Do I need to stop drinking beer and alcohol to climb 5.12 [Solved! Nope! But I'll cut back anyways]

Tony B wrote:

Ted, I have studied a bit of clinical neurology, molecular neuropharmacology, and yes... even a semester of sleep medicine.
I remain comfortable with what I have said and am not at all confused.
But I'm not offering to teach a course here either.  This isn't the venue for it and I'm no professor.  

And as for behavioral changes, perhaps I should state that certain changes are only "extremely likely" but might not happen.  I could say "causes the very high likelihood of..." instead of "causes" because yes, in theory, one might potentially escape the effects.  So if that satisfies you, then sure, please accept my apologies for the tersely worded statement.  In teh future I'll try to be much more verbose when communicating with you.

If you remain unsatisfied, then fine, let's go with that.. and here we are:
You 'Caloric Surplus' is correct, but over simplified.  Surplus, as you correctly observe is  X(intake)-Y(output).  And this is a term with 2 variables in it, and you are failing to consider how a depressed nervous system leads to lower output, and how disrupted sleep cycles deferentially effect that output.  One need not change their diet at all to generate a surplus.  But taking a depressant, or sleeping less will cause a surplus, regardless of intake.

As for the direct and causal mechanisms for this, these are complex, but becoming increasingly understood... if you have the education for it.  But like many other things, a lack of knowledge about a subject on your part should not be mistaken for your ability to correct others when they speak of what you do not understand or know about.  Not knowing is fine as long as you are not handing out advice or "correcting" people who actually have a grasp on the subject matter. But you are wrong in fact, which doesn't suit you well in this particular conversation.

But before I am corrected again, can I ask if you have considered for a moment how the activation of GABAa and projection from the  effects orexinergic function (and the quality of sleep) or how that, or a lack there of) body metabolism?  If not, you might be over your head.  You can find more, and with an open mind as opposed to the desire to try to disprove what I said to reach your predisposed conclusion, and the willingness to read longer articles, I imagine you'll find quite a bit more that is enlightening.

And FYI - what SORT of calories one takes in DOES change metabolism because it effects insulin.  And as you (should) know, that regulates your metabolism, not just your appetite.

Tony B wrote:

Ted, I have studied a bit of clinical neurology, molecular neuropharmacology, and yes... even a semester of sleep medicine.
I remain comfortable with what I have said and am not at all confused.
But I'm not offering to teach a course here either.  This isn't the venue for it and I'm no professor.  

And as for behavioral changes, perhaps I should state that certain changes are only "extremely likely" but might not happen.  I could say "causes the very high likelihood of..." instead of "causes" because yes, in theory, one might potentially escape the effects.  So if that satisfies you, then sure, please accept my apologies for the tersely worded statement.  In teh future I'll try to be much more verbose when communicating with you.

If you remain unsatisfied, then fine, let's go with that.. and here we are:
You 'Caloric Surplus' is correct, but over simplified.  Surplus, as you correctly observe is  X(intake)-Y(output).  And this is a term with 2 variables in it, and you are failing to consider how a depressed nervous system leads to lower output, and how disrupted sleep cycles deferentially effect that output.  One need not change their diet at all to generate a surplus.  But taking a depressant, or sleeping less will cause a surplus, regardless of intake.

As for the direct and causal mechanisms for this, these are complex, but becoming increasingly understood... if you have the education for it.  But like many other things, a lack of knowledge about a subject on your part should not be mistaken for your ability to correct others when they speak of what you do not understand or know about.  Not knowing is fine as long as you are not handing out advice or "correcting" people who actually have a grasp on the subject matter. But you are wrong in fact, which doesn't suit you well in this particular conversation.

But before I am corrected again, can I ask if you have considered for a moment how the activation of GABAa and projection from the  effects orexinergic function (and the quality of sleep) or how that, or a lack there of) body metabolism?  If not, you might be over your head.  You can find more, and with an open mind as opposed to the desire to try to disprove what I said to reach your predisposed conclusion, and the willingness to read longer articles, I imagine you'll find quite a bit more that is enlightening.

And FYI - what SORT of calories one takes in DOES change metabolism because it effects insulin.  And as you (should) know, that regulates your metabolism, not just your appetite.

Wow, thanks for the reply!  I think we may be arguing about slightly different things (maybe even a semantic difference), as I don’t actually disagree with what you’re saying now.  I did concede that sleep loss has an effect on metabolism and that this leads to a lower output, but my point was that behavior (eating habits) had a more significant effect and that one could avoid these additional gains by resisting these cravings.  

