training/nutrition
P o l iq iq u i n P e r fo fo r m a n c e
CHARLES
POLIQUIN
INTERVIEW PART II Phillips is Phillips is cle clean. an. Be Becaus causee of a varie variety ty of is issues sues,, I ran a hormon e profilee on h im. I don’t profil don’t ru n a standard IOC drug test because because any guy guy with any smarts can cheat that test.So I have doctors runs test on LH, FSH FS H to see if anything is depressed. depressed. always wond wond ered why th ey didn’t didn’t look at t hat. WL: I always CP:
Yeah, because that’s that’s actually what weightlif weightlifting ting d oes. The cleanest spor t out t here is actually weightlifting weightlifting because weightliftweightlifting chose years ago to do hormone profiling and not compound testing. tes ting. The reason reason they did that is to clean clean the sport, and it’s obviou sl slyy workin workin g because their weight weight perform ances are not what they used to be. The trend in oth er sports is to get something something that is not on t he list. list. But that is not an Easte Eastern rn lis list. t. It is a Weste Western rn lis list. t. That’ That’ss why there has never never been a p ositi ositive ve Easte Eastern rn on recor record. d. Look it up. Wh y? Beca Because use actu ally at the ‘92 ‘92 Olymp ics I had a friendly discussion with an O lympian and he basically said,‘W said,‘Wee were alway alwayss 12 steroids steroids ahead of the list’ list’.. So you you kn ow they would would take a steroidd that they are testing, sa steroi sayy oxandrolone, oxandrolone, and add a chlorine ion to m odify it so so the test couldn’t couldn’t pick itit up. Com pou nd testing do esn’ esn’tt work. WL: So
n Part II of our hard-h itti itting ng interview interview with with Ch arl arles es
I
Poliquin Poli quin , Charles delv delves es into the taboo iss issue ue of dr ug use in comp etiti etitive ve spor ts. He d isc iscusses usses the evasion evasion
techn tec hn iques of the old East East German Olympic doping machine, as well well as the current state of dr ug culture in pro fess essional ional sports,including football,basketball,and hockey.Charles also gives giv es us a little little m ore detail abou t what it is he d oes with h is elite el ite cli clients ents at his Poliquin Poliquin Perf Perform orm ance Centers. Ou r interview took took place shor shor tly before before the 2004 Sum mer Olympics. WL:What
do you say to the person who says that you can do a lot of things to build muscle muscle and improve performance, but no thin g is ever ever going to b ring it to the level that steroids do ? You mu st take anabolics to be a world-class athlete athlete.. Wh at do you say to that p ers erson? on? bullshit really really because I coach a lot of people CP: I th ink th at’s bullshit who d on’ on’tt u se anabo lics lics.. The o nly place it’s going to m ake a world of difference diff erence is in in b odybuilding. Ev Even en in tr ack, a guy I coach, coach, Dwight
www.bodyofscience.com
this was a som som ewhat recent conversation? Can you tell me more about what he used to d o. falle lenn by th en an d t he athlete was comp comp eting for CP: The Wall had fal un ifie ifiedd Germ any any.. He said said when he was an East East German , he took anabolics for 20 years. He said in the original days, days, he used Deca Dur abolin,m aybe 12 weeks weeks out,but woul wouldd switch switch to diff differe erent nt com poun ds for testing.H testing.H e would would u se Turinabol Turinabol and he knew how many days to go off, off, and t hen he would take non- steroi steroidal dal anabolic compou nds to p rolong the aff affects of the cycle cycle.. They basicall basicallyy used injectables injectabl es and th en switched switched to orals and th en they would get to a closer cl oser and clos closer er period with the o rals.T hey fel feltt Turinabol was the dr ug of choice because because it maintained gains when they went went off; off; there wasn’ wasn’t such a dro p in p erforman ce.Both males and females were were on it. The difference difference betwee betweenn m en and women back then was basicallyy the time th ey would call would spend on Dianabol. They were were onto ot her stuff before the Wall fe fell ll too. Bas Basically ically,, the dr ug progr am was run b y the state securit y, which is equivalent to the U.S. Secret Service. Service. It’s maybe m ore equivalent equivalent to the KGB or C IA. definitely had had t he mo st in-depth WL: The Germ ans definitely
