Fitness Philosopher

Dr. Michael Eades Does it Again.

Dr. Eades and his wife, Dr. Mary Dan Eades, are on a mission to bring healthier lives to individuals who suffer from weight-related issues.  Michael prolifically contributes to his blog and I thought you would enjoy one of his latest (great) entries:  "Fisking Repovich and Peterson." 

Drs. Repovich and Peterson aimed to shed some light on the "Top 10 Nutrition Myths" at a recent summit held by The American College of Sports Medicine.

Dr. Eades, in his words, found it necessary to "debunk the debunkers."

With all the misinformation that we have to filter through as we strive for improved health and fitness, Dr. Eades' entry (and blog as a whole) is a great resource for nutrition-based education.  He also drives home an important point with the following comment:

"Now don't you feel better knowing that the influential health-care experts who are giving speeches to large groups of other health-care experts are so knowledgeable about basic physiology and biochemistry?  And so well read in the medical literature, to boot."

Educate yourself thoroughly.  Seek opinions from experts that you trust.  Critically think about information being presented to you. . . and don't assume that every individual with a title (MD, PhD, MPH) is a credible expert.  Seek reality and the truth.  If you find it, it will resonate within you -- regardless of the source.

Don't Quit.

I was in college the first time I saw this poem; it's one of my favorites.

(The "Don't Quit" image originated at BeatBob.com)

DON'T QUIT!

When things go wrong as they sometimes will
When the road you're trudging seems all up hill
When the funds are low and the debts are high
And you want to smile, but you have to sigh
When care is pressing you down a bit
Rest, if you must, but don't you quit.

Life is queer, with its twists and turns
As everyone of us sometimes learns
And many a failure turns about
When he/she might have won had he/she stuck it out
Don't give up though the pace seems slow
You may succeed with another blow.                            

Success is failure turned inside out
The silver tint of the clouds of doubt
And you never can tell how close you are
It may be near when it seems so far
So stick to the fight when you're hardest hit
It's when things seem worst that you must not quit.

-author unknown

Coke and Pepsi, for Enhanced Worship and Health.

I'll give credit to the beverage giants Coke and Pepsi -- they sure know how to infiltrate our communities to keep their profits soaring.

Check out this story in The New York Post.

Kosher Coke?  Those members of the Jewish community must really be purchasing this soda by the truckload if Coca-Cola Bottling Co. is willing to re-create a beverage for 8 days of passover.  The Coke is still nutrient poor and contains phosphoric acid and loads of sugar, but, hey, it's kosher, so how bad can it be?

As if this story wasn't enough to knock me off my chair, we've got Pepsi launching a promotion called Smart Spot Dance! 

Ironic, isn't it?  We've got a nation-wide campaign to encourage physical activity for improved health, but it's sponsored by a company that pushes for the consumption of  processed (generally nutrient poor) foods and sugary beverages.

Picture this. . . starved, thirsty individuals come off the dance floor, having just done 30 minutes of High Intensity Metabolic Training (dancing).  And there, waiting for them, are bottles of juice, Gatorade, Pepsi and water; and snacks like Baked Lays or Doritos.  It's the equivalent of saying, "Hi.  Great effort during your training.  Now eat and drink this -- it'll all but negate the benefits of all your hard work."  This sounds logical, doesn't it?

Of course, Pepsi claims that it's "smart spot" snacks are healthier, and they illustrate it in these beautiful tables. But they're basing the health impact of their "smart spot" foods on daily reduction of calories, NOT on other more important variables like nutrient ratios (ratio of protein:carbs:fats ingested per day) and nutrient quality.  So essentially, this data (in terms of predicting health) is misleading.  Remember this:  The amount of calories you consume  vs. the amount that you expend is not the only variable responsible for weight loss, and it's certainly not the sole predictor of good health.  The type and quality of food you eat has a much greater impact on your overall well being.

