Whey protein is the most popular protein source in sports nutrition, but studies show whey provides health benefits beyond just supporting lean body mass. Whether you’re trying to maximize the muscle on your frame, drop some excess body fat or simply enhance your health and vitality, whey protein should be a regular part of your nutrition plan.

Heart Health

A study this week, published in the prestigious British Journal of Nutrition, shows whey protein enhances lipid profiles and insulin levels. Knowing that dairy consumption in general has shown positive effects on health in past studies, the researchers sought to understand whether whey, which is one protein in dairy, or casein, the other protein source, provided different health benefits.

Study participants were put into one of three groups: One group supplemented with whey, a second group with casein and a third group used a glucose placebo. The study lasted a total of twelve weeks, and while there was not a difference in body composition among the groups, the whey protein-supplemented group had significant reductions in triglycerides, total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol and insulin levels compared to either of the other test groups. With the high rates of heart disease, the positive effects of whey on triglycerides and cholesterol are important considerations for today’s average person.(1)

Aging

Higher-protein intake has been shown to be beneficial for decreasing the loss of bone density associated with aging. Whey protein has been shown to activate osteoblasts, cells that stimulate bone formation.(2) In addition, muscle tissue decreases with aging, which makes physical performance more difficult as well as slows metabolic rate. Increasing protein intake has been shown to help decrease the rate of lean mass loss. Whey protein has been shown to stimulate protein synthesis, or muscle growth.

Weight Loss

Whey protein appears to reduce food consumption when it’s consumed prior to a meal. Of course, eating anything prior to a meal can reduce one’s appetite. That’s why when we were young we were told we couldn’t snack until after dinner. In a recent study, though, whey protein had a more dramatic effect. This could be because whey protein seems to stimulate two appetite-supressing hormones, CCK (cholecystokinin) and GLP-1 (glucagon-like peptide-1). It also helps maintain glucose and insulin levels after later meals.(3) In previous articles, we’ve looked at how increasing protein in the diet enhances satiety and decreases total calorie consumption. Whey protein seems to produce more of an effect than what is typically seen from simply increasing protein from other sources. That said, the simplicity of making a shake with whey protein is a great way to increase total protein intake and get the benefits associated with whey protein at the same time.

The amino acids in whey protein also provide the building blocks for glutathione, the body’s most significant antioxidant. Glutathione is important for supporting healthy immune function as well as supporting the body’s detoxification process.(4) Since the buildup of toxins can affect the ability to manage a healthy weight, whey’s influence on glutathione levels may also indirectly support weight management.

Sports Performance

Whey protein has been used in sports nutrition supplements for several years. Studies show whey enhances protein synthesis and can be beneficial when used after, and possibly before and during resistance exercise as a way to avoid excessive muscle breakdown and support workout performance.(5,6) Although strength-focused athletes often focus on increasing protein intake, endurance athletes can benefit from whey protein as well. Exercise puts the body in a catabolic (muscle breakdown) state. Long-duration endurance activity can put the body in more of a catabolic state than strength training or sprint training, so a proper nutrition plan, including extra protein intake can be beneficial. Since whey protein stimulates protein synthesis, it can be especially beneficial as a way to avoid lean mass losses with endurance training.

Summary

Whether your goals are combating the effects of aging, managing weight, enhancing health or improving performance, whey protein can play an important role in your nutrition plan. There is no food or supplement that provides a magic solution, but whey protein supplementation certainly provides more benefits than a good diet plan will by itself. Just like the food you eat, with whey protein and other supplements, you get what you pay for. Whey protein powder is great for use in a breakfast shake when you’re short on time in the morning, for a post-workout shake, or for a snack between meals. Although dairy allergies are becoming more common, many people who have allergies to dairy from its casein or lactose content often find they can easily digest whey protein without digestive distress.

The following is a nutrition-packed whey protein shake recipe from one of our Weight Loss Specialists, Cindi Lockhart, RD:

Blend one scoop of whey protein isolate (should provide ~22 grams of protein), ¾ cup 2% plain Greek yogurt, one cup mixed berries, two tablespoons ground flaxseed, one tablespoon organic peanut butter, one cup fresh spinach, three tablespoons raw oats and water/ice. Enjoy!

In health,

Tom Nikkola

TO POST COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS, PLEASE CLICK HERE

References

1. Pai S, Ellis V, Dhaliwai S. Effects of whey protein isolate on body composition, lipids, insulin and glucose in overweight and obese individuals. Brit J Nutr. 2010;104:716-723

2. Takada Y, Aoe S, Kumegawa M. Whey protein stimulated the proliferation an differentiation of osteoblastic MC3T3-E1 cells. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 1996;223(2);445-9

3 .Akhaven T, Luhovyy B, Brown P, Cho C, Anderson GH. Effect of premeal consumption of whey protein and its hydrolysate on food intake and postmeal glycemia and insulin responses in young adults. Am J Clin Nutr. 2010;91(4):966-975

4. Bouhous G. Whey protein concentrate (WPC) and glutathione modulation in cancer treatment. Anticancer Res. 2000;20(6C);4785-4789

5. Hulmi J, Lockwood C, Stout J. Effect of protein/essential amino acids and resistance training on skeletal muscle hypertrophy: A case for whey. Nutrition & Metabolism. 2010;7:51

6. Hall WL, Millward DJ, Long SH, Morgan LM. Casein and whey exert different effects on plasma amino acid profiles, gastrointestinal hormone secretion and appetite. Br J Nutr. 2003 Feb;89(2):239-48

This article is not intended for the treatment or prevention of disease, nor as a substitute for medical treatment, nor as an alternative to medical advice. Use of recommendations in this and other articles is at the choice and risk of the reader.

You work hard, you sweat, you push yourself harder each time you exercise. You do what you think you need to do while you exercise to get leaner, stronger, healthier and generally more fit. Yet, most people don’t realize that the benefits of a great workout come in the hours and days following the exercise session. A training session is a stimulus to make your body change, but for that to happen, you must provide the right kind of nutrition before and after your workout, in addition to a good diet the rest of the day.