doping syste system, m, jud ging by a lot of th thee docu m ent entss released th e past 10-15 10- 15 years.W hat about Ch ina? How do you you th ink they played played into th e Eastern Eastern do ping system system ? basicall allyy set set out to make the Eastern sports CP: The dr ug program basic system sy stem the one to beat. There was was also also cooperation with China. In the 80’s,th e German s were were shitty shitty at diving, and the swimmers in Ch ina were we re terrible, terrible, so they swapped swapped coaches coaches.. So they sent sent Eastern swim-
B O D Y O F SC SC I EN EN C E S u m m e r 2 0 0 5
39
Po l iq u i n P e r fo r m a n c e
Inside the Poliquin Performance Center
min g coaches to China. And th e Chinese sent diving coaches to East German y. So they started to show the Chinese the East Germ an train ing techniqu es,an d two weeks later the swimm ers were all sick. So they asked if there was a chan ce it was because testosterone levels were low.An d t hey were like “um .. yyyeah”.It to ok th e guy abou t 10 minutes to realize the Chinese doctor had no clue about anabo lics. So ok, they knew the d eal. They said they would b ring in th ese two guys from East Germany, and n ow sudd enly the Chin ese start to dom inate in swimming.And then they got smar ter with testing,and they popped them for DH T. But anyway, so the East Germ an do ctor and the pharm acist show up, and t hey gave them th e anabolics to suppor t the East Germ an tr aining system. But that’s where the argum ent that an abolics are a requirement is bullshit,b ecause there were countries that could actually beat the East Germ ans with anti-dop ing control. Right now Canada is doing very well in swimm ing, to spite no dop ing. The d ifference is they just didn’t follow the East Germ an t raining m ethodo logy. They said, well,we can’t d o as m uch, so we’ll just adjust the training. So I don’t really agree with t hat statemen t. I thin k it was tru er in 1996,and then after that there is more and m ore to help you ou tside of steroids. Look, where there is money and profit, there are more dr ugs. So like in weightlifting it is pretty much gone. But track, swimm ing, cycling, tenn is - prob ably the worst offend er for steroids is tennis,( which is)not well known by the general pub lic.
40
Su m m e r 2 0 0 5 B O D Y O F SC I EN C E
WL: Yes, you wouldn’t th ink, but
I have seen it myself. CP: Do they use big dosages? No.D o t hey use stuff like Anadrol? No. But th ey use small doses of designer stuff, just enough so th e guy can recover and play and make m oney every weekend. That is prob ably where designer steroids first started; in ten nis.
The cle anes t sport out there is actually weightlifting be caus e weig htlifting c hose years ago to do hormone profiling and not com pound te sting. WL:
So what do you th ink going into the O lympics this summ er? Who do you t hink is going in using? Do you t hink there is a lot with organized doping and designer compou nds? CP: Not as an organized countr y anymore.It is an individual thing. Correction,I think t here is one countr y doing it as an organized system and if I said it on t he record, I’d get sued. WL:
Without m entioning any nam es, what technologies do you
w w w .b o d y o fscien ce.co m
see right now? CP: Self testing, they will test them selves to see how man y days you need to stop before a test to come b ack clean. They’ll find, say go 28 days on th is comp ound , 14 days on anoth er.W ith orals now, the test can prett y much pick anything within 28 d ays.4 years ago, some guys were doing 8-10 days and they would use cream form . Like one med allist I know used an oxand rolone cream and he tested clear in 8 d ays. WL:
That’s really interesting. I would have th ought that the t ransderm al would have had a sm all delayed action effect. I would h ave tho ught or als would have been a little bit bett er. CP: So would I. For some reason, they want the cream. But you got to realize, this guy had bo dyfat of less than 4%. And also, there is a trend after they go off steroids to use detox proto cols.
inhibiting the conversion of arachidonic acid to active prostiglandins. Th is also would be a negative for m uscle growth. CP: Yeah, milk th istle is not pop ular. Guys definitely stick with other b otan icals. They also use bot anicals to increase free testosterone durin g the detox or clean- up ph ase.
