It’s been a crazy couple of months of travel, research, and writing for me, but I’ve learned some incredible new things. Over the last three years of personal transformation, an amazing clarity of overall energy balance of Human metabolism has emerged. T S Eliot wrote in the Gidding:
“We shall not cease from exploration
And the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive where we started
And know the place for the first time.”
I believe I have arrived where I started and I’ve never known it better. One of the difficulties in discussing a more unified approach is just how unbelievably misinformed we all are about the basic words involved in the discussion. The diet industry has bantered about protein, carbohydrate, fat, calorie, and many other terms to such a wide-extent that my revelation was simply going back to the basics.
In simple terms, it was necessary to purge the mental construct I had grown to rely on in the past when discussing weight gain/weight loss.
I really doubt that this confusion is driven by mass corporate conspiracy. I also believe that most who write diet books really believe their assertions and are motivated largely, because they want to help people. Everyone wants to profit and so I don’t condemn the large corporations for giving us what we demand/buy (salt, sugar and fat) nor the diet industry for rearranging the same message ad nausem to help you resist the three.
I will say the medical community, and in the United States, the USDA and NIH, on the other hand are probably more deserving of criticism. School lunch/breakfast programs begin misinforming our children at an early age and the net result has followed us all into adulthood to create a nation full of obesity. Now, this obesity trend is being exported to the rest of the world. Physicians are able to get a medical degree without a class in nutrition and when they do study it’s the USDA Food pyramid scheme.
I certainly appreciate the efforts of Dr. John McDougall and others for passing California SB 380 that mandates continuing education in lifestyle and nutrition in the management of chronic illness. Rather than mindlessly attack, I’d like to pick back up from last March and present a new foundation of the calorie and in particular, its relationship to the macronutrients, protein, carbohydrate and fat, so that we can all at least share a common language.
During this exploration of protein, carbohydrate, and fat, I will ask that you temporarily put aside what you believe at the moment and to the extent possible, suppress the diagnosis bias. I know that what I am going to discuss over the next few weeks is definitely contrary to what I was taught in undergraduate/graduate biochemistry class and what I believed to be true when I started my transformation; I also am confident that it is COMPLETELY consistent with the underlying science that was the foundation for nutrition.
Today, Seth Godin had an insightful blog entry that everyone should read. He’s amazing in both his deep insight to Human motivation, but most important to me, in his phenomenal ability to simply observe. These two sentences really pique my interest:
“You are welcome to believe that aqua metals will improve your sports performance and that z-rays will cure your arthritis, but only until it collides with things that are actually true. Placebos are a good thing, and everyone is entitled to their own beliefs, but they’re not entitled to their own science.”
And that seems to be the issue we have and it’s probably why you haven’t met your goals. He goes on to say,
“The trend I’m concerned with is the notion that we’re entitled to get upset when the truth doesn’t match our point of view.”
I’m both guilty of this and I have been the recipient of it from the other end. Fortunately, I am not motivated by politics, popularity, nor dogma, and so I am perfectly willing to change my opinion in the face of sound new data that is contrary to the data I based my previous opinion.
What is interesting is that when one takes a thermodynamic view of calorie, nutrition, and weight loss, it all becomes very obvious how the system works. It also opens the possibilities of alternate ways to view “food” and in particular what is going on in the very complex interplay of Macro vs Micro nutrients. Once you look through this new pair of glasses, it won’t be necessary to understand how the watch works to tell time.
For today, let’s just start with a very basic understanding of nutrition and I will invoke the much overused car analogy.
The Drive-Thru
To keep your car running you need two things: fuel and routine maintenance. The body is no different. The fuel can be in the form of Protein, Carbohydrate, or Fat and the maintenance is provided by vitamins, minerals, phytochemicals, and antioxidant capacities of food along with routine cardiovascular and strength conditioning. I don’t think anyone would disagree with that (long) sentence.
So, we have to routinely top-off the tank at the gas station and we also need to perform routine maintenance: change the oil, rotate the tires, check the timing belt, etc… So what happens if you show up to the gas station three times a week, whether or not you need gas? What if it became the center of business or social meetings, “hey, would you like to meet at the Exxon at 6 o’clock for a fill-up? or, Wow, it’s about time for some gas, I haven’t filled up for hours?
How do we KNOW we need fuel? Now where's the gas gauge again?
Ok, these days you would go broke, but think about it. If you show up to “socially” or habitually fill up, where does it all go? Eventually the tank is full, so you put in in a can in the trunk. Then the the trunk is full and now we put it in the back seat – eventually strapping it on the roof. I mean, we are going on a LONG trip and have no idea where the next station is…
Get the picture?
