Here's a new study that I'm trying to obtain the full-text of. Based on the abstract, it seems like a significant study to me. It tests whether adding sugar, fat, and salt will cause toddlers to consumer more food. It turns out adding salt was the only factor that increased consumption of the foods. However, the suagr and fat parts are more interesting to me. When they separately increased sugar and fat, toddlers still ate the same amount of food. So added sugar or fat didn't increase consumption by food volume, but obviously it did increase total calorie intake. To me, this shows that humans have no ability to compensate for high energy density foods. If a food is laced with sugar or fat, then toddlers seem to eat the same amount (at least in the short run) and therefore ingest more calories. If you continue with this pattern, then the extra calories from sugar or fat have to go somewhere - either to activity or towards body fat. I am surprised the authors didn't make this simple case that high energy density foods could induce obesity directly through this mechanism.
-
Posted to google.com
Suagr & Spice & Everything Nice
http://www.mattmetzgar.com/matt_metzgar/2011/05/suagr-spice-everything-nice.html
- Tags:
- Health
May 23 2011, 4:27pm | Comments »
-
Posted to google.com
A Metabolic Paradigm Shift, or Why Fat is the Preferred Fuel for Human Metabolism
http://www.marksdailyapple.com/a-metabolic-paradigm-shift-fat-carbs-human-body-metabolism/
There’s a good reason so many people (mostly the sugar-burners, whose disparate group includes fruitarians, veg*ans, HEDers, body-builders, most MDs, the USDA and virtually every RD program in the country) can’t seem to grasp why a lower carb, Primal approach to eating is a better choice for health and fitness: their fundamental paradigm – the core theory that underpins everything else in that belief system – is flawed. They remain slaves to the antiquated notion that glucose is the king of fuels, so they live their lives in a fear of running low. The truth is, fat is the preferred fuel of human metabolism and has been for most of human evolution. Under normal human circumstances, we actually require only minimal amounts of glucose, most or all of which can be supplied by the liver as needed on a daily basis. The simple SAD fact that carbs/glucose are so readily available and cheap today doesn’t mean that we should depend on them as a primary source of fuel or revere them so highly. In fact, it is this blind allegiance to the “Carb Paradigm” that has driven so many of us to experience the vast array of metabolic problems that threaten to overwhelm our health care system.
It boggles my mind that such a large segment of the so-called health and fitness community would continue to defend high carbohydrate diets with such tenacity. It should all be very obvious by now. The studies keep piling up indicating that carbohydrate intake is the major variable in determining body composition and that excess glucose from carbohydrate intake (especially from processed grains and sugars) is the primary culprit in obesity and in many disease processes. It follows logically that if you can limit carb intake to a range of which is absolutely necessary (and even up to 50 grams a day over) and make the difference up with tasty fats and protein, you can literally reprogram your genes back to the evolutionary-based factory setting you had at birth – the setting that offered you the opportunity to start life as a truly efficient fat-burning organism and to continue to do so for the rest of your life as long as you send the right signals to your genes. Becoming an efficient fat-burner is the major premise of the Primal Blueprint eating and exercise strategies. But logic doesn’t rule when you are stuck in the Carb Paradigm, so I still see some misguided bloggers decrying the Primal Blueprint eating strategy as potentially harmful for its relatively low carb intake or stating that my advice to “generally keep carbs under 150 grams a day unless you’re an athlete” is ridiculous. How many more times do I have to overhear a trainer advising a still-portly client to “eat 5 or 6 small meals throughout the day, always with some carbs, so you keep your blood sugar up and don’t go into starvation mode.”? It’s time to stop this nonsense and reframe the current views of human metabolism to accurately reflect the two and a half million years of evolution that shaped the current human genome – a perfect DNA recipe that fully expects us from birth to function largely on fats. It’s time for a Metabolic Paradigm Shift within the health and fitness world. The Faulty Carb Paradigm “Logic” Goes Something Like This The basic underlying assumption is that glucose is the preferred fuel of most cells; BUT, because we can’t store very much glucose (as glycogen in liver and muscles), we need to provide a continuous source of glucose in the form of exogenous carbohydrate (high carb meals) to keep the brain, blood, and certain organs humming along and the muscles primed for activity. AND, if we don’t feed ourselves enough carbohydrate every few hours, our blood sugar will drop and we’ll go into “starvation mode” and cannibalize our precious muscle tissue. AND any lack of regular glucose refilling (i.e. skipping a meal or fasting) will cause cortisol to rise, which will have additional deleterious effects. FURTHERMORE, an excess of glucose in the bloodstream is known to raise insulin and will predispose excess calories (from all sources) to be stored as fat. THEREFORE, we should also be doing a lot of moderate-to-heavy cardio or lifting activity most days to burn off this excess stored body fat. HOWEVER, if we want to be ready and able to exercise frequently and strenuously to burn off our stored fat, we need to eat lots of complex carbohydrates between workouts to refill our glycogen stores. And ULTIMATELY, the only way to lose weight is to restrict calories (calories in<calories out), BUT if you’re working out regularly, it’s almost impossible to maintain a calorie-restricted regimen and still be able to work out hard enough to burn appreciable calories. Sheesh.