The g ut is your se cond b ra i n. So m e p e o p le g e t d e p re s s i o n b e c a u s e t he y have a g ut pathoge n. WL: Th ere’s
WL: Can
you explain what you m ean by a detox protocol? CP: They use a program to get rid of the metabolites. So like calciumd- glucurate. They’ll use what th ey basically call “pushers”,which are large injections of detoxing compound s,and they use mainly botanical liver detoxifiers that don’t mess up the and rogen sites like milk th istle,which will actually decrease steroid absorp tion. WL: I also know that
www.bodyofscience.com
milk th istle has an anti-inflamm atory effect,
also a test th at they have to identify if the testo sterone in your bod y is natur al or synthetic. CP: They’ve been able to do t hat since 1994. WL:
Yeah, I kn ow they developed it, but I haven’t heard they’ve implemented it yet. CP: I th ink t hey will implement it this year. But t hey’ve had th e technolog y forever. Now they’re saying th ey can test for GH but I’m n ot sure what’s going on with that .
B O D Y O F SC I EN C E S u m m e r 2 0 0 5
41
Po l iq u i n P e r fo r m a n c e WL:
I’ve been wond ering that myself. I k n o w t h e y’ve s p e n t a l o t o f m o n e y working on t hat. They keep saying they have something. CP: The Australians have been p ushing for it. And they’ve had the techn ology for a while.
has too m uch cortisol for his training, we can bring it down. If it’s too low, we can give him liquor shoot to raise it so that he has more energy. It is not uncom mon to see people with very depressed DHEA levels. That’s mainly from over-training. And if there is one th ing I do a lot, it’s botan icals to raise testosterone.
WL :
I spoke with a reporter not long ago who assured me this year we were going to see this test used. So what do you th ink? Do you th ink a lot of people will be taking the chance? I know I wouldn’t risk it knowing the test might happen this year. CP : I f t h e y a c t u a ll y d o t e s t fo r G H , they could theoretically catch 80% of the Track & Field world. Especially in t he field events and the Shorts, anything un der 200 meters, they will catch a shitload of people. WL: I know you do n’t want that p rinted. CP: Th at you can
because it’s way more u se (pau ses) t han people realize. There’s a lot of people being treated for dwarfism in Track & Field.
WL: So what about som e other pro fessional
sports. Wh at about football and ho ckey?
In the NHL, you could put a jar of Dianabol in the locker room, and nobody would be interested.
mon e profile and food sensitivity to see if everyth ing is nor mal. If they’re not perfectly n o r m a l, t h e n w e wo r k o n f i xi n g it , s ay increasing free testosterone with b otan icals. We’ll look at your n utrition, and you’d be surprised as to how m any clients I work with that don’t un derstand a lot abo ut n u t r it i on . I h a ve t h i s o n e c li en t . H e r breakfast consists of one egg, and then she goes and trains. Obviously, genetics is a big part. You’d b e surpr ised as to how comm on cheese puffs are among ath letes. I work with th is one woman who is in the 4-person relay for sprinting. She basically had the 7-Eleven D iet:m icrowave hotdo gs, cheese puffs, anything you can buy at 7 - E le ve n , s h e at e . I f ix ed h e r d i et a n d instantly, she started m aking progress. I have a ru le with m y female athletes. They have to have 50g of protein by lunch everyday. It’s not enorm ous, but bo om! It m akes a difference! (pau ses) And also we’ve noticed no decline in p erform ance when cheese puffs are dropped from the d iet.In the U.S., there are so many great athletes. On e of the reasons why we tend to do so well is t h e m a g n it u d e o f t h e b a se p o o l o f great athletes.
WL:
So you drug test people when they com e to work with you? You won’t work with an ath lete if they’re using gear? CP: I’ve got too much money in there (referring to h is state-of-the-art t raining facility). So what I do is run a saliva test, which is as good as blood work. They do i t fo u r t i m e s a d a y fo r 2 4 h o u r s . T h i s way I can test testosterone, DHEA, and I look at the ratio between all the hor mo nes. And the lab that I use, there is an HPLC here,there is a RIA in Georgetown,an d th ey do an RIA at Georgetown so every samp le is tested twice with two different m ethod s. And th ey test 16 hormon es, 4 times a day. And we look at the ratio, so I can tell who is using. WL: Wh at’s your
reasoning for do ing this? Is it that you d on’t want to work with people using so that you can use your technologies? Or is it a legal concer n? CP: I think it can b e done without steroids. And th e other thin g too is a scandal would ruin m y business. I have to do the testing here to protect myself. Plus, if there is a problem with the horm ones, I can correct those through natural means. So if a guy
42
Su m m e r 2 0 0 5 B O D Y O F SC I EN C E
WL: So CP: The N FL has very rigid do ping contro ls.
