Gluttony at the Dome: All-You-Can-Eat Seats

Don't get me wrong, I consider myself a big Twins fan. I have to admit I don't really watch a lot of games (we have a bare bones cable package for news and PBS Kids) but I enjoy reading about the team's exploits -- and blunders -- and my wife and I take our kids to a half dozen games a year, attend a handful more by ourselves and listen to games on the radio.

Recently, however, I noticed a promotion that gives new meaning to "big" sports fans. The All-You-Can-Eat seats allow patrons to scarf an unlimited number of "hot dogs, nachos, popcorn, peanuts, soft pretzels, [and] fountain soda" then sit on their duffs for 3 hours while their blood sugar goes through the roof. Sounds like a recipe for a heart attack, or at least an invitation to adult onset diabetes.

I find it really quite sad. Not that people enjoy this kind of food, but that they're enticed by how much money they could "save" by stuffing themselves with it. It highlights one of the central problems at the intersection of our brand of capitalism and the "personal food economy." A rational consumer wants to maximize the value of his or her food dollar, so portion size becomes the primary gauge of value. Once again it's quantity over quality.

I don't think I'm that much of a food snob, at least not at the ball park. I enjoy a good beer or two, and typically eat a large bag of peanuts by myself. But I'm not going to stuff myself on food simply because it's cheap and available. There are relatively healthy food choices at the ball game, but you have to search them out, and they do often cost a bit more. The "Carving Stations" for instance serve a nice roasted turkey sandwich, carved up on the spot with a Caesar salad on the side. So I guess I'd rather sit in the "cheap seats" and eat the pricier fare.

Next time I go to a game I think I'll take a stroll over to the A.Y.C.E. section and see if the patrons there look much different from those in other sections. My guess is they probably won't. But if they start sitting in these seats game after game, I'd suggest the engineers take a close look at those gusset plates before the end of the season, as the Twins will have found a new way to achieve spectator growth.

Biking and Your Carbon Footprint

Recently a friend asked me what kind of impact I thought my bike commuting had on reducing my personal carbon footprint. Concern for the environment is certainly one of the many reasons I enjoy biking (and bike commuting particularly) but I'd never tried to even estimate the positive effects these choices might be having.

So, I decided to conduct a very crude "back of the envelope" estimate of the impact my bike commuting has on reducing my carbon footprint and came up with the following estimate:

Using a standard carbon calculator on the web, I estimated my car emissions at 4.39 metric tons of CO2 annually. Assuming that I travel roughly the same number of miles by car each day I drive (weekdays or weekends), and considering I commute by bike an average of 3 times per week from at least May through roughly October, I avoid driving approximately 65-70 times per year. This doesn't count my weekend rides, which are typically much longer, but these rides aren't really substitutes for driving (though at least I don't have to drive to the gym, ball field or other meeting place for this hobby!). This means I bike as opposed to drive somewhere around 17-20% of the year. This would put the reduction in my carbon footprint at at least 3/4 of a metric ton of CO2.

While I was pretty please to learn this, it's made me want to try to commute a little more this year, and at least get my percentage up to 20%. Please let me know if you find any major flaws in my reasoning.

Column 2: Preparing For Your First Bike Commute

The second installation of my monthly Shifting Gears column (on "Preparing For Your First Bike Commute" just appeared in the Minneapolis Downtown and Southwest Journals. My first column, which focused on "Buying a New Bike" appeared in April.

Here are a couple of additional points I had to cut from the column due to space restrictions:

• Bike commuting provides excellent benefits for your metabolism, by providing two "bursts" of activity (one in the morning and one in the late afternoon). In many ways this is better than one long period of exercise. The timing is good, too, since it's right around mealtime (breakfast and dinner) allowing you to offset the spike in calories you're taking in.
  
  
• If you don't feel like you can bike the entire way from your home to your workplace, consider biking part of it to start with. Put you bike in or on your car and drive part way. Find a safe spot to leave your car during the day and bike the rest of the way in. Pretty soon you'll be able to bike further and eventually you'll more than likely be able to ride the whole way.

Happy commuting, and happy Bike-to-Work Day (May 14)!

.

8 Glasses a Day Advice Doesn't Hold Water

Recently researchers writing in The Journal of the American Society of Nephrology wrote that drinking extra water is unnecessary, and that there is no clinical evidence that drinking eight glasses of water a day is beneficial to otherwise healthy people. [See Go Ahead, Put the Water Bottle Down, New York Times, April 19, 2008.]