Sure, there are exceptions, like the driven and genetically gifted types, who can train long hours, refuel on carbs and not add much body fat (hey, I was one). But unless you love to work out incessantly and have really lucky familial genes, the Carb Paradigm is an unsustainable and ridiculous literal and figurative treadmill, a self-fulfilling prophecy for most people who tend to gain weight steadily and insidiously over the years and wonder why. If you are one of the 60+% of the American population who is overweight, the above scenario plays itself out because you have spent your life programming your genes in the direction of being an effective sugar burner and, as a result, have become dependent on a fresh supply of sugar (carbs) every few hours. Naturally, in the presence of all that glucose, and provided you actually do some exercise, your genes will eventually get the signals to up-regulate the enzyme systems, pathways and receptors involved in sugar-burning and fat storage and they’ll down-regulate all those involved in accessing and burning fat for energy. Of course, that doesn’t make it right, but it sure makes it appear as if glucose is king. What makes it worse, if you don’t exercise, you head down the path to insulin resistance and/or obesity. The Problem: The Basic Assumption of the Carb Paradigm is Wrong Glucose is not the preferred fuel of muscle cells under normal human resting metabolic conditions or even under most normal human movement patterns (exercise). Fat is. Sure, given an unlimited supply of glucose and regular refilling of glycogen stores, skeletal muscle will burn through it during exercise the same way a fire burns through kindling when that’s all you have to offer. The body can shift carbohydrate oxidation to keep up with intake. But skeletal muscle can burn fat with great efficiency (and far less oxidative fallout) at relatively high outputs for very long bouts. Cardiac muscle actually prefers ketones, and the brain can run just fine (maybe even optimally) on a blend of ketones and minimal glucose. Our survival as a species has depended on these evolutionary adaptations away from glucose dependency. Entire civilizations have existed for ages on what is practically a zero-carb diet. Think about this: there is actually no requirement for any “essential dietary carbohydrates” in human nutrition. It’s possible to live a very long and healthy life never consuming much – if any – in the way of carbs, provided you get adequate dietary protein and fat. The same can’t be said for going too long without protein or fat. Cut too far back on either of those macronutrients and you will eventually get sick and die. The Evolutionary Model Fat and protein were the dominant macronutrients (when food was even available) over the majority of our two-and-a-half million years as evolving humans. The lack of regular access to food and a scarcity of carbohydrates for much of this time necessitated that we adapt efficient pathways to readily store and access body fat for energy if we were to survive day-to-day and generation-to-generation. Our movement patterns were such that we never required large amounts of glucose or that we needed to store very much glycogen. It was predominantly fats, ketones and the minimal infusion of glucose via gluconeogenesis that got us here. Dietary carbs were insignificant. In fact, when you consider how ridiculously small the body’s glycogen reservoirs are, you understand that it would have been impossible for us to survive as a species if glucose were truly the “preferred” fuel. The liver, the main back-up glycogen/glucose storage facility for the brain and other glucose-burning organs, can only store about 100 grams of glycogen. Less than a day’s worth. Your muscles can only hold another 350-500 grams, barely enough to run for 90 minutes at a reasonable clip, and that glycogen isn’t even available to provide fuel for the brain. Meanwhile, we have a virtually unlimited storage capacity for fat (like 100,000 grams or close to a million calories on some people). The reason glycogen storage wasn’t necessary is because, between our copious fat storage capability, easy access to fats as fuel, gluconeogenesis and ketones, we just didn’t need much. Evolution tends not to reward structures or functions that take up unnecessary space or waste energy. So How Much Glucose Do You Really Need? Much less than most people assume. At any one time, the total amount of glucose dissolved in the bloodstream of a healthy non-diabetic is equivalent to only a teaspoon (maybe 5 grams). Much more than that is toxic; much less than that and you pass out. That’s not much range for a so-called “preferred” fuel, is it? Several studies have shown that under normal low MET conditions (at rest or low-to mid- levels of activity such as walking and easy work) the body only needs