Obesity and McDonald’s
Yesterday for lunch, I sat at my desk at work eating a Quarter Pounder with cheese and a ten piece Chicken McNugget from Mcdonalds. Several people in the office commented with amazement that I was consuming such an atrocious meal, since I’m known for being knowledgeable and conscientious about food and exercise. I even made a rule for my Soldiers that everytime I see them drinking a soda at work, they have to do one burpee for every gram of sugar in the bottle. The burpee tax began when one Soldier had a 12 oz. bottle of Coca Cola on his desk. I picked it up and read the label: 65 grams of sugar.
As I sat munching my delicious burger, one of the officers asked me how many burpees I was incurring from the McDonalds meal. I told him, none, that sugar is the killer, especially liquid sugar. An NCO chimed in with his negative comments, too. I reminded them to look at my Physical Fitness test scores, and they conceded they couldn’t argue with my results.
I didn’t bother going in to any more detailed explanation of why it was ok for me to eat the meal, but I’ll touch on a few things here. First, calories are the big thing. Calories in, calories out matter, and they matter a lot. There’s are other important issues, but mostly it comes down to energy balance. To give you an idea of my energy expenditure energy yesterday, First, our section did an hour of physical training which entailed the following: 20 minutes of continuous exercise, 5 pullups, 10 parallel bar dips and 20 lunges, rotating through as many sets as possible in those 20 minututes. At the end, we all did a minute of situps. For me that ended up being 47 situps. I lost count of how many sets I did, but I’ll estimate around 20. So that’s 100 pullups, 200 dips, 400 lunges. Next, after lunch I went for a two mile walk. This in addition to walking quite a bit during my normal daily duties. We also spent about 2 hours moving big rolls of razor wire and moving some moderately heavy boxes around. So as you can see, I’m fairly active.
My food intake for the day, my energy intake, comprised the following:
Breakfast: 3 egg cheese omelet; two pieces whole wheat toast with butter
Lunch: Quarterpounder with cheese; 10 piece Chicken McNugget
Supper: One 6oz filet mignon wrapped in bacon; one ear of corn on the cob; 2 16oz cans of beer; and handful of mixed nuts
Some quick online research on calorie content, and using Fitness Magazine’s calorie requirement calculator (male, 41 years old, heavy exercise, 173 pounds), tells me that my calorie intake yesterday was 2859 and my daily average calorie requirement to sustain my current body weight is 2960 calories. Almost exactly on, but just a little under. My appetite yesterday tells me that this is correct: I felt very slight hunger pangs before going to bed, but nothing serious. The net result is no weight gain. Period.
Many people are familiar with Super Size Me, a documentary directed by film maker Morgan Spurlock. In the film, Spurlock ate only meals from McDonalds for 30 continuous days and “Super Sized” his meals whenever the cashier asked him if he wanted it so. The result was a measurable deterioration in Spurlock’s health and well being. He gained over 23 pounds. Many people attributed this to the evils of fast food. Ignored was the fact that Spurlock consumed over 5000 calories per day, and did no regular exercise during this period. Well, at least his nutritionist in the movie tells him he’s eating that many calories per day, though it’s been pointed out that in order to reach that many calories per day, Spurlock had to have broken his own eating rules, that is, he simply ate more than he stated. And, he has never released a food log showing what he actually ate, only stating that he Super Sized 9 times total in 30 days. The following video explains:
The following video shows Spurlock for what he really is: A Vegan zealot, out to prove to the world the evils of meat, and the healthfulness of celery:
So Spurlock did what every bad scientist does: Set out to prove what he already knew. If Spurlock ate 5000 calories of bananas he would have gained weight and felt awful. If he’d eaten 2500 calories a day of McDonalds and cut out the soda and fries, he would have been fine.
In fact, several people have lost weight on diets of “bad” food from McDonalds.
And… this man.
Tim Naughton did an experiment and showed he could lose weight over the same period that Spurlock gained weight, eating only fast food.
Eating fewer calories makes people healthier in almost all measurable ways. Haughton’s blood lipids all improved while eating only at fast food restaurants.
