Matt Metzgar

High Fat Heaven

Coincidentally, I have been thinking more about high-fat eating, and then Mark Sisson lays down this killer post about it.  Mark has been out of commission for a few months, doing no cardio and some light weightlifting, but his physique has remained stellar due to his correct eating.  He notes that his diet is sometimes up to 65% fat - enough to make a traditional doctor choke, but not that crazy from a Paleo perspective.

I was combing through my own records the other night, and I noticed my waist was the lowest a couple of months ago when I was eating the most fat.  I was literally just drinking spoonfuls of oil, yet my waist and weight declined.  Strange, but true.

I think part of this can be contributed to the idea that you have to eat fat to burn it.  Many scientists think of the body as a fat-hoarding machine, but that doesn't really make much sense to me.  Even at low body fat levels (<10%), there's still plently of fat to use.  In various studies, people have gone 30 days or more on water-only fasts, with minimal ill effects.  So why would the body jump at seeing any calorie excess and direct it to fat storage, if it can go weeks without any food at all?

One other connection to make comes from this statement (originally from a scientific journal) from this online book:

"Fasting or feeding a high-fat diet abolished lipogenesis (fat formation) in adipose tissue and reduced glucose oxidation markedly; lipogenesis increased to the highest levels on a high-carbohydrate, fat-free diet."

So it appears that both fasting (as in intermittent fasting) or feasting on high-fat (Paleo) foods can contribute to lower body fat levels.  This falls in line with my feast/fast model I've discussed previously.

I believe the research will continue to turn away from the dysfunctional low-fat diet model towards higher-fat eating over the next decade.  Scientists are already testing high-fat diets to treat cancer, so the machinery is already in motion.  Until then, many people can potentially benefit from higher-fat eating in terms of health and weight loss. 

The Cheerleader and The Jock

I absolutely love papers like this one(pdf), which shows how female mate choice is influenced by male sports participation.  The paper seeks to validate the common idea that male athletes are more successful at mating than non-athletes.  The study finds this to be true, but it takes things a step further.  It goes on to show that male athletes who are successful in team sports do even better than male athletes in solo sports.

Why so?  The authors believe that team sports showcase other qualities besides pure athletic ability, like leadership, teamwork, and role acceptance.  It is thought that these characteristics would carry over to real-life, producing men who are better providers and parents.  Interesting!

The paper also briefly mentions how this may drive the crazy behavior you see among the parents of some young athletes.  If better athletic performance increases mating opportunities, then in an evolutionary sense the parents actually benefit (in terms of inclusive fitness) if they can propel their male sons to greater athletic heights.  Of course, all this is not really going on at the conscious level, but it is being driven by underlying evolutionary mechanisms.

Ultimate Aerobic Training

One trend I see in aerobic training is a greater focus on interval training.  This is fine because interval training does increase fitness, but it is a bit too narrow-minded for my tastes.  There is a good case to be made that aerobic training should encompass both interval training and continuous training. 

For example, here are a couple of studies (one and two) that compare interval training versus continuous training.  If you want to look only at one variable, aerobic capacity (VO2max), than interval training will be the winner every time.  But what's missed is that continuous training has different benefits than interval training, benefits that interval training may not be able to reproduce.  This is shown in the second study I cited, where interval training increased capillary density by 21% but continuous training increased it by 40%.

Interval training and continuous training can be performed separately or within the same session.  For my own training, I find it easier to just combine the two into a single workout.  Usually, I do some easy running for a few minutes, then a half-minute or so of faster running, and then directly repeat the cycle.  This way I perform a volume of easy running, while also interspering the high-intensity spikes to increase fitness.

Aerobic Epiphany

I was doing some thinking about the benefits of resistance versus aerobic exercise.  What's strange for me is that even though I've gained some muscle this year, it has had no effect on my day-to-day life.  I don't feel any different.  I suppose the added muscle is functional, but in a non-physical job (like mine) you don't really utilize your muscles much on a daily basis.

Conversely, when in the past I've been in better aerobic shape via running/interval training/dancing, I've felt better and had more energy on a daily basis.  This is somewhat in line with the recent paper on how the aerobic system truly underlies the capacity of the human system.

I remember in the 90s there was a big anti-aerobics push, and there was the notion that strength training provided all the aerobic training that was necessary.  This is entirely false in my opinion, mostly because of the evolutionary implications.  Roughly you could say that in terms of hunter-gatherers, the aerobic system provided locomotion (running, walking, etc.), and the muscular system either supported this locomotion or was used to move heavy objects.  But it would seem very probable that the locomotion system was dominant.  How can you acquire game by standing in one spot?  If a load was too heavy, you could always get help to move it.  But if you just sat around in camp and expected others to go hunt for you, I'm not sure that would take you very far.

