http://thefitnessinsider.menshealth.com/2008/01/selling-cereal.html
This is a link to a blog that was written by an editor of Men's Health Magazine. He stopped contributing to it back in February of 2008, but there is still plenty of good information here.
Adam Campbell is also the co-author of the TNT Diet (Dr. Jeff Volek is the other co-author). I will blog about this book at a later time, but it is essentially a manual for low carbing in conjunction with moderate exercise. This is an excellent read, and very straightforward if you are looking for a barebones approach that doesn't count calories.
One of the biggest paradigm shifts I've had in the last year is that cereal is bad for your health. Yes, even the Heart Smart, Whole Grain, Lower you cholesterol, blah blah blah cereal. It's all bad. We have been lied to by ALL of these companies marketing campaigns, and the biggest offender, in my opinion, is Cheerios.
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result. This described my eating for YEARS, and while it may not have made me insane, I was a shadow of the person that I could have been (figuratively, because truth be told, I was a pretty big shadow). I used to start my morning EVERYDAY with Total cereal and skim milk, because everyone knows they need vitamins, it is better to get those nutrients from food, and Total contains 100% + of your recommended daily vitamin intake. That's what their commercials told me, so it has to be true. And while I agree that nutrients are better absorbed from food, you should not discount the impact of that food on your blood sugar and health.
I will come back in more detail later, but its time to head off to work, so this will have to suffice for now.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Calories......... Schmalories
1 pound = 3500 calories
We've all heard this before. If this mathematical equation is true, then you could run an "energy deficit" of 500 calories a day for 7 days and lose one pound (500 x 7 = 3500). It makes logical sense, huh? Then why doesn't this work in application?
There are several reasons.
for clarification--Energy Deficit meaning that the calories you consume below your equilibrium and calories you burn through "exercise." Ex. If your body needed 2000 calories a day to remain in it's current state, Eating 1800 calories and burning 300 during exercise in one day would create an energy deficit of 500 calories-- Do this for 7 days in a row, and you would have had 3500 calories fewer of "energy" this week than you did over the week before. If the equation at the beginning held true, you would weigh 1 pound less than you did at the start of the week.
First, you really aren't wanting to lose "weight" per say, because that would assume that you don't care about preserving Lean Body Mass (Muscle). What you want to do is change your body composition (Lose excess Body Fat, and Build Lean Body Mass) This includes losing flab and fitting into smaller clothes. So weighing on a scale should not be your only way of tracking progress. Getting a body composition test is best, but using a measuring tape is the easiest. Take measurements and write them down. You'll be surprised later when you look back at these numbers.
Back to calories, those nasty report cards on the back side of labels. What does that number really mean? Here is an academic website that details the collection of nutrition information in a laboratory.
http://seplessons.ucsf.edu/node/349
"A calorie is the amount of energy, or heat, it takes to raise the temperature of 1 gram of water 1 degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit). "
So the numbers on the back of our food labels refer to how much heat is put off by a set quantity of food when it is incinerated in a controlled "closed" system.
I've been told that I had a "fire in my belly" before, but they were talking about spirited debate. And unless you are drastically different than I am, you don't have a calorimeter incinerating food in your stomach either.
Rather, we "digest" food. And there are LOTS of factors that influence what we absorb from the food we consume. Not to be graphic, but have you ever thought about how many calories might be in the bottom of the bowl when you "do a little paperwork"?
We've already talked about how insulin tells your body to store excess calories as fat cells, do you suppose there would be a hormonal environment in your body that would tell it to NOT store extra energy (calories).
Another problem with the energy equation above is that it doesn't account for calories that "escape" the body. I am specifically talking about ketone bodies that can be expelled in your breath and urine. (I'll do a post in greater detail on this at a later time)
Now, I'm not saying to ignore the calories in the food you eat, but open your eyes and recognize that our current definition of a "calorie" as it relates to our bodies is flawed and can be influenced by a number of factors. Trying to equate a calorimiter that literally burns up every ounce of food with no waste and your stomach that breaks down a comparable piece of food with digestive juices is like comparing apples to spatulas.
As a rule of thumb, I pay more attention to the number of carbohydrates in the food. While I agree this has NO factor in the Energy Deficit equation above, it gives me a better indication of the signals this food will give my body when eaten (namely whether to store it or burn it).
The first step to getting out of a hole is to "stop digging." So before we are able to lose this excess body fat, we have to stop telling our body to store it. This is why a low carbohydrate diet is SO effective at shedding body fat.