In the NH L, they don’t give a shit. In the NH L,you could put a jar of Dianabol in the lo c ke r ro o m , a n d n o b o d y wo u ld b e interested. It’s no t par t of the cultu re. You’d think t hat it was a spor t that could prob ably use it because they don’t test for it, but t hey don’t care. WL:
That’s interesting to hear, especially with the aggressive natu re of ho ckey. CP: I think in the NHL,if you ran doping control unann ounced, you’d maybe catch four athletes. Alcohol and golf are more interesting to them. It might be somewhat of the “forbidden fruit” theory. If you ban it, people will be m ore interested. In ho ckey, they can d o whatever they want, and they do n’t give a shit. WL:
So the athlete that comes to you an d says,‘I’ve got a ch ance to do t he O lympics or someth ing big and I’m considering steroids, but I really don’t want to go th at route. Wh at can you do for me?’ CP: First, I’d take you in an d do your hor-
you t hin k overall, we’re not as disciplined as we cou ld be? CP: Nowhere near the potential. Nowhere n e a r. I r em e m b e r wh e n I co a c h e d the Olympic boxing team and won Gold, we used to look at athletes on the Americanside, and we used to laugh, ‘Imagine if we had th ose guys to work with’. I rememb er Hershal Walker in the ’92 Olympics, this guy on ly ate French fries.We all stayed at the Club Med , and that’s all he ate for 14 days. And t he guy has an incredible physique! I had another athlete that does biathlon, which is basically Canadian dr ive-by shoo tin g. It’s a cross between cross-country skiing and target shooting. This woman ate a very strict diet, but on the two days she won the Olympic Gold, her pre-race meals were double-cheeseburgers, French fries, and a Fresca. And I asked her, ‘I’ve knows you for years, and you’re like a granola head. How can you eat that shit before you go and comp ete?’She said th at ‘it’s the food I grew u p o n a s a k id , a n d i t m a k e s m e f ee l mentally secure to eat that before a race’. And I remember the Italian girl who was
w w w .b o d y o fscien ce.co m
her biggest comp etitor in the biathlon, and she walked by her while she was eating her cheeseburger and we almost said it at the same time, ‘What is she doing eating that shit?’ I know a num ber of athletes that do that. WL:
So when you work with somebody, how much time do you spend with them? CP: Th ey typically come every 25 d ays for 3 days at a time du ring their off-season.
you have a client that typically has a lot of cortisol,you’ll find that it comprom ises the imm une system. WL:
How do you feel about glutam ine? CP: I’ve used a lot of it. I use it with fat guys as a substitu te to replace glycogens after a workout. I use about 60g post-workout. WL: How do
you feel about glutam ine and general intestina l health? Do you thin k it’s overrated?
