Dr. Layne Norton: Tools for Nutrition & Fitness
04:04:29 Share

Welcome to the huberman lab podcast, where we discuss science and science space tools for everyday life. I'm Andrew huberman and am a professor of neurobiology and optimo gy at stanford school of medicine. My guess today is doctor lane norton.

Doctor lane north n did his training in biochemistry and nutritional sciences and is one of the world's foremost experts in exercise and nutrition. He is also an expert in the topic of supplementation and other tools to augment health. Today, we discuss a large number of very important topics in these categories, and we start the conversation by establishing what doctor north n threshold are for what he accepts as evidence, in particular actionable evidence. So what follows is the description of what doctor and really believes is worth paying attention to, versus what he believes is worth ignoring in the realms of nutrition training and supplementation.

So you can be certain that as we start to go through the topics of sugar G L P one agonies, things like olympic artificial sweet ener, whether you should train to failure or not during your resistance training sessions, how much of volume of training you need to do, cardiovascular training and its different forms in terms of how they benefit, health span and lifespan and body composition, protein and its different sources, and on and on. Indeed, we cover many topics in this episode. You can be sure that all of the information you hear from dr.

Or or norm is being filter through that extremely stringent filter that doctor nordin is so well known for. And thus, by the end of today's episode, you'll be armed not only with the latest information on nutrition and training and supplementation, but you'll also be armed with your own filter to determine what sorts of health protocols are actionable for you. Before we begin, i'd like to emphasize that this podcast is separate from my teaching researchers at stanford.

IT is, however, part of my desired effort to bring zero cost to consumer information about science and science related tools to the general public. In keeping with that theme, i'd like to thank sponsors of today's podcast. Our first sponsor is mattina Martino mics, loose leef and ready to drink your biotic year bao.

I has long been my preferred source of caffeine, not just because IT tastes great and provides that stimulate fect that caffeine provides for focus on alertness, but it's other many benefits that are unique to your bramah such as regulating blood sugar, high anti oxide content and IT can improve digestion. And of course, I drink your romantic because I simply love the taste. While there are a lot of different choices out there in terms of urban mot drinks, my personal favorite is mattina here biotic, because it's made with the highest quality organic ingredients and IT has a very rich but clean taste.

And given Martina's great taste and commitment to quality, I recently became a part owner in the company, and i've helped design some of their drink products. In particular, I love the taste mattina, as can zero sugar cold brew year batte, which has a slight taste of lemon. And I personally helps develop that drink.

I drink two kinds of Martino urbano a cobo u in the morning, and I often drink a third can in the early afternoon. If you'd like to try mattino, you can go to drink mattino dot com slash huberman. Right now, Martini a is offering a free one pound bag of loose leaf ib mott and free shipping with the purchase of two cases of their cold brew year ba mart again, that's drink Martina dot com slash huberman to get a free ebag of your bata loose, leafy and free shipping.

You can also find Martina at all Sunny locations and everyone locations. So please be sure to look for IT both at sun life end at iwan. Today's episode is also brought to us by eight sleep. Eight sleep makes smart mattress covers with cooling, heating and sleep tracking capacity. Now i've spoken many times before in this podcast about the critical need for us to get adequate amounts of quality sleep each night.

One of the best ways to ensure a great night sleep is to control the temperature of your sweeping environment, and that's because in order to fall and stay deeply sleep, your body temperature actually has to drop by about one to three degrees in, in order to wake up, feeling, refresh and energize, your body temperature actually has to increase by about one to three degrees. Eight sleep makes IT incredibly easy to control the temperature of your sleeping environment by allowing you to programme the temperature of your mattress cover at the beginning, middle and end of the night. I've been sweeping on an eight sleep matters cover for well over three years now, and IT has completely transformed my sleep for the Better left recently launched their newest generation pod cover, the pod for ultra.

The pod 4 ultra has improved cooling and heating capacity， higher fidelity sleep tracking technology and IT, also a snoring detection that remarkably will automatically lift your head a few degrees to improve your airflow and stop your snoring. If you'd like to try and to eight sleep mattress cover, you can go to eight sleep dot com slash huberman to save three hundred and fifty dollars off their pod for all trip sleep. Currently ships to the U.

S. A, canada, U. K. Select countries in the eu. And australia. Again, that's a sleep dot com slash huberman. Today's ephod is also brought to us by mary vinson. Marie knew Evanston is the most neutral, dense and delicious red meat available.

I spoken before on this podcast about the fact that most of us should be seeking to get about one gram of quality protein propound of body weight every day. That protein provides critical building blocks for things like muscle repair and synthesis, also promote overall health. Given the importance of muscle as an organ, eating enough quality protein each day is also a terrific way to stave off hunger.

One of the key things, however, is to make sure that you're getting enough quality protein without ingesting excess calories. Marianne vanish has an extremely high quality protein to calorie ratio, such as getting that one gram of protein per pound of body weight is both easy and doesn't cause you to invest in excess amount of calories. Also, mariee vaison is absolutely delicious.

They have veness on stakes, ground venison and venison bond I personally like and eat all of those. In fact, I probably eat a mali ee venison burger prety much every day. And occasionally i'll swapped that for a mary new mistake.

And if you're traveling a lot or simply on the go, they have a very convenient marie nue venison jerky, which has ten grams equality protein per stick at just fifty five calories. While now I knew offers the highest quality meat available, their supplies are limited. Responsible population management of the access year on the island mi means that they will not go behind harvest capacity.

Signing up for a membership is therefore the best way to ensure access to their high quality meat. If you'd like to try now in new evanish, you can go to mali ku Evanson dotcom slash huberman to get twenty percent off your membership or first order again. That's now I knew evensen duck comm slash huberman. And now for my discussion with doctor lane norton, doctor lane north.

And welcome back. thanks. I have me back .

before we jump in. I want to get your stance on what constitutes evidence because I think a big reason why you are considered one of the, if not the, most trusted person in the realm of nutrition and training is that you set a very high bar for what you consider science based fact that motivate action. So to just kind of break this down, based on my read of the landscape online, IT seems that there is a group of people, I don't know what to call them purse or something, who unless there's a analyzed control trial. So that means in humans, or several that .

points .

in a particular direction, they are very unlikely to adopt a new practice, say, removing a given food or new train and adding a given food or new training. Training a certain way, not training a certain way OK. That's one group.

Then there are the people who, if they are told something to be a value, they hear its work very well for somebody. Maybe they see some before and after ters. And IT gets mapped to a mechanism that exists in humans and animals like, oh, there's this molecule.

And if this molecule increases, X, Y, Z, Z, happens in training this way. Reading this way increases that molecule, for instance, but no random zed control trial, then they are willing to try IT or adopt IT IT. And then there's a third, probably a fourth categories well where people say they don't trust science anyway, science is flawed or the the controls required to design a really good experiment are so constrained that they don't mimic the real world well enough.

And so they're really just interested in what works. So they look to people that seem to have achieved with the results they want. Feel free to add another route, but which group would you consider yourself in personally? And then where does your evidence that you put out online and today come from? And I already know they answered the last question, but I think he is important. Spell out the landscape.

So everything you just mentioned would fall into the category of evidence. Everything that we can observe is evidence. But I think what people really struggle with is the idea of different levels of quality of evidence.

And if I had to put myself into a group, I have definitely been on the side of, well, there's a case study in this junto, and we're going to try that now because I must work. And or you know, my friend tried this and and they said at work, I am going to try IT. And then i've also gone to the group of, well, there's no human remixed control trial, so I don't believe IT.

And I think now you i'm forty two now and i've been doing this for two decades. I think what i'd fall into is IT really depends on how the individual is talking about the evidence OK. 所以 as you can probably imagine， I get sent a lot of stuff for people to like od bunk this.

And a lot of times people will send me things and i'll go, hey, this person said, this is their opinion. That's fine. Like I may disagree with their opinion, but I am not going to like rake them over over the calls for saying this is an opinion or this is my personal experience that's evidence is low quality evidence, but IT is evidence.

I think I kind of fAllen A A line of, I ideally wanna see human random ze control trials. But there's also, as you mention, practical limitations with how things are implemented. And I think one of the things that gave me a very unique perspective was the fact that I was doing my PHD nutrition after I did the battle and biochemistry.

So I had that mechanistic understanding. And then I had an absolutely wonderful PHD advisor, don laman, who just shout out to him, got a lifetime, and you've been award by the american inside nutrition twenty years to eight. But he was just incredible at being able to understand the small things, but how they impacted the big things and what that look like overall.

It's like a conductor looking at a symphony, right, and understanding how the trump pet sounds affects everything else, but then not getting so tied up in that that he can't hear all the music right. And he was so good at that and was so good at getting me to think that way. And so I think we are people out in the landscape trying to to simulate this really struggle is they don't really know well, this person side to study and they equate that is evidence that equal with any other evidence, right? And as a researcher, you know, not all evidence is created equal.

Not all journal articles are created equal. And I mean, honest people who don't have been researched background, it's hard to unpack this stuff. So what I would say is you have to be very careful with people who cite studies.

And one of the things i'll say to is there's nothing more dangerous than somebody read about a chemistry book because they're going to see pathway, biochemical pathway. There must be an outcome. So outcomes are what we really care about right at the end of the day.

And when I say outcomes are gaining muscle mass, losing fat mass, um risk of crudities, rescue disease, influence sensitivity, cancer. But these are hard outcomes, right? And those outcomes are the sumac of dozens, if not hundreds, if not thousands of biochemical pathways, all summing up to an outcome.

And just because something has a biochemical pathway doesn't mean we'll create an outcome. But if there's an outcome, there's absolutely a mechanism to explain that. Now let me give you an example of why this stuff can be so complicated and why it's so easy for people to if you want to create a narrative, you can always find a study to create a narrative asprin.

We would agree as an anti regulate um there's a reason they give a two patients who arrived for heart disease or a heart attack because IT reduces blood clots, reduces regulation IT also activates proper pathways but the overall outcome is anticoagulation. But if I wanted to create a narrative that aspirin was bad for blood clots, I could say look at these by chemical pathways and activites. And you see this, like, for example, I could create a narrative that smoking is not bad for you.

Okay, I I remember reading a meta analysis of the effect of smoking on the risk of a na. right? And there's a force plot with probably about fifty studies, and most of those studies are to the very far right of the line, which is increased risk.

And I think the overall effect was like three or four hundred percent increased risk customer. But there were two studies there were to the left of the line, not by much, and IT wasn't statistically significant. But I could say, hey, look, I could say these two studies, PMI d they showed no increase for civil.

A carcinogen actually might be slightly protective. And by the way, did you know that smoking decreases the risk of parkinsons by thirty to forty percent? And by the way, that's very consistent literature.

So I can start creating this narrow of the smoke. But we know smoking is not good for you, is not good for you. Raise the risk of lung cancer. All different kinds of cancers call you of actually massive increase in risk, right? But I could you I could thread the needle of science using these Cherry picked studies. And so what i'll tell people is, if I go into a topic, if I go into something, what i'm looking for highest quality evidence is, first off, do we have some Better analysis on this topic?

Just explain for the general listener what a man anal see is just think I have top control.

absolutely. So a man analysis is basically, we are trying to compile l studies that ask similar questions and look at what is the overall effect. Do we have a senses in the literature? And usually they they're going to show some kind of force plot of all these studies and have a for right or left of the center line is kind of giving an idea of how powerful the effect was in that study. And then you can see the confidence in eval in terms of how much variability there was. And then you can see the thickness of the dot on there, which shows how much IT contributed the overall analysis by usually how many subjects were in IT.

right? One study with ten subjects would have a very small dog compared to a subject with five hundred subjects. exactly.

And so you're trying to now you can do a bad man analysis based on inclusion criteria. You know that's what it's important to look at. But let me give you an example of a analyze pretty frequently. The inclusion critch is very important to make sure that you answer the question that you want to answer. And I say this when you're reading scientific studies, i'm like, listen, just because there's a headline and even a paper, just because the conclusion says something that is the author's opinion, okay, you need to check to see.

Did they actually test what they're talking about? And are the test they use valid, right? So this men analysis was looking at lower cb diet for this higher cb diets or low fat diets and the inclusion criteria, this is not my Kevin hall, the in age back in two thousand and seventeen, I want to say. And I thought he did a great job at the inclusion criteria, which was we're only going include control L L. Feeding trials where the food is provided to participants because obviously we know the limitations of know free living studies with nutrition.

right? Self report, people sneak, people forget.

We are going to make sure that these studies equated calories for the reasons we talk about. You're got to compare apples to apples, right? So a lot of stuff will come out saying to produce more fat loss, low car, but then they in control calories and it's it's very likely these people just date less.

So they controlled calories and they controlled, which is also important because protein changes the composition of weight loss. Protein has a demotic effect, uh, protein increases in mass attention. So that can change how much fat you lose. And I think that I also had a requirement of like a minimum of four weeks, right? And the outcome was looking at changes in fat mass, not fat oxidation, not energy expenditure.

IT actually looked at the outcome that they care about and they they show no difference, right? So I thought, well, that's a very well done meter analysis because the inclusion criteria make a lot of sense for the question that they want to answer, which is not, is one die easy to stick to, not is IT um you know more practical. The question was mechanically, do these diets produce differences when we're comparing apples to apples in actual fat loss? And the answer was no, right? So and and then when you look at the the other man analysis that have been done, they tend to kind of support that, right?

So the first thing i'm going to look at, all these men analysis tend to be looked at as kind of the highest form evidence, right? Because you're compiling a bunch of different studies which, listen, we know there are bad studies that get done. I think the amount of studies to get like just straight up faked is probably much lower than people think.

But one hopes but yeah yeah I I would agree I think that people make errors. Um I do think that a lot of cortical bad papers or illegal false conclusions arise from elimination of data that did not fit the person's a desired outcome. But in the reason I say that as I think it's impossible to control for so you've got the student or post dog doing the experiment, the results don't come out the way they would have preferred.

And then there you let's to say, i've observed before never reminded laboratory, fortunately. But cases where people come up with reasons why that particular experiment was because you know, the mice were initially sick or the drug the a lot of drug that they used wasn't IT was heading towards expiration, they come up with reasons to exclude rather than outright data fabrication where people literally create results, aren't there? Yeah you know and there are number different examples through our history that where people have done that. But I like to think that those are more rare.

I think that's probably pretty small. My experience the same as you I didn't see much of that I never .

thought observed um usually end up reading about that in the form of retractions right in journals that come out nowadays close to the publications because of AI ability .

to scan images and things that sorry yeah I think um no usually if I see a paper and the conclusion. Like, just straight up, I go, I know about that when I go, and I read the methods, and I read how they analyzed IT, and I read how they measure things. Ninety nine percent of the time I walk.

And o okay. Now i'm not surprised they found found right, because, again, a lot of and this does happen and IT shouldn't, but a lot of studies are set up to kind of find what people want to find. You can buy as things in a certain .

way well and what nobody talks about, where it's not discuss enough is that a lot of time is the way the paper is written poses a question after the results are in. I mean, I think and this is A A really had not correct way to do science. I mean, clinical trials, one has to waga hypothesis, excuse me, wage a hypothesis from the outset. You go test that hypothesis.

You are not asking a question right? exactly. We're as in more typical laboratory science, people will design in experiment. They have hypotheses.

But then, depending on healthy experiments, work out or don't work out often times still change the question to modify the hypotheses. And one would, as a reader, as a journal, as as a reviewer, one we will never know. And so that's that's a slide of hand that is, I would say, unfortunately is very common in their science.

But I will say like there's very, very well, I say this was a bad study. Often what i'll say is, you know I don't agree with their conclusion based on their data and there are design, but the data is the data.

You know I was just very fortunately again, shit to my PHD advice or I have so much gratitude because he just right away was like I M going on you're wrong about something that's fine now and I i'll give you an example of how results can seem to conflict but um you know how things are designed. We actually wanted to test this protein quality, make a difference. And we wanted look at IT at like not low, but like just kind of like rda levels of protein.

And we saw that protein quality did make a difference at those levels of protein. But if you look at experiments where people are feeding like high levels of protein, like one point six to two grams per kilogram of body weight, you don't really see much difference. And you know the mass or protein syntheses with looking different protein sources.

Well, that's because it's much more regulation in a low end because you're closer to those threshold lds that trigger that signals. And so you know, we wanted to show at that level that I made a difference, but then we also acknowledge, okay, this level probably doesn't make as much of a difference, but people can read those things and say, well, I don't believe studies because they're conflicting. But no, when you read how was designed, I can easily like, remember, there was a somebody is simple stand.

So well, how is this fit with your data? Which they were compared in rice first, this way, protein, and found that both stimulated protein. So this is to the same degree.

And so will they use four graphs of protein? Like if you get protein high enough, you can max up protein syntheses regardless of the of the former protein you're using. And so that's just like one of those examples, right? So when i'm looking through this stuff, i'm looking at, okay, IT doesn't seem to be a consensus in the data.

And then is IT like in these man analysis, does the inclusion crit syria makes sense? And then if there's no real agreement amounts, the man analysis is going i'm looking at, okay, what do the most tightly controlled studies show like in the random ze control trials? And then i'm kind like bastian opinion of that.

But you know you you know the the hierarchy evidence, the pyramidal analysis, systematic reviews, realised control trials, you have coherent data, epidemiology and the animal studies tend to get kind of lumped together. And then you got like case studies and in sol and so forth, right? And so all that stuff is valid. It's all valid.

I think where I spend a lot of time on social media is, for example, i'll give you a great example, someone saying, well, you don't want to eat crucifiers festivals because they have issued any and which can bind to iodine, and that is going to import your thyroid d function, lower your medical rate and cause you wake. And so that's a, that's a pathway, that's a mechanism, is IT possible, I suppose IT is possible, right? That pathway does exist. Eyedee is important for thyra d function. I so, and it's dubufe to, I dine.

You can take any food, even organic food, and you can find a compound in IT that if you fed IT in a hypos, IT would have weird effects, right? And so the question is not, if you eat something, are there compounds in that that may be activate negative biochemical pathways? The question is, what is the overall outcome? And so when these pathways are promoted versus lets see if we actually have randomized control trials and humans that measure what we actually care about.

And so we do have like in that particular case, we have analyzed ed control trials looking at okay crypt er festival and take anthropic unction, and there's no difference in the outcome. And so what that says and then no difference in the amount. And then actually people who eat more crucifiers festivals, I tend to be a little leaner, but that could be a little healthy user bias.

And they project the less college was associated, but it's certainly not going the opposite direction, right? And so the point is, again, if an outcome exists, there is absolutely mechanism to explain IT. But just because a mechanism exists does not mean you're gona produce an outcome.

And I got exposed to this very early because I cut my teeth on the body building message boards back in the day where he was a bunch of, you know, nerds arguing with each other, mostly who had no background arguing, but there were some actual like sport scientists and professors who would get on those once to all. This was before social media existed. And I remember I was in biochemistry classes is two thousand, three.

And they're talking about how caffeine inhibits, like a in for four, which is a mechanism, and that exists caffy and habits. I could didn't fast four days. And so I made this post right on the forms.

I said, well, we should be having caffeine after work out then because you will help with like aging resistance thesis, because will keep the luggage in fast from breaking down black agen. And somebody came in and said, you're really like zoom ing in on a plate of grass instead of zoom ing out and looking at the forest, right? And biochemist, I was guilty of this.

And biochemist, by trade, we get very focused on pathways. But if you think about what cafe does overall activities of sympathetic nervous system, its function is to like, you're liberating fuel like you. And in some people, when they take caffie, actually have a risen blue lue cose. So that is the outcome is actually counter to what that biochemical pathway is. And so we've got to be really careful with how we promote these biochemical athletes.

I mean, did a really funny post on twitter where my cell phone, Joseph sem dell on a truck or for with a cancer biologist, great guy and we were joking back and force I said, you know what I bet I could like come up with a uh uh a pathway to get people at pop like, I can make a compelling argument for just eating pop and then he goes, I back up his like, but unlike, okay, let's give a shot so like, what is the some of the most common compounds and human fecal matter? And one of his mutate right, which is a short chain free acid produced by fermentation, do the rate. So I did this post was like, here's why you should need poop to lose fat.