I've never been an advocate of drinking a lot of extra water. Drink a glass when your thirsty. Don't if you're not. When you're on your bike riding hard it's a little different. You need to drink a little ahead of your thirst, because your muscles often need water long before you feel a sense of thirst.

At the same time, I am a big proponent of substituting water for other drinks during meals and with snacks. It took some time but I now much prefer fruit juice diluted at least half and half with water, if not more. To make it a little more interesting, mix juice with sparkling mineral water or club soda. It's actually cheaper to buy good quality juice (always look for 100% juice with no added sugars) and a large bottle of carbonated water than drinking straight juice (even the cheap stuff).

And it's much healthier.

So, drink water when you're thirsty. Can the soda completely. And dilute naturally sweet juices. You don't need the extra sugar . . . or the extra water.

Feeling Twitchy? The Difference Between Fast and Slow Twitch Muscle Fibers

A topic that's interested me since taking up cycling several years ago has to do with the muscles used in different sports, and more interestingly, how the very same muscles can be used quite differently. Prior to rediscovering cycling I was a pretty serious soccer player, playing on my college team and continuing at a competitive level after college and graduate school.

After my first year back on the bike -- having started a regular commuting regimen along with longer weekend rides -- I noticed an interesting impact on my performance on the soccer field. On the one hand, I was in better cardiovascular shape than ever and my weight was down (about 20 pounds from the year before and even 10 pounds below my college soccer days). I typically play in center midfield, a position that involves the most running in a sport where you’re constantly moving. Now I felt like I could run forever; like I could play two 90-minute games back to back!

The problem was I felt like I had lost my quickness. My first step seemed slow, and I was getting beat by feints I would have stopped a year earlier (even when I was carrying 20 pounds of extra girth).

What was happening?

A friend of mine suggested I add some short sprints and jumping to my training, and when I did a little research to find some drills I found he was right. Apparently my cycling had done an excellent job developing slow-twitch muscle fibers, whereas soccer demands both slow and fast-twitch fibers.

What’s the difference?

Physiologists now believe that muscle fiber types can be broken down into two categories: slow twitch (Type I) muscle fibers and fast twitch (Type II) muscle fibers.

So what?

These distinctions apparently influence how muscles respond to physical activity, with each fiber type capable of contracting in a certain way. Slow Twitch (Type I) are very efficient at using oxygen for continuous and extended muscle contractions over long periods of time. They fire more slowly than fast twitch fibers and take longer to fatigue. These fibers are great for cycling for hour after hour or for running a marathon.

Fast Twitch (Type II) fibers operate anaerobically (without oxygen) to supply short bursts of strength or speed. Think of weight lifters. They don’t typically breathe hard (at least not for long) because the muscles they’re using (1) don’t require much oxygen, (2) fire quickly and are (3) are done doing their work sooner. Fast twitch fibers produce the same amount of force as slow muscles for each contraction, but they fatigue more quickly. Having more fast twitch fibers can be an asset to a sprinter since she needs to quickly generate a lot of force.

But there’s another interesting wrinkle.

Physiologists suggest that human muscles possess a genetically determined mixture of both slow and fast fiber types (around 50% of each). One important question that apparently has not been definitively answered is “can training help an athlete change the fiber type and composition of their muscles?”

There is an interesting sub-class of fast twitch muscles often referred to as Type IIa, also known as intermediate fast-twitch fibers. They can apparently use both aerobic and anaerobic methods to create energy. In this way, they are a combination of Type I and Type II muscle fibers. So, theoretically, an endurance athlete can "recruit" these dual purpose fibers to act more like slow twitch muscles, while a sprinter can use them for fast twitch power and speed.

It's interesting to think about how these types of muscle fibers affect cycling performance at the highest levels. Great all-around cyclists (and team leaders) need to be able to do everything reasonably well -- climb, sprint and endure mile after mile in long multi-stage races. They need both slow and fast-twitch muscles. But the very best sprinters (those who specialize in the last 100 meters of the race) must have explosive power, and therefore well-developed fast twitch muscles. You can see this directly in their body types. Sprinters are often "bulkier" than generalists, who tend to be lean and sinewy looking.

In the end, although training may or may not actually change the fiber type from slow to fast twitch (or vice versa) it’s clear that it does help you more fully realize the potential your muscles have for work (either intense bursts of power and speed, or long, grueling periods of activity).

