Body Composition

I don't want to leave you with those last two posts without giving you some practical ways to improve body composition. Body composition is the ratio of lean tissue to fat. The ideal ratio differs depending on gender and individual differences. In general, 10% and 20% bodyfat are good targets for men and women, respectively. There's no need to measure however, as the eye is a pretty good judge.

The most dangerous fat is visceral fat, or the "beer belly". Fortunately, it's also the most responsive to lifestyle changes.

The strategies I recommend all have one thing in common: they work to restore insulin sensitivity. This will not only improve body composition, it will normalize your metabolism on a fundamental level, reducing the risk of all the common chronic diseases. I may cover these topics again in more detail at another time.

1. Carbohydrate restriction. This is by far the most effective way to improve body composition. It will even benefit people who are already profoundly insulin resistant. Eliminating grains, legumes, potatoes and sugar is the simplest and best way to do this. That includes wheat, corn, rice, beans, oats, honorary grains like buckwheat and quinoa, and especially their derivatives. Carbohydrate is not the devil, but restricting intake to moderate amounts from vegetables and fruit is ideal for someone trying to lose weight. I think starchy root vegetables, soaked or sprouted legumes and soaked, sprouted or fermented non-gluten grains are OK for people who already have a healthy body composition.

2. Exercise. Our hunter-gatherer ancestors had a word for exercise: "life". Exercise helps improve insulin sensitivity by increasing the muscles' demand for fuel. It also builds muscle mass. Any exercise is great, but the best kind is brief and intense (anaerobic). This includes sprinting and brisk weight training. It's more effective than jogging at improving muscle mass, decreasing fat mass, decreasing insulin and improving other markers of metabolic health. Chris at Conditioning Research covers this topic regularly. Traditional sports like soccer and basketball are effective because they have anaerobic and aerobic components. Even walking up stairs or down the street have measurable health benefits, however.

3. Intermittent fasting. This is very effective at improving insulin sensitivity and body composition. IF isn't starvation; it simply postpones calorie intake. Nor is it unhealthy. In fact, it's probably closely in line with the variable energy intake to which we are fundamentally adapted. My method is one 24-hour, water-only fast per week. No juice; that defeats the purpose. If you have elevated insulin like most people, it's best to get into IF gradually. Try skipping breakfast first. If you can skip breakfast and lunch, you've completed a 23-hour fast.

4. Lose the soda! Soda and other sweet foods are the enemy of body composition and general health. Fructose, found abundantly in high-fructose corn syrup, table sugar and agave nectar, seems to have a particular talent for causing insulin resistance. It's rapidly converted to fat in the liver, which is partially stored on the spot, and partially exported into the bloodstream as triglycerides. Diet soda isn't much better. It's been associated with weight gain in humans, and actually causes weight gain in rats. Normalizing insulin through carbohydrate restriction and fasting reduces cravings for sweet foods. A moderate amount of fruit is probably fine.

Body Composition

I don't want to leave you with those last two posts without giving you some practical ways to improve body composition. Body composition is the ratio of lean tissue to fat. The ideal ratio differs depending on gender and individual differences. In general, 10% and 20% bodyfat are good targets for men and women, respectively. There's no need to measure however, as the eye is a pretty good judge.

The most dangerous fat is visceral fat, or the "beer belly". Fortunately, it's also the most responsive to lifestyle changes.

The strategies I recommend all have one thing in common: they work to restore insulin sensitivity. This will not only improve body composition, it will normalize your metabolism on a fundamental level, reducing the risk of all the common chronic diseases. I may cover these topics again in more detail at another time.

1. Carbohydrate restriction. This is by far the most effective way to improve body composition. It will even benefit people who are already profoundly insulin resistant. Eliminating grains, legumes, potatoes and sugar is the simplest and best way to do this. That includes wheat, corn, rice, beans, oats, honorary grains like buckwheat and quinoa, and especially their derivatives. Carbohydrate is not the devil, but restricting intake to moderate amounts from vegetables and fruit is ideal for someone trying to lose weight. I think starchy root vegetables, soaked or sprouted legumes and soaked, sprouted or fermented non-gluten grains are OK for people who already have a healthy body composition.

2. Exercise. Our hunter-gatherer ancestors had a word for exercise: "life". Exercise helps improve insulin sensitivity by increasing the muscles' demand for fuel. It also builds muscle mass. Any exercise is great, but the best kind is brief and intense (anaerobic). This includes sprinting and brisk weight training. It's more effective than jogging at improving muscle mass, decreasing fat mass, decreasing insulin and improving other markers of metabolic health. Chris at Conditioning Research covers this topic regularly. Traditional sports like soccer and basketball are effective because they have anaerobic and aerobic components. Even walking up stairs or down the street have measurable health benefits, however.

3. Intermittent fasting. This is very effective at improving insulin sensitivity and body composition. IF isn't starvation; it simply postpones calorie intake. Nor is it unhealthy. In fact, it's probably closely in line with the variable energy intake to which we are fundamentally adapted. My method is one 24-hour, water-only fast per week. No juice; that defeats the purpose. If you have elevated insulin like most people, it's best to get into IF gradually. Try skipping breakfast first. If you can skip breakfast and lunch, you've completed a 23-hour fast.

4. Lose the soda! Soda and other sweet foods are the enemy of body composition and general health. Fructose, found abundantly in high-fructose corn syrup, table sugar and agave nectar, seems to have a particular talent for causing insulin resistance. It's rapidly converted to fat in the liver, which is partially stored on the spot, and partially exported into the bloodstream as triglycerides. Diet soda isn't much better. It's been associated with weight gain in humans, and actually causes weight gain in rats. Normalizing insulin through carbohydrate restriction and fasting reduces cravings for sweet foods. A moderate amount of fruit is probably fine.

Bring on the Cookie Monster!

Hello and Happy Monday Everyone!I hope you received your You Have Arrived Newsletter today and found some delicious and nutritious cookie recipes you could use. If you aren't a subscriber yet simply click HERE to learn more about our free email publications.Do you want to make that cookie snack even more nutritious? Here are few "throw-in" ideas for adding more nutrition to the recipes:Add 1-2

Walking the Weight Off

Laura wanted to lose a lot of weight. One hundred and thirty pounds. It took her two and a half years but she succeeded by beginning a very rigorous walking program. Now four years later, the weight has stayed off. But she walks an average of about 50 miles a week!

She's written a book about her experience; Commit To Get Fit: The Secret to True and Everlasting Weight Loss

At sabotage point

Ok folks...

Weight 16 stone 2 pounds and holding...

The time has come, and I am now sabotaging my weightloss. I am doing it consciously.

I get to this point on whatever diet I am 'doing' where I decide I just cant take it any more.

Admittedly, there are quite a few things going on right now that could also be making me revert to type, but I also feel that this particular weight is a point I don't believe deep down that I will ever break through.

I spent ALL of today in bed. ALL DAY! At 2pm I had a glass of squash and 2 weetabix. I then went back to sleep. I got up at 6pm and drank the cold coffee that was at my bedside which had obviously brought in by DH earlier to tempt me to get up.

Then I made dinner for DS and also for myself. I made some spinach and ricotta tortellini and topped it with some puttanesca sauce that I had frozen from a couple of weeks ago. I managed to eat half of the plate.

Then I later had another glass of squash.

Good day so far... then I started looking at the web at pictures of Stoma's and illiostomy bags and all kinds of stuff about colorectal cancer and other peoples stories.

