at the maintenance phase, and have decided to eat that way. Is it possible to move my percentages around (body fat, etc) through exercise alone? That is, if I'm creating a moderate deficit through cardio exercise and weight training, will I see visible weight-training results? In other words, can I get firmer looking with weight training alone? I know it's good for me (the whole bone-density thing is important to me)

Or, do I need to create a huge calorie deficit through diet to lower my body fat % further?

I'm really frustrated/confused right now. I guess the short version is: is it possible to change my body composition through exercise alone, without restricting calories?:flowerforyou:

songbyrdsweet

Okay, I will definitely find out. My gut is telling me that it would still help with bone density because building bone is far different from building muscle tissue, so don't stop yet! :bigsmile: I certainly don't want you to hurt your shoulder though.
You'll see a gain with lifting for the same reason you see if after a looooong bike ride and carb ingestion--glycogen.

I take it easy with the shoulder and know when "enough is enough." Yeah, glycogen :grumble: UGH! Need it but hate it!

I was also curious, and maybe you can check with your profs, how being Type 2 Diabetic (non-insulin dependent) impacts all that glycogen storage, usage, etc. Does it make it worse, less effective for my body, is there something I could do as a diabetic to limit the dramatic increase in weight after a long ride, etc.? I have nothing online to do with this--at least in regards to Type 2--and it's frustrating. So maybe your profs might know???

That would be affected by prescription drugs. You can PM me or let me know what what you're taking for your diabetes, and that would help in figuring out some answers.

songbyrdsweet

OK, now I'm back in the questioning.

So, I'm essentially at the maintenance phase, and have decided to eat that way. Is it possible to move my percentages around (body fat, etc) through exercise alone? That is, if I'm creating a moderate deficit through cardio exercise and weight training, will I see visible weight-training results? In other words, can I get firmer looking with weight training alone? I know it's good for me (the whole bone-density thing is important to me)

Or, do I need to create a huge calorie deficit through diet to lower my body fat % further?

I'm really frustrated/confused right now. I guess the short version is: is it possible to change my body composition through exercise alone, without restricting calories?:flowerforyou:

Good! Maintenance is important, especially if you've been at this a long time. You can always go back to cutting calories whenever you like, that's the great thing.

If you're truly eating maintenance with activity included, your weight really isn't going to move. It won't go up or down aside from daily fluctuations. If you're creating a deficit through exercise, it's still the caloric deficit that is causing fat loss--not the exercise.If your deficit is something like 200 calories per day, you'll see very slow fat loss but will lose virtually no muscle and will avoid plateaus for a longer period of time. You can definitely burn 200 calories in a good weight training session. If that's all you need, there's no reason to do cardio for fat loss. It's still important for CV health though, so you should still keep up with your 3X a week at 30 min. Your body fat % will continue to decrease as long as you're in a deficit. (If you're shooting for something really low, like 12-15%, you'll have to do ungodly amounts of cardio to be able to still eat and maintain a deficit due to the extreme down-regulation of metabolism and hormonal changes that occur at those body fat levels in women.)

Buuuuuuuuuuut....if you're eating slightly *above* maintenance, THEN the good stuff happens. Then you can gain muscle! You only need about 100 extra calories per day to build lean muscle mass. You can eat more than that, but then you'll be gaining some body fat as well, and your muscle gains won't be accelerated. The COOL thing about this is that this actually WILL increase your BMR since you're adding muscle, which burns twice as many calories as fat per hour since it takes a lot of energy to maintain. So you could always enter a bulking phase (no you won't get 'bulky' lol) wherein you eat those extra 100 calories per day and lift for hypertrophy for a few months. Then switch back to cutting calories again if you feel that your progress is stagnating or your pants feel snug.

You will *always* have to eat less than you burn to lose fat, and *always* eat more than you burn to gain muscle. It's simply because we need extra 'stuff' to build with, and need to take away 'stuff' to get rid of tissue. It's like trying to build or tear down a house...we can only do that if we're adding or taking away the bricks. Nothing happens if we leave the bricks alone.

lotusfromthemud

That "200 calories a day deficit" very slow fat loss and no muscle loss sounds good to me. I think I'm building a pretty good "muscle foundation" but now essentially feel like I'm wearing a light sweatsuit of fat over it. (eeeewwww. . .gross visual) This is a BIG change from the fat "parka/snowpants" I used to wear.