Build rate increases for oxy, I think that activate Brown fat increases in lent sensitivity decreases. It's been shown to actually eliminate uh the development of obesity and um the in studies and I said only many ideas now what I did didn't tell people was those are all mostly in rodents, right? And it's giving an amount of beauty rate that you'd need to eat about fifty one hundred pounds of fecal matter a day .

in order to get right. Sound like a very worse idea.

but that is very similar to a lot of the content that is out there, which is find isolated compound, scare people or promoted to be the best thing ever, and then link IT to an outcome. And then sometimes you can tie an epidemiology with IT as well to support whatever you want.

But again, like i'm not saying, I do things in my training, in my nutrition that don't have random zed control trials to support, right? They don't really have anything to support, just I have kind of fAllen into doing things um so that's okay but what I wouldn't do is come out and say what I do is the best thing ever and here's why, especially if there is human Randy zed control trials to the counter, that is the biggest thing, right? If we have human realized control trials and you're going the opposite direction of a case study and observation, there's a reason human renommist control trials, I screamed about them all of the time and why they're considered al standard revivals. When we look at cohort data, you're just observing people.

There's no maybe explain what cohort data, what is that comparing two groups? sure.

So core data, you're comparing groups, but you you're not having an intervention. So you're tracking them over the course of, however, but here the time studies like looking after disease.

these people decided to be vegan. These people decided to be, let's just say, on in the board, those are some of the classic experiment. And they weren't assign to this experiment.

They agreed to join the experiment. They've been eating this way for a while, right? You ask them a bunch of .

questions and you look at, okay, over ten years, over twenty years, who gets whatever more often or less often, right? And then we try to figure out and about, calculate, okay, what's the effect? And is this real?

The problem is you you have a lot of bias with those sorts of studies, meaning people don't do single habits. They don't isolated habits. I was, I actually proper, really good day from my appearance, sons, even botley podcast, where he said, if I want to fix my diet, I go to the gym.

Because of people do that, if they're training the gym, they don't want to waste their effort. But having a sub part diet. Now, in reality, eating healthy diet is more important if you going to the gym, right, because at least you're getting something, but people do this habit coupling.

And so it's really hard to disentangle those sorts of things. Now the reason that human randomized control trials are important is if you are designing the experiment and you, Randy ze, what you are doing by randomly assigning people to groups. You're washing out that bias because you can assume that whatever inherent characteristics that might be coupled to whatever you're gna try are going to be randomly distributed and be easily distributed across the groups.

Therefore, we say human randomized control trials are kind of what's needed to establish causation because by Randy zing, you can assume whatever differences are observed between the groups are due to your treatment and not due to random chancer data art effects. Now analyze control trials, specially nutrition, have very strong limitations, which is you you can't do a renommist control trial for thirty years. You can't.

I mean, I think the longest range ized control of heard about nutrition like two years ago, right? And even then, it's not going to be a very tightly controlled analyzed control trial. may.

And if you're doing if you're time about like the tightest level of control, like a medic world study for six weeks, maybe because you're keeping people in food jail. And I think where some of this confusion comes from us, I think people think that just like this pool of people waiting around to be selected for experiments, I guess i'm ready. I've been waiting here.

No, there people like you, like me, like just the average person walk on the street who saw flying goes, all right, volunteer for that. And the more control you try to establish over their lives, the less likely they are to do IT. And you're ably gonna pay them.

You know, I don't know anybody who would do a metal abc study without getting paid for IT. I mean, you're basically giving up for six weeks of your life to go do that. And so, well, I love human analyzed control trials for some things do not always appropriate.

For example, if you're trying to look at heart disease and you want to do a one year human analyze control trial, looking at, say, you saturated fat l deal class, all those sorts of things, well, how many do people have heart attacks within one year after age sixty? Means me. You're going to look for really small number difference between really small numbers, right? And the problem with that is you have no idea about their diet.

Forty years leading up to that. And we know based on now them dealing realization trials at the risk, well, the is more of like a lifetime exposure risk. It's not just in this narrow sliver of time.

And so I love human analyze control trials, but it's also, I try to tell people never turn your brain off just because something is published a certain journal, just because a certain researcher said something, just because IT was a certain design. IT doesn't make IT infallible. okay?

Science is perfect. Science is perfect. Science is what is. But it's done by humans. And humans are fallible, imperfect people with their own personal beliefs and biases.

And that's why I look at consensus of data first because yeah, you could maybe some of experiments got fake or maybe they had, but when it's done over, let's take something like creates on a hydrate, right? You have thousands of experiments done over decades of time in hundreds of different labs with many different funding sources, in bunch of different countries, under a bunch of different conditions. IT works, right? Like if you go to consensus and you type in, does create and build muscle. It's like ninety two percent, yes.

which is crazy consuming, five ten grams of creating mono hydro per day is going to benefit strengthened muscle mass and likely cognition an to yes.

yes.

I'd like to take a quick break and acknowledge sponsor ag one. By now, many of you have ve heard me say that I could take just one supplement. That supplement would be A G one. The reason for that is A G one is the highest quality and most complete of the foundational nutritional supplements available.

What that means is that IT contains not just vitamins and minerals, but also probiotics, probiotics and adapt giants to cover any gaps you may have in your diet and provide support for a demanding life. For me, even if I eat mostly whole foods and minimally proceed foods, which I do for most of my food intake, is very difficult for me to get enough fruits and vegetables, vitamins and minerals. Micrometer tries ended up from food alone.

For that reason, i've been taking A G one daily since two thousand and twelve, and often twice a day, once in the morning or midd morning, and again in the afternoon or evening. When I do that, IT clearly bolsters my energy, my immune system, and I got microbial. These are all critical to bring function, mood, physical performance and much more.

If you'd like to try A G one, you can go to drink A G one dot com slash huberman to claim their special offer. Right now, they are giving away five travel packs plus a year supply a vitamin d 3k two。 Again, that's drink A G one dotcom slash huberman to claim that special offer.

I realized i've been on a long diet.

try. No, no. This is, I wouldn't call to a diatribe, I think, for those listening like this is pure goal, because never before, certainly on this podcast or other podcast, is anyone ever really spelled out how to design differences in quality of evidence, right? And ever. It's mostly a free world. Most places and people can do what they want, but I think they need to decide what their thread holes are for quality.

yeah. And I think the one of the thing i'll tell people is I saw this still date. I saw somebody post. I think IT was a common on my post. I actually comment IT back.

They said, you know, I just, I know I can trust you and I just, whatever you say, I know that I can take you to the bank and I said, I appreciate that, but I am a flawed human like anybody else. Please don't turn your brain off like and one of the things i've really tried to do now in this stage of my career, as I wanted, teach people how to think. Because if I just give you the information and i'm giving you a fish, great.

But i'd rather you understand how I came to these conclusions. You can see my logic and how IT tracks, and then you can start to plan and elsewhere. One of things I say to people, as i'm like, if you want a quick and dirty hack for no one who to follow, try not to listen so much to exactly the information people say, but listen to how they say IT. Okay, I was just telling you, I was on a podcast today where I said, you know, here's this study. I might butch the details.

And if I get the math wrong, if h expert thought that I want to comment and correct me, please do that like that is a way of talking about something where you're saying, hey, I could get this wrong or hey, I might be uncertain that's very different than saying, you know, hard, pure, you know, real experts don't really talk like best, worst, always, never like they don't really use words like that um and one of my favorite phrases that I tell people it's actually from an economist named tomas saw said there are no solutions. There are only trade ffs and a for example, um you know those day out there that if you lower saturated fat IT may lower your test test room. But there's also date out of the data fat raises L D O which is an independent reflector accretive basic disease okay.

Well, there's trade off there, right? Like what you value more. I would argue that probably the decline testosterone isn't really physiologically meaningful for most people. But again, there's not a good or bad. There's trade, ffs. And I think when people get talking about biochemical pathways, one of the things I really tried to hold like hate, there's not have really good or bad biochemical pathways either.

Like all these things exist for a reason like people like one of things popular like well, inflation tion, inflation tion, like, hey, you don't like information, does some things that we really need to like, you just don't want like no information, like it's actually important physiological process right now. You don't want you to run away for sure. And so again, I just give my PHD adviser a lot of credit of.

He's like, know what you know, but always question everything. Even the things we feel most fundamental are true because that is the job of a good scientists, give you one more story. And moved to another thing when I did my first experiment, actually. So no, it's been like my fifteen experiment because my first fourteen blue, I didn't work .

a typical graduate .

or yeah yes, but and again, very patient man, very support about I still cannot give him enough credit. And if you look at the the people that came out that lab a lot of studs.

So I did I um an experiment looking at way protein or so I complete meal with way protein injection and how long the duration muscle protein synsi was because most people kind of measured at sixty or ninety minutes like the the snapshot post penalty for protein sentences. Looking for a peak. And we're like, is that really where the peak is? We don't know.

We're basing this is of a purified solution. So let's do a duration experiment, right? And my hypothesis was, well, however long blue scene is elevated in the blood is gonna how long proteins that the city stays up.

And when we got the data back on protein synsi, protein syntheses had come up peak at ninety minutes and by three hours to come back down the baseline. And I went to run the place when you know, acids and i'm like, okay, well, this is what we're gonna and that's not what we saw. So plan assets not only were still elevated, they were like maxed out or platow at the highest level. They would be at three hours where protein synthesis were back to baseline and so I said, okay, well it's got to be intor signally intor signaling going to be turning off or something in's happening. No intor signals was still elevated, right um and we saw this through false ration of the binding protein for E B P one, which is a proxy for intact activation.

Um and then I said, okay, well, maybe Lucy isn't getting into the cell, maybe that's why so we look to into losing followed the exact path of plastic Lucy and so didn't I kept rerunning the plastic data over and over part right at five times right? And lemon find the calls me into his office when anyone so where do we stand with the duration experiment and I said, yeah, it's almost done. I just, I, I gotto run the data again because the plasma is going wrong.

And he, I saw his like little eyebrow go up, you know? And he goes, why do you think that? Let me see your data.

Because your standard airbase are good. This looks to be relatively tight data. How's your technique? And i'm going through like how I you know.

All the steps of to analyze pass me to acids it's not like csi by the way but you don't just like take a pie pet, put something in the fusion also you get back data s there are many steps in here um and so I I showed him all that and he goes, you know, that sounds like you are trying to get the data to fit your conclusion. And what you need to do is change your conclusion to fit the data. And that one line, again, I just opened my whole world up to one if I am wrong, okay, cool. Like I care more about getting the right answer than being right and that's why I we were talking earlier and like there's so much stuff that I just don't believe I want to see ten, twenty studies before I go yeah you know and other i'll tell people is, hey, I don't plant my flag real strong very often so when you see me do IT, i'm not saying i'm not fallible, but if you see me do IT, you probably should pay attention because I don't usually do that.

I love that description, but now my curiosity is big and god to tell me so if ninety minutes after ingesting protein, protein sentences peaks and then IT drops to based on IT three hours but loosening one of the key mino aeds and m tour SHE is in the pathway of cellular growth and protein senses are still elevated three hours, what is the conclusion that explains the discrepancy?

Yeah so we actually looked for this for years. Um so a few things. There was some other studies that supported that um we called IT our fractally response I should we didn't name at that. There was another lab named at that basically that protein 3 thesis was becoming refractory to the signal for protein synthesis。 So just just for real quick, i'm going to trying to explain this easily.

So protein synthesis, you know this sounds like probably a very abstract thing, but it's how you make your body makes more protein, and whether it's in skull muscle, whether to deliver whatever you have, your DNA, which is your genetic code, right? And then that cits transcribed to an M. R.

N. A. By the way, i'm leaving a lost steps here, but just there with me that mra gets translated by a ribas one into a polypeptide char protein. So arrival zone is basically attaching to the mra. And then based on the mra sequence, is bringing in the minal assets to match that sequence.

So all the proteins in your body are coated for in your DNA, right? So when IT comes to this process, there's a complex called E I F four f, which acts a scaffold for the ribs zone to hook on to the mra. And E I F F, the formation of IT is basically rate limited by the association of two proteins called iff and ig.

And E I F F E is bound by a binding protein for E B P one. And when you stimulate, when loosening, stimulate, m tour. In tour stimulates the fast for relation of four bp, one which makes IT unavailable for binding with E I F E IT combined to E F G.

That ef for f complex can be made, brings the rival zone onto the mra. And now I can read, I can translate IT. So there is a little solar biology.

If people didn't follow that, don't worry about IT. What leans describing is that the presence of a bunch of molecules involved in protein synthesis is necessary, but not sufficient for the protein synthesis. right? A few other things have to happen. Apparently those other things are not happening after hundred and twenty minutes.

So another lab called the the muscle full effect, basically the ideas I want you've initiated that signal IT kind of runs, and then it's done right? And just pounding more metal acids into the system is not onna further stimulate? In fact, there was a there was a study done back and I think that was two thousand one by I want to say by rainy um not a very well on protein lab and they infuse the central minal assets for six hours and looked at skull muscle protein synsi and they found IT went up and then came back down by two hours and they never went back up. right?

Good experiment.

Yeah, very interesting. So we look at to a bunch of different things. The only thing we found that perhaps explained a little bit, and i'm sure there's other labs would argue with me on this.

And again, this is an rats go to muscle, which, by the way, is a good model for human protein metabolic. But still, we looked at each atp levels and actually found that they were declining kind of in concert with the decline in muscle protein syntheses and muscle protein synthesis, an p dependent process. But the the process of protein turnover is energetically expensive.

It's one of the reasons that protein has a higher thermic effective food. And so our hypothesis was perhaps by the effect of protein stimulating proteins that this is to start, this machinery is energetically expensive enough that eventually you kind of run a steam. And so you have a signal there, but IT just kind of ends right now. There have been other experimental jorn travel. And just publish a paper a few months ago, got a bunch of few back hundred grams of protein after me after a resistant training exercise, and saw, you know, that I was basically like a lot more of IT was used than we thought would be used.

right? Because for many decades, IT has been purported, believed and propagate that the maximum amount of protein that you can utilize after a meal is thirty grams became the the holy number. And this study essentially showed that more than thirty grams can be used not just as energy, but for the sake of protein.

3 thesis in muscle， correct? yeah. And and how did that study land with you, given that it's one study without going in all the details I did that inspire you to change anything about your protein intake after training.

So what I tell people is I don't make big shifts in my opinions .

based on single studies.

And what SHE is me a little bit right? So and what even before that study came out, what i'd said is I think protein distribution matters, but I think IT matters much, much less than total protein and take per day because all we need to do is look at some of these resistance train studies with and fasting, where people are eating older protein in our window.

And theoretically, you would think they would get less muscle growth, specially based on this refractory data, is less time to stimulate. But at least in the studies on a grand tins lab, I think this two studies were rare, well done, where we don't see that. now.

Important point out, they trained during the feeling window, and they had three. They make sure they ate three high quality, high protein meals during that eight our time, right? So in at least in that context, there was no difference in the amount of the mass gained between innate faster groups for continuous feed groups.

Now in the continuous feeding groups that you recall what duration they were eating their meals over probably twelve hours or so.

I don't recall specifically, but I don't recall an actual define time.

I have to go back more than eight hours for sure you know i'm so glad we're landing here because my first less just call its our Operational and actionable question which came from um you know asking on social media for questions for you was a many, many people, if not in the thousands, asked how to make sure that they're getting enough protein if they're doing something like intermitted fasting.

And I myself falling into this category, I don't do IT for any specific purpose. This was long before such an panda started doing his work on team state feeding A K in remain fasting, but I don't tend to want to eat any food until about eleven A M occasionally wake up hungry like this morning. And I had my exos is particularly hurry, but that I think that's representative of a lot of people.

I want hydration and caffeine in the morning. I want to a train in the morning, and then I want to eat pretty soon after I train. But what that means is that i'm eating in during an eight to nine hour right beating window.

And if I only managed two meals and there in a snack, and I can only assimilate, ate, or excuse me, I can only, uh, put thirty grams of protein per meal toward protein synthesis. We have to be careful, not about using IT for energy, but toward protein synthesis. Does that mean that i'm not gonna hit my a target of one grammar protein per pound of desired less body mass? Because i'm one hundred kilograms, I weigh out two hundred and twenty pounds.

I can easily eat two hundred twenty grams of protein in a nine hour period like, give me three ribes, i'll eat all three. I love rebi stake, right? But the question is.

can I use that? So I am going to bring this background to that particular experiment. So over time, and is when I love gradual, my position was that IT matters, protein contribution matters so i'll give you to straight on the line scientific answer and then i'll give you, if you inject me a true th term, what I really think answer um and in so we did the experiment again in rats, uh, we fed them completely.

Same diets, same told calories, protein, carbs, facts. Uh in one group they got that pretty evenly across three meals, and the other group, seventy percent of the approach in was coming at their last meal. And in the other two meals were like fifty percent protein, fifty percent of daily protein.

And eleven weeks again, seven weeks out of a rat life, Brown live eighteen to twenty four months um that's a big chunk of life, right? And we did see about five to ten percent difference in the way to the hind limbs in terms of muscle mass in action, a favouring equal distribution right now. Again, hard to repeat that study in humans, right? And for the duration is done.

So I came out saying, you know what, that's actually less than I thought we're I thought we're going to find a good differences in that, you know, because I mean, if you're talking about number of times you're stimulating protein, 7 thesis mean one per day versus three per day。 I mean shouldn't be like a pretty significant difference there. And I was I mean that reached the level of significance.

But again, I thought the effect is was small er than I thought and so I kinda walked out saying, you know what, total protein intake is the most important thing per day. And then if you can distribute IT relatively evenly, that may be the last five to ten percent right? And you seen some human studies what seems to matter most seem to show IT doesn't matter matter that much here.

Here's what I think if you're measuring an outcome like lean mass, that doesn't change much in eight weeks. Unfortunately, very small differences. And so I think it's can be harder to attack that.

but. What i'll tell people is, if you asking, can you build muscle? internment? absolutely. Can you build a lot of muscle? Probably if you are a body builder, specific population, or if your goal is to be the most muscular, strongest human being, you can possible become, I think you're probably Better off not doing intermit fasting just because those last that last five percent may make a big difference.

And you're never going to be able to pick that out of a human randomized control trial in eight weeks, at least I don't think you will. And so again, I don't have any human data to really back that up, but just based on what I know about signaling and the effects we saw on animals, that kind of recommendation. But most people don't follow that category.

Most people were just worry about I want to look good, the muscle perfectly find tool for doing that. I will say you obviously, we haven't studied some of the more extreme forms of fasting in terms of building muscle, right? Like the sixteen eight has been studied. But like i'm thinking of a study that was done without resistance training, alternate day fasting versus continuous .

kind of Normal feeding. One day, no eating. Next day, eat. So I release for somebody. I can think of anything worse.

I'd rather fast for three days in a row and then eat for four days in a row, simply because I know that by day two, it's probably gonna easier, not, not hard, bit on off fasting. Eatings got to be just tortuous. But on the way they did that was they did.

The continuous group was getting seventy five person of their maintenance calories per day. So in the deficit and then the alternative day of group was doing hundred fifty percent in in zero, right? So you're getting average of seventy five.

And they actually saw differences in mass in that study that continues feeding group a lost lesser mass than the other day. Faster groups, what not that's only one study had didn't have resistance training is possible that resistance training could continue. Ate some of that stuff. But what i'll say is, you know the more stream forms of fasting, probably arts optio for lee mass, right?

Also can imagine training a day of complete fasting after three hours after that you can be dying. You can say, well, you could just train on the days when you eat within the ever train legs hard, which I know you do, if anyone does and then the next day you're not going to eat anything right the day after training legs properly on my appetite increased.

yes. So I think this is where the rubber kind of meets the road in terms of straights down the line. The analyzed control trials say this, but I still do something a little bit different, right um because the randomize control to say my approaching distribution don't seem the matter right.

Again, you inject me true term. I think you probably does matter a little bit right now. Doesn't matter as much as total protein. Absolutely not. That is by far the biggest liver. But again, if my context is I want to become the most muscular, strongest human being, I can be, which I do, because that's where I compete. I'm gona distribute my protein, probably over four to five meals per day.

right? And so for you just personally, what what time of day do you wake up and once your first meal.

So well, summer right now, so kids are off to school, so we're usually getting up around like seven thirty eight o'clock in the morning. And um my first meal usually within an hour um and then I usually eat within an hour of going to bed and then I have two or three meals in between those. So usually I have about four meals a day. Sometimes i'll have five. If it's just a longer day or just how my timing kind of goes or whatever.

And is each one of your meals include approximately thirty plus grams of quality protein? Some started carbo hydra bre carbo hydrate and and some fat.