The nutrition professor below ate about 1800 calories a day for 10 weeks, consuming twinkies and snack cakes. He lost 27 pounds and his colesterol went down by 20 points. This is real science. And frankly it drives people nuts. Many people who say they “trust in science, not religion” are lying: They simply believe what they want to believe.
Here’s the Twinkie Diet:
So, my diet strongly focuses on these factors: calories, effects on blood sugar, intermittent fasting. My calories remain reasonable, I stay away from foods that spike blood sugar–especially chronic use of sugary drinks and sugary foods low in fiber, and finally, skipping about two meals a weak leading to a 16-18 hour fast. Pretty simple. I don’t count calories, except when I’m making a point to unbelievers.
Think about it. A Quarter Pounder with cheese has about 510 calories. If someone ate only 3 Quarter Pounders a day, they’d take in only 1530 calories a day. But many Americans are taking in 4000-5000 a day–and that’s why they’re fat and sick.
Diet and Common Sense
I recently had a long series of exchanges on another blog. The topic was diet. I posted some studies supporting the reduction of carbohydrate intake as a way to reduce weight and maintain health, and received a few flames for it. In any case, people doubt the veracity of what I’m saying.
One person advocated a “balanced” diet, instead of the one that he thought I prefered. I’m all for balanced, but balanced is not what Americans are eating nowadays and they are simply eating too much of their unbalanced diet. 2/3rds of adult Americans are overweight and obesity among children has tripled in the last 30 years. Clearly something is not right.
The average American is consuming between 300 and 500 grams of carbohydrates per day. And these aren’t “good carbs.” Much, perhaps most of these carbs, are refined or in the form of liquid sugar ie soda and energy drinks. This is simply unacceptable and I belive that the average American puts away more bags of Doritos per week than Porterhouse steaks. In other words, I do not believe that the obesity problem has its root in meat consumption, but in the over eating of calories in the form of carbohydrate.
One poster on the blog pointed out that the science was behind me. Recommendations in the scientific community are 130 grams of carbs per day, with 38 grams of fiber. That’s 100 grams of digestible carbs per day. That sounds right on to me. That’s about 5 slices of whole wheat bread a day. Is that “extreme”? No, what’s extreme is the current American diet, a virtual deluge of refined carbohydrates. Science is figuring out that these carbs are worse than fat.
Carbs have their uses. I’m not anticarbohydrate. But almost all of the carbohydrates I eat have some fiber mixed in, besides a few lumps of dark chocolate every now and again. In my experience, I start getting uncomfortable if I cut carbs below, say, 60 grams a day. My sleep gets messed up. Plus, I notice a boost in some physical activities and energy when I eat a few more carbs–about 100 grams in a day. My mood’s better, too. So, yes, eat some carbs. But don’t eat as many as the average American.
Lets be clear. The way an apple impacts blood sugar and insulin is significantly different than what happens after a person drinks a glass of apple juice. I say don’t drink fruit juice–ever. Eat the apple or orange. Not only will the juice spike insulin, it won’t make you feel nearly as full as the fruit. Do this for years, than decades and we make ourselves old before our time.
My diet today (it’s 3:21 pm right now) is as follows:
Breakfast: Three-egg omelet and two pieces of whole wheat toast with peanut butter; 2 cups of coffee; 2 glasses of water.
Lunch: A “Doner” wrap (Lamb meat with lettuce, onions, garlic tomatoes, cheese wrapped in a flour tortilla); 2 bottles of water; 1 cup of coffee; 2 sqaures Dove dark chocolate.
Does this sound extreme to anyone? Just remember though, if a person asked me if they should have 2 cans of beer after work or 2 cans of Coke, I go with the beer all the way.
Moms, don’t let your kids grow up to be soda drinkers
Want to have and immediate positive impact on your kid’s health? Don’t let them drink soda or fruit juice. Yes, that’s right, fruit juice. Juice is pretty much just soda without caffeine. For instance, Motts 100% apple juice contains 28 grams of sugar per 8oz glass. A can of soda is about 40-50 grams. That’s about 14 teaspoons of sugar in a single can. And it doesn’t even make you feel full.
Our bodies are not meant to ingest sugar in this form. In nature, the absorbtion of sugar from fruit is blunted by the fibre. Without the fibre, insulin levels skyrocket. Over years, chronically high insulin levels lead to obesity, and eventually “Syndrome X”; a systemic failure as a result of insulin resistance.
