This last Wednesday, January 7, 2026, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and U.S. Department of Agriculture released the Dietary Guidelines for Americans that will be used through the end of 2030. These guidelines are to not only to be used by citizens to plan their meals but are used by policymakers and federal nutrition programs (like school meals, military rations, WIC, SNAP). So, they have significant impact. https://cdn.realfood.gov/DGA.pdf

According to the press release on the HHS website, the Guidelines emphasize simple, flexible guidance rooted in modern nutrition science:

• Prioritize protein at every meal
• Consume full-fat dairy with no added sugars
• Eat vegetables and fruits throughout the day, focusing on whole forms
• Incorporate healthy fats from whole foods such as meats, seafood, eggs, nuts, seeds, olives, and avocados
• Focus on whole grains, while sharply reducing refined carbohydrates
• Limit highly processed foods, added sugars, and artificial additives
• Eat the right amount for you, based on age, sex, size, and activity level
• Choose water and unsweetened beverages to support hydration
• Limit alcohol consumption for better overall health

Going back to 2018, I’ve written articles about the Dietary Guidelines several times before.

Even back then, almost 8 years ago now, my message was simple:
“…you should not blindly trust what the government tells you when it comes to what to eat. There is a lot at play behind the scenes when any new guidelines or regulation is issued.

My recommendation is simple and is always the same: eat real food. By eating real food, as close to its natural state as possible, you're likely to be much healthier simply because you'll avoid a lot of processed foods. Unaltered foods contain all the nutrients your body needs, and in far more ideal ratios than even the best scientists and estimate.”

Back in June of 2025, I wrote that I hoped the new HHS and Dept of Health leadership would make sweeping changes. 

While not everything I hoped for changed, the new guidelines have more drastic changes than we have ever seen.

WHOLE FOODS

The new guidelines emphasis on whole foods is huge! The guidelines advise people to eat “whole foods” or “real food.” This is almost word for word what I have hoped for and I’m excited that this language is so prominent.  Virtually all nutrition experts agree that eating foods in which the ingredients are limited, recognizable and not highly processed is a good thing. Heavily processed foods have very little to no benefits.

Another interesting thing the guidelines emphasize is the introduction of allergens, like food containing peanuts, wheat, eggs and shellfish, in children’s diets at around 6 months old. The research on this is clear that it lowers the risk of developing food allergies later on.

PROTEIN

The previous recommended dietary allowance for protein was 0.8 grams per kilogram of body weight per day. The new guidelines suggest 1.2 to 1.6 grams per kilogram (0.54 and 0.73 grams of protein per pound of body weight daily). While I still think this is low, it’s an improvement.

ADDED SUGAR

Previous guidelines suggested no added sugar in food for children under 2; the new guidelines extend this to age 10. Everyone that knows me knows how I feel about excess sugar in anyone’s diet, but it has bigger impacts on children. Kids that eat too much sugar will likely face a lifetime of health problems. This may be because early sugar exposure can affect children’s long-term taste preferences. American children currently consume a lot of added sugar.

SATURATED FATS

One of my main sticking points with the previous food pyramids and then MyPlate was that they all said to limit saturated fats. The recommendation to limit saturated fats remains intact in the newest guidelines, yet they also encourage people to eat foods higher in saturated fats, including full-fat dairy and red meat, and list butter and beef tallow as options for cooking with “healthy fats.”
The problem is that it would be nearly impossible for people to follow the guidelines’ suggestions on protein and dairy while staying under the 10% saturated fat limit it recommends.

The influence of health advocacy groups and medical societies can be seen still and is likely the reason for the contradicting recommendations on saturated fat.

Nina Teicholz, author of the 2014 book “The Big Fat Surprise” and head of the advocacy group Nutrition Coalition is someone that I have referenced many times on this site over the years. I trust her research and opinion on nutrition.

The positive messaging about butter, beef tallow, and red meat are “impossible to reconcile” with limitations on saturated fat, Teicholz said, suggesting that Kennedy and his advisers may have been reluctant to stick their necks out as the only country in the world without limits on saturated fat. They also may have been wary of challenging the nutritional establishment, she said.

LOW-CARB

A low-carbohydrate is included in a section called “Special Populations & Consideration” as a possible option for people with chronic disease (obesity, diabetes, other metabolic diseases). But as I mentioned already, achieving this low-carbohydrate diet, which will be higher in protein, will be nearly impossible with the continued 10% cap on saturated fats.

FOOD GROUP TIES

I’ve written in the past about the influence of lobbyists and those tied to the food industry on these guidelines.

Unfortunately, these ties still remain. Three of the nine members of the HHS panel that wrote these guidelines have received grants or done consulting work for the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association. One of those also received a research grant from and serves as an adviser to the National Pork Board. At least three members, including two of the same ones who have done work for red meat groups, have financial ties to dairy industry organizations, such as the National Dairy Council.

Overall, while they are not perfect, I’m very pleased with the direction these new guidelines have taken. That’s the first time I’ve ever been able to write that!

There is without a doubt conventional wisdom about metabolism. It goes something like, “Most people gain weight each year no matter what because their metabolisms slow down, especially around middle age.”.
We’ve also been told that women have slower metabolisms than men. Menopause only makes things worse, slowing women’s metabolisms even more.
Turns out, none of this is true.

A study done a few year ago, published in Science, using data from 6,400 people across the world, ranging in age from 8 days to 95 years old, had some results that have changed how experts think about metabolism.
The shocking results of this study were made possible because they were able to use regression analysis to remove any excess body fat from each person. Not only did they find that there are no real differences between the metabolic rates of men and women after controlling for other factors, but the results also showed something that had never been identified - four distinct phases of human metabolism based on age.

The four phases of metabolism:

    Infancy (Up to 1 year): Metabolism is at its highest, burning calories at a rate about 50% higher than adults. Babies absorb everything. Everyone loves a fat baby, right?

    Adolescence (1 to 20 years): The metabolic rate gradually slows by about 3% each year until it reaches adult levels around age 20. Despite the teen years being a time of growth spurts, the researchers didn’t see any uptick in daily calorie needs in adolescence after they took body size into account.

    Adulthood (20 to 60 years): The metabolic rate remains stable, even through major hormonal changes like pregnancy and menopause. We are hardwired for our metabolism to be stable through the majority of our adult life. While several factors could explain the thickening waistlines that often emerge during our prime working years, the findings suggest that a changing metabolism isn’t one of them.

    Older Adulthood (After 60 years): The metabolic rate begins to decline, slowing by about 0.7% to 1% per year. This decline is likely linked to a general slowdown in organ function. Energy requirements of just the heart, liver, kidney and brain account for about 65% of your resting metabolic rate.  The slowing of your metabolism at age 60 is likely then linked to your organs not functioning as well as they should.  The authors go so far as to note that despite how ‘young’ a person looks in their 60’s, biologically their organs are likely not functioning nearly as well as they had previously. Getting old is just never going to be easy on your body!

