Has anyone tried out Dave's recommendation (in his book) for running? It calls for running as fast as you can for 30 seconds, rest for 90, then continue until you reach a total of 15 minutes. What're your thoughts?
Those sound like Tabata sprints, but the action / rest periods seem way off. It is nice to hear some actual physical activity being talked about by Dave, but why did he increase the ratio to such a degree on the rest periods?
You could also change location to increase your difficulty (switching from track to trail, or trail to sand, or sand to mud) without changing your time. Or change incline (controlled-slide down a muddy hill then try to sprint up it, and end up doing bear crawls and sliding back down, and the only way home is UP THAT HILL!)
I have! I started a whole thread about it in the athletic section about how it was destroying my quads. I took a break and just got back into it yesterday, and it went great. A little tight today but not the injured muscle feeling I had before. If you feel PAIN in your muscles, STOP! Of course your chest might feel some strong sensations, but I think that's what you're aiming for.
Can you provide a link to this thread? Did you try it long enough to notice any improvements in endurance or sprint speed?
The short answer is that this type of activity done properly is a horrible idea combined with very low carb, therefore the rest periods need to be increased to make it doable in these populations. I was just trying to play nice haha.
Yeah the first time I did the sprints I went with Dave's suggestion of "just having a little protein" after working out and i think that might have been why my recovery was so horrible.
anytime you HIIT like this or lift weights you need a good amount of protein and carbs in your diet as well as adequate rest. if you eat lower-carb bulletproof and sleep 5 hours a night like dave does you will quickly hit a giant wall of fatigue.
oh yeah i learned my lesson quick with the skipping out on post workout carbs after a sprint session. it was just one of those times where i was like "okay, well dave is right about a lot of stuff, lets see if he's right about this", and yeah, dave should maybe change that part of his book. good thing i didn't listen to him totally and just do "2 tablespoons of protein" so that i can avoid "inflammation".
I think the paleo and primal communities would argue this point. Is it something to do with the Bulletproof Diet in particular? I never experienced major issues with HIIT on very low carb.
Wouldn't you be doing your HIIT in a fasted state anyways?
I agree with pd85, you would have to modify your food intake and sleep patterns for recovery, but it is most definitely doable if you pay attention to working at your own fitness level. Avoiding overtraining would be key, and doing Tabata sprints is certainly not endurance running.
1. Of course they would, they have a dogma to fulfill. The best ones understand the performance nature of carbs and recommend them (see Robb wolf, Loren Cordain, Chris Kresser etc), perhaps they understand human physiology.2. Not in particular, just using the treatment for sickness as the treatment for athleticism is incorrect.3. You could be better, or in other words, whatever your performance and recovery is now will be better with carbs.4. Yes, but my glycogen and system hydration has been addressed before starting.
1. Of course they would, they have a dogma to fulfill. The best ones understand the performance nature of carbs and recommend them (see Robb wolf, Loren Cordain, Chris Kresser etc), perhaps they understand human physiology.
2. Not in particular, just using the treatment for sickness as the treatment for athleticism is incorrect.
3. You could be better, or in other words, whatever your performance and recovery is now will be better with carbs.
4. Yes, but my glycogen and system hydration has been addressed before starting.
1. What dogma? The paleo and primal movements are not 'required' to be very low carb, and for the most part are not scared of carbs. They just function well in very low, low or moderate carb situations. I'd like to know what dogma we are talking about here.
Primal people in particular like to be fat-burners and stay relatively low carb. They also lean towards burst exercising and HIIT, and it works fantastically. They do HIIT properly, it isn't a horrible idea on their version of very low carb, and rest periods are standard 20/10 for the most part (of course this changes based on initial fitness level of an individual, as it should (n=1) but not as a movement overall as far as I am aware. Not in the fashion here in any case.)
2. I agree. When we say "Bulletproof Diet" is this being taken to mean "treatment for sickness"? Should we add a qualifier in there so we know which protocol we are discussing?
3. I was speaking of my training in the past (I'm not HIIT-ing currently, I had to take an extended hiatus) but I found that doing HIIT in a fasted state worked better for me most of the time. To hit this nail right on the head I think we need to know what you are considering very low carb, it may mean something quite different from person to person especially around here. (Then I'd like to know why you say I would be unequivocally better with carbs. Hopefully we are differentiating what source these carbs come from at least?)
4. Would you mind sharing specifics? Are you going pre-workout Bulletproof Coffee, or pre-workout shakes, or something like that?
I'm speaking of fasted state as in literally fasted, i.e. water or electrolyte beverage and basic morning sups at the most.
What is your personal goal when doing HIIT? I hypothesize that your reason for training via Tabata sprints or other HIIT is vastly different than mine, and this might influence the pre- and post-workout loadouts a bit here.
