Currently viewing the tag: "protein"

Carbohydrates – Part 3

By On · 41 Comments

glycogen is key to running long distance. When we bonk, it's because we are running low on glycogen and must switch to fat reserves.We’ve covered a lot of ground. What we’ve discussed  is that carbohydrates come in the form of simple sugars (monosaccharides) and more complex carbohydrates (polysaccharides). We know that the sugar names all end in “ose” (glucose, fructose, lactose, etc…). Polysaccharides are many of these monosaccharides linked together in a chain and are a common way plants store energy (similar to our fat) for later use.

I’m suggesting you stop thinking about “Carbs” as a food group; instead categorize meat, vegetables, grains, dairy, etc… Starch (potato) and Cellulose (wood) are made from IDENTICAL glucose molecules. They have a different saccharide bonds, only one of which we have the enzyme (amylase) to digest.

So in Part 3, I want to talk about another pseudo-carbohydrate that is critical for you – glycogen. Many of you are familiar with glycogen from athletics. It’s the “load” part of carb-loading in preparation for a race. It’s also the center of your glucose-centric metabolism and the reason I personally don’t think “carbs” are bad or unhealthy.

What is unhealthy is the way we process high-energy foods with even more empty calories and then consume them in excessive quantities.

So, let’s take a little step back to understand what glycogen is and why it’s important to your performance and your life. Your body has three basic storage points for energy: ATP (adenosine triphosphate), glycogen, and fat. the most immediate energy – what is behind the muscle explosion is ATP. You have about 250 grams of this stuff, about the same amount of energy as is contained in a AA battery, energy comes form popping off one of the phosphates to form ADP (adenosine diphosphate + energy)(1). We then use this other enzyme many of you will be familiar with, creatine kinase, to shuttle these phosphates back and forth.

Save the Liver

glycogen is key in energy of muscle tissue. When you run out fat must be utilized. ATP is at the very basic level of your energy utilization. Just above this in the “energy food chain,” is our friend, glycogen.  Think of  glycogen as a “fuzzy protein.”  It is made of a core protein, glycogenin, surrounded by fuzzy starch (poly glucose) hairs. It is located throughout your body.  You have about 2000 calories at any given time; 500 or so is stored in your liver and the rest packed among your muscles where it can be readily accessed. I’m using approximate numbers because everyone is slightly different, but here is an interesting side fact.

It takes (about) 2600 calories to run a marathon.  2000 calories/2600 calories = 77%.  Now using that number and knowing a marathon is 42.2Km/26.2M we see that 77% is 32.5Km/20.2 miles.  Anyone that has attempted to run a marathon can tell you about that number: THE WALL.  If you are like me and would rather freeze your ass off than run a marathon, that is the point where ATP can no longer be generated by glycogen stores (you’ve run out) and you MUST resort to stored fat.

Fat is then the highest level and quantity of stored energy in your body and the body has to work to get it into a primary glucose-based energy system.  Conversely, fatty foods (Oils, lards, etc)  have the densest energy reserves. It’s simple: fat is there for long term storage.  Plants, and Humans have carbohydrate based reserves for the most immediate needs and that is in your blood sugar level and glycogen reserve.

Record marathoners have trained their bodies to dip into fat reserves much earlier and they use fat throughout the race.  When we get back to fat metabolism and thermal loading, you’ll find this is a side benefit of conditioning your body to withstand cold – free fatty acids (FFA) liberated from your fat stores. You may remember from BATGirl, that the mitochondria of BAT and other tissue can use FFA in the presence of a special up-regulating proteins to create HEAT instead of generating ATP.

Your ability to regularly engage in this FFA economy can be significantly influenced by running marathons – extreme milage  volume causes this switch as does mild cold stress.  People make fun of me about cold all the time, but I just think this is far easier than running 50 miles/day. You may see it different.

What happens in Protein-rich diets is you have depleted your glycogen reserves and it’s energetically costly to refill glycogen from converting protein. Your body switches over to fat metabolism and voilà, you start losing weight. That’s how it works and the ultimate decision one should consider is what will be the long term health effects by using your body’s tertiary macronutrient, protein, to drive it into a secondary reserve, fat, by depleting it from it’s primary energy, glucose. The other direction works just as well and in a glycogen replete state, Chris  Voigt lost weight eating 20 potatoes a day – all bad carbs.  This is an interesting contrast to the high-fat approach and I think it’s far more important than a silly PR stunt.

Seems complicated, but I just want people to discuss this factually and make informed decisions.

We can equally manage 1) hunger (satiety) and 2) total caloric intake, while maintaining correct micronutrient intake, living permanently thin as opposed to yo-yo dieting.  This does require modifications to your lifestyle and I won’t tell you it is trivial, but neither is bypass surgery, insulin shots, high blood pressure, or lugging around an extra 50-200 lbs.

So, there really is not debate that carbohydrate, particularly starch, is a perfectly natural food.  As we process with cooking (or over process) ANY carbohydrate, the energy becomes more readily available and then we damn “starch” as the bad-calorie; it’s simply not true.  What is interesting is there are many ways to put your body into “survival mode” and only two that have ever demonstrated longevity in laboratory animals: caloric restriction and mild cold stress.

We still have to cover proteins and fats and we’ll keep the rules engaged, neither are food groups. As well, I want you guys to jump in on new commenters in the future and explain when we discuss carbohydrate here, we are primarily discussing high-starch foods that are relatively unprocessed (heated, with no added fat, dairy, or sugar).  If you don’t believe me, TRY to go find food in a restaurant that 1) contains a starch and 2) is not loaded with sugar, fat, or dairy. I did it as an experiment for 14 months and know first hand the difficulty.

