Interview: Jonathan Bailor of ‘The Smarter Science of Slim,’ part two

Here’s part two of the interview I conducted with Jonathan Bailor, author of The Smarter Science of Slim.

Fat Head: Based on your definitions of SANE and inSANE foods, what are the three worst foods you see people typically consume?

Jonathan:
1. Any beverage with a high concentration of sugar or high-fructose corn syrup (e.g., regular soda)
2. Foods full of processed starch combined with sugar (e.g., cakes, pies, snack cakes, doughnuts, etc.)
3. Foods that are fundamentally sugar or processed starch (e.g., candy, white bread, etc.)

Fat Head: You also state that the quality of food affects our need and ability to burn fat.  I know it’s a complex topic, but as briefly and simply as you can explain it, how does higher-quality food enable us to burn fat more efficiently?

Jonathan: The need to burn fat (distinct from the need to slow down and to burn muscle) means our body has an abundance of nutrition and a shortage of calories. When there’s an abundance of nutrition and a shortage of calories, the body wants to burn fat to fuel itself instead of slowing down and burning muscle.

The ability to burn fat means metabolizing fat for fuel is “easy” given our hormone levels. For example, if we have the hormone insulin circulating in our bloodstream, it is not “easy” for our body to burn fat for fuel. No matter how much we need to burn fat at that point in time, insulin has removed our ability to do so effectively.

High-quality food provides an abundance of nutrition and satisfies us so effectively that we avoid overeating. Additionally, high-quality food creates a hormonal environment that makes it much easier for us to burn fat for fuel. More nutrition plus less overeating and healed hormones enables our body to burn fat rather than slowing down and burning muscle.

Fat Head: The USDA recommends eating nutrient-dense food, but advises against eating red meat.  Isn’t red meat nutrient-dense?

Jonathan: If we divide the nutrition provided in a serving of lean red meat by the calories provided in a serving, we see that lean red meat is nutrient-dense.

Fat Head: Are whole grains nutrient-dense?  Do you ever eat them?

Jonathan: Dividing nutrition per serving by calories per serving, we see that whole grains are less nutrient-dense than non-starchy vegetables, seafood, lean meats, low-fat or fat-free plain Greek yogurt, low-fat or fat-free cottage cheese, citrus fruits, and berries, as well as most nuts and seeds. Therefore, we would be better off eating so much of the aforementioned nutrient-dense foods that we’re too full for less nutrient-dense whole grains. For example, when we’re out to eat, we could easily tell our server, “Please hold the starch and double the vegetables.”

I personally do not eat any whole grains because they do not further my health and fitness goals.

Fat Head: I’ve seen quite a few guidelines on how much protein a person should eat, and they’re all over the place.  According to one expert, I only need about 50 grams of protein per day.  The Protein Power guidelines put me at around 130 grams per day.  According to both you and Tim Ferriss, I should be consuming closer to 200 grams per day.  That’s a lot of protein.  What would be the advantage for me of consuming that much?

Jonathan: Lean sources of protein are very satisfying, positively impact our hormonal balance, are nutrient dense, and are relatively difficult for the body to convert into body fat. Also, we have to eat something, so focusing on protein-rich foods is a great way to satisfy ourselves while ensuring both the need and the ability to burn fat. Put differently, if you didn’t get about a third of your calories from protein, you’d be getting them from foods that are less likely to ensure you have both the need and the ability to burn fat.

Fat Head: You suggest consuming at least 30 grams of protein soon after waking.  I’ve been doing the opposite lately, limiting my meals to lunch and dinner as a form of intermittent fasting, which I presume you’d advise against.  Why should I eat a protein-rich breakfast in the morning if I’m not actually hungry?

Jonathan: Studies show that consuming protein every three to four hours boosts the metabolism (need to burn fat) and creates a hormonal environment more optimized for fat burning (ability to burn fat). I, too, am not hungry when I wake up. As a solution, I’ve found mixing whey protein powder with a big glass of water is a great way to boost the metabolism and help hormones even when hunger isn’t present. I also mix two tablespoons of wheat grass powder into my protein shake to sneak a few servings of non-starchy vegetables in.

Fat Head: How do you feel about intermittent fasting in general?  Do you believe the positive hormonal changes promised by advocates of intermittent fasting do indeed occur?

Jonathan: The research behind The Smarter Science of Slim shows that anytime the body has insufficient nutrition (distinct from insufficient calories), the metabolism slows down (bad), the body burns at least as much muscle as fat (bad), and a hormonal environment is created that will cause fat gain in the long term (bad). However, my research suggests that as long as the body is provided with an abundance of nutrition (including protein and essential fatty acids) insufficient calories could provide a positive result.

Fat Head: The diet you recommend is around one-third protein, one-third carbohydrates from fruits and non-starchy vegetables, and one-third fat.  I haven’t tried to calculate macronutrient percentages lately, but I’m pretty sure my diet is more than 50% fat and probably no more than 15% – 20% carbohydrates.  Is there something wrong with that ratio?   Can you explain why less fat and more carbohydrate would help me lose weight more weight?

Jonathan: As long as you are eating at least ten servings of non-starchy vegetables a day while getting about a third of your daily calories from protein, the rest of your diet could consist of natural fats—ideally, mostly from plants and seafood—without compromising long term health or weight. In other words, studies show that to optimize long-term fat loss and health, we must eat at least ten servings of non-starchy vegetables and approximately a gram of protein per pound of body weight per day (there are exceptions for very heavy individuals). After that, as long as it’s full of water, fiber, and protein, we are good to eat it.

Fat Head: You urge your readers to get their carbohydrates from non-starchy vegetables and low-sugar fruits, and I totally agree with that.  But frankly, I’d find it difficult to consume a third of my calories in the form of, say, green vegetables while simultaneously limiting my fat intake.  For example, I checked the nutrition label on a box of spinach and found that it provides about 90 calories in the form of carbohydrates.  I’ll happily eat that box of spinach, but only if I add at least two tablespoons of butter to the mix, which means I’m already consuming twice as many fat calories as carbohydrate calories, and that’s before I even put any meat on my plate.  So, with that preamble out of the way, here’s the question:  if you’re going to get a third of your calories from non-starchy carbohydrates, how do you make all those piles of vegetables palatable?

Jonathan: Without a doubt, a SANE cookbook is needed, and one is coming this year.

