What an incredible month and I can’t believe November came and is gone. “Fat bottom girls, you make the rockin world go round…” It’s time to dive into Fat. It’s sort of the original sin of food. Unlike proteins and carbohydrate, most of us know when we have too much of it around. We covered some material in the BATgirl posts – predominately the “brown” flavor, so now let’s talk about the “white version.” After we discuss a little bit about how we get it and how to lose it, we will pick up with the dietary forms of fat.
Look at this image. Do you feel your fat suit? I did when I was 50 lbs heavier and I do right now as I gear up to take the last 15 or so off.
Everyone by now has heard me say, “you can’t out-exercise your mouth.” I think most realize that movement is amazing for health, but relative to how many calories one can stuff into their mouth on any given day, movement is probably only a small part of the weight loss plan. Here is the corollary to that quote: You must go on a high fat diet to lose weight.
It’s ALWAYS true. Let’s see why.
Saving For a Rainy Day
I hope everyone came away understanding that carbohydrate is neither bad, nor unhealthy. We have been taught in the last few years to fear carbs and before that it was fat. The reality is that our bodies run on a carbohydrate based economy – Glucose. When we consume too much energy, the evolutionary survival trait kicks in and we naturally store this energy as fat in adipose tissue to use at a later day.
Our problem is the later day never comes.
In organic chemistry we refer to this class of compounds as Lipids. They are mostly carbon and hydrogen, but are very different than carbohydrates. For one, they are typically insoluble in water – you’ve seen the oil floating in vinegar and oil dressing. Lipids act in the same way. There are three main categories of Lipids: Fats, phospholipids, and steroids.
We have discussed Free Fatty Acids (FFA) being used by the mitochondria to produce ATP (or heat in presence of up regulating proteins). In general, fatty acids are how we store fat in chains of about 18 carbons long. In some sense they look a lot like the chains of glucose in starch, but are typically shorter in length. FFA are just the units of these that have been mobilized to use as energy, analogous to the free glucose that is freed from starch/glycogen. The bonds in these fat molecules have a LOT of energy, which is why our bodies use them to store for a rainy day.
When the rainy day never comes and we continue to go back to the table to refuel, there’s no hiding where it goes.
Cholesterol is a steroid of fat that is produced by the liver and intestines and is used as a starting material to produce other important materials in our body like Vitamin D and cell Membranes.
Phosopholipds are manufactured to create the “lipid bilayer” of cell membranes. One end is the fat we are discussing – it wants to repel water (hydrophobic – phobos Greek for fear) and the other end is REALLY attracted to water (hydrophilic – philia Greek for love). These form a sandwich with the water loving side pointed to the inside and outside of the cell and the “fatty part” in the middle. This keeps things from freely passing from one side to the other.
I won’t get into any more details, but I hope you have a taste of how this range of lipid molecules are related. Many don’t know that cholesterol is a steroid or that it is a form of fat. Others might not know that very important molecules, like Vitamin D come from cholesterol our bodies (and other animals) make. As well, every single cell in your body is absolutely dependent on fat for it’s membrane as are many of the bioactive molecules.
Fats are important and it is a shame that we now use the word “fat” to monolithically categorize food. Like “carbs,” it’s simply a bad idea. It leads to many people becoming confused and obsessed with managing something in hopeless ways. Our results in managing our weight speak for themselves. We have used the “macronutrient shuffle” to move society into unprecedented chronic disease. When your body NEEDs fat, it can make it. Now, if it has enough ability to manufacture all of these necessary components like cholesterol and fatty acids, what do you think happens when it is simply OVERRUN with the stuff by consuming excess amounts of it in your diet?
System break downs. Oh, but I eat the HEALTHY kind. I need more Omega-3s. Yeah, right.
Heart disease, diabetes, and other chronic illness end up consuming your health, but managing “fat” alone is not the answer. I am not certain that eating it in massive excess trains the body to deal with it any better. A commenter on Carbohydrate Part – 3 tried to count (a very small list) of fat regulating hormones to justify why we don’t need to eat carbohydrate. Since most hormones, all cell walls, and the primary energy storage is all based in a FAT economy, don’t you think we would have a few extra processes hanging around? Eating is one activity and our preferred, day to day, economy of energy is carbohydrate – glucose.
I understand his confusion. In fact I think one of the most profound statements at TEDMED 2011 was, “molecular biology has failed.” What was meant by the speaker is that there is not just one genetic pathway to health – identify the bad gene and eradicate it was the naive thought we had pre-Human genome knowledge. Now we understand that there exists a “symphony” of reactions that are going on and we don’t have to understand each one to manage them. Instead we can manage in a more holistic approach.
Your body CAN shift over and stuff fat into that primarily energy economy if that is what it is given (or you are starving), but it is not our primary operating mode (glucose, glycogen, blood sugar). When you run out of glucose/glycogen your body naturally starts metabolizing fat. This is why the Atkins-type diets are so effective short term. They mimic starvation mode. When this fat is gone (and we’ll see sometime before) the body can metabolize protein (your muscle). These are the phases of starvation. Deplete short term energy, move to long term, and then go into complete survival to “protect the brain and organs” and sacrifice the arms, lets, etc..
Not too unlike what we learned about getting cold – stop flowing blood to the extremities and protect the core.
Under a NORMAL diet, we get alarmed when excess ketones (byproducts of this fat metabolism) show up in urine. ketogenesis is the result of going into a fat-based economy and often looking for ketones in the urine is a sign that you have switched over. As the two of the main ketone groups, acetoacetate and beta-hydroxybutyrate, are very acidic, blood pH can drop, which results in ketoacidosis. The other ketone formed is acetone – fingernail polish remover, well, before they removed it because it was unhealthy.
All in all, these byproducts are a natural part of Fat metabolism. You have to go through this process to shed those love handles. I think doing it like I did in yo-yo dieting probably has a very unhealthy effect – I just don’t like the idea of acetone running through my system. This is one of the issues that is unresolved in eating – is long term ketosis detrimental to health?
It seems to me that living in this mode is not healthy long term even though short term it is VERY effective in losing body fat. I think the positive longevity benefits associated with caloric restriction are from nutrient dense, calorically poor diets. While on the surface these two forms of “starvation” may share a common name, it’s likely the outcome is very different. Just my speculation.
