Caloric Density spreadsheet.

[JAK]

The protein stuff is JAK said very true. The more active you are the LESS protein (as a percentage) you need in your diet. The protein for athlete crazes is from some early ex-phys and nutrition research, and the protein=success finding was actually a statistical relic

Jak, Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I know there isn't necessarily a one to one between the source of your energy (fats vs carbs) and which your body actually uses as a source of calories for exertion. IIRC carbs take less oxygen to convert to energy during exercise, but your body has a fairly limited supply in the form of glycogen (1600 calories or so) that it can readily draw on. Your body will use fat when it can, and carbs when it needs to (you can actually look up a graph of heart rate versus % carbs and get a good idea). But any carbs you digest and don't either use immediately or turn into glycogen get turned into fat. Energy in your body is pretty fungible.

There's also a digestion issue here--your body digest carbs very quickly and easily when compared to fats/proteins, so you have the energy available quickly and your body isn't working on digestion instead of hiking.



I've found that in shape and with a high carb diet I do days in the 37-42 mile range on a regular basis (that is to say, any day that isn't a resupply day or where something major has gone wrong), and that I'm not able to hike that strongly on higher-fat diets (I can get away with a bit more fat the the cold weather, and a bit less in deserts). Also, I usually avoid 'town food' that many hikers rely on. Maybe if you are only hiking half the day then a high fat diet makes more sense, I'm not sure. But I've found that the extra few ounces per day that I carry by keeping my fat intake below that of other hikers (as a percent) is one of the few 'extra' things I'm willing to carry.

Yes I think for most people fat burning peaks around 50-70% Vo2Max and falls off again, whereas glycogen burning rises steadily to V02Max. In relative terms I think fat burning can be 65% around 40-50% VO2Max, easy walk pace, and might still be 30% at 70-80% VO2Max, half to full marathon pace. At a fast 1 hour run pace its pretty much all glucogen. The other variable is how much glycogen you have and how high your blood sugar level is. If you are topped up on glycogen and blood sugar your body will burn relatively more carbs even if you are walking or sitting around. Conditioning plays a role also, as your muscles can get relatively better at storing and burning carbs or fats or both depending on what they are used to. Digestion would play a role on long hikes. I can see some merit in higher carbs at breakfast and through the day, and more balanced at the end of the day where you have time to digest through the night. This should keep you warmer through the night also, especially towards morning when it is usually coldest.

At 15 miles per day, with say 4000 feet cummulative gain, an average person, somewhat overweight, might have to hike 8-10 hours but at a moderate pace. I think that would still keep them in a range where they would be burning more fat than carbs, but a diet somewhat higher in carbs would make sense if body fat is being burned along with dietary fat.

For yourself if doing 30-36 mile days, and perhaps 8000 feet cummulative gain on top of that, you gotta be fit and lean, and well conditioned to maintain perhaps 60% VO2Max. You should still be able to burn at least as much fat as carbs, especially when you round out the rest of the day, but I can see how you would need to keep resupplying mostly carbs through the day because even though you have relatively higher glycogen reserves they are a smaller percentage of your daily calories burned. Also, digestion is harder at 60% VO2Max than 40-50% VO2Max, and so mostly carbs while hiking makes sense. Still at the end of the day I can see a more balanced diet making sense. All in all I can see your diet being somewhat higher in carbs than fats, mostly for digestion reasons.

So a slower overwieght hiker and a faster fitter leaner hiker might have the same diet in relative terms, perhaps 10-15% protien, 25-35% fats, and 50-60% carbs, but for different reasons, and different quantities. The slower overweight hiker, like myself, might only need 3000 Calories of food, and lower in fat even though he is burning more fat, because an additional 1500 Calories in fat can be coming off the body. The faster fitter leaner hiker might need 6000-8000 Calories of food, lower in fat mostly for digestion reasons, and also because he is averaging a higher percentage of VO2Max. The slower hiker is burning more calories per mile because of his weight, but the faster hiker burns more calories in total because of their fitness. Now if a lean hiker decided they wantesd to slow down, even just 80%, they could burn alot more fat in relative terms, and probably be able to digest more fat also. So slowing down 10-20% in speed and miles per day might be a good option for lean hikers worried about losing too much weight, rather than taking zero and nero days and binging in town. Not sure.