Ah, but true to life, it’s far more complicated. We’ve just described macronutrients (fuel), but what about micronutrients (maintenance)? If it weren’t for the pesky maintenance side, we could just stop eating and hopefully by thanksgiving (or pick your favorite holiday – they ALL seem to involve food) we would have reached our goal in time for pumpkin pie.
Can we just take micronutrients in a pill and fast? Again, it’s just not that easy. Starvation (caloric restriction) does appear to lengthen life according to studies. Then again, I am told it is so miserable you just THINK life is longer. HCG/Starvation is one form of popular “severe” restriction diet. If you don’t eat you WILL lose weight. If you are not losing weight then you MUST be eating too much. NO exceptions.
This is the duplicity in the problem. We can’t just give up food like like other out of control habits with out all sorts of problems. When we forego calories, we ALL certainly lose weight. We need micronutrients (maintenance) and many of them come in macronutrient (fuel) wrappers. So an optimal plan would involve restricting macronutrient calories, while getting the maximum micronutrients.
What many diets suggest is simply limit calories without regard to all the micronutrients and since it is only for a short period, there is no long term impact. Still others try to promote supplements or enriched shakes to bridge the gap. These are all short-term solutions and probably the reason so many regain the weight.
So in the next few posts, we’ll take a look at the three macronutrients (fuel): protein, carbohydrates, and fat and begin to unravel this evolutionary mystery. I’ll attempt to reframe them as fuel and give you a good way to think about not just how they the body “burns” them, but more importantly, how this ties back into the overall thermodynamic balance your body must maintain.
Fat or thin, fit or unhealthy, your body stays within a degree or so of it’s set point. It does so by managing HEAT not TEMPERATURE and we’ll see that a lot of the issues with perceived contradictions of the calorie come back to misapplication of macronutrient connections and an too much generalization about what your body really needs.
I am currently very busy, but very interested also. Is there a short version? I can go into details later in November. Thank you for your help. I’ve learned a lot from you & Tim Ferris!
I wonder what the next great place to catch up with people will be that doesn’t involve food. Imagine if going for a walk became the next “see you at starbucks”
I think this is one of the keys. Food has become a central collecting theme. So much so that even in the overwhelming evidence of death with certain unhealthy eating, people feel somehow that life is “restricted” or not worth living without it. Clearly some dopamine is playing a role in this sort of thinking.
I think it’s not so much about going for a walk as much as the amount of calorie that has been poured into coffee. Note that for centuries, coffee had caffeine but certainly wasn’t contributing to obesity. It wasn’t until it became calorically dense that the masses decided to “meet at starbucks.” While the caffeine has its drawbacks, it is the huge shot of dairy and simple sugar that is probably the biggest issue. After that, it is easily absorbable liquid calorie (this means soy too).
Ray
I agree with that line of thinking. Thanks for the reply.
Great post. I successfully incorporated two “rounds” of hcG, and agree. It can only be used as a temporary tune up, not a way of life. Still trying to formulate my own maint. Schedule, but I will tell you I stopped “topping up” in social situations, and it’s unbelievably easy.
Glad it worked. I’ve spent a lot of time on the peer reviewed literature and there are no good studies, nor plausible metabolic mechanisms for anything other than placebo. If there was any benefit, I am CERTAIN of is the vast majority of people end up with something that will clearly say on the side “homeopathic remedy.” That by definition means there is no HCG left in the solution. It’s not limited to HCG, increasingly you have to look carefully even at CVS or Walgreens, because a LOT of over the counter medicines are nothing more than water.
Somehow that doesn’t seem like it should be allowed, but the other side of the coin is an open economy.
As for a maintenance phase, it requires being certain that you fill up with nutrient-dense calorically poor food BEFORE you go to dinner or social functions. Keep pushing!
