This foreword introduces Dr. Jason Fung and his book The Obesity Code. It summarizes that Dr. Fung realized modern medicine focuses on treating symptoms rather than underlying causes of disease. He determined that type 2 diabetes and obesity are reversible through diet. The foreword explains that Dr. Fung argues the standard treatment model for type 2 diabetes is wrong and actually harms patients. It states Fung provides a coherent framework to understand obesity by explaining its true biological causes, not just symptoms. The foreword asserts Fung has provided a blueprint to potentially reverse the obesity and type 2 diabetes epidemics through understanding their causes rather than symptoms.
In this guide you will discover how the correct diet and good nutrition can help you improve many aspects of your life ... And among them, it will help your blood sugar levels not get out of control.
I will teach you the most beneficial foods, so that you leave behind frustrations and trial and error. You will know what to eat and what not to try to be a person with more energy and vitality.
We will be in contact with you, so that you can apply what we teach you. Correct nutrition will help your body, mind and spirit.
Although the level of collective information is constantly improving, there are still those who affirm -and those who believe it- that it is possible to lose so many kilos in a few days
The Obesity Code Unlocking the Secrets of Weight Loss (Jason Fung) (z-lib.org...Ovick
THE ART OF medicine is quite peculiar. Once in a while, medical treatments become established that don’t really work. Through sheer inertia, these treatments get handed down from one generation of doctors to the next and survive for a surprisingly long time, despite their lack of effectiveness. Consider the medicinal use of leeches (bleeding) or, say, routine tonsillectomy.
The Focus of this book is to help readers unlock the secret of weight loss.
See more: http://suongmastery.com/How to-reverse-diabetes
Heal Your Type 2 Diabetes For Good!
Attack diabetes at its source…without swallowing dangerous drugs
Never poke or prick yourself with glucose meters or insulin EVER again
Completely REVERSE (not just treat) type 2 diabetes in 3 dead-simple steps
The document discusses reversing diabetes naturally through lifestyle changes. It introduces the Penninghame Diabetes Initiative, which offers a natural alternative to medication for diabetes that focuses on diet, exercise, and mindset. Their residential program teaches participants how to adopt a healthy lifestyle through cooking classes, exercise programs, and education sessions. The program aims to eliminate the lifestyle factors that cause diabetes and reverse the disease process naturally without the need for lifelong medication.
In this guide you will discover how the correct diet and good nutrition can help you improve many aspects of your life ... And among them, it will help your blood sugar levels not get out of control.
I will teach you the most beneficial foods, so that you leave behind frustrations and trial and error. You will know what to eat and what not to try to be a person with more energy and vitality.
We will be in contact with you, so that you can apply what we teach you. Correct nutrition will help your body, mind and spirit.
Although the level of collective information is constantly improving, there are still those who affirm -and those who believe it- that it is possible to lose so many kilos in a few days
The Obesity Code Unlocking the Secrets of Weight Loss (Jason Fung) (z-lib.org...Ovick
THE ART OF medicine is quite peculiar. Once in a while, medical treatments become established that don’t really work. Through sheer inertia, these treatments get handed down from one generation of doctors to the next and survive for a surprisingly long time, despite their lack of effectiveness. Consider the medicinal use of leeches (bleeding) or, say, routine tonsillectomy.
The Focus of this book is to help readers unlock the secret of weight loss.
See more: http://suongmastery.com/How to-reverse-diabetes
Heal Your Type 2 Diabetes For Good!
Attack diabetes at its source…without swallowing dangerous drugs
Never poke or prick yourself with glucose meters or insulin EVER again
Completely REVERSE (not just treat) type 2 diabetes in 3 dead-simple steps
The document discusses reversing diabetes naturally through lifestyle changes. It introduces the Penninghame Diabetes Initiative, which offers a natural alternative to medication for diabetes that focuses on diet, exercise, and mindset. Their residential program teaches participants how to adopt a healthy lifestyle through cooking classes, exercise programs, and education sessions. The program aims to eliminate the lifestyle factors that cause diabetes and reverse the disease process naturally without the need for lifelong medication.
The diabetes cure (the 5 step plan to eliminate hunger, lose weight, and rev...Aqileditz
This document discusses the real cause of diabetes as chronic inflammation in the body. It explains that diabetes results from fat and waste buildup in and around cells that damages mitochondria and hinders insulin production. Several lifestyle factors can increase inflammation like poor diet, lack of exercise, and sedentary behavior. While genetics play a role, epigenetics or how lifestyle influences gene expression, may be more important. The document distinguishes between acute and chronic inflammation, noting that chronic, hidden inflammation in organs is what leads to diabetes and other diseases over time if left unaddressed.
Type 2 diabetes information can be extremely misleading. Not long ago, it wasbelieved that type 2 diabetes could not be reversed. By 2013, a number of nutritionscientists had spent years researching a cure for type 2 diabetes, and all of themcame to the same conclusion: type diabetes can be cured
Red Light Therapy for Diabetes and Insulin ResistanceMarkSloan21
For the Show Notes and to sign up for our free monthly newsletter visit: https://endalldisease.com/episode20
Over 30 million people in the United States have been diagnosed with diabetes, all of whom were told they have a terminal disease that cannot be cured. They’re told that all they can do is manage their symptoms by eating less sugar and getting regular insulin injections. However, as you’re about to find out, the root cause of diabetes and how to reverse it has been known scientifically for over 70 years. Obviously, profiting from selling insulin is far more important to the medical industry than reducing humanity’s suffering.
In 1947, a Nobel Prize-winning scientist discovered that overconsumption of polyunsaturated fatty acids can cause diabetes. This means that every time you eat a large amount of polyunsaturated fats like vegetable oil you’re becoming temporarily diabetic and insulin resistant. And if you enough of these fats, the diabetes metabolism will become chronic.
In the decades since this landmark study, researchers have shown in both animals and in humans that eating a diet low in polyunsaturated fat can completely reverse diabetes.
In 2001, a paper in the New England Journal of Medicine admitted that “Type 2 diabetes can be prevented by changes in the lifestyles of high-risk subjects”[1] so contrary to popular belief, diabetes is a metabolic disease not a genetic one and it can be completely reversed.
In this video, you’ll learn what causes diabetes and how to use treatments like red light therapy and dietary changes to help you safely and effectively prevent or reverse the disease.
For the show notes visit:
https://endalldisease.com/episode20
If you liked this video and want to support my work, you can do so by donating, or by buying one of my bestselling books or red light therapy devices below.
Check out our red light therapy store:
https://endalldisease.com/store
Read my books:
https://endalldisease.com/books
Donate :
►Paypal:
https://www.paypal.me/endalldisease
Thanks for listening! Don't forget to subscribe, will see you in the next episode.
The document discusses the growing problem of obesity around the world and in the UAE specifically. Some key points:
- Over 30% of the global population is now overweight or obese.
- In the UAE, over 60% of men and 66% of women are overweight or obese, which is double the world average.
- Obesity-related diseases like diabetes are rising sharply in the UAE, with nearly 1 in 5 people affected and projections that over 1.8 million people could have diabetes within a few years.
The document discusses terms and conditions for a report on healthy foods that provide energy. It notes that while efforts were made to verify the accuracy of the information, errors may exist due to the changing nature of information online. Readers are advised to use their own judgment and not rely on guarantees of income. The document then provides an outline of chapter topics to follow, including the basics of different energy systems in the body, how to think about food, honey and whole grains, nuts and lean meat, and the benefits.
- A study on fruit flies found that restricting eating to a 12-hour period each day led to better sleep, less weight gain, and healthier hearts compared to those that ate throughout the day, despite eating similar amounts.
- A small study on humans with type 2 diabetes found that eating a larger breakfast and smaller dinner helped control blood sugar levels throughout the day.
- Research shows that zinc lozenges may help shorten the duration of cold symptoms like nasal discharge and cough if started within 24 hours for periods under two weeks.
The document discusses diabetes and obesity. It defines the three main types of diabetes - type 1, type 2, and gestational diabetes. Type 2 diabetes is most common and is associated with obesity. The document also defines obesity clinically as a BMI over 30 kg/m^2. It notes that approximately 80% of people with type 2 diabetes are obese. The South region of the US has the highest obesity rates, which may be due to factors like poverty, fried foods, and limited access to healthy foods. There is a strong positive correlation between obesity and type 2 diabetes.
Obesity has become a major public health crisis in the United States, affecting over 35% of adults. It is linked to increased risk of diseases like heart disease, diabetes, and cancer. Treating obesity-related medical conditions costs over $190 billion per year. While weight loss drugs and other treatments have advanced, many patients still lack insurance coverage and access to care. Expanding Medicare coverage to include obesity drugs and preventive counseling could help patients better manage their condition and save billions of dollars in long-term healthcare costs.
In the Public Health Nutrition course, I was part of a group that evaluated Dr. Jason Fung's "Obesity Code," comparing the information provided to peer-reviewed nutritional research.
Acupuncture In Fort Lauderdale
Welcome to Highpoint Healing and Wellness, your partner in your healing journey! We treat your pain and help put you on the road to excellent health in some cases as quickly as within a few weeks. Conditions such as recurring headaches, neck pain, and lower back pain respond well to acupuncture as well as other treatments we specialize in, including Chinese herbal medicine, cupping therapy, homeopathy, and vitamins and supplements.
This document summarizes a book called "The Diabetes Destroyer" that claims to provide a method for permanently reversing diabetes. It describes how the author, David Andrews, was able to cure his type 2 diabetes after being hospitalized. His friend Jonathan conducted additional research and they developed a unique method using diet and lifestyle changes to control insulin levels. The book contains their findings on managing diabetes naturally and reversing it within 4 weeks by regulating insulin production and glucose levels without medication. It claims readers can learn the "hidden secrets" doctors don't share to cure diabetes, even pre-diabetes, in as little as one week. Links are provided to posts about the book on Facebook, Pinterest, Google Plus and Academia.edu
So here is my answer. Diabetes Choose Life is for all types of diabetics and prediabetics.
It has been designed to be useful to anyone who reads it, even those
without diabetes. Indeed, the type of diet and lifestyle that I describe there seem
appropriate and beneficial for the majority of people in the majority of situations.
And the life of type 1 diabetics could be made easier by my approach
Diabetes is a disease in which blood glucose (sugar) levels are too high. Glucose comes from the food you eat. Insulin is a hormone that helps glucose enter cells to supply them with energy. In type 1 diabetes, the body does not produce insulin.
10 Benefits an EPCR Software should Bring to EMS Organizations Traumasoft LLC
The benefits of an ePCR solution should extend to the whole EMS organization, not just certain groups of people or certain departments. It should provide more than just a form for entering and a database for storing information. It should also include a workflow of how information is communicated, used and stored across the entire organization.
The diabetes cure (the 5 step plan to eliminate hunger, lose weight, and rev...Aqileditz
This document discusses the real cause of diabetes as chronic inflammation in the body. It explains that diabetes results from fat and waste buildup in and around cells that damages mitochondria and hinders insulin production. Several lifestyle factors can increase inflammation like poor diet, lack of exercise, and sedentary behavior. While genetics play a role, epigenetics or how lifestyle influences gene expression, may be more important. The document distinguishes between acute and chronic inflammation, noting that chronic, hidden inflammation in organs is what leads to diabetes and other diseases over time if left unaddressed.
Type 2 diabetes information can be extremely misleading. Not long ago, it wasbelieved that type 2 diabetes could not be reversed. By 2013, a number of nutritionscientists had spent years researching a cure for type 2 diabetes, and all of themcame to the same conclusion: type diabetes can be cured
Red Light Therapy for Diabetes and Insulin ResistanceMarkSloan21
For the Show Notes and to sign up for our free monthly newsletter visit: https://endalldisease.com/episode20
Over 30 million people in the United States have been diagnosed with diabetes, all of whom were told they have a terminal disease that cannot be cured. They’re told that all they can do is manage their symptoms by eating less sugar and getting regular insulin injections. However, as you’re about to find out, the root cause of diabetes and how to reverse it has been known scientifically for over 70 years. Obviously, profiting from selling insulin is far more important to the medical industry than reducing humanity’s suffering.
In 1947, a Nobel Prize-winning scientist discovered that overconsumption of polyunsaturated fatty acids can cause diabetes. This means that every time you eat a large amount of polyunsaturated fats like vegetable oil you’re becoming temporarily diabetic and insulin resistant. And if you enough of these fats, the diabetes metabolism will become chronic.
In the decades since this landmark study, researchers have shown in both animals and in humans that eating a diet low in polyunsaturated fat can completely reverse diabetes.
In 2001, a paper in the New England Journal of Medicine admitted that “Type 2 diabetes can be prevented by changes in the lifestyles of high-risk subjects”[1] so contrary to popular belief, diabetes is a metabolic disease not a genetic one and it can be completely reversed.
In this video, you’ll learn what causes diabetes and how to use treatments like red light therapy and dietary changes to help you safely and effectively prevent or reverse the disease.
For the show notes visit:
https://endalldisease.com/episode20
If you liked this video and want to support my work, you can do so by donating, or by buying one of my bestselling books or red light therapy devices below.
Check out our red light therapy store:
https://endalldisease.com/store
Read my books:
https://endalldisease.com/books
Donate :
►Paypal:
https://www.paypal.me/endalldisease
Thanks for listening! Don't forget to subscribe, will see you in the next episode.
The document discusses the growing problem of obesity around the world and in the UAE specifically. Some key points:
- Over 30% of the global population is now overweight or obese.
- In the UAE, over 60% of men and 66% of women are overweight or obese, which is double the world average.
- Obesity-related diseases like diabetes are rising sharply in the UAE, with nearly 1 in 5 people affected and projections that over 1.8 million people could have diabetes within a few years.
The document discusses terms and conditions for a report on healthy foods that provide energy. It notes that while efforts were made to verify the accuracy of the information, errors may exist due to the changing nature of information online. Readers are advised to use their own judgment and not rely on guarantees of income. The document then provides an outline of chapter topics to follow, including the basics of different energy systems in the body, how to think about food, honey and whole grains, nuts and lean meat, and the benefits.