Brain Drain

We are fat, but let’s not damn potato, squash, and rice – the very staples of Humankind – as the punching bag for of our epidemic obesity. Let’s acknowledge that preparation and added empty calories play the MAJORITY role.  When I construct a new paradigm to consider for eating at the end, you’ll see that there is plenty of room for carbohydrate (starchy-foods) on the plate.

Starches are an EXCELLENT food option and contain glucose, the only fuel used by the largest energy consumer of your body: The Brain.  When you run low on glucose (and glycogen), gluconeogenesis creates glucose from amino acids by stripping off the nitrogens and using what is left to synthesize glucose.  Energy for this is driven through beta-oxidation of FFA. If you have a lot of  beta-oxidation is occuring (untreated diabetes or starvation), acetyl-CoA builds up, and is converted to the ketone bodies. That’s the basis of ketosis and why ketones are found in your urine.

The brain-blood barrier is the separation of this distinctly different glucose metabolism from the rest of your body. So, I think is at least it is easily questionable to say carbs are “bad” or even the cause of obesity. At the same time, throwing your body completely into starvation mode, while certainly effective to lose weight, might not be the best long term. Of course we have to consider the implications of caloric restriction too. I just raise the question.

With that is it fair to ask if “carbohydrate” was so bad for you, why did we evolve one of the most advanced, energy-conuming brains of any species to use only a carbohydrate fuel?

Think about it.

 

(1) “On the prebiotic potential of reduced oxidation state phosphorus: the H-phosphinate–pyruvate system,” David E. Bryant, Katie E. R. Marriott, Stuart A. Macgregor, Colin Kilner, Matthew A. Pasek and Terence P. Kee, Chem. Commun., 2010, 46

**************
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:

 

Thanks!
Ray

Carbohydrates – Part 2

By On · 41 Comments

carbohydrates, like potatoes need not be your enemy. These can be good sources of nutritionIn Part 1, we began the process of distinguishing the difference between a food group and a macronutrient. Carbohydrates (Carbs) are probably the most vilified of the macronutrients. This is probably due to the ubiquitous availability of starch foods throughout human history. For the most part, oils, fats, and meats were the food of the rich. Everyone else ate beans, rice and potatoes.

If we listed the many staple foods: grains, rice, beans, squash, quinoa, potatoes and corn we see a high amount of starch. Remember, starch is simply a long chain of glucose. We all need glucose to live and our primary energy is derived from glucose and stored glycogen or fat (more later).

I want you to know that a carbohydrate need not be fattening, nor lead to diabetes.  In fact, Carbohydrates can be very satiating (1) for 4-5 hours after meals. What seems to be the big diversion, where the “bad carbs” come in, is the processing (blending, frying, flouring, pasting, etc) of carbohydrate.  When we break down starch too much in the food preparation process, it leads to lots of simple sugars. These are both easy to overeat and can have other deleterious health effects.

Starch digestion begins in the mouth with the amylase in the saliva. The starch begins to break down to glucose.  A great way to experience this first hand is to take a unsalted cracker and just hold it in your mouth. You will begin to generate a lot of saliva and as you hold it there, begin to taste sweetness as the glucose is formed. Remember, a termite can do exactly the same thing with cellulose in wood.

From an evolutionary biology perspective, the AMY1 gene that is responsible for making amylase is so important  that you have as many as 12 copies of it (2).  It was extremely important to our hunter-gather predecessors. While there’s been much put forward on the “hunting” side of the equation, some of the most recent anthropology suggest that the “gathering” side dominated.  Underground storage organs (USOs – tubers, bulbs, corms, and rhizomes) played a significant role in our energy management of times past.

Men like the idea of beating their chest and running through the woods hunting and they write a lot of the stories, but gathering is actually a better (less sexy) explanation of our survival. It even allows the elderly to participate productively in the group, even grandmothers would have a significant role in the earliest tribes. Anyone can dig up a potato, they aren’t very fast, and they grow in predicable places.

The naked mole rat is found with archeology of hominid population explosions and points to USOs as a gathered food source. click photo for NPR Story

Many of the early tools used to process USOs were probably made of wood and didn’t survive in the archeological records, but the early Hominid starch crystals in teeth have. Also there are also fossilized populations of mole rats that surge with every human population expansion (3). We’ll also learn that the mole rat has some FASCINATING genetics that impacts thermal loading.

I don’t want to get into the Paleolithic debate. What I want everyone to see is that starch IS an important evolutionary part of your fuel system, but at the same time recognize french fries are NOT the starch I am talking about.  Your view of carbohydrate has been jaded since the beginning of diets. In the earliest of diets (Banting) it was simple breads combined with butter/sugar that caused the excess energy to creep in. Processed starch (sugars) of all kinds can lead to excess caloric intake; it’s just easy to digest and pleasurable to overeat, especially when combined with salt and fat.

For today, understand that primary complex carbohydrates: squash, legumes, onions, carrots, whole corn, whole rice, and potato are all good bases of energy. They are satiating ways to make up for caloric deficit, but don’t confuse those items, “items your great grandmother would recognize as food,” Michael Pollan might say, with the “carbs” served at school lunch.

Most importantly understand that many of these “starchy” foods also contain significant proteins with complete compliment of the essential amino acids your body will use to synthesize your own protein. These complex carbohydrates are broken down by amylase to glucose: the fuel for your brain and many cells in the body.  If they aren’t consumed with excessive alternate energy sources (like excessive fat or simple sugar), your body will tap into it’s own fat reserves.  If too much pre-processing is performed, then you might see increased problems managing blood sugar.

Eating carbohydrate is convenient and pleasurable, and know there is room for “carbs” in your diet if you make the correct choices.

So, when we are putting this all together and I say carbohydrate, I want you to think about these whole, starchy food items that enter YOUR kitchen/cooking reasonably resembling how they came out of the ground or off the plant. Sugar, raw, brown…whatever, is refined. I challenge you to eat the 250 lbs of sugar a year  gnawing on sugarcane, however; you might be able to do it with grapes or beets.