about 5 grams of glucose an hour. And that’s for people who aren’t yet fat-adapted or keto-adapted. The brain is the major consumer of glucose, needing maybe 120 grams a day in people who aren’t yet on a low carb eating program. Low carb eating reduces the brain’s glucose requirements considerably, and those who are very low carb (VLC) and keto-adapted may only require about 30 grams of glucose per day to fuel the brain (and little-to-none to fuel the muscles at <75% max efforts). Twenty of those grams can come from glycerol (a byproduct of fat metabolism) and the balance from gluconeogenesis in the liver (which can actually make up to a whopping 150 grams a day if you haven’t metabolically damaged it with NAFLD through fructose overdosing). Bottom line, unless you are a physical laborer or are training (exercising) hard on a daily basis, once you become fat-adapted, you probably don’t ever need to consume more than 150 grams of dietary carbs – and you can probably thrive on far less. Many PBers do very well (including working out) on 30-70 grams a day. The Fat Paradigm The Fat Paradigm, under which the human species has thrived quite effectively for two and a half million years, recognizes that human metabolism is pre-programmed by evolution to be primarily fat-based (the real preferred fuel). In other words, our genes expect us to function optimally when we consume fats and can easily access our stored fat. The Fat Paradigm acknowledges that the body is able to manufacture adequate glucose as needed. It acknowledges that most typical human movement patterns can be fueled almost entirely by fats and/or ketones (PDF) if need be, but can draw on glycogen when energy bursts are required (and which can then be replaced over time). It acknowledges that fat (and cholesterol) are not the proximate cause of heart disease. It acknowledges that fat cells are designed to release stored fatty acids as required, especially during times of scarcity or fasting. It allows for intermittent fasting as a means of accelerating fat loss without sacrificing muscle tissue. It increases insulin sensitivity, modulates energy and mood swings, and allows for a normal and healthy drop in hunger and cravings. There is a downside, however: you can’t train long and hard day-in and day-out in the fat paradigm. Now then, having explained all this, please understand that I am not carb phobic. I actually permit more carbs in the Primal Blueprint than many other low carb eating strategies. I prefer to view carbs as the “elective” macronutrient, as a tool to use to manipulate your glycogen levels as needed. Low carb isn’t even the main objective of eating in the PB: eliminating grains, sugars and seed oils are the primary objective. Of course, when you get rid of that crap and naturally limit your carb intake to veggies, root tubers and a few fruits, you almost invariably decrease carbs to under 150 grams a day. And that emulates our ancestral dietary intake. I came up with a simple Carbohydrate Curve a few years ago that offers a pretty concise picture of where most people ought to fall if they are seeking optimum health and energy, depending on their size, weight, sex, age, goals, etc. Now, many hundreds of thousands of user experiences later, I am finding that the Curve is pretty much spot on for a large segment of the population.
When I say generally that a chronic intake of over 150 grams of carbs can lead to insidious weight gain over a lifetime, I am factoring in the concept that many people are at the effect of a familial genetic predisposition to storing fat easily under the carb paradigm (the 60+% overweight). I am also factoring in the drop in metabolism that happens naturally with age, as well as the fact that PBers don’t NEED to purge and refill glycogen stores every day via exercise. Yes, there are some people (a small percentage of outliers) who might maintain pretty decent body composition at up to 300 grams a day on little exercise. I would bet that they also are selective about the carb sources and do a better job of controlling overall calories, so there’s little excess to store. For most of the population, that 150 mark remains a good average level for maintaining ideal body composition. Well, that was a lot to digest today. You see where I’m going with this. I need your help in showing the health community that their basic assumptions are wrong and that they need to make a Metabolic Paradigm Shift. I’m sure there will be lots of specific questions, so bring ‘em on and I’ll do a follow up post in a week or two. Grab a copy of Primal Blueprint Quick & Easy Meals for over 100 Primal Recipes You Can Prepare in 30 Minutes or Less
Related posts:In Defense of Meat Eaters, Part 2: Animal and Human Well-Being Who You Callin’ Stupid and Lazy? Dear Mark: Rapid Weight Loss
- Tags:
- Health
- Sisson Said What?
