On 03/18/2009 06:58 AM, David Thomas Jackemeyer wrote:
> --- In morelife@yahoogroups.com, Ólafur Páll Ólafsson <olafurpall@...> wrote:
>
>> --- In morelife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Wakfer <paul@> wrote:
>>
>>> This is my response to the second part of the original for which the
>>> subject title is still appropriate.
>>>
>>> On 01/07/2009 11:30 PM, David Thomas Jackemeyer wrote:
>>>
>>>> --- In morelife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Wakfer <paul@> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 12/31/2008 11:21 AM, David Thomas Jackemeyer wrote:
>>>>>
>>> <big snip of what was previously responded to>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> I would like to fast for extended periods, and one 2hr meal per day
>>>>>> has been working fine for me. I would also like to exercise 45 min
>>>>>> per day. BTW, I have completely cut out alcohol from my diet, in
>>>>>> response to the posts related to message 1809 on Morelife Yahoo Group
>>>>>> posted 06/04/08:
>>>>>> http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/morelife/message/1809
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Question: If I finished my (one per day) meal by noon, to what extent
>>>>>> would exercising seven hours later disturb the important pathways
>>>>>> hypothesized to occur during a long fast period?
>>>>>>
>>>>> Exercise will always enhance the beneficial biochemical activities of
>>>>> the fasting state. The time you give appears to be quite ideal.
>>>>> Exercise is best in relation to fasting if done as long as possible
>>>>> after eating, but not so close to sleeping that it will interfere with
>>>>> that important activity - ie it is probably best to end exercise by at
>>>>> least 2 hours before sleep so that the body can wind down and get into
>>>>> a very relaxed state by sleep time.
>>>>>
>>>> I was concerned that when exercising, my body might retard autophagic
>>>> response to fasting because of the increased liberation of energy
>>>> stored in liver, muscles, fat, and ingested ingredients (whey
>>>> protein, e.g.). Is this a concern?
>>>>
>>> I don't think so. If there is a great deal of stored energy, the
>>> autophagic effects of recycling proteins will not be high anyway,
>>> since the energy stores of carbohydrates (and fats, but to a lesser
>>> extent because they are harder to liberate) will tend to be used first
>>> for fuel as they are more easily converted to fuel. WRT, ingested
>>> ingredients, the whole purpose of fasting and exercising in a fasted
>>> state is precisely because there are no longer any ingested
>>> ingredients available - they have all gone past the point where they
>>> can be absorbed.
>>>
>> I agree with Paul here. Jack, I don't know how familiar you are with
>> autophagy, but autophagy is basically a process whereby the body eats
>> itself because it is lacking energy stores and the building blocks
>> required to support anabolism. Now here is a logical exercise for you
>> Jack (This relates to the use of logic Paul spoke about in your last
>> post). The question you have to ask yourself here is *why* is there an
>> increase in the liberation of energy stores during exercise? Why does
>> your body start liberating fat and increasing glucose output from the
>> liver when you exercise, and how does that relate to autophagy?
>>
>> If you think about the answer you can come to realize that it doesn't
>> make sense that exercise would cause autophagy to decrease. The answer
>> is that energy stores are being liberated because the muscle tissue is
>> burning up so much energy and it needs more of it to keep the exercise
>> going. The energy stores thus are being liberated in order for the
>> muscles to take up the energy they need (glucose and fat) to keep
>> functioning at high efficiency. Now this energy has to come from
>> somewhere and since you have not eaten for a long time it makes sense
>> that the body has to turn to itself by both breaking down stored
>> energy (glycogen and fat) as well as by eating itself through
>> autophagy. Note that the liver can not store much glycogen and as it
>> starts to empty it will have to increase gluconeogenesis (the
>> synthesis of glucose from noncarbohydrate precursors such as amino
>> acids). Now where do the amino acids required for gluconeogenesis come
>> from? Again the answer is from autophagy, if you haven't eaten for a
>> while that is.
>
> This last part helped me understand that the increase in
> gluconeogenesis is fueled by amino acids liberated during
> autophagy -- I did not understand the details, so this has
> spurred my further investigation.