Others have commented on fructose, a simple sugar in fruit, and I think there is merit to the issues that come from too many simple sugars, especially highly processed. This likely includes high fructose corn syrup, apple juice, sucrose, agave nectar, etc…).  Fruits are not found in nature year round, but USOs are. Similarly, think about what is easily stored (beans vs beets).  It’s amazing to hear people rave about “natural agave nectar” (inulin/fructose squeezed from agave) and then begin to lambast the food industry for high fructose corn syrup (fructose squeezed from corn). Yes there are some differences, but we’ll debate it in 5-10 years.  It’s all simple sugar  to me and best avoided.

These simple sugars are energy without the fiber or micronutrients. Others, like Robert Lustig, have covered the issue of fructose in far better detail than I will, but likely our problem as a nation is probably more related to drinking, for example, too much apple juice, rather than eating too many apples. The same is true of french fries vs potatoes. The larger group health statistics just don’t separate the issues (e.g. apples vs apple juice or fries vs potato) with enough granularity and it is all complicated with saturated fats and other compounding, synergistic concoctions we now call food.

Many energy dense foods are now available year round (like fruits or avocados) and so we must be careful with these foods.  We’ll see a similar trend with fats, oils, and nuts.

Starch is a wonderful molecule and has been around for millions of years. Starch is just one bond different from wood.  You are designed to eat starch, with back ups systems in place (AMY1).  We can identify paleolitic starch in teeth, even knowing the plants that produced it, and so there is nothing wrong with carbohydrate as a food – it highly processing it and combining with other energy-rich processed product that causes much of the issues.

You will inevitably hear more about the amazing work anthropologist, Nathaniel Dominy is doing with starch and USOs.  I personally believe the depth and thoroughness of his work will have an impact on what many, like Loren Cordain, believe to absolute. Nate has a very uncanny ability to see past the obvious. For the record, he’s a meat eater, despite what he’s uncovered in the last few years about starch in anthropology.

In terms of the thermodynamics, most natural starches come with a compliment of other micronutrients that are beneficial.  These are “energy foods” and so we absolutely CAN lose weight by eliminating them from your diet.  I am not suggesting diets higher in fat or protein (atkins, paleolithic, slow carb) cannot be used to lose weight – I am diet agnostic. What I can explain is on whole the overall management of energy, heat (not temperature), that is responsible for your success.

If we stop isolating these foods based on our perceived/suggested notations of macronutrient content and return to simple food, A calorie will be a calorie.  Once you learn to recognize what you are consuming at every meal (and snack) you’ll see the results you’ve been after. It doesn’t even take discipline once you understand the underlying principles.

Gauging on the comments/questions, I might dig in a little more (Part 3) on carbohydrate. Eventually I will post the overall biochemistry and some have written asking me to explain the TCA cycle (that complex part in the middle of a Lustig presentation if you’ve seen one).  Otherwise, I will move onto fat and catch sugars in the wrap up.

Next week is TEDMED in San Diego. It’s hard to believe a year has past.  I’ll probably have at least one update on what I learn there, but will *try* to write two posts on fat before I leave so they can post next week.

(1)  Carbohydrates and human appetite, Blundell, JE, et al.,Am J Clin Nutr 1994;59(suppl):728S-34S.

(2) Diet and the evolution of human amylase gene copy number variation, Perry, G.H., et al., Nature Genetics 39, 1256 – 1260 (2007)

(3) Communication/presentation with Dr Nathaniel Dominy, Dartmouth University Dept of Anthropology

**************
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:

 

Thanks!
Ray

Carbohydrates – Part 1

By On · 17 Comments

carbohydrates slow carb diet, thermogenex, thermal loading As we have been discussing, macronutrients are the basic energy, or fuel, our bodies need for all biological processes. This can be used for exercising, thinking or synthesizing the many biological molecules that keep the system smoothly operating.

Micronutrients are the building blocks – the stuff our body uses to create the many cells, tissues, and hormones.  Like we discussed in our car analogy, macronutrients are the gas and micronutrients are the routine maintenance service for the car .

Today we are going to begin the discussion of Carbohydrates. What I hope to do, is change your reaction to that word.  I don’t want you to say “carb” or think french fries, potatoes, or rice.  I don’t want you to think about ANY food group.  Forget glycemic index.  Those are all useful bits of information for diet schemes, but not to understand how your body works.  When we are done, we’ll move onto the other macronutrients: fat and protein.

So, do we have a deal? No discussion of FOOD for the conceptual understanding of carbohydrates, but I will give examples carbohydrates contained food so that we can understand the bigger picture.

Thermodynamics is the study of heat and energy and how these systems interact. We derive energy from the basic three macronutrients.  Later, there will be detail of this complex process, but for now, it’s just a game of “pass the electron.”  Every whole food you eat contains some amount of the three macronutrients. We call something a Protein or a Carb in response to its greatest portion of macronutrient by weight.

Now, we are discussing energy, the thermodynamics, and really weight has nothing to do with energy other than some means of quantifying the amount you eat.  We’ll see that this macronutrient/weight is extremely useful for food labels, but not very indicative of either the amount energy or macronutrient you might derive from a given amount of food.Telt

Let’s dive into what a carbohydrate is and why we need it.

A Carbohydrate is a Carbohydrate

We’ll see that all this fuss about calorie a calorie is going to be a simple accounting issue, but if you have a negative reaction to the word carbohydrate, if you think that there are good carbs and bad carbs, if you’re worried about blood sugar, then fret no more.  We aren’t going to discuss any of that here.  Not going to even take questions on it.

Instead, I want you to return to 4th grade and think about that simple view of the world. You breath in oxygen, it’s combined with fuel (“burned”)  to give energy and then you exhale carbon dioxide.  That is in turn used by plants in photosynthesis, to yield sugars and other biologically active compounds and they return the oxygen.

