Monday, April 21, 2014

Takeaways from the FASTER Study


I was fortunate enough to fly out to Connecticut during Spring Break to participate in an experiment examining elite ultrarunners' diets. I recently talked a bit about my participation in the FASTER Study, which is being put on by Dr. Jeff Volek and a team of graduate students, many of whom are working on their doctoral theses, at the University of Connecticut. Now I am back to give you some of the specific details of my experience.

In its simplest form, the study is aimed at discovering the role diet plays in how our bodies metabolize fat vs. carbohydrate during exercise. The complete study will be released later this summer, but I can at least share with you some of my personal results.

One portion of the study was a VO2 Max (maximal oxygen uptake) treadmill test. VO2 Max is the maximum amount of oxygen that an athlete's body can utilize during exercise, and is a partially determining factor in an athlete's aerobic endurance. It is important to note that VO2 Max is not necessarily the point at which you have to stop running; the measurement is is a general indicator of endurance at best: Some folks are able to push on well past hitting their VO2 Max, while others almost immediately cave upon reaching it. I guess this is where mental toughness and guts come into play.

During the test, the researchers gradually increased both the speed and incline on the treadmill until I could no longer continue, and my rates of fat and carbohydrate metabolism at various intensities were measured. In order to be consistent with all testing subjects, they had to use the same method of VO2 Max testing, increasing both speed and incline. Personally, I'd like to try the test again with a program that just increases speed, as my training is more specific to flat, fast surfaces at this time. This makes a difference in the VO2 Max, which is why everyone has a different VO2 Max score for each sport. (Like I said, they did it the way they did for methodological purposes; this is just me being a data geek.)

My VO2 Max came in at 66.1. As I suggested above, this number is of rather little importance by itself, as it really doesn't say too much about what I can do on the racecourse. However, with the rest of the data from the study, I can pinpoint where my fat metabolism and carbohydrate metabolism peak at varying intensities, and I can see the ratio between the two at any given percentage of my VO2 Max.

Analyzing the data was wonderfully reassuring to me. My fat metabolism peaked at 1.57 grams/minute. At this point in the test, my VO2 uptake was at 49.4. By dividing this number by my eventual VO2 Max of 66.1, I can calculate at what intensity I burn the most fat: 74.4%. At that intensity, I was burning 98% fat 2% carbohydrate (1.57 fat grams/minute and .07 carb grams/minute). To put this into perspective, 65% of my VO2 Max had me running approximately a 7:15 per mile. Even when I increase my speed to around 7:00 per mile, I was still burning nearly all fat! Of course, as the intensity moves up, these numbers begin to shift a bit, but you would be surprised at how efficient at fat burning one can be, even at increased intensities.

Take a look below at a few more of my personal data points from my VO2 Max test:

% VO2 Max
Fat Usage
Carb Usage
75%
98%
2%
84%
76%
24%
96%
23%
77%

As you can see, even when I start reaching some pretty high (for ultrarunning) intensities (80%+ VO2 Max), I am still metabolizing way more fat than carbs. This is an important takeaway for me, especially as I strategize for longer races. An athlete cannot replace the amount of calories they are burning quickly enough to expect an outside fuel source to meet their race-day caloric demands. A person may be able to physically consume enough, but their body would simply not be able to process the fuel quickly enough to stay ahead.

This is why I strongly believe that the less you have to fuel during a race, the better. Not to mention that fueling can be a hassle, and if it can be minimized, the hassle lessens. There are a lot of other factors that come into play as well. Heat, for example, can greatly effect how the body accepts (or on super hot days, rejects) the calories you give it. This is why you see so many more stomachs turn at hot weather races. Less eating means your body can use its precious blood stores for cooling and muscle function, rather than for digestion.

21 comments:

  1. NOTE: For those who read this immediately. I found one mistake in my numbers and have fixed it. I accidently put down .09g/min. for carb burning during peak fat metabolism. It was actually .07g/min. It's been fixed!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Very cool. Zach, what was your HR at the max fat-burning point?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'd have to look back, but it was somewhere near 140-150

      Delete
    2. Which if I've super-fan stalked you accurately, is roughly your 180-age (MAF), no?

      Thank you for putting out the info and participating in the test. It'll be interesting to see what other numbers come back from the rest of the participants - especially from anyone who would consider themselves to be very non-fat-adapted, aka, a sugar-burner. I'm not sure it is going to result in some grand new theory applicable to all runners, but it'll give us more data points for starting self-experimentation..good stuff.