In the meantime, sautéing non-starchy vegetables with a teaspoon of olive oil and various seasonings can make it easy and delicious to consume 3-4 servings of non-starchy vegetables in a sitting. Do this with lunch and dinner, and someone can eat 6-8 servings of non-starchy vegetable with less than a tablespoon of olive oil. Add some non-starchy vegetables to an omelet or scrambled eggs for breakfast and put some sugar snap peas (delicious raw) in a bag to snack on, and it’s relatively easy and tasty to take in more than 12 servings of non-starchy vegetables without consuming over 12 servings of added fat. And that’s what someone would do to achieve excellent health and fitness. If someone’s goals are more moderate, the non-starchy vegetable intake becomes even easier.

Note: The research underlying The Smarter Science of Slim shows that naturally occurring fats found in foods that are rich in water, fiber, and protein are fantastic for fat loss and health. It does, however, recommend we add as little fat to food as possible, as pure fat isn’t rich in water, fiber, or protein.

Fat Head: You cite research in your book to convince readers that despite what we’ve all been told, saturated fat and cholesterol don’t cause heart disease.  But you also recommend consuming egg whites and low-fat or fat-free dairy products.  While producing Fat Head, I was focused mostly on restricting carbohydrates, but I’ve become more of a whole-foods guy in the past couple of years.  Since eggs are a whole food, why should we consume eggs whites instead of whole eggs?  Why consume consume fat-free dairy products instead of full-fat dairy products?

Jonathan: Whole eggs are healthy sources of fats since the majority of eggs’ calories come from fat versus from protein or carbohydrate. I recommend mixing egg whites with whole eggs to even out the ratio of protein and fat. If someone gets sufficient lean protein from other sources and takes in all the non-starchy vegetables necessary to optimize heath and weight, then whole eggs are fine. More simply, if someone eats eggs as a source of fat, whole eggs are fine. If someone eats eggs as a source of protein, he needs to mix egg whites with whole eggs to ensure he is actually eating mostly protein.

The point with the low-fat or fat-free plain Greek yogurt and cottage cheese is similar. If someone eats Greek yogurt and cottage cheese as sources of fat, then the full fat variants are fine. However, if someone uses these foods as sources of protein, she needs to make sure the majority of the associated calories are from protein. Note: Eating reduced fat/low-fat anything is only desirable if the fat is not replaced with sugar. Low-fat food that is chock full of sugar is terrible for health and fat loss.

To be really clear, it’s not about fearing fat. Rather, it’s about maximizing our intake of foods rich in water, fiber, and protein. We should enjoy fat freely, just after focusing first on water, fiber, and protein.

Fat Head: I’ve heard from dozens of readers who lost a lot of weight by cutting sugar and starch, but are now stuck at 20 or 30 pounds heavier than they’d prefer.  What, if anything, can people who reach a plateau do to lower their set-points even more?  What do you tell people who can’t seem to drop that last 20 pounds?

Jonathan: Exercise less—but smarter—as recommended by The Smarter Science of Slim. This type of exercise is specifically designed to work our muscles in a unique manner to trigger a magnitude of “fat-burning hormones” unparalleled via nearly any other exercise technique.

Fat Head: You wrote quite a bit about how hormones drive weight gain in your book.  Once women reach menopause, their bodies undergo hormonal changes that encourage accumulating more body fat.  Is there anything they can do to avoid this hormonally-driven weight gain?

Jonathan: Yes. Eat more and exercise less, but smarter. More specifically, eat so many non-starchy vegetables and so much lean protein that you are too full for starches and sweets. Then exercise your muscles so deeply that it is impossible for you to exercise that way again for about a week.

Fat Head: A couple of other authors who wrote about lowering the body’s set-point claim that we need to engage in aerobic-type exercise for an hour per day.  Do you believe aerobic exercise can lower the body’s set point?  If not, why not?

Jonathan: I did not find any studies that showed aerobic exercise to meaningfully impact the hormones which influence the set-point. Therefore, I do not see how aerobic-type exercise could meaningfully impact the set-point.

Fat Head: You recommend brief, high-intensity exercise instead of jogging or walking on a treadmill.  Why do you believe this kind of exercise is better for weight loss?

Jonathan: What I believe is based on the work of countless brilliant doctors, academicians and researchers all over the world. As I said earlier, biology isn’t a matter of opinion. Consequently, every piece of advice I give is grounded in the research, which has proven that high-force exercise works a specific type of muscle fiber (Type 2b) that triggers a uniquely helpful hormonal response. Think about triggering this hormonal response like trying to move a heavy piece of furniture. You can gently poke at the furniture for one, ten, or even 100 hours, but no quantity of low-force movements will cause you to move the furniture, i.e., the result you want.  Fewer but higher-force movements are how you get the result we want.

Fat Head: There’s a lot of buzz these days about paleo diets and paleo exercise.  I’m sure you’re familiar with the terms, so what do you think of the paleo/primal lifestyle?  Is it healthy?

Jonathan: The eating philosophy I advocate is similar to a paleo type diet, but there are three differences. My understanding of paleo diets is that no/very little legumes or dairy are permitted and fatty meats are encouraged. (My apologies if I am mistaken.) My research shows there are high-quality legumes and a few high-quality dairy products, and that these high-quality foods are both healthy and helpful for fat loss. It also shows that the best sources of fat are plants—nuts and seeds—and seafood. Therefore, if you are looking for the highest quality protein combined with the highest quality fat and given the choice between a fatty cut of meat and a lean cut of meat plus a handful or two of nuts, The Smarter Science of Slim recommends the latter.

Fat Head: How would what you recommend differ from the advice people receive from paleo/primal advocates like Mark Sisson and Robb Wolf?

Jonathan: It’s going to be more similar than it is going to be different. I mentioned the three dietary differences above.

When it comes to exercise, I agree with Mr. Sisson and Mr. Wolf on the “less but higher-quality” angle. However, my research takes this concept one step further and provides a specific type of exercise that can be done at home without any equipment and ensures the highest-quality exercise possible while minimizing impact on joints and ligaments. To my knowledge, the specific type of exercise recommended by The Smarter Science of Slim is not part of the paleo/primal regime…although I suspect Mr. Sisson and Mr. Wolf would not be opposed to it, as they are both scientifically minded individuals.

Fat Head: You don’t have recipes or meal plans in The Smarter Science of Slim, so explain what a typical day’s meals look like for you or someone following your recommendations.

Jonathan: Recipes and meal plans are coming. In the meantime, SANE meals are going to be similar to paleo meals but focus on getting fat from plants and seafood rather than fatty meats and can include high-protein, low-sugar, and low-fat dairy as well as legumes. At the end of the day, it’s about each individual’s tastes and goals because The Smarter Science of Slim is not a set of ridged laws, but a body of knowledge that enables people to most effectively accomplish their particular health and fitness aspirations.

Thank you, Jonathan.

