This is the second post is our “Science is Hot” series, featuring Mathieu Lalonde, a chemist with a lifelong interest in nutrition and human performance. As a reminder, Matt obtained his bachelor’s degree in science with a concentration in chemistry from the University of Ottawa (Canada), and a PhD in organic chemistry at Harvard University. He is currently pursuing post-doctoral studies in inorganic chemistry at Harvard. (Translation: Matt is scary Smart.) In addition, Matt has a real gift for translating complicated and highly technical concepts into practical, applicable advice tailored specifically for CrossFit athletes.
Our first Science is Hot post came from some conversations I had with Matt while hanging out at the Science Exercise Certification in January. Over the course of the next few weeks, that post received more hits than any other entry in the history of this blog. Because of the response, and as a result of the huge number of questions I’ve been responding to lately about performance, nutrition and fat loss, the second post in this series deals specifically with that subject.
__________________
Let’s talk about fat loss. Isn’t it just a matter of “calories in, calories out?”
“Calories in, calories out” belongs on the shelf of flawed hypotheses, right next to “a calorie is just a calorie”. Gary Taubes does a good job of debunking these myths in his book entitled ‘Good Calories Bad Calories’. The “calories in, calories out” hypothesis arises from the application of thermodynamics to the human body. Energy conservation tells you that:
ΔE= Ein – Eout
Where ΔE is the change in energy, Ein is the energy intake (typically in units of calories), and Eout is energy expenditure. From this simple equation, it appears that weight loss should occur if energy expenditure exceeds energy intake. In other words, a caloric deficit (i.e. ΔE is negative) must be created in order for weight loss to occur. Wouldn’t it be great if it were that simple?
The problem with “calories in, calories out” is that Ein and Eout are assumed to be independent variables – that you can reduce Ein without changing Eout. In reality, the two variables are somewhat dependent. For example, if an individual consumes an amount of calories that is near or below starvation levels, the individual’s basal metabolism will decrease in an attempt to conserve energy. In this case, reducing Ein led to compensatory decrease in Eout. (This is why diet and exercise are such a powerful combination; exercise allows one to increase Eout.)
But even then, things aren’t that simple, right?
Right. Treating the human body like a motor completely ignores all of endocrinology; the hormones involved in the mechanisms of energy storage and release. Therein lies the real flaw of the “calories in, calories out” hypothesis. When endocrinology is ignored, it is easy to think that fat people are fat because they don’t exercise or they eat too much. For some folks, that is true. But for people with metabolic syndrome who suffer from chronically elevated insulin levels and insulin resistance, the opposite is true. Taubes’ genius lies in the fact that he was able to properly identify the cause and the effect. If someone has chronically elevated insulin levels or insulin resistance, fat stores are not accessible for energy. In this case, fat people don’t exercise because they are fat, or eat too much because they are fat. Obesity is the cause; lethargy and hunger are the effect. Everything gets turned on its head.
So what about “a calorie is a calorie”?
“A calorie is a calorie” is simply incorrect because it also ignores endocrinology; in this case the food’s effect on human hormones. The source of the calories is just as important, if not more, than the total number of calories itself. A common cause of insulin resistance and elevated levels of insulin in the bloodstream is excess consumption of refined carbohydrates. If individuals with chronic insulin resistance try to lose weight by simply cutting calories or exercising without changing their diet, they will end up losing muscle mass as opposed to fat. On the other hand, if someone with a diet consisting mainly of insulin-spiking foods (sugar, starch, bread, dairy, etc..) switches to a diet consisting mainly of lean meat, vegetables, nuts and seeds, some fruit, little starch, no sugar, no grains, no dairy, no legumes (“Paleo”), then weight loss may occur even if the diets are isocaloric (i.e. have the same amount of calories).
This becomes apparent when high-carbohydrate low-fat diets are compared to isocaloric high-fat low-carbohydrate diets. People on 1,500 calorie high-fat, low carbohydrate diets lose weight and feel better than people on the same calorie high-carbohydrate, low-fat diets. In fact, cases of severe dementia as the result of 1,500-calorie low-fat high-carbohydrate diets have been documented, while people on a high-fat, low-carbohydrate diet have excellent biomarkers of mental and physical health.
Why is a higher fat diet so important if you’re trying to lose body fat?
Fat makes it much easier to live on a caloric deficit. The consumption of fat causes the release of various compounds that tell your brain you are no longer hungry. Fat consumption also changes the expression of a gene that synthesizes adropin, which plays a role in energy homeostasis and lipid metabolism.
In addition, fat consumption triggers the release of N-acylphosphatidylethanolamine, which inhibits food intake, and foods that are high in fat also have a much lower insulin response when compared to foods high in carbohydrates. This is why Robb Wolf recommends cutting out carb blocks and replacing them with fat blocks for people who are always hungry on the Zone. Not only does subbing fat for carbs prevent hunger, but it also increases the caloric content of the diet.