Ray
Sorry for spamming your article Ray, but perhaps the next step in your personal journey of understanding human metabolism is trying the HCG diet yourself. First, on HCG you will find that you have your normal hunger pangs – but they are satisfied with as little as 300 cals of protein. However, you can continue eating palatable foods well past satiety up until about 80-90% of your normal intake (when you normally eat a “large” meal). This is puzzling to me.. On HCG, I could get a noon hunger pang and be satisfied with a 300cal bag of beef jerky, not getting hungry again until 2pm. However, I could also eat a couple of baked potatoes, some rice, and milk to top it all off (or any combination of sugarless but palatable items). So in essence, I had a scenario where 300 calories is enough to feel satisfied but I could keep eating until 1500-1800 easily. Normally I can down a 2000kcal (clean calories) meal no problem when I’m very hungry, and this would be what I need in order to feel as satisfied as I do with 300 cals of protein on HCG. However, if I tried to go 1200-1300 calories above satiety without HCG, I would feel so full I’d be sick, and I wouldnt even be able to do this in the first place without forcing food down my throat. When you have tried HCG and experienced it yourself with an open, critical mind, you will realize how all the studies that show HCG is ineffective for weight loss can be right and wrong simultaneously. This is so because the set of mechanisms via which HCG can work and the set of mechanisms tested in research are not collectively exhaustive. It is very easy for someone on HCG to not lose any weight simply because of not modifying their behavior (and by the way, HCG seems to cause mood swings and cravings, perhaps because it disrupts the HPTA and more particularly upsets the balance of intra-testicular testosterone to estradiol versus serum testosterone and estradiol).
HCG *CAN* work, but it most likely will not given the fact that most people who are fat have an underlying behavioral problem, and without fixing this problem HCG cannot work. In addition, most fat people also have undelying nutritional defficiencies, which crash dieting will worsen, so hcg is probably a very poor long term solution.
However, the fact that HCG gives you the POSSIBILITY to not have to endure hunger makes it a valuable tool, though certainly not suitable or necessary for everyone. The effects of HCG are even more notable and valuable when you are a somewhat proficient athlete; the fact that HCG enables you to exercise intensely and perform well (athletically) in weightlifting or aerobic fitness events (but not on anything anaerobic, since you will be eating low carbs) is also very valuable in helping to lose weight. Most people who diet hard see their exercise performance suffer and thus their diet efforts suffer too.
With all this said, I do not recommend you do HCG for any longer than 2 weeks, and keep your dose at or under 200IUs/day. This is because HCG emulates LH and thus interferes with the normal functioning of your HPTA.
Victor
I like the “spam.” Don’t apologize unless you make it personal. Keep an open mind and don’t allow your personal experiences to completely convince you. Be a skeptic. One of the reasons I agreed to let Tim tell my story was what I was told what would be in the appendix – a healthy way to treat junk science.
First and foremost, I am a scientist. While I know longer have the multimillion dollar labs at my disposal when I regularly peer-review published, I understand the process of science and very much look past anecdotal data. For example, there has been criticism of my own work in Tim’s book (and Tim’s) about “where the published data” is on our claims. In the case of the thermal loading there are no less than 200+ articles on it, primarily in the 50s and 60s, but interesting it was the basis of work that the atwater factors arose in the 1800s. We didn’t have any idea in Atwater’s day that the mitochondria were being short circuited and using free fatty acids (FFA) to produce heat. What we knew was that the “inner fire” was heat generated and it was a necessary force of life. We knew how much snow an animal could melt. we knew that they took in oxygen and gave off CO2 and heat, just like a candle.
Food ingestion was a way to a ascertain WHY we lived. Atwater was the first person to scientifically take-on obesity (primarily the over consumption of sugars and breads) other than William Banting. At that time Banting was dismissed, because the medical community didn’t believe “dieting” worked. Some still don’t and most fail at attempts. What I know for certain is that my results are backed by 100s of paper that support the simple notion that the Human body uses FFA to generate heat through shivering and non-shivering thermogenesis. The rate of the loss demonstrated in peer-reviewed papers of obese/non obese participants is of the same level that my self-experiments produced. Further, there seems to be a much deeper evolutionary biology explanation for some of the unreported results I have seen.
On hCG. there is a scientific basis for the claims, see This study. Here is the problem I have. MOST of what is sold as human chorionic gonadotrophin is in fact, not hCG, but a “homeopathic remedy.” Just look at the label on the side. What that means is that it is WATER. It once had hCG, but it was so diluted that it no longer contains any of the original material. To homeopaths, they “water” contains the same ability to cure as the original substance.
Now, here is the absurd part. One might invoke “placebo effect” meaning they think they are getting cured because they BELIEVE they are getting the material. If that is true, then the study I just quoted that SUPPORTS hCG would have not been possible. In other words, there would have been no difference between hCG and Water and so hCG would be dismissed. That was not the case and there was a difference. Now Simeons (ref 2&3) did not claim that the people on a 500 kcal/day diet lost MORE weight using hCG (injections), what he said was that they were less hungry.
Now both cannot at the same time be true. I don’t know if you got hCG injections, but I know MANY that had same results that did not. They ate the restricted diet and they lost weight. Now, what if there were another way to balance hunger and macronutrient intake that was sustainable? And what are the essential micronutrient results or difference between a diet with only rice and one with chicken and rice? are they equivalent in our need for essential amino acids?