FUCKING MISTAKE

I grabbed a box (!) of toffifee that Carina's Mum had sent to us in a big parcel full of goodies in a 'Thank You for having my daughter and looking after her' gesture.

Each toffifee is 45 calories. I ate 13. do the maths.
I then went back to the cupboard about half an hour later and grabbed bag of Lindt Nougat eggs that also came in the package. I had 4 of them, as DH swiped one. I also had half a bottle of red wine - in total and lucid knowledge that I am going to SERIOUSLY regret it tomorrow.

So today my intake of calories was 1913 and I am feeling like a sad sack of shit.

My calorie intake is calculated by the daily plate to not exceed 1650 cals per day so that I can lose 2 pounds a week. I have never exceeded that amount.

I feel totally sick and ashamed of myself, but at the same time kind of pleased too.

Boy am I glad I have a fill coming up on Saturday. I knew it was a good idea to book that bastard. I have been the same weight for the last 3 weeks. I cant help but think that the daily plate is in fact wrong because I have not gone above 1500 cals during that whole time, and mostly less than 1000; According to them I should have lost 2 pounds a week. Just shows not everyone is a statistic that fits an equation huh.

I can feel the pressure of being in the 15 stone somethings and there is something in me that does NOT want me to get there. I am hoping that when I push through that barrier I wont have any more head-fucks like this, but I am guessing the barrier between 14 and 15 will be the same.

So I might not weigh for a couple of weeks (did I just say that?) and see if not knowing takes the pressure off or drives me out of my mind and straight into the nut house.

Virtual me at 18 stone 12

ME RIGHT NOW 16 stone 3Virtual me at target weight of 11 stone 7lb
I need these boosts occasionally. I have been really really bad the last week or so. I haven't eaten over 1500 cals on any day, but its all been crap. I have tried to include my veggies and stuff, but my Dad's operation and situation is really taking its toll on my eating. I don't even bother to try and stop myself. I look at chocolate and just eat it. Its like I am resigned to it.

Bunk mate - I am sorry I haven't been in touch. I was calling around all the rest of the afternoon trying to tie up a fill with Dr. Dillemans. Sadly he is on holiday next week so its not gonna happen. However if you phone EOC they have now got a new deal with www.WLSgroup.com and they have spaces on the 5th April... that's next Saturday. The first is a consultation and stuff for £120 for EOC patients, and then fills are £85 a go. You can go there every 2 weeks, and if its not right within that 2 weeks you can get it filled/unfilled again for free. I was already going to see them the last couple of times, so I have booked another appointment with them on Saturday at 12pm. If you wing EOC they will arrange a time. After that we were going to take DS to the Natural History Museum if you wanna bring Your DH and the DD's.

It would be nice to catch up.

I have just come home from Mum's. Tensions are running high and everyone needs Dad to get better. He has really been going through it the last few days. The stuff they never tell you about before an operation man!

Here's a run down... (If you are queasy... don't read!)

Tuesday: in Hospital in the morning. Enema's and nothing to eat or drink

Wednesday: in hospital waiting for operation first thing in the morning... and waiting... and waiting until 3pm when he was finally taken down to theatre. Out of theatre and into the Intensive Care Unit at 8:30pm. No visitors all day. Had tumor removed from rectum, bowel cut and hole cut into the side of stomach. Bowel pushed through stomach wall and secured with a plastic rod and wing nuts making 'the stoma' where he will wear a bag over for the next 8 weeks. Reality is this 7cm round red raw bit of gooey meat hanging out his side. Massive 40cm incision vertically from breast to pubis stapled together and covered with dressings. 8 cannula's in various parts of the body... back of hands, arms, neck etc. Drain on opposite side of the stomach leaking blood into a bag, and a catheter for urine.

Yea Gods.

Thursday: In hospital in High Dependency Unit. Blood pressure raised and very bloated from surgery. In obvious pain and wincing at ever couple of words he said.

Friday: In normal hospital ward. Developed chest infection and having to cough up sputum into a pot. in pain. Epidural dosage doubled by his surgeon as he said its not high enough for him (2 days too late me thinks!!). Not in pain except when coughing. Was very sick after having first 'meal' of an ice cream and soup. Brought up green and black fluid.

Saturday: in ward looking flushed. All cannula's removed except one administering a drip with antibiotics in it. Epidural removed because if fell out during the night and soaked into the sheets. Was in increasing pain, doctor called to administer Morphine. Immediately unconscious and slept all night. In the morning awoke to feeling very bad stomach pains. Nurse inserts tube through the nose and down back of the throat and draws off 6 large syringes of green and black watery liquid. Apparently this has FECAL matter in it as the bowel stoma is swollen and everything is backing up into the stomach again! Tube left down back of throat to drain waste water and faeces from stomach into a bag. No food allowed, just clear liquids... like water.

On top of all this awfulness my Granny throws a fit and gets in a strop about not being picked up because we are obviously a taxi service. She upsets my Mum, and in turn Me, DH and DS. She should be supporting my Mum not making herself another burden. My Mum doesn't know which way to turn.

We have come home now and hopefully she can then have some peace and quiet and space to get her head around everything. Although she obviously loves having us there... 3 extra bodies makes 3 lots of extra mess and bother and DS is boisterous and jumping up and down. Its not conductive to thinking straight!! If she needs me, I will be there in a blink. I think that the thing she needs most now is to just be thinking about herself and Dad for a bit and being able to do what she wants rather than what everyone else wants for a change. Everyone worries about the person in the hospital bed, but no one really gives much support to the one trying to keep everything together and cheer everyone up and keep everyone's spirits up.

So, when I have more news I will post it. A simple operation it was not. This is one horrible nasty little cancer that hopefully has been stopped in its tracks.

Poor Dad. I would rather do this for him myself if I could.

Coddler Fever & Fun Friday

Greetings Neighbors!Coddler Fever? Have you caught it yet? Link HereHas Spring Sprung in your part of the world or perhaps a nip of fall is in the air for our Down'Under friends. Either way, the weather is always perfect at the LivingAfterWLS Neighborhood!Today is the final Fun Friday of March 2008 and it puts a song in my heart to invite you to participate in our weekly get-to-know-one-another

Act As If You Are already Slim

Here's some good advice about the positive benefits of visualizing yourself as already being at your ideal weight;

The law of attraction states that you get more of what you put your attention on. When you are overweight your attention is focused on fat, food, diets, calories, etc. You are negatively focused. You are focused on the problem. The key to using the law of attraction for weight loss is to stay focused on the solution.

One of the most powerful ways of doing this is to act as if. Act as if you have already manifested and created the body and weight loss you want! Act like the thin person you want be!

Acting “as if” creates a powerful energy shift. Your actions will begin to align with your new intentions because it creates a positive expectation of success.

See more weight loss secrets and good advice at Secrets of a Weight Loss Master.

Visceral Fat and Dementia

This study was released today, demonstrating in 6,583 patients that visceral fat mass in the 40s predicts the risk of dementia in old age. Patients in the highest quintile (20% with the most visceral fat mass) had an almost three-fold higher risk of dementia than patients in the lowest quintile. This is a greater effect than you see from "genetics". Overall fat mass was less strongly correlated with dementia. This study is so timely, they must have heard about my blog post.

They used a measure of visceral fat called the "sagittal abdominal diameter", basically the distance from the back to the belly button. In other words, the beer belly.

What we're looking at is another facet of the pervasive "disease of civilization" that rolls into town on the same truck as sugar and white flour. Weston Price described it in 14 different cultures throughout the world in Nutrition and Physical Degeneration. Diabetes, cardiovascular disease, obesity, cancer and dementia all seem to come hand-in-hand. It's hard to say exactly what the root cause is, but the chain of causality seems to pass through visceral fat and insulin signaling in many people.

