Resilient Human

To Eat Organic Or Not

2010-02-17T14:27:00.001-08:00

A recurring question people have for me is whether or not they should eat organic or conventional, or non-organic food, food. There are a lot of variables that we need to consider here, so the question isn't as easy as "yes" or "no."

Here are some factors that influence my decision about eating organic:

-Is it available?

Most of the time, organic produce isn't even available. Even though it's growing at a phenomenal rate, at least before the recession, it's not available to a large extent in most grocery stores, and most products don't even come in organic versions. My local grocery store has organic apples, pears, carrots, spinach, tomatoes, and bananas. So everything else you buy is conventional. There's no point eating organic lettuce with conventional carrots, radishes, and bean sprouts. It's either all organic, or it's not.

-Is it organic throughout the production line?

The production line includes the trip from the farm, to the truck, the warehouse, the cooler in the grocery store, the display, and everybody who handles it. There only has to be one leak in the system for conventional food to contaminate organic. Organic foods are poorly labeled, and most stores aren't very meticulous about contamination. At least Whole Foods has color-coded labels to identify organic and conventional foods, and takes extensive measures to make sure that organic produce isn't contaminated. The shelves and displays are sanitized before organic produce is displayed; organic produce must not be placed below conventional food, and workers change gloves after they have handled conventional produce. But that's only Whole Foods.

-Will I consume the pesticides and chemicals?

The Environmental Working Group has a list of items that you should always eat organic: apples, pears, cherries, kale, lettuce, carrots, grapes, nectarines, celery, and peppers. Other foods such as eggplant, avocados, bananas, tropical fruits, broccoli, tomatoes, and onions are relatively low in pesticides. Even so, if you're concerned about environment and the impact of pesticides and herbicides, then you'll want to eat as much organic as possible. The chemicals they use on bananas are nasty from what hear, but I haven't been to Costa Rica to confirm this. If you're eating meat, then please eat grass-fed, organic meat. Don't eat conventional, cheap meat full of pesticides and antibiotics. It's not worth it. Organic seafood doesn't exist.

-Can you afford it?

Most of the markup on organic produce is actually an emotional premium. That is, grocery stores know that people will pay a lot more for organic if they believe it's healthier for their bodies and the environment. It doesn't cost that much more to be organic, so most of the profit goes to the grocery store, not the farmer. It's a matter of how much it's worth to you: is the risk of consuming pesticides that great? Will it harm you? Will it increase your risk for cancer? Possibly. Pesticides might be one reason why cancer is so prevalent in today's society, but there's no definitive proof. Here's what I say: choose organic when you buy the foods I mentioned above, and then be more liberal with other foods with tough skins.

-Does organic food have more ingredients?

It's not clear. A British report last year sponsored by the Food Standards Agency in the UK analyzed 55 studies and concluded that organic and conventional food has equal amounts of eleven nutrients, including calcium zinc, vitamin c, magnesium and potassium. It did not measure flavonoids or antioxidant content. Other studies have shown that organic foods have more antioxidants and flavonoids than conventional produce. Will it make a difference? Oxidation is what makes you age, so if you want to slow down the aging process, then you'll want as many antioxidants as you can. Of course, you can always take a supplement if you can't find organic produce. If you're an athlete, then get as many antioxidants as you can. In 2008 the Organic Center found that organic foods has more nutrients, and a French study last year concluded that organic produce has more minerals and antioxidants and fewer nitrates. Pesticide levels can fall dramatically just after a few days of eating just organic foods.

Take Home Message

Don't go all over the area getting organic food. If you really want it, go to a natural food store where you'll get as much organic food as possible. Buy the 12 foods called the 'Dirty Dozen' by the Environmental Working Group, but don't worry about the other foods. Don't sacrifice your college education to buy organic. I think organic is better for the environment, and it's probably not healthy to chronically ingest pesticides.

Kevin

Choosing Good Meat

2010-02-16T19:06:00.000-08:00

Meat is usually the main course of the American diet. Notice how we say that someone is a "meat and potatoes" kind of guy. We always call our meals "meat and (insert side dish)." Even though the side dishes provide more nutrients than the meat, those are referred to as the second course. The meat is the main show. As a "flexitarian," this distresses me, but I just have to accept that.

Having watched 'Food Inc.', and having read Fast Food Nation and a couple other books that describe in graphic detail the atrocious methods we use to raise and deliver meat in this country, I can't accept eating meat that doesn't meet certain standards. If you're going to eat meat, then hear are my recommendations.

-Eat seafood. Yes, seafood is meat. Fish are animals too. Sardines, Wild Alaskan salmon, Maine tilapia, mahi mahi, and Gulf shrimp make great choices.

-Free range omega-3 eggs. Eggland's Best makes the best eggs. They're usually brown and they're only $3.50 per box. That's a lot of protein for $3.50, folks.

-Look for meat that meets the USDA organic label. This means the animals have been raised with pesticides, hormones, antibiotics or grains with GMOs. Get grass-fed meat, as it has a lot more conjugated linoleic acid and omega-3 fatty acids. "Free range" and "cage-free" doesn't mean outdoors. If you're not sure, contact the manufacturer. If they actually use good standards, they'll be more than happy to tell you. If not, they'll avoid you like Tyson chicken.

-For beef, don't worry about saturated fat. It's not that bad. Saturated fat plus sugar will kill you. You need a certain amount of fat, and grass-fed beef is a good way to get it.

-Lamb- these animals need a lot of land. Whether or not they're raised humanely, they're still using a lot of resources.

Pork- Refer to beef.

Venison/deer- buy it from a local hunter. Venison is a very lean but tasty meat. Wild game is the best way to eat meat. Humanely killed and not loaded with corn.

Turkey- get heritage turkeys or go to an organic market. I once ordered a turkey from a local farm in Maryland. It wasn't certified but I called them to make sure their standards met mine. Their standards are so good that kids take tours of the facility!

Chicken Breast- skinless has less fat, but so what? If you like dark meat, then eat it. Just make sure the quality is good. Crappy, skinless chicken is worse than a high-quality, full-fat meat.

Buffalo/Bison- Go to Ted Turner's restaurant.

I hope this helps. Your best bet is to go to Trader Joe's or Whole Foods to get the highest quality of meat. Avoid Tyson, Purdue and Smithfield. If it's cheap, don't eat it. There's a reason it's cheap. And you probably don't want to know what it is.

Kevin

Sweeteners

2010-02-14T18:21:00.000-08:00

I talked about Splenda a few months ago and how too much might not be a good thing. I don't believe Splenda per se is that bad. After all, most sports supplements contain it. And I don't see athletes leaning over and dieing. But too much could clog your liver and maybe even disrupt your metabolism. To date, there isn't much evidence for that, but I would still limit Splenda.

I'm now going to talk about natural sweeteners.

Stevia- my preferred choice. You can get in tablets, in liquid form, or as a powder. I prefer the liquid form and add it to my tea and smoothies. Tablets work best when you're on the road and all the restaurant has is the pink stuff. South Americans have been using this sweetener for years. Stevia arrived in the US not too long ago, and until last year it was called a "dietary supplement." No longer. Now it's being used in many products such as soda and candy. Even though stevia is non-glycemic, that is, it doesn't raise blood sugar, it might trigger an insulin response because the brain senses that it is sweet. There is no definitive proof of this, and the long use of this sweetener attests to its safety.

Lo han- this is extract of a Chinese fruit. 250x sweeter than sugar.

Erythritol- tastes similar to sugar but is usually combined with other sweeteners.

Agave- the nectar of the desert plant in Mexico, it has a lower glycemic-index than honey because of its high fructose content. Limit yourself to one tablespoon. It's not calorie-free.

Barley malt syrup- the maltose in this sweetener doesn't raise insulin levels. Works well in baking or cooking.

Brown rice syrup- cultured cooked rice and enzymes converts sugar to maltose. Haven't seen too much. Not a lot of feedback here.

Purevia/Truvia- Pepsi makes the former while Coca Cola makes the latter. They're actually hybrids of the purified extract of stevia, or rebaudioside A, and erythritol, a sugar alcohol. One study showed that rebiana caused mutations, but the amounts were extraordinarily large. But the Joint Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations/World Helath Organization Expert Committee on Food Additives declared it safe as a sweetener. The Japanese have used it since the 1970s with no problem. These sweeteners come in packets, and PureVia can be found in SoBe Life Water, my favorite "sports drink."

Aspartame/saccharin- the evidence is mixed here. I like to splurge on Diet Cherry Coke once in awhile. Some lab tests have shown that these sweeteners can cause cancer in rats. To be safe, limit it.

Kevin

The Bone Diet

2010-02-14T18:14:00.001-08:00

I used to work with a client who had osteopenia, a precursor to osteoporosis. She asked me for my advice on building healthy bones. Of course, the best way to do that is with weight-bearing exercise. That's why she came to me.

Diet is another good way to build strong bones, but medications such as Fosamax Boniva probably aren't. Users report everything from bone and join pain, destruction of the jaw bone, esophageal reflux, and spontaneous fracture of the bone. If you thought the brakes on a Toyota were dangerous, then you haven't been taking these drugs.

Fortunately she wasn't taking these medications. Instead, she was talking 1,000 IU of vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol). I told her to get at least 2000 IU. I take 4000 IU per day, but I'll take less during the summer when there's more sunlight.

If you're going to get calcium in your diet, then skip the dairy. Dairy can actually leach calcium from your bones. It's no wonder that this country has one of the highest rates of osteoporosis. Most people in this world lack the enzyme to digest milk so clearly it's not an essential food. If you're trying to avoid dairy, then watch out for whey and casein, two cow-milk proteins. If you have to eat dairy, then get organic and make sure the quality is good. Plant-based milks are fortified with calcium: soy milk, rice, oat

If you're worried about osteoporosis, get 1,200 mg of calcium daily. Good sources of calcium include chard, spinach, broccoli, beans, figs, edamame, and almonds.

What's not known is that vitamin K is also important. It increases bone density and reduces the risk of fracture. I recommend supplementing with 50-100 mcg of k2. You can also get k in miso, a fermented source of soy.

Like always, avoid processed foods, trans fats, and high amounts of meat. Meat contains arachidonic acid, a fatty acid that's inflammatory. Exercise to strengthen bones. Take an antioxidant supplement to reduce COX-2, a enzyme that's a major source of inflammation. Like I said in my post about spices, add tumeric and ginger to your diet, as they have anti-inflammatory effects. Of course, take your fish oil to reduce inflammation.

A good combination of exercise, a clean diet, fish oil, no unnecessary medications, and supplements will manage the pain of osteoarthritis.

Keep those bones strong, especially if you don't walk or run a lot.

Kevin

The Immunity Diet

2010-02-12T17:34:00.000-08:00

Have you been getting sick recently? It might be because you touched your face. It might be because you take public transportation, or you share keyboards, or you're locker rooms a lot, or you work with clients a lot. There are billions of bacteria in your body and you can't avoid it. Even wearing white gloves like Michael Jackson won't protect you completely.

One of my colleagues the other day asked me to get him some echinacea oil because he said it helped prevent and treat his colds during the winter. The reviews on echinacea is mixed, but I started to investigate other ways to boost your immunity.

Cortisol is a hormone that's released when we experience large amounts of stress. Cortisol is no good. With all things equal it can add body fat, without changing your diet or exercise. It's that powerful. How do you combat it? Get your finances straight. Find a job you like. Hang out with people who support you. In fact, the new study of psychoneuroimmunology shows that loving relationships can boost immunity and lower cortisol. So if you're a loner, go to happy hour once in awhile. Stress also exhausts your kidneys, where our adrenal glands are. Adrenal glands help us adapt to change and if they're not working properly, then you'll be more susceptible to colds and other illnesses.

Have plenty of joy in your life. Read scripture. Turn off the news. Spend time with friends and family. Don't miss opportunities to have good times with people. If that means going to a restaurant, then go.

Vitamin C (cleverly called emergency-C at Trader Joe's). Stress depletes vitamin C, which helps your immune system fight off pathogens. If you eat a lot of fruits and vegetables, you probably get enough. 1000 mg is enough. Your multivitamin should provide plenty. Don't fall for megadoses. They dehydrate you and cause diarrhea.

Like Vitamin C, Zinc helps your lymphocytes fight infection. Zinc has the added benefit of cutting the length of colds. Aim for 15 mg per day, and up to 50 mg every when you're sick. Good sources include seafood and meat, but if you're vegetarian, take a supplement.

Vitamin A, E, D- You should always supplement with vitamin D. Aim for 4000 mg per day. You can usually get enough vitamin A through your MV and plenty of fruits and vegetables. You can supplement while you're sick with 20,000 IUs. Vitamin E is usually found in nuts, but you can also supplement.

Coconut oil- It seems researchers are finding more and more reasons to eat coconut oil. I still don't eat it, as I usually don't cook much. But coconut has lauric acid, a type of saturated fat, which is antimicrobial.

Other supplements- AHCC is a mushroom plenty that aids the immune system. Olive leaf extract boosts the immune system and helps fight infections. Elderberry, like zinc, reduces the length of the flu.

Looking forward to spring,

Kevin

The Libido Diet

2010-02-10T08:27:00.000-08:00

The popularity of Viagra, Cialis, and Extenz indicates that erectile dysfunction and sexual performance is a primary concern among men. The elusive quest for foods, herbs, and spices that act as aphrodisiac is as old as civilization. ED affects 30 million American men. Even ladies suffer from poor sexual performance. The Journal of the American Medical Association reports that 43 million report sexual dis-satisfaction.

There are physical and mental reasons why you might have a flagging libido. Mental reasons include too much stress, a low-calorie diet, anger, anxiety, and even financial problems. These reasons, combined with poor diet, can really zap your energy and sexual performance.

I'm here to talk about the physical or diet reasons. If you don't work out or you're pretty sedentary, you're not going to have much of a sex life for a couple reasons. First, you're not going to be very attractive. You're not going to have a lot of energy, and the opposite sex isn't going to be inclined to come to you. You might be able to sweet talk them, but a good body is going to help. But exercise also boosts circulation. Good circulation can improve mental health, and clean out all your organs, including your reproductive organs. exercise raises levels of chemicals in the brain that make you more lustful.

So if you're not working out, start. If you have anxiety, worry, and too much stress in life, fix that. Eliminate as much as possible. But assuming your problem is mental, then you might want to include some of the following foods.

Almonds and avocados contain fatty acids that improve brain health. Remember, good mental health is important for a good sexual life.

Celery- contains androsterone, a hormone that can attract women

Capsaicin- not a food, but a compound found in chili peppers. They make chili peppers hot

Chocolate- raises level of chemicals that make you feel in love

Coconut- the scent of coconut can actually arouse men and women

Oysters- the mineral zinc helps improve sexual functioning

Figs- amino acids enhance performance

Lavender- the scent in candles is a sexual stimulate

Licorice candy- if you want to turn on female, give her a couple pieces of candy. Don't get Twizzlers, they contain a lot of junk. Get natural licorice at Whole Foods.

Nutmeg- the spice found in Indian food has been used to boost desire for centuries

Pumpkin Pie- just the aroma can arouse sexual desire

Popcorn- its aroma makes men want to have sex

Finally, there is one supplement that might help. L-arginine, an amino acid, can help boost circulation. But before buying a supplement, or a prescription medication, I recommend you eat these natural foods, take care of your stress, and move a lot. You should eat these foods and work out anyway. So better sexual performance might be one more reason to find time to exercise.

Kevin

25 Ways to Make Football Better

2010-02-08T19:07:00.000-08:00

Last Sunday it was 6:00 before I realized that football was on. I had totally forgotten. I used to be a big football fan through high school. Then I slowly drifted away. The most football I’ve watched since then is the first season of Playmakers and the movie Any Given Sunday, both negative portrayals of football.

I was thinking about why I don’t watch football anymore. I’m sick of pass interference, onsides kicks, instant replay, strict rules on being out of bounds, commercials, and the constant down time. Instead of naming this post “25 Reasons Football Sucks,” I’d rather make it positive and call it “25 Ways to Improve Football.”

Since 1970 football has been America’s pastime, despite everything George Will says about baseball. Baseball doesn’t have the allure it used to, and football is without a doubt a much bigger draw than baseball. More kids watch it, and nobody talks about baseball on Monday mornings like they do football.

I like many things about America, but I don’t love everything. One is our fascination and obsession with a truly stupid sport. It doesn’t have to be stupid. The sport could implement my rules and make it a great national pastime. But until profits and popularity decline, it won’t happen. It boggles me how we could enjoy a sport like this, which is really a corrupt and slow version of another great sport, rugby.

Here are my 25 recommendations for Roger Goodell and the 32 owners of football.

Get rid of instant replay. There are enough delays and pauses in the game, so why add another one? Save instant replay for the playoffs when calls are critical. Baseball has no instant replay, and neither should football. Have faith in the refs.

Why do refs have to announce the call to the entire stadium? They should make a signal and penalize the team.

Allow false starts.

Have a staggered schedule. Start games at 1:00, 2:00, 3:00, 4:00 and 8:00 on Sundays. Have on game on Thursday, and another on Saturday.

Decrease the play clock from 40 to 30 seconds. These guys should sprint to the line of scrimmage.

Ban running plays inside the 10

Ban field goals in overtime

Allow each team to have possession in overtime

Be more liberal about being out of bounds. How many games have been delayed because refs can’t determine whether or not a receiver was 2/10s of an inch out of bounds? Does it matter?

Ban on-sides kicks.

Quarterbacks shouldn’t be allowed to spike the ball at the end of the game to kill the clock.

Get rid of the two-minute warning. This is another excuse for a commercial break.

Get rid of commercial breaks between the kickoff and the first play from the line of scrimmage.

Get rid of special teams. The kicking team should use its defensive unit. The receiving team should use its offensive unit.

Get rid of the extra point. A field goal is a field goal.

Allow pass interference. Can anyone actually define pass interference? Isn’t part of the game blocking the pass?

Make two preseason games regular season games.

Get rid of bye weeks. Our troops abroad don’t get a bye week, neither should pampered football players.

Allowing holding, interference, and any other “penalty” that requires physical contact.

Ban players above 300 pounds.

Get rid of salary caps. Most of the revenue in football comes from television. There are no “big markets” and “small markets.” As long as each stadium is filled to capacity, there’s no difference between Cincinnati and Chicago.

Combine the position of fullback and running back

Change the season from September-January to March –July. The Super Bowl could be anywhere

Increase the length of each quarter to 20:00 and don’t stop the clock except for an occasional commercial break.

Allow quarterbacks to pass beyond the line of scrimmage. The quarterback rarely runs past this line anyway so why not let him pass?

If you think about it, soccer and rugby are far more logical games. It’s not a matter of running down the clock. Possession constantly changes. There are no penalties. There are no stoppages in play. When play goes out of bounds, the game quickly resumes. The goal in soccer is to put the ball into the net. The goal of rugby is to run past the end zone. Both those sports can easily be played by non-professionals. Both require far less equipment. Rugby is physically brutal, but soccer is not.

Football (which should be called passball) should do everything to emulate those two sports, which are far more popular on a global scale than football. People around the world watch the Super Bowl, but not regular season games.

There’s my prescription for a better form of football. Football’s popularity is due more to the successful marketing of the NFL than the nature of the sport, which, as you can see, is silly.

Kevin

Wobbly Boards and Other Contraptions

2010-02-07T12:32:00.000-08:00

One of the latest trends in the fitness industry is unstable surface training. Not too long ago I mentioned that walking/running sideways in the frontal plane was another trend that was catching on the industry. I concluded there was merit behind that method of training. Today we move from the cardio area to the "functional" fitness area of the gym. And instead of discussing a particular way to train, I'd like to talk about equipment: unstable surfaces.

There are several varieties of unstable surfaces: Airex pads, Reebok Boards, and Bosu balls. Bosu balls should be called semi-balls, because they have a flat base and a rounded top. Walk into any gym today and you'll see exercisers standing on one of these apparatuses. Even people working with trainers use these quite frequently.

I keep wondering whether or not these are beneficial, but first, we need to get examine the purported purpose of these wobbly boards. Many people will say because it's fun, or because it looks cool, or because everybody else is doing it (training incest, a topic for another article). These are not good reasons to do it.

A good reason might be because it promotes "balance." Let's define the difference between balance stability. Balance is maintaining your weight equally over a center of gravity. Stability refers to the ability to remain in a stable position, or in a static position. You can remain in a certain position despite exterior forces. I doubt most people understand the subtle distinctions between these two.

Another line of thinking is that if you can stay on your two feet on an unstable surface, then surely you'll become that much more resistant on stable surface. Good thinking, but I haven't seen much evidence for this.

Even if these wobbly boards did promote balance and stability, most people cannot manage their own body weight with one foot. So instead of using some expensive, fancy piece of equipment to increase your balance, why don't you make a more logical progression to your exercise and do it on one foot. It makes no sense to stand on a Bosu ball if you can't manage your body weight on one foot on a stable surface.

Also ask yourself why you need to improve your balance. If you're reaching old age and you're worried about falling over, then maybe you need to work on your balance to avoid costly and dangerous spills. Even then, Bosu balls and Airex pads might be overkill. If you're a skier or snowboarder, then you might need some additional balance work.

But I don't see how endurance athletes, strength athletes, hockey players, or basketball players would really benefit. How often are your ever on an unstable surface? How functional is that? If you're a hockey player, and a 200-pound defenseman creams you, you're going to fall down. It makes much more sense to assume a proper stance before a hit, work on your agility, and know how to prepare for a hit.

I also see a lot of stupid stuff on unstable surfaces. I see people doing all your traditional exercises (curls, tricep extension, squats, deadlifts) on Bosu balls. For the life of me, I cannot understand why. All this does is compromise the amount your can lift. As Brett Jones, Kettlebell expert, said in his interview with Mike Robertson, standing on a BOSU ball with five-pound dumbbells is not strength training! If you can normally press 100 pounds, you're not going to press that on an Airex pad. So you've compromised your strength, and you gain nothing by standing on the unstable surface.

What we're looking at here is a case of training incest. Because it looks cool, and everybody else is doing it, we should do it too. Unfortunately, because training is based on science and not fashion, I don't like "trends" or trendy exercises. Either it's functional or it's not. In this case, doing exercises on the unstable surface is non-functional. It might or might not improve your balance, but it definitely won't make your stronger.

If you're going to use one of these devices, then make sure you can answer these questions:

1. How will this make me a better athlete or stronger person?
2. What are the benefits?
3. How does this fit into my larger plan? Is this a natural progression?
4. Is this exercise based on science?

The one instance where I think it's beneficial to use unstable surfaces is during core training. You can do planks on the stability ball, stability ball roll outs, moguls, hamstring curls with your arms folded against your chest, stability ball push-ups, and even crunches. In fact, doing crunches on a stability ball will actually increase your range of motion. So if you're doing core work, a Swiss, or medicine, ball will actually be a logical way to progress your core training.

As for BOSU balls and other contraptions, skip them. If you don't know how to use or incorporate them, or if you don't know have a specific reason why you should use them, then don't. Want to work on your balance? Stand on one leg and close your eyes. Sometimes it's better to keep things simple.

Kevin

Against the Grain

2010-02-05T19:02:00.001-08:00

As you probably know I'm not a big fan of grains, especially wheat. I don't care whether or not it's "whole grain" or not. Grains are concentrated sources of calories. On an evolutionary timeline, the consumption of grain is new. The Neolithic Revolution occurred only 11,000 years ago. Our bodies still think grains are relatively new.

Grains come in many forms: buckwheat, barley, amaranth, arrowroot, rye, bulgar, durum flour, semolina, teff, Job's Tear, corn, oats, Kamut, millet, spelt, rice, sorghum, etc. The most ubiquitous grain is wheat. Highly subsidized, and highly allergic too. One more reason that you might want to consider eliminating wheat is that it's one of the most common allergens. Gluten/wheat intolerance occurs when the small intestine cannot properly digest gluten, a protein found in wheat. To be clear, gluten intolerance is not the same as Celiac's disease.

It's estimated that 1/1000 people are allergic to wheat, but there's a lot of evidence that indicates that many more people are "closet Celiacs." They are actually suffering the effects of gluten intolerance but don't even know it. Gluten intolerance can lead to digestive disorders, and can damage your adrenal glands. It can also exacerbate other health problems as well: cancer, autoimmune disorders, chronic pain syndromes, and neurological disorders. It is also associated with ADD, epilepsy, osteoporosis, premature birth, and liver diseases.

Gluten-free grains include amaranth, corn, brown rice, and quinoa. Some people with Celiac's disease can tolerate oats, but not all. Beware that many products in the grocery store include hidden sources of gluten. Watch out for hydrolyzed vegetable protein, maltodextrin, flavorings, and dextrin. Common sources include prepackaged meals, soups, and even canned vegetables. Watch out for energy bars. Almost all of those have some form of wheat. Good sources without wheat include Enjoy Life bars, Kind bars, and Clif Bars. Most products nowadays will deliberately indicate whether or not they contains wheat (as well as nuts, soy eggs, and milk).

If you've been have adverse reactions to any grains, then eliminate them now. If you feel that grains "don't agree" with you, then try to find the particular grain that triggers that adverse response. If you're trying to lose fat, then I'd eliminate grains all together. They're concentrated sources of calories. Starches and fat loss are bad combinations! There's a reason why skinny guys who want to gain muscle mass eat a lot of grains. They're concentrated sources of calories. If you do eat grains, only eat them during the first hour after exercise or for breakfast.

Don't believe claims that whole grains have to be part of a healthy diet. They're not very good sources of nutrition, and they're easy to overconsume. They taste awful alone, and I don't think they are necessary for optimal health. As for protein, they contain a little, but if you want protein, eat beans, nuts, and meat. Even as a very active triathlete, I avoid most grains. So even if you are very active, you probably still don't need them.

Kevin

Mind Your Manners

2010-01-31T19:27:00.000-08:00

I've said it before and I'll say it again. How you eat is just as important as how much or what you do. You've probably "inhaled" food once in your life. You ate it so fast you didn't know what you ate. Well, don't do that. Especially if fat loss is your goal. Research consistently shows that those who eat slowly and mindfully lose more fat and maintain their weight more easily than those who eat voraciously.

Eating slowly and focusing on what you eat allows you to feel more fufilled emotionally and mentally. Here are a few tips to help you slow down:

-Use chopsticks. I remember I first started using chopsticks in the Spring of 2006. I've never stopped. It started as a habit, then it became an idosyncracy, and now it's a potent weapon to maintain a low body weight. I remember eating with one my relatives in Texas. When she saw me eating with chopsticks, she said, "you know, that's probably really healthy! I should do that too." She's right. She didn't need to lose fat, but her assessment was correct! Maybe Asians are small and skinny because they never adopted forks. I like it think it's their diet of fish and vegetables.