Right now I'm taking a (short) break from logging my calories, but when I start again, I'm going to maintenance, but not eating all of my exercise calories. If I aim for 200-300 calories a day in deficit, I think I will start to see some real transformation. I've made peace with the idea that this will not go quickly. (mostly.) The idea of scaling back my cardio sounds lovely (I've been doing 5-6 hours a week for three years+ now).

It's just been such a tricky mental transformation from the somewhat constant gratification of shrinking to the very very slow gratification of changing my shape.

But, thanks for the re-assurance that I'm sort of doing it right! I feel like you should set up a paypal account so that we could pay you for the advice. If you were running for mayor of Fitness-town, you'd get my vote.:flowerforyou:

songbyrdsweet

LOL the 'light sweatsuit of fat' cracked me up!! :laugh: :laugh: If only we could just unzip it and take it off!

I understand you on the cardio hehe...I got up to 120 minutes of cardio a day last year, and I thought I was going to keel over. I would do two classes in a row, or run for an hour in the AM and PM. I didn't know at the time that I was just a hamster on a wheel...I thought that more exercise = more fat loss. I'm glad that's not the case, because I'm doing much less cardio now because I just don't have the time anymore between work and school. Plus it's just so taxing spending that much time on a treadmill. :sick:

I have reached some incredible plateaus. I have dropped my calories way down, played with meal timing, dropped carbs completely, pretty much everything. Nothing seems to work as well as bumping up for a while, lifting hard, and then getting back to cutting after a couple months. At times I've put on more than I wanted (last Dec. I did an experiment with carb-cycling...got a little too happy with the wheat pizza hehe). But the benefit of being alive and having years to do this is that I can always undo what I don't like, and never do it again. :laugh:

My body has really changed since I started this...I had no muscular definition whatsoever, my shoulders were very narrow, my stomach stuck out more than my chest, and my thighs touched all the way down. I even had that awful fold of fat above my elbow...man, I hated that thing! :explode: Now, I weigh more than I did back then, and I'm not just a smaller version of my old self. I have these broad shoulders and I like my butt and my stomach is pretty near being flat. No more elbow fat either. :bigsmile: I really think changing *everything* is WAY better than just being a smaller version of my old lumpy self.

Haha thanks for the vote....now I guess I'm supposed to say something about change, yada yada?

lotusfromthemud

AAAAAARRRRGH! The elbow fat! I know exactly what you're talking about. It's one of those spots that I know will be the last to go.

I have built broader shoulders and my butt is finally lifting and rounding out.

And yes, I've actually visualized unzipping it and stepping out of it. (I do meditations and that's something I've visualized. . .welcome to my weird brain):flowerforyou:

songbyrdsweet

AAAAAARRRRGH! The elbow fat! I know exactly what you're talking about. It's one of those spots that I know will be the last to go.

I have built broader shoulders and my butt is finally lifting and rounding out.

And yes, I've actually visualized unzipping it and stepping out of it. (I do meditations and that's something I've visualized. . .welcome to my weird brain):flowerforyou:

Hey, that sounds like a great visualization! I usually visualize myself power cleaning 250 lbs...but then I look at the bar and it's 70. :grumble:

shorerider

That would be affected by prescription drugs. You can PM me or let me know what what you're taking for your diabetes, and that would help in figuring out some answers.

Glimepiride for Diabetes right now. Plus Altace for HBP. And Naproxen for shoulder (anti-inflammatory).

shorerider

Hey SBS!!!

Any answers on the diabetes stuff yet?

Also, I think I had an epiphany today while riding--let me run this by you

You know how I tend to gain sudden poundage after a hard or a long ride, right, from like you explained "depletion of glycogen" and my body building the glycogen store back up.

Sooo,,, if I stay down in the lower percentage of my optimum HR, say 65% -75%, would that then allow my body to use more fat for energy than ready carbs/glycogen? If so, then that should result in not depleting my glycogen stores, right? Which would mean no sudden weight gain? Is this all correct or even close?

Because, as I said, I love to go fast but am more than willing to slow down if it will allow for glycogen storage to remain more steady.

shorerider

bumping to see if SBS comes on here

hmo4

I have been going strong with all kinds of exercise over the past year, with cardio and several days of weight training. I have gained 15 lbs, but am in smaller clothes than I was before. So now, I am eating more protein and sticking with in my caloric intake alotted to hopefully bring down the body fat%. It is VERY frustrating to have the bigger thighs now, but at least I have some tone and definition. So we have to just hang in there, it will take alot longer to tone and firm up and hopefully decrease fat % than a guy. I'm with ya, keep up the good work!:drinker:

songbyrdsweet

Hey SBS!!!

