Last week, we accepted a new group of clients into our January 2012 Lean Eating Coaching Program. This one looks to be our best yet: we’ve got a motivated group (the women’s group sold out in minutes!), numerous improvements to the program based on our ongoing research, and the best coaches in the world.

From all of us at PN, a warm welcome to all our new clients. This is going to be a great year; a challenging one, to be sure, but more than worth it.

This most recent group includes men and women from 27 different countries, from all walks of life, from age 21 to 68. And among those new clients is a special group of 45 young adult cancer survivors.

Cancer. The C-word.

Hear it spoken in hushed tones in a doctor’s office, or over the phone, and you’ll feel for a moment like your heart has already stopped.

I remember that phone call, from my mother, saying that C-word. She survived her cancer. So did our colleague and client Alwyn Cosgrove. So have many of our Lean Eaters.

But first, we had to roll that horrible C-word around in our mouths an awful lot, along with similarly repugnant words like malignant. Stage 3. Chemotherapy. Stochastic.

Cancer touches almost all of us in some way.

A cancer diagnosis — whether for you, or a loved one — is life-changing.

If folks survive, they’re often left with bodies ravaged by medication, radiation, and surgery. Bodies that may often look lean, but that suffer from sarcopenic obesity — wasted muscle, fragile bones, softened tissues. Frail. Skinny-fat… or just regular over-fat after enduring the side effects of medications. Metabolically disrupted. In women, maybe prematurely menopausal.

Perhaps these bodies are now missing something, such as a chunk of flesh. Missing their freedom to move without restrictions. Missing their appetite or proper nutrition. Missing a sense of what’s “normal” and “healthy”, which got lost somewhere between the 32nd doctor’s visit and sorting out handfuls of multi-coloured pills on the kitchen table.

Cancer survivors must get used to a new way of life along with a new body.

Yet often, although they’ve gotten up close and personal with their own fragility, cancer survivors’ spirits remain tough as old shoe leather. No bloody way they’re going to let cancer get them again, they say. This time, they think, they’re gonna throw everything they’ve got into rebuilding their battered bodies.

This is especially true for young cancer survivors, women with early breast cancer or men with testicular cancer. They have their whole lives ahead of them. They’ve got decades full of things to do ahead of them, damn it!

Carrie Stricker, PhD, RN and Kathryn Schmitz, PhD, MPH, both researchers at the University of Pennsylvania, are hard at work leading a team to investigate whether the Lean Eating Coaching Program could be one strategy to improve their chances.  To this end, they’ll be supervising as 45 young cancer survivors go through Lean Eating from beginning to end.

Helping cancer survivors get healthy

Shannon Lynch is a doctoral student and part of the Penn research team.  Shannon remembers her own Lean Eating experience well, having been a client last year. She’s also working on a PhD in epidemiology, with a growing interest in helping cancer survivors adopt healthy lifestyles post-treatment.

“A lot of folks who’ve survived cancer want to know what they can do next to help themselves. They want to do more — to feel like they’re doing everything they can to give themselves the very best chance and quality of life.”

Through her studies at the University of Pennsylvania, Shannon came to know Dr. Schmitz, an associate professor at Penn, well-known for research on physical activity and breast cancer survivors, and learned that she had written a grant proposal for an internet-based program to help testicular cancer survivors.

“I looked at her proposal,” recalls Shannon, “and said, ‘I think there’s a program out there for this already.’” Dr. Schmitz and Shannon brought Dr. Stricker, a clinical assistant professor of nursing at Penn, in on these discussions, given her ongoing program of research and clinical care in cancer survivorship.

Then they got in touch with Dr. John Berardi. He was just as excited about the possibilities as they were. After all, it’s not every day that a world-class authority on cancer research, leading innovative and ground-breaking projects, wants to know about Lean Eating

And as it so happens, JB had just come up with PN’s new mantra: Life-changing, research-driven nutrition coaching for everyone.

Yes, everyone. Now including young cancer survivors.

Can Lean Eating work for cancer survivors?

First comes the study. The first step is to see if this program is not only workable, safe, and adaptable for cancer survivors, but also to explore if the Internet-based exercise program and nutrition coaching that Lean Eating offers can help young cancer survivors look, feel, and perform better, even after a potentially devastating illness.

It’s a tall order. Although we’ve supported many of our Lean Eaters through a cancer diagnosis and recovery, we’ve never tried specifically to seek out and help young cancer survivors in particular.

So, like Lean Eating’s “one habit at a time” coaching method, the Penn team is starting small.

They’re beginning with a pilot study: The January 2012 round of Lean Eating will host a cohort of female survivors of breast cancer, and male survivors of testicular cancer.

Just like our other Lean Eating clients, they’ll work with a coach; get lessons, workouts, and habits; and participate on the support forum — with one key difference: We want to know if Lean Eating helps improve their health and wellness after going through cancer treatment.

The Penn team will gather important feedback from participants, such as:

• What’s unique about young cancer survivors?
• What are their demands, concerns, and experiences?
• What do they need from the Lean Eating program? What do they like/dislike about it?
• How can the program be better tailored to cancer survivors?

They will use this information, along with other metrics like body measurements and health indicators, to see if this program can help young cancer survivors.

What do cancer survivors need and want?

As the Penn team reaches out into the community of young cancer survivors, they’re testing assumptions about what barriers people might face.

“We were concerned that people might say no to the program because they didn’t have the Internet, or had financial constraints. In fact, right now people say no because of a perceived time commitment. They have children; they work; they travel, and so forth.”

“However, we know that all kinds of people go through the program, and the coaches are there to help. Plus there are lessons on traveling, balancing work demands, care-giving, etc. There are all kinds of lessons and strategies.”

“Sure, it’s an exercise and nutrition program, but it’s also a lifestyle management program.”

Interested survivors get more information about Lean Eating, decide whether they want to join, go through informed consent procedures, and schedule appointments to get baseline measurements done (such as weight, body measurements, and body fat). As participants go through the program, coaches carefully monitor their health and ability to do the workouts, with the Penn team carefully monitoring participants’ health and safety as well.

This is especially important for cancer survivors who may be on medications that affect body fat and hormones.

“Many people are on treatments right now or have undergone treatments that make them gain weight, or for women, put them into premature menopause — which again makes them gain weight,” explains Shannon. “They may be frustrated with changes in their body, and would like something to do about it.”

And, Shannon notes, Lean Eating may help with the mental and emotional aspects of cancer survival as well.

“Lean Eating was a mental exercise for me as well.. The lessons speak to things like body image; or if you’re feeling stressed, how to handle it. These are lessons cancer survivors may appreciate given what they have been through.We are conducting this study to see what survivors need and want from a program like this.”

What makes Lean Eating special?

Shannon is eager to see if survivors will benefit from the in-depth coaching that Precision Nutrition offers.

“To me, other diet programs aren’t sustainable in the long run — all those meal plans and prepackaged meals. In Lean Eating, you are offered tools you need to sustain good health within your own daily routine. It’s not a short-term solution. You just do a little something every day.”

We’re excited, and proud to play a part. Her participants are excited. (And maybe a little nervous. That’s normal.) Of course, Shannon’s excited too.

“If this pilot program is successful, I think this could be huge. And it’s a population that really wants something like this, who needs something like this. There’s so much that could be done.”

Click here to join the waiting list.

The book is called “Experiments with Intermittent Fasting.”  The best part?  It’s totally free.

[Honestly, once you see it, you’re gonna think we’re crazy for just giving it away. It’s really that good].

So, if you haven’t yet heard of IF, it’s time to take notice.  This style of eating is getting extremely popular and is worth considering in certain situations.

And if you have heard of IF – and are wondering if it’s for you – we’ll help answer that question in this book.  We’ll also share our experiences with half a dozen different IF protocols. And we’ll provide key takeaways for everyone interested in looking better, feeling better, and performing at their highest potential.

Experiments with Intermittent Fasting (Free)

Free E-Book: Experiments with Intermittent Fasting

Click here to join the waiting list.

Whether you’re a fitness pro or someone who’s just trying to lose a few pounds, we know you’ll find our updated weight loss calculator useful.

For more information, visit our Weight Loss Calculator.

Click here to join the waiting list.

8 hours and 32 minutes.

That’s how much time Marsha spent in the gym… over the last 4 months.

Do the math. That’s only 32 minutes… per week.

What’s the deal? Is this Marsha person lazy?

No.

She works 2 jobs, runs a Girl Guides group (Girl Scouts, for you Americans), and plays co-ed volleyball a few nights per week. Oh yeah, and she’s planning a wedding.

No, she’s not lazy at all. She’s a hard-working, busy, social, fun woman.

Is Marsha recovering from some kind of injury?

Nope.

She’s as healthy as can be. And she could technically work out 8 hours a week… if she wanted. But she doesn’t want. Her goal is to get leaner than she’s ever been — while still having a life — with as little exercise as possible.

Leaner than she’s ever been? On 32 minutes a week? She must be crazy!

No, not at all.

In fact, if anyone’s crazy it’s me. Because I’m the one who recommended this program to her. She actually asked for more exercise. But I capped her at 4 workouts per week and 32 minutes.