Visceral Fat and Dementia

This study was released today, demonstrating in 6,583 patients that visceral fat mass in the 40s predicts the risk of dementia in old age. Patients in the highest quintile (20% with the most visceral fat mass) had an almost three-fold higher risk of dementia than patients in the lowest quintile. This is a greater effect than you see from "genetics". Overall fat mass was less strongly correlated with dementia. This study is so timely, they must have heard about my blog post.

They used a measure of visceral fat called the "sagittal abdominal diameter", basically the distance from the back to the belly button. In other words, the beer belly.

What we're looking at is another facet of the pervasive "disease of civilization" that rolls into town on the same truck as sugar and white flour. Weston Price described it in 14 different cultures throughout the world in Nutrition and Physical Degeneration. Diabetes, cardiovascular disease, obesity, cancer and dementia all seem to come hand-in-hand. It's hard to say exactly what the root cause is, but the chain of causality seems to pass through visceral fat and insulin signaling in many people.

Visceral Fat

This week, I stumbled upon a very interesting series of articles from the lab of Dr. Nir Barzilai.

The first article I came across showed that surgical removal of the visceral fat deposit of rats increased their lifespan. Visceral fat (VF) is the "beer belly", and consists of the perinephratic fat around the kidneys and the omental fat in front of the intestines. It doesn't include subcutaneous fat, the fat layer under the skin.

VF is tightly associated with the metabolic syndrome, the quintessential "disease of civilization" that affects 24% of Americans (NHANES III). It's defined by three or more of the following criteria: high blood pressure, large waist circumference, low HDL cholesterol, high triglycerides, and high fasting glucose. The metabolic syndrome is associated with a 3-4-fold increase in the risk of death from cardiovascular disease, and a 6-fold increase in the risk of developing type II diabetes. From a review on the metabolic syndrome (parentheses mine):

The most common alteration related to the impaired glucose metabolism with aging is the progressively increased fasting and postprandial [post-meal] plasma insulin levels, suggesting an insulin-resistant state.

This is all well and good, but who cares? What's to say VF plays any role other than as a simple marker for overweight?

The longevity paper led me to Dr. Barzilai's previous papers, which answered this question rather thoroughly. Rats raised on standard rat chow, which is a sad little compressed pellet made of grains and added nutrients, develop elevated insulin and insulin resistance with age, just like humans. Unless they don't have VF. Rats that had their VF surgically removed did not develop insulin resistance or elevated insulin with age, despite rebounding to their original total fat mass rather quickly (VF accounts for ~18% of total fat in these rats). These parameters are unaffected by removing an equal amount of subcutaneous fat, which has been shown in human liposuction patients as well.

Removing VF also improved diabetes-prone Zucker rats, which are profoundly insulin-resistant (leptin receptor loss-of-function). It kept wild-type rats just as insulin-sensitive as calorically restricted controls, which had a small amount of VF. This shows that VF isn't just a passive player; it's essential for the development of insulin resistance. It also shows, along with human studies, that insulin resistance is not an inevitable consequence of aging.

Adipose (fat) tissue is being increasingly recognized as an important endocrine (hormone-secreting) organ. It produces many different hormones that affect insulin sensitivity and appetite regulation, among other things. These hormones are collectively known as fat-derived peptides (FDPs). At least one of these FDPs, TNF-alpha, promotes insulin resistance.

Dr. Barzilai's group went on to explore the mechanism of VF contributing to insulin resistance. They increased the rate of glucose flux into the fat tissue of rats by infusing either glucose or insulin into the bloodstream. These treatments both cause increased glucose uptake by fat cells. What they saw when they dissected the rats was striking. The VF had ramped up its production of FDPs from 2- to 15-fold, while the subcutaneous fat had barely changed. Incidentally, insulin increased glucose uptake by VF twice as much as subcutaneous fat.

I'll say this again, because it's important. They forced glucose into VF cells, and those cells dramatically upregulated FDP production. And again, no visceral fat, no FDPs.

In earlier papers, he also showed that the removal of VF dramatically reduces the expression of TNF-alpha and leptin (two FDPs) in subcutaneous fat on a longer timescale, showing that VF and subcutaneous fat communicate to alter the metabolism. Again, TNF-alpha promotes insulin resistance, making it a possible link between the fat tissue and peripheral effects. VF removal had no effect on triglycerides, suggesting that they're only a marker of insulin dysfunction rather than a cause.

Now to take this research to its logical conclusion. Here's a plausible sequence of events leading up to the metabolic syndrome:

• A meal high in quickly digested carbohydrate elevates blood glucose. OR, excessive fructose causes insulin resistance in the liver which leads to high fasting glucose.
  

• Visceral fat responds by increasing production of FDPs.

• FDPs, directly and/or indirectly, cause insulin resistance in the liver, muscle and other tissue. Liver insulin resistance causes alterations in lipoprotein ("cholesterol") profile (more on this in another post). Fat tissue remains insulin-sensitive.

• Fat tissue (including VF) grows in size, because due to its insulin sensitivity it's taking up more than its share of glucose.
  

• The vicious cycle continues, with increased visceral fat size and glucose uptake increasing FDP production, which makes the liver more insulin resistant, which increases glucose production by the liver, etc.
  

• In the absence of lifestyle changes, the cycle only stops when the fat tissue becomes insulin-resistant, at which point you lose control over blood sugar and become diabetic.
  

Visceral Fat

This week, I stumbled upon a very interesting series of articles from the lab of Dr. Nir Barzilai.

The first article I came across showed that surgical removal of the visceral fat deposit of rats increased their lifespan. Visceral fat (VF) is the "beer belly", and consists of the perinephratic fat around the kidneys and the omental fat in front of the intestines. It doesn't include subcutaneous fat, the fat layer under the skin.

VF is tightly associated with the metabolic syndrome, the quintessential "disease of civilization" that affects 24% of Americans (NHANES III). It's defined by three or more of the following criteria: high blood pressure, large waist circumference, low HDL cholesterol, high triglycerides, and high fasting glucose. The metabolic syndrome is associated with a 3-4-fold increase in the risk of death from cardiovascular disease, and a 6-fold increase in the risk of developing type II diabetes. From a review on the metabolic syndrome (parentheses mine):

The most common alteration related to the impaired glucose metabolism with aging is the progressively increased fasting and postprandial [post-meal] plasma insulin levels, suggesting an insulin-resistant state.

This is all well and good, but who cares? What's to say VF plays any role other than as a simple marker for overweight?

The longevity paper led me to Dr. Barzilai's previous papers, which answered this question rather thoroughly. Rats raised on standard rat chow, which is a sad little compressed pellet made of grains and added nutrients, develop elevated insulin and insulin resistance with age, just like humans. Unless they don't have VF. Rats that had their VF surgically removed did not develop insulin resistance or elevated insulin with age, despite rebounding to their original total fat mass rather quickly (VF accounts for ~18% of total fat in these rats). These parameters are unaffected by removing an equal amount of subcutaneous fat, which has been shown in human liposuction patients as well.

Removing VF also improved diabetes-prone Zucker rats, which are profoundly insulin-resistant (leptin receptor loss-of-function). It kept wild-type rats just as insulin-sensitive as calorically restricted controls, which had a small amount of VF. This shows that VF isn't just a passive player; it's essential for the development of insulin resistance. It also shows, along with human studies, that insulin resistance is not an inevitable consequence of aging.

