- The Authors
Jeff Thiboutot
Matt Schoeneberger
Wal-Mart, You Must Be Kidding Me!
Watch the Wal-Mart video here.
Here’s a quick breakdown of some of the ingredients of the so-called nutritious breakfast products.
- Frosted Flakes (3/4 cup, 11g sugar): 2nd and 4th ingredients are sugar, and high fructose corn syrup, respectively
- Raisin Bran Crunch (1 cup, 20g sugar): 2nd ingredient: sugar, 5th ingredient: oat and honey cluster (which includes sugar and corn syrup, then more sugar and high fructose corn syrup… high fructose corn syrup and sugar are both listed 3 different times.
- Nutri-grain bars (12g sugar): crust: 4th: high fructose corn syrup, 5th: sugar, 6th: honey filling: 1 and 2. high fructose corn syrup and corn syrup, 4th is sugar
Filed under: nutrition — Tags: breakfast, weight loss — Matt Schoeneberger M.S. @ 1:01 pm
S.P.E.E.D. Weight Loss for Dogs
I’ve noticed my dog has an incredible sense of self-discipline. She’s been following the recommendations in S.P.E.E.D. since before S.P.E.E.D. was written. She exercises a little every day, gets plenty of sleep, doesn’t allow distractions while she’s eating, eats 1-2 meals every day or sometimes throws in a day of fasting. She eats a low-carb diet and only has ice cream (Frosty Paws) vary rarely. If you follow the checklists at the beginning of each chapter of S.P.E.E.D., she follows almost every rule… and it shows:
Mocha, a.k.a. “The Bean”
Ok, maybe it’s not self-discipline. Maybe she’s just been trained to eat only what is given to her and I don’t feed her junk. She’s my best friend and I want her to be around a long time. I don’t pretend I’m caring for her by giving her treats every time I leave the house to make myself feel better about not spending time with her. *climbs off soapbox*
The ingredients in her food are better than what you’ll find in most things humans eat. This and the walks/runs we go for are all she needs to stay healthy. It’s probably most of what you need, too!
The point is we could learn a thing or two about what we see with dogs. Feed them good quality food and they regulate their appetite well, maintaining a lean, muscular physique. Feed them processed junk they weren’t meant to eat and they’ll gain unwanted fat and become tired and sluggish. So, maybe the title of this post shouldn’t be “S.P.E.E.D. Weight Loss for Dogs.” Maybe it should be “Mocha’s Weight Loss Plan for Humans.”
Filed under: nutrition — Tags: weight loss — Matt Schoeneberger M.S. @ 2:09 pm
Yogurt, whey protein and a Clif bar: Another quick and fairly low carb meal.
Here is another quick meal; 1 cup organic whole milk plain yogurt (Trader Joes brand), 1 scoop of whey protein (Jay Robb brand), ½ of a blueberry crisp Clif bar adn 1tbs flax seed meal (I blended the protein powder and flax meal with the yogurt, and broke up the bar (1/2 the bar) into small pieces and through it into the mix). I had this for lunch today.
Here is the meal breakdown. It is a bit on the higher side for carbs, but for a low-carb, non-ketogenic eating style it should fit in fine.
| Food |
Protein(g) |
Net Carbs(g) |
Fats(g) |
Calories |
| ½ Clif bar (blueberry crisp) |
4.5 |
19 |
2.5 |
120 |
| 1 cup organic whole milk yogurt (Trader Joes) |
12 |
14 |
7 |
170 |
| 1 scoop whey protein (Jay Robb) |
25 |
1 |
0 |
110 |
| 1 tbs flax seed meal (Health from the Sun) |
1 |
0 |
3 |
37 |
|
Meal total |
42.5 |
34 |
12.5 |
437 |
An additional note about convenience; you could have made an additional serving of this (using the other ½ of the bar) and had it for another meal in the same day, dinner for instance. Having this twice in one day would give you about 68 grams of carbs. As long as your other meal (if you had one) is a low carb meal, say less than 10 grams (i.e., a big piece of grilled salmon and a big salad or a few cups of steamed broccoli with butter), your daily carb total would probably be in a good weight loss range. Having the same meal twice in one day is fine and it can make food preparation easier.