      Delete
    3. Yeah, it will be fun to see the final product of this study. I don't think anything is for everyone, but in my world of running it's been a grand theory :) I use to be pretty high carb.

      180-Age would be 152. I'd definitely suggest finding MAF with a test on the road/track rather than doing the age calculation. It can be way off for some folks.

      Thanks for reading!

      Delete
  3. Another great post Zach! We need to give the readers a "heads up" that not only did the incline add some unfamiliar stressor to your body but that you were only 2 weeks out from setting the American 200K Record so, as we discussed, you probably were not optimally recovered....so, while your numbers are GREAT, and paradigm-shifting, they are probably not what you are certainly capable of achieving. It would be interesting to see what numbers a "sugar-burner" would yield 2 weeks out from running a fast 200K.

    It is really great to see that there is data finally emerging that confirms what we have known all along.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Replies
    1. @Scott Dunlap: Scott been trying to get up with you. I think we should do another interview soon 6 years later than the first when you were a super early adopter and everyone scoffed at this approach......have some really useful info for your readers and also some insights as to why this has not taken off.....it has not been a "best kept secret" as you said in a blog post as we have been shouting it out there along with full page ads in UR and M&B....all that being said we are starting to see things change in spite of persistent "group think" .....thanks to performances like Zach's and Nikki's etc.

      Delete
  5. Awesome fat-burning - thanks for sharing this Zach!
    I a keto athlete (inline speed skating), I recently had my own metabolic test done for precisely the same reasons.. my results are here: http://www.londonspeedskaters.com/forums/Getting-a-Metabolic-test--t5891.php

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hi Zach, great blog and very interesting reading, amazed to see you're burning 98% fat at 75% intensity of your VO2max. I've been a follower of the fat adaption approach to my marathon training for a while with good steady progress and I really believe in it.

    I'm currently focussing on speedier track workouts for the summer targeting 5k to 1/2 marathon races and continuing with my approach of training on empty. Obviously the fat adaptation is most useful for an ultra runner give but do you think the approach is just as effective for these shorter, faster distances?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey Conor, thanks for reading! I think it would become more important in the area of recovery then for the race or workout itself. This also would depend a lot on your intensity of training. Lots of high intensity workouts (speeds sessions, weights, etc.) are going to allow you to "get away with" more carbs. This is why I follow OFM. It allows me to adjust my carb levels strategically based on what I am doing in my training and racing.

      Delete
  7. Hi Zach great info..im 42 yrs old and 97kg..Do you believe that running typically at 75% intensity is the best pace for fat loss.?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey Kevin, to be honest probably closer to 65%. My results posted above are accurate, but I wouldn't be surprised if I did a "tapered" fully recovered VO2 Max on a flat surface (no gradual incline) that my Max wouldn't go up a tad. If this was the case my peak fat metabolism would still be the same 98/2 ratio, but would be closer to approx. 70% intensity then 75%. All just my humble observations though.

      Delete
    2. Interesting research. I'd be intersted to know how they measured macronutrient metabolism ratios during exercise. Were they doing blood analysis or was it based on an algorithm?

      Delete
    3. They did blood analysis and respiratory. I gave them a TON of blood that week :)

      Delete
    4. Interesting. Give us an update when the study is published.

      Delete
    5. Hi Zach,
      Just a quick one for you..today I ran an average of 73% of my max.that had my heart rate in and around 127-134bpm...my problem is I had to start to walk to keep it at that rate and felt a pointless excersise for an hour..I believe this or maybe even lower maybe 125-130 would drop to 70% max..problem is im barely moving..Am I really burning maximum fat at that very low bpm..really frustrated....kevin...

      Delete
  8. So are you able to fuel with the higher fat intake low carb mix over the course of a race, say a 100 mile race?

    ReplyDelete
  9. You dont need to fuel with any fat because you are accesing your bodies fat for fuel. The carbohydrates you take in are to keep your liver topped up and your brain.(via Tim Noakes) if your liver glucoses empties you will end up with that light headed wonky feeling. I think you may refer to that as a bonk in America. This is opposed to hitting the wall where you are depleted of muscle glycogen. This obviously is not an issue running an ultra in a fat adapted state at 70% vo2max. Hence consuming 100 calories an hour to fuel the brain and keep your liver topped up is all you need.

    ReplyDelete