There are more than 80 co-authors on the study. They combined data from six different labs collected over 40 years. All of the research centers involved in the project were studying metabolic rates with a method considered the gold standard — doubly labeled water. It’s a urine test that involves having a person drink water in which the hydrogen and oxygen in the water molecules have been replaced with naturally occurring “heavy” forms and then measuring how quickly they’re flushed out. The investigators also had participants’ heights and weights and percentage body fat, which allowed them to ultimately factor in someone’s excess fat and muscle mass when it came to calculating their actual metabolism.

Many people still see their weight increase as they get older, despite their metabolism staying relatively the same throughout their life. This suggests that weight gain isn’t a result of slowing metabolism. Rather, it’s more likely to be due to eating more food than our body uses. What else contributes to weight gain?

Primary factors to weight gain as we age are:

Muscle loss (Sarcopenia): Starting around age 30, adults lose about 3–8% of muscle mass per decade. Muscle burns more calories at rest than fat, so less muscle mass means fewer calories are burned throughout the day.

Reduced physical activity: People tend to become less active as they get older, which lowers overall daily energy expenditure. They usually do not adjust food intake accordingly.

Poor sleep: Your body continues to perform essential functions overnight, requiring energy (45-55 calories per hour) to do so. This includes repairing cells, processing nutrients, and maintaining a core body temperature.

Fat storage: Excess body fat crushes our metabolism. The body's ability to burn fat for energy is reduced, while its capacity to store fat increases, creating a cycle that favors further weight gain

Medications: Some medications can promote weight gain.

Remember that all of these findings were after controlling for the amount of fat free mass people have - pretending people were all lean - and then comparing.  

The study shows that less fat that you have, regardless of age, the more energy you expend. 

Every 5 years around June, I write an article about the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. This is because they are reviewed every five years to advise on what Americans should eat to prevent chronic disease. They were first released in 1980, yet the U.S. obesity rate has tripled since then.

The recommendations were designed primarily for healthy bodies, which most Americans don’t have. Not only are 74% of us overweight or obese, but about 40% are insulin-resistant or pre-diabetic. Only around 12% of Americans are metabolically healthy. The guidelines don’t account for the dysfunctional metabolic state of our bodies and frankly assume that people live a healthy lifestyle that consists of frequent exercise and minimal stress.

These Dietary Guidelines are used by professional associations such as the American Medical Association and the American Diabetes Association. They are used to determine what foods to feed our children (National School Lunch Program), what military rations consist of, and what foods are available on SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) and WIC (Special Nutritional Program for Women, Infants and Children). Feeding programs for the elderly are also based on the Dietary Guidelines. So even though most Americans may know very little about the actual Guidelines, they are used to sculpt advice from medical professionals and even what foods are available to anyone that is fed by a government program.

From the original food pyramid in 1992 to the introduction of MyPlate in 2011, the recommendations have included large portions of processed carbohydrates. Americans suffering from insulin resistance, obesity and diabetes need less carbohydrates in their diets. Excessive carbohydrate intake fuels high insulin levels, as insulin manages the rise in blood sugar caused by carbs. High carbohydrate consumption reduces the clearance of insulin from the body, which further increases blood lipid levels. A 2024 study found that insulin levels rose from 28% to 41% between 1998 and 2018.

There is plenty of evidence to support the notion that when metabolically vulnerable people consume less carbohydrates, their insulin levels decrease. Yet until recently, doctors and scientists advocating low-carb diets were viewed skeptically by the nutrition and cardiology communities.

Processed carbohydrates, often sugar, are particularly damaging and not to be confused with healthy high-fiber carbohydrates in fruits and vegetables. Processed carbs are packed with energy and are absorbed rapidly into the bloodstream, adding to the metabolic chaos.

The current dietary guidelines recommend that 45% to 65% of daily calories come from carbs. That percentage is too high for the metabolically challenged bodies that have become the norm, especially since most people consume carbs in the ultra-processed form. The interior isles of grocery stores are full of cereals, soda, chips, pastas, candy, baked goods, bread, bagels, frozen pizza and other processed carbohydrates that crush our metabolic system.

While I still hear the “calories in versus calories out” theory when it comes to losing weight, that does not mean that your body doesn’t care what those calories consist of. Cutting calories from carbohydrates will lower insulin levels, which in turn helps mobilize fat from fat cells and burn that fat for fuel. Low-carbohydrate diets also keep people feeling full longer and prevent fluctuating feelings of hunger.

So back to the guidelines. In 1990, Congress passed the National Nutrition Monitoring and Related Research Act, which mandated that the Dietary Guidelines be published jointly by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) every five years. They were last updated in 2020, so it’s time again.

If you pay attention to the news, you know that the new Secretary of HHS is Robert F. Kennedy Jr.. He came out decently and said that he intends to revise Dietary Guidelines for Americans by the end of this summer.

Kennedy and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins have voiced concerns that the previous guidelines were overly influenced by the food industry and not based on sound science.

Some organizations like the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) express concern that RFK Jr’s personal beliefs could override scientific evidence. CSPI argues that lack of adherence to the current 2020 guidelines, not the guidelines themselves, is the real issue. But data shows the increase in obesity and metabolic disease in this country has risen proportionally with the introduction and consumption of processed foods.

However, as I wrote in 2020, even at the time, those guidelines faced criticism regarding industry ties, exclusion of certain research, and lack of clarity on topics like sugar and alcohol intake.

So what might we see in the 2025 version? Kennedy said "We're going to have four-page dietary guidelines that tell people essentially, eat whole food, eat the food that's good for you.”

Kennedy also told lawmakers that HHS would study food additives and suggested food packaging should contain labels indicating the presence of some additives.

My hope is that the new guidelines not only recommend reduced processed carbohydrate consumption, but will talk about healthy fats. The 2020 MyPlate avoids fats altogether. This likely confirms some unfounded fears of fat and steers consumers toward low-fat, high-carbohydrate foods. Eating butter and healthy oils, like olive, avocado coconut in cooking, on salads, and at the table should be part of everyone’s diet. These healthy fats reduce harmful cholesterol and are good for the heart, and Americans don’t consume enough of them each day.

I would like to see the recommended daily portion of protein and type be increased. A hot dog is not the same as a good piece of salmon. The consensus from people I trust is between 0.8 and 1.2 grams of protein per pound of body weight daily.  There are variables that must be accounted for, such as a person’s activity level, age, any medical conditions they have, and their health goals. For reference, under these recommendations, someone who weighs 180 pounds would need between 144 grams and 216 grams per day.
Not all protein is created equal and the guidelines should emphasize protein from both animal-based (red meat, chicken, fish, eggs) and plant-based options.

The current U.S. Dietary Guidelines recommend that protein make up 10-35% of your daily calories and the recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) is just 0.8 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight (this is only 0.36 grams per pound), which is roughly 65 grams for the 180 pound person I referenced. Nowhere near enough.