Fat is also responsible for the synthesis of a variety of hormones. Interestingly, it has been shown that high fat diets have a vitamin sparing effect compared to high carbohydrate diets. Most importantly, as long as fat is available for fuel, the body will not catabolize muscle for energy. So the consumption of fat also has a muscle sparing effect.
But we do need SOME carbs.
Yes. Ideally, one would only want to consume enough complex carbohydrates to be able to perform optimally during exercise, with the remainder of the calories consisting of protein and fat. Eating only as many complex carbohydrates as absolutely necessary is especially true if the carbohydrates are coming from insulin spiking sources such as bread. (You shouldn’t have to worry about your intake of vegetables, however.)
So what’s going on with CrossFitters who write to me, saying they CrossFit 3/1 and are only eating 1,400 calories a day… and STILL don’t seem to be losing fat?
There could be a l
ot going on here. First and foremost, what are these CrossFitters eating? If it’s high carb, low fat, then I’m not surprised. If they are eating Paleo (meat, vegetables, low fruit, with plenty of healthy fats), then the problem might be elevated cortisol levels due to too much stress. Stressors include one or a combination of too few calories (i.e. starvation), too much exercise, not enough sleep, as well as a variety of other work or life related factors.
Assume a CrossFitter is already on a solid Paleo diet. How do they know if they need to eat MORE or LESS to jump-start fat loss?
It all depends on how much they were eating to begin with – this one is trial and error. If they were eating too much, caloric restriction might see them leaning out and performance could improve. If they were eating the right amount of food and cut more calories, they might get sluggish and become more likely to over train (or under recover). The problem isn’t necessarily one of basal metabolism, which tends to slow down when a significant caloric deficit is created, but rather of energy stores. If food intake is insufficient for replenishment of muscle and liver glycogen, intense bouts of exercise such as CrossFit may become somewhat more challenging. That is because the amount of glycogen used by the body increases with the intensity of the exercise. The glycogen stores of someone on a low calorie diet may not be able to supply sufficient quantities of glucose to maintain a high level of intensity for the duration of the workout. The same can be said of individuals who have to resort to a very low carbohydrate diet (i.e. just meat and vegetables) in order to lose body fat.
Low glycogen stores aside, burning fat for energy (Krebs cycle) requires more oxygen than burning glucose. When oxygen demand is high, such as during most CrossFit workouts, the body will shift energy sources in order to use oxygen as efficiently as possible. If glucose, from glycogen, is not available, fat will be burned for fuel… but less oxygen will be available to the muscle. (As an aside, the purpose of a post workout meal consisting of complex carbohydrates such as sweet potatoes is to replenish spent glycogen stores.)
So if you’re eating to lean out, can you still maintain performance? Or is there always a trade-off?
It depends on food quantity and quality. If you have a small caloric deficit, your performance might actually improve as you lose body fat. This has been shown time and again by many who follow ‘The Zone Diet’ or ‘Paleo/Zone’. Unfortunately, ‘The Zone Diet’ doesn’t work for everybody. In the case, a ketogenic cyclic-low-carbohydrate diet is typically the way to go. Decreased performance is almost a guarantee here, however, given that the point of the diet is to deplete glycogen stores to allow fat to be burned for fuel. The cyclic nature means that you gorge on complex carbohydrates at specific meals and specific times in order to replenish spent glycogen stores. A male CrossFitter on a Paleo diet with an already low body fat level between 10% and 15% can further decrease his body fat level with a ketogenic cyclic low carb diet, but performances will suffer to some extent. You can find a great description of a CLC diet in Rob Faigin’s Natural Hormonal Enhancement.
How do I figure out how much I need to eat to cut body fat without sacrificing muscle?
If you exercise regularly and your protein consumption is adequate for the amount of exercise that you perform, it is unlikely that you will lose a significant amount of muscle mass. The amount of food required will be found through trial and error, sticking with each “phase” for two weeks to one month before evaluating the effectiveness and making changes. Exercising during this whole process is key. Here is what I would recommend.
1. Use the Zone Calculator to determine your protein intake. Have protein at every meal to meet this intake and use lean meat (preferably grass-fed), fish and sea food, poultry and wild game as well as eggs as your main sources of protein.
2. Eliminate highly refined and sugar laden foods from your diet. Replace some of the calories with foods containing good fats like olives, avocados, coconut, nuts and seeds.
3. Eliminate foods made from grains or grain-like substances (such as buckwheat). Breads, cereals and pasta are the number one targets here.
