<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Cycling Nutrition 101: Part 3</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.roadcycler.com/2006/09/cycling-nutrition-101-part-3/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.roadcycler.com/2006/09/cycling-nutrition-101-part-3/</link>
	<description>Cycling News, Gear, Nutrition and More...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 Jun 2010 13:28:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mathamagician</title>
		<link>http://www.roadcycler.com/2006/09/cycling-nutrition-101-part-3/comment-page-1/#comment-13319</link>
		<dc:creator>Mathamagician</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 04:01:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.roadcycler.com/2006/09/cycling-nutrition-101-part-3/#comment-13319</guid>
		<description>Is your calculation for protein correct? Going by your example, if you take your weight and mutiply by any of those conversion factors you would get varying results based on if you used Pounds or Kgs as the unit. So according to your example of 0.9 x 160, you get 144 grams of protein. Assuming this is pounds, the kg conversion is around 72.5kg or around 65grams of protein. This is much more realistic than 144 grams. I can&#039;t understand how you can swap between pounds and grams, one is imperial and the other is metric. Totaly smashes your creditablity bro.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is your calculation for protein correct? Going by your example, if you take your weight and mutiply by any of those conversion factors you would get varying results based on if you used Pounds or Kgs as the unit. So according to your example of 0.9 x 160, you get 144 grams of protein. Assuming this is pounds, the kg conversion is around 72.5kg or around 65grams of protein. This is much more realistic than 144 grams. I can&#8217;t understand how you can swap between pounds and grams, one is imperial and the other is metric. Totaly smashes your creditablity bro.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cycling Nutrition 101: Part 4 - RoadCycler.com</title>
		<link>http://www.roadcycler.com/2006/09/cycling-nutrition-101-part-3/comment-page-1/#comment-8439</link>
		<dc:creator>Cycling Nutrition 101: Part 4 - RoadCycler.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2007 23:41:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.roadcycler.com/2006/09/cycling-nutrition-101-part-3/#comment-8439</guid>
		<description>[...] parts 1, 2, and 3 of Cycling Nutrition 101, we dug into the main components of not only cycling nutrition, but [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] parts 1, 2, and 3 of Cycling Nutrition 101, we dug into the main components of not only cycling nutrition, but [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