WL: How much tim e do they spend at your
facility du rin g the d ay when you’re there? CP: 2 hou rs a day. 1 hou r each for 2 visits. And the rest of the time, they see the doctors for IV’s or acupu nct ures, or whatever th ey’re doing. WL:
Charles, what do you have at your facility in term s of services and equipm ent? I understand it is one of the best cond itioning facilities in th e coun tr y. CP : Yeah, we’ve got a fully equipped weight room .We also have two doctor s, and we run every test you can thin k of. We do genom ic profiles; we run all the horm one tests. We run urin alysis tests, these energy metabolism tests, and then with all the information we have, we develop your training. For example, I have this athlete;he had brain fog when h e tried to play in t he Stanley Cup. It turns out he had on e of the highest doses of antibiotics, which destroyed his good bacteria, and by destroying the bacteria, it destroyed the neurotransm itters, which effected brain function . We treated him to suppor t his neurotr ansmitters, and replace the good bacteria. We do a lot of diverse things here. WL:
So too much antibiotic can actually affect brain functionin g? CP: Yes, 66% of the neurotransmitters are made in the gut lining, and 95% of the serotonin comes from the gut. That’s where you get sayings like, ‘I’ve got a gut feeling that this is bad’. The gut is your second brain. Some people get depression because they have a gut p athogen. Or lets say Candita, which is this type of yeast. They have mo od swings and don’t u nderstand why.You k ill the Can dita , and you don’t have moo d swings anymore. Your neurotransmitters are made in th e intestines.And 66% of the immun e system is in the intestine. If
www.bodyofscience.com
If you have a client that typically has a lot of cortisol, you’ll find that it compromises the immune system. CP:
No. When a guy can’t gain weight, a quick cure is 80g of glutam ine per d ay for a few days. It helps them repair the gut lining so they can absorb food better. I actually like glutamin e. I consider fat as anyone with more than 10% body fat. Until they get to 10%, I only use whey protein, glycine and glutamine post workout. If they get over 10%, we start u sing glutamine. WL: Will you d o no carb s during the whole
2 hour window post workout when you are using glutam ine? CP: Correct. No carbs if you are fat. WL:
Charles, I know we are runn ing way over your allotted time, so I’ll end the interview here.I want to than k you for your tim e! We’ve got some great stuff here, and I had a great time talking with you. I know our readers will appreciate what you h ad to say! CP: Than k you Bill! Anytime.
training/nutrition
B
R
Th e o r y o f N u tr i t i o n
I
N
K
’
S
UNIFIED T H E O R Y OF NUTRITION BY WILL BRINK
When people hear the term Unified Theor y, sometimes called the Gran d Unified Theor y, or
even “Theor y of Everything,” they probably think of it in term s of physics,where a Unified Theor y, or single theor y, capable of defining the n ature of the inter-relationships am ong nu clear, electromagnetic, and gravitational forces, would reconcile seemingly un comp atible aspects of various field th eories to create a single comp rehensive set of equations. Such a theor y could p otentially un lock all the secrets of nature and the un iverse itself, or as theoretical physicist Michio Katu, puts it “an equation an inch long that would allow us to read the m ind of God.” That’s how impor tant un ified th eories can be. However,u nified theor ies don’t have to deal with such h eady topics as physics or the nature of the universe itself, but can be applied to far more mund ane topics,in this case nutr ition. Regardless of the topic, a unified theor y, as stated above, seeks to explain seemingly incompatible aspects of various theories. In th is article I attempt to u nify seemin gly incomp atible or oppo sing views regarding nutrition, namely, what is probably the longest run ning debate in th e nutritional sciences:calories vs.macro nutrients. On e school, I would say the ‘old school’ of nutr ition, maint ains weight loss or weight gain is all about calories, and “a calorie is a calorie,” no m atter the source (e.g., carbs, fats,or proteins).Th ey base their position on various lines of evidence to come to th at conclusion. The other school, I would call more the ‘new schoo l’of thou ght on th e issue,would state that gaining or losing weight is really about where the calories come from (e.g., carbs,fats, and proteins),an d that dictates weight loss or weight gain. Meaning, they feel,th e “calorie is a calorie” man tra of the old school is wrong.They too come to this conclusion u sing various lines of evidence. www.bodyofscience.com
This has been an ongoing debate between people in the field of nutr ition, biology, physiology, and m any other disciplines, for d ecades.The result of which has led to conflicting advice and a great deal of
“Total calories dictates how much weight a person gains or loses; macro nutrient ratios dictates what a person gains or loses” confusion by the general public, not to mention m any medical professionals and other groups. Before I go any further, two key points that are essential to understand about any unified theor y:
