Can you complete/compete at the 140.6 distance w/ only 10 hrs of training per week?

Wednesday, January 16, 2013


Like a kid in a candy store I am jittery with excitement as I am poised to share the next block of data for your perusal. Today I engaged the treadmill at Life Time Fitness - St Louis Park, MN with HEED in my tummy and an appetite to tackle the same protocol from Jan 10, 2013. Working through the 8.9 to 10.9 MPH progression works the mind and body for sure.

For this test I took on 1 scoop of HEED within 24 oz of water. Within 10 min I was on the tread and working the belt. For what its worth, my gut was not as settled as it was when rolling with UCAN. I have used HEED previously in training, but was never able to validate substrate (fat vs carbohydrate utilization) preference until working at Life Time Fitness.

Below you will see that there was a stark difference between the two tests:

Please take a few minutes to see the significant difference between substrate use between the UCAN and HEED tests. For purposes of this post I want to zero in solely on the Training Phase (TP). First the similarities. You will note that HR response was actually pretty similar for both. That is where the similarities stop friends. By stage 3 (9.7 MPH) my body began to shift towards carbohydrates over fat for fuel. This can be seen by the RQ value of .84 (for more on RQ please refer to my previous post). By stage 4 (10.1 MPH) my body was happy to sink its teeth in carbs vs. fat to fuel the intensity I was driving. From that point forward there was no turning back. You will note that by the final stage I was only pulling 12.7% from fat. The rest was from carbohydrates, which are finite in supply.

Shift focus for a moment to the UCAN test and you will see that my body never went beyond an RQ of .84. That is remarkable. Please take note that at the same HR (minus a beat) my body was using 54% fat for energy and only ~13% fat while using HEED.

Please keep in mind that this is only two data points on one guy. The validity of these findings would be strengthened if I had 500+ more samples to pull from. I lack the funding and time to support such research ;). In the weeks to come I will continue to consume other brands and see what happens against the variables noted above.

Hope this post makes you question your fueling preferences. One last thought friends. The reason I am pushing a pace and protocol like the one above is to make one think how powerful this product would be at Ironman and Half Ironman intensity (~50 to 75% max VO2). I can't wait to start testing this product at low end Ironman intensity. Can you imagine delving into 75% fat stores while pushing 200 watts? Or at 7:30 pace? By the numbers I am seeing I am left to imagine 85% fat use and the remaining coming from carbohydrates. Gitty up to that! This is the stuff that makes me envision setting an IM PR of 9 flat some day. LETS ROLL!

Train smart, think big,
Coach L

1 comment:

  1. LL,
    Couple questions:
    1. Can you post the control numbers (i.e warmup phase) next to the data charts for UCAN and the product you're comparing UCAN to?
    2. Is it possible that the optimal ingestion time is different for each supplement due to the varying macronutrient content?
    3. To what extent does your level of fastedness affect the results? (i.e would you or I be better off eating normally and using HEED or fasting and using UCAN, or even eating normally and using UCAN?)
    4. To what extent can the results of your tests be generalized to other people? I'm optimistic about your results (they look spectacular), but I've got HEED and Gatorade on the shelf that I got fo free and I want to make sure I do my due diligence before I invest in some UCAN!