The workouts looked like this:

• 2 sprint workouts – 6 minutes each
• 2 circuit workouts – 10 minutes each

The results?

Well, in the last 16 weeks Marsha lost a whopping 20 pounds of body fat. She dropped from 150 pounds to 130 pounds. That’s nearly 2.5 pounds of fat lost for every hour spent in the gym.

Want to know how she did it? If so, read on.

Marsha’s Minimalist Training Program

As I said above, Marsha could have worked out much more than 32 minutes per week.

She could have willed herself out of bed extra early to do some low intensity cardio. She could have given up her recreational activities and stopped hanging out with her friends after work in favor of hitting the weights. She could have delegated more of her wedding tasks or quit one of her jobs.

But why would she do any of that?

All that work doesn’t just sound shitty. It sounds unsustainable. Maybe she could do it for a while. But eventually, she’d either lose motivation or some life demand would squeeze the unrealistic workout program out of her life.

So, when thinking about her program, I asked myself the following three questions:

1. How much has she got going on in her life? (Answer: A lot.)
2. How much gym experience and proficiency does she have? (Answer: Not much.)
3. What are her weaknesses? (Answer: Upper body, glutes, anaerobic system.)

Given these particular needs, I wanted to build a program that was light on the time commitment and the requirement for technical skill development — but one that still would produce excellent results.

(This approach allows clients to get started right away without having to reschedule their entire lives. It also allows them to get moving without having to hire a personal trainer to learn all the movements.)

One 30-minute session with me is all it took for Marsha to learn the entire first phase. And after that, no workout lasted longer than 10 minutes.

So what did the program look like?  Here’s what she started with during week 1.

Day 1 – 10 minutes

Close-grip push-ups x 10 reps
Inverted rows x 10
Kettlebell swings x 20
Rest 1 minute
Repeat 5 times

Day 2 – 6 minutes

2 minute walk
15 second sprint on treadmill at 8 mph and 10% incline
15 seconds rest (standing on side of treadmill)
Repeat 5 times
2 minute walk

Day 3 – 10 minutes

Close-grip push-ups x 10 reps
Swiss ball crunches x 10
Air squats with hands behind head x 20
Rest 1 minute
Repeat 5 times

Day 4 – 6 minutes

2 minute walk
15 second sprint on treadmill at 8 mph and 10% incline
15 seconds rest (standing on side of treadmill)
Repeat 5 times
2 minute walk

Notes On Marsha’s Exercise Program

In addition to scheduling these workouts, here are a few important notes I gave her for the program. These are critical for experiencing the type of results she saw.

Progression

Start with the exact numbers above and with each consecutive workout do one thing to make the workout harder.

For strength workouts, this means doing additional repetitions or reducing the rest time between rounds. And for sprinting workouts, this means increasing the incline, the speed, or the number of repeated sprints.

It doesn’t matter what you choose, just do one thing more than the last time. And make each increment small. It might feel easy at first. But eventually, you’ll reach your performance limits and the increases will come slower.

Workout Frequency and Rest

Do your workouts every other day if possible, with one day off in between workouts. If that’s not possible, take a day off after two consecutive workouts in a row.

All other recreational activities (walking, volleyball, etc.) are fine and can be scheduled in whenever you like. However, these recreational activities will be in addition to the workouts above, not in place of. And, of course, they’re not required. You’ll get in great shape with this alone.

Workout Log

Buy a small spiral-bound notebook and write down every workout you do. Record the time it took you to complete. Record the number of reps and sets you do for strength days. And record your sprint intensity (speed and incline) as well as the number of reps you do.

This book will help you decide which improvements (progression) to make from one week to the next. Without it, you probably won’t remember what you did the week before.

Duration

Follow this program for 4 weeks and then recalibrate, if necessary, at that time. It’s only 32 minutes of exercise per week, or just over 2 hours for the month. So there are no excuses for not completing all the workouts. Of course, if, for some reason, you miss a workout, that’s fine. Just don’t ever miss two in a row.

That’s pretty much it for the program. It’s simple, it’s brief, it’s challenging, it’s sustainable. And, most importantly, it actually works.

Before moving on, I just want to add a few things about Marsha’s exercise experience throughout the 16 weeks. These will help you gain a greater appreciation for both what she focused on and what she struggled with.

Weak and Deconditioned – So What?

During the first week, Marsha was so deconditioned that she couldn’t actually complete any of the workouts. For example, she could only do 3-4 push-ups. And only 4 rounds of the circuits. Even though it was hard for her ego, she showed resiliency and kept going.

Remember, progression means doing a little more each week. So that’s exactly what she did. By the end of the 8th week, she was able to do a GI-Jane-worthy 20 push-ups. And she was able to do 8 rounds of sprints at 8.0 mph on a 12% incline. I’ll bet she’s glad she hung in there.

Monthly Program Changes

Every four weeks I made some slight changes to the exercise selection on the circuit days. This provided her with some different muscle stimulation every new training phase.

Besides a few exercise swaps and the steady progression she was making, nothing else changed for the full 16 weeks. The workouts didn’t get longer. We just crammed more work into each session as she got more fit.

Vigilant About Progression

I have to point out that Marsha was vigilant about her progressions. Every week she added a little more resistance, did another rep or so, or increased the treadmill incline or the speed by a small fraction. This is crucial.

By the end of the 16 weeks, she went from very weak and deconditioned to surprisingly strong and fit. Honestly, even I was surprised by how quickly her fitness adapted and how much change we saw with this minimalistic approach.

If there’s one lesson to take away from Marsha’s experience, it’s this: When tackling a new exercise program, begin with a program that’s even easier than you think you can do. Yes, it’ll start off easy (that’s the point). Yes, it’ll bruise your ego (“I can do more, damn it!”) But starting off easier helps you develop a few important habits.

Being realistic.

Early motivation always makes us overestimate our capabilities. So we tackle something that’s unsustainable. Starting slowly allows us to do an exercise program we can sustain – while still sustaining the other important things in our lives.

Consistency.

You’ll stop skipping workouts. When you know it’s only 6 or 10 minutes of exercise, the excuses start dissolving. And you get in the habit of exercising instead of in the habit of skipping workouts (which some people get quite good at).

Progression

This is the number one thing people miss out on when starting a new program. Week 1 is hyper-enthusiastic. Week 2 is a regression because you’re sore. Week 3 you struggle to match Week 1. And so on. Why not start off slowly and focus on doing just a little better each week? This is the key to long-term results.

In the end, Marsha did an awesome job.  And hopefully you learned a few things from Marsha’s plan. Of course, the exercise program was only part of the experience. Now, let’s talk nutrition.

Marsha’s Super-Simple Nutrition Program

As I’ve said many times before, without a good nutrition program, exercise doesn’t really work all that well – especially when body transformation is the goal. For more, check out these articles:

• Why Exercise Doesn’t Work
• Why Exercise Still Doesn’t Work

Thus, nutrition was an integral part of Marsha’s transformation. However, like with the exercise program, we kept it really simple.

I just gave her the following nutrition notes, and had her repeat my expectations to me (aloud) so I could be sure she understood them.

Hunger and Exercise

Intense exercise often makes people hungrier. This leads to overeating and no weight loss. For this reason, the most important thing you can do is pay close attention to your food intake and make sure you’re not eating more than usual. Awareness is the key. (Fortunately, the minimal exercise volume will help keep hunger down too.)

If you’d like to speed things up even more, follow these simple rules.

• Eat each meal slowly.
• Eat about 4 meals per day (every 4 hours or so).
• Eat lean protein, legumes, and lots of veggies w/each meal.
• Avoid white, starchy carbs (breads, pasta, rice, chips, etc).
• Avoid fruit.
• Don’t drink your calories (use lots of water or coffee and tea instead).
• One day per week, eat whatever you want.

Contrary to what you’d expect; I didn’t even give her a diet to follow. In fact, I rarely ever give anyone a diet to follow. 99.5% of my clients get guidelines and habits to follow instead of diets. I do this for three main reasons:

1. People aren’t very good at following diets when conditions are “normal”.
2. People completely give up on the diet when conditions are “abnormal”.
3. People don’t learn anything when they are prescribed a diet.

Now, if you’re still questioning the habits and guidelines approach (vs. the diet approach), ask yourself this question.

What’s better: starting out really fast with a detailed and intricate diet… and then quitting after a month? Or starting out more slowly and methodically… and losing 20 pounds of fat in 16 weeks like Marsha did?

Wait! What About G-Flux?

Now, for those of you who’ve been around a while, you’re likely scratching your head and wondering how I could recommend such a minimalist program.

I mean, I’m the guy who did that study showing that you probably need 5 hours of exercise per week to be truly happy with your body.

And, I’m the guy who’s written all about the benefits of increasing your energy flux, or G-Flux, when you want to improve your body composition, including both adding lean mass and removing fat mass.

So, doesn’t this very program contradict those ideas?

Well, not really. I mean, I do still believe that if you have the time and you love exercise (like most of our PN readers do), shooting for about 5 hours of exercise per week is perfect.

(And remember, you don’t have to do all 5 hours in the gym.)