 

Share

130 thoughts on “Interview: Jonathan Bailor of ‘The Smarter Science of Slim,’ part two

  1. nonegiven

    I think a serving of non starchey veg is one cup raw or half a cup cooked, Atkins said to have 2 cups of salad or one cup cooked veg per _meal_ for induction, that is 2 servings of either.
    I think 150 g of carb would be bad for my already screwed up metabolism and I know low fat is and 33% is not that much higher than the 30% that the ADA recommends, which is low fat. I think I’ll stick with extra yolks instead of extra whites. I only eat low fat yogurt because it’s all they have here, I get full fat when I go out of town. I eat butter and use cream, I eat the chicken skin and don’t trim off the fatty parts of meat.
    Dr Bernstein says for diabetics to set your carb amount and protein amount and add enough fat to make it satisfying, vary the protein until you find the amount that maintains your weight. To gain, eat more protein, to lose eat less. I don’t think I’ve eaten as low as 30g of carb though, maybe I should.

    Reply
  2. Patricia

    11 servings of vegetable per day? ICK! Unless I can drown them in butter, I’d barf.

    Egg whites? Not this girl!

    Low fat yoghurt? Criminal!! (more sugar, less fat a la Ornish?)

    Plant fats? Huh?!!! On what paleo plant?

    I can think of tastier ways of upping my protein and lowering my fat. Using slightly leaner cuts of meat and not floating them in herbed butter.

    I’m afraid I have to agree that this sounds more like the lipophobic “Heart Healthy Mediterranean Diet” guidelines.

    I’m just not up for eating 11 servings of vegetables per day, even if I did put butter on them.

    Reply
  3. Robinowitz

    Hmm, not particularly compelled to buy this book based on his emphasis on lean meats and getting fat from plant sources. The only plant I can think of that we get any decent quantity of fat is the olive… or am I mistaken? Leafy greens and low starch veggies don’t contain much fat and are pretty much unpalatable to me (and most people I’ve met) without added fat. Also, I’ve read in several different books that many of the nutrients in veggies are fat soluble, so should be consumed with some source of natural fat. AND eating veggies cooked in natural fat means I’ll actually eat them and feel satisfied. I prefer butter, bacon grease, and coconut oil. Does he even mention coconut oil as a good vegetable fat, or does he consider it ‘too saturated’? I know it’s got a better fatty acid profile than the much-touted olive oil. Like olive oil for salad dressing, but that’s about it. Not the best fat for cooking, in my opinion.

    Unfortunately, it seems to me the author is still trying to keep with the more mainstream recommendations than come up with anything truly groundbreaking. Thanks for the interview, Tom! You asked all the questions in the second part I was wondering about from the first part:)

    He doesn’t fear saturated fat as a heart-disease risk, but says quality vegetable fats such as olive oil may help with insulin resistance.

    Reply
  4. Galina L.

    I noticed a while ago, that I feel sub-optimal after eating any big meal, sort of mild version of a carb coma, especially after IF. Dr.Bernstein’s “Chinese food effect” comes into my mind as an explanation. Basically nothing what that guy said about nutrition rings my bell, especially eating when not hungry.
    Thank you, Tom, for your plan to experiment with his suggestions.

    Reply
  5. Paul L in MA

    Eleven servings of veggies? My jaw muscle cramps thinking about it. Too much mastication will make me bind.

    Reply
  6. Jan

    I’m sorry, but by advocating that we get the majority of our fat from plant and seafood sources (keeping in mind that not everyone has access to quality, sustainably raised/caught seafood) he’s advocating that the majority of the fats we consume be in the form of inflammatory omega 6 fatty acids. And fill up on lean meats and non-starchy vegetables so we won’t “be hungry” for starches or sweets? That’s like Dr. Oz telling us it’s okay to eat servings of pretzels or chocolate the size of your fist as long as you wash the taste of it out of your mouth right afterwards with water so you won’t crave it later.

    The guy smacks of quack to me. Sorry, but he does.

    Reply
  7. Alex

    @ mrfreddy

    Try calorie counting. A few years ago, I used fitday.com and shed those last few pounds, going from 183 down to 170. I floated between 170 and 172 for a couple years before my weight started creeping up again. Believe it or not, a low-ish carb paleo diet doesn’t magically prevent weight gain when one starts eating more food. I hit 177 a few weeks ago and decided it was time to count calories again. I eat at home and weigh all my food to the gram. I shoot for around 2000 calories per day (averaged out over a week, eating more on some days and less on others), and after two weeks I’m down to 174.

    This idea that calories don’t matter is nonsense. Sure, some foods affect the metabolism differently than others, but when all the metabolic effects are accounted for, if you’re not in caloric deficit, you’re not going to lose weight. Counting calories and eating low carb to manage hunger levels is simple and easy, although weighing/measuring everything and entering it in on the fitday website is a bit tedious.

    If you don’t give your body a reason to tap your stored fat, it won’t. The reason a low-carb diet worked for me is that by allowing my body easier access to the stored fat, I ended up eating less without feeling hungry. Way back in the first Protein Power book, Eades & Eades stated clearly that losing weight requires an energy deficit.

    Reply
  8. Marilyn

    It would appear from some of the reading I’ve done that the jury is still out on vegetables. Are they REALLY good for a person, and more is always better? Or will one or two servings a day be adequate? Or are vegetables so filled with anti-nutrients, it would be best to leave them alone entirely?

    The jury is still out on fiber, as well.

    I don’t think anyone has a definitive answer on how much or how little we really need. We usually have one or two vegetable dishes with every dinner meal.

    Reply
  9. Patricia

    11 servings of vegetable per day? ICK! Unless I can drown them in butter, I’d barf.

    Egg whites? Not this girl!

    Low fat yoghurt? Criminal!! (more sugar, less fat a la Ornish?)

    Plant fats? Huh?!!! On what paleo plant?

    I can think of tastier ways of upping my protein and lowering my fat. Using slightly leaner cuts of meat and not floating them in herbed butter.

    I’m afraid I have to agree that this sounds more like the lipophobic “Heart Healthy Mediterranean Diet” guidelines.

    I’m just not up for eating 11 servings of vegetables per day, even if I did put butter on them.

    Reply
  10. Paul L in MA

    Eleven servings of veggies? My jaw muscle cramps thinking about it. Too much mastication will make me bind.

    Reply
  11. Saultite

    @Mike, I’m with you, there’s a whole lot of misinformation here. I am also in the process of reading the art and science of low carbohydrate living, and there is a whole lot of conflicting evidence here. I’ll keep my animal fat, thank you very much!

