i'm in Colombia with angry ostriches!
supplementation for hiking?
actually they've shown that caffeine does not dehydrate you.
but it depends on context. I think they show that if you drink the same amount of liquid after drinking (coffee vs non), you have same hydration level. however my own experience says that perhaps you naturally drink less water after drinking coffee (in total), so you end up dehydrated later on.
still, it should dehydrate you during the hike so much...
And I have HEARD of GU, I ment , wtf IS it? like ingredients, lol. I dont drink any chemical, fake stuff, not even gatorade.so im not familiar with it. -- for my energy drinks i mix OJ, pineapple juice n water for my hikes n runs. on longer hikes i take potassium with me too (cause bananas always get squished) and my recovery drink is chocolate milk 
and im not THAT young, Ive seen 30...just not that long ago, lol
Sweet Ostriches!
and im not THAT young, Ive seen 30...just not that long ago, lol
Sweet Ostriches!
Sugar, sugar, and more sugar. And something to hold the sugar together.
Auuugh! It's FIGHT ON's little sister!!! NOOOOOOOO!!
A mere babe in arms.
HJ
lol hj. fo's sister. haha.
i always try to get stuff that doesn't have a lot of simple sugars in it. gu is pretty good as far as nutritional content, in my opinion, but the taste is hideous for most of them.
and, everyday: i just hit 30 last week... the hammer gels (similar to gu) that i take seem to provide me with a great amount of energy for doing extended hikes (10+ milers). i've tried just using trail mix and fruit juice... and i'm pretty sure it was not the same experience, for what its worth.
p.s. 30 aint so bad. im in the best shape i've ever been in. we're as old as we let ourselves be
actually not quite. gatorade and a lot of other supplements, yes, but gu...no.Sugar, sugar, and more sugar. And something to hold the sugar together.
i always try to get stuff that doesn't have a lot of simple sugars in it. gu is pretty good as far as nutritional content, in my opinion, but the taste is hideous for most of them.
and, everyday: i just hit 30 last week... the hammer gels (similar to gu) that i take seem to provide me with a great amount of energy for doing extended hikes (10+ milers). i've tried just using trail mix and fruit juice... and i'm pretty sure it was not the same experience, for what its worth.
p.s. 30 aint so bad. im in the best shape i've ever been in. we're as old as we let ourselves be
interesting, ze. is caffeine still considered a diarrhetic then?actually they've shown that caffeine does not dehydrate you.
but it depends on context. I think they show that if you drink the same amount of liquid after drinking (coffee vs non), you have same hydration level. however my own experience says that perhaps you naturally drink less water after drinking coffee (in total), so you end up dehydrated later on.
still, it should dehydrate you during the hike so much...
MattCav wrote: ↑interesting, ze. is caffeine still considered a diarrhetic then?actually they've shown that caffeine does not dehydrate you.
but it depends on context. I think they show that if you drink the same amount of liquid after drinking (coffee vs non), you have same hydration level. however my own experience says that perhaps you naturally drink less water after drinking coffee (in total), so you end up dehydrated later on.
still, it should dehydrate you during the hike so much...
I think you mean diuretic, bro. Close, but wrong output means.
HJ
Thirty is great. It wasn't until my late 30's that injuries started piling up. TAKE CARE OF YOURSELF. I'm not convinced I took the best care of myself.
Now, in my late forties, I have a lot of foot and knee problems.
HJ
Well, i hike n run at least 8 miles a day on the trails out here with at least a 2200elev gain, 3 days a week, and 2 days a week I do 16-20mi with at least a 4500ft-6000ft elev gain. so I dont need a "different" experience. I feel fine after, and the day after all my workouts. So ima stick with just eatin fruits, veggies n dead animals for daily nutrition, and no processed/ chemically stuff. thanx anyway ima stck with my pineapple/oj/water combo, and chocolate milk. I dont like ingesting stuff i cant pronounce, and NO fluids should have a whole paragraph of ingredients! thats crazyMattCav wrote: ↑
and, everyday: i just hit 30 last week... the hammer gels (similar to gu) that i take seem to provide me with a great amount of energy for doing extended hikes (10+ milers). i've tried just using trail mix and fruit juice... and i'm pretty sure it was not the same experience, for what its worth.