However, what if you don’t have the time? Or you’re new to exercise and you’re not sure if you like doing it yet? If you’re in either situation, what are you going to do with the 5 hour recommendation?

If anything it becomes an excuse for not working out.

“Oh, I can’t do that 5 hour thing. So why even bother exercising in the first place. I’ll get started next week…or next month.”

Bullshit! I say get started now.

Start with 5 minutes a week, if you have to. Build it up a little at a time. Eventually you’ll find the perfect amount of exercise: just enough to help you reach your fitness goals; not so much that you can’t accomplish your other goals in life.

In his book The 4 Hour Body, Tim Ferris calls this the “Minimum Effective Dose.” From the book:

“The minimum effective dose (MED) is defined simply: the smallest dose that will produce a desired outcome…. Anything beyond the MED is wasteful.

To boil water, the MED is 212°F (100°C) at standard air pressure. Boiled is boiled. Higher temperatures will not make it ‘more boiled’. Higher temperatures just consume more resources that could be used for something else more productive.

If you need 15 minutes in the sun to trigger a melanin response, 15 minutes is your MED for tanning. More than 15 minutes is redundant and will just result in burning and a forced break from the beach…”

For Marsha, 32 minutes a week did the trick. For me, a little more was required.

My Experiment In Exercise Minimalism

Over the last few years, my life has changed pretty substantially. I bought a house, I got married, my wife and I had a baby girl, and PN has grown tremendously.

As a result, I have less time for the gym than ever in my life. Not only that, I have less desire.

Don’t get me wrong, I still love training. However, I’m just not willing to give up time with my family – or time spent doing meaningful PN work that actually helps people – so that I can do extra squats.

That’s why I was so excited by Marsha’s results. So excited, that I tried my own experiment in exercise minimalism.

Now, because I have 20 years experience in the gym, and a long history of higher-volume training, I decided to build a program that combines a little more exercise volume with a little more complexity.

However, the program is still quite minimal. The total time requirement – without the optional recovery workouts – is 80 minutes a week. With the optional workouts – 140 minutes.

Here’s what that program – designed for fat loss – looked like:

WEEK 1

Day 1 – Monday (Upper body circuit – 20 minutes)

Upper body warm-up
Close-grip push-ups x 20 reps
Inverted rows x 20
Flat DB press x 10
Bent over DB rows x 10
Band crunches x 10
Reverse hypers x 10
Rest 1 minute and repeat 5 times

Day 2 – Tuesday (Treadmill sprints – 7 minutes)

2 minute walk
15 second sprint at 8mph/10% incline
15 seconds rest
Repeat 6 times
2 minute walk

Day 3 – Wednesday (Rest or recovery – 30 minutes)

30 minutes of light cycling (or complete rest)

Day 4 – Thursday (Lower body strength – 45 minutes)

Lower body warm-up
A1. Front squat 5 × 3 reps
A2. Swiss ball leg curls 5 × 10 reps
B1. Deadlifts 5 × 3 reps
B2. Dumbbell squats 5 × 10 reps
C1. Kettlebell swings 5 × 8-10 reps
C2. Speed deadlifts 5 × 8-10 reps

Day 5 – Friday (Treadmill sprints – 7 minutes)

2 minute walk
15 second sprint at 8mph/10% incline
15 seconds rest
Repeat 6 times
2 minute walk

Day 6 – Saturday (Rest or recovery – 30 minutes)

30 minutes of light cycling (or complete rest)

WEEK 2

Day 1 – Monday (Upper body strength – 45 minutes)

Upper body warm-up
A1. Flat DB press 5 × 3 reps
A2. Pull-ups 5 × 10 reps
B1. Bent over rows 5 × 3 reps
B2. Low cable crossover 5 × 10 reps
C1. Explosive bench press 5 × 8-10 reps
C2. Explosive inverted rows 5 × 8-10 reps

Day 2 – Tuesday (Treadmill sprints – 7 minutes)

2 minute walk
15 second sprint at 8mph/10% incline
15 seconds rest
Repeat 6 times
2 minute walk

Day 3 – Wednesday (Rest or recovery – 30 minutes)

30 minutes of light cycling (or complete rest)

Day 4 – Thursday (Lower body circuit – 20 minutes)

Lower body warm-up
Air Squats x 20
KB Swings x 20
Front Squat x 10
Lunges x 10
Band crunches x 10
Reverse hypers x 10
Rest 1 minute and repeat 5 times

Day 5 – Friday (Treadmill sprints – 7 minutes)

2 minute walk
15 second sprint at 8mph/10% incline
15 seconds rest
Repeat 6 times
2 minute walk

Day 6 – Saturday (Rest or recovery – 30 minutes)

30 minutes of light cycling (or complete rest)

When I designed this program, I’d committed to following it for at least 8 weeks – 4 weeks of week 1 and 4 weeks of week 2. (I liked it so much, I ended up following it for 4 months and counting.)

Like Marsha, my program was based on progression. I set my weights and intensities lower than I thought I could handle. During each session I kept a workout log. And each week I used the progression principle to do a little more than the previous week. Interestingly, I’ve been able to do just a little more every week for 16 straight weeks.

One example: over the course of 4 months I slowly worked my way up from 6 sprints at 8 mph and 10% incline to 10 sprints at 9 mph and 12% incline. That would have been impossible for me in the beginning.

In terms of diet, I followed my advice to Marsha with two exceptions:

• My exercise volume was dropping off, so I ate a little less to keep dropping fat.
• I also fasted completely during one day each week (more on this in a future article).

So here’s the nutrition plan (note that it’s still not very complicated).

1. Eat a little less than usual
2. Eat each meal slowly
3. Eat about 4 meals per day (every 4 hours or so)
4. Eat lean protein, legumes, and lots of veggies with each meal
5. Avoid white, starchy carbs (breads, pasta, rice, chips, etc)
6. Avoid fruit
7. Don’t drink any calories (used lots of water or coffee and tea instead)
8. One day per week, eat whatever you want
9. One day per week, I didn’t eat anything at all (more on this in a future article)

The whole thing has worked out great. I’ve lost about 15 pounds of body fat so far (4 months into the program) — and I didn’t have much fat to lose.

Plus, my strength is good, my fitness is awesome, and – even as I approach 40 years of age – I am as lean as I’ve ever been in my life. In fact, I’m probably about 3-4 weeks away from “contest shape”, should I ever want to do a physique contest.

Even more importantly, I feel awesome on this plan. In the past, to get to this level of body fat, I’ve had to do more extreme, bodybuilding-style diets. These calorie-restricted short-term plans made me feel miserable – like the walking dead. And the day my “diet” ended, I’d binge away. A few weeks later it was like I hadn’t gotten leaner at all.

This plan? Well, I feel normal. Like I’m not dieting at all, really. Marsha mentioned the same thing to me. No brain fog. No insufferable cravings. No crushing lack of motivation.

Sure, from time to time we have to say no to an ice cream craving. But we can always eat that ice cream on our “eat what we want” day. We just have to wait a couple of days.

So, what’s next?

Marsha’s still plugging away.  She thinks she’ll be happiest in the 120 pound range and a little leaner.

For me, I’m happy with my current body weight and composition.  So it’s my goal to maintain my current body comp (and this minimal approach) for an entire year.

In my life, gone are the days of bulking up and cutting down. I’ve moved beyond that characteristic bodybuilding schizophrenia – “I want to get big… no, I want to get lean… no, I want to get big.”

Now, I just want a plan that keeps me lean, healthy, strong, and fit. One that’s not based on uncomfortable overeating followed by uncomfortable undereating. One I can just “do” – every day, as long as I want to do it.

If you’re looking for the same thing from a training and nutrition plan – something you can do to get in awesome shape while also having a life – maybe you should try your own experiment in exercise minimalism.

Find your own minimum effective weekly dose of exercise, quit obsessing about your fitness program, and get out there and have some fun.

Of course, if you want some fat-loss or muscle-gain coaching, give us a shout.  We’d be happy to help you find that minimum effective dose for you.

Click here to join the waiting list.

On March 22nd, 2011 — almost on the first day of spring, which seems fitting for rebirth — I ended one year of dessert-free, sweet-free, and candy-free living. Twelve months. No cake, no candy, no gummi worms, no Twinkies, no crême brulée — no added sugar of any kind.

Am I somehow a better human being? Do I have exceptional self-control? Neither.  I simply wanted to explore what it would be like to live without something that most North Americans take for granted.

Month 1: The initial experiment

This whole experiment started back in March of 2010.  It was my goal to live 30 days without any added sugar in my diet.  [Remember, this means no added sugars.  I was OK with the naturally occurring sugars in fruits/vegetables].

At the time, several things were on my mind.

• I was working on the All About Natural Sweeteners article.
• I was working on the All About Gluttony article.
• I was reading about Buddhism and attachments to food, material items, alcohol, etc.
• I was reading about addictions.
• My sister eliminated most desserts from her life (and she used to eat them every day).

Like you and everyone else, I’m a product of my environment. What I read, what I do for work, and who I hang out with influences what I do.

I also started to notice how I felt and acted around sugar, and I didn’t like it.

