Stacy T. Sims

It's hard to rate a book like this before trying some of the advice, but it's probably 3.5 stars rounded up. Once again, like her previous book, it is hard to know how much to apply as I am not an elite athlete. My main goal was to figure out how to do HIIT and sprinting without getting hurt and her main hints are hydration and protein, which I have been paying attention to since reading her previous book, but I find it repulsive to eat that much protein which makes me feel like that is not what my body wants.… (altro)

While a lot of the info in this book wasn't new to me, it is a really good compilation. I was mainly reading to glean some info on how to keep my distance running kid injury free, though was pleasantly surprised in regards to the info for older woman like myself.

The trick is to pick out what info/advice actually applies to what scenarios. Primarily recognizing that this is a book for female athlete's who train a lot, and may not have a whole lot to offer for moderate or non-athlete's, especially those looking to lose weight. Some of the recommendations are for training or competitions that last for 3 hours, which aren't really relevant for people who aren't doing that. But the big, overarching theme was that for women who are training a lot, in order to prevent injuries and improve performance, the solution is to eat more and to eat often, which yes, goes against 99% of nutritional advice out there which presumes that everyone is lazy and gluttonous.

What I appreciated most was when the author spoke of your mood as being a good indicator of whether you are getting enough food. I think this is a hugely underrated phenomenon. Caloric restriction, perceived or real, makes you feel blah, depressed, and lack motivation.

I do have a few quibbles: Though the general theme was to eat more, the sample food logs were short on what the prescribed amounts were. ie one section was about an athlete who improved (and "got lean") when eating 1000 more calories a day, but when I punched in the menu to a nutrition calculator it was 400 calories short of the minimum caloric range (and 1200 calories short of the max) it was prescribing. :/

I was happy to see the part about saturated fat not being bad and that there is some evidence stearic acid(aka beef/butter/dairy fat) is beneficial (I have personally had some good success with swapping vegetable oils for butter), but all the menu recommendations had low or non-fat dairy. One, low/non fat dairy is gross and two the stearic acid in it is beneficial especially for slow-release energy delivery, and the full-fat dairy would make up the caloric difference issue mentioned above. These discrepancies just demonstrate how insidious the low fat/low cal mindset is. :/

My other quibble was the contradictory recommendation of asprin for various ailments vs the recommendation to avoid NSAIDs due to damaging gut balance was also confusing.… (altro)