4. Eliminate dairy.
5. Eliminate legumes.
6. Eliminate dried fruit and fruit juice. Try to eat more vegetables than fruit. If you eat fruit, make it fresh fruit.
7. If you are down to lean meat, eggs, fish and seafood, poultry, vegetables and good fats and still not losing body fat, then slowly cut the calories from fat until you start to lose weight.
__________________
In summary, food quality (“Paleo”) is both the most important factor in your diet – and also where you’ll see the most bang for your buck. Fat is your friend. The Black Box is important – get your quality in line, then start playing around with quantity and macronutrient proportions. Change things one at a time, so you’ll know what’s working and what isn’t. And recognize that for most of us, in the quest for fat loss and the perfect six pack, at some point, there ARE performance trade-offs.
Post any follow-up questions to comments. Matt will do his best to answer them, but is leaving on Friday for the Eastern Canadian Qualifiers. If I can, I’ll pick up where he left off, or I’ll recruit Dallas to help out (since almost everything I know about diet and nutrition, I first learned from him).
Best of luck this weekend, Matt, and thanks for dropping more of your Science-y genius on us.
Subscribe to the Whole9 Newsletter
Fill out the form below to stay updated about Whole9 articles, discounts and events.
Great post. Thanks Melissa and Matt. I am 2/3 of the way through “Good Calories, Bad Calories” and you summarized it really well. Good luck at the qualifiers Matt, be good to see you a California in July. Donna and I already have our spectator tickets.
Thanks for posting this, I think I needed to read something like it right about now. I was starting to suffer from ‘slippery slope’ syndrome.
I am 12B, 2x fat, 136 lbs, have been here for a while since it seems to work the best for me. WODs are 5d/wk, and IF 2d/wk. I have that last bit of umbilical fat that I cannot seem to shake! The leanest I have ever been was at 126lbs, adding on extra metcon, but my strength suffered. Sleep is pretty solid, 7hrs. I find it super tricky to lean out for the 6-pack w/o sacrificing strength! At age 38, this is my nemesis. I know there are so many other factors, but any tips? I am tight Paleo, use Zone to measure only- keep fruit to a minimum, fat is nuts, evoo, avocado. The IF has seemed to help some for a slight leaning, so I am pretty happy…but damn! Would love to see those lower beer cans.
Wow, this is an awesome info filled post! I am new to paleo, and while I didn’t know all the science behind it, my struggles to lose weight on a low fat/high carb program are really starting to make sense to me. I will be adding Taubes’ book to my reading list ASAP.
Should have also mentioned that I go 4-5B/carbs/day. I know I bonk at prolonged days of 3B carbs- but I don’t cycle out of that 4-5range. Could that be an issue here? I wouldn’t know how to act with 6 or more carbs/day! A typical day of eating for me is 12-4ish-33..45ish
Awesome post, Matt really hammers this stuff home! I’m totally on board with everything here, but I do have 2 questions:
Question 1:“7. If you are down to lean meat, eggs, fish and seafood, poultry, vegetables and good fats and still not losing body fat, then slowly cut the calories from fat until you start to lose weight.”We’ve already shelved “caloric balance” in regards to causing/curing obesity, and also shown that fat itself and eating more fat is beneficial for fat loss.
so what’s going on in this example?
does negative/positive caloric balance still play a part in all this? or is it too much fat that is messing things up?
Question 2:“then the problem might be elevated cortisol levels due to too much stress.”How does elevated cortisol/stress interfere with fat loss? Maybe this one’s obvious, admittedly I haven’t read up on cortisol much.
Thanks in advance Matt/Melissa/Dallas or whoever can shed some light on this!
and thanks again for the great article and awesome blog
-Simon
IMHO, Taubes’ foundation for arguing that grains are “bad” is no better than the science he seeks to debunk. Not to say he’s wrong, but I don’t understand the fervor with which Crossfitters cultishly embrace his book. He spends more time attacking other studies than affirmatively proving his hypothesis. His own “proof” seems to come primarily from anecdotal stories. I hardly see how it’s gospel.
It seems obvious that lots of refined garbage is bad. But I have a very hard time believing the moderate inclusion of things like wheatberries and kamut in my diet is going to make me fat and Taubes’ book didn’t convince me otherwise.
Also, I think it’s important to bear in mind that “eating for performance” isn’t the same for all Crossfitters. Some Crossfitters also do other sports, including endurance sports, and may not benefit from an uber low-carb diet. Yet, in my experience, the advice given by Crossfit people isn’t tailored at all with specific needs in mind. (Although Paleo for Athletes is a great resource).
Interesting stuff though. Much enjoy your blog!
Danni,
You make a great point – and one that, I think, we’ve been hammering. One, the same advice won’t apply to everyone. There are some general principles that I believe DO – focus on quality, make sure you’re eating enough to fuel performance, etc. – but the truth is, you need to play around with all of these factors yourself. Someone else can point you in the right direction, but it’s your responsibility to test it all out, and then make up your own mind.If you do well eating wheatberries and kamut, then by all means, keep eating them! And if you’re ever wondering whether you’d do better WITHOUT them, give it a try for a few weeks and see what happens. Or don’t. Your body, your goals, your call.