It’s a fair criticism to say that the calorie balance is an oversimplified model, but when it comes down to it, this IS primarily what actually determines weight gain/loss, so the only reason I brought it up (regrettably, perhaps) was to make the point that eating a donut at 2 in the afternoon is effectively no different from eating it at 11:00 at night, assuming all of your other consumption is the same.  I’ve seen a few possible exceptions to this (Fructose, if you accept Lustig’s research), so if alcohol is one of them, I’m genuinely interested to learn more.

I have not considered the activation of GABAa...etc and won’t pretend to even know what exactly you are talking about, but I’d love to hear more if it’s relevant to this.  If that makes me “over my head” so be it, but I generally find that to be a prerequisite for learning, so I’m ok with it.

I think you misunderstand my position - I honestly have no desire to disprove your position, only to lay out the evidence that supports my current one.  I’m open to changing that stance and in fact do so regularly when presented with compelling evidence.  I know that this is rare and understand your skepticism, but please know that I am being genuine when I say that I would love to hear more.  Thanks again for responding seriously and for clarifying your position.

If one were to drink often and climb 5.12, would that mean if they quit the booze they could climb 5.13? 

Ted Pinson wrote:

I have not considered the activation of GABAa...etc and won’t pretend to even know what exactly you are talking about, but I’d love to hear more if it’s relevant to this.  If that makes me “over my head” so be it, but I generally find that to be a prerequisite for learning, so I’m ok with it.

Here is a pretty reasonable article in layman's terms that more or less explains how alcohol's primary mechanism on GABAa receptors, and their function, with respect to sleep:
https://www.livescience.com/58990-why-drinking-alcohol-makes-you-sleepy.html
I was able to locate this pretty quickly.  

If you want to peel another layer off of that onion, you can read up on adenosine (mentioned in the article) on wikipedia if you want to dig a layer deeper on that:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adenosine
Bear in mind that caffeine is a non-selective competitive antagonist at the adenosine receptors... so more or less Alcohol INITIALLY acts like "anti-caffeine" and then later starts acting like anti-anti-caffeine. In other words, it wakes you up, like caffeine.

So now you understand what I mean by "cause" and not "correlate" which has everything to do with why WHEN you drink matters.  And BTW, Zeitgebers and Circadian Rhythms are real, not hippy-dippy stuff, so the effects of subtle timing differences in drinking can be... not so subtle.

I think you will be able to take it from there on how sleep quality or lack of sleep causes (directly) a change in body function, metabolism, and caloric expenditure.  In short, adenosine accumulates in the basal forebrain whenever you are NOT sleeping and decreases when you are asleep.  So if you think of being tired is a depressant, and that the brain when tired tries to shut down... to ready the body for sleep.  It does so when the adenosine acts to begin (long story short) projecting inhibitory transmissions while you are awake (More GABA stuff here).  This results in a slowing the heart, the lungs, the muscles... and your metabolism.  This is the abbreviated version of how and why poor sleep quality or lack of sleep causes weight gain even without a change in behaviors.  It is not just a correlation.

And as well, it is not so much the CALORIES in your alcohol that causes the change in weight, it is the drug.  And the drug effects you differently dependingon when you take it.  And when it profoundly effects your sleep then all hell breaks loose the next day, in terms of neurology and metabolism.  Aside, It also effects where in the body you deposit fat, acting effectively like a hormone.  Thus, the classic "beer belly."  But that's more trivia about why it's "not just the calories" it is the drug.

I am still vastly over-simplifying, but that's the gist of it and should give you the language and direction to go look around/read/verify more about it.  
Nobody should be taking anybody's word for it on the internet anyway.  People give out terrible advice sometimes, mostly out of ignorance of their ignorance.  Always best to fact-check.

Rob the tricam wrote:

Look at my post. Why do you have to be drinking  to be having fun?  Why is the idea of cutting back or out alcohol such a problem. As far as I am concerned your tone proves my point.  

I dont drink, I dony mind if you do. However, dont pretend it's not a potent intoxicant with habit forming pathways in the brain. Dont pretend that under the established medical guidelines most people have a substance abuse issue with alcohol. Two beers a night is well over the weekly units of alcohol. It's no ones fault. Humans are hardwired to enjoy getting fucked up for the most part.

I am not edge, I enjoy some recreational substances. However, I have a keen eye for why I want to use and when. Socially with friends my ability to act wildly uninhibited, gregariously and hilariously, does not require alcohol. If you require a substance to create a certain mental state. You have a problem with that substance.