Filed under: fat loss, nutrition, weight loss — Tags: diet, weight loss — Jeff Thiboutot M.S. @ 5:07 pm
Another low-carb meal for weight loss: Pass me the organic grass-fed hot dog
Here is a quick and simple low-carb meal. Two organic grass-fed hot dogs (Applegate Farms purchased @ Sprouts) with two sticks of mild cheddar cheese (Trader Joes) with 1 small apple. This took 2 minutes to prepare (heated-up the dogs, opened the cheese and washed the apple). Here is the nutrient breakdown.
| Food |
Protein |
Net Carbs |
Fats |
Calories |
|
2 – Organic grass-fed hot dogs |
14 |
0 |
16 |
220 |
| 2 – cheddar cheese sticks |
10 |
0 |
14 |
160 |
|
1 – small apple |
0 |
17 |
0 |
77 |
|
Meal totals |
24 |
17 |
30 |
457 |
This reminds me of a meal I had this weekend, bratwurst and sauerkraut; another very low-carb meal. Sauerkraut is a great low-carb dish (about 2 grams of net-carbs per cup) and it has some health promoting nutrients.
Filed under: body composition, diet, fat loss, nutrition — Tags: Low-carb, quick meals, weight loss — Jeff Thiboutot M.S. @ 5:31 pm
S.P.E.E.D. Special Report – HCG & Weight Loss: Enough Already!
HCG & Weight Loss:
Enough Already!
This special report revealing why HCG for weight loss is NOT an effective option is posted at www.SPEEDweightlossbook.com. Just click on HCG Special Report in the navigation section at the bottom of our home page and you’ll be there!
Please share with as many of your friends and family as you’d like.
In Health,
Matt
Filed under: Research, diet, fat loss, nutrition, weight loss — Tags: fat loss, HCG, human chorionic gonadotropin, Research, science, weight loss — Matt Schoeneberger M.S. @ 7:29 am
As you all know, we’re getting closer and closer to being finished with this weight loss ebook. It’s getting more exciting each day. We apologize for our infrequent posting lately, we’ve just been pouring our energy into the book itself rather than this blog and our L.E.A.N. Wellness Letter. We thank you for your patience and we hope you find the posts we have been making useful and intriguing.
Now to the point. We’ve nailed down most of the original myths we came up with for the book, and we’ve thought of some more issues we’d like to tackle. Two of them are the hCG diet (Simeons Protocol) and the whole B12 shot fad. We’re digging into the science and evidence for these right now. But, we wanted to ask you…
What controversial weight loss topics do you want us to investigate? Are there any diet or exercise programs for which you would like to see the evidence (or lack thereof)?
Reply with a comment and let us know.
Filed under: Exercise, Research, body composition, diet, fat loss, nutrition, weight loss — Tags: diet, Exercise, nutrition, S.P.E.E.D. Weight Loss — Matt Schoeneberger M.S. @ 2:44 pm
Diet+Resistance Training+Protein=X
Let’s talk research.
One of the studies we reviewed for S.P.E.E.D.’s exercise chapter compared the effects on body composition and strength gain of a calorie-restricted diet with or without resistance training, differing levels of protein intake and different types of protein supplementation over 12 weeks. Participants were randomized into three groups:
-Diet alone
-Resistance exercise +whey protein
-Resistance exercise + casein protein
The results of the study showed support for the benefits of protein intake (25% of total calorie intake vs. 16% in diet alone group) and resistance training on body composition, since both groups showed increased fat loss and increased muscle gain compared to the diet only group. Additionally, the casein group showed significant increases in both measure when compared to the whey group. The same goes for strength gain – the casein group comes out on top.
There are some issues with the design of the study we’d like to discuss. This will give you a window into what we are doing as authors when writing the book, so you can understand what goes into well-supported advice.
First, when discussing the grouping of participants, the authors mention that the diet only group was assured they could follow the full program after the 12 week research period. Well, isn’t that a bit de-motivating, knowing that you’re not getting the full program? This is where blinding of research comes into play. The diet group shouldn’t have known that there was even an alternative to their treatment, that there were two other groups who got to perform resistance training programs. This could greatly affect the diet-only group’s ability or willingness to comply with the program.
Second, speaking of resistance training programs, the authors of this study do not specify the resistance training programs that were followed by the two protein+exercise groups. We find out that they performed 4 exercise sessions per week, working one of four large muscle group each session, and the session took 30-35 minutes. There is no mention of whether or not the exercise sessions were the same for each group outside of these parameters. What if one group performed 1 set of 10 reps while the other group performed 4 sets of 10 reps? Would we not expect a difference between groups? A researcher cannot be too specific.
The differences between the two protein+exercise groups in body composition changes and strength changes is remarkable. The casein group took their bodyfat % from about 26 to about 18. The whey group changed theirs from 27 to 23. The casein group increased total strength by 59% while the whey group increased by 28%. These are staggering differences over a 12-week period!