I mean sometimes they end up being like mostly protein or or what not but for the most part there's a mix in each one um and using around fifty grams of protein to the meal. I about two hundred and twenty five graphs approaching the day. Some people would argue that ask more than you need.

The research is one at one point six ground for kg access on the response. Here's the thing. And again, this is where like scientific experiments are big blood instruments. Okay, they will tell you what not to do.

More often, they will tell you what to do, okay, when IT comes to protein, my personal opinion, and this is just, I guess, a little bit intuition based off for twenty years of studying this stuff, is that I don't know if there's an actual amount of protein that maxes out the proteins at this this response. I would bet if I was a bedding man that is kind of asm top you familiar with? Yp.

so you will not everyone's watching. I just an assure and an aside plot. But for those not watching you think about IT, a plant quickly rising very, very high and then essentially stays stable at the high level, maybe with a slight bit of taper.

yeah. So so it's easy to explain if it's going toward a zero. So an aisle top might be okay. You start out, you have ten and five and two and you're running .

in the opposite direction. Still ask them tobe going from hide allow asm to can go from low to high, can go from hide allow.

correct. So i'm trying to explain IT because IT makes more sense when people kind of go this way, you never reach zero, but IT keeps getting incremental closer. On the other end, I don't think protein citizen ever maxes out.

I just think the increment of the increase becomes so small that practically there's no difference and you wouldn't see a difference in outcome, right? And so I think that one third debate over is at one point, this grants for kg, two point four grants for kg, and there's even been a meta regression that showed up to three point three grams per kg had benefits. I think a lot of this is with proteins at the history looking before small differences between small numbers.

It's not a very sensitive analysis, to be quite honest with you. And again, we would never be able to pick out this. And I think that there was a study by two phillips, if people don't know two flips is this is he's the best research are going in protein metabolic right now um one of the best so I don't want to take anybody off um and he did to study probably fifteen years ago when they gave uh people different levels of eg.

Protein and they looked at five, ten, twenty and forty grams of egg protein and their conclusion was that twenty grams of a protein maximized the protein. So the response but that's because straight on the line, if there's A P value of more than points zero five, you can't say there's a difference, right? But if you looked at the absolute difference between twenty and forty grams, I think IT was like a eleven percent.

And if you look at the the the graph, IT almost looks like the start of an alison top right now. This was one study wasn't a huge subject number, but that's kind of where my personal thoughts land on IT that there's that kind of also support this. Okay hung ms in a meal you know could still be utilized.

Um is that not sure if there's a max out I think there's a practical max out where you get to a point where, hey, you're like slammed down fitty grams more protein for a point zero zero zero one percent more protein synthesis IT doesn't make sense. Um but yeah will never be love, I doubt will be able to pick those numbers out in actual side of experiments. And the other thing to keep in mind with this whole protein metabolite picture is we're really talking about one side side of the equation.

So net gain or loss of skull muslim ass is the baLance between protein synthesis and protein degradation. And most of us protein researchers just kind of stick our fingers in our ears and o la la when IT comes to protein degradation because it's so incredibly hard to measure. And so yeah like when we start to put all that stuff together, it's like, now this picture is really complicated.

So when I tell people what IT comes to that kind of stuff is, listen, you could really get the weeds on this stuff. The big rocks are about the ground per pound of body weight. You want to really, for all intensive purposes, max out the response you're gonna fine one .

grandpa pound of body way yeah I doctor Gabriel line also essentially recommended.

right? I'm probably like you real sticklers might be like now what's actually more like point seven, eight, point eight? And then it's, well, what's actually based on lean mass, could I agree with? But just for all intents and purposes, you could say, you know your body weight, I do your body weight, whatever IT is that number is, is going to be very sufficient for masking up muscle building for the majority of people.

And we should probably point out, not just for a muscle building, unless you disagree and feel free to, of course not. I need to tell you that doctor Gabriel, when he was here, made a really key point, which is that ingesting sufficient quality protein each day isn't just about building muscle even for focus.

I don't want to build muscle and perhaps even particularly for women who assume that um you know building muscle is that can be a runaway process that maybe they're going to build too much muscle. That's a false false assume, of course, that interesting one grammar of protein per pound of body weight or ideal body weight is going to be beneficial because it's going to improve muscle quality, one's own muscle quality, the health of the muscular tissue. And and then SHE did the next lent job of relating the health of muscular tissue, skeletal muscle, that is, to overall health and longevity.

So I just raise that because I know that many people listening to this probably want to add a little bit of muscle here. There are some perhaps wants to keep the muscle theyve gotten, lose fat, and some, of course, want to add a lot of muscle. But that sounds like the recommendation is always the same since we need to eat sooner later. One gramm of quality protein propound of lean body mass or current body waiter desired body weight. That's gona be a good starting place .

yeah for sure. And I I think I would tend to agree with her you know that the process because when you eat protein, you would not just going to start laying down slaves of these tissues for meeting protein there has to be a which is resistance training um or some people are you could structurally hard and and get the same thing, which there maybe some evidence of .

with weight and lift them in between stretches. Now i'm just kidding. They actually our .

studies now where they like put people and like really kind of hard core stretching for you know several minutes and they actually see hypo ropy with IT. Um yeah very interested. We could talk about those if you wanted, but the point is, either way, mechanical tension, right? So that's that's the stimulus to build muscle, to lay down lean tissue um but the process of remodeling is probably beneficial for multiple reasons.

So you eat protein like we said, sentence is goes up, decoration goes up, right? Because you're stimulating that process, you're stimulating protein turnover, one that's that's relatively energetically expensive, all things being equal. So that's where the thermal effective protein comes from.

People say what the ura cycle and this and that most those, most those atp, you you get back in different phases. That cycle really. I in my a the thermic effect of protein is due to the kind activation, this futile cycle of your building more protein, but then you're also breaking down more protein.

And so part of that is you are remodeling. You are making sure that, that protein is higher quality in that tissue by continuously breaking IT down and building IT back up. And so I I would probably agree with that.

Um and then again, even if you're in a resistance training program, you're not really building much more muscle more the process of a modeling is probably good for you, you know and I would just say try to allow some of these concerns um from people who are concerned about gaining too much muscle. So I have been lifting really hard consistently for twenty five years. I am very comfortable saying I trained harder than almost anybody else you can possibly imagine.

And anybody who has trained around me will back that up, back me up in the comments, I, I trained very hard. And in a shirt, I looked like an athletic guy who lives. I don't look like a monster, you know, like, you might see pictures of me when I was a body building show, like very, very lean and outlooks, you know, over the top.

But for the most part, I just look kind of athletic. And I spent my entire adult life trying to get too big, right? So for most people, unless your own performance enhancing drugs or you just have incredible genetics, that's not gonna happen.

And if IT starts to happen, just back off on your lifting, easy effects. So I think most people is concerned with that is is is a little bit this place. And the only thing i'll tell people is like, hey, some of these like fitness like especially like for women latest fitness models you follow, they they show you certain workouts.

They do they built that physic by lifting weights, right? And your you're thinking that's a tone feet and all that person is actually pretty muscular, right? And so again, especially for women to there are exceptions.

Some people, some women have very great again for building muscle. They usually up in track and field that sort of thing. But it's very hard to get too muscular for a woman.

And and what i'll say is like, you know, typically muscle looks good and fat is what makes you kind of look bulky, you know. So again, I want to pay IT with two broad of a brush. But I would say that you don't really have too much to worry about when IT comes to to getting to muscular.

I'd like to take a brief break to think one of our sponsors element, element is an electrical, electrical that has everything you need and nothing you don't. That means the electronic, sodium, magnesium and peacetime in the correct ratios, but no sugar. Now, I and others on the podcast have talked a lot about the critical importance of hydration for proper brain and bodily function.

Research shows that even a slight degree of dehydration can really diminish cognitive and physical performance is also important that you get adequate electronics in order for your body and brain to function at their best. The elective lights, sodium, magnesium and potash, are critical for the functions of all the cells in your body, especially your neurons or nerve cells. To make sure that i'm getting proper amount of hydration and electrical light, I dissolve one packet of element in about sixteen to thirty two hands of water when I wake up in the morning, and I drink that basically first in the morning, I also drink element dissolved in water.

Drink any kind of physical exercise i'm doing, especially in hot days, if i'm sweating a lot and losing water and electronics. If you would like to try element, you can go to drink element dot com slash huberman spell drink L M N T dot com slash huberman to claim a free element sample pack with the purchase of any element drink mix. Again, that's drink element dot com slash huberman to claim a free sample pack since where in this room of protein may be build out from there.

Because a lot of questions related to um something I can do the following. So okay, so somebody strives to get one grammar quality protein, propound of body weight per day. And I realized that whether somebody follows a suda intermit and fasting thing where the first meal is IT, you know, around eleven, and they they finish up eating around eight P.

M. Or a more traditional leading schedule really is just the addition of one more meal like in the morning. It's like whether that you eat breakfast, of course, some people will shift to the other way. They start with breakfast and they all need dinner.

But um I would argue that in order if you have kids or a social life of any kind, most people can deal with sitting across the table with someone just having a cup of coffee for breakfast. But it's sort awkward. You limit yourself a lot in life if if you can't eat dinner with other people, at least IT. And that's and that's .

again where the rubber meets the road with what is practically do because there have been some of these like crate and rythm studies that suggested, well, maybe early time restricted feeding Better than late time restricted feeding, the more high quality were revised.

Sly controlled animist control trials are coming out now seems to show that doesn't really make a big difference um and some of the again, the measured to use matter, right? So there was actually a very recent study where they looked at twelve weeks. They provided all the food to participants, equal protein calories.

The whole deal, the only difference was one group was eating eighty percent of the calories before one pm, and they had a eight hours our feeding window in total. The other group had a twelve our feeding window, and we're eating over fifty percent of calories after five pm, I want to say. And so really like based on some of the the chron nutrition stuff we've seen from some of the lesser well controlled trials, we they are respecting to see differences and like you costata lem and what not, and they just didn't really see difference in anything.

And the I think the only thing they saw a little little difference was, was in fasting glucose. And here's what I tell people, when you see a different and fasting bug, blue coast, but not hba, once see you, you're looking at a transient difference and wants to mean by that is H B A won't see such a great measurement because it's a spot area on hemoglobin that can be calculated. And so that is very dependent on what is your overall concentration of glue cose in the blood over a twenty four our period time because it's exposed the entire time is in your bloodstream.

So whether you're getting IT me blue coast bikes at meals or you have higher, faster bulga costs can be very reflective of the overall twenty four hour area of the curve, right? So why did they see why do some of these studies see little a Better improvement and lowering fasting? Blue u cose, where is hb a one c doesn't show up.

Well, think about IT. If somebody y's early time strict feeding and they finish most of their food and take before one P M, they have an extra like six, seven and eight hours that are not hardly eating anything IT doesn't surprise me that the next morning, because they're technically fasted for a longer, you have a lower blue, blue coast. I can't I can't really back this sub straight up and measure IT, but that I think is a logical explanation while you see some other stuff.

And that's why I tell people, you know, the measurement you take really matters. I think facing the glucose is useful, measured. But I put much more value on something like home. I R um you guys see me clean up or H B A one, see. Um so anyways, I I think the early versus late time restricted is kind of doesn't matter too much.

great. You answered a future question right there.

See your .

telex. That's what you didn't know. Bottom the so the scenario here is whether not meals are distributed evenly through the weekday or stacked a little bit more toward the morning or stack a little bit more towards evening. If somebody gets that one grama quality protein propound of body weight, then they need to make up the rest of their calories with other stuff. Um and we have broadly speaking, starches, fibers, fruits and vegetables, starches and of course facts and weight gain and weight loss, I think we both would agree, is or weight maintenance is going to largely be dictated at this point by that you consume more calories than you burn or not.

So assuming somebody y's getting that one gram equality protein propounder body weight, is there any data that support or do you believe just by your own experience, that there's some value in stacking the starch carbo hydrate toward the earlier part of the day versus the later part of the day? This has been wrong going debate like I ve, for instance, like a nearly pure protein and fat meal for the first meal, plus maybe a salad, some virus cover hydrates. And then as they get towards evening, I like more starches and I actually take off the protein I find personally that matches what I need to do with my brain, and more alert when i'm drinking caffeine and hydrated on a backroads, slightly lowered carbon hydrates.

But then as I get toward evening, tapper off the caffeine, of course, for me, because I wanted sleep well, start ingesting some more starches, it's not started heavy, but I sleep like a baby. But everyone would tell me and does tell me, eating starts as late the day, is going to make me fat. Even started late in the day, is going to do all sorts of terrible things.

I find his act opposite for me. So is there any real evidence that where one places there starches throughout the day matters? And let's just forget resistance training for the moment, because there is this post training window where, if I train first thing in the morning, I will eat starters at that time. But I just just remove resistance training for for the moment.

So again, we're rover me throw in practicality versus what hard line research says. So I am not real convinced at all that that really matters when you eat a couple of high.

Thank you. Thank you. I knew I D for can .

leave now. So I really try to get people focused on the stuff that matters the most, right? So this is if we're were about carbo hydra g timing, even if there are differences, we are zoomed away. And on the blade of grass, right, we're not zoom me out the way. And I think, hey, if somebody likes deep, more CBA hydrate the morning and that fits their lifestyle, and that is easy for them to continue to do, I would say.

do that. And could I add, in terms of not focused on a blade grass, but something that I consider a major leaver, if eating fewer carbon hydrates in the afternoon and evening doesn't impede your sleep, then you're okay. But I would argue, if anything is interfering with your sleep on a consistent basis, you've got a serious problem.

P, so there are no solutions, only tradeoffs, right? And when IT comes to carbo hydra intake, you'll hear people say the day is all over the place, okay, in terms like timing and how people feel. So you think I feel sleepy after I have card.

Some people have. I felt very afraid of court, like I am ready to go left. I have a big car meal before I go left.

You know, IT seems to be all over the map. Now here's the thing, what i'll tell people, because people ask me how people wanted me to do IT. No, a full day of eating video. And i've kind of put IT off for a while because i'm like so much of the stuff I do, i'm not going to give you guys a citing for, and I know you're gonna want IT and some of stuff I do because I just like doing IT that way, right?

Like I grew up in the era of body building magazines where they said, you ve got to have a big carbon hydroid and taking a big meal before you go train in the big meal after you train. So guess what I did. I got a habit of eating like that, and it's still sticks to this day.

I don't try to talk people it's Better doing at that way. Plenty of people have told me, um hey, I don't feel good with a lot of my stomach when I go train or if I have a car heavy meal in the morning, I felt hard. The data doesn't really support that in terms of like you know on an average response.

But if you know that you feel that way, then by all means avoid, right? Like there's put I member one time, I am. So I used to go to massage therapies in tampa who would do coming.

And there's really noted that to back up the efficacy of coping. Yeah not much, but SHE did IT I like the way I felt and i'm like, okay, whatever. So I post the picture and me flexing one time you know there's the cup Marks all over.

I was like, go and crazy like, how can you do this? You're I like, hey, hey, hey, with a second. I never said this, does this.

And I never made the claims about IT. SHE does IT. And I like the way fills. I'm not saying IT does anything, actually one of things about being a scientist is like now and impossible to placebo, which is really annoying because I would love you able placebo myself .

a little bit more because of that .

is power is powerful and it's one I was told you early before we started from me like it's one of the reasons I just don't believe a lot of stuff because know how powerful the powerful of belief is. I mean, you had a shammai on here. Your belief about pain change your pain, like actually change how much pain you get to changes your pain experience. So one of the things I become big on recently is, hey, what happens in the mind affects the body. What happens in the body affects the mind.

So just because I don't have a analyze control trial to support something, if we know that rcs don't say it's worse, right, then you do whatever you like, right? And I think a lot of people been out of shape, and I say, well, when they controlled the variables and need to be controlled, no sting or just regular old car restriction, or the no different between low fat diet and high fat diet. What people here is, low carb socks element.

Fasting sucks. He said. They don't work. No, no, this is great. This is a great news for everybody. IT means you have all the tools at your disposal, and you get to pick the one that fits in your lifestyle best because that is what makes the difference, is what your overall lifestyle looks like.

And we have way too many people worrying about the militia who just don't even exercise on the consistent basis. So they don't sleep well on a consistent basis, so they don't manage psychological stress well or they try to be perfect with nutrition and they fall off the deepen. And what i'm saying is like, no, like be imperfect, but be consistent with what you do, right? And so for you, obviously, cards at night have not made you fat, like I have I balls so we can just dispell that math right now. Yeah, I would say eating.

eating the way I eat. Now i'm lear at forty nine. Even then I was ten years ago or ten years ago that I was pretty lean then and I don't put a ton of attention to uh, tracking calories.

Although and I want to be very, very clear this, I was not paid to say this like I ve purchased and use lane's carbon APP. He happens to be wearing a shirt. This is carbon today.

But i've talked about this before on other on other podres and social media, and it's absolutely you that there's no endorsement relationship. I but I love the APP because that was really the first time person's college. I started lifting, know sixteen.

Running and lifting has always been my thing since I was sixteen. But since college, that I used a tool, in this case, carbon, to, you know, basic track what are meeting, like exactly what I meeting. And what I like about IT is that I can just click on different boxes of things like IT within the APP.

And really, you know, IT makes IT very easy. So like a this thing that you know White rice from this package. And like in IT, IT generally knows products. IT knows brands. And IT did a really good job of letting me check in and just see how many calories I was consuming, how much protein, how much fat in from what sources.

But one of the major takeaway that at least I got from carbon was that you can arrange or die any number of different ways, in fact has like a really nice slider where you can put in um you know, you want any more carbon yara than less protein even or you want to have a vegetarian diet, which I I don't. I'm an omar, an oma war. My dad is argenti.

I like me. I like meat. I really like fish that much. We're chicken. I just like asking meat legs like about my preferred sources and way protein.

Okay, fine um but you can arrange things within the context of different types of diets. And I think there's a real value to tracking precisely what one eats for even short periods of time. And then I confess I stopped using the afford, but then I went back to IT.

No, and not because things want to drift. I think some people really need that consistent checking. Other people um need to perhaps s just kind of eyeball IT for themselves. But for me, i've found that knowing exactly what i'm doing for some period of time allows me to explore things in a way that's really effective.

And so I just want know I just want to you give a nod to to carbon, and I don't do product endorsements on this podcast, and you know I do ad reads and that kind of thing for things I love. But I say that because I think it's IT lds square in the context of what we're talking about, which is that I know what works for me. I also know that some people really love like a shy ant card meal in the morning.

Some people don't like meat. Some people, you know. And I think what's so beautiful about the way that you've been talking about science and nutrition in particular over the last few years and still here now, is that you don't really seem to care whether not people are vegan, vegetarian and omaar or even carnivore there.

I say it's just a matter how people are touching the advice, for sure. The reason why I keep coming back to this is that I really think that you this discussion, but you in particular, are best poised in this whole field of public facing health nutrition advice to really change the way that the messaging occurs and the way that people hear that messaging. And I say that with the utmost like respect.

I mean, lots of me.

thank you. Because most people are not gonna read them in analysis, right, and most people don't know how to parse data, but I think that paying attention of the words that are spoken right before the advice should be, we need to think come up with something like that, like the door, the north n method, pay attention to the words provided .

right before the advice yeah I think how you say that, uh, makes all the difference, right? And even you takes somebody i've had no conflict on social media with which should be, paul, you know what? You know when he would say something like why I cut vestibules out of my diet and I felt like my exam a got Better.

Okay, that you expect you can't go out on average, that's definitely not perfecting in the research, you know. But hey, if you know that you did this thing and you felt Better, that's fine. But how we're over generalizing to the population is the problem, right? And so I think, I mean, again, i'll say, hey, I calories cycle a little bit, which again you can do using the APP, right? You can change your days and what I can be more calories some days, more calories to the days.

And I was, I showed a screen shot of one time, and somebody goes, so what do you do IT like that. Like that because it's it's Better this way for, like, most growth. And that also, I go, no, because I had a, uh, I get together with friends on saturday and I knew I was going to a couple beers and I knew the livers, some fat food.

So I put four thousand calories on that day last last week. No, like that that your reasoning, I like compliance is the biggest one. I will tell people, unlike. The reason that I, we talked about the world, like I ve ever used performance of dancing drugs.

i've ever even, even when pringle, because people nowadays like to put T R T. Well, as long as it's keeping someone's ostern in the Normal reference range, which is somewhere between three hundred and twelve hundred diagrams, or just then, they are like they're not a you've never injected a synthetic version .

of a hormone. no. And I like my test also shown even from like age eighteen, when the first time I had had measured up until, like even a year ago, the lowest it's spin, I think, has been like seven fifty, and the highest spin was like ten fifty.

