Wednesday, September 16, 2009

Hot Calories, Cool Calories

I wanted to come home and just do some pleasure reading, or immerse myself again in some technical stuff. But I wasted an hour with that dog in front of the TV. That new guy on The Late Show has some okay stuff. And I actually laugh at AquaTeen HungerForce. That is my sense of humor. Now I've just been puttering around for a while. Replied to a comment. You're welcome.

But I've got some new stuff rolling around in my head. Here's the thing. Vegetarians burn hotter than meat-eaters, per The China Study. These skinny Asians eat over 3000 calories and are, well, skinny. Where does it go? Body heat.

That bothers me. Heat is bad. You know that because heat is bad for your car engine. How could it be good for us? I know it's bad for athletic performance. So is a veg diet bad for exercise? Yes. A grain diet, high carb even unrefined, is not ideal. This seems clear on theoretical grounds.

In terms of performance, I got a call tonight from my son, and I'll have to follow up -- bad connection -- can you hear me now? -- but he said that his endurance seemed a bit less on the raw vegan no oils or supplements diet. Never argue with reality. I didn't want to influence the outcome of his experiment, so I had kept my expectations to myself, that this would or might happen. It was all too theoretical -- too pure and idealistic. That's not how reality seems to work. He'll be adding oils and cooking some food every day or two now. Tweaking. It's about reality. We shall see.

Here's what I think, as an instant theory. Just as different types of fuel combust differently in an engine, producing more or less heat, more or less power -- don't ask me about it, it's just what I've been given to understand ... something about octane and grades and whatnot -- that's how it is with carbs and fats. When you have almost only carbs, glucose, to burn, it burns instantly, more as heat than power. Fat burns cooler, more controlled, with more energy available for movement, if there is movement. Otherwise it stores as fat -- as will glucose too, if it's not used. Glucose doesn't store. If it's not burned it gets changed into glycogen or triglycerides. Think of glucose as flash and fat as glow -- one all intense and mistimed, too much expended all at once, and the other steady, cool, reliable.

I'm going to have to look again at the Kreb's cycle, to see if this makes sense. Fat burns as fat, right? -- not broken down into glucose? I seem to think so. Man I hate the Kreb's cycle. Is that even how it's spelled? Kreb's? Krebs?

Glucose is designed to be brain and organ food. It shouldn't be the primary energy source for muscles. So, that it is less efficient in muscles makes sense. Athleticism is about efficiency. Athletes are better at using fat energy than are non-athletes. Metabolism is trained too, you see. Fat is designed to be muscle food. If you do extraordinary feats, you need an extraordinary diet. Carbs may be great for treks across the Kalahari, or working all day in the fields, but that's not athletics.

As I say, this is an instant theory. I just made it up. No one has ever thought of this before. Man I'm good. A regular Tesla. You should send me money. Jack H, c/o General Delivery, 91504, Burbank, CA. No checks please.



Will C. said...

"These skinny Asians eat over 3000 calories and are, well, skinny. Where does it go? Body heat."

Just off the cuff...could it be that because the major dietary component of the asian diet is rice (milagrosa), a notoriously harder carb to digest, and thus perhaps they use more energy processing it (hotter) into a usable form than we do, eating our easily digestable/storable potatoes, corn, etc...

Will C. said...

I hope this isn't your ultimate goal...

We may have to intervene and save our Jack. No literally, inter your vene and put in an IV
...ah cha cha cha cha cha!

Jack H said...

Digestion in general does raise body temp for an hour or two after a meal. But carbs are easier to digest than protein, and "easier" means less work, which should mean less energy, which should mean less heat. It's not so much a comparison of our carbs to their carbs, but our fats and proteins to their carbs.

Animal populations fed low protein diets ate more, gained less fat, burned hotter, got less disease, and did more voluntary exercise. They consumed more O2, indicating higher combustion rates.

Your point is interesting. The heat/inefficiency is not in muscle but in digestion. At this point I don't think it's supported.

... Oh, pardon me ... i got all caught up in the Krebs cycle. Not helpful. I shall have to ponder the matter.

Jack H said...

As for Breatharianism, I so totally am going for that. As a step in my evolution. A stepping stone to my eventual and inevitable transcendence out of the plain of this filthy stinking existence, with its fluids and people. Eventually I shall become a lightairian -- what need have I for so coarse a burden as air? Then, my final transmogrification shall be unto Darknessairian, wherein I need nothing at all. It will be terrific.

I knew a breatharian once. In the sense that he believed it. Don't ask.