-Don't watch TV. Even if you're not eating, don't watch TV. But when you are eating, read something. I like to read scripture. It really forces you to slow down. You should read scripture anyway.

-Read Mindless Eatingi Brian Wosniack, a researcher on eating habits at UPenn. Some of his findings are remarkable and halarious. People will eat stale popcorn if given a larger container to eat from. Yes, stale popcorn. Colors, dish sizes, music, the environment, and the number of people around you can affect how much you eat.

-Chew slowly. If you want to take this to extremes, count to 50 before you swallow. Chewing more produces signals of satiety in your brian, especially the hormones leptin, and...

-Another way to eat like the Asians is to eat until you're 80% full. The Okinawans do this. They don't live to 100 for nothing. It takes about 15-20 minutes for signals of satiety to reach t the brain. If you have extra food, save it for tomorrow. Don't waste it. When you are comfortably full, drink something and enjoy the conversation.

If you're trying to lose weight, try to determine not only how much you eat, and what you eat, but also how you eat. Do you eat in the car? Do you eat in the office? Do you notice what you eat? Eating in a rush is an easy way to add empty and junk calories to your diet.

Research shows that when people eat slowly and mindfully, they're less likely to be overfat. Eating mindfully is more satiating and gives you a feeling of content. You'll feel more fufilled emotionally and mentally.

I recommend you eat low-density foods such as soups, salads, and plenty of fruits and vegetables. This is what I call the volumetrics diet. Eat food that takes awhile to eat. Don't eat 400-calorie cookie bars packaged as "energy" or "protein" bars. Screw those. If you feel like you've eaten like a king, you're not going to eat more later. Feel full now and you're less likely to eat a lot later.

Minefields

2010-01-29T18:13:00.000-08:00

There a million reasons not to go to the mall. Impulsive purchasing, ridiculous prices, crowds, babies, parking lots, and noise are among them. I can't remember the last time I went to the mall to get anything. I don't care how nice it is, the advent of the internet and Amazon.com makes it a waste of time. These days they're playgrounds for teenage girls.

From a diet perspective, the mall is a nightmare. It's almost as bad as an amusement park (another place to completely avoid. At least admission to the mall is free). Most malls include a food court or a food zone. Cinnamon rolls have 800 calories. Ms. Field's cookies have 350 calories. Auntie Anne's pretzels have 500-600 calories. Don't even mention Burger King, Arby's, McDonald's or Ruby Tuesday's. Whether your sit down or you eat on the go, avoid mall food. Here's how to get in and get out in the same pant size.

-Going early. Most food vendors aren't ready to serve until the early afternoon. Get to the mall as soon as it opens. Have breakfast beforehand. Have a breakfast shake, a bowl of buckwheat or oats, or even some chicken and brown rice for breakfast. But skip breakfast and eat there. If you just have to eat there, and I don't see why you would, try to sit somewhere that serves decent food. Look for a salad. My local mall has a Cheesecake Factory, which should be called the weight gain factory. As one of the worst food offenders, it does offer good salads and appetizers. Stick with those.

Worst than restaurants are buffets such as Old Country Buffet, Chinese buffets that serve "food" drenched in "sauce", Golden Corral, and other independent restaurants. The food there is never fresh. It sits under lamps for hours upon end. It doesn't look or taste appetizing. But the appeal is that it's free and that you can eat as much as you want. The other appeal is that you don't have to order and wait for the waiter to take your order. Here are my tips for navigating the buffet table:

-Get seconds, but make sure your first plate was a modest portion. Food should not be falling off the plate. Your first plate should be a big salad to fill you up and should leave little room for those white crackers and egg rolls.

-Make most of your food fruits and vegetables, with a little meat and some sprinkled cheese on top. Good choices include all lettuce, radishes, peppers, cucumbers, broccoli, mushrooms, tomatoes, sprouts, avocado, and minestrone (soup). Speaking of soup, don't get cream-based soups. If you do, take a cup, not a bowl.

-Avoid the "glazed" or "marinated" vegetables that look like they are drenched in oil. Vegetables can easily become unhealthy when drenched and bathed in vegetable oils. Olive oil is healthy, but your body only needs a little. Also avoid croutons, ranch dressing, mayonnaise, or any of the heavy dressings.

Offices

After the holidays people bring in their "leftover" treats and desserts so they aren't lying around their house. The theory is, somebody else will eat them. And often, they do. But you shouldn't. Do you really want cookies that are three days old? If you're going to eat a cookie, eat one that was baked 20 minutes ago. Get one that just came out of the oven. If you're going to splurge, go all the way. Most cookies have at least 100 calories per piece. Fudge has 120 calories per ounce. If you feel like having a cookie, wait until you leave. Most of the cookies will be gone, and they won't look nearly as appetizing.

Starbucks

Liquid McDonald's is what I like to call it. Of course, it doesn't have the same reputation as an unhealthy restaurant because the same elitists who want to ban transfat and tax cheeseburgers frequent coffee shops to read their political books and discuss how they can control other people's lives. If you're going to tax junk food, then tax the banana nut bread at 500 calories, or the mochas and eggnogs that have between 500-700 calories. Stick with black coffee, and tell yourself you won't order a pastry or cookie until after you've ordered, sat down, and read the paper. By the time you're ready to leave, you won't have time or the inclination to stand in line again. Better yet, make your own coffee at work. Skip the sugar and replace it with Stevia. Not only is brewing your own coffee cheaper, but it'll save you time.

Use these tips to navigate your minefields.

Kevin

Spicy

2010-01-27T18:14:00.001-08:00

I'm not a food adventurer but I do think we can incorporate other traditions and spices from ethnic cuisine. In other words, I'd like to keep the baby but throw out the bath water: that means keeping spices such cayenne but throwing out the cheese and fattening tortillas. I want to keep the cinnamon but not the cereal. I want to keep turmeric but not the curry sauce. Spices can replace excess salt and fat, and can add pizazz and flavor to your favorite dishes. Here are four spices you ought to include in your Lazy Susan:

Turmeric- here's a reason to like mustard. It contains a compound called curcumin which acts as an antioxidant and is anti-inflammatory. Benefits include: protection against dementia, inflammatory bowel disease, and colon cancer. Turmeric works best in soups, sauces and marinades.

Cinnamon- my personal favorite. This works best with smoothies, oatmeal, cereal, or even fruit. I like to dash it on diced apples. Just don't eat Frosted Flakes with cinnamon! There are actually two types of cinnamon. Ceylon is preferred by naturalists and herbalists. Cassia is usually what you find in the grocery stores. It can reduce inflammation and lower blood glucose levels. Whichever your choose, just use it.

Ginger- Used in China, India, Japan, and the Middle East, this is actually made from an underground stem called rhizome. It relieves nausea, inflammation, and can aids digestion. It's kind of a hassle to use. You have to buy the root and then use a cheese grater. Ginger can also treat colds and coughs. Add it to stews, soups, or even smoothies.

Cayenne- This contains the compound caspsaicin, which makes chili peppers hot. Capsaicin can kill and retard cancel cells in the brain, liver, prostate, and the skin. The best way to use cayenne is in chili and stews. You can even add it to sauces when you cook meat, the subject of my next post.

Kevin

Raw Food Myth

2010-01-27T18:13:00.000-08:00

One trend we've seen in the last ten years is the rise of the raw food movement. The theory, in short, is that cooking food destroys enzymes. This theory is often based more on emotion and ideology than fact or science. In fact, cooking often liberates nutrients from food and makes them more bioavailable. The difference between raw and cooked can be significant.

Tomatoes- I eat stewed tomatoes straight from the can. But now I cook them. Here's why. Cooking provides more lycopene than raw tomatoes. Lycopene helps your heart. Here's the difference in lycopene levels:

One medium tomato: 3.7 mg
Can of sauce: 19.4 mg

Take that, raw tomatoes! Look for tomatoes that include the peel.

Carrots

Boil or steam your carrots. Carrots have carotenoids, which are converted to vitamin A. Boil for about 3-4 minutes to break down the tough fibres. You can tell when your fork easily penetrates the carrots. You can also crush them when juicing them. Carrots also work best with a fat, as vitamin A is fat-soluble. Eat them in a salad with eggs, flaxseed oil, and avocados.

Bell Peppers

Stir fry them with your fajitas. Since you'll be using oil in frying pan, the fat will help absorb vitamin B6 and A. Steaming and roasting them are also good options.

Green Vegetables

These taste nasty when eaten raw, so steaming them or cooking them is mandatory. This separates the calcium from the oxalates. Eat with protein as this will increase the bioavailability of the iron.

Broccoli

Boiling and steaming preserves the antioxidants and glucosinolates, which counteract carcinogens in your body. Steam for three minutes or until the broccoli slightly wilts and turns bright green.

Onions/Garlic

Yes, onions improve heart health. But onions on a Philly cheese steak won't help your heart. The secret to onions is allicin, an enzyme. Add garlic at the very end of the cooking process so you don't destroy allicin. Add onions and garlic to your fajitas, along with bell peppers, some kind of meat, and a source of fat and you have one antioxidative meal.

Kevin

Supplement Review: A, C, E

2010-01-27T18:09:00.001-08:00

There are myths and facts about these vitamins regarding their health effects. Vitamin A and E are fat soluble while VC is water soluble.

Vitamin A can be found in almost all fruits and vegetables, especially carrots, pumpkin, green leafy vegetables, mangos, melons, sweet potatoes, and peppers. Vitamin A is actually a collection of vitamins. Retinol is the most usable form. Cartenoids found in carrots and pumpkin are only converted when the body needs it. Vitamin A is important for immune function, wound healing, and red blood cell development. A deficiency in vitamin A can exacerbate iron deficiency anemia. Too much retinyl palmitate, a preformed vitamin A, can lead to toxicity. That's why the best sources include carrots and colored fruits.

Vitamin E can be found in almonds, avocados, seeds, apples, vegetable oils, and tomatoes. There's no evidence that it lowers prostate cancer risk or cardiovascular risk. Vitamin E scavenges free radicals and acts as an antioxidant. If you're on a low fat diet, aim for 400 IU of tocopherols, fat-soluble alchohols that have vitamin E, and tocotrienols, vitamin E compounds.

Vitamin C is found in most vegetables, peas, citrus fruits, asparagus, cauliflower, lemons, and tropical fruits. It protects cells from free radicals and improves iron absorption. It develop collagen and synthesizes carnitine, an amino acid. Vitamin C boost immunity, and new research shows that a 500 mg supplement could lower your LDL cholesterol by acting as anti-inflammatory.

Take home message: track these vitamins in your diet. Use an online tool such as fitday to track your vitamin intake. I suspect that if you eat a lot of fruits and vegetables, you're probably not deficient in A or C, but you probably don't get enough E.

Kevin

Injured athletes take supplements of these vitamin to facilitate the healing process.

What is Red 40?

2010-01-27T18:07:00.001-08:00

Remember when you were kids and you used to tell your friends that the yellow 5 in your Mountain Dew caused your balls to shrink? I don't mean to be gross, but that's what we used to say. It turns out those color additives aren't so good after all!

Since the 1970s, food additives have been linked with psychological and behavioral disorders. Studies have also linked them to asthma, hives, eczema, and sleep distrubances. They're so bad that even Kraft, Mars, and even McDonald's, not exactly providers of wholesome, unadultured food, don't use them in thier products. Food manufacturers only use them color colorless foods such as soda, sprinkles, ice cream, ice cream and a ton of other processed foods. They don't affect taste, but just makes products look more attractive.

Let's take a look at our roster of offenders:

-Yellow 5 and 6 (no evidence that they shrink gonads but I wouldn't be surprised)
-Red 3 and 40
-Blue 1 and 2
-Green 3
-Orange B

Look for them at the end of a label. If your product has it, reconsider drinking or eating it. This stuff looks like crap to me.

Kevin

Trends of 2009

2010-01-27T18:06:00.001-08:00

I know the new year is six weeks old and most people have forgotten their new year's resolutions to get into shape, but I do want to recap some emerging trends in the fitness industry. Like I've said before, the industry is plagued by fitness incest.

Flexitarianism- a hybrid word from flexible and vegetarian, this refers to a diet that is rich in fruits, vegetables, nuts, grains, and legumes, but also allows a small amount of meat. I think this is where I fall. I eat seafood and eggs, which means I'm not really a "pescatarian," or a seafood vegetarian. Eggs aren't really dairy but they are an animal source. I think flexitarian is much better than say, semi-vegetarian, or plant-based. I hope more people adopt this diet, as it is much better for the environment. Cattle are raised with corn, they shit everywhere, and then they're transported to slaughtering houses and then finally to the supermarket. Richard Manning referred to this as "the oil we eat," in Harper's a few years ago. Refer to Mark Bittman's Food Matters for more details.

Kettlebells- These pieces of metal with a handle attached to them have become very popular in America in the last two years. The Russians have used them for years but the "secret" has only recently come here. I could go on and on about kettlebells, but here's what I think: they're very effective, but they're not absolutely necessary to get into shape or to train for sports. They're just tools. Great tools, but they can be dangerous if you use them incorrectly. And from what I see in most gyms, most people have no idea how to use them. I see rounded backs during swings, and simply atrocious Turkish get-ups. If you want to use them, start light, and at least watch a DVD on how to use them correctly. Focus on proper movement and mechanics before lifting heavier kettlebells.

Kevin

How You Can be the Biggest Loser

2010-01-27T18:05:00.002-08:00

I've never watched The Biggest Loser but I know what the concept is, I know who Jillian Michaels is, and I know what the contestants did to lose massive amounts of weight in a short amount of time.

The show wasn't realistic for a couple reasons. Their diet was strictly controlled. They had someone watching them every day, every hour. They lived in a controlled environment. But there were some lessons you should learn from the show.

First is the power of accountability. The contestants had to eat what the trainers told them. They had to do exactly what they told them. There was not quitting. There was no choice. Social support is very important in achieving any goal, whether it be athletics, weight loss, or establishing a business. Having workout partners makes achieving a goal easier. It shifts attention away from the pain, and it forces you to keep going. Just as overweight friends and family members can predispose your to obesity, friends who share the same goals and aspirations can help you achieve your goal.

Contestants ate very well. They learned how to eat vegetables at every meal, how to eat several meals per day, how to eat a balanced diet, how to eat protein, how to cut out junk food, how to cut out liquid calories, and how to prepare healthy food in a minimal amount of time. Exercise cannot overcome a bad diet, folks. You have to have both. The contestants weren't making gourmet meals, but they were making healthy, simple meals that they could enjoy.

Here's the dark side to the show. The fixed environment was completely unrealistic. Nobody lives in that environment. In the real world we have a million choices to make. Those choices determine our results. The show took out all the thinking and all the temptation.

The contestants also lost extreme amounts of weight. And I thought the claims on magazines that promised four pounds in four days were unrealistic! These people lost 100 pounds in 12 weeks. However, it's important to remember that really fat people have an easier time losing massive amounts of weight. Two pounds per week is not uncommon. Their maintenance diet is so large, usually 3000-4000 calories, that cutting 2000 calories isn't hard. Still, eight pounds per week can only happen in a controlled environment, with massive reduction in calories, and extreme increases in exercise.

Unrealistic exercise. These were completely unconditioned people. They hadn't done any structured exercise in a long time, if ever. Then they started running miles and miles in the sand. These are workouts that Navy SEALS do. Most people have no time or inclination to work out more than an hour per day.

Demonizing food. You should enjoy what you eat. While this show made the contestants eat healthy fare, food became the enemy. It's not the enemy. What you eat and how much can limit your progress, but food per se is not the problem. I think this show taught a bad relationship with food that's hard to reverse.

No emphasis on behavior modification. These contestants weren't taught how to intuitively eat, and how to listen to their bodies. They didn't learn the emotional issues behind their weight gain. These people gained a lot of weight because they had underlying psychological issues, and deeply ingrained bad habits. It's no wonder that when these contestants left the show, they quickly regained the weight. They lost the weight, but not the reason for the initial weight gain. As soon as they returned to the real world, they regained it.

Kevin

Testosterone Lab

2010-01-27T18:05:00.001-08:00

I like talking about testosterone. It's in the name of my business. It's what makes me a man. It's what gives me libido. It's what gives me my voice. So I'm always interested in ways to increase it without drugs. Although I'm still taking a prescribed supplement, I do like to boost it naturally.

Every year men get older and their testosterone levels drop. This explains why their libido starts to lag, their muscles mass deteriorates. This is why learning how it works and how it affects your body is very important. You should also understand remedies and possible treatments.

The hypothalmus is a part of the brain that controls the pituitary gland. The pituitary gland produces luteninizing hormone, a precursor to testosterone. If LH is low, so is testosterone. Testosterone is created in the testes, but low testosterone levels are often not because of a problem in the testes. I can attest to that. A freak lesion on my pituitary gland was the reason that my body stopped producing the hormone at sufficient levels.

Symptoms of low testosterone include low iron levels (anemia), increased body fat, low libido, erectile dysfunction, and depression. If you like lifting weights, you're not going to see impressive gains.

Low testosterone is now called "andropause," similar to "menopause" in women. The effects of andropause are just as important.

To measure your testosterone, go to a lab and have "free testosterone" measured. This type is not bound by transport molecules. Also measure total testosterone. Total testosterone should be between 300-800 nanograms per deciliter and free T should be at least 15 pg/ml. Also measure your LH, prolactin, hematocrit, hemoglobin, bone density, and prostate-specific antigen.

Supplementing is worth considering but there are risks. Too much testosterone is almost like a steroid. It could lead to aggression, and could raise you risk of heart disease. high levels of T could promote hormone-dependent cancers. Get Testim. You don't have to wear a patch all day and absorption is better. You just have to remember to apply one packet per day (bring scissors or a pen to poke a hole in the tube).

I've had mixed success. One month my levels will be above normal, the next month it could be much lower. I can't explain the results. I hardly ever notice the affects of the medicine. I can't tell when I'm taking medication and when I'm not.

Kevin

Statins

2010-01-27T18:04:00.002-08:00

Statins are being prescribed more and more by doctors who consider it a miracle drug for lowering cholesterol. I always recommend you find easier and more simple ways to lower cholesterol and improve your health. I'm not going to write about the myth of cholesterol, but I do want to update you about how diet affects cholesterol and why statins probably aren't your best solution.

The latest JUPTER study that included thousands of patients from across the world showed that statins lowered heart problems by 44% and mortality by 21%. All these people had normal LDL levels but high levels of c-reactive protein. So what was more important here? The cholesterol or the high levels of inflammation? Inflammation is the root of chronic disease, not cholesterol. High cholesterol is a signal or sign that inflammation if high. Cholesterol is just a signal. In the JUPITER study, Crestor, a statin, lowered cardiac events by 50%, from 1.8% to 0.9%! What a difference!

Statins can cause muscle pain, nausea, and liver complications. I'd rather you adopt a diet high in fruits and vegetables. Get plenty of vitamin C, as it can reduce CRP, even in people with high levels. Get at least 1000 mg. Avoid alcohol. Too much alcohol and leave fatty deposits on your arteries, which triggers monocytes to come fight off the deposits. Instead, they stick to the fat deposits and cause blockages.

Kevin

Pressure Cooker

2010-01-27T18:04:00.001-08:00

High blood pressure is associated with heart disease, poor diet, lack of exercise, and type-II diabetes. One third of all adults have high blood pressure, or hypertension. Hypertension is also associated with rising rates of obesity. In other words, it's not good, and you need to lower it. Common remedies include exercise, limiting alcohol, eliminating smoking, and reducing salt intake. I want to share some recent findings that show how other dietary changes can lower blood pressure.

Increase your potassium. To do this, you need more avocados, bananas, chard, lima benas, and sweet potatoes. However, it's hard to reach the recommended 4700 mg per day. I'd definitely supplement with potassium, as most MVs don't even come close to giving you what you need, even if you eat a lot of fruits and vegetables.

If you like chocolate, then here's good news for you. Danish researchers found that Dutch men with the highest consumption of cocoa from food and beverages had the lowest blood pressure and the lowest rates of cardiovascular disease. Flavonoids in chocolate relax arteries. Don't worry about studies that show that chocolate lowers body density. These studies didn't control for crappy diet and milk chocolate. Get Endangered Species chocolate.

Olive leaf extract. I mentioned this in my post about the immunity diet. This has been found to lower blood pressure with suppplementation of 250-500 mg.

Garlic- supplementation of 600-900 mg can reduce blood pressure as much as prescribed beta-blockers

Relax- Good times, music, scripture, comedy, and quiet time can relax your mind and arteries. A recent American Heart Association Study showed that old people with high blood pressure lowered their systolic blood pressure (the top number, by the way), by 6.4% by listening to music.

I haven't tried consuming olive leaf extract with garlic while I work out. It coudn't hurt, but it wouldn't be too palatable!

Kevin

Heat

2010-01-27T18:00:00.002-08:00

As I write this, there are 26 inches of snow on the ground outside. Perhaps that's the inspiration for an article about heat.

There was a great article about surviving brutal heat in the latest issue of Inside Triathlon. It was written by Torbjorn Sindballe, a fantastic cyclist who unfortunately had to retire early due to a congenital heart defect. He was one of the best cyclists in all triathlon. He won the Ironman-distance numerous times, but never captured a championship in Kona. The heat and humidity are what make Kona famous, along with the atmosphere, the Energy Lab, the geography, and the winds. But the heat is what makes and break champions and potential champions. Sindballe described the risk factors of training in the heat, and how to manage them.

Dehydration. When we sweat, we lose fluid. Dehydration can increase core temperature, make us feel lethargic, and increases use of muscle glycogen. Since we can only store several hundred grams of carbohydrates in our body, this isn't good. Glycogen stores some amount of water, but not a lot. Sweat rates range from .5- 2 liters per hour, but absorption rates range from 1.3-1.4 liters per hour. If you sweat more than 1.4 liters per hour, you're in trouble.

Hyponatremia- the opposite of dehydration. Contrary to popular belief, this does not occur due too much water, but the concentration of sodium in the body. Too much water can dilute sodium levels, which can degrade performance, or, worse, even kill you.

Overheating. Interestingly, the latest research on exercise performance shows that in extreme conditions such as Hawaii it is not muscle fatigue or glycogen depletion that causes deactivation of muscle fibers, but core temperature. If the core temperature rises to a certain point, the brain will save the body by deactivating muscle fibers. Heat balance is critical, and it's a huge disadvantage to larger people. Heat can literally be an insurmountable barrier to a personal record in any given event. It's no wonder that running records are set in mild conditions between 5-15 C or 40-60 F. The more extreme the conditions, the less weight you must have to perform at a particular pace. In other words, at any given temperature, a smaller athlete is going to be less affected by heat and humidity. That's great news for me!

Economy- This refers to the distance you cover with a certain amount of energy. This is why technique is so crucial in endurance events. Bad technique means you have to use more energy to cover a certain distance. Optimizing biomechanics and technique will help you manage extreme conditions. You must also do a lot of goal-pace work. Don't try to go faster on race day. By the way, cramps are not the result of electrolyte imbalances. They're the result of poor training, and not training for race-day conditions.

Lipolysis- A fancy word for fat burning. If you can utilize fat more than carbs, and perform for long periods of time with no carbs, then you teach your body to use fat, not carbs. There's little evidence that a high-fat diet can make you burn more fat. Training your body to use fat is what's more important, not the percentage of fat in your diet.

Acclimatization- One of the most interesting points in the article was how important it is to acclimatize. It's like acclimatizing to altitude. At first, your performance suffers. After a week, you feel fine. Heat is the same way. After just one week, time to exhaustion doubles! If you're going to run in a hot climate, then train in a hot climate. Doing some training in the late afternoon. Don't forget the sunscreen. When you acclimatize, you work at a lower heart rate, your metabolic rate decreases and you use more fat, not carbs. Your body releases less sodium in sweat. This is when a heart rate monitor can actually help you. You can monitor your adaptation to extreme environments, and you can make sure you don't cross a critical threshold. Heart rate monitors are a topic for a different post.

Nutrition- Drink water, but also consume some electrolytes, especially sodium. Do not drink Gatorade. Gatorade has a lot more water than sodium, so drinking Gatorade will actually dilute your sodium concentration even more. But you must eat/drink on race day what your ate/drank during your training

Clothing- Wear a sun visor with no protection on the top of the head. You want to protect your eyes and avoid sunburn, but you need to release the heat from your head. While the majority of your heat does not leave from your head (another exercise myth), a good portion of it does. Also consider wearing white clothes, or a wet long-sleeved t-shirt.

That's heat management 101. I also recommend that you not train between 10-2, as this is when UVA rays are most prevalent. Refer to my post on vitamin D for more information about that. But if you do plan to race in a hot environment, then you need to plan some of your workouts for the late afternoon. Heat does not kill. Poor management of heat, improper training, and lack of preparation do.

Kevin

Destroying a Dogma: Don't Eat White Food

2010-01-27T17:53:00.001-08:00

It's common to hear that "white food" is bad for you. Usually white refers to: Wonder Bread, flour, corn starch. But I'm going to go against the grain, again.

Not all white foods are bad. Consider button mushrooms and onions. Mushrooms are good sources of selenium, riboflavin (vitamin B2), pantothenic acid (vitamin B5), copper, niacin (vitamin B3), potassium and phosphorus. Mushrooms also provide protection against Alzheimer's disease and age-related cognitive decline. Crimini and button mushrooms are also great sources of L-ergothioneine, a potent antioxidant.

Onions are another food that comes in a white variety. Onions can lower your blood glucose levels, decrease fasting blood glucose levels, improve glucose tolerance, lower insulin levels, and decrease total cholesterol and triglyceride levels, while increasing good HDL-cholesterol levels. Onions also benefit your heart, and can reduce your risk of heart disease by lowering levels of homocysteine levels. Regular onion consumption is also associated with decreased risk of colon, pancreatic, ovarian cancer, esophageal, laryngeal, and prostate cancer. If you're not eating onions, then you better start now! If you don't like onions, like my father, then try eating apples. Apples have a polyphenol called quercitin, an anti-inflammatory compound.

Cauliflower is a white cruciferous vegetable that has a nice crunch and a versatile vegetable. Cauliflower, as well as kale and broccoli, contain both glucosinolates and thiocyanates, which help the liver neutralize toxins. Cauliflower is packed with vitamin K, and vitamin C, and is also a great source of phytonutrients. Cruciferous vegetables also provide protection against prostate cancer, and rheumatoid arthritis.

Chicken- not all good white foods come from plants. Chicken is one of the best sources of protein. Since it's an animal source it contains all 20 essential amino acids, the basic component of proteins. Chicken is a terrific source of tryptophan, niacin, selenium, vitamin B6, and phosphorus. White chicken is almost fat free. Dark chicken contains the same nutrients, but has a little more fat, and because it contains more myoglobin, the hemoglobin of muscles.