Insulin is the hormone that tells our body to store food as fat.
Carbohydrates are the primary macro nutrient that force our body to release insulin.
So if you reduce/remove the bad carbohydrates from your diet, you have "Stopped digging" (Storing fat) and can begin focusing on burning your current stores of fat.
-I will touch on this more at a later time, but be sure not to shy away from ALL carbs. I personally eat leafy green vegetables on a daily basis and have never eaten as many vegetables in my life as when I made these lifetime dietary changes. So don't think I'm telling you to only eat meat, cheese, and eggs at every meal-
We've all heard this before. If this mathematical equation is true, then you could run an "energy deficit" of 500 calories a day for 7 days and lose one pound (500 x 7 = 3500). It makes logical sense, huh? Then why doesn't this work in application?
There are several reasons.
for clarification--Energy Deficit meaning that the calories you consume below your equilibrium and calories you burn through "exercise." Ex. If your body needed 2000 calories a day to remain in it's current state, Eating 1800 calories and burning 300 during exercise in one day would create an energy deficit of 500 calories-- Do this for 7 days in a row, and you would have had 3500 calories fewer of "energy" this week than you did over the week before. If the equation at the beginning held true, you would weigh 1 pound less than you did at the start of the week.
First, you really aren't wanting to lose "weight" per say, because that would assume that you don't care about preserving Lean Body Mass (Muscle). What you want to do is change your body composition (Lose excess Body Fat, and Build Lean Body Mass) This includes losing flab and fitting into smaller clothes. So weighing on a scale should not be your only way of tracking progress. Getting a body composition test is best, but using a measuring tape is the easiest. Take measurements and write them down. You'll be surprised later when you look back at these numbers.
Back to calories, those nasty report cards on the back side of labels. What does that number really mean? Here is an academic website that details the collection of nutrition information in a laboratory.
http://seplessons.ucsf.edu/node/349
"A calorie is the amount of energy, or heat, it takes to raise the temperature of 1 gram of water 1 degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit). "
So the numbers on the back of our food labels refer to how much heat is put off by a set quantity of food when it is incinerated in a controlled "closed" system.
I've been told that I had a "fire in my belly" before, but they were talking about spirited debate. And unless you are drastically different than I am, you don't have a calorimeter incinerating food in your stomach either.
Rather, we "digest" food. And there are LOTS of factors that influence what we absorb from the food we consume. Not to be graphic, but have you ever thought about how many calories might be in the bottom of the bowl when you "do a little paperwork"?
We've already talked about how insulin tells your body to store excess calories as fat cells, do you suppose there would be a hormonal environment in your body that would tell it to NOT store extra energy (calories).
Another problem with the energy equation above is that it doesn't account for calories that "escape" the body. I am specifically talking about ketone bodies that can be expelled in your breath and urine. (I'll do a post in greater detail on this at a later time)
Now, I'm not saying to ignore the calories in the food you eat, but open your eyes and recognize that our current definition of a "calorie" as it relates to our bodies is flawed and can be influenced by a number of factors. Trying to equate a calorimiter that literally burns up every ounce of food with no waste and your stomach that breaks down a comparable piece of food with digestive juices is like comparing apples to spatulas.
As a rule of thumb, I pay more attention to the number of carbohydrates in the food. While I agree this has NO factor in the Energy Deficit equation above, it gives me a better indication of the signals this food will give my body when eaten (namely whether to store it or burn it).
The first step to getting out of a hole is to "stop digging." So before we are able to lose this excess body fat, we have to stop telling our body to store it. This is why a low carbohydrate diet is SO effective at shedding body fat.
Insulin is the hormone that tells our body to store food as fat.
Carbohydrates are the primary macro nutrient that force our body to release insulin.
So if you reduce/remove the bad carbohydrates from your diet, you have "Stopped digging" (Storing fat) and can begin focusing on burning your current stores of fat.
-I will touch on this more at a later time, but be sure not to shy away from ALL carbs. I personally eat leafy green vegetables on a daily basis and have never eaten as many vegetables in my life as when I made these lifetime dietary changes. So don't think I'm telling you to only eat meat, cheese, and eggs at every meal-
Saturday, November 1, 2008
"And it's got half the fat, so I can eat twice as many!"
Yes, that's what I heard last night when I went to Walgreens to pick up some candy for trick or treaters. No, I'm not worried about the hypocrisy of living a low carb lifestyle,and passing out candy to the "unwashed" of dietary ignorance. You see, this was an insurance purchase, because I didn't want to be cleaning egg off the side of the house this morning. But not to worry, I got my comeupance. (More on that later)
The title of this post was LITERALLY what I heard another customer at Walgreens say to his wife in justification of purchasing a particular brand of candy.