Your High Fat Diet
photo: Issac Hinds bodybuilding.com
So, this might come as a complete surprise, but the way you lose weight is to go on a natural high-fat diet. In fact it is EXCLUSIVELY the way you lose, because it is YOUR fat that you need to digest. At it’s basic level weight loss is actually quite simple in theory: eat enough micronutrients (the maintenance stuff – vitamins, minerals, essential amino acids) to keep the system running and then consume your “gas reserves” for energy.
If you want want a 6-pack (btw, everyone has one) you have to remove enough fat to SHOW it. You just can’t see it through your “fat suit.” lose body fat (without muscle atrophy, or break down) and stay toned with a moderate amount of exercise and you WILL look fit.
Now some of us don’t have as much muscle mass and putting that on is a completely different topic. As any bodybuilder will tell you there are two steps to their sport: 1) Putting on mass (excess calorie combined with muscle stress/exercise) and 2) dropping body fat for competition (right Christy?) .
While some level of fitness can be maintained (you don’t need to become obese), putting on muscle mass typically comes with some extra body fat (and water) that are normally shed just before competition. Most body builders would be hard pressed to stay at this extremely low (some unhealthy) level for much time.
The point here is that the way you shed fat is to restrict caloric intake (of any kind) and just focus on high nutrient food. This is most easily accomplished with plants/fiber, but there are other ways to do it as well. The part I want you to keep in mind with EVERY BITE is that if you are putting calories IN, then the body does not have to tap into calories OUT of your fat reserves. Remember the gas station analogy?
There are very healthy ways to create caloric restriction and stay satiated throughout the process. Remember this point as well – the body does not KNOW it is fat. Therefore, anything you do to push it away from its CURRENT set point (reduce calories) it will see as starvation and most likely turn on hunger.
There is a base to metabolic restriction that the body can’t get around and we will see in Part 2 that increasing cold exposure with added exercise will preferentially send free fatty acids out to be metabolized by mitochondria for heat and can create a one-two punch on the love handles.
**************
Do you like these blogs and want to help me? Please take a minute to scroll up on the right side of the screen consider making a monthly donation to this program. You can also make a one time donation here:
Excellent. I made it through the socially accepted practice of stuffing my gourd with food over Thanksgiving. Now it is time to test the Minimum effective dose of food inputs to see if we can get the gas tank reserve moving off my internally combustible fat stores.
I did a vegan thanksgiving again. Thanksgiving week 2009 was when I launched my first vegan experiment. Finished slow carb and binging work this summer and transitioned back.
Now adding blood testing to the mix and will see where that goes.
Now, those were might fine pants you were squeezing into on your Facebook post. You wouldn’t want to out grow THOSE!
Ray
Thanks Ray… if your travels ever find you in Dallas or Waco, let me know. You can see them live at a Baylor sporting event.
Absolutely!
I thought he meant “Philly” – which is Northeastern for adding cheese whiz to it.
Yum. It’s been forever since I had a Philly cheese steak. Mouth watering, but I will not sucomb to your taunts!
Ray.
Glad to see the new blog entry and cannot wait to learn more about cold exposure + added exercise. I would like to use the next few weeks to blast away some fat before Christmas!
Well the obvious things are to go easy on bundling. My house slid down in temp until it reached 43F/6C last night. I put on heat and set to 55F/12C. I woke up today sweating as I had pulled on covers. It was interesting to go through the adaptation and I slowly dropped 6 lbs with no real effort or diet modification.
I set the temperature of swim spa to 75F/24C for my first round of swim/kettlebell routines. Will be collecting data over December. Now that I have more access to cold air, I can finish some self experiments from last year. My goal is to shoot for moderate activities that don’t require extreme adaptation. After a few weeks if these your perception of cold changes radically.
Ray
I wish I could test keeping the temp low in the house, but the wife is tiny and cold natured, so that is not going to happen. I’ll have to settle for going lighter on the clothing, doing shiver walks and swimming in my gym’s pool.
What kind of swim spa did you get? 75F would be great. I have been swimming in 82F water at the athletic club I use, but that is as low as they go unless they are hosting a swim meet, in which case they drop it to 80F.
I have an Tidalfit (tidalfit.com). I did not get jets and I am using a swim tether. I will have more on this soon. I went a little nuts with an AquaCal heat pump so that I can go from 104F down to 45F.
Just finishing my lab now with metabolic equipment. Hope to knock out some good numbers in next 3 months. Right at the EDGE. has taken me a while to get started. There were a few false starts with companies that didn’t come through, but now its all WHIRLING!!!.
Ray
So, does this mean you’re going to do kettlebell swings in 75 degree water? haha
Why do you say “our preferred, day to day, economy of energy is carbohydrate – glucose”.What about the primal men,in those times there were no carbs.What about eskimos?Fat is directly used for energy.Carbs must be digested and converted to glucose.
P.S. Sorry for my english,I am from Bulgaria.
Alex
Great to have you and no worries – broken English is the official language of this blog. Mine is broken too!
I will try to post some more links when I get to my computer later, but if you will google the work of Nathaniel Dominy, you will find some very different perspectives. First, he’s a meat eater – so don’t confuse his science with an “agenda” or funding source.
While Loren Cordain has been successful in popularizing his views, they are far from conclusive. There is a lot in archelogical and anthropometric analysis that show we probably ate closer to 25% or less of our calories from animals. Most of the energy boost that fueled our big brain came from the starch in underground storage organs of plants (tubers, bulbs, and corms). We find records at dig sites of these and our digestive system matches it.
You don’t maintain a energy “fat level” in you blood and liver it’s glucose and glycogen. In the presence of both fat and glucose the body preferentially uses the glucose and stores excess glucose/fat calorie as fat. What one must assert is situational environment and assume these people 10-70 thousand years ago didn’t have starch. If so, they had to find fatty meat. No one will argue that meat cannot be eaten, but if it was a primary food source, why is fat/protein digestion secondary to sugar in our bodies? Why does protein starvation exist? Why must we cook meat to avoid sickness?
There are too many inconsistencies with our biology to suggest meat was primary fuel pre-agriculture for all mankind. There were pockets of it throughout history and right now we have record heart disease and chronic illness from the mass quantity of fried food and saturated fat diet (dairy and meat). Unfortunately we have “evolved” such perverse processing of starch in our modern diet as to become completely unhealthy. Potato is not equivalent to chips or french fries.