The last white food I'd like to mention is my personal favorite food, bananas. First brought to the United States after the Civil War, this has become America's favorite fruit ever since, and for good reason. Bananas are good sources of potassium (500 mg). Bananas can lower blood pressure and prevent atherosclerosis. Potassium is an important electrolyte, which regulate heart function and fluid balance in the body. Bananas promote bone health, and are even sources of prebiotics, necessary fuel for probiotics, which promote proper intestinal health and digestion.

Chicken

So keep eating white food. Wonder Bread, white rice, starch and flour are still out, but not these foods.

Kevin

Weight Loss Rules

2010-01-27T17:19:00.000-08:00

The first step in helping someone lose fat is changing what they eat. The second step is how they eat. I firmly believe that how you eat is as important as what you eat and how much you eat. So assuming the quality of your food is high and you're eating within your limits, then , then here are some ideas for you to help you lose fat.

Make sure you adhere to these rules most of the time. Don't get too excited, emotional, or distressed if you break them some of the time. But if you want to get leaner, then you have to eat like a lean man. If these habits seem alien to you, remember it takes about three-four weeks to develop and ingrain a new habit. Start with one at a time.

-Eating several meals throughout the day. It might seem hard, but you don't have to have a gourmet meal every time you eat. If you're like me, and you have no place to eat, and no appliances at work, then you'll have to play ahead. Healthy and convenient foods will be your weapon. I recommend Clif Nectar bar, Kind Bars, nuts, fresh fruit, baby carrots, chopped vegetables, jerky, and maybe a small salad. You can still eat these on the run. Certainly at some point during the day, you'll be able to slow down and have something substantial. On your days off, when you're at home, then you have no excuse to have four-five healthy meals throughout the day. On hectic days, I recommend at least two substantial meals, and then small snacks between those meals. If you can't have two substantial meals, reevaluate your life. Adhering to this rule means you need to prepare ahead, and you need to make sure your meals are small to medium, not Italian-style seven-course meals.

-Incorporate fiber into every meal. No, this does not mean Fiber One bars with a ton of preservatives. It could be as simple as having a pear, or a pile of vegetables with your lean protein. It could be a cup of soup. Beans have a ton of fiber, which is why their insulin index is so low. It's often said that grains have a lot of fiber, but they're concentrated sources of calories, so I recommend you get your fiber from somewhere else, like fruits and vegetables. Lean protein usually has no fiber (except beans), so if you eat a lot of meat, you'll have be to extra diligent about getting your fiber.

-Don't eat late at night. There's considerable debate about how fast your metabolism works throughout the day. Even if your metabolism worked at the same throughout the day, I have to say that eating most of your calories earlier benefits you in two ways. One, you're less likely to overeat at night. Late-night snacking can sabotage any fat-loss plan. Second, you're less active at night. Eat more after you workout when your cells are more receptive to carbs, not at night when you're not doing anything.

-Speaking of late-night eating, redefine what desert is. Why should desert have to be ice cream, cookies, pies, and other dense foods? The last thing you need is a ton of sugar and fat before going to bed. Desert usually comes after a big meal, which makes it even worse. Most ice cream has trans fat or other unrecognizable ingredients. If you want something else after your meal, then have some crudites and some fresh salsa or guacamole. It'll be more satisfying anyway. Sorbet is a good alternative to those who love ice cream. Also try a cup of soy or organic yogurt and add some blueberries. If you have to have a "traditional" desert like apple cobbler, make that your main course and have an appetizer as desert. Either way, desert will take you backwards in your goal to lose fat. And don't order desert at restaurants. Some have more calories than you need in a day. Don't fool yourself by sharing it, either.

There are my tips of the day. Make one change at a time!

Kevin

Essential Supplement: Green Foods?

2010-01-27T17:13:00.001-08:00

A good diet will contain at least 10 servings of fruits and vegetables, with vegetables comprising two thirds of those servings. But I understand that eating fruits and vegetables throughout the day can be a hassle. The problem with these foods is that you often have to prepare them, especially vegetables. Other than baby carrots, it's hard to find a vegetable that's convenient. So I understand, to an extent, why people don't eat enough of them. You have to have the proper cooking ware, the proper utinsils, and the proper environment to eat vegetables. This is not often the case.

If you're busy, or traveling, or you don't have time to sit down, then consider a green food. These products are usually derived from chlorella (pronounced kli RELL a, not like cholera, the intestinal disease), and immature grasses such as barley, wheat, and alfafa. I talked about gluten intolerence in a prevoius post. Wheatgrass does not contain any gluten, so you can consume it without any reaction.

How do you consume green foods? The easiest way is to mix it with water or juice. You don't need a lot. You can add one teaspoon to any concoction of berries, fruit, milk, or yogurt. I prefer not to use dairy products, so I would use a plant-based milk or soy yogurt. Blueberries and bananas make the best smoothies in my experience.

What are the benefits of green foods? Green foods have chlorophyll and phycocyanin. Chlorophyll inceases circulatoin, bolsters immunity and eliinates waste products. They promote production of killer cells in your immune system. Green foods contained a lot of vitamin A, gamma-linolenic acid, GLA, vitamin C, E, and antioxidants. Green food can also lower the acidity of your body.

One reason I don't eat a lot of animal food is because it increases the acidity of my body. This can leach calcium from bones. So this contradicts the common belief that milk and yogurt are good sources of calcium. In fact, too much dairy can reduce calcium in your bones. Is it any wonder that countries with the largest dairy intake have the highest rate of osteoperosis?
On the other hand, the vitamin K in green foods delivers circulating calcium to the bones. Green foods also contain magnesium and calcium. Green foods are alkaline so they reduce the acidity of the body.

I recommend the following green foods:

-Berlean's Greens
-Garden of Life
-Greens +
-Nature's Plus
-Paradise Herbs
-Superfood
-Alive! Energizer

You can find these at natural food stores or at Whole Foods. So if you don't want to prepare vegetables, or if you hate vegetables, or if vegetables aren't convenient, then I highly recommend a green food. Greens are an easy way to help you reach your goal of achieving 10 servings of fruits/vegetables per day. Green foods often come from organic sources. If you want to reduce you environmental footprint, then green food would make you more environmentally benign. Otherwise, the best thing to do is to consume vegetables in their natural state.

Kevin

Supplements Worth Considering- Straight to the Heart

2010-01-27T15:57:00.004-08:00

If you want to improve your heart's health, there's nothing better than cardiovascular exercise. Even though I don't promote a lot of aerobic-based training, either for endurance athletes or for people looking to lose fat, aerobic exercise is good for the heart.

I also believe supplements are necessary for optimal health. I've written about vitamin D and fish oil, and now I'm about to recommend another supplement: Co-Enzyme Q10. Co-enzymes are just there: co-enzymes. They assist in certain processes in the body, and help enzymes carry out essential functions. They're like assistants for enzymes.

How important is CoQ-10? According to Stephen Sinatra, M.D., "if there's one thing you could do to maintain your heart's health, make sure you're taking CoQ-10 daily."

I also recommend L-carnitine, but not for fat loss, which is why it's typically used. The theory is that L-carnitine, an amino acid, helps shuttle fatty acids to the muscles for energy production. Since the heart is a muscle and gets 60% of its energy from fat, according to Jonny Bowden, it makes sense to take a supplement that helps your heart function. L-carnitine supplementation has been associated with reduced incidences of abnormal heart beats, second heart attacks, and less chest pain. If you've had heart problems, consider 2,000 mg of L-carnitine.

D-ribose is another supplement worth considering for heart health. Supplementation can reduce fatigue, soreness and stiffness after long-duration exercise. If you do endurance events, D-ribose might be something you'd want to consider. D-ribose can help whenever you've depleted your energy reserves. It helps the heart recover from exercise such as running or cycling.

You can get l-carnitine and CoQ10 through diet, but not nearly enough. Remember, supplementation allows you to what is optimal, not what is necessary.

When to Use Weights

2010-01-27T15:57:00.003-08:00

Strength training and weight training are almost synonymous. It seems that if you engage in resistance training, then you are automatically using weights. Perhaps this is because the original proponents of strength training were bodybuilders back in the '50s and '60s. Weights are just the standard tool for increasing strength and building muscle. Barbells, Olympic bars, dumbbells, bench presses, leg presses, machines, are use some form of weight.

Weights have their obvious advantage. Their the best way to build raw muscle. While other modalities, which I will discuss in a minute, help build strength, power, and endurance, they simply don't build muscle the same way that weights do. I'll admit that I don't understand the physiological difference between weight training and band training, for example, there's a reason why body builders and strength athletes prefer to use weights.

Weights have another advantage. It's easy to track progression. In order to get stronger, you have to overload your body. The easiest way to do this is to add weight to the bar, or to increase the number of reps you do with the same weight. It's easy to record weight on a sheet of paper. It's also to see your progress with weights.

But weights have disadvantages. It's so easy to cheat and use improper form when using weights. This applies especially to males. Men have a lot of vanity in the strength training room. They want to believe that they can use more weight than they can actually use. So when you say that weights are "dangerous", that's correct and incorrect. Too much weight is dangerous. But weights with good form is beneficial for muscle preservation and growth.

I see a lot of bad form in the gym. This doesn't mean that I think nobody should do weights, but I think a lot of people aren't really ready to use them. The prevalence of rounded backs, buckling knees, and weak core strength tells me that people need a much larger base before using weights.

A deconditioned person could still get a great workout using his own bodyweight. If you can't manage your own bodyweight, there's no reason you should be adding external loads to any exercise. This is how Alwyn Cosgrove trains his athletes, not just people looking to lose fat. Can you do a proper squat? Can you maintain a neutral spine while squatting? Can you even squat correctly? Do you have proper shoulder mobility and stability? Most people don't. We live in the broken society. Using weights will only exacerbate these imbalances.

If you can manage your bodyweight, then progress to a suspension trainer like the TRX. If you think push ups are easy, then put your feet on a stability ball or a bench. Use a Perfect Pushup. Put your feet in the TRX and do a pushup. Do a one-armed pushup. If you think pull ups are easy, do a one-arm pull up. Wrap a towel around a pull-up bar and attempt to pull your body. There are so many progressions to basic body weight exercises that people skip. Before doing these progressions, with no external load, then do not do weight training. Gravity is the ultimate resistance. If you can't do a pull up, then you have business doing T-bar rows, bent-over rows or cable pulls.

There are other alternatives to weights. You can use a weighted vest like the X-Vest to add difficulty to squats, lunges, push ups, pull ups, running, and any other bodyweight exercise. It might be the best $200 investment you ever make.

Bands are definitely my preferred way to train. They are so versatile and functional, that they should be included in everybody's program, regardless whether or not your can do 10 pull ups, 100 push ups and and 10 one-leg squats. The movements you can perform with bands, or Freemotion's Cable Cross machine, are endless. You can add resistance to just about any movement, from lunges, step ups, punches, to throwing and rowing.

I often see people on machines. These machines cost hundreds of dollars. And yet the movement and muscles they're training could easily be trained using a $10 band. I don't know why people think they have to use such expensive apparatuses to train. Using bands is also a lot more functional. You can work all three planes of motion, while on a machine you're pretty much limited to one (almost always the sagittal). I can't think of a single machine that allows your body to move sideways.

Here's my theory of progression:

Bodyweight.
Bodyweight with weighted vest
Bands/pulleys/cable machines
Weights

Of course, this doesn't mean you can't mix and match these modalities. What I'm saying is that weights are the most advanced form of strength training. These are designed for people who can manage your bodyweight, use proper form on various exercises, and are looking to add mass or raw power. Strength athletes and power athletes, under the supervision of a coach or trainer, should use weights. But if you're using weights, you can also use bands. In fact, I encourage you to use bands in all your training.

If you can't manage your bodyweight, do that first. Out of 100 people, I bet 99 could not do 6 pulls ups, 5o pushups, or hold a plank position for 1:00. And out of those 100 people, I could find some serious posture deficiencies, imbalances, and weaknesses. Why, then, would they need or want to use weights?

Weights are sexy and popular, so they are another victim of training incest. Everybody else is doing it, so everybody should do it. I'm saying far fewer people should be using weights. There should be fewer weights in gyms, and more bands and pulley machines. But pushing a band into the air doesn't look as cool as throwing a dumbbell over your head.

Kevin

Do You Need a Fat Burner?

2010-01-27T15:57:00.001-08:00

Fat burners are one of the most popular supplements on the market. What are they and how do they work? More importantly, do they work? Do you need them? Can they actually accelerate fat loss?

Fat burners really work in several ways.

Elevated heart rate. By stimulating parasympathetic nervous system, it elevates your heart rate, which elevates your metabolism, which increases the amount of energy you use, even at rest. How much? I'm not sure, but if you're on a very low calorie diet, you need to burn as much as possible.

Increased energy. Actually, fat burners don't provide any energy at all. Calories are energy. I'm talking about perceived energy, or at least alertness. If you're eating very few calories, you're less inclined to exercise or perform small daily tasks. Your body will do everything it can to reduce the amount of movement in your daily life. You'll be as lazy as possible. If you don't have the energy to walk an extra few steps at the mall, you'll have little motivation to do purposeful exercise.

More lypolysis. If you read this blog often, then you know what lypolysis means. Of course, I'm referring to burning fat. Fat burners often contain green tea extract, which some studies show can increase the number of calories you burn by a little. Other ingredients have limited support, but a lot of claims. Fucoxanthin is a carotenoid from seawood that supports metabolism by utilizing more energy within fat cells. Bluberry leaf promote glucose metabolism and stabilize blood sugar levels. Ashwangandha extract reduce cortisol, a hormone we release when we're stressed.

Preservatoin of lean body mass. Research has shown that Tonalin CLA and branched-chained amino acids can help preserve muscles mass while dieting. This is a good thing. These supplements do not increase energy expenditure or increase metabolism, but anything that preserves muscle mass is a good thing. Dieting can lower metabolism, which will make it impossible to lose weight.

Do you need a fat burner? If your diet is clean and you're consuming less than your body utilizes, and you're working out at least five hours per week, and you're doing at least 2.5 hours of high-intensity work, then a fat burner might be the missing ingredient. If your diet sucks and you're eating pasta and potatoes at night, and you're not working very much, a fat burner is a waste of your money. Eat clean, move a lot, and then consider a fat burner. But I'd rather you take something like CLA or BCAAs to preserve lean body mass, instead of elevating your heart rate all day.

Kevin

Improving Sleep

2010-01-27T15:56:00.004-08:00

It seems weird that you can get increase your risk of obesity and fat gain by sleeping less. After all, you're not doing anything while you're sleeping. So how could more rest enhance your fat loss?

Sleep affects your endocrine, or hormonal, system. Low levels of sleep can increase a stress hormone called cortisol. Interestingly, some studies have shown that stress alone can cause weight gain. So quit worrying about your life, your job, your relationship, and your finances at night! Do that at work. But don't let your thoughts sabotage your sleep. Sleep also affects ghrelin and leptin, two hormones that control your appetite. Ghrelin makes you eat more, and leptin makes you eat less.

Getting enough sleep means you can recover faster. I believe the one reason that elite athletes perform so much better than age groupers is that elite athletes can rest and recover much more. Daily naps and 9-10 hours of sleep per night means they can perform better. They don't deal with 8-10 hour workdays, long commutes, and other stressers of life. Stanford University recently conducted a study that showed that tennis players hit harder and sprinted faster when they had 10 hours of sleep per night for six weeks. This is because during deep sleep, you experience rapid eye movement (REM). This strengthens neural connections created during training. During other periods of sleep, your muscles are repairing themselves. Perhaps this is the elusive answer to why we sleep.

The other way sleep can help you lose fat is that it gives you more energy throughout the day. If you're tired and beat up from the time you wake up to the time you go to bed, how likely are you going to work out or train? Even if you do, you're not going to have a very effective training session.

This country is sleep-deprived. Look at the people on the Metro and it won't take long to see that most people need more sleep. I don't see how this can be, when we're only working on average 40 hours per week. Perhaps it's the long commutes, too much TV, or too many other obligations.

Fortunately, your diet can improve you sleep. I recommend making small changes.

First, avoid large doses of caffeine late at night. Caffeine is in stimulates for a reason. Caffeine increases your heart rate and activates your peri-sympathetic nervous system, or fight-or-flight system. At night, I usually drink non-decaffeinated tea and soda. A little caffeine is tolerable, but if you really can't sleep, try to completely eliminate caffeine after 5:00.

Don't eat too much at night. Not only are big meals at night more likely lead to fat gain, but large meals can stimulate blood flow to your stomach, which releases gastric acid. Your pancreas and intestine work extra hard. Instead, frontload your calories. That is, eat more at breakfast. Your blood glucose levels are low and you should restore them. Breakfast is the most important meal of the day. Eating small meals throughout the day. Eating a good breakfast, eating small meals throughout the day, eating unprocessed foods, limiting caffeine, and limiting alcohol are all good ideas anyway. Improving sleep is just one more reason to implement these habits.

Don't go below the critical threshold. If you're a guy, don't go below 1800 calories per day. I don't care how fast you want to lose fat, or how big you are, or how inactive you are. You risk nutritional deficiencies, loss of strength, loss of bone mass, loss of muscle mass, and can negatively affect your sleep. Make sure you get enough calcium, zinc, iron, and copper, all essential minerals. Zinc, found in crab, oysters, and beef, can prevent insomnia. Copper is usually found in nuts and dark leafy greens. Iron, especially heme iron, is found mainly in meat, but also in beans and seafood. Good sources of calcium are beans, almonds, dark leafy greens, orange juice, and supplements. Even though dairy is considered a good source of calcium, dairy intake is inversely related to osteoporosis! Go figure.

Some evidence shows that zinc-magnesium supplments (ZMA) can improve your sleep. I haven't tried it myself but the anecdotal evidence increases every day.

These are ways that diet can improve your sleep. Stay tuned for other ways to make you sleep better. If diet isn't the answer, there be other causes.

Kevin

Anti-Depressants

2010-01-27T15:56:00.003-08:00

Detox Your Detox Program

2010-01-27T15:56:00.001-08:00

I've mentioned training incest, which is doing what others are doing without considering your own strengths, abilities, goals, and your program. Now I'd like to talk about dieting incest, which is eating or drinking what others are doing, with taking into account your body type, your needs, and your goals.

A big trend in the diet industry is "detoxing." Raw Cleanse and Total Detox are two good examples. They claim, for only $30 or $40, you can take their pills and rid your body of all toxins and harmful substances. Makers of these products claims that raw foods and juices are essential ingredients of any detox programs, and yet turn around and say that you need their products to detoxify your body.

Detoxing programs are largely popular because of the backlash against chemicals and anything man-made in the last 15 years. Natural, green, and organic sell; processed, chemical, industrial are all bad words these days. We live in a polluted environment, there's a greater awareness of the environment, climate change, and integrative health. As a result, pushers of detoxing programs appeal to that emotion- without detoxinig, we're victims of the industrial wasteland. The only way to restore our natural health and purge ourselves of toxins, we need to take pills and powders.

There's almost not science supporting these products. The FDA has not verified it. But there is plenty of evidence that shows organic fruits and vegetables can detoxify your body naturally, without the extra expense of some detox program.

These products are nothing more than repackaged fruits and vegetables. If raw food and juice is what you need to detoxify your body, then eat them! Don't pay for overpriced detox programs. They contain what natural food already has: probiotics, antioxidants.

Antioxidants and natural food will detoxify your body, and will relieve oxidative stress in your body caused by free radicals. Fiber is also critical for detoxing your body. Fiber can trap toxins and remove them from the body. Where do you get fiber? Fruits and vegetables. Vegetables in general promote gastro-intestinal health.

Kevin

Bar None

2010-01-27T15:55:00.005-08:00

The last ten years has seen an explosion of energy bars on the market. It used to be Powerbars had no competition. They weren't popular due to their horrible taste and chewy texture. But America's demand for convenience has forced manufacturers to create a wide array of bars that serves every preference. Some have more protein than others. Some have "super green" foods. Some are organic and pretty simple, others have a few more ingredients. Some are designed to aid in weight loss, some aid in muscle growth. They make remarkable claims, have appetizing packaging, and look tasty. I'm going to make my personal recommendations, and tell you which bars to avoid.

Here's a dirty secret you don't know: gelatin and hydrolzed collagen are crap. They aren't complete proteins. And bars often contain less protein than what is displayed on the label. And don't think glycerin has no carbs; it does. I can't believe bar manufacturers still advertise this and get away with it. So even if it says it has 10 grasm of protein, it probably doens't. If it doesn't have extra protein, that means it's no better than a candy bar. And instead of whey proteins, many bars contain a lot of sugar. Snynonyms include corn syrup, sucrose, brown rice syrup, maltodextrin, and others. One teaspoon of sugar is 4 grams. Sugar free bars have calories too. If it has no sugar, it has sugar alcohols, which aren't as sweet as sugar, so more are used. They can also cause GI distress.

Almost every bar on the market contains one of the following: whey, wheat, soy, or peanuts. And most bars are nothing more than what Marion Nestle calls over-hyped cookie bars. Sometimes these bars are no better than Snickers bars, except with a little more protein. Many have high fructose corn syrup, artificial sweeteners, allergens, trans fat, and palm oil. They're convenient, but not necessarily healthy.

There is only bar I know of that has none of these allergens: Enjoy Life bars. They're not that big, but they contain brown rice and other ingredients that won't trigger an alergic reaction. Clif Nectar bars have walnuts, but most people who can't tolerate peanuts can tolerate walnuts, which contain a good amount of ALA, an omega-3 fatty acid. Clif Nectar bars have about 160 calories, and the only other ingredients are vanilla extract, dates, and cocoa. Flavors include dark chocolate (my favorite), apricot, lemon, and pomegranate. Think Thin bars and Weil bars are pretty much the same in terms of ingredients. The only problems with these bars is that they contain too many carbs in relation to the amount of protein. A Weil bar has 27 carbs but only 3 grams of protein.

Kind Bars are also excellent. They are nothing more than a collection of coagulated nuts with some honey holding the bar together. Some bars include a small amount of soy but the amount is minimal and you shouldn't even count it. Kind Bars are fat bars because the majority of the ingredients are nuts. The nuts also have some protein. These bars are perfect for low-carbohydrate diets. Some Kind bars have as much as 7 grams of protein. Protein and fat is a great combination at the end of the day.

Soy is the most ubiquitous ingredient in energy bars. All other forms of Clif bars have soy, in the form of isolates, hydroisolates, or soy lecithin. Atkins bars, Nature's Valley, Powerbars, Zone bars, Steel bars, Protein Crunch, and all other popular protein bars have soy. I guarantee it. Find me one bar that doesn't have soy and I'll buy an entire case for you. I don't want to go into the politics of soy, but soy is cheap, and the soy industry has infiltrated just about every product on the market. Beware of the soy! Too much soy actually has an estrogenic effect. That is, it can enlarge the mammary glands in males. I'm not saying you'll grow boobs when you soy, but I can't see how much too much soy is a good thing.

Also keep in mind that "energy bars" are a misnomer. They should be called food bars. Calories are energy. These bars have plenty of those! But many can raise your blood sugar and make you crash. I think we often confuse "energy" with "alertness." These "energy" bars won't improve your performance.

If you're going to eat a bar, look for one with less than 200 calories. I think bars are poor meal replacements. Five bites of a bar are not going to satisfy you. Avoid bars that have 30 grams of protein. They promise to make you bigger, but you won't gain muscle! If you're going to eat an energy bar, get something small like an Atkins bar, Power Crunch or a Clif Nectar bar. These bars should be snacks, not meals. Good bars will have natural sources of fiber. Look for at least three grams. And no, Fiber One bars are not good sources of fiber.

I'm currently making a table of all energy bars on the market. I'm going to include calories, fat, carbs, protein, and certain ingredients: high fructose corn syrup, added sugar, trans fat, fractionated fats, whey, soy, wheat, nuts. It will be the most comprehensive list, anywhere.

Kevin

Over Analysis?

2010-01-27T15:55:00.003-08:00

Organic or not organic? Raw or processed? Pasteurized or raw? Red or green? Frozen or canned? Absolutely no soy, wheat, dairy, and eggs, or maybe just a little? No artificial sweeteners?

If you're asking these questions, you're probably over-analyzing your diet too much. My diet is the short-ingredient diet, for sure. Nothing I eat has any more than six ingredients (okay the canned salmon and vegetables has eight, but it's all natural ingredients.) That's usually what I tell people to do. If a person's diet is atrocious, I focus on quality first, and then quantity and then timing. Telling them to eat a particular percentage of calories, and to eat a particular ratio of carbs and protein 35 minutes after a workout is too confusing.

Your diet should be as natural as possible: fruits, vegetables, nuts, beans, organic, free range meat, seafood, and maybe a few grains (quinoa if possible, but not technically a grain). Dairy is optional. You shouldn't eat processed foods and avoid anything with a lot of sugar.

Sometimes, however, we want to enhance our diet even more. Fruit in a can is still fruit, but it's still a concentrated source of sugar, for example. And even when we think we're eating okay, we learn that common ingredients such as wheat, soy, and dairy, and artificial sweeteners aren't really good for us after all. Yet they are so ubiquitous that they're almost impossible not to eat. Almost everything on the supermarket shelf has a common allergen. That prepackaged tuna salad I wanted to buy has soybean oil. Good god!

Improvements

Here are some simple ways you can enhance your diet

Good: fruits and vegetables
Better: organic fruits and vegetables

Good: canned fruits and vegetables
Better: frozen fruits and vegetables

Good: peanut butter
Better: Raw almond butter

Good: lean meat
Better: grass-fed, organic meat

Good: seafood
Better: only particular types of seafood. Wild Alaskan salmon. Farm-raised tilapia. Sardines. Yellowfish tuna.

Good: "Healthy" bread and energy bars
Better: Limited grains, soy, wheat, dairy, peanuts, eggs

As you can see, even if you think you're eating "healthy," there's always a healthier option.

But are these ingredients really going to kill us? Probably not, at least not in insignificant quantities. Even so, nobody knows how much of any of the crap is in our food. They aren't measured like macronutrients, vitamins, and minerals. And since humans aren't really designed to eat anything but unprocessed, natural food, it's probably a good idea to err on the safe side and not consume much of these ingredients.

While I commend people for improving their diet, you can oveanalyze your diet. It's not necessary to eat everything organic. It's not necessary to avoid tofu, tempeh, and tamari just because it has soy. It's not necessary to avoid a sauce because it has wheat gluten in it. But don't make any of these foods staples of your diet. If there is an alternative without these ingredients (and these days, they aren't hard to find), then choose the alternative. Going from junk food to more produce and fresh meat is a huge improvement. Going from a little wheat in your diet to no wheat is not as beneficial, and is much harder to do. It's like training for a sport. A deconditioned athlete will make initial improvement fast, but Olympic-level athletes have to train for years to make just the smallest improvement. Fine, subtle improvements in your diet are the same. I'm trying to eliminate all common allergens (wheat, soy, dairy, corn, eggs, but not fish) from my diet, and it's a true challenge!