I also thought of this when I was at the grocery store this morning, and was trying to find the REGULAR cream cheese in the dairy section. There were plenty of Fat Free and 1/3rd the Fat packages, but I had to end up purchasing an off brand of cream cheese to get the regular FULL FAT cream cheese. (So Philly, you just lost $1.98 because of poor supply chain distribution - not that you care since people are buying twice as many of the Fat altered versions since they've been deemed HEALTHY by the establishment)
You may ask yourself, "Self... why does he want the full fat cream cheese?" And I'll tell you, it boils down to mathematics.
Food consists of 3 macro nutrients. Protein, Carbohydrates, and Dietary Fat.
Prot + Carb + Fat = 100%
If you remove fat from the finished product, there MUST be MORE protein and/or CARBOHYDRATES.
Prot + Carb = 100% - Fat
And food companies don't usually bulk with protein, so food products that are marketed as LOW FAT are going to be HIGH CARB! It is undeniable. As easy as 1 + 2 = 3 (Carry the 1, cross multiply, etc...)
And as I mentioned before, dietary FAT (the fat in the food we eat) is completely healthy (does not lead to heart disease) IF eaten in the absence of foods that stimulate insulin secretion. (Carbohydrates).
Remember, Insulin tells your body to store what you are eating, so the fat "passes through" if you aren't telling it to be stored. It's a little more technical than that, but this is sufficient for now.
The sad part about the Walgreens customer is that while HE thinks he is getting away with something because he gets the same candy he likes but now it is healthier, is that bulking that candy with more carbohydrates makes it EVEN MORE unhealthy. This is because the sugar will have aneven greater glycemic influence on his system now, and the sugar is used to produce MORE cholesterol, triglycerides, and body fat.
--------------------------------------------------------
I said I got my comeupance from the candy, well, I was too stupid to just pass the candy out, and ended up indulging on a few select pieces that only I will know the count of, and my pancreas is pissed (the organ that secretes the insulin to remove the excess sugar from the blood stream). It has been noticeably throbbing this morning. I'll stay away from the carbs for a few days and should be fine. If not, I'll have it checked out.
The title of this post was LITERALLY what I heard another customer at Walgreens say to his wife in justification of purchasing a particular brand of candy.
I also thought of this when I was at the grocery store this morning, and was trying to find the REGULAR cream cheese in the dairy section. There were plenty of Fat Free and 1/3rd the Fat packages, but I had to end up purchasing an off brand of cream cheese to get the regular FULL FAT cream cheese. (So Philly, you just lost $1.98 because of poor supply chain distribution - not that you care since people are buying twice as many of the Fat altered versions since they've been deemed HEALTHY by the establishment)
You may ask yourself, "Self... why does he want the full fat cream cheese?" And I'll tell you, it boils down to mathematics.
Food consists of 3 macro nutrients. Protein, Carbohydrates, and Dietary Fat.
Prot + Carb + Fat = 100%
If you remove fat from the finished product, there MUST be MORE protein and/or CARBOHYDRATES.
Prot + Carb = 100% - Fat
And food companies don't usually bulk with protein, so food products that are marketed as LOW FAT are going to be HIGH CARB! It is undeniable. As easy as 1 + 2 = 3 (Carry the 1, cross multiply, etc...)
And as I mentioned before, dietary FAT (the fat in the food we eat) is completely healthy (does not lead to heart disease) IF eaten in the absence of foods that stimulate insulin secretion. (Carbohydrates).
Remember, Insulin tells your body to store what you are eating, so the fat "passes through" if you aren't telling it to be stored. It's a little more technical than that, but this is sufficient for now.
The sad part about the Walgreens customer is that while HE thinks he is getting away with something because he gets the same candy he likes but now it is healthier, is that bulking that candy with more carbohydrates makes it EVEN MORE unhealthy. This is because the sugar will have aneven greater glycemic influence on his system now, and the sugar is used to produce MORE cholesterol, triglycerides, and body fat.
--------------------------------------------------------
I said I got my comeupance from the candy, well, I was too stupid to just pass the candy out, and ended up indulging on a few select pieces that only I will know the count of, and my pancreas is pissed (the organ that secretes the insulin to remove the excess sugar from the blood stream). It has been noticeably throbbing this morning. I'll stay away from the carbs for a few days and should be fine. If not, I'll have it checked out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)