• A good u nified theory is simple, concise, and u nderstandable even to lay people. However, underneath, or behind that theor y, is often a great deal of information that can take up many volumes of books. So,for me to outline all the information I h ave used to come to t hese conclusions, would take a large book, if not several,and is far beyond the scope of this article. • A un ified theor y is often prop osed by some th eorist before it can even be p roven or fully suppor ted by ph ysical evidence. Over time, different lines of evidence, whether it be mathematical, physical, etc., supports the theor y and thus solidifies that theory as being correct,or continued lines of evidence shows the theor y needs to be revised or is simply incorrect. I feel there is now mo re than enou gh evidence, at this point, to give a un ified theory of nutrition and continuing lines of evidence will continue (with some possible revisions) to solidify the th eory as fact. “A calorie is a calorie”
The old school of nutrition, which often includes most nut ritionists, is a calorie is a calorie when it com es to gaining or losing weight. That weight loss or weight gain is strictly a matter of “calories in, calories out.” Translated, if you “burn” more calories than you take in , you will lose weight regardless of the calorie source and if you eat more calories than you burn off each d ay, you B O D Y O F SC I EN C E S u m m e r 2 0 0 5
45
Th e o r y o f N u tr i t i o n
will gain weight,regardless of the calorie source. This long held an d accepted view of nutr ition is based on the fact that prot ein and carb s contain approx 4 calories per gram and fat approximately 9 calories per gram and the source of tho se calories matters not. They base this on the many studies that finds if one redu ces calories by X nu mb er each d ay, weight loss is the result an d so it goes if you add X num ber of calories above what you use each day for gainin g weight. However,th e “calories in, calories out”m antr a fails to take into a cc o u n t m o d e r n r e s ea r ch t h a t f in d s t h a t f at s , c a r b s, a n d prot eins have very d ifferent effects on t he m etabo lism via count less pathways, such as their effects on hormon es (e.g., insulin, leptin, glucagon, etc), effects on hu nger and app etite,th ermic effects (heat production), effects on uncoupling proteins (UCPs), and 1000 other effects that could be mention ed. Even worse,th is school of thou ght fails to take into account t he fact that even within a macro n utrient, they too can h ave different effects on metabolism. This school of thought ignores the ever mou nting volum e of studies that have foun d diets with different macro nutr ient ratios with ident ical calorie intakes have different effects on bo dy compo sition, cholesterol levels, oxidative stress, etc. Translated, not only is the m antra “a calorie is a calorie” proven to be false,“all fats are created equ al” or “protein is pro tein” is also incorrect. For example,we n ow kno w different fats (e.g.fish oils vs. saturated fats) have vastly different effects on metabolism and health in general,as we now kno w different carboh ydrates have their own effects (e.g.h igh GI vs.low GI), as we know d ifferent proteins can have unique effects.
The “calories don't matter” school of thought This schoo l of thou ght will typically tell you that if you eat large amounts of some particular macro nutrient in their magic ratios, 46
Summ er 2005
B O D Y O F S CI E N CE
Mr.Ge t-Off-You r-Ass
“Die ts with ide ntical e nergy contents can have different e ffe c ts on leptin co nce ntrations, e nergy expe nditure, voluntary food intake, and nitroge n balanc e, sug ge sting that the physiolog ic adaptations to e ne rg y re striction c a n b e m o d i fie d b y d i e t a ry composition."
calories don't m atter. For example, followers of ketogenic style diets that consist of high fat intakes and very low carboh ydrate intakes (i.e.,Atkins, etc.) often m aintain th at calories don't m atter in such a diet. Ot hers maintain if you eat very high protein int akes with very low fat and carbohydrate intakes,calories don't matter.Like the o ld school, th is schoo l fails to ta ke into accoun t the effects such diets have on various pathways and ignore the simple realities of hum an physiology, not to m ention the laws of thermod ynamics! The reality is, although it's clear different macro nutr ients in different am oun ts and ratios h ave different effects on weight loss,fat loss, and other metabolic effects,calories do m atter. They always have and they always will.Th e data, and real world experience of millions of www.bodyofscience.com
dieters, is quite clear on that reality. The tru th b ehind such d iets is that they are often quite good at suppressing appetite and thus th e person simply ends u p eating fewer calories and losing weight. Also, the weight loss from such diets is often from water vs.fat, at least in the first few weeks. That's n ot to say people can't experience meaningful weight loss with som e of these diets,but the effect comes from a reduction in calories vs. any m agical effects often claimed by propo nents of such diets.