Sugar changed my physical and mental state.  Whenever I ate dessert my energy tanked, I got really thirsty, and I felt bloated.

Sugar also changed how I thought about food rewards. When I ate dessert, I wanted more dessert (thanks be to dopamine). And this led to more internal dialogue (e.g.: Should I have another piece? Life is short – maybe I should? blah blah blah…).

I think I spent at least 2 hours each week just debating whether or not I should eat dessert. Not exactly productive.

Dopamine and food rewards

Make no mistake, my original sugar experiment had little to do with body fat and health – well, at least not my physical health, although I was starting to wonder about my psychological health. I wanted to test myself and see if I was attached to desserts.

Everyone says they have a “guilty food pleasure.” But isn’t this an artificial idea created by modern society (and food companies)? Do we really require a food vice?

In the end, my 30 day experiment was a success. So, what did I do at the end of the experiment?  Did I spend day 31 crushing cake?

Nope. Instead, I found myself not missing desserts. And really, I felt better physically and mentally.  So I figured I would roll with the no-dessert theme and see where it took me.

Fast forward 11 months – past birthdays, Halloween, Thanksgiving, Christmas, and Valentine’s Day — all the candy-centric holidays.  It’s now been one year and I’ve had no desserts.

During this time I’ve realized a few things. Maybe you’ll find them useful on your own eating journey.

Lesson 1: Desserts are addictive

Addiction: an overpowering craving to repeatedly engage in an activity that provides temporary relief at the expense of terrible consequences.

Yikes. Doesn’t this describe most North American eating? It’s easy to get attached to processed foods. And by attached, I mean addicted.

• You crave it.
• You think about it.
• You rely on it.
• The food takes over.

Sound familiar?

As powerful as attachments/addictions can be, during the past year I was reminded of something even more powerful:

We get to choose what we do.

If we have enough incentive to eliminate a food (or include a food), we get to choose accordingly. We are in control.

Now, while it’s easy to place dessert in the “addictive” category, I also realized just how trivial dessert is. Think about it.

• Not eating cake is easy when compared to raising kids.
• Not eating cookies is easy when compared to running a business/non-profit.
• Not eating ice cream is easy when compared to maintaining a marriage.
• Not eating a candy bar is easy when compared to 60 minutes of box jumps, Power Wheel crawls and jump rope.

Seriously, isn’t it about time we put food in its place?

Lesson 2: We don’t eat sugar “in moderation”

The standard American diet is composed of over 60% processed garbage. Nearly 90% of the carb-dense foods we consume are highly processed, and mostly in the form of refined flour/sugar.

This looks more like the only thing we're not eating in moderation is processed food.

Our view of moderation can get skewed because we often think of eating as “one-off” occasions. A dessert here, a dessert there.  But these desserts add up faster than we imagine.

Three bowls of ice cream per week isn’t a big thing, right? Well, three bowls of ice cream each week means 156 bowls each year.  Is that moderation?  I don’t know.

Lesson 3: Isn’t this a habit?

From the previous example, it seems to me that eating 156 bowls of ice cream a year, 3 bowls a week, whether moderate or not, constitutes a habit.

Unfortunately, we don’t often realize the compounding impact of our food habits until it’s too late (e.g., 42-inch waist, heart attack, cancer, etc.).

Our habits catch up with us – sooner or later.  And it’s important to make sure we’re monitoring our habits, making sure they match up with our values and our goals.

Lesson 4: It’s hard to get fat on whole foods, particularly plant foods

Without desserts (and other processed carbs) in the diet, it’s tough to gain body fat. Really.

If we listen to hunger/fullness cues and eat, in particular, whole plant-foods (without added sugars), it’s challenging to get fat.

On average, each of us eats about 4 pounds of food every day.  So, for most of us, if our 4 pounds are made up of whole, energy-dilute plants, we’ll be set.

Another bonus: I found that my hunger/fullness cues were much clearer with desserts out of the eating equation. With lots of sugar comes lots of drive to eat. This is great if you are trying to gain weight (or even maintain weight).  But not so great if we want to get (or stay) lean.

During my last physical exam (where I do my annual weight check), after only a few months without desserts, I was already down several unintended pounds. Why? I just wasn’t as hungry. Without dessert, you might be surprised how your appetite changes.

Lesson 5: The all-or-none approach can work

Most of us agree that the all-or-none approach doesn’t work. But I’ve used it successfully many times in my life. I’ve used it with alcohol, drugs, smoking, animal products, car ownership, credit cards, cable TV – and now desserts.

But here’s the catch. To make the all-or-none approach work, we need strong incentives. The all-or-none approach will probably fail when incentives are weak/superficial. But when incentives run deep, the all-or-none approach can be a useful tool.

Weak incentive:

I want to completely eliminate desserts to look better in a tank top.

Strong incentive:

I want to eliminate desserts because it will benefit me spiritually and physically. It will promote peace of mind — I’ll have less daily attachment and internal dialogue.

Maybe Dan John is right: If it’s important, do it every day. If it’s not important, don’t do it at all.

The final bonus of the all-or-none approach is that the thing you eliminate becomes a non-issue. This eliminates the regular internal dialogue that goes with it. And speaking of internal dialogue…

Lesson 6: Internal dialogue sucks

Food tension is the worst. You know the self talk:

• Should I have the cookie? Or shouldn’t I?
• I’ve eaten mostly nutritious foods this week; I deserve a cookie.
• The experts say to eat everything “in moderation”. I might as well have a cookie.
• It’s only one cookie (for the fifth time this week).
• I only live once.

Mayday mayday……

Those internal debates are a bitch. When this tension develops, the way we solve the tension is by making a choice: eat it or don’t eat it. “Eat it” usually wins.

Lesson 7: Taste re-calibration is possible

Recently I was at a friend’s house and asked for some peanut butter. The peanut butter was natural and organic, so I was happy. But after my first bite, I immediately knew something was different.

It was the “no-stir” variety. Apparently this means there is added sugar and oil to smooth it out. Holy sweetness. It tasted like candy. The friend I was with couldn’t tell sugar was added.

Introduce yourself to taste bud re-calibration.

Fruit wasn’t sweet enough when I was eating a dessert each week. Now it is, because my taste buds changed.  Everyone’s do when they change their eating habits, especially when dropping certain foods, like I did with sugar.

Eat more sugar and fat and that’s what’ll taste best to you.  Get rid of the sugar and fat and you won’t even like the stuff if you go back.

Lesson 8: Some people aren’t addicted to desserts/sweets

Yes – it’s true. Some folks can eat a reasonably sized piece of dessert, enjoy it, and move on to the next thing. I’ve witnessed this first hand over the past year.

If this describes you, maybe eliminating desserts isn’t something you need to do.  Seriously, don’t read this article/post and get any weird ideas about dessert elimination.

My suggestion? Be your own nutrition expert and find what works for you.  And if there’s an area of your life where your attachments are becoming overbearing, perhaps you can apply this article to that area.

Lesson #9: Change occurs at the desire level

I’ve made some substantial eating changes in my life that have stuck for the long-term. After some reflection, I’ve noticed the following theme among my successful long-term nutrition changes:

Change must occur at the desire level.

What do most people do when making a food change? They resist. They think about all of the “off-limit” options they’re missing out on. And deep down, they haven’t truly acknowledged or embraced that the new way of eating is best for them and the world.

Most of us desire a cookie but settle for an orange. But what if we started to desire the orange, enjoy the flavor, and know that consuming it aligns with who we are and what we believe in?

Back in my bodybuilding days, I’d go 4 months without desserts leading up to a contest. But I still desired desserts. I dreamt about them at night and sprinkled packets of Equal on everything to get my fix.

I built up a stash of sweets to immediately consume after the “diet” was over. Since I still desired desserts, nothing really changed long-term, things just changed while I was “dieting.”

Now, I choose fruit instead of cookies because that’s what I truly want. And importantly, desserts aren’t off limits. If I really want dessert, I’ll have it.

Will I ever eat dessert again?

Will I ever eat desserts again? It’s a good question.  And the answer is that I probably will.

I just know that for the past year it’s been a privilege to eliminate them from my decision catalog. But life circumstances change.  And I don’t want to put the pressure on myself that comes with saying never.

Of course, some of you reading this probably can’t fathom the idea of no desserts for a week, let alone a year. Trust me, I was the same way.

If you would have asked me 3 years ago to cut desserts, I would have laughed with you as we held hands and skipped to the bakery.

Fortunately, we can allow our eating to evolve. You never know what might change.

Summary: What my dessert-less year taught me

In the end, here’s what my year of dessert-free eating taught me.

• Desserts are addictive
• I don’t like foods that cause withdrawal symptoms when I stop eating them
• The more desserts I eat, the more I want
• We don’t eat desserts “in moderation”
• It’s hard to gain fat on whole foods, particularly plant foods
• The “all-or-none” mindset can work to your advantage if you have enough incentive
• It feels good to eliminate internal dialogue
• We can recalibrate our taste buds
• The key to making big eating changes is changing at the desire level
• When we care about something enough, we can choose to do it

Quite a few great lessons there, at least for me.  Well worth giving up a little sugar.

