This post was originally published on this site

http://www.thekitchn.com/feedburnermain

(Image credit: Samantha Bolton)

This past spring, at The Kitchn team retreat, I sat around a table with my fellow editors and admitted something rather controversial: I don’t wear shoes in the kitchen. This admission sparked harrowing tales of severed toes and other knife-related atrocities, but I dug in my (barefoot) heels and stood by this cooking faux pas. Here’s why.

READ MORE »

Be Nice and Share!
This post was originally published on this site

http://www.marksdailyapple.com/

Why Exercise Actually Does Matter for Weight Loss FinalIf you follow health news, you might be thinking exercise doesn’t matter when you’re trying to lose weight. Vox just published a big piece showing how useless exercise alone is for weight loss. The NY Times says “eating less” is way more effective than “exercising more.” Obesity researchers like Gary Taubes and Yoni Freedhoff—who don’t agree on much else—both think using exercise to fix obesity is futile. I’ve always said that 80% of your body composition is determined by your diet, not how you exercise. And everyone knows it’s really hard, bordering on impossible, to out exercise a bad diet. You might be able to out exercise a bad diet if all you care about is abs and race times and make it your job, but eventually your poor health will catch up with you.

That doesn’t mean exercise doesn’t matter for weight loss, though. It does.

What is true? The value of exercise doesn’t depend on its caloric burn. The studies cited in the media pieces make it clear that energy expenditure through exercise has very little effect on weight loss. To focus on that and discard the effectiveness of exercise in general is misleading, though. And wrong, because fat loss isn’t just about mechanistically burning calories.

Notice what I wrote: fat loss.

We’re not trying to burn bone, or dissolve muscle, or shave a few pounds off our internal organs. All those things will reduce your weight but also your health, performance, and lifespan. We’re trying to burn fat. To take a couple notches off the belt. To look good naked. That’s what nearly everyone means when they say “lose weight.” So even if exercise doesn’t lead to a significant net loss of weight on its own, it can help us preferentially remove body fat while retaining lean mass.

So let’s see how exercise can help weight loss, both directly and indirectly. By the end of today’s post, you’ll be itching to go lift something or run really fast up a hill.

Exercise empties glycogen

If your glycogen stores are full, any extra carbs that aren’t immediately burned for energy will be shunted to your liver for conversion into fat, aka de novo lipogenesis. If you exercise hard enough to empty those glycogen stores, you’ve just cleared space for the carbs you eat. They’ll refill glycogen stores. Conversion into glycogen is a desirable metabolic fate for carbs. Carbs locked into muscle glycogen stores will not contribute toward fat stores. Instead, they’ll contribute toward high-intensity physical activity that aids fat loss.

One study found that depleting glycogen stores with exercise reduced postprandial de novo lipogenesis in subjects fed a carb-rich meal. Compared to the non-exercising control group, the exercisers experienced three-fold higher postprandial muscle glycogen synthesis (more dietary glucose became muscle glycogen) and a 40% reduction in hepatic triglyceride synthesis (less liver fat produced).

Exercise improves blood glucose control

Although the scientific community debates the etiology of “hangry,” I think it usually stems from reactive hypoglycemia. Consider the sugar-burner whose blood sugar spikes after a meal then drops lower than it was before the meal. He won’t be able to access body fat for energy. His body wants the only kind of energy it knows—sugar—and it’s just not there. He’s going to eat something sugary and right away.

Now consider the fat-burning beast with low blood sugar. Is he going to freak out and binge because no energy’s available, or does he have the metabolic machinery necessary to take advantage of all that animal fat hanging around?

Who’s hungrier? Who eats more? Who gains more weight?

Smart exercise can help you establish better control over your blood glucose levels. It doesn’t take much, and most modalities work: moderate resistance training, moderate endurance training, both uphill and downhill walking, walking, walking meditation, sprinting.