Adipose (fat) tissue is being increasingly recognized as an important endocrine (hormone-secreting) organ. It produces many different hormones that affect insulin sensitivity and appetite regulation, among other things. These hormones are collectively known as fat-derived peptides (FDPs). At least one of these FDPs, TNF-alpha, promotes insulin resistance.

Dr. Barzilai's group went on to explore the mechanism of VF contributing to insulin resistance. They increased the rate of glucose flux into the fat tissue of rats by infusing either glucose or insulin into the bloodstream. These treatments both cause increased glucose uptake by fat cells. What they saw when they dissected the rats was striking. The VF had ramped up its production of FDPs from 2- to 15-fold, while the subcutaneous fat had barely changed. Incidentally, insulin increased glucose uptake by VF twice as much as subcutaneous fat.

I'll say this again, because it's important. They forced glucose into VF cells, and those cells dramatically upregulated FDP production. And again, no visceral fat, no FDPs.

In earlier papers, he also showed that the removal of VF dramatically reduces the expression of TNF-alpha and leptin (two FDPs) in subcutaneous fat on a longer timescale, showing that VF and subcutaneous fat communicate to alter the metabolism. Again, TNF-alpha promotes insulin resistance, making it a possible link between the fat tissue and peripheral effects. VF removal had no effect on triglycerides, suggesting that they're only a marker of insulin dysfunction rather than a cause.

Now to take this research to its logical conclusion. Here's a plausible sequence of events leading up to the metabolic syndrome:

• A meal high in quickly digested carbohydrate elevates blood glucose. OR, excessive fructose causes insulin resistance in the liver which leads to high fasting glucose.
  

• Visceral fat responds by increasing production of FDPs.

• FDPs, directly and/or indirectly, cause insulin resistance in the liver, muscle and other tissue. Liver insulin resistance causes alterations in lipoprotein ("cholesterol") profile (more on this in another post). Fat tissue remains insulin-sensitive.

• Fat tissue (including VF) grows in size, because due to its insulin sensitivity it's taking up more than its share of glucose.
  

• The vicious cycle continues, with increased visceral fat size and glucose uptake increasing FDP production, which makes the liver more insulin resistant, which increases glucose production by the liver, etc.
  

• In the absence of lifestyle changes, the cycle only stops when the fat tissue becomes insulin-resistant, at which point you lose control over blood sugar and become diabetic.
  

Okinawa and Lard

The inhabitants of Okinawa, an island prefecture of Japan, are one of the longest-lived populations in the world. Their diet and lifestyle have been thoroughly studied for this reason. Papers typically focus on their consumption of vegetables, fish, soy, exercise, and the fact that some of them may have been mildly calorically restricted for part of their lives.

The thing that often gets swept under the rug is that they eat lard. Traditionally, it was their primary cooking fat, and they use it liberally. Of course, they also eat the pork the lard came from.

I'm not saying lard will make you live to 100, but it certainly won't stop you...

Okinawa and Lard

The inhabitants of Okinawa, an island prefecture of Japan, are one of the longest-lived populations in the world. Their diet and lifestyle have been thoroughly studied for this reason. Papers typically focus on their consumption of vegetables, fish, soy, exercise, and the fact that some of them may have been mildly calorically restricted for part of their lives.

The thing that often gets swept under the rug is that they eat lard. Traditionally, it was their primary cooking fat, and they use it liberally. Of course, they also eat the pork the lard came from.

I'm not saying lard will make you live to 100, but it certainly won't stop you...

Health Benefits of Vegetarianism

Diana gave up meat many years ago. She said it made her feel sluggish and mentally slow. Diana is 55 years old and teaches yoga classes. She says eating meat affected her yoga practice.

See an interesting article about the health benefits of vegetarianism. They say people who cut meat from their diet have about half the cancer risk and are 50 percent less likely to develop heart disease. Vegetarians are less likely to be obese. They have lower cholesterol, blood pressure, rates of hypertension, type 2 diabetes and prostate and colon cancer.

Real Food IV: Lard

Your great-grandmother would have told you that natural, homemade lard is an excellent cooking fat. It has a mild, savory flavor and a high smoke point. It's well suited for sauteing and frying foods, and it makes the flakiest savory crust. It's also cheap to buy and easy to render. Rendering lard is the process by which fat tissue is turned into pure fat. I buy the best quality lard available for $2/lb at my farmer's market, making it far cheaper than butter and olive oil of equivalent quality.

The best place to buy lard is at a local farmer's market. Look for pigs that have been "field-raised" or "pasture-raised", and are preferably organic. This ensures that they receive sunlight and have been treated humanely. The "organic" label by itself simply means they have been fed organic feed; the pigs will often not have had access to the outdoors. I recommend avoiding conventional (non-organic) pork at all costs, because it's profoundly inhumane and highly polluting. This is where I buy my lard.

If you don't have access to good quality local lard, there are a couple of sources on the Local Harvest website. Look for "leaf lard", which is the fat surrounding the kidneys. It's lowest in polyunsaturated oil and thus has the highest smoke point and the lowest omega-6 content. It's also practically pure fat. You will recover 90% of the pre-rendering volume from leaf lard. On to the recipe.


Ingredients and Equipment:

• Lard
• Cheesecloth
• Baking dish
• Jars
  

1. Preheat the oven to 225 F.

2. Cut off any pieces of meat clinging to the fat.

3. Cut fat into small (~1-inch) cubes.

4. Place them into a non-reactive baking dish and then into the oven.

5. Over the next 2-3 hours, periodically mash the fat with a potato ricer or the back of a large spoon. The fat will gradually separate from the residual protein as a clear liquid.

6. When you are satisfied that you've separated out most of the fat, remove the baking dish from the oven and allow it to stand until it's cool enough to be safe, but warm enough to be liquid.

7. Pour through a cheesecloth into jars. Save the "cracklins", these can be eaten.

8. If you plan on using the lard for crusts, cool it as quickly as possible by placing the jars in cold water. If the lard solidifies slowly, it will have a slightly grainy texture that works less well for crusts, but is irrelevant for other purposes.

Finished lard has a long shelf life but I like to keep it in the fridge or freezer to extend it even further.

Real Food IV: Lard

Your great-grandmother would have told you that natural, homemade lard is an excellent cooking fat. It has a mild, savory flavor and a high smoke point. It's well suited for sauteing and frying foods, and it makes the flakiest savory crust. It's also cheap to buy and easy to render. Rendering lard is the process by which fat tissue is turned into pure fat. I buy the best quality lard available for $2/lb at my farmer's market, making it far cheaper than butter and olive oil of equivalent quality.

The best place to buy lard is at a local farmer's market. Look for pigs that have been "field-raised" or "pasture-raised", and are preferably organic. This ensures that they receive sunlight and have been treated humanely. The "organic" label by itself simply means they have been fed organic feed; the pigs will often not have had access to the outdoors. I recommend avoiding conventional (non-organic) pork at all costs, because it's profoundly inhumane and highly polluting. This is where I buy my lard.

If you don't have access to good quality local lard, there are a couple of sources on the Local Harvest website. Look for "leaf lard", which is the fat surrounding the kidneys. It's lowest in polyunsaturated oil and thus has the highest smoke point and the lowest omega-6 content. It's also practically pure fat. You will recover 90% of the pre-rendering volume from leaf lard. On to the recipe.