Most of the advice people receive about pre and post-workout nutrition comes from research on athletes. For athletes performing several hours of training each day, recovery becomes critically important. They also tend to burn significantly more calories than the average person who exercises for an hour three to six times per week. The appropriate pre and post-workout nutrition approach for an average person is dramatically different than the ideal approach for an athlete. Because this series of articles is targeted at the average person looking to optimize their ability to shed fat and body weight, we’ll look at pre and post-workout nutrition from that point of view in this article.

As you may recall from the first article in this series, we reviewed how your body uses its main fuel sources – carbohydrates and fat – and how you can measure how efficient your body is at burning fat over carbohydrate. In the second article, we looked at how the meals you choose to eat each day play an important role in which fuel your body burns; carbohydrate or fat. When people eat excessive amounts of carbohydrate, their body becomes more of a sugar-burner, which makes it difficult to shed extra body fat. Those two articles are an important foundation because the perfect pre and post-workout nutrition approach doesn’t provide much benefit if the rest of an individual’s nutrition plan is not appropriate.

Origins of Pre and Post-Workout Nutrition

Much of the advice about pre-workout and post-workout nutrition comes from sports-performance nutrition. Originally, carbohydrates were found to be an important part of optimizing endurance performance, especially in athletes who spent hours each day exercising. Over the past twenty years, pre and post-workout nutrition became a more common component of strength and bodybuilding nutrition programs as well. In 2004, Dr. John Ivy and Dr. Robert Portman published a book called Nutrient Timing which became an often-used template for optimizing nutrient intake for athletes.

The nutrient timing recommendations for athletes became more mainstream recommendations, even though there was little evidence of their value for the general population. People were told to load up on high-carb foods before their 45 minute cardio session and have another high-carb, moderate protein meal immediately after. As we’ll see, these recommendations may offset the benefits individuals may have gained from their exercise sessions.

Fat-Burning Effects of Exercise

Exercise has been shown to dramatically increase fat utilization during a workout, as well as for up to 36 hours after a training session, provided the right approach to nutrition is taken.  Think of that! If you follow the right approach to nutrition, your body can be burning extra fat for a day and a half after exercising! Different types of exercise sessions affect fat metabolism in different ways, which we’ll look at in an upcoming article. The main point here is an exercise session has a dramatic effect on metabolism and fat utilization. If your post workout approach and general diet are appropriate, those effects can be long-lasting.

Pre-Workout Nutrition and Fat Loss

If you remember from the previous article, carbohydrate intake leads to an increase in insulin production. Increased levels of insulin decrease the ability to burn fat. Studies in both athletes and non-athletes show that a pre-workout meal has the ability to significantly alter the body’s ability to burn fat.

For those who have a primary goal of body fat reduction, exercising in the morning in a fasted state has been shown to result in the greatest amount of fat utilization.  Glucose levels are usually the lowest in the morning, which means insulin levels are low, so fat utilization is higher. For those who exercise first-thing in the morning, waiting to eat until after exercise can be a great way to stimulate an increase in fat burning. Again, this is for those looking to shed body fat. Doing a high-intensity strength training or Boot Camp style workout without eating first could result in a big drop in performance. That isn’t what we’re talking about here, though.

For those who are not early-risers, or just don’t have time in the morning to exercise, it’s likely you’ll be eating meals prior to exercise, so your pre-workout food choices are important to ensure you’re able to burn as much fat as possible during your training session. The recommendations for pre-exercise meals are much like they were for the diet in general. For fat loss, studies show fewer carbohydrates consumed results in greater fat burning.  One of the myths about exercise is a high-carb snack will provide energy during a training session, but in reality, the carbohydrates are really only beneficial for athletes training for over sixty minutes. Also, if a runner is carrying an extra 20 pounds of body fat, it would be more worthwhile to sacrifice a bit of performance and drop the body fat levels as opposed to overusing carbohydrates to get through a training session.
For those doing extended training sessions where carbohydrate intake may be important, low-glycemic carbohydrates (whole, unprocessed carb) allow the body to burn more fat than high-glycemic carbohydrates (breads, cereals, juice, gels,etc.)  Again, if the goal is really about fat-loss, these food probably aren’t necessary.

Good pre-workout options will vary based on individuals’ taste preferences, digestion and time available prior to a workout. Snack foods could include nuts and seeds, whey protein, a couple of hard-boiled eggs or some jerky.

Post-Workout Nutrition

If you’ve done everything right with your nutrition through your training session, you’ve set yourself up with an increased metabolic rate and an increased fat utilization. What you do after your exercise session can help the fat-burning continue, or stop it in its tracks.
Fat utilization is increased when glucose (blood-sugar levels) are decreased. The post-workout effects on metabolism may also result from increased gloconeogenesis (refilling glycogen levels), increased protein synthesis and/or hormonal changes.  By providing your body what it needs to begin the recovery process, without raising blood-sugar levels excessively, you may be able to prolong the fat-burning effects of your exercise session.

To reiterate the significance of your post-exercise meal choice, a study published in Nutrition & Metabolism compared the results of an intense exercise session followed by a mixed meal (50 g carbs, 7 g fat, 20 g protein) with a calorie-free placebo. They compared both groups with a non-exercising group who also ate the mixed meal. The group who ate the calorie-free placebo continued to burn an elevated amount of fat long after the exercise bout. However, the group who exercised and had the mixed meal after exercise had the same rates of fat utilization as those who did no exercise! Basically, the carbohydrates in the post-workout meal shut down the fat-burning benefit of the training session.  This begs the question, then, “What is an ideal post-workout meal?”

During a training session, you have put stress on your body and it does require some nutrients to begin the recovery process. Protein is a key nutrient necessary to help muscle tissue repair itself. If additional calories are needed, some healthy fat could be added as well, such as coconut milk, nut butter or flax. A protein shake can be ideal because it is absorbed faster than a whole-food meal. Whey protein is an ideal protein powder, and whey isolate is low enough in lactose that many who have lactose intolerance can still use it without digestive distress. Rice protein and yellow pea protein reasonable vegetarian protein sources. Beyond shakes, a nutrient-dense, lower-carb option can simply be a salad with protein on it.

After an intense workout, a shake might be better, but following a cardio workout, a salad can work well. Remember, the goal is to keep your body burning fat, so if you have a salad, skip the bread and croutons. If you’re going to have a meal replacement shake, look for one that has more protein than it has carbohydrates. Otherwise, have a shake with whey protein and some berries. Though it’s a good idea to limit carbohydrates for fat-loss benefits after exercise, they do not need to be eliminated. Fibrous vegetables, berries, nuts, seeds and even high-quality protein shakes will have some carbohydrates, but that’s nothing to be concerned with.