And so obviously need IT upper high Normal.

So the reason that i've been able to have so much six and I get this captures, I really do so many people say me look at how many people up beating their chest saying their drug for you and then IT comes out that they weren't right um but I have been brutally consistent for twenty five years. In twenty five years the longest I ever took off of resistance training was seven days.

And I was, after I want world championships in twenty twenty two for in one ninety three kilo. No, I thought i've been able to be really consistent my training and I always give this comparison of I think it's just really highlights how powerful consistency is. And IT relates back to my favorite quote i've ever heard.

The magic you're looking for is in the work you keep tempting to avoid the work is the hack. If people and I like what our friend Peter, ta said this when he was talking about biohacking and why I didn't like to turn biohacking, said that I would like to occupy so much mind space, right? You get people really focused on the manisha, which is fine if they already doing the big stuff, if they want kind level of a little bit cool.

For me, munich, where I live, because that never treat me winning a power of thing, meet me, losing world championships is one percent right. But for most people, we just got to get in consistent. If I said, Andrew, I want you to become the best report to do you possibly can be, but you can't get any coaching.

You can't even watch any two toys, right? But all you did for ten years was go out and shoot three ponders for two hours a day. You've probably will go to the NBA, but I bet you be pretty good at three pointers, right? And I feel like if people could just get that message and and turnaround ze IT more.

No, it's not that you didn't have your carb to fat ratio perfect. No, it's not that you ate your cars at the wrong time. No, it's it's not that you didn't get exactly this much protein.

It's you just stop being consistent. You stop doing IT you yeah you were really consistent monday to friday and then said on sunday came and you blew out, right? Like if i'm consistent with my budget monday through friday, but then I blow IT on the weekend, hey, guess what? That weekend money still counts and or use of the same .

way and you enjoy resistance training.

I love you. I love that you .

cardio as you defined as because people get i'm starting to catch like these days when I say cardio, believe IT or not, the repetitive motion movement designed to elevate your heart rate for twelve minutes or more.

So i'll usually do like a five minute warm up on the bike before I train and then I will um I will also make true at least ten thousand steps on average per day. I use the average more closer like eleven thousand, but I don't do a lot of purpose cardio. Now what I will tell you is my average heart rate in lifting session about one forty to one fifty. So if the definition of cardio is that that i'm getting cardio and actually when we when i've had you know most my markers of medical health assist, i'm very metal bally healthy. Um i've got good actually I was funny.

Um I I just competed at nations in late may and like one so I want and actually again very cool kind of side story you we talked about the injuries i've dealt with and and so i'm forty two now it's been eight year journey and I mean going from i've had backpack so bad I couldn't be up the floor, needed the court on injection, my spine at one point just people stand up and multiple hip injuries, lot chronic pain out out worth. And i'm very proud of myself that I never gave up because in my heart of hearts I felt like I haven't hit my last pr yet. And the nationals is passed here.

I actually set an national down the record from my age and weight. And he was actually an official world record and qualified for world championship ships. But the one of the team USA coaches, the names is matt gary, human d's wife suz are like in evidence based powerful thing.

There are the goats and there are, there is no Better game day coach to pick attempts than math. And susie ary over the maybe Michael ben escrowed have been, but they were at the meat. And we've known each other for fifteen years.

And the next day I came down the lobby and the downed in breakfast and math like ours must be burnt. We were just talking about you and i'm like, go well, because you know what i'm impressed with? He goes, your cardiovascular fitness and you know, policy meets nine lifts, right? Get three attempts on squad enterprise that left.

And so I kind of like looked at them where he goes. We were there between warm ups and finishing IT was about four hours. You never set down.

You were yelling the entire time. You're talking the entire time because i'm a very extroverted, active person. Then when i'm fire myself up IT IT comes out very extra.

He's like you're yelling the entire time and you never were tired. And I again, I look at my part rate and I said the meat, I think in the average was like one fifty year or one sixty. And so, you know, some people would not consider that cardio, but I would say my cardio ask, your system does arrive.

So I would argue IT might be related to your not getting sick very often. You it's very clear that activation of the sympathetic nervous system is one main driver of the immune system. This is why often people observe that they go through a very stressful period of life and then they go on vacation and they get sick yeah or there taking care of a loved one and know that person either gets Better or passed his way, know there's some ending to that care taking and then they get sick.

I have observed that exact thing when I went through my first divorce. Um I was also getting I was also involved in a lawsuit with a company that I don't a portion of its a very long story ended up having a good ending for me and all that stuff kind of resolved itself the divorce, the lawsuit, everything resolved itself and about a six week time period as soon as IT resolved, I got sicker than I ever had been in my entire life.

I got the actual influenza. You know, I told people after that experience in two thousand and eighty ago, here's words you'll never use again. I think I might have the flu. No, you know, after you've had IT for sure, you know and I mean IT, but I was like my body had just maybe a little bit of woo, but I was like my body I dragged IT across the finish line and and said, okay, we'll see in a couple of weeks because we're taking a break. You think human evolution.

I mean, these are just so stories. Anytime people talk about human evolution, by the way, really knows. But the idea that you there was a famine ine, or you need to take care of children in famine, in the idea that you would be more vulnerable to disease at those moment, sure. But um it's also true that the category means stop me een ef nor an f an activate certain components to the immune system that protect you against things. I mean, I can protect you against everything, but it's when you relax and rest, finally, that you are more vulnerable to .

incoming in the pain, too, right? Like aci, on talking about this stuff where, you know, I forget who was talking about this, I ever listened to a podcast, IT wasn't him, but there was another painting expert, and they said him, you know, because your beliefs about pain, your stress level, your sleep, like your psychological meu actually matter in terms of european experience.

In fact, the single biggest leaver i've pulled to get me consistently training in pain free was becoming more related and less stressed all the time. Imaging my psychological stress Better. You know, you're not vibrating and spend up all the time your body has. Again, this is a little w we, but I think you have more energy. I mean, if you make sense.

IT makes sense. I mean, those kind of all means. I mean, there are other molecules involved too, but that, you know, doping appen afnan f an know cocktail is driving us forward in motion and thinking, you know, all the time. And if you're put in dots into one set of things, they're not going elsewhere, like you said.

that it's all trade off. I I read something from P. H.

D. And psychology said, stop thinking about your problems. The problem is you're talking about your problems too much. Thinking about IT doesn't solve them and just ruminated on the makes IT worse.

And actually again, if you look at like pain literature, uh firelight's a quality and rome very close ties to psychological stress um and we were talking earlier about like if you look at the the data on mortality, quality of disease, cancer on with asis scores, which is adverse childhood in scale. So zero being best, you were beloved as a child, that sort, that you had no real big worries. Ten being basically abused.

There's like A A very A, I say, very tight, but there's A A dose response of aces scores on the risk of mortality. So what happens in the body affects the mind, and what happens in the mind affects the body. And we we are talking about with paying sure.

What happens in the mind affects the body in your pain experience, and even just something like sleep. There was a study done when they looked at military members and they had eight hours sleep for six, four hours of sleep, and they looked at the risk of acute injury. Two hundred and thirty six percent increased risk in the people getting four hours asleep vers eight hours.

And here's where people get this wrong. People, somebody was said to say, well, I I got four sleep last night, should I? No, no one bad night of sleep doesn't do that.

Sleep is accumulative effect. Just like if you have a weeks along worth a bad sleep and you sleep two thousand hours in the weekend, you're not making up that sleep dead. It's more about what you're doing time over time.

just like nutrition, just like training.

exactly. And so this actually brings me I know we're kind of have gone down the rapid hole here, but when you look at um bin carpenter to a great example of this, uh he's a good social media account. Here's a um a jar of like blue marbles and a jar Green marbles.

He said, let's pretend that this is all junk food. Blue Green marbles s are all junk food alter process. This blue is minimally process whole foods, right? If my diet is mostly junk and I add one good meal, he puts a blue marvel in the Green.

Did IT change things? no. And everybody knows that, right? Like if you need mostly a junk die, and you have one, one thousand or one you good meal, I got to change things.

So why does everybody think if we take one from here and put IT over here, that IT drastically changes things? Because IT doesn't. It's about what you do consistently over the course of time. And so um speaking of what about the mind affecting the body, but then the body also affects the mind and so there was just a study published I just covered my on my channel when they took men with general exist of disorder and major depressive disorder and they had them resistance strain two times a week for twenty five minutes session, fifty minutes total, eight weeks.

It's not much training.

I think he was like six hours and forty minutes of total training over the entire two months. Now in statistics, you're familiar with an effect size, which is basically how meaning falls in effect because you can have a significant effect that isn't very meaningful if you have enough subject number. So when we say things like at effect size, point two is considered small, point five considered moderate, in point eight is considered large.

Any about point eight s sr. Is are typically in the point three to point five range, I think in like best case and arrows to get up around a point eight points point eight. The effect size for resistance training two times a week, twenty five minutes a day for eight weeks, was at one point seven on major depressive disorder.

Wow, anybody who's a scientist out there, they effect size of one point seven. They do exactly what you did. Their eyebrows go up and they go and they they sure that's right. You don't see effect sizes like that very often. And I want to be very clear, i'm not saying do resistance training in place of s sis.

That's a very these individuals had not trained.

They had trained very healthy or actually don't know the specific characteristics, but I knew they were coming from like not training right now. Hey like listen, that both things seems to be true. Maybe somebody need to get s si because like depressed people don't even want to get out of bed a lot of times, right?

So getting them to the gym, even if they know it's going to help them, is a hard it's a hard swing. So maybe coupling that, but that's just resistance training and that affects this, right? So I think one of the biggest revolutions we're going to see in science is the broad application of bio cycle social across a bunch of different disciplines.

And stop thinking about, well, your body's a bag of meat and it's attached to your brain, and if you poke the bag, punched the bag, burn the bag, cut the bag, brain goes away. And I think we're gone to start thinking about things much differently. And I think it's gona open up a lot more in science in in fact, honestly, if I had to go back to A P H D again, IT IT would be in some sort of like psychology or or what not because I just think there's so much untapped in that realm.

And I was actually talking about this with some of the other day, and it's puranic dote. I'm completely speculating. I have yet to see an interview with somebody who's in their nineties or hundreds who sounds really stressed out.

They're mostly like D, G, A, F, right? And when you ask them what they did, like most of say, I drink line every night and I member, he was like a hundred intention, I drink a doctor pepper every day whatever. IT strikes me that.

And again, genetics matter. Their lifestyles, inking that stuff doesn't matter. I I don't see, at least in my experience, people who make IT old age.

They're not usually very spin up all the time. I just I haven't observed that. I don't know if you seen similar observations or .

they seem to enjoy life. I have a grandfather on one side that i'm died um earlier, but a grandfather on the other side who lived into his nineties and he had a stake every day he smoke pretty late in life before he eventually quit. He had ice cream desert ah after every dinner his argentina they stacked their meals towards the end of the day, definitely like walking.

I guess the point that he was always interested in what was in the newspapers, but he wouldn't get riled up about IT. He like walking. He really enjoyed life. Like if there is one you know key characteristic to describe him as he really enjoyed life. Now he didn't take the best care of himself in in the sense that had he perhaps never smoked or quitter earlier or drop to the excess calories, he might have lived in additional two or three years. But he was really happy until the end.

And that's the lesson there is we're not saying that stuff doesn't matter. He would have got ten Better results if he hadn't smoke, if he had paid more attention, instruction, that sort of thing. But we have to keep in mind like what is the the higher gave importance in the power here, right? And so I give an example, it's it's it's we're gonna me on the boy of grass, but I believe IT relates back to this this conversation we're having.

So we know create in works because we've got thousands of double blind possible control trials showing that create and works, right? But there was a study where they gave people creative or didn't give them creating and then randomly told them if they got IT or not. Meaning you had people who didn't get create and got creating, who didn't get IT, told they didn't get IT, people who got IT, told they got IT and people who got IT told they didn't get IT.

And what they felt was the results. And I forget what they actually specifically measured, but the results basically were like not what they got, what they told them. okay. Now people will misinterpret that as we will see. Creative doesn't work.

No no no IT works IT just means your beliefs about what creates and does or more powerful than what IT actually does just like actually there's a similar travel caffeine and um i'm thinking about um there was a study um I don't have the best excitation but they they had two groups of men train drug free. One group they told they were getting steroids. That group gained significantly more strength, muscle mass.

Now I would argue that's probably because they're going in the training sessions that they can train harder, believing that they will recover Better. But that goes to show the power of placebo and the power of belief. When I say placebo, people think what i'm saying is you're lying about your experience.

That is not what I am saying at all. I think your experience is probably quite valid. What i'm saying is IT may not be due to the thing you think it's do to, but your beliefs about the thing.

And so where I get really focused is let's do the big stuff, right, because so many people are so worried about little stuff. And one of the things i'll tell them is, hey, I have no dated back this up, but my intuition tells me that the amount stress you're spending on these small variables is probably killing you faster. Then if you got those variables wrong and if we could just focus on the big rocks first and if we can pick up some pebbles after we get the big rocks, great. But don't drop the .

big rocks trying to pick up pebbles. I love IT, and I love this example of the creating experiment. Because just to repeat the conclusion, because I want to make sure that people don't take away the wrong conclusion.

Creating works, absolutely.

but your belief about creating works more, in this case, yes. So two things can work, one more than the other. And the placebo, A K belief effects are very, very powerful. exactly. Completely agree with you there. Wonderful way to set the stage for some of the specific questions that were asked when um is on social media and I sit down with lay north again um and i'm very curious about some of these as well. So yeah all inject um some of my own experiencing questions, training to failure and reps and reserve we should define these a little bit.

And before we get into IT, it's fun to have these kinds of nowadays about resistance training knowing that both men and women should resistance training people who want bigger muscles and who don't they should resistance strain. Because in the past he was always body building in Prices and in football and people going to the military. I think thanks to the great work that you've done.

But i'll just give a partial shot out to some of the women in the nutrition of fitness space, namely doctor Gabriel, a lion, in terms of maniple, pari manoah's, ctr, marler hav, or and women in that sexual, really emphasizing the key needs for resistance training the other names as well. But you really champion the importance of resistance training. Training to failure, in my book, means when you can't move the wait by whatever means um any more in good form, in proper form, that's failure.

So we're not talking about four steps. We're not talking about swing that body or are using momentum. When so trying to failure, you can move the resistance anymore in good form and reps in reserve. My understanding is one's own subjective understanding about how close they are to that point of failure.

right? right? yeah. So do you define failure? The way I define failure, which is you cannot take the wait to another concentrate repetition without breaking form.

Reps and reserve would be an rr of one means you stopped one rep shy failure, our hour of two, you stop two upside of failure and saw on. And so fourth, right? And so I would to find those that way.

okay. So with those definitions in mind, is training to failure more effective at generating strength in hypertext y increases then if one keeps a few reps in reserve, and of course, we have to baLance this against all the factors related to recovery is said.

But assuming that one follows a program of doing and i'm really just trying to cut right through the middle here, let's say two or three exercises per muscle group and does after a sufficient warm up, let's say two to five sets that we're going to call work sets. You could imagine an extreme scenario where every single worker is taken the failure. You could imagine taking only the last set of each exercise of failure.

You can imagine taking none of them to failure, assuming adequate volume is achieved across the week. My understanding is this is ten to twenty sets poor muscle group across the week that could be distributed across different workout or all done in one workout. Is training to failure.

You're going to generate more strength and hypertrophy than leaving some repetitions in reserves. So let's start with the extreme scenario. I go to failure on every single set, and I do what I need you to recover. Doesn't matter if it's a one, you know, only doing that muscle group once per week or spread out model times per week, I am doing what i'd need to to recover in between my genetics, my permanent status, my sleep, my nutrition on and on. Is going to failure more effective than not going to failure.

Going to generate a lot of discussion in the comments. I cannot wait to see IT. Um so i'm going to site quite bit of work from my health and coach at Robinson because he is that F A U just finishes PHD and did a lot of messiah and analysis on this exact topic.

So i'll give you the answers first that a straight online scientific answers and then all explain things for muscular hypertrophy. You need to get close to failure, but you probably don't need to train to failure to maximize hypertrophy. But you guys to get pretty close, you can be stronger.

But to maximize strength, you're probably Better off not touching failure very often. So there are a few studies now looking at this showing that think there was one study recently, and I can't member these act details, but I remember that being pretty well designed. And the takeaway was hypocrisy was similar between the groups, but the group that went to failure take a few web shy. A failure actually got stronger compared to the group that was taking more sets of failure.

And did they control for total volume work? So because I can imagine not a failure, you can do more sets because you've got .

and that's exactly .

more cortical gas in the tech.

And practically, that may be a benefit of stopping shy failure, right? But yeah, they control for those variable. So when we talk about volume, the way we to find that is essentially number of hard sets, which a hard set would be a set close to failure.

The general consensus is within five reps of failures considered a hard set now um what I will tell people is that may not sound like much. Most people have never truly pushed themselves to failure. Okay, i'll give some practical examples of me. So my best set of squats ever, I did five thirty for ten. This is long time ago. Yx, um I when I finished that said I actually somebody had to come save me because I couldn't fully lock out my lumbar and I couldn't get the bar on my right side all the way back up something to run over in the gym and helps me after that set, I lay down and I physically hardly couldn't move for about fifteen minutes.

So this is gun to the head.

You can your families being killed up if you don't get these .

ten that sort of thing.

And I think I was done, you know I mean, and so one of things you'll tell people is the first five reps. So that set, we're still hard. They still felt hard, right? And so people who will say, all you stop or rapper tui, I failure, you train like what like you so you tell me if I stopped two b shire on that one, the does and easy said because it's not I can tell you that.

And the reason giving this background is because in research studies where they have people who are like beginners are immediately and they asked them to rate their R I R, they tend to underestimate their R I R, right? So they they'll say, know during a set, say, you R I R. And they might say, too.

And what they find is when the researchers push them to true failure, yelled them, crack them music, get them really sight up, they get five more reps than they think we'll get on average, right? So most people, if you've never actually taken things to true failure, you actually probably don't know one of this. I do think it's useful to trying to failure at times.

I think you make a very important point, which that occasionally training to failure gives you a sense of what failure really is for you. And and no one can really tell you that. Only you can tell you that and experience that.

But if I understand recent earlier, you said once you know what failure is for you, then if strength gains are your goal. And I think more and more people, by the way, are training for who don't want hypertrophy, at least not across every muscle group. When I talk to the general public, which I do a lot, I get the men and women are like, A L I lift weights.

I can see the value of that. Um would love a little bit more muscle here, a little bit more muscle there. But they don't want to be generally larger, and yet they cannot understand and appreciate the value of getting stronger everywhere, right? Because being strong across your whole body is one of the core definitions of health.

Being strong is fun. So again, for hypocrisy, doesn't seem to the matter to take every set to failure. You or stop a couple of rep. Shah, I would argue that probably you'd you'd want to leave most rapes, rose sets, sia failure.

And if you're going to take one to failure, take the last set of an exercise to failure because then you can get whenever benefits might be there. But if you take the first set to failure, I can imagine if I did that, like set of ten with five thirty on squats, is my first set to what i'm going to get. The next set.

If I tried to do five thirty, I can tell you based how I felt, maybe three reps maybe you know um and so your performance is just gonna drop off a Cliff if you're going to true failure on like a compound exercise isolations little bit different um and so I would say whether if you you probably could have done like that with six seven labs for multiple sets and then have gone to failure on your last one right now IT may seem a little bit counterintuitive. Why would be the same hyper try, but different for strength? Well, drink, you also have to think about stimulus to fatigue ratio because fatigue will mass strength, right? And I know this because i've like when I overreached for powerful in competitions, which is basically like we're taking me a little bit past my point of what I can recover from.

I mean, i've had literally before ashes in two thousand and seventeen, I was warming up on dead lift in my last but heavy debt live session, like ten days before the meat. And I went to pull my final warm up, which is five eighty five, and I couldn't budget off the ground. I was so tired, sore I couldn't get IT was like, I couldn't get my body to do what I wanted IT to do.

Ten days later, I pulled seven, sixteen, right? It's amazing what what fatigue will mask. And so if you are always training to fail you, you're going to be training under pretty high fatigue circumstances.