Most modern analysis, including Cordain, miss this. Dominy’s work will be key in the next 3-5 years and starch/plant-based diet will be a large component to addressing chronic disease like diabetes, heart disease and cancer.
There are numerous studies that show increased percentage plant base diet improves these risk factors and I’m not aware of any that have ever said the risk is worse outside of processed starch: fried, bread, chips, cereal, etc.
What has changed is people entering the debate like Dominy and me that have absolutely no objection to eating animals. Our quest is what is the basis of energy that fueled human evolution? What food provides the best basis for health?
What I will propose is a plant-based and animal based way to lose weight. I happen to personally believe plant-based is healthy, but one can shed fat either way.
Ray
Hi Ray,
Historically (in the UK) we are told by the media and medical sources that vegetarianism is not sustainable without protein,mineral and vitamin supplements.
Not finding much on Nathaniel Dominy apart form a 10min youtube vid, is he suggesting that this is wrong. Even though we can eat meat (if the only food source available in times of hunger) we don’t need it can are able to meet all requirements from vegetable sources? Obviously I haven’t included nuts but I’m guessing this would be included in his theories also as is honey and plant nectar.
With regards to seasonal fruits and vegetables are we to perceive that even though we can sustain on year round bulbs, roots, etc. our bodies would be deficient in certain food types and nutrient according to seasons?
Sorry if this is off the fat post but this is very, very, interesting and makes me wonder, even though i could eat a 16oz ribeye cooked rare very easily, is it necessary? With regards to my children’s growth also is meat necessary?
Aside from Vitamin B12, which is produced by bacteria found in the rumen of animals, there are no nutrients in meat/fat not easily obtained in plant sources. This is why one must stop using protein, carbohydrate, or fat as “food groups.” When we get to protein, we’ll learn about indispensable (essential) amino acids. These are found in nearly all plant foods.
We CAN eat meat, and that was a good adaptive trait for survival; it is not necessary to eat it.
Think about it for just a second. Pick any animals we eat for “protein” and think about what they eat? The largest animals we find – cows, giraffe, hippopotamus, elephants, etc…grow to enormous size and eat only plants. That’s because protein, complete protein, is the building blocks of life. It’s ubiquitous and we don’t need that much. Human breast milk has one of the lowest levels of any species 1.1% vs say rat @11.3% or whale @ 13.6%.
If you google the Protein Digestibility Corrected Amino Acid Score (PDCAAS), one of several schemes available to assess protein quality, you’ll find that soy and eggs get a perfect score of 1.0 and beef is only .91. As you will find, even foods like grain with a score of .4 (limited in amino acid lysine) have adequate sources of other amino acids. No one in today’s world eats a single plant species or food group, so these limits are somewhat irrelevant.
We don’t have a world protein difficiency disease and virtually all minerals/vitamins are adsorbed/produced by plants. They’re forced to as they CAN’T eat. Perhaps modern refrigeration/transportation allow too much access to simple sugars, such as fructose, in fruits and concentrates. This is probably only an issue if your getting excess energy in form of fats. This seems to be key. Eat adequate energy and the rest follows. More later on that concept.
I did personal experiments both ways. After I beat my own personal addiction to fat/meat (took a year) I found that I felt better and blood work was better on a vegan diet. I still love chicken wings, ribs, sushi and lamb (with mint sauce!). I choose to eat this VERY sparingly else I’ll slip back into excessive consumption.
The fact is that you no more need meat in your diet then a smoker needs cigarettes. When you pass the addictive part, you’ll likely feel better without excessive meat/fat in your diet. Like a smoker, you’ll swear you feel better eating meat short term; the brain is amazing at rationalizing what it craves. Most people are too closed-minded to give it a try and vegans on the whole can be annoying with loads of animal rights propaganda – sorry if I’m being offensive, but it’s not persuasive for me. I’m simply not personally moved by that argument, but if others are it’s their choice. I guess if that’s important, either way they win as I’m not eating animal products.
That being said, it’s always quite humorous to suggest we eat cats and dogs (complete protein) and watch people wince. Really, what’s the difference? Our minds make up a lot of silly rules. That’s a luxury we have in a modern society that has ubiquitous calorie. Bet that starving paleo man would eat a raw Chiwawa in a heartbeat.
I’d prefer a sweet potato with tamari and toasted sesame seeds – simple, fast, and healthy food.
Ray
Thanks Ray.
Your work here is an amazing RAY of light – sorry had to be said!
Ray,
You said: “Think about it for just a second. Pick any animals we eat for “protein” and think about what they eat? The largest animals we find – cows, giraffe, hippopotamus, elephants, etc…grow to enormous size and eat only plants..”
But may be these animals were so big beacause they eat starches.Look at any animal that eat meat and fat,like lions.All of them are lean and muscular,fast and strong.I am not sure the potatoe gives a men everything he needs for living.I think a man could not live all his life eating potatoe.But eating meat gives him protein for building blocks and fat for enegy.You said that egg has the perfect quality protein,and it is not a starch.Egg also have the perfect protein to fat ratio.Also a man cannot live without protein or fat,but can live without starches.I am not trying to argue with you,I am years away from you,and your experience.Yesterday a had turnip and carrots with my dinner.I am just looking for the truth.And thank you very much for answering my posts,that way a lot of things come clear to me.
P.S. The mother milk is the only thing a baby need to grow,and it’s ratio is a lot of fat and protein,and very little starches.
Alex
you have a lot of “media mantra,” but you need to start researching and figure out what the facts are. I have researched about 32 species of animals milk. I agree, this is when the animal is in its HIGHEST level of growth. Would you expect we need more energy/protein later in life compared to when we are growing? what about the ratios?
In fact, Human milk is 4.5% fat and 6.8% Lactose (sugar) – far higher in sugar than a lion. For comparison, a rat (VERY Small) is 14.8% fat, 11.3% protein 2.9% lactose. That lion you discuss has 11.4% fat, 6.0 % protein, and 2.6% lactose. Aquatic animals need energy – especially in cold environments, for example a gray seal has 53% fat, 11.2% protein, and 2.6% lactose.