One final caution on your post-workout meal. Some people work up quite an appetite during their exercise session. As much as you may feel you’ve “earned” something, if the goal is weight loss, you have to maintain some control over what you’re eating. I’ve met many people over the years who were consistent with their workouts and thought they were doing everything right with their nutrition, but couldn’t figure out why the scale wasn’t changing. For many of them, the protein shake with extra fruit, sandwich and bag of baked chips more than offset any benefits they would have gotten from their exercise session.

Summary

As you may have realized, there isn’t a big secret to what you should eat prior to and following an exercise program. The only thing out of the ordinary from the rest of the meals during the day is the fact that protein shakes are a convenient, efficient and effective way to take in the nutrients you need prior to and following exercise without adding additional carbohydrates or calories.
From a nutrition standpoint, the foods you eat are a huge part of how you can enhance your body’s ability to burn fat. In the next fat-burning article, we’ll look at which nutritional supplements can further enhance fat-burning and weight loss. However, if you’re not doing what you should with the foods you eat, there’s little effect dietary supplements will be able to have.

In health,
Tom Nikkola

See also: Making the Body a Better Fat Burner: An Introduction

See also: Making the Body a Better Fat Burner: Meal Basics

TO POST QUSTIONS OR COMMENTS, PLEASE CLICK HERE

There wasn’t a great place to add this paragraph, but it is important to include in this article about nutrition and exercise. In the many years I worked in our fitness centers, I saw dozens of people pass out, get incredibly sick, disoriented and become pale and clammy. Once they were feeling back to normal, we often discussed what they had eaten prior to their workout. Almost every time, the response was something like a granola bar. A processed, high-carb snack can cause a fast increase in blood-sugar levels. As blood-sugar goes up, insulin goes up, which causes blood-sugar to go down. When an exercise session begins shortly after insulin levels peak, both insulin and the exercise session can drive blood-sugar levels down dramatically. Often times, the result would be a crash in blood sugar, and the feelings described above. Although everyone I saw this happen to eventually recovered and nothing serious happened, it can be a scary situation. If you are new to exercise, or feel you are deconditioned, please work with someone experienced in nutrition and its application to exercise, and take your time adapting to a higher-intensity exercise program. The Fitness Professionals are there to support you, so ask for help when you need it.

References

Kimber NE, Heigenhauser GJ, Spriet LL, Dyck DJ. Skeletal muscle fat and carbohydrate metabolism during recovery from glycogen-depleting exercise in humans. J Physiol. 2003;548:919–27
Bennard P, Doucet E. Acute effects of exercise timing and breakfast meal glycemic index on exercise-induced fat oxidation. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2006;31(5);502-511
Stevenson E, Astbury N, Simpson E, Taylor M, MacDonald I. Fat Oxidation during Exercise and Satiety during Recovery Are Increased Following a Low-Glycemic Index Breakfast in Sedentary Women. J Nutr. 2009;139(5):890-897

This article is not intended for the treatment or prevention of disease, nor as a substitute for medical treatment, nor as an alternative to medical advice. Use of recommendations in this and other articles is at the choice and risk of the reader.

As you look throughout the Life Time Weight Loss Site, you’ll see the tag line “More than just calories in, calories out.” In the battle for weight loss, calorie counting is one of the most popular methods for attempting weight loss, but it is not the only factor for weight loss. A variety of factors exist, which influence the body’s ability to shed excess body fat. Over a series of articles, we’ll take a look at the many ways we can positively or negatively impact our ability to burn fat and shed extra weight.

As mentioned above, calorie reduction is the most common suggestion for losing weight. Unfortunately, our bodies adjust to many lifestyle factors, including the calories we provide it. Generally, if an individual eats fewer calories, the body responds by burning fewer calories. If we exercise more, hunger can be increased as a way for the body to offset the extra calories burned. If we eat more of the right kinds of calories, our body can respond by burning more calories.

To effectively lose weight long-term, an appropriate nutrition and exercise program must change the body’s metabolism – the way the body uses the energy we provide it from food. An appropriate training and nutrition program for weight loss is designed to make the body better at burning fat at rest and during exercise. There are a variety of lifestyle factors which change how the body burns fat. They include:

• Appropriate daily dietary patterns
• Pre-exercise nutrition
• Post-exercise nutrition
• Exercise intensity
• Nutritional supplements
• Other lifestyle factors

Today, we’ll take a look at some of the background information. It’s a bit technical, but important for understanding how to influence the way the body burns fat. In upcoming articles, we’ll look at the specific ways you can modify nutrition and exercise to positively affect the way the body burns fat and conserves muscle.

Respiratory Quotient and Fat Burning

Just as your car has various measurements which show how the engine is running, so does your body. When it comes to fuel utilization (carbs vs. fat), a measurement called your respiratory quotient (RQ) helps to show how well your body burns fat. Respiratory quotient is measured during a resting metabolic rate assessment (CaloriePoint). The RQ value is the volume of carbon dioxide expired divided by the volume of oxygen inhaled. By measuring how much oxygen is inhaled and how much carbon dioxide is exhaled, the amount of carbohydrate and fat being burned can be measured.

The body is only able to use fat as a major fuel source when it is able to get enough oxygen to its cells. Generally, under resting or moderately active conditions, RQ is 0.7 to 1.0. During intense exercise, the ratio climbs above 1.0, which means the body is working anaerobically (without sufficient oxygen). The higher the RQ value, the more carbohydrate and less fat an individual burns. Because people burn the majority of their calories at rest or being slightly active, understanding your resting RQ level helps you understand how well you burn fat most of the day.