The best breakfast for kids is a whole grain cereal with whole milk. No juice, just water. Teach them when they’re young and it’ll be easy for them when they’re adults.
Vegetarians are mean
You can look at my recent post about individual traits indicating something of the greater whole of a person.
I have my opinion of vegetarians too. I don’t think most of them are very nice people and some of them seem really, really mean. I’ve written of this in several posts in the past. Don’t know if it’s a vitamin B deficiency or an intrinsic trait of ideologues. Probably a little of both. I’m sure there are some friendly vegetarians out there. Honestly though, I’ve yet to meet one who isn’t a little quirky. It’s nothing personal–it’s an honest observation. I don’t care what people eat.
The book, The Vegetarian Myth, by Lierre Keith, made Amazon’s best seller list in the health arena. Keith is a former vegetarian who did her research and found that most of the reported supremacy was based on unchallenged assumptions. Everything from health benefits to environmental utopias took a hit in her research.
But as usual, the angriest amongst us–the ultra-leftists–rose up with a vengeance. Lierre was recently attacked by masked aggressors, who shoved cayenne-laced pies into her face while she read from her book at a convention. The mostly vegetarian crowd (it was San Francisco afterall) cheered as she tried to wipe the irritant from her eyes.
So to all the nice vegetarians out there: I’m glad you didn’t have to kill a moo-moo to eat dinner. But to all the mean vegetarians, why don’t you stick that carrot where the sun don’t shine.
Veganism
Read below a comment I posted on a friend’s blog concerning the ethics and healthfulness of veganism.
This book The Vegetarian Myth, is written by a feminist who drank all the grape kool-aid and paid the price. Her health was permanently damaged by 20 years of veganism. Eventually she came to explore the real implications of veganism, and found that it is unsustainable as a world-wide diet.
Only people who are motivated by ideology or religion can continue in veganism. They will, over a period of years, watch their health and physical capabilities rapidly decline.
I have never met a vegan who was physically strong. They may be able to run for distance (even this capability will diminish much quicker than if they were not vegans) but they simply have no physical power. If you find an Olympian who is a vegan, it will be in an endurance, aerobic dominated sport, not an anaerobic power sport like bobsledding. This is because power sports exert much more stress on the body. I remember reading something written by All-Pro tight end for the Atlanta Falcons, Tony Gonzalez. He decided to go vegan one off season. When he went to the ream’s first workout session inthe gym, he could barely lift the dumbbells that before he’d thrown around for high repetitions. He made some adjustments to his diet, and in his new book, recommends small amounts of meat.
My sister experienced the same sort of thing when she went to play rugby in college. She was a vegetarian, but quickly found that she only performed her best if she ate meat. In high school, where she was the best female athlete on the track and field team as well as cross-country, she simply didn’t experience the stressors of rugby–which is a power-sport with vast endurance requirements.
Vegan seems to me to attract those looking for The Way. Hence the nearly religious mindset.
Can one survive survive without meat? Oh yes–go to India and find vegans, who because of their religious convictions eat only vegetables and suffer from the worst mal-nutrition in the world, not to mention some of the lowest IQs because of stunted brain development. Can a vegan in the West do better? Yes, by micro-managing their diet to a point that would make me miserable, and that is only sustainable bythe very thing that many in the vegan community would stand against: Industrialisation. Without industry there is almost never the selection of food that we have here. Not in the wilds of Africa or the Rainforests of South America. In other words, the claim that veganism as practiced by the most Westerners is a natural diet, is wrong. The diet is in fact a product of Western living, not nature, in which man will eat anything once living in order to survive.
http://aphilosopher.wordpress.com/2010/02/18/debating-meat-ii-theology-of-meat/
Health Heresy
First off, I’m not a doctor. I’m not responsible for any health benefits you may gain from not following the rules your unhealthy doctor gives you. You know, like, don’t eat meat, don’t go out in the sun and don’t drink.
Want to join me in my health heresy? Do what I do:
- Eat plenty of meat, fat and all. Atkins was a genius and unafraid of the truth.
- Skip a meal every now and again. Believe me, not eating food is not the reason people’s health is suffering in America.