Any answers on the diabetes stuff yet?

Also, I think I had an epiphany today while riding--let me run this by you

You know how I tend to gain sudden poundage after a hard or a long ride, right, from like you explained "depletion of glycogen" and my body building the glycogen store back up.

Sooo,,, if I stay down in the lower percentage of my optimum HR, say 65% -75%, would that then allow my body to use more fat for energy than ready carbs/glycogen? If so, then that should result in not depleting my glycogen stores, right? Which would mean no sudden weight gain? Is this all correct or even close?

Because, as I said, I love to go fast but am more than willing to slow down if it will allow for glycogen storage to remain more steady.

Hey I'm sorry I haven't been around, I am still SO busy!

Glycogen depletion is really about the summation of intensity and time. If you go for 2 hrs at 65% MHR, you're still going to deplete glycogen. If you're going for 45 min at 85% MHR, you can deplete glycogen. There's no exact rate or one thing that works for everyone, but generally you're going to be running out of it at about 90 minutes of moderate-intensity cardio. If your rides are long, it's pretty much unavoidable. I really wouldn't worry about the weight gain...it's just a fact of training. It's not going to negatively affect your fat loss.

shorerider

Hey I'm sorry I haven't been around, I am still SO busy!

Glycogen depletion is really about the summation of intensity and time. If you go for 2 hrs at 65% MHR, you're still going to deplete glycogen. If you're going for 45 min at 85% MHR, you can deplete glycogen. There's no exact rate or one thing that works for everyone, but generally you're going to be running out of it at about 90 minutes of moderate-intensity cardio. If your rides are long, it's pretty much unavoidable. I really wouldn't worry about the weight gain...it's just a fact of training. It's not going to negatively affect your fat loss.

Ok, so what about if I make sure to get in plenty of carbs during riding to have a ready source available for my body to draw upon for fuel "right then"---like Cliff shots, GU, etc. Would that keep the glycogen depletion down somewhat at least?

battykatty2002

from what i was told (so this isn't set in stone)

"Muscle weighs more than fat but burns more calories so it will balance out in the end"

i don't know if this is true but i like the sound of it,

songbyrdsweet

Hey I'm sorry I haven't been around, I am still SO busy!

Glycogen depletion is really about the summation of intensity and time. If you go for 2 hrs at 65% MHR, you're still going to deplete glycogen. If you're going for 45 min at 85% MHR, you can deplete glycogen. There's no exact rate or one thing that works for everyone, but generally you're going to be running out of it at about 90 minutes of moderate-intensity cardio. If your rides are long, it's pretty much unavoidable. I really wouldn't worry about the weight gain...it's just a fact of training. It's not going to negatively affect your fat loss.

Ok, so what about if I make sure to get in plenty of carbs during riding to have a ready source available for my body to draw upon for fuel "right then"---like Cliff shots, GU, etc. Would that keep the glycogen depletion down somewhat at least?

Somewhat, it just depends on the gastric emptying times of those things. I believe those are gel/liquid so they'd probably be digested quickly. I'm not sure if that would be great for your BG though.

shorerider

Somewhat, it just depends on the gastric emptying times of those things. I believe those are gel/liquid so they'd probably be digested quickly. I'm not sure if that would be great for your BG though.

Actually, they're the only thing I've found that will keep my BG levels up for more than 30 minutes or so. They are gel-like (and the chocolate GU tastes just like melted chocolate! ) and will keep my BG levels steady at about 120 or so (perfect for riding) if I consume 1 per hour.

I'm just trying to avoid the up/downs in the weight the this glycogen stuff. Plus, I really am beginning to think that somehow, this depletion of glycogen and how it sends your liver, etc. into "overtime mode" has to have some link to why my BG levels are so hard to keep up while riding.

firegirlred

This is good to know for long runs-I may have to purchase a few GU's

shorerider

This is good to know for long runs-I may have to purchase a few GU's

GET THE CHOCOLATE! I just had GU for the first time yesterday and could not believe it! Like chocolate frosting or something but not as sweet. And, I really was happy to see that, like the Cliff shots, it didn't spike my BG levels but kept it up in a good range. And, it just gives some good old "extra energy," you need when exercising, too! the hard part is to have this whole box of this stuff in the house and not eat it except on my rides because it is SO GOOD!