Weight loss must generally be accompanied by some modification to calorie intake. Some individuals, though, don’t lose weight at the expected rate even when their calories are reduced. Researchers were interested in this phenomenon. If the majority of weight loss philosophies revolve around calories in, calories out, and it in fact does not work for everyone, they wanted to find out why. After adjusting for dietary adherence, they found the next most significant factor in one’s ability to lose weight was the RQ value. Those who had the lowest RQ values had the most success with weight loss. That means those who burned the highest percentage of fat at rest had the most success with weight loss. In fact, that group also had the most success with avoiding weight regain as well.(1)

As an individual becomes more efficient at burning fat, RQ tends to decrease. The right kind of exercise can help decrease resting RQ levels; so can an appropriate nutrition plan. Periodically measuring your resting metabolic rate (CaloriePoint) can show you, over time, how well you’re doing at increasing your body’s ability to burn fat, as well as show you how much energy you burn at rest.

Just Help Me Burn Fat

Whew. That was a bit technical, but it’s an important foundational concept. The point of the above section is so you understand if you can help the body burn more fat instead of carbohydrate, even in a resting state, you can improve the ability to get the weight off. That being the case, the next question should be “What do I have to do to get my body burning more fat?” There isn’t any one answer, so we’ll take a look at the variety of ways in upcoming articles. The next article will be: Making the Body a Better Fat Burner: Your Daily Diet.

Regardless of what any magazine article may say, there is not a quick fix and there is not a single answer for losing weight for all people. The greater the number of ways you can influence your body to burn fat, the more likely it is you’ll find success. Stay tuned.

See also: Eat Well. Live Well E-Book

In health,
Tom Nikkola

TO POST COMMENTS OR QUESTION, CLICK HERE.

Reference

1. Barwell N, Malkova D. Leggate M, Gill J. Individual responsiveness to exercise-induced fat loss is associated with change in resting substrate utilization. Metabolism. 2009;58(9):1320-1328

This article is not intended for the treatment or prevention of disease, nor as a substitute for medical treatment, nor as an alternative to medical advice. Use of recommendations in this and other articles is at the choice and risk of the reader.

A new research study presented additional evidence of the benefits of a lower-carb approach to diet. The study was published in the Annals of Internal Medicine and financially supported by the National Institutes of Health.(1) It compared a calorie-controlled low-fat diet, against a low-carb diet in which participants were allowed to eat as much protein and fat as they wanted, over a two-year period. The bottom line finding was that both approaches led to the same weight loss over two years, but the low-carb diet led to much greater levels of health-promoting HDL cholesterol. Though this is the summary that’s made most of the news stories, there was additional, valuable information revealed in the study.

Study Design

The study group consisted of overweight individuals who were put into two different groups. The first group (low-fat group) was instructed to eat a diet consisting of 1200-1500 calories per day for women, and 1500-1800 calories per day for men. Of the total calories, 55% were to come from carbohydrate, 30% from fat and 15% from protein. Interestingly, it was only this group was instructed to maintain a specific calorie level.

The second group was instructed to follow a specific Atkins-diet protocol. In the first three months, they were to keep carbohydrate content below 20 grams per day from fibrous vegetables, while freely  eating as much protein and fat as they wanted to. After the first three months, they gradually increased carbohydrate intake. Each week after the first twelve weeks, they were told to add an additional five grams of carbohydrate to their daily intake.

During the first twenty weeks (~five months), both groups received in-person, group support. Exercise and multivitamin recommendations were the same for both groups.

Study Findings

Not surprisingly, the groups lost their greatest amount of weight at the six-month mark, shortly after the group support program ended. This is important in that for many overweight individuals, without the support and accountability of a group or one-on-one program, they easily get off-track with their nutrition plan. From the six-month mark to the end of two years, weight crept back on in both groups to the point where, at the end of the study, both groups had lost 7% of their body weight from where they started, which averaged 15 pounds.

Dietary adherence is one of the most challenging aspects of studying nutrition. Without cooking meals every day for individuals, it’s nearly impossible to ensure they follow the prescribed plan. In many studies, the low-fat group tends to maintain a closer diet to what is recommended than the low-carb groups do. This is because the “low-fat” approach is not dramatically different than the Standard American Diet (SAD), where as the low-carb plan is quite different than most people in today’s society eat. From a weight loss perspective, a key point is that the low-fat group had to count calories to lose the weight, whereas the low-carb group simply had to limit carbohydrate intake. It would have been even more interesting if, over the two years, all foods would have been prepared for the low-carb group to ensure they stuck to the plan. Of course, it isn’t feasible for studies such as these to have that much control over food intake for such a long period of time.

Although LDL cholesterol was lower at Month 3 and Month 6 in the low-fat group, VLDL (small, dense LDL), which is the real “bad” cholesterol was lower in the low-carb group. A common misconception about low-carb diets is that they raise LDL cholesterol, but it is the large, fluffy LDL particles that usually rise on a low-carb diet, which does not present the health risk that VLDL cholesterol does. Excess carbohydrates tend to cause a rise in VLDL cholesterol. HDL cholesterol, a known protector against heart disease, often decreases with a low-fat diet. Consumption of fat, especially saturated fat, helps increase HDL cholesterol.(2) The recent study again confirmed this finding.

During the first year of the study, triglyceride levels fell dramatically more in the low-carb group than in the low-fat group. High triglyceride levels are another known indicator of heart disease risk. In the second half of the study, the second year, the difference in triglyceride levels was less significant. The change in triglycerides in the second half of the study was likely due to an increase in carbohydrate intake, which is common among those who participate in a low-carb study without regular support and accountability.

Bone mineral density was measured over the two-year period as well. Low-carb diets have a reputation for decreasing bone mineral density because of their higher protein intakes, although research has not supported that reputation.(3) This study showed that the low-carb approach was not detrimental to bone density. Generally, higher-protein diets can increase the body’s acid load, which requires more minerals to offset the acids. Consuming sufficient vegetables can offset any potential risks for decreasing bone density when consuming protein, and some studies show that higher-protein diets are better for maintaining bone density with aging.

Summary

We can glean a few important points from this study, which have been mentioned before. First, changing dietary habits is NOT easy. We live in a society where processed foods available everywhere. Without support, the chance of long-term success is greatly diminished. Until one’s life is completely changed, and they can’t think of going back to the old way of eating, it’s critical to find a support group. Support can be in-person, such as programs like EAT or TEAM. You may also find the support and encouragement you need through an online community. Participating in discussion forums and tracking what you eat can be great ways of finding motivation and accountability.