The best type of exercise that improves blood glucose control without inducing hypoglycemia in its own right is probably low-rep, high-weight strength training, walking, and short sprints (and I mean really short, like 5-8 second bursts).

Exercise improves sleep

Sleep is where fat loss actually occurs, because when you sleep, you experience the biggest spike in fat-mobilizing growth hormone. When you don’t sleep, cortisol increases to compensate for the groggy headspace and muddy thinking. Chronic levels of stress hormones, from chronic bad sleep, lead to fat retention, especially in the belly.

Strength training and aerobic training all help sleep (sprinting should as well, but I wasn’t able to find any solid evidence in either direction). Put nursing home seniors on an elastic band training program and you’ll improve their sleep. Put hard-headed obese teens on an exercise program and they’ll start sleeping better and longer. Exercise even improves depression-related sleep disturbances and mitigates muscle loss caused by sleep deprivation. It’s not magic, but it’s close.

When you exercise can affect your sleep negatively, of course. Don’t train at 11 PM in a fluorescent light-lit gym with blaring pop music. Don’t settle for 5 hours a night because you want to wake up at 5:30 for a workout.

Exercise beiges white fat

What are those words you just wrote, Sisson? “Beige” isn’t a verb.

You all know about brown fat, the metabolically-active genre of body fat that burns calories to keep mammals warm in cold temperatures. It increases energy expenditure and the fatter you are, the less brown fat you have and the less metabolic activity you show in the brown fat you do have. Brown fat is awesome stuff and almost certainly makes it easier to lose fat.

One cool thing about certain types of exercise is that it can make white adipose tissue behave more like brown adipose tissue. Hence, “beige.” It does this by reducing the size of fat cells, reducing the lipid content of said fat cells, and building more energy-consuming-and-ATP-producing mitochondria within the fat. Transplanting exercise-induced beige fat cells into sedentary controls improves their body-wide metabolic homeostasis and increases their muscles’ uptake of glycogen.  This beigeing of white fat improves body-wide metabolic homeostasis and increases the uptake of glycogen by your muscles. It helps nutrients go where they’re useful.

(To make sure your exercise is working, remove a dime-sized pat of butt fat with a grapefruit spoon and observe the color. If it’s beige, you’re on the right track!)

(Please disregard the previous parenthetical.)

Exercise increases our resistance to stress

People respond to stress in many different ways. Some stay awake at night, endlessly ruminating on the hundreds of outstanding responsibilities. Some freeze up, unable to progress. Some go hungry, refusing even their typical favorite foods. But perhaps the most common response to psychosocial stress is binge eating junk food (PDF). This is especially common among women (PDF), who tend to focus on salty, sweet, and fatty snack foods. Stress eating is a major risk factor for weight gain; anything that reduces stress will probably increase fat loss.

Exercise blunts our stress response. When we’re physically fit, or we’ve just come off a tough 30 minute lifting session, stressors that’d fell a sedentary person just roll off the back. Training doesn’t just make our muscles stronger and our cardiovascular system more efficient. It trains our psyche, too.

Exercise makes movement fun again

It won’t always do this. But in my experience, when people get fitter, stronger, faster, and more confident in their own bodies, they enjoy their own bodies again. They start moving for the sake of moving. They’ll go for hikes because they enjoy it, not because they’re trying to work out. They’ll play sports again, and start walking when they would have driven. Movement becomes an integral part of their lifestyle. And once non-exercise activity thermogenesis—energy expenditure through daily movement, not formal exercise—increases, fat loss often follows.

Exercise increases your calorie sink

Exercise gives you a little wiggle room. It lets you eat enough to be satiated. It allows you to eat enough food to get the micronutrients you need. A full-on calorie restriction weight loss diet without exercise is rough; you must micromanage your entire day just to ensure you’re obtaining the vitamins and minerals your body needs while battling constant hunger. When you throw in exercise, you can eat a bit more. You don’t have to plug everything into a nutrition calculator. You can have an extra helping of potatoes to get more potassium, resistant starch, and magnesium. You can add another half cup of full fat yogurt with a blueberries to get your calcium and phytonutrients. Fat loss diets get easier when you train.

