CrossFit Discussion Board  

Go Back   CrossFit Discussion Board > CrossFit Forum > Nutrition
CrossFit Home Forum Site Rules CrossFit FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Nutrition Diet, supplements, weightloss, health & longevity

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-14-2010, 07:54 PM   #11
Katherine Derbyshire
Member Katherine Derbyshire is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Seattle  WA
Posts: 7,596
Re: Dynamic Duo: Crossfit + Raw Vegan Diet

I think there may be two different definitions of "recovery" here. Are you "fully recovered" if you have DOMS?

24-36 hours before you're ready to do another workout is a pretty long time, clearly inadequate for any real world application of fitness.

But no soreness beyond 36 hours, no matter what the workout? That's actually pretty good.

So which is it?

Katherine
 
Old 02-14-2010, 11:07 PM   #12
David Knutzen
Member David Knutzen is offline
 
David Knutzen's Avatar
 
Profile:
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Oklahoma City  OK
Posts: 416
Re: Dynamic Duo: Crossfit + Raw Vegan Diet

I'd be extremely surprised if anyone, regardless of diet, was always recovered from all DOMS in 24-36 hours regardless of the workout. Every now and then, something comes along that knocks you flat, at least in my experience. Maybe I'm just speaking for myself, I don't get severe DOMS very often, but I still get some intense soreness for 3-4 days following a WOD sometimes.
 
Old 02-15-2010, 07:39 AM   #13
Oliver Newton
Member Oliver Newton is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Dayton  OH
Posts: 1
Re: Dynamic Duo: Crossfit + Raw Vegan Diet

SLOW DOWN...
I know everybody likes to bash the veg*ns, but somebody needs to pump their brakes...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles Staley View Post
[...] Then you remove the cooking process, which further reduces the nutritional value of the already non-nutritious food you're eating, and it leaves me wondering how you define "great success." But maybe that's just me...
Ummm... cooking veggies WILL reduce the nutritional value, and if you are stating that all the whole foods such as veggies and fruit one would eat on say a paleo diet are "non-nutritious", I think there is a serious misunderstanding and/or miscomunication...

I would like to state for the record my experience has been RAW fruits and veggies are great for you.
 
Old 02-15-2010, 07:56 AM   #14
Charles Staley
Member Charles Staley is offline
 
Charles Staley's Avatar
 
Profile:
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Phoenix  AZ
Posts: 89
Re: Dynamic Duo: Crossfit + Raw Vegan Diet

OK. I stand corrected then
__________________
Charles Staley
http://www.TeamStaley.com
 
Old 02-15-2010, 09:00 AM   #15
Cassie Savage
Member Cassie Savage is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Knoxville  TN
Posts: 32
Re: Dynamic Duo: Crossfit + Raw Vegan Diet

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliver Newton View Post
Ummm... cooking veggies WILL reduce the nutritional value, and if you are stating that all the whole foods such as veggies and fruit one would eat on say a paleo diet are "non-nutritious", I think there is a serious misunderstanding and/or miscomunication...
It may destroy some of the nutrients, but if you don't cook them at all your body can't absorb any of the nutrients anyway. I've heard that if you want to get the most nutritional value from your veggies, you should steam them.
 
Old 02-15-2010, 09:41 AM   #16
Kevin Daigle
Member Kevin Daigle is offline
 
Kevin Daigle's Avatar
 
Profile:
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Dracut  MA
Posts: 502
Re: Dynamic Duo: Crossfit + Raw Vegan Diet

Is it possible? Yes

Is it difficult? Yes...in fact many, many times more difficult than if you're eating meat.

Protein sources that are not animal in nature, in almost all cases, do not produce the same glucagon response hormonally speaking...and in many cases are not even available protein that your body can use. Like the protein in nuts for example.....it doesn't even count in zone blocks.

