Skip to main content

The pithy title is a free trans­la­ti­on of a quo­te by Juli­us Cae­sar. More than 2000 years ago peo­p­le alre­a­dy knew how important our ener­gy inta­ke is for a strong per­for­mance. Hence, I want to sum­ma­ri­ze in the last part of the small blog series the most important points and offer somefood for thought.

  • Our meta­bo­lism has a rela­tively low effi­ci­en­cy – only about 25% of the con­su­med calo­ries can be tur­ned into mecha­ni­cal work. We need the rest to digest food, for «main­ten­an­ce work» and to keep the body nice and warm at around 36°C.
  • 80% of the ath­le­tes I con­sult unde­re­sti­ma­te their ener­gy needs and have breakth­rough expe­ri­en­ces upon incre­asing their intake.
  • A posi­ti­ve ener­gy balan­ce results in an increase in body mass.
    Atten­ti­on: if you want to build up mus­cles, you also need an ener­gy sur­plus! Ener­gy sur­plus does not auto­ma­ti­cal­ly mean that you get chub­by immediately.
  • A nega­ti­ve ener­gy balan­ce results in a reduc­tion of body mass.
    Atten­ti­on: valuable mus­cu­la­tu­re (and thus per­for­mance!) is often lost here. If you want to redu­ce body fat in a tar­ge­ted way, you have to coor­di­na­te ener­gy inta­ke, nut­ri­ent mix and trai­ning well.
  • A con­stant body weight with con­stant per­for­mance is a good indi­ca­tor for a balan­ced ener­gy inta­ke. If the weight is con­stant, but despi­te good trai­ning the­re is hard­ly any impro­ve­ment in per­for­mance, ener­gy defi­ci­en­cy could be a reason.
  • A long-term ener­gy defi­cit harms the body. First, the basic meta­bo­lic rate drops (also due to decre­asing mus­cle mass), then the­re are dis­tur­ban­ces of vital pro­ces­ses in our body with serious long-term con­se­quen­ces (see part 3, RED‑S).
  • In eli­te sports it may be appro­pria­te to cut body weight radi­cal­ly befo­re a peak com­pe­ti­ti­on. After­wards, howe­ver, a nor­ma­liza­ti­on should take place – in other words: extre­me com­pe­ti­ti­on weight must not beco­me a per­ma­nent condition!
  • As for the long-shot and all the lei­su­re ath­le­tes a reasonable ener­gy inta­ke and sus­tainable opti­miza­ti­on of weight & body com­po­si­ti­on are, hands down, not only bet­ter for your health, but also bet­ter for your performance.

Food for thought

The ener­gy expen­dit­u­re you read on your fit­ness watch is as accu­ra­te as a tabloid’s horo­scope. The only way to make a pre­cise mea­su­re­ment of the work per­for­med is with a power-mea­sur­e­ing sys­tem (cycling, rowing, run­ning etc.).

Recent­ly, calo­ry- or macro track­ing has beco­me popu­lar. Meals and work­outs are ente­red into an app that auto­ma­ti­cal­ly ana­ly­ses ener­gy balan­ce and macro­nu­tri­ent dis­tri­bu­ti­on (car­bo­hy­dra­tes, pro­te­in, fat). While the accu­ra­cy of ana­ly­sis can be debata­ble, the­re is no deny­ing that such beha­vi­or leads to dis­or­de­red eating over time. I the­r­e­fo­re stron­gly advi­se against it.

Star­va­ti­on is never a reci­pe for suc­cess. If you want to opti­mi­ze your body and your diet to beco­me strin­ger, you should do it thoughtful­ly and not with a sled­ge­ham­mer. This does not neces­s­a­ri­ly mean that you have to hire a per­so­nal trai­ner a/​o nut­ri­tio­nist, but at least a high degree of com­mon sense.

Leave a Reply

Close Menu

Dani Hof­stet­ter –
Per­for­mance Nutrition
Mas­ter of Food Sci­ence ETH,
Nut­ri­tio­nist and Long distance tri­ath­lon world champion