May 19 2011, 8:08pm | Comments »
-
Posted to google.com
Is Eating Too Much Protein Going to Harm My Kidneys?
http://www.marksdailyapple.com/protein-kidneys/
Dear Mark, I am studying to become a nurse and am taking my first nutrition class at a local college. As one of our assignments we had to record everything we ate for an entire week. After looking at my results my teacher was dumbfounded. To make a long story short, my teacher told me that I should only be eating 38 grams of protein each day, and that any more than that could harm my kidneys. I’ve been Primal for 2 years and am healthier than ever. I am 5′ 2″ and and a very lean 105 pounds. Should I be concerned? Renee
Well, Renee, I’m sorry to break it to you, but all those subjective health markers – like being “healthier than ever,” a “very lean 105 pounds,” and satisfied enough to be “Primal for 2 years” – mean absolutely nothing because you are destroying your kidneys by exceeding your daily allotment of six ounces of animal protein. In fact, it’s highly likely that feeling good and maintaining a trim, lean figure are byproducts of impending kidney failure. The human body, you see, is a cruel practical joker dead set on destroying itself (hence the daily internal manufacturing of that poison known as cholesterol); it’s only trying to keep you pacified with regards to your health long enough for outright kidney failure to commence. You should be extremely concerned. I only hope this message reaches you in time. Seriously, though – the notion that eating more than 0.3g protein per pound of bodyweight (which appears to be how your teacher came to her conclusion) will definitively harm human kidney function leaves me dumbfounded. I’m reminded of the time I had to take Buddha in for a quick checkup at an unfamiliar vet and the woman examining him mentioned that I’d probably want to switch him to a low-protein diet or risk certain renal failure. Because, you know, the kidneys of dogs, close relative of the carnivorous wolf, are unable to process all that meat and protein. It’s ridiculous on its face, and rather than waste a lot of space debunking what Dr. Eades calls one of the “Vampire Myths” (it just won’t die; get it?), I’ll just link to a few papers that have already done so. There’s this one from the Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, a massive review of the evidence in favor of and in opposition to the AHA’s weasel warnings about “high protein diets,” namely, that people who engage in such risky behaviors as limiting carbs and increasing protein “are [at] risk for … potential cardiac, renal, bone, and liver abnormalities overall.” Long story short: there’s far more evidence in opposition to the claim than evidence in favor of it. The AHA recommendations are at best incorrect and at worst deliberately misleading, and the sum of the actual evidence points to protein as being protective against heart disease, osteoporosis, kidney disease, and liver problems – all things protein is supposed to initiate or worsen. Another review, this time focusing strictly on whether or not protein intake can precipitate kidney disease in healthy people, is even better. I mean, that’s the important thing, isn’t it? If we want to exonerate or condemn protein, we must study its effects on healthy kidneys. We have to see if it creates problems rather than potentially worsens them. And, according to the exhaustive analysis of Martin et al, there exists no evidence that protein intake negatively influences renal health in otherwise healthy, active individuals. There is some evidence that already impaired renal function might worsen with increased protein, but the experts, as is their wont, can’t resist applying the same recommendations to everyone, regardless of renal health. The result is a nutrition teacher sowing misinformation across the student body in an introductory course, i.e. one that is intended to establish foundational knowledge that the students will carry on through life as a cornerstone of their thinking. Simply put, healthy kidneys can handle plenty of protein; heck, they are meant to handle protein. One of their primary functions is to process the metabolic waste that results from protein metabolism. Yeah, protein “works” the kidneys, but that’s what they’re there for! Strength training works the muscles. You might even say it strains them. But is that a problem? Compromised kidneys in patients with renal disease (either full-blown or still in development) may not be able to handle as much protein as healthy kidneys, but even that’s up in the air – and protein is not the cause of the problem. So what causes kidney disease, if not too many deck of cards-sized pieces of deadly animal protein in the diet? The top two conditions responsible for chronic kidney disease (CKD) are, respectively, diabetes (45% of CKD cases) and hypertension, or high blood pressure.”Even” the Wikipedia entry on renal failure fails to mention “excess protein in the diet” as a cause (even potentially) of CKD. If you have CKD, chances are fairly high that you’re either diabetic, hypertensive, or