    Reply
  12. Hilary Kyro

    Sorry Johnny, Slow Negative Reps have been discredited. As Tom notes, the muscle soreness is extreme and the gains are feeble, unless you are a young man or on anabolic steroids or masochistic. I worked out hard at the gym for decades, I always felt slow, sore and sluggish until I burned-out and couldn’t lift a finger. I switched from fat-o-phobic to hi-fat diet. I stopped over-doing it at the gym. I use dumbells, resistance cords and an exercise ball at home to take a 5 minute break from computering and lounging. I feel so much better going for the gain and taking pain as a signal for rest and nourishment.
    It would be good to see our Fathead Role Model sporting bare-chested buffness! Go Tom, Go! Keep on Pumpin’ Iron and keep those reps Positive! Concentric! Dynamic! & Rewarding!

    I’m not planning on publishing any shirtless photos. I’ve always been shy about that; it’s a holdover thing from my adolescence and teen years.

    Reply
  13. Nickie

    I read the book and I am still a little confused. I eat low-carb (50g or less) every day. I might have one sweetened dessert per week (ex. two honey sweetened macaroons). I drink coffee with cream every morning and eat two meals: lunch and dinner. About 1600 calories. Even with his suggested foods I am not able to eat more than 1600 calories and 10 servings of veggies is out of the question. I can eat 6 but feel uncomfortably full. The rest of the calories come from fruit (max 1 serving per day), nuts, cream, butter, and meats. 40% from fat 30% protein and 30% carb. Still no weight loss. I am not just 15-20 pounds from ideal weight either. What gives? Do I eat even more? This is very frustrating. I have read WWGF, this book, watched your movie, read Atkins, and still am sure I am doing it wrong.

    I’d suggest seeing what happens if you eliminate or cut back on the dairy and nuts. You may also want to check to make sure you’re not dealing with a thyroid issue.

    Reply
  14. Jim

    There were a number of things about his presentation that I didn’t like. However, upon reading the text some, and thinking a lot, I suggest that this is a great contribution to the diet literature.

    Why?

    The openness of the research materials giving PUBMED citations which I can get right from my desktop, and not having to go to a medical library or to a public library and getting interlibrary copies of the papers.

    I really disliked the fact that the “Protein Power” was without references, and I never could locate th information on the obesity of ancient Egyptian rulers.

    It is a bummer that there is no paper based index for the book. I find that a paper index is a way to browse while looking something up.

    I haven’t gotten far enough into the text to understand the “decline and fall” of the “set point” theory. I have seen a lot of silly web pages denouncing it because of what they “thought” constituted the theory and lack of proof.

    I suspect that the Steamroller of “Energy Balance” “Eat Less, Exercise More” flattened most everything else along with “Artery Clogging Fat” as a second weapon.

    Since the “Absolutely Perfect, According To Me” (really all of YOU) nutrition/diet /physiology book has not yet been written, I don’t really have the need to bash everything that fails to meet that nearly impossible standard.

    Rarely does any science evolve by individuals creating absolutely perfect and all encompassing works and laying them out all in one single swoop.

    Learn to appreciate regular and large steps, and don’t blame somebody for lack of making true momentous giant strides.

    I believe it’s good read and consider the recommendations in a book like this, even if I don’t immediately agree with all of them. This should be an on-going quest.

    Reply
  15. The Older Brother

    Seems to me that Hahn’s ‘Slow Burn’ is also a negative resistance program in that you’re working your muscles to failure with low number of very slow reps (although on both positive and negative motions).

    Did Bailor comment or was he aware of SB?

    Cheers.

    I didn’t ask, but I’d be surprised if he’s never heard of it. With negative-only, I start with heavier weights than I can lift in the positive phase. For triceps, for example, I used my body weight to help get the handles down, then fought them back up while keeping good form.

    Reply
  16. Saultite

    @Mike, I’m with you, there’s a whole lot of misinformation here. I am also in the process of reading the art and science of low carbohydrate living, and there is a whole lot of conflicting evidence here. I’ll keep my animal fat, thank you very much!

    Reply
  17. Hilary Kyro

    Sorry Johnny, Slow Negative Reps have been discredited. As Tom notes, the muscle soreness is extreme and the gains are feeble, unless you are a young man or on anabolic steroids or masochistic. I worked out hard at the gym for decades, I always felt slow, sore and sluggish until I burned-out and couldn’t lift a finger. I switched from fat-o-phobic to hi-fat diet. I stopped over-doing it at the gym. I use dumbells, resistance cords and an exercise ball at home to take a 5 minute break from computering and lounging. I feel so much better going for the gain and taking pain as a signal for rest and nourishment.
    It would be good to see our Fathead Role Model sporting bare-chested buffness! Go Tom, Go! Keep on Pumpin’ Iron and keep those reps Positive! Concentric! Dynamic! & Rewarding!

    I’m not planning on publishing any shirtless photos. I’ve always been shy about that; it’s a holdover thing from my adolescence and teen years.

    Reply
  18. Nickie

    I read the book and I am still a little confused. I eat low-carb (50g or less) every day. I might have one sweetened dessert per week (ex. two honey sweetened macaroons). I drink coffee with cream every morning and eat two meals: lunch and dinner. About 1600 calories. Even with his suggested foods I am not able to eat more than 1600 calories and 10 servings of veggies is out of the question. I can eat 6 but feel uncomfortably full. The rest of the calories come from fruit (max 1 serving per day), nuts, cream, butter, and meats. 40% from fat 30% protein and 30% carb. Still no weight loss. I am not just 15-20 pounds from ideal weight either. What gives? Do I eat even more? This is very frustrating. I have read WWGF, this book, watched your movie, read Atkins, and still am sure I am doing it wrong.

    I’d suggest seeing what happens if you eliminate or cut back on the dairy and nuts. You may also want to check to make sure you’re not dealing with a thyroid issue.

    Reply
  19. higher protein FTW

    “That’s the experiment I’m conducting on myself; more protein, less fat”

    FINALLY!

    While we discovered that “it’s not about fearing fat”, to be REALLY LEAN fat should be kept moderate and protein higher than many do (I love Jimmy’s podcast etc. but I think his mistake, for weightloss, is the lcHF fixation).

    I’m looking forward to see your further improvements.

    BTW https://twitter.com/#!/Martinberkhan had a nice protein rant recently

    I figure it’s worth an experiment. My diet would probably still be considered high-fat and I’ll still happily (and fearlessly) consume saturated fats, but I’ll cut back on the quantity a bit.

    Reply
  20. Jim

    There were a number of things about his presentation that I didn’t like. However, upon reading the text some, and thinking a lot, I suggest that this is a great contribution to the diet literature.

    Why?

    The openness of the research materials giving PUBMED citations which I can get right from my desktop, and not having to go to a medical library or to a public library and getting interlibrary copies of the papers.