While you might consider it nit-picky, I would like to see the guidelines distinguish between types of vegetables. Americans are particularly deficient in their vegetable consumption—except for potatoes and french fries. Potatoes are chock full of rapidly digested starch, and they have the same effect on blood sugar as refined grains and sweets. Believe it or not, some people (and school lunch programs) consider eating deep fried onion rings a vegetable. Or a sweet potato with brown sugar and marshmallows as a healthy vegetable.

MyPlate recommends dairy at every meal, even though there is little if any evidence that high dairy intakes protect against osteoporosis, and there is considerable evidence that too-high intakes can be harmful. As for sugary drinks, MyPlate says 100% fruit juice counts as part of the Fruit Group. I would like to see the new guidelines talk about consuming mostly water with some coffee or tea (not your sugary Starbucks drink).

The new guidelines don’t have to be published until December 31, 2025, but I am hopeful that RFK Jr and his team at the HHS will make some improvements over the previous recommendations.

Leaves are turning and the temperature is dropping. That means it’s time for “No Sugar November”! Can you go from November 1^st until Thanksgiving (November 28th) with no sugar? It might seem like a monumental task, but take a few minutes to read the rest of this post and I’ll guide you through the four weeks that will hopefully change your life.

Before getting into the details of the challenge, I feel like I should take a minute to remind everyone why sugar needs to be eliminated from your diet. Here are some of the things that sugar/sweeteners do:

• Promotes fat storage and weight gain
• Decreases your body’s production of leptin, a hormone critical for appetite regulation (i.e., it makes you not realize that you are full).
• It thickens the blood
• Compromises your immune system
• Fuels cancer cells (cancer LOVES sugar)
• Disrupts transfer of amino acids to muscles
• Triggers inflammation
• Causes Type 2 diabetes
• Causes nerve damage
• Causes Cardiovascular Disease
• Has addictive properties
• Causes tooth decay

If you want to know more about all of the horrible things that happen to your body when you consume sugar and/or artificial sweeteners, do a simple Google search.

So if you want to join me in the challenge, here’s what you do:

Starting now, look at the labels of everything that you eat. If the word “sugar” (in any form) is listed in the ingredients, don’t eat it. But it’s not that simple. Sugar can come in many forms. It can be very tricky to find hidden sugar in foods that you don’t even think of as being sweet. It’s obvious that candy bars and donuts are off limits, but would you ever think that pasta sauce, peanut butter and yogurt have added sugar? Even simply drinking a glass of sweet tea can trigger the release of huge amounts of dopamine into the brain. It’s the same chemical that causes people to become addicted to gambling, alcohol, drugs, sex, etc.. So when your brain gets this release from even a small amount of sugar, it makes you want it more. The only way to keep from getting cravings is to cut it out completely.

Here's a list of common names for added sugars and sweeteners you may find on food labels:

Common Sugars

1. Sucrose
2. Fructose
3. Glucose
4. Dextrose
5. Maltose
6. Lactose
7. Galactose

Syrups and Other Sweeteners

1. High-Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS)
2. Corn Syrup
3. Rice Syrup
4. Maple Syrup
5. Molasses
6. Agave Nectar
7. Honey
8. Brown Rice Syrup

Sugars Ending in “-ose”

1. Dextrose
2. Fructose
3. Glucose
4. Maltose
5. Sucrose
6. Galactose

Natural Sweeteners

1. Cane Sugar
2. Coconut Sugar
3. Date Sugar
4. Fruit Juice Concentrates
5. Caramel
6. Barley Malt
7. Muscovado Sugar
8. Evaporated Cane Juice

Artificial and Alternative Sweeteners

1. Aspartame
2. Saccharin
3. Acesulfame K (Ace-K)
4. Sucralose
5. Steviol Glycosides (Stevia)
6. Monk Fruit Extract
7. Sugar Alcohols (e.g., Sorbitol, Xylitol, Mannitol, Erythritol)

Other Names

1. Invert Sugar
2. Turbinado Sugar
3. Raw Sugar
4. Brown Sugar
5. Golden Syrup
6. Evaporated Cane Juice

All of these are off limits. Even though the artificial sweeteners don’t have the calories of their natural counterparts, they are toxic to your body and send mixed signals to your brain. Artificial sweeteners cause you to actually eat more because they break the connection between a sweet sensation and a high-calorie food, thereby changing your body’s ability to regulate calorie intake naturally.

What about eating in a restaurant?

So what about when you are not buying your food from the grocery and you are out to eat (or Door Dashing) at a restaurant? When you are not preparing the food, it’s a little more difficult to find the hidden sugars. I usually try and order a salad with oil and vinegar instead of the dressings listed on the menu. Nearly every salad dressing out there has added sugar. Many salads also have caramelized nuts, so look to avoid those or just pick them off. Ketchup and BBQ sauces will always contain sugar. Often, sandwich meats at fast food restaurants are treated or injected with a sugar solution to add to the flavor. It’s not easy, but it can be done if you take the time to look at the menu and ask the server questions. Things can be left off or put on the side very easily if you just ask.

Are you up for the challenge?

So if you are up for it, join me in going cold-turkey on sugar (and artificial sweeteners) from now until Thanksgiving. I’ve gone without sugar for weeks at a time before and while the first week or so is tough, it’s amazing how the body transforms and you no longer care about sweets. After going a few weeks without sugar, you will be able to walk by that vending machine or that plate of cookies without the slightest urge. If you slip up and have a soda on day three, don’t quit – just start over from that point. In order for this to work, you cannot have “cheat” days. Once you introduce that sugar again, the cravings will come back and it will be harder to get sugar off of the brain. It literally starts to control your thoughts and you will start thinking about that next sweet treat.

Hold yourself accountable

If you want some accountability, share this post on Facebook or X and let everyone know that you are going to give it a try. Use hashtag #NoSugarNovember. We also have a Private Facebook group. If you would like to join, just send me a friend request. If your family members, friends and co-workers all know that you are avoiding sugar, you are more likely to stick with it. You must also remove all sources of sugar from your home and replace them with real, unprocessed foods. Out of sight – out of mind. If you have a craving during the first few days, eat some berries or a banana. If your immediate family is not on-board this could be a big test for your will power.

If you are still on the fence about cutting out sugar, here are some additional benefits that you may not realize will come once you eliminate it:

• Clearer Skin – A study published in the Journal of Clinical Nutrition in 2006 showed that those participants who had a high-sucrose diet also had a higher level of systemic inflammation than those who had an overall decrease in sucrose consumption. Sugar spikes insulin levels—and more insulin and inflammation means more acne.
• More Energy – You may think that without sugar, your energy levels will drop. Fact is, after a few days, your body will recognize that you are not going to pump sugar in every few hours like usual and it will start to switch to burning fat as fuel. This results in sustained energy, instead of a roller-coaster throughout the day as your blood sugar spikes and drops. You will notice this particularly in the afternoon when most people usually get an energy slump between 2pm-4pm that calls for a candy bar, soda or another cup of coffee to get them through the rest of the afternoon.
• Motivation – Once you start reading labels and being mindful of sugar intake, you will find yourself making better choices in other areas of health and fitness. You will be motivated to eat the salad at lunch instead of the sandwich. You will want to exercise as you get more energy and see the pounds coming off!
• Better Sleep – Sugar triggers the release of the hormone cortisol, which interferes with sleep. By giving up sugar, you should be more awake and alert during the day, and also better prepared to fall asleep at bedtime.
• Clearer Thinking – Keep forgetting things? Sugar could be the culprit. A study at UCLA found that a diet high in sugar hinders learning and memory. Over time, eating sugar may actually damage communication among your brain’s cells, the study showed.