I am looking for something beyond a simple scheme to find what drives lots of people that take hCG (placebo water) and still lose weight despite the studies to the contrary. I fully understand that the total papers on hCG and weight loss are very limiting compared to the thermal regulatory work done over a century, but none the less, I acknowledge that there is evidence that hCG injections have impact. There is no support of homeopathic hCG remedies having any help – other than marketing. This is exactly why I quoted Seth Godin’s article.
I think I have enough to understand your argument and while we disagree on hCG, I am actually not interested in controlling hunger with injections or sublingual drops. It is interesting to me that if one searches scholar.google.com for sublingual hCG vs hCG injections a BIG difference emerges. The first is loaded with self-anoiting papers and claims, while the second has research that pretty much flurried with Simeons work and died out.
I’ll try to keep your points in mind and thanks for taking the time to reply. Congratulations on your weight loss. I personally think YOU had more to do with it than the drops, but if you want to give them the credit, that is ok. It’s just not something I want to deal with in looking at macro/micro nutrient connections and misunderstandings as they apply to obesity.
Ray
(1) Asher W.L. and Harper, H.W. Am J Clin Nutr 26:2, 1973
(2) SiMEONS, A. T. W. The action of chorionic gonadotrophin in the obese. Lancet 2: 946, 1954.
(3) SIMEONS, A. T. W. Chorionic gonadotropin in geriatrics. J. Am. Geriat. Soc. 4: 36, 1956.
Ray,
You say that most of what is being sold as hcg is water. I don’t really know whether that’s true or not (I live in miami and I am literally bombarded with ads for anti-aging docs that prescribe real bioidentical hcg or hcg extracted from the lovely piss of pregnant ladies). I guess I sort of spun off in a tangent because to me, oral hcg and other omeopathic remedies are such snake oil that I just cannot even fathom a discussion about their validity. If your contention is only that oral hcg drops are ineffective, then this is as true as the sky being blue.
My post was about actual hcg, not sublingual lemon zest water. My hcg was real hcg, injected subq, so that’s what I’m talking about. I can’t quite put to words how obvious it is that HCG is not a placebo. I’ve crash dieted with and without hcg, and the fact that 10 days into a crash diet of 500kcals I still have the energy to lift near my personal bests in the gym is astonishing. Without hcg, after 10 days of such a crash diet I dont even have the energy to have private time with my lady. And when I say “I don’t have the energy” I don’t mean “I don’t feel like it.” I mean it’s physically and biologically impossible due to a depressed libido/reproductive system and crashing hormones. I also tend to get sick in a snap when crash dieting, which didnt happen on hcg.
Also, I’m speaking not only of weight loss, as weight loss is a VERY poor gauge of progress in this matter. In my experience, HCG greatly helps to spare lbm. The study you linked me is very thought-provoking, but very poorly done. They should have measured body fat % and not only weight, and they should have had 24/7 supervision for adherence. Now that we are on the topic of the study, let me just nitpick two things you said:
“One might invoke “placebo effect” meaning they think they are getting cured because they BELIEVE they are getting the material. If that is true, then the study I just quoted that SUPPORTS hCG would have not been possible.”
That’s just not true, it’s a false dichotomy. The existence of a placebo effect does not necessitate the magnitude of the placebo effect being equal to that of a real drug. A placebo effect can easily exist that does not match the effectiveness of the drug. I see a HUGE placebo effect in that study. For 48% of the people taking water injections to not feel hunger is nothing short of remarkable; at least that’s what I think based on my own experience with crash dieting, as well as the experiences of those around me.
“Now both cannot at the same time be true.”
Yes they can – in a way. It can be easily explained when you consider that the subjects not on hcg quite simply could not adhere to that VLC diet and must have broken it. A 500kcal diet is damn near impossible to maintain. As I gather from the study, the patients were not under 24/7 observation so some of them could have been snacking in between meals. To recap: there are ways in which this study can simultaneously have the results it had while also exhibiting the existence of a pwoerful placebo effect AND at the same time not be an adequate rebuttal to Simeons’ arguments.