    I really disliked the fact that the “Protein Power” was without references, and I never could locate th information on the obesity of ancient Egyptian rulers.

    It is a bummer that there is no paper based index for the book. I find that a paper index is a way to browse while looking something up.

    I haven’t gotten far enough into the text to understand the “decline and fall” of the “set point” theory. I have seen a lot of silly web pages denouncing it because of what they “thought” constituted the theory and lack of proof.

    I suspect that the Steamroller of “Energy Balance” “Eat Less, Exercise More” flattened most everything else along with “Artery Clogging Fat” as a second weapon.

    Since the “Absolutely Perfect, According To Me” (really all of YOU) nutrition/diet /physiology book has not yet been written, I don’t really have the need to bash everything that fails to meet that nearly impossible standard.

    Rarely does any science evolve by individuals creating absolutely perfect and all encompassing works and laying them out all in one single swoop.

    Learn to appreciate regular and large steps, and don’t blame somebody for lack of making true momentous giant strides.

    I believe it’s good read and consider the recommendations in a book like this, even if I don’t immediately agree with all of them. This should be an on-going quest.

    Reply
  21. Robinowitz

    I think I could get behind the notion of upping protein and maybe not eating fat as liberally as I do now, but I’d have to try it for myself and see if my workouts were as strong and if I started dropping fat easier and with no hunger. But I thought that lowering the fat means upping the carbs for energy we were getting from the high fat portion of the diet. And, like other commenters have mentioned, I don’t really feel it would be easy to eat 1/3 of your calories from veggies as they’re not necessarily calorie dense. I guess it’s worth trying and seeing how things go, as I know there isn’t a one size fits all when it comes to weight loss and nutrition. And if what one is doing isn’t working for them it makes sense to tweak things a bit, I suppose.

    If consuming more protein encouraged my body to burn more body fat, then it would still be a high-fat diet of sorts, since the calories making up the deficit are from fatty acids. But that’s a big IF. I’m experimenting to see if it really works that way.

    Reply
  22. The Older Brother

    Seems to me that Hahn’s ‘Slow Burn’ is also a negative resistance program in that you’re working your muscles to failure with low number of very slow reps (although on both positive and negative motions).

    Did Bailor comment or was he aware of SB?

    Cheers.

    I didn’t ask, but I’d be surprised if he’s never heard of it. With negative-only, I start with heavier weights than I can lift in the positive phase. For triceps, for example, I used my body weight to help get the handles down, then fought them back up while keeping good form.

    Reply
  23. Marilyn

    @ Jan: “The guy smacks of quack to me. Sorry, but he does.”

    My impression is that he’s kind of a quack-by-default. I think he’s probably done a lot of research, and then he got too eager to jump on the health/diet book bandwagon. I haven’t read the book, but from what I’ve read in these interviews, it seems he womped up something he hoped would be different from other books — including different macronutrient ratios and an acronym, SANE — and ended up with a whole lot of stuff that needed to be thought through and tried out a lot more before it was published.

    Reply
  24. Larry AJ

    This is for Jim whose post is just before The Oder Brother’s post.

    Here is the PROTEIN POWER LIFEPLAN BIBLIOGRAPHY with all the PubMed citation IDs that could be found.
    http://ppwol.suddenlaunch3.com/index.cgi?board=resources

    Because of the limitation on post size, it had to be broken up into thirteen separate posts in the linked forum. In the beginning of each post is an explanation of how to get to the PUBMED abstract, if one exists. There are about 450 references all toll. The list was posted on the original PP website (which get hacked and taken down), but a copy was preserved locally and used to make these posts.

    Tom, if you want to add this bibliography to your web site, let me know. I think (crossed fingers) I can find the original file before it had to be broken up – easier to read.

    Please edit my previous post to indicate that the FIRST post has the way to create a proper link to PUBMED using the numbers associated with each citation, NOT all posts have the information in the beginning just the first – “PPLP Biblio w/PubMed#’s – Intro to Ch.3A-H The Fat”

    I wasn’t sure how you wanted this edited, so I combined your comments.

    Reply
  25. Robinowitz

    @Nickie: I find that when I get stuck at a weight and can’t lose I HAVE to drop all nuts and dairy to get fat loss moving again. Try it for a few weeks and see what happens. Dairy is insuligenic for some people, so your blood sugar might be going up too much and kicking you out of fat burning. As for nuts: I find I eat too many of them…never seem to be satisfied with just a few. So I have to stay away if I’m in a fat loss phase. Might work for you..?

    Dr. Eades has mentioned in at least one post then when people are stalled on a low-carb diet, he recommends they give up dairy and nuts to see if that makes a difference.

    Reply
  26. Robinowitz

    @Tom: I agree about any fat loss diet actually being a relatively high fat diet. In my more meddlesome past, I’ve told low fat high carb dieting friends this very thing and they just ignore that. But what other way is there to understand fat loss and fat storage? Fat is stored food and to lose fat one has to consume their stored fat and use it as energy. So, in effect, those low-fat/high-carbers are actually moderate/high fat high carbers. I also explain to them that eating dietary fat makes you more satisfied and if the body fat loss happens due to me needing less food (energy) because I’ve tapped into my stored energy (body fat) then this seems a much more satisfying lifestyle than forcing my body to think it’s starving by eating too few calories and constantly feeling ravenous.

    Yeah…I don’t tell my weight watchers friends and family what I think anymore. It’s like trying to explain the color blue to a blind man. Well, maybe it’s worse, because the blind man can’t help being blind:)

    That’s why I don’t give dietary advice to acquaintances unless they ask. I have friends who still think a good diet should be low in fat, low in calories, and exclude red meat. So when we meet for dinner, they order their small low-fat meals, I eat a steak or another meaty dish, and we talk about something other than diet.

    Reply
  27. higher protein FTW

    “That’s the experiment I’m conducting on myself; more protein, less fat”

    FINALLY!

    While we discovered that “it’s not about fearing fat”, to be REALLY LEAN fat should be kept moderate and protein higher than many do (I love Jimmy’s podcast etc. but I think his mistake, for weightloss, is the lcHF fixation).

    I’m looking forward to see your further improvements.

    BTW https://twitter.com/#!/Martinberkhan had a nice protein rant recently

    I figure it’s worth an experiment. My diet would probably still be considered high-fat and I’ll still happily (and fearlessly) consume saturated fats, but I’ll cut back on the quantity a bit.

    Reply
  28. Robinowitz

    I think I could get behind the notion of upping protein and maybe not eating fat as liberally as I do now, but I’d have to try it for myself and see if my workouts were as strong and if I started dropping fat easier and with no hunger. But I thought that lowering the fat means upping the carbs for energy we were getting from the high fat portion of the diet. And, like other commenters have mentioned, I don’t really feel it would be easy to eat 1/3 of your calories from veggies as they’re not necessarily calorie dense. I guess it’s worth trying and seeing how things go, as I know there isn’t a one size fits all when it comes to weight loss and nutrition. And if what one is doing isn’t working for them it makes sense to tweak things a bit, I suppose.