This is what we get when we let these companies sponsor health initiatives -- marketing at its finest to enhance the malnutrition and fattening of our society.  Gotta love it.  At least this gives me and my peers practice -- practice at sorting through all the misinformation that's out there so that we can better serve our confused clients.                                                                         

Believe In (and Develop) Your Strength

My hope for this blog is that it serves as a source of inspiration as well as an educational source on the finer points of strength training and nutrition.  As such, I leave you with the following words:

Never undervalue yourself.  Believe in yourself.  Believe that you can do your work well, and then make good.  Never doubt yourself.  Faith in one's self unlocks those hidden powers that all of us have, but that so few of us use.  Every man and woman has undeveloped strength undreamed of until emergencies call it forth.  Every one of us has been surprised at how much we can do and how well we can do it when we have to do it.
Do not wait for these emergencies to call out the might within you.  Realize your assets every day.  God has made an investment in every one of us; shall we go to Him when our life is done giving Him no return upon that investment?  When He invested in you He meant that you should pay Him dividends in the betterment of the world and helpfulness to your fellow-men.  You can do this only by your best work.  And your best work is possible only by faith in yourself and by love of your work.
                                                                            -- Albert J. Beveridge

Aesthetics and Training

A client once said to me,

"I don't care about how I function or how I feel, I just want to look good."

I appreciated what this guy told me.  He'd successfully lost over 20 lbs of fat and was in the process of packing on significant amounts of muscle.  He was finally at a place where he was confident in his appearance. . . and he sure didn't mind the positive attention that it brought him from his wife, his children and his peers.  But I countered with something along the line of,

"What good will 'looking good' do you if you can't play with your kids or simply stand up out of a chair because your body is out of balance and not functioning properly?" (As if I would ever let that happen. . . :))

Even today, with all information emphasizing the importance of training for improved performance, there are countless individuals still training themselves with a "bodybuilder mentality" -- and focusing a majority of their thoughts on aesthetics as opposed to function. 

I'm all for the idea of "training for improved appearance."  After all, it's one of the major perks of a good exercise and nutrition protocol.  Just make sure that you're enhancing (not ignoring or sacrificing) your body's health and functional capacities in the process.

Nutrition 102 -- Definition of a Calorie, and Some Other Tidbits

(Note to reader -- There are many variables that influence your body's ability to burn fat/build muscle.  For the simplicity of this article, only the role of calories is emphasized.)

Most of us are familiar with calories, but if you're looking for a very basic refresher on the topic, here you go:

Calorie (definition) -- the amount of energy required to raise the temperature of 1 gram of water 1 degree celsius at 1 atmospheric pressure. 

Simply stated, a calorie is a unit of energy, nothing more, nothing less.  It's a measure of the energy that we generate with every task we do (blinking, breathing, sleeping, exercising, thinking, digesting food -- anything coinciding with us just being) as well as a measure of the energy delivered by the food we eat.

The nutrients we consume deliver caloric energy in the following ratios: 

• 1 gram of protein = 4 calories                    1 gram of carbohydrate = 4 calories

• 1 gram of fat = 9 calories                          1 gram of alcohol = 7 calories

With all the conversation time that calories get in a gym, one might think that there's more to it than this.  Not so.  Calories should be on a client's mind when considering two concepts:

1)  Survival.  If you don't get enough of them to adequately fuel your body, you're going to have a hell of a time generating the energy to get through your day, let alone your workout.  How do you estimate your caloric needs?  You use a calculator, of course!

2)  "Calories in" and "Calories out" as related to weight loss/gain.  As common sense would tell you, weight gain occurs when you eat more calories than you burn off (positive calorie balance).  Conversely, weight loss occurs when you consume fewer calories than you naturally burn off within a day's activities (negative calorie balance).

How your body composition changes in response to a positive/negative calorie balance is directly related to your strength training.  Eat excessive calories without training, and you'll be more likely to add fat to your body instead of muscle.  Eat less without training, and your weight loss will likely be the result of losing muscle and not fat.   

Over the years, I've sensed that clients describe calories "good" or "bad" depending on their training perspective, with the negative connotation usually coming from those trying to burn fat.  And the fact is, calories are neither good or bad.  How can they be?  All they are is a measure of energy.  In actuality, what's usually "bad" is the client's lack of portion control relative to their physical activity as well as the quality of the food consumed. 

Pay attention to portion size -- because you can't get around its effect weight loss/gain.  But make more of an effort to increase your physical activity and improve the quality of the food you eat.  Doing this will have as much impact, if not more, on your body's ability to transform into the one you want.

Nutrition 101 -- Where on Earth do we begin?

I've got to admit something -- I find the topic of nutrition pretty overwhelming.  Here I am, trying to convey lessons to my clients about "proper eating habits," and there's so much information to filter through that some days it's hard to know which way is up.  And I'm the one with the education, continuously studying.  It's no wonder that the average person on the street is confused.  As the saying indicates, "The more we learn, the less we know. . ."  and with all the studying done by diligent personal trainers, it's amazing that we're able to teach our clients an intelligible lesson rather than being paralyzed by analysis.