See it?

We are all confused about the breathing oxygen and burning part, remember, a calorie isn’t a calorie? So, let’s start with the plant side of the circle. There aren’t many obese plants, maybe they’ve figured something out.

Plants take in carbon dioxide and form sugars, fats, complex carbohydrates (e.g. starch) and structural cellulose. With the exception of venus fly traps and pitcher plants, they just don’t eat.  They also take in Nitrogen from the soil (fertilizer) creating proteins and even even psychoactive alkaloids, like mescaline (peyote buttons). It seems plants are a trip.

In fact plants synthesize every single protein, fat and carbohydrate you need to live.  We eat them or we eat animals and bacteria that eat them and here we are. Perhaps this is what they didn’t tell us in 4th grade. Food and Macronutrients are somehow separated at birth of the concept, but we are here to discuss Carbohydrates, like starch and really understand what they are and how they work.

We all know the word sugars. There are natural sugars, bad sugars, processed sugars, and high glycemic sugars, but really, a sugar is just the simplest molecule that makes up the long chains of stored energy in plants.  It’s their way of saving for a rainy day (literally).  They all named to end in “ose” – glucose, galactose, lactose, fructose, maltose, etc.  Once ingested, you extract energy from them to fuel ATP/ADP through electron transport chain.

For now, just know that your body MUST have glucose. That’s what we measure when we measure “blood sugar” and that is what your brain runs on as a fuel.  It’s chemical formula, C6H12O6 is the building block of two very familiar compounds: Starch and Cellulose. Both of these “polysaccharides” (poly = many, saccharide = sugar) are simply long chains of the EXACT same sugar: Glucose.

House of Potatoes

cellulose, glucose, starch

Starch and Cellulose are made from the same building block, Glucose. They have a different saccharide bond that holds them together. Since many animals don't make the enzyme to break down cellulose, the fiber passes through. If you ever wondered how hippopotamus, rhinoceros, cows, and giraffes grow lean and muscular as herbivores, here's your answer.

That’s right, a baked potato and a wood are essentially the same thing.  So why aren’t we whipping a wonderful Mahi-Mahi dusted in a fine pepper-birch sawdust and parchment-baked? It’s because we happen to be protein deficient.  Yes, it’s true, a polysaccharide like cellulose or “poly-glucose” must be broken down by enzymes, proteins, into glucose so we can use them.

Cellulose is put together in just a slightly different way and we can’t break it down. To a termite, or the bacteria in the rumen (a stomach) of a cow, that piece of wood or grass fiber works as food JUST like a baked potato does for you.  These bacteria and insects create  the protein, cellulase, to extract glucose from cellulose.  We create another protein, amylase, that breaks down the starch.  You have as many as 4-12 copies of the gene that creates amylase enzyme, because it’s so genetically important for your survival.

Carbohydrate, fats, and proteins all enter the electron transport chain to deliver energy to your body in a set of reactions designed around glucose, the building block of carbohydrate.

What do I want you to take away? first, “Carbs” aren’t food groups and neither are proteins and fats. Theses very defined terms in organic/biochemistry, but have been popularized in order to help you “eat healthy.  The irony is we’ve never been more unhealthy as a world.  Proteins aren’t meat; there are also other bioactive proteins, for example enzymes like amylase or cellulase, that participate nearly every metabolic process keeping you alive.

We will eventually come back to food, and calories, and see that nearly every food you eat is a combination of these. You don’t “need a complete protein” and can’t “avoid carbs.”  The truth is that what you need is energy to run the process, fuel. You  probably have a few weeks (months?) supply of fuel you’ve been lugging around for some time. We need to find creative ways to burn it.  None of them involve schemes of putting MORE energy in your mouth. You’ll never run empty if you fill up three times a week.

For today, here is what I want you to take away: carbohydrates are polysaccharides ( “many” “sugars”) that provide the basic energy currency precursor of your body, glucose.  We’ll discuss some of the other (evil – lol) simple carbohydrates in the next blog.  We use and need carbohydrate in our diet.  There is a big difference between starches, like rice, squash and potatoes and donuts. Fruits, on the other hand, contain simple sugars as well and those come with their own issues.  It is key to separate carbohydrates, especially complex carbohydrates, from simple sugars.

We’ll then turn to the other macronutrients, fat and protein, to fill in the basic metabolism energy cycle.

You shouldn’t feel uncomfortable with the idea that ultimately, cows eat grass, gain glucose and amino acids, and grow tasty, “grass-fed” beef. That beef is laden with amino acids.  When you eat it, you can in turn use the amino acids (no significant glucose in beef) to create insulin or pus in pimples (also a protein), whatever protein you need,  and metabolize the left over to supplement your daily energy requirements. You can even store it for “later.”

Perhaps,  it’s not as simple as the CO2->Sun->O2 symbiotic respiration we learned in 4th grade, but it is plenty understandable.  When you no longer see protein, carbohydrate or fat as food groups, your mind will be opened to lots of different options.

Equally important, we’ve all learned the hard way, you can’t out-exercise your mouth.  It is simply put, impossible.

Until next time…

**************
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:

 

Thanks!
Ray

The Chain Gang

By On · 45 Comments

chains of energy. Carbohydrates, protein, fat are all the building blocks of energy. The picture says it all. We are going to talk about chains, not of steel, but of the basic energy units that keeps your body going and make you fat.  I hope it is a new beginning, a bridge to a new way of thinking. Once you understand how the body processes food, it’ll take away mystery and magic.

The reality is actually far more simple than all of the crazy schemes you’ve followed in the past; the beauty is every one of them can be easily explained – with no contradictions.

The beginning of the story actually starts at the end. It is an interesting circle. You are here primarily because you have fat to lose.  That fat is stored, in the form of Triacylglycerols (fancy term don’t worry about it) in the adipose cells.  These “fat cells” are a place so this high-energy can be stored for “later use.” As we learned last week, our problem is that later never comes before we return to the gas station. You know the rest of the story.