What you see is a simple trend. Animals that grow rapidly tend to have higher protein in their milk. As well, animals in very cold environments and aquatic animals have lots of FAT for ENERGY to fuel heat production.
But what are our needs after primary growth stops?
Your assertion that a man cannot live without protein and fat really doesn’t have any bearing on the problem – PLANTS have both protein and fat in sufficient quantities to sustain life. Here is the issue. you are mentally categorizing food by macronutrients – protein carbs and fat and that is incorrect. Meat HAS protein and fat, but is NOT a protein or a fat. It is meat. Avocados have protein and fat as well. So do we call an avocado a protein? no. It is a fruit (technically a berry, fyi).
I realize this is what you have been taught, but it’s simply not true. you need energy – carbohydrate or fat will work. is preposterous to think that a starch is more fattening than a fat.
We will learn that protein (in the absence of fat) causes death and starvation in Humans (google protein or rabbit starvation). On the other hand you CAN live on ONLY rice or a potato and not starve. A potato is a COMPLETE food source as is rice. I don’t want to rehash it here, but I covered it all in the carbohydrate section.
french fries and potato chips are not a potato. Rice cakes are not rice. All would be considered “carbohydrate” and that is the issue with using that term.
I am not saying you CAN’T eat meat, what I am saying is that your explanation (and many physicians/diet “experts”) is just technically wrong in terms of necessity for a protein source. I know I was wrong about it for YEARS, until I stopped taking peoples opinions and got into the details.
What I learned is that if you discuss “proteins, carbs and fat” as an approach to diet – you FAIL every time. The reason is that real food is NEVER single sources of any of these. What is a single source – refined sugar (carb), refined oil (fat) are the most unhealthy sources of energy. Equally, even protein powder typically has sugar added, so it’s not “just protein.”
I don’t want to try to mix up a drink using sugar, fat, and protein that is complete and nutritious. Mother nature does that for infants, called milk, and every animal is naturally weaned at some time.
I think you are missing what I am trying to say, but don’t apologize. I respect your debate AND welcome the questions. We only learn when we are wrong. I love it when I am, but I feel pretty certain about this.
Ray
If I understand you correctly,we can eat both meat and potato for energy.The more important is to eat whole,natural,unprocessed foods.So one day I can eat potato,and the next day meat or eggs.Or may be If I am active enough, I can eat potatote cooked with lard.Am I finally getting the picture?
Ok, I am getting ahead of myself, but it may help you. Essentially fat or carbohydrate can serve as your energy basis. If you want to lose weight, then you want to use your OWN fat as energy and just add the things you need to keep your body running and healthy (micron nutrients – vitamins, minerals, phytochemicals…)
The tough part is going to be satiety. If you switch back and forth like that, you will be EXTREMELY hungary and will tend to overeat. I’ll explain more later on this in the wrap up.
Health is different. I think the saturated fat IS an issue. I would never cook a potato with lard (or even olive oil). I don’t use refined sugars or oils in any significant quantity and think both refined sugar and refined fat are issues. The weight loss associated by cutting out one or the other has to do with biochemical shifts in our body and energy management.
Bottom line is that I do believe that Health = Nutrients/calories. This is the approach of Joel Fuhrman. It is backed by the caloric restriction work and general trends in chronic disease when those are reversed. That being said, if weight loss is your first goal, it can be done carb-free or fat free.
Ray,
have you thought of the possibility that someone who does a lot more than 15mins of kb swings twice a week may actually have protein needs that cannot be met with rice and potatoes without grossly overshooting caloric requirements? If you’re lifting and throwing hundreds of pounds every day, twice a day, research shows that the need for protein is in the vicinity of 1 gram per pound of bodyweight. The amount of potatoes one would need to eat in order to satisfy this need is staggering and would result in extreme obesity. Eating a potatoe based diet would result in something like 0.1g of protein per pound of body weight and massive nitrogen loss. Unless of course you overfeed yourself and gain weight (like in that rice/chicken paper you’ve mentioned before), which is not relevant to the point as weight gain is what we’re trying to avoid here.
Victor
The problem is that you are using numbers that are “pulled out of the air” based on averages of an average population of heavy meat eaters. First, we need amino acids, not proteins. Amino acid requirements are not fixed. Protein adaptation is well known in biochemistry. Humans adapt to various levels of protein intakes and total calories consumed. It’s a process of protein:energy ratio. The more protein the body consumes the LESS efficient it becomes at recycling amino acids. As protein is restricted, it adapts back (it can take 5-6 weeks) and it hangs on to more amino acids as opposed to converting to fuel via deamination and transamination.
The level for positive nitrogen balance (obligatory nitrogen) is in the range of .3 g/kg of total protein. It is lower than the WHO states that between 0.56g/kg-0.66g/kg is the safe estimate for 95-97% of the people in developing countries to maintain nitrogen balance. Compared to western standards of 0.78-0.83g/kg is the safe estimate for 95-97% of the population to maintain nitrogen balance and you see the number creeping up. The 1.5g/kg for athletes is based on a western population that is NOT adapted to lower protein levels – and most of the amino acids are thrown into the furnace instead of being recycled (why bother, there is an excess, I’ll just grab them when I need them.)
So no, I don’t think you can jump into it. I think if you adapt past the point of ridiculous claims like “I don’t eat red meat,” or “I eat only lean cuts of meat” referring to fat/cholesterol and continue to eat massively excessive protein, you cannot get by on as little. If you eat reasonable, then i’m quite confident that you can get by on numbers that approach the obligatory nitrogen level at around .3g/kg. Does this number need to double? I don’t know it depends on how fast you can/want to put on muscle mass. Is that the healthiest lifestyle? no, I’d say body building is the epitome of unhealthy. Steroid use is rampant and there’s no positive correlation between huge muscle mass and longevity. If someone where into that, they make the trade off.
So that is the problem with talking macronutrients. The body adapts and so there are such static rules, because after all, we are evolutionarily designed to work at a range of nutrition. Just because we CAN does not mean it is optimal. I am looking to avoid heart disease, cancer, and stroke. My needs are health at this point in my life and I wish I had done it earlier.