I hope you will give No Sugar November a try this year. Get your spouse or partner on board and make it a challenge. If you slip up, start again. Let’s take this journey together and see how much better it makes you feel. And you can still enjoy that pumpkin pie and sweet potato casserole on Thanksgiving!

I’ve heard nutritionists and diet “experts” give the advice to only eat a few bites of something. While there is evidence that you can satiate your cravings through just two or three bites and that after that you are no longer getting that dopamine release that gives you the pleasure you seek through sugary foods – it’s not as simple as just stopping yourself.

Why is that? Why do we find ourselves eating a whole bag of candy or the whole bowl of chips? Three words…The Bliss Point.

The term was coined by a US market researcher and psychoanalyst, Howard Moskowitz, known for his work in creating soft drinks and pasta sauces. The bliss point refers to the point at which sugar, fat or salt are blended to delicious perfection. In other words, it's when the ratio of sweetness, saltiness or richness is most irresistible.

Foods that are created around bliss points have the power to override the body’s natural 'stop' signal in the brain that tells us when we're full and satisfied. As you would expect, foods like donuts, cakes, ice cream and candy are all created around a bliss point. But it’s more than just these obvious foods. Tomato sauce, soup, sliced bread, dressings and cereal bars are all products that contain that longed-for trio of salt, sugar, and fat that keeps us coming back for more and promotes future cravings.

Big food companies pay their scientists and chefs huge salaries to understand how we're attracted to food and how they can make their foods attractive to us. None of it is by accident. There’s as much math and science and analysis done at Nestle as there is at NASA. There are billions of dollars at stake. Getting the consumer to buy their products over the competitor's is their only job and finding that perfect amount of salt, sugar and fat that will get their products off the shelves and into our homes is all that matters.

With processed foods, it’s a balance though. Many ingredients in processed food have nothing to do with taste. They're there to reproduce a certain texture, to control the moisture level, to keep the various ingredients from separating and spoiling during the months that they will sit on the shelves or in your pantry. To mask the bitterness or sourness that the formulations can cause, the food industry uses flavor enhancers to trick the brain into tasting something that isn't there, and not tasting something that is there.

Just look at the ingredients list of must “flavored” packaged products and you won’t see the actual flavor they are creating anywhere on the list. How can a strawberry flavored Fruit Roll Up not have any strawberries or even strawberry extract in the ingredients? Simple, a Chemical Engineer came up with a concoction that tastes very close to strawberries. There's tremendous amounts of money spent on creating tastes and smells that feel real but in reality are completely artificial, but that keep you wanting more.

This takes us back to the bliss point. When we eat foods regularly that hit the bliss point, it disrupts the signals that our brain sends to our body when we're full. This makes us less sensitive to the dopamine rush from these foods, meaning we need to eat more and more to get the same satisfaction. It's a game food companies are playing with consumers...and we are losing!

So what can we do to combat the bliss point (other than just eating whole, natural foods)?

Pay attention to how much you are eating. – Pick and choose times to have your junk food. Plan out your week around a dinner or event where you know you want to indulge and then limit the amount that you have access to. Then stay away from it the rest of the time.

Eat more satiating foods. Having meals that leave you satisfied will reduce the risk of junk food cravings in between meals. Include fresh vegetables with meat or fish in your meals. Processed carbohydrates like pasta and bread will leave you not feeling full and have you reaching for that dessert.

Be aware of bliss-point foods. Just like when you are participating in The Holistic Hundred or No Sugar November, you have to read labels. There are unexpected foods that we use every day (like tomato sauce and salad dressing) that have also been engineered to have a bliss point. Try experimenting with making your food to replace store-bought ones. There are many online resources for these recipes.

Sleep and Stress. The more sleep-deprived we are, the hungrier we feel and the more we crave sugar, and fat-filled foods as opposed to healthy snacks. Getting 8-9 hours of sleep, compared to 6-7 hours, can massively reduce the risk of junk food cravings. Stress can also lead to binge eating. Cortisol increases hunger because the body craves energy to combat whatever stressors we may be facing.

The bottom line is that we must be advocates for ourselves and our health. The food companies are out to profit off of you and the pleasure you get from eating their foods. We should never trust them when it comes to providing healthy choices for us. We need to take responsibility for our own health, make informed decisions about the foods we eat, while allowing ourselves to enjoy food fully. By being aware of the bliss point and the way it works in our brains, we can make healthier choices that will improve our short-term and long-term health.

The liver, located on the upper-right side of the abdomen, is the largest internal organ of the human body. The main functions of the liver are to remove toxins and process food nutrients. Blood from the digestive system filters through the liver before traveling anywhere else in the body.

A meta-analysis was released in May of this year explored non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) in adults. The goal of analysis was to ascertain the contribution of ultra-processed food (UPF) consumption to the risk of developing NAFLD.

NAFLD represents a disease spectrum ranging from liver fat accumulation through to end-stage liver disease with fibrosis, cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. NAFLD is associated with related diseases such as type 2 diabetes (T2D) and obesity. There is strong evidence that NAFLD is associated with an approximate twofold higher risk of developing T2D, irrespective of obesity and other common metabolic risk factors.

NAFLD is similar to a type of liver disease caused by alcohol consumption. Most people may not know they have it because doctors don't routinely screen for it and it can develop without symptoms until it reaches an advanced stage, when liver damage occurs.

NAFLD was recognized in the early 1950s but only in 1980 was it pointed out as a possible cause of cirrhosis of the liver.

Ultra-processed foods (UPFs) are industrial formulations of cheap ingredients from high yield crops (such as refined sugar, starch, oil, protein isolates) and remnants of intense animal agriculture that are highly energy-dense due to total fat, saturated fat and trans-fat contributions, combined with low fiber and poor micronutrient profiles.

They can be differentiated from processed foods due to additional chemical enhancement using preservatives, emulsifiers and artificial sweeteners aiming to increase shelf life and palatability. They include such food items as confectionary sweets, high-sugar drinks and ‘microwave ready-meals’, constituting around half of daily energy intake in Western populations. Their cheap production cost, contrasting with the higher relative cost of minimally processed foods, drives a high UPF consumption rate globally; particularly in low-income households.

In this meta-analysis, a total of 5454 records were screened, and 112 records underwent full text review. From these, 9 studies analyzing 60,961 individuals were included in the meta-anaylsis.