    If consuming more protein encouraged my body to burn more body fat, then it would still be a high-fat diet of sorts, since the calories making up the deficit are from fatty acids. But that’s a big IF. I’m experimenting to see if it really works that way.

    Reply
  29. Jim

    The more that I read of this book, the more that I understand some of the contradictions and gaps in contemporary dietary “advice”.

    I recommend that everyone who has commented on this book without reading it, actually read it. Yes, seriously.

    I remember someone saying something about not being able to judge a book by it’s cover.

    Between the Taubes book and this one, one can more readily see the exceptionally poor state of “Science” of diet ( actually now the pseudoscience of diet) that has been promoted by the official US Government via USDA and NIH since the McGovern Committee 1977 “Dietary Goals for the United States” report , almost single-handedly written by Nick Moltern, a former labor reporter (with no significant training in matters dietary or nutrional).

    The Nick Moltern document was probably easier to read than either of thse two books.

    Reply
  30. Marilyn

    @ Jan: “The guy smacks of quack to me. Sorry, but he does.”

    My impression is that he’s kind of a quack-by-default. I think he’s probably done a lot of research, and then he got too eager to jump on the health/diet book bandwagon. I haven’t read the book, but from what I’ve read in these interviews, it seems he womped up something he hoped would be different from other books — including different macronutrient ratios and an acronym, SANE — and ended up with a whole lot of stuff that needed to be thought through and tried out a lot more before it was published.

    Reply
  31. Tuan Nguyen

    I find Jonathan’s interpretation of the science behind the benefits of a high fat medium protein and low carb rather rather peculiar at best. For example: “My research shows there are high-quality legumes and a few high-quality dairy products, and that these high-quality foods are both healthy and helpful for fat loss. It also shows that the best sources of fat are plants—nuts and seeds—and seafood. Therefore, if you are looking for the highest quality protein combined with the highest quality fat and given the choice between a fatty cut of meat and a lean cut of meat plus a handful or two of nuts, The Smarter Science of Slim recommends the latter.”

    1. Fat loss has got nothing to do with high-quality dietary foods, whatever high-quality means.
    2. A High fat (70% to 80%) medium protein (20% to 30%) low to no carb (50g or less a day) diet has been clinically shown to reduce fat accumulation on an indefinitely sustainable basis with no loss of muscle mass, by conditioning the body to burn ketones rather than locking the excess glucose in fat cells. And yet Jonathan demonstrates a curious reluctance to recommend the inclusion of saturated fats in the diet, particularly if sourced from animals. A reminder why low carbs diet must be high fat, and not high protein, can be found here: http://www.second-opinions.co.uk/fat-not-protein.html

    Reply
  32. Larry AJ

    This is for Jim whose post is just before The Oder Brother’s post.

    Here is the PROTEIN POWER LIFEPLAN BIBLIOGRAPHY with all the PubMed citation IDs that could be found.
    http://ppwol.suddenlaunch3.com/index.cgi?board=resources

    Because of the limitation on post size, it had to be broken up into thirteen separate posts in the linked forum. In the beginning of each post is an explanation of how to get to the PUBMED abstract, if one exists. There are about 450 references all toll. The list was posted on the original PP website (which get hacked and taken down), but a copy was preserved locally and used to make these posts.

    Tom, if you want to add this bibliography to your web site, let me know. I think (crossed fingers) I can find the original file before it had to be broken up – easier to read.

    Please edit my previous post to indicate that the FIRST post has the way to create a proper link to PUBMED using the numbers associated with each citation, NOT all posts have the information in the beginning just the first – “PPLP Biblio w/PubMed#’s – Intro to Ch.3A-H The Fat”

    I wasn’t sure how you wanted this edited, so I combined your comments.

    Reply
  33. Robinowitz

    @Nickie: I find that when I get stuck at a weight and can’t lose I HAVE to drop all nuts and dairy to get fat loss moving again. Try it for a few weeks and see what happens. Dairy is insuligenic for some people, so your blood sugar might be going up too much and kicking you out of fat burning. As for nuts: I find I eat too many of them…never seem to be satisfied with just a few. So I have to stay away if I’m in a fat loss phase. Might work for you..?

    Dr. Eades has mentioned in at least one post then when people are stalled on a low-carb diet, he recommends they give up dairy and nuts to see if that makes a difference.

    Reply
  34. Robinowitz

    @Tom: I agree about any fat loss diet actually being a relatively high fat diet. In my more meddlesome past, I’ve told low fat high carb dieting friends this very thing and they just ignore that. But what other way is there to understand fat loss and fat storage? Fat is stored food and to lose fat one has to consume their stored fat and use it as energy. So, in effect, those low-fat/high-carbers are actually moderate/high fat high carbers. I also explain to them that eating dietary fat makes you more satisfied and if the body fat loss happens due to me needing less food (energy) because I’ve tapped into my stored energy (body fat) then this seems a much more satisfying lifestyle than forcing my body to think it’s starving by eating too few calories and constantly feeling ravenous.

    Yeah…I don’t tell my weight watchers friends and family what I think anymore. It’s like trying to explain the color blue to a blind man. Well, maybe it’s worse, because the blind man can’t help being blind:)

    That’s why I don’t give dietary advice to acquaintances unless they ask. I have friends who still think a good diet should be low in fat, low in calories, and exclude red meat. So when we meet for dinner, they order their small low-fat meals, I eat a steak or another meaty dish, and we talk about something other than diet.

    Reply
  35. Jim

    The more that I read of this book, the more that I understand some of the contradictions and gaps in contemporary dietary “advice”.

    I recommend that everyone who has commented on this book without reading it, actually read it. Yes, seriously.

    I remember someone saying something about not being able to judge a book by it’s cover.

    Between the Taubes book and this one, one can more readily see the exceptionally poor state of “Science” of diet ( actually now the pseudoscience of diet) that has been promoted by the official US Government via USDA and NIH since the McGovern Committee 1977 “Dietary Goals for the United States” report , almost single-handedly written by Nick Moltern, a former labor reporter (with no significant training in matters dietary or nutrional).

    The Nick Moltern document was probably easier to read than either of thse two books.