Are there competitive (successfully) athletes who are vegetarian/vegan? Yes, there are.....but they are very, very rare. Why? Because it's so hard to provide your body with the nutrients it needs to compete at a high level....it'd be damn near a full time job to just keep your nutrition dialed in.

So it can be done....is it worth it? No.....definitely not to me. I also find it logically impossible to have a moral issue with eating meat....but thats just me.
__________________
Daigle Breathes Fire
 
Old 02-15-2010, 12:31 PM   #17
Mario Coss
Member Mario Coss is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Mesa  AZ
Posts: 72
Re: Dynamic Duo: Crossfit + Raw Vegan Diet

Matt Haxmeier wrote:
Quote:
How do you find your strength does with so little protein though. That seems to be one of the main problems with a vegan diet. (not to mention the sugar you're ingesting with that much fruit)
Naturally, as a vegan, I get asked about protein more often than anything else. The problem is not protein actually. This is why some of the largest animals on the planet are or where herbivores. You can clearly get muscle growth with fruits and veggies. The problem with vegan diets in my opinion (and by the way, I am currently 26 years old, I have been a predominantly raw, 100% vegan for 3 years now, but before that I indeed was on a Weston Price/Paleo diet), is not that there is not enough protein, it is not that there is not enough essential fats and amino acids (for instance my omega 3-omega 6 ratio is literally 1:1, which by academia's standards is all but "impossible" today, and my amino acid intake is more than adequate)...the problem with the vegan diet is two-fold:

#1 Reliance on grains. Grains are not meant for human consumption. I think we all probably agree to this. Not only do grains lead to intestinal permeability, they also serve as anti-nutrients (depleting both the B vitamins, as well as lowering the body's pH), but a byproduct is also the gluten conversion into Gliadorphin, an opiod-like compound that serves to further addict people to grains. And another problem of course, is the associated B12 issue. I have studied this subject extensively and from many articles I have reviewed in the primary literature, I have found an amazing trend that shows that b12 deficiency is not a result of being a vegan specifically, but rather of increased grain consumption. There are people who eat meat for instance that have plenty of b12 issues. These are the ones who happen to also eat lots of grains. There are vegans who have no b12 issues, even after decades. These are the vegans who do not eat grains.
Destruction of the parietal cells in the stomach (which produce stomach acid and INTRINSIC FACTOR), accompanied by the inflammatory effect that the gluten proteins have on the intestinal gap junctions, allow for large particles to come into the body (and hence allergies, auto-immune diseases, and those opiod-like compounds leading to addictions) and thus cause disease.

#2 Not eating enough calories. The reason meat and animal products are so successful for many people instead of vegan foods is simple: calorie density. Most vegans fail miserably at eating enough. Most of them also happen to be, no offense, "sissy types." Not all of them. And I can promise I am not one of the vegan sissies, but that is a trend. If you don't eat enough calories you are bound to fail. Calories make your body grow. Not protein, or fat, or carbs. But calories in general.
A pound of meat will cost you a couple bucks, and provide you with 1000 calories.
A pound of fruit and veggies will cost you up to 10 bucks, and will provide you with at most 300 calories.
So you can see why it is both economically and in terms of convenience, a preferable option for many to use meat as their prime calorie source.