Doesn't really matter from muscle growth because it's religious about doing enough hard sets in putting that mechanical attention on the muscle with strength. You also have to think about like what is the most pure former strength. It's force production, right, and forces mass times acceleration.

So you have a, you have a mass component, you a, you have a speed component. And so this is actually zac Robinson and his company, Davida a of strength, who have been coaching with for three years. I heard them on a the cast, and he was giving his like hypothesis of how to often my strength and a power lifter.

And I remember thinking, I really like the way this guy is thinking. He is thinking outside the box. And IT makes a lot of sense. So one of his things was, if you're training close to fatigue all the time and the goal is strength, think about what that means in terms of your force production.

So let's let's say you do a set of eight reps, right? Your first few are pretty fast, and then by the end, they're pretty slow. The load has IT change.

So what happened to your force production? Your force production is going pretty far now, he said. I don't really want my athletes grinding reps in training. I want them to hit some heavy singles and doubles and triples because they need that, because that's a skill you have to have those neurologic. If everybody's done this with, well, why I hit this for ten reps, and here's what my world map map should be.

And then they go and to get stapled with IT, right? Because IT doesn't a silly transact because of one rep max or the pure former strike is a very specific skill. If you've never trained IT, it's very difficult to get a customer to.

So we wanna hit some his idea, as you know, in workouts, were going to be a heavy top set, heavy single double worship or whatever is. And then are back offsets instead of taking those close to failure, instead of doing, say, what we'll do, you know, seventy five percent of your your training max for sets of eight. And have you getting pretty close to failure instead of three sets of eight? Why don't we just do like six sets of four with that weight? Because now you're doing those first four reps, which you can move that weight faster.

You're having greater force production and creating the, say, good stimulus, but with less fatigue. And so again, that was quite a hypothesis. And he did a man anal suspend of a russian that supported this. And out some of the randomised control trials have come out and shown something similar. And in my experience, I was honestly shocked.

And because he had all kinds of the stuff to deal with when he first started training me, because I so was doing with a lot of back pain, a lot of hit pain, I hadn't really gotten that under control yet. And when I got ready for worlds in twenty twenty two, which I think we did our first podcast, like the week after I had one worlds, I worked up to being able to do like two or three hard sets of squats a week. And at this, and that was all I could do, that was all my body could tolerate before I get pain.

And so we did a lot of low load, relatively low, low for me, you know, sixty seventy percent one R M for low rep number sets, but trying to move IT as fast as possible to keep that pain under control for me, but to get the stimulus. And I was shocked at how strong I got. Because before, in two thousand and fourteen fifteen, when I was winning open national titles, I mean, I was doing fifteen, twenty hard sets of squats and dead leaves, so weak, and way more for bench press.

And so I always thought, well, that's how much I need to get to that level of strength. And even now, like so we we've been able to keep progressing sing IT. Now i'm doing probably more like six, seven harder sets of those exercises per week, and i'm basically back to the the strongest i've ever been doing way less set.

And I think a lot of IT is we have learned to find the sweet pot with managing that stimulus to fatigue ratio. So all that to say, if your goal is building strength, it's mostly about you know, doing enough like heavy lifting that you actually do get stronger. And then if you want to train closer to failure, you can. Because again, most about audiences trying to be a power l after.

right? no. But I think a lot of the audience would like to be stronger and not necessarily grow their muscles bigger. Accept in a few specific .

places on the body. And so this would be the protocol have we go protocols plug um this would be a protocol for probably not necessarily like growing the most muscle mass but getting stronger because you are training so close to failure. Um but you know obviously, you're trying to move as jax as you whatever that given load is, you want to move IT as quickly as possible. And so um that is actually also data to show that like if you train slower purposefully that it's not as good for strength. So they actually there was a men, I think a men analysis recently when they looked at either concentrated repetition of slower than two of more than two seconds or less than two seconds and saw string that outcomes were Better and people in less than two seconds to clear rep.

interesting. So that's the concentric phase, the lowering phase.

the east tric phase. Not sure about that. I mean, we do use some tempo training in my training, but it's mostly because like me doing a slower tempo a squad, if my back started acting up, I can do some square and not really IT that pain trigger as much.

So but I still trying to move the concentrate as quickly as possible and so I don't know about that. Doesn't matter how slowly move the concentric verses, how fast you move in um but yeah what I would say is, you know what IT comes to building muscle. Really, the world is your oyster.

The the the research really shows machines versus free. Weights lives going low. Rap s high.

Raps going to failure. Stop in a few rap shape. IT all builds the same of muscle for the most part. And you have to work hard, but you ve got to work hard.

Yeah, you got to be consistent with IT, obviously like the the theme of this podcast, right? But you can do that. And if we look at the I mean, obviously anicom, but if we look at the history of the mystery MPA is they all trained very differently.

You I an roney common. I mean, i'm sure you remember when the unbelievable came out, the his DVD back. And like two thousand and one is tossing around two hundred pound dumbbells, and he's doing seven, eight hundred pound squats, six hundred pound front squats, and everybody just looking at this, like, my god. And then you ask something like, feel heat train, who again, one of the greatest mister olympus of all time film mostly did machines. But he built obviously a great about the most people will say, well, they're on to all those guys.

It's all controlled .

that just be it's an equal playing field because they're all in. They're doit, right?

And the research shows anywhere from whatever you know, five to thirty repetitions can generate hebert ropy as, alas, the final few repetitions are really hard and and volume is is adjusted.

I really there is no hypocrisy rep rage like people used to think of is all it's like six to fifteen reps is hypothesi. I think practically IT makes sense to do a lot of your sets in that range because you know if you're try to do thirty raps getting close to failure .

in and if you work out and him where there are other people like the kind of like other people were going to need the space in the equipment so could take forever. You know you know know ten sets of thirty like that. That's a that's impolite.

So we only have a kidding there. One of the more common questions, it's about training for people fifty years old and older. And I love the fact that we're talking so much about strength. There seems to be one of the key evolutions in this field again, in my opinion.

Um the people have come through this podcast as guess got Rogero a lion um yourself andy galpin, who now is his own podcast, the performing podcast more more discussions about strength and training for strength for the general public, not just people want to be power lifter. So I think there's a lot of Carry over there. And I think the more that people here, I say that resistance training can be really powerful for health and longevity in getting strong as one of the best things you can do for your health and longevity injury protection, IT said.

Our Peter t has talked about this, and it's not just about building muscle. Want to know how they should adjust their training, if at all, if they are fifty in order. So obviously, one of the key things to getting and staying in great shape over time, I would say, is avoid getting hurt. Could we say, okay, don't try to anything to novel and crazy without easing into IT? We also perhaps.

but I would say that goes for anybody. Okay, Frank.

okay. Could we also say, perhaps find the movements that you can do without injury and just keep doing those over and over there? Is there any evidence that that mixing up the exercises is important, meaning doing new movements? Or if you find two or three movements that works well for you, and you just stick with those and just work on progressive overload.

I think you can stick with those. I think you know, muscle, the whole part of muscle confusion, muscle those tension. And how long is under the attention and for how many that is under that does it's not like, well, this is I can tell that this is an inclined venture.

Press first is an incline bumble. I mean, you you might move through different range of motion of what not, but the tension on the muscle is the tension on the muscle. So i'd say to people is I think most people probably change up things too much because there is like a neurological adaptation to doing a specific exercise when you get stronger at IT.

And so now you're using more load and create more mechanical tension. But if you're always changing things up, you you might not take advantage of that full of kind of neurological adaptation. But if you're always doing the same exercises, it's too easy to get comfortable and fAllen into.

Well, did I do three sets of ten? And I always do three sets of ten, and I use this weight. That's what I do. And now you're no longer progressively overloading.

So I think there has to be a baLance between enough changing of exercises to kind of promote some novelty because, as you know, novelty, there is a reward center in the brain for that just changing something. And think about any time you've going to try a new workout, you get look excited about IT, you know. Well, when I was going to try that way of training three years, very, very excited about IT, you know.

So I think there is a place for that. But I think people tend to fall into a little bit too much of doing the same thing over and over or constantly changing things because are always chasing that novelty. And I think that the reality is, Polly, somewhere in the middle, but specifically for older, over fifty.

I think whenever you can do with low pain level and be consistent with that, you enjoy, that's what's best for you. I mean, I I always told the story at a client who they love cross fit. They love doing cross IT.

And they said, I want to, but I I want to build muscle and I know it's not the best workout for building muscle. I said you might be for you because if you hate body building training and you're not motivated to go do IT and you don't enjoy IT, you're probably not going to work hard at. And so maybe for you across the workout is the best muscle building work out because I tried to get you to do something else you'd hate IT would lose motivation.

right? And feeds back to that consistency principal that you talked about before.

exactly. So when we look at like I think this is might be interesting for some relist. And so when we look at how much muscle you can build after certain age, you can build the same amount of muscle as a percentage of your starting skeletal muscle.

us. okay. So what I mean by that is one hundred, fifty, sixty, you've usually lost some muscle.

okay? If you've never lifted IT before, if you go into lift as a percentage basis, IT appears that you will still gain the same amount of land mass. But for example, if somebody has eighty kilos of startling, aren't most your pocket and or U S S M.

So let's say somebody has a hundred and fifty pounds of the mass when they start just turn around. And again, ten percent over a couple years now they have one hundred sixty five pounds of the mass. They've gained fifteen pounds.

But they're the percentages tent. If somebody starts that, they have one hundred and say twenty pounds of the mass, ten percent of that is twelve pounds. They gained an absolute less amount. But as a percentage, IT was similar, the same.

And we actually see that with women, two women actually develop as a percentage of starting lemass, the same percentage increase in landmass as men when they do the same level of hard training. So what I tell people who are, i'll hope people say, well, you know, i'm too old to start with. No, no, now is the perfect time to start right now. And honestly, IT doesn't take a huge dose.

I mean, if you want to be like, you know, go getting the power lift thing and like computer company to, yeah, now IT takes a bitter or dose, right but what IT takes to get, and i'm to go throw a number out, eighty percent, the majority of the benefits for health, strength, resistance, training, you could probably get in three, four sessions of thirty to forty minutes. You know you don't have to have a huge input of time. And just look at the depression and study we talked about.

Obviously, that's not like muscle and strength, but two sessions of twenty five minutes and minute IT is an absurdly low dose that you require. I think a lot of people, I tried to be careful about this too. We'll see how eye train, which is two, three hours a day for five days a week, and think that's what's needed.

No, that's what I want to go win a world championship. That's what's needed for that is that needed for you to build muscle, get stronger? And even when I was a graduate school across the street, they did a study and fail elderly, where they had them, basically they had trouble like standing up from the sea position.

And by the end of a twelve week study of them, like progressively overloading them, which was basically like them just lwr ing the seat first right, and then maybe adding like a little little bit await, they saw these people built muscle, built bone um got healthier, Better quality of life. And these are people in their seventies. And there was A A study in australia that actually got on the news Peter tea talk about IT um with a elderly women who I think they were above eight seventy and there's some of them they are dead lifting like a hundred and fifty like like upper hundreds in dead left.

You know it's incredible how I took a class called, uh, score, muscle structure, functioning, plasticity. Your skeletal muscle is so adaptable. IT is such an adaptable tissue is amazing.

The same thing they can allow somebody to squat, his Oliver are shut up. Squat over a thousand pounds is the same tissue that can allow somebody to run one hundred miles like David gags. Think about that. That's really incredibly adaptive.

And so what i'll tell the people, goals of your age, your whatever demographic you are in resistance training for just a couple times a week, for a short period of time, will dramatically improve the prospects of your quality of life, your longevity. If we look at hand rip strength, we look at the master, all inversely associated mortality ality, especially the older you get becomes a stronger association, and always tell people like it's not about the hand grip strength. Th, this is a proxy for just strength of role, right? There was a study where they looked at pushups and found pushups were inversely associated with mortality.

Is not that doing push PS is magic, is that that is a proxy for that person being strong. And we focus so much of our attention, especially on falls in the elderly, right? Well, if they had more bone mass, they wouldn't break their bones.

What if they didn't fall in the first place? Because they were strong enough and had good enough gate and baLance to catch themselves. And all, by the way, nothing Better for increasing bond mass than resistance training.

So I am a huge fan and IT. And then we always talked about like the media, like like skull muscle. Gabriel touched on IT was one of the first things, don lam.

And so when I came in his lab, he goes skeletal muscle foods, every definition of an organ. And we don't talk about like an organ. We talk about like it's this inner tissue that just sits there.

And IT is not IT sends out signals to other tissues and integrates signals from other tissues. IT is an indecent organ, and so many people have unhealthy skettle a muscle. And if we treat, and what happens when you resistance train, what happens when you build muscle? Muscle is a metal sink.

IT is greedy, right? It's sucking up. It's inco. You can take people who are type two diabetic, and if you give them on a slight calorie deficit, you give them to start exercising. IT is incredible how fast their blood markers will start to resolve like they can still be obese.

And you'll see their blood markers start to resolve within like you'll see improvements in weeks like I want to say, sixteen week study and either diabetic or prediabetic women back like two thousand three, I want to say and he said within four weeks, he said, we already saw these blood markers start to resolve like your H, B, A, one see as IT resolved. But a lot of the other market are result because at a fundamental level, at least in my opinion, and other meta les and people may disagree, i'm a big fan of oculus razer, which is plainly stated the same. All things being equal, the simplest explanation is typically true.

The, the, the actual hard core scientific definition is the the hypotheses system requires the least amount of assumptions is usually true. You're putting in so much energy into a system and you're running out of places to put IT. So you have skeletal muscle mash of liver, these other tissues in the referee, and then you have at a post tissue.

And did you know they actually show people who have more ATP sites are actually more resistant to type to abeles, so they have more smaller fat cells that can soaked up more of this stuff. And since type two diabetes is basically too much glue cos in the blood, right, and a lack of insulin sensitivity, small adp sites are more insulin sensitive. And so what happens is we, at least in atop ite physiology we used to think of of ad post is also in an earth tissue. And now we know .

that's not true either, and lots of different cell types. Just think that the Brown, beige and White fat cells and subcutaneous and introvert or al, now they've done you sequencing of different White fat cells. And like twenty five, probably now fifty different, I A different genetics among those cells that respond differently to insulin mean fat as a very interesting in sue yeah.

But most fat cells, at least best literary I ve read. And again, i'm happy to have somebody to correct me who's an expert in this, but they can expand to a certain point where they really becomes difficult for them to get bigger. The integrity of this, because you still got so war, you pleasant limbering everything, and you have an extra cellar matrix that is scuffling this fat tissue on your body.

And so at a certain size of episode, basically becomes they just can't pack anymore in there. okay? And so if you can't put any more in muscle because muscle isn't you not active and muscles not moving and turning through sub straight and you can't pack anymore to ada pose, where's the line up? It's in your blood.

You can. And now when your blood levels of it's interesting because there are some people have all these theories. But like one person um a researcher was like why I think branch chain assets actually causing little resistance because we see them elevated in the blood in type.

I betes and I was actually in was I I was in a um I was a grad student watching this person present right but my head, I said, isn't everything else in the blood tito dites, you know, why are we why are we picking our brand shame of assets? So you do have some people who are too can become type to diabetic who are obese. They tend to have not as mini fat cells, which sounds like to be an advantage.

And if you need or sorry, if you are not over eating right and getting enough exercising, IT probably is an advantage because you have less overall fat mass, but you are going to reach that critical massive, an opposite, about a hundred microns. I think IT is faster because your your overall fat cell numbers. So at the same fat mass, your fat cells are bigger, and bigger fat cells are less insulin sensitive.

In fact, one of the treatments were typed to diabetes. So follow you, as I think they are called. There people are gama agonies.

They actually increase the production of fat cells. They create new small fat cells. Now you have a place to put stuff, and you lower your blood.

Lue cose, so very reservoir, exactly. And i'm overgeneralizing to be sure. And I get, I hope, if butter anything.

somebody come and correct me. They will.

But what's amazing is this stuff in the blood, you just got to get stuff moving like because you start doing our size, start controlling your calories a little bit. Guess what? Your oxide ing things to create cycle, your oxyde, you're going to get cause IT.

You can now start to pull things in, right? You're using this subject. You start to pull things in. And because you're pulling things in now, antipodes can start to release some of its free file assets into the bus to try to try. So good strides into three different assets into the bloodstream, which can also facilitate this.

So using muscle you are IT is a partitioning effect, and IT doesn't take long to start lowering this glue cose blood lipids. These things in the blood IT can actually resolve you. At least those markers can start resolving themselves prety quickly, which is why, you know, when we look at weight loss, what level of weight loss they say is clinically relevant? Is only five percent, right? Which you have obese people, and will say, well, five percent wait loss.

You see these big benefits and blood lipids and minimal like health. You wouldn't think which is five percent weight loss, you would get that. But you do because you're just giving a little bit of space to get that stuff in the blood out.

Now again, this is my I want to be very clear, this is not a proven thing. I I feel pretty strongly that this explains a lot. But again, this is my personal opinion about how these diseases developing, what not. But IT is I think it's relatively .

simple yeah using thinking about muscle as an organ, thinking about feeding muscle, we talk about that are earlier, thinking about moving muscle in a particular training for training resistance, training of different kinds before. yes. And but know i'm kind of given a little bit of A A bias vote for more strength training out there across the population for really for the longevity reasons.

I mean Peter t has pointed out that um the percentage of people who die after a fall um not because of the fall itself, but because of a hip injury or risk injury. And then there they go in mobile. Not or they're just not exercising as much more than they get infection.

And then IT IT, cascadia fect had a conversation with one of my parents recently on their seventy nine birthday. I said in the next five, ten years, your biggest risk is probably going to be going down stairs or stepping off a curb, not going up. But as Peters point out, going down. So that eventual movement, right, know, being able to sustain a fall, being able to not fall, to catch yourself.

so to speak. Well, actually you fall further .

going downstairs. And that pattern of falling while going down proceeds a lot of infections and that end up deadly, right? So and you know, that's off to Peter for really pointing out the relationship between those things. And to you who are encouraging people to strain train.

Also, I love the idea that I don't have to go to failure from string training because I like training heavy but the the training to the point where the muscles are quaking even though that how I initially started training because I came up in the mike mentor the camp um I actually find that IT eats into my recovery in a way that um maybe a little more subbed but meaningful and on the last which is that I feel fatigue later in the day. Whereas I complete a training session where I can complete every rip, I noticed that I don't get that quaking thing. I actually have a lot of mental and physical energy later in the day.

and it's psychologically and emotionally fatigue as well.

Maybe this could be out of a brief f answer or maybe not, I don't know. Um are there true age related changes in metabolic that are independent of decline in muscle mass? You know, I saw a paper I think was publishing science a few years ago that said that metabolic actually doesn't slow that much as we age. Of course, total muscle. Man, B M R, B M R, OK meta, like grape in general, unite. Well, I should to say up until that paper came out, I thought, okay, as we get all our metabolic slows, then of course we have to remember that puberty and and childhood is sort of like um being on performance enhancing drugs in the sense that protein synthesis is just massive and ongoing but in a letter safe from age thirty onward, I say between thirty and eighty, assuming that somebody's doing things to maintain muscle mass, is there any reason to believe that their their basal mediocrity actually goes down just as a function of age?

Yeah you signing to work from herman poser and really great lab looking energy expenditure. He doesn't have a great stuff. Um and so that study was looking at several thousand people, I think looking at their total daily energy expendable and and really found it's pretty flat from like age twenty to eight seventy and then kind of starts to go down.

But you can tie IT to the loss of the mass and same thing for a basis of metal blog ate when they do into a callimachus if you look at and this goes for so older people, also women versus men and then also typed to diabetics first is non type two diabetics. Obese first is not obese eighty. I think that the number is like over eighty percent of the variance in bm r.

Is completely explained by the lean mass, by the amount of land mass somebody has. And by the way, the last twenty percent probably is explained by where that lean mass occurs. Because liver, for examples of more medically active tissue grand program that prety much in the other tissue, skettles muscle is more meltingly active, then like that, that tissue, but for a lean tissue, is actually somewhat like mentally slow because it's turn over is only one two percent today of an absolute of of oris.

You in a lot you have so much of a great point. Um so things like got liver tissues or program of tissue are very active. So yeah just doesn't seem to be a for a long time, we spent so much time focused on the the tables m side of things.

We were looking at iec, what we're looking at obesity, and we just didn't really find impressive stuff. Even so, obese people don't have slow metabolism on average. The, the, the research shows that actually are on an absolute basis, they're faster than people who are Normal weight.