Ingredients and Equipment:

• Lard
• Cheesecloth
• Baking dish
• Jars
  

1. Preheat the oven to 225 F.

2. Cut off any pieces of meat clinging to the fat.

3. Cut fat into small (~1-inch) cubes.

4. Place them into a non-reactive baking dish and then into the oven.

5. Over the next 2-3 hours, periodically mash the fat with a potato ricer or the back of a large spoon. The fat will gradually separate from the residual protein as a clear liquid.

6. When you are satisfied that you've separated out most of the fat, remove the baking dish from the oven and allow it to stand until it's cool enough to be safe, but warm enough to be liquid.

7. Pour through a cheesecloth into jars. Save the "cracklins", these can be eaten.

8. If you plan on using the lard for crusts, cool it as quickly as possible by placing the jars in cold water. If the lard solidifies slowly, it will have a slightly grainy texture that works less well for crusts, but is irrelevant for other purposes.

Finished lard has a long shelf life but I like to keep it in the fridge or freezer to extend it even further.

A Vegetable Orchestra

And now for a truly extraordinary intermission...

"I'm... Dreaming... of a white... Easter...!"

Yes, a snowman penguin built on Easter Sunday. DS was busy building this large beast before we were even out of bed - this is worked out according to the simple equation of

kids + snow = lie in for Mum and Dad

Yes. That's right. The whole village is covered in the white stuff. Wish I had put a couple of quid on that one! I consider the most impressive thing about this snowman's construction to be the fact that it is so particularly well clothed. As you can see, DS wasted no time in making sure it didn't catch 'warm' and gave it his £90 North Face coat. Ahhh Bless.

*Insert blank, furious face, of a mother who works fingers to the bone for
said child to have nice clothes*

Also, thankfully DS pays attention to his science lessons, because he told me he found out the best thing to save a snowman from melting was to clothe it for insulation. "Yeah, they said so on Mythbusters" he chirped.

Oh Goody.

Happily, after calming myself down by looking at my husband having hysterics at how cute our son is... I was able to pleasure myself with the fact that snow at the end of March usually means that within about 4 weeks it will be roasting hot sunshine. Every time we have had a strange tumble of snow this late in the year, it has been followed by a really great summer. I hope that's the case this year.

Today I am going to be mostly doing nothing. I am currently trying to eat some pomegranate and raspberry wheats with milk from Tesco. I have eaten about 20g of the 50g serving I gave myself. Monsieur Bandino, however, seems a little pissed off today for some reason, so I am giving up. Just so you can see how wonderfully little I am eating here is a funky little picture of the remains!

The L-word

That's right, ladies and gentlemen: lard. The word alone makes lipophobes cringe like a vampire from garlic. It also makes epicures salivate. But why is lard so unhealthy? Let's take a look.

The fatty acid profile of lard might give us a clue. A major portion of lard is monounsaturated, 40% by weight. This is the same type of fat that predominates in olive oil (73%), and which is widely recommended by mainstream nutrition experts. Another prevalent class of fat in lard is saturated, at 48%. More than one third of this saturated fat is stearic acid, which even the most hardened lipophobe will agree has a "favorable" effect on blood lipids. Then there's the 8% polyunsaturated fat, which has been the darling of mainstream heart disease research for decades due to its ability to lower blood cholesterol (for the record, I believe the polyunsaturate content is lard's least healthy feature). The omega-3:6 ratio depends on how the pig was raised, but is typically skewed more toward omega-6.

So what does that leave us with? 66% fats that we're told are heart-healthy, and 30% non-stearic saturated fats that are supposed to be unhealthy. But if you still believe saturated fats cause heart disease, check out this post, this one and this one.

Lard also contains a small amount of vitamin D. The sun is the best source of vitamin D, since your skin synthesizes it when it's exposed to UVB. But due to the low angle of the sun in winter, and the fact that many people don't spend enough time outdoors even in the summer, extra vitamin D in the diet is helpful.

I think you can see that lard's bad reputation is undeserved. It may be a legacy of the time when hydrogenated vegetable oils were competing with animal fats for the food market.

There is such a thing as unhealthy lard, however. It's the stuff you might find at the grocery store. Store-bought lard is often hydrogenated to make it more shelf-stable. It also comes from confinement-raised pork operations, which aside from being profoundly inhumane, do not allow access to the outdoors. Thus, the fat won't contain vitamin D.

In the next post, I'll talk about how to buy pasture-raised lard and render it yourself.

The L-word

That's right, ladies and gentlemen: lard. The word alone makes lipophobes cringe like a vampire from garlic. It also makes epicures salivate. But why is lard so unhealthy? Let's take a look.

The fatty acid profile of lard might give us a clue. A major portion of lard is monounsaturated, 40% by weight. This is the same type of fat that predominates in olive oil (73%), and which is widely recommended by mainstream nutrition experts. Another prevalent class of fat in lard is saturated, at 48%. More than one third of this saturated fat is stearic acid, which even the most hardened lipophobe will agree has a "favorable" effect on blood lipids. Then there's the 8% polyunsaturated fat, which has been the darling of mainstream heart disease research for decades due to its ability to lower blood cholesterol (for the record, I believe the polyunsaturate content is lard's least healthy feature). The omega-3:6 ratio depends on how the pig was raised, but is typically skewed more toward omega-6.

So what does that leave us with? 66% fats that we're told are heart-healthy, and 30% non-stearic saturated fats that are supposed to be unhealthy. But if you still believe saturated fats cause heart disease, check out this post, this one and this one.

Lard also contains a small amount of vitamin D. The sun is the best source of vitamin D, since your skin synthesizes it when it's exposed to UVB. But due to the low angle of the sun in winter, and the fact that many people don't spend enough time outdoors even in the summer, extra vitamin D in the diet is helpful.

I think you can see that lard's bad reputation is undeserved. It may be a legacy of the time when hydrogenated vegetable oils were competing with animal fats for the food market.

There is such a thing as unhealthy lard, however. It's the stuff you might find at the grocery store. Store-bought lard is often hydrogenated to make it more shelf-stable. It also comes from confinement-raised pork operations, which aside from being profoundly inhumane, do not allow access to the outdoors. Thus, the fat won't contain vitamin D.

In the next post, I'll talk about how to buy pasture-raised lard and render it yourself.

YES - LOWEST WEIGHT EVER!

I have DONE it!

Ya ya ya ya ya ya ya!

Today I weighed (many times just incase)

16 stone and 2 pounds

AWESOME

The lowest I have ever been with my band is 16 stone 3 pounds. That was on 16th May Last year. Wow, this makes me feel completely awesome.

Its absolutely GREAT to be in Uncharted Waters again. There is something awful about trudging the same couple of stone up and down and up and down over a few years. It makes you feel really useless.

There is no doubt now people, MY BAND IS WORKING!

LONG LIVE THE BAND

Ok, the last couple of days...
Went to Mum and Dads yesterday. Had a really cool time and a good laugh. I ate the following:
Banana
Nutrigrain bar
small pot of mini eggs
few more of DS's mini eggs
half a chocolate egg
packet of hula hoops
chicken curry and rice

Not good, but the calories were actually reasonably low at 1200.

I know that its calories that count at the end of the day, but it still makes me feel like a greedy pig when I eat chocolate. I didn't exactly have anything else! However, I don't want to be someone who subsists on a mars bar and a coffee for lunch. What with Dad having Bowel cancer I think it brings home that I don't want to eat junk any more. I really felt grim yesterday evening and drank several glasses of water throughout the night. I am just not used to that much crap any more I guess.