A factor that the researchers came across was that the manufacturing process behind UPFs is metabolically damaging to the food as well. Through chemical modification, cosmetic additives and artificial packaging. Common cosmetic additives to UPF, such as monosodium glutamate and artificial sweeteners, have been associated with NAFLD.

They also discovered that timing of eating impacts metabolic outcomes. with high consumption of low-quality carbohydrates, such as those found in UPFs, being more harmful when consumed during evening meals.

NASH (or nonalcoholic steatohepatitis) is a type of NAFLD that can damage the liver. NASH occurs when the fat buildup in the liver leads to inflammation (hepatitis) and scarring.

Conclusion:

Both moderate (vs. low) and high (vs. low) intake of UPF significantly increased the risk of NAFLD. Consumption of UPF is associated with NAFLD with a dose–response effect.

These results provide valuable evidence to support public health policies in respect to dietary advice in this increasingly prevalent disease. We would advocate global efforts to minimize consumption of UPFs, in exchange for fresh and minimally processed foods, with promotion of physical activity to tackle the societal burden of this disease.

In its early stages, NAFLD generally does not cause symptoms. In fact, many people—and their doctors—are unaware they have NAFLD. However, it can lead to liver damage over time in some people.

Fortunately, screening techniques such as blood levels of liver enzymes, ultrasound, and imaging techniques for assessing liver stiffness can help detect NAFLD, and the condition can often be reversed in its early stages with dietary and lifestyle changes.

About 100 million individuals in the United States are estimated to have Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease (NAFLD).

NAFLD in children has more than doubled over the past 20 years!

Bottom line – cut out processed foods! Don’t be lazy and eat whatever you can find in a pinch or is simple. Your body and long-term health are worth you taking the time to eat real food (meat, fish, vegetables and fruits).

Unfortunately, neurological conditions are back in the news due to several celebrities making public their struggles with disorders such as epilepsy, Alzheimer's, ALS, Dementia and Aphasia. Neurological disorders are medically defined as disorders that affect the brain as well as the nerves found throughout the human body and the spinal cord. Structural, biochemical or electrical abnormalities in the brain, spinal cord or other nerves can result in a range of symptoms.

The specific causes of neurological problems vary, but can include genetic disorders, congenital abnormalities or disorders, infections, lifestyle or environmental health problems and injuries to the head or spinal cord.

The “lifestyle or environmental health” causes are the ones that are most fascinating to me. These can be controlled and have been studied quite a bit over the last few years. Some of the evidence should be alarming to everyone but seems to go unnoticed.

I determined long ago that I wanted to do all that I could to maintain my physical abilities as I aged. It’s no secret that physical decline begins in the decade of the 50s and worsens as we age, especially for those who don't exercise. I want to be self-sufficient and independent as long as I can, so I do things like lifting heaving things, pushing myself physically on a regular basis and eating healthy.

But what about maintaining mental health as I grow older? How do I not only make myself harder to kill physically, but mentally? I don’t want to be the ripped-up 85-year-old in the nursing home that doesn’t know where he is!

Until recently, there wasn’t much research that had explored the association between specific dietary patterns and the risk of neurological disorders. However, if you look at research over just the last three years, it suggests that oils widely used in cooking and added to commonly consumed foods, could harm brain cells and heighten the risk of mental decline.

A 2020 study in mice showed that consumption of soybean oil leads not only to weight gain, but also to gene dysregulation that could cause higher rates of neurological conditions like autism, Alzheimer’s disease, anxiety, and depression.

Another study found that feeding mice the equivalent of 2 tablespoons of canola oil per day is associated with worsened memory, learning ability and weight gain, along with “considerable neuronal damage” and increased formation of beta-amyloid plaques, the signature of Alzheimer’s disease.

Need more evidence or don’t think mice are relative enough to humans? How about the results of this study on baby pigs that found increasing the amount of calories from vegetable oil from 1.2% daily to 10.7% daily compromised neurodevelopment. Americans now consume nearly twice that amount, and most baby formulas include vegetable oil as one of the first ingredients.

Are monkeys close enough to humans to believe test results? This study changed the diets of a group of 36 monkeys to a Western diet for 27 months. The change is the monkeys was amazing. They became depressed! The percent time spent depressed was positively correlated with higher concentrations of monounsaturated fats, a higher polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) ratio and higher concentrations of omega-6 PUFAs. Omega-6 fatty acids can be found in sunflower, safflower, soy, sesame, and corn oils.

Vegetable oils, while nearly nonexistent a hundred years ago, now account for over 20% of Americans’ calories and have made their way into nearly every packaged food and restaurant meal we eat, like cookies, salad dressing, bread, crackers, chips, candy, vegetable puffs, granola bars, and even nut milks.

Unlike the name, these oils are not made from vegetables. Vegetable oils are oils extracted from seeds.  Specifically, vegetable oils include:

• Canola oil (also known as rapeseed oil – lovely name)
• Sunflower oil
• Safflower oil
• Grapeseed oil
• Soybean oil
• Cottonseed oil
• Sesame oil
• Corn oil

While some of these seeds in their whole food form are healthy, it’s the crazy amount of processing that must take place to extract oil from the seeds that results in a product that contains unnaturally high levels of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs), which are highly unstable and prone to further oxidation when heated. 

So what can I (and you) do to protect ourselves from these “brain killers”? I’ve been looking for these dangerous oils for years now. Ever ssince reading Cate Shanahan’s book Deep Nutrition. Despite my efforts, it’s nearly impossible to completely avoid these oils, but there are some things that I do.

Read food labels carefully.  While most foods found in a box or package contain vegetable oils, not all do. I’ve found crackers, chips and even some bars that are free from them.

Don’t cook with vegetable oils.  When it comes to cooking, stick with extra virgin olive oil, coconut oil, or avocado oil. You can get them in spray form, which is helpful as well.

Eat at home or try making your favorite packaged foods at home. This takes some time and lots of trial and error, but there are lots of helpful links online now to recipes.

Don’t feel like it’s not worth the effort. I promise that there is not a single person suffering from a neurological disorder that wouldn’t give anything to go back in time and at least try everything they could to prevent it.

Leading up to my trip to Greece where I will race in the Spartan Trifecta World Championships, I had to get a medical release form signed. While I was having this physical done, I asked that I have a blood panel done as well. It has been a few years since I had this done and even all of my efforts to be healthy are no guarantee that something might be going on that I’m unaware of.