Second, evidence continues to mount which shows the positive outcomes from a reduced-carbohydrate diet for many people. Most peoples’ lifestyles are not active enough to justify the high amounts of carbohydrates we consume on a daily basis. The challenge, of course, is making the right decisions and avoiding the convenience foods we’re faced with each day. This goes back to the first point of connecting with a support group and staying connected with like-minded people.

Finally, lower-carbohydrate diets and higher-protein diets tend to go hand in hand. There is some debate as to which macronutrient plays a more significant role in weight management. Those who make protein intake a priority at each meal tend to eat less carbohydrates and less food in general. For some people, it may be easier to think of changing their nutritional habits by increasing the intake of vegetables and protein rather than reducing carbohydrates. In the end, less carbohydrate and more healthy fat and protein should help you get to your weight-management goals easier.

See also: US Dietary Guidelines 2010: Part 2 – Macronutrient Ratios

In health,
Tom Nikkola

TO POST COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS, CLICK HERE.

References:
1. Foster G, Wyatt H, Hill J, Makris A et al. Weight and Metabolic Outcomes After 2 Years on a Low-Carbohydrate Versus Low-Fat Diet. Ann Intern Med. 2010;153:147-157
2. Siri-Tarino P Sun Q, Hu F, Krauss R. Meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies evaluating the association of saturated fat with cardiovascular disease. Am J Clin Nutr. 2010;91:525-546
3. Darling A, Millward DJ, Torgerson DJ, Hewitt C, Lanham-New S. Dietary protein and bone health: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Clin Nutr. 2009;90(6):1674-1692

This article is not intended for the treatment or prevention of disease, nor as a substitute for medical treatment, nor as an alternative to medical advice. Use of recommendations in this and other articles is at the choice and risk of the reader.

Here is the July list of some interesting, random health and fitness studies that have come out. You can review the May and June versions here and here. They are topics that may not require a full article, but are still worth reviewing. Enjoy!

Omega-3s and Triglycerides: It’s well known that a high-carbohydrate diet can lead to increases in triglyceride levels, as well as other possible negative effects on health. In a study published in the Journal of Nutrition(1), researchers showed that triglyceride levels can be reduced in those on a low-fat, high carbohydrate diet with as little as 1.24 grams per day of the long-chain omega-3s, DHA and EPA. That’s the equivalent of 2-3 fish oil softgels per day. While the fish oil likely can’t undo all the potential issues related to a long-term low-fat diet, in this study it showed at least triglyceride levels can be reduced, which is a significant marker for heart disease risk. Of  course, a better option is probably to get off the high-carbohydrate diet and still take the fish oil.

Cool Your Palms & Increase Your Strength: This is kind of off-topic, but interesting nonetheless. Researchers showed that cooling exercisers palms had a significant impact on strength, at least in the bench press, which was the exercise used in the testing. The study, published in Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise(2) was based on the fact that other research has also shown that local cooling has an ergogenic effect on strength. This study only related the temperature of the palm to chest strength, but it’s possible it could result in a positive effect for other upper body exercises.

Calcium and Body Fat: The results of a four-year study on 870 women showed that supplemental calcium seems to have an effect on limiting the development of trunk body fat. The results of this study are especially interesting because the supplemental calcium had a positive effect on body fat, whereas other studies using dairy calcium as a measure of calcium intake have not shown a positive effect on body fat regulation. This could be because supplemental calcium ensures a specific amount of calcium is taken in each day, or the fact that supplemental calcium requires no extra calories compared to taking in calcium by consuming dairy products.(3)

Live Longer With Friends: New research shows what many of us probably already know. People tend to live longer when they are involved in social relationships. The data from BYU showed that low social interaction is equivalent to smoking 15 cigarettes a day, or being an alcoholic, or does more harm than not exercising, and can be twice as harmful as obesity. The full study is published in the journal PLoS Medicine.(4) The main point is if you want to live longer, building strong relationships with others is an important part of a healthy lifestyle. If you’re short on time, why not build relationships with people at Life Time (i.e. group fitness, TEAM, Run Club, etc.)? That way you can get in the exercise you need and build relationships with other health-conscious people!

Obese Men Twice as Likely to Die Premature: The International Congress on Obesity tracked the longevity of 5000 men from age 20 to 80. They found men who were obese at age 20 had twice the likelihood of premature death as those who were not obese. While the study did not provide additional detail about those who lost weight after they were previously obese, it provides more reason to get the weight off sooner than later. Not only is it a health concern, but it is associated with a significant increase in financial costs.(5)

In health,

Tom Nikkola

References:

1. Jimenez-Gomez Y, Marin C, Perez-Martinez P, Hartwich J, et al. A Low-Fat, High-Complex Carbohydrate Diet Supplemented with Long-Chain (n-3) Fatty Acids Alters the Postprandial Lipoprotein Profile in Patients with Metabolic Syndrome. J Nutr July 14,2010 doi:10.3945/jn.109.120816

2. Kwon, Y, Robergs R, Kravitz L, Gurney B, Mermier C, Schneider S. Palm Cooling Delays Fatigue during High-Intensity Bench Press Exercise. Med & Sci Spor & Ex. 2010;42(8):1557-1565

3. Zhou J, Zhao L, Watson P, Zhang Q, Lappe J. The effect of calcium and vitamin D supplementation on obesity in postmenopausal women: secondary analysis for a large-scale, placebo controlled, double-blind, 4-year longitudinal clinical trial. Nutrition & Metabolism 2010;7:62

4. Brigham Young University. Stayin’ alive: That’s what friends are for. University News Release. July 27, 2010 (http://news.byu.edu/archive10-jul-relationships.aspx)

5. International Association for the Study of Obesity. Lifelong Doubling in Death Risk for Men Who Are Obese at Age 20, Study Finds" ScienceDaily 14 July 2010. 1 August 2010 http://www.sciencedaily.com­ /releases/2010/07/100713091321.htm

This article is not intended for the treatment or prevention of disease, nor as a substitute for medical treatment, nor as an alternative to medical advice. Use of recommendations in this and other articles is at the choice and risk of the reader.