Other animals, and even plants, store slightly different forms of energy for the exact same reason; it’s stored for later use. This is energy to sustain life when fuel (food/light) is not around to keep the animal/plant functioning. We’ll learn of some other special types of storage in addition to fats, glycogen and starch, and how it fits into the  puzzle.  When we are done, you will see ALL food with a new view – from ingestion to use or from ingestion to storage. I want you to FORGET about the association of carbohydrates, protein and fat with particular foods (e.g potatoes = carbs) – most (real) food has all three sources of macronutrients.

The Evolutionary Shuffle

So here is the picture that should be etched in your head:  Stumble around, find food, eat as much as you can, starve for a while living off of reserves, and find food again.  That is how it worked for nearly 7 million years. Even in the last 10,000 years, when Humans became far more useful with respect to their hunting and gathering, we still mostly starved.  If we go back to the first recorded agriculture (5000-6000 years ago) we are still talking a mere blip on the evolutionary scale.  Genetically speaking, we are still programmed to stumble, eat, starve and eat again.

Genetically speaking, we haven’t changed that much in the last 5000-6000 years.  To put that into evolutionary perspective if all hominid development of 7 million years was represented by a mile, our dominion over agriculture was the last 4 feet – barely a step.  You are  genetically programmed to store energy for times of famine. So are your skinny friends.

The problem? Famine never comes.

So when we eat animal or plant fat, we take that stored energy and either convert it to useful energy or extract the energy from it and store it ourselves. The same goes for carbohydrates. We use the energy directly or just convert the excess to fat for later.  Proteins, we’ll see, are  just a little different. We can break them down and use the nutrients (amino acids) to build other proteins (e.g. insulin, enzymes, antibodies, or hair) or we can burn them and use the energy or store it in fat for later use.

In case you didn’t notice, I didn’t say MUSCLE in that list, because we’re over focused on the muscle/protein connection – both on intake and body nutrient use. It keeps you from really digesting these concepts. Put it away for now.

Each of these macromolecules: Carbohydrates, Proteins and Fats contain smaller “packages” of energy, but are stored like the links on the chain.  As we dive into the each of the individual chains, you will see the similarities, and differences, but right now the BIGGEST obstacle to understanding this is to stop associating proteins, carbohydrates, and fats with specific foods.  These are not food group labels like meat, dairy, or vegetables. These are basic collections of molecules of similar chemistry and function and the vast majority of unrefined food has all three.

To define a particular food by what macronutrient it has “most of” or to reject it because it’s a macronutrient that you believe you should consume less/more of is THE problem.  It starts a chain of events and you end up inextricably linked to the latest fad diet. They make money; you stay fat.  These macronutrient-based diet schemes all invoke an enormous amount of generality and in doing so, well, the results speak for themselves the world is getting fatter despite record spending on diet/fitness.

We have excess energy not bad genes. Can anyone argue with this logic? can you possibly get fat if you don’t eat?

Think Different

Steve Jobs, an extraordinary man that challenged status quo - all the time.

This photo takes you to the 2005 Stanford Commencement Speech - please take 14 minutes to watch it.

So, in memory of Steve Jobs, I want you to THINK DIFFERENT beginning today. Steve taught us in his amazing 2005 Stanford commencement speech, “Don’t be trapped by dogma — which is living with the results of other people’s thinking.”  You CAN understand this in a way that you will no longer be trapped by dogma. I’ll take the time to explain the difference between protein and meat or potatoes and carbohydrate, if you’ll keep an open attitude.

Why am I splitting hairs on this? Because you can’t recognize or even taste a protein and yet, you’re probably convinced you need more. It’s not limited to protein, Harvard professors (1), even an outrageous story on NPR YESTERDAY, can’t seem to differentiate between a potato and a french fry and therefore group them together with the resulting blame for childhood obesity going to the poor potato. A food that has been around in some form for millions of years is now THE problem de jour. It doesn’t stop there as the USDA is probably the worst place for information.

When you get to the end of the news report note that the kid get’s it right: who wants to eat a dry potato just for the fun of it? The answer: your starving ancestors did. They were hungry and you’re fat. But until you get past that it has nothing to do with carbs, glycemic index or fat, you’ll stay stuck in the yo-yo cycle. That continues to fuel another jiggleflex sale, a deal a plate, or a bypass surgery. Everybody wins, right?

I will stop ranting now.

Today, make a step in the right direction. Forget food for a moment. We are going to dive into the three macronutrients. We are going to understand the difference between starch and cellulose – why cows can eat grass and termites can eat wood. Does your current idea of food explain where the cows get protein or how termites digest and get energy from undigestable fiber  Probably not, but once you truly understand carbohydrates, proteins and fats, you can rebuild from the ground up and construct a different, a RADICALLY DIFFERENT, basis for what and why you put stuff in your mouth.

I’ll even leave room for creme brûlée.

After we are finished, what I hope you’ll never do again is to try to pick your food groups based on macronutrients: carbohydrates, proteins or fats.  I hope you realize that rice, for example, has enough available protein (and a full complement of amino acids) to sustain you (2). I want you to understand why birds and wild cats aren’t fat and how an elephant can grow so much muscle mass without a single protein shake.

You see, we once understood how to survive and, ironically, didn’t even think about it. We stumbled through the world and ate what we could find. Today, with all of our macronutrient diet schemes, eat for blood type, 21 days to fight belly fat, or super secret supplement goop, we’ve lost the way. It’s unbeliveable that we have never know MORE about food and yet it’s never been more difficult to understand what to do.

Steve Jobs took everything we knew about computers, music, and computer programs and turned it into an incredible assembly of tools that…just worked.  I am suggesting that we do the same with nutrition.  I say for the group following this blog – stop debating and let’s just break this down and see what makes sense.