It's important to adhere to your principles most of the time. I would aim for 90% of the time. If 90% of your food is unadulterated, unprocessed, and doesn't come in a package, then you're fine. If the majority of your food has a long list of ingredients, it's time to make some changes. Most people would be shocked to see how much crap is actually in their food. Even mustard these days has high fructose corn syrup, and rice bowls and pre-cooked enchiladas have a lot more than fresh vegetables and a corn tortilla. As much as I prefer to eat naturally, even I drink diet tea and soda. But most of the fluid I drink is water and tea. I feel excess sugar will kill me before a little Splenda in my diet. Too much, as you know, can wreck havoc on your body. So moderation is the key.

Follow this rule: if your food is convenient and ready-made, you might want to check the ingredients. Those products have long shelf lives because of the preservatives in them. Natural food doesn't last long; processed food does. Don't you ever wonder how peanut butter can sit in a pantry for a year?

Take home message: do your best. Try to remove most allergens from your diet. Avoid packaged food. Eat as natural as possible. Adhere to these principles 90% of the time. Initial improvements in your diet are easy. Aiming for perfection is difficult, and you can spend all day trying to adhere to a 100% natural, unadulterated diet.

Kevin

Sideways

2010-01-23T18:06:00.000-08:00

Recently I've noticed people walking sideways on the treadmill and Stairmasters. This might seem silly and it might be a fad, but I think people might actually be trying something that really works! The gym is often the scene of many fads and trendy workout protocols. Good examples include Kettlebells, kickboxing classes, and Bosu balls. It shouldn't be that way. Exercise science shouldn't be be like clothes and fashion. It shouldn't be based on what looks good and what doesn't. Instead, it should be based on results.

I think there is some validity to walking sideways. I need to establish some basic physiology for you. Movement patterns are divided into three planes: the sagittal, frontal, and transverse plane. The sagittal plane divides the body into the left/right side. The frontal plane divides the body into the front and back half. The transverse plane divides the body into the top and bottom. Almost all human movement involves the sagittal plane: running, walking, racking, shoveling, cycling, swimming, rowing, etc. So the frontal plane often gets neglected. We might bend sideways to grab something, but most of the time we will bend over forwards or reach backwards. Most people in the gym do things in the sagittal plane, because there are few cardio or weight machines that actually allow you to move sideways: treadmills, preacher curl machines, t-supported rows, bicycles, rowing machines.

Some sports, however, give us the chance to work the frontal plane. Good examples include hockey (imagine a player moving his skates back and forth), soccer, rugby, tennis, and basketball. Those sports require rapid change in direction and agility. That's probably why ACL tears almost always occur during those sports. Even so, very few people play those sports for an appreciable amount of time to really work the frontal plane. And most of the time, they're in the sagittal plane.

Anyway, running or hopping sideways can be beneficial. If you think walking sideways on a treadmill looks silly, even though it might be effective, you can also incorporate frontal plane work into your strength training routine. Instead of doing traditional squats, do side squats. Step to the left with your left leg, and then stretch your right leg and bend your left leg. You can also do sideways lunges. I prefer to do these exercises with bands and pulleys attached to a weight belt.

Even if you incorporate frontal plane work into your routine, you're still going to be in the sagittal plane most of the time. If you play soccer or any other explosive sport, then you must incorporate frontal plane work into your training. By not doing so, you're setting yourself up for injury. You have to train for the demands of your sport.

As a triathlete, I have to question how important it is to train the frontal plane. After all, swimmers, bikers, runners, and rowers don't spend much time going sideways! So how important is it that endurance athletes incorporate the frontal plane? I imagine it's not going to improve performance much, but it's never a bad thing to train all patterns of movement, muscles, and to perform different muscles. This is especially true during the offseason. Athletes have spent the last eight or nine months doing the same repetitive movements, so going sideways couldn't hurt.

So don't laugh at people walking sideways. They have science to support them. But I feel moving sideways is just another fad. It's only cool when only a few people do it.

Kevin

Alcohol and Fat Loss

2010-01-17T12:13:00.000-08:00

The other night my sister was pouring herself a glass of red wine that had been sitting on the counter for a few weeks. She offered me a glass and I pleasantly declined. She told me that having a glass of wine with friends was one of life's greatest pleasures.

I'm here to talk about wine, alcohol, and fat loss. I'm going to tell you right now that if you want to stay lean or are trying to get lean, then stop drinking wine and alcohol.

According to Susan Kleiner, the author of Power Eating, "alcohol puts fat metabolism on hold. It's not your friend if you're trying to stay lean." I think that summarizes this post. If you want to metabolize fat, then don't drink alcohol.

Here's how alcohol works in your body: alcohol goes to the liver, which processes and removes toxins from your body (this is why excessive alcohol consumption can cause cirrhosis). As long as the liver is busy oxidizing alcohol, it isn't oxidizing anything else. Meanwhile, the other macronutrients in your body cannot be utilized. Lyle Macdonald writes in The Ketogenic Diet, "alcohol consumption will almost completely impair the body's use of fat for fuel." So if those macronutrients aren't being utilized, then what are they doing? They're making you fat!

The metabolization of fat also depletes your body of vitamins and water-soluble minerals, niacin and thiamin in particular. It ruins the lining of your stomach and impairs digestion. It can dehydrate you, and even lower your testosterone production. Not only do you get fat, but you lose your ability to build muscle. A double whammy.

If that weren't bad enough, alcohol is devoid of nutrients. It's empty calories. It has some vitamins and nutrients, but not much. The media have touted the benefits of resveretrol, a compound in wine that can protect against cardiovascular disease because its antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties. Okay, but if you want resveratrol, you can eat grapes. Not only that, but resveratrol needs to be present in such large quantities to have any significant impact.
If you must have alcohol, then drink one small glass of red wine per night, or every other night. Remember, the larger and heavier you are, the more you can tolerate. Men can tolerate more than women. Avoid martinis, daiquiris, and margaritas. Don't have multiple drinks and never, ever binge. Just realize that every glass you drink is taking your backwards, not forwards. How badly do you want to lose fat? If you drink every night, you need to question your commitment to your fitness goals.

How much do you want to drink alcohol? That's a question you have to decide for yourself. If you want to lose fat more than you want to drink alcohol, then cut it out immediately. At the very most you should have no more than a few glasses per week.

Keep in mind that a "glass" should be a tall glass of about 5-6 oz of alcohol. Alcohol is calorically dense. It provides seven calories per each gram. That's more than carbs or protein, but less than fat. Anything beyond "moderation" is going to ruin your fat loss efforts.

Of course athletes consume alcohol sometimes. But they are using enormous amounts of energy each day, and one or two glasses is hardly going to dent their performance. They could probably use the extra calories.

Kevin

PS- I'm reading the New Testament right now, and I've noticed several references to wine. Since this is a health and fitness blog, here's my message: I don't care what the NT says about wine, it's not good for fat loss!

Liquid Calories

2010-01-13T17:32:00.000-08:00

Liquid Calories
America’s weight gain is clearly attributable to the quantity and quality of food. In the last 100 years, our diet has changed more than it did in the previous 10,000 years combined. As I pointed out in a previous article, physical activity hasn’t changed much since the 1900s. Sure, more people were in agriculture and factory jobs, but nobody belonged to gyms, and nobody ran or did any kind of sustained exercise for long periods of time. People didn’t have the wealth, means, or inclination to do voluntary exercise.

What has changed is the standard American diet, whose acronym, SAD, fittingly describes what our diet is: poor in nutrients, high in processed foods, poor in fruits and vegetables, a lot of high-glycemic carbohydrates, fast food, snacks, and worst, liquid calories.

While many people will count or estimate the calories that they’re eating, they fail to calculate the calories they're drinking in liquid form. It never occurs to them that what they're drinking could be sabotaging their weight loss efforts. But they still count. Calories not only come in food, but every year Americans consume more and more of them in the form of liquids.

Until the early 20th century, there was almost no such thing as liquid calories. Coca-Cola was the first manufacturer of soft drinks in 18. The English drank coffee with sweetened tea. But most people drank plain old water and got their calories from solid food.

There are a number of reasons why solid food is a better way to maintain a healthy weight. The very act of chewing actually uses energy, but for most people it is more satisfying to chew food. Several studies have also shown a link between the number of times people chew and the amount of food they eat. The more they chew, the less they eat. A recent study in the Netherlands showed that people who chewed three times more ate 52% less food. Chewing sends signals to the brain that calories have been consumed.

As David Kessler points out in his new book The End of Overeating, shows how food manufacturers have actually made overeating so easy with foods that dissolve quickly in the mouth and are easy to chew. These concoctions of high-fat and high-sugar foods encourage people to eat fast before their bodies can send a signal of fullness. In other words, food manufacturers want to make food more like liquid calories.

Liquid calories do not send the same signal of fullness as real food, at least for most people. Some researchers propose that we are evolutionary not designed to interpret liquids for food. If our bodies did recognize liquids as food, then drinking a lot of water would decrease our appetite to the point that we would never want food, and thus we would starve.

Liquid calories are ubiquitous these days. The American Journal of Preventive Medicine showed that the average portion of sodas and beverages has increased 6 ounces between1976-1996. Americans are now drinking ¼ of all calories in liquid form. Here are the various beverages that contain hidden calories.

Soda is the most obvious form of liquid nutrition. America's obesity rates have increased in direct proportion to soda consumption, which usually contains high fructose corn syrup. One 8-oz can contains up to 40 grams of sugar and anywhere between 120-200 calories. If you want to drink soda, limit yourself to one or two cans of diet soda. The portions of soda have also exploded. You can now buy 64 oz (half a gallon!) at convenience stores. That would be almost 1,000 calories. Bottles of soda usually have 20 oz, but the serving size lists the calories per 8 oz. In other words, if one 8-ounce serving of soda contains 120 calories, but the bottle is 20 oz, there are 2.5 servings, and 280 calories in the bottle. Read labels carefully.

Tea- In the last 10 years Americans have become enamored of tea. Tea has antioxidants and anti-cancer properties, but manufacturers have added sugar to a lot of these beverages. One can of Arizona Green Tea, for example, contains 140 calories. Tea’s bitter taste can also induce people to add sugar to their drinks.

Coffee- Starbucks is quickly becoming known as liquid McDonald’s. We can't solely blame fast food for America's weight problem. Starbucks is part of the problem too. Look at a sample of some of their drinks and you’ll understand why. One tall Caramel Frappucino Light Blended Coffee with no whipped cream has 170 calories. A White Chocolate Mocha with whipped cream has 470 calories. Many other drinks contain 100-300 calories. These drinks provide little nutrition, raise your blood sugar, and are not satiating. The key is to avoid an item with long names, and avoid extra toppings such as whipped cream, ice cream, and caramel.

Juice- This is a food that’s easy to consider healthy, but is really just a load of sugar. Many juices aren’t 100% juice, and even those that are, contain concentrated sources of sugar. It’s always better to eat the whole fruit than to drink it. Whole fruit contains fiber and nutrients, while many fruit juices have a dearth of vitamins that were originally in the drink. Naked, Odwalla, and Bolthouse Farms produce juices with vitamins and minerals, but they still contain a lot of calories. Eight ounces of liquid is unlikely to make you feel full. Orange juice is usually fortified with vitamin D, calcium, and vitamin C, but still has 24 grams of sugar per cup. Tropicana now makes Trop 50, with only 13 grams of carbohydrate per serving.

Beer and alcohol- One can of beer usually contains about 120 calories. These calories come in the form of carbohydrates and alcohol. Alcohol contains 7 calories per gram, compared to 4 for carbohydrates. The problem with alcohol is that it completely shuts down fat burning until the liver processes all the alcohol. Light beer contains about 80-90 calories. Red wine contains about 80 calories per serving, but one serving is five ounces.

Energy drinks- First it was Red Bull. Now it’s Amp, Energy Rush, Sobe, and many others. Most contain 100-200 calories per can, and have questionable value. The energy rush they provide usually comes from caffeine, not he added sugar. If you want caffeine, drink black coffee. If you want energy, focus your diet on wholesome foods, physical activity, and plenty of sleep.

Sports drinks- More and more Americans are engaging in exercise, which is good, but manufacturers have responded with more and more options. While sports drinks have their purpose of replenishing glycogen and increasing endurance, most people don’t work out long enough to warrant a sports drink. One bottle of Gatorade contains 120 calories, and is unlikely going to enhance your performance. Water will serve just fine for any exercise under an hour, even high-intensity exercise. Working out longer than 75 minutes could deplete your glycogen stores. In that case, a sports drink might help so you don’t “bonk.” If you must drink something sweet or flavorful, try Vitamin 10, with 25 calories per bottle, or Sobe Life Water with zero calories. Power Ade also has a zero-calorie version, but is artificially sweetened.

There you go. Your first step to weight loss is not what you eat, but what your drink. Be wary of those liquid calories. They can easily add up. Remember, they don’t call it a beer gut for nothing.

Kevin

TRX Suspension Training

2010-01-06T12:57:00.000-08:00

When I was in San Francisco in 2008 I went to a gym and it was there that I first used the TRX Suspension system. My physical assessment with Sam, my trainer, was fun and challenging. I had never seen such a device. I couldn’t believe how much harder every exercise was. I thought I was tough and that I had a strong core, but the TRX proved me wrong. The TRX will expose all your weaknesses and imbalances. I quickly forgot about the TRX until this year, when I asked for received one for Christmas.

The TRX is just two straps with a buckle that can wrap around a pull-up bar, a pole, or even a tree. The straps have a couple of handle on the bottom. You can either hold them, or put your feet into the straps. It’s a simple device, but it’s one of the most effective tools in the fitness industry. In fact, you can do up to 300 exercises with just two straps.

The TRX uses your bodyweight. Unlike bodyweight exercises, you can easily increase the resistance or the load just by changing the position of your body relative to the harness. To make it easier, stand further from the support; to make it harder, stand closer to the support.
Basic exercises include push-ups, inverted rows, bicep curls, lunges, single-leg squats, knee tucks, hamstring curls, flies, and tricep extensions. But your imagination is the only limit to the amount of exercises you can do. You can change the grip, the tempo of the exercise, and rest periods, just like you would with traditional weights. Some coaches even use plyometric exercises such as 180 degree jumps, ice skater jumps, and jumping pushups.

Doing bodyweight exercises with the TRX is much harder. Every exercise is a core exercise, as you have to stabilize your body. Even though some exercises directly target the core, such as planks and rotations, inverted rows and pushups naturally activate the transverse abdominis, that deep muscle that fires before all movement. Traditional exercises support the body and provide some amount of stabilization. For example, when you do a pushup, your hands are firmly on the ground. With the TRX, your hands are on the straps, which can move in all directions. Your body has to work to stabilize the straps. The first time I used it, I put my feet in the straps and did pushups. I didn’t do many. Perhaps the military should make TRX pushups the new standard!

The versatility of the TRX is what makes it truly unique. It weights just a few pounds, and can be folded. You can use it in your home, your hotel room, or even on a playground. Using it with a door is not optimal, because the door will restrict your range of motion. Ideally, the straps can swing like a pendulum under a bar or bream.

Now when I see people using heavy weights, I ask, why? If you can’t manage your own body weight, you have no business lifting heavy weight with bad form. Weights certainly have their benefits, especially if your goal is to maintain muscle and bone mass. Nothing builds muscle like weight. But you get stronger with the TRX, without worrying about damaging your body with improper form.

I know incorporate the TRX into my strength training program. Athletes, general enthusiasts, and even the military are using the TRX into the training. It’s compatible with my belief of keeping things short and simple.

Kevin

Eat your Fruits and Vegetables, and Your Fish Oil Too

2010-01-04T07:45:00.000-08:00

Fish Oil
Your mom always told you to eat your fruits and vegetables. It’s still sound advice. Fruit and vegetable consumption is certainly a critical component of any diet. But a good diet also includes some key supplements. Last week I discussed vitamin D, and how crucial I is for optimum health. This article will tell you why you should get fish oil, how to get it, and how much to get.

Here’s why you should take fish oil. If there were a substance that mitigated your risk of liver disorders, intestinal disorders, immune disorders, arthritis, hypertension, heart disease, reproductive failure, visual problems, neurological disorders, protected your joints, and helped you burn fat, wouldn’t you take this magical potion? Of course you would. And for $10-$30 per month you can have all those benefits.

Not only will your life be healthier, but you might live longer too. A good example is the Eskimos (or Inuit, to be politically correct). The Inuit live far longer than Danish people, even though they are ethnically the same and both people consume fat in similar quantities. The difference is that a larger percentage of the Inuits’ diet consists of omega-3 fats.

The two fatty acids that you need to focus on are docosahexanoic acid and eicosapentaenoic acid (DHA and EPA for short). The other omega 3 fatty acid is alpha-linolenic acid, which can be found in flaxseed, hemp seeds, walnuts, pumpkin seeds, canola oil, and even bread.

But ALA is not nearly as potent as DHA and EPA. So not all omega 3 fatty acids are created the same. Unless the source is fish, then omega 3 fatty acids aren’t doing you much good. Processed foods that supposedly have these fatty acids usually don’t have as much as they claim.

The typical western diet of processed foods creates too much arachidonic acid in our bodies. High levels of this acid, the foundation of hormones called eicosanoids, are involved in the syntheesis with cytokines that produce inflammation in the body. Omega 3s are anti-inflammatory, and inhibit the effects of arachidonic acid.

One of the best things about fish oil is the way that reduces inflammation in the body. You might not know it but inflammation is implicated in almost all diseases, especially heart disease. Where there's inflammation, there's disease. Not only does it reduce inflamed joints, but because high levels of inflammation are usually the precursor for high levels of very-low lipoproteins (VLDL) in the arteries, reducing inflammation means that the liver will reduce the amount of VLDL it sends to the arteries to fight the inflammation. Fish oil consumption can reduce level so interleukin-6 and c-reactive protein, both good indicators of inflammation in the body.

Our ancestors used to consume a diet that had a 1:1 or 1:2 ratio of omega 6 and omega 3 fatty acids. The typical American eating processed food has a 20:1 ratio! So to balance that, stop eating a lot of omega 6 fatty acids, and start eating more omega 3 fatty acids. The best way to do that is to cut processed food and start consuming fish oil.

Heart Disease

You are 50% less likely to suffer a cardiac death if you consume fatty fish once per week rather than once per month. A study 10 years ago showed that 1000 mg of fish oil supplementation reduced sudden death from heart attack by 50%! Fish oil decreases triglyceride levels, which are usually high in obese people. Levels of VLDL, the most dangerous form of cholesterol in the body, go down with fish oil consumption. If you’re recovering from bypass surgery, then fish oil can help in the recovery process. Hypertension can also be reduced with 4,000 mg of fish oil per day. Fish oils make cell membranes more fluid and elastic. Saturated fats can make cells more rigid, which can lead to more arrhythmia's.

Joint Health

Fish oil alleviates inflammatory joint disease by decreasing inflammation of chrondrocyte (connective tissue in the ligament) metabolism. Chondrocyte degradation causes cartilage erosion, but fish oil can reverse this. People report that joint pain has vanished almost immediately, even though they’ve had pain all their lives. Bodybuilders have been taken fish oil for years but only recently have we discovered the secret. Those with rheumatoid arthritis experience less fatigue and stiffness with 3 grams of fish oil, and report using fewer non-steridol anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS)

Treating Disease

Fish oil is now being used to treat a variety of diseases and syndromes, including fibromyagilia, chronic fatigue syndrome, epilepsy, schizophrenia, multiple slcerosis, sickle cell anemia, and Chrone’s disease. High levels of fish oil are inversely related to rates of skin, prostate, and breast cancer.

Fish oil also aids in fat loss.

Forget CLA, green tea, fat burners, and thermogenic supplements. While they might work, they cost a lot of money and they can’t overcome a lack of exercise or a poor diet. Save your money and take fish oil. Not only will you get all the benefits I’ve just mentioned above, but you will also accelerate fat loss. In one study in the International Journal of Obesity, men either ate no fish, lean fish, fatty fish, or fish oil. Men who ate fatty fish like salmon and supplemented with fish oil lost two pounds without adding any exercise to their life. Talk about a fat burner! It’s been shown that fish oil increases resting metabolic rate, can improve insulin levels, and improve glucose tolerance in type-II diabetics. This is great news for those suffering from adult-onset diabetes.

Don’t discount exercise however. A study a couple years ago in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition showed that participants who walked a measly 45 minutes three times per week. Those who exercised and supplemented with fish oil lost the most fat. The theory is that fish oil makes more fat available for energy. Fish oil decreases resting heart rate, which makes it harder to achieve a particular heart rate. The more you have to work, the more energy your burn. Fish oil, like exercise, increases oxidation of fat by increasing the amount of mitochondria in your cells.

Another way fish oil can aid in fat loss is by reducing the amount of stress we experience. Although stress is psychological, fish oil inhibits adrenal activation in the kidneys. High levels of stress can release too much cortisol, a hormone that inhibits fat loss and promotes fat gain. Fish oil can also alleviate depression, reduce the chance of alcoholism and suicide. If you’ve had a bad day, take some fish oil!

Okay, so now that you know the benefits of fish oil, you know you should be taking it. But how do you get it? Of course, the best way is to consume cold-water fish: mackerel, sardines, tuna, wild Pacific salmon, and anchovies. Mahi mahi and shrimp, eggs don’t have as much.

If you don’t like fish, it’s okay. Supplement manufacturers have devised a method of extracting fish oil from fish and encapsulating them into pills. I recommend that you consume 3,000 mg per day. If one pill has 500 m g, then take six per day. That’s 60 calories, but don’t forget the thermogenic effects of fish oil.

Take your fish oil with your food. The best thing to do is to consume it at breakfast so you don’t forget. You will notice that your breath might smell like shrimp or fish. If you don’t like that, use a breath mint or a Listerine strip. Your breakfast should conceal the fish breath anyway.

I recommend you look for a fish oil that contains about 500 mg per capsule. Twin Labs has 450 mg of EPA/DHA, while Biotest’s Flameout has 500 mg. I’ve seen some capsules that say ‘1000 mg fish oil’ but only 100-200 mg of that is EPA/DHA. Remember, don’t’ look for fish oil, look for EPA and DHA. EPA and DHA are the two fatty acids you’re looking for. Carlson Labs also makes a good way. Whichever product you buy, get 400-500 mg per capsule

I hope this helps. Keep eating plenty of clean food, but you must supplement with fish oil, unless you eat large amounts of fish every day. Even though I eat fatty fish every day, I still take four-five capsules per day. A can of salmon has about 2,000 mg of EPA/DHA, but that’s still 1,000 mg shy of the recommended intake of 3,000 mg per day.

If you’re a vegan, then I high recommend that you make this one exception. There is no way you can get EPA/DHA if you’re vegan. Wild pacific salmon, wild-caught mackerel, pole-and-line caught mahi mahi, wild-caught Atlantic herring (a.k.a sardines, sperling, pilchard, brit, and sild), and Atlantic pole-and-line Yellowfin Tuna are all excellent choices. They are sustainable harvested and they do not endure the cruelty of animal feedlots. Veganism should be healthy. I respect the central tenants of veganism, but this is one exception that you must make. Go to the Monterrey Bay Aquarium for more information.

What to Look for in Good Trainer

2009-12-27T13:16:00.000-08:00

I don't work as a trainer, but I work with them, and I used to work as one. I also consult with and learn from other trainers. After watching Alywn Cosgrove's Program Design for the 21st Century, I've come to a few conclusions about training, and what good makes a good trainer.

1. Constant contact. The trainer should either have a newsletter, or at least contact his clients with e-mail once a week. Not talking with clients outside of the health club or studio is a mistake.

2. Not watching form. My first trainer used to watch SportsCenter while I was training. He would watch TV while I was lifting heavy weights. The trainer should always show the client certain cues and pointers to make sure the exercise is performed correctly. When the client works on his own, he'll be able to do it correctly after doing it right so many times.

3. Mobility work. If your trainer is still telling you to warm up with jumping jacks and 10 minutes of easy jogging on the treadmill, ask them when the last time he's actually questioned this protocol. Most good trainers these days recognize the importance of mobility work, or exercises that activate or and strengthen muscles that are underused or weak (think glutes), or are overtight (hip flexors). Skip the treadmill and do some mobility work.

4. Core work. Most people have weak cores. And by core, I don't mean just the abs. I'm talking about everything from the lats to the hips. A weak core means you're predisposed to back pain. A weak core means everything you do will be harder. A weak core means you'll run slower. Core work is not crunches. If you're trainer has you doing crunches, ask how that will help your back pain and improve your posture. Serious core work means rotational and stability exercises.

5. A reason for every exercise. Ask your trainer why you're doing a particular exercise. And the answer should be better than, "because it's cool," or "I saw someone else doing it." In fact, you should do an exercise because no-one else is doing it.

6. Continuing education. A good trainer will invest in conferences, seminars, DVDs, and books to help him develop a more functional, safer, and more effective program. Trainers who don't are slackers and are cheating their clients. They should be investing their income in educational products created by those with years of experience. The initial price might be high, but in the long run a good trainer will get more results, and more referrals. Good trainers are constantly finding new protocols, new exercises, or new routines. One of the main reasons people don't see results is that they don't get enough variety in their program. Continuing education means the trainer needs to analyze what he knows and what he's doing. At some point, he will have to admit that what he has known until now is wrong. A good example is Mike Boyle's recent admission that his core program in Functional Strength Training published in 2003 needs to be rewritten. Show some humility and admit that you were wrong. Just don't keep doing those wrong things.

7. Injury prevention and rehabilitation. Today's lifestyle predisposes us to injuries. We have so many weak and overused muscles, and asymmetries in our bodies that it's little wonder that 80% of our population suffers some kind of back pain. A good trainer prescribes exercises that not only make the client stronger, but also more functional.

8. Enthusiasm. A good trainer can transfer his passion for exercise science and anatomy to the client. Trainers know that strength and functional training benefits everyone, but their clients might not see the benefit or understand why trainers are so passionate. I'm not saying a good trainer is a cheerleader, but rather knows how to motivate and excite the client. This takes a particular personality and effective communication skills, and not everyone has it. It's probably the one reason why I would never be a top trainer.

9. Nutritional guidance. I can't tell you how many trainers I've seen that are out-of-shape or outright fat. Many trainer eat fast food, and food that is inconsistent with a healthy lifestyle. A good program is worthless without solid nutrition advise. You can't overcome bad nutrition. It's that simple.