Thanks for contributing to the discussion.
Stop being so damn reasonable and balanced!
Melissa,
“Easy for you to say” gave me a much needed slap on the hand, so to speak. When I see fit people I tell myself that it’s easy for them because they have a high metabolism, allowing myself a false reality and a dose self pity while thinking that I work so hard and get no where. Wrong. Wrong. And Wrong. I don’t work hard enough on my diet. My hard routine is not the workouts, it’s the diet.
The planning and figuring of what works…how much ….and change this or that, is mentally exhausting and overwhelming. I fell off of my chair and swore a little when you wrote about egg yolks and an acid base, but I am okay : ) Just kidding. I will start with eating clean and see how things go. So – no more complaining about my weight until I follow a paleo diet with a vengeance. And since I really like beer, I may never get to complain again. Sigh.
Thank you for your honesty and for all of the good info you share, it really makes a difference. And thank you to the hot science-y guy as well, you did a fabulous job of making the technical stuff understandable.
This is awesome!! I’m trying to switch over to the Paleo diet, and had so many questions – this answered most of them!! Awesome post!
Wicked Post!
It's hard to get my family and friends on to some of these concepts. The mainstream media, fitness and nutrition industry and government has done a great job of dropping the ball on this basic concept that relates back to a flawed study.
I ordered the movie "Fat Head" – which talks a great deal about what Taubes discusses in his book- Although that book is badass it is hard to get an average person to read about hormones for 70 pg's and stay awake. Besides watching a cartoon of insulin with a bat trying to wack carbs into the cells is hilarious. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNYlIcXynwE&feature=related
Matt are you living in Ottawa right now?
Sarah,
Matt is leaving for the Qualifiers in an hour, and promised to check up tonight when he gets to the hotel. In the meantime, I’ll take a crack (and ask Dallas to weigh in, too).
You said, “I find it super tricky to lean out for the 6-pack w/o sacrificing strength!” Um, YEP. As Matt said, there will probably come a point where it’s a trade off – leanness vs. performance. To see if you can closer approach that trade-off without actually hitting it…
Your carb blocks might be a little low, or you may not be getting them in when you need them. Do you do a post workout meal, including half your carbs there? That might be a good way to up the denser carbs a little (like sweet potatoes or squash), AND put them to good use. Try sticking with five to six blocks, but with half of them in a denser format immediately after a workout.
Now, one extra block of carbs isn’t going to make a huge difference, I don’t think. It’s just one thought. The bang for your buck, I think, is going to come from fat. IF your quality is perfect, and your protein is adequate and your carbs are at a good level, then I would start adding fat. Go up to 2.5x for two weeks. See how you feel. If that feels good, your performance is good AND you start leaning out again, then either stay there, or try going up to 3x fat. Stay THERE for a few weeks, repeat. Keep adding fat, slowly, until you start getting softer. Then back off a bit and stay put.
Also, make sure you are resting enough to facilitate good recovery. Rest is key – feel free to take an extra rest day when you think you need it.
Melissa
Simon:
Question 1:If you are down to lean meat, eggs, fish and seafood, poultry, vegetables and good fats and still not losing body fat, then slowly cut the calories from fat until you start to lose weight.
“We’ve already shelved “caloric balance” in regards to causing/curing obesity, and also shown that fat itself and eating more fat is beneficial for fat loss. So what’s going on in this example? Well, it’s not QUITE this simple. Here’s the Dallas rule of thumb – if quality is perfect, your protein levels are adequate and you’re getting as many carbs as you need to fuel performance (but not fall asleep after every meal), then he’ll tell you to slowly keep adding fat to your diet. Add, see if you start leaning out, see how your performance does. If you stay there for a week or two and things are headed in the right direction, add more. Repeat this cycle, until you hit enough fat in your diet that you start getting softer. There’s your tipping point – so then, back off to the prior level and stay there.
Whether you need to eat MORE or LESS is something everyone needs to figure out for themselves. I suspect most of you know which camp to try first, though. I wonder if it’s coincidence that EVERYONE who writes to me needs to eat more… or if people write to me because they KNOW they need to eat more, and are just looking for permission.
Question 2:”then the problem might be elevated cortisol levels due to too much stress.”How does elevated cortisol/stress interfere with fat loss? Maybe this one’s obvious, admittedly I haven’t read up on cortisol much.Robb Wolf has a great post about over-training under-recovering and eating too little. It basically stresses the body into this “panic” state where it wants to hold on to everything it’s got, including all your fat.