It is easy to stay in positive nitrogen balance with a plant based diet. Numerous athletes do incredible with it and have no problem competing. I am not, nor will I ever be, a body builder. I don’t see that as part of the longevity process. Perhaps when I was 25 it might have mattered, but today, I simply want to be fit (toned). For that reason I am working on the fastest ways to strip fat, but at the same time I am separately working on optimum diet. RIght now, there are MANY reputable physicians/researchers that I (fortunately) have access to, that see the excessive fat/protein connection. Do I think the USDA is going to look at this seriously? not likely. I am sure it was PULLING TEETH and threats of more lawsuits that forced them to remove meat from the latest food “plate.”
Ray
Ray,
i have been dieting and training for triathlons for some time. But losing weight is kind of tough to me, since i love eating out and have some predisposition for body fat. I tried some ice bathing recently, it seems to work with some caffeine/other drugs injections that i have been taking to boost fat loss, but i wanted to understand better how your ideas for temperature changes work. i tried to find them on the blog but couldnt. also, couldnt find your email. could you help me out?
best!
kiko
Kiko
I guess the first question if ask is how much body fat you have now and where you want to be? Ultimately we all have lower limits. Perhaps some of our desire is based on youthful fitness models that can’t possible achieve those levels every day of the year; they lose for photoshoots/competition.
That being said if you get down to the last 10-15 lbs that’s a different story.
Ultimately it’s a fairly simple process 1) restrict calorie (liquids and refined oil/sugar worst) and 2) increase mild cold stress when possible. I’ve been living for the last three days in a perpetual cool environment. I can feel when my body kicks into that mode now and it becomes very easy to drop 5 lbs.
I’m working hard on more prescriptive approaches, but I hope that helps for now.
Ray
Thank you for your blog and I am listening, learning, and testing. I got a paragraph from you about me on this post, so im happy ;). Anyway, my showers are getting cold, maybe about 65 degrees, at about 15 minutes, would that “do” any considerable damage to fat? Also, I will disagree that saturated fat has anything to do with heart disease, inflammation from certain unnatural foods or chemicals, will cause the build up in arteries. The Inuit tribe live soley off meat and fat and live relativley healthy lives. My test right now is this very subject of high fat diet, and i want to see how my body responds, athletically as well as physically. I feel really good, and my intestinal track is feeling much better, but we will see. Science question, How hard is it to break the triglyceride chain back to FFA? If the free fatty acid never has to bind, it can be used more readily by cells, right? have you found any studies on how successful calorie restriction is for long term? Thank you again, I don’t mean to be a pain, just curious, and just asking the questions that can open the conversation to different routes and ideas.
Thanks Seth
It’s not exactly like glucose – FFA can be of various chain lengths and oxidized directly in the mitochondria through beta oxidation. I just tried to draw a visual analogy with starch for people to think about. Each unit in the chain has energy stored in the bond. As you may know if the bonds are saturated/unsaturated, then these FFA have different effects on overall health.
Inuit are invoked frequently, but they are the exception and not the rule. First there is a lot of misinformation on their general health. They exist on high levels of fat, but ONLY because they are in such an extremely cold environment (I guess you can’t imagine why I studied these guys ;^). The Inuit are not exactly the model of longevity or health. They don’t get scurvy that was the original fascination of their and heart disease (until junk food migrated in) is low.
Still, I don’t see them in the top 100 of healthy societies and I wouldn’t use that datapoint unless you want to live in EXTREMELY cold environments and eat loads of whale/seal blubber (not meat). They can have consume up to 75% of calories in blubber.
This is a group that has been there for 1000 or so years. Still a blip on the evolutionary scale.
So, overall, my focus is on three different thermodynamically driven aspects of weight loss: 1) caloric restriction with/without animal products, 2) longevity – milid cold stress and plant-based diets, and 3) boosting overall rmr through methods of thermal loading. I am pretty diet agnostic and I fortunately everyone’s “blood numbers” improve as the weight is coming off. It wasn’t until after I lost weight that I could effectively think about/study long term health and I’m not finding a ton of evidence counter to plant-based diet approach.
I know I am the rare-bird that actually LIKES meat, but eat mostly vegan. It’s just not a ethical issue to to me. That gives me a little more freedom to explore. I have also successfully lived for nearly 2 years with this approach – so I also understand people’s addiction to fat/meat from the outside looking in. I have felt the different hungers (in the stomach vs in the throat and mouth). I can now very easily detect food cravings initiated by what I eat. Most of all, I have my taste buds back and food – all kinds of food – tastes AMAZING even when not drenched in oil, salt and sugar; this food would taste “bland” by many people’s standards.
So I am still open, but I’ve seen a lot of first hand success. I’ll still support the paleo/slow carb community on the thermodynamic basis of how the diets work, but I don’t think it is very health-stable in the long run. If I see new evidence to the contrary, I will definitely change my mind. I am looking forward to the End of Illness by David Agus. I know from our discussions, I’ll disagree with some things he says, but he’s a bright guy and I will keep an open mind and read it. I think it ships this month.
Ray
Ill look into reading that as well, I am currently reading “good calories bad calories” by taubes that is fascinating to me and want to try some things out. I see how you would like vegan, when I did it, the flavors of the foods that you have to blend together were amazing, and with time and a good cook book(Vegan planet) it was fun, its just my body didn’t feel right on it. Eating more paleo/atkins style seems to feel better on my stomach and gi track and mood(no binges/cravings). Do you find that the thermal loading causes a much higher hunger response and if so how do you curb that?
Seth
One of the issues I personally experienced is when you transition over, you can’t do it “part time.” If you give it 100% for about 6-8 weeks, then you can occosionally revert back, say have hot wings, and with only a 24 hour effect on hunger.
I can now repeat it over and over again. Because I wanted to 1) beat my addictive cravings and 2) try it 100% out of intellectual curiosity, I was able to really experience something first hand. I can now easily tell when people describe their experience. I know of no one that does it 100% that has had an alternate experience. We simply do not “crave” food. that is an addictive trait, not one of survival.
When you push past the current addictive hunger/habits you are in and into true hunger (experienced in the taste, mouth, saliva, and throat) you will at least be able to evaluate it objectively.
I did binge eating experiments from February to late summer to see what happened. It was extremely reproducible. Your body “not feeling right” is part of this entire rationalization people invoke to justify certain patterns/lifestyles. I’m not being critical, but just saying that this is not unlike the same talk any addictive trait – sex, smoking, opiates. etc… brings out. Massive rationalization.