But those proteins in the meat...they don't get used as muscle building blocks. They don't get used as structural amino acids etc. Granted some do. If you were to consume 2500 calories entirely of meat, some small amount of it would be used to replenish some of the amino acids you lose on a daily basis (which is an incredibly small amount because your body knows how important protein is, and how expensive it is to manufacture, so it recycles it quite well). Maybe 20-30 grams maximum. This is called Obligatory Nitrogen losses (you are thus OBLIGATED to consume this amount in your diet of amino acids to replenish the lost amino acids). Like I said though, this number is very small. In my medical textbook that is probably the most circulated and well known in physiology (Guyton's Textbook of Medical Physiology), it states plainly there that the necessary amount of protein to consume is no more than 20 grams per day. This will be more than enough to keep you in positive nitrogen balance. If you are trying to build muscle, the one thing anyone who build muscle will tell you is that you need to have ENERGY to do the exercises if you want to build muscle. There is yet to be a person who builds muscle without getting in a gym or doing physical exercise. So, as your energy level needs increase, so should your calorie consumption. And as your calories increase, so too, should your protein quantity. For 2000 calories, for instance, on my diet, I get around 40 grams of protein. This is already more than enough to build muscle. But if I were to increase my calories because I wanted to do some more exercise and do some crossfit etc, my calories would almost double, and thus, so would my protein intake, because it's all proportional. Indeed, the trainers for the Olympic athletes have a similar principle. They advocate that the nutrient ratios do not change for different athletes or for different times in their training. The ratios stay the same, the only thing that increases is AMOUNT of calories. This is, in fact what we see in nature.
You don't see lions eating mostly protein sometimes and mostly fat other times, etc. What you see is stasis. Same with cows. Some cows are active and some are not, some are big some are not, some are young, some are not, but they all consume grass. With the exact same calo-nutrient ratios.


Quote:
I've never tried eating that way, but I know how my body reacts when eating too much fruit
Indeed. Same with me. When I was eating meat and animal products, I was not happy about for instance apples, or lots of citrus. This is largely a phenomenon that has to do with the slower digestion of animal products, which especially if high in fat can take significantly longer to break down and be absorbed by the body than something like fruits and veggies. If you have a body that has lots of meat and dairy and fat in the digestive tract, you tend to require more "transit time" so to say. Thus when you introduce some other food source that wants to be in and out, really quick, it gets blocked, then you have the phenomenon of fermentation. Bloating. Gas. Etc.

Anyone who complains about "too much fruit" is basically talking about getting the ****s or some painful gas. And I understand. I in fact used to think Granny Smith Apples were specifically the most evil and vicious fruit in the world because I would get intense cramps and gas after eating even a small amount, like a few slices.

If you plan on eating fruit as well as meat and fatty foods, it has to be fruit first, on a relatively empty stomach (aka, in the morning) and then no more fruit only veggies and meat and fat in the latter part of the day. However, if one were to get on a fruit-based diet, such as what I did, your digestion very quickly eliminates the last remainder of the fatty/meaty foods and becomes different in it's speed so to say, and thus introducing massive amounts of fruit will have no negative impact.

But, yes, I do know exactly what you mean by "too much fruit." Some people say "too much fruit" in the sense of "too much sugar" but this is of course nonsense, as, fruit sugar is not pathological because it contains fiber, vitamins and minerals and phytochemicals and water and, well, everything it needs so as to not spike insulin and cause any problems. Indeed, I challenge anyone to find someone who got diabetes from eating "too much fruit." It is impossible. Which is why the Mayo Clinic and the diabetes associations, have fruit listed as something that is not only recommended to eat, but is listed as an "unlimited food" along with vegetables, meaning that, there is no limit as to what is "too much."

But again, meat/fat and fruit are not exactly best buddies when eaten together. Evidence of this is beans, which are one of the few veggies that have large amounts of carbs and protein. And what do they cause? Gas. Correct. It's no mystery why. :-)
 
Old 02-15-2010, 12:32 PM   #18
Mario Coss
Member Mario Coss is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Mesa  AZ
Posts: 72
Re: Dynamic Duo: Crossfit + Raw Vegan Diet