I can’t speak too much on this subject, as it’s not my area of expertise. Hopefully, I can get Dallas/Matt to jump in on this one.
Melissa
Thanks in advance Matt/Melissa/Dallas or whoever can shed some light on this!
and thanks again for the great article and awesome blog
-Simon
Simon,
A little while ago my husband Daniel put together an excellent, thorough post on the effects of cortisol.
You can read it here:
http://onrockrockon.blogspot.com/2009/04/crosskitchen-spotlight-on-cortisol.html
Thank you for the excellent guest post Matt!
Sarah Markle,
If you are lean everywhere else but still carry a small amount of umbilical fat the odds are your cortisol levels are high due to stress and lack of good quality sleep, if that is the case your body is storing it right where it should. Try adding an hour of sleep to your day.
(Please keep in mind that since I’m not there to actually work with you personally this is just a wild though educated guess. – Pierre Auge)
Great Post..Only thing I don’t understand in the no soy or tofu ??Any thoughts as to why??
Rippetoe on why no soy milk:
http://ripquoteoftheday.blogspot.com/2009/04/quote-of-day-29th-april.html
My first guess re: no soy is that soy (soybeans) are a legume, so that would not line up with Paleo.
Thank you Melissa and Pierre for your comments. It's been tough to add an hour- my body seems to wake up after 7hrs, no matter when I go down- but duly noted.
RE: Post WOD meals: Just started playing with this on triple mod days, salmon & sw pots w/in 30-40min…gonna keep this up for a while. I dig it.
Matt, doooode. Great post, thanks. It would be cool if you could be a regular contributor to Melissa’s already very cool blog. Very interesting info.
Are you off to the Qualifier’s in Eastern Canada? I train at Crossfit Connection in Burlington, Ontario and owner Jason is there now as well. Good luck to all.
Lee
Jonathan-
Thanks for the link..but very testosterone driven…
Jill,
I really like Mark Sisson’s summary here:
http://www.marksdailyapple.com/soy-scrutiny/.
Much better..I am trying to cut tofu out, but find it a easy lunch alternative to meat with a salad..
Here is what I come away with..Do the best you can, don’t beat yourself up, and at the end of the day..your a crossfitter..That in itself is something to be amazingly proud of. My husband is in competition mode getting ready for the qualifiers so I understand he needs to get precise with it. For me, I do and will always need my F/Off foods and drinks..I want to enjoy this process and that allows me to do so..balance and knowledge and I’ll get there.
Jill
Excellent post – I love reading about the science behind the scenes on this type of stuff. Very informative.
I would like, however, to point out (since Melissa loves it when I do this) that “Paleo” doesn’t refer to quality. Paleolithic is actually derived from two greek words meaning “Old” and “Stone” – technically Paleolithic means “Stone Age”. ;)
Either way the diet rocks and has worked wonders for me in the last few months.
Awesome post with excellent breakdowns on the “how to” of certain issues.
Last article Matt weighed in on the issue of PWO nutrition and recommended waiting an hour to eat to help with insulin sensitivity especially if the person will not be working out for another 12-24 hours.
This article he talked about PWO nutrition as more of a necessity, or at least that’s how I read it. I already spoke with Wolf about this and of course he said “tinker with it” but I’m trying to see if Matt changed his mind or recommends a 1 on 1 off of PWON or 1 hour fast. Just trying to get two sides of the coin. Or would it be beneficial to add like apple cider vinegar to the Sweet potatoes? Maybe he could shed some light on the insulin sensitivity because Matt sounds like he had a very similar childhood as my self (with the cereal and I also used to drink soda at least 6 times a day from ages 8-17) I can lose fat easy in front but the love handle- insulin storing region is pretty tough to maintain leanness.
Also, the paragraphs above: But even then, things aren’t that simple, right?
The 1st line says: The problem with “calories in, calories out” is that Ein and Eout are assumed to be independent variables – that you can reduce Ein without changing Eout.
Shouldn’t it be “- that you CANT reduce Ein without changing Eout” or am I wrong on that? I thought Taubes explained it as you can’t change one because it affects the others i.e. there is no independent variables and no arrows of causality. Sorry ex-english major here.
Chris,
I’ll take this one, as Matt and I have spoken about this at length. In the last post, he mentions skipping a PWO meal if regaining insulin sensitivity is your primary goal. If you’re coming from a high carb diet (especially if those carbs were primarily grains and sugars), the insulin spike that comes from slamming half your carbs post-workout may not help you in your quest to take control of your hormones.
However, assuming that you’ve been on a good, quality Paleo diet for a while, your insulin sensitivity should be in decent shape. At that point, your primary goal is no longer to restore that balance – it’s already there. In which case, a PWO meal will help your training performance and recovery.