- Drink coffee. Remember when it was bad for you? Turns out it’s not. It has tons of anti-oxidants, and apparently significantly reduces the chances of dementia and some types of cancer.
- Drink alcohol. Lower your chances of heart disease and dementia with moderate consumption.
- Get some sun. People in higher longitudinal areas have higher rates of cancer. The magic is in the vitamin D–a hormone not a vitamin really. Makes you happy too. Don’t use sun screen unless you think you’ll burn.
Do these and the Inquisition may be knocking on your door wondering why you look and act a decade younger than you really are. But if you want to age quickly, simply eat lots of sugar like most other people do.
Has science really done better than religion?
The modern age can be properly summed in this way: Man has moved away from relying on the unseen and has now placed his faith in the seen. That is: Empiricism. There can be little argument that this change in thinking has resulted in tremendous advances in medicine, engineering, and the overall comfort level of the Western citizen.
But this is all quite new. Aristotle’s theory of the Tabula Rasa barely impacted the ancients. Not until Aquinas and Locke melded empiricism with Christian doctrine did a real scientific method begin to form and even then, it was not until the advent of the Steam Age, that it can truly said that science had a major impact on the life of the everyday man.
But the true schism of thought occurred when Galileo published his book: Dialogue. Man began a slow movement away from his belief in an invisible God, even though Galileo himself argued that his findings were not contrary to scripture. To this day, the following passages are used as “proof” that the scriptures are not scientific, therefore cannot be divinely inspired:
“the world is firmly established, it cannot be moved.”~Psalm 96:10
“And the sun rises and sets and returns to its place” ~Ecclesiastes 1:5
Galileo argues, like Augustine, that the above statements were obviously metaphorical. The fissure between science and God was set, and those who did not believe set about to insert a chisel to widen the gap. Darwin all but completed the split of religion and science as monolith.
The gap between science and religion has had several unintended and negative consequences for science itself. For one, it set those who are vehemently anti-religion on a path that seeks to use science as a weapon of religious deconstruction. This is no better–indeed probably worse–than the Church of Galileo’s day which sought to mold nature into an ideological model of a perfect Christian Universe. The problem was, they had no real arguments as to why that universe was perfect or Christian.
We see now, that the atheists try to prove the evil of religion, by labeling evil men of the past as religious, and assigning religion as these men’s motivation. In reality, any motivation of adequate power can be used to commit atrocity. Repeatedly we are reminded of Hitler’s mystical and religious overtones. I remain extremely sceptical of Hitler’s religious motivations and I urge those who want to dwell on his mysticism as his primary reason for slaughtering millions, to consider this: What would his efforts have come to without science? A zealot without a weapon is only a hateful monk.
Though Hitler may have searched for religious texts to justify himself, it seems his beliefs would have been the same regardless. Afterall, he was a staunch believer in the authenticity of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion–a proven fraudulent document written by the Russian, Czarist secret police.
The science used by the Nazi’s is well documented.
Nazis measure the skull to prove racial purity
Jew submitted to cold water experiment
And of course, the strides made by the Nazis in military tactics and weaponry have strongly affected all modern military thought.
Is this blog entry an anti-science, anti-intellectualism diatribe on my part? No–on the contrary. It is a call for truth. The schism between science and religion has in many cases boiled to scientists being afraid of what they may find, because it contradicts their ethos. Because of this, because of that split that ocured long ago, the intellectual Left, to this day, holds a heavy sway over science. And so, they are short-changing science by starting with an ideological premise. We’ve seen the terrible results of this type of thinking: The man-made global warming issues we have today are a symptom of a greater evil: Science as a weapon.
There are many other examples that I see, of science being twisted and truth suffering. Though some may not see the problem as a large one, let’s look at the effects of ideology on our diets. Heart disease is the number one killer of Americans. Shouldn’t we take back the science of good diet from those that have reasons other than our best health in mind? What am I speaking of? Again, go back to the split of religion and science. While the original premise that fat is responsible for heart disease was originally born of over-simplified, linear thought, it has been allowed to remain and prosper because of the Left. It is the Left, with its adoration of vegetarianism–and therefore the over-consumption of grains and processed carbohydrate–that preach the evils of eating meat. The science simply doesn’t back it–but a modern liberal’s ethos does. Dr. Atkins, though his theories were not perfect, was willing to step outside his preconceptions–and more and more he is being shown as correct.