Weight loss vs. fat loss! This is where we get into th e crux of the tru e debate and why the two schools of thought are not actu ally as far apart from one ano ther as they appear to the un trained eye.W hat has become abund antly clear from the stud ies perform ed an d real world evidence is that to lose weight we need to u se more calories than we take in (via reducin g calorie intake and or increasin g exercise), but we know d ifferent diets have different effects on the metabolism, appetite,bo dy composition, and ot her physiological variables... Brink’s Unified Theory of Nutrition ...Thus, this reality has led m e to Brink’s Unified Theor y of Nutrition which states: “Total calories dictates how much weight a person gains or loses; macro nutrient ratios dictates what a person gains or loses” Th is seemingly simple statement allows people to und erstand t he differences between th e two schools of thou ght. For example,stud ies often find t hat two groups of people put on the same calorie intakes but very different ratios of carbs, fats, and proteins will lose different amounts of bodyfat and or lean bod y mass (i.e., muscle, bone, etc.). Some studies find, for example, people on a higher protein lower carb diet lose approximately the same amou nt of weight as anot her group on a high carb lower protein d iet,but the group on the higher protein diet lost more actu al fat and less lean bo dy m ass (muscle). Or,
www.bodyofscience.com
some stud ies using the same calorie intakes but d ifferent m acro nutrient intakes often find th e higher protein diet m ay lose less actual weight than t he higher carb lower protein diets, but th e actual fat loss is higher in the h igher protein low carb d iets. Th is effect has also been seen in som e studies that compared high fat/low carb vs.h igh carb/low fat d iets. The effect is usually amplified if exercise is involved as one might expect. Of cour se these effects are not foun d u niversally in all studies that examine the issue, but the bu lk of the data is clear: diets containin g different macro nutrient ratios do have different effects on human p h y s i o l o g y e ve n w h e n c a l o r i e i n t a k e s a r e i d e n t i c a l (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11).
Or, as the authors of one recent study that looked at the issue concluded: “Diets with ident ical energy contents can have different effects on intake, and nitrogen balance, suggesting that the physiologic adaptations to energy restriction can be m odified by dietary composition.”(12) The point b eing, there are many studies confirming that th e actual ratio of carbs, fats, and p roteins in a given diet can effect what is actually lost (i.e.,fat,m uscle,b one, and water) and that total calories has the greatest effect on how mu ch tot al weight is lost. Are you starting to see how my unified theory of nutrition combines the “calorie is a calorie” school with the “calories don’t m atter”scho ol to help people make decisions about n utrition ? Knowing this, it becomes much easier for peop le to un derstand the seemingly conflicting diet and nutrition advice out there (of course this does not account for the down right unscientific and dangerous nutrition advice people are subjected to via bad books, TV, the ‘net, and well meaning friends, but that’s another article altogether) .
B O D Y O F SC I EN C E S u m m e r 2 0 0 5
47
Th e o r y o f N u tr i t i o n Knowing the above information and keeping the Unified Theory of Nutrition in mind, leads us to some important and potentially useful conclusions: • An opt imal diet designed to m ake a person lose fat and retain as mu ch LBM as possible is not th e same as a diet simply designed to lose weight. • A nutrition program designed to create fat loss is not simply a reduced calorie version of a nutrition program d esigned to gain weight, and visa versa. • Diets need t o be d esigned with fat loss, NOT just weight loss, as the goal, but total calories can’t b e ignored . • Th is is why the d iets I design for peopleor write about- for gaining or losing weight are n ot simply higher or lower calorie versions of the same diet. In short: diets plans I design for gaining LBM start with total calories and build macro nutr ient ratios into the numb er of calories required. However, diets designed for fat loss (vs. weight loss!) start with the correct macro nutrient ratios that depen d on variables such as amount of LBM th e person carries vs. bod yfat percent , activity levels, etc., and figure out calories based on the proper m acro nutrient ratios to achieve fat loss with a m inimum loss of LBM. The actual ratio of macro nut rients can be quite different for both diets and even for ind ividuals. • Diets that give the same m acro nutr ient ratio to all people (e.g., 40/30/30, or 70,30,10, etc.) regardless of total calories,goals,activity levels,etc.,will always be less than optimal. Optimal macro nutrient ratios can change with total calories and ot her variables. • Perhaps most important, the unified theor y explains why th e focus on weight loss vs. fat loss by the vast majority of people, including m ost medical professionals, and t he med ia, will always fail in the long run to deliver the results