The normal panel measures several things. For each one, I'll give my results as compared to the "normal" or "recommended" ranges. This range is a set of values that includes upper and lower limits of a lab test based on a group of otherwise healthy people. When comparing my (or your) results to these ranges, there are a few important things to consider:

• A "normal" result in one lab may be abnormal in another: You must use the range supplied by the laboratory that performed your test to evaluate whether your results are "within normal limits." While accuracy of laboratory testing has significantly evolved over the past few decades, some lab-to-lab variability can occur due to differences in testing equipment, chemical reagents used, and analysis techniques. Consequently, for most lab tests, there is no universally applicable reference value.
• A normal result does not promise health: While having all test results within normal limits is certainly a good sign, it's not a guarantee. For many tests, there is a lot of overlap among results from healthy people and those with diseases, so there is still a chance that there could be an undetected problem. Lab test results in some people with disease fall within the reference range, especially in the early stages of a disease.
• An abnormal result does not mean you are sick: A test result outside the reference range may or may not indicate a problem. Since many reference values are based on statistical ranges in healthy people, you may be one of the healthy people outside the statistical range, especially if your value is close to the expected reference range. However, the abnormal value does alert your healthcare provider to a possible problem, especially if your test result is far outside the expected values.

Blood test results generally use the metric system of measurement and various abbreviations, including:

• cmm: cells per cubic millimeter
• arb'U: arbitrary unit
• g/dL: grams per deciliter
• U/L: international units per liter
• mEq/L: milliequivalent per liter
• mg/dL: milligrams per deciliter
• mL: milliliter
• mmol/L: millimoles per liter
• ng/mL: nanograms per milliliter
• pg (picograms): one-trillionth of a gram

Now that we’ve covered all of that, let’s jump in to my results:

Total Cholesterol - 179 mg/dL

The "recommended" range is under 200. Cholesterol is a waxy, fat-like substance produced primarily in the liver. It is used to repair cells, maintain proper hormone levels, vitamin D absorption from the sun, salt and water balance, digestion of fats. It is essential to joint health, hormone regulation, healthy cell membranes, fighting infections, etc. People tend to think of Cholesterol as something bad, but it's essential to a healthy body. Cholesterol is in the body to help, not harm you. Most recent evidence suggests that dietary cholesterol alone (what comes from the food you eat), in the presence of a healthy diet, does not negatively affect blood lipids.

The other part of the lipid panel that gets a lot of attention is the LDL-C.

LDL-Calculated - 94 mg/dL

According to the range listed on my results, anything under 100 is good. But if you notice, the "C" at the end of LDL-C stands for calculated. So your LDL cholesterol is determined using an equation. If you have a higher HDL and lower triglycerides, the calculation will be significantly skewed higher. There is a way to actually measure the number of LDL particles and to distinguish the size of LDL. This requires what is called a NMR Lipoprofile test. You want to see more of the large particles than the small particles. However, if your triglycerides are under 70 and your LDL is over 70, you can assume that most of your LDL is the good kind.

My Lipid Panel measured VLDL, which are the small, dense particles.

VLDV - 9 mg/dL

This is a very small amount of those little guys as anything below 40 is considered good.

So that leads me right into my Triglycerides number.

Triglycerides - 44 mg/dL

Anything under 150 is considered in the good range. I think that lower triglycerides are a much more key marker than total cholesterol and LDL-C. Even though my results said that anything under 150 mg/dL is good, I've heard that under 70 is the optimal number to shoot for. The more unhealthy carbohydrates that you eat, the higher your triglycerides will typically be.

I've skipped over HDL earlier because I wanted to talk about it in conjunction with Triglycerides.

HDL - 76 mg/dL

HDL is what people like to call the "good" kind of cholesterol. Anything at or above 60 mg/dL is considered good. I eat a pretty good amount of saturated fat, but adding even more of these healthy fats will also boost my HDL. When you reduce your triglycerides by cutting the processed carbohydrates in your diet, while consuming more fat to increase your HDL, it’s a fantastic one-two punch. I firmly believe that higher HDL and lower triglycerides are much more indicative of good heart health than the total and LDL cholesterol numbers that most people focus on.

Another number that appeared on my results was CHOL/HDL ratio. This is just the total cholesterol number divided by the HDL number.

CHOL/HDL ratio - 2.3

I don't feel like that total cholesterol number is very important, so this ratio doesn't mean much to me. Even if it was over 3.0, I still wouldn't be worried as long as my HDL was in the 75-100 range.

Triglycerides/HDL Ratio - 0.57

Anything under 1.0 is great!

_______________________________________________________________________

Now let's move on to minerals.

Sodium - 139 mmol/L

The recommended range is between 136 and 145 mmol/L, so I'm within range. Sodium is both an electrolyte and mineral. It helps keep the water (the amount of fluid inside and outside the body's cells) and electrolyte balance of the body. Sodium is also important in how nerves and muscles work. It is possible to have low sodium levels following physical activity, but for blood taken under non-extreme conditions, a low level of blond sodium is usually due to a condition such as Addison's disease, diarrhea, diuretic administration, or kidney disease. A high blood sodium level is almost always due to dehydration.

Potassium – 5.1 mmol/L

Normal range is between 3.4 and 5.4 mmol/L. Potassium helps keep the water and electrolyte balance of the body and is important in how nerves and muscles work. Potassium levels can be affected by how the kidneys are working, the blood pH, the amount of potassium you eat and hormone levels in the body. A common cause of high levels of Potassium is kidney disease. Low levels can be attributed to diarrhea or dehydration.

Chloride - 104 mmol/L

Normal range is between 98 and 107 mmol/L. Most of the Chloride in the body comes from the salt that you eat. It is absorbed by your intestines when you digest food. Excess chloride leaves the body through urine. Low levels of blood chloride can be caused by low blood sodium, congestive heart failure, chronic lung diseases and loss of acid from the body. High levels usually indicate dehydration, but can also be caused by Cushing syndrome or kidney disease.

Carbon Dioxide - 26 mmol/L

Normal range is between 22 and 29 mmol/L. In the body, most of the CO2 is in the form of a substance called bicarbonate (HCO3-). Therefore, the CO2 blood test is really a measure of your blood bicarbonate level. When bicarbonate levels are higher or lower than normal, it suggests that the body is having trouble maintaining its acid-base balance or that you have upset your electrolyte balance, perhaps by losing or retaining fluid. Both of these imbalances may be due to a wide range of dysfunctions. Low levels can be a warning sign for Addison's disease, diabetic ketoacidosis or Kidney disease. High levels can be cuased by Cushing syndrome, Conn syndrome or lung diseases.

Calcium - 9.0 mg/dL 

Normal range is 8.4 to 10.2 mg/dL. Calcium is the most common mineral in the body and one of the most important. The body needs it to build and fix bones and teeth, help nerves work, make muscles squeeze together, help blood clot, and help the heart to work. Almost all of the calcium in the body is stored in bone. Blood calcium levels do not indicate levels of bone calcium but rather how much calcium is circulating in the blood. Normally the level of calcium in the blood is carefully controlled. When blood calcium levels get low (hypocalcemia), the bones release calcium to bring it back to a good blood level. When blood calcium levels get high (hypercalcemia), the extra calcium is stored in the bones or passed out of the body in urine and stool. It is important to get the right amount of calcium in your food because the body loses calcium every day. Foods rich in calcium include dairy products (milk, cheese), eggs, fish, green vegetables, and fruit. Most people who have low or high levels of calcium do not have any symptoms. Calcium levels need to be very high or low to cause symptoms. Some causes of high levels of calcium are hyperthyroidism, sarcoidosis, excess Vitamin D, HIV/AIDS and cancer. Low levels can be caused by liver disease, renal failure or malnutrition.