One thing we noticed while looking over the study was the mention of the sources of protein supplements. The whey supplement by one manufacturer and the casein supplement by another. There is no mention of any conflicts of interest of the authors or any mention of sponsorship by any corporation. We can only hope that the researchers did not skew the results of the study, knowingly or unknowingly, toward one product being used. This could be a case of conformation bias – what happens when a researcher has an ideal conclusion in mind and so steers the research toward that conclusion or outcome.
Blinding a study, which refers to the act of making sure the researchers and/or participants are completely unaware to which group they belong, can greatly reduce this phenomenon, but is not mentioned in this study. For example, if the researcher who takes the body composition measurements does not know which participants belong to which group, the researcher has no reason to skew results. However, if this information is known by the researcher performing the measurements, skewing the results, both consciously or unconsciously, is a possibility and cannot be ruled out.
In conclusion, since a practitioner should never base their methods of practice off of one single source of research, this study needs to be combined with many others to decide whether or not resistance training, caloric restriction, and protein supplementation are beneficial when making body composition changes. Wouldn’t it be nice if someone was working on compiling all that information right now and putting it in an easy-to-read, easy-to-follow plan? Hmmm…. what a good idea 
Check out our weight loss ebook as soon as it’s available!
Demling RH, DeSanti L. Effect of a hypocaloric diet, increased protein intake and resistance training on lean mass gains and fat mass loss in overweight police officers. Ann Nutr Metab. 2000;44(1):21-29.
Filed under: Exercise, Research, body composition, diet, fat loss, nutrition, weight loss — Tags: body composition, fat loss, Research, strength gain — Matt Schoeneberger M.S. @ 11:03 am
Meal Frequency – Boosting Your Metabolism: busted as promised
A few weeks back we sent out a challenge to our blog readers and newsletter subscribers to send us more traffic. They’ve answered the call, partially. Our blog traffic has gone up considerably, so we’d like to bust one of the myths we promised. This is really like getting a sneak peak at one of the most interesting sections of S.P.E.E.D.
Myth: I have to eat many small meals throughout the day to “boost my metabolism”.
Fact: Meal frequency has been shown to increase weight loss in some studies, due mostly to curbing hunger and helping the subjects adhere to the diet and not due to an increase in metabolic rate. (Smeet) However, research shows that when eating diets essentially identical in calories either through three or one meal(s)/day, the 1 meal per day group showed positive changes in body composition compared to the 3 meals/day group. (Stote) Metabolic rate has been shown to be no different between feeding patterns of 7 and 2 meals/day. (Verboeket-Van De Venne) Intermittent fasting (reduced meal frequency) with caloric restriction has been shown to have positive effects on life span and brain chemistry. (Mattson) So, there is no need to eat 6+ meals/day and it might just be more health promoting to eat less frequently, like 2-4 meals/day.
Mattson, M. P. (2005). Energy intake, meal frequency, and health: A neurobiological perspective. Annual Review of Nutrition, 25, 237-260.
Smeets, A. J., & Westerterp-Plantenga, M. (2008). Acute effects on metabolism and appetite profile of one meal difference in the lower range of meal frequency. British Journal of Nutrition, 99(6), 1316-1321.
Stote, K. S., Baer, D. J., Spears, K., Paul, D. R., Harris, G. K., Rumpler, W. V., et al. (2007). A controlled trial of reduced meal frequency without caloric restriction in healthy, normal-weight, middle-aged adults. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 85(4), 981-988.
Verboeket-van de Venne, W. P., Westerterp, K. R., & Kester, A. D. (1993). Effect of the pattern of food intake on human energy metabolism. The British Journal of Nutrition, 70(1), 103-115.
Low Carb Eating – A Quick Overview
By Jeff Thiboutot
Low carbohydrate (CHO) food plans/diets have been around for a long time. For instance, William Banting, in 1864, wrote a book on low CHO eating called Letter on Corpulence (Bowden). Additionally, there have been a number of populations, such as the Eskimos (Inuit) of Alaska and Masai tribe in Africa, that have been eating a low CHO diet for thousands of years and have been exceptionally healthy. Ever since then there have been surges of popularity in this type of eating (i.e., Atkins, South Beach, etc.). The question is; is this type of eating healthy and does it help with weight loss? The simple answer is an overwhelming yes!
Eating a low-CHO diet, often considered to be 10-40% of caloric intake as carbohydrates, has been extensively researched over the past three decades. However, there has been some published research on low CHO eating as early as 1926. The 1926 article, titled “The effects of an exclusive long-continued meat diet”, was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association. The results of this long study showed no harmful effects from eating a very low CHO, med protein, and high fat diet (Lieb et al). Another early study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1953, demonstrated positive effects on weight loss and no negative health effects were noted (Bowden).