    Reply
  36. Tuan Nguyen

    I find Jonathan’s interpretation of the science behind the benefits of a high fat medium protein and low carb rather rather peculiar at best. For example: “My research shows there are high-quality legumes and a few high-quality dairy products, and that these high-quality foods are both healthy and helpful for fat loss. It also shows that the best sources of fat are plants—nuts and seeds—and seafood. Therefore, if you are looking for the highest quality protein combined with the highest quality fat and given the choice between a fatty cut of meat and a lean cut of meat plus a handful or two of nuts, The Smarter Science of Slim recommends the latter.”

    1. Fat loss has got nothing to do with high-quality dietary foods, whatever high-quality means.
    2. A High fat (70% to 80%) medium protein (20% to 30%) low to no carb (50g or less a day) diet has been clinically shown to reduce fat accumulation on an indefinitely sustainable basis with no loss of muscle mass, by conditioning the body to burn ketones rather than locking the excess glucose in fat cells. And yet Jonathan demonstrates a curious reluctance to recommend the inclusion of saturated fats in the diet, particularly if sourced from animals. A reminder why low carbs diet must be high fat, and not high protein, can be found here: http://www.second-opinions.co.uk/fat-not-protein.html

    Reply
  37. mrfreddy

    hmmm, that Mind Your Mitochondria lady also advocates eating a helluvalotta greens… not sure what her position on fats is tho?

    @Alex, I agree about calories. I can’t be bothered to actually count them, but I have played around with portion control (intentionally eating smaller servings of meat, cutting down on butter, etc.) and had some minor success. Thing is, I’m never really satisfied eating that way, and just like if I was on weight watchers, success depends on will power. Which I eventually run out of.

    Reply
  38. BobG

    I get where Bailor’s coming from, I think – it makes intuitive sense that to lose weight, you need a calorie deficit – but in order for that weight loss not to be muscle mass (bad), you need “proper” nutrition, which he’s defining as “tons of non-starchy vegetables and lots of protein.” Protein and fat are similarly satiating, but protein is “better” – doesn’t mean fat is bad, just means that, given the choice, your body gets more benefit out of two chicken breasts than it does out of a quarter-stick of butter.

    Getting adequate protein from fattier sources would make it hard to both eat all those vegetables AND have a calorie deficit, which I think is why he pushes hard on the lean protein. And as long as you don’t get all your protein from whey powder and egg whites (and what a miserable life that would be…), you easily get enough fat to stay comfortably non-hungry.

    I do think there’s a little “hiding the ball” going on around calorie reduction, though – Bailor insists throughout the book that “calories in == calories out” is a dangerous myth, because it doesn’t take into account the havoc wreaked upon our metabolism by overconsumption of sugar & grain (where “overconsumption” means “ANY consumption,” basically). But he kinds of glosses over the idea that, once hormones are correctly balanced & the body is burning fat efficiently, then suddenly calories matter again. (In Bailor terms, correct nutrition gives you the ABILITY to burn fat, calorie reduction gives you the NEED to – and you have to have both.)

    My major criticisms with the book are: (a) I think he tries too hard to sugar (er, Stevia?)-coat the need for calorie reduction, possibly because it would cause dissonance with his EAT MORE bullet point; and (b) if he does present scientific peer-reviewed evidence for preferring lean protein over fatty protein, it didn’t jump out at me the way his other (well-researched) evidence did.

    But on the whole, his plan makes sense to me – I’ve been following it pretty faithfully for about three weeks now, and it’s not particularly hard to do – Greek yogurt and berries are a good breakfast and a good snack (non-fat dairy products of any kind are repulsive to me, but low-fat is fine), the cafeteria at work has a nice salad bar with grilled chicken, beef, or shrimp available, and the protein powder seems weird, but mixes well with the yogurt and I’m willing to play along for a while and see where it goes.

    So far, my weight loss is similar to what it was on strict Atkins years ago, and Weight Watchers more recently (~7-8 lbs. so far) – but I felt super-restricted on Atkins, and weak & hungry on Weight Watchers, and I’m not feeling either on this, which is encouraging. Also, I *feel* like I’ve lost more weight than I have, and my clothes feel somewhat looser, and I’m not feeling tired all the time – which could be a (very-unscientific) indicator that I’m not burning muscle & slowing down my metabolism.

    N=1 study, your mileage may (WILL) vary.

    The calorie issue is always tricky to explain. Yes, to burn body fat, you need an energy deficit. But simply eating less may not do the trick long-term because our bodies can (depending on the hormonal balance) make up for the deficit by slowing down and digesting muscle protein instead of tapping body fat.

    Reply
  39. cisco

    I have a question slightly off topic here…any good low carb recommendations when feeling ill? I recently had a nasty stomach virus that, without going into gory detail, made it difficult to keep anything down for any length of time. As the illness subsided a bit and my appetite returned, I was at somewhat of a loss as to what I should consume that was both lowcarb, would agree with my tummy, and would nourish me. The standard BRAT recommendation (banana, rice, applesauce and toast) is obviously loaded with carbs and just the thought of my usual bacon and egg omelette for breakfast made me queasy. Thanks!

    I like chicken soup with real chicken broth, hold the rice.

    Reply
  40. LCNana

    Tom, even one day trying to eat less fat and more “veggies” left me feeling a hunger I have not felt for ages – forgetaboutit!!!!! But my doctor says my thyroid is a bit low so we’ll see if a few months of meds will make a difference. Post menopausal women are in a specific category all right!!! Add low thyroid to the mix and the scales won’t budge.

    Oh well onwards and upwards!!

    I’ve opted to try more protein and less fat. So far, it’s not making me hungry.

    Reply
  41. Jim

    To clarify my point in my earlier reply, not judging a book by it’s cover, . Just because the “set point” theory did not catch on and outlast the “Energy Balance” “Eat Less, Exercise More” theory which had the full force of USDA and NIH approvals, and swept the media along with it for nearly daily drummings of the message, that’s no reason to believe that it was without substance. After all, the same politics tried to drown the low carbohydrate message….. which is one of the focuses of this website.

    Recently, Dr Michael Eades posted on gaining weight over the holidays. In that post, he said the following:

    ” The best and easiest way to stay slim is to never become obese in the first place.”

    ” What I mean by making this seemingly obvious statement is that when a person goes from being normal weight to being overweight it is an indication that something metabolically has gotten broken. At this point, no one knows for sure what gets broken, but many (and I count myself in this ever growing group) believe the damage occurs in the mitochondria, the organelles within the cells that are the energy furnaces. Once whatever it is that gets broken breaks, it is difficult from that point on to lose weight and maintain weight loss without effort.”

    While no one knows what is “Broken” metabolically, in the opinion of Dr. Eades, just the concept of “Broken Metabolism” is strangely similar to the term “Dysfunctional Fat Metabolism” as used by Johnathan Bailor.