To my main point, you really cant argue that drinking is good for performing effectively. Arguments using anecdote aside.

Its fucking poison.

I'll get my sister to explain her PHd in alcoholism pathways and gene expression if your interested.

You sir have replaced one addiction with another. Number chasing.

With a normal job and 20+hours of training a week I would burn out myself, similar to a booze hound who drinks way too much.

Those numbers are good but you must know that there are plenty of people out there drinking and smoking who don't obsess on training with even better numbers. Any chance that Utah culture has had any influence on your lifestyle?

Tony B wrote:

Here is a pretty reasonable article in layman's terms that more or less explains how alcohol's primary mechanism on GABAa receptors, and their function, with respect to sleep:
https://www.livescience.com/58990-why-drinking-alcohol-makes-you-sleepy.html
I was able to locate this pretty quickly.  

If you want to peel another layer off of that onion, you can read up on adenosine (mentioned in the article) on wikipedia if you want to dig a layer deeper on that:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adenosine
Bear in mind that caffeine is a non-selective competitive antagonist at the adenosine receptors... so more or less Alcohol INITIALLY acts like "anti-caffeine" and then later starts acting like anti-anti-caffeine. In other words, it wakes you up, like caffeine.

So now you understand what I mean by "cause" and not "correlate" which has everything to do with why WHEN you drink matters.  And BTW, Zeitgebers and Circadian Rhythms are real, not hippy-dippy stuff, so the effects of subtle timing differences in drinking can be... not so subtle.

I think you will be able to take it from there on how sleep quality or lack of sleep causes (directly) a change in body function, metabolism, and caloric expenditure.  In short, adenosine accumulates in the basal forebrain whenever you are NOT sleeping and decreases when you are asleep.  So if you think of being tired is a depressant, and that the brain when tired tries to shut down... to ready the body for sleep.  It does so when the adenosine acts to begin (long story short) projecting inhibitory transmissions while you are awake (More GABA stuff here).  This results in a slowing the heart, the lungs, the muscles... and your metabolism.  This is the abbreviated version of how and why poor sleep quality or lack of sleep causes weight gain even without a change in behaviors.  It is not just a correlation.

And as well, it is not so much the CALORIES in your alcohol that causes the change in weight, it is the drug.  And the drug effects you differently dependingon when you take it.  And when it profoundly effects your sleep then all hell breaks loose the next day, in terms of neurology and metabolism.  Aside, It also effects where in the body you deposit fat, acting effectively like a hormone.  Thus, the classic "beer belly."  But that's more trivia about why it's "not just the calories" it is the drug.

I am still vastly over-simplifying, but that's the gist of it and should give you the language and direction to go look around/read/verify more about it.  
Nobody should be taking anybody's word for it on the internet anyway.  People give out terrible advice sometimes, mostly out of ignorance of their ignorance.  Always best to fact-check.

Totally agree!

Mobes Mobesely wrote:

You sir have replaced one addiction with another. Number chasing.

With a normal job and 20+hours of training a week I would burn out myself, similar to a booze hound who drinks way too much.

Those numbers are good but you must know that there are plenty of people out there drinking and smoking who don't obsess on training with even better numbers. Any chance that Utah culture has had any influence on your lifestyle?

I live in Vegas now. .. I feel pretty comfortable saying that I am wired to like exercise.  Additionally, I never said I dont have a complex around climbing. I have in fact built most of my life around it. However, I think being compulsively into getting better at rock climbing may do more for your grade and hleath than  being really into beer. 

Also... its not about anyone's numbers but my own. If you want to validate your own accomplishments against others your done before you even begin.  Like I said, it's about me and my climbing and numbers. I am lucky to get to climb with some of the best climbers in the world. If I wanted to compare them to me I would always feel bad. Additionally... your ability to put 20hrs a week in and mine are an irrelevant observation.  Our life circumstances are likely dissimilar. It also did burn me out, which is why you take breaks. That level if training load isnt somthing you can maintain indefinitely.

Rob the tricam wrote:

I live in Vegas now. .. I feel pretty comfortable saying that I am wired to like exercise.  Additionally, I never said I dont have a complex around climbing. I have in fact built most of my life around it. However, I think being compulsively into getting better at rock climbing may do more for your grade and hleath than  being really into beer. 

My point comes from seeing folks get so into chasing #s that they burn out and stop climbing. On the other hand you have people who climb a bunch, drink and be merry with friends who never burn out. Climbers IMO tend to be the healthiest people I know, even the beer "addicts" you speak of. Moderation of everything is key.

