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

[CMKSAGEHIL@aol.com]

In a message dated 12/16/99 12:47:02 AM Pacific Standard Time, Tivers writes:

<< 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 didn't say that four ounces WOULD shut it down.  (In fact, you didn't give 
your doseage in prior posts--or if you did, I missed it.)  My complaint is in 
your inference that the same four ounces will fuel the entire horse--as in 
your statement that carbs will replace other sources of nutrition.  Please 
explain THAT.

<<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.>>

Did I say you weren't seeing benefit from small supplements of carbs??  No, I 
did not.  You are confusing me with someoone else.  What I said was that you 
were leaving VFA's and normal gut function out of the equation with your 
inferences that carbs are the entire story.  But the key here is that the 
carbs at the level you are adding ARE indeed a supplement to the normal 
process that is (according to sources which more academic sorts have listed 
for you in this forum in previous discussions and which I'm sure you can find 
in the archives if you really care about references on this subject) up to 
half VFA's and half carbs in the normal aerobic athlete.

<<You're extrapolating dire results with absolutely no empirical evidence 
other than bad dreams. >>

If you want to call the nightmares one has after treating horses whose 
roughage intake has been ignored "bad dreams" you have a point.  But the 
cases that trigger them and the feeding programs that triggered them were 
real.  You forget, Tom--I'm not an academic, but an old field hack who asks 
lots of questions about horses that crash and horses that don't.  I'm not 
trying to say that what you are doing is bad--I'm just trying to give the 
audience the benefit of the knowledge that there has to be a sound 
roughage-based diet FIRST before you start adding your supplements and that 
they are not a substitute for a sound nutritional approach to the sport--but, 
rather, a supplement.  Is that so difficult for you?

<<> 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.>>

Hay is not, and has never been, a fad.  It has been the staple of the horse 
since the horse evolved on the grasslands of Asia, and since his forerunners 
evolved on the grasslands of North America.  His entire digestive process has 
evolved to utilize roughage.  That is the point you seem to want to ignore.  
As for fat--although your point about the problems of feeding fat on race day 
is correct, the general feeding of fat has well-documented advantages--in 
both the aerobic AND the anaerobic athlete.  But then you didn't choose to 
read the references given you in past times in this forum, so I guess there's 
no point in referring you once again to the archives where the academics with 
the references at their fingertips have listed them for you again and again 
and again.  But perhaps others reading the discussion are more willing to 
learn and might be willing to look them up, since Steph has so kindly 
provided archives for this forum...

<<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. >>

Perhaps some of those references do.  That isn't a number that has stuck in 
my mind.  The take-home lesson, though, from the research is that nearly half 
of the energy utilized by the aerobic athlete is in the form of VFA's coming 
from the gut, from that very roughage.  Can't remember which ones gave actual 
percentages on the energy from VFA's--may have been Hintz and others.  As to 
Lon Lewis and roughage--perhaps YOU should go back and study him--he 
certainly doesn't advocate replacing hay with carbs.  I believe it was Sarah 
Ralston, DVM (and aren't you also a PhD in nutrition, Sarah?) who gave you a 
long list of references from Lewis backing up the concept that the diet MUST 
be hay-based and that a great deal of energy comes from it.  Lewis has kept 
up--his more current work is not the same as what he was putting out 20 years 
ago.  But then that's what happens when people continue to research and learn.

<<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.>>

Well, SO glad you're finally admitting that you won't change the basic diet.  
Thank you.  As to making the VFA's useless--they will still be there, even if 
you shift the percentage somewhat with your carbs.  And they will still 
provide a steady state of material for the Krebs cycle, whether you want to 
acknowledge that or not.

<<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. >>

You're right--it's the glucose that causes the hills-and-valleys, not the 
VFA's.  They are a much more steady-state source.  And oh, yes--timing is 
everything, you said.  Darn--this course just doesn't have a vet check at the 
place where I need to stop and supplement carbs--guess I'll have to stop and 
get off and give them, and watch my competition disappear over the hill...  
Yeah, yeah, jump all over me that that's an extreme.  And you're right.  But 
the point is that endurance does not always lend itself well to "timing" and 
thus some emphasis on a nutritional plan where "timing" means making sure the 
horse has a good gut fill for 48-72 hours BEFORE the ride is still beneficial.

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

Yes, Tom, we know that all too well.  Which is why it gets kind of old when 
you present your ideas in exaggerated terms to push people's buttons instead 
of just saying hey, this is a supplemental approach that can help if you are 
careful to do it right.  You go far beyond Poobahs, and you undermine support 
that you would have from sensible, well-rounded folks if you would keep the 
perspective of the whole horse in your discussions.  I know you get a big 
charge out of these debates.  I personally think they are a boring waste of 
time, but I do feel that the readers in this forum deserve to see the whole 
picture.

Heidi


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