Re: RC: Re: one of your type discussions on ridecamp now

[Tivers@aol.com]

In a message dated 12/15/99 11:20:20 PM Pacific Standard Time, CMKSAGEHIL 
writes:

<< << Beside the point. I read your post carefully. Your thrust was that 
endurance horses can't survive without VFAs providing the primary energy for 
the sport. You're wrong, I think. Nothing wrong with quality roughage--just 
as long as it doesn't get in the way of quality energy provision.  >>
 
 My thrust was that you are leaving the VFA's out of the equation.  They are 
a part of normal GI function of the horse, and a major source of energy for 
the distance athlete.  There is nothing less "quality" about the ATP that 
emerges from the Krebs cycel as a result of VFA's going into it than the ATP 
that emerges when carbs are the input.  When you push the scale too far in 
the direction of the carbs, you begin to compromise the gut function in the 
horse and that can have serious repercussions to the horse. >

Ok, let's examine this statement. Please explain how 4 ounces of 
sugar/chromium every two hours during a ride compromises gut functin and 
results in serious repercussions to the horse. 

 >I'm not suggesting here that VFA's be the ONLY source, and I think it would 
be equally foolhardy of you to suggest that carbs be the only source in the 
horse, too.>

Nothing is foolhardy until proven incorrect. Thus far, we've seen nothing but 
benefit from supplementing fast acting carbs during a ride and all these 
trials have been timid, at best. Soon, I'll be able to tell you what happens 
when you get SERIOUS about carbohydrate supplementatio is the midst of a 
gruelling flat-terrain, high speed endurance ride with a large sample of 
horses. Until then, the only thing foolhardy about suggesting the possibility 
of a major enhancement of performance is the chance of being proven wrong. 
I'd rather be wrong than ignorant.
 
 <<Yes, that is your phobia. Goes against the grain.>>
 
 No phobia here.  Just the reality of looking at the horse as an entire 
entity and taking his GI physiology and function into account.  When that 
doesn't happen, he ends up in the treatment barn with jugs hanging--not an 
acceptable end point in this sport.>

You're extrapolating dire results with absolutely no empirical evidence other 
than bad dreams. 4 oz, 8 oz, or even larger supplements given periodically 
affect the gut not one whit. It's been done. No hanging jugs were necessary. 
In one case, a moron who didn't know what four ounces was was told that it 
was about a coffe cup full. He was deaf or something and fed a coffee CAN 
full of ERF2, twice a day, for three days. No ill effects at all except that 
the horse eventually snoozed through the race. No hanging jugs, no 
spontaneous combustion, no earthquakes, no founder, no nothing. Just a snoozy 
race. The guy simply complained that a 4-race bucket only lasted for one 
race--I gratefully gave him a refund.
 
 <<If carbs are available, the body always uses them instead of fat and 
protein. Carbs block the use of secondary fuels. Fat in the diet also blocks 
the absorption of carbs--that's why we don't feed sludge on raceday.>>
 
 Once again, you are confusing the issue here, Tom.  Fat (more accurately 
triglycerides) is not the same thing as VFA's.  You'll get no argument from 
me that carbs are selected ahead of fats and proteins.  But VFA's, like 
carbs, go DIRECTLY into the Krebs cycle, and are not the product of 
catabolism. >

Didn't say they were a product of catabolism. what I am saying is that all 
fats, including VFAs, are inhibited from muscle uptake by the presence of 
elevated levels of glucose and insulin. They can only go into the krebs cycle 
if they're taken into the muscle. Do you want documentation on this? 

> Both are utilized, and both must be considered.  You are correct that 
feeding fat slows digestion--not once in this discussion have I suggested 
feeding fat on race day.>

Good. That was the old fad. Now it's hay, the new fad.

>  What I AM saying is that the distance horse must have his roughage load in 
order to be producing VFA's (and technically that roughage is cellulose--so 
to get technical, I'm advocating VERY complex carbs), and the roughage that 
is producing those VFA's has to be ingested far enough pre-ride to be in the 
large colon and cecum on ride day.>

Ok, do you have numbers on the percentage of weight of roughage that 
eventually becomes viable energy,  say, 36 hours after ingestion? Lon Lewis 
says "not much". Maybe you have a more informed source I can study. 