In a previous article (Gluten Confusion) we took a look at where some of the attention on gluten is coming from. A significant part of the population appears to be sensitive to gluten, although a much smaller percentage is actually considered “allergic” to gluten. Even those who have minor sensitivities may find disruptions in their metabolism or other health ailments. Many people find themselves facing the idea of cutting gluten out of their diet but are left wondering how they will shop or how they will order foods at restaurants. The good news is that with a small amount of modification, it’s actually pretty easy to get the gluten out of the diet. Since many of the complications from consuming gluten were covered in the article mentioned above, this article will just focus on how to make some changes when you do your shopping or order foods at a restaurant, if your goal is to avoid gluten in your diet.

What is gluten?

“Gluten” is a term used to describe a group of proteins that are created when wheat flour is combined with liquid. The common sources of gluten include wheat, rye, barley or any crossbred grains from those three grains.(1) Typically, oats are considered gluten-free. However, if they are made in a facility that processes other grains, they can easily become contaminated with gluten.(2) According to the USDA, “Currently, there is no FDA regulation that defines the term ‘gluten-free.’ However, FDA has not objected to the use of the term ‘gluten-free’ in the labeling of foods, provided that when such a claim is made, it is truthful and not misleading.” That is an important statement because it places 100% of the responsibility for label claim on the manufacturer of the food. It is possible that food products can be contaminated with gluten during their production process and an individual would not know about it. While it may not be significant for an individual with a light sensitivity to gluten, it can be serious for those with celiac disease, a full-blown gluten allergy.

Many processed foods contain gluten. This could be one of the reasons the rate of gluten sensitivity has increased so much in recent history. We’re exposed to more gluten than we were in the past, especially when people focus on consuming a higher-carbohydrate, higher-grain diet. If you are buying processed foods, be sure to check the label.

What are some alternatives?

Being human, many of us are looking for the answer that’s keeping us from having optimal levels of health and fitness. There is no magic-bullet, but some people certainly do start feeling better, losing weight and having less aches and pains when they take gluten out of their diet. Oftentimes, this can be a result of simply removing extra carbohydrates and calories from their diet. Those who look for gluten-free replacements for their favorite foods may not have the same kind of health benefits. Eating gluten-free cookies instead of gluten-containing cookies may help avoid issues with gluten, but they still contain unnecessary calories and sugars. Once you get in the habit of avoiding gluten, you may find there are a variety of healthy meals you can make without the need to add extra carbohydrates.

For those times when you really do need to make up a starchy food like bread, cookies, etc. and want to avoid using gluten-containing ingredients, there are some options. Flours can be made with rice flour, arrowroot, potato, tapioca, nut flour (almond flour), corn, bean, pea, flax and cottonseed.(3) If you’re simply looking for other grains to add to recipes, the list below shows a more complete list of gluten-free options:

What about dining out?

Most restaurants have gluten-free options, even if it isn’t stated on the menu. For the most part, you can’t go wrong with a salad as long as you have the croutons left off of it. A salad with a portion of protein is a fantastic meal which helps ensure you’re getting in the vegetables you should be eating. If you need some carbohydrates, potatoes, sweet potatoes and corn are often available on the menu. If you eat a big salad with protein on it, you probably won’t be hungry enough to eat the extra starch anyway.

What about LifeCafe?

LifeCafe offers a variety of nutritious, filling, great-tasting options made without gluten. The salads are a tremendous value, loaded with vegetables and outstanding in taste. Personally, I’d have a hard time finding another restaurant that makes a better salad. Gluten-free salad options include the Chicken Taco, Cobb, Fiesta BBQ Chicken, House, Mediterranean, LifeCafe and Tuscan Chicken salads. Of course, the shakes are made without gluten as well, with the FastFuel Complete being a nutrition powerhouse of a shake.

Summary

For those who decide to, or need to get the gluten out of their diet, there is still a large variety of foods available. In fact, if your diet is composed mostly of vegetables, fruit, proteins, nuts and seeds, you may be eating a pretty limited amount of gluten already. If you’re training hard and need the additional carbohydrates, you still have a lot of options. If you’re unsure about whether or not this is a necessary step in your nutrition plan, talk with a Nutrition or Fitness Professional. Many people eliminate gluten from their diet for a month and are amazed at how much better they feel. Others don’t notice a difference and may find they can tolerate gluten just fine. Based on the prevalence of issues with gluten, at worst, the effort won’t result in anything. At best it may make a significant difference in how you look, feel and perform.

In health,

Tom Nikkola

References:

1. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Questions and Answers on the Gluten-Free Labeling Proposed Rule. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services website. January 23, 2007

2. Saturni L, Ferretti G, Bacchetti T. The Gluten-Free Diet: Safety and Nutritional Quality. Nutrients. 2010;2(1):16-34

3. Celiac Spruce Association. Gluten-Free Diet: Basic Diet Choices. Celiac Spruce Association website (http://www.csaceliacs.org/gluten_choices.php).

This article is not intended for the treatment or prevention of disease, nor as a substitute for medical treatment, nor as an alternative to medical advice. Use of recommendations in this and other articles is at the choice and risk of the reader.

Last week, I talked about the new report which will be used to create the 2010 Dietary Guidelines later this year. The most referenced part of the dietary guidelines is the food pyramid. Although the pyramid has gone through several facelifts over the past thirty years, the major recommendations have remained virtually the same: eat most of your calories from whole grains and other starches, eat plenty vegetables, fruit and dairy products, limit meat consumption as well as limit the intake of fats. As explained in last week’s article, the recommendations have remained, for the most part, unchanged since they were put in place in 1980. During that time, rates of obesity, heart disease, cancer, diabetes and other diseases have continued to rise at alarming rates.  The food pyramid is a visual way of depicting what is supposed to be an ideal diet. By selecting the right number of each of the food groups, it should result in an appropriate balance of carbohydrates, fat and protein. The Dietary Guidelines for Americans Committee (DGAC) report attempted to review this issue, and their conclusions were…interesting, especially based on the research they used. One of the major questions the committee attempted to ask was:

“What is the Relationship between Macronutrient Proportion and Body Weight in Adults?”

To answer this question, the committee reviewed research on whether a particular diet type (high-carb, low-carb, high-protein, etc.) affected weight loss more significantly than the others. The committee’s conclusions, and the results the research itself presented, spoke two different messages. In addition, in focusing solely on weight loss, the committee may have missed how much of an impact dietary adjustments make on other health-related measures, such as cholesterol, triglycerides, glucose and insulin levels.