10. Outsourcing. Good trainers need to learn that they cannot train every client. You cannot train a teenage athlete who's trying pack on 20 pounds of muscle, and a 35-year-old postnatal woman. It doesn't work. Too many people have disparate needs, and no trainer can properly create a program for every kind of client. So what does a good trainer who do when he confronts a potential client that doesn't fit his niche? He outsources to another trainer who does. A trainer who doesn't is cheating his client, and doesn't believe in the golden rule. If you outsource, other trainers will outsource to you. And if a trainer knows nothing about nutrition, then have the client talk to someone who does.

11. The right amount of variety. I've established that variety is good, but a trainer can go too far. Changing reps, weights, sets, rest time, exercises, routines, and equipment every day can actually stagnant growth. Why? Because your body never has time to adapt to an exercise. It's constantly exposed to new stimuluses, and never has a chance to adapt or improve. Subtle changes are okay, such as grip or stance, but frequent drastic changes will not lead to drastic results.

12. Assessing needs. Good trainers review a client's history, occupation, goals, abilities, and everyday activities. Every client should have a different routine. Some clients are trying to lose fat, some are trying to gain size, some are looking for functional exercises, and others simply can't or shouldn't do particular exercises. My old trainer pretty much gave me exercises that I know were totally inappropriate for my goals. Preacher curls, smith machine squats, and hamstring curls will not make you a faster runner! Band work will not add a lot of muscle! And 6o seconds of rest between sets will not help you lose fat!

13. The right mindset. This might be the most important of all, even more than enthusiasm. Why is a trainer training? Is he training clients to make extra cash on the side to pay for school? Is he training because he wants a free membership? Or is he training clients to help them reach their physical goals? It better be the last one. And a good trainer should expect
to be a trainer for the foreseeable future.

14. Behavior modification. A trainer works with his client, at most, three hours per week. The other 165 hours are critically important, because a client can completely reverse the benefits of his exercise program with bad posture, repetitive motion, poor diet, etc. A client has 23 hours per day to screw things up! If a client complains of shoulder injury, and wears his backpack on that shoulder all the time, then behavior modification is required. Behavior modification will probably account for 90% of results. Yes, 90%. 165/168 is 98%, so I'm actually underestimating!

15. Proper stretching. Forget static stretches that you learned in school. A few static stretches of 15 seconds at the end of the day might have some benefit, but a good trainer should teach his client how to use a foam roller or Trigger Point technology to smooth out adhesions in the muscles. Most people have very tight IT bands, hip flexors, and piriformis muscles (butt muscles). Active-isolated stretching also has been shown to increase range of motion. Active Release Therapy is a little more advanced, but a trainer should at least recommend this.

There you go. There are 15 things to look for in a good trainer. Notice that I never mentioned certification. I think a certification shows some level of knowledge and skill, but I'd rather work with a trainer who exhibits these 15 characteristics than one that read a textbook and answered 75% of the questions correctly on a test. Certification lends some credibility, but it can never replace enthusiasm, a desire to learn, and the ability to communicate effectively with the client.

Kevin

Summer Solstice and Vitamin D

2009-12-22T18:19:00.000-08:00

Winter is here and the days are short. A lack of sunlight is not only depressing, but it’s actually unhealthy. Sunlight provides us with the greatest source of vitamin D, which is one of the most important vitamins for the body. It’s also a common deficiency. The benefits of vitamin D are still being discovered, and awareness of its deficiency is becoming more common. Trainers, coaches, dermatologists, and chemists are recommending that we get more. The American Academy of Pediatrics now recommends 400 IU per day and the FDA will more than likely increase its recommendations in 2010. But there are some myths, facts, and half-truths that you need to know before you start supplementing.

Claim: Vitamin D is a hormone
True

Vitamin D is actually a misnomer; it’s not a vitamin. Some doctors wouldn’t consider it a hormone, but calcitdiol (25D3) is the metabolic product of cholecalciferol, or D3, which is made at the skin. When sunlight hits the skin it converts 7-dehydrocholesterol to vitamin D3, which then turns into 1.25 d3 in the kidneys. Calcidiol (1, 25D3) is what’s actually measured in a drug test and is a prehormone. Calcitriol is made in the kidneys and a steroid hormone

Claim: 400 IU is enough
False

The government’s recommendation was made almost 40 years ago. 400 IU is just enough to maintain bone health and prevent rickets, but even this is probably far too low. Recommendations from most dermatologists are at least 1,000 IUs. The vitamin D council recommends 5,000 IU or 50 ng/dl. Robert Heaney at Crieghton University recommends 3,000 IU per day. A healthy level of vitamin is about 35-50 ng/ml, although the vitamin D council recommends up to 80 ng/dl. 3000 IU would be the minimum to reach 35 ng/ml. To find your level of vitamin D, measure 25-hyrdoxyvitamin D (calcidiol) in your next blood test. Reinhold Vieth, a leading researcher of vitamin D at the University of Toronto, recommends 4,000 IU.

Claim: Vitamin D can boost athletic performance
Maybe

German swimmers actually used sunlamps 80 years ago to increase performance. Athletes have used sunlamps since to increase endurance, speed, muscle strength, and improve reaction time. The American Council of Sports Medicine published a study showing that vitamin D enhanced athletic performance. Vitamin D, along with calcium, helps strengthen bones, which could help runners and prevent osteoporosis in swimmers, cyclists, and other athletes in non-weight-bearing sports. The Russians and German both showed improvements in their athlete’s performance in the 1930s and ‘40s. German children were given large doses of vitamin D showed improvements in strength and fitness. The theory is that vitamin D can increase protein synthesis.

Claim: Vitamin D can facilitate fat loss
Maybe

Dermatologist Shalamar Sibley says that vitamin D can help with fat loss on a reduced-calorie diet, and even preserve muscle mass. Preserving muscle mass would help prevent any decrease in metabolism. Vitamin D might also stabilize insulin levels and reduce cravings for junk food. Vitamin D can decrease the release of insulin and maintain blood glucose levels. UV-B and vitamin can regulate blood sugar and appetite. A healthy weight is correlated with adequate amounts of vitamin D. Obesity is linked with impaired production of vitamin D from UV-B radiation. The theory is that low levels can increase the production of free fatty acids. This means calories turn into fat. Vitamin D and calcium can help prevent fatty acid synthesis. Therefore, if you want to burn fat, get more vitamin D. However, most evidence for these roles comes from in vitro, animal, and epidemiological studies. Findings presented at the Endocrine Society's 91st Annual Meeting in Washington, DC, showed that higher levels of vitamin D were inversely related to weight loss. Researchers cautioned that “it is not clear whether or not inadequate vitamin D causes obesity or the other way around. Higher baseline vitamin D levels of both 25(OH) D and 1,25 (OH)2D were linked to increased loss of abdominal fat. UVB stimulates melanocytes to produce melanin and melanocyte--stimulating hormone, which is important in weight loss and energy production.

Claim: Vitamin D can be easily obtained in food
False

The best sources of vitamin D include eggs, halibut, salmon, mackerel, cheese, beef , and fortified milk. Just to get 400 IU, you’d have to drink four glasses of milk. If it’s so hard to get vitamin D through diet, then how did human ancestors obtain it? They used to eat shellfish, oily fish, and insects but today we don’t eat those foods for social reasons. Humans would eat the fur and skin of animals, which was loaded with vitamin D. They would eat the tissues and organs of their animals but organs are not a part of modern society’s diet. It also hurts that many people avoid egg yolks, which contain all the D in an egg. Vegetarians get almost no vitamin D naturally. Human ancestors, it is estimated, obtained 3000-6000 IU daily. Best sources per 100 grams:

Cod Liver Oil: 10000 IU
Pork fat: 2800 IU
Herring: 680 IU
Oyster 640 IU
Catfish: 500 IU
Sardines: 480 IU
Mackeral 450 IU
Smoked Chinook Salmon: 320 IU
Sturgeon Roe: 232 IU
Shrimp, canned and drained 172 IU
Egg yolk: 150 IU
Almond Milk: 100 IU
Orange juice, fortified 100 IU

Claim: Vitamin D can increase longevity
Maybe

The New England Journal of Medicine recently showed a correlation between several diseases and vitamin D deficiency. Other studies clearly show that a supplementing with vitamin D can reduce mortality. The vitamin D council says that a D deficiency is a factor in 17 forms of cancer. Vitamin D is inversely proportional to the rates of diabetes. High levels can reduce fatigue, depression and season affective disorder (SAD). Increasing vitamin D can also reduce your risk of Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s. A study in the Archieves of Internal Medicine linked vitamin D to lower mortality rates. In a miraculous study, Dr. Anu Prabhala treated five paralyzed patients with 50000 IU of vitamin D and all become mobile within six weeks. Vitamin D has also been show to contribute to immune health, muscle strength and hormone production. In the 2000s researchers have shown that vitamin D is one of the most potent antioxidents. Low vitamin D is associated with Sjogren’s syndrome, rheumatoid arthritis, thyroiditis and Crohn’s disease, all common auto-immune disorders. Breast, prostate, skin and colon cancer are linked to low levels of vitamin D. Vitamin D can improve fertility and increase production of dopamine, epinephrine, and norepinephrine, which means vitamin D can treat Seasonal Affective Disorder with just two hours of exposure to a light box. However, the Women's Health Initiative, in which 36,282 postmenopausal women of various races and ethnicities were randomly assigned to receive 400 IU vitamin D plus 1,000 mg calcium daily or a placebo, found no significant differences between the groups in the incidence of colorectal cancers over 7 years. However, more recently, a clinical trial focused on bone health in 1,179 postmenopausal women residing in rural Nebraska found that subjects supplemented daily with calcium (1,400-1,500 mg) and vitamin D3 (1,100 IU) had a significantly lower incidence of cancer over 4 years compared to women taking a placebo. The different result could be attributed to the higher doses in the Nebraska study.

Claim: Vitamin D can prevent heart disease
Maybe

Again, correlation is not cause. Research in the last ten years have shown that low levels of vitamin D can contribute to syndrome X, the combination of hypertension, obesity, diabetes, and heart disease. When high levels of calcium, but low levels of D are present in the blood, leads to calcification of arteries, joints, and kidneys. Deposition of calcium in the arteries can cause atherosclerosis. This might be the missing link between industrial society and high levels of cardiac disease. Even the Vitamin D council warns that associations are not causes. While there are correlations between vitamin D and a litany of ailments, it’s impossible to pinpoint a single deficiency as a cause of any disease.

Claim: Vitamin D Enhances Bone Health
True

If you are predisposed to osteoporosis, than calcium is not enough. It’s recommended that you supplement with vitamin D. Not only does it control calcium levels in the blood, but it also aids in absorption of magnesium, iron, and zinc, minerals that are commonly deficient in our diet. Without sufficient vitamin D, bones can become thin, brittle, or misshapen. Osteomalacia is the result of weak muscles and bones.
Claim: Tanning/sunlight is a good way to get vitamin DTrueLying in a tanning bed for just 10-20 minutes can provide several thousand IUs of vitamin D. Tanning too long can burn the skin and cause cancer if done repeatedly. Going outside to get your vitamin D is probably the easiest, cheapest, and most effective way to get vitamin D. Length of exposure ranges from 5-30 minutes, and depends on cloud cover, the color of your skin, and pollution. It’s important to get sunlight during the late morning and early afternoon to get UVB exposure. Brief exposure to the sun probably is not enough. Tanning beds usually contain UV-A and a little UV-B. UV-A is now linked to non-melanoma skin cancers. UV-B interacts with cholesterol to produce vitamin D. To get maximum exposure, 85% of the body needs exposure during midday. Dark-skinned people need up to two hours per day! During the winter UV-B is less prolific. Living above 34 degrees north or south (almost all of North America and Europe) means that for several months per year, exposure to sunlight isn’t enough. The key is to get moderate amounts on a consistent basis. Single bouts of intense exposure can cause burn and suppress the immune system. A Sperti sun lamp provides just the right amount of UV-A and UV-B. Make sure your tanning bed contains more UV-B than UV-A. Humans can make up to 10,000 units of vitamin D within 30 minutes of full body exposure to the sun.

Claim: You Should Supplement with Magnesium and Calcium along with Vitamin D
True

High levels of Vitamin D without calcium can lead to calcium leaching. That is, vitamin D will take calcium from the bone, not from the blood. Accumulation of toxic materials can occur without magnesium and zinc. Aim for at least 1200 mg of calcium and at least 600 mg of magnesium. Calcium and magnesium should be taken several times per day, not once. Limit your intake of polyunsaturated fats (found in vegetables oils) and eat some fat when you take vitamin D, as vitamin D is a fat-soluble vitamin (or hormone). Too little vitamin D can reduce the number of binding proteins

Claim: Too much vitamin D is bad
Maybe

Some dermatologists believe anything higher than 65 ng/ml is too much. Dr. Reinhold Veith, a nutritional scientist at University of Toronto, and one of the world’s leading authorities on vitamin D believes 20000 IU can be toxic and recommends an upper limit of 10000 IU. Chronic supplementation should not exceed 4000 IU. High levels of D can lead to heart rhythm abnormalities, raise blood levels of calcium , and increase the chance of kidney stones. Veith reports human toxicity probably begins to occur after chronic daily consumption of approximately 40,000 IU/day (100 of the 400 IU capsules).

Claim:
You Should Supplement with Vitamin D
True

This should be clear by now. Because most people spend most of their days indoors, live in northern latitudes, use excessive sunscreen, and eat foods that are poor in vitamin D, supplementation is necessary. The Vitamin D council now recommends about 50 ng/dl, but 35 ng/dl should be the minimum. The daily recommended value of 400 IU is far too little. Taking a supplement of at least 3-5,000 IUs in the winter, and making a habit of exposing most of your body outside between 10 AM and 2 PM during the spring and summer for at least 10 minutes, should give you adequate amounts of vitamin D. While research hasn’t proved that vitamin D will prevent any disease, the number of correlations is hard to ignore. It’s important to get regularly tested for 25-hydroxyvitamin D, not 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D.

Claim: Absorption is based on many factors
True

Recommendations regarding supplementation and exposure to UVB sunlight depends on the following:-Height-Weight-Race-Gender-Age-Location-Season-Pollution levelsTaller people need more. Heavier people need more. Black and Hispanic people need more. Females need more than males. Old people need more than young people. People in northern latitudes need more. Everybody needs more during the summer. And people in cities with pollution and tall buildings need more. Keep in mind that UVB cannot penetrate glass, so standing in a sunroom is not beneficial.

Kevin

P.S.- I just got my first tan yesterday. Tanning is a safe way to get vitamin D in the winter. Too bad Congress wants to tax it. Policy-makers obviously don't read this blog.

Get Rid of Trans Fat

2009-12-19T11:27:00.000-08:00

If you’re going to eat a lot of sugar this holiday season, at least don’t eat trans fat. I can’t imagine putting this into your body. Trans fat, a.k.a. partially hydrogenated vegetable oil (the world partially is key. Don’t worry about the chemistry. Just avoid that word in the foods you eat) is designed to keep foods solid at room temperature for a long period of time. It’s also designed to increase your risk of type-II diabetes, heart disease, and atherosclerosis.

How can you avoid trans fat?

Do not eat anything fried in oil with trans fat (or anything fried for that matter). Pop your own popcorn, which can actually be healthy snack.

Avoid processed foods like chips, cookies, crackers, cereals, dairy products, deserts, and energy bars.

Avoid eating at restaurants. Even salads can contain hidden trans fat. Where is it? It’s usually in the sauce or cheese.

Boycott Dairy Queen. You want ice cream? Eat something natural at Whole Foods. Dairy Queen’s malts, shakes, and Blizzards all have trans fat. Try the Xtreme Blizzard with 6.5 grams of trans fat, three times what you should eat, and 165 grams of sugar. That’s more than 6 packs of M&Ms!

Boycott Denny’s. The double cheeseburger has 7 grams of trans fat an 1500 calories. But that can’t beat Bob Evans’ caramel banana pecan hotcakes with 9 grams of trans fat, 109 grams of sugar and 1500 calories! That’s before syrup, and bacon, and sausage, and…apple pie. Get the one at Bob Evan’s with 13 grams of trans fat.

Don't fall for claims on products that say "zero trans fat." The FDA permits that label as long as the product contains less than half a gram, so it could have .4 grams. Look for products that say "no partially hydrogenated oil." That's the key. Look at the ingredients. If you find that word, find another product.

It's really simple. Do what I say and you'll never worry about Trans Fat.

In Defense of Jogging

2009-12-15T18:19:00.000-08:00

Trainers in the fitness industry have turned against steady-state jogging recently. Everybody these days is touting the benefits of high-intensity interval training (HIIT), which refers to a form of cardio that undulates between intense periods of exercise interspersed with moderate or easy periods. For example, you would run hard for 30 seconds and then run easy for 1 minute. Rest-to-work periods vary, but the principal is the same.

I’m not going to deny the benefits of interval training. I incorporate it myself and I find it beneficial to increasing my top speed. Everybody should include it, whether you are a recreational “jogger” or an elite runner, or whether you specialize in the one mile, the 10k, or the marathon.

Jogging gets a bad reputation for several reasons. It takes a lot of time. To get any kind of results, you have to run for a sustained period of time to accrue any kind of benefit. Despite the recommendations by the World Health Organization to get 30 minutes of exercise per day, that’s the bare minimum, and it seems more like an inducement to get people to exercise. If the WHO told people they had to do 45-60 minutes each day, people would say they don’t have enough time. The thinking is that 30 minutes is better than nothing.

Long, slow jogging can also be boring. Doing the same form of exercise at the same speed, at the same intensity every day can get monotonous. This might explain one reason why people can’t adhere to an exercise program.

Another reason is that the body adapts to any form of exercise and that benefits diminish. This is simply the law of diminishing returns. When you first start exercising, the benefits come right away. Then they slowly diminish over time. That’s why some people can’t seem to lose any more weight. Their bodies have adapted to the form of exercise they’re doing.

Jogging also doesn’t elevate metabolism long after the workout is completed. In other words, you only burn calories during the workout but nothing after the workout. So if you jog for 45 minutes, the caloric burn stops as soon as you end the workout. On the other hand, HIIT workouts elevate your metabolism well after the workout has ended. This is called EPOC, or excess post-oxygen consumption. So not only does HIIT burn more calories per minute, but the afterburn of the workout will burn more calories. Jogging has no such after effect.

So fitness professionals have been telling people to do nothing but HIIT. Forget jogging. It’s inefficient. Your body just adapts to jogging. It’s an ineffective way to burn fat. It’s so common in the fitness industry to take things too far. This is another example. Trainers completely abandon one methodology for another. A few studies show the after effects of HIIT and all the sudden HIIT is the latest rage.

I’m not denying the benefits of HIIT: more efficient, more calories burned afterwards, etc. But rarely do trainers ever discuss the downside to HIIT. People who are just new to jogging and haven’t ever exercised should not do HIIT. They should instead establish an aerobic base (which they don’t have). After they have established that base, then they can slowly incorporate HIIT into their program. Prescribing hit to someone who has never jogged or ran in their life is a recipe for disaster. It’s like taking a high-school pitcher and sending him to the major leagues. He needs to progress through single, double and triple AAA before he’s ready for the big leagues. Non-exercisers need to progress in the same way. They need to establish a routine first, and then start doing short intervals. Eventually they increase the speed, incline or time of the interval.

But it’s important not to completely disregard the benefits of steady-state aerobic exercise. Women’s Health had a great article just last month about the benefits of jogging. It reports the following:

Researchers at Stanford University discovered that regular runners have a 39 percent lower risk of dying an early death compared with healthy adults of the same age.

Running can help prevent cardiovascular disease, diabetes, metabolic syndrome, osteoporosis, and even cancer

Most recently, a 2009 study published in the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research found that running is as good a bone-builder as strength training.

The Journal of Anatomy found that running does not increase your risk of osteoarthritis, the cartilage decay that causes pain and inflammation in hip and knee joints. Nor does it wreck your back, according to a research review in the Southern Medical Journal. Researchers suggest that because running builds stronger muscles and ligaments.

Tom Holland, an exercise physiologist in Darien, Connecticut. "The reason runners can sometimes appear weathered is that they're thinner— low body fat makes fine lines more visible— and they're out in the sun more. Jogging also relieves stress and forces you to focus. Believe me, some of my best ideas have come on the treadmill!

Opponents also criticize the lack of muscle that marathoners and joggers have. They are contradicting themselves when they say this. On the one hand, they say that jogging is an inefficient way to burn fat. On the other hand, they like to point out how joggers look frail and weak. You know why? Because running burns so many calories that it’s almost impossible to gain muscle! I know that first hand. I can’t tell you how many trainers have told me to limit my cardio to gain muscle. Limiting cardio would impair my performance in triathlon. But if jogging doesn’t burn fat, then why can’t runners gain muscle?

The physiques of marathoners and sprinters are often compared to convince people that HIIT is the only solution to burning fat. Marathoners look weak and skinny, while sprinters look muscular and sleek. First of all, unless you train like Olympic sprinters, you’re not going to look like one. You don’t have the time, genetics, or inclination to train like them. So you’re not going to look like them when you do HIIT. Marathoners look skinny, but they have extremely low amounts of body fat, which is what people want. It’s a myth that marathoners have higher percentages of body fat. Proponents of HIIT say it’s because their levels of a hormone called cortisol are higher. This is false. Most marathoners have extremely low percentages of body fat.

I’d also like to remind you of what marathoner Bill Rodgers said, “if you want to win something, win a 100 m sprint. If you want to accomplish something, win a marathon.” I don’t care how sleek and muscular sprinters look. I’d rather look weak and have the endurance to run for several hours than to run for 100 meters.

If jogging is such a poor way to lose fat, then why have so many people lost weight doing it? I’ve talked to so many people who say they lose weight simply by exercising. They didn’t do any kind of HIIT. They would have lost weight faster had they incorporated HIIT, but the extra jogging create the energy deficit they needed to lose weight.

Even seasoned runners spend much of their winter training establishing an aerobic base. While many have questioned this methodology as well, there aren’t many runners who don’t do a significant amount of “base” training during the offseason as well. In fact, a study of marathoners just a few years ago showed that more than 80% of the training was at an “easy pace” while the other 20% consisted of threshold runs, hill repeats and speed work.

The opponents of steady-state jogging also fail to realize that jogging burns a significant amount of calories. It burns more than swimming, cycling, rowing, and the elliptical because of its high-impact nature. So if somebody who has never exercised before starts to jog 30 minutes every day and doesn’t increase his caloric intake, then that person will lose weight. At first the amount of weight he loses will be significant, and will eventually reach a plateau. He will reach a plateau only when the body becomes so efficient at jogging for 30 minutes that it negates the original caloric gap between expenditure and intake.

Opponents of jogging say that once the body adapts, then you will have to jog farther at the same pace to get the same effect. But if you start jogging for 30 minutes at 6.0 MPH, then eventually you will be able to run farther in the same amount of time at the same intensity. In other words, running one mile today will be just as easy as running 1.5 miles in the future. A mile is insurmountable to people who have never jogged before. But marathoners can run an “easy” mile in 6:00 minutes, believe it or not.

HIIT also has the same limitations. Even though the EPOC of interval training is higher, if somebody does the same workout over and over, he will eventually stop losing weight because the body will adapt. This is what enthusiasts of HIIT never mention. The body will adapt to interval training too. That’s why it’s important to increase the speed, duration, or intensity of the interval. Joggers need to challenge their bodies in the same way.

So how do you incorporate HIIT? In depends on your history, available time, and frequency that you run. If you’ve just started to run, I’d start jogging at an easy pace for 3-4 weeks and establish a base. If you can’t run a mile, you have no reason doing HIIT. Once you feel comfortable jogging for 30 minutes, add some intervals to your program. A typical program would look like this for somebody who can run just three times per week:

Weeks 1-41.
1.30-40 minutes easy
2.30-40 minutes easy
3. 30-40 minutes easy

Weeks 5-8

1. 10 min warm up 10x (20 seconds hard, 60 seconds easy), 10 min cool down
2. 30-40 minutes easy
3. 10 min warm up 10x (20 second hill sprint, 60 seconds easy) 10 min cool down

Weeks 9-12
1.10 min warm up, 5 min moderate, 5 min hard, 10 min cool down
2. 40-50 minutes easy
3. 10 min warm up 10x (30 seconds hard, 60 seconds easy)

After you’ve been running for 12 weeks, you can then start to increase the length of the intervals, decrease the rest time, increase the speed or incline, and increase the duration of the entire workout.

I hope I’ve brought sanity to the argument about HIIT vs. jogging. HIIT is certainly sexy while jogging is not, but both have their place. Neither one will bring optimal results by themselves. They need to be incorporated into a program. Without HIIT, you’ll become a slow jogger. With no jogging, you’ll burn out and you’ll never increase endurance.

Kevin

The Health Conspiracy

2009-12-12T18:38:00.000-08:00

I was reading Dave Soucy’s blog the other day and I saw a video of Bill Maher berating the health care industry (you can see the video here). Bill Maher is openly progressive. He voted for Ralph Nadar, loves Michael Moore and Arianna Huffington, and was vehemently critical of George W. Bush during the 2000s. His views on health care, drug legalization, war, and the role of government are obvious to anyone who watches him.

The thesis of his rant was that the health care industry wants people to be sick and frail so that they can make billions selling expensive drugs. If people were healthy and had no pain, they’d have no reason to buy drugs that lower cholesterol, kill pain, unclog arteries, etc. If people were healthy, they’d n ever buy drugs. The logic seems simple. If people didn’t buy drugs, then the companies who sell them would go out of business.

This argument is false for several reasons. Does Bill Maher really believe that the creators of these drugs and the people who market them wake up every morning and hope that people are sick and broken? Do they hope they don’t find alternative treatment? If so, then they truly are monsters who deserve to go to hell. But I don’t think these CEOs of these companies really believe that. They honestly believe that they’re selling a product that people need and that will make them better.

Maher’s right that we as people can take a lot of precautions. We can eat right. We can exercise regularly. We can do strength training. We can stretch, brush our teeth, drink tea, have a strong purpose in life, and have plenty of social activity. I agree that a healthy lifestyle can preclude the use of prescription drugs almost all the time. And I agree we should do everything we can before we resort to expensive pills and medications. But there are instances when we need drugs and prescriptions. Diet and exercise don’t seem to be doing much for my testosterone levels. Many women such hypothyroidism despite leading a healthy lifestyle. Some people are predisposed to heart disease. Just recently one of the best triathlete’s in the world ended his career due to a rare heart condition that could kill him. Some people are born with type-I diabetes and need to inject insulin everyday.