>  This is NOT an instantaneous thing as you describe with more simple carbs.>

That's what makes simple carbs so much fun.

>  Furthermore, in order to keep the gut moving, there has to be a continued 
ingestion of roughage throughout the race, or else the GI process slows down 
and so does the production of VFA's. >

Again, the only change I'm suggesting is the addition of a carbohydrate 
supplement--which will shift energy metabolism toward glucose/glycogen 
dramatically. You can feed all the hay, and water, you want for gut motility. 
But the VFAs will become nexrt to useless with the carb supp.


 >What I'm trying to have folks keep in mind is that even if they DO 
supplement with simple carbs to get an immediate increase in blood glucose, 
they must ALSO keep that roughage going to keep up the VFA production, or 
else they will REALLY get into the hills-and-valleys with the blood glucose.>

Nope. You go too far. I'll go along with the gut motility theory, even though 
I believe that dehydration is a more important factor in loss of gut motility 
than any hay intake during a ride--but I'll go along just to be pleasant. 
However, VFA production has nothing to do with "hills and valleys" of blood 
glucose in carbohydrate supplemented horses. 

The way to avoid hills and valleys with carb supp is simply to time the 
administration properly. 1 1/2 to 2 hours after a carb supp you'll get a peak 
blood glucose. If, at that point, you supplement again, you'll catch the down 
curve in the middle of its decline, eliminating the fearsome valley of death. 
In our latest experiment, the unsupplemented horses came to the end of the 
ride with glucoses as low as 57 while the supplemented horses crossed the 
110K line with glucoses invariably exceeding 100.

>  Or perhaps you would have them go down the trail with a feeding tube in 
place in which they can run a continuous drip of simple carbs to maintain the 
horse??>

Hey, an innovative thought! 

>  You might get some arguments from the veterinary Poo Bahs on that one.> 

Snaark.  You know me, anything that enrages a Poobah with a pet, embedded,  
theory to protect brings a blossom of joy to my heart. 


 <<Nope. A glucose crash will stop the horse dead in his tracks, no matter 
how much sludge is sloshing away in the gut. That's how the discussion 
started--the "bonked" horse. Very likely that horse had a gutfull of fiber in 
transition to FFAs and VFAs. >>
 
 And the horse likely "bonked" because he didn't have enough roughage on 
board to begin with, and hence didn't have his VFA's up to par either.> 

I'll say it again. VFAs by the ton will not prevent a horse from stopping. 
Dead. Still. when the glycogen/glucose is exhausted. 

 > Or (no, could it be?) he was simply overridden...>

Let's examine that statement. What would overriding do, physiologically? Two 
things that could potentially stop a horse--glycogen/glucose depletion and 
core temp buildup, the former being most likely. VFAs, FFAs and triglycerides 
are not a factor. 

>  But then see the feeding tube solution above--I guess you think you'd keep 
him going indefinitely??>

Be interesting to find out, wouldn't it?
 
 <<Without carbs, the hindgut energy provision is completely useless. It will 
not keep the horse alive, much less move it forward. Carbohydrate, glucose or 
glycogen, is the preferred, and indespensible, fuel for every organ in the 
body. Even the heart, which loves VFAs, FFAs and triglycerides, dies without 
carbs.>>
 
 Tom, I've never suggested NO carbs.  Just trying to get you to remember that 
in the distance horse, they are only PART of the equation.>

The first part. The major part.And, perhaps, under the right circumstances, 
the only part. One thing is absolutely for sure: VFAs can only play a very 
limited role, at best, while glucose and glycogen are vital, not only for 
reasonable athletic performance, but for survival--horse, human, rat, 
hummingbird--true for all. 

The horse isn't from Mars.  
 
 >Heidi
 
  >>

ti

ti


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.    
Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/RideCamp   
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=