- A study on fruit flies found that restricting eating to a 12-hour period each day led to better sleep, less weight gain, and healthier hearts compared to those that ate throughout the day, despite eating similar amounts.
- A small study on humans with type 2 diabetes found that eating a larger breakfast and smaller dinner helped control blood sugar levels throughout the day.
- Research shows that zinc lozenges may help shorten the duration of cold symptoms like nasal discharge and cough if started within 24 hours for periods under two weeks.
The document discusses diabetes and obesity. It defines the three main types of diabetes - type 1, type 2, and gestational diabetes. Type 2 diabetes is most common and is associated with obesity. The document also defines obesity clinically as a BMI over 30 kg/m^2. It notes that approximately 80% of people with type 2 diabetes are obese. The South region of the US has the highest obesity rates, which may be due to factors like poverty, fried foods, and limited access to healthy foods. There is a strong positive correlation between obesity and type 2 diabetes.
Obesity has become a major public health crisis in the United States, affecting over 35% of adults. It is linked to increased risk of diseases like heart disease, diabetes, and cancer. Treating obesity-related medical conditions costs over $190 billion per year. While weight loss drugs and other treatments have advanced, many patients still lack insurance coverage and access to care. Expanding Medicare coverage to include obesity drugs and preventive counseling could help patients better manage their condition and save billions of dollars in long-term healthcare costs.
In the Public Health Nutrition course, I was part of a group that evaluated Dr. Jason Fung's "Obesity Code," comparing the information provided to peer-reviewed nutritional research.
Acupuncture In Fort Lauderdale
Welcome to Highpoint Healing and Wellness, your partner in your healing journey! We treat your pain and help put you on the road to excellent health in some cases as quickly as within a few weeks. Conditions such as recurring headaches, neck pain, and lower back pain respond well to acupuncture as well as other treatments we specialize in, including Chinese herbal medicine, cupping therapy, homeopathy, and vitamins and supplements.
This document summarizes a book called "The Diabetes Destroyer" that claims to provide a method for permanently reversing diabetes. It describes how the author, David Andrews, was able to cure his type 2 diabetes after being hospitalized. His friend Jonathan conducted additional research and they developed a unique method using diet and lifestyle changes to control insulin levels. The book contains their findings on managing diabetes naturally and reversing it within 4 weeks by regulating insulin production and glucose levels without medication. It claims readers can learn the "hidden secrets" doctors don't share to cure diabetes, even pre-diabetes, in as little as one week. Links are provided to posts about the book on Facebook, Pinterest, Google Plus and Academia.edu
So here is my answer. Diabetes Choose Life is for all types of diabetics and prediabetics.
It has been designed to be useful to anyone who reads it, even those
without diabetes. Indeed, the type of diet and lifestyle that I describe there seem
appropriate and beneficial for the majority of people in the majority of situations.
And the life of type 1 diabetics could be made easier by my approach
Diabetes is a disease in which blood glucose (sugar) levels are too high. Glucose comes from the food you eat. Insulin is a hormone that helps glucose enter cells to supply them with energy. In type 1 diabetes, the body does not produce insulin.
Similar to The Obesity Code_ Unlocking the Secrets of Weight Loss (16)
10 Benefits an EPCR Software should Bring to EMS Organizations Traumasoft LLC
The benefits of an ePCR solution should extend to the whole EMS organization, not just certain groups of people or certain departments. It should provide more than just a form for entering and a database for storing information. It should also include a workflow of how information is communicated, used and stored across the entire organization.
Cell Therapy Expansion and Challenges in Autoimmune DiseaseHealth Advances
There is increasing confidence that cell therapies will soon play a role in the treatment of autoimmune disorders, but the extent of this impact remains to be seen. Early readouts on autologous CAR-Ts in lupus are encouraging, but manufacturing and cost limitations are likely to restrict access to highly refractory patients. Allogeneic CAR-Ts have the potential to broaden access to earlier lines of treatment due to their inherent cost benefits, however they will need to demonstrate comparable or improved efficacy to established modalities.
In addition to infrastructure and capacity constraints, CAR-Ts face a very different risk-benefit dynamic in autoimmune compared to oncology, highlighting the need for tolerable therapies with low adverse event risk. CAR-NK and Treg-based therapies are also being developed in certain autoimmune disorders and may demonstrate favorable safety profiles. Several novel non-cell therapies such as bispecific antibodies, nanobodies, and RNAi drugs, may also offer future alternative competitive solutions with variable value propositions.
Widespread adoption of cell therapies will not only require strong efficacy and safety data, but also adapted pricing and access strategies. At oncology-based price points, CAR-Ts are unlikely to achieve broad market access in autoimmune disorders, with eligible patient populations that are potentially orders of magnitude greater than the number of currently addressable cancer patients. Developers have made strides towards reducing cell therapy COGS while improving manufacturing efficiency, but payors will inevitably restrict access until more sustainable pricing is achieved.
Despite these headwinds, industry leaders and investors remain confident that cell therapies are poised to address significant unmet need in patients suffering from autoimmune disorders. However, the extent of this impact on the treatment landscape remains to be seen, as the industry rapidly approaches an inflection point.
Co-Chairs, Val J. Lowe, MD, and Cyrus A. Raji, MD, PhD, prepared useful Practice Aids pertaining to Alzheimer’s disease for this CME/AAPA activity titled “Alzheimer’s Disease Case Conference: Gearing Up for the Expanding Role of Neuroradiology in Diagnosis and Treatment.” For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, and complete CME/AAPA information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at https://bit.ly/3PvVY25. CME/AAPA credit will be available until June 28, 2025.
DECLARATION OF HELSINKI - History and principlesanaghabharat01
This SlideShare presentation provides a comprehensive overview of the Declaration of Helsinki, a foundational document outlining ethical guidelines for conducting medical research involving human subjects.
- Video recording of this lecture in English language: https://youtu.be/Pt1nA32sdHQ
- Video recording of this lecture in Arabic language: https://youtu.be/uFdc9F0rlP0
- Link to download the book free: https://nephrotube.blogspot.com/p/nephrotube-nephrology-books.html
- Link to NephroTube website: www.NephroTube.com
- Link to NephroTube social media accounts: https://nephrotube.blogspot.com/p/join-nephrotube-on-social-media.html
How to Control Your Asthma Tips by gokuldas hospital.Gokuldas Hospital
Respiratory issues like asthma are the most sensitive issue that is affecting millions worldwide. It hampers the daily activities leaving the body tired and breathless.
The key to a good grip on asthma is proper knowledge and management strategies. Understanding the patient-specific symptoms and carving out an effective treatment likewise is the best way to keep asthma under control.
The skin is the largest organ and its health plays a vital role among the other sense organs. The skin concerns like acne breakout, psoriasis, or anything similar along the lines, finding a qualified and experienced dermatologist becomes paramount.
Test bank for karp s cell and molecular biology 9th edition by gerald karp.pdfrightmanforbloodline
Test bank for karp s cell and molecular biology 9th edition by gerald karp.pdf
Test bank for karp s cell and molecular biology 9th edition by gerald karp.pdf
Test bank for karp s cell and molecular biology 9th edition by gerald karp.pdf
Are you looking for a long-lasting solution to your missing tooth?
Dental implants are the most common type of method for replacing the missing tooth. Unlike dentures or bridges, implants are surgically placed in the jawbone. In layman’s terms, a dental implant is similar to the natural root of the tooth. It offers a stable foundation for the artificial tooth giving it the look, feel, and function similar to the natural tooth.
6. PART 4: The Social Phenomenon of
ObesityCHAPTER 11: Big Food, More Food
and theNewScienceofDiabesity
CHAPTER12:PovertyandObesity
CHAPTER13:ChildhoodObesity
PART 5: What’s Wrong with Our
Diet?CHAPTER14:TheDeadlyEffectsofFructose
CHAPTER 15: The Diet Soda
DelusionCHAPTER16:CarbohydratesandProtect
iveFiber
CHAPTER17:ProteinCHAPTE
R18:FatPhobia
PART 6: The
SolutionCHAPTER19:Whatto
EatCHAPTER20:WhentoEat
APPENDIXA:SampleMealPlans(withFastingProto
cols)
APPENDIXB:Fasting:APracticalGuide
APPENDIXC:MeditationandSleepHygieneto
8. FOREWORD
DR. JASON FUNG IS a
Torontophysician specializing in the
care ofpatients with kidney diseases.
His keyresponsibility is to oversee the
complexmanagement of patients with
end-stagekidney disease requiring renal
(kidney)dialysis.
His credentials do not
obviouslyexplain why he should author
a
booktitledTheObesityCodeorwhyheblog
son the intensive dietary management
ofobesityandtype2diabetesmellitus.Toun
derstand this apparent anomaly, weneed
first to appreciate who this man
isandwhatmakeshimsounusual.
Intreatingpatientswithend-stage
9. kidney disease, Dr. Fung learned
twokey lessons. First, that type 2
diabetes isthe single commonest cause
of kidneyfailure. Second, that renal
dialysis,however sophisticated and
even
lifeprolonging,treatsonlythefinalsympto
ms of an underlying disease
thathasbeenpresentfortwenty,thirty,forty
or perhaps even fifty years. Gradually,
itdawned on Dr. Fung that he
waspracticing medicine exactly as he
hadbeen taught: by reactively treating
thesymptoms of complex diseases
withoutfirst trying to understand or
correct theirrootcauses.
He realized that to make a
differencetohispatients,hewouldhavetos
tartbyacknowledgingabittertruth:thatour
10. venerated profession is no
longerinterested in addressing the
causes ofdisease.
Instead,itwastesmuchofitstime and
many of its
resourcesattemptingtotreatsymptoms.
He resolved to make a real
differenceto his patients (and his
profession)
bystrivingtounderstandthetruecausesthatu
nderliedisease.
Before December 2014, I
wasunaware of Dr. Jason Fung’s
existence.Then one day I chanced upon
his twolectures—
“TheTwoBigLiesofType2Diabetes” and
“How to Reverse Type
2DiabetesNaturally”—
onYouTube.Assomeone
12. intrigued. Who, I thought, is this
brightyoung man? What gives him the
certaintythat type 2 diabetes can be
reversed“naturally”?And
howcanhebebraveenough to accuse his
noble profession oflying? He will need
to present a goodargument,Ithought.
It took only a few minutes to
realizethat Dr. Fung is not only
legitimate, butalso more than able to
look after himselfin any medical scrap.
The argument hepresented was one that
had
beenbouncingaround,unresolved,inmyo
wnmind for at least three years. But I
hadnever been able to see it with the
sameclarity or to explain it with the
sameemphaticsimplicityashadDr.Fung.B
ytheendofhistwolectures,IknewthatI
13. had observed a young master at
work.Finally,IunderstoodwhatIhadmissed
.
What Dr. Fung achieved in those
twolectures was to utterly destroy
thecurrentlypopularmodelforthemedical
management of type 2 diabetes—
themodelmandatedbyallthedifferentdiab
etes associations around the
world.Worse,heexplainedwhythiserrone
ousmodel of treatment must inevitably
harmthehealthofallpatientsunfortunateen
oughtoreceive it.
According to Dr. Fung, the first big
liein the management of type 2 diabetes
isthe claim that it is a
chronicallyprogressive disease that
simply getsworse with time, even in
those
15. medicineoffers.But,Dr.Fungargues,this
is simply not true. Fifty percent
ofthepatientsonDr.Fung’sIntensiveDiet
ary Management (IDM) program,which
combines dietary
carbohydraterestriction and fasting,
are able to
stopusinginsulinafterafewmonths.
Sowhyareweunabletoacknowledge
the truth? Dr.
Fung’sanswerissimple:wedoctorslietoou
rselves. If type 2 diabetes is a
curabledisease but all our patients are
gettingworse on the treatments we
prescribe,then we must be bad doctors.
And
sincewedidnotstudyforsolongatsuchgreat
cost to become bad doctors, this
failurecannot be our fault. Instead, we
17. patients, who must unfortunately
besuffering from a chronically
progressiveand incurable disease. It is
not adeliberate lie, Dr. Fung concludes,
butone of cognitive dissonance—
theinabilityto
acceptablatanttruthbecauseaccepting it
would be too emotionallydevastating.
Thesecondlie,accordingtoDr.Fung,is
our belief that type 2 diabetes is
adiseaseofabnormalbloodglucoselevels
for which the only correcttreatment is
progressively increasinginsulin dosages.
He argues, instead, thattype 2 diabetes is
a disease of insulinresistance with
excessive insulinsecretion—
incontrasttotype
1diabetes,aconditionoftrueinsulinlack.
To treat
18. How Jones loss his weight without any exercise you
want to learn this special method than click here
19. bothconditionsthesameway—
byinjectinginsulin—
makesnosense.Whytreat a condition of
insulin excess withyet more insulin, he
asks? That is
theequivalentofprescribingalcoholforthet
reatmentofalcoholism.
Dr.Fung’snovelcontributionishisinsight
that treatment in type 2
diabetesfocusesonthesymptomofthediseas
e—anelevatedblood
glucoseconcentration
—rather than its root cause,
insulinresistance. And the initial
treatment forinsulin resistance is to
limitcarbohydrate intake. Understanding
thissimple biology explains why
thisdiseasemaybereversibleinsomecases
—and, conversely, why the
21. notlimitcarbohydrateintake,worsensth
eoutcome.
But how did Dr. Fung arrive at
theseoutrageous conclusions? And how
didtheyleadtohisauthorshipofthisbook?
In addition to his
realization,described above, of the long-
term natureof disease and the illogic of
treating
adisease’ssymptomsratherthanremovingit
s cause, he also, almost by chance, inthe
early 2000s, became aware of
thegrowingliteratureonthebenefitsof
low-carbohydrate diets in those
withobesity and other conditions of
insulinresistance. Taught to believe
that acarbohydrate-restricted, high-fat
dietkills, he was shocked to discover
theopposite:thisdietarychoiceproduces
23. range of highly beneficial
metabolicoutcomes,
especiallyinthosewiththeworstinsulinresi
stance.