The truth is that if you were trapped on an island and had to make choices, you would make it work and that “not feeling right” wouldn’t be part of the solution set.
Btw, I tell the same things to vegans. I can MAKE my body work on meat, even lose weight, but generally speaking, I have never obtained the level of health eating that way. I’m not personally swayed either way, but I can tell you honestly, I don’t do ANY of this half-way.
after all, how else can you explain – freezing your ass off? LOL. science.
Ray
Ray, it’s sugar I have been addicted too, not meat. I actually had to force myself to eat more meat, when starting a more paleo diet. I personally would eat peanut butter and honey/banana sandwiches all day if I could but I wont stop, so im abstaining. Meat keeps me full and not overeating and its proven to me that it keeps me lean without trying to hard. With the vegan, I was totally vegan for 6 months, I would never say I would not eat meat again, it was expensive, because I would only eat grass-fed, and when my financial situation got better, I could buy it. Vegan caused me bloating, gas, stomach pain and such. It physically didn’t feel good. Could it be possible, that i wasn’t made to deal with high starch diet? Maybe my ancestry was meat/fish eating(Scandinavian ancestry ) Just a thought With vegan and health, think about it this way, maybe it was the addition of vegetables, and not the absence of meat that makes the vegan healthier? I still try to get in a cup or 2 of veggies a day though. Have you researched AGE? It’s a process in your body that causes free radical damage from starch conversion. And the starches cause a rise in IGF-1 that makes your cells replicate and as you may know, your cells can only do that so many times and the cell replication can lead to more cancer if it replicates wrong. A more ketosis diet promotes a more cellular death and turn over rate for reuse after its broken back down , so newer cells instead of a replication process. The same thing happens during fasting, which is proven to lengthen life. With calorie restriction, I heard success rate is 5% over 5 yearor span, not awesome.
Ray,last night i did a quck google search about Nathaniel Dominy.He is sayng that ancient people ate roots and plants.This is ok,but roots and plant have nothing to do with grains (rice,corn,oatmeal etc.)Plant and roots are generally – turnip,onion,bulbs etc.All these are with very little carbs.But think for a moment,if ancient people rely only on plants and roots,how many of them they had to eat a day,to reach their goal of perhaps 3000 kk.Do you think they would be strong enough to walk all day long and fight with wild animals,eating only roots.I don’t.The other thing i am concerned with is the digestability of those plants.They are made of cells with membrane,which is made of fibre (cellulose), and we know that fibre cannot be broken down.There are so many question marks.You can eat raw meat (in present days only if it is home growth) but you cannot eat raw potatoes.And why if the carbs are so important for energy,they exists in our body only in 400-500 grams?I think ancient men take the vitamins from plants and the energy from fats.I think all day long they were searching for animal to kill.In days there were no animal,they ate roots and plants.So a few days on animal,and the next few days on plants,this sounds like they were counting on fats for energy.Once again,in those days there were no kind of grains which leads to so much diseases.The plants and roots did’n have enough carbs in them to deliver energy or disease to the people.
I think you might need to read carbohydrate series again. First, stop using carbs and start using starch for energy component of these foods. It’s accurate and will break the pattern that is causing you to group and organize foods in the old way. I explained in detail fiber (cellulose) vs starch.
No, underground storage organs – USOs (tubers,bulbs, corms, and rhizomes) are the plants way to store energy (like we store fat). They ate extremely energy dense and take a very low amount of effort to harvest. Some of these are still growing and routinely harvested by aboriginal tribes and can be up to 6 feet in diameter. They are starch and can easily be eaten/digested. As well, most have complete amino acid compliments. Not sure where you read you can’t eat a raw potato, that is simply not true.
There are some “resistant starches,” which pass through the small intestine into the large intestine, where it’s fermented by the intestinal flora. This isn’t too different from eating Legumes and the fermentation of resistant starches increases the production of butyrate, a fatty acid that is associated with positive effects on diseases in the colon.
Grains weren’t a significant part of the evolutionary story until the last 6000 years out of about 7 million.
I’m not sure if you live in the city or country. I can tell you that animals avoid Humans. I can’t remember getting into a fight with one. Even when I dress like a tree and go sit for hours, they are hard as hell to shoot with a gun. If I had a couple of sticks and rocks they become more difficult and very energy intensive to find and kill. Gathering (including dead animals) is a more likely, less energy intensive activity. Plants don’t move and they tend to grow in clusters. USOs can (and still are) harvested year round. In the African equatorial climate that humans began, one of the highest concentrations of USOs exist. I think California is the second highest concentration.
Grain does not lead to disease and you’ll not find any work to support the notion. What you will find is that highly refined grain, sugars and oil – calorically dense, nutrient poor food – does make people sick. pop tarts are not “starch” or starch – there highly refined food full of sugar and saturated fat. they can be classified as carbohydrate because of sugars. That’s why using carbohydrate to put potato, rice and pop tarts in the same category is a completely worthless notion and why your opinion is so skewed.
To try to make a potato (not a french frie or chip) a bad food one needs to invoke a common logic flaw: the fallacy of confirming the antecedent – all dogs have four legs, it has four legs therefore it’s a dog.
It’s interesting that meat plays almost no role in any primate diet and yet a gorilla, for example, is far more capable of hunting an animal physiologically speaking than you or me.
We can and have eaten meat throughout all of human evolution. Of you read Dominy’s work and have the opportunity to listen to him lecture – you’ll find that he’s got a lot of solid evidence. He’s not a plant based diet activist. He still eats meat, but his investigations are far more detailed then Cordain’s work and I think you’ll discover he’s going to be closer to the truth.
I really understand your confusion. I was in the same place. That’s why I’m taking the time to back out of what I was writing about and drop into this way of redefining food. What began as a simple effort by the USDA has now become a massive exercise in unintentional misinformation. It’s a travesty.
So please take some time with the carbohydrate series here. You are missing a lot of facts on starches and the historical significance to many human cultures. Carbohydrate is a term for a class of macronutrients. The popular use of it to classify food has cause a huge misunderstanding about disease. Many societies that are completely heart disease and cancer free eat almost exclusively carbohydrate without issues.
Thanks for comments.