Click here to join the waiting list.

We’re looking for 60  men and women who live in the US to participate in a really cool project we’ve got going on. If you live in the US and are willing to participate, here are the details.

The goal

The project we refer to above is designed to look at the effect of a specific nutritional supplement on joint pain and range of motion.  This supplement has been designed to reduce pain and inflammation while lubricating joints and helping them move more easily and through a greater range of motion.  Therefore, if you suffer from joint pain, this is something you might want to try.

The supplement

This supplement – which will remain anonymous throughout the course of the project – is a commercially available joint care product. It has been proven safe and effective in numerous trials. However, we simply can’t tell you which brand it is because of required anonymity.  What we can tell you is this. Should you participate in the project, we’ll mail you all the supplements you need for the protocol, free of charge.

The protocol

To determine how your joints feel and their range of motion, you’ll be required to fill out a series of questionnaires based on your experiences without an exercise challenge, during an exercise challenge, and the next day after an exercise challenge.   Should you participate, we’ll ask you to fill these questionnaires out once a week for a few weeks in a row.  In addition to filling out these questionnaires, you’ll also be asked to take 1 capsule per day (i.e. the recommended dose) of the supplement mentioned above.

So, here’s how the protocol would look:

First week of the project (July 5th-July11th):

• Note: no nutritional supplement required this week
• First thing in the morning on Monday, fill out questionnaire
• After filling out questionnaire, perform 30 minute exercise challenge (any time during day)*
• Immediately after exercise challenge on Monday, fill out questionnaire again
• First thing in the morning on Tuesday, fill out questionnaire again
• Continue with your normal exercise for the rest of the week (no further questionnaires this week)

Second week of the project (July 12th-July 18th):

• Note: begin taking recommended dose (1 capsule daily) of the nutritional supplement
• First thing in the morning on Monday, fill out questionnaire
• After filling out questionnaire, perform 30 minute exercise challenge (same time as last week)*
• Immediately after exercise challenge on Monday, fill out questionnaire again
• First thing in the morning on Tuesday, fill out questionnaire again
• Continue with your normal exercise for the rest of the week (no further questionnaires this week)

Third week of the project (July 19th-July 25th):

• Note: keep taking recommended dose of the nutritional supplement
• First thing in the morning on Monday, fill out questionnaire
• After filling out questionnaire, perform 30 minute exercise challenge (same time as last week)*
• Immediately after exercise challenge on Monday, fill out questionnaire again
• First thing in the morning on Tuesday, fill out questionnaire again
• Continue with your normal exercise for the rest of the week (no further questionnaires this week)

Fourth week of the project (July 26th-August 1st):

• Note: keep taking recommended dose of the nutritional supplement
• First thing in the morning on Monday, fill out questionnaire
• After filling out questionnaire, perform 30 minute exercise challenge (same time as last week)*
• Immediately after exercise challenge on Monday, fill out questionnaire again
• First thing in the morning on Tuesday, fill out questionnaire again
• Continue with your normal exercise for the rest of the week (no further questionnaires this week)

Fifth week of the project (August 2nd-August 8th):

• Note: keep taking recommended dose of the nutritional supplement
• First thing in the morning on Monday, fill out questionnaire
• After filling out questionnaire, perform 30 minute exercise challenge (same time as last week)*
• Immediately after exercise challenge on Monday, fill out questionnaire again
• First thing in the morning on Tuesday, fill out questionnaire again
• Continue with your normal exercise for the rest of the week (no further questionnaires this week)

Last measurement days (August 9th and 10th):

• Note: discontinue use of nutrition supplement
• First thing in the morning on Monday, fill out questionnaire
• After filling out questionnaire, perform 30 minute exercise challenge (same time as last week)*
• Immediately after exercise challenge on Monday, fill out questionnaire again
• First thing in the morning on Tuesday, fill out questionnaire again

*The exercise challenge is dependent on the area of your joint pain.  If you have elbow or shoulder pain, it would be an upper body challenge and if you have knee or ankle pain, it would be a lower body challenge.

You can participate if

• You live in the US
• You are between 18 and 70 years of age
• You weigh 200lbs or less
• You currently exercise at least 3x per week
• You have regular pain in one (or more) of the following joints: ankle, knee, shoulder, or elbow
• Your joint pain is chronic and the most recent flare-up has lasted at least 1 month
• You are willing to avoid NSAIDS and other analgesic medications during the course of the project
• You are willing to perform the “exercise challenge” 1 day per week for the duration of the project
  • This “exercise challenge” would be in addition to your regular exercise program
  • This “exercise challenge” would last no longer than 30 minutes
  • This “exericse challenge” would consist of either an upper or a  lower body challenge
• You are willing to fill out a simple questionnaire:
  • One morning per week for the duration of the project
  • Immediately after the weekly “exercise challenge” for the duration of the project
  • The morning after the weekly  “exercise challenge” for the duration of the project
• You are willing to take the recommended nutritional supplement with breakfast each day
• You are able to send us your questionnaire responses at the end of each week during the project

You are not eligible to participate if:

• You weight more than 200lbs
• You are allergic to eggs
• You are pregnant or breastfeeding
• You are currently taking methotrexate or immunosuppressive medications
• You are currently taking glucosamine, chondroitin sulfate, or MSM
• You use NSAIDS or other analgesic medications during the project duration
• You are unwilling to perform the exercise challenge weekly
• You are unwilling to fill out the required questionnaires and return them to us weekly
• You intend on changing your diet/training program in a major way during the course of this project

Timeline

We need all 60 men and women enrolled by June 25th at the latest, which gives you about 9 days to contact us and let us know you’re in.  Once enrolled, we’ll send out the free supplements and the questionnaires.  The official measurement period begins on July the 5th and wraps up August 10th.  (See outline above for specific dates).

Risks

There are minimal risks associated with participating in this project. The exercise challenge and questionnaire process poses minimal risk.  And the supplement, as indicated, is commercially available, tested safe, and widely used.

Benefits

There are a few benefits associated with your participation.

• First, you get free supplements.
• Second, you get to assess your joint pain and range of motion.
• Third, you get to take a supplement designed to improve your joint health and range of motion.
• Finally, you get to contribute to the body of knowledge out there with respect to improving joint pain/range of motion.

How to get involved

So, if you meet the criterion above and you’re interested in participating, here’s what I need you to do:

1) Email us at research@precisionnutrition.com. This is how you can let us know you’re in.  Note: in your email, please state the following:

• Your full name
• The full address and phone number of where we can ship your product
• Confirmation that you’ve read the criterion above and are 100% eligible to participate
• Confirmation that you’ve read the risks/benefits and give your consent to participate

So, your email should look like this.

“Hey Precision Nutrition, I’m in.  I would like to participate in the joint pain project.  My name is Joe Smith.  You can ship my product to 1234 Joint Pain Way, Madison, WI, 89012.   My contact number is 555-123-4567.  I have read the criterion in the blog post and I am 100% eligible to participate.  Also, I give my informed consent to participate.  Thanks.  Joe”

2) Once we hear from you, we’ll follow up to let you know that you’ve been approved.  We’ll also send you your questionnaires and your supplements.

Please note: we’ll be contacting all applicants around the 28th of June, when all responses are received. So if you don’t hear from us before then, don’t get antsy. I promise we’ll be in touch around the 28th.

Also note: the project is first-come, first-serve.  So, if you really want in, and you meet our criterion, let us know right away.  We expect interest to be high.  So don’t miss out by waiting too long to contact us.

Questions

If you’re serious about participating and have any questions, please email us at research@precisionnutrition.com.  You can also contact us at this address to let us know you’re interested in participating.

Click here to join the waiting list.

“Food X” is almost always processed and human-made. We know that the majority of foods found in nature don’t have extremely addictive properties.

But it’s hard to figure out if “food X” is addictive on its own, or if people choose “food X” based on societal norms, culture, advertising, previous food restrictions, parents, friends, yo-yo dieting, fitness mags, etc.

I’ll bet all of those factors play a role.

At PN, when we’re curious, we do experiments and gather evidence. We’re scientific like that.

So I did an experiment: a taste test to observe natural food preferences.

Methods

Subjects:

• N=2
• My nephews
• 3 & 5 years old
• Fairly untainted in the nutrition world (as far as I can tell)
• They watch minimal TV advertising, they haven’t been to a fast food restaurant, and their parents stock the house with healthy eats.
• Further, they have no pre-conceived notions about “diet” foods, no history of dieting, no strange food rules, no restrictive parents and don’t read the latest diet books.

I used a taste test: I picked seven food categories and had them choose between a minimally processed and highly processed version of the food.

Let’s find out what happened.