both. You know what’s even better? High-protein diets, when compared to the high-carb diet commonly recommended, improve glucose tolerance and blood sugar control in type 2 diabetics without changing kidney function. And, since type 2 diabetes often leads to CKD and is characterized partly by poor glucose tolerance and blood sugar control, you might even say that eating more protein is actually protective against renal failure. As for hypertension, the latest systematic review concludes that more protein in the diet seems to correlate with lower, or at least normalized, blood pressure in humans. That doesn’t necessarily mean anything definitive, but it’s certainly interesting, and it doesn’t support the standard position. Of course! Anyway, unless it’ll compromise your grade in the class, I’d speak up about it. Engage your teacher, for without disagreement, especially when warranted, there can be no progress. At the very least, defend your stance, perhaps wielding the aforementioned papers, and by all means: don’t feel the need to limit yourself to 38 grams of protein per day! While that may be adequate – that is, you’ll live – you definitely have room for more. You need protein for a number of reasons: It’s required for good skeletal health; contrary to what many vegetarians will scream, animal protein doesn’t leach calcium from the bones, leading to osteoporosis. In fact, inadequate protein intake is a huge risk for the debilitating bone disease. It provides amino acids, which play multiple roles in the human body. They act as building blocks for most bodily structures, including hair, organs, skin, and muscles. Using amino acids, we build new tissue and repair damaged tissue. Lifting weights “damages” muscle tissue; we repair the damage with amino acids. Amino acids also act as precursors to hormones and neurotransmitters, like serotonin (the amino acid tryptophan) and dopamine (the amino acid tyrosine). It’s good for quality of life, especially in the later years where folks are more susceptible to skeletal muscle wasting. You try keeping up with your grandkids while experiencing severe systemic muscle atrophy! It’s good for satiety. Younger and older men eating 1g protein per kg of bodyweight had greater satiation than similarly aged men eating either 0.75g/kg or 0.5g/kg, and they reported a superior ability to stick to an eating plan. (Animal protein is best, of course. A recent study found that due to reduced bioavailability of plant protein, vegetarians should probably increase their total protein intake to make up for the deficiency.) Most people don’t need a ton of protein. If asked, I say I eat roughly 1 gram per pound of bodyweight, but it’s not something I’m militant about and I’m no longer hitting the weights like I used to. I just eat to satiety. Since it’s a satiating macronutrient, I find there’s a natural, relatively organic limit to how much pure protein I even want. Lean chicken breasts? I’m lucky if I can get through a whole one. A nice juicy grass-fed ribeye festooned with fat? I’m licking the plate. Other people will need more protein. Highly active athletes, Crossfitters, powerlifters, folks trying to gain mass and strength, folks trying to lose a bunch of weight – they all can benefit from an increased protein intake, either by increasing satiety (thus improving diet adherence) or providing amino acids for muscle recovery and repair. One gram or protein per pound of lean body mass is a good average number to shoot for over a range of a few days.
Renee, if you’re feeling good with your current level (how much protein are you eating, by the way?), you’re performing well, you’re lean (and you apparently are), and you’re healthy (free of diabetes and hypertension), I don’t see any reason to curtail your protein intake. And certainly not because it’s going to destroy your kidneys. There is some contention that protein restriction (or protein cycling) can extend lifespan, but as I said in the fasting post, I’d rather have a fantastic quality of life (which for me means plenty of lean mass, plenty of physical activity, and plenty of meat on my plate) than live a few extra, protein-restricted years. I hope this proves helpful for your situation – though I’d hesitate to even classify it as a real “situation.” I wouldn’t worry. How about everyone else? How much protein do you typically eat in a day? What’s your activity level like? Ever had any kidney problems? Get the Primal Blueprint Fitness eBook, Free Health Tips and Primal Recipes Delivered to Your Inbox
Related posts:Protein Powders: How Do They Measure Up? A Primal Primer: Whey Protein Eating Habits and Memory Function
March 1 2011, 6:05pm | Comments »
-
Posted to google.com
Tons of Doctors and No Solution
http://www.marksdailyapple.com/tons-of-doctors-and-no-solution/
It is my pleasure to share Tara’s success story with you today. Follow her journey through marriage, the birth of her twin boys, and a year and a half transformation to a healthy lifestyle. When doctors fail, when WebMD fails, it’s time to take health education into your own hands.