Anion Gap – 9 (arb'U)

Normal range is between 5 and 13 arb/U. The anion gap measures the difference—or gap—between the negatively charged and positively charged electrolytes in your blood. If the anion gap is too high, your blood is more acidic than normal. If the anion gap is too low, your blood isn't acidic enough.

Total Proteins – 6.9 g/dL

Normal range is 6.3 to 8.2 g/dL. Total protein measurements can reflect nutritional status and may be used to screen for and help diagnose kidney disease or liver disease. A low total protein level can suggest a liver disorder, a kidney disorder, or a disorder in which protein is not digested or absorbed properly. I talked about blood proteins quite a bit in my posts on gluten. A high total protein level may be seen with chronic inflammation or infections such as viral hepatitis or HIV. It also may be associated with bone marrow disorders such as multiple myeloma. It's worth mentioning that a high-protein diet doesn't cause high blood protein. High blood protein is not a specific disease or condition in itself.

My report shows total protein, albumin, globulins, and the calculated ratio of albumin to globulins, termed the A/G ratio. Normally, there is a little more albumin than globulins, giving a normal A/G ratio of slightly over 1. Because disease states affect the relative amounts of albumin and globulin, the A/G ratio may provide a clue as to the cause of the change in protein levels.

Albumin - 4.7 g/dL

Globulin - 2.2 g/dL

A/G Ratio - 2.1

A low A/G ratio (under 1.1) may reflect overproduction of globulins, such as seen in autoimmune diseases, or underproduction of albumin, such as may occur with cirrhosis, or selective loss of albumin from the circulation, as may occur with kidney disease. A high A/G ratio (over 2.5) suggests underproduction of immunoglobulins as may be seen in some genetic deficiencies and in some leukemias.

_______________________________________________________________________

The Liver Panel is used to screen for, detect, evaluate, and monitor acute and chronic liver inflammation (hepatitis), liver disease and/or damage. The liver serves several important functions in the body, including changing nutrients into energy for the body and breaking down toxic substances. The liver panel consists of four tests.

Total Bilirubin - 0.4 mg/dL

Normal Range is between 0.2 and 1.3 mg/dL. Bilirubin is a brownish yellow substance found in bile (helps digest food). It is produced when the liver breaks down old red blood cells. When bilirubin levels are high, the skin and whites of the eyes may appear yellow (jaundice). Jaundice may be caused by liver disease (hepatitis), blood disorders (hemolytic anemia), or blockage of the tubes (bile ducts) that allow bile to pass from the liver to the small intestine. Low levels of bilirubin are not generally a concern and are not monitored.

AST (aspartate aminotransferase) / SGOT - 100 U/L

Normal range is between 15 and 46 U/L. An AST test measures the amount of this enzyme in the blood. AST is normally found in red blood cells, liver, heart, muscle tissue, pancreas, and kidneys. When body tissue or an organ such as the heart or liver is diseased or damaged, additional AST is released into the bloodstream. Very high levels of AST (more than 10 times normal) are usually due to acute hepatitis, sometimes due to a viral infection. Low levels of AST are not a concern. The AST test is usually done at the same time as a test for alanine aminotransferase, or ALT.

ALT (alanine aminotransferase) / SGPT - 104 U/L

Normal range is between 13 and 69 U/L. As with the AST test, ALT is used to identify liver disease, especially cirrhosis and hepatitis caused by alcohol, drugs, or viruses. AST and ALT are considered to be two of the most important tests to detect liver injury, although ALT is more specific to the liver than is AST. In most types of liver diseases, the ALT level is higher than AST, and the AST/ALT ratio will be low (less than 1).

While both my AST and ALT are outside the normal range, levels need to be closer to 1000 U/L before there is concern around serious liver damage. I do not drink alcohol very often and when I do it’s usually just one drink. I am not on any medications either, which can cause long-term liver damage. I did have a beer the night before the bloodwork, so that might have causes the minor elevation. I will likely ask my doctor if another rest is recommend.

ALP (alkaline phosphatase) - 59 U/L

Normal range is between 38 and 126 U/L. The liver makes more ALP than the other organs or the bones. ALP helps break down proteins in the body and exists in different forms, depending on where it originates. Some conditions cause large amounts of ALP in the blood. These conditions include rapid bone growth (during puberty), bone disease (such as Paget's disease or cancer that has spread to the bones), a disease that affects how much calcium is in the blood (hyperparathyroidism), vitamin D deficiency, or damaged liver cells. A deficiency in zinc may cause low ALP levels. Malnutrition or protein deficiency as well as Wilson disease could also be possible causes for lowered ALP. It may also be caused by celiac disease or a deficiency in vitamins and minerals.

_______________________________________________________________________

Next I'll move on to the Kidney tests. Kidney's not only remove waste products and excess fluid from the body, they regulate of the body's salt, potassium and acid content. The kidneys also produce hormones that affect the function of other organs. So needless to say, these little bean-shaped dudes are very important. The blood tests will show how well your kidneys are doing their job and how quickly the waste is being removed.

BUN (Blood Urea Nitrogen) - 10 mg/dL

Normal range is between 7 and 20 mg/dL. The BUN test is primarily used, along with the creatinine test, to evaluate kidney function in a wide range of circumstances, to help diagnose kidney disease, and to monitor people with acute or chronic kidney dysfunction or failure. If your kidneys are not able to remove urea from the blood normally, your BUN level rises. Heart failure, dehydration, or a diet high in protein can also make your BUN level higher. Liver disease or damage can lower your BUN level. BUN levels can increase with the amount of protein in the diet. High-protein diets may cause abnormally high BUN levels while very low-protein diets can cause an abnormally low BUN.

Creatinine – 0.95 mg/dL

Normal range is 0.7 to 1.5 mg/dL. Creatinine is a waste product formed by the breakdown of a substance (creatine) important for converting food into energy (metabolism). The creatinine is filtered out of the blood by the kidneys and then passed out of the body in urine. If the kidneys are damaged and can't function normally, the amount of creatinine in the urine decreases while the amount of creatinine in the blood increases. Low blood levels of creatinine are not common, but they are also not usually a cause for concern. They can be seen with conditions that result in decreased muscle mass. Blood urea nitrogen (BUN) and creatinine tests can be used together to find the BUN-to-creatinine ratio (BUN:creatinine). A BUN-to-creatinine ratio can be used to check for problems, such as dehydration, that may cause abnormal BUN and creatinine levels. My ratio was 10.7 - the normal range is between 10 and 20.