Data gathering

Intro & Test #1: Whole corn vs. Corn Chips (with salt and oil)

Preference? Corn Chips (with salt and oil)

Test #2: Raw buckwheat granola (no added sugar) vs. Sugared Oat Squares

Preference? Sugared oat squares

Test #3: Whole strawberries vs. Dried Strawberry Snacks

Preference? Tie

Test #4: Sprouted grain bread (low sodium) vs. white bread

Preference? White bread

Test #5: Baked potato vs. potato chip (with salt and oil)

(Stay with us on this one. Parents, you’ll be able to relate to the dialogue in this one)

Preference? Potato Chip (with salt and oil)

Test #6: Air popped popcorn (no salt) vs. oil popped popcorn (with salt)

Preference? Oil popped popcorn (with salt)

Test #7: Natural peanut butter (no salt, oils, sugars) vs. natural peanut butter (with salt, sugar, palm oil)

Preference? Tie

Findings

Discussion

Can you relate to some of their reactions?

I can. I usually classify food into two main categories.

Good & Too Good.

I like food that tastes good. But I DON’T like food that tastes too good.

Food that tastes too good kind of freaks me out.

I remember early in high school when I would frequent fast food joints. That stuff tasted too good. I didn’t want to stop eating it. I would physically be full, but for some reason I would want to keep eating it. I can see you nodding in agreement.

Sometimes, too good foods don’t even really, truly, taste that great. They may be too sweet, too fatty, too salty, or have a strange chemical aftertaste. But yet, somehow, they’re incredibly compelling. They make you want to devour them way past the point of having a stomachache.

They may be in colours and formats that would normally make us recoil. Blue food in your fridge? Food with the consistency of congealed mucus? Food in dry flake format? Euw! Blue Gatorade? Gummi Bears? Doritos? Yum!

Somehow, with too good food, our natural “this is poison” defenses don’t kick in. It’s like a skilled con artist in food form. Before we know it, we’re $10,000 poorer and have a lot of Nigerian swampland to show for it.

Now I eat foods on a daily basis that are good and I enjoy them. But the foods I regularly eat definitely aren’t too good. Yes — a difference exists.

Foods that are too good don’t have a place in my weekly food rotation. Why? I don’t want them there. They scare me. My appetite regulating systems go knucklehead and nothing constructive happens.

The good news is that we aren’t brain dead. We can be smart when eating some of the foods that fall under the too good category. However, I’ll warn you, it may require your willpower and cognitive eating skills to kick in. Uh oh. Good luck with that. How many “dieters” that rely on willpower have long-term success?

Based on my various observations over the years, I’ve generated a list of foods that are good and foods that are too good. Here goes:

Good	Too good
Raw, unsalted, nut butter (simple, satisfying and tasty)	Salted, sugar added nut butter (too much stimulation for my taste buds)
Good	Too good
Brown rice, veggie stir-fry made at home (after one plate, I'm good)	Rice and veggies stir-fry from the local Chinese take-out (after one plate, I'm ready for 5 more - can I hear it for salt, oil and MSG)
Good	Too good
Raw, unsalted nuts/seeds (a few handfuls and I'm content)	Roasted, salted, and sweetened/flavored nuts (do you sell the Costco wholesale container?)
Good	Too good
Plain, homemade popcorn (a couple bowls and I feel great)	Oil added, salt added, sugar added popcorn (I sent the girl in the photo above back for 3 more bags)
Good	Too good
Baked potato/sweet potato (tasty and satisfying)	French fries, potato chips (bloated, yet still want to eat them)
Good	Too good
Sprouted grain bread (a slice of this stuff with hummus or nut butter and I'm good)	Regular flour breads (too light, too fluffy, too unsatisfying)
Good	Too good
Fruit (if I eat two pieces of whole fruit in a row – I’m ready to call it a day)	Dried fruits (that was only a 5 pound bag? Gosh....)
Good	Too good
Oatmeal, quinoa, buckwheat, corn, wild rice, most any plain, steamed whole grain (one bowl and I'm good)	Standard cold breakfast cereals with added sugars and salt (When I was about 12 years old, I spent way too many afternoons eating massive bowls of Cinnamon Toast Crunch). By the way, in case you're wondering, primate scientists assure me that gorillas do NOT eat sugar puffs in the wild.
Good	Too good
Homemade raw cookies with dates, walnuts, and coconut (dense - I am satisfied after one or two)	Standard flour based cookies with margarine, oil, sweeteners, and processed grains (the combo of oil, flour and sweetener is taste overload)
Good	Too good
Beans (one of nature’s perfect foods)	Beans with lard in a huge flour tortilla with salt and cheese from your local restaurant (Taco Bell gives beans a bad rap)

This makes sense, doesn’t it?

I mean, when you look at the list, the common theme is that the too good foods have been altered. They are human-made products (or a whole food with added man-made ingredients). Too good foods aren’t true to what you would find in nature.

Conclusion: What makes a food “too good”?

Consider what might make a food too good:

• It’s multisensory (salty, sweet, crispy, fatty, all together) and “layered” (fat on sugar on fat on heaven knows what)
• It’s physically easy to consume (forms a nice melty bolus that slides down the gullet; not much chewing)
• It strongly and immediately stimulates reward pathways in a druglike fashion. I’m talking dopamine and serotonin here.
• It’s  “craveable” and provides an immediate, superficial reward that does not fundamentally satisfy or nourish. This means the experience is always existentially and nutritionally deficient, which leads to an endless pursuit of satisfaction that cannot actually be achieved via the consumption of that food. In other words, you keep eating, and don’t really ever feel any better.
• It’s deliberately engineered by teams of food scientists to cater to human vulnerability.

Think about your rituals and emotional attachments to brands as well. I have a friend who WILL NOT deviate from Hellman’s Mayonnaise, Nabisco Cheez-Its and Oreos. It’s like being part of a cult. When you add in rituals and emotions to the fat, sugar and salt – we have a fatness disaster.

Food companies want to alter foods so that we, the consumers, eat too much of them. When we eat too much, we buy more, and we keep coming back for more. That means more profit for them and more disease and body fat for us.

Remember, all of us are a bit different. Some people may classify a particular food too good, while someone else may consider it good.

Have you found any foods that are good and too good? What makes them different?

For more on food processing and how it influences our eating habits, see: The End Of Overeating.

Click here to join the waiting list.

This service was designed to keep manual therapists and chiropractors abreast of the latest research relevant to the therapy field.  And, so far, users have been very pleased with the wealth of research-based information at their fingertips.

On the success of the original Research Review service, Dr. Thistle is at it again.  And he’s recently released a new service for fitness professionals.

Now, personal trainers, conditioning specialists, nutritionists, and coaches can have access to professional reviews of the latest scientific literature with the new Research Review service – called RSS-fitness.

So, how does RRS-fitness work?

Every week, RRS-Fitness posts 1-2 new reviews which analyze, contextualize, and put into practice the findings of a recently published scientific article from industry-leading peer-reviewed journals.  Here’s how it works.

• Each review takes 5-10 minutes to read
• Reviews focus on the practical application of results and functional knowledge of research methodology
• Reviews are all contained in a database that subscribers have full access to
• Topical content is varied and comprehensive
• Topics include everything from from exercise sciences to sports injuries and rehabilitation

The overall goal of RRS-Fitness is to increase knowledge translation from the scientific literature to those in contact with clients in all types of exercise and training environments.  Further, RRS-Fitness will help subscribers collaborate more effectively with Chiropractors, Physiotherapists, and others who deal with common sports injuries.  This can help grow your client base and increase your revenue.

To check out the site, click here:

http://fitness.researchreviewservice.com

For A Little Taste

Of course, when it comes to the quality of these reviews, you don’t have to take my word for it.  To get a little taste of the RSS-fitness site, you can now check out 5 sample reviews – completely free.  These will give you an idea of the format and length  of the weekly postings.

• To check out your free sample reviews, click here
• Further, to see some of the other titles currently in the database, click here.

In the end, if you’re like me and want to be able to use the latest research with your clients and patients – whether you’re a fitness pro or a therapist – definitely check out the Research Review service.  Not only will it save you countless hours of scouring research databases for science relevant to your practice, it’ll also help you interpret this science, no PhD required.

Click here to join the waiting list.

Back in January we asked for people interested in taking part in a particularly cool informal experiment. And boy were they interested! Within 24 hours we had more people than we knew what to do with and had to limit the number of participants to fewer than 150. We guess getting 8 weeks of training designed by Alwyn Cosgrove, JB, and Fraser Quelch was a big draw.

The experiment compared the effectiveness of three similar, but distinct, different strength and conditioning programs for fat loss and overall fitness.

1.  One was a strength program that also included steady state cardio: get on the treadmill at a given speed and go for 30-45 minutes.

2. One was a strength program that also included interval training (aka high intensity interval training or HIIT): get on the treadmill and run really fast, take a short break, and repeat for a given number of rounds.

3. And the final group was a strength program that also used suspension training (aka TRX training) as part of their conditioning work. Don’t know what suspension training is? Well, read on.

In this study, we asked three questions. Which of these three programs:

-would most effectively improve performance?

-would most effectively promote weight loss?

-would people find most fun, and thus, stick with the longest?

Methods

The testing
We compared the programs based on two indicators: body weight and performance.

Assessing body weight was easy: Participants simply recorded their weight once a week during the study. By the end of the study we had 9 body weight measurements to compare from week 0 to the end of week 8.