“Exercise” doesn’t tell us much, of course. There are many ways to exercise, and some are better than others for improving body composition and burning fat.

Much has been made of the studies showing that people training for a marathon fail to improve body comp. Over the course of 18 months of hardcore marathon training, males lost just 2.4 kg of fat and women didn’t lose any. That’s 18 months of pounding the pavement, and weight barely budged (and not at all in women). Everyone knows by now that endurance training isn’t great for body comp.

The overall most effective way for your average overweight to obese person starting from square one to lose fat and retain lean mass is resistance training combined with a low-carb Primal way of eating.

A recent study found that the most effective method for weight loss in the severely obese was diet+resistance training. Compared to endurance training+diet or endurance training combined with resistance training+diet, simply focusing on strength training and diet produced the best results for the severely obese. The most effective kind of strength training was whole body exercises using free weights. There was some evidence that if you wanted to add “cardio” training to your lifting, high-intensity interval training/sprinting was the only one that really worked. Typical endurance training was ineffective. This makes sense. It’s high-acute stress (your workouts are really tough but end quickly) and low-chronic stress (which few people, least of all sedentary obese people, are equipped to handle).

For people who are close to their ideal body composition but want to shed the last 10-12 pounds of body fat, sprinting has to be considered. This is the simplest (yet most intense) way to lean out those last few pounds.

For everyone else: lift, walk lots, and sprint if you’re able.

But honestly? Almost everything works. No matter what exercise modality you study, they’ll all generally improve your metabolic health, increase your muscles’ capacity for glycogen, increase your strength, improve whole-body glucose control, help you sleep better, and make your body fat a little more metabolically active. They can easily get out of hand—I’m looking at you, endurance athletes, 5-6x weekly CrossFitters—but nothing has to.

Combine your exercise with a Primal way of eating and you’ll be on your way to easy, sustainable fat loss. I’m biased, of course, but for good reason: this stuff works. A recent study of the paleo diet in middle aged type 2 diabetics found that while diet alone works (especially if it’s something like paleo) really well, it works even better when you throw in some exercise.

Over the course of 12 weeks, paleo diet-only subjects told to follow standard exercise recommendations (moderate cardio for 45 minutes to an hour three times a week) lost 5.7 kilos of body fat. Those who participated in supervised aerobic and resistance exercise lost 6.7 kilos.

Diet-only subjects lost 2.6 kg of lean mass, paleo exercisers only lost 1.2 kg of lean mass.

Leptin, the pro-metabolism hormone that increases satiety and energy expenditure, dropped by 62% in the diet-only group. In the exercisers, leptin only dropped by 42%. Higher leptin means higher energy expenditure and lower appetite—both important for weight loss.

All in all, paleo dieters who exercised lost more body fat, retained more muscle, and had stronger metabolisms than those who didn’t. Sounds familiar, eh?

To sum up, training and diet work synergistically. You need both, and stalls in weight loss can often be countered by doing whichever one you aren’t. For most of you reading this, you’ve got the diet down pat. You’re eating well, you’re monitoring what you consume. But you might not be training. Today, right now, that stops. You have the tools you train effectively. You have the justification to train. You now know how imperative it is for your health, your performance, and, yes, your body fat levels that you move your body consistently.

Directly using exercise to incinerate calories and shift your energy balance isn’t sustainable. Eventually, you’ll burn out, or start bingeing on junk, or the health consequences will surpass the benefits.

Using smart exercise—lifting heavy things, running really fast once in awhile, running longer distances without lapsing into chronic cardio,walking, hiking, biking, climbing, playing, and generally just moving—to supplement a healthy diet is the only way to do it.