Charles Staley wrote:
Quote:
Mario, given the fact that protein and fat are both essential nutrients, added to the fact that carbohydrate is a non-essential nutrient, I've never been able to understand why someone would deliberately choose a diet low in the former and high in the latter.
Well, the fact that carbs are not "essential" is a misnomer. Cholesterol is also not "essential" but it is VITAL. So is glucose. So are lots of things in the body. But, nevertheless, I will give you my reasoning, to help you better understand why someone may deliberately choose a diet high in carbs, low in fat and protein:
We eventually convert everything to carbs for energy. So if we ingest 2000 calories of animal foods, more than 95% of that protein literally gets used as energy. In order to do this, our bodies have to convert it. This in and of itself requires energy though. And as the saying goes, there ain't no such thing as a free lunch. So, essentially we are asking our bodies to do more metabolic work. What ends up happening is, our blood flow is centered in our digestive system, and indeed, if you have a large meal of meat and fat, you feel tired afterwards. Nobody I have ever talked to feel like doing 100 jumping jacks after eating a heavy meal. They feel lethargic and full. This is literally the body's energy being centered on digestion and it makes you feel sleepy and tired.
The byproduct of this is that, energy and blood flow that could be used elsewhere is stuck being used to digest. End result? Areas of the body that are not very vascular, degenerate as they cannot be repaired as efficiently. This would include cartilage, ligaments and joints. Indeed, I used to have these lingering joint problems myself while on a meat based diet. Literally within 3 weeks of my switch, my long lingering ankle problems went entirely away. I used to not be able to play basketball without serious ankle braces. I thought for sure I needed some kind of surgery etc. Within 3 weeks my ankles were literally entirely healed. I have heard many others tell me similar things about raw vegan foods specifically about joint problems getting better.

Anyway, the fact that carbs are not essential doesn't mean they are best NOT eaten. Even if you do think that our paleolithic ancestors were meat eating hunter gatherers, the fact is that overall consumption of meat was still very small. I have studied this extensively too, and it appears that mainstream science still isn't absolutely sure about our exact intake of animals. They are certain that we did consume massive amounts of fruits and veggies historically, and then on the aspect of animals, it is a bunch of statements that are made like this:
"humans may have consumed animals"
"it may be likely"
"could have"
"there is a possibility."

Indeed, I don't doubt we did. But the fact is that the overall amount of animal food was quite small, especially in those hunter gatherer times.
A recent book that came out in fact documents human predation as not something we did, but that was DONE TO US. This book is called "Man the Hunted."
Very interesting info therein.

At any rate, why do I not like the idea of eating lots of protein? Because again, most of it is used up as energy. Which means it has to be turned into carbs. But even before that, it is well known that protein requires much more digestive resources to break it down to begin with. And animal protein specifically. Why? The proteins in animal products are more dense, harder to be broken down, and require more time and energy to digest. Lots of sulfur-containing amino acids in the proteins. Lots of tight bonds (disulfide bonds for instance) and fibrous and dense structure that requires much more acid and pepsin secretion to break down.
So, after we are done using up lots of energy breaking down the proteins, now we have amino acids. And we have too many! The body is like "Whoa, I don't need all these building blocks dude!" So what does it do? The smart thing. It converts them to energy, to either use up (glucose), or store for later (glycogen, fatty acids).
IN ORDER TO DO THIS, the animo acid MUST lose the "AMINO" group. This is done by a process called deamination. First we have an amino acid that is first TRANSAMINATED onto an alpha-ketogluterate molecule. This then becomes the amino acids glutamate (the body prefers to first transaminate all the amino acids into one so that it doesn't have to have 19 individual enzymes to deaminate each individual amino acid....clever, isn't it).
It is thus deaminated by glutamate dehydrogenase. But now instead of just moving around the amino group, we see the presence of the toxic byproduct: Ammonia.
This ammonia needs to be dealt with. It is simply a waste product. And the body can deal with it by converting it to Urea. But the body doesn't prefer to do this. In fact using protein as a source of energy (because it is so toxin-forming) is not the body's first choice. In fact it is not the second choice. Or third choice. It is the body's last and final choice for fuel. It will use glucose first (no toxic byproducts, highest ATP output), then glycerol and fatty acids, it will look for anything else to break down for energy before it decides to go for protein.