I’m willing to go against the mass market. I believe people are intelligent enough to figure this out. I know that I was wrong for most of my adult life – even with advanced education and a deep interest/motivation to understand it (I was FAT).  The difference, perhaps, is that when I found the contradictions – michael phelps eats 12,000 cal/day and termites eat wood – I took the time to reflect on the world and set aside my bias.

But like ts eliot observed: I’ve arrived where I started, and know the place for the very first time. I think you will too.

We’ll start with carbohydrates on the next post. See you there!

 

1) Changes in Diet and Lifestyle and Long-Term Weight Gain in Women and Men,  Mozaffarian D et al. N Engl J Med 2011;364:2392-2404.

2) Nitrogen retention of young men fed rice with or without supplementary chicken, Lee CJ, et al., Am J Clin Nutr. 1971 Mar;24(3):318-23.

**************
Like these  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:

Thanks!
Ray

Burn, Baby, BURN

By On · 43 Comments


As we discussed in the last post, I want you to suspend all that you know about carbohydrates, proteins, and fat. I want you to clear notions of glycemic index and eating for blood type.  I’m asking you to not have conclusions about our paleolithic ancestors. No, let’s talk about the very basics of energy in our body, but check the Chakras at the door.

Today we’ll take a rather geeky-side step. We are going to talk about energy, oxidation, and heat (not temperature).  These are all things that we can see, measure, and repeat. Let’s reserve comments to questions and clarifications – I don’t want a similar scheme from someone else.  I am confident that what I am saying is true – to the best of our current understanding.

Quick background.  We are “homeotherms” in that our body temperature stays constant. This temperature (around 37C +/-) is the net result of waste metabolic heat. We need to stay in an environment cooler than our body for the most part, so that the waste heat can leave – else we just burn up. Cars need radiators.  We are the same. Heat (not temperature) always flows from hot to cold.  At the atomic level, that’s just lots of atoms bouncing together – just like rubbing your hands together and getting warm.

Heat (not temperature) is then the net energy in that object. Hot coffee has MORE heat than your tongue. It transfers (rapidly) when you sip it. That is what causes the discomfort. That is a very visceral picture of heat, but in thermodynamics we talk about heat in a far more general way. Most of the discussion has absolutely NOTHING to do with temperature and in fact, temperature is something that goes up and down in many cases to preserve the balance of energy when heat is transferred.

Riding The Wave

all metabolism processes release heat - you can consume protein carbohydrates or fat.At the top of a roller coaster, you have a LOT of potential energy just before you fall. At the bottom of the hill you have lots of kinetic energy (energy of motion). Stand on that track and splat, you are mowed over my the massive car. Chemical reactions release and absorb energy in much the same way.  Hold some explosive in your hand, you have potential energy, light the fuse and bang, release of all that stored energy at one time.

Get the picture?

The process of extracting energy from carbohydrates, proteins, and fats is metabolic oxidation.  We add oxygen to the “fuel” and “burn it” to release energy.  This is a extremely complex process, with lots of steps, but we can attack the problem from the basic energy in, energy out approach.

Let’s say you eat some glucose…or even table sugar, sucrose.  In both cases those two molecules have Carbon (C), Oxygen (O) and Hydrogen (H).  These individual atoms are all linked together with chemical bonds. Breaking these bonds requires energy (pulling the roller coaster up the hill) and then releases energy (going down the hill).

Some of the energy does work – like move a muscle, beat the heart or fire a neuron in the brain, but MOST of the energy (80%) is just waste heat energy (not temperature) that gets transferred to surrounding tissue and the tissue then increases in temperature.

What we will learn on specific posts about carbohydrates, protein, and fats is that each of them is processed a little differently by the body, but all can be used for that fundamental energy we need to live (pulling the roller coaster up the hill).

Additionally, we’ll discuss that proteins have a dual use – they can not only be burned like fuel, but they provide a store house of amino acids that are the basic building blocks of our tissue, hormones, and hair.  In that sense when you EAT protein, it is not USED by the body; rather it is broken down into amino acids and the body picks out the ones it needs to make whatever is on the “to-do” list – be it eye tissue, insulin, or keratin (hair & nails). The rest of the unused amino acids get tossed into the burn pile. We don’t store them.  When we dig into proteins, you’ll see that this word is so misunderstood, that it’s caused huge problems. We’ll find why our body doesn’t actually “burn” protein in much the same way as our body can’t burn “starch.”

On the other side of the balance, fats are places our bodies (and plants) can store energy.  We’ll talk about one other form of stored energy, glycogen, in the post on carbohydrates, but just remember that adipose (fat) tissue is a place to dump excess, non waste heat energy until you need it later (gas in the trunk).

So all of these hand-waving sentences: I need more protein to build muscles, high glycemic carbs are my problem, or it’s the good fat, are just distractions at this very basic level. If you were not fat, or competing in an intense triathlon, then really, any of these three fuel sources would do just fine for energy. All of them are acceptable for fuel. Some have more heat energy stored within and others have less.  Some can cause secondary hormonal issues, etc…but your body has evolved to process all three of these. Alcohol is another fuel we can throw in the mix – it’s digestible, but the by-products are toxic; it’s certainly energy that can be processed.

Sweet Mistakes

Ultimately, it is glucose – a simple sugar (carbohydrate) that fuels your brain and keeps the cells nourished. We monitor “blood sugar” and for most of us it stays in a pretty tight range.  Proteins and fat can be inserted into the process with some fancy tricks, but all the heat energy they contain is eventually assimilated to some part the overall system to process glucose.

What do you need to know from this to move on? Simple. These three macronutrients: carbohydrate, protein, and fat are all useful sources of energy. If you are about to run a race and are 6% body fat, you might want to stock up on energy. If you are worried about the scales and the only exercise you get is looking for the remote control, you probably have plenty.