Measuring performance was a little more intensive. Before the study began, and after it ended, everyone did the following five performance tests:

1. Maximal push-up test: You’ve probably done this at some point in your life and it’s pretty straightforward. After a 5 minute warm-up, use a 2″ sponge or yoga block as a depth marker and do as many consecutive push ups as you can. Start with the arms in full extension, descend to the depth marker, and extend back up. This counts as one repetition. Do as many as you can without resting. Once you’re finished, record your number.

2. Inverted row test: With your feet elevated on a Swiss ball, box, or bench and your arms gripping a barbell or Smith machine bar, do as many inverted rows as you can. Start with your arms fully extended, pull up until your chest touches the bar, and extend back down. This counts as one repetition. Do as many as you can without resting. Once you’re finished, record your number.

3. Standing broad jump test: Choose an open area and using a countermovement knee bend, jump as far forward as you can, going for maximum distance. Start with two practice jumps, aiming for about 80% of your maximum distance. Then, on your third jump, give it your all. Have someone mark where you landed and measure the distance from where your toes started to where they landed.

4. Treadmill V-max test: Perform this one on a treadmill. Begin by running at 7-9 mph (choose 7 if you’re not a very good runner and 9 if you’re a good runner) and 0% elevation. Every minute, increase the elevation by 1%. Continue this until you simply can’t continue running. Go to complete exhaustion. (Flying off the back of the treadmill counts as complete exhaustion.) Once you’re finished, record the speed and elevation at which you stopped. These numbers represent your V-max.

5. Treadmill T-max test: On another day, after a 5 minute warm-up run, set the treadmill to your V-max (speed and elevation recorded above). Run as long as you can. Go to complete exhaustion again. Once you’re finished, record the total time you lasted. This represents your T-max.

Thus at the end of the study we had before/after body weight measures as well as before/after performance changes to compare between groups for the entire 8 week study.

The three groups and their workout programs
We split our participants up into 3 groups:

1. A steady state cardio group

2. A sprint interval group

3. A TRX conditioning group

All three groups did the same strength training program, designed by Alwyn Cosgrove, which consisted of 2 days of strength training per week.  Every 4 weeks, the strength workouts changed.

After that, our groups diverged. So, everybody (all groups) did exactly the same strength workouts, but the conditioning workouts were different.

1. Steady state cardio = 2 weight training workouts, 2 steady state cardio sessions per week

2. Sprint interval = 2 weight training workouts, 2 interval sessions per week

3. TRX conditioning = 2 weight training workouts, 2 TRX conditioning sessions per week

The conditioning workouts changed every 2 weeks.

Conditioning workouts were either about a half an hour of “steady state” aerobic conditioning, interval training or suspension circuit training. And all 3 groups got progressively harder workouts each week.

OK, we can hear the outrage now. You’re probably thinking that an half an hour of steady state doesn’t burn the same calories as interval or suspension training. So how can we compare?

Yes, it’s true that steady state doesn’t burn as much calories. But in real life, people usually go by how much time they have, not how many calories they want to burn. When was the last time you went to the gym and thought: “I only have time for 200 calories”? So we equated the conditioning workouts based on time, not on total calories burned.

For details and videos of each workout, check out these links below:

Steady state cardio

Sprint interval

TRX conditioning

Who was in the study?
On average, participants in all three groups were in their early to mid-thirties, although we had participants up to 70 years old (see table 1).

Table 1 – Average age (in years) of participants

Note:
Once the participants were selected to participate in the study, they were matched and assigned to groups based on gender, age, weight and training experience. This meant that the groups were very similar to begin with, so any measured effects should be the result of the training intervention rather than individual differences.

Our participants had an average of 9 years’ exercise experience. These people knew their way around the gym.

A few more things…
We wanted to make sure that the results reflected the exercise program, not other factors. So we asked our participants to make a few sacrifices in the name of science.

First, although we didn’t have any dietary restrictions for the participants, we did ask anyone who was currently on a “bulking” diet (weight gaining diet) to exclude themselves from the study or modify their diet.

Second, the participants couldn’t do any other physical activities except activities required for everyday life (such as shovelling snow in February… or in April, for those of you living in Alberta).

Finally, anybody who had specific, short-term performance or body composition goals (such as a 5 k race or a figure competition) were discouraged from participating, as this program was a general, not a targeted, plan. And we wanted to measure what our intervention alone could do.

Study results

What happened: Weight loss
Interestingly, those in all three groups lost weight. Indeed, after 8 weeks, the average weight loss was about 3.2 lbs with no statistical differences between genders or groups. In other words, although all groups lost weight, any apparent differences in table 2 below are likely due to random chance rather than real differences.

Table 2 – Average weight loss (in pounds) over 8 weeks

What happened: performance
Along with weight loss, every group improved their performance — often impressively. (High fives to Alwyn.) But there were no statistical differences between genders or groups; remember, they all did the same strength workouts.

Table 3 – Average change in push-ups after 8 weeks

Table 4 – Average change in inverted rows after 8 weeks

Table 5 – Average change in broad jump distance (in cm) after 8 weeks

Table 6 – Average change in V-max (% grade at constant speed) after 8 weeks

Table 7 – Average change in T-max (in seconds) after 8 weeks

Fun Factor
While there wasn’t much of a difference between groups as far as weight loss and performance, we noticed a huge difference in the study drop-out rate.  Steady state cardio had a very high drop-out rate, while the TRX group participants were most likely to finish the study.

Table 8 – Drop out rate

Most research labs never have this sort of dropout rate. Because subjects are paid to participate and because they have to report to real-life people, they finish what they start. However, because our Informal Experiments are unpaid and distance-based, it’s easy for participants to blow us off.

Sure, a few will let us know if something happened to exclude them from finishing. However, many of them simply ignore our emails. Even if we were kind enough to send them a workout plan — or even a TRX suspension trainer. Shame, shame. But, no matter. This is what explains the higher drop-out rates seen in a study like this.

However, we’re not sure what explains the higher drop-out rate in the steady state cardio group. For starters, 5 people in the steady state group dropped out the day they received their programs. We figured this was because they assumed steady state cardio sucks (which it does not, when combined with a good strength program). Again, shame, shame.

Of course, injuries are another possibility. But we didn’t get more e-mails from the steady state groups saying they were injured. For the most part any injuries were evenly distributed and mostly non-exercise related (for example, we got a picture of a bruised toe to prove a ladder accident story.) So we doubt that was the problem.

The final explanation could be — simply — that steady state cardio is kinda boring. Not everyone loves the idea of walking on a treadmill for 45 minutes. (Personal trainers everywhere, are you listening?)

Conclusions

Performance
All groups saw equal improvements in performance and weight lost. At least, statistically speaking. If you ask me, these improvements were excellent. For example, after just 2 months following the prescribed programs, participants improved their performance by an average of 30%.

This is especially awesome considering that, on average, these people had over 9 years’ exercise experience. Why does this matter? The vast majority of exercise studies use participants with no training experience (aka untrained). And anybody who has trained can tell you that in the beginning you get the biggest improvement.

And yet, in this study, people who had already been exercising for over 9 years saw up to 30% improvement in some performance measures (push-ups, inverted row and T-max) 8 weeks!

Why no difference between groups?
Now, you probably noticed that for push-ups, rows, broad jumps, and V-max, the group means were pretty similar. That’s not unexpected.

While there is literature out there showing the effectiveness of interval training and other types of conditioning exercise vs. steady state cardio for weight and fat changes, there isn’t really any data showing that with a properly designed cross-training program, we should expect differences in key performance variables.(1)

The steady state group did seem to have better T-max scores. Now, again, statistically, there was no difference between groups. However, if there were a slight trend toward a higher T-max, a surrogate marker of anaerobic threshold and aerobic fitness, we would expect the groups that spent the most time on the treadmill to do the best.

So, what’s the take home? Well, around here, most of us do interval training and circuit training (similar to the TRX work) for our conditioning exercise because we find theses types of exercises more challenging, and far more interesting than steady state cardio work.

Maybe this type of training just brings out the masochists in us; we usually alternate between states of:

• trying to survive the work interval without flying off the treadmill or getting tangled in our TRX
• dreading the end of the rest interval, thinking, “Is there something wrong with my watch?”

But I think that’s what most folks want in a workout: challenge. And fun.

So, while the performance numbers weren’t really different between groups, something more important was: actually doing the workouts. Remember, 80% of the people in the steady state group dropped out. 55% dropped out in the interval group. And only 35% dropped out in TRX group.

As Woody Allen said, “80% of success is just showing up.”

Weight loss
Participants lost, on average, 3-5 lbs without changing their diets. And if you think this isn’t much, think again. Resent research has shown that exercise alone isn’t very effective without some sort of nutritional change. In fact, many studies have shown no change if a nutrition plan isn’t implemented. Check out this article for more.

The simple fact that weight loss occurred in all three groups of experienced exercisers is very cool.

Why no difference between groups?
Although many people have pooh-poohed steady state cardio for the last few years, when combined with a solid strength training program, steady state cardio can help folks lose weight and improve performance.

That’s right: steady state cardio + strength training has been used – with much success – by physique champions for decades. It works. As does interval work + strength training. As does TRX work + strength training.