That's why I go with what I go with. But again, not all carbs are created equal. Grains for instance, are carbs, but they are toxic to us. By the way, the opiod gliadomorphin formed from gluten is not the only opiod substance we know of. Another almost identical one is called casomorphin. This comes from casein. This is found in huge quantities in cow milk. Which is one reason why both of these foods tend to addict people to them. I don't hear of people being addicted to meat, or to fruit or to veggies. But I do hear quite often bread and dairy (especially cheese, which is nothing more than super concentrated milk).

Quote:
Then you remove the cooking process, which further reduces the nutritional value of the already non-nutritious food you're eating, and it leaves me wondering how you define "great success." But maybe that's just me...
Yeah, I would disagree with this, just as another member disagreed. By the way the "nutrient value' you speak of is solely macronutrient related. And it is related to, of all things, carbs. You don't make it easier to obtain amino acids in the diet by cooking. You don't make it easier to obtain fats by doing so. In fact cooking fats and amino acids either oxidizes them, or in the case of protein, turns them carcinogenic or creates protein cross-linkages that makes them much harder if not sometimes impossible to digest.

My food, without being biased...is probably the most micronutrient dense food you can eat. This is why I do not take any vitamins and am indeed having great success.
 
Old 02-15-2010, 12:33 PM   #19
Mario Coss
Member Mario Coss is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Mesa  AZ
Posts: 72
Re: Dynamic Duo: Crossfit + Raw Vegan Diet

Casey Crooks wrote:
Quote:
Taking 24-36 hours to recover from a workout would tell me that i needed to find a better way to recover.
I should have been a bit more clear. I was speaking of glycogen recovery. Muscles, like wounds, recover at very similar rates almost across the board. As you age, it is slower, and indeed, there are individual differences, but overall, most generally healthy people heal their muscles just as fast. If you stretch too hard you can rip your muscles. It will take us both probably the same time to heal that wound.
BUT, when it comes to glycogen reserves being back up to 100%, it is a scientific fact that a high carb diet is best for glycogen replenishment. It doesn't mean a high protein diet doesn't replenish glycogen, it just means it takes much longer. I will show you a graph from Guyton's Textbook of Medical Phsyiology:
http://api.ning.com/files/m3aGxsTDdV...ogenWindow.JPGYOU MUST ANNOTATE ALL LINKS WHETHER WORK AND FAMILY SAFE.

As you can see, a high carb diet replenishes this level of glycogen much faster. And indeed, I have noticed this trend myself. With my diet, which is not even mostly complex carbs, but simple carbs (healthy ones, with much fiber and vitamins of course), does so even faster. I am typically back up to 100% within 22 hours. And it should be clear to see why it takes so long to replenish glycogen stores with a heavy protein and fat diet: because it requires to much time and energy to extract it and convert it to carbs. Yes the body can do it...but why make it jump through hoops for it? That's my logic.


Normal Tasfi wrote:
Quote:
Like Casey said don't you think that is a lousy recovery time? Look at all the game competitors doing wod after wod, I don't think a single one of them eats vegan, let alone a raw vegan diet. They would crash and burn on something like that. Do you have any moral reservations about eating meat or just trying this diet? If you have time check out robb wolfs podcast and write ups on this stuff, he if I remember correctly, was a vegan too at one point in time and now eats paleo.
I really don't think I have a lousy recovery time.
As far as the game competitors, yes, I study them. And I see a trend in early-life renal failure, bone problems and short lifespans. I'm interested in the long haul, not straining the body and not being in any "cometition" but rather feeling good about myself and indeed, packing on some serious muscle...just not Hulk Hogan stuff. If you're interested in getting Hulk Hogan up in here, hey, you have my best wishes.