Heart disease and diabetes are two major health issues our nation faces. Although they are typically associated with being overweight, that is not always the case. When reviewing research on different diet types, it’s important to not only review the effects those diets have on weight loss, but on other risk factors which increase the chance of developing additional diseases. As you’ll see below, even those studies which didn’t show much of a difference in weight loss often did show benefits for other risk factors.

The Challenge of Studying Macronutrient Ratios

The study of macronutrients and their relationship to weight management and health risk factors has proven to be somewhat of a challenge. For example, the term “low-carb diet” can mean a diet of less than 40% carbohydrates in some studies, while in others it is far less. Some studies consider high-carbohydrate to be at a level of 50-55% of daily calories. When diets of 55% carbohydrate are compared to diets of 40% carbohydrate, there is little significant difference in outcome. The overall carbohydrate load is not significantly different. It is when carbohydrates are more reduced that greater changes begin to appear. The same can be said of the term “high-protein.” A high-protein diet may include 20-25% of total calories and be considered “high-protein” because it is greater than the 15% average most Americans consume. Other studies use 30-35% or higher of total calories to consider a diet “high-protein.” To get a better understanding of diet’s role in weight management and health risk factors, the studies conducted at the greater extremes often provide us with the greatest understanding. In addition, compliance can often be an issue as well. When study participants are sent home to follow a particular diet type, they often have a difficult time adhering to the diet protocol.¹ That’s why support groups and accountability sessions are some important, not only for research, but for those who are focused on changing their diet and improving their health.

Macronutrient Proportion and Weight Loss

The DGAC reviewed some of the existing research on various diet types and the impact on weight loss. In total, they reviewed 36 published papers. In the committee’s review, they explained that 20 of the 36 studies showed no difference in weight loss for different macronutrient proportions. Thirteen studies showed that lower carbohydrate reduced weight better than low-fat or high-cab diets. Four studies showed higher-protein diets reduced weight better than lower-protein or higher-carbohydrate diets. To reiterate, of 36 papers, twenty showed that any of the diet types resulted in weight loss (as long as there was a caloric deficit), 13 studies showed better weight loss with a lower-carbohydrate diet and four showed better weight loss with higher-protein diets. The conclusion was…no difference exists. If there were not any studies showing low-fat did better, and there were 13 that showed that low-carb did do better, one must wonder why the conclusion was not “evidence suggests a lower-carbohydrate and/or higher-protein diet appears to more positively affect weight loss than a higher-carb or lower-fat or lower-protein diet.” If that were the conclusion, you can imagine it could have a major effect on the look of the food pyramid and could require a recant of previous recommendations. It would also cause a major change in the processed food industry.

Aside from the effects of the diet types on weight loss, there were other health benefits associated with the diet types which were not discussed. As mentioned above, the committee concluded that 20 studies showed no difference in weight loss. The following are some comments and conclusions from the some of the studies the committee said show “no difference in weight loss between diets differing in macronutrient proportion.”

• Capel et al. compared a high-carbohydrate and moderate-carbohydrate diet with obese women and found the weight loss to be similar, but lipid profiles improved more with the moderate-carbohydrate group.²
  
• Frisch at al. concluded: “Despite the favorable effects of both diets on weight loss, the carbohydrate-reduced diet was more beneficial with respect to major cardiovascular risk factors such as central obesity, triglycerides, HDL-cholesterol, and systolic blood pressure compared to the fat-reduced diet.”³
  
• A study by Gordon et al. compared high (30% of diet) protein and normal (15% of diet) protein diets and found the lower protein group lost a little more body weight, but averaged a loss of 37.5% of lean body mass, whereas the higher protein group only lost an average of 17.3% of lean body mass. Comparing fat loss, the higher protein group lost more body fat.⁴
  
• A comparison of a plant-based low-carbohydrate diet with a high-carbohydrate lacto-ovo vegetarian diet showed similar weight loss in both groups, but the low-carb group had greater reductions in LDL-cholesterol and total choelesterol-HDL ratio and a greater reduction in triglyerides.⁵
  
• A comparison of a ketogenic low-carbohydrate diet (<20 g carbs/day) with a lower-carbohydrate diet (40% of diet) showed no advantage of one or the other. Low carbohydrate diets provide a variety of benefits, but there does appear to be a point where further decreasing carbohydrates is not necessary. In this case, keeping carbohydrates under 20 grams per day didn’t provide benefit, and would likely be more difficult to achieve, than a more moderately-reduced carbohydrate diet.⁶
  
• Another study on protein intake compared a diet of 30% protein with 18% protein. Both groups lost similar body weight, but the “high” protein group better maintained lean body mass and had better feelings of satiety.⁷
  
• McLaughlin et al. compared high- and lower-carbohydrate diets (60% carb, 25% fat vs. 40% carb, 45% fat). Weight loss, fasting glucose, as well as decrease in blood pressure were similar between the two groups. However, the lower-carb group showed greater decreases in fasting insulin and triglycerides. HDL levels rose significantly more with lower-carb group as well.⁸
  
• A 2006 study in Nutrition & Metabolism compared three diets: Very low fat (70% carb/10% fat/20% protein), high unsaturated fat (50/30/20), and very low carb (20/60/20). Total pounds lost did not differ much among groups, but percentage weight lost was significantly greater in VLC group, although total fat loss was similar among groups. The low-carb group had a slight increase in total LDL with, which is often the case as saturated fat tends to increase the large, fluffy LDL particles which do not negatively impact health. HDL increased with VLC whereas it decreased with other two. Major changes to fasting insulin were seen with the VLC group (decreased 33%) whereas HUF decreased 19% and VLF decreased it 15%. Also, the VLC group significantly reduced triglycerides.⁹
  
• A 2008 study in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology compared two diet groups: A very low-carb (4% carb/35% pro/ 61% fat) and a moderate carb (46% carb/24% pro/30% fat) diet. HDL (“good cholesterol”) increased by three times as much in low-carb group compared to higher-carb. Triglycerides decreased by twice as much in very low-carb group versus the higher-carb. Weight loss was greater in low-carb group, but difference was not significant. The research group concluded, “…the VLCHF (very-low carb/high-fat) diet as a weight loss strategy may confer the greatest clinical benefits in patients who present with hypertriglyceridemia, low HDL levels, abdominal obesity, and insulin resistance.”¹⁰
  