Not everyone will take care of themselves the way they should. Nobody does all the time. How many people overate on Thanksgiving? Was that healthy? How many people will get wasted on New Year’s Day? Is that healthy? How many people strength train like they should? How many people have more than one person to confide in? Nobody is perfectly healthy.

This debate can also apply to anyone. I asked a couple of physical therapists the other day at my health club about this argument. They said there will be always be broken people, bad posture, and injuries. They’re simply providing a solution to that problem. Do they hope people are sick and injured? No, but there will always be demand for rehab. Chiropractors don’t want people to have bad backs, but they know people will have bad backs. Do personal trainers like me hope people never lose fat? No. I want people to get results. But there will always be overfat people in our society. And even if they were in good shape, they’d want to be in better shape. People are never satisfied. The fitness industry is serving a need to get into better shape. Nobody is perfect shape. And until everybody is in perfect shape, the fitness industry isn’t going anywhere.

To take this argument to the extreme would be to say that grocery stores hope people don’t learn how to grow their own food. If they did, they’d never shop at a grocery store. But nobody grows all their food, and only a few people actually grow a fraction of their food. The car industry sells cars, but does it hope that people don’t start walking or riding a bike everywhere, even though that would be healthier?

Should pharmaceuticals therefore deny drugs to people who didn’t care of themselves properly? Who’s to define what is proper care? At one point does someone become responsible? I agree that responsibility and preventive health care is lost in this whole debate, but the defintion of preventive care is elusive and fuzzy.

Imagining a world in which people don’t’ need drugs is a fantasy. If everybody in this country started to take care of themselves as best as possible, the number of prescriptions would gradually fall. Pharmaceuticals would either cut staff, or adapt.

How could they adapt? When people are healthy and don’t need drugs, they would start to demand something else that would improve their lives: drugs that improve mental clarity; supplements; protein powder; multivitamins, drugs that improve intelligence; drugs that prevent fatigue. The idea that pharmaceuticals would go out of business assumes that people’s wants and needs are static. As soon as we satisfy our needs and wants of today, we’ll be perfectly happy.

If people’s wants and needs were static, our economy would never grow. As we accumulate and build wealth, our wants and needs expand to meet that available wealth. Our economy is predicated on consumption of goods and services. How many people want nothing? The answer is zero, even though the average person today is far wealthier than our forebears generations ago. People will always want something. Wants change, but there will always be wants.

Kevin

How I Learned to Love the "Dread"mill

2009-12-09T17:29:00.000-08:00

Until last year you wouldn’t see me on a treadmill, which I often called the “dreadmill”. I called it that because I thought it was a monotonous form of exercise. I couldn’t stand running in one place for a long duration of time. I always preferred to run outside. Sometimes I still do, but I’ve learned to love the treadmill for reasons I explain below.

I understand negative attitudes to treadmills (or Stairmasters, ellipticals, Concept 2 Rowers, and stationary bikes). It can be dull and boring. It’s not as scenic. It’s not as “natural.” You don’t get to run through nature or see the neighborhood.

But I can counter all those claims, and then enumerate the benefits of running on a treadmill that running on land simply cannot replicate.

I’ve been riding my bike on a trainer for three years now, and I never had problem with riding for an hour or even two hours. The concept is the same as running on a treadmill. You stay in one spot for a long duration of time and tax your cardiovascular system. For some reason I never applied this rational to running in a stationary position. Somehow riding indoors was tolerable but running in place was not.

When I started to follow a plan to prepare for my triathlon this year, it called for a lot of treadmill running. At first I wanted to do these workouts on land as much as possible. But I realized that to get the full benefit of the proven program, I had to spend time on the treadmill.
Over time, I came to like and love the treadmill for the following reasons:-I never had to worry about the weather. I never had to worry about rain, lightning, wind, or worse, cold air. I hated running in freezing temperatures. I hated spending money on winter clothing that only made running outside tolerable at best. I hate running with a lot of clothes. On the coldest days, I could run in my tri-suit and still wipe sweat off my face. This is one of the best benefits of the treadmill. I never have to worry about the forecast (except on race day).

-I could do whatever workout I wanted. If a workout called for hills, I could increase the incline to any grade I wanted for any length of time. Since my goal is to live in Florida in the near future, I will have to like running on the incline on the treadmill. I could do endurance work, progressive runs, intervals, and anything else I liked.

-I could watch TV and run at the same time. Most gyms these days have Cardio Theater, which is a service that delivers television to all the cardio machines. My gym, XSport, has TVs on every one of the 140 machines we have. They don’t have as many channels as I’d like, but they have my favorite channels. I can now do two things at once: get the news and workout. Someday, I’d like to have my own treadmill in my home, and watch movies. Watching TV and movies can be a good distraction during stressful workouts. It usually removes any negative thoughts I might have.

-I don’t have to worry about what I will eat and drink during a run. When you run outside, you have to carry water and food (if you choose to carry any at all). There are no aid stations and nobody to give you rations. The treadmill has a convenient cup holder. I can also put small amounts of food there. I don’t have to stash anything in my pocket. When I run out of water, I simply refill at the water fountain.

-The treadmill is a controlled environment. Weather is never an issue. There are no dogs. No stop lights. No pedestrians. No leaf blowers or other lawn equipment. No cyclists. The treadmill is always your own. You never have to share it with anyone. You don’t have to pass anyone. There are no potholes or cracks into which you can trip.

Downsides

I will admit there are a few downsides to the treadmill. As running coach Jack Daniels notes, perceived exertion is higher at any given speed on the treadmill, even though oxygen update is lower. I can attest to this. When I run at 8:30 per mile outside, my heart rate might be 125-130 beats per minute. My heart rate would be 10-15 beats higher on the treadmill, and it would seem much harder to run at that speed. The world record for the marathon, held by Ethiopian Haile Gebrselassie, is just under 2:04. The world record for the marathon on a treadmill is 2:31. You can see that running on a treadmill means we have to run slower. Nonetheless, we can still get a great workout and run at any intensity or heart rate we want.

Another downside is doing long, endurance runs on the treadmill. I still can’t imagine running more than 90 minutes at one time. However, I couldn’t run more than 30 minutes on the treadmill last year. Until I have to run more than 90 minutes either outside or inside, I won’t worry about exceeding that length.

Running outside has a few perceived advantages, but I don’t think they’re really based on reality. One claim is that it’s healthier to run in nature and breath fresh air. First, the air outside isn’t necessarily healthier than it is inside. In fact, many times it is worse, especially if you live in the city. The air quality index in the summer time can be atrocious. There are tons of particles and pollutants in the air. Running indoors means we are running in filtered, air-conditioned air. How refreshing.

We often hear that running allows us to connect with nature. Many runners have dreams of running through forests and parks. But this image is based on myth more than reality. How many people have access to such beautiful areas? How many people actually live on a lake, or next to a trail that goes through pristine forests? The nearly trail to me isn’t very long. Not only is it treacherous, but it starts on a street and ends in a parking lot. The Washington & Old-Dominion Trail is about 10 miles from my house. It’s nothing more than a long bike path with shrubs and bushes along the side. It also crosses several major roads. My point is, unless you live in the middle of nowhere, or in a national park, we don’t really run with nature. We run along congested highways, through neighborhoods, or on busy city streets.

Running outside doesn’t necessarily make you a faster runner. The best runners and triathletes effectively use the treadmill to do workouts that they simply can’t do outside. Some have proposed that treadmills aren’t as effective as running outside. But clearly, if Olympians and the top runners in the world use them, then they are certainly effective for your average runner!

I do almost all my running on the treadmill now. In the winter, I hardly run outside, except when I run immediately after dismounting my bike (a brick run). Until it’s light and warm outside, you won’t see me running. Even then, I’ll do most of my key workouts on a treadmill.
If you don’t like the treadmill, at least try it. Try one run per week. I think you’ll find that you can tolerate it, and even prefer it. Do your long runs outside. But I highly recommend that you do your interval, hill, and speed work on the treadmill. It’s much easier logistically and nothing can interfere with your workout.

Happy training.

Kevin

Not so Splendid: Part II

2009-12-06T17:44:00.000-08:00

Last week I shared with you my awful experience with Splenda and the effects it has had on me: weight gain due to water retention, and a increased desire for carbohydrates and sweets. This week I look at more anecdotal evidence that SPlenda and artificial sweeteners are associated with fat gain and overfatness.

I was at Giant, my local supermarket, the other day, and as I was leaving, the young bag lady asked me how I liked my SoBe water. Sobe water is flavored with PureVia, which is natural sweetener made from Stevia. I told her I liked it and that I prefered a beverage with no artificial sweeteners. I told her I upset my digestive system (it doesn’t, but it has affected my digestive patterns), and that it didn’t agree me. The lady next to me agreed, and said she couldn’t tolerate much sucralose.

The bag lady said she loved Splenda. She said it allowed her to eat her 100-calorie cheesecakes. I noticed that she was 30-40 pounds overfat. Clearly, adding Splenda to her diet hasn’t helped achieve her ideal weight. This could be for several reasons. She could be overcompensating. She could be eating more cheesecakes because each cheesecake has fewer calories than a typical cheesecake. Thus, she doesn’t feel guilty eating them, since they are calorie. If she ate regular cheesecakes, then she would only eat one, not several. But I have no evidence that she’s eating more of these cheesecakes.

I suspect two other things are happening that explain her overfatness. Using Splenda has increased her cravings for carbs and other foods that have a lot of sugar, or that taste like sugar. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that she eats cheesecakes and liberally uses Splenda.

I also suspect that Splenda is somehow interrupting her hormonal system, and disrupting her natural metabolism. Again, I have no scientific evidence for this, but I have read plenty of stories and have seen preliminary evidence that Splenda can negatively affect our hormonal systems.

Here’s another observations I’ve made. I’ve never seen anyone who uses a lot of Sucralose that is actually in good shape. Think about it. How many people do you know drink a lot of diet soda, use artificial sweeteners, and are good shape? I see a direct correlation between diet soda consumption (and regular soda consumption) and fat. People who drink diet soda are either overweight, or are futilely trying to lose weight. People who are in good shape rarely consume diet soda.

Here’s the bottom line. If you’re trying to lose fat, then quit drinking diet soda. Even if you don’t overcompensate when you drink diet soda, keep in mind that it could be ruining your metabolism and hormonal system. If you want to lose weight, then you need to do what healthy people do, and that’s not drinking diet soda. If you don’t want to be overfat, then don’t do what your overfat counterparts are doing: drinking diet soda!

Not so Splendid

2009-11-24T19:57:00.000-08:00

I used to be very holistic regarding nutrition. I believed you shouldn't eat anything unnatural or processed. I was adamantly opposed to artificial sweeteners, including saccharine, sucralose, and aspartame. I would occasionally "splurge" and have a diet soda. I never noticed any negative side effects.

As you know I still believe in whole, unprocessed foods, a term open to interpretation. The best definition comes from ultrarunner Dean Karnanzes, who uses this question as a test: would our ancestors recognize the food? If the answer is no, then it's probably a man-made food. Ancestors would not recognize artificial sweeteners.

I started incorporating Splenda into my diet a few months ago. My rational was that most sports supplements contain small amounts of Splenda to mask the chalky and unpalatable flavor. Those supplements are designed to be mixed with water or juice, so they must taste good in order for athletes to consume them. I figured Splenda was the safest of the artificial sweeteners. I wasn't sure about aspartame, and saccharine (Sweet N' Low, the pink stuff) wasn't found in many products anyway.

I gradually started using more and more Splenda until I was using several dozen packets per day! I was even using granulated Splenda when I ran out of packets. Moreover, I was drinking V8 Fusion Light, with a small amount of Splenda, and calorie-free salad dressing. The reason I was using so much was because I was drinking up to 10 smoothies per day (see my previous post about the liquid diet, which I still adhere to).

Splenda had the advantage of being cheap. Stevia, Purvia, and Truvia are all a little more expensive. I could get 400 packets of Splenda for about $13, far more than I could get with the other natural sweeteners (which tasted better). Splenda was also available in most restaurants, Starbucks, gas stations, and 7 Elevens, so I could always grab some there when I put ice into my smoothies.

Yes, here I was, a personal trainer with one of the most regimented and structured diets, eating large amounts of an artificial sweetener. I would put my packets into a sandwich bag every day to make sure I would have enough Splenda to last until the evening. The experiment came to end last week. I was at work, role-playing a consultation between a fitness consultant and a prospect looking to lose weight. My co-worker weighed me, and to my splendid surprise, found that I had gained 17 pounds! I couldn't believe it. I couldn't see the extra weight anywhere. My clothes weren't tight. I didn't feel fatter. I didn't look different. My diet hadn't changed. All I could suspect was the introduction of this chemical into my system caused me to retain all the water I was drinking.

Could this benign sweetener cause such a drastic change in my body? According to my perfunctory research, possibly. Here's what I found:

According to findings published in the peer-reviewed Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, a 12-week feeding study conducted at Duke University, control animals experienced an increase in body weight of 93 per cent over the 12 week study The effect of Splenda on body weight is likely due to the combined elevation of both intestinal P-gp and CYP. Splenda also affected the expression of certain enzymes known to interfere with the absorption of nutrients and pharmaceuticals. At the end of the initial 12 weeks, significant reductions in the levels of so-called beneficial bacteria were observed

Eight years of data collected by Sharon P. Fowler, MPH, and colleagues at the University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio showed that diet soda is linked with obesity. They report a 41% increase risk of obesity with every can of diet soda consumed.

Observational evidence shows that there are side effects of Splenda, including skin rashes/flushing, panic-like agitation, dizziness and numbness, diarrhea, muscle aches, headaches, intestinal cramping, bladder issues, and stomach pain.

While I didn't notice any of those side effects, I definitely noticed the weight gain, which could've been a result of excess water retention. Some scientists speculate that Splenda can interfere with proper metabolism of nutrients and lipolysis (liberation of fat for fuel). So I am anecdotal evidence that Splenda can interfere with fat metabolism and can cause weight. Other side effects include an increased craving for carbohydrates and sugar. I definitely noticed this! I have never craved sugar like I have in the last few months.

I have not cut out all Splenda. No drinks, no supplements, no packets, no granulated sugar. I want to see if Splenda is really causing this weight gain. It could be the liquid diet I'm on, or drinking too much fruit in the afternoon and evening. We'll see. But others have reported unexpected weight gain with Splenda.

Should everyone absolutely avoid Splenda? No. Small amounts in sports supplements or drinks are fine. One or two diet sodas probably won't kill you. A moderate amount of Splenda is less likely to kill you than excess sugar, which is associated with obesity, insulin resistance, and type-II diabetes. So I'd rather you eat a little Splenda than a lot of sugar. Just don't add Splenda to your diet. You shouldn't avoid a performance enhancer just because it has a little Splenda.

My experiment with Splenda has ended. I wish I hadn't conducted it in the first place. Now I'm back to using just Stevia, and occasionally some Truvia. Keep it real.

Kevin

PS- I should've listened to my Aunt Lori before conducting this experiment. I should have listened to her warnings!

How Many Minutes Do You Need?

2009-11-22T16:58:00.000-08:00

One trend in the fitness industry is designing workouts that are so effective and hard that they only need to last several minutes. These programs promise results in as little as seven minutes per day. It's hard to believe, but do these workouts really produce the results they promise? They have some validity. The infamous Tabata intervals, first produced by the Japanese scientist Isha Tabata, show that eight 20-second maximum bursts of effort interspersed with 10 second rest periods produced dramatic improvements in both aerobic and anaerobic fitness.

This trend isn't new. Remember eight-minute abs? Remember Bowflex's claim that you could get a strong, lean body with 3 20-minute workouts? Remember that machine that promised results in as little as 4 minutes per day? It was so expensive that it never really took off. A couple recent examples of this trend come to mind. I saw the 7-Minute Muscle by Jon Benson. Fabrice Ribalde takes it to an extreme with his 1-Rep workout. Body by Jake promises results in 11-minutes per day. Some magazines offer awesome workouts with guaranteed results in just minutes a day.

It makes you wonder why anyone would train for an hour in the gym. Who would train that long when you get results in a fraction of the time?

These programs have a lot of appeal for a couple reasons. First, people just don't think they have the time to train. They have the time, they just don't make the time. That's the crucial difference. If their life depended on training, they'd find a way. These same people always find time for television, video games, happy hour and and one-hour commutes, but can't find the time to take care of thier bodies. That's why "minutes a day" sounds so appealing. They don't have to make any adjustments to thier lifestyle. They can do a few easy exercises at some piont in the day and think that they are going to get results.

Womens' magazines are the worst culprit of this type of nonsense. They promise thier readers "flat abs fast," "get fit fast," and "drop 20 pounds before Christmas." I'm not making these up. I saw them at the grocery store this morning. These claims are of course false but you can print almost anything you want as long as you don't slander somebody.

On the one hand, I think the trainers who design these programs actually care about people getting in shape. I don't think there are many trainers who don't want thier clients to get results. The trainers who promise fast results realize that many people will not even consider using thier program unless it requires minimal time and that results will come fast. If they said their program required hard work, sweat, time, effort, and commitment, they might not capture their audience. Hard work doesn't sell.

However, these trainers are doing a huge dis-service to their audience. They make them believe that they can get results in a few minutes per day, and that results will come quick. They never mention lifestyle factors, such as previous exercise history, injuries, nutrition, posture, or fatigue. They promise thier readers something they can't have: great results with minimal investment. How appealing. Have the strength of a warrior in less than an hour per week.

These workouts are of course ridiculously easy. More often than not they show a model with a beautiful physique. This model of course did not get this body with this workout. Sometimes, the model is even smiling. Let me tell you something. If you're smiling and laughing in your workout, you're not working!

Here's the reality. If you want to get into shape or lose fat, you're going to have to work to do it. There are no shortcuts in life. If something is too good to be true, it's false. You have to invest time and effort to get results. This applies in all aspects of life. I laugh when I hear "hard-earned" money. What money isn't hard-earned? Somewhere, somebody worked hard to create the value of that money.

You cannot have the body of an olympian or champion with minimal investment. If you could, there would be no such thing as an olympian. Olympians are what they are because of the time and effort they invested to achieve their goals. They pushed their limits and never quit. They overran their mind's protective mechanism and expanded their comfort zone. Few people have the inclination to go that far.

So what do you have to do to get into shape? First of all, don't say you want to get into shape. You have to visualize your goal, and then say, I'm going to get into shape. There's a huge difference. Tell somebody you know. Write your goal on an index card and put it in your wallet. Then you need a plan to take you to your goal. Whether you're trying to increase muscle or lose fat, you're going to have to commit for several weaks, maybe even several months.

You have to be consistent too. You can't be discilplined one day and then slack off the next. This has to be a consistent effort every day. Your life has to change. You can't commit to going to the gym for one hour per day and then not change anything for the other 23 hours. In fact, it's those 23 hours will determine whether or not your achieve your goals. You have to adhere to a strict, but palatable nutrition program. You'll have to commit to eight or more hours of sleep. You'll have to skip some social events to make time for workouts. Everything comes with a price.

If you're trying to lose fat, expect to work out every day. You will have to do both strength training, metabolic conditioning, steady state cardio, and high intensity cardio. You will have at most one day off. If you're trying to build muscle, you'll still have to workout several times per week. But the other 23 hours in the day will be just as critical. You will have to have a dedicated recovery and nutrition plan.

One reason why people don't get results is because these trainers keep peddling programs and products that promise maximum results with minimum work. People believe them and then wonder why they don't get results. Becaues results require time and effort! You have to work. You can't do a few sets of easy exercises, and a few wind sprints and then think you'll have the body you want.

I think these programs are a manifestation of one of the worst characteristics of modern society: a short attention span and instant gratification. We want things to happen instantly. We don't want to wait. We want what we desire now. Now, now, now. That's why so many books and magazines use words such as "quick," "fast," "simple", and "easy." Those words are so appealing. I sound pessimistic and cynical, but if our society really did think long-term, we wouldn't be drowning in debt like we are now. The debt that is burdening this nation is a result of our impulse for instant gratification at the expense of the long-term consequences.

Kevin

How to Avoid Holiday Weight Gain Forever- Part II

2009-11-14T14:20:00.000-08:00

My first post was an attack against Thanksgiving. Again, I'm going to anger some people and I'm going to get angry responses. Just at least consider this post. This time I'm going to attack another cherished holiday: Christmas. But I'm not attacking the purpose of the holiday or the religous aspect. Instead, I'm just attacking one of its unhealthy traditions: the constant parties, dinners, and festivals that take place in the weeks before Christmas. I'm not going to say we shouldn't celebrate Christmas. It, along with the Fourth of July, are the two holidays I think actually matter and that warrant a day off.

Like Thanksgiving, Christmas is a time of abundance of unhealthy food that ends up on peoples' waists. The health "experts" continue to recycle their advise about how to avoid weight gain this winter. Their tips are always the same, and they never seem to work. They don't work because they don't attack the root cause of the problem, or the unhealthy and ingrained beliefs we have about Christmas feasts.

The root problem is that we think we should gorge ourselves on Christmas Day, and during the four weeks preceding the holiday too. For some reason, the adage "everything in moderation" is no longer applicable. Call me Scrooge or a miserable human being (I'm neither), but the real solution is to have fewer parties, less food at those parties, healthier food at those parties, and smaller Christmas meals.

For some reason we think that part of the Christmas spirit is to eat enormous amounts of food. If there isn't a lot of bad food, then Christmas just isn't Christmas. Let's take a look at all the traditions that make Christmas the most wonderful part of the year (except the cold!)

-Christmas trees are beautifully displayed with ribbons, ornaments, bulbs, and even glass bulbs with trains that spin around in them

-Christmas carols. Unless you work in retail, you won't get sick of them. All the stores and radio stations play them for the last five weeks of the year. There's no other holiday that has its own soundtrack.

-Giving gifts. While I think we spend too much time and money giving presents to each other, there's no other time in the year when we do this. Only one person receives a gift on a birthday. I could say much more about gifts, but this is a health and nutrition blog, not a personal finance one.

-Santa Claus and all the other whimsical tales we tell each other. I use to love watching old Disney Christmas cartoons.

-Decorations. Parking light posts, stores, and even homes are all decorated with a beautiful assortment of wreathes, manger scenes, ribbons, statues, and lights. Our towns and neighborhoods look much different in December than during the rest of the year.

Christmas has both a secular and religious purpose. Obviously you should already know the religious aspect. It's a celebration of the birth of Christ, but there's no indication in the Bible that he was born on December 25. We're not even sure which year he was born in, much less which day. His birthday wasn't even celebrated for some 300 years after his death. December 25, then, is an arbitrary date to coincide with the pagan holidays, such as Rome's Saturnalia.

The secular aspect has to do with the time of year. Many cultures have holidays that celebrate the harvest, or the end of the growing season. Western nations are no different. Our harvest festival comes at the end of the year, when the days are the shortest.

The purpose of Christmas then, is to celebrate Christ, the harvest, and the end of the year, as well as to have a chance to be together with family and friends. Christmas provides a reason for families to see each other. That's very important in today's hyper-mobile society.

But one tradition needs to go: the large, gargantuan meals. I'm not referring to the number guests either. A large gathering of family, friends, or even neighbors is wonderful. I'm referring to the food. For some reason, people tend to make high-caloric, nutrient-poor food at Christmas that they never make at other times of the year. Let's take a look at some of the usual suspects:

-Candied sweet potatoes (one cup): 400 calories

-Fruitcake (one slice) 165 calories

-Cranberry sauce (1/2 cup) 200 calories

-Stuffing (1 cup) 400 calories (nothing beats a bunch of bread crumbs and meat juice!)

-Breadroll roll 130 calories

-Shortbread Cookie 40 calories (nothing but butter, by the way)

-Ham (3 ox) 250 calories

-Duck (3 oz) 260 calories

-Eggnog (1 cup) 400 calories -This one blew me away. One little cup has 400 calories. That would be almost a half gallon of soy milk.

-Pecan Pie (1 slice)- 500 calories. Pecans are healthy, but not everything else it comes with.

Despite all the traditions of Christmas, our culture seems to think that it's all about food. Without all that food, Christmas just wouldn't be the same.

Just as some athletes and people have physical contraindications to avoid particular exercises (think baseball pitchers and bench presses), some cultures have contraindications to avoid particular activities. Our society is broken, overweight, and sedentary. There is simply no need to have five weeks of overeating. It's only making our problem worse.

Imagine for a moment that Russia, a country with a notorious epidemic of alcoholism, had a tradition of drinking parties that lasted an entire month. Wouldn't people think, "why do they do that? That's why they're always so drunk! They're always looking for excuses to drink!"

We've established a tradition in this country of over-eating at a particular time of year, even though we overeat during the rest of the year, except in smaller quantities. Weight gain is the steepest in November and December, but weight loss is not as steep in January and February. Perhaps people are overweight as a result of the fat that they have accumulated over the past holiday seasons.

Planned overeating is okay once in a while. Everyone has a "cheat" meal once in a while. I disagree with this term, but it refers to a meal that is high-caloric and nutrient-poor and that deviates from the typical diet. As I've said before, there's room for all food in a diet.

The problem planned overeating at Christmas is that we don't just overeat once, we overeat starting on Thanksgiving. Everybody has a party. And at every party you'll find the typical unhealthy fare.

As I've already shown, there's plenty more to Christmas than a lot of food. That's what we should focus on instead. Friends and family should be the focus of Christmas parties, not a lot of food, much of which will go to waste anyway.

You might say that I'm breaking a tradition. Yes and no. Having a constant stream of parties has not always been part of our culture. I suspect it's only been in the last 40 or 50 years that we've done this. It used to be that people would cook a few delicacies on Christmas Day, like a goose and a pie. Like I said before, not all traditions are good. Just because we've always done it doesn't mean we should always do it.

We eat a large amount of food for all the wrong reasons. We don't eat it to become healthier, that's for sure. We don't eat eat it because we actually need it, but only because we think we deserve it, or because it's there, or because it's free, or because it's what we've always done.

Let's be honest. Overeating, especially for several weeks, is self-destructive. It's grotesque and unhealthy. I can't find any rationalization for it yet people get angry whenever I suggest that we stop overeating during the holidays. "Just because you don't want a lot food, doesn't mean nobody else does," they tell me. "You don't have to have the cookies." I won't have those cookies, but just because other people want those cookies doesn't mean we should provide them. Then they'll tell me, "life is short. Enjoy it." To me, putting dirty, greasy food into you mouth that might provide a few minutes of pleasure is ridiculous when you consider that you will deal with that fat gain for the rest of your life. I enjoy life because I am healthy, and I feel the benefits of healthy living every day, not just for a few minutes.

No holiday or tradition can justify such a destructive and unhealthy behavior such as massive eating. Massive eating is no more acceptable than hot dog-eating contests. I find them just as gross. The thing is, at least the participants admit that they're disgusting. We have a hard time admitting that the five-week marathon of indulgence is okay just because it's part of the Christmas spirit.