Einstein said, “We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.”

Weight loss, ALL WEIGHT LOSS, is then the process of going on a naturally “high fat” diet and consuming your body fat to fuel the roller coaster of life.  For each and every heart beat, mouse click, or push up, you need some energy and you’ll want to get it out of your own reserves, not help plants and animals lose weight by eating theirs. If you only drink water, you’ll have no choice but lose body fat.

The problem with the starvation approach is that your body also has to constantly replace proteins (not necessarily your meat, but more hormones, cells, etc..) and in the next post we’ll look closer at how that complicates things and makes severe starvation, not the most appropriate form of weight loss.buy big water slides

 

**************

Like these  and want to help? 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:

Thanks!
Ray

Meet You at the (Gas) Station

By On · 32 Comments

Proteins, carbs, and fats are your body's fuel. Indiscriminate trips back to the tank can lead to obesity. IN Tim Ferriss' Four Hour Body, Scientist Ray Cronise teaches how you can use thermal loading to lose weight 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?

Thermal Loading provides a method of losing weight at maximum rate.

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.

Pyramid Schemes

By On · 33 Comments

Personal perspectives are always plagued with some set of bias.  For example, there are those that look at the great Egyptian pyramids as incredible acts of engineering prowess and still others that see the same building as representing a society that built with diminishing ambition (psssst, a joke). There is always an absurd way to categorize things and any time you base a theory, concept, or idea on a false premise, eventually that idea will crumble.

People can sell “snake oil” for a while, but eventually it will catch up with them and the facts (not opinions, perceptions, or feelings) will rule the day.

My Plate or Theirs?

I think it is certainly clear that the USDA Food Pyramid Scheme, is just that – a scheme and not a particularly good one.  Recently we were presented with a “My Plate.” It’s certainly a step in the right direction. Not Earth-shattering innovation, but it at least it can serve as a foundation for a wide range of nutritional dialog. It’s got catchy colors, cool design, but take a look at it closely…

it doesn’t say meat.

ChooseMyPlate.gov - Is it Industry or Health Promotion?

Look at that. Most everything else on the plate is now in plain English: Grains (not breads), Fruits (not juice), Vegetables (not low glycemic carbs).  Then there is Dairy (liquid meat – check out the nutritional labels and compare beef to milk or cheese) and Protein.

Does anyone REALLY know what a “protein” is? Isn’t that a Chicago song?  Can you distinguish between a hydrophilic and hydrophobic amino acid or understand how these might affect proteins folding? If you could, would you care?  The level of detail in macromolecular science is so incredibly complex today and yet we have many walking around with sound bites cashing in on the latest techno buzz-phrase pandering to the unknowing masses. Meanwhile, those trying to get funding for the basic research fueling this culinary renaissance struggle.

Saying protein is synonymous with meat, is like calling all rectangles squares. The good news is that there is now the foundation to separate this century old belief.

Rational Decisions

As people who know me will clearly defend. I am not AGAINST meat. I love the taste of meat, don’t have a personal issue with eating animals, nor do I focus on carbon footprints of steak.  I am not trying to discount anyone that believes these things, but rather to put out clearly that I am simply not motivated by the politics or ethics of meat.

Yet I did live on a vegan diet for a little over a year. I did it as a “radical” self-experiment; you would have thought I was attempting to join a terrorist plot or cult by the reaction of some friends and family. There were those that thought it an unthinkable personal deprivation – akin to a prison sentence. Still others were overly concerned with how I would “get my protein,” yet none of them could really tell me what protein was or more importantly, how a rhinoceros, giraffe, or even <gasp> a beef-laden steer get’s protein when they are all herbivores.

Whatever protein is, the government wants to be sure you get some and make sure you get a little dairy too – all of the industry interest at the USDA need a “little help from their friends.” Sadly, I happen to LOVE sushi and chicken wings. I’m confident neither the mercury, saturated fat, nor animal protein are all that good for me, so I’ll significantly limit these from here on out.

And yet on my last few years of self reflection and intense study, there are many of the top ailments – Multiple Sclerosis, Diabetes, pulmonary hypertension, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, rheumatoid arthritis…the list goes on, which are all radically affected by diet and nutrition. I can’t IMAGINE having one of these and not giving this a try. I don’t understand the “I’d rather be dead then give up cheese” mindset. That sounds more like a heroin addict and less like a rational, or free decision.

My sensitivity and motivation was rooted in a looming trend towards Type II diabetes when I gave it a try. I used to have (and can more or less still induce with diet) bouts of hypoglycemia that was absolutely tied to my meal. It hit me within an hour or so and my friends saw it first hand. I was far more safe driving a car after doing four Jäger bombs, than eating a slice of cheesecake.

New World Order

Gary Taubes presents an interesting history of the media/medical PR machine in Good Calories, Bad Calories (2007) along with the political, socio-economic, scientific debates of Cholesterol-Heart Disease relations and ultimately Eisenhower’s own struggles to his nutritional-based death.

I want to change this thought by asserting two things:

1)  a calorie IS absolutely a calorie in thermodynamics and

2)  a “dietary calorie” is a very loosely determined set of averages related to a “kilocalorie” and isn’t necessarily exact.

Why this distinction? I have spent the better part of the last three years reading vociferously on food, diet, and exercise. Before that I spent a great part of the previous 15 years struggling with my weight. If you are overweight now,  I get it and really do understand. What I have also learned is that a lot of people have made a lot of money on ideas they don’t really understand that well.  Part of the issue is in the quest to make things “understandable” or generalized, it can often lead to further summaries that end up failing.

I believe that a dietary calorie is one of those things that is asserted with exacting detail when in fact it should be viewed more as an approximation.