If you have your own Primal Blueprint success story and you’d like to share it with me and the community please contact me here. Have a wonderful Thursday, everyone, and thanks for reading! Hi Mark! I had been fairly healthy my entire life, but had always carried about 10 extra pounds. When I turned 24, that changed. All of a sudden, I started experiencing allergies. Major weight gain. Depression. Acne. Itchy scalp. Boils. Missed periods and debilitating pain when they did come. Joint pain. IBS. These were all new things to me. I saw dozens of doctors – German ones, Canadian ones, American and Dutch. Some told me I was suffering from allergies. Others made me keep a food journal and count calories. Some gave me acne medication. I was poked, prodded and bled. The one conclusion that all of the doctors shared was that I was overreacting, hysterical and wasting their time. According to them, I was just fat and lazy – and probably a hypochondriac. I was miserable. I tried everything to lose weight, but I was just so tired all of the time. I diagnosed myself with Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome (PCOS), Metabolic Syndrome, endometriosis and depression, which the doctors then confirmed. They put me on Prozac, which made me gain more weight. At my heaviest, I was around 235 lbs. I am a 5′9″ female. 235 lbs is not a healthy weight. When I asked the doctors HOW to lose weight, I was told, “We don’t know. Just lose it. Then symptoms will go away.” So, Google it was.
After months of trying to find information on PCOS online, I discovered a random comment on someone’s journal that said that some women with PCOS had had success losing weight with a low carb diet. That was the only help I could find. I dropped carbs that first day. I went zero carb overnight and felt amazing. I got my energy back. Exercising became fun again. I shed 40 pounds in two months and kept it off. I stabilized at 185. I realized that my previous diet had consisted of nothing but simple, refined carbs. Thinking I needed lots of carbs for energy (thank you, USDA!) I had thought nothing of eating an entire plate of white rice for dinner, with nothing else. Things got better – but only slightly. I started eating carbs and grains again – in moderation. When I found I could maintain my weight and pretty much eat whatever I wanted, I let it slide. I practically killed myself to get down to 175 for my wedding in April 2005. I had to go to the gym and work out 5 days a week, hard and watch everything I put in my mouth. I was still eating grains and everything was going soooo slowly. The minute I said, “I Do,” I gained 5 pounds. By the time we got back home from Las Vegas, I was back at 185 lbs and didn’t know why. From 2005 to 2009, my hormonal issues were wiggin’ out of control. That was 4 years of hair falling out, suicidal lows, no sex drive, mysterious hives, rashes and boils. Tons of doctors and no solutions – the only help they would give me were useless tests and pharmaceuticals. I had my thyroid checked over 10 times. Each time it was fine. Google and I were on close terms, and according to it, my hormones were way out of whack (or I had some sort of cancer. Nothing like WebMD for scaring the crap out of yourself!) Because I didn’t know any better, I didn’t realize the part that insulin was playing, and instead, concentrated on getting my estrogen/testosterone levels right. Which didn’t work. Once again, the doctors had failed me. The whole time, I was freaking out for a baby. We had to resort to IVF to get pregnant, since the endometriosis had ravaged my fallopian tubes. I had a miserable, sugar-soaked, bed-ridden pregnancy and identical twin boys in January of 2009. My kids were born two months early, but I had somehow managed to gain 80 pounds during the short pregnancy. By May of that year, I was still 235 pounds and PISSED OFF because I had been told (and believed) that breastfeeding burns calories and that the weight would “just melt right off!”