When you standardize for land mass, IT ends up being about the same people who are type to diabetic same thing. When you stand ize for the mass, if anything, they have a little bit faster bmc. And so if you think about IT and actually economic inl abo chemical level, because of your insulin resistant, you're also insulin resistance fat tissue, right?

So like OK, so IT makes sense that maybe you like a waste some more energy because you're not able to put IT where you want to put IT, right? So the people get upset about this because it's got to be meta m meta ism and then gp one memetics have a really kind of shown no. The answer to this question is very much on the appetite side of things.

It's like we tried to make a bunch of different drugs that would increase metabolism. We tried to do all these things, increase metabolic, and nothing seem to really make a big difference. And then we came out with the most powerful appetites of presence in the history of mankind.

And people are losing large amounts of weight and keeping IT off. So I think, you know, people got too focused on that metabolism side. Or or what I hear a lot of is from like, like post minal poles of women here, somebody say my metabolism PPT.

What probably happened? You're sleeping less. You're more stressed.

You don't feel as good because the home minal changes. You don't feel as good. And so you spontaneity became less physical active.

And realize that because our needs that are not exercise activity, damage dicis are non purposes physical activity that we do, figuring pacing is actually a large portion of our daily energy expendable. And people get this wrong. You can't make yourself do more neat because then it's just exercise if you're purposely .

doing its exercise.

So all subconscious, right? But if you're not sleeping as well and you're feeling worse spontaneity, you just not move as much. And I know that people like that feels like there's like a lot judgment, shame associated with that.

But IT is the truth. IT is a practical limitation. And IT may not be metabolic. I guess i'm a little bit peden's with that, but IT still contribute to overall energy expenditure. And so again, they have y've looked at this. And um I mean, there there is some evidence that like if you're estrogen drops and you replace that with self a mille estrogen that that can like help out with like maybe fifty two hundred color energy expansion ure per day if you're replacing something that's like not clinically low.

But my guess is that he would also drive more activity, feeling Better, more activity, seeking Better.

more activity. And that's what hard to to disconnect that, right? So yeah, I think of metabolic wise, the result ended up being pretty underwhelming for all this stuff that we just assume of somebody is overweight. So the research didn't pen that out, but I still think is very interesting. Again, that speaks to like the power of the mind and the connection in the mind of how some of these drugs act.

But I do tell people when they say, we know, you know, Carry deficit and worked for me and I obviously my metabolic was messed up because I had to get on olympics to lose weight like IT doesn't really do anything. The metabolic like the speed of your metabolism. What happen is you just you no longer mindless with snack.

You feel you you, you are now in touch with your society signals. And that's why you're losing weight. And that's why these drugs they work.

All right. So speaking of olympic monja and similar, let's talk about these drugs that are reducing appetite and you know, in fairness, have allowed millions of people to lose substantial amounts of weight and keep IT off. This topic tends to get people a little bit riled up on social media because I think for some reason, people believe that if one gives these drugs the nod, they are essentially saying, you don't need to exercise. But I didn't see anywhere here, anywhere, that the use of any compound drugger otherwise is mutually exclusive with taking good care of oneself in other ways, too. So what are your thoughts on these compounds and what you're seeing out there?

I think my tag is pretty baLanced on this, which is I think they appeared to be great tools for people reducing their intake and reducing body fat. IT functions through appetite. I mean, these drugs are gp one, memetics.

And so G, L, P, one is horrors secreted by the gut in response to feeding. And IT acts on the gut as well as the brain to reduce appetite, slow mortality. So it's it's a society hormone, essentially.

Now IT has a very short half life in the body. So the reason a lot of people will come out so well, there are things you can do naturally to increase your G, L, P. one. This is like talking about, I mean. Yes, A, B, B, gun fires a projector and attack fires a projector.

But there's a pretty big difference, right? So with G, L, P, one, the medics, what's happening is there taking that protein and changing out some of the middle assets in that protein, and basically just gives a much longer half life. That's why people can take IT, you know, once a week or whatever IT is, because IT just stays around much longer.

And so if you think about the food environment we live in, which is free access to cheap hyper pound's foods, our brains, for the most part, are probably not equipped to regulate appetite in that environment. And IT really, actually is kind of incredible how resilient the human body is. Because if you look at when the obesity crisis started, we already had to process foods of all.

We had cakes, cookies, all these sorts of things. But the difference was you had to go the Bakery, get IT. You had there had to be some small barrier, right? And then, no, I think kind of the barrier that got flip was basically, now know, in the last thirty years you can go anywhere and get access to cheap, enter process, hyper patmore calorically dense foods.

And they just don't have the same effect on society that Normal food does, where like a Kevin hall study at in an age where they took people from a milling process diet and switched them to an ultra process diet and they spontaneous ly increased their chloride intake by five hundred calories like overnight. That may sound like not a big deal to some people listening. That is a very big deal.

It's about a pound of per .

week of the increasing body, penny ure betwen know happens over time. But um with these G L P one, the medics they're slowing down a tilly they're acting on hypothetical is they're reducing appetite and it's a very powerful effect. Now some of the side effects are like navia.

Some people were reported kind of like not freezing, but like too slow mortality, essentially. So there's some gi side effects which are kindly to be expected with something like this. And and you know, on one side, you've got it's so funny, everything everything is politicized these days.

But on one side, you ve got people saying, all these jokes have no sound affects whatsoever. And, you know, I think everybody should be on top ones because that we're not made to live in this food environment. And the other side, you've got people saying, well, this just obliterates the need for hard work and these people don't take account service.

And I don't really think either those messages are really useful. I think there's a lot of new ones here. And I mean, it's a drug and every drug is going to have side effects, some worse than others for different people.

And so for some people, it's not going to make sense to take IT based on their lifestyle and side effects that get. But other people I didn't post on this where you I talked about um how much weight people lose on average. And so many people in the comments said, i've lost one hundred pounds. I have lost eighty pounds. And whatever is taking one?

Js.

yes, one of these. Gp, one metics. And again, going back conversation of big rocks. People worry about the mass loss. They worry about.

There was a study, and I think rodents where they saw an increase in that I want to say die cancer or something like that, but that was and not really a physiological dose and again its its ruins. People say we don't know what the long term effects of these drugs are. Well they've actually been around for um diabetes treatment for a couple decades now.

But I mean, do we know what they do in fifty years? I guess not, but we know what obesity is. So i'm going to take ron White line, which is shoot the allegation or closest to the boat. I think if somebody's very overweary obese and y've tried to butcher different methods, and they just, people say what, they just have been consistent, okay, so we can live in fantasy land or we can live in the real world, which is maybe some people just need some more training rules and other people, okay, if we could stop putting, like, an ethical judgment on how easy or hard IT is for certain people to do certain things, I mean, it's easy for me to say, just be consistent, because nutrition has never been a problem for me.

I'm ever struggle with my weight, but I struggle in other areas of my life that why can I just be more consistent? Why can I just do the things I know I need to do? I'm sure you would feel the same way about certain things in your life is like what I know logically what to do, but it's hard for me to do IT right? And so if we look at the burden on the health care system of obesity and these die typed diabetes and then all the other diseases associated with them, it's hard for me to imagine a scenario with this is not a big net positive, to be quite Frank.

Now I wanted this is, as my friend john a. Loney says, its bulls. And okay, some people, this is really gone to help them.

And you should be done in concert with lifestyle changes and lifestyle education, because we don't want people to go from eating a lot of a crappie diet to a little of a crappy diet, right? We want them to make Better choices overall. But sometimes, again, habit coupling, people don't get motivated and then get results.

People start getting results and then get motivated, right? And so a lot of times, people will start losing weight. And now they motivated to go to the gym, they're motivated to eat Better.

It's IT is IT doesn't happen in a linear path. These things are kind of like like the opposite of the vicious cycle. This is you're getting into a good cycle, right? A lot of people tend to fall into these categories where when things go bad, they go really bad because it's a vicious cycle.

When things go well, they go really well because it's a good cycle. And so what I would say is with the concerns about G L P ones, the one I hear most is lost vely mass. So in studies, people who use G L P one medics, IT looks like thirty to forty percent of the weight from lean mass, which is a concern, but by the way, that is similar to the demand of weight from the mass people use who died without resistance training exercise.

So I don't think that is a unique problem to g op once. And my guess is when we start getting studies that combine exercise with G, L, P. Ones and look at the mass attention, we will probably see pretty similar results.

So not not super word about that. On a practical level, I can see some concern with that because if you don't have much appetite, you're using that selecting protein is kind of your first you line of what you're going to pick. And additionally, fiver, you're not usually onna select this, your first. So I think again, these are great kind of like if we think about like training whiles, I think these are great training whiles for people and through natural just having less appetite, people start controlling their intake Better. And in all these other habits started to fall in the place for some people.

And I talk to a friend who she's an earth practitioner and SHE tried A G O P one memetic um just because she's like i'm in there I want to see what the stuff is like for me and then um he told all over clients and the the ane's feedback that pops up a lot was IT stopped the food noise in my head. I wasn't thinking about food all the time. I just stop thinking about IT so much.

And if you look at obesity, I mean, again, that really is on the appetite side. We know that obese people have lower sensitivity to society, signal als. They get a greater reward from food.

Like I just posted about a study that day when they gave up a milk shake to people and they didn't really see a dopamine e response. And but in people with binge ed in disorder, when they give something like that, they do see a dopamine response. So a lot of this contextual right.

And so I think a lot of this contextual around obesity of, okay, these are people who get a greater reward from food on average, they're thinking about food more often. They've probably also dealt with people telling them in their entire life or however long that they need to lose weight. And so food is always on their mind and one thing or another, it's kind like in ghost busters where they say, you know, don't think about you think bad was the first thing you going to do you you're think about something bad, right?

And so trying to calm down food noise while knowing that you need to eat us food is probably pretty difficult. So on the whole, I think these drugs are positives. I think it's gonna wer the health care burden, and I think it's going to help a lot of people. And the only thing i'll say is like they're been a lot of push back in the fitness industry by fitness influencers.

Why do you think that is like if it's going to take their jobs away? It's like the same way that people fear A I like it's somehow get like like this stuff is here to stay. IT benefits many, many people.

I feel this way about these G L P one memex. And I M medics, excuse me, and I feel the same way about A I it's like these things could be, yes, potentially used for evil. But, but, but you know also for good.

if I think back about when I might have had that sort of reaction I was in my early twenty years and that's when I thought obesity was a choice. Um I still think there is personal responsibility involved in obesity, but I think my feelings about obesity at that time were when if some boy's obese, they are making the choice, they they don't care about the stuff they eat that mindfully.

They are choosing to eat these foods, knowing this is going to be the outcome. Yes, I think that's the case at all. I think a lot of people's behaviors are are on autopilot.

You know, I can member very clearly. I drop my kids off at school one day I stop seven eleven um to film a gas and I grab something from the store drink. And there was there was an obvious woman in front of me, and he was getting to slice pizza.

And at first I kind of had that major responsible of so lazy a corporal. And then I thought, you what? This is probably something she's done for a long time. This is probably a very habit where he goes to seven, eleven, SHE gets pizza. Or on tuesday morning at A M, she's around the area and SHE goes seven gets pizza.

And maybe not, but I think a lot of people out there like that, whether habits and behaviors are very much on autopilot, not this mindful mindfulness that we think they're doing, and that translates into other areas. And the other thing I I realized I like IT can be lazy. This like all of IT, because there is obese people who are very successful in other areas of their life so that you want to work hard.

And so at least not for everybody, that can be the explanation. And I think with fitness influences of people who have ask, they've worked hard. They've built a good physic.

It's almost like, how dare you get results without doing IT yourself, without, I did this without any help, you know. And the reality is you might have had help because you up bring might have not in food focus. You might not have had a mother who was always on you about food, or you want to have parents who shame you.

If you didn't clean your plate, you might have had genetics that made you more sensitive to society singles. You might have had a final type war. If you over read, you tend to just becomes spontini more active as part of the obvious resistance finot pe.

And so you might have had advantage, and you used to realize IT. So I think if we could just get away from the judgment of stuff and look at take the judgment, all that stuff out of IT. Does this seem to help people and is IT gonna a net positive on society? Thas sauce said, order have made compassionate policy.

You have to have disaster onate analysis of the data. And the data says this can be passive for our society and it's it's a huge benefit. So regardless of my personal feelings of somebody should be able to look, look at eaten to be lost three hundred pounds doing that through all hard work and exercise.

I'm pretty I ve talked to you about this and he said, I think this is great. We know because it's hard to get people to believe if people believe what they can see. And so if they start seeing results, then they can buy in.

And yep, I I think overall and net positive. So I mean, maybe studies will come out in ten years and people are falling over dead from this stuff. And we will say, ops, but I mean, you have to shoot the allegations closest the boat and right now, the biggest bird on our health care system. I think i'm correct in saying this. And the biggest threat in a lot of ways is how medically unhealthy our society is getting yeah I .

think also when people hear about these drugs, they think about the person whose slightly overweight, who is already fit, who wants to be even thinner. And that's not what we're talking about here. And I have a good friend who is an air traffic controller.

IT works very, very hard, very stressful job, obviously high consequence job ah and he's very over way. He's got to be more than three hundred pounds, a significant margin, and he's really struggled over the years. And for years he talked about getting his and stomach stabled that sometimes referred to that way couldn't afford this surgery, this sort thing.

And I asked about, I was, what's that about? He said, I just need something that's going to allow me to move without pain or a little bit less pain every time he tries exercising. Injured himself and he's probably going about that incorrectly.

But he doesn't have a lot of time, and he literally has lives in his hands. He's marry now. You know, he may have kids soon, so I haven't spoken to him recently about these drugs, but to me, that seems like that's like the perfect candidate for these drugs.

If he could eat less with more ease and lose some weight and then also start exercising, I think that be a significant win for him. So scenario is like that or what I think of and then also you know it's mostly free world in many places, not all um so if people can afford these things and they wanted take them, like who might to say they should take them? You know I just like I feel like the amount of judgment involved to say that somebody shorter should not use a drug that's safe and potentially helpful for them is like kind of I mean, that's that's almost offensive in in a way yeah if .

you had something that like if we came out with a dragon like IT, looks like for a lot of people, this can fix opium addiction, right?

You will be shouting .

from the rooftops and celebrating, right? We wouldn't say you just to go IT out and work harder, know? You just GTA want IT more like, no, like there's there yeah there is some personal responsibility there, and there are choices and things that can be made. But why are we try to make this barrier so high for people? Like.

let's lower this barrier. I love that. On the other side, the coin, you've been pretty vocal elsewhere about the fact that sugar is not a drug you know um because sometimes people will say, you know sugar is a drug.

I I would so put in the soft argument from my side soft argument that highly processed oos were literally called them high density of taste foods, right? They combine, you know, process carbon hydrates and fat that, you know, at high heats that can be consumed in you, where you can easily, several thousand calories, you know, almost unconsciously. Mean, unless you're a sleep, we're in a coma.

You can just pop these things in your mother and keep going. I don't know if they taste that good, but people just keep going that there's there's a bit of kind of lack of awareness and compulsivity to them. Very different than addiction, of course, because people are necessarily going out of robbing Robin people.

But maybe just touch on your view of sugar as a substance. We're not tell you about the sugar in fruit. We're tell you about Candy, ice creams, deserts, quoting hidden sugars. yeah. What are the real risks of these things if people are consuming them still within the convince of their daily chloric needs so they are not eating access calories, what's the .

deal or shouter? okay. So this is where it's very important to the appropriate contacts in new once. I'm glad you set up the way you did.

So I always tell people when IT comes to almost anything, have guidelines, not hard rules, because hard rules will give you to do things that are kind of dumb, right? So for example, if you say i'm never going to eat, proceed foods are well, way protein is process. But if you look at the data, way protein that proves metall c health, that increasingly mass body composition, even lower s information.

So I mean, if we just can see all process foods are bad, will isn't way bad. So guidelines in that nature, same thing for sugar because obviously, okay, well added sugar is that IT doesn't have a big society benefit. Its clarity dense makes food very palatable.

I'm going to come back to that because it's contextual, but fruit shorter and biochemically not really that different. I mean, if you're talking about the rose, okay, it's a molecule of glucose and fruit dose, okay, lot of fruit to have blue coasts and fruit to in them, right? So if sugar has some inherent lipids, ic, biochemical toxicity, addictive quality, whatever, we should see similar effects across different sources of sugar.

And we don't see that, right? And even when IT comes to some of the the process foods, people don't realize what goes in the create, making something hyper palatable. It's complex.

It's not just sugar, it's not just fat, it's not just sodium. It's textual values. El, you mention temperature. All these things matter. And in fact, there was actually a study, a while b act, that suggested that texture might actually make a bigger impact on the palatability of food than even the sugar content. And let's take IT more from a mechanistic level from your example. If you're in the confines of your calories, what happens? I would say high sugar diet is still not ideal because it's going be hard to get enough fiber in a high sugar but I long time ago being at school, I was under the opinion that sugar and hyper concert were cale per calorie, more fattening, mental, Sally and healthy.

Now is that a uh, graduate mixer with a professional manner camera who was annoy and he had done some of the feeding studies in rats with fruit tos and seen these weird model effects, right? And i've overheard him having a conversation, another professor, and I was shocked by what he said because he, the one did this, some of this research, and other professor said, so know hybrid to consume is bad, and and fruit to is bad. He goes, now it's really just the calories that are IT.

It's easy to overconsume. People consume IT through soda. Know this is too much. And the guy was like, what you showed all these things in in these mice goes we fed them like over fifty percent calories from pure photoshop.

That's pretty much impossible to get through the diet unless, like you're literally doing nothing but drinking soda and he said, you know, we showed a pathway, but that's not practical in terms of like the application to humans. And so I got curious, I really started going down the literature on sugar, trying this. okay.

Was he okay as he write about this? Is is that really not calory per calorie more damaging than than non sugar corbo hydrate? When you look at sugar intake, IT is associated with increased levels of inflation tion. It's obesity. But there are what we call confounding variables, which is people who eat a lot of super and the a lot of calories.

So if we look at here's my favorite human randomized control trials where we controlled total calorie intake and sugar intake, what do we see? And probably the best example of this was a study from sweet back and I one thousand nine hundred and ninety seven. And the reason i'm going to a pick up this studies because they had the best controls in IT, so they provide them all the food to participants.

The protein cob, hy rates and fats were all the same. IT was A I think I was a twelve hundred calorie diet. And they provide all these meals for six weeks and looked at fat loss and some blood of kids in those sorts of things.

And they found that so one group was getting over a hundred grams of sugar day. I think I was around. I mean, I was based on some like body weight, energy expenditure stuff, but was I think I was around like one hundred ten grams of sucrose per day, right last year.

Other groups like around ten, so ten times different super. And at the end of the study, there was no difference in fat loss. There was no difference in the mass attention. There was no division, almost any marker they looked at, the only difference they saw. All the blood markers improved, the only difference they saw.

Was that l dio, columbo improved a little bit Better in the low sugar roup, and that is probably a function of the fact that the low sugar group had more fiber. We know fiber can bind to the clue, and nowhere l dio, clue on the blood. So when I saw that, I was I who man.

And then when I look through all these other studies with similar kind of controls, they pretty much show the same thing across the board on my bolic health on um information like inflation. Tion really isn't different. If calories are control with high sugar versus low sugar, as long as you're getting enough fiber.

What about feelings of society? Because what that that is the real downside.

If you're eating like like if you're eating a two hundred calories diet and four hundred calories are coming from pure sugar, I mean, you're probably going to become hungry, right?

Yeah, I be extremely hungry. I mean, I consume artificial al sweeteners for the record, right? But there are enough data, and I have enough experience with them to know that sometimes they will curb my appetite.

Like he'll get me over the bomb. But i've come to associate it's probably just prepared placeor association search of where if I drink a diet coke too soon after that, I want to eat something. Now i've chAllenged that by not eating something because I pretty good discipline and IT passes.

But I think i've come to associate the the sweet taste with wanting to eat something. And nothing to me is more delicious that there are many things, like a diet coke slice of pizza from the new york, or die coke in a burger, or, you know, there these food associations. But I don't think, for instance, that sweet taste necessarily stimulates appetite. But I can imagine if I only had, as you said, twelve on our calories a day at and i'm getting you know four hundred to those calories from sugar. Like you said, there's not going be much a Better be in a lot of broccoli as well or else i'm going to be pretty hungry just based on my learn relationships between sweet taste and .

food consumption. What I tell people is I would focus less on like sugar intake. I me if you want to focus on added sugars, that's fine um fox on calories, protein and your fiber content, right?