Anyway, today has not been any better to be honest. Its been a bit of a rubbish day and we have been rushed off our feet. Shopping, hair dying, and again because it was DREADFUL, etc etc.
I didn't have breakfast as I wasn't hungry at all. We had lunch at KFC. I ate 4/5ths of a twister and gave up after that. I kept it all down which I am glad about, as I ate really really carefully. I was still eating when everyone was finished and DS was eating his ice cream! A normal KFC meal for me would be 2 twisters, large fries and a large drink and an ice cream. That's what the band does folks! WICKED HUH!!!!!

Then there was the hair disaster. I have obviously been black haired for a while. I get bored easily, so I decided to go back to blonde, or brown or something... anything! I put a whole heap of bleach on my mop and left it there. When it had cooked for about 40 minutes and I had washed it out, I revealed a delicate shade of violent orange.

Seriously you could NOT get this style in a hairdressers. I had a black fringe with white (YES WHITE) roots, orange back of the head with scarlet streaks and a mixture of orange and flame coloured patches interspersed with black highlights. My whole head had about 0.5 cm of WHITE roots. Its was AWFUL. It also felt like a birds nest!!

So I died it another colour... I realised that it had an ash hint in it too late, but actually its not so bad. Its kind of a pinky brown... Hmmm But at least its not on fire any more.

I still have black highlights which actually look really radical... Might have those again!

Right, see yaz folks

Small result...

I caved. I got on the scales and I have lost another pound, so that has really pleased me.

I have now lost 24 pounds - 16 stone 4lbs this morning

1 elusive pound away from my all time low of 16 stone 3 ... cool.

At least now I don't need to worry that I have put anything on or anything like that.

Today's food:
banana
mars bar shared with DS
mussels in tomato and pineapple sauce. Mmmmm
5 chips
half an avocado

I love mussels. You can just put ANYTHING with them and they are fabulous. These were lush wild Cornish ones. To die for. They are my all time favorite food now.

I will get some more on Tuesday next week - can't wait

Oh and I forgot, I also had a slice of DS's sponge cake that he made. Bad news I'm afraid. I puked most of it back up. Its just too dry, and I cant do dry.

Other than that, no PB's

Determined to Lose the Flab

Here's a really good video by one guy who is 40 years old and wants to get fit again.



By his birthday on May 12, he wants:

1) More muscle tone and continued cardio
2) Continued weight loss (lose the rest of the tummy so you can see those killer abs hiding beneath the cottage cheese)
3) Healthier and more frequent eating, but not at night.
4) Reduced caffeine

It's easy to forget why you started something, so here's my reminder to myself. I wanna feel really healthy and secure hanging out by the pool this spring/summer!

Thoughts on Obesity, Part II

In my reading, I've come to the conclusion that, in some people, overweight may be a type of carbohydrate intolerance.

Insulin is the master hormone that orchestrates the metabolic changes that cause fat accumulation. It instructs the body to transport glucose and fat from the blood into the cells. It tells the liver to synthesize fat from sugar. It inhibits the release of fat from fat cells. There are no other hormones that have a similar range of effects.

Insulin is the "storage hormone". Don't believe me? Ask a type I diabetic. Type I diabetes happens when the pancreas no longer secretes insulin. These people are rail-thin until they are given insulin injections, at which point they often gain excess weight. Many deliberately skip injections to lose weight. Unfortunately, this has serious consequences as it allows their blood glucose to rise to dangerous levels unchecked.

If insulin is kept low, fat synthesis and storage are inhibited, and fat release from fat cells is increased. Carbohydrate is particularly effective at elevating insulin, acutely and chronically. As carbohydrate digests, it's broken down into glucose, which enters the bloodstream. The pancreas releases insulin in an attempt to keep blood glucose within a healthy range, and the storage begins. Refined carbohydrate is the worst offender, because it causes a large and rapid rise in blood glucose.

Regular overconsumption of carbohydrate causes insulin to be chronically elevated in many people [update- I no longer believe this is true. I now believe that only certain types of carbohydrate- namely wheat and sugar- cause a pathological increase in fasting insulin over time]. This comes along with "insulin resistance", whereby most or all tissues become desensitized to insulin. This is the tissues' way of saying "Stop! My energy stores are already full! I can't handle any more glucose or fat!".

Some people are able to maintain normal insulin levels (and sensitivity) in the face of a high-carbohydrate diet. This is probably partly genetic and partly environmental. Certain people, for whatever reason, have fat tissue that is prone to fat accumulation. It could be because they oversecrete insulin, or because their fat tissue is sensitive to the action of insulin, but probably both. It likely has to do with a combination of insulin resistance in non-fat tissue, and insulin sensitivity in fat tissue. Inactivity and fructose consumption (from corn syrup or sucrose) are also high on the list of suspects.

Fat tissue is typically the last to become insulin resistant because it acts as a valuable buffer to remove excess (and potentially toxic) glucose from the bloodstream. Unfortunately, simply being thin is not a reliable indicator that your body tolerates carbohydrate well. It can indicate either that all tissues are insulin-sensitive and insulin levels are low, or all tissues (including fat) are insulin resistant and insulin levels are high. The latter scenario leads to type II diabetes, pronto.

Since fat accumulation revolves around carbohydrate intake and insulin production, it makes sense that reducing carbohydrate causes weight loss. No more carbohydrate = a lot less glucose, and a lot less insulin to deal with it. This completely sidesteps the problem of insulin resistance, although that seems to respond favorably to carbohydrate restriction as well. Every time true low-carbohydrate diets are matched head-to-head with reduced-calorie, carbohydrate-rich diets, subjects lose more weight and have fewer problems with hunger on the low-carbohydrate diet. I discussed a recent study here.

The idea that you can achieve and maintain a healthy weight without cutting calories sounds too good to be true. In fact, all it represents is a return to our natural pattern of eating as human beings. It may involve breaking an addiction to carbohydrate. True hunter-gatherers eat between 0 and 35% of their calories as carbohydrate, and no refined carbohydrate [correction: a number of hunter-gatherer groups ate more than 35% carbohydrate, typically from starchy tubers]. In industrial nations, we eat approximately 50% of our calories as carbohydrate. Hunter-gatherers also exercise regularly, and don't eat Frosted Sugar Bombs for breakfast. This helps maintain good insulin sensitivity. Since we are genetically very similar to our hunter-gatherer ancestors, we would be wise to learn from their example.

Thoughts on Obesity, Part II

In my reading, I've come to the conclusion that, in some people, overweight may be a type of carbohydrate intolerance.

Insulin is the master hormone that orchestrates the metabolic changes that cause fat accumulation. It instructs the body to transport glucose and fat from the blood into the cells. It tells the liver to synthesize fat from sugar. It inhibits the release of fat from fat cells. There are no other hormones that have a similar range of effects.

Insulin is the "storage hormone". Don't believe me? Ask a type I diabetic. Type I diabetes happens when the pancreas no longer secretes insulin. These people are rail-thin until they are given insulin injections, at which point they often gain excess weight. Many deliberately skip injections to lose weight. Unfortunately, this has serious consequences as it allows their blood glucose to rise to dangerous levels unchecked.

If insulin is kept low, fat synthesis and storage are inhibited, and fat release from fat cells is increased. Carbohydrate is particularly effective at elevating insulin, acutely and chronically. As carbohydrate digests, it's broken down into glucose, which enters the bloodstream. The pancreas releases insulin in an attempt to keep blood glucose within a healthy range, and the storage begins. Refined carbohydrate is the worst offender, because it causes a large and rapid rise in blood glucose.