If exercise aids fat loss, it does so indirectly. It builds lean mass that consumes more energy and perpetuates more exercise. It clears glycogen stores, ensuring the carbs you do eat go to a good cause. It improves blood sugar control, limiting the peaks and valleys that cause many people to snack. It improves your mental health, self-confidence, and resistance to stress, deterring the types of destructive, depressive behaviors that often lead to binging and gorging and weight gain. It even seems to improve our sleep habits.

But it still does it.

What do you think, folks? What’s been your experience with exercise as a tool for fat loss? Has it worked? Has it not? Let me know down below!

Thanks for reading.

Like This Blog Post? Subscribe to the Mark’s Daily Apple Newsletter and Get 10 eBooks and More Delivered to Your Inbox for FREE

Be Nice and Share!
This post was originally published on this site

http://www.thekitchn.com/feedburnermain

How do you improve upon something as pure and simple as the Rice Krispies Treat? By taking this minimalist dessert and giving it the maximalist treatment. From the small changes in how it’s prepared to ingredient upgrades and mix-ins, here are five ways to make a better Rice Krispies Treat.

READ MORE »

Be Nice and Share!
This post was originally published on this site

http://www.thekitchn.com/feedburnermain

(Image credit: Leela Cyd)

Rice Krispies Treats, when prepared according to the recipe on the box, are pretty close to perfection. For many years I saw no need to change them, but simplicity has its own way of inviting change, so I started tweaking the recipe, adding ingredients and changing some of the techniques to make a Rice Krispies Treat that’s better than any I’ve ever eaten. That’s the recipe I’m sharing here.

READ MORE »

Be Nice and Share!
This post was originally published on this site

http://www.thekitchn.com/feedburnermain

(Image credit: Apollo Peak)

Cat lovers, rejoice! You can now unwind with your favorite feline, thanks to Apollo Peak, a new company based in Colorado that produces a non-alcoholic beverage that’s laced with cat nip. Now the only decision you need to make is whether your cat deserves some Pinot Meow or MosCATo.

READ MORE »

Be Nice and Share!
This post was originally published on this site

Originally Posted At: https://breakingmuscle.com/feed/rss

In an industry that promotes strength as beauty, are booty shorts, strappy sports bras, or sexy dance routines truly necessary?

Have you heard of barbell dancing? You read that right. Have a look for yourself:

 

 

read more

Be Nice and Share!
This post was originally published on this site

http://www.thekitchn.com/feedburnermain

(Image credit: Brie Passano)

BBQ chicken wings are ubiquitous at summertime parties, and for good reason — they can be eaten with one hand (cold drink in the other) and are satisfying to devour. Typically, wings are fried or baked and tossed in sauce just before serving. With these wings, we flip the procedure and cook the wings long and slow in their sauce, and then crisp them on the grill just before serving. The results are tender, juicy wings with a caramelized, crispy skin that everyone will love.

READ MORE »

Be Nice and Share!
This post was originally published on this site

http://www.thekitchn.com/feedburnermain

(Image credit: Sustainable Kitchens)

From Apartment Therapy → 5 Ideas to Steal from a Small But Efficient Family Kitchen

READ MORE »

Be Nice and Share!
This post was originally published on this site

http://www.thekitchn.com/feedburnermain

(Image credit: The Recipe Critic)

You can never start planning your 4th of July menu too early, and this grilled shrimp recipe will definitely be on mine. Between the spicy, tangy shrimp and the creamy avocado sauce, this dish is sure to be a crowd-pleaser. Is it Monday yet?

READ MORE »

Be Nice and Share!
This post was originally published on this site

http://chriskresser.com/

Organic cow grazing on grass

U.S. organic food sales have grown from $1 billion in 1990 to $31.5 billion in 2011 (1), and the demand for organic meat products has steadily increased over the last two decades. Most consumers cite an improved nutrient profile as their primary reason for buying organic (2). But is organic meat really better for us, nutritionally speaking? In this article, I’ll discuss the major differences between organic and conventional meat so that you can make an informed assessment of your meat purchases.

What is organic meat?