As far as moral reservations, yes...I think I have indeed developed some. I can't lie. But initially, no, the move for me was strictly nutrition and science based. Even to this day I think it is very possible to be a moral meat eater. One can raise the animals in a healthful environment, or simply wait for them to die naturally and eat them then...of course, most people who do eat meat, eat the nasty industry-grown C.A.F.O. style animals, and I don't support that for many reasons. But no, I'm not here to bash on animal food eaters.

I just don't see animal foods as optimal fuel for humans. That's really all there is to it. I'm not in favor of them for that reason, but I am WAY more against grain-damage than I am animal foods actually. Specifically processed grains. Pure poison.

Most corn in this country, here's a funny thing, ISN'T EVEN FRIGGIN' EDIBLE!

It's a damn commodity! It's used as a raw material for making other stuff, or feeding the animals. It's used to make HFCS, or batteries, or plastics, or crackers, etc...how sad.

I'll check out Robb Wolf's podcast. I am always interested in other people's perspectives. I enjoy learning new things. I doubt I will give up my diet, because it just leaves me feeling so damn good, but I might learn new weight training techniques or interesting tid bits etc.

Chances are, if the man used to be a vegan, he has failed for very predictable reasons:
Getting not enough calories
or
Relying on grains (ohh, those evil ****ing grains, how many lives have they probably ruined!)
or
Not being able to overcome addictions to breads/dairy.

But thank you for the reco. I promise I will look into it.
 
Old 02-15-2010, 12:34 PM   #20
Mario Coss
Member Mario Coss is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Mesa  AZ
Posts: 72
Re: Dynamic Duo: Crossfit + Raw Vegan Diet

Joe Bernard wrote:
Quote:
Have you tried Paleo? Robb Wolf has tried many diets, including vegan, and he found that Paleo is the best, along with alot of other people (myself included). I just don't see how you are going to build any amount of significant muscle with a small amount of protein.
Yes I was on a paleo diet for 2 years about 5 years ago. It was the second best diet I ever tried. I felt good on it.
As far as building muscle, you cannot physically gain more than 100 grams of muscle per week. This means you only need to increase your protein intake by about... 14 grams a day extra. And this is BEST case scenario.
We need no more than 20 - 30 grams for basal metabolism. Yes, the RDAs may say 50 or so, but in reality those are "recommendations" they are not scientifically viable proofs. The science shows we need no more than 30 grams to maintain positive nitrogen balance. If we thus begin to train as hard as possible, all we need is another 14 grams per day, and we are officially at the maximum of our ability to put on actual muscle.

Most people don't understand however, that building muscle is not really what they are doing. Most of it, especially INITIALLY (when you see the most dramatic results) is water, glycogen, and bloodflow increases. As you use your muscles more, you store more glycogen in them.

Go and play a bunch of basketball and you will notice after a few hours, your arms look skinnier, etc. Why? All your glycogen is being depleted. If you lift weights, while you lift your muscle appear much bigger. Why? Bloodflow. You don't actually think that visible increase is from muscle right? Of course not. It's bloodflow and water.

As you reach the point where your muscle glycogen levels are finally plateauing, this is when you begin to notice that you have reached a plateau as well in your size of your muscles. Why? Because now that they are storing maximum glycogen and water and no more can be stored, the only other way to make the muscles look bigger is actual physical muscle, this takes MUCH more time.
So many people that start out after long bouts of laziness and couch sitting, they notice great increases at first. But almost all of that is water, bloodflow and glycogen stores. As those reach their peak, then you are only getting bigger by the muscle you build out of actual protein. And this is a slow process.
14 grams per day. Like I said. That's it.

Don't believe me? Check this dude out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKBDqsK4zHI YOU MUST ANNOTATE ALL LINKS WHETHER WORK AND FAMILY SAFE.


I think largely there is ignorance about this subject and, much like Roger Bannister, there will be people soon enough who start to bust through these mental barriers and we will start seeing one major person/celebrity increase their weight on a raw vegan diet and just shatter the myth and then more will follow.

