Ln the past, athletes were in a pretty daft position when it came to providing themselves with quick energy during exercise. In the 1950s and 1960s, athletes had no choice but to bite into an apple or banana, eat nuts and dates or chocolate. It was not until the race to the moon that scientists began to work on a compact, fast, concentrated form of nutrition, but the findings were reserved for astronauts and kept under lock and key: top secret. It was not until the end of the 1980s that the first energy bars for athletes appeared on the market. In the meantime, the range has grown into a confusing flood of bars, gels, drops, shakes and powders. To get some orientation, we asked an expert from e-bar pioneer Powerbar.
BIKE: Simon, you are a two-time rowing world champion, sports nutritionist and nutrition expert at Powerbar. You should know - how do you define "energy bar"?
Simon Barr: Carbohydrates, proteins and fats - all macronutrients provide energy. But even during gentle physical activity, such as walking, I primarily burn carbohydrates and fats. In other words: for me, an energy bar should provide carbohydrates and/or fats. When it comes to energy during intense exercise, I narrow it down even further and say: energy bar = carbohydrate bar.
In contrast to the protein bar?
That's right. A protein bar is not an energy bar for me, as most protein bars are low in carbohydrates or sugar. So when I'm on my bike and need an energy boost, I definitely don't want to eat a protein bar. Instead? A carbohydrate bar. Whether these are carbohydrates in the form of oats, cereals, potato flakes or sugar, for example - it doesn't really matter.
Humans generally have enough fat reserves
Then I could also eat a Corny nut bar or a Snickers bar.
It does contain a lot of energy in the form of fat, and if you go hiking, for example, that's okay. Because the exertion is quite low when hiking - fat works quite well as fuel. However, you should know that it is generally not necessary to supply the body with fat under stress, as people generally have enough fat reserves.
But a Snickers tastes delicious.
Yes, of course. Fat acts as a flavour carrier. A Snickers has about 500 calories per 100 grams. But that's not just fat, it's also a lot of sugar. However, the energy boost comes from the sugar.
Powerbar offers the "Ride Energy". This bar is reminiscent of Snickers. What's the difference?
The Ride has 10 grams of protein per bar, i.e. 19 grams per 100 grams. That is significantly more than a Snickers. The Ride is a sportier version of the Snickers. However, I would not recommend the Ride during exercise as it contains too much protein. You can eat a bar like this as a snack after exercise. If you go hiking - for me, hiking is always the prime example of sporting activity that is not very intense but burns a lot of energy in the long term - I can also eat a bar like this.
What is the objective when you design an energy bar at Powerbar?
1. high carbohydrate content, low fat, low protein, low fibre. 2. easy to digest, but this happens anyway if the bar contains little protein, fat and fibre. And then of course there are the criteria of flavour, texture, handling and format. But I assume your question is aimed at the composition of the nutritional values.
Protein slows down digestion. You don't need that if you cycle intensively
No, not only that. I remember, for example, that the original Powerbar became so tough when cold that it could pull your teeth out. In contrast, a Clif Bar is pleasant to eat.
The Clif Bar is very similar to our Ride in terms of its nutritional composition. It also contains 10 grams of protein as well as carbohydrates and fat. That's why I would recommend the Clif Bar cannot be described as a classic sports energy bar. The protein content is too high for that - the protein slows down digestion. You don't need that when you're cycling hard up a mountain. I agree with you about the texture. A bar like this must be easy to eat and handle. It's no good if the bar is so sticky that you can't unwrap it, or so hard that you bite your teeth out. But it's also no good if the bar has the perfect texture or the perfect flavour, but too much fat or fibre that it feels like a block of lead in your stomach. So, as is so often the case, you have to find a happy medium.
There are experts and doctors who say that the banana is still unbeaten as an energy bar. Are they talking rubbish?
The banana is difficult. You just have to go to the supermarket and look on the shelf. Bananas vary in colour from light green to black-brown. And depending on the colour, i.e. the degree of ripeness, the composition varies. Light green = a lot of starch that is difficult to digest. Dark = lots of easily digestible carbohydrates or sugar. In other words, a ripe banana may be a real pain in the jersey pocket, but it is a much better sports snack than a hard, green banana.
Carbohydrates are currently being demonised in the media. It is said that they cause blood sugar levels to soar, with many health risks. What is the truth behind this accusation?
It's different whether I sit on the couch and eat a bar of chocolate or supply my body with carbohydrates or sugar in the form of an energy bar during exercise. The so-called blood sugar spikes do not occur during exercise.
Everyone wants to live healthily. What are your dos and don'ts?
My do is: A balanced diet with lots of different unprocessed foods, mainly plant-based, with sufficient protein and healthy fats. Plus an active lifestyle with a combination of endurance and weight training. Don'ts: Too many ready meals, little sleep, little exercise and too much stress.
What else might interest you
>> Are gummy bears good for sports nutrition?
>> Marginal gains in cycling
>> How much caffeine makes you faster on the bike?
Dimitri Lehner
Editor