I put in a good aerobic workout (along with weightlifting) yesterday, and I definitely had more energy than usual today.  I will probably start putting more emphasis on aerobic work, if only to gain the psychological benefits.

Posture

The other night I was walking through the neighborhood, and I saw a jogger coming up the road.  It was getting dark, so I couldn't really make out anything except the outline of the person.  I noticed the person's posture was less-than-great, and so I guessed that it was an older runner.  As the person got closer, it turns out I was right.

Posture really seems to take a nose-dive during aging.  If you compare a college-aged recreational runner to a jogger in their 40s, the difference in posture is dramatic.  I don't know if resistance training alone is enough to maintain good posture through the years.  Perhaps some other special exercises are necessary.

Does anybody have any good resources on posture?  I have a Paul Chek book somewhere in the basement, but that's about all I've got.

Barefoot Running Technique II

With the weather turning warmer, I have been running outside a bit.  Initially, I noticed my stamina running outside was much lower than when I run inside at the track.  I thought about it, and realized there was one major difference: when I run indoors, I run barefoot (in socks only).

Apparently, even with wearing minimal shoes when running outside, my form disintegrates and I run less efficiently.  I don't plan on running barefoot outside on the streets, so I need to come up with an alternative.  I may buy a pair of Vibram Five Fingers, which have received some positive reviews from runners.  Other than that, I may just have to practice more barefoot running indoors, and try to transfer the same technique to when I'm outside running in shoes.

Strangest Workout of the Year

I've been meaning to post about this funny incident I had at the gym recently.  I was doing some squats and I ended up working in with a few athletes from the local university.  I think they are on the basketball team, though I'm not sure.

They had brought along a friend who was obviously new to lifting - he wasn't in shape and didn't really seem to know what was going on.  When it was his turn to squat, one guy loaded up the bar with weight for him, then said, "don't fall down," and walked away.  That was the sum of his guidance.

Of course, this new guy almost bit the dust on the first rep.  I thought I'd have to step in and bail this guy out, because his friends weren't even paying attention to what was happening.  The new guy managed a few reps with minimal depth and then racked the bar.

I don't think these friends will win any "personal trainer of the year" awards!

Health Campaigns

I saw in this article the other day that breastfeeding rates are the highest they've been in 20 years.  All I can say to this is: great!  Science is just beginning to discover the many benefits of breastfeeding.  Breastfeeding has been the norm for millions of years of human evolution - it should be the default method for feeding an infant in my opinion.

The increase in breastfeeding rates was attributable to health campaigns designed to highlight the benefits of breastfeeding.  This is also good news because it shows people's perceptions and habits can be influenced for the better.  It doesn't seem like any health campaigns about better eating have made much of a dent in the overweight/obesity problem, but maybe it takes some time to get traction.

Green Works II

I was at the store earlier, so I decided to look at the Green Works brand versus typical cleaners.  As you can see in the picture, the Green Works cleaner costs $2.99 a bottle, while "409" (also made by Clorox) costs $2.29.  I don't know if this price differential is based on higher costs for the Green Works product, or if they are just trying to charge a premium for a health-conscious product.

I looked on the back of the "409" bottle, and it had listed: "Precautionary statement: Harmful to humans and animals".  So they are telling you right on the label that the product is probably toxic.  For me, I'd rather spend the extra 70 cents for a healthier product.

I have actually emailed Clorox to ask them why they sell both a toxic and non-toxic line of cleaners.  It wil be interesting to see if or what type of response I'll receive.

More Than A Website

Sometimes I wonder how far you can go with a website.  I enjoy blogging and hopefully others enjoy the site, but it seems limited at times.  For myself, I really only check a few other websites on a regular basis.  So I shouldn't somehow expect that everyone is going to always drop what they're doing and race to my website.

Part of the issue is content.  You can post information, and that's all well and good, but that doesn't always drive interest.  I can provide lots of information about eating Paleo and exercising, but again I'm just not sure if that's the highest thing on a reader's priorities list.

So what do people want the most?  Inspiration?  Motivation?  Pictures and videos are always more exciting than just plain text, so that can help things.  But it seems like there should be a way to turn a website into something bigger, something more valuable.  How to do this, I haven't quite figured out yet.