1. I said very low carb, you said paleo and primal, perhaps dogma is strong wording but that was your unbaited direct connection (as if one means the other), that connection is very common, some people would defend it, paleo/primal is just eating what the planet makes, not a macro breakdown, and therefore is outside of this discussion. 2. The bulletproof diet as Rx'd is not meant for athletic populations engaged in frequent anaerobic activity. 3. Training fasted was not part of my original comment that you replied to, there is nothing wrong with training fasted, adequate glycogen loading should have already been done previously, consuming a drinkable carbohydrate at a rate of 50g/hr would be advisable for 1-2hrs+ training sessions, this is only a 15 minute session so does not apply. 4. Unfortunately fat is not useful pre workout or post workout, unless the activity is purely aerobic which can run on fat, anaerobic activity uses carbohydrate/glycogen. Personally speaking, when morning training I take various amino's and caffine pre, carbohydrates during, post, and post post, which is the glycogen addressing I spoke of. 5. My goals? increased work capacity measured against broad time and modal domains, measurable using the basic terms of physics (force, distance, time)
1. I said very low carb, you said paleo and primal, perhaps dogma is strong wording but that was your unbaited direct connection (as if one means the other), that connection is very common, some people would defend it, paleo/primal is just eating what the planet makes, not a macro breakdown, and therefore is outside of this discussion.
2. The bulletproof diet as Rx'd is not meant for athletic populations engaged in frequent anaerobic activity.
3. Training fasted was not part of my original comment that you replied to, there is nothing wrong with training fasted, adequate glycogen loading should have already been done previously, consuming a drinkable carbohydrate at a rate of 50g/hr would be advisable for 1-2hrs+ training sessions, this is only a 15 minute session so does not apply.
4. Unfortunately fat is not useful pre workout or post workout, unless the activity is purely aerobic which can run on fat, anaerobic activity uses carbohydrate/glycogen. Personally speaking, when morning training I take various amino's and caffine pre, carbohydrates during, post, and post post, which is the glycogen addressing I spoke of.
5. My goals? increased work capacity measured against broad time and modal domains, measurable using the basic terms of physics (force, distance, time)
1. The point I was getting at was that these groups can function in 'very-low-carb' mode without horrible things happening to them when doing Tabata sprints or other HIIT activities, and I feel confident in making that claim because I myself have done so. More situational than as a tenant of the group.
2. I've often wondered exactly what is meant when Dave says "high performance", I think this needs a very concise definition from him at some point. "High performance" in what areas? Not endurance running or burst intensity activities it seems. I think this can all be accounted for by individuals though.
3. Agreed. When you say 'very low carb' what specifically do you mean? Under 150g of carbs per day? Under 50g? Ketogenic?
4. Interesting. Do you think a strong gluconeogenesis response would make up some of the deficit? I'm thinking of indigenous people who's traditional diets included few carbs or only slow-release carbs, yet still undergo feats of endurance, or modern endurance athletes working off of lower carb diets. Epigenetic responses to environmental stress might also play a part (heightened metabolic efficiency, higher native altitudes producing increased blood-oxygen response, that sort of thing).
5. Ah, yes. I aim for a strong situaltional threat response and end up training under various pre- and post-meal states to keep my responses dynamic and adapt to the moment.
1. "Can function" (to me) doesn't cut it I'm afraid, it carries with it an heir of mediocrity not unlike the term "lean gains", but yes I would agree that minimal time in these states would see less negative impact from carb deficits, probably why low carb advocates more often than not also suggest minimal activity in conjunction.
2. At the risk of committing logical fallacy, if you observe him and his lifestyle, the high performance takes precedence the mind, which is completely valid for those populations.
3. Depends on the size of the organism, in healthy individuals 0.5g/lb is a reasonable floor be in conjunction with no activity outside of NEAT, it goes up from that (1-3g/lb) depending on type/duration of activity, losing water has no relavence to performance.
4. Of course it will make up some of the difference, your body has no emotional attachment to your physique or skeletal muscle, it will do as is required to survive, gluconeogenisis is not a fast or necessarily efficient process, right now processes (proper glycogen stores) are unequivocally better. Endurance is more aerobic and can use fats, the object is to stay out of lactic threshold as much as possible to preserve glycogen in these events/scenarios, short + fast/heavy= glycogen fuel, long + slow/light=fat fuel.