So my take is that a PWO meal can depend on where you are with your diet, in general, as well as your goals… and, of course, a whole host of other factors. Robb’s right, as usual – you may have to play around with this one a bit.
As for the Ein and Eout… we’re all saying the same thing. The two variables are linked. Change one, and you WILL change the other. Maybe the punctuation was in the wrong place or something, but that is exactly what Matt and Taubes are saying.
I just arrived in Fredericton. It seems like Melissa and others are doing a good job of answering questions.
I’ll start with Jill P., If you are looking for a really good article on soy, search for “Spilling The Beans: The Trouble with Soy” by Lorette C. Luzajic who writes for the food journal Gremolata. In fact check some of her other articles too. I’d recommend “Separating The Wheat From The Chaff”, “Life After Bread”, and “I’m A Natural Born Killer”.
Don’t get me wrong, I love RIP, but Loretta’s stuff is worth reading.
M@
Chris,
I think confusion arose because I mention that nutritionists often assume that energy intake and expenditure are independent. They are not.
As far as the PWO meal is concerned, Melissa spelled it out very well. If your goal is fat loss or regaining insulin sensitivity, don’t have it. If you are at the CrossFit games and have to workout every four hours, PWO meal is a must. While at the qualifiers or Games, add some apple sauce to your sweet potatoes, The Fructose in the apple sauce will top off liver glycogen while the starch in the sweet potatoes will replenish muscle glycogen. A ratio of 2:1 sweet potatoes to apple sauce would be ideal. Then, throw in a little protein to make the carb:protein ratio about 4:1.
Sarah Markle,
Pierre’s and Melissa’s advice is right on. You could also try replacing nuts with olives, olive oil, and coconut as fat sources. The latter have fewer carbohydrates than nuts. You could also give a cyclic low carb approach a try.
I had the same problem you do with regards to sleep. Here is how I fixed it; when my eyes open and I can no longer sleep, I get up, have breakfast, and go back to bed. Works like a charm! Even if its just for an extra hour. I feel the difference.
Danni,
Are you confusing Loren Cordain and Gary Taubes? In ‘Good Calories, Bad Calories’, Gary Taubes does not tell people what to eat. People are supposed to figure that out on their own given the information. Taubes’ book is essentially a very thorough meta analysis of the scientific literature on nutrition. He does not perform any experiments and does not pretend to be a clinician.
On the other hand, Loren Cordain has very good evidence that suggest that the consumption of grains is responsible for causing autoimmune diseases. Even if brown rice and pasta don’t spike insulin all that much, they should be avoided because they contain lectins that cause allergic reactions that lead to autoimmune diseases. In addition, grain also contain phytates; chemicals that bind and prevent the absorption of calcium, zinc, iron, and magnesium. Aren’t those the four metals in which most average americans are deficient? Grains also contain compounds that stimulate opiod receptors in the brain, which makes them addictive.
I have read a lot of papers published by nutrionists, and nutritional scientists. They are by far the worst papers I have ever read. On the other hand, Cordain and other paleo researchers publish material of far greater quality.
Dawn,
I feel your pain. Some people can get away with eating anything and they remain lean. That is because they have a blunted insulin response to carbohydrate intake. Unfortunately, those people are used as poster children for high-carb low-fat diets. They are the exception, not the norm. However, just because they are lean, doesn’t mean they are healthy. I’ve seen plenty of very lean people with Alzheimer’s (diabetes of the brain). If the sugar doesn’t go to your waist, it will go somewhere else.
Most of us have to watch what we eat in order to remain lean. It turns out I can pretty much eat whatever I want and stay at the same weight. Nevertheless, I’m strict paleo. I don’t even drink alcohol or chew gum. I make these choices because I’m thinking ahead. I’m sure you can do the same.
Sean B-H,
I’m currently living in Cambridge Massachusetts but I still visit Ottawa twice a year. Whenever I do, I make sure to visit Pierre Augé at CrossFit Ottawa (a.k.a. The Gas Hut)
Simon,
Caloric balance isn’t completely wrong. Note that I did say that for some people, overeating or laziness is the cause of obesity. But only some people. Why? Because there is so much sugar in the American diet that it is almost a given that people who are overweight need to make better food choices and not just cut calories.
Can you gain weight on a paleo diet? Absolutely! Both Robb Wolf and I have done it. It’s pretty hard though and you have to do some serious eating. A recent paper in the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition inadvertently confirmed exactly this. It turns out that they wanted to test the effects of a paleo diet on various biomarkers without weight loss being a variable. In other words, they wanted to know if a paleo diet could improve triglycerides, cholesterol, insulin sensitivity etc….without changing the weight of the subjects. It turns out that when the subjects switched from their own personal diets to an onramp version of the paleo diet and then to a full fledged paleo diet, the calories had to beincreased in order to prevent weight loss. They had to feed the subjects approximately 300 extra calories per day to prevent weight loss in the subjects. And they weren’t even exercising!