One point that Olafur did not mention is that if a person has stores
of easily available triacylglycerols, then glucose (and other other ATP
production precusors) will be generated first from decomposition of
those triacylglycerols (stored in fat cells) into free fatty acids and
glycerol (a three carbon hydroxylated chain), with the glycerol
portion then used to produce glucose.

[Recall that triacylglycerol is the correct biochemical term for what
is often still referred to as triglyceride -
http://morelife.org/glossary/stu.html#triacylglycerol **Kitty]

Because this process is always third in line after glucose production
from digestion and from glycogen stores, it is only natural that the
body "eats" its own fat before it then starts eating its own proteins,
particularly muscles (since fat takes far less work to store as a
source of energy than does production of protein, and proteins are
more important for continuation of survival).

In fact, the whole point of taking acipimox is to *prevent* the
decomposition of triacylglycerols and the consequent use of the
liberated glycerol as a glucose source in order to force the body to
recycle its own proteins. It should thus be clear that acipimox is not
something that a person attempting to lose weight from reduction of
calories and fasting should be taking. Acipimox is only beneficial for
enhancing autophagy for people such as me and Kitty who have no more
fat to lose and do not care to go through a fat storage and release
cycle every 3 days. Rather we want to go through a mainly protein
breakdown, recycling and buildup process at as high a rate as
possible. Again the reason for this is because the greater "pressure"
(need by the body) for energy substrate, the greater will be the
likelihood of breaking down dysfunctional proteins.

> Is there known to be a self-reported difference in the quality
> of performance of subjects between fueling vigorous exercise
> with gluconeogenesis versus fueling with stored gylcogen or
> fat stores? Quality of performance meaning relative
> sluggishness, alertness, or emotional motivation in response
> to physical performance.

This is a good question that I will leave it to Olafur (and his twin
Egill - who is even more into exercise physiology than is Olafur). My
own thoughts on this are that theoretically the level of physical
exertion capability should decrease in the order of glycogen, fat and
protein use. See my recent post in this thread for a personal example
relative to this point.

> I'm wondering because if yes, then maybe it be wise to
> exercise vigorously when stored glycogen and fat stores
> are available to ensure peak physical performance,

That would probably be true if you had any good reason to want to
"ensure peak physical performance". This again raises the question
about the purpose of the physical performance and why it needs to be
"peak" (and what constitutes "peak", for that matter). There is a huge
difference between exercise for the purpose of health and longevity
and exercise to achieve some sports, other cultural or personal
enjoyment goal.

[The phrase "ensure peak per performance" most definitely requires
from the speaker/writer definitions of "performance" and "peak". These
are very subjective terms and rely entirely on the value judgments of
each individual - the choice of what activity is being performed and
the level that is considered to be "peak". **Kitty]


> with the remaining hours of regular caloric demand between
> exercise and meal expected to be powered more-so by autophagy.

Ignoring "peak performance", yes, it makes sense that sufficient
exercise to burn up your glycogen and easily available fat, and then
consuming acipimox to prevent further fat decomposition, should enable
protein autophagy to take place for the longest period. However, the
overall effect of the amount of protein autophagy would only be
increased by any such method given that the amount of exercise and the
fasting period remained the same and your amount of stored fat
reserves had not yet reached a minimal level (where each fat cell
contained so little actual stored triacylglycerols that any left were
not easily released).


>> Energy depleting exercise increases insulin sensitivity in the muscle
>> tissue being exercised, which increases uptake of nutrients such as fat
>> and glucose into the muscle tissue being exercised. The muscles are
>> basically creating a funnel for nutrients. This increased insulin
>> sensitivity in the muscle tissue being exercised also lasts a while
>> after the exercise is over causing increased nutrient uptake into the
>> exercised muscle for a while after the exercise. But this effect is
>> strongest right after exercising and fades somewhat afterwards which
>> is one reason it is beneficial to eat immediately after exercising as
>> opposed to eating later on. If you eat right after exercising more of
>> the nutrients will be taken up by the muscle tissue. Much of the
>> glucose f.ex. will go towards filling the muscles glycogen stores
>> leaving less of it left to cause harmful elevation of blood glucose.
>
> Understood -- these are good reasons for scheduling a meal
> to immediately follow exercise.
>
>>>> If this is viable, are these concerns mitigated if exercise instead
>>>> immediately precedes the 2hr large meal?
>>>>
>>> That would be an even better time for it. The more deeply fasted state,
>>> the better effect of the exercise on promotion of autophagy. And 2 hrs
>>> should give your body sufficient time to recover before the large meal.
>>>
>> Since he wrote "immediately precedes" I think Jack was speaking of
>> exercising immediately prior to eating the meal not 2 hrs before
>> eating it as you appear to have understood it.
>>
>
> Yes, for 8 weeks now I have exercised followed ~40 min later
> by a 2-hour meal. Since I take a shower, gather my study
> material, then walk to the cafe, I must be missing an important
> period of nutrient uptake since my heart rate, sweating, and
> overall physical exertion has decreased to pre-workout status.