1. The fact of the matter is that "can function" does not equate to your original assertion of "horrible idea", and if the "can function" is at a reasonable level then you are not justified in asserting it is mediocrity. Blanket assertions like "they have a dogma to fulfill" and "is a horrible idea combined with very low carb" are lacking the necessary context to support them, which is what I have been attempting to flesh out. Perhaps what you think of when someone says "can function" is only mediocre, but I would only consider preforming at a moderately high level "functioning", and anything lower would be functioning poorly or would not be functioning at all. In the associated context (primal/paleo people) there is not much avocation for minimal activity at all, is that directed towards Bulletproof people instead?
2. I'm not 100% on what you are trying to say here, but think you mean the "high performance" is geared towards mental performance. I don't follow though. What logical fallacy, and how is it valid for burst (anaerobic) activities?
3. Your definition of very low carb appears to hover above ketogenic and below the primal/paleo carb levels. This difference might be where most of the disconnect between our two points of view. Is the Bulletproof Diet's recommended carb level that low? Seems that the infographic deals mostly with ratios rather than grams per pound, but I haven't read the book, that may be more specific. Not sure where the water bit ties in with the carbs either.
4. If someone is working out hard enough that their body begins severely breaking down skeletal muscle, and they are not increasing their carb and protein intake or modulating their exercise, I'd say they need to take a step back and rethink their approach wouldn't you? Ideally gluconeogenisis would be utilizing BCAAS and fatty acids from your dietary intake before attacking your skeletal muscle I should think, something like the pre and post-workout routines you outlined would help that point. As long as you don't rely on gluconeogenesis perpetually.
The fact that the rest periods have to be altered like that overall for Bulletproof is interesting, but all in all I'm not terribly worried. Carbs are not hard to come by, and you have to adapt or get dropped.
1. You may be taking it too literally, the goal of this forum and biohacking in general is to seek out the premium result of whatever the subject happens to be, we aren't "shooting for bronze" here, you could also run a 15 minute hiit on 3 hrs sleep, I also think that's a horrible idea (using premium performance as the basis of measure). Achieving the most ideal situation possible before execution is baseline, anything less is undesired.
2. It was a joke, the fallacy in this instance would be using physical appearance as the basis of knowledge of a subject, and yes the diet as Rx'd and ketosis in general is good for focus and disease mediation, not optimal for physical exertion.
3. Yes, many people following bulletproof are adapting sub 50g/day, certainly sub 100g with inadequate "refeeds" because they have demolished their hunger signals, and combining these high cortisol states with frequent exercise which is not recommended as part of the diet. People just get excited about things and go too far with it. When you remove carbs from your diet you rapidly lose water weight, this is part of the low carb magic that people confuse with fat loss, it has no benefit in performance.
4. yes, unfortunately people tend to blame themselves first, which is why we have discussions about these things, the goal is to help people, you do see people that are struggling with negative outcomes met with responses like "you're just adapting" or "maybe it's detox" or "just keep going", there must be a voice(s) that doesn't put negative experience back onto the individual to spare the particular paradigm if there is one.
1. I never mentioned "shooting for bronze". Let me clarify. The groups I cited can perform well in their version of a relatively low carb state. Through this discussion we have found that what you mean by very-low-carb and the examples I have given are vastly different.
I would be hesitant to define the goal of an entire movement, especially one that is as individualized as biohacking.
I disagree with your idealistic view on performance baseline. Baseline performance should be based on average conditions, since ideal conditions are situation-dependent. Baseline performance should not be situation-dependent (unless you are talking about the baseline for a specific situation, i.e. baseline performance on an obstacle course vs peak performance on the same obstacle course). Similar to the control state in an experiment.
2. I have no idea what "physical appearance as the basis of knowledge of a subject" has to do with the question "What specifically Dave Asprey means when he says high performance".
3. Ahh, so that's where the water thing comes in. I like to call that 'magical' period in which people get overly-excited and go too far extolling the virtues their new thing they are trying the "honeymooning period". (What's worse is when this period is combined with psychogenic effects or a healthy dose of Pla-c-bo)
4. Agreed. As long as this is not confused with having someone to push you harder as a motivator, since that can be quite useful. Sufficiently rational people should be able to tell where the responsibility falls, and if it is the protocol that you are following that is causing the issue then blaming yourself can be counter-productive. Thankfully in the internet age we are able to rapidly weed out those faulty protocols, as long as we ask questions and keep ourselves from merely accepting things because a 'guru' asserts them.
To the OP's question, HIIT is a good training tool as long as you use it carefully/intelligently. And as Jason said in his first response, consider varying the timing/framework of the HIIT sessions in order to:
- Understand what may or may not be working for you.
- Adopt a semi-structured 'cyclic approach' to mitigate the risk of too much over-reaching prior to adaptation.
To the point regarding Dave and high-performance athletics... he's a poor example of athleticism and certainly not a guiding light regarding all things 'optimal performance'.