This is my major bone to pick with people who put so much stock in research papers. It’s as if science has ceased to exist, and the people of today think “peer reviewed published papers” are science. Science is a separate entity from research papers. In fact, research papers are an imperfect (and in most cases very poor) attempt at arriving at science with incomplete information and limited resources. Just because a research paper is peer reviewed this doesn’t make it scientifically sound. Hell, if I was in charge of reviewing all papers none would pass until scientists finally figure out a way to randomize samples so that they dont do research that violates the basic tenets of statistics. As the authors of that paper aptly concluded, “more research is needed.” This is almost always the case, because when it comes to observational trials of this nature it is virtually impossible to monitor every variable. What I’m saying is that to me, a study where body fatness was not measured and patient food intake was measured via a food diary (I chuckled while typing that) has barely any more true scientific worth than a study that measures the correlation between the incidence of cancer to the amount of pink items in one’s wardrobe. Such studies can present interesting hypotheses but they are not science nor are they scientific, they are merely systematic observations.
Before concluding, I want to clarify that I dont think hcg is a long-term solution to a weight problem. I think that for this purpose it’s about as worthless as liposuction. If you are weight stable at point A and you do either lipo or an hcg cycle, then upon resuming your normal life (which led you up to point A) then you will slowly wind up to whatever your level of body fatness was at point A. I used hcg for a total of about 3 weeks to lose less than 10 pounds of fat (real pounds of fat, not weight), and I’ve lost over 100lbs of fat in total on my own. I do have to thank hcg for showing me the futility in chasing quick and dirty solutions; my hcg failure was the way in which I got started towards learning about micronutrients.
The only reason I started arguing with you about hcg is because hcg is something you can try for yourself and it will really open your eyes to how imperfect research papers are as a vehicle towards science. You are a very valuable resource and I would hate it if you ended up being one of those guys that misses the forest for the trees because they dont bother critically reading and tearing apart the flaws in the scientific studies that are commonly accepted as gospel. I would hate to see you leave the status quo of calories in vs calories out only to join some other equally nonsensical status quo (call it “primal”, blood type diet, ketogenic diet, or whatever).
I agree. I offered that paper as an example of one that supported, with data, the notion that it was effective. The only place it has shown any significance was with injection. The sublingual (which constitutes the majority of what people refer to) and the homeopathic remedies have no effect. People can and have live on a calorically restricted diet and the psychology of placebo should not be underestimated. I think there is great harm in “personal science” and as imperfect as the peer-review process might be, it is vastly superior to decision by website. I wrote a lot of papers when that was my full time position at NASA and it is a very difficult bar, despite the criticism that many have that have not participated. You will see me soundly criticize peer-reviewed research all the time. As say, many don’t correctly control the variables. This is exactly the point of this next few blog posts, but I don’t need to throw the baby out with the bath water.
Science is not dogma, so things are always disproven – with NEW data – that is the point. The public often takes the core position, well they were WRONG. yes, they were and in a knowledge based system that is predicated on substantiated data, that system can continue to produce new, verifiable, innovations. When it doesn’t go the way people “believe it should” then they invoke conspiracy or cover-up.
I think we largely agree on many issues, but I don’t agree that hCG is very effective, despite your personal results, but I remain open to the idea. Like you said, it’s not a permanent solution and so I am spending my effort in other areas. I don’t deny that you lost weight, and I am happy for that, but I would say that when we look at the broad scope of data, then we see it’s not very compelling. Can people sell it and make claims? sure, but that does not mean it is true. The dairy industry did this for years with calcium. Ultimately, science wins. The world won’t stay flat and we get a chance to land on the moon. It is not correct for you to say it is impossible to comply with a 500Kcal/day diet without hCG. I know people that practice caloric restriction (for health and longevity) and even anorexics, that disprove that assertion. If a person is motivated enough, they can do it. You and I would agree that if it did help you, it was because it was really hCG and it was injected. Remember, you end up getting lumped in the “sublingual lemon zest water” category, but I did not assume that and offered a paper that defended your position. Maybe it works – I remain open, but it’s not where I want to put my research effort, nor experience.
IF you want to follow up on your criticism of the research (measuring fat loss, not weight) then here is the best meta-analysis I could find in open literature. It examines 8 controlled and 16 uncontrolled research efforts. You can read the results. Now, if we were to compare this to a similar meta analysis of say, penicillin, you would find that penicillin has strengths and weaknesses, occasionally killing people, but efficacy is clearly there.
Most of all, relax. Don’t get hung up on this one point, but I do have the right to dismiss something here, and you will see, be wrong. Once I see any indication that I am wrong, I will quickly change my opinion to alight with what science says is right. It’s fleeting, but It is something I really enjoy. The entire point of my TEDtalk and this subject is that it is wrong to leave out 80% of the data (metabolic waste heat) and then cry foul when calories “just don’t add up.”
That is changing very fast. Thanks for you comments victor.