With regards to Cortisol, it increases blood levels of glucose, and does a variety of other things. Nevertheless, the increased blood levels of glucose are what cause the weight gain or prevent further weight from being lost.
Red Dog,
I am in the Fredericton for the Eastern Canadian Qualifiers. Don;t think I stand much of a chance but I’ll give it all I got. It all depends on what WODs are prescribed. I’m disadvantaged by the fact that I do really well at exercises that don’t come up often in WODs. Heavy Back squats and pistols would be a good example. Pierre Augé could tell you all about that. I’ll see if I can find Jason.
Read about the paleo diet a few years ago. Apparently based on the diet of our ancestors. And I must say it made sense. Problem is concerns about issues like bone density. Our diet is not only about weight loss. It is about getting the nutrients that we required for our bodies optimal functioning.
Hi…first of all great post, very informative.
I would like to ask if you can clear up some confusion I have between the first science is hot post and this one: 1) in the first post I got the feeling Matt was not recommending nuts as something to eat because of the ALA issue…this time it seems like the straight paleo reccommendation exactly as written by Dr. Cordain. What am I missing? 2) I am unclear on lean meat vs fattier meat such as bacon…I thought after the first article Matt was OK with fattier meat provided one then just backed off on additional fats such as coconut oil, olive oil, avacado and even butter. Is this simply due to the second post being about fat loss, did I misinterpret Matt the first time or am I totally misunderstanding something?
Maybe the next science is hot could be about saturated fat…truly evil or simply misunderstood.
Thanks again.
Great post! And I totally agree on the “Easy for you to say “article. I hope you don’t mind but I am going to link this Nutrition article to the Crossfit Regina blog.
Your blog is awesome and where can I get my wife a pair of those arm socks?
Mathieu finished in the top 10 in the eastern canadian qualifier. Fantastic achievement. Congratulations!!
This isn’t really about the article, but I just wanted to say that I had the pleasure of meeting the Sexy Scientist this weekend at the Canada East Qulifiers. The dude is smart and strong! And apparently he’s got some mad skills on the rings… I saw the pics and the man can hold some wild positions.
Although the weekend wasn’t without controversy, Mathieu demonstrated loads of integrity and maintained his cool throughout all the drama. At the end of the final event on Sunday, as everyone was packing up to go home, I looked over and saw “science is hot” sitting alone cross-legged in the field eating his food. He just looked so Zen. Very cool.
Congratulations on your strong performance this weekend Mathieu! It was very nice meeting you.
Jeanette
Jeanette, Bill
Thank you. I gave it my all. Although I did not finish in the top three, if you look at my times (or my deadlift vs my weight), I think I displayed good work capacity over broad time and modal domains. In the end I look fairly well rounded and that was what I was aiming for.
Stephen,
I have absolutely nothing against nuts. In fact, I eat plenty myself. In the previous post, I simply pointed out that the primary omega 3 fatty acid in walnuts and macadamia nuts is ALA. As such, walnuts and macadamia nuts should not be considered superior to other nuts because they contain omega 3 fatty acids. The enzyme that transforms ALA into EPA and DHA (via carbon chain elongation) also uses LA (an omega 6 fatty acid) as a substrate. If someone consumes a lot of ALA and LA, the excess ALA will be shuttle to another pathway where it will be transformed to hormones with undesirable properties. So eat walnuts and macadamia nuts, just don’t over do it. And watch out for the Canola oil (which is also high in ALA).
With regards to saturated fat, it is a question of how much and not whether or not you should consume it. Read these posts on Robb Wolf’s blog to get a sense of the controversy surrounding the issue.
http://robbwolf.com/?p=87
http://robbwolf.com/?p=423
Back to M@-
Way to be on the strong finish. Top 10 is impressive, for any quali, I feel! I guess there was some drama?
AAAAhhh….I eat mostly walnuts as my nut source due to the closest 6:3….I will begin to lay off now-I have been keeping almonds in check because of the high O-6, pecans get in there occasionally. Do you recommend any over the other? Also- I am going back to base zone for a week, (12B, 3-3-3) then will begin to drop carbs, add fat, regularly to tinker, still keeping fat at 1x for a while. When you suggest cyclic low carb, what does that look like for a 12B female? Have I given enuff info?