_______________________________________________________________________

Glucose - 90 mg/dL

Normal range is 74-106 mg/dL. A blood glucose test measures the amount of a type of sugar, called glucose, in your blood. Insulin is a hormone that helps your body's cells use the glucose. Insulin is produced in the pancreas and released into the blood when the amount of glucose in the blood rises. Normally, your blood glucose levels increase slightly after you eat. This increase causes your pancreas to release insulin so that your blood glucose levels do not get too high. Blood glucose levels that remain high over time can damage your eyes, kidneys, nerves, and blood vessels. There are several different types of blood glucose tests, but the one I had done was a Fasting Blood Glucose (FBG). It measures blood glucose after you have not eaten for at least 8 hours. It is often the first test done to check for prediabetes and diabetes. Anything over 126 mg/dL on this FBG test would indicate diabetes. With a family history if diabetes, this is a number that I will always keep a close eye on.

A1C - 5.60%

Normal range is 4.0-6.0%. The A1C test is a blood test that provides information about a person’s average levels of blood glucose, also called blood sugar, over the past 3 months. The A1C test is based on the attachment of glucose to hemoglobin, the protein in red blood cells that carries oxygen. In the body, red blood cells are constantly forming and dying, but typically they live for about 3 months. Thus, the A1C test reflects the average of a person’s blood glucose levels over the past 3 months. The A1C test result is reported as a percentage. The higher the percentage, the higher a person’s blood glucose levels have been.

Now that I’m over 40 years old, I will strive to stay as healthy as possible and will continue to have a blood panel done once every year or two to try and catch anything that might be of concern.

If you haven't had a Basic Metabolic Panel (BMP) in the last few years, I would suggest you talk to your healthcare provider about having it done. The results can give your health practitioner important information about the current status of your overall health, including health of the kidneys, blood glucose level, and electrolyte and acid/base balance. Abnormal results, and especially combinations of abnormal results, can indicate a problem that needs to be addressed. The earlier you catch somethings, they better off you are!

The results of a new study that was published in August confirms what I’ve been telling people for years – exercise is a horrible way to try and lose weight!

Turns out those “calories burned” calculators on fitness apps or exercise equipment at the gym are not even close to being accurate. Think you just burned 500 calories with a 30 minute session on the elliptical? Turns out it was more like 300 or 350.

If you have tried to lose weight through a new exercise program, you know that most people lose less weight than would be expected based on the number of calories they think they are burning during their workouts, even if they strictly monitor their diets.

The researchers in this study wanted to see why that is, so they set out to see what happens to our metabolisms when we move. They pulled data for 1,754 adults (692 men and 1,062 women aged 18 to 96 years) that included their water consumption, measures of their body compositions and basal energy expenditure, which is how many calories they burn simply by being alive, even if they otherwise are inactive. Subtracting basal numbers from total energy expenditure gave the researchers an approximation of people’s energy expenditure from exercise and other movement, such as standing, walking and general fidgeting.

The study found that we tend to automatically compensate for at least a quarter of the calories we expend during exercise. They also found that this calorie compensation varies from person to person, based on how your unique metabolism responds to workouts.

What they found was that most people seemed to be burning only about 72 percent as many additional calories through movement, on average, as would be expected.

The results also show that carrying extra pounds unfortunately compounds calorie compensation, making weight loss through exercise even more elusive for those who are already overweight. They tended to compensate for 50 percent or more of the calories they burned by being active.

It appears that our bodies compensate by dialing back overall calorie burning the longer or more frequently we exercise or move…to avoid starvation. This is likely part of our ancestral make-up to keep us alive while burning calories to find food.

With this knowledge, in the future it might be possible to screen individuals to ascertain whether exercise would be a valuable fat loss intervention because they are “weak compensators” or a fruitless fat loss intervention because they are strong compensators. The researches also think that there may be other factors that play into your level of compensation, such as a compromised immune system or recovery from injury.

The few national guidelines that have been published converge on the recommendation of a 500–600 kcal/day deficit through exercising to instigate fat loss. These guidelines are general for the population and do not factor in the variation in energy compensation exhibited by people with different levels of fat mass, as demonstrated in the study. Public health strategies for fat loss should be revised to recognize energy compensation as our understanding progresses about which individuals compensate and by how much.

Don’t let this study discourage you from exercising. Even if your body compensates for 50 percent or more of the calories you burn during physical activity – this is still more than if you stayed on the couch! Not to mention that exercise can combat health conditions and diseases, improves mood, boosts energy and promote better sleep among other benefits. Bottom line is that you should not use exercise for weight loss. To drop pounds, you just must eat better…there’s no way around it.

You can read the full study here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982221011209

A new study came out last week in Science magazine. These researchers have precisely measured life’s metabolic highs and lows, from birth to old age, and the findings will surprise you.

The findings suggests that your metabolism (the rate at which you burn calories) actually peaks much earlier in life, and starts its inevitable decline later than we thought.

According to the abstract, the scientists analyzed the average calories burned by more than 6,600 people ranging from one week old to age 95 as they went about their daily lives in 29 countries worldwide.

Most previous studies on metabolism only accounted for the calories we burn for things that are critical to life (breathing, digesting, pumping blood).  Requirements of the heart, liver, kidney and brain account for 65% of the resting metabolic rate although they constitute only 5% of body weight. Previous studies did not take into account the energy we spend doing literally anything else. Even sitting burns calories.

Pooling and analyzing energy expenditures from data gathered over the last 40 years from multiple labs across the entire lifespan revealed some surprises. Some people think of their teens and 20s as the age when their calorie-burning potential hits its peak. But the researchers found that, pound for pound, infants had the highest metabolic rates of all.

Energy needs shoot up during the first 12 months of life, such that by their first birthday, a one-year-old burns calories 50% faster for their body size than an adult.

After this initial surge in infancy, the data show that metabolism slows by about 3% each year until we reach our 20s, when it levels off into a new normal. Despite the teen years being a time of growth spurts, the researchers didn’t see any uptick in daily calorie needs in adolescence after they took body size into account.

I remember being told that “once I turned 30, my metabolism slowed dramatically”.  Turns out that it’s not a changing metabolic rate that causes weight gain in our 30’s and 40’s. So why do most people put on the extra pounds at this stage in life? Aside from people just eating more calories than they are burning, other lifestyle changes including stress, a busier schedule and less exercise are also contributing factors.

Researchers discovered that energy expenditures during these middle decades – our 20s, 30s, 40s and 50s -- were the most stable. Even during pregnancy, a woman’s calorie needs were no more or less than expected given her added bulk as the baby grows.

The findings show that our metabolisms don’t really start to decline again until after age 60, and then at a rate of only 0.7% a year. But a person in their 90s needs 26% fewer calories each day than someone in midlife.

As might be expected, while the metabolic rate patterns hold for the population, individuals vary. Some have metabolic rates 25 percent below the average for their age and others have rates 25 percent higher than expected. But these outliers do not change the general pattern, said the researchers. So don’t assume they you are different. You likely are not

This research is going to reshape the science of human physiology and may even have doctors and pharmacists rethinking appropriate drug doses for children and older people.

You can find the details on the study here: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34385400/