Ray
Ray, also for clarity sake, I did NOT take the homeopathic hCG. I used doctor prescribed HCG. It was certainly the prescribed therapy. I also followed Dr. Simeon’s protocol to its exact specifications. Glad to chat with you offline about the differences, but your research on the homeopathic stuff is spot on.
I didn’t assume one way or another, but do understand that this public discussion DOES serve a great purpose: there are probably hundreds that read this post that didn’t know the difference.
So it’s good. I like people including some outside references, but if it ever gets to the point that we know someone is just being “spammy,” I hope you guys chip in..
I could have MANY more users if I did not require registration. The good news is that the people that take the time, I think, want to learn. I don’t abuse that trust and I hope in return, they will help by digging in just a little bit deeper and spreading the word.
I am not interested in the hGC right now, because it is simply treats the symptom, not the disease. I have spent considerable time researching it, but it doesn’t interest me at the moment. Maybe in the future.
I want people to focus on the basics.
Ray
I’m a bit disappointed, I expected more substance. I am well aware that although your body can transform one macronutrient to another, the three macro nutrient metabolisms are largely compartamentalized and managing your macros is an important part of working the “calories in vs calories out” equation. And this is where micronutrients step in, as they are all interrelated and overconsuming one depletes you of another, so if you do not plan your macros carefully you will find your body depleted of micronutrients and thus the “calories out” side of your equation will keep getting further and further depressed over time. I am very curious to see you expand on all this, you usually offer good insights.
Thanks Victor
I plan to lay out more of the details in the upcoming posts. Not all of the readers are familiar, or can even define, the difference between Macro/Micro nutrients. Compounding that issue is that on macronutrient, protein, also contains necessary micronutrients in the from of essential amino acids. That is further compounded by the general misinformed assertion that protein = meat, which it does not. Amino acids are the building blocks of life. The DNA is full of codons that encode for the many polypeptides that regulate all of our systems and form our tissue.
The calories in, calories out has equation dates back to the Atwater factors in the late 1800s.
The key to ALL of the upcoming posts is contained in this sentence of your comment:
if you do not plan your macros carefully you will find your body depleted of micronutrients and thus the “calories out” side of your equation will keep getting further and further depressed over time.
I agree with the overall notion, but disagree that carefully is a necessary (adjective) in this case. I think the “careful” part is due in part, to the misunderstanding of the difference between macro and micro nutrients, and the entire paradigm of a “well balanced diet” containing all three. In our quest to use “fancy” words to describe foods, we have labeled it in such a way that even WELL EDUCATED people, make simple mistakes.
Let’s watch how this goes, but I feel confident in that if you take the thermodynamics out of the equation (i.e. body’s management of heat (not temperature), then you end up with the seeming paradox created.
It’s not about exercise as we cannot out exercise our mouths. Thermodynamically speaking, it is impossible.
Thanks for the comments.
I agree with you. I only used the word “Careful” to describe the management of macronutrients because of my own personal bias – if you care about lifting 600 pounds then the “careful” thing becomes absolutely imperative. Obviously, though, not everyone cares about such things and most people just want to be healthy, energetic and look reasonably slender.
BTW Ray, you need to take a look at wholehealthsource.com
That guy has invested a lot of time in digesting the role of palatability and food reward in obesity. This is one of his most interesting pieces (that I’ve read):
http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2011/08/roadmap-to-obesity.html
Read the first link you sent, but not any further. While I think he does an excellent job of dismissing why our current paradigm does not work, I don’t think he passes on the thermodynamics side. This whole issue of “hereditary” ignores the entire 3-4 million year evolutionary cycle. I think that last 100 years of obesity is an evolutionary microsecond. When we go back and look at gracile australopithecine and gracile australopithecine, some of the earliest Hominids, we can see these evolutionary pathways.
Before the molecular revolution, we used to think that orangatangs were more closely related to Humans, because of morphology (like teeth), but now we know genetically that gorillas and chimps are closer. We see convergence of thick enamel evolution on teeth for some reason. We can look at C3/C4 signatures of hominids and infer the kinds of things they are eating. When we fast forward through all of this, we know that bipedalism happened at around 7 million years, tools at 3-4 million years and big brains at about 2 million years. Meat eating was often cited as the fuel that caused brain explosion, but it is now know that underground storage organs (tubers, corms, bulbs. and rhizomes) are the best hypothesis and are completely consistent with the C3/C4 data.
So when we look at obesity it is highly unlikely that we genetically mutated for any reason in 100 years, but epigenetic factors could play a role.