Plastics Scare a Sign of Deeper Regulatory Problems

If you've been following health news recently you know that Health Canada (the Canadian health agency) is preparing to declare the chemical bisphenol-a, or BPA, toxic. This is the chemical used to create clear and virtually unbreakable polycarbonate, used in drinking bottles popularized by Nalgene but now used by many others manufacturers. BPA has been shown to disrupt the hormonal systems of animals. [Just today Nalgene announced it will stop using the plastic because of growing concern over BPA. Check out the New York Times article.]

A couple of years ago my wife and I made the shift to stainless steel drinking bottles, both for ourselves and for our kids. We use the brand Kleen Kanteen, which produces stainless steel bottles with a variety of interchangeable caps. My wife and I use the standard sports bottle cap while our younger kids use "sippy" caps. (I do have to admit that I still use standard plastic sport bottles -- the kind you can squeeze -- when I'm cycling, but I try not to let the water sit for long.)

If you use bottles made of hard polycarbonate plastics I'd recommend discarding them and looking at other alternatives. Also, if you haven't done so already, you'd be wise to get rid of insulated coffee/tea cups and mugs that have plastic liners. Look for all-steel varieties. Even though they might not contain BPA, all plastics leach some amount of petrochemicals. Also, I prefer stainless steel rather than aluminum since aluminum is often sealed with dangerous chemicals. Uncoated aluminum also has problems, as it breaks down over time.(Click here for an interesting article regarding research on aluminum drinking vessels.)

What I find most troubling, however, is the pattern of denial on the part of our own governmental agencies (the FDA, USDA and EPA, particularly) in the face of growing concerns about products or practices that might adversely impact industry. Two examples immediately come to mind. Several years ago Health Canada made an announcement about the dangers of Bovine Growth Hormon (rBGH) in milk. While rBGH has been banned in Europe and Canada for several years now, the FDA, Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Agriculture continue to license the drug, and, as the result of industry pressure, rGBH milk (just like many genetically engineered foods) are NOT required to carry identifying labels.

The second example involves the use of Polytetraflouethylene (PFTE) and Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), chemicals used to create Teflon for non-stick cookware as well as stain resistant fabrics. After years of concerns, DuPont, the chief developer of these chemicals, agreed to a settlement with the EPA, admitting that it neglected to report health safety information about PFOA for 20 years.

As a result of our own agencies' foot dragging and industry coddling I would suggest you pay more attention to the announcements by Health Canada and other international health agencies. Why not err on the side of caution, particularly since there are clear alternatives?

Season-Starting California Tour

I just returned from a short but sweet 3-day bike trip in California. I'm a big proponent of inaugurating your "season" with a big event of some kind. Each year I plan a spring bike trip with my brother, Jeremy, who lives in Mountain View. It's one of the few times each year I get to see him, and it provides much time on the bike (and at cheap hotels) to catch up.

[Photo: A break along the Big Sur Coast before our big climb. From left: Don, Paul, Fred (me), and Jeremy]

Several years ago, when cycling began to take over my life, I convinced Jeremy to buy a road bike. Fortunately I had some help on the campaign from Jeremy's co-worker and eventual cycling partner, Don. Since then, Jeremy, Don and I (accompanied at times by others) have taken a mini-tour each spring. Each tour is structured essentially the same way. I fly in around noon on day one and we do a short 30-40 mile tune-up ride that afternoon. Days 2 and 3 are harder, with 60-75 miles and more climbing. It's been a great way to start the biking season. To date we've toured Sonoma (CA), Scottsdate/Sedona/Flagstaff (AZ) and now Monterey/Carmel/Big Sur/King City (CA).

This year we were joined by Don's friend Paul, who served as our lead tour guide. Paul rides the route we took a few times each year with his son. In addition to his expert guiding skills Paul is a great conversationalist. I know all three of us would agree we hope Paul can join us for any and all future tours.

Here are a few photos Paul took during the trip (thanks Paul!). I'll update this post soon with a map and additional information about our route.

The Big Sur Coast looking north, toward the Bixby Bridge. The Tour of California crossed this bridge a few weeks earlier.

Enjoying a delicious breakfast at Deetjen's. Try the oatmeal!

A view of one of California's famous 21 missions, San Antonio de Padua, near Jolon, CA.

Another nice coastal view, compliments of Paul (a fine photographer).