See my other message in this thread for reasons and evidence that eating
*immediately* after a strenuous workout is *not* healthy. I think your
40 min delay is likely quite excellent and you should not change it.

>> Anyways your point
>> still stands, that the more deeply fasted state, the better effect of
>> the exercise on promotion of autophagy.
>>
>> BTW in case anyone is wondering which is better I think it would be
>> better to exercise immediately prior to eating the single meal rather
>> than 2 hours before eating it (I know Jack didn't ask this question
>> but I'm on a roll here:-). There a few reasons I think this is the case:
>>
>> 1) If you exercise immediately prior to eating there will be longer
>> since you last ate when you exercise compared to if you exercise an
>> hour or two before eating. Not having eaten for so long will increase
>> the demand for autophagy to provide the energy required for the
>> exercise, not to mention that autophagy will already have been
>> increased considerably if it is so long since you last ate. Exercising
>> at this time should strongly induce autophagy.
>
> Regardless of the time of day of exercise, as long as all other
> things were equal, one would always end up metabolizing the
> same amount from both normal body stores (glycogen and fat)
> and autophagy.

Yes, if you are not eating less calories than you are using and if you
are not taking acipimox. And note that if you are not losing weight,
then you are also restoring those same body stores of glycogen and fat
every eating, sleeping and exercising cycle of your body.

> However, what I gather from each of you is
> one can increase the autophagic effect by pushing exercise to
> later in the day, but this seems false because, calories-in
> calories-out, there is no difference in the number of calories
> taken in and likewise, no difference in the amount/type of
> energy-expending exercise.
> The difference I do see, which does not strike me as significant,
> is: during a much earlier bout of exercise, one will rely less on
> autophagy for energy, but the autophagy will show an increase
> earlier in that day, whereas during a much later bout of exercise,
> one will rely more heavily on autophagy for energy, and the
> autophagy will show an increase later in the day-- but this
> difference is only in timing exercise to match with autophagy,
> which does not necessarily change the calorie count.
>

Your logical is impeccable and is similar to what I wrote above (about
the timing not mattering overall). With regard to calories, the only
thing that can be changed is the amount of energy that is from protein
autophagy versus that from usage of stored fat. I have no more fat to
lose and by the usage of acipimox, I am forcing my body into protein
autophagy (moreso than it would normally be) and saving it from having
to use up and then restore fat. This is very different from Olafur's
considerations for himself since he has more fat than I do and is more
concerned with retaining muscle mass and strength (for no good reason
that I have ever been able to discern).

However, the consideration of protein recycling via autophagy is not
the only one of concern to Olafur nor to me. Also highly important is
the contribution of blood glucose toward glycation and ultimately to
AGE formation. It is for this purpose that Olafur's scheme of
exercising soon before eating (moderated by my information about the
digestive needs) is important, since it should reduce the highest
blood glucose levels if not the average blood glucose level. Recall
that glycation rate increases faster than directly proportional
(linearly) to blood glucose.

> Are you suggesting that timing exercise so one relies more
> heavily on autophagy as a source of energy brings an additional
> calorie-burning advantage versus timing exercise to rely more
> heavily on glycogen and fat stores as a source of energy (and
> thus leaving autophagy for later, relaxed states)?

Actually this is true to a certain extent because usage of protein for
energy takes more usage of energy and is highly wasteful of chemical
components (all the nitrogen containing amine groups are ultimately
excreted by the kidneys). The energy needed to reclaim each calorie
from stores increases in the order from glycogen, fat, protein (which
is why the body reclaims that energy in that order).

--Paul