Andfinallycamethecherryonthetop
—a legion of hidden studies
showingthat for the reduction of body
weight inthose with obesity (and
insulinresistance), this high-fat diet is
at leastas effective, and usually much
more
so,thanothermoreconventionaldiets.
Eventually, he could bear it no
longer.Ifeveryoneknows(butwon’tadmit)
thatthe low-fat calorie-restricted diet
isutterly ineffective in controlling
bodyweight or in treating obesity, surely
it istime to tell the truth: the best hope
fortreating andpreventing
25. excessiveinsulinproduction,mustsurely
be the same low-carbohydrate,high-fat
diet used for the management ofthe
ultimate disease of insulin
resistance,type 2 diabetes. And so this
book wasborn.
In The Obesity Code, Dr. Fung
hasproduced perhaps the most
importantpopularbookyetpublishedonthis
topicofobesity.
Its strengths are that it is based on
anirrefutable biology, the evidence
forwhich is carefully presented; and it
iswrittenwiththeeaseandconfidenceofam
aster communicator in an
accessible,well-reasoned sequence so
that itsconsecutive chapters
systematicallydevelop,layerbylayer,ane
vidence-
26. based biological model of obesity
thatmakes complete sense in its
logicalsimplicity. It includes just
enoughscience to convince the
skepticalscientist,butnotsomuchthatitcon
fusesthosewithoutabackgroundinbiology.
This feat in itself is a
stunningachievementthatfewscience
writerseveraccomplish.
Bytheendofthebook,thecarefulreader
will understand exactly
thecausesoftheobesityepidemic,
whyourattempts to prevent both the
obesity anddiabetes epidemics were
bound to fail,and what, more
importantly, are thesimple steps that
those with a weightproblem need to
take to reverse theirobesity.
27. The solution needed is that which
Dr.Fung has now provided: “Obesity
is... amultifactorial disease. What we
need isa framework, a structure, a
coherenttheorytounderstandhowallitsfact
orsfit together. Too often, our current
modelof obesity assumes that there is
only onesingle true cause, and that all
others
arepretenderstothethrone.Endlessdebate
sensue...Theyare allpartiallycorrect.”
In providing one such
coherentframework that can account for
most ofwhat we currently know about
the realcauses of obesity, Dr. Fung has
providedmuch,muchmore.
Hehasprovidedablueprintfortherev
ersal of the greatest
medicalepidemicsfacingmodernsocie
29. epidemics that he shows are
entirelypreventableandpotentiallyrever
sible,but only if we truly understand
theirbiological causes—not just
theirsymptoms.
The truth he expresses will one day
beacknowledgedas self-evident.
Thesoonerthatdaydawns,thebetterforus
all.
TIMOTHYNOAKESOMS,MBChB,MD,DSc,PhD
(hc), FACSM, (hon) FFSEM (UK),
(hon)FSEM(Ire)
EMERITUSPROFESSOR
UNIVERSITYOFCAPETOWN,CapeTown,
SouthAfrica
30. INTRODUCTION
THE ART OF medicine is quite
peculiar.Onceinawhile,medicaltreatm
entsbecome established that don’t
reallywork.Throughsheerinertia,theset
reatments get handed down from
onegeneration of doctors to the next
andsurvive for a surprisingly long
time,despitetheirlackofeffectiveness.
Consider the medicinal use of
leeches(bleeding)or,say,routinetonsillec
tomy.
Unfortunately, the treatment of
obesityis also one such example. Obesity
isdefinedintermsofaperson’sbodymassind
ex,calculatedasaperson’sweightinkilogra
ms divided by the square of
theirheightinmeters.Abodymassindex
31. greater than 30 is defined as obese.
Formore than thirty years, doctors
haverecommendedalow-fat,calorie-
reduceddiet as the treatment of choice
forobesity. Yet the obesity
epidemicaccelerates. From 1985 to
2011, theprevalence of obesity in
Canada tripled,from 6 percent to 18
percent.1Thisphenomenonisnotuniqueto
NorthAmerica, but involves most of
thenationsofthe world.
Virtually every person who has
usedcaloric reduction for weight loss
hasfailed.And,really,whohasn’ttriedit?
By every objective measure,
thistreatment is completely and
utterlyineffective.Yetitremainsthetreat
mentofchoice,defendedvigorouslyby
32. nutritionalauthorities.
As a nephrologist, I specialize
inkidney disease, the most common
causeof which is type 2 diabetes with
itsassociated obesity. I’ve often
watchedpatients start insulin treatment
for theirdiabetes, knowing that most will
gainweight. Patients are rightly
concerned.“Doctor,”theysay,“you’vealw
aystoldmetoloseweight.Buttheinsulinyou
gavememakesmegainsomuchweight.How
isthishelpful?”Foralongtime,Ididn’thave
agoodanswerforthem.
Thatnagginguneasegrew.Likemanydoc
tors, I believed that weight gain wasa
caloric imbalance—eating too muchand
movingtoo little.
Butifthatwereso,whydidthemedicationIp
rescribed—
33. insulin—cause such relentless
weightgain?
Everybody, health professionals
andpatients alike, understood that the
rootcause of type 2 diabetes lay in
weightgain. There were rare cases of
highlymotivated patients who had
lostsignificantamountsofweight.Theirtyp
e2 diabeteswouldalsoreversecourse.
Logically, since weight was
theunderlying problem, it
deservedsignificant attention. Still, it
seemed thatthe health profession was
not even theleast bit interested in
treating it. I
wasguiltyascharged.Despitehavingworke
d for more than twenty years
inmedicine,Ifoundthatmyownnutritionalk
nowledgewasrudimentary,atbest.
34. Do you want to loss your weight
without any exercise than click here
35. Treatment of this terrible disease—
obesity—was left to large
corporationslikeWeightWatchers,aswell
asvarioushucksters and charlatans
mostlyinterested in peddling the latest
weight-loss “miracle.” Doctors were
not evenremotely interested in nutrition.
Instead,the medical profession seemed
obsessedwith finding and prescribing
the nextnewdrug:
Youhavetype2diabetes?Here,letme
giveyoua pill.
You have high blood
pressure?Here,letmegiveyoua
pill.
You have high cholesterol?
Here,letme give youa pill.
37. megiveyoua pill.
But all along, we needed to
treatobesity. We were trying to treat
theproblems caused by obesity rather
thanobesity itself. In trying to
understand theunderlying cause of
obesity, I eventuallyestablished the
Intensive
DietaryManagementClinicinToronto,Ca
nada.
The conventional view of obesity as
acaloricimbalancedidnotmakesense.
Caloric reduction had been
prescribedfor the last fifty years with
startlingineffectiveness.
Reading books on nutrition was
nohelp. That was mostly a game of
39. Dr. Dean Ornish says that dietary fat
isbadandcarbohydratesaregood.Heisares
pected doctor, so we should listen tohim.
But Dr. Robert Atkins said
dietaryfatisgoodandcarbohydratesarebad.
Hewasalso arespecteddoctor, so
weshouldlistentohim.Whoisright?Whois
wrong? In the science of nutrition,there
is rarely any consensus aboutanything:
Dietaryfatisbad.No,dietaryfatisgood
. There are good fats and badfats.
Carbohydrates are bad.
No,carbohydratesaregood.Therea
regoodcarbsandbadcarbs.
Youshouldeatmoremealsaday.
40. No, you should eat fewer meals
aday.
Countyourcalories.No,caloriesd
on’tcount.
Milk is good for you. No, milk
isbadforyou.
Meatisgoodforyou.No,meatisbad
foryou.
Todiscovertheanswers,weneedtotur
n to evidence-based medicine
ratherthanvagueopinion.
Literally thousands of books
aredevoted to dieting and weight
loss,usually written by doctors,
nutritionists,personal trainers and other
“healthexperts.” However, with a
fewexceptions,rarelyismore thana
44. multifactorial, and these factors are
notmutually exclusive. They may
allcontribute to varying degrees.
Forexample, heart disease has
numerouscontributing factors—family
history,gender, smoking, diabetes,
highcholesterol, high blood pressure and
alack of physical activity, to name only
afew—
andthatfactiswellaccepted.Butsuchisnott
hecase inobesityresearch.
Theothermajorbarriertounderstanding
is the focus on short-termstudies.
Obesity usually takes decades tofully
develop. Yet we often rely
oninformation about it from studies that
areonly of several weeks’ duration. If
westudyhowrustdevelops,wewouldneedt
oobservemetaloveraperiodofweeks
45. tomonths,nothours.Obesity,similarly,is a
long-term disease. Short-
termstudiesmaynotbeinformative.
While I understand that the research
isnot always conclusive, I hope this
book,which draws on what I’ve learned
overtwenty years of helping patients
withtype 2 diabetes lose weight
permanentlyto manage their disease,
will provide astructuretobuildupon.
Evidence-based medicine does
notmean taking every piece of low-
qualityevidence at face value. I often
readstatements such as “low-fat diets
provento completely reverse heart
disease.”The reference will be a study
of fiverats. That hardly qualifies as
evidence.
Iwillreferenceonlystudiesdoneon
46. humans, and mostly only those that
havebeen published in high-quality,
peer-reviewed journals. No animal
studieswill be discussed in this book.
Thereason for this decision can
beillustratedin“TheParableoftheCow”:
Two cows were discussing the
latestnutritional research, which had
beendoneonlions.Onecowsaystotheother,
“Did you hear that we’ve been
wrongthese last 200 years? The latest
researchshows that eating grass is bad
for
youandeatingmeatisgood.”Sothetwocow
s began eating meat.
Shortlyafterward,theygotsickandtheydie
d.
One year later, two lions
werediscussing the latest nutritional
48. to the other that the latest
researchshowed that eating meat kills
you andeating grass is good. So, the
two
lionsstartedeatinggrass,andtheydied.
What’s the moral of the story? We
arenot mice. We are not rats. We are
notchimpanzeesorspidermonkeys.Wear
ehumanbeings,andthereforeweshouldco
nsider only human studies. I
aminterested in obesity in humans,
notobesity in mice. As much as
possible,
Itrytofocusoncausalfactorsratherthanass
ociation studies. It is dangerous
toassume that because two factors
areassociated,oneisthecauseoftheother.
Witness the hormone
replacementtherapy disaster in post-
50. wasassociatedwithlowerheartdisease,bu
tthatdidnotmeanthatitwasthecauseoflow
erheartdisease.
However, in nutritional research, it
isnotalwayspossibletoavoidassociationst
udies, as they are often the
bestavailableevidence.
Part 1 of this book, “The
Epidemic,”explores the timeline of the
obesityepidemic and the contribution of
thepatient’sfamilyhistory,andshowshowbo
thshedlightontheunderlyingcauses.
Part 2, “The Calorie
Deception,”reviews the current
caloric theory indepth, including
exercise
andoverfeedingstudies.Theshortcomin
gsof the current understanding of
obesityarehighlighted.
51. Part 3, “A New Model of
Obesity,”introducesthehormonaltheoryo
fobesity, a robust explanation of
obesityas a medical problem. These
chaptersexplain the central role of
insulin
inregulatingbodyweightanddescribethev
itally important role of
insulinresistance.
Part 4, “The Social Phenomenon
ofObesity,” considers how
hormonalobesity theory explains some
of
theassociationsofobesity.Whyisobesity
associated with poverty? What can
wedoaboutchildhoodobesity?
Part 5, “What’s Wrong with
OurDiet?,”explorestheroleoffat,protein
and carbohydrates, the
53. addition, we examine one of the
mainculprits in weight gain—
fructose—
andtheeffectsofartificialsweeteners.
Part 6, “The Solution,”
providesguidelines for lasting treatment
ofobesity by addressing the
hormonalimbalance of high blood
insulin. Dietaryguidelines for reducing
insulin levelsinclude reducing added
sugar andrefined grains, keeping
proteinconsumption moderate, and
addinghealthy fat and fiber. Intermittent
fastingis an effective way to treat
insulinresistance without incurring the
negativeeffects of calorie reduction
diets. Stressmanagement and sleep
improvement
canreducecortisollevelsandcontrolinsuli
55. The Obesity Code will set forth
aframework for understanding
thecondition of human obesity.
Whileobesity shares many
importantsimilarities and differences
with type 2diabetes,this is
primarilyabookaboutobesity.
The process of challenging
currentnutritional dogma is, at times,
unsettling,butthehealthconsequencesaret
ooimportant to ignore. What
actuallycauses weight gain and what
can we doabout it? This question is the
overalltheme of this book. A fresh
frameworkfortheunderstandingandtreatm
entofobesity represents a new hope for
ahealthierfuture.
60. particular should have both
theknowledge and the dedication to
staythinandhealthy.
Sowhyaretherefatdoctors?
The standard prescription for
weightlossis“EatLess,MoveMore.”Itsou
nds perfectly reasonable. But
whydoesn’titwork?Perhapspeoplewanti
ngto lose weight are not following
thisadvice.Themindiswilling,buttheflesh
is weak. Yet consider the self-
disciplineand dedication needed to
complete anundergraduate degree,
medical
school,internship,residencyandfellowshi
p.Itis hardly conceivable that
overweightdoctors simply lack the
willpower tofollowtheirownadvice.
Thisleavesthepossibilitythatthe
61. conventional advice is simply
wrong.And if it is, then our entire
understandingofobesityisfundamentallyf
lawed.
Given the current epidemic of obesity,
Isuspect that such is the most
likelyscenario. So we need to start at the
verybeginning, with a thorough
understandingofthediseasethatishumanob
esity.
Wemuststartwiththesinglemostimport
antquestionregardingobesityoranydisea
se:“Whatcausesit?”Wespend no time
considering this crucialquestion
because we think we alreadyknow the
answer. It seems so obvious:it’s a
matter of Calories In
versusCaloriesOut.
Acalorieisaunitoffood
63. breathing,buildingnewmuscleandbone,
pumping blood and othermetabolic
tasks. Some food energy isstored as fat.
Calories In is the foodenergy that we
eat. Calories Out is
theenergyexpendedforallofthesevarious
metabolicfunctions.