I prefer not to feel overstuffed, glutinous, and fat after every holiday. I prefer not to look at those extra pounds of fat around my body on January 1. Just ask yourself, "is it worth it?" We have equated a lot of food with pleasure, and we pay dearly for it. If everybody were fit, healthy, strong, and at a normal body weight, then a few traditional treats wouldn't be a bad idea. The problem is, we're not fit, healthy, or strong, and we don't limit ourselves to a few treats. It's not just once Christmas dinner, it's a series of dinners.

What would a healthier Christmas season look like? Here's my proposal:

If you're going to host a party, banquet, or luncheon, then have the food catered. Tell the guests that they do not need to bring any food. All food will be provided. Instead of having dozens of trays of food and a ton of different cookies and desserts, it would be best to have Whole Foods or Boston Market provide all the food for you. Nobody will complain about your party if there are plenty of people there and if the atmosphere is good. In fact, some people might thank you for not having tempting treats and other high-caloric food.

If you're the boss of a company, plan to give your Christmas bonuses at a palatable restaurant. Reserve a room, and let everybody eat a regular meal.

Limit the number of parties you need to attend. Unless you're the head honcho, you probably don't need to go to every event you're invited to. Limit yourself to one business and one personal party over the course of a month.

When cooking Christmas dinner, you have a couple options. Go to Whole Foods or Boston Market a couple days before, and buy what you want. Everybody will get a plate of turkey, vegetables, and maybe a couple scoops of traditional stuffing. That's it. There are several advantages to this option: you don't have to cook anything; you don't have to clean anything; you won't be stuck with leftovers; and best of all, food will not be the focus of Christmas

You're second option would be to prepare your own food, but serve less than you think. Buy the smallest turkey possible. Cook a ton of vegetables. Skip the ham, the potatoes, the drinks, the cookies, the pies, the gravy, the sauces, the chocolates, and all the little extras that will linger in your refrigerator and your fat cells.

That concludes my analysis and diagnosis of Christmas. Other "solutions" to not overeating do not work because they don't even attempt to fix the cause, which is our misguided belief that Christmas justifies massive eating. It doesn't and shouldn't.

Kevin

How to End Holiday Weight Gain Forever

2009-11-12T17:22:00.000-08:00

I was perusing the health and fitness magazines the other day at my local grocery store. Since it's the beginning of November, they all have at least one article telling thier readers how to avoid gaining weight in November and December. These articles never say anything new and they are more or less recycled versions of last year's article.
Typical tips include:

-Eat before you go to the party so you're full
-Eat plenty of fiber
-Stay away from the buffet table
-Choose what you'll eat before you grab a plate
-Hold a bottle of water so you're hands are occupied
-Eat mindfully and slowly

If these tips really worked, then why do they have to publish these guidelines every year? Clearly they don't work. If they did, then people would not gain an average of seven pounds in November and December. By the way, that's over 35,000 extra calories! It's hard to imagine such rapid fat gain. But consider that one cup of eggnog has 400 calories, one slice of pecan pie has 500 calories, and a little spoonful of stuffing (whole wheat or not) has 200 calories, and you can begin to see how 20,000 is achievable. But still, that's a lot of food.

In a previous post, I talked about how we need to modify Halloween. Trick-or-treating is fine, but we need to limit the amount of candy we give to kids, and the quality of the treats. I'm going to take another controversial stand and say that the holidays need to be modified as well. Let's begin with Thanksgiving. Thanksgiving was originally celebrated in 1621 in Plymouth, Massachusetts. The happy and whimsical story we teach our kids isn't true, but that's beyond this article. If you want to read what really happened, refer to Charles Mann’s article.

But I want to point out the context of the first Thanksgiving. The pilgrims were starving. It was a celebration of survival, and an attempt to forge an alliance, not a celebration of a lot of food. My point is that a large feast was a sign of gratitude and friendship. Today, we aren't starving. We don't have to worry about our next meal. We're not trying to make peace or finagle our neighbors. We have more than enough food. We could have Thanksgiving every day if we wanted to. And judging by the size of many people today, perhaps they do.

Thanksgiving wasn't even celebrated as a holiday until 1863. It's not as if it's an indelible part of our culture. Should we continue to celebrate Thanksgiving? I don't think so but it's not going away any time soon. Any person with faith should give thanks every day, or at least a lot more frequently than once per year. I give thanks before a good meal, or sometimes even after a hard workout. Thank you for giving me the ability to run today, God, because I might not have my legs forever.

Here's my prescription for a better Thanksgiving:

-If you're not celebrating with family, then consider it a work day. Don't worry, Christmas is only four weeks away and Veterans Day was just a couple weeks ago. It's not as if you're deprived of holidays.

-Rake up the rest of the leaves. If there are still leaves on your yard, then don't wait longer. You'll kill your grass and everyone will think you're lazy. Don't use a leaf blower either. It shows that you don't like yard work and they're too loud.

-Play flag football. Instead of watching football, why don't you actually play football? The weather in most of the United States is perfect for explosive sports like football.

-Put up your Christmas lights. -As for dinner, don't be extravagant. Imagine that Thanksgiving is just like any other dinner. You've invited some friends to your house, and you're going to share a meal together. The focus should be on the company and the people, not the food. Instead of having a seven-course marathon, have some turkey, stuffing (I'd skip it), and some vegetables. It's really that simple. If you make less, you'll have fewer leftovers, less cleaning, fewer dishes, and less preparation time. Skip the pumpkin pie, thick gravy, and other "traditional" foods.

-Make less than you think. I've been to parties where there was less food than normal and nobody complained. I suspect it's because people are more focused on conversation than food. -Do your Christmas shopping on Amazon.com and skip the mall tomorrow. In my next post, I'll talk about a modified Christmas. Don't expect recycled tips. Expect to be offended.

Kevin

A Natural Bias

2009-11-05T13:47:00.000-08:00

I was watching Isabel de Los Rios' video blog about high fructose corn syrup. She's the creator of the popular Diet Solution Program. She's passionate about her product, and about good nutrition. I like her articles and her blogs but I have to take exception to her latest rant against chemicals.

Her first countercharge is that HFCS is not the same as natural sugar, or sucrose. She admits that HFCS is somewhat natural because it's derived from corn, but it goes through so much processing that it becomes a chemical. Thus, when we eat HFCS, we are ingesting chemicals (along with the thousands of other chemicals that are floating around in our body.) She calls HFCS a "toxin", a claim she doesn't back up.

She says HFCS and table sugar (a disaccharide) are not the same. In fact, they contain very similar amounts of glucose and fructose (monosaccharides). I'll tell you something: the effects of eating too much of either are the same. As I've said before, ingesting a lot of sugar, as natural as it is, will lead to rapid fat gain. De Los Rios admits, "even if they were the same, sugar is horrible for you too."

Here's the best part. She refutes the charge that HFCS and honey are the same. She says honey is "natural" and made by bees, while HFCS is made by evil chemists.

Her second and third charges completely contradict each other. She says we should avoid sugar on one hand, but then she says honey is a wonderful natural product. What is honey? Honey is straight sugar! One tablespoon has 15 carbohydrates. It's also very high on the glycemic load index (a measure that takes into account the volume of food as well as the rise in blood sugar). As natural as it is, it's still sugar, and humans were never designed to consume large amounts of honey. Our ancestors were rarely able to obtain it. There were no teddy-bear-shaped containers of honey back then.

De Los Rios is not really attacaking HFCS at all. In fact, she's part of a wider campaign to discredit anything that is not considered natural or organic. Anything man-made is bad, while everything from nature is good. Honey and sugar are good because they're natural, while Splenda, HFCS, and all the millions of other chemicals are bad

Is natural necessarily better? No. Honey is a concentrated source of sugar that should only be used in small quantities. The bees that produce honey can injure or kill people. Swine Flu is natural too. So is the common cold. Nature can be a brutal, nasty place. Humans used to die after 30 or 40 years. But in our "toxic" and man-made environment, we're living twice as long.

And what about medicine? If we aren't supposed to ingest chemicals, then I suppose we should never take man-made medicine. Instead, we should only use herbs and natural remedies from Andrew Weil's books to solve our medical problems.

Just 40-50 years ago everyone believed in "better living through chemistry." Man could perfect the world through the wonders of technology. At some point, chemistry and man-made chemicals become synonomous with evil. It was seen as tampering with nature. Natural now means good and benign.

Life is never so simple. We cannot create such simple distinctions. It's like saying some foods are "bad" and some are "good." In fact, some foods are only good until a certain point, and some are only bad beyond a certain point. We need to discard black-and-white thinking.

I think the natural movement is a testament to how spoiled we are. We have so many conveniences, comforts, and features these days that we forget how much they have actually improved our lives. The people who attack "man-made" chemicals or products fail to realize how much they benefit from the marvels of the modern world. Almost all of them use You Tube and laptops, drive cars, have iPods, expensive TVs, cell phones, and use the internet on a consistent basis. None of them actually live "naturally."

If they want to live naturally, they can. They just shouldn't expect to live as long or send text messages.

Kevin

Is Your Hand in the Cookie Jar?

2009-11-03T04:47:00.000-08:00

That's the question that Smart for Life Cookies asks on its TV commercial. This is another fad diet that claims to have the solution to fat loss. Here's the concept in as few words as possible:

Eat specially-formulated cookies six times per day and lose weight. It's that simple. It was created in the early 2000s by Dr. Sasson Moulavi, a bariatric physician.

The diet, as silly as it sounds, actually has quite a few benefits:

-It’s cheaper than food. It costs as little as $10 per day to sustain your body on this program. Of course, that also depends on your nutritional needs, but if you ate nothing but cookies all day, you could certainly save money. You only save money on this program because you're eating so little. Want to really save money? Eat one fast food meal and take a multi-vitamin to cover your nutritional deficiencies. I guarantee rapid fat loss without expensive programs like this.

-Reduced hassle. I like this one. I like good meals, but I'm a busy person and I don't have time to cook a different meal every night, much less for every meal of the day. Even if you did, your life would be spent procuring ingredients and cooking them. We live in an age of convenience, and Smart for Life is certainly compatible with that.

-Good taste. According to the testimonials, they taste good. All diets must include food that is palatable to the person on the diet.

-Plenty of nutrition. It has no preservatives, and it somehow incorporates fruits, vegetables, dairy products, and plenty of protein and carbohydrates. It sounds like Alive! Energizer to me.

-High level of satiety. According to Smart for Life, a few cookies every few hours will keep you satisfied. I highly doubt this. Who actually feels full after a couple of cookies? I suspect people who eat these cookies count the hours and minutes before they can eat another cookie. If it does keep you full, it’s because it has fiber and a generous amount of protein. But you don’t have to eat expensive cookies to get fiber and protein.

-Support. Smart for Life has over 30 weight-loss centers to help and counsel their clients.

-Benefits. According to the web-site, a cookie diet will reduce your cholesterol, increase your insulin resistance and keep your insulin levels in balance, lower your weight and improve bone health. But I imagine this is due to the caloric deficit it creates. If you ate two pieces of cake everyday, you'd get all these benefits too (but also a sharp rise in insulin).

Of course, there are two big catches here. First, it's not really a cookie diet. Smart for Life sells shakes, muffins, supplements, and other food. Perhaps even they realize that the monotony of cookies is not sustainable for most people. So it's not really a cookie diet, but really a diet of Smart for Life products.

The other big catch is that the Lifestyle Program that they offer places the "patient" on a very strict diet of 800-1200 calories per day. Anything less than 1500 in my opinion is death. An old lady in a wheelchair would need more than that. Of course, if you're trying to lose weight, you have to create a deficit. Smart for Life says most people need 2500 calories per day (not true), and that if you ate only 800 calories per day, you'd create a 1700-calorie deficit per day, which would be one pound of fat per day. So they then calculate that you can lose 15 pounds in one month. Of course, they used the highest estimate for average intake the lowest estimate for caloric intake on the Smart for Life diet to come to their outrageous calculation.

If you want to get results like that, eat 800 calories per day of real food and skip the Smart for Life cookies. Good luck.

Kevin

Better Treats

2009-10-30T16:38:00.001-07:00

I’m going to take a controversial stand today. Any time you attack a tradition you're going to receive flack for it. Halloween and Trick-or-Treating is almost a national pastime. It’s what defines the calendars of October. Stores are dressed in orange and black. Costumes are everywhere. Commercials advertise Halloween specials.

Halloween itself is fine, but the concept of Trick-or-Treating needs to be modified. Just because it’s a tradition doesn’t mean it’s a good tradition. The Mayans used to sacrifice hundreds of people just to satisfy the gods and to make sure the cycle of life continued. Trick-or-Treating isn’t as bad of course but you get the point.

Trick-or-Treating originated centuries ago in Europe when poor people would sing songs in return for food. I don’t know about you but I can’t remember the last time I heard Halloween carols. And I can’t remember the last time I gave a cake to a kid.

Why am I attacking Halloween? Almost one-third of children today are considered obese or overweight. Kids are getting less and less exercise. Type-II diabetes is appearing almost at birth these days. Even if kids were at a normal weight, I would still advocate against the avalanche of candy we give kids on one night.

I admit that I celebrated Halloween until I was about 13 or 14. I went out as Dick Tracy, Batman, a Ninja Turtle, and a hockey player. I even impressed everyone with my Bill Clinton mask and white stains on my pants in October 1998. My goal every year was to gather more candy than anyone else. I have vivid memories of my grocery-sized bag filled with candy.

It appears, then, that I’m trying to deny today’s generation what I once had. This is true, but kids also used to be able to work in coal mines and they used to smoke at a much younger age. Marijuana and cocaine were once legal, so should we make those drugs freely available to kids?

We call Trick-or-Treating a tradition but then we mock hot dog-eating contests as insane, gross, and even dangerous. But consider Trick-or-Treating as a candy-eating contest. Kids eat enormous amounts of candy over the span of several days, much of which is consumed on one evening.

Let’s look at the nutritional quality of a typical Halloween feast:
5th Avenue (1 full-size bar) -- 280 calories, 14g fat
Snickers (1 full-size bar) -- 280 calories, 14g fat
Twix Caramel (2 bars) -- 280 calories, 14g fat
Baby Ruth (1 full-size bar) -- 280 calories, 13g fat
Butterfinger (1 full-size bar) -- 270 calories, 11g fa
Milky Way (1 full-size bar) -- 260 calories, 10g fat
Mr. Goodbar (1 full-size bar) -- 210 calories, 14g fat

What can you give instead? There are plenty of options:
- Lolli-pops
- Chewing gum
- Baseball cards
- Raisins
- Cashews
- Sunflower seeds
- Microwave popcorn
- Small bags of crackers/chips

If you must give away traditional candy, then go with Starburst, Jolly Ranchers, Pixy Sticks, or Smarties. And whatever you give away, make sure you only give one piece to each child. Buy less than you think, and stop giving away candy after three hours. Kids who stay out late probably have more than enough.

I’m not saying you shouldn’t participate and be the Scrouge of Halloween. Don’t turn off your lights. Don’t ignore the knocking on the door. Just make wiser choices for the kids.

And what can you do with leftover candy? You have several choices:
-Eat it all and get fat
-Give it to co workers at work and let them get fat
-Throw it away
-Best option: take the candy out of the wrappers, and place the candy in a compost bin. If you don’t have a bin, go to Whole Foods and dump it. Next spring, that leftover candy will be the rich organic soil that brings May flowers.

Kevin

The Shoes You Really Should Wear

2009-10-26T06:37:00.000-07:00

In my previous post I told you about Shape-Ups, and why they won't shape you up. Are there any shoes that I recommend? Actually there are.

They're called Vibram Five Fingers. They look like gloves for feet. They have individual sleeves for each toe. Vibram is a manufacturer of rubber soles. They actually designed the shoes for sailors, but ironically they have been adopted by strength athletes, runners, and other outdoor enthusiasts. According to the web-site: It puts you in touch with the earth beneath your feet and liberates you to move in a more natural, healthy way. FiveFingers stimulate the muscles in your feet and lower legs to build strength and improve range of motion. Our customers report an increased sense of balance, greater agility, and visibly improved posture." Again, these are mighty claims and we have to ask whether or not they're true.

As a runner I'm more interested in the benefits of minimalist shoes and barefoot running. Vibram and other proponents of barefoot running swear that these shoes allow them to run naturally, for longer distances and without injury. According to Vibram: “Running in FiveFingers improves agility, strength, and equilibrium, plus it delivers sensory feedback that allows runners to make immediate corrections in their form. This greatly improves running efficiency.”Again, bold claims.

There is plenty of research currently going on about the benefits and possible risks of running with minimalist shoes. In a future post, I will discuss the merits of barefoot/minimalist running, but I want to share my experience with you all.

I bought these shoes a few months ago. I loved the way they felt almost immediately. I started to wear them around the house, then in the gym, then on soft surfaces, and then finally on pavement.

What I love is the feel. I love wearing as little as possible. I hate excessive, bulky clothes. I feel almost imprisoned in clothes. That's one reason I hate winter, and envy people who live in countries where white dress shirts and khaki shorts are all you need. Anyway, I love the freedom of movement of the toes, and the compliments I receive about them. I certainly accept the claims of "feeling the earth" and improved sensory feedback. I would never wear anything else when I strength train. They feel great on soft surfaces. They also feel wonderful on grass and fields.

I will admit, however, that they have a couple of flaws. Walking on pavement for miles and miles has created a tear on the bottom of the third toe. I can feel the asphalt sometimes. I expected better quality from a $75 shoe.

As for running in these shoes, I don't recommend it. It's true that our ancestors ran barefoot, but not on concrete and asphalt. Some enthusiasts, like Barefoot Ted, featured in Born to Run, have run entire marathons with no shoes. So it's possible, but I suspect only for a few people.

I can't say my agility, strength, or posture have improved since buying them. If those components of my health have improved, it could be because of the training I do, not because of the shoes. I'm simply applying the same logic that I did to the Shape-Ups: does the training or the shoe improve conditioning? Perhaps the Five Fingers have improved my training, but it's hard to say. I think running itself improves strength, agility, sensory feedback, and balance.

I bought some Avia-Bolts this last summer. I wanted something that weighed less than 10 oz. The Bolts weigh 9 oz, and have minimal cushioning. They felt great until I developed retrocalcaneal bursitis. Bursae are sacs that surround the bones and tendons and provide cushioning and facilitate motion. The bursae in my heel became inflamed (hence, bursitis). I tried ice, heel inserts, and even considered acupuncture. The pain only subsided when I reverted to my old Brooks shoes, which provide a lot more cushioning. The reason the bursitis developed was because I am completely flat-footed. I have no arch at all. Many people are the same way. If you have no arch, buy shoes with cushioning.

Verdict: great shoes for everyday use. I use them to run (not literally) my errands, train clients, strength train, and to walk around the house. But I would never run in them. Go to your local outfitter, try them, and buy them. You might get a lot of stares, but you'll feel the ground in a way you've never experienced.

Kevin

Shape-Ups

2009-10-24T14:44:00.000-07:00

Sketchers' new brand of shoes, Shape-ups, are making bold claims. They are designed, according to the web-site, to improve posture, promote weight loss, and tone muscles. Not only that, but they improve blood circulation, straighten the back, tighten the core, firm the glutes, and even reduce cellulite. Their "dynamic rolling bottom, soft foam insole and dual-density midsole can target and condition the postural and stability muscles of the hips and lower back."

They even have a clinical study to back this up. During a six-week trial, the participants wore these shoes and saw noticeable gains in gluteal strength, lost a few pounds of fat, and increased low-back endurance. Of course, and here's the rub, they maintained their "typical walking program" and diet. The study doesn't say what that includes, of course.

On the one hand, I support any shoe that replace high-heels, the worst kind of shoe that a woman could wear. They promote a more natural gait, and I can't complain about that. Testimonials say they are more comfortable than regular shoes.

However, fat gain is not a result of bad shoes. You will not lose or gain fat because you're wearing the wrong shoe. Wrong shoes can ruin your posture, cause pain, and even lead to injuries. The reason some people can't lose weight is because they aren't walking or moving at all. A woman who wears Shape Ups and sits all day is not going to lose weight. Another woman who wears normal shoes and actually walks several thousand steps per day is going to lose more weight.

All the claims regarding increased fat loss, caloric burn, firmer muscles, and a tighter core cannot be attributed to the shoes. The benefits are not a result of Shape-Ups, but rather the actual act of walking.

The instructional video says that you can avoid the gym with Shape-Ups. I didn't realize that shoes work the upper body as well. That's pretty remarkable.

There might be one more benefit to these shoes, however. They might encourage women to walk more. If women think they're burning more calories with these shoes, and walk more as a result, that's terrific. But the fat they lose is because of the extra walking, not the design of their shoes.

Verdict: Save your $110.

Stay tuned for my next post, which will be about the shoes everybody should be wearing.

Kevin

Everything the Body Needs

2009-10-23T18:08:00.000-07:00

I was writing about Nature's Way Alive! Energizer yesterday and I remembered a scene from the movie The Matrix. Keanu Reaves is talking with one of the other members on board the vehicle they're in. They're all eating something that looks like polenta or oatmeal. One of the other members says, "it has everything the human body needs." The person Keanu Reeves is speaking to says, "it doesn't have everything."

Fortunately, you don't have to eat gruel to get everything the body needs. All you need is one scoop of Alive! Energizer. Click on the link, and then look at the nutrient facts (or specs). It's mind-boggling to think that that many nutrients can be in one spoonful of powder. If you are pressed for time, or you are eating a hypocaloric diet (fewer calories to maintain your weight), then I highly recommend you add one scoop (130 calories in the rice/pea protein version) to a cup of milk or water each day. It tastes great and it gives just about everything your body needs. If it doen't cover all of your nutritional needs, it will certainly help you reach your quota.

Assuming the bio-availability is equal to whole foods, then I never again have to worry about iron or B12, two nutrients that are otherwise hard to obtain in a diet, especially a vegetarian one like mine.

I find my Alive! Energizer at Whole Foods, but I'm sure Wegman's or other natural-food stores carry it as well. If you travel a lot, then I recommend the individual packets.

Kevin

P.S.- Sorry I can't remember the names of the characters in the movie. It's an interesting movie, but it's not worth another two hours of my time.

What I'm Drinking

2009-10-22T13:14:00.000-07:00

I told you in an earlier post that I have started a new liquid diet. I "eat" nothing but shakes until I have a big salad at night. Those are the only calories I chew throughout the day. You might be wondering what exactly I put into those shakes. Here's a list

-Ice
-Sweetener: Splenda, Stevia, or Truvia. I'd use nothing but Stevia if I had the money.
-Bananas
-Frozen fruit: mixed berries, strawberries, Wyman's Own wild blueberries, pineapple, cherries
-Plant-based milk: Enriched Almond Milk, 365 Unsweetened Rice Milk, Almond Breeze Unsweetened Vanilla Almond Milk, Living Harvest Unsweetened Vanilla Hemp Milk
-TerraAmazon Cacao Powder
-Planter's Mixed nuts: pistachios, almonds, cashews, hazelnuts, pecans
-Protein powders: Nutribiotic Plain Rice Protein Powder, Nature's Way Alive! Energizer (vanilla flavor. This contains rice/pea protein), Manitoba Harvest Hemp Pro 70

Enjoy

Liquid Diet

2009-10-15T15:39:00.000-07:00

I'm experimenting with a new diet: the liquid diet. With the exception of my salad at night, all the calories I consume are in the form of shakes. I'd like to share with you the advantages and disadvantages.

The reason I started this diet was because I was tired of sitting down every 2.5-3 hours to eat something. One of the principles of a good a nutrition plan is to eat smaller meals more frequently. This keeps your metabolism high and it ensures that your body will never sense hunger. But sometimes this can be highly inconvenient, as I can attest. It's hard to eat when you have meetings, appointments, clients, errands, and other arrangements. I can't be working with a client and then stop everything to eat a burrito. It would be rude and unsatisfying. Unless you work in an office with access to a microwave, refrigerator, and other appliances, eating five or six meals per day is unrealistic.

So convenience and portability is the probably the number one advantage. Shakes are portable and they can go anywhere. You can sip them while talking with people, while walking through a store, training clients, or sitting in a meeting. It's not considered rude to drink in the presence of others, especially in this day and age of bottled water. They don't require utensils, napkins, or a place to eat.

Shakes are easy to make. All you need is a blender to make them. The only ingredients in my shakes are: various protein powders, frozen fruit, a few packets of Stevia or Splenda as a sweetener, ice, plant-based milks (hemp, almond, and rice) and some chopped nuts. It takes very little time to make a quality shake with a lot of nutrition. Every night I spend about 10-15 minutes making the shakes that I'll need to bring with me.

But don't liquid calories lead to fat gain? Yes and no. Liquid calories such as soda, sports drinks, energy drinks, and teas have little to no nutrition, and are not satiating. But shakes made with fruits, vegetables, powders, and other whole foods provide plenty of nutrition, hydration, and are thicker and more luscious than liquid calories. They're like complete meals in a liquid form.

There are a couple of disadvantages. It's inconvenient to urinate every 60-90 minutes, but this is better than being parched and dehydrated. Usually you'll be close to a bathroom so it's not a problem. It's only a problem when in the car, or when you really need to go to the restroom while talking with someone.

Another problem is keeping these shakes cool. You might have to put them in a cooler with plenty of ice if you don't have access to a refrigerator. Camelback's Chill Jacket doesn't seem to work very well. One solution is to fill one water bottle with ice, or stop at a Starbucks or 7 Eleven and put ice in the shake. As for water bottles, I prefer the 24-oz Camelbacks with the straw that flips.

Try this diet for a couple days and see how you like it. If you don't like shakes, then obviously that will be a problem. If you don't like fruit, that would be another problem. Some people don't consider shakes a meal, and would much rather eat something hot. That's fine, as long as it's convenient.

Kevin

Sweet Surprise

2009-10-14T15:54:00.000-07:00

The Corn Refiners Association (CFA) has launched a new campaign called Sweet Surprise. The intent is to counteract the negative publicity that high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) has gotten in recent years. The sweetener has been blamed for the rise in obesity in the last 35-40 years. It's only been used since the 1970s to sweeten almost every food in grocery stores. Is the CFA confusing the public, or does it have a case?

The prima facie evidence suggest the HFCS is a prime culprit in the rise of obesity. As its consumption has increased, so have rates of obesity. People who eat products with HFCS are usually heavier, which suggests a link.

As an advocate of clean eating and whole foods, I actually have to side with the CFA. Chemically, HFCS is the same as sugar, or sucrose: both are disaccharides (molecules composed of two kinds of sugar), and both contain almost equal amounts of fructose and sucrose. Most medical evidence shows that they are metabolized the same in the body. Both are completely "natural" as HFCS derive from corn. You can get all this information at the campaign's FAQ.