Back to today. There have been dozens of studies on low CHO diets. The collective result from all these studies is the fact that this type of eating, relative to higher CHO, low protein, low fat diets, has much better effects on appetite control, fat loss, and blood markers of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk, such as HDL, triglycerides, insulin, and blood sugar (Volek et al, 2005; Volek et al, 2004; Volek et al, 2002; Meckling et al, 2007; Foster et al, 2003; Golay et al, 1996; Accurso et al, 2008). Most recently, July 17, 2008, a paper was published in the New England Journal of Medicine. The paper was the result of a 2 year study on the effects of three different diets; low-carbohydrate, Mediterranean, and low-fat diet. The results from this study demonstrated that the low CHO diet had the best results regarding weight loss and metabolic markers of CVD risk. All the diets induced weight loss, and some improvement in CVD markers, but the low CHO diet induced the best changes (Shai et al, 2008).
To continue to state that a low CHO diet is ineffective and harmful is a red flag of ignorance on the subject (Manninen). This does not mean that everyone needs to eat this way to improve their weight and health. However, from the currently available evidence, it certainly seems that it typically is the most efficient and effective method. Also, eating a low CHO diet may not have to be followed forever. When a goal weight and other health markers are achieved some people can start to increase their CHO intake. However, others may need, for weight and health issues, to eat in a similar fashion continually. The amount of CHO that can be increased will depend on the person, but eating a diet that is up to 50% CHO is certainly possible and not unhealthy. As CHO increases, fat intakes will need to decrease proportionally and protein intake may decrease a little also.
One last point on a low CHO diet, it is not really a high protein diet, but is actually a high fat diet. The typical ranges for macronutrient ratios, based on the percentage of calories, are; 10-40% carbohydrates, 20-30% protein, and 40-60% fat. For a 1,500 calories diet this would equate to 38 – 150 grams of carbohydrates, 75 – 115 grams of protein, and 66-100 grams of fat. Typically, the intake of these macronutrients should be spread out over 3 or 4 meals a day. There are times when more or less frequent meals should be utilized but that is outside the scope of this article and will be dealt with on another occasion.
This article is meant to give a brief overview of low CHO diets regarding weight loss and overall health. For more detailed information on low CHO diets I would recommend the Nutrition and Metabolism Society (www.nmsociety.org) and any of the references used for this article. Also, there is a low carb food pyramid handout that is a good compliment to this article. It is available at L.E.A.N. U.
References:
Accurso, A. et al (2008). Dietary carbohydrate restriction in type 2 diabetes mellitus and metabolic syndrome: time for a critical appraisal. Nutrition and Metabolism. 5:9
Bowden, J. (2005). Living the low carb life. New York. Sterling.
Foster, GD. et al (2003). A randomized trial of a low carbohydrate diet for obesity. NEJM. 348: 2082-2090.
Golay, A. et al (1996). Weight loss with low or high carbohydrate diet? Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 20: 1067-1072.
Lieb, C. et al (1926). The effects of an exclusive long continued meat diet. JAMA. 87(1): 25-26.
Manninen, A. (2004). Metabolic effects of the very low carbohydrate diets: Misunderstood “villains” of human metabolism. J Inter Society Sports Nutr. 1(2): 7-11.
Mechling, KA. & Sherfey, R. (2007). A randomized trial of a hypocaloric high-protein diet, with or without exercise, on weight loss, fitness, and markers of the Metabolic Syndrome in overweight and obese women. Appl Physiol NutrMetab. 32(4): 743-752.
Shai, I. Et al (2008). Weight loss with a low-carbohydrate, Mediterranean, or low-fat diet. NEJM. 359(3): 229-241.
Volek, J. et al (2002). Very low carbohydrate weight loss diets revisited. Cleveland Clinic J Medicine. 69 (11): 849-862.
Volek, J. et al (2004). Comparison of energy-restricted very low-carbohydrate and low-fat diets on weight loss and body composition in overweight men and women. Nutrition and Metabolism. 1:13.
Volek, J. et al (2005). Corbohydrate restriction improves the features of Metabolic Syndrome. Metabolic Syndrome may be defined by the response to carbohydrate restriction. Nutrition and Metabolism. 2(31).
The nutritional information in this material is for educational purposes only. The information is not offered to treat, mitigate or cure disease, and should not be used as a substitute for sound medical advice. This information is designed to be used in conjunction with the services of a trained licensed healthcare practitioner.