Before we dive into the nutritional differences, it’s important that we define what organic meat actually is. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) organic livestock conditions require that animals must be given year-round access to the outdoors, except in inclement weather. They must be managed without antibiotics (except in cases of illness), added growth hormones, or prohibited feed ingredients like animal byproducts, urea, and arsenic compounds.

Organic livestock must be raised on certified organic land meeting organic crop production standards and any feed must be 100 percent certified organic. Organic ruminants—such as cattle, sheep, and goats—must have free access to organic pasture for the entire grazing season, and 30 percent of their diet must come from organic pasture. Organic practices help to support animal health and are also markedly better from an environmental perspective (3).

Now that we’ve got a basic understanding of what the “organic” label actually means, let’s dive into the nutrition research.

Organic vs. conventional: fatty acid profile

Fatty acids are essential to health and are one of the key areas where organic and conventional meats differ. Two recently published meta-analyses assessed the differences in fatty acid composition between organic and conventionally raised meat and dairy products. We’ll look at the findings of each in more detail.

Meat: The amount of saturated fat was similar in organic and conventional meat, while monounsaturated fats were slightly lower in organic meats. Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids were 47 percent higher in organic meat (4). Omega-3 fatty acids reduce inflammation and have been shown to be protective against cardiovascular disease and cognitive decline (5).

Dairy: The amount of saturated, monounsaturated, and total polyunsaturated fatty acids was similar in organic and conventional milk. Organic milk had 69 percent higher alpha-lipoic acid (ALA) than conventional milk. ALA is known to reduce levels of LDL cholesterol and enhance its clearance from the bloodstream (6). Organic milk also had 41 percent higher conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) and 57 percent higher omega-3 fatty acids.

So what about the organic method is driving this difference? The authors suggest that the pasture-based diets prescribed under organic farming standards are the primary reason for differences in fat deposition in the meat. This is consistent with differences seen between grain-fed and grass-fed animals, as we’ll come back to later on.

Five good reasons to choose organic meat.

Organic vs. conventional: other nutrients

While most studies have seemed to focus on the fatty acid differences, a few studies have attempted to assess minerals, toxic metals, and other parameters of nutrition in organic versus conventional meat. Both organic and non-organic meats are rich in essential nutrients, including protein, zinc, iron, phosphorus, and B vitamins.  

In the same meta-analysis that looked at fatty acid composition, organic dairy was found to have slightly lower iodine and selenium levels, but higher iron and vitamin E levels (4). The authors of the study suggest that the iodine concentrations in conventional milk may be too high in animals receiving large amounts of fortified feed. On the other hand, organic dairy systems support a higher intake of natural alpha-tocopherol (vitamin E) and carotenoids (precursors to vitamin E), which surpasses the amount of vitamin E that conventional dairy animals get from synthetic alpha-tocopherol (7).

A different meta-analysis conducted in 2012 found that organic dairy had significantly higher levels of protein than conventional dairy (8).

Would you like some antibiotics with your chicken?

Organic and conventional meats also differ regarding antibiotic use. Antibiotics are used in conventional meat production as a means to promote growth. For many years, farmers did not know why antibiotics helped to make animals larger, only that they worked! We now know that it is their devastating effect on the gut microbiota, the microbes that inhabit the intestines, that produces this effect. By essentially inducing a state of chronic microbial dysbiosis, or an altered gut community, the antibiotics increase the amount of energy that the animals can harvest from the same quantity of food (9). Ironically, most people never think that the same agents that fatten up meat animals (antibiotics, grains) will likely also cause weight gain in humans.

Beyond changing the microbial composition of the gut, many antibiotics are absorbed systemically, meaning that they make their way into the bloodstream and can become “lodged” in various tissues. Antibiotic residues have been detected in meat and other animal products at low levels (10), despite the required USDA withdrawal period before slaughter to try to reduce the amount consumed by humans.