My brother, who I am super proud of and who is one of my greatest influences and motivators, sent me Mark Sisson’s book, The Primal Blueprint in May of ’09. It literally changed my life. It made so much sense to me that we should be eating the way we had evolved to. I looked up the Primal/Paleo lifestyle and found a community of people who had been suffering from a lot of the same maladies as I had been but who now seemed to be completely CURED. Where did I sign up? I immediately cut out all grains and sugar, but I still didn’t have it right. I had been eating so much sugar before that cutting it out completely was unbearable to me. It was my only vice so it seemed so justifiable. Instead of Sweet Tarts and donuts, though, I ate fruit. A lot of it. And tons of nuts, too, since they are allowed on the Primal diet. I didn’t stop eating dairy, either. But cutting out grains and white sugar was having an effect. I lost 20 pounds pretty quick. I started tweaking my diet. Way less fruit – mainly berries and the occasional apple. Whipping cream instead of half and half. Limiting nuts to once a week. More fat, fewer carbs. My palate changed. Biting into a kiwi gave me the same satisfaction that Sweet Tarts used to. Salads came alive and cooking became fun again. The Primal Blueprint allows for “cheats” if you stick to the lifestyle 80% of the time. So, I allowed myself treats from time to time but I planned them and enjoyed the hell out of them. I didn’t suddenly pack on 10 pounds if I ate something bad, because I stopped at that one thing. Instead of “falling off of the wagon,” I listened to my body and occasionally gave into cravings when they came. It became easier and easier to say “no.” During this time, I noticed that most of my hormonal issues were disappearing. My periods became super regular. I barely noticed them, to be honest, which was NOT the norm for me. My skin cleared up, I didn’t need to use moisturizer anymore, I was freakin’ HAPPY all the time, and I was losing weight. It was slow, about a pound a week but it was coming off. And I wasn’t really trying all that hard! The Primal Blueprint mentions that nutrition is 80% of the battle. I especially liked Mark Sisson’s take on fitness – you don’t actually have to do as much as the industry would have you believe. I also learned that most people are working out incorrectly. Hours of “chronic cardio” on the treadmill is actually having the opposite of the desired effect – people are overtraining, injuring themselves and making themselves hungry as hell. (It’s a lot easier to justify a donut when you’ve worked out hard, right?!) I didn’t have to work out hard to see results. I now do CrossFit once or twice a week, yoga once (maybe), sprints now and then and the occasional walk around the neighborhood with the kids. I guess when I stop to consider it, I probably do do more exercise than the average person – I tend to do a proper deadlift when I lift each one of my 30 lb boys and will sometimes drop down and do a couple burpees for no reason at all. I blame that on all the extra energy I now have. I’ve just passed my one-and-a-half-year anniversary with the Primal lifestyle. I’ve been so enamored with this way of life that I have completely changed the way I live. I’ve done tons of research, reading and studying. I had never really thought too much about the environment, but some of the stuff I uncovered – about pesticides, chemicals, hormones and antibiotics being used in the food industry – has made me change a lot of the ways I do things and I feel like I’m doing my part for the environment now. I compost with worms for the free fertilizer, I’m growing a lot of my own vegetables and I even got a few chickens for my backyard. I get 4 organic, free-range eggs a day and I don’t have to worry about them being loaded with antibiotic residue. I eat grass-fed beef.
Mainly, I eat real, whole foods and I eat less than I did before. I’m at 153 lbs as we speak. I’m 5′9″ so I’m at my goal weight for the first time ever. I weigh less and am smaller than I was in high school! In order to lose the dreaded “last 10 pounds,” I incorporated intermittent fasting. Since my insulin and blood sugar are working properly now, going a whole day without food actually leaves me feeling fantastic and energized. I couldn’t have imagined missing even a single meal in my old life! In fact, since my blood sugar was so out of whack, missing a meal meant bouts of hypoglycemia, where I felt like shit and was a total bitch to everyone around me. That’s gone. I take 6000 units of Vitamin D a day and I’m sure that is helping towards my overall health. My depression, PMS, PCOS, endometriosis and everything else is just… gone. I’m currently training to become a Certified Personal Trainer, and when I’ve finished that, I’m going to get a certificate in holistic nutrition so that I can officially start helping others. Mark Sisson, the Primal Blueprint and Mark’s Daily Apple have changed my life and I would like to pay it forward. Tara
Grab The Primal Blueprint Cookbook Today and Receive Free S&H
Related posts:The Beginning of a New Life Dear Mark: Rapid Fire Edition
- Tags:
- Health
- Success Stories
December 24 2010, 3:00pm | Comments »
1