Ray
Hello Alex. I realize this is a really old comment, but In this video he names tubers, corms, and bulbs specifically. https://www.drmcdougall.com/health/education/videos/advanced-study-weekend-experts/nathaniel-dominy-phd-starchy-plants-and-early-human-ancestors-diet-in-the-evolution-of-the-pygmy-body-size/
Thanks for the detailed answer,although i am even more confused:) Tonight I am going to read the carb. articles again.But i can’t still imagine eating bulbs and roots fo energy.It’s more then two months I am eatin very high fat,moderate protein and very low carb diet,and i thought I am finally eating primal and natural,like ancient people.But it looks like,I’d stuffed myself with lard unnecessarily.I’m tired of looking for the right meal.Old-time strongmen ate a lot of everything – lard,meat,eggs,potatoes,bread etc. and they were strong as hell.
Alex
There is a fundamental disconnect you have with the people you are trying to emulate – you live in a world where ubiquitous food/calorie exists and eating is more pleasure than survival. Are you overweight? If so, understand that comes from excessive caloric intake.
These people didn’t know squat about calories, proteins or carbs. They ate to survive. I think you’d understand more if you just went out for a week in the woods and looked around. What do you eat?
I think the primal approach was an excellent way to get people connected – to believe a story. At the same time, people don’t really want to live that way so they pretend to do it in modern day.
As for not understanding how starch can be sufficient energy, just eat potato for a week. Nothing else. You’ll become bored, but not run out of energy. In that boredom realize we are spoiled. Food is recreational not survival based. Starving people never become bored with food; they eat.
Ray
Ray,
I am not overweight.I am 182 cm and 78 kg.But I am the kind of “skiny fat”.I don’t have big arms and shoulders and I tried almost everything but couldn’t see my six pack abs.On first place I want to eat the helthiest way.On second place I want to be strong and a litlle more muscular.So I pay attention on nutrition and excersize,but I still cannot find the truth abouth them.I have recently found your blog,but still did not read all of it.I think your opinion is very important,because you are looking for the truth without being one-sided, just like me.
If you want to be big and strong, learn to train – AND EAT CARBS. There hasn’t been one single school/population of athletes in history that didn’t eat carbs. Your first teacher in the art of getting big and strong should be your own compatriot, Ivan Abadjiev. Although you will find that the application of his methods needs to be toned down for drug free athletes, the core of his ideas is true. To quote Mr. Abadjiev, “You lift more, train more, you get higher results.” Diet is very secondary, as you will learn from him since he had his athletes eating candy and drinking soda. As long as you are meeting your caloric requirements in order to support your training, eating enough meat and a bare minimum of starch, it really doesn’t matter that much what percentage of your calories comes from potatoes or lard.
The chinese, too, eat whatever they like (talking about the chinese weightlifting team). They don’t have a specific diet plan and each athlete is allowed to eat whatever foods he finds most tasty with a HEAVY emphasis on meat. Starch is never absent from the chinese’s diet, either.
Victor
here is an exercise for you. Go to: http://cronometer.com/ and start creating some “hypothetical meals.” unfortunately it is driven from the USDA database and they don’t list breakdowns of protein for potato, but Rice does have it in there.
Start playing with calorie content and see where you hit RD Levels. I think you might be surprised.
Do it with pure foods for fun…just olive oil or avocado, etc… It’s very easy to see just how much/little it takes to meet these numbers even though they are skewed (mostly up).
Ray
I understand that I cannot get enough strong with carbfree or fatfree diet.I need both of them.The problem is wich should be in major quantity from healthiest point.I am waiting part 2 and hope I will understand why Ray thinks natural saturated fat could be issue.
It matters for longevity. For calories, it really doesn’t. I just don’t want to use athletes as the gold standard. Just because someone shaves 1/10 of second off of a time in the prime of their life, does not mean they won’t become the fat gym coach (or doctor). Looking at the populations with the highest longevity matters more. Those all seem to be heavily swayed away from excessive fat/mat consumption.
Again, I don’t want to get too much into my preferences as that does not change the fundamental facts about nutrition and macronutrients. Most people can’t help themselves and I hear people saying “I need protein” as if they really know or could tell. We’ll look at fat/meat in Part 2, with a twist.
thanks for the input.
Ray
Natural fat can also be easily digested and help with weight loss is all natural Coconut oil. It’s scientifically proven to be superior to other oils like Olive, Macadamia Oils, etc. These other oils bring free radicals in your body and stick to your cells to store excess fat, while Coconut oil is a different kind of fat that barely/rarely sticks to your body.
I have been cooking with Coconut Oil and at one time experimented to eat it in bulk and never have I gained nasty fat from this God’s gift to man kind.
Here is some evidence behind this.
http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/coconut_oil.htm
Coconut Oil the untold truth.
I disagree with your science about macademia oils and olive oil. What are you specifically referring too as macademia oil has one of the highest polyunsaturated fat levels of any oil.
Everything brings free radicals into your body at some point, you could argue that the storage unit for you coconut fat is plastic and is leaching toxins into the fat.
Coconut fat is very good and far superior to animal fats and there are benefits to be found in other plant based oils.
I have been munching my way through a 1kg bag of chia seeds which contain a huge amount of omega 3 oils and other beneficial oils along with a reasonably high amount of complete proteins for a plant seed.
The question is what do you need and where is the best source available from rather than labelling 1 thing as the best and other things inferior.
You are just promoting something that is fresh in your mind!
Although it gets a bad rap in some circles for its high saturated fat content, we know that such fats can offer many health benefits. For example, coconut oil has been found to help normalize blood lipids and protect against damage to the liver by alcohol and other toxins, can play a role in preventing kidney and gall bladder diseases, and is associated with improved blood sugar and insulin control and therefore the prevention and management of diabetes. In addition, coconut oil has antiviral, antibacterial and anti-fungal properties. On a more superficial level, meanwhile, coconut oil is thought to help strengthen mineral absorption, which is important for healthy teeth and bones, and can also help improve the condition and appearance of the scalp, hair and skin when ingested or topically applied.
Read more: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/coconut-oil-health-benefits/#ixzz1h1Ob9UFB
I guess I was promoting something fresh in my mind here buddy…
I’m agreeing with Wayne here, but am open for productive discussions. I actually think that there is a good chance stripping ANY macronutrients source out from its natural carrier (sugar or fat) is actually one of the big issues.