And to think that Christianity and science cannot coexist is simply wrong. I’m not pressing for the abolition of science, but for the abolition of fear.
My novel’s title: For Want of Knowledge, is taken from the Bible verse:
For Want of Knowledge, my people perish, Hosea 4:6
It’s about a man, Craig Looms, who finds himself without friends, skills or direction, and so falls under the sway of an assassin vampire, resurrected. I understand man needs science, lest we perish.
I challenge scientists to cast aside their own bias. To face truth, however horrible it may be, however it may discredit their comrades. I see science drifting away and becoming the holy relic of an anti-mystical religion. The unipolar control that leftist intellectuals have exuded on science has damaged science and its reputation. Bring it back from the cliffs of idealism to the pastures of truth.
Is exercise making people fat?
I love exercise. I encourage all people to take up some form of physical fitness, because the benefits are remarkable and documented.
But is weight loss one of those benefits?
I work for an organization–the US Army–that mandates physical exercise. It doesn’t just say: do pushups and run whenever you can. It makes its supervisors, NCOs, make sure that soldiers are exercising and then it tests those soldiers bi-annually to make sure they are making the grade. It also has weight and bodyfat standards. Yet there are tons of what I would call, skinny-fat people in the Army. Their legs and arms look skinny, but their guts and butts tell a different story. They look doughy and soft. Rather weak.
Most of these people, I think, have come under the illusion that if you work out on most days, you can plow however much food you wish into your mouth and still lose weight. And actually, thinking like that, combined with excercise, may actually be making us fatter than no exercise at all. Exercise makes you hungry–hungrier than not exercising.
I just read an article in Time Magazine, written by John Cloud. Cloud talks about various studies that conclude people, working out, typically ingest more calories than when they were sedentary. He also shows that normal movement throughout the day, in addition to eating a spare amount of calories, may be more effective than regular trips to the gym at helping people lose weight. To my surprise, I agreed with most of what Cloud said.
There is a light at the end of the dark tunnel, however. In the article, Cloud laments that he’s 163 lbs, and that he was only able to reach that weight by cutting out dessert.
I’ll step aside for a moment, and let the an expert–perhaps the foremost on body mass control–do some talking: Clarence Bass.
Bass wrote a retort to Cloud’s article, here.
I think Bass’ best point is that Cloud doesn’t seem to enjoy his exercise. Whatever someone decides to do, they’d best enjoy it if they wish to have long-term results. He also shows that short, intense bursts are much more efficient than steady-state aerobics in building fitness. I’m not saying stop running for distance if you enjoy it. I’m only saying that if you don’t like it, there are options.
Like Bass, I prefer intervals and weight lifting or calisthenics. Sometimes I do like a long run, but before I came in the Army, I almost never ran more than a mile or so. I did interval sprints and lifted kettlebells. I was lean and strong. I’d skip breakfast sometimes. I’d allow myself to get hungry once in a while, but not always. In the Army, I run more, but most of that is only to prepare for an upcoming physical test, then I tend to move back to my old training ways. But I like to change it up. This past weekend, I ran in my first 10k race, placed second in my age group despite not having run in three weeks. It hurt, I admit, but the change and the challenge are good. Competition gives a reason to stay fit.
Keeping with Bass’ point about choosing exercise you like, let’s look at my deadlift training. While I’m deadlifting, I get a surge of energy. Low rep, high intensity (weight) gives your nervous system a charge. I get so jacked up from doing the deadlift, that I have to purposely put the breaks on to keep myself from doing too much. Three sets of five reps can build incredible strength over time, provided you follow the progressive overload principle and don’t allow yourself to burn out. Point is, I love this training and want to do it. I run for distance because I have to, therefore I slack on running when I don’t have to.
Pick stuff you like, do that the most, and add a touch of other things that you need for health. Do what you like 75% of the time. The rest, do what doesn’t come so naturally. You’ll find that the change of pace keeps you motivated, but doesn’t grind you down by becoming punishment.