•
people want. Finally, the Un iversal Theory m akes it clear that the op tim al diet for losing fat, or gaining mu scle, or what ever the goal, mu st accoun t not o nly for tot al calories, but m acro nutrient ratios that optimize metab olic effects and answer the question s: what effects will th is diet have on app etite? Wh at effects will this diet h ave on metab olic rate? Wh at effects will this
People that want to know my thoughts on the correct way to lose fat should read my ebook Diet Supplements Revealed
•
•
diet have on m y lean bo dy mass (LBM) ? Wh at effects will this diet have on ho rm o n e s; b o t h h o r m o n es t h at m a y improve or imp ede m y goals? Wh at effects will this diet have on (fill in the blank)? Simp ly asking,“h ow mu ch weight will I lose?” is the wrong question which will lead to t he wrong answer. To get the optimal effects from your next diet, whether loo king to gain weight or lose it, you mu st ask the right questions to get mean ingful answers. Asking the right questions will also help you avoid the pitfalls of un scientific poorly thought out diets which m ake prom ises they can’t keep an d go against
Will is the author o f the b est selling ebook “Diet Supp lements Revealed”,as well as the best selling print book “Priming The Anabolic Environment”, which can be found at any bookstore,Amazon.com or Barnes & Noble. He is also a mon thly colum nist for MuscleMag International, a regular contr ibuting writer to num erous other top fitn ess pub lications, and is considered by man y to be one of the world’s leading gurus on supplements and training.
48
Su m m e r 2 0 0 5 B O D Y O F SC I EN C E
what we know abou t hum an physiology and the very laws of physics! People that want to know my th oughts on t he correct way to lose fat should read my ebook D iet Supp lements Revealed, see this website http:// www.aboutsupplements.com. If you want to know my thoughts on the best way to set up a d iet to gain weight in the form of muscle while minimizing bodyfat, consider reading m y ebook Muscle Building Nutr ition (AKA Brink’s Bodybu ilding Bible) at this web site: http ://www.musclebuildingnutrition.com . BTW, bot h ebooks also cover supplement s for their respective goals along with exercise advice. There are, of course, many additional questions that can be asked and points that can be raised as it applies to the above, but those are some of the key issues that come to mind . Bottom line here is,if the diet you are following to either gain o r lose weight d oes not ad dress those issues and or q uestions, then you can count on being among the millions of disappointed p eople who don’t receive the optim al results they had h oped for and have made yet another nutrition “guru” laugh all the way to the ban k at your expense. Any diet th at claims calories don’t m atter, forget it. Any diet that tells you they have a magic ratio of foods, ignore it.Any diet th at tells you any one food source is evil, it’s a scam. Any diet t hat tells you it w ill work for all people, all the time, no m atter the circumstan ces,th row it out or give it to som eon e you d on’t like! References: 1 . J Sp o r t s M e d P h y s F it n e s s 2 0 0 0 Dec;40(4):336-42 2. Neuroscience 2002;112(2):243-60. 3. Am J Physiol Endo crinol Metab 2001 Nov;281(5):E1095-100. 4.Ar thr itis Rheum 1998 Mar;41(3):406-13. 5. Mol Cell Biochem 2003 Feb;244(1-2):95104. 6.Med Sci Sports Exerc 2001 Feb;33(2):183-8. 7. Sports Med 2000 Sep;30(3):155-70. 8.Med Sci Sports Exerc 2000 Mar; 32(3):706-17. 9.Med. Sci.Sport. Exerc. 31:1108-1110,1999. 1 0 . M e d S c i Sp o r t s E x er c 2 0 0 0 Fe b ; 32(2):291-6. 11. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2003 Feb; 18(2):258-64. w w w .b o d y o fscien ce.co m
• Human Growth Hormone (Generic also available) • Testosterone • Testosterone Replacement Therapy (Cypionate, Propionate, Enanthate, Suspension)
• Maximum Personal Enhancement • Nandrolone Deconate Introducing the world’s strongest injectable fat burner! • Winstrol • Winstrol - Stanozolol L-CARNITINE • Anavar • Anavar - Oxandrin All orders are private and confidential. • Arimidex • Arimidex - HCG CALL TOLL FREE or • Viagra • Viagra - Cialis - Levitra log onto one one of of our our websites: websites:
800.239.3951
MAXLIFE4U.COM • MAXIMUMTHERAPY.ORG • WHOLESALEHORMONE.COM