The Art of Self Misdirection

Let’s take a quick diversion to something I am CERTAIN about, and then let’s see how these same steps might complicate the concepts around the dietary calorie.  Certainly one of the best parts of the internet is that one doesn’t have to be a multi-million dollar corporation or famous spokesperson to get a message out.  On the other hand, if you are viewed as a “reliable source,” you can unknowingly infect millions of people with incorrect information with a simple tap on the return key.

Here is a recent news piece from CBS MIami – Can “Chilling Out” On Ice Diet Help Lose Weight?

The actual news report (video) is quite accurate, even though they focus on the extreme, it covers the point made by both Tim and me. Clearly we have told everyone that these techniques are desinged to ENHANCE diet and exercise, not replace them. We point out, as do many, that “burning calories” (there’s those words again) isn’t that easy when compared to consuming them.

Having watched the video, read the story on the page. See the difference?  Despite the credentials, Dr. Stacey Ingraham, is just wrong.  In fact, this is the very point I made in my TEDtalk and unfortunately she isn’t alone.  It is surprising just how many people confuse the body’s need to dump excess waste heat resulting from exercise as the cause of the energy consumption when in fact it’s a result of the body maintaining a core homeostasis. I tried to comment, but they were all rejected accept the one post asking that a comment be posted.

Not sweating it… Just know that many people that might be help will be confused. This doesn’t just happen with the media – it’s also common when science is summarized and generalized, which brings us back to the calorie.

First, we must look at thermodynamics with great respect. The laws have worked well and while they can be disproven if there is data to do so, no one has ever found any evidence to the contrary. This is the difference between science and dogma. So this is where I can state unequivocally that within thermodynamics a kilocalorie is the amount of energy to raise 1 kg of water 1 degree Celsius. It’s a simple definition and it does not change, nor can it be avoided.  In thermodynamics, Heat (not temperature) = energy.  It’s repeatable, measurable and observable.

Where we do have good reason to doubt is that 1 “dietary calorie” = 1 kilocalorie as it was defined over a century ago.  I’ve participated in the past, and many of you still participate in nearly certain indisputable discussions about X calories of protein vs Y calories of carbohydrate. No matter what mental image you might have about a calorie of this or that, what each conversation, idea, and method involves is a basic estimate on digestibility and absorption of those macronutrients in order that it may be used, stored or excreted by the body.

This is the point where thermodynamics and food split paths. This is where I was able to achieve a thermodynamic advantage. This is where good calories/bad calories, body for life, sugar busters, slow carb, and Atkins all tweak and twist to make us all believe a “calorie is not a calorie.”

So is this all about semantics?  I don’t think so. I am not going to take issue with any of these diet schemes; I’ve used all of them and they all worked for me to restrict calories. I was the one that ultimately couldn’t stick to them or make them a lifestyle.

A Plate Full of Schemes

The My Plate scheme is probably the best the USDA has ever done in helping people move towards a good balance. I think people can lose weight with either choice of protein: plant or animal.  Plant will get you there much faster and my blood work suggests a much healthier landing.

Dairy? I think it’s seen it’s better days and yet I REALLY love cheese. When I look at the label and try to rationalize eating it, but giving up “red meat,” the rational debate goes right out the door. Liquid beef seems a better way to couch it for my mental process.

Changes in Diet and Lifestyle and Long-Term Weight Gain in Women and Men

Changes in Diet and Lifestyle and Long-Term Weight Gain in Women and Men. Bars to the right indicate these food tend to cause this weight gain over each four year period. Bars to the left are weight loss associated with that category of food.

I think most people are in fact trapped by what they THINK or are TOLD is healthy and the sales and marketing on the package, ESPECIALLY THE NUTRITION LABEL. It’s a sad case where in order to label the widest range of food, we have distilled down the categories and quantities until the point where the labels are not very meaningful.   Take for example this: “Zero Calorie Olive Oil” I have in my pantry (hint ALL oil has calories and NO ONE sprays it for 1/3 of a second).

That’s all just plain dishonest and our children are suffering because of it.

Now looking at the chart to the right is anyone REALLY surprised by the results? This study published in last week’s New England Journal of Medicine tracked 120,000 men and women during a 20 year period (1986-2006), my fat years (1).  During that same time I picked up an extra 50 lbs – go figure. Ok, don’t just rationalize your favorite junk food (cheese and yogurt looking good), but take in the entire picture. Bars to the right create a tendency to gain weight eating those foods and bars to left tend to lose. The length of the bar tells you how much on average.

Sure, you are not surprised, but what are you doing to change the trend in your life?

The Hot Points

Simply put – without some way to generate internal heat, you would assume whatever the temperature of your immediate surroundings. We don’t and it requires energy to create this heat in everyone and the energy source is food. If you control the food going in (nutrient dense, calorically poor foods – like plants) and exercise to strengthen your cardiovascular system and create excess waste heat, you’ll lose weight.

If you further expose your body to COOLER surroundings: swimming, cold showers, less layers, morning/evening walks, or just turning down the thermostat, your body MUST burn more or drop in temperature.

The resistance to change in temperature, the external thermal load on your body, depend on how large the temperature difference between your body and the environment and how fast heat (energy) is leaving your body. 40F water is a lot more drastic than 40F air, due to the increased heat capacity and thermal conductivity of water. A change of only 2-3 degrees down in water is equal to many more in air.

Swimming WILL positively effect your body’s heat loss and as such, will also trigger hunger. Resist the urge to eat and you’ll lose faster, guaranteed.

No amount of discussion changes these scientific facts; what is up for debate is how we might effectively and comfortably add these thermal loads to our lives. We don’t have to guess about calories in thermodynamics, maybe we should stick to words and food groups in diet schemes that people truly understand.

1) Changes in Diet and Lifestyle and Long-Term Weight Gain in Women and Men,  Mozaffarian D et al. N Engl J Med 2011;364:2392-2404.