Today, news broke about a study printed in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) entitled, "Comparison of the Atkins, Zone, Ornish and Learn Diets for Change in Weight and Related Risk Factors Among Overweight Premenopausal Women:  The A To Z Weight Loss Study:  A Randomized Trial."  This study showed that of the 4 diets studied, Atkins was the most effective at generating fat loss (10.36 lbs/12 months) with the other diets coming in a distant second (with the Zone diet performing worst, at 3.5 lbs lost/12 months).  The article received plenty of commentary, especially amongst the professionals.  Here are 3 that I identified strongly with, written by professionals who I admire because I think they do thorough, objective research, with an open mind:

Dr. Michael Eades, a respected nutrition and weight-loss expert (and a great teacher/writer from my initial perceptions), gave a wonderful technical breakdown of the study.   Generally  speaking, he wasn't surprised with the results of the study, being that he's shown through his work that lower carb nutrition is effective in promoting healthy living.

Regina Wilshire analyzed the study in her blog, Weight of the Evidence, under the title "Bad Science - Good Publicity."  Essentially, she made the great points that this study, while doing a great job of bringing the topics of nutrition and dieting into the spotlight, was poorly designed. . . which resulted in a high percentage of non-compliant subjects.  In fact, during the one year study, many subjects failed to rigorously follow their assigned diets during the first two months (despite being supervised), let alone the entire year.  Regina's contention isn't so much with the data obtained in the study, but with the fact that $2 million was spent on a project that failed to maximize its validity because it couldn't get the subjects to fully comply.

My colleague Eugene, diligent reader that he is, also provided his insight.   Most notable was his synopsis of commentary by many MDs about the study, along the lines of, "Wow, look at these findings, aren't they something?   Too bad Atkins isn't good for you, despite what the blood work shows."  In short, it's a scary world when scientists and doctors fail maintain an open mind and objectively review research.   

What's my reaction to the study? 

• Is it me, or is it near impossible to design a valid nutritional study that won't be "poorly executed?"

• As I see it, despite this study showing that one nutritional plan gives better results than the others, ALL OF THESE DIETS have been shown to have shortcomings -- whether it be because they might negatively impact your physiology or because they fail to take fat off and leave it off permanently.  So who wins here?  If all these diets have consistently failed to provide long term results, does it matter if one successfully failing diet is better than another?

• This study conveys a message that the educated public (sadly, still a very small number) already knows:  we need to eat meals containing protein, fats and carbohydrates, but the carbohydrate intake has to be low (accomplished by getting the carb calories from vegetables and low-sugar fruits, NOT from starches or legumes.)  This idea is not only supported by recent research, but by studies of our nutritional habits since the evolution of man.

• I don't think it can be emphasized enough that with a low carb diet, carbs are still present.  I think too many clients misinterpret "low carb" with "NO carb" and that sends their minds reeling, wondering "What the heck am I going to eat?"  As stated above, preferred sources of carbs are quality fruits and vegetables, not starches, refined sugars, legumes, etc.
  

• Even the most successful "diet" is destined to fail if it is not tuned to your specific needs.  ("What works for somebody else, may not work for you.")  Find what works for you.

Now, back to my studies. . .

Gastric Bypass -- NOT A Preferred Fat Loss Method

I just read a disturbing article on CNN.com regarding childhood obesity surgery.

Is it not worrisome that in lieu of providing education for our children about the importance of physical activity and quality nutrition -- and taking the time to show them how to make it a part of their lives -- we're giving our surgeons permission to remove most of their stomach in order to lose weight?

Is it just me that thinks a human being would be better off with their digestive system fully intact, thus ensuring ideal food metabolism?  Is anyone else bothered by the notion that, instead of promoting alternative options (beyond "trying every diet"), these surgeons willingly put teens under the knife for such an invasive, dangerous surgery?

Beyond the surgery issue, please don't get me started on the fact that they have a picture of Eric Decker doing what looks to be slow, long distance running "to effectively burn bodyfat."  Nothing like that kind of picture to perpetuate the myth (as opposed to a picture of him strength training) that this type of exercise is most effective in promoting fat loss.  I'll leave that topic for another blog. . .

Tags: gastric bypass , nutrition, weight loss