Scotch as a Diet Hack
bradpilon.com
bradpilon.com
As to the actual topic, I'm not sure that its so much that people think scotch has a higher alcohol content, I've always imagined it had more to do with seeming somewhat classier and in control. Sipping a scotch while your companions pound beers establishes you (perhaps on a subconscious level) as the leader of the group whose choices aren't really up for discussion.
Of course I rather like scotch so maybe I'm biased.
I'd take the 10lbs of muscle, because most people wouldn't believe how much better it makes you feel doing regular things. I'm seriously like a pack-mule coming out of a supermarket. I don't struggle like I used to, which means I don't get tired like I used to.
Sure it would be great to be lean, but my body type would never allow it, it would be unhealthy.
In the end if you have very little muscle, regardless of weight, you should add it. It will help you lose fat (ie ripping muscles speeds up your metabolism - yes, but most importantly the burn effect lasts much, much longer than an equivalent amount of endurance work). Also you'll have more energy to do more activities allowing you to lose more fat.
To take the argument to an absurd extreme, the fastest way to lose weight would be to cut off your leg.
Obviously "losing weight" is really a euphemism for "losing fat."
The only time I'd have taken the additional weight is when I was playing rugby, and then mostly because I couldn't really afford much food. I was 20, 65kg and worked really hard to try and get to 70kg. Being hit hurt when I was that light (ok, it hurt at 70kg too, but at least then the other guy noticed me when he ran over me)
I think anyone into endurance sports would take the weight loss too (based on the running & cycling I've done).
Thus, at the elite level, one expects superior performance from smaller athletes in aerobic events where power requirements are approximately proportional to body mass--such as distance running and uphill cycling. (Technically, the power requirement scales more closely to mass, i.e. M0.76-M0.79 than does the power supply, M0.67; Swain, 1994). It is not surprising that the pre-eminent climber of the 1990s, Marco Pantani, is one of the smallest men in the peloton at only 55 kg. Anything that can be done to reduce the weight of a cyclist and bicycle, without compromising the cyclist's aerobic power, will improve hill-climbing performance.
And of course sports performance is not the only criterion for choosing +5lbs muscle vs -5lbs fat ;)
PS I am a Marathon runner and I'd take the muscle... And have you seen the quads on a serious cyclist?
Quads, yes, but have you seen the rest of the body?
WRT runnimg, generally speaking (elite) marathon runners have much higher ratios of slow-twitch muscle than average. That means they will have lean bodies, without the peak strength or muscle mass of a fast-twitch heavy athlete like a sprinter.
Take a look at http://www.letsrun.com/2010/heightweight0504.php. The entire running world was shocked when Solinsky broke 27 minutes (for a 10 km). He's 6'1", and 160lbs - obviously still what most people would consider skinny, but way, way heavy compared to most distance runners.
(You might have good reasons to want more muscle - I'm just pointing out that it's unusual for a distance athlete)
In my experience running is harder on your entire body, cycling just on legs and lungs.
Obviously a Marathon runner wouldn't be interested in adding 100lbs of muscle the way a bodybuilder would.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fabian_Cancellara_-_Tour_O...
Form, effecency, and power are important for both sports. However, cyclists focus more on power output.
Relative to the average American they do have similar thin and muscular body types. And, I think it's easy to underestimate how strong these people are because they have so much less fat than the average person. But, as you say the relative cost of drag for increased body size helps support a more bulky cyclist.
In my personal experience with cycling and running I'd say that carrying 1kg of fat running is a smaller disadvantage than carrying 1kg of fat cycling in mountain terrain. This is reversed when you consider cycling on flat terrain.
I think it's a combination of malnutrition, chronic dehydration and impact on metabolism.
"Mach dein eigenes Ding, dann klappts auch mit der Nachbarin." - German for "Do your own thing and it will work out with the neighbours girl."
Or that you're a pretentious rich kid.
Alcohol causes inflammation, it's not an anti-inflammatory in any way. Maybe the author was confused because both alcohol and aspirin reduce your risks of heart attacks, and the latter is an NSAID. But taking alcohol if you have inflammatory problems is an extremely bad idea.
Perhaps worth saying as well, please do not buy a nice whiskey, and ask for coke mixed in. If you tried that in Scotland or Ireland, they would at best refuse you.
The "ppm", in the Scotch context, is for the amount of peat phenols, which is essentially a peatiness metric, and it is recently a competition metric, for some reason, between at least a few distillers ( http://blog.thewhiskyexchange.com/2009/03/bruichladdich-octo... as an example article but you can just google scotch ppm and get a ton of articles ).
I haven't had the Octomore but the Supernova is not that great in my opinion. It was interesting to taste a Scotch intentionally that peaty, but I'd consider it more of a novelty than a great taste improvement. That said taste is an amazing thing, so it might be precisely your cup of tea.
In terms of enjoyable smokiness I'm with you on the Ardberg, but in terms of the crazy +peatiness competition in Scotches, it isn't the winner.
But my absolute favorite is Port Charlotte, which is produced by Bruichladdich. (I'm not enough of a connoiseur to appreciate the differences among PC 5, 6 and 7.) It's the most intense and flavorful scotch I've ever had, but not very rough. Pretty smoky too. Unfortunately it's kind of expensive and kind of hard to find.
As a condition of this award, we agree to pay a yearly ground rent in the sum of one dram of Laphroaig, to be claimed in person at the distillery. You’ll understand we’re not offering heritable ownership or any right to cut peat, farm sheep or extract minerals from the plot - far better to take up your right to a warming measure of Laphroaig.
Upon the Leaseholder’s arrival at Laphroaig we undertake to provide a map, with adequate directions for locating the PLOT, and suitable protective clothing against Islay’s rugged weather and eccentric wildlife.
I've only used it to put infuse some smokey herbal flavor in cooking, its way too smokey for me.
Obviously you could just have a water
This is more about hacking other people than it is about diet. Managing other people's impressions of you without having to be upfront about what you're doing.
When I don't want to eat a lot, I set up barriers. I have literally no food in my apartment. 0. I am a former fat person, who has gotten into shape purely by avoiding the need for willpower. I like this hack - I'll try it this weekend.
I had some Blue label on Saturday. Oh my, so so lovely...
I'm not attacking you, and I apologise if this has come across this way, but really, it's made in a factory in Glasgow, not the original Kilmarnock distillery and Blue Label is ridiculously overpriced for what it is. There are so many other beautiful Scotches out there, it's a sin to eschew them in favour of lining Diageo's pockets.
I have noticed my gut has receded slightly since attending these events because I haven't been drinking as much beer, yet still socialising just as much. 'Tis a good hack I say.
The only problem with giving in to vices like these is giving yourself an excuse to drink. Thankfully, I'm pretty relaxed with alcohol and often don't drink anything at all for weeks or even a few months on end, but you still have to be careful that it doesn't become a daily ritual.