Hey Mathieu,
Congratulations on a great performance! Your comments are great and much appreciated. In learning from Robb Wolf, you, Stephan at Whole Health Source, and Mark Sisson to name a few, I’ve come to the conclusion that the most important underlying theme in nutrition is digestion. The ability of the body to break down and assimilate all the nutrients in the food that you eat. So going with this, avoiding bread and legumes makes sense. My question comes with starchy foods such as potatoes (white and sweet) and white rice. While these have a high GI, they don’t seem to carry any anti-nutrients like that of bread/dairy/legumes. So in your opinion, do you think that the avoidance of high GI food is only relevant for those that may already have damaged insulin sensitivity (Westernized countries) as opposed to the Kitava culture for example where 70% of their calories come from starchy tubers? I believe in pretty much all aspects of the Paleo way but this is the only area I’m unsure of. So this leaves me with: meat and vegetables (including starchy tubers and white rice), nuts and seeds, fruit, no dairy, no legumes, no wheat. Sorry for the long post. Thanks!
Hi Mathieu,
Congrats on your finish at the Eastern Qual’s.
Well if you didn’t meet Jason you must have seen him!! After the controversy, Jason ended up in first!
Way to represent the Canadians and Burlington, Ontario!! All you guys are Beast’s! Great job by all.
(Sorry to be off topic)
Lee
Mark,
Rice does contain anti-nutrients. I can post the content of the papers here but phytates and other anti-nutrients have been isolated from rice.
If you read ‘The Paleo Diet For Athletes’, you will see that sweet potatoes come highly recommended as a source of complex carbohydrate. So, I would get rid of the rice but keep the sweet potatoes. I those every week during my carb-up meals.
Hi Matt,
Thanks for the reply and sorry to nit-pick here but do you think Sweet Potatoes or any other high GI food that falls under ‘meat and vegetables, fruit, nuts and seeds, no dairy, no legumes, no wheat’ should be avoided outside of a PWO window? (bananas for example). I know I’m splitting hairs here but I’m really curious to get your opinion on whether or not most should stick to lower GI foods (sub 50) to repair their insulin sensitivity, outside of carb up meals (Rob Faigin’s NHE) or PWO meals. Essentially, I think it’s ok to spike insulin in and outside of the PWO window as long as you don’t have too many spikes which leads to chronically high insulin levels. Thanks again.
Sarah Markle,
I typically buy bags of ‘Fancy Raw Mixed Nuts’ from Trader Joe’s. I think the mix is cashews, almonds, filberts, pecans, and brazil nuts. Really excellent. Just eat a variety of nuts and there will be no need to avoid any of them.
Mark,
If the goal is to increase insulin sensitivity then high glycemic load foods should be avoided. I personally eat low glycemic veggies all day and only have high glycemic foods during a carb-up.
I read this article last night after a friend linked it to me. I'd recently written a post telling my non-athlete friends how to lose weight — eat less than you burn. Easy, right?
Well, this article seems to fly in the face of it, and I mulled it over, and I've decided that semantically, the argument presented here doesn't hold.
Here's the problem: a calorie is a calorie. Thermodynamically, it's always going to be the same. A system will always work according to the simple equation that you claim is incorrect.
1) Weight loss will occur if energy in is less than energy out. There is no way around this. If metabolism drops as a result of reduced calorie intake, the equation is still correct, but the value of Eout HAS CHANGED. Ein must be modified to account for this. ΔE being negative means that the system isn't being sustained. You mention as much in the following paragraph, but it actually doesn't change the veracity of the initial equation; the assumptions are actually besides the point. Don't imply that the equation is wrong. I think that most people understand that the less big they are, the less food they need. I've certainly never met someone that's lost a lot of weight that thought that they should be eating the same amount as before.
2) Endocrinology is a factor only insomuch as it affects availability of calories. Again, a calorie is ALWAYS a calorie, by definition. The issue here is that all FOODS aren't created equal. The old saw about celery costing more calories to eat than it returns is particularly apt.
If you put celery in a bomb calorimeter and measure the amount of energy output, you'll get a value, and that value will be positive. There's a certain amount of energy stored in that mass. This is indisputable. The real question is the amount of work that it takes to get to the energy. A bomb calorimeter doesn't have to worry about fibre, digestion, hormones and all that messy biological garbage.
So what ends up being the issue here is not so much that the value of a calorie is incorrect, but the measure of FOOD VALUE is wrong. Calories(net) = Calories(measured) – Calories(unavailable), where Calories(unavailable) is the stuff that our body rejects as indigestible, like fibre.
The point is subtle, but I think it's important. It would be more useful for the food industry and nutritionists to come up with a net value measurement so people could more accurately assess how much they're eating.
So with regards to the paleo diet in particular, people are actually just EATING LESS. It doesn't matter that the MEASURED caloric value of the foods is x (or claimed to be isocaloric), the net value is y, and if y < Eout, you get weight loss; our equation still works.
If a carbohydrate rich diet provides calories in such a way that the measured value is very close to the available value, that's easy to account for.
In the end, my issue with all of this is more about physics and thermodynamics than biology. You can't get around energy in vs. energy out. The problem is with measuring Ein.