I don’t think you need to drink to be merry or that there’s anything wrong with being dedicated to your craft.

Dedicated to your craft you are sir, 4000 posts in 4 years shows it. 

Hahahah touché.  You do what you can in Flatlandia with kids...which sadly means talking about climbing a lot more than actually climbing.

Been there. From smelly diapers to bringing the kid along for the day to actually belaying them on real climbs, there is light at the end of the tunnel.

Beer helped me through those dark days I swear.

I've lost track of this one. Is beer performance enhancing or not?!

Tradiban wrote: I've lost track of this one. Is beer performance enhancing or not?!

No.  But it is liquid patience available without a prescription or fear of incarceration if found in your possession.

Absolutely not.  I would actually check out some of the stuff Layne does, as a lot of his research focuses on performance for bodybuilders and professional lifters.  There’s a fair amount of well-funded nutritional research in sports medicine.  The problem seems to be that it is incredibly difficult to consume enough macronutrients to recover from training while running a caloric deficit; maybe you’ll be able to cut those pounds, but can you do so while maintaining your training strength?

Nivel - most of the studies I’ve seen have shown that performance can be sustained for endurance athletes but strength/power suffers, so that’s interesting that this one yielded different results.

Real advice:

Stop arm-chair training and start actually training, you will quickly find out what helps you lose weight, what keeps you motivated, and what makes you feel better (the actual key to enhancing performance).

All this talk is the basis of diets and multi-level marketing schemes. Eat well and live well and you will perform better.

If you want to be pro hire a real coach that actually meets with you and knows you. These training plan write up coaches are a joke, they don't know you or your body on a daily basis and simply spew traning based.on their own bodies, not yours.

Godspeed.

Tim Lutz wrote: Sunday Morning Sermon from the tradi-Troll

Amen. I haven't had a drink or refined carbs in 2 months, eat mostly fats and some protein (keto-ish), lost 6-8 pounds, and now climbing and training better.  

In my 30s this type of dietary discipline mattered significantly less, but now in late 40s, it does. YMMV

3am wake up leaves time for pontificating before climbing!

You one of those keto-kooks?!?

It will also be easy to find the studies on radical calorie restrictions (IE down to 700cal a day) that result in little or no weight loss because the body can restrict caloric expenditure to match the intake.  The body can, more or less go into a state of physical depression.  This can be modulated during exercise, of course, but the baseline during sleep and rest will be reduced.
The point is, once again, that this is not a simple model where all things are equal but for "calories in" that controls the outcome.

There is actually a complex endocrinology associated with weight loss (as there is with sleep) and most "common sense" conclusions are not correct.  Some key search terms here are probably 'weight loss, genetic, wnt, adipocyte, sfrp5 signaling, mitochondria, hyperplasia, atrophy' and perhaps also: "liposuction, effective".  Yes, these effects are more profound in people who are obese because MORE fat cells means MORE signaling.  But the point here is not to believe that the body is as simple as our individual understanding of it.  My own included of course, which is limited to knowing that it isn't as simple as it is painted here.  Even endocrinologist researchers are still studying this to better understand it.

Tim Lutz wrote: I'm an intermittent-fasting kook too.

Why is this not surprising after seeing your other posts? Intermittent fasting is for overweight ladies and desk jockeys trying to loose weight not athletes

Tony B wrote: It will also be easy to find the studies on radical calorie restrictions (IE down to 700cal a day) that result in little or no weight loss because the body can restrict caloric expenditure to match the intake.  The body can, more or less go into a state of physical depression.  This can be modulated during exercise, of course, but the baseline during sleep and rest will be reduced.
The point is, once again, that this is not a simple model where all things are equal but for "calories in" that controls the outcome.

There is actually a complex endocrinology associated with weight loss (as there is with sleep) and most "common sense" conclusions are not correct.  Some key search terms here are probably 'weight loss, genetic, wnt, adipocyte, sfrp5 signaling, mitochondria, hyperplasia, atrophy' and perhaps also: "liposuction, effective".  Yes, these effects are more profound in people who are obese because MORE fat cells means MORE signaling.  But the point here is not to believe that the body is as simple as our individual understanding of it.  My own included of course, which is limited to knowing that it isn't as simple as it is painted here.  Even endocrinologist researchers are still studying this to better understand it.

This is also why most diets (especially crash) fail; calorie restriction leads to a depressed resting metabolism, causing people to rapidly gain the weight back when they stop restricting calories.  It makes sense from an evolutionary perspective; starvation is a much faster and more reliable killer than heart disease.