If if you're getting enough fiber, it's will be hard to eat a lot of junk doing that right? And when we look at um the sugar intake and calorie levels, all that kind of actually a great example would be the case of doctor mark ab. Are you familiar him as a canada state is nutrition professor. In two thousand and eleven he got the name the twin ky died professor. I'm not sure if you saw this.

but I know about the twin y defense.

right? So he, he, he asked his students what they thought mattered more for for fat loss, the calories you eat or the food choices you make and they said, most of them said, food choices and he said, okay, looks to an experiment. Do you think if I do an eighty hundred calorie diet from ultra cess foods exclusively, that I will lose weight and get healthier? And most students said, no.

And so for twelve weeks, he eight hundred thousand. He called Richard the seven eleven diet. He basically like, I couldn't get the seven eleven.

I didn't need IT. He now the cave yet is he had a motivator and he had some way protein. So he was getting enough protein because it's hard to get protein from some of those older process foods.

And by eight hundred calories, and he lost twenty seven pounds, and all of his blood markers improved and his insurance sensitivity improved. Now that seems crazy to a lot of people. But for those people who have worked and looked at blood work with weight loss and what not, I mean, it's not that surprising.

That is the one of the biggest levers for metal wallet health. And so when they asked them afterwards, we that would like one a great diet like you can eat all all the junk food goes well, not really like it's eighteen hundred calories of junk food that goes really fast. I was pretty hungry and honestly, like at first week I was, I got all this is kind of ice and then after I was like, you really like, just a really big salad.

You know, just something, say, eating. So again, no solutions, only tradeoffs. There is a benefit to being able to go well. I can if I can fit into my calories, it's okay is almost getting a fiber and protein o yeah the trade off is it's it's a high budget cost, right same thing with people's um you know the data on like model red alcohol consumption shows that that doesn't impede fat loss IT doesn't if you come for the calories and IT.

But i'll tell people like hey, do you really like if you have like two craft beers you really want to spend four five hundred calories on like twenty four answers of fluids that's not going to impact your tide all and so I think a lot of people view this very, very black and White lens right where it's like, oh, lane says, or this person says, I can eat sugar and lose fat so I can use much sugar says, I want no, no, no, no, no. Because there are practical limits to this, right? But take somebody like me right? If if my calorie intake is my budget.

I trained two, three hours a day. My maintenance calories are anywhere from thirty three to thirty four hundred calories a day, which is not crazy amount, but a health amount for somebody of my size. I have a decent size budget, right? If I, if I can still get my protein in, get my fiber, hit my micro ie train targets, and I have calories leftover for energy filer.

sure. Just like if somebody makes some million dollars a year and they want to go buy a sports car, it's not a great investment. It's not a good investment at all.

Why would they just bank every single thing they make? Well, because maybe for them, having that little reward motivates them to keep doing what they are doing and making that level of money, right? But if you are making, let's take a loan out of IT, right?

If you're making one hundred thousand dollars here doesn't makes sense to spend ninety thousand dollars on a sports scarf IT means you can't pay your mortgage and you can save money for retirement. You can't meet obligations. No, it's IT IT doesn't make sense, right? And so if you're a small woman, small thing, mass wise, who is trying to lose some weight, does that make sense?

If you're eating twelve on our calories day to lose weight, to spend three hundred calories of that on some ultra process junk food, I don't think IT does. But if you are an olympic athlete burning four, five thousand calories a day, good luck eating that level of calories from good mining process foods. You're going to feel full all the time.

There does seem to be a kind of a requirement in books, in sometimes even in podcast, or to take a stance like to be anti something um at because saying, you know what I personally believe based on my read of the data is that most people should strive to get anywhere from seventy to ninety percent of their food from process minimum process quality foods and then allow some space for the you know some process food, highly process foods and sweets and things like that.

But mostly to get the the macros right, as we have described them earlier. And what the range will depend on age, will depend on activity level, will depend on prior health history. And and there are some people who have um enough issues that relate to die in lack of exercise that when i've seen them get IT right and undergo such incredible transformations that like I also know these people's capacity to fall off the train right and you want to say, you know, maybe make that number hundred percent so you'll never go back because I seen them slip before and then and then the guilt and then the gung, excuse me.

So there are two ways to look at IT. One is you tell people, listen, you don't have to be perfect, right? If if perfection is the goal, you're gna fall off.

But then there are those individuals like severe alcohol s who quit drinking. You don't say like, hey, like you're gonna have a beer on Christmas. You don't say that, right? It's all or none. But anyway, here we're getting into the psychology of IT.

But I think that that's what you're saying right there is that's where the individualizing comes in, right? Like it's it's it's contextually dependent and it's been on the individual and what makes sense for that. And I think we as people, if we find something that works for us, we're a little bit too quick to want to have Angela ze everyone else around us because we want we do want to help.

We do have good intentions for the most part. And we over generalize. And I ve you know for me again, like cutting macros, flexible dating, when I I dt, with a little bit of bin eating, when I was Young, when I first got the body building, because I was trying to know, eat clean and I would end.

I was in college, so my bodies was want to piso whatever I like, an entire pizza myself, right? And so once I allowed myself to just have that the food I wanted, moderation, I just got brutally consistent, right? So that for me, that was the switch that flipped.

But other people, that may not be the right solution. And I think we we we make a bunch of, well, that didn't work for me. We assume physiology when I actually I think it's much more psychology and just trips that compliance allegorist m and somebodies head and that makes sense. And if we could just if we could just be willing the same more often. Hey, this is what I do but I I like this in you don't have to do IT maybe try IT .

yeah and everyone struggles with different things and everyone finds certain things easier. Like, I i'm not an alcohol, I am an adult so I can have a drink or two. I just don't like IT. So I want to assume because I did this episode on an alcohol that i'm like anti alcohol.

Like, I don't like if you're an adult, you're not alcohol you know issues with you know alcohol use disorder saying like you might guess, like just know the data, right? But there are certain things like stake i'm never giving up. You could tell me IT takes ten years of my life and i'm not going to give you up.

I'll do other things to offset whatever that decrease in largely might be. I don't think that, that's a real thing, but i'm just not going give IT up at central to my enjoyment of life like the period. Speaking of wis, when if one really wants to wait into the waters of strong opinions and conflicting data, recovered this a bit last time you were on the podcast, but the questions were replete with request to discuss c oils.

I'm sure sea oils, and I must say, this whole thing about seed oils has really gotten in my head, even though, even though i'm a scientist. Like the other day, went to my sisters for dinner, and they made a really nice dinner from her mom's birthday. And then he made a really nice salad.

And I love fruits, vegetable, so like salad. And then I looked out like she's made this out with, like, grapes, oil. I was, why do you grape c il stead of an out? And I I found myself like looking at the at the salad.

Like, is this safe to eat? Like, heard do your voice in my paul's voice. Salo, I thought, well, I ate the side. By the way, I really enjoy ed IT was good grapes.

Oil doesn't takes as good to me as olive oil, generally like trying to use olive oil, butter, things like that. I when I cook. But what's the deal? Will see oils. I understand that they are calorically dense, told that last time, I understand people tend to over consume them and then blame them for a bunch of things that are not related to their seed oil ness, rather than their calorie containing this. These aren't real words, of course, but you get the idea.

But are there any data out there that have your you know ears kind of prick up to the possibility that assuming equal, equal calories, that there might be something bad about seed oils? Or is there zero and there's no pressure here to answer one way or the other? Not that you would respond to pressure from me, anyone.

Um so I think it's all about making the appropriate apples to apples comparison, right? Because if we're looking at addition studies of you adding something to a diet, adding to make six is little acid, little a is whatever. Well, if you're adding those, you're adding calories, which is a confounding variable, right? So I what what the real question is because that the debate tends to be the people who are anti c all tend to be very prosa urate fat.

And so the question really is, okay, if we swap out these things in a wonder one ratio, what is the outcome? right? So not like when? How come? I mean my all health inflation tion, those sorts of things. So in the studies, I have yet to find a good human, Randy zed control trial, where they give Polly on saturated fat in place of saturated fat, exchange the one to one ratio and see negative like actual outcomes. What about .

swapping with mono on satory? Felt like, why? Why are we tell you about sea oil versus large and butter? Why are we talking about sea oil's versus all of oil?

Yeah, that's i've looked less than that just because people asked that question. Yeah, less. But IT seems like both puff s and mother are Better than saturated fat terms of medaba health and rising disease. So of things.

does anyone have a problem with all of oil?

I'm sure you could find somebody OK.

well, never pay. Terrible way for me to post a question. Is there any reason to think like like for the person who isn't sure about seed oils, because they have just heard enough negative things even if there's no basis for IT like me who was like, I like butter and I also assume that eating too much butter might not be good for me just because i'm a rational being based on my read of the data anyway.

So I have some butter, yes, but I like all of those tasty. I'm told it's good for me. Is there any knowledge about anything in olive il that says, listen, even if you consume IT in concert with your coloured threshold to meaning you're not eating too many calories, something bad in olive oil .

i'm not a way of anything um but I will say like if you extend the logic of the the c dos crowd or antsy dos crowd, which actually I want make a new logical false which is just appeal to see oils because I have so many times i've laid out this data. People go basically like have a freak out and go, but at sea oil, how dare you defined seed oils and like the finding them i'm just talking .

about data people on x when I put out questions for you're coming on this episode, literally there were multiple who they claimed that you are paid off by by them, by big seed oil. And I was just like, I had to laugh out out. I think they are my a lot of companies that are large that makes these oils, but I guarantee they are not paying lame nor you to say what .

you um so I find this actually very funny as somebody whose research was funded by the national dairy council, the ignition ent center and the national city's beef association that somehow I would be the person who would be, you know, different and all these things act in opposition to it's like, well, you think i'm proceed oil but then over here i've been defending meat with this thing, right? And then over here i've been defending, not sorry, defending is the wrong word, discussing the data on sugar, which, by the way, those would be in .

opposition to each other. right? right? yeah.

So and I tell about sa fat. I don't like that. I say, hey, IT raises olio class role, which is independent reference of projections. I'm just just gutting IT, right? So i'll say what I said online, which is um I don't defend new trance that don't need defending.

There's not ethical considerations here if you want to eat them, I don't think you're less of a person um I find IT curious that some people get so uh emotionally and um just like ethically entrenched around certain nutrients. So the logic goes something like, well, you have these multiple double bonds and so they can be oxidized and so that oxy ation is going to cause an increase in inflation tion, which is going to cause heart disease and cancer. Okay, well, all of the words of modern saturated fat is still has a novel bond.

So by that logic, IT would still be worse than saturated effect. So when we look at trading out and move, us would fall in this too, I believe. Um if you look at the cohort data, Polly, on saturated fats, substituted for saturated fats have a stronger effect on reducing heart. These the moon saturated facts by created fats do stilt end to have an effect of reducing the risk of heart disease compared to compared to satory effect.

And so that will be trading out butter in large meat fats for you. More oil, oil.

And just to add some new ones to IT, not all situated fast critique that they are like historic acid, I believe doesn't raise L D OK like IT. But in general, saturated fat is going to be something that raises close or more. And also, again, i'm thinking of a several analyzed control trials where they feed the same calories, they feed the same month of fat.

They just have people either, you know, saturated fat or pollinator ated fat. You see either neutral or positive effects on inflation tion. You see neutral positive effects on liver fat. You see neutral positive effects on basically overall medical health and influence sensitivity.

So again, and and a paul actually counting this one time, many he decided to study looking at, uh, I think that was, I don't want to say IT all is like giving a me a six years and they saw increase in liberal xing. I don't think they were comparing IT a saturated fat. I could be wrong.

But again, this is an example of a mechanism, right? So limit processing mechanism, we can try to project what that might mean down the road. But when we look at actual levels of information, actual risk for creative aides, actual insulin sensitivity, actual levels of liver fat, these are outcomes we can actually, if we're worried about those, we can actually measure them.

And again, some studies shows no difference. Some studies, some some of the study i've seen on like inflation tion between poland situated fats and liver and and saturated fats don't really show difference and inflation tion. But i'm not aware of any that shows going in the opposite direction where subsiding and pollen taty effects actually raises in laty markers like C R P and l six, those sorts of things.

Um and actually one things I tell people when they're worried about you for activates the novel hypothesis in the liver and i'm like, well, here's this study where they overfed fructose and saturated fat by the same amount and saturated fat increased liver fat by seventy percent more than fructose so if you are worried about fruit, do you you Better really be worried about saturated fat? Now again, both that's an overfeeding study. They're eating excess calories, but again, calorie per calories that acted that was worth for liver fat.

Um so that kind of where I land on IT, I just you know maybe i'm missing some data, but you when you're looking at these studies, again, i'm looking at not one study, not two studies. I'm looking at fifty studies or how are many studies are is on the topic. And I go on this forest plot, where do they land and when they're almost all on one side or neutral, I feel pretty confident that that's something not to worry about, right? So let's let's take another discussion to tie this.

And I think this will help people understand how I come to a conclusion about this sort of stuff. So I do not necessarily think red meat is cariogenic, even though the arc has classified as probably cautioned agent ic right um because when you look at the studies, you can find studies associate red meat with cancer and you can find studies that show no association of read me with cancer. And so it's kind of all over the place now there's probably more that shows the association then don't.

But when you look at like studies with a control for overall diet quality, so i'm thinking of a study out of canada back in twenty and twenty, I think the author was maxim mobile. I want to say they looked at different levels of red, medium take and incidents of cancer, but also with different levels of fruit, vegetable intake. And so what they found was, at low levels of fruit vegetable intake, lower red meat consumption reduced the risk of cancer relative to higher red meat consumption, but at high levels of fruit vegetable consumption, I don't think there was a significant difference, but actually the high level of red me consumption was a lower risk, then low red meat, high fruit vegetables.

Les, I believe I, I believe I have that correct in terms of the absolute risk. And I don't know that was statistically significant, but what that says to me is red meat is more of a proxy of poor overall diet quality. And if you control for that with some diet proxy of fruit vegetable intake, you're eating a lot of red meat and a lot of fruit vegetables. There's not a really a whole lot of room.

and you'll diet for a bunch crap. You just described the way that I eat and that any time a friend of mine and this happens, a lot comes to me, as you know, twenty to fifty pounds to lose. Well, make IT as easy on yourself as possible.

You can need me eggs, vegetables and fruit. And that's all you're gna do for two months. And most of those guys, in this case, they were guys, lost a substantial amount of weight and kept IT off. They all exercised as well.

And how is the restriction related? Yeah but but they're not touching positive. They're not touching bread. They ask me all the things that can I do this and I just said, listen, if he wasn't only I just gave you unit sounds restrictive the good news about something like that is that generally taste good and stake is very social delicious yes um if you don't like me, I suppose this would work. But but I don't think there's anything magic about that diet IT just gets people below their maintenance calories with relative ease.

Well, it's simple. You could probably still do in a restaurant, right, is just ask for meeting festivals.

socially .

compatible. So there is some beauty and simplicity. There's beauty in what I do, which is I track everything and I can have whatever I want. You could not have some form of restriction to lose weight.

You pick the the kind of restriction that you can stick to, right? So bring that all bx, you have this deal that's all scary on meat, right? And then looks, look at something like dietary fiber, okay? Because people say you can establish causation.

This is some people might say, well, the the carnivals might say, what's all healthy user bias? If IT was healthy user bias, there be some disagreement in the data and there's no disagreement in the data. I am not aware of any study looking at dietary fibre intake or fruit vegetable intake that doesn't show reduce risk of cancer, reduce risk quality, vast disease, reduce the risk of mortality, usually in the those response.

And IT is very consistent. Now some studies might show more of a respecting versus other studies. But if you doing a line of a force plot, and this is risk reduction, this is increased risk, everything on this site, right.

eating more fruits and vegetable les can only be good for you.

right? So um and is like kind of a dose response. So that's when I become even without random zed control trials necessarily, that's when I get pretty confident.

Okay, this is a very consistent effect and there's a those response. And we're seeing about a different populations across about different countries in about two different labs. Okay, confident.

And so for somebody to make the claim that see doors are toxic or that they're bad for you independent the calories, I mean you're basically relegated to using animal studies um in vitro mechanisms and an epidemiology which trying to like tides all together. I mean that's not really high quality evidence. Really high quality evidence is the you have the mechanisms, okay? There's a mechanism, right? Because there's now come there's a mechanism.

The animal day agrees es with IT, those those response the human analyzed controlled trials supported and then the epidemiology supports IT. Like in order for something to really, truly be strong evidence, we need that. Now let's take an example of fiber. Again, right?

Epidemiology supports that we have mechanisms in terms of short chain fly acid production, in terms of like a soldier fiber moving, like getting food through the gut faster might be actually Better because there are some, I don't want to use this word likely, but like some, so like toxic in products of like battles osm in the gut, that if they stay around too long, IT might have negative and interactions with the correct doll cells. And that may be one of the reasons that insurable fiber helps to decrease the risk of collective cancer. So we have the mechanisms the animal study show IT.

When we do the human analyzed control trials, looking at shorter term sergant markers, they show move in the right direction and the epidemiologists in the right direction. That's when I become very confident about something. So i'm not ready to say like, hey, c doors are really, really good for you and you should have a bunch of them. I'm not saying that obviously they're colorful dance, right people at oil of stuff and that's calories. But anybody trying to claim that the strong evidence that they are bad for you, if we are very different definitions of a strong is and you have to apply your logic symmetrically.

If you are going to use a certain level of logic for one thing, you have to apply IT to another thing, right? And and i'll give you an example of this um like the the the when they were talking about the cruel suffers festivals and ice to say seven, eight and IT reduces I and I said, well, you know this person was advocating for a meat based diet and i'm like, okay, well there's U V five G C and meat which by the way human uh they found anti bodies for that in human thyroid now i'm not saying that meats going to mess up your thyroid. But if you're worried about this stuff and Christoph for his vegetables don't have to worry about IT meat too, because if you are playing that logics symmetrically, I would actually argue that the stronger evidence that you're worried about the v five G C in meat and you actually see those anybody show up.

So with the the seat, all stuff, i'm okay. Let's apply this logic to saturated fat for a moment, right? So do we have a mechanism? We do SATA fat raises L D OA. Well, L D O clur can penetrate the interface.

Um we know this so there there is to be this debate about small oxidize VS large fluffy both can penetrate the antithetic um even large l dio can penetrate the interview um now small oxide ed penetrates more easily but IT Carries less told customer deposits. Less clustering in the indianian large doesn't penetrate as easily, but per unit of L D O cluster's, it's deposit more clusters because it's bigger. The net effect is both are equally authority giic in the end.

So we have the mechanism right now. Lets look at the epidemiology. Well, the epidemiology tends to support IT as well.

And then if we look at the they really want for me change my mind because I used to be somebody who is on the side of as that L D L. That really Better. It's hdl to L D O ratio. And was when I saw the madelin randomized studies, which for those one familiar, you're basically looking at natural polymorphism on genes that caused differences in secretion of l dio, right? And since L, D, L is a lifetime exposure risk, meaning if you're doing up a two year analyze control trial, looking at all the all levels, IT says nothing about what the eight before.

And you know in that time frame, what's the likelihood people are gonna heart attacks or some sort of milo? And for pretty low now that we have all these like data banks of you know blood samples and what not from people from all these old studies, they go back and do these analysis. And when they look at l diodes, lustral and plot IT, so a lifetime exposure to l diode strong and plot IT against the risk of heart disease, I mean, you can prety much draw straight line to in.

And so to me, that's pretty strong evidence. If you if you want to apply the same logic of what we have this. And L D L, by the way, can cause inflation tion in the interface.

Um so you have that damage to IT because the apple epo e protein that attracts in platy market. So people are getting some of this cart before the horse. And in the other thing that sealed IT for me was again like hdl, they looked at the same thing in hdl.

Turns out hdl just kind of a marker of medical health. It's good to have high hdl, but hdl self doesn't appear to be protective because if they raise IT with drugs or look at people secret more or less, IT doesn't seem to independently modulate risk of action disease. So all that to say, saturated fat is really only an issue, I would say, for the L D O.