I agree bout the trail mix though, that sux, i take cheesy bread n homemade chocolate chip cookies
i've wondered about that, knowing what i've heard, but i leave home with 8 ozs of caffienated mint tea and have a soy hazelnut latte before most hikes if i can find a Starbucks within reach. i have never become dehydrated (yet) from that combo. i then try and down 6-12 ozs of water before i begin my hikes and i wear a Camelbak reservoir in my pack, so i am constantly sipping water (and peeing!)Zé wrote: ↑actually they've shown that caffeine does not dehydrate you.
but it depends on context. I think they show that if you drink the same amount of liquid after drinking (coffee vs non), you have same hydration level. however my own experience says that perhaps you naturally drink less water after drinking coffee (in total), so you end up dehydrated later on.
still, it should dehydrate you during the hike so much...
i stopped eating GU years ago since i found it bothered my stomach and switched to Philippine Brand dried mangoes from Costco when i need a quick sugar boost. they taste great and are super moist.
after reading Zé's blog i started putting my meat, cheese & avocado in some whole wheat bread, i.e. a half sandwich, to ingest the complex carb's the bread has. many years ago i stopped eating bread at lunch to lower my carb's but i find the carb's helpful when hiking.
Since no one else has mentioned it so far, I'll bring up the subject of not supplementing. If I am hiking 20 miles or more, going up and down mountains, I find supplements useful. For 15 miles or less, I don't bother. I carry water, of course, especially on hot days, but I generally don't eat anything unless my hike overlaps a meal -- I hate missing meals.
yeah, i only take the cookies n stuff if im out through lunch. I didnt mean im out there stuffin my face all the time, lol. if im hiking like at 7am n gonna b back by noon, i dont take foods. even on my 16mile artsmith-to tables n bak jogs. However, even after a good breakfast, i do take food if i go ramon rd to top o tram out here on san jacinto mtn, i need food around flatrock, or i get a lil weak feeling near top, not cause its far, but cause the UPness seems to suk all the strength outa my legs by the last 1 or 2 miles
-
bertfivesix
- Posts: 206
- Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 3:29 pm
Hammer and Gu look pretty much the same to me, ingredient-wise. Both are mainly maltodextrin (veggie complex sugar), some fruit sugars and flavoring, amino acids, preservatives, and a couple incidental vitamins or herbals. Beyond that, taste is subjective; just buy whatever you like better or can get cheaper. I've tried both and don't really have a flavor, texture, or performance preference - but since I don't use gel bottles and thus have no incentive to buy bulk Hammer, I usually end up with Gu packets. Gu is considerably more viscous, though.
I tend to use gels for cycling, when I need to eat without breaking pace, and Clif bars while hiking/climbing because it gives me an excuse to sit and eat, aka slack off.
I tend to use gels for cycling, when I need to eat without breaking pace, and Clif bars while hiking/climbing because it gives me an excuse to sit and eat, aka slack off.
yeah I don't even eat anything when I hike. I find if I'm not glycogen depleted, I don't feel the need or hunger too, and will summit before breaking out any snacks.
Only time I would ever care about supplementation if it was a 'race'. Otherwise my conditioning alone is good enough.
Only time I would ever care about supplementation if it was a 'race'. Otherwise my conditioning alone is good enough.
That sounds reasonable. One has glycogen stores sufficient to fuel around 20 miles on level ground. Head up Skyline and you're burning enough extra calories climbing to be depleted well before reaching Long Valley.
This is a bit of an oversimplification because you are also burning flat, and you have sufficient fat stored (no offense -- we all do) to fuel a lot longer effort, albeit at lower intensity.
more or less, yes. there could be other reasons for fatigue, but glycogen depletion is a biggie. even if you are going for a mile run, larger glycogen stores will make you feel like you have more energy (because you do) and you go at a faster pace (burn more glycogen anaerobically) because you have more.
LOL!I just let Ze pull me in my carbon fiber wheelbarrow.