• Wal et al. compared diets including moderate- and low-carbohydrate diets including moderate carbohydrate, low-fat or low-carbohydrate, high-fat meal replacements. Both groups lost significantly more weight as well as inches from their waists and thighs than the control group, while the low-carbohydrate group lost a greater percentage of body fat. Although the moderate-carbohydrate group showed significant reductions in serum cholesterol, the low-carbohydrate group showed the greatest improvements in serum cholesterol, triglycerides, high-density lipoprotein, low-density lipoprotein, and very-low-density lipoprotein.¹¹
  

Of the twenty studies the DGAC listed as showing no difference in weight loss between different macronutrient-proportioned diets, the ten mentioned above all provide evidence in benefits of reduced-carbohydrate diets beyond weight loss. These ten, plus the thirteen studies the DGAC did mention as providing evidence of reducing carbohydrate provide a compelling case for revisiting the low-fat dogma behind our current dietary guidelines. The evidence is strong which shows how simple changes to our diet by reducing carbohydrate intake positively affect lipid profiles, insulin and glucose levels, as well as our beltlines. If the comments above seem impressive, the results of the seventeen studies which showed positive results from lower-carbohydrates or higher protein on weight loss were even more impressive.

For an educational and entertaining review of an additional study which was not included in the DGAC list of studies, check out this presentation from Dr. Christopher Gardner of Stanford University, titled The Battle of the Diets: Is Anyone Winning (at Losing)?

Summary

In study after study, reducing carbohydrates and increasing protein and/or fat positively affects fasting insulin levels, triglyceride levels, HDL-cholesterol levels, and often results in greater weight loss compared to low-fat, high-carbohydrate diets. The one stumbling block for many researchers is that increasing fat often increases LDL cholesterol levels. However, for those who take their research a step further, they generally find that the LDL cholesterol that is increased is large-particle LDL cholesterol, which has been shown to have no detrimental effect on risk factors. Keep in mind there is a big difference between “reducing carbohydrates” and being on a “low-carb” diet. Many of the benefits with lipid profiles and insulin levels are seen with diets containing as much as 40% of total calories as carbohydrates. There isn’t a perfect level to suit all individuals, but 40% may be a good place to start for many people.

On a positive note, this year’s committee appears to be placing more emphasis on using current research to build out the guidelines, even though they may not be looking deeply enough at what that research shows. The DGAC report contains a variety of other information related to diet as well such as stressing the need to increase the consumption of vegetables and fruit. Because suggested macronutrient levels lie at the heart of dietary guidelines, the suggested macronutrient levels should receive more attention from the committee before drafting the final version of the 2010 Dieatary Guidelines for Americans.

In health,

Tom Nikkola

References

1. Sacks FM, Bray GA, Carey VJ, Smith SR, Ryan DH, Anton SD, McManus K, Champagne CM, Bishop LM, Laranjo N, Leboff MS, Rood JC, de Jonge L, Greenway FL, Loria CM, Obarzanek E, Williamson DA. Comparison of weight-loss diets with different compositions of fat, protein, and carbohydrates. N Engl J Med. 2009;360(9):859-73

2. Capel F, Viguerie N, Vega N, Dejean S, Arner P, Klimcakova E, Martinez JA, Saris WH, Holst C, Taylor M, Oppert JM, Sørensen TI, Clément K, Vidal H, Langin D. Contribution of energy restriction and macronutrient composition to changes in adipose tissue gene expression during dietary weight-loss programs in obese women. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2008;93(11):4315-22

3. Frisch S, Zittermann A, Berthold HK, Götting C, Kuhn J, Kleesiek K, Stehle P, Körtke H. A randomized controlled trial on the efficacy of carbohydrate-reduced or fat-reduced diets in patients attending a telemedically guided weight loss program. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2009;18(8):36

4. Gordon MM, Bopp MJ, Easter L, Miller GD, Lyles MF, Houston DK, Nicklas BJ, Kritchevsky SB. Effects of dietary protein on the composition of weight loss in post-menopausal women. J Nutr Health Aging. 2008;12(8):505-9

4. Jenkins DJ, Wong JM, Kendall CW, Esfahani A, Ng VW, Leong TC, Faulkner DA, Vidgen E, Greaves KA, Paul G, Singer W. The effect of a plant-based low-carbohydrate ("Eco-Atkins") diet on body weight and blood lipid concentrations in hyperlipidemic subjects. Arch Intern Med. 2009;169(11):1046-54

6. Johnston CS, Tjonn SL, Swan PD, White A, Hutchins H, Sears B. Ketogenic low-carbohydrate diets have no metabolic advantage over nonketogenic low-carbohydrate diets. Am J Clin Nutr. 2006;83(5):1055-61

7. Leidy HJ, Carnell NS, Mattes RD, Campbell WW. Higher protein intake preserves lean mass and satiety with weight loss in pre-obese and obese women. Obesity. 2007;15(2):421-9

8. McLaughlin T, Carter S, Lamendola C, Abbasi F, Yee G, Schaaf P, Basina M, Reaven G. Effects of moderate variations in macronutrient composition on weight loss and reduction in cardiovascular disease risk in obese, insulin-resistant adults. Am J Clin Nutr. 2006;84(4):813-21

9. Noakes M, Foster PR, Keogh JB, James AP, Mamo JC, Clifton PM. Comparison of isocaloric very low carbohydrate/high saturated fat and high carbohydrate/low saturated fat diets on body composition and cardiovascular risk. Nutr Metab. 2006;11;3:7

10. Tay J, Brinkworth GD, Noakes M, Keogh J, Clifton PM. Metabolic effects of weight loss on a very-low-carbohydrate diet compared with an isocaloric high-carbohydrate diet in abdominally obese subjects. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;51(1):59-67

11. Wal JS, McBurney MI, Moellering N, Marth J, Dhurandhar NV. Moderate-carbohydrate low-fat versus low-carbohydrate high-fat meal replacements for weight loss. Int J Food Sci Nutr. 2007;58(4):321-9

This article is not intended for the treatment or prevention of disease, nor as a substitute for medical treatment, nor as an alternative to medical advice. Use of recommendations in this and other articles is at the choice and risk of the reader.