Whenthenumberofcalorieswetakein
exceeds the number of calories weburn,
weight gain results, we say. Eatingtoo
much and exercising too little
causesweight gain, we say. Eating too
manycaloriescausesweightgain,wesay.
These “truths” seem so self-evident
thatwe do not question whether they
areactuallytrue.Butarethey?
64. PROXIMATEVERSUSULTIMATECA
USE
EXCESS CALORIES MAY certainly be
theproximatecauseofweightgain,butnot
itsultimatecause.
What’s the difference
betweenproximateandultimate?Theprox
imatecauseisimmediatelyresponsible,w
hereas the ultimate cause is
whatstartedthechainofevents.
Consider alcoholism. What
causesalcoholism? The proximate
cause is“drinkingtoomuchalcohol”—
whichisundeniably true, but not
particularlyuseful.Thequestionandthecau
sehereareoneandthesame,sincealcoholis
mmeans “drinking too much
alcohol.”Treatmentadvicedirectedagain
66. proximate cause—“Stop drinking
somuchalcohol”—isnotuseful.
Thecrucialquestion,theonethatweare
really interested in, is: What is
theultimate cause of why
alcoholismoccurs.Theultimatecauseincl
udes
the addictive nature of
alcohol,anyfamilyhistoryofalcoh
olism,excessive stress in the
homesituationand/or
anaddictive personality.
There we have the real disease,
andtreatment must be directed against
theultimate,ratherthantheproximatecause.
Understandingtheultimatecauseleadstoeff
68. case) rehabilitation and social
supportnetworks.
Let’stakeanotherexample.Whydoesa
plane crash? The proximate cause
is,“there was not enough lift to
overcomegravity”—again, absolutely
true, but notin any way useful. The
ultimate causemightbe
human
error,mechanical fault
and/orinclementweathe
r.
Understandingtheultimatecauseleads
to effective solutions such asbetter
pilot training or tightermaintenance
schedules. Advice
70. wings,morepowerfulengines)willnotre
duce plane crashes.
This understanding applies
toeverything. For instance, why is it so
hotinthisroom?
PROXIMATE CAUSE: Heat
energycominginisgreaterthanheatener
gyleaving.
SOLUTION: Turn on the fans to
increasetheamountofheatleaving.
ULTIMATECAUSE:Thethermostatissettoo
high.
SOLUTION: Turn down the
thermostat.Whyistheboatsinking?
PROXIMATE CAUSE: Gravity is
strongerthanbuoyancy.
SOLUTION:Reducegravitybylig
hteningtheboat.
71. ULTIMATECAUSE:Theboathasalargeholei
nthehull.
SOLUTION:Patchthehole.
In each case, the solution to
theproximate cause of the problem
isneitherlastingnormeaningful.Bycontras
t,treatmentoftheultimatecauseisfarmore
successful.
Thesameappliestoobesity:Whatca
usesweightgain?
Proximatecause:Consumingmorecalori
es thanyouexpend.
If more calories in than out is
theproximatecause,theunspokenanswerto
that last question is that the
ultimatecause is “personal choice.” We
chooseto eat chips instead of broccoli.
WechoosetowatchTVinsteadofexercise.
72. Through this reasoning, obesity
istransformed from a disease that needs
tobe investigated and understood into
apersonal failing,acharacter defect.
Insteadofsearchingfortheultimatecau
se of obesity, we transform
theprobleminto
eating too much (gluttony)
and/orexercisingtoolittle(sloth).
Gluttony and sloth are two of
theseven deadly sins. So we say of
theobese that they “brought it
onthemselves.” They “let themselves
go.”It gives us the comforting illusion
thatwe understand ultimate cause of
theproblem.Ina2012onlinepoll,161
73. percent of U.S. adults believed
that“personal choices about eating
andexercise” were responsible
fortheobesity epidemic. So we
discriminateagainstpeoplewhoareobese
.Webothpityandloathethem.
However, on simple reflection,
thisidea simply cannot be true. Prior
topuberty,boysandgirlsaveragethesame
body-fat percentage. After
puberty,women on average carry close
to 50percent more body fat than men.
Thischange occurs despite the fact that
menconsume more calories on average
thanwomen.Butwhyis thistrue?
What is the ultimate cause? It
hasnothingtodowithpersonalchoices.Itisn
otacharacterdefect.Womenarenot
74. moregluttonousorlazierthanmen.Thehorm
onal cocktail that differentiates menand
women must make it more likely
thatwomen will accumulate excess
caloriesasfatasopposedtoburningthemoff.
Pregnancy also induces
significantweightgain.Whatistheultimatec
ause?Again, it is obviously the
hormonalchangesresultingfromthepregnan
cy
—not personal choice—that
encouragesweightgain.
Having erred in understanding
theproximate and ultimate causes,
webelievethesolutiontoobesityis
toeatfewercalories.
The“authorities”allagree.TheU.S.Dep
artment of Agriculture’s
DietaryGuidelinesforAmericans,updated
76. 2010, forcefully proclaims its
keyrecommendation:“Controltotalcalo
rieintaketomanagebodyweight.”TheCen
ters for Disease
Control2exhortpatients to balance
their calories.
TheadvicefromtheNationalInstitutesof
Health’s pamphlet “Aim for a
HealthyWeight”is“tocutdownonthenum
berof calories... they get from food
andbeverages and increase their
physicalactivity.”3
Allthisadviceformsthefamous“EatLe
ss, Move More” strategy so belovedby
obesity “experts.” But here’s apeculiar
thought: If we alreadyunderstand what
causes obesity, how totreat it, and
we’ve spent millions
79. ANATOMYOFANEPIDEMIC
WEWEREN’TALWAYSsoobsessedwithcalorie
s. Throughout most of
humanhistory,obesityhasbeenrare.
Individuals in traditional societies
eatingtraditional diets seldom became
obese,even in times of abundant food.
Ascivilizationsdeveloped,obesityfollow
ed. Speculating on the cause,many
identified the
refinedcarbohydratesofsugarandstarches
.
Sometimes considered the father of
thelow- carbohydrate diet, Jean
AnthelmeBrillat-Savarin (1755–1826)
wrote theinfluential textbook The
Physiology ofTaste in 1825. There he
wrote: “Thesecond of the chief causes
of obesity
81. manmakestheprimeingredientsofhisdaily
nourishment. As we have saidalready,
all animals that live onfarinaceous food
grow fat willy-
nilly;andmanisnoexceptiontotheuniversa
llaw.”4
All foods can be divided into
threedifferent macronutrient groups:
fat,protein and carbohydrates. The
“macro”in“macronutrients”referstothefa
ctthatthebulkofthefoodweeatismadeupoft
hese three groups.
Micronutrients,which make up a very
small proportionof the food, include
vitamins
andmineralssuchasvitaminsA,B,C,D,Ean
d K, as well as minerals such as
ironandcalcium.Starchyfoodsandsugarsa
83. Severaldecadeslater,WilliamBanting
(1796–1878), an Englishundertaker,
rediscovered the
fatteningpropertiesoftherefinedcarbohyd
rate.In1863,hepublishedthepamphletLett
eron Corpulence, Addressed to
thePublic, which is often considered
theworld’s first diet book. His story
israther unremarkable. He was not
anobese child, nor did he have a
familyhistory of obesity. In his mid-
thirties,however, he started to gain
weight. Notmuch; perhaps a pound or
two per year.By age sixty-two, he stood
five foot
fiveandweighed202pounds(92kilograms
).Perhaps unremarkable by
modernstandards, he was considered
quiteportlyatthetime.Distressed,hesought
84. How Jones loss his weight without any exercise you
want to learn this special method than click here
85. adviceonweightlossfromhisph
ysicians.
First,hetriedtoeatless,butthatonlyleft
him hungry. Worse, he failed to
loseweight. Next, he increased his
exerciseby rowing along the River
Thames,
nearhishomeinLondon.Whilehisphysicalf
itness improved, he developed
a“prodigious appetite, which I
wascompelled to indulge.”5Still, he
failedtolose weight.
Finally,ontheadviceofhissurgeon,Banti
ngtriedanewapproach.Withtheideathatsug
aryand starchyfoodswerefattening, he
strenuously avoided
allbreads,milk,beer,sweetsandpotatoesth
at had previously made up a
largeportionofhis diet.(Todaywewould
86. call this diet low in
refinedcarbohydrates.) William Banting
notonly lost the weight and kept it off,
buthe also felt so well that he
wascompelledtowritehisfamouspamphle
t.Weight gain, he believed, resulted
fromeating too many
“fatteningcarbohydrates.”
Formostofthenextcentury,diets lowin
refined carbohydrates were acceptedas
the standard treatment for obesity.
Bythe 1950s, it was fairly standard
advice.If you were to ask your
grandparentswhat caused obesity, they
would not talkabout calories. Instead,
they would tellyou to stop eating sugary
and starchyfoods. Common sense and
empiricobservationservedtoconfirmthetr
uth.
87. Nutritional“experts”andgovernmento
pinionwere notneeded.
Caloriecountinghadbegunintheearly
1900s with the book Eat Your Wayto
Health, written by Dr. Robert
HughRose as a “scientific system of
weightcontrol.” That book was
followed up in1918 with the bestseller
Diet
andHealth,withKeytotheCalories,writte
n by Dr. Lulu Hunt Peters, anAmerican
doctor and newspapercolumnist. Herbert
Hoover, then the headof the U.S. Food
Administration,convertedtocaloriecount
ing.Dr.Petersadvised patients to start
with a fast, oneto two days abstaining
from all foods,and then stick strictly to
1200
caloriesperday.Whiletheadvicetofastwas
88. quicklyforgotten,moderncalorie-
counting schedules are not
verydifferent.
By the 1950s, a perceived
“greatepidemic” of heart disease
wasbecominganincreasingpublicconcer
n.Seemingly healthy Americans
weredeveloping heart attacks with
growingregularity. In hindsight, it
should havebeen obvious that there was
really nosuchepidemic.
The discovery of vaccines
andantibiotics, combined with
increasedpublic sanitation, had
reshaped themedical landscape.
Formerly lethalinfections, such as
pneumonia,tuberculosis and
gastrointestinalinfections,becamecu
rable.Heart
89. disease and cancer now caused
arelatively greater percentage of
deaths,giving rise to some of the
publicmisperception of an epidemic.
(SeeFigure 1.1.6)
Figure1.1.CausesofdeathintheUnitedS
tates1900vs.1960.
The increase in life expectancy
from1900to1950reinforcedthepercepti
91. of a coronary-disease epidemic. For
awhite male, the life expectancy in
1900was fifty years.7By 1950, it
hadreached sixty-six years, and by
1970,almost sixty-eight years. If people
werenot dying of tuberculosis, then
theywould live long enough to develop
theirheart attack. Currently, the average
ageat first heart attack is sixty-six
years.8The risk of a heart attack in a
fifty-year-old man is substantially
lower than in asixty-eight-year-old
man. So the naturalconsequence of a
longer life
expectancyisanincreasedrateofcoronary
disease.
Butallgreatstories needavillain,
and dietary fat was cast into that
93. that is thought to contribute to
heartdisease, in the blood. Soon,
physiciansbegantoadvocate lower-
fatdiets.Withgreat enthusiasm and shaky
science, thedemonization of dietary fat
began inearnest.
There was a problem, though
wedidn’t see it at the time. The
threemacronutrients are fat, protein
andcarbohydrates: lowering dietary
fatmeantreplacingitwitheitherproteinorc
arbohydrates. Since many high-
proteinfoods like meat and dairy are
also highin fat, it is difficult to lower
fat in
thedietwithoutloweringproteinaswell.
So,ifone were
torestrictdietaryfats,then one must
increase dietarycarbohydrates
95. developed world, these
carbohydratesalltendtobehighlyrefine
d.
Low Fat = High
CarbohydrateThisdilemmacreate
dsignificant
cognitive dissonance.
Refinedcarbohydrates could not
simultaneouslybe both good (because
they are low
infat)andbad(becausetheyarefattening).T
he solution adopted by most
nutritionexperts was to suggest
thatcarbohydrateswerenolongerfattenin
g.Instead,calorieswerefattening.Without
evidence or historical precedent, it
wasarbitrarily decided that excess
caloriescausedweightgain,notspecificfo
ods.
97. In/Calories-Out model began to
displacethe prevailing “fattening
carbohydrates”model.
But not everybody bought in. One
ofthe most famous dissidents was
theprominent British nutritionist
JohnYudkin (1910–1995). Studying diet
andheart disease, he found no
relationshipbetween dietary fat and
heart
disease.Hebelievedthatthemainculpritof
bothobesity and heart disease was
sugar.9,10His 1972 book, Pure, White
andDeadly:HowSugarIsKilling
Us,iseerily prescient (and should
certainlywin the award for Best Book
TitleEver). Scientific debate raged back
andforth about whether the culprit
99. THEDIETARYGUIDELINES
THE ISSUEWASfinallysettledin1977,notby
scientific debate and discovery, butby
governmental decree. GeorgeMcGovern,
then chairman of the UnitedStates
Senate Select Committee onNutrition
and Human Needs, convened atribunal,
and after several days ofdeliberation, it
was decided thathenceforth, dietary fat
was guilty ascharged. Not only was
dietary fat guiltyof causing heart
disease, but it alsocaused
obesity,sincefatiscaloricallydense.
The resulting declaration became
theDietaryGoalsfortheUnitedStates.Ane
ntire nation, and soon the entire
world,wouldnowfollownutritionaladvice
100. from a politician. This was a
remarkablebreak from tradition. For the
first time, agovernment institution
intruded into thekitchens of America.
Mom used to tell uswhat we should and
should not eat. Butfrom now on, Big
Brother would betelling us. And he said,
“Eat less fat andmorecarbohydrates.”
Severalspecificdietarygoalsweresetf
orth.Theseincluded
raiseconsumptionofcarbohydratesu
ntiltheyconstituted55percentto60pe
rcent ofcalories,anddecrease fat
consumption fromapproximately
40 percent ofcalories to 30
percent, of which nomorethanone-
thirdshouldcome
101. Do you want to loss your weight without any exercise
than click here
102. fromsaturatedfat.
With no scientific evidence,
theformerly
“fattening”carbohydratemadeastunningtra
nsformation.Whiletheguidelines still
recognized the evils ofsugar, refined
grain was as innocent as
anuninaconvent.Itsnutritionalsinswereex
onerated, and it was henceforth
rebornandbaptizedasthehealthywholegrai
n.
Was there any evidence? It
hardlymattered. The goals were now
thenutritionalorthodoxy.Everythingelse
was heathen. If you didn’t toe the
line,you were ridiculed. The
DietaryGuidelinesforAmericans,
104. recommendations of the
McGovernreportclosely.Thenutritionalla
ndscapeoftheworldwas foreverchanged.
TheDietaryGuidelinesforAmericans,
now updated every fiveyears, spawned
the infamous
foodpyramidinallitscounterfactualglory.
The foods that formed the base of
thepyramid—
thefoodsweshouldeateverysingleday—
werebreads,pastasand potatoes. These
were the precisefoods that we had
previously avoided
tostaythin.Forexample,theAmericanHear
tAssociation’s1995pamphlet,TheAmeri
can Heart Association Diet:
AnEatingPlan
forHealthyAmericans,declared we
should eat six or
106. starchy vegetables (that) are low in
fatand cholesterol.” To drink,
“Choose...fruit punches, carbonated soft
drinks.”Ahhh. White bread and
carbonated softdrinks—the dinner of
champions.
Thankyou,AmericanHeartAssociation(AH
A).
Entering this brave new
world,Americans tried to comply with
thenutritionalauthoritiesofthedayandmad
e a conscious effort to eat less fat,less
red meat, fewer eggs and
morecarbohydrates. When doctors
advisedpeople to stop smoking, rates
droppedfrom33percentin1979to25perce
ntby1994. When doctors said to
controlblood pressure and cholesterol,
therewas a 40 percent decline in high
108. cholesterol. When the AHA told us to
eatmore bread and drink more juice, we
atemorebreadanddrankmorejuice.
Inevitably, sugar
consumptionincreased. From 1820 to
1920, newsugar plantations in the
Caribbean andAmerican South
increased theavailability of sugar in
the U.S.
Sugarintakeplateauedfrom1920to1977
.
Eventhough“avoidtoomuchsugar”was
anexplicitgoalofthe1977DietaryGuideli
nes for Americans,
consumptionincreasedanywayuntiltheye
ar2000.
With all our attention focused on fat,
wetookoureyesofftheball.Everythingwas
“lowfat”or“lowcholesterol,”andnobody
110. increasedtheaddedsugarsinprocessedfood
forflavor.
Refined grain consumption
increasedby almost 45 percent.
Sincecarbohydrates in North America
tendedto be refined, we ate more and
morelow-
fatbreadandpasta,notcauliflowerandkal
e.11
Success! From 1976 to 1996,
theaverage fat intake decreased from
45percentofcaloriesto35percent.Butterco
nsumptiondecreased 38 percent.
Animal protein decreased 13
percent.Egg consumption decreased 18
percent.Grains andsugarsincreased.
113. away from the natural fats, we
embracedrefined low-fat carbohydrates
such asbread and pasta. Ironically,
theAmerican Heart Association, even
aslate as the year 2000, felt that low-
carbohydratedietsweredangerousfads,de
spitethefactthatthesedietshadbeeninusea
lmostcontinuouslysince1863.
Whatwastheresult?Theincidenceofhea
rt disease certainly did not decreaseas
expected. But there was definitely
aconsequencetothisdietarymanipulation
—
anunintentionalone.Ratesofobesity,define
d as having a body mass indexgreater
than 30, dramatically increased,starting
almost exactly in 1977,
asillustratedbyFigure 1.2.12
Theabruptincreaseinobesitybegan
114. exactly with the officially
sanctionedmove toward a low-fat, high-
carbohydrate diet. Was it
merecoincidence?Perhapsthefaultlayinou
rgeneticmakeupinstead.
116. INHERITING
OBESITY
IT IS FAIRLYobvious that obesity runs
infamilies.1Obese children often
haveobese siblings. Obese children
becomeobese adults.2Obese adults go
on
tohaveobesechildren.Childhoodobesityi
s associated with a 200 percent to
400percent increased risk of adult
obesity.This is an undeniable fact.
Thecontroversy revolves around
whetherthis trend is a genetic or
anenvironmental problem—the
classicnatureversusnurturedebate.
Familiessharegeneticcharacteristics
that may lead to obesity.
118. the1970s.Ourgenescouldnothavecha
ngedwithinsuchashorttime.
Geneticscanexplainmuchoftheinter-
individual risk of obesity, but not
whyentirepopulationsbecomeobese.
Nonetheless, families live in the
sameenvironment,eatsimilarfoodsatsimi
lartimesandhavesimilar attitudes.
Families often share cars, live in
thesamephysicalspaceandwillbeexpose
dtothesamechemicalsthatmaycause
obesity—so-called chemicalobesogens.
For these reasons, manyconsider the
current environment
themajorcauseofobesity.
Conventional calorie-based
theoriesof obesity place the blame
squarely
onthis“toxic”environmentthatencourages
119. How Jones loss his weight without any exercise you
want to learn this special method than click
here Do you want to loss your weight without any
exercise than click here
120. eating and discourages
physicalexertion. Dietary and
lifestyle
habitshavechangedconsiderablysincet
he1970sincluding
adoption of a low-fat, high-
carbohydrate
diet,increased number of
eatingopportunitiesperday,
moremealseatingout,more
fast-food restaurants,more
time spent in cars
andvehicles,
increased popularityofvideosgames,
increased use of
computers,increasein dietary
sugar,increaseduseofhigh-
122. syrupand
increased portionsizes.
Anyorallofthesefactorsmaycontribute
to the obesogenicenvironment.
Therefore, most moderntheories of
obesity discount
theimportanceofgeneticfactors,believin
ginstead that consumption of
excesscalories leads to obesity. Eating
andmoving are voluntary behaviors,
afterall,withlittlegeneticinput.
So—
exactlyhowmuchofaroledoesgeneticsplayi
nhumanobesity?
123. NATUREVERSUSNURTURE
THE CLASSIC METHODfor determining
therelative impact of genetic
versusenvironmental factors is to
studyadoptive families, thereby
removinggeneticsfromtheequation.Byco
mparing adoptees to their biologicaland
adoptive parents, the
relativecontribution of environmental
influencescan be isolated. Dr. Albert J.
Stunkardperformed some of the classic
geneticstudies of obesity.3Data
aboutbiological parents is often
incomplete,confidential and not easily
accessible byresearchers. Fortunately,
Denmark hasmaintained a relatively
complete registryof adoptions, with
information on bothsetsofparents.
124. Studyingasampleof540Danishadultado
ptees, Dr. Stunkard compared themto
both their adoptive and
biologicalparents. If environmental
factors weremost important, then
adoptees shouldresemble their adoptive
parents. Ifgenetic factors were most
important, theadoptees should resemble
theirbiologicalparents.
Norelationshipwhatsoeverwasdiscover
ed
betweentheweightoftheadoptiveparentsa
ndtheadoptees.
Whetheradoptiveparentswerethinorfat
made no difference to the
eventualweight of the adopted child.
Theenvironment provided by the
adoptiveparentswaslargelyirrelevant.
Thisfindingwasaconsiderable
125. shock. Standard calorie-based
theoriesblame environmental factors and
humanbehaviors for obesity.
Environmentalcues such as dietary
habits, fast
food,junkfood,candyintake,lackofexerci
se,number of cars, and lack of
playgroundsandorganizedsportsarebelie
vedcrucialinthedevelopmentofobesity.
Buttheyplayvirtuallyno role. Infact,the
fattest adoptees had the
thinnestadoptive parents.
Comparing adoptees to
theirbiologicalparentsyieldedaconsider
ablydifferentresult.Heretherewas a
strong, consistent correlationbetween
their weights. The biologicalparents had
very little or nothing to
dowithraisingthesechildren,orteaching
126. themnutritionalvaluesorattitudestoward
exercise. Yet the tendencytoward
obesity followed them likeducklings.
When you took a child
awayfromobeseparentsandplacedthemint
oa “thin” household, the child
stillbecame obese.
Whatwasgoingon?
Studying identical twins raised
apartis another classic strategy to
distinguishenvironmentalandgeneticfac
tors.
Identicaltwinsshareidenticalgeneticm
aterial, and fraternal twins share
25percentoftheirgenes. In1991, Dr.
Stunkard examined sets of fraternal
andidentical twins in both conditions
ofbeing reared apart and reared
together.4Comparisonoftheirweightswo
128. determine the effect of the
differentenvironments. The results sent
ashockwave through the obesity-
researchcommunity. Approximately 70
percent ofthevariance
inobesityisfamilial.
Seventypercent.
Seventypercentofyourtendencytogai
n weight is determined by
yourparentage. Obesity is
overwhelminglyinherited.
However, it is immediately clear
thatinheritance cannot be the sole
factorleading to the obesity epidemic.
Theincidenceofobesityhasbeenrelativel
ystable through the decades. Most of
theobesityepidemicmaterializedwithina
single generation. Our genes have
notchangedinthattimespan.Howcanwe
130. THETHRIFTY-
GENEHYPOTHESIS
THE FIRST ATTEMPTto explain the
geneticbasis of obesity was the thrifty-
genehypothesis, which became popular
in the1970s. This hypothesis assumes
that allhumans are evolutionarily
predisposedtogainweightasasurvivalmec
hanism.
Theargumentgoessomethinglikethis:
In Paleolithic times, food
wasscarceanddifficulttoobtain.Hungeri
sone of the most powerful and basic
ofhuman instincts. The thrifty
genecompels us to eat as much as
possible,and this genetic predisposition
to gainweighthadasurvivaladvantage.
Increasingthebody’sfoodstores(fat)permitt
132. scarce or no food. Those who tended
toburnthecaloriesinsteadofstoringthem
were selectively wiped out.
However,thethriftygeneisilladaptedtothe
modern all-you-can-eat world, as
itcauses weight gain and obesity. But
weare simply following our genetic
urge togainfat.
Likeadecomposingwatermelon,thishyp
othesisseemsquitereasonableonthesurfac
e. Cut a little deeper, and you findthe
rotten core. This theory has
longceasedtobetaken
seriously.However,it is still mentioned
in the media, and soits flaws bear some
examination. Themost obvious problem
is that survival inthe wild depends on
not being
eitherunderweightoroverweight.Afatani
134. is slower and less agile than its
leanerbrethren.Predatorswouldpreferenti
allyeat the fatter prey over the harder-to-
catch, lean prey. By the same token,
fatpredators would find it much
moredifficulttocatchleanandswiftprey.
Body fatness does not always provide
asurvival advantage, but instead can be
asignificant disadvantage. How
manytimes have you seen a fat zebra
orgazelle on the National
Geographicchannel?Whataboutfatlionsa
ndtigers?
Theassumptionthathumansaregenetica
lly predisposed to overeat isincorrect.
Just as there are hormonalsignals of
hunger, there are
multiplehormonesthattelluswhenwe’refu
llandstopusfromovereating.Consider
135. the all-you-can-eat buffet. It
isimpossibletosimplyeatandeatwithoutst
opping because we get
“full.”Continuing to eat may make us
becomesickandthrowup.Thereisnogeneti
cpredisposition to overeating. There
is,instead, powerful built-in
protectionagainstit.
The thrifty-gene hypothesis
assumeschronic food shortages
preventedobesity. However, many
traditionalsocieties had plentiful food
year
round.Forexample,theTokelau,aremotet
ribein the South Pacific, lived on
coconut,breadfruit and fish, which
wereavailableyearround.Regardless,obe
sity was unknown among them
untiltheonsetofindustrializationandthe
136. Do you want to loss your weight without any exercise
than click here
137. Westernization of their traditional
diet.Even in modern-day North
America,widespreadfaminehasbeenunco
mmonsince the Great Depression. Yet
thegrowth of obesity has happened
onlysince the 1970s.
In wild animals, morbid obesity
israre, even with an abundance of
food,exceptwhenitispartofthenormallife
cycle,aswithhibernatinganimals.
Abundant food leads to a rise in
thenumbers of animals, not an
enormousincrease
intheirsize.Thinkaboutratsorcockroaches.
When food is scarce, ratpopulations are
low. When food isplentiful, rat
populations explode.
Therearemanymorenormal-
sizedrats,notthesamenumberofmorbidlyo
139. There is no survival advantage
tocarryingaveryhighbody-
fatpercentage.A male marathon runner
may have 5percent to 11 percent
bodyfat. Thisamount provides enough
energy
tosurviveformorethanamonthwithouteatin
g.Certainanimalsfattenregularly.
For instance, bears routinely gain
weightbefore hibernation—and they do
sowithout illness. Humans, though, do
nothibernate. There is an
importantdifference between being fat
and beingobese. Obesity is the state of
being fat tothe point of having
detrimental
healthconsequences.Bears,alongwithwh
ales,walruses and other fat animals are
fat,but not obese, since they suffer no
141. genetically programmed to become
fat.We aren’t. In humans, evolution did
notfavorobesity,butrather,leanness.
The thrifty-gene hypothesis
doesn’texplain obesity, but what does?
As wewill see in Part 3, “A New Model
ofObesity,” the root cause of obesity is
acomplex hormonal imbalance with
highblood
insulinasitscentralfeature.Thehormonal
profile of a baby is influencedby the
environment in the mother’s bodybefore
birth, setting up a tendency forhigh
insulin levels and associatedobesity
later in life. The explanation ofobesity
as a caloric imbalance simplycannot
account for this predominantlygenetic
effect, since eating and
exercisearevoluntarybehaviors.Obesitya
146. THECALORIE-
REDUCTIONERRO
R
TRADITIONALLY,OBESITYHASbeenseen
as a result of how people
processcalories, that is, that a person’s
weightcouldbe predictedbya
simpleequation:
Calories In–Calories
Out=BodyFatThiskeyequationperpetra
teswhatI
call the calorie deception. It
isdangerous
preciselybecauseitappearsso simple
and intuitive. But what
youneedtounderstandisthatmanyfalseass
148. and
CaloriesOutareindepende
ntofeachother
THISASSUMPTIONISacrucialmistake.
As we’ll see later on in this
chapter,experimentsandexperiencehave
proventhisassumptionfalse.Caloricintake
andexpenditure are intimately
dependentvariables. Decreasing
Calories
IntriggersadecreaseinCaloriesOut.A30
percent reduction in caloric
intakeresults in a 30 percent decrease
incaloric expenditure. The end result
isminimalweightloss.
Assumption2:Basalmet
150. barely a thought for caloric
expenditure,except for exercise.
Measuring caloricintake is simple, but
measuring
thebody’stotalenergyexpenditureiscomp
licated. Therefore, the simple
butcompletely erroneous assumption
ismade that energy expenditure
remainsconstant except for exercise.
Totalenergy expenditure is the sum of
basalmetabolic rate, thermogenic effect
offood, nonexercise
activitythermogenesis, excess post-
exerciseoxygen consumption and
exercise. Thetotal energy expenditure
can go up ordown by as much as 50
percentdepending upon the caloric
intake aswellasotherfactors.
151. Assumption 3: We
exertconsciouscontrolov
erCaloriesIn
EATINGISAdeliberateact,soweassume
that eating is a conscious decision
andthathungerplaysonlyaminorroleinit.B
ut numerous overlapping
hormonalsystems influence the decision
of whento eat and when to stop. We
consciouslydecide to eat in response to
hungersignals that are largely
hormonallymediated. We consciously
stop eatingwhen the body sends signals
of satiety(fullness) that are largely
hormonallymediated.
Forexample,thesmelloffryingfoodmake
syouhungryatlunchtime.
152. However, if you have just finished
alarge buffet, those same smells
maymake you slightly queasy. The
smells arethe same. The decision to eat
or not isprincipallyhormonal.
Ourbodiespossessanintricatesystem
guiding us to eat or not. Body-
fatregulationisunderautomaticcontrol,lik
e breathing. We do not
consciouslyremind ourselves to breathe,
nor do
weremindourheartstobeat.Theonlywayto
achieve such control is to
havehomeostatic mechanisms.
Sincehormones control both Calories In
andCaloriesOut, obesityisahormonal,
notacaloric,disorder.
Assumption4:Fatstoresare
153. How Jones loss his weight
without any exercise you want
to learn this special method
than click here
154. essentiallyunregulated
EVERY SINGLE SYSTEM in the body
isregulated.Growthinheightisregulatedb
y growth hormone. Blood sugars
areregulated by the hormones insulin
andglucagon, among others.
Sexualmaturation is regulated by
testosteroneand estrogen. Body
temperature isregulated by a thyroid-
stimulatinghormone and free thyroxine.
The list isendless.
We are asked to believe,
however,that growth of fat cells is
essentiallyunregulated.Thesimpleact
ofeating,without any interference
from
anyhormones,willresultinfatgrowth.
Extracaloriesaredumpedintofatcellsliked
156. This assumption has already
beenprovenfalse.Newhormonalpathway
sin the regulation of fat growth are
beingdiscovered all the time. Leptin is
thebest-known hormone regulating
fatgrowth, but adiponectin, hormone-
sensitivelipase,lipoproteinlipaseandadi
pose triglyceride lipase may all
playimportantroles.Ifhormonesregulatef
atgrowth,then obesityisahormonal,
notacaloricdisorder.
Assumption5:Acalorieisacal
orie
THISASSUMPTION ISthemostdangerous
ofall.It’sobviouslytrue.Justlike adogis a
dog or a desk is a desk. There
aremanydifferentkindsofdogsanddesks,
157. but the simple statement that a dog is
adog is true. However, the real issue
isthis: Are all calories equally likely
tocausefatgain?
“A calorie is a calorie” implies
thatthe only important variable in
weightgainisthetotalcaloricintake,andth
us,all foods can be reduced to their
caloricenergy. But does a calorie of
olive oilcause the same metabolic
response as acalorie of sugar? The
answer is,obviously, no. These two
foods
havemanyeasilymeasurabledifferences.
Sugar will increase the blood
glucoselevel and provoke an insulin
responsefrom the pancreas. Olive oil will
not.Whenoliveoilisabsorbedbythe
smallintestineandtransportedtotheliver,
158. thereisnosignificantincreaseinbloodgluco
se or insulin. The two differentfoods
evoke vastly different
metabolicandhormonalresponses.
These five assumptions—the
keyassumptions in the caloric
reductiontheory of weight loss—have
all beenprovedfalse.
Allcaloriesarenotequally likely to cause
weight gain.
Theentirecaloricobsessionwas afifty-
yeardeadend.
So we must begin again. What
causesweightgain?
159. HOWDOWEPROCESSFOOD?
WHAT IS Acalorie? A calorie is simply
aunit of energy. Different foods
areburnedinalaboratory,andtheamountofh
eatreleasedismeasuredtodetermineacalor
icvalue forthatfood.
All the foods we eat contain
calories.Foodfirstentersthestomach,wher
eitismixed with stomach acid and
slowlyreleasedintothesmallintestine.
Nutrients are extracted throughout
thejourney through the small and
largeintestines.Whatremainsisexcretedass
tool.
Proteins are broken down into
theirbuilding blocks, amino acids. These
areused to build and repair the
body’stissues,andtheexcessisstored.Fatsa
re
160. directly absorbed into the
body.Carbohydrates are broken down
intotheir building blocks, sugars.
Proteins,fats and carbohydrates all
providecaloricenergyforthebody,butdi
ffergreatly in their metabolic
processing.This results in different
hormonalstimuli.
161. CALORICREDUCTIONISNOTT
HE PRIMARY FACTOR
INWEIGHTLOSS
WHY DO WE gain weight? The
mostcommon answer is that excess
caloricintakecausesobesity.Butalthoug
htheincrease in obesity rates in the
UnitedStates from 1971 to 2000
wasassociated with an increase in
dailycalorie consumption of roughly
200 to300 calories,1it’s important
toremember that correlation is
notcausation.
Furthermore, the correlation
betweenweight gain and the increase in
calorieconsumptionhasrecentlybrokendo
wn.2Data from the National Health
andNutritionExaminationSurvey(NHANES)
162. in the United States from 1990 to
2010finds
noassociationbetweenincreasedcalorie
consumptionandweightgain.
While obesity increased at a rate of
0.37percentperyear,caloricintakeremaine
dvirtually stable. Women
slightlyincreased their average daily
intake from1761calories to 1781, but
men slightlydecreased theirs from 2616
calories to2511.
The British obesity epidemic
largelyran parallel to North America’s.
Butonce again, the association of
weightgainwithincreased
calorieconsumptiondoes not hold
true.3In the Britishexperience, neither
increased caloricintake nor dietary fat
164. relationship.Infact,thenumberofcalories
ingested slightly
decreased,evenasobesityratesincreased.
Otherfactors, including the nature of
thosecalories,hadchanged.
Wemayimagineourselvestobeacalo
rie-weighingscaleand maythinkthat
imbalance of calories over
timeleadstotheaccumulationoffat.
Calories In–Calories
Out=BodyFatIfCaloriesOutremainssta
bleover
time, then reducing Calories In
shouldproduce weight loss. The First
Law
ofThermodynamicsstatesthatenergycann
either be created nor destroyed in
anisolated system. This law is
ofteninvoked to support the
166. obesity researcher Dr. Jules
Hirsch,quotedina2012NewYorkTim
esarticle,4explains:
Thereisaninflexiblelawofphysics—
energy taken in must exactly equal
thenumberofcaloriesleavingthesystemwh
enfatstorageisunchanged.Caloriesleaveth
esystem
whenfoodisusedtofuelthebody.Tolowerfa
tcontent—reduceobesity—
onemustreducecaloriestakenin,orincrease
theoutputbyincreasingactivity,orboth.Thi
sistruewhethercaloriescomefrompumpkin
sorpeanutsorpâtédefoiegras.
But thermodynamics, a law
ofphysics,hasminimalrelevancetohuman
biology for the simple reason that
thehumanbodyisnotanisolatedsystem.
167. Energy is constantly entering
andleaving. Infact,
theveryactwearemostconcerned about—
eating—puts
energyintothesystem.Foodenergyisalsoe
xcreted from the system in the form
ofstool. Having studied a full year
ofthermodynamics in university, I
canassure you that neither calories
norweight gain were mentioned even
asingle time.
If we eat an extra 200 calories
today,nothing prevents the body from
burningthat excess for heat. Or perhaps
thatextra
200caloriesisexcretedasstool.Or
perhaps the liver uses the extra 200.We
obsess about caloric input into
thesystem,butoutputisfarmoreimportant.
169. thesystem?Supposeweconsume2000ca
lories of chemical energy (food) inone
day. What is the metabolic fate
ofthose2000calories?Possibilitiesforth
eiruse include
heatproduction,
new protein
production,new bone
production,new muscle
production,cognition
(brain),increasedheartra
te,
increased stroke volume
(heart),exercise/physicalexertion
,detoxification
(liver),detoxification(kidney),di
gestion (pancreas and
171. excretion(intestinesandcolon)andfat
production.
We certainly don’t mind if energy
isburned as heat or used to build
newprotein,butwedomindifitisdeposited
as fat. There are an almost
infinitenumberofwaysthatthebodycandiss
ipate excess energy instead
ofstoringitasbodyfat.
Withthemodelofthecalorie-balancing
scale, we assume that fat gainor loss is
essentially unregulated, andthat weight
gain and loss is underconscious control.
But no system in thebody is unregulated
like that.
Hormonestightlyregulateeverysinglesyst
eminthebody.Thethyroid,parathyroid,
172. sympathetic,
parasympathetic,respiratory, circulatory,
hepatic,
renal,gastrointestinalandadrenalsystemsa
reall under hormonal control. So is
bodyfat. The body actually has
multiplesystemstocontrolbodyweight.
The problem of fat accumulation
isreally a problem of distribution
ofenergy. Too much energy is diverted
tofat production as opposed to,
say,increasing, body-heat production.
Thevast majority of this energy
expenditureis controlled automatically,
withexercise being the only factor that
isunder our conscious control.
Forexample, we cannot decide how
muchenergy to expend on fat
accumulationversusnewboneformation.
174. metabolicprocessesarevirtuallyimpossib
le to measure, they are assumedto
remain relatively stable. In
particular,CaloriesOutisassumednottoch
angeinresponsetoCaloriesIn.Wepresume
thatthetwo areindependentvariables.
Let’stakeananalogy.Considerthemoney
thatyouearninayear(MoneyIn)and the
money that you spend (MoneyOut).
Suppose you normally earn andalso
spend $100,000 per year. If
MoneyInisnowreducedto$25,000
peryear,whatwouldhappentoMoneyOut?
Wouldyoucontinuetospend$100,000pery
ear? Probablyyou’re
notsostupid,asyou’dquicklybecomebank
rupt.
Instead,youwouldreduceyourMoneyOutto
$25,000peryeartobalancethe
175. budget. Money In and Money Out
aredependent variables, since reduction
ofone willdirectlycause
areductionoftheother.
Let’sapplythisreasoningtoobesity.
Reducing Calories In works only
ifCalories Out remains stable. What
wefind instead is that a sudden
reduction ofCalories
IncausesasimilarreductioninCalories
Out, and no weight is lost
asthebodybalancesitsenergybudget.
Some historic experiments in
caloriereductionhaveshownexactlyth
is.
176. CALORIC
REDUCTION:EXTREME
EXPERIMENTS,UNEXPECTE
D
RESULTSEXPERIMENTALLY,IT’SEAS
Ytostudy
caloric reduction. We take some
people,give them less to eat, watch them
loseweight and live happily ever after.
Bam.Case closed. Call the Nobel
committee:Eat Less, Move More is the
cure
forobesity,andcaloricreductiontrulyisthe
bestwaytoloseweight.
Luckily for us, such studies
havealreadybeendone.
A detailed study of total
energyexpenditure under conditions of
177. reducedcaloric intake was done in 1919
at theCarnegie Institute of
Washington.5Volunteersconsumed“sem
i-starvation”
178. diets of 1400 to 2100 calories per
day,an amount calculated to
beapproximately 30 percent lower
thantheirusualintake.(Manycurrentweigh
t-loss diets target very similar levels
ofcaloric intake.) The question
waswhethertotalenergyexpenditure(Calo
ries Out) decreases in response
tocaloric reduction (Calories In).
Whathappened?
The participants experienced
awhopping 30 percent decrease in
totalenergy expenditure, from an
initialcaloric expenditure of roughly
3000calories to approximately 1950
calories.Even nearly 100 years ago, it
was clearthat Calories Out is highly
dependent onCaloriesIn. A30
percentreductionin
179. caloric intake resulted in a
nearlyidentical30percentreductionincalor
icexpenditure. The energy budget
isbalanced. The First Law
ofThermodynamicsisnotbroken.
Several decades later, in 1944
and1945, Dr. Ancel Keys performed
themostcompleteexperimentofstarvatio
never done—the Minnesota
StarvationExperiment, the details of
which werepublished in 1950 in a two-
volumepublication entitled The
Biology ofHuman Starvation.6In the
aftermath ofWorld War II, millions of
people wereon the verge of starvation.
Yet thephysiologic effects of starvation
werevirtually unknown, having never
beenscientificallystudied.
TheMinnesota
180. study was an attempt to understand
boththe caloric-reduction and
recoveryphases of starvation.
Improvedknowledge would help guide
Europe’srecovery from the brink.
Indeed, as aresult of this study, a
relief-worker’sfield manual was
written
detailingpsychologicalaspectsofstarvat
ion.7
Thirty-sixyoung,healthy,normalmen
were selected with an average height
offive foot ten inches (1.78 meters) and
anaverage weight of 153 pounds
(69.3kilograms). For the first three
months,subjects received a standard
diet
of3200caloriesperday.Overthenextsixm
onths of semi-starvation, only
182. to reach a target total weight loss of
24percent (compared to
baseline),averaging
2.5pounds(1.1kilograms)perweek.Some
meneventuallyreceivedlessthan1000calo
riesperday. The foods given were high
incarbohydrates,similartothoseavailable
in war-torn Europe at the time—
potatoes,turnips,breadandmacaroni.
Meat and dairy products were
rarelygiven.Inaddition,theywalked 22
milesper week as exercise. Following
thiscaloric-reduction phase, their
calorieswere gradually increased over
threemonths of rehabilitation.
Expectedcaloricexpenditurewas3009
caloriesperday.8
EvenDr.Keyshimselfwasshocked
183. by the difficulty of the experiment.
Themenexperiencedprofoundphysicalan
dpsychologicalchanges.Amongthemostc
onsistent findings was the
constantfeeling of cold experienced by
theparticipants. As one explained,
“I’mcold. In July I walk downtown on
asunny day with a shirt and sweater
tokeepmewarm.Atnightmywellfedroom
mate, who isn’t in the
experiment,sleeps on top of his sheets
but I crawlundertwoblankets.”9
Restingmetabolicratedroppedby40
percent. Interestingly, thisphenomenon
is very similar to that of theprevious
study, which showed a drop
of30percent.Measurementofthesubjects’
strengthshoweda21percentdecrease.
184. Do you want to loss your weight
without any exercise than click here
185. Heartrateslowed considerably,
fromanaverage of fifty-five beats per
minute toonly thirty-five. Heart stroke
volumedecreased by 20 percent.
Bodytemperature dropped to an average
of95.8°F.10Physical endurance
droppedby half. Blood pressure
dropped.
Menbecameextremelytiredanddizzy.The
ylosthairandtheirnails grewbrittle.
Psychologically, there were
equallydevastating effects. The
menexperienced a complete lack of
interestin everything except for food,
whichbecame an object of intense
fascinationto them. Some hoarded
cookbooks andutensils. They were
plagued
withconstant,unyieldinghunger.Somewe
187. withdrew from their university
studies.There were several cases of
franklyneuroticbehavior.
Let’s reflect on what was
happeninghere.Priortothestudy,thesubj
ectsateand also burned approximately
3000calories per day. Then, suddenly,
theircaloric intake was reduced
toapproximately 1500 per day. All
bodyfunctions that require
energyexperienced an immediate,
across-the-board 30 percent to 40
percentreduction, which wrought
completehavoc.Consider
thefollowing:
Caloriesareneededtoheatthebod
y.
189. reduced. Result: constant feeling
ofcold.
Caloriesareneededforthehearttopu
mp blood.
Fewercalorieswereavailable, so
the pump sloweddown. Result:
heart rate and strokevolume
decreases.
Calories are needed to
maintainbloodpressure.Fewercalor
ieswereavailable,sothebodyturnedt
he pressure down. Result:
bloodpressuredecreased.
Caloriesareneeded
forbrainfunction, as the brain
is verymetabolically active.
Fewercalorieswereavailable,s
ocognition was reduced.
Result:lethargyandinabilityto
190. concentrate.
Calories are needed to move
thebody.Fewercalorieswereavail
able, so movement
wasreduced.Result:weaknessduri
ngphysicalactivity.
Caloriesareneededto
replacehairandnails.Fewercalories
wereavailable, so
hairandnailswerenot replaced.
Result: brittle nailsandhairloss.
The body reacts in this way—
byreducing energy expenditure—
becausethe body is smart and doesn’t
want todie. What would happen if the
bodycontinuedtoexpend3000caloriesdai
lywhiletakinginonly1500?Soonfat
191. stores would be burned, then
proteinstores would be burned, and then
youwoulddie.Nice.Thesmartcourseofacti
on for the body is to immediatelyreduce
caloric expenditure to
1500caloriesperdayto restorebalance.
Caloric expenditure may even
beadjusted a little lower (say, to
1400caloriesperday),tocreateamarginof
safety.This isexactlywhatthebodydoes.
In other words, the body shuts
down.In order to preserve itself, it
implementsacross-the-board reductions
in energyoutput. The crucial point to
remember
isthatdoingsoensuressurvivaloftheindivi
dualinatimeofextremestress.
Yeah,youmightfeellousy,butyou’ll
192. live to tell the tale. Reducing output
isthesmartthingforthebodytodo.
Burning energy it does not have
wouldquickly lead to death. The energy
budgetmustbebalanced.
CaloriesInandCalories
Outarehighlydependentvariables.
With reflection, it should
immediatelybeobviousthatcaloricexpen
dituremustdecrease. If we reduce daily
calorieintake by 500 calories, we
assume that 1pound (0.45 kilograms) of
fat per weekis lost. Does that mean that
in 200weeks, we would lose 200
pounds
(91kilograms)andweighzeropounds?Ofc
oursenot.Thebodymust,atsomepoint,
reduce its caloric expenditure
tomeetthelowercaloricintake.Itjustso
193. happens that this adaptation
occursalmost immediately and persists
longterm. The men in the
MinnesotaStarvation Experiment should
have lost78 pounds (35.3 kilograms),
but theactual weight lost was only 37
pounds(16.8kilograms)—
lessthanhalfofwhatwas expected. More
and more severecaloric restriction was
required
tocontinuelosingweight.Soundfamiliar?
Whathappenedtotheirweightafterthes
emi-starvationperiod?
During the semi-starvation
phase,body fat dropped much quicker
thanoverall body weight as fat stores
arepreferentially used to power the
body.Once the participants started
therecoveryperiod,theyregainedthe
194. weight rather quickly, in about
twelveweeks. But it didn’t stop there.
Bodyweightcontinuedtoincreaseuntilitwa
sactually higher than it was prior to
theexperiment.
The body quickly responds to
caloricreduction by reducing
metabolism (totalenergy expenditure),
but how long doesthis adaptation
persist? Given enoughtime, does the
body increase its
energyexpenditurebacktoitsprevioushigh
erlevel if caloric reduction is
maintained?The short answer is no.11In
a 2008study, participants initially lost
10percent of body weight, and their
totalenergy expenditure decreased
asexpected.Buthowlongdidthissituationla
st?Itremainedreducedover the
195. course of the entire study—a full
year.Evenafteroneyearatthenew,lowerbo
dyweight,theirtotalenergyexpenditure
was still reduced by
anaverageofalmost500caloriesper
day.In response to caloric
reduction,metabolism decreases
almostimmediately, and that decrease
persistsmoreorless indefinitely.
The applicability of these findings
tocaloric-reductiondietsisobvious.
Assume that prior to dieting, a
womaneats and burns 2000 calories per
day.Following doctor’s orders, she
adopts acalorie-restricted,portion-
controlled,low-fat diet, reducing her
intake by 500calories per day. Quickly,
her totalenergyexpenditure
alsodropsby500
196. caloriesperday,ifnotalittlemore.Shefeel
s lousy, tired, cold, hungry, irritableand
depressed, but sticks with it,thinking
that things must eventuallyimprove.
Initially, she loses weight, butas her
body’s caloric expendituredecreases to
match her lowered intake,her weight
plateaus. Her dietarycompliance is
good, but one year later,things have not
improved. Her weightslowly creeps
back up, even though sheeats the same
number of calories. Tiredof feeling so
lousy, she abandons thefailed diet and
resumes eating 2000calories per day.
Since her metabolismhas slowed to an
output of only 1500calories per day, all
her weight comesrushingback—
asfat.Thosearoundher
197. How Jones loss his weight without any exercise you
want to learn this special method than click here
199. ANERRONEOUSASSUMPTION
LET’S CONSIDER Alast analogy
here.Supposewemanageacoal-
firedpowerplant. Every day to generate
energy, wereceive and burn 2000 tons
of coal. Wealso keep some coal stored
in a shed,justincasewerunlow.
Now,allofasudden,wereceiveonly150
0 tons of coal a day. Should
wecontinuetoburn2000tonsofcoaldaily?
We would quickly burn through
ourstores of coal, and then our power
plantwould be shut down. Massive
blackoutsdevelop over the entire city.
Anarchyandlootingcommence.Ourbosste
llsushow utterly stupid we are and
yells,“YourassisFIRED!”Unfortunatelyfor
us,he’sentirelyright.
200. In reality, we’d handle this
situationanotherway.Assoonaswerealiz
ethatwe’ve received only 1500 tons of
coal,we’d immediately reduce our
powergeneration to burn only 1500
tons. Infact, we might burn only 1400
tons,
justincasetherewerefurtherreductionsin
shipments.Inthecity,afewlightsgodim,
but there are no widespreadblackouts.
Anarchy and looting areavoided. Boss
says, “Great job. You’renot as stupid
as you look. Raises
allaround.”Wemaintaintheloweroutputo
f1500tonsaslongasnecessary.
Thekeyassumptionofthetheorythatreduc
ing caloric intake leads to
weightlossisfalse,sincedecreasedcalorici
ntakeinevitablyleads todecreased
201. caloric expenditure. This sequence
hasbeenproventimeandagain.Wejustkeep
hoping that this strategy
willsomehow,thistime,work.Itwon’t.Fac
eit. In our heart of hearts, we
alreadyknow it to be true. Caloric
reduction andportion-
controlstrategiesonlymakeyoutired and
hungry. Worst of all... youregain
alltheweightyouhavelost.Iknowit.Youkn
owit.
We forget this inconvenient
factbecauseourdoctors,ourdieticians,ou
rgovernment, our scientists,
ourpoliticiansandourmediahaveallbeens
creamingatusfordecadesthatweightloss
is all about Calories In versusCalories
Out. “Caloric reduction
isprimary.”“EatLess,MoveMore.”We
203. EATING IS NOT
UNDERCONSCIOUSCONTR
OL
BY THE EARLY 1990s, the Battle of
theBulge was not going well. The
obesityepidemicwasgatheringmomentum
,withtype 2 diabetes following
closelybehind. The low-fat campaign
wasstartingtofizzleasthepromisedbenefits
had failed to materialize. Even as
wewere choking down our dry
skinlesschicken breast and rice cakes,
we weregetting fatter and sicker.
Looking foranswers, the National
Institutes ofHealth recruited almost
50,000 post-
menopausalwomenforthemostmassive,
expensive, ambitious
205. controlledtrialwascalledtheWomen’sHea
lth Initiative Dietary
ModificationTrial.12This trial is
arguably the
mostimportantdietarystudyeverdone.
Approximately one-third of
thesewomen received a series of
eighteeneducation sessions, group
activities,targeted message campaigns
andpersonalized feedback over one
year.Their dietary intervention was to
reducedietary fat, which was cut down
to 20percent of daily calories. They
alsoincreasedtheirvegetableandfruitintak
eto five servings per day and grains to
sixservings. They were encouraged
toincrease
exercise.Thecontrolgroupwas instructed
to eat as they normallydid.Thoseinthis
207. with a copy of the Dietary
Guidelinesfor Americans, but otherwise
receivedlittlehelp.Thetrialaimedtoconfir
mthecardiovascular health and weight-
reductionbenefitsofthe low-fatdiet.
Theaverageweightofparticipantsatth
e beginning of the study was 169pounds
(76.8 kilograms). The startingaverage
body mass index was 29.1,putting
participants in the overweightcategory
(body mass index of 25 to29.9), but
bordering on obese (bodymass index
greater than 30). They werefollowed
for 7.5 years to see if thedoctor-
recommended diet reducedobesity,
heart disease and cancer
asmuchasexpected.
Thegroupthatreceiveddietary
208. counseling succeeded. Daily
caloriesdropped from 1788 to 1446 a
day—areduction of 342 calories per
day foroversevenyears.Fatas
apercentageofcaloriesdecreasedfrom38.
8percentto
29.8 percent, and
carbohydratesincreased from 44.5
percent to 52.7percent. The women
increased theirdaily physical activity by
14 percent.The control group continued
to eat thesamehigher-calorieandhigher-
fatdiettowhichtheywere accustomed.
The results were telling. The
“EatLess, Move More” group started
outterrifically, averaging more than
4pounds (1.8 kilograms) of weight
lossoverthefirstyear.Bythesecondyear,th
eweightstartedtoberegained,andby
209. the end of the study, there was
nosignificant difference between the
twogroups.
Did these women perhaps
replacesome oftheirfatwithmuscle?
Unfortunately, the average
waistcircumferenceincreasedapproximate
ly
0.39 inches (0.6 centimeters), and
theaverage waist-to-hip ratio
increasedfrom 0.82 to 0.83 inches
(2.1centimeters), which indicates
thesewomen were actually fatter than
before.Weightlossover7.5yearsofthe
EatLess,MoveMorestrategywasnoteven
onesinglekilogram(2.2pounds).
This study was only the latest in
anunbroken string of failed
experiments.Caloricreductionastheprimar
211. of weight loss has
disappointedrepeatedly. Reviews of the
literature bythe U.S. Department of
Agriculture13highlight this failure. All
these studies,ofcourse, serveonlyto
confirmwhatwealready knew. Caloric
reduction doesn’tcause lasting weight
loss. Anybody
whohasevertrieditcantellyou.
Manypeopletellme,“Idon’t
understand. I eat less. I exercise
more.But I can’t seem to lose any
weight.” Iunderstand perfectly—
because thisadvice has been proven to
fail. Docaloric-reduction diets work?
No.
TheWomen’sHealthInitiativeDietaryMo
dification Trial was the
biggest,baddest, most kick-ass study of
214. HUNGERGAMES
THECALORIESIN,CaloriesOutplanforweig
ht loss assumes that we
haveconsciouscontroloverwhatweeat.B
utthis belief ignores the
extremelypowerful effect of the body’s
hormonalstate. The defining
characteristic of thehuman body is
homeostasis, oradaptation to change.
Our body dealswith an ever-changing
environment.
Inresponse,thebodymakesadjustmentsto
minimizetheeffectsofsuchchangesandretu
rn to its original condition. And so
itis,whenthe bodystartstolose weight.
There are two major adaptations
tocaloric reduction. The first change,
aswe have seen, is a dramatic reduction
intotalenergyexpenditure.Thesecondkey
215. change is that the hormonal signals
thatstimulate hunger increase. The
body ispleadingwithus
toeatinorderforittoregainthe
lostweight.
This effect was demonstrated in
2011,in an elegant study of
hormonaladaptation to weight
loss.14Subjectswere given a diet of 500
calories perday, which produced an
average
weightlossof29.7pounds(13.5kilograms
).
Next, they were prescribed a low-
glycemic-index,low-
fatdietforweightmaintenance and were
encouraged
toexercisethirtyminutesperday.Despitet
216. heir best intentions, almost half of
theweightwasregained.
Varioushormonallevels,includingg
hrelin—ahormonethat,essentially,
217. makes us hungry—were
analyzed.Weight loss significantly
increasedghrelin levels in the study’s
subjects,even after more than one year,
comparedtothesubjects’usualbaseline.
Whatdoesthatmean?Itmeansthatthesubj
ects felt hungrier and continued
tofeelso,rightuptoendofthestudy.
The study also measured
severalsatiety hormones, including
peptide YY,amylin and cholecystokinin,
all of whichare released in response to
proteins
andfatsinourdietandservetomakeusfeelful
l.Thisresponse,inturn,producesthedesired
effect of keeping us
fromovereating.Morethanayearafterinitia
lweightloss,thelevelsofallthreesatietyhor
monesweresignificantlylowerthan
219. about is food. Interest in all
elsediminishes. This behavior is not
somestrange affliction of the obese. In
fact,it’s entirely hormonally driven
andnormal.Thebody,throughhungerands
atiety signaling, is compelling us to
getmore food.
Losing weight triggers two
importantresponses. First,
totalenergyexpenditure is immediately
andindefinitely reduced in order to
conservethe available energy. Second,
hormonalhunger signaling is
immediately andindefinitely amplified in
an effort
toacquiremorefood.Weightlossresultsini
ncreased hunger and
decreasedmetabolism. This evolutionary
survivalstrategyhasasinglepurpose:to
221. regainthelostweight.
Functional magnetic
resonanceimagingstudiesshowthatareasoft
hebraincontrollingemotionandcognitionli
ghtup inresponseto food stimuli.
Areas of the prefrontal cortex
involvedwith restraint show decreased
activity.In other words, it is harder for
peoplewho have lost weight to resist
food.15Thishasnothingwhatsoevertodo
with a lack of willpower or any kind
ofmoral failure. It’s a normal
hormonalfact of life. We feel hungry,
cold, tiredanddepressed.
Theseareallreal,measurable physical
effects of calorierestriction. Reduced
metabolism and theincreased hunger
are not the cause ofobesity—
theyaretheresult.Losing
222. weight causes the reduced
metabolismand increased hunger, not
the other
wayaround.Wedonotsimplymakeaperson
al choice to eat more. One of thegreat
pillars of the caloric-reductiontheory of
obesity—that we eat too muchbecause
we choose to—is simply
nottrue.Wedonoteattoomuchbecausewec
hoose to, or because food is
toodelicious, or because of salt, sugar
andfat.Weeattoomuchbecauseourownbra
incompelsusto.
223. THEVICIOUSCYCLEOFUNDER-
EATING
ANDSOWEhavetheviciouscycleofunder-
eating. We start by eating less andlose
some weight. As a result,
ourmetabolism slows and hunger
increases.Westarttoregainweight.Wedou
bleourefforts by eating even less. A bit
moreweight comes off, but again, total
energyexpenditure decreases and
hungerincreases. We start regaining
weight. Sowe redouble our efforts by
eating evenless. This cycle continues
until it isintolerable. We are cold, tired,
hungryand obsessing about calories.
Worst
ofall,theweightalwayscomesbackon.
At some point, we go back to our
225. slowed so much, even resuming the
oldwayofeatingcausesquickweightgain,
up to and even a little past the
originalpoint. We are doing exactly
what
ourhormonesareinfluencingustodo.Butfri
ends, family and medicalprofessionals
silently blame the
victim,thinkingthatitis“ourfault.”Andwe
ourselvesfeelthatweare afailure.
Soundfamiliar?
All dieters share this same sad
storyof weight loss and regain. It’s a
virtualguarantee. The cycle has
beenscientifically established, and its
truthhas been forged in the tears of
millionsof dieters. Yet nutritional
authoritiescontinue to preach that
caloric
228. THE CRUELHOAX
CALORICREDUCTIONISaharshandbitterdisa
ppointment. Yet all the “experts”still
agree that caloric reduction is thekey to
lasting weight loss. When
youdon’tloseweight,theysay,“It’syourfau
lt. You were gluttons. You weresloths.
You didn’t try hard enough. Youdidn’t
want it badly enough.” There’s adirty
little secret that nobody is willingto
admit: The low-fat, low-calorie diethas
already been proven to fail. This
isthecruelhoax.Eatinglessdoesnotresulti
nlastingweightloss.It.Just.
Does.Not.Work.
It is cruel because so many of us
havebelieved it. It is cruel because all
of our“trusted
healthsources”tellusitistrue.
229. How Jones loss his weight without any exercise you
want to learn this special method than click here
230. It is cruel because when it fails,
weblame ourselves. Let me state it
asplainlyasIcan:“EatLess”
doesnotwork.That’safact.Acceptit.
Pharmaceutical methods of
caloricreduction only emphasize the
spectacularfailure of this paradigm.
Orlistat(marketed in the U.S. as Alli)
wasdesigned to block the absorption
ofdietary fat. Orlistat is the
drugequivalent of the low-fat, low-
caloriediet.
Amongitsnumeroussideeffects,themo
st bothersome was
euphemisticallycalled fecal leakage
and oily spotting.The unabsorbed
dietary fat came out theother end,
where it often
stainedunderwear.Weight-
232. in with useful advice about the
“orangepoopoil.” Neverwearwhite
pants.
Never assume it’s just a fart. In
2007,Alli won the “Bitter Pill Award”
forworst drug from the U.S.
consumergroup Prescription Access
Litigation.Thereweremoreseriousconce
rnssuchas liver toxicity, vitamin
deficiency andgallstones. However,
orlistat’sinsurmountable problem was
that it didnotreallywork.16
In a randomized, double-
blindcontrolled study,17four years of
takingthe medication three times daily
resultedin an extra 6 pounds (2.8
kilograms) ofweight loss. But 91
percent of thepatients complained of
234. of the drug peaked in 2001 at
$600million. Despite being sold over
thecounter,by2013,saleshadplummetedt
o$100million.
The fake fat olestra was a
similarlyill-conceived notion, born out
ofcaloric-reduction theory. Released
togreat fanfare several years ago,
olestrawas not absorbed by the body
and thushad no caloric impact. Its sales
began tosink within two years of
release.18Theproblem? It led to no
significant weightloss. By 2010, it
landed on Timemagazine’s list of the
fifty
worstinventions,justbehindasbestos.19
236. THEEXERCISE
MYTH
DR. PETER ATTIAisthe cofounder
ofNutrition Science Initiative (NuSi),
anorganization dedicated to improving
thequality of science in nutrition
andobesity research. A few years ago,
hewas an elite long-distance swimmer,
oneof only a dozen or so people to
haveswum from Los Angeles to
CatalinaIsland. A physician himself, he
followedthe standard prescribed diet
high incarbohydrates and trained
religiously forthree to four hours daily.
He was also,by his own estimation,
about fortypounds (18 kilograms)
overweight
239. THE LIMITS OF EXERCISE:
AHARSHREALITY
CERTAINLY, EXERCISE HAS great
healthbenefits. The early Greek
physicianHippocrates, considered the
father ofmedicine, said, “If we could
give everyindividual the right amount
ofnourishment and exercise, not too
littleand not too much, we would have
foundthe safest way to health.” In the
1950s,along with increasing concern
aboutheartdisease,interestinphysicalacti
vity and exercise began to grow. In1955,
President Eisenhower
establishedthePresident’sCouncilonYout
hFitness.By 1966, the U.S. Public Health
Servicebegan to advocate that
increasingphysicalactivitywasoneoftheb
241. ways to lose weight. Aerobics
studiosbegan to sprout like
mushrooms after arainstorm.
The CompleteBook
ofRunningbyJimFixxbecamearunawayb
estsellerin1977. The fact that he died at
age fifty-two of a massive heart attack
was only
aminorsetbacktothecause.Dr.KennethCo
oper’s book The New Aerobics
wasrequired reading in the 1980s where
Iwent to high school. More and
morepeople began incorporating
physicalactivityintotheirleisuretime.
It seemed reasonable to
expectobesity rates to fall as exercise
ratesincreased.Afterall,governmentsaro
undthe world have poured millions
ofdollarsintopromotingexercisefor
242. weight loss, and they succeeded
ingettingtheircitizensmoving.IntheU
nitedKingdomfrom1997to2008,regu
lar exercise increased from
32percent to 39 percent in men and
21percentto29percentinwomen.1
There’s a problem, though. All
thisactivity had no effect on obesity at
all.Obesityincreasedrelentlessly,evenas
we sweated to the oldies. Just take
alookatFigure 4.1,2.
245. main motivation for exercise in
allcountries. Did all this activity
translateintolowerratesofobesity?
Glad you asked. The Dutch
andItalians, with their low exercise
rates,experienced less than one-third
theobesity of those iron-
pumpingAmericans.
The problem was apparent in
theAmerican NHANESdata as well.
From2001 to 2011, there was a
generalincrease in physical
activity.4Certainareas (Kentucky,
Virginia, Florida andthe Carolinas)
increased exercise atHerculean rates.
But here’s the
dismaltruth:whetherphysicalactivityinc
reasesordecreases,ithasvirtuallynorelat
ionshiptotheprevalenceof
246. obesity. Increasing exercise did
notreduceobesity.Itwasirrelevant.Certain
states exercised more. Other
statesexercised less. Obesity increased
by thesameamountregardless.
Is exercise important in
reducingchildhood obesity? The short
answer
isno.A2013paper5comparedthephysical
activity (measured usingaccelerometry)
of children aged three tofive years to
their weight. The
authorsconcludedthereisno
associationbetween activityand
obesity.
Whatwentwrong?
Inherent to the Calories In,
CaloriesOut theory is the idea that
reducedphysicalactivityplaysa keyrole
248. used to walk everywhere, but now
wedrive. With the increase in
laborsavingdevices such as cars, our
exercise hasdecreased, leading to
obesity. Theproliferation of video
games, televisionand computers is also
believed
tocontributetoasedentarylifestyle.Likean
ygooddeception,thisonesoundspretty
reasonable at first. There is asmall
problem,though.Itisjustnottrue.
Researcher Dr. Herman
Pontzerstudied a hunter-gatherer society
living
aprimitivelifestyleinthemodernday.
TheHadzainTanzaniaoftentravel15to20mil
esperdaytogatherfood.Youmight assume
that their daily
energyexpenditureismuchhigherthanatypic
250. surprising results in a New York
Timesarticle: “We found that despite all
thisphysical activity, the number of
caloriesthat the Hadza burned per day
wasindistinguishable from that of
typicaladultsinEuropeandtheUnitedStates.
”6
Even if we compare relatively
recentactivity rates to those of the
1980s,before the obesity epidemic came
intofull swing, rates have not
decreasedappreciably.7In a Northern
Europeanpopulation, physical-activity
energyexpenditure was calculated from
the1980s to the mid 2000s. The
surprisingfinding was that if anything,
physicalactivity has actually increased
since
252. predicted energy expenditure for a
wildmammal, which is
predominantlydetermined by body mass
and ambienttemperature. Compared to
its wild-
mammalcousinssuchastheseeminglyvigo
rous cougar, fox and caribou,
Homoobesus2015
isnotlessphysicallyactive.
Exercise has not decreased
sincehunter-
gatherertimes,orevensincethe1980s,whil
eobesityhasgallopedaheadfullsteam.Itish
ighlyimprobablethatdecreased exercise
played any role
incausingobesityinthefirstplace.
Iflackofexercisewasnotthe causeof
obesity epidemic, exercise
254. CALORIESOUT
THE AMOUNT OFcalories used in a
day(Calories Out)is
moreaccuratelytermedtotalenergyexpen
diture.Totalenergy expenditure is the
sum of basalmetabolic rate (defined
below),thermogeniceffectoffood,non-
exerciseactivity thermogenesis, excess
post-exercise oxygen consumption and,
ofcourse,exercise.
Totalenergyexpenditure=Basalmetaboli
crate+Thermogeniceffectoffood +
Nonexercise activitythermogenesis +
Excess post-
exerciseoxygenconsumption+ Exercise.
The key point here is that total
energyexpenditure is not the same as
exercise.Theoverwhelmingmajorityoftot
al
255. energyexpenditureisnotexercisebutthe
basal metabolic rate:
metabolichousekeeping tasks such as
breathing,maintaining body temperature,
keepingtheheartpumping,maintainingthe
vitalorgans,brainfunction,liverfunction,k
idneyfunction,etc.
Let’stakeanexample.Basalmetabolic
rate for a lightly activeaverage male is
roughly 2500
caloriesperday.Walkingatamoderatepac
e(2miles per hour) for forty-five
minutesevery day, would burn roughly
104calories.Inotherwords,thatwillnotev
enconsume5 percentofthetotalenergy
expenditure. The vast majority(95
percent) of calories are used
forbasalmetabolism.
257. Nonexercise activity thermogenesis
isthe energy used in activity other
thansleeping, eating or exercise; for
instance,inwalking,gardening,cooking,cl
eaningand shopping. The thermogenic
effect offood is the energy used in
digestion
andabsorptionoffoodenergy.Certainfood
s, such as dietary fat, are easilyabsorbed
and take very little energy tometabolize.
Proteins are harder
toprocessandusemoreenergy.
Thermogenic effect of food
variesaccordingtomealsize,mealfrequen
cyand macronutrient composition.
Excesspost-exercise oxygen
consumption (alsocalled after-burn) is
the energy used incellular repair,
replenishment of