Organic products are also less likely to contain antibiotic-resistant bacteria. These “superbugs” pose a real threat to human health, as research and development for new antibiotics no longer interests most pharmaceutical companies. Bacterial contamination of meat products occurs at about the same rate in organic and conventional meat, but the risk for isolating bacteria resistant to multiple antibiotics is 33 percent higher in conventional than in organic pork and chicken (11).

Hormones may alter the composition of animal products

Hormones are another factor to consider when weighing the merits of buying organic meat. Estrogen, progesterone, testosterone, zeranol, and trenbolone acetate are among the most commonly used hormones, typically implanted in the ear of the animal three months before slaughter to help promote growth (12). Most of these hormones have been banned in Europe since 1989.

Okay, but do we really ingest enough of these hormones to make a difference? Probably not, but studies have shown that hormones might alter the composition of the meat or dairy product in other ways. For example, while recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH) is not itself found to be present in dairy products (because the hormone denatures during pasteurization), it may increase the production of insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) (which survives the high heat of pasteurization). Increased IGF-1 levels have been associated with both colon and breast cancer (13). Today, the European Union, Australia, Japan, New Zealand, and Canada all do not allow the use of rBGH due to both animal and human health concerns.

Pesticides from animal feed end up in meat

Organic meat also has fewer synthetic pesticides involved in its production, which lends to improved animal health and less environmental impact. Like antibiotics, fat-soluble pesticides used to produce chicken feed have been shown to transfer to chicken tissues (14) and eggs (15). We then consume these pesticide residues when we eat the animal product.

This is particularly true for fatty meats. Pesticides, hormones, and other toxins tend to concentrate in the adipose tissue (16). This means that choosing organic may be a particularly wise choice for fattier cuts of meat. It also means that when we ingest these toxins, we store many of them in our fat tissue. Repeated exposures can allow these substances to “bioaccumulate” over time, particularly if you don’t have a healthy detoxification system.

Putting it all together

Taken as a whole, organic meat tends to have a more favorable fatty acid profile and reduces exposure to antibiotic, hormone, and pesticide residues. In reality, organic or non-organic is just one factor to consider when sourcing animal products for your next meal. Other important considerations include:

  • Grass-fed vs. grain-fed: If you remember from the beginning of this article, organic livestock are required to be get at least 30 percent of their nutrition from pasture. However, ruminant slaughter stock are exempt from this requirement for the last fifth of their lives (up to 120 days). The organic label therefore tells you nothing about the animal’s diet—in fact, most organic meat in the U.S. is fed at least some grain prior to slaughter. Check out my previous article on this topic for more about the nutritional difference between grass-fed and grain-fed animals.
  • Source: If you look closely next time you’re at the supermarket, you’ll likely see that some of the meat that has the USDA certified organic label was not even produced in the USA! In other cases, the animals were raised in the US, but the meat itself was shipped to another country for packaging. Unless immediately frozen and shipped, it’s likely that the meat has lost some of its nutrients. Look for locally produced meat when possible.
  • Cost: Cost is, of course, one of the biggest hurdles to many people choosing organic. Organic meat tends to be more expensive, not only because of the effort to use sustainable practices, but also because of the cost of organic certification for the farmer. In most cases, there is an application fee, annual renewal fee, assessment on annual sales or production, and inspection fees, in addition to the time required to complete extensive paperwork. Instead of charging conventional farmers for using synthetic chemicals, the burden is on organic farmers to prove the quality of their methods to the USDA. The best option? Get to know your local farmers, and ask about their growing practices! Many small farmers use organic and sustainable practices but do not find it cost effective to get the certified organic label. They are usually more than happy to discuss their methods or even let you visit the farm. Look for cheaper cuts of meat like organ meats, chuck roast, or round steak. Many of these cheaper cuts are just as, if not more, nutritious than their pricier counterparts.

Now I’d like to hear from you. Do you eat organic meat and other animal products? Have you found a good source at your local farmers market? Share your thoughts in the comments section!

Be Nice and Share!