Regular overconsumption of carbohydrate causes insulin to be chronically elevated in many people [update- I no longer believe this is true. I now believe that only certain types of carbohydrate- namely wheat and sugar- cause a pathological increase in fasting insulin over time]. This comes along with "insulin resistance", whereby most or all tissues become desensitized to insulin. This is the tissues' way of saying "Stop! My energy stores are already full! I can't handle any more glucose or fat!".

Some people are able to maintain normal insulin levels (and sensitivity) in the face of a high-carbohydrate diet. This is probably partly genetic and partly environmental. Certain people, for whatever reason, have fat tissue that is prone to fat accumulation. It could be because they oversecrete insulin, or because their fat tissue is sensitive to the action of insulin, but probably both. It likely has to do with a combination of insulin resistance in non-fat tissue, and insulin sensitivity in fat tissue. Inactivity and fructose consumption (from corn syrup or sucrose) are also high on the list of suspects.

Fat tissue is typically the last to become insulin resistant because it acts as a valuable buffer to remove excess (and potentially toxic) glucose from the bloodstream. Unfortunately, simply being thin is not a reliable indicator that your body tolerates carbohydrate well. It can indicate either that all tissues are insulin-sensitive and insulin levels are low, or all tissues (including fat) are insulin resistant and insulin levels are high. The latter scenario leads to type II diabetes, pronto.

Since fat accumulation revolves around carbohydrate intake and insulin production, it makes sense that reducing carbohydrate causes weight loss. No more carbohydrate = a lot less glucose, and a lot less insulin to deal with it. This completely sidesteps the problem of insulin resistance, although that seems to respond favorably to carbohydrate restriction as well. Every time true low-carbohydrate diets are matched head-to-head with reduced-calorie, carbohydrate-rich diets, subjects lose more weight and have fewer problems with hunger on the low-carbohydrate diet. I discussed a recent study here.

The idea that you can achieve and maintain a healthy weight without cutting calories sounds too good to be true. In fact, all it represents is a return to our natural pattern of eating as human beings. It may involve breaking an addiction to carbohydrate. True hunter-gatherers eat between 0 and 35% of their calories as carbohydrate, and no refined carbohydrate [correction: a number of hunter-gatherer groups ate more than 35% carbohydrate, typically from starchy tubers]. In industrial nations, we eat approximately 50% of our calories as carbohydrate. Hunter-gatherers also exercise regularly, and don't eat Frosted Sugar Bombs for breakfast. This helps maintain good insulin sensitivity. Since we are genetically very similar to our hunter-gatherer ancestors, we would be wise to learn from their example.

Thoughts on Obesity, Part I

From the US Centers for Disease Control website:

Since the mid-seventies, the prevalence of overweight and obesity has increased sharply for both adults and children. Data from two NHANES surveys show that among adults aged 20–74 years the prevalence of obesity increased from 15.0% (in the 1976–1980 survey) to 32.9% (in the 2003–2004 survey).

In hunter-gatherer and some semi-agricultural societies, obesity is rare. In most, it's nonexistent. Wild animals typically do not accumulate enough fat to interfere with vigorous exercise, and when they do, it's because they're about to hibernate or migrate. Wild animals also tend to have similar amounts of body fat between individuals (at a given age and sex), unlike industrialized humans. This makes me think that obesity is an unnatural effect of our current lifestyle. Whatever the cause, it's getting progressively more common.

According to self-righteous nutrition experts, we know exactly what causes overweight. It's a character flaw known as overeating. Calories in, calories out. And the cure is to eat less. The problem is, this is not supported by the evidence. First of all, overweight people often eat no more than the thin. Second, weight gain is a highly individual process. Overfeeding under controlled conditions can produce more than 3-fold differences in weight gain between individuals fed the same number of calories.

Restricting calories is also fraught with problems. Each person's metabolism has a preference for a specific body composition within the context of a particular lifestyle. If total calories are restricted without changing diet composition, the body reacts vigorously to maintain homeostasis. Energy expenditure is reduced; muscle and organ mass diminish. The psychological effects are particularly bad, as anyone can tell you who has been on a low-calorie diet. In 1944, Ancel Keys undertook a calorie restriction trial in conscientious objector "volunteers" in Minnesota. They remained on a 1,570-calorie diet that was low in fat and protein and high in carbohydrate, for 24 weeks. Hardly a draconian calorie count. Here's a quote from the study:

As starvation progressed, fewer and fewer things could stimulate the men to overt action. They described their increasing weakness, loss of ambition, narrowing of interests, depression, irritability, and loss of libido as a pattern characteristic of "growing old".

Some of the men ended up suffering from neurosis and borderline psychosis before the end of the study, one culminating in self-mutilation. This is what we're being prescribed for weight loss?

There are some diet trends that have associated with rising obesity in the US. Per capita calorie consumption has increased. This increase is due to a higher consumption of carbohydrate. Total protein and fat consumption have been almost identical for the past 30 years. This period also saw increases in the consumption of unsaturated vegetable oils, hydrogenated vegetable oils and high-fructose corn syrup. It's hard to say from this association which of these factors (if any) has caused us to gain weight in the last 30 years, but it certainly isn't total fat or protein. Fortunately, we have other clues.

Thoughts on Obesity, Part I

From the US Centers for Disease Control website:

Since the mid-seventies, the prevalence of overweight and obesity has increased sharply for both adults and children. Data from two NHANES surveys show that among adults aged 20–74 years the prevalence of obesity increased from 15.0% (in the 1976–1980 survey) to 32.9% (in the 2003–2004 survey).

In hunter-gatherer and some semi-agricultural societies, obesity is rare. In most, it's nonexistent. Wild animals typically do not accumulate enough fat to interfere with vigorous exercise, and when they do, it's because they're about to hibernate or migrate. Wild animals also tend to have similar amounts of body fat between individuals (at a given age and sex), unlike industrialized humans. This makes me think that obesity is an unnatural effect of our current lifestyle. Whatever the cause, it's getting progressively more common.

According to self-righteous nutrition experts, we know exactly what causes overweight. It's a character flaw known as overeating. Calories in, calories out. And the cure is to eat less. The problem is, this is not supported by the evidence. First of all, overweight people often eat no more than the thin. Second, weight gain is a highly individual process. Overfeeding under controlled conditions can produce more than 3-fold differences in weight gain between individuals fed the same number of calories.

Restricting calories is also fraught with problems. Each person's metabolism has a preference for a specific body composition within the context of a particular lifestyle. If total calories are restricted without changing diet composition, the body reacts vigorously to maintain homeostasis. Energy expenditure is reduced; muscle and organ mass diminish. The psychological effects are particularly bad, as anyone can tell you who has been on a low-calorie diet. In 1944, Ancel Keys undertook a calorie restriction trial in conscientious objector "volunteers" in Minnesota. They remained on a 1,570-calorie diet that was low in fat and protein and high in carbohydrate, for 24 weeks. Hardly a draconian calorie count. Here's a quote from the study:

As starvation progressed, fewer and fewer things could stimulate the men to overt action. They described their increasing weakness, loss of ambition, narrowing of interests, depression, irritability, and loss of libido as a pattern characteristic of "growing old".

Some of the men ended up suffering from neurosis and borderline psychosis before the end of the study, one culminating in self-mutilation. This is what we're being prescribed for weight loss?

There are some diet trends that have associated with rising obesity in the US. Per capita calorie consumption has increased. This increase is due to a higher consumption of carbohydrate. Total protein and fat consumption have been almost identical for the past 30 years. This period also saw increases in the consumption of unsaturated vegetable oils, hydrogenated vegetable oils and high-fructose corn syrup. It's hard to say from this association which of these factors (if any) has caused us to gain weight in the last 30 years, but it certainly isn't total fat or protein. Fortunately, we have other clues.

