Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
For 5 days, eight well-trained cyclists consumed a random order of a high-carbohydrate (CHO) diet (9.6 g. kg(-1). day(-1) CHO, 0.7 g. kg(-1). day(-1) fat; HCHO) or an isoenergetic high-fat diet (2.4 g. kg(-1). day(-1) CHO, 4 g. kg(-1). day(-1) fat; Fat-adapt) while undertaking supervised training. On day 6, subjects ingested high CHO and rested before performance testing on day 7 [2 h cycling at 70% maximal O(2) consumption (SS) + 7 kJ/kg time trial (TT)]. With Fat-adapt, 5 days of high-fat diet reduced respiratory exchange ratio (RER) during cycling at 70% maximal O(2) consumption; this was partially restored by 1 day of high CHO [0.90 +/- 0.01 vs. 0.82 +/- 0.01 (P < 0.05) vs. 0.87 +/- 0.01 (P < 0.05), for day 1, day 6, and day 7, respectively]. Corresponding RER values on HCHO trial were [0. 91 +/- 0.01 vs. 0.88 +/- 0.01 (P < 0.05) vs. 0.93 +/- 0.01 (P < 0.05)]. During SS, estimated fat oxidation increased [94 +/- 6 vs. 61 +/- 5 g (P < 0.05)], whereas CHO oxidation decreased [271 +/- 16 vs. 342 +/- 14 g (P < 0.05)] for Fat-adapt compared with HCHO. Tracer-derived estimates of plasma glucose uptake revealed no differences between treatments, suggesting muscle glycogen sparing accounted for reduced CHO oxidation. Direct assessment of muscle glycogen utilization showed a similar order of sparing (260 +/- 26 vs. 360 +/- 43 mmol/kg dry wt; P = 0.06). TT performance was 30.73 +/- 1.12 vs. 34.17 +/- 2.48 min for Fat-adapt and HCHO (P = 0.21). These data show significant metabolic adaptations with a brief period of high-fat intake, which persist even after restoration of CHO availability. However, there was no evidence of a clear benefit of fat adaptation to cycling performance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Burke et al. (2000) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: