4 ms·

Except nobody is claiming all runners need a high carb diet. If anyone actually claimed that it was that most runners would benefit from a high carb diet (I hav

Except nobody is claiming all runners need a high carb diet. If anyone actually claimed that it was that most runners would benefit from a high carb diet (I have no idea if anyone actually makes this claim scientifically).

Dylan16807 10y ago
"most [runners] would benefit" is a pretty weak and unhelpful assertion. If we instead go with "almost all [runners] would benefit" then the anecdote is pretty good evidence against it.
- argonaut 10y ago
  No it's not. Most is quite a strong assertion.
Fnoord 10y ago
> If we instead go with "almost all would benefit" then the anecdote is pretty good evidence against it. No, one anecdote is not pretty good [scientific] evidence against anything. I can give you an anecdote about how I drove through red lights multiple times. That does not mean you should follow the example. Why not? You have no idea about the circumstances. I was actually talking about driving a bike, I was a teenager, and there was barely (if any) traffic. There's pro and cons there, but what matters is I omitted the details. Hence, YMMV. Plus, the statistical evidence is too small (sample size is one). Good luck reproducing the outcome, too. Its the same in our runner's example. There's simply hardly any -if any- evidence presented to even make the anecdotal claim. Which still lacks any statistical evidence. What anecdotal evidence can lead to is scientific research. But we should not conclude on the outcome yet. We must keep an open mind, accept on a method and test circumstances, and gain statistical relevance. It is absolutely mind blowing, btw, how much 'scientific' research these days is not statistical relevant yet gets passed good grades (and yields the paper) at say college & universities. I'm not sure if its incompetence or laziness or lack of time or lack of money. I've even witnessed this first hand recently when my significant other was completing an assignment for her higher education degree which I was reviewing. Four interviews lead to a conclusion. Which, yes, is anecdotal ;)
- Dylan16807 10y ago
  > I can give you an anecdote about how I drove through red lights multiple times. As evidence for what? If you're trying to disprove an assertion that everyone running a red light gets hit, it's good evidence. > You have no idea about the circumstances. I was actually talking about driving a bike Assume good faith.
revelation 10y ago
Plenty of people make that claim, just search carbohydrate loading. The scientific reasoning is very simple. Aerobic exercise performance is limited by the rate of oxygen uptake, turning fats into usable energy takes considerably more oxygen than it does for CHO. You can in a single race/session exhaust your glycogen stores, but the supply of fats is essentially limitless. So for ideal performance you want to maximize your glycogen stores before an event, and for long ones, take additional CHO during, though rate of consumption is usually significantly higher than replenishment through digestion if you are going at all fast. That point when you have exhausted your glycogen stores is what they call bonking. Now you can fine-tune your low carb diet to hopefully have enough glycogen at any point to sustain you through an exercise session (more realistic for running than cycling) but everyone else just eats a high-carb diet.

Dylan16807 10y ago

"most [runners] would benefit" is a pretty weak and unhelpful assertion. If we instead go with "almost all [runners] would benefit" then the anecdote is pretty good evidence against it.

argonaut 10y ago
No it's not. Most is quite a strong assertion.

Fnoord 10y ago

> If we instead go with "almost all would benefit" then the anecdote is pretty good evidence against it. No, one anecdote is not pretty good [scientific] evidence against anything. I can give you an anecdote about how I drove through red lights multiple times. That does not mean you should follow the example. Why not? You have no idea about the circumstances. I was actually talking about driving a bike, I was a teenager, and there was barely (if any) traffic. There's pro and cons there, but what matters is I omitted the details. Hence, YMMV. Plus, the statistical evidence is too small (sample size is one). Good luck reproducing the outcome, too. Its the same in our runner's example. There's simply hardly any -if any- evidence presented to even make the anecdotal claim. Which still lacks any statistical evidence. What anecdotal evidence can lead to is scientific research. But we should not conclude on the outcome yet. We must keep an open mind, accept on a method and test circumstances, and gain statistical relevance. It is absolutely mind blowing, btw, how much 'scientific' research these days is not statistical relevant yet gets passed good grades (and yields the paper) at say college & universities. I'm not sure if its incompetence or laziness or lack of time or lack of money. I've even witnessed this first hand recently when my significant other was completing an assignment for her higher education degree which I was reviewing. Four interviews lead to a conclusion. Which, yes, is anecdotal ;)

Dylan16807 10y ago
> I can give you an anecdote about how I drove through red lights multiple times. As evidence for what? If you're trying to disprove an assertion that everyone running a red light gets hit, it's good evidence. > You have no idea about the circumstances. I was actually talking about driving a bike Assume good faith.

revelation 10y ago

Plenty of people make that claim, just search carbohydrate loading. The scientific reasoning is very simple. Aerobic exercise performance is limited by the rate of oxygen uptake, turning fats into usable energy takes considerably more oxygen than it does for CHO. You can in a single race/session exhaust your glycogen stores, but the supply of fats is essentially limitless. So for ideal performance you want to maximize your glycogen stores before an event, and for long ones, take additional CHO during, though rate of consumption is usually significantly higher than replenishment through digestion if you are going at all fast. That point when you have exhausted your glycogen stores is what they call bonking. Now you can fine-tune your low carb diet to hopefully have enough glycogen at any point to sustain you through an exercise session (more realistic for running than cycling) but everyone else just eats a high-carb diet.