Cry me a river...

Or a couple of canals as well.

My Dad is going to have surgery on Wednesday. 1 week today and it will be all over thank goodness. Apparently the cancer is localised, hasn't spread, and is totally sortable.

One mill stones less.

I cant describe how I felt or how I feel now, but I wish that I could have the operation for him. I know what surgery is like and I know I can handle it... Dad's never been in hospital. Its so strange the way things change and you want to protect your parents rather than how it used to be. I would totally do it for him. In a blink.

So foodwise...
Today has been good. Banana for breakfast, Home made ratatouille on toast for lunch, then more ratatouille on pasta in the evening. 2 yogurts in the evening.

I am going to weigh in soon. I have been putting it off, I have to admit. What with having the curse and then having a couple of pig out days until I pulled myself together, I know that I need to see something nice. If I get on those scales and it hasn't moved in the right direction I will be devastated. So I am giving myself a little time to make absolutely sure that what I want to see WILL be there.

I will see how I feel tomorrow. I always take a drink to bed with me, and if I cant face weighing in, I always drink when I wake up. I never weigh after food or drink, so it tops the wondering instantly.

I also have not done any regular exercise since being banded. I am very active as you know, but I haven't joined a gym, or started a morning walk or any kind of routine. I am now glad that I haven't done this. If my weight starts to plateau out it will mean that at least I will have one more type of ammunition in my arsenal.

I so want to get the next half stone off. I cant wait.

Ripped Fuel Pills

As you may already know I have been reviewing fat burners to give you the best in diet products. In all this scam nowadays fat burning pills are difficult to find these days and therefore it is difficult to calssify any one pill as the best weight loss pill in the market today We all want to look for the most effective weight loss pills in market today but we are not patient. We want to loose belly fat as fast as it came on!!..
Well guess what it is not that straightforward and I am sure you know that more that I do. It is important that one uses a proper weight loss program while trying out any supplement.
There are many weight loss pills available out there. A few which come to mid our there are: zantrex pills, zantrex 3 pills, xenadrine, alli, stacker 2, stacker, trimpsa, . Most of these products are either fda approved or not but one thing id for sure that they all are targeted for people like you both men and women who are looking to lose a few pounds…
Other pills like green tea fat burning pills, green tea pills have also become apparent now. Everybody has tried all sorts of thing… some have tried caffeine pills while others have used energy pills, ephedra and ephedrine pills. You can even get fat burning tablets, and fat burning vitamin from over the counter.
Whether you are a bodybuilder or a regular person you must dream of getting the “ripped” look. Even if you are healthy you want to try out the ripped fuel pills… you think this will give you a miraculous transforming your body.
I started this blog to give you a comparison on diff weight loss products and supplements in the market today. I would like for you to be able to compare these and then possible try something safely which is at the best an FDA approved diet pill or if not then has a sufficient safety profile that it does not cause you harm more than good. A diet pill is good if it is a safe otherwise it is just another toxic compound being injested by you.

Losing the Last 10 Pounds

MM wanted to lose the last 10 to 12 pounds. She has been at the same weight for the past couple of years despite already eating quite well (she's a vegetarian). MM is a middle-aged woman who found out she has a small brain tumor recently. Her quest to live everyday to the fullest includes losing the last 10 pounds.

She recently joined 24-Hour Fitness and has been amazed to lose six pounds in the first two weeks already! 24 Hour Fitness has about 400 clubs across the US. See her quest to lose the 10 pounds.

Say Hello to the Kuna

For those of you who haven't been reading the comments, we've been having a spirited discussion about the diet and health of hunter-gatherers here. I brought up the Kuna indians in Panama, who are immune to hypertension, live a good long time, do not gain excess weight, and seem to have less cardiovascular disease and cancer than their city-dwelling cousins.

I was hungry for more information about the Kuna lifestyle, so over the last few days, I've dug up every paper I could find on them. The first paper describing their lack of hypertension was published in 1944 and I don't have access to the full text. In 1997, a series of studies began, headed by Dr. Norman Hollenberg at Harvard. He confirmed the blood pressure findings, and collected data on their diet, lifestyle and kidney function. Here's a summary:

The Kuna are half hunter-gatherers, half agricultural. They cultivate plantains, corn, cocoa, yucca, kidney beans, and several types of fruit. They trade for sugar, salt, some processed cocoa and miscellaneous other foods. They drink 40+ oz of hot cacao/cocoa per day, some locally produced and some imported. A little-known secret: the Kuna eat an average of 3 oz of donut a week. They also fish and hunt regularly.

In the first recent study, published in 1997, the Kuna diet is described as 29% lower in fat than the average US diet (56 g/day), 23% lower in protein (12.2 g), 60% higher in cholesterol, and higher in sodium and fiber. The study doesn't specifically mention this, but the reader is left to infer that 65% of their calories come from carbohydrate. This would be from plantains, corn, yucca, sugar and beans. The fat in their diet comes almost exclusively from coconut, cocoa and fish: mostly saturated and omega-3 fats.

In the next study, the picture is beginning to change. Their staple stew, tule masi, is described as being 38% fat by calories (from coconut and fish), exceeding the American average. In the final study in 2006, Hollenberg's group used a more precise method of accounting for diet composition than was used in previous attempts. The paper doesn't report macronutrients as a percentage of calories, and I suspect the reason is that they aren't consistent with the previous papers. They have retreated from their previous position that the Kuna diet is low-fat and describe it instead as "low in animal fat", leaving plenty of room for saturated fats from coconut and cacao.

I was able to find some clues about their diet composition, however. First of all, they report the meat consumption of the Kuna at approximately 60 oz per week, mostly from fish. That's 8.6 oz per day, identical to the American average. They also reported the fat content of the cacao the Kuna produce locally and brew into their favorite 40-oz-a-day drink. It's 44.2% fat by weight. The low-fat cocoa drinks they used to calculate macronutrient totals are made from imported cocoa (cocoa is defatted cacao powder), ignoring the locally produced, full-fat cacao. If we assume half the chocolate they drank was locally produced, that's about 30 additional grams of fat a day, bringing their total fat intake to 8g above the average American. I suspect the authors chose to ignore the locally-produced cacao to lower the apparent fat intake of the Kuna, even though the paper states they drank both regularly.

By putting together the pieces from the later studies, a new picture emerges: a diet high in fish and moderate in protein, high in unprocessed fat (especially saturated and omega-3), and moderate in mostly unprocessed carbohydrate.

Here's my biased interpretation. The Kuna are healthier than their city-dwelling cousins for a number of reasons. They have a very favorable omega3:6 ratio due to seafood, wild game and relatively saturated vegetable fats. Their carbohydrate foods are mostly unprocessed and mostly from non-grain sources. They also live an outdoor life full of sunshine (vitamin D) and exercise. The chocolate may also contribute to their health, but I doubt it's a major effect. They're healthier than industrialized people because they live more naturally.

Another lesson to be learned from the Kuna and other exceptionally healthy indigenous peoples is that the human body can tolerate a fair amount of carbohydrate under the right conditions. Peter discusses another example of this, the Kitavans, on his blog. 50% carbohydrate while sitting in front of a desk all day, eating corn oil and getting no exercise = bad. 45% carbohydrate while hunting, relaxing and preparing whole, natural food in the sun all day = good.