    Page 24, in the “Shadow Box” of “The Clog”…. “Academics also refer to “the clog” as metabolic dysregulation and it is the underlying cause of long term weight gain”

    He goes on to quote T. Kelesidis UCLA and Harvard Medical School) as saying “The circulating [hormone] level…directs the central nervous in regulating energy [balance]…[However] the vast majority of obese humans.. are resistant.. to its weight-reducing effects.” This comes from his Ch1, ref. 5 fully listed in the bibliography as Ann. Intern. Med 2010 Jan19;152(2):93-100.

    I disliked the phrase “the clog” when I first read it, but once you have read far enough to understand what it means, the objections diminish. It is easier to say and spell.

    Sure, they’re all different labels for whatever it is that makes our bodies want to stay fat.

    Reply
  42. eddie watts

    i eat around 3000 calories a day, 1000 calories of spinach, broccoli, cauliflower, sprouts and cabbage would be near impossible!

    Reply
  43. Pierce

    I went searching online to find it if the previous poster was joking or serious about Dr. Oz recommending washing one’s mouth out immediately after snacking to combat cravings. I couldn’t find that, but I did found his top 100 weight loss tips (http://www.doctoroz.com/videos/dr-ozs-100-weight-loss-tips?page=3#copy) which is astonishing.

    Tip 52 says: Make sure you check food labels and avoid anything with more than 4 grams of sugar, especially high-fructose corn syrup, per serving.

    Tip 53 says: Eat a fiber-filled apple before a meal to help you feel full faster.

    So I checked a few sources and they seem to agree that apples have around twenty (20!) grams of sugar.

    Maybe he meant to say eat 1/5 an apple before a meal? It’s unbelievable that his advice is treated as gospel.

    But he’s good-looking and he’s on television! What other qualifications do you need?

    Reply
  44. AndreaLynnette

    On the high-veg diet, there is a great TEDx Talk by Dr. Terry Wahls who has MS, but became asymptomatic (in other words, cured herself of an incurable disease) on a strict paleo diet that consists of:
    * 3 cups of dark leafy greens (kale, spinach, parsley)
    * 3 cups of sulfur-rich veg (garlic family, onion family, cruciferous veg like broccoli and cabbage)
    * 3 cups of bright colored veg and/or fruit (beets, radishes, turnips, purple cabbage, berries, oranges, peaches)
    * grass-fed meat and/or wild-caught omega-3-rich fish like salmon and herring
    * organ meat at least once per week
    * seaweed as often as you like

    I don’t remember where I found it, but I embedded it on my little blog and you can watch it <a href="http://andrealynnette.wordpress.com/2011/12/21/doctors-multiple-sclerosis-now-asymptomatic/"%5Dhere. It’s an interesting talk, and worth the 17 and a half minutes.

    Reply
  45. mrfreddy

    hmmm, that Mind Your Mitochondria lady also advocates eating a helluvalotta greens… not sure what her position on fats is tho?

    @Alex, I agree about calories. I can’t be bothered to actually count them, but I have played around with portion control (intentionally eating smaller servings of meat, cutting down on butter, etc.) and had some minor success. Thing is, I’m never really satisfied eating that way, and just like if I was on weight watchers, success depends on will power. Which I eventually run out of.

    Reply
  46. BobG

    I get where Bailor’s coming from, I think – it makes intuitive sense that to lose weight, you need a calorie deficit – but in order for that weight loss not to be muscle mass (bad), you need “proper” nutrition, which he’s defining as “tons of non-starchy vegetables and lots of protein.” Protein and fat are similarly satiating, but protein is “better” – doesn’t mean fat is bad, just means that, given the choice, your body gets more benefit out of two chicken breasts than it does out of a quarter-stick of butter.

    Getting adequate protein from fattier sources would make it hard to both eat all those vegetables AND have a calorie deficit, which I think is why he pushes hard on the lean protein. And as long as you don’t get all your protein from whey powder and egg whites (and what a miserable life that would be…), you easily get enough fat to stay comfortably non-hungry.

    I do think there’s a little “hiding the ball” going on around calorie reduction, though – Bailor insists throughout the book that “calories in == calories out” is a dangerous myth, because it doesn’t take into account the havoc wreaked upon our metabolism by overconsumption of sugar & grain (where “overconsumption” means “ANY consumption,” basically). But he kinds of glosses over the idea that, once hormones are correctly balanced & the body is burning fat efficiently, then suddenly calories matter again. (In Bailor terms, correct nutrition gives you the ABILITY to burn fat, calorie reduction gives you the NEED to – and you have to have both.)

    My major criticisms with the book are: (a) I think he tries too hard to sugar (er, Stevia?)-coat the need for calorie reduction, possibly because it would cause dissonance with his EAT MORE bullet point; and (b) if he does present scientific peer-reviewed evidence for preferring lean protein over fatty protein, it didn’t jump out at me the way his other (well-researched) evidence did.

    But on the whole, his plan makes sense to me – I’ve been following it pretty faithfully for about three weeks now, and it’s not particularly hard to do – Greek yogurt and berries are a good breakfast and a good snack (non-fat dairy products of any kind are repulsive to me, but low-fat is fine), the cafeteria at work has a nice salad bar with grilled chicken, beef, or shrimp available, and the protein powder seems weird, but mixes well with the yogurt and I’m willing to play along for a while and see where it goes.

    So far, my weight loss is similar to what it was on strict Atkins years ago, and Weight Watchers more recently (~7-8 lbs. so far) – but I felt super-restricted on Atkins, and weak & hungry on Weight Watchers, and I’m not feeling either on this, which is encouraging. Also, I *feel* like I’ve lost more weight than I have, and my clothes feel somewhat looser, and I’m not feeling tired all the time – which could be a (very-unscientific) indicator that I’m not burning muscle & slowing down my metabolism.

    N=1 study, your mileage may (WILL) vary.

    The calorie issue is always tricky to explain. Yes, to burn body fat, you need an energy deficit. But simply eating less may not do the trick long-term because our bodies can (depending on the hormonal balance) make up for the deficit by slowing down and digesting muscle protein instead of tapping body fat.

    Reply
  47. Nickie

    Thanks so much for the replies. I have one question further…does butter count as dairy? I will boohoo over my cup of hot water (no coffee or cream I guess). I really do appreciate it. Trying to lose weight really bites. I hate it.

    Butter apparently boosts insulin in some people, like other dairy products, but it may not be a significant rise. Here are some takes on the issue:

    http://www.trackyourplaque.com/blog/2010/03/butter-and-insulin.html

    http://high-fat-nutrition.blogspot.com/2010/03/butter-insulin-and-dr-davis.html

    If you have sensitivity to casein, butter would still be a problem.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.