Thus, we weren’t surprised at all that there were no differences between groups in terms of weight loss or performance. After all, they did about the same total duration of exercise – 4 sessions per week; 2×45 min strength sessions and 2×30-45min conditioning sessions. So, when total workout times were equated, why should we expect to see anything different?

Now, we don’t have body composition data, as described above. Had we collected those data, perhaps we’d have seen more subtle changes in fat mass and lean mass.

But, truthfully, I doubt it. All three programs included a strength training program and a similar volume of exercise. We have no reason to believe more muscle would have been built and fat lost with any specific intervention.

The bottom line

Here’s how to interpret these results:
When you equate total exercise time, as long as you’re doing an intense, progressive strength + conditioning exercise program, you can feel free to choose whichever program you like best.

If you prefer steady state work, add it in. If you prefer interval work, add it in. And if you prefer TRX style workouts, add them in.  Indeed, in this study, participants seemed to prefer the TRX style workouts. They loved the diversity and intensity associated with this program. So we published the entire 4 phase workout, complete with video demonstrations below.

Phase 1 – Weeks 1 and 2

Phase 2 – Weeks 3 and 4

Phase 3 – Weeks 5 and 6

Phase 4 – Weeks 7 and 8

Of course, to do these workouts, you’d obviously need a TRX suspension trainer.  Here’s how you can get one:

TRX Suspension Trainer

And once you have your TRX system, know that as long as you have a great strength training program, feel free to add in steady state cardio, TRX circuits, and sprint intervals to your heart’s content.

Reference

1. Gibala MJ, Little JP, van Essen M, Wilkin GP, Burgomaster KA, Safdar A, Raha S, Tarnopolsky MA. Short-term sprint interval versus traditional endurance training: similar initial adaptations in human skeletal muscle and exercise performance. J Physiol. 2006 Sep 15;575(Pt 3):901-11. Epub 2006 Jul 6.

Click here to join the waiting list.

Before I get to the results, here’s why we studied the effect of dynamic stretching on strength in the first place. It’s simple: nobody else had already studied it. (As they said in the Karate Kid, “Strike first! Strike hard! No mercy!”)

Nowhere in the research literature has the effect of dynamic stretching on bench press strength been examined. On the other hand, there are loads of data showing that static stretching before a workout temporarily decreases strength. (1-3)

Why warm up?

Most of us rush through or completely skip warming up. But a well designed warm-up can benefit your workout in many ways, including:

1. Faster contraction and relaxation of both the agonist (primary muscle) and antagonist (biomechanically opposite muscle) (4)
2. Faster reaction time (5)
3. Improved strength and power (6)
4. Lower viscous resistance in muscles (6)
5. Improved oxygen delivery (7)

OK, OK, so we know we should be warming up. Jeesh. But if that’s true, then what’s the best way to warm up — at least in terms of improving your strength on exercises that follow the warm-up? That’s what we tried to find out.

Static versus dynamic stretching

To understand this experiment, you need to know the difference between static and dynamic stretching.

Static stretching occurs when you hold a position that stretches a muscle for a given time (usually 15-90 seconds.) Common static stretches are the sitting toe touch or pretty much any stretching you did in gym class. Most yoga poses would also fall into static stretching (with the exception of balance poses).

Dynamic stretching is when you actively move a joint through its range of motion (ROM). Dynamic stretching is also sometimes called mobility drills. Perhaps you’ve heard of the DVDs Magnificent Mobility (by Eric Cressey and Mike Robertson) and Inside-Out (by Mike Robertson and Bill Hartman) — a collection of lower and upper body dynamic stretches/mobility drills, respectively.

Table 1 – Comparing static and dynamic stretching (mobility drills)

(Source: Bahrke and Drews, 2008)

Method

We recruited some volunteers from the always-keen PN community. (Thanks, folks!)

16 participants completed the entire study. There were 6 women and 10 men.

In order to participate in the study, the 16 participants had to meet our experimental criteria:

• They had to be already following a weight training program. (In other words, they couldn’t be untrained newbies.)
• They had to be able to measure their bench press strength (3 rep max) three times over a two week period.
• They had to be familiar with the bench press exercise.
• They had to have bench pressed in the previous three months.

They were not eligible to participate if they had any sort of injury, were unfamiliar with proper bench press form, didn’t have a spotter, or intended to change their diet or training program in any significant way during the course of the experiment.

The experiment proceeded as follows.

First, participants tested their 3-repetition maximum (3RM) bench press strength by following a specified protocol that was slightly modified from the Bahrke and Drews 2008 version (see citation 8 below). (Click to download the protocol in PDF.)

Then they were randomly given one of two warm-up protocols. After the first warm-up they tested their 3RM again. Then they were given the other warm-up protocol and tested their 3RM yet again. Each session was separated by at least two days.

Warm-ups

Warm-up 1 was a standard warm-up with no stretching, just a ten-minute jog.

Warm-up 2 was a warm-up with a five-minute jog and three upper body dynamic stretches:

1. Wall slides (or what Craig Ballantyne describes as “stick-ups” in this video)
2. Side-lying extension-rotations
3. Dynamic Blackburns

As the experimenters, we tried to be as sneaky as possible by labeling the warm-ups “Blue” and “White”. That was an attempt to withhold as much information about the warm-ups as we could… but it’s not as though it was a total mystery, since trained people are likely to recognize when they’re doing dynamic stretching.

Results

Men For the men, there was a modest (2%) but statistically significant increase in 3RM after a warm-up with dynamic stretching compared to just a regular warm up with no additional stretching of any kind. On average the guys lifted 206.6 lbs after the standard warm-up, and 210.5 lbs after the warm up with dynamic stretching.	Women The women lifted, on average, 95.0 lbs after the standard warm-up and 94.2 lbs after the warm-up with dynamic stretching. So there was no difference between the warm-ups for the women. In fact there was a slight decrease. Why? I’ll get to that later.
Average 3RM by warmup type, men	Average 3RM by warmup type, women

Since this was acute -– a one time thing –- we didn’t bother getting any differences in injuries. However, a few people e-mailed me to say that they felt “looser” with the dynamic warm-up.

Conclusion and discussion

The big question is why in our experiment a warm-up with dynamic stretching helped the guys lift more weight, but didn’t do anything for the women.

I think there are two explanations: the differences in the weight lifted, and possible differences in flexibility.

Say you’re lifting 200 lbs on the bench press and you want to add the smallest amount of weight you possibly can. Chances are, the smallest increment you can add is 5 lbs (2.5lb/side). If you’re lucky, your gym has 1.25 lb plates and you can add a smaller increase of 2.5 lbs. Since the men increased their 3RM by 2% (or about 4 lbs on average) there were some men who increased their bench by 5 lbs or more (the minimum amount available at most gyms) and some who didn’t -– but the average worked out to an increase.

For the women a 2% increase works out to be less than 2 lb. Even if they had a 4% increase (4 lb) they still would be below the 5 lb increment. So the women may have increased their strength in the dynamic warm-up, but the absolute change is too small to measure. Here we see one methodological problem that can arise in experiments: the structure of the experiment (in this case, the available weight progression) can, to some degree, affect the results.

The other possibility is that the women were generally more flexible than the men and the warm-up with dynamic stretching wasn’t as beneficial for the women as it was for the men. It’s certainly possible, but since we didn’t assess flexibility, we can’t say for sure.

Personally, I think it’s very likely that the weight increments were too big to show small changes in the women’s performances, which makes the men’s differences very interesting. It seems with this preliminary data that a warm-up that includes a dynamic stretching increases 3RM on the bench press –- a little.

Thus, in addition to the other benefits of dynamic stretching –- improved flexibility, decrease in injuries –- improved strength might be another.

Give it a try yourself and see what happens. And have a few small plates handy, just in case!

References

1. Fowles JR, Sale DG, MacDougall JD. Reduced strength after passive stretch of the human plantarflexors. J Appl Physiol. 2000 Sep;89(3):1179-88.
2. Evetovich TK, Nauman NJ, Conley DS, Todd JB. Effect of static stretching of the biceps brachii on torque, electromyography, and mechanomyography during concentric isokinetic muscle actions. J Strength Cond Res. 2003 Aug;17(3):484-8.
3. Viale F, Nana-Ibrahim S, Martin RJ. Effect of active recovery on acute strength deficits induced by passive stretching. J Strength Cond Res. 2007 Nov;21(4):1233-7.
4. Physiological Aspects of Sports Performance and Training. Hoffman, J. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 2002.
5. Franklin BA, Whaley MH, Howley ET & Balady GJ, eds. ACSM’s Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription. 5th ed. American College of Sports Medicine.  Philladelphia: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins. 2006.
6. Heyward VH. Advanced Fitness Assessment and Exercise Prescription. 4th ed. Champaign, IL Human Kinetics, 2002.
7. Semenick D. Conditioning Program: Testing and Evaluation. NSCA J. 1989 3(2):8-9
8. Bahrke MS and Drews CM. Essentials of Strength Training and Conditioning. 3rd ed. National Strength and Conditioning Association. Champaign, IL Human Kinetics, 2008.

Click here to join the waiting list.