Right now I’m spending a little more time researching nutrient uptake for Fat Part – 2, but may get some time to dig deeper here. For now, let’s see where this conversation goes.
To others I’ve not responded too…hold tight! Busy travel schedule and time of year.
Ray
Anyone can find evidence to support one train of thought Owen the clever thing to do is to look at the whole picture.
There are many herbs/spices, fruits, vegetables, seeds, nuts with macro-nutrients and micro-nutrients that support many if not all of the traits you are mentioning; do you suggest that it would be safe to only eat coconut fat?
http://www.bewellbuzz.com/nutrition/avocado-nutrition-facts/
mmmmm seems very similar to coconut fat!
Nice!
Also thanks for the informative article on Carbohydrates I have increased my intake of variety of beans and popcorn I cook. I have lost 4 pounds a week and work out once a week using Combat Conditioning, combined with PAGG. I always went around telling my friends Carbs were bad and I stressed eating more protein. Now I rarely eat grams of protein except maybe 1-2 days after an intense workout (once a week btw). My grocery bill is crazy low. I’m stronger, leaner and faster each week. Thanks for that incredible article on Carbohydrates.
Ray, I was just rereading your old posts and I mentioned something I didn’t before.
“Ok, I am getting ahead of myself, but it may help you. Essentially fat or carbohydrate can serve as your energy basis. If you want to lose weight, then you want to use your OWN fat as energy and just add the things you need to keep your body running and healthy (micron nutrients – vitamins, minerals, phytochemicals…) ”
Well I am proud to say that I finally understood what are you talking about in your series about protein/carb/fat.It is so logical and simple.Thank you!
BINGO!
(my first one-word response, no 5, no 7…LOL)
Ray
damn I am excited. is there anyone else following this?
Ray
Yes. More, Again, now!
[…] Fat – Part 1 I explained some details about our body’s use of lipids (fat) and the role it plays in both […]
Haha. Loving your blog so far, but have had little to add. But now I get to be very pedantic and point out that ‘phobos’ and ‘philia’ are ancient Greek, not Latin 🙂
And with that, I’ll get on with reading the rest of the post!
🙂 You’re right! changed!
Ray
http://www.easyhealthoptions.com/alternative-medicine/high-fat-diet-may-be-good-for-diabetes/
intersting
careful…follow the link and read the paper:
The patients were randomised to either an LCD or a traditional LFD, both with an energy content of 6,694 kJ/day (1,600 kcal/day) for women or 7,531 kJ/day (1,800 kcal/day) for men. Randomisation was not stratified and was based on drawing blinded ballots. The LCD had an energy content where 50 energy per cent (E%) was from fat, 20 E% was from carbohydrate and 30 E% was from protein. The LFD had a nutrient composition that was similar to that traditionally recommended for the treatment of type 2 diabetes in Sweden, with 30 E% from fat (less than 10 E% from saturated fat), 55– 60 E% from carbohydrate and 10–15 E% from protein.
You can read it here.
SO we have
LCD
50% fat
20% carbohydrate
30% protein
LFD
30% fat (<10% trans)
55-60% carbohydrate
10-15% protein
30% fat is a low fat diet? I wonder if Oreo Cookies were on the approved list - they are about 39% - close. Protein was cut in half, but fat, the star of the study wasn't even cut by 50%. Carbohydrate was TRIPLED. SO is this really a fat vs carbohydrate study?
This is why I want to lose these terms forever and the point of my rant about macronutrients.
Now we see a great case for the point I make about "protein, carbohydrates and fats." if a potato or rice is nitrogen positive, i.e. excess amino acid load and "complete" protein, would the instructions(meeting for one week and then follow up for 2 years) have instructed a potato or rice to be listed as a protein, carbohydrate or fat? Hey, it has about the right amount of protein (3 g/110 calories or 10.9%).
They go on to say in the discussion that:
“Our study did not confirm the finding that weight reduction is more efficient in individuals following an LCD than in those following an LFD, as has been found in some previous trials.”
in fact the weight loss (pretty pathetic – 3kg/6lbs in TWO YEARS?? see figure 2). We don’t know if “carbohydrate” meant table sugar or rice. We know that the vast majority of carbohydrate is served with fat (butter, etc…) and it has a tremendous effect on both satiation and the feed forward response of the gut.
Read the conclusion. They basically sum that you can drop HbA1C and increase HDL (modestly), but not much else. I’d say, the blogger, not the study is probably more at fault here. I’d be willing to bet that the nutritional advice for either of these groups did not include a bacon cheeseburger on a crap, white bun as depicted on the link.
For comparison, I would suggest the average person would see a 30-40 point drop in cholesterol and control if they simply increased starch (not carbohydrate, but starch) in their diet (brown rice, rice, potato…take your pick) and minimized dairy/meat. If you are overweight, you have fat – its all around you and so what’s the difference between digesting that or chewing on a nice, juicy rib? Ok. taste and food dopamine hits don’t count here.
By default, a calorically restricted, low fat diet in an overweight individual MUST be a high human-fat diet. I don’t doubt people see similar effects when they consume animal fat, but why not just consume your own? The problem is most people complicate it by increasing the protein load, which is subsequently piled onto the carbohydrate-side of the equation through gluconeogenesis (i.e excess amino acids digested in liver instead of being used as a source for protein synthesis).
neat stuff. I remain unconvinced, but I have new data over the last 6 weeks that is REALLY starting to fall in place.
As always thanks wayne!!!
new post soon.
Ray
Hello! I just joined – so glad to see all of this information available.
I am in a little bit of a dilemma, and I was hoping y’all all could help. I have been accepted to medical school, and I am trying to get a Navy Scholarship. However, one of the requirements for this scholarship is a certain height and weight. I have been on and off a paleo diet for 6 months now, and I’ve lost 30lbs, but it’s the last 15-20, that I am having problems with. I have 4-6 weeks to drop another few inches of my waistline or I am not going to qualify for this scholarship.
So I ordered some supplements that will help improve my leptin function (specifically doing a leptin challenge/rest through Byron Richards), going to amp up my fasted AM cardio sessions, and continue to lift as normal. I already take cold showers sometimes after a workout, but I have never done an immersion in the tub. Do you think I could add this in, and how many times per week? per day? I think I read 3x a week is optimal, but again I’m not sure.
Thank you very much for your help!