[JAK]

In terms of protien I think 10% of total calories burned is probably enough for anyone under any circumstances, for maintaining muscle. If gaining muscle, or growing, or pregnant or breastfeeding, the % protien needs to go up, but for maintaining muscle I think it is about 10% of calories burned rather than a fixed amount dependant on lean body mass. This is because I think even though some protien is recycled from fatigued muscle, I think the amount of tissue repairs is still dependant on total calories burned. Some exercise might be more damaging than others but I think 10% still covers it. 10-15% allows some extra margin, but I think its already there at 10%. Above 15% I think its not so good for you, unless you are using it for building muscle, etc. I think 30% is a safe upper limit, and too high for most people. That is all in percentage of calories burned. If burning body fat, the protien and carbs in your diet increase in relative terms. I think up to 50% of calories burned can come from body fat, as long as you have enough. This means in relative terms 10-15% becomes 20-30%, and 30% would be 60%, but still only 30% of calories burned. The ammount consumed would be the same, but still I would be weary of taking in protien that the body isn't using to repair or build tissue, and I don't think dietary fat should be less than 10% of your food because you still need some fats for digestion, and essential fatty acids for all sorts of things, especially Omega-3.

That is something to bear in mind. On a low fat diet Omega-3 fatty acids need to be a higher percentage of your diet. I think its only 2-3 grams per day, like a can of sardines and some flax seeds or grass fed meat or eggs or whatever, but that is for normal activity. So perhaps it should be 1 gram per 1000 calories burned, or 1% of your diet if not losing weight and up to 2% if losing weight. So if your diet is only 10% fat the omega-3 becomes 20% of your fat so pretty much all of your fat needs to come from omega-3 sources like sardines, grass fed meat and eggs, flax seeds and canola oil.

So I think safe limits as percentage of caloried burned are...
Protien: 10-15% up to 30% Max if building new tissue, breastfeeding, etc.
Carbs: 10-60% up to 70% Max if burning high carbs
Fats: 10-60%

If 50% of your calories are coming from body fat your food eaten becomes...
Protien: 20-30% up to 50% Max if building new tissue, breatfeeding etc.
Carbs: 40-60% up to 70% if burning high carbs
Fats: 10-30%

Middle of these ranges are best for most people.

To work out how much fat you can safely burn I think it is 1% of your available body fat, up to 50% of your total calories burned. If 35 pounds overweight with 50 pounds of body fat this would be 0.5 pounds of body fat per day, but only if you burn about 3500 calories per day. Weight loss above this is more limted by how much exercise you can do. Weight loss below this becomes more limited by how much fat you have to lose.

Another way of saying it...
10 pounds overweight = lose up to 1 pound per week by burning 2500 and eating 2000.
20 pounds overweight = lose up to 2 pound per week by burning 2500 and eating 1500.
30 pounds overweight = lose up to 3 pound per week by burning 3000 and eating 1500.
40 pounds overweight = lose up to 4 pound per week by burning 3500 and eating 1750.
50 pounds overweight = lose up to 5 pound per week by burning 4000 and eating 2000.

So heavier people can lose weight faster, but only if they exercise more.
I'm currently in the 40-45 pounds overweight category, so I need to get off this computer and get busy. lol

[ScottP]

Yup, i get most of my fat/protein in my dinners.

and just a word on flax seed, there are several types of omega-3's. Humans can't use the omega-3 in flax seed for all the nifty things omega-3 is supposed to do for you.

[JAK]

Cool. I hope to get into your shape some day if not too late. I did read that about plant sources of omega-3. I live in New Brunswick and try and have a can of sardines every day. They dehydrate pretty good in the oven at 170. I like sardines because besides omega 3 they have bones and stuff, and are wild not farmed, and they are low enough on the food chain to avoid high levels of mercury and stuff. Hopefully I don't get too much of BPA and whatever else from the canning process. Too much of a good thing is always risky. I also like canola oil because it is not too high in omega 6 to omega 3, and it tastes a little fishy, in a good way. Again, its a plant source, but I think its good to avoid too much omega 6 vs omega 3 even from plant sources. Sunflower seeds are way high in omega 6, so I'm cutting back on that now. I don't believe everything I read, but when its sort of backed up with what natural primitive diets were like I go with it. Primitive diets seem to have had more omega 3 and less omega 6, or at least closer to 1:1 vs 1:10. Even oats are somewhat suspect I think, but I think the canola oil and sardines balance it out. This omega 3 vs omega 6 thing is new to me.