As far as diet goes, I agree with Cloud that exercise can make you hungry, especially lots of aerobic exercise. As I’ve said in other articles, my weight has been steady for over a decade. My bodyfat % is around 8. I shifted to a diet very similar to Clarence Bass’ plus some intermittent fasting and fairly quickly dropped about 10lbs. Bass says low fat, moderate protein and heavy on the veggies is the way to go. I didn’t worry about fat (chicken skin and all), didn’t eat as much bread as Bass does (he eats it every day, the heavy, whole grain type) and went very heavy on the salad. I’m not talking lots of lettuce in the salad. I’m talking heavy stuff that made me full. It’s important that people realize the volume effect of water-laden vegies with fibre. They make you feel full and they digest slowly, so you stay satiated longer. Also, I rarely ate dessert. On the other hand, I wasn’t shy about beer–usually one or two cans every single day. That was my dessert I guess.
So, while Cloud writes an excellent article, I would guess that his exercise isn’t very intense–it’s just long and painful. I can guarantee (almost) that if I were to work with him, put him on a program of deadlifting and work in some intervals and lactic acid producing (and thus growth hormone producing) calisthenics and kettlebells, he’s lose his gut–and even be able to slip in a piece of pie once in a while.
Again: Fast
“A little starvation can really do more for the average sick man than can the best medicines and the best doctors. I do not mean a restricted diet; I mean total abstinence from food for one or two days. I speak from experience; starvation has been my cold and fever doctor for 15 years, and has accomplished a cure in all instances.”~ Mark Twain
Yet another study showing that periodic fasting has health benefits. This one studied a group of Mormons. Mormons have lower risk of Coronary Artery Disease than the people surrounding them who are not Mormons. The Mormon faith prohibits known factors of heart disease, such as smoking, and also restricts other behaviors that have possible effects on health, such as alcohol consumption and drinking coffee and tea. This study adjusts for those tertiary factors and focuses on the effects of fasting, which is also part of the Mormon faith.
When it was all said and done, the scientists found that fasting reduced the chances of a person having Coronary Artery Disease.
Don’t listen to those who tell you that fat people just aren’t eating enough meals and that skipping chow will only make you fat. Eating too much makes people fat, plain and simple.
Easy, effective pre-competition meal
Recent science shows that apples may increase endurance capacity, due to an anti-oxidant known as Quercetin. The study showed that people fed Quercetin twice a day for seven days showed a 13.2 percent increase in endurance with no additional training. That’s a huge boost. Actually, apples have a number of health benefits.
In addition, very cold water increases work capacity, especially in warm wheather. When I say cold water, I mean 4 degrees C.
So, a good pre-competion meal would have me eating two apples the day prior to a race or game. Spread some peanut butter on a sliced apple to add some fat and salt. Drink a tall glass of water before going to bed the night before, to help with general hydration. Loss of as little as 2% of bodyweight can negatively effect performance and a 5% loss can reduce performance by 30%.
An hour before competition, eat half an apple with peanut butter and drink a glass or two of ice water.
Want to live longer, look younger, have increased athletic ability and stay disease free? Eat less.
The study results are mounting: Less calories=better and longer life. I practice fasting, which by-proxy reduces calorie intake; you can’t catch up when you quit the fast, even short fasts.
Here are two monkeys, side by side, the one on the left given about half the calories of the one on the right. The monkeys are within one year in age. According to the study, the monkey on the left is more energetic, his blood tests are perfect, while the monkey on the right looks older, acts older and his blood shows high glucose and triglycerides–and arthritis and wrinkles.
Plain and simple, we’ve got to stop eating so much.
How “science” failed Americans with the low fat diet
Gary Taubes wrote an article back in 2002 for the Yew York Times, entitled: “What if it’s all been a big fat lie?”
Well, the diet that got sold to us, with little or no fat, and lots and lots of processed carbohydrates was a lie. It didn’t–and couldn’t do– what the doctors said.
Taubes later authored: “Good Calories, Bad Calories.” in which he addresses hundreds of studies that have decisively demonstrated low-glycemic foods, and high protein and fat are the way to go. The book is great.
The road to health= Intermittent fasting, low glycemic foods, slow digesting vegetables and fruits, meat, natural fats, moderate alcohol consumption and exercise. Got it? Do it.
Recent Comments