We, as a society have been very much indoctrinated into thinking protein = muscle. Yes. You do need some protein. But you don't NEED that much. You CAN consume that much, but it is not necessary. What is necessary is training.
And I can tell you from personal experience that the protein=muscle myth is a myth. I have been always trying to gain weight my entire life. I too, was screwed over by grains for some of my life. I was also screwed over by getting colds and flus all the time. Little did I know adequate vitamin D levels are all one needs. I get all the sun I can in the summer, and I supplement in the winters, and I have not been sick ONCE (and I used to get sick 3-4 times a year) since doing this.

Hope that clarifies about the protein.


Casey Crooks wrote:
Quote:
in all fairness if you are trying to live a vegan lifestyle for ethical reasons you can do it and succeed with crossfit and athletics. just not the way you are eating... more protein! robb and mark have written about paleo vegans somewhere... i just cant find it.
No, it's not ethical reasons. As I said, I have nothing against people who eat animal foods. I do tend to have my own personal feelings about it, but by no means was that the deciding factor in me switching over. At all. In fact I tend to like people like yourselves more than vegans because vegans are so "bla" sometimes. But then again, I have seen some raw vegan girls that are...holy **** drop your jaw beautiful. Anyways, I'll just say in my opinion, you are wrong about protein, but I don't blame you. It's a sort of collective notion we have had instilled in us. Protein is very important, but the amount we actually need is much less than when we are told.

Yahya Kohgadai wrote:
Quote:
This thread will not end well.
I think it will. I'm not here to trash talk. And I think I won't be received negatively, maybe just a bit quirky or something. Like "ohh yeah, then there's that vegan guy here somewhere too who does crossfit" etc...Which I'm cool with.

Katherine Derbyshire wrote:
Quote:
I think there may be two different definitions of "recovery" here. Are you "fully recovered" if you have DOMS?

24-36 hours before you're ready to do another workout is a pretty long time, clearly inadequate for any real world application of fitness.

But no soreness beyond 36 hours, no matter what the workout? That's actually pretty good.

So which is it?

Katherine
As far as muscle recovery, again, I would say this is relatively the same for most people. Just like wound healing. I think I may have been misinterpreted as referring to muscles. Anyone that claims their muscles HEAL within a day might want to alert some scientists, because that sounds very impressive.
I was referring to glycogen levels. I used to notice that some days I would feel no soreness, but I wouldn't be able to lift the same amount as last time I lifted. But I wasn't sore. It just wasn't happening. Or I would get on the basketball court and not have the same pep in my step. This is glycogen depletion.
Now, glycogen depletion DOES indeed also impact the ability of the muscles to heal to some degree, so there is some degree of improved time, but not much. If you are sore for more than 2 days you probably did too much. And you do that consistently, you are probably over-training in my opinion, as the muscle tearing you are doing isn't stimulating growth, just repair at that point. Sometimes it can even lead to atrophy. So says the science.

But you are absolutely right about Delayed Muscle Soreness. And there is a fine line between healthy DOMS and pathological over training. The most I sore I ever get is after I do my "Filthy Fifty" workout. I have DOMS and it lasts no more than 2 days. In fact, I just did a Filthy Fifty at very high intensity Friday night. I was sore yesterday for a while. Today I woke up and feel ready to go. I think I'm gonna play bball today and not do any weight exercises, but Tuesday, I'll be back at it again!
 
Closed Thread


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Raw Diet Kreg Costa Nutrition 5 07-03-2008 07:08 AM
Raw Vegan Diet Curtis Black Nutrition 4 12-31-2007 03:30 PM
Vegan diet and diabetes Jason Steele Nutrition 35 08-07-2006 12:48 AM
Why not Raw or Vegan? Kyle Short Nutrition 26 08-11-2005 07:43 PM
Crossfit vegan; can it work? sean hernandez mccumiskey Nutrition 16 03-14-2003 02:41 PM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
CrossFit is a registered trademark of CrossFit Inc.