All of that is complicated and so rather go way out with some incredible story and debate, can we come up with a basis for three macronutrients and yet unknown plethora of micronutrients that explains obesity in the presence of ubiquitous caloric sources of any kind of food – plant, meat, refined sugars and fats (all sources).
I think yes. and I think when this is superimposed on the thermodynamic balance that is mandatory (there is no evidence that thermodynamic principles have changed in 7 million years), we’ll see that the ONLY outcome possible is obesity.
Hope that make sense, and if not, stick with me.
Ray
I didn’t mean to imply that Stephan is right about everything. I personally disagree (very strongly so) with his prescription to “cure” the obesity epidemic: focus on eating only bland and tasteless foods for the rest of your life. But he has a lot of experience and he’s familiar with a lot of research into the role of palatability in obesity… I guess you can say a lot of his writing is complimentary with what you’re aiming at right now. He tries to explain why it is that we are going to the gas station as a social gathering and why it is that our brain allows us to foolishly fill up when we’re already topped off, so that we end up having to store gas in our trunk and back seat.
agreed. “bland food” is a matter of what one’s comparison is. If you constantly coat your food in hot sauce, normal food no longer is pleasing. This is similar to what people say is “cold.” If no change occurs, then there will never be a cure, only yo-yo weight loss/gain.
It does not require a sacrifice, but it does require a change. There is no way to eat unlimited calories and remain thin at this time. Perhaps in the future, but not now.
Ray
I have no bones to pick with you and no links to spam you with. 🙂 Thank you for the great research you are doing for all of us! 🙂
Hey!
we learn in the places we are wrong. pick away! 😉
remember, gloves (and socks-lol) before sweaters make you look better.
Ray
I appreciate your work…
Two things…
1) As you go down this path, be sure to read/research/study the path of http://www.bulletproofexec.com … should you not be familiar already. I think you’ll find his bio-hacking work something well worth your time. Have a conversation if at all possible…
2) I am purposely taking a 2-3 week vacation to spend a considerable amount of time near a 72 degree cold pool & warm pool style spa… I could spend a large part of my day in the 72 degree water… any thoughts, protocols, caveats, or outright warnings for such a trip… and is 2-3 weeks long enough… considering a 6-8 week makeover during this time if life allows and your work is a huge part of it…
thanks…
Ok John
every now and the someone comes along and zaps HOURS of my life. You, my friend, have just done that with the bulletproof site. I hate you jk 😉
thanks!
ok, on the water, just do a little bit of interval training. Remember, what competitive swimmers do…or better what they DON’T do…is get in the pool and swim repetitive laps like they’ve just had a shot of prozac and a laxative. They are doing intervals and it is intense. Often they do exercises on the pool’s edge. Many times it is early in the morning and often on empty stomach.
If you are effective in the thermal load you will feel hunger (whew, there’s that word again today) about 2 hours after you are in the water or have the peak thermal load. This should be your highest fiber/lowest calorie meal of the day or you are likely to overeat.
Focus on caloric density. Eat the highest volume foods, with the lowest caloric content. If you eat fats/meats you will stimulate hunger. Cut out ALL …ALL…let me say that again…ALL liquid calories of any kind. Unfortunately its vacation, so that means the “4th macronutrient” alcohol. What will happen is that calories will sneak in and be readily absorbed when all the rest of your diet is on-track. You can successfully lose weight by getting down to the level of intake that Victor talks about here, but don’t expect to sustain that mentally. Not unlike caloric restriction for longevity, that is a VERY difficult thing to do.
You WILL see results from excessive time in water, but you must have a plan to counteract the hunger of that extreme heat (not temperature) load on your body. It will require will power, but hunger can be controlled if you limit saturated fat/excessive meat. They are satiating on a high protein diet, but in the face of an extreme thermal load, you won’t pass the calories through…
Ray
it wont be hours of your life… It will be days if you keep the open mind i trust you will… Death iin the name of results is headed my way apparently… An honorable death indeed…
If you and bulletproof exec get on a call, i only ask to listen in… You both agree calorie model is broken/incomplete but he’s on about 4500 calories a day with no exercise or cold exposure… And a six pack after similar weight struggle as yours…
Being open isnt easy but my guess is your advice about my protocol on vacation will radically change…
Staying open is difficult but admirable…. Contempt prior to investigation is contemptible!
Lookb forward to connecting… Perhaps for japanese food next time i am in huntsville!