The problem is not HFCS itself. If you eat something with HFCS, it's not going to make you gain weight. In fact, if 90% of diet is clean, then HFCS is small amounts is not a problem. It's not as if it distorts your hormones and disrupts your metabolism.

The true problem is that a diet that is highly processed, and contains a lot of sugar and refined carbs will undoubtably lead to fat gain. Since HFCS is found in most packaged and processed food, it's easy to blame this one ingredient. But the problem is not one ingredient, but the processed food itself. Even if food manufacturers substituted HFCS for another sweetner, obesity rates would keep rising. The problem is the overall diet, not HFCS.

Somehow natural sugar and it's many variations have eluded the attacks of nutritionists and tax advocates. I don't see why. If sucrose substituted for HFCS, the food would not be any healthier. Excess calories, especially excess sugar, are the problem, not HFCS.

When everything somebody eats contains HFCS, then that person is eating a diet of refined carbs, sugar, and processed food: cookies, chips, crackies, cereals, dressings, frozen food, juice, candy, etc.

Should you absolutely avoid HFCS? No. But beware that food with HFCS is probably not healthy anyway. HFCS usually is found in foods with a long list of ingredients and that have little nutritional value. If you eat a clean diet, then HFCS is unlikely to sneak into your diet. Keep your diet real and simple and you won't have to worry about HFCS.

Kevin

Fat Tax in North Carolina

2009-10-14T15:20:00.000-07:00

North Carolina is making health insurance more expensive for state employees who are obese. It is the second state, after Alabama, to implement this policy. Rising health care costs have prompted this measure in a state famous for its bar-be-que. Is this right?

Proponents say that health care costs are rising. Health care costs are rising largely because of obesity and tobacco use. The idea is that obese people should pay more for health care. This makes sense, so what's wrong with this plan? The state government says it's trying to promote healthier lifestyles. It's only fair, it says, that people who require more health care pay more.

This is similar to another measure in the Congress to tax soda and other "unhealthy" food. What exactly is an unhealthy food? In fact, no food is unhealthy as long as portions are controlled. If a person eats perfectly healthy 99% of the time, but then drinks a Pepsi, should he pay a tax? How can we conclude that these foods are causing obesity, and not lifestyle factors? Which food would be targeted?

There are several reasons to oppose the North Carolina measure, however. First, what's the definition of obese or overweight? Do we use the BMI scale, or another arbitrary scale? Some people who are "overweight" are healthy, while some who are underweight are unhealthy. Because of genetics, many black people are considered 'overweight' on the BMI scale despite showing no ailments of syndrome X (a combination of symptoms, including high blodd pressure, high triglycerides, high LDL cholesterol, and type II diabetes). Michael Jordan would be classified as overweight according to the BMI scale.

The measure also assumes that people know what's healthy and what's not. If this were true, then the series of books called Eat This! Not That! would not be so popular. People aren't sure what to eat, when to eat, and how much to eat. They're uninformed and unaware. Proponents of fat-tax measures know much more about nutrition and exercise than the general population. With no program to teach people how to modify and change their lifestyles, then people will be confused and angry with a tax that penalize the lifestyle they've always known.

There are better ways to promote healthier lifestyle. One would be to provide incentives for joining wellness programs, or hiring a personal trainer. These programs will have better long-term effects on the cost of health care than punishing taxes. It's inconceivable that during a recession states are considering more taxes.

Another solution might be just to reduce the amount of people working for the state government, which employs 600,000 people in a state with a little more than seven million people. That's almost one employee for every ten citizens.

Extend Yourself...Slowly

2009-10-07T17:45:00.001-07:00

At the Army 10-Miler last weekend I noticed that a lot of people shouldn't have been there. They were either unprepared or they were not conditioned enough to handle a 10-mile race. Many of them probably signed up for wrong reasons: somebody told them to; to see if they can run a two-digit distance without training; to say they did it.

A better reason to race would be to test your abilities and to see if you've properly trained for the race. Races are tests of mental and physical endurance. If you trained right, you'll succeed; if you didn't, you won't.

Many people have the idea that longer races are necessarily more challenging and more worthy of their time. I can't tell you how many stories I've heard of people who start running and then within a year are participating in long-distance events. I asked a woman the other day how many half marathons she had done. Zero, she answered. Yet she's running a marathon in Jacksonville in February.

At the two half-marathons I've participated in, I've seen marathoners walking around mile 10. I can't believe they have another 16 miles to go. Many marathoners overestimate their physical capabilities. Not only do they block other runners, but they get discouraged or injured, and end up ruining their running careers. Doing a marathon as one of your first races is a fast way to burn out, not a fast way to run.

Why is going longer and slower more worthy than going shorter but faster? Running long and slow for four hours is hard, but so is running fast and hard for 40 minutes during a 10k.

And why stop at marathons? What makes the marathon the Holy Grail of running? Why not do an ultra? Don't stop at 42k (marathon distance). Do a 50k. Do an 80k. Do a 100k. Do a 24-hour event. Do several marathons in a month. What makes 42k so special that runners think they have to do it?

I suspect many people gravitate towards the longer distances because they don't like the pain of shorter distances. Short distances are tough. They aren't long, but they hurt. Ask Roger Bannister or Steve Prefontaine, two great short-distance runners. Running long and slow, however, relieves some runners of the deep breathing and burning lungs that are always present during fast runs. Four hours of shuffling is just a mental test.

I wonder where the division is between "running" a marathon and "completing a marathon." Anybody can walk a marathon. That's 4 MPH for six or seven hours. Running a marathon means you are working hard for 2.5-3.5 hours, not walking or shuffling for several hours.

I wish runners would take a more gradual approach to running. Your first race should not be a half marathon. Your first race should be a 1-mile or 5k run. That's completely manageable for a novice runner who wants to participate in an event. Gradually novice runners can start running 10ks (the hardest distance in my opinion), then half marathons, and then marathons (if they ever choose to go that distance).

Get fast and fit in the shorter distances in order to run the longer distances. If you race long and slow, you'll always run slow. If you master the shorter distances and do a lot of speed work before you attempt a marathon, your results will be much better. You'll have a much stronger base of endurance and speed work. And your body won't be used to "long and slow."

Kevin

What Not to Do at a Race

2009-10-05T17:51:00.000-07:00

I ran in the Army 10-miler yesterday. I have a few observations that I'd like to share with you. I want you to know several things you shouldn't do at a road race. Just because everyone else is doing it, doesn't mean you should.

1. Static stretch before running. Evidence shows that static stretching before exercise will actually impede your performance and reduce elasticity. Instead, do some dynamic stretches or some mobility drills to get warmed up. I also recommend jogging slowly for 10 minutes, and then finish with 6-10 20-second sprints. Those seem to work for me.

2. Static stretch improperly before running. This is even worse. I saw plenty of people "stretching" their quads while yanking their thighs. Your thighs should be together when you hold the traditional quadricep stretch. Doing the quad stretch before a race is bad enough; doing it incorrectly is just plain stupid.

3. Wear an iPOD. This is a road race. This is not a training run.

4. Wear a large fuel belt for such a short distance. I saw some runners with four bottles of fluid around thier waist. I saw one guy with a granola bar, a bottle of juice, and a gel. It's 10 miles, folks. It's not a multi-day expedition. These runners lost more time with all that weight around their belt than they gained by being properly fueled and hydrated.

5. Overestimate your ability as a runner. There are no waves in running races. Everybody starts in one mass. When there are 30,000 runners like yesterday, that's one big mass. Don't go to the front if you run 9:00-10:00 per mile. Allow the fast runners to go up front. Placing yourself at the front when you know you're not a fast runner only blocks the faster runners behind you. You hurt their performance by becoming an obstacle. I had to go around dozens of people. I probably ran more than 10 miles.

6. Wait until the race starts to urinate. People were using the Don Jon's 1/4 mile into the race. Didn't they realize they needed to piss 1/4 mile earlier? Don't wait until the last minute.

7. Rely on the race organizers to provide breakfast for you. While there were boxes and boxes of bananas, and plenty of bottled water, the other post-race food was atrocious: 400-calorie muffins with tons of sugar and HFCS (high fructose corn syrup); bagels with similar ingredients; Kashi granola bars (acceptable); cookies; and soda. I can't believe I was the only runner who actually brought something to eat after the race. I wonder what these people drink or eat after they run at home. If you're going to race, bring your own nutrition. It'll be much healthier than anything they serve at the race.

8. Have casual conversation while you run. If you can talk, you're not running very hard. As the run progressed, I heard less and less talking.

9. Sign up for a 10-mile run if you can't run more than two. Some people simply didn't belong here. I think you should prove that you've completed a 10k before you can run a 10-mile race (16k). Likewise, I wish marathon organizers would require runners to prove that they've completed a half-marathon.

Follow these guidelines, and you'll be healtheir, you'll go faster, you'll save yourself hardship, and you won't slow down other runners.

Kevin

Your Doctor's Permission

2009-09-24T13:15:00.000-07:00

Almost every exercise video or book I see always comes with a disclaimer: Do not perform any of these exercises without the consent of your doctor.

First of all, how many people are going to read the message, go to their doctor, show them the product, and then decide whether or not to use it? If they've already bought it, they're going to use it.

Even if they did ask their doctor, they'd be wasting their time. Sometimes we put too much faith in doctors. We think they are the fountain of knowledge and wisdom. They can answer all of our questions regarding health and nutrition. Their advise is gospel.

My experience indicates otherwise. A couple years ago I went to donate blood at the American Red Cross. They told me they couldn't take my blood because I was anemic (not enough hemoglobin in the blood, due to the lack of iron, a key component of this protein). Not too much longer a lesion formed on my pituitary gland which created bleeding in my eye.

Two years of visiting doctors never gave me an answer as to why this happened. "Pipes leak," was my conclusion. The bleeding resided within a couple weeks but it led to the discovery of a more troubling problem: a low level of testosterone. My testosterone levels had dropped to as low as 90 mg/dl, when it should have been at least 200-500 mg/dl.

To make a long story short, over the next two years I made countless trips to see my doctor, two endocrinologists (hormone doctors), two hemotologists (blood doctors), a brain surgeon, and an eye doctor. The result? No answers. I took one prescription that never worked, and another that worked one month but not the next.

That's just my story. I've heard so many stories of patients going all over looking for a doctor that can accurately diagnose their problem. Doctors often give conflicting information, recommend unnecessary surgeon, misdiagnose the problem, tell their patients to take a medication that either doesn't work or inflames the problem, or give misinformation. Doctors are dangerous too. One of the leading causes of death in America is poor handwriting on prescription notecards. Pharamicists misread the prescription and the patient gets the wrong medicine. No kidding.

Doctors know absolutely nothing about nutrition. They repeat standard disinformation (saturated fat is bad, cholesterol is determined by diet, grains are food but fat is bad, etc...) but certainly shouldn't be depended on for nutritional advise. From what I hear, most doctors aren't even required to take a course in nutrition in medical school.

If doctors had the best bodies then I'd rely on them for exercise and fitness advise, but look at your doctor. Does he have a six pack? Probably not. Is he overweight? Probably. If they practiced what they preached they'd look a lot better. That's why I recommend you don't consult your doctor before starting an exercise problem. Review your medical history with a qualified personal trainer who will then prescribe a program that takes into your account your contraindictions.

Are doctors worthless then? No, but they're like a dress: you need to find one that fits you. Does he understand your history and needs? Is he fit and active? Does he have any background in nutrition? Does he take a holistic approach? Does he do more than prescribe medicine that has negative effects on you health?

Sometimes you are your best doctor. Listen to your body, do your own research, consult with people who share a similar problem, and read as much as you can. If you do want to consult with a doctor, then get a recommendation.

Happy, healthy, and strong,

Kevin

Will Exercise Make you Fat?

2009-09-11T15:39:00.000-07:00

Time magazine released an article last month about the inability of exercise to lower your weight. This might seem counterintuitive. Haven’t we been told to exercise to lose weight? Won’t a caloric deficit lead to fat loss? Isn’t physical activity essential for losing weight? The answers to all these questions are yes. This article highlights the second, and most critical, part of fat loss: proper nutrition. However, the author, John Cloud, doesn’t seem to recognize that. So ironically, his article makes a terrific point but fails to acknowledge it. But Cloud goes further and says hard work and exercise might make you fat.

Cloud says, “I get hungry after I exercise, so I often eat more on the days I work out than on the days I don't…exercise has another effect: it can stimulate hunger. That causes us to eat more, which in turn can negate the weight-loss benefits we just accrued.” He then quotes Steven Gortmaker at Harvard who says, “"If you're more physically active, you're going to get hungry and eat more." Again, this can easily be avoided with a meal plan that is palatable and pre-planned.

Cloud also makes a good point, but once again fails to acknowledge it. On days you don’t work out, your caloric demands will obviously be lower. If you normally eat a pre-workout meal, skip it on days you don’t. If you usually have a bowl of granola, a banana, and a cup of milk after your workout, reduce the portion of the granola or cut out the banana on days you don’t. This is called periodizing your diet, but I doubt Mr. Cloud, a journalist who reports on more than exercise and fat loss, and whose expertise probably lies elsewhere, understands this.

It’s true that if you workout on the Versaclimber or the Elliptical for 45 minutes and then eat a blueberry muffin and a scone at Starbucks, you’ll negate the weight-loss benefits of exercise. But you don’t have to do that. As I tell my clients, plan ahead and make your meals ahead of time. Determine your caloric needs, figure out what you’re going to eat, then go to the grocery store once a week, get what you need, and prepare all your meals for the week. That way, you don’t have to “wing it.” That is, when it’s time for breakfast, you’re not debating which fast food restaurant or baked good to choose. Breakfast will already be prepared, and of course, the macronutrients (protein, carbs, fat).

He cites research in Obesity Research that claims that muscle only burns 4 calories per day. This goes against all other research that estimates that muscle tissue burns 35-50 calories per day. This is the first time I’ve ever seen research that claims that muscle tissue only burns four calories per day. More recent research at James Madison University suggests it’s far more metabolically active.

Nonetheless, the article does make reference to the numerous health benefits of exercise: reduces risk of just about every disease imaginable, as well as psychological benefits. Cloud also says that moderate but sustained daily activity might actually be as good as structured exercise. Instead of running on a treadmill for an hour, you might be better off standing and walking throughout the day. Instead of driving, walk or drive a bike. Instead of using a power lawnmower, use a push mower. Small changes in your expenditure, just like small changes in your intake, can lead to enormous fat-loss benefits.

If you sit all day at your job, and you go to the gym religiously, that’s great. Assuming you’re adhering to a good nutrition plan, you’re probably losing fat or maintaining the weight your body wants you to stabilize at. But I also recommend you get up every hour and walk around. Take stairs, take daily walks, stand if you don’t need to sit. Don’t avoid manual labor. Adding a little movement here and there can certainly help you lose weight.

Cloud’s thesis seems to be backed by research, but anecdotal evidence overwhelmingly shows that when people start exercising, they lose weight and they keep it off. How many testimonials and stories do you have to hear to believe it? Whenever you ask people how they lose weight, they say the same thing: I just started running or lifting weights, and I cut out the beer and soda. The answer is never new, even though it seems like we’re expecting some miracle answer. Hundreds of thousands of people lose fat permanently just by making some subtle changes. It’s that extra glass of wine at night, or just adding some exercise five-six times per week. It’s pretty simple.

Let’s say Fred is overweight. He eats 3000 calories per day and his weight is stable. If he adds exercise to his daily routine and burns 500 calories during that hour of exercise, he should expect to lose a pound per week. This is reasonable. But Cloud seems to think that it’s inevitable that he will eat an extra 500 calories to compensate. This is possible, but it doesn’t have to happen. A meal plan of 3000 calories will achieve fat loss.

Cloud also thinks that if we exercise more, we’ll be more sedentary later. When people start exercising, they’re usually replace sedentary time with exercise. It’s not as if overweight people are constantly moving throughout the day and swinging on monkey bars. And then when they start going to the gym an hour per day, they all the sudden become more sedentary the rest of the day. Rather, most people who start exercising are adding activity to their lives, not subtracting it. Instead of sitting 16 hours per day, they’re sitting 15 and climbing the Stairmaster for one hour. My point is, in our society, adding activity is much more likely to increase expenditure than to decrease it.

So keep moving and stick to a solid nutrition plan. It won't make you fat.

Kevin

Should We Exercise Less as we Age?

2009-09-05T18:11:00.000-07:00

An article in the Wall Street Journal can be misinterpreted to mean that old people shouldn't exercise, and that they should keep their heart rate below a certain number of beats. But let me disect this article to make sure you understand it. The author isn't lying, and he isn't being deceitful, but it can be easily misunderstood.

Sudden cardiac death (SCD) is natural death from cardiac cause within a short time period less than one hour after onset of symptoms. It's the most common fatal manifestation of cardiac disease. Almost 2/3s of deaths attributed to cardiac death are SCD. When SCD is exercise-related, it is associated with obstruction of two or more coronary arteries, or ruptured atheroslcerotic plaque and extensive blood cotting. Fatty depsoits break away from the artery wall and block the artery. During exercise, these ruptures can occur in the center of the artery. When this happens, you die.

Exercise can also cause an imbalance between oxygen delivery and oxygen demand, which can result in ventricular arrhythmias, or irregular heartbeats. When the symphatiec nervous system turns on the flight-or-fight mode, the coronary artries expand, but not in those with coronary heart disease. The chambers of the heart don't fill and this reduces cardiac output. So exercise really only increases SCD for those who already have risk factors for coronary heart disease. Risk factors include gender, age , smoking, family history, and hypertension. Low levels of physical activity are also associated with myocardial infarction and SCD. The US Physicians Health Study showed that people who exercised four times per week were at a much lower risk than those who exercised once a week or less.

So there are many risk factors associated with SCD, intense exercise among them. However, if you make sure you adhere to a diet of clean food, you don't smoke, you consider your family history, and you have no contraindications (unlike Mr. Helliker), intense exercise is unlikely going to kill you.

Back to the article. Kevin Helliker, the author, has been told not to cross 120 BPM at any time, even during the triathlons he competes in. He writes, "unquenched competitiveness can become a threat to their stiffening joints, ridgid muscles, hardening arteries and high-mileage hearts." First of all, none of those ailments are inevitable. A good routine of stretching, a healthy diet, and proper recovery will drastically reduce the risk of those ailments. Mark Allen, an avid proponent of heart rate monitor training, is quoted: "If you have to go as fast at 50 as you did at 20, you will grind yourself into the ground and become stressed out."

I think this is obvious. Does anyone really believe they can go as fast at 50 as they did at 20? It's possible, assuming you were totally deconditioned at 20 and now you're an avid athlete later in life. But really the article comes down to this: you can't exercise as much or as intensely in your middle ages as you did when you were a young adult. Is this really anything new?

The article continues: "exercise can provide substantial protection against chronic ailments ranging from heart disease and diabetes to dementia and depression, all the while helping weight control. But like any medical treatment, exercise can also cause damage." There's still nothing new here. Exercise (or movement as I like to call it) is essential at any age. By more is not always better. More is not better for any athlete. You should do as much exercise as you can absorb.

"Older athletes struggling against declining performance are prone to excess training, which can hurt the immune system and raise levels of the stress hormone, cortisol." All athletes are prone to excess training, especially type-A triathletes.

As you age, you have to accept that you're going to slow down, and you're not going to be as strong as you were when you were in your 20s. This should seem obvious, and we need to adjust intensity and volume as we age. But this doesn't mean we can't win our age group, be extremely fit, and test our body's limits. You just have to know how to rest and recover properly.

Don't forget, this author has an aneurysm in his aortic root, which is a major contraindication for high-intensity exercise. I don't know how common aneurysms are, but they're probably very rare, and most people don't have them. While exercise increases the risk of sudden heart attacks, there are too many proven benefits of exercise to not perform it because of a fear of sudden cardiac death during your bike ride. Keep moving, and stay happy healthy and strong.

Kevin

Should you Avoid Saturated Fat and Cholesterol?

2009-09-05T15:38:00.000-07:00

My mother's doctor told her that her cholesterol levels were high. Her total was 270, but her LDL was too high, but her HDL was healthy. Her cholesterol has always been high, but never like this. After taking a second blood test to make sure the first wasn't inaccurate, her doctor prescribed a statin to lower it.

Cholesterol levels are not largely determined by the food you eat. Read that again. Eating red meat, shrimp, and eggs everyday will not determine your cholesterol level. Your cholesterol level is largely genetic and a response to internal damage and inflammation. So is cholesterol the cause or a response to coronary damage? If dietary cholesterol were the cause of high cholesterol, then it doesn't explain why my mother has such high levels. Her diet is immaculate: plenty of vegetables, a couple of protein bars, walnuts, salads, some soy chips (with no saturated fat), and the occasional splurge of light whip cream at night. She runs three times per week and goes to her fitness boot camp religiously three times per week. In short, her dietary cholesteral is very low and the amount of exercise she does suggests that it's not her lifestyle causing high levels.

Nonetheless, she started counting all the saturated fat in her diet. I told her she was wasting her time, and was mistakingly blaming saturated fat for her high cholesterol levels.

For the last 30-40 yeers it's been dogma that saturated fat is bad and that its consumption should be limited. Almost every nutritionist agrees that saturated fat should comprise no more than 10% of your total fat consumption (not total daily caloric consumption). The common belief is that saturated fat causes obesity, coronary heart disease, and high levels of LDL cholesterol. The problem is, no study has ever shown causation, only correlation. But these two terms are not the same. Even so, many studies haven't even shown a correlation between saturated fat and the health problems it's typically associated with. For more on that, I recommend Gary Tabuson's Good Calories, Bad Calories. Or read this article in Men's Health last year. Experience Life has two good articles about cholesterol: Skimming the Truth and Cholesterol Reconsidered.

If saturated fat is so bad, then why do the French, who consume so much full-fat cream and butter, have much lower rates of heart disease?

Why did a recent Harvard study find a relationship between healthy cholesterol levels and the highest saturated fat intakes?

Why is there no definitive study showing that saturated causes heart disease?

Why do some people in the world, like those in Greenland and some tribes in Africa, consume large amounts of saturated fat but have never heard of heart disease?

If saturated fat were the cause of coronary heart disease, why do most people who have heart attacks have normal levels?

In fact, saturated fat has plenty of proven health benefits:

-Absorption of vitamins. Vitamins A, D, E, K are all fat-soluable vitamins, which means you need to eat fats (including saturated) to absorb them properly
-Healthy metabolism. Adding fat to a food makes it more satiating. That is, you'll feel more satisfied after eating a high-fat meal than after a low-fat meal. So is it really better to eat low-fat foods that leave you hungry for more, or to eat a meal with more fat and feel full?
-Proper hormonal production. Fat is needed to proporal produce testosterone and to make a woman fertile. Low fat diets are associated with low fertility and low hormonal production. Adequate fat intake is associated with increased sex drive. Peanut butter as an aphrodisiac? Believe it.
-It tastes good. There's a reason why humans prefer the texture of guacamole, peanut butter, cheese, and ice cream. It has a lot of fat. This isn't a bad thing. For reasons I mentioned above, you need to eat a certain amount of fat. Aim for one gram per kilogram of body weight, or at least 20% of your calories.
-Low fat diets are almost impossible to adhere to. Why? Because we like the texture of fat. And fat makes us feel full. And it tastes good.

So what's my message? If you like milk, enjoy your full-fat milk. If you like ice cream, eat full fat ice cream. If you like butter, don't buy margerine. If you like beef, then enjoy it (as long as it's grass-fed. Don't buy grain-fed). At some point, you have to eat fat in you diet. Eating 'fat-free' or 'low-fat' or 'lean meats' all day will not give you the fat you need. If you're going to eat fat, eat real food (like beef, milk, eggs, coconut oil, etc.)

Enjoy those bad, fatty foods. As long as your insulin levels are normal and balanced, avoid sugars and excess starches, and you eat unprocessed food, you shouldn't worry about saturated fat. I don't.

Kevin

New York's Campaign Against Liquid Calories

2009-09-02T11:29:00.000-07:00

Since it's well established that taxes on junk food and soda don't work well, New York City has started a new campaign against liquid calories, soda in particular. The campaign will last three months and cost $90,000. You can see a photo of the ad at the New York Times web-site. It shows body fat pouring out of a bottle and it could be very effective. It's simple and memorable. Drink your calories, and you'll get fat.

New York is the same city that banned trans fat in 2007. We're still not sure how much healthier New Yorkers are because of this. There are still plenty of ways to eat unhealthy without transfat. A diet of fast food, donuts, and beer will still have deleterious health consequences

While this campaign might work to reduce soda consumption, should New York take this initiative? Why is it the city's job to get people to reduce soda consumption? How will New York be better if people stop drinking excess calories?

What will people drink instead? Why don't they target orange juice (120 cal. per 8 oz, just as bad as soda just without high fructose corn syrup and some vitamin c) and milk? Why should soda be singled out? Why is there no campaign against lataes at Starbucks, or the ubiquitous energy drinks that fill the freezers at all convenience stores?

I'm still not sure what the goal of this campaign is. Should we stop drinking soda alltogether, or should we just reduce it? If I'm a fit healthy person who enjoys a can of soda every day, is that harming my health?

Some compare this campaign to the anti-smoking campaign, but this is a faulty comparison. Cigarrette smoking was harmful at any level, whereas a single can of soda is not going to kill you. In fact, if you drank nothing but soda everyday, you could remain at a normal weight and body fat if you didn't exceed the calories your body required.

This goes back to my philosophy that there is no such thing as junk food. You can eat anything you want in moderation. Clearly, Americans and New Yorkers consume too much sugar and soft drinks, but that doesn't make soda inherently bad. Our habits are bad, and I doubt a few signs on buses are going to change the way people drink. Like most government campaigns, it will only lead to further confusion.

Kevin

Welcome to the Resilient Human

2009-08-31T19:13:00.000-07:00

My name is Kevin Burciaga and I'm a certified personal trainer with NASM in Chantilly, VA. I offer my services at Sport and Health in Arlington, VA, and I am also available in Western Fairfax County.I specialize in endurance sports, fat loss, and also general health. This blog is called the Resiliant Human because I want people to perform their best in their chosen sports, and also in everyday life. I emphasize prehabilitation, which means preventing injuries before they happen. Prehabilitation emphasizes flexibility, stretching, rest, recovery, good nutrition, strength training, sleep, and even sunshine.This blog will cover topics about nutrition, fat loss, general health, and some of the hot issues in the health and fitness world today. I will offer my own opinions and insight. You can also leave comments.You can e-mail me at sraem@mail.com to schedule a free one-on-one session and personal assessment. I look forward to working with you.

Kevin BurciagaNASM-CPT