[JAK]

Unfortunately sardines are high in purines, so not good for gout, but hopefully I will avoid gout.

[ScottP]

the omega 3 omega 6 thing is a result of a broken US ag system. Corn subsidies have a lot to do with it.

As far as endurance sports go, it's not too late. The most successful long ultra-runner (100+ miles) had some of his best performances in his mid 50s http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yiannis_Kouros

What are you doing for training?

[JAK]

Very little in the last 3 months. Last spring it was alot of running and walk. Last summer and fall it was alot of running and paddling. Some weights. Did some cross-country skiing this winter, but very little. Have a morning paper route now which helps, but its only about 6-8 km total, walking. Better than nothing. Good base considering the rest of my day is quite sedentary, but just a base. Need to get back to at least 1,000 calories per day in exercise on top of that base, 2,000 calories on long days. That's where I was. It's a motivational thing. I think I can get back to a 40min 10k once down to 165 pounds. Lean body mass is 150. Current weight 210. Pretty decent VO2Max for my age, so the heart and lungs are there, but the mind isn't.

[JAK]

My plan starting tommorrow is to do 10 hours a week walking, on top of the morning paper route, and gradually replace most of those hours with running, weights, rowing machine, and paddling. Then a good hike when I can, 8-10 hours per day. Heck, this weekend after the paper maybe. No Sunday morning paper here in Canada, so maybe an overnighter.

[JAK]

I've always found a good hike a good way to kick things off. Cheers.

[fenderbenderfc]

So what we have learned here is protein powder would be great with your dinner to allow your muscles to recover. Lol

[JAK]

So what we have learned here is protein powder would be great with your dinner to allow your muscles to recover. Lol

Where did you get that from? I thought we were saying there is enough protien in real food.

[fenderbenderfc]

I thought that all depended on your goals...

[fredmugs]

I always bring Met-Rx Big 100 bars. 100g in weight and each type is around 400 calories, 14g of fat, 40g of carbs, and 30g of protein. Plus when I eat one with a liter of water it's a long time before I'm hungry again. Eating crap food like Little Debbie's will only spike your blood sugar and when it goes back down you'll just crave more.

The only "bad" thing I normally bring is Snickers bars. How can you possibly leave Snickers bars off your list? :-)

[House of Payne]

I'm sure I can get better advise here on WB. I just went to an REI class last week on "AT thru-hike; food and nutrition". I had the same concerns as this thread has talked about. Long story short, REI supplied us with a 22 yr old ice climber that is a general employee of this certain store. He has no long hike experience and mostly read from a notepad for 2 hrs. I really didn't get much from the class at all for the $20 I spent. I was rather upset.
Anyways, the one thing the class did make me aware of is lack of protein of a long period of time will eventually make the body feel sick and unenergetic. They explained that most dry food meals are complex carbs with little protein. What proteins will be lighter than say Peanut Butter? or the like??

[JAK]

I see know reason why dry food meals should be low in protien.
Oatmeal is 17% protien by calories, so 6000 calories would be 250g of protien.
Heck even parsley is 24% protien.

[JAK]

Sorry, Parsley is 32% protien, Lentils 29%, Paprika 20%, Skim Milk 40%.
Plenty of room to throw in some empty calories and still come up with 10-15%.

It's Iron, Calcium, Vitamin A, and Vitamin C that you have to pay closest attention to, not protien.
But a diet full of junk food will pretty much sink all ships.

[JAK]

Omega 3 Fatty Acid might be another one to keep a close eye on, especially if avoiding foods high in purines.

[Driver8]

Seems to me that nuts would be excellent long-distance hiker food, with their natural companions, dried fruits and veggies. Nuts carry quite a caloric wallop and have plenty of protein and complex carbs.

[oddbird]

6000 calories is 20 cups of dry oatmeal; I'm not sure these plans are realistic in terms of volume of food.
http://www.livestrong.com/thedailypl...al-12-cup-dry/


I've read many AT memoirs saying that guys tend to look scrawny at the end, like they need more protein, but women do better because they can turn the fat into muscle.

-Mrs. Oddbird

[oddbird]

This might be a good option for long term hikers:
http://ucanrun2win.com/super.html

It is a form of resistant starch that helps keep your blood sugar steadier than most carbs. The company told me it has been tested to 10 ppm for gluten.

-Mrs. Oddbird