A little word of warning about the bulletproof exec guy: He’s on steroids. Yes, he admits to TRT in the video where he talks about mycotoxins. By the way, most modern docs who prescribe TRT take the approach of “replacing” what was never there; they prescribe enough testosterone to give you the levels of the most gifted russian olympian of all time. Some people on TRT are walking around with three times the level of total testosterone as the average normal male.
I think he’s a farce in selling people on the idea that they can look like him and sleep like him by eating keto when in fact he is on steroids. Imagine a colombian druglord who launders his money by injecting it into a chain of laundromats. Now imagine this colombian druglord telling you you can be as rich as him if only you learn to run laundromats as awesomely as he does. That’s basically what this guy is. I find it dishonest and insulting. When you are on steroids your body is basically on permanent nitro boost, you build muscle, lose fat, and your sleep is twice as effective without doing anything else beyond your injections. Look at this study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8637535
Basically, injecting steroids + sitting around on your ass is twice as effective at building muscle and losing fat as weight training + not being on steroids. So yes, after 14 years of walking around with the testosterone levels of Achilles and Hercules one can expect to look muscular and lean with no effort whatsoever.
For a more realistic view of what you can expect to look like if you eat keto and DON’T inject testosterone, have a look at garry taubes or Dr. Eades: Slightly pear-shaped and pudgy. FYI there is pretty good research on keto diets slowing down thyroid function to a crawl, this is possibly related to the fact that carbohydrate feeding is the only way to directly boost leptin via food.
Thanks Victor.
I’m not going to promote him any time soon, but it is interesting to read other views. Some times there is a gem within a big mound of dirt if you care to get muddy and sift through it.
Let’s move back to the subject here: Macro Nutrients and Micro Nutrients. All the other fancy stuff fails if we don’t have the basics defined.
Ray
I think his diet, linked below, addresses Macro Nutrients, Micro Nutrients and a couple of other factors such as mycotoxins & inflammation which should be part of intelligent conversation. To leave either out of the equation is a mistake.
Further, if nothing else, replacing beef with grass fed beef, adding grass fed butter to diet vs other oils, and increasing the amount of truly healthy fats one consumes can’t possibly be a bad thing.
http://www.bulletproofexec.com/the-complete-illustrated-one-page-bulletproof-diet/
John
PS… Athletes, and those looking to be healthy long term, need three things… a healthy immune system, a healthy nervous system, and muscles that turn on and off really fast. How about we center our Macro Nutrients & Micro Nutrients around feeding/training those three things…if we do, I bet you’ll find the body fat conversation gets a lot simpler.
In the meantime, someone should be opening up “Cold Yoga” & tweaking poses to work the muscles while they are at length at temperatures under 70 degrees… THAT class would be the toughest, most incredibly demanding, results producing, growth hormone skyrocketing, fat loss class available anywhere. Instead we live in a culture of hot yoga and smoothies…
(end of rant here)
John
Stick with me here. You have too many variables and those are confusing. I don’t agree with much on that page. That does NOT mean it does not work, but it is just another variant of the same 70 year old explanation of macronutrients that have landed us in this critical problem of heart disease, rampant cancers, diabetes, auto immune disease, and obesity.
You are throwing around big words (not implying you don’t understand them) but you will see in the next post why we ALL need to reflect a little and take a HUGE step backwards if we are to progress.
I don’t even do WARM yoga, but I can tell you that it would be grueling … hey, they have a 50 below in las vegas, why not.
Stay with me for a few more posts and try to really understand and NOT go into interpretation or project onto other sites/hypothesis. Need for you to throttle your mind WAY back and let’s take this stepwise. You WILL see the paradox and it leads to all sorts of claims. I can’t tell you which one is true, but I know that the fork in the road is clearly identifiable.
Ray
[…] Meet You at the (Gas) Station On September 25, 2011, in Blog, by admin […]
Hi, Rey! I don’t know where to put my question. Is oats a good source of energy. I mean it is not processed and don’t have added trans fats,oils, salt, sugar etc. What do you think?
Love them! I cook with frozen wild blueberries. You can use a little unsweetened almond milk for more creamy texture. A couple of months ago when I was doing food experiments I ate them for a couple of days straight and measure both glucose monitor and metabolic response.
New paper will be good. We have food so wrong as a society. Now our habits have captured science and we twist reductionist facts into stories that just don’t explain what one sees in the lab.
Exciting.
Ray.
Well, now I can eat them with more pleasure:) Here in Bulgaria, now is the season of the blueberries. Last saturday I spent 6 hours in the mountain picking up wild blueberries. I don’t cook the oats. I soak them in a boiling water and add some dried berries for some sweet flavour. I am now going to eat them regularly, as I already train and need more energy.