This is becoming an interesting thread. It's cool to see how different things work for different people. Perhaps one reason I am a bit more intentional about my sports nutrition is that I do not consume dead animals (or live ones) and that puts me at a nutritional disadvantage, at least potentially. I dunno. This is all very interesting. Thanks to everyone for sharing thus far.
ok, so here's a question for you, ze: if one goes at a pace of 70% their max HR for 5 hours... and another person goes at a pace of 85% of their max HR for 3 hours... is it reasonable to think that the the second person may need to eat more, citing their likely depleted glycogen stores? In my own experience, I've found this to be the pattern. Whatcha think?more or less, yes. there could be other reasons for fatigue, but glycogen depletion is a biggie. even if you are going for a mile run, larger glycogen stores will make you feel like you have more energy (because you do) and you go at a faster pace (burn more glycogen anaerobically) because you have more.
I resolve to only consume live animals from now on.
HJ
Glycogen is one form of stored energy -- calories. To a good approximation, you burn a fixed number of calories to go a certain distance on flat ground, regardless of speed. You burn additional calories going uphill -- a fixed number of calories for a certain elevation gain. So, if you go slowly for 5 hours or intensely for 3 hours, you will be more or less equally depleted of stored energy if you covered the same distance and gained the same elevation.MattCav wrote: ↑if one goes at a pace of 70% their max HR for 5 hours... and another person goes at a pace of 85% of their max HR for 3 hours... is it reasonable to think that the the second person may need to eat more, citing their likely depleted glycogen stores? In my own experience, I've found this to be the pattern. Whatcha think?
Really? I'm surprised by that. I would think that it would be more like an automobile. If I drive X miles at 85 mph, it will take a lot more gasoline than if I had driven the same X miles at 25 mph. You're saying it does not work that way with hiking? I find that very difficult to believe.AlanK wrote: ↑ To a good approximation, you burn a fixed number of calories to go a certain distance on flat ground, regardless of speed. You burn additional calories going uphill -- a fixed number of calories for a certain elevation gain. So, if you go slowly for 5 hours or intensely for 3 hours, you will be more or less equally depleted of stored energy if you covered the same distance and gained the same elevation.
HJ
its actually not that simple...read more hereAlanK wrote: ↑Glycogen is one form of stored energy -- calories. To a good approximation, you burn a fixed number of calories to go a certain distance on flat ground, regardless of speed. You burn additional calories going uphill -- a fixed number of calories for a certain elevation gain. So, if you go slowly for 5 hours or intensely for 3 hours, you will be more or less equally depleted of stored energy if you covered the same distance and gained the same elevation.MattCav wrote: ↑if one goes at a pace of 70% their max HR for 5 hours... and another person goes at a pace of 85% of their max HR for 3 hours... is it reasonable to think that the the second person may need to eat more, citing their likely depleted glycogen stores? In my own experience, I've found this to be the pattern. Whatcha think?
glycogen stores can be depleted extremely rapidly when using anaerobic metabolism. the ratio of glycogen / calories changes between anaerobic and aerobic.
if there weren't other limiting factors that fatigue you when 'sprinting', you'd probably deplete glycogen stores in like 10 mins!
if you were trying to deplete glycogen as quickly as possible, maybe 3 min sprints with rest, repeat 5 times.
as for 5 hours at 75 vs 3 at 85...i dunno exactly what the intensity / duration curve looks like...but both may equally deplete glycogen (possibly). even though calories burned may be different.
I guess the 5/75 and 3/85 numbers came from trying to consider different fuel sources... I always learned that if one is in the aerobic HR zone, they burn mostly fat, but if they are in the anaerobic or redline HR zone, they use up way more of that stored glycogen. I remember seeing your blog about that, too, ze, and it showed me why I suck at hiking by myself (I don't pace myself nearly enough when I hike alone...my average HR is usually in the low to mid 80 percentile over 4-5 hours +).glycogen stores can be depleted extremely rapidly when using anaerobic metabolism. the ratio of glycogen / calories changes between anaerobic and aerobic.
if there weren't other limiting factors that fatigue you when 'sprinting', you'd probably deplete glycogen stores in like 10 mins!
if you were trying to deplete glycogen as quickly as possible, maybe 3 min sprints with rest, repeat 5 times.
as for 5 hours at 75 vs 3 at 85...i dunno exactly what the intensity / duration curve looks like...but both may equally deplete glycogen (possibly). even though calories burned may be different.