The fact that you can raise all the and there is some evidence it's not necessarily good for the gut microbiome because the biosolids products from a motifs saturation effects that requires more bile that those might be toxic to some beneficial species of bacteria. But who's why i'm nothing i'm not saying don't need any saturated fat. What i'm saying is, again, your overall dieus ality is what matters.

I think it's fine to have some saturated fat. I think probably try to keep below seventy eight percent of your daily calorie intake. What also matters is there's no solutions, only tradeoffs.

And so if somebody says to me I wasn't to lose fifty pounds on low carb and everything got Better, but my L D. O. Went up a little bit.

And they felt like that was the only thing they're ability to be consistent with. I'd say on baLance, they're probably Better off with that slightly elevated ldl then they would be if they kept the fifty pounds on. Now I would argue if they had lost the fifty pounds and lower their L D L, their overall risk would be lower than IT is now.

But again, we have to look at what can somebody consistently execute. So all that to say, i'm not saying you should consume seed oil. I'm not saying that there there's no negative downsides, but if we look at comparing IT to a comparable molecule, saturated fat, there's a much more compelling argument that saturated fat is bad. A few first as eos.

Thank you for that very throw and very clear answer. And I just will highlight that you wait a stake last night, so you will, by no means, and I meat or saturated .

fat stake in front of vegan OK.

not to not to aggravate them, just because they stuck to their principles. You stocked to yours. I was really .

going to order fish. And they said, okay, if you want to go stake and I saw, okay, if you say so now they did make A A couple of comments in jest during the .

during the meal fair. Let's talk about artificial sweet.

tender sweet, the other people to .

pay me um that's right. He's .

kidding .

folks. good. Even I got into a IT wasn't a scrap. We got into a little disagreement about this years ago, so long ago that it's probably not worth mentioning that know I somewhat enticed by the data from dana alls laboratory than a year. I think now she's up at my gill looking at kind of palo vian conditioning of our official sweeteners. So basically, children, children, in that case of consuming a high amount of, I think IT was either super lose or sacring .

in combination .

with a meal, standard meal and look at the insulin response and then removing the food component sometime later. And what they essentially observed was a conditioned insulin response, so that you then have these kids just have the the sweet tasting non coLoring drink, minus the food, and they still, and they then saw an elevated instill in response.

In other words, the same way that pavlov got dogs to celebrate in response to a bell that was paired with food, then you remove the food and then they just simply accel livin response to the bill. The idea was, well, maybe you can um create a conditioned pavlovian like response to artificial sweet. Tener, okay.

And I was going a cool study. Looking back, I probably wou'd covered IT the way I did because it's not a typical scenario. I think the more important questions are, is there any evidence that artificial and low calorie or zero calorie sweeteners like stevia, we have to be very careful .

here so that .

they are somehow dangerous in any of the following ways. One, do they alone increase in sin to levels that are problematic? To do they stimulate appetite in a way that's problematic, independent of instance, in, or maybe as a consequence of instance in.

And then three, what's the story with their potential effect on the gut microbial? I think those are three categories that come to mind. They're probably other categories. And I just want to say for the record then and now sume some expert every once in a while in the form of a diet coke, stevia seems to be a lot of the things that I consume and I don't have a problem with that. So i'm not anti artificial or low calorie sweetener, although for reasons that are entirely personal and have no scientific basis, what's ever I avoid things with super lose in them. I only really like the task of IT, and I have kind of inversion to IT for an interesting .

reason and and it's a great way to touch that of. I don't have data for this up this personally.

I don't do IT yeah, I see you on my no, I find Steve up, gets thumbs by me. And I will choose low calorie or zero calorie so does or drinks or energy drinks when I have the option to have something with sugar. It's just kind of but i'm not entire sugar either. I just developed this as a habit. Yeah, I prefer to get my calories from food.

Yeah, you'd prefer to have a stake, but I supposed to having the cola.

Yeah, extraordinary blue ries of me on rice. Yeah, button olive oil and all the other delicious, wonderful things as opposed to a coke I D just have a diet coke and eat a bit more stake.

So let's take the instant thing first. Um so it's interesting mechanism they're showing there. What I would say there's been a couple of many analysis now looking at different knowledge of sweeteners, and they are effects on instant and they don't show effect.

So there's no there's no real effect in let's just kind of played out logically a little bit. If there was a significant effect on instant, one of two things gna happen. You're going going to see a drop in blood gender because you're not eating anything, right?

So most of us, if we eat, if we did drink a diet solo, we don't then go happy classic c right? Or if there is an increase in instant, if blood lue cose isn't dropping, then there must be a corresponding increase in glucagon, which is basically offsetting all of influence issues. I don't think I do.

Those things happen. I I think it's it's in earth. And the research, the many analyses tend to show this. There was i'm thinking of two many analysis where they looked at these, they looked at climbing a, they looked at instant sensitivity of instant released, and they just didn't see any effect. Now when IT comes to was the second point.

So we have insulin, we have does IT stimulate the appetite ways that mayor may not be related. Info, you ruled out instant in increase. So yeah, like, could there be a pairing of, like, okay, every time I eat, I have a diet soda.

Then if I have a diet soda on my, on its own, does IT stimulate the desire all of the day. A small study. But and by the way, that study was halted.

They this is the problem with that study is IT was being done in kids. The increases in insuing that they saw on a subset of the kids were so dramatic. This is the way he described in the talks.

I feel comfortable saying this. Maybe she's changed her tune, but in this online talk, an academic talk, the increases in insulin and were so dramatic that they were concerned about the kids becoming prediabetic ics. So they halted the study, which means that totality of the data ever came in, means that was it's hard to draw a conclusion. okay?

We talk about studies were always talking about means and averages, right? I leave open the idea that there could be subsets of populations, that there could be individual. I leave all that open.

So on average, if that's true and there is a condition response we're worried about, well, one is the effect on appetite, where there people going to eat more even if those things will have calories, they're not going to make a fat. There's no instance release, okay? They're stimulating you to eat more.

Well, if we look at the random ze control trials where they tell people, hey, instead of regular cola, drink diet cola. If that was true in actual an actual outcome, we would see people on diet soda either not lose weight or gain weight, definitely compared to water and probably similar compared to a regular cola. Um maybe a little bit less, but we would expect to see waking.

We actually see the exact opposite thing. So we have several randomized control trials now where people like comparing not just diet, so I don't want to say diet. So a lot of a low no calorie averages was kind of the what they talk about because not everything intangible diet soda.

But I think people know diet drinks in particular where they're comparing that. They tell people either switch out, either have cola, either have diet solar outside diet drink or just use war. Now they absolutely every single one of these trials, they lose weight. Going to diet drinks are usually a pretty significant amount yeah.

And usually, as I recall, a pretty significant amount of diet drink like a two leaders a day and like the person will Carry around a leader or two leader of of diet drink and on whenever they get thirsty or hungry.

Yeah yeah. So then what's went interesting is they've done direct comparisons to water, and some studies don't really show a difference. But several studies and several more analysis now have that when people, if they have either use water in place of regular soda or diet drinks in place over your sold, that people actually lose a little bit more wait.

And it's specially significant with the diet drinks. Now I don't think diet drinks are fat partners, okay, but not causing you to have increased energy exploitation. But if you are somebody who is used to a sweet taste, if you switch to water, perhaps you seeking out that sweetness elsewhere.

And so maybe those people are consuming little bit sweet food or or what not, wherein the diet drink group, maybe it's filled that sweet taste for them. So I don't get into the bed again. This gets like people get very like ethically charged about this.

What's drinking? what? this? Nothing wrong with drinking water. If you can drink water, you feel socially and .

you maintain your buts, just cki. Because if drinking water becomes an issue online, ridiculous.

Again, perhaps that mechanism exists, but at least on average, it's obviously washed out by the fact that for whatever reason, for most people who do this, they get a little bit more satie out of consuming a diet beverage as opposed to suturing water for a beverage. Now again, if you are somebody who you can drink water and you don't have an inclined for diet dress, then don't do IT, you don't need IT. But again, I look at that as we need to lower the barriers for people to start getting healthy.

And unfortunately, a lot of people with the message of just drink water and you'll say, well, diet cookies or diet so bad for you, regular soda or it's worth IT for you, the regular soda, their intention might be, I just want people to drink water, but the outcome is people go, I can to give my sodas i'm i'm just going to regret solo then, right? And so while your intention was positive, the outcome is actually kind of disastrous, right? And so we have to disconnect with the intentions of the message are from what the will actually produces.

And so that's what I say, hey, if we're move in, leavers did. If body, if somebody is obese, they came to me and there like, well, you know, I drink five colors a day. I'm like, fantastic because i'm thinking five diet soldiers instead and now we have just saved seven hundred and fifty calories and you're going start lose the way just by doing that, right? Which again, people say all what about hundred years down the road or whatever I like well.

Most of these sweets have been around for decades now. We do have quite a bit of data on them, but let's say that there is that we don't again, i'm shot now i'll get a closest to the boat, right? Like we know what obesity does.

So and in people who do these diet drinks lose weight, they get more, more balick healthy. So again, if IT comes down to soda or diet soda, by all means, let's do the diet soda. And if there's some small nuking effects to IT, i'll be with them.

So that brings me to the got microbial. Most of the research studies in humans where they use reasonable doses don't really show much effect on the good microbes. And however, there are a few with particular sweetnam like suker los that do short effect.

Now there was one that got a lot of playing. You would. I actually talked about this.

I think we actually talked on the phone about this. And IT was an interesting study. I thought I was well done. But I want to be careful about how over generalized IT was.

So the first part is in this study, they selected for people who basically they did a very, very like intense selection process where I think there was over fifteen hundred people who were like originally included in the study, and they widdle them down to like a hundred and something because they wanted people who had really hardly ever use artificial sweeteners in their life. And that's a pretty small percent population. What they felt was a lot of people submitted saying, I I don't use them, i've ever used them.

And then when they did die, recall logue like I actually, you're using IT here and you're using IT here so they select all of people out and they found that when they gave them super lose that the composition of the microbial changed and they call the disputes come back to that because that's a scary sounding word. Um first of what interesting is if you're somebody that population that they're selecting, those are probably people who have been specifically trying to avoid them because if you're not even if you don't try to consume them there everywhere. So if you haven't been consuming them, it's likely that you're specifically trying to avoid them probably means that you have negative thoughts and beliefs around artificial sweeteners. And again, we've discuss the power of belief before. I'm not saying that was a bad study because that i'm just saying we'd be careful about how much we over this research data.

Are you saying that the potential that those subjects had to believe that something local sweater's or low salary sweater's could be bad for the microbes might have actually made they're microbiome, more just biotic maybe.

I mean, I get what we've talked about. The power belief is very powerful. I I have no way to support that, right? I'm just saying be careful before you over generalized plus IT was a two week study and just two weeks.

Yes, I was two weeks. Now again, two weeks is two weeks is enough time to show differences. And they got microbes. Actually, a few days is typically .

enough time and only for super low. So stevia, no change there.

There was another sweetener that I think had a change might have been sacred.

sacred and suck. So the ones that seem to always show the biggest effects, quote, quote, and I don't know how often those are used in diet drinks these days. I mean, less than less. I mean, it's usually ask pertain stevia more in the kind of wellness, health fitness crowd .

drinks is preta lot of diet products. And but I like Frank my way, protein powder without organs ration is sweet with superiors. I mean, it's it's a great, sweeter.

And so some people will take that as well. Of course, he's going to defend super those because in this protein. But if I thought I was really bad, I would just use a different suit.

So what I will say as well is gut dispute. This sounds bad, but IT simply means that the gut microbes om changed. And I have several friends who are gut microbial experts.

And though when we sit down and talk about the stuff they like mean that they're takeaway yeah like fifty years will reply have a really good idea of this stuff. But right now we just know that things change and we don't really know like if it's a good change, bad change. So given example, there was another other study that didn't show a gut microbes shift with super lose, and they showed some of the species of bacteria that were increased or decreased. And one of the species that was increased, I believe i'm gonna butcher this so badly, I think, was bloody a cocos was was the name of IT, or at least how I tried to read IT, right? Because these are very like strange lattin work.

Yeah the names of bacteria are really difficult yeah to pronounce.

Now what's interesting is this pieces of bacteria was associated with Better medical health, lower risk obesity um Better insulin sensitivity. And so I kindly walked away saying, well, couldn't you make the argument that sucrose actually changed the gut micro bion for the Better based on some of the data? And so i'm not saying that what i'm saying is the following.

We don't really know if that changes to got microbiome, a good change, bad change or neutral. We just know that IT changes. So if you want to avoid, fine.

But if you're somebody who really struggles with moderating your intake and a super s is or an aspect or whatever have you helps you moderate that intake? Then again, you're shooting the allegations closer to the boat. S let's focus on the big stuff, right? And that kind of where island.

And again, I I hold open that perhaps my mind will change and adjust. But super l spent around a long time. Now that thing people bring up with cancer theyll bring up cancer with our artificial sweet nursing.

I'll give you example why i'm not worry about this. First off, you have to keep in mind the negativity bias in the news. All right, things that are negative are much more likely to get play than things that are positive.

Okay, think about how much you hear about this causes cancer. This causes heart disease. First is this protects against this. This protects against .

this is also a safer to when the media warns people off, things are supposed to towards things because if they push people towards things, there's a more reliability, push people away from things. Rarely are they responsible for the opportunity costs. There are the trade off.

as you refer to IT, right? So you hear a lot of people, like all man and all these studies say that these called cancer. So again, i'm going give a shadow to consensus because it's a great A I tool that basically will give you like if you ask the question um and there's some filters that help with that IT will give you kind of like this percent of study say yes, this percent same possibly .

in this to say .

no you and if you type in does ask cause cancer for example eighty percent say no and then like I think that split is like thirteen percent say possibly in ten percent say yes why would you would ever know that from like listening to social media, watching the news. But I wanna point out one study in particular that did show an association of ascertaining with cancer and IT was from the neutral santi cohorn.

I think there was out of france like a hundred thousand people and they looked at, uh like people who didn't use IT for these people who were like a low mode users and the people who were like high users, they can arrive in the turtles. And between the no non users and the low moderate users, there was like, I believe I was like a fifteen ish percent relative risk increase in cancer incidents, and that's what I reported in the news. And then that dropped too, like a six percent increased risk in the high group.

So IT is this, which i'm not aware of, any cars engine that they actually decrease in terms of the risk, like can carcinogenesis as they go up in like the concentration? And so to me, you know, one of the things you've got to realized, my PHD adviser used to say, if you torture the data enough, IT will confess what you wanted to say. And so if you go through a large group of people and you start trying to associate things with other things, you'll find things which could be very careful with how strongly you interpret IT.

And so for me again, if i'm i'm feeling strongly about for me to feel strongly about something, there has to be some kind of dose response, or at least like if there's a bell curve. Sometimes you see that, but you very rarely, especially with with cancer stuff IT. Usually this is kind of a linear effect.

And so again, that's why I land right now artifical sweater's. I land on them as A A useful tool for a lot of people. I don't think they're magic.

I think they occupy that sweet taste. A lot of people. And if you can completely avoid them and obtain from them and you're perfectly happy, then by all means do that. But if they help you maintain a healthy body weight and bio means .

do that love IT. You've done with some injuries. You've alt with pain. You talk a little bit about how reducing your stress and interpretation of the pain could help. I want to talk about pain and pain management.

But before we do that, a more general question that relates is about recovery tools. Many, many people want to know, okay, we were to create the pure mid of the hierarchy of tools for recovery after training. And here, let's change out, or let's use resistance training and cardiff asia training interchangeably.

Some people run hard, other people lived hard. Or do both from the moment that session ends. What do you have in your in your kit of things to maximize recovery over the shortest possible amount of time? And I can immediate think of sleep as critical, but what are the things you can do starting from that final repetition?

So I think it's not so time dependent. And like I say, it's more about what you do over the course of twenty four hours and you know your day to day life style. But uh, sleep, as you said, uh, also nutrition.

So being consistent with nutrition and you don't have to get in, you know ultrafast I just in carbon hydrate and you know fifty grams of way isolde right after you, you know. But it's probably a good idea within a couple hours of finishing your workout that you have, you know, meal with high quality protein and that you're just eating overall healthy dye throughout the course of a day. We've kind of discuss that .

at links you could do IT .

immediately after you yeah .

lutely quick and layer and dial question. There are any evidence that fruit is not good at replenishing lugging as compared to start because the real assess is that you like, if I finish your work out, I have. Like a way protein shake with a bunch of barriers in in a couple bananas, assuming equal calories. Is that going to replenish language in the same way as if I have a couple sculps away protein and a bullet vote? Miller rice.

this is going to a circle back to our mechanism versus outcome. And and this is one where I change my mind because of seeing outcomes. So the reason this comes up is e fructose.

Your muscles and other tissues lack the enzyme to turn fruit tos into muscle. Lacker agen, your liver has that inside me, so your liver can take fruit dose and turn them into liver like tion. So that has made some people in sports science CER or research to say, well, dona, fruit tos have to work out.

Actually, fruit tos is kind of a dead carbon hydrate, right, because it's not going to replacment muscle liquid. And then I was reading a study from Tracy and john Anthony y, which were they came out of lamon's lab, and they actually responsible for really flushing out a lot of the in tor pathway, a lot of translation initiation pathway. Very, very brilliant people.

And glad I got to see them. A few weeks ago in my advisor got this award, Tracy personally taught me ha western blots. So thinking Tracy, they did a study where they looked like likely for a punishment after exercise, giving either success, which is fifty percent blue cose, fifty percent fruit ose or pure glucose.

And actually, if I were call correctly, they actually got a little bit Better muscle like IT into a punishment with sucrose. Now this, how do you explain that? That seems completely kind of intuitive.

And there, I believe, against spend sometimes that I read this paper, but I believe the explanation was by providing some fruit tos. What you're doing is you're kind of social. The livers need for glue cose. And so that glue cose that does come in from suse can then kind of just bypass deliver and be available from muscle, whereas if you're getting pure glue cose deliver is gonna art. Picking things off now wasn't a if I were all crapy wasn't a big difference in the rate of like to punishment.

But um no thing is people don't realize well, even though fructose can be used to application, muscle lack age and directly, you forget about how the body Operates in terms of whole body metabolism, and you can store fu tos as glucose the like, aging in the liver, and then the liver can release that luggage in at some point into the bloodstream, and then that can be taken up, buy the muscle and turn in the muscle like a gen. So again, when IT really boils down to is what are you doing on the twenty four our basis? And what I will say too is the rate of blanky general punishment gets really tossed around a lot as something really important.

For the most part, the rate isn't so important if you're eating enough total carbo hydrate on the total daily basis and enough calories you replenishing muscle agen. And most of people, I always say, do you you're great training for an hour. You're going to do IT again in twenty three hours, you got plenty of you don't need cyclical destine or deco or whatever. And so i'm not really worried about that.

I think where the rate of language in replacement really matters is when you're dealing with athletes who have multiple events in a day, right where IT is, they're going to perform and then they need to replenish quickly before they go to the next event or know people obviously doing like in dance exercise where like iron man's ethology and that sort of thing where you know getting in that replacement and keeping IT going is very important. But I think for the average person is just exercising one today. Not really a big deal. Just make sure eating enough total cover hydro for you. The barriers and and the fruits in the in the way proceed afterwards.

ExcEllent OK then perhaps and then typically i'll do a meal that includes some starch little bit later in the day. Yes, great. So nutrition post workout or in the eight hour or two post workout, making sure you eat enough in the following hours.

Um do you include any kind of stressed down regulation? Are you do you do anything else besides nutrition and sleep to accelerate? sure. So stress management.

like you said. So um I I am blessed enough that I currently live in home on tampa ay and I get to watch the sunset over the water every night and that might say that might seem like A A weird thing, but I really feel like that is helps my .

stress level viewing horizons we know, but you in a panoramic c vision, we know this from .

stuff my life yeah pandemic .

vision is is a will come off the the accelerator of the of the sympathetic ARM of the autonomic nerve system, which is just nerd, speak to say, enjoy those sunrises and sun that they're very good.

I was talking to a friend and I was sitting out, I said, well, you know, Andrew approve of the sunset viewing. He might not approve of the burb an I am having with IT.

but you don't need my approval yeah .

so whatever could you just slow down a little bit, you know, and just decompress and feel Better? And so I mean, thing i'll do is all, you know, once to find the kids, once you go to bed, go on stage, al, on the couch with my cat, no, play a video game. relax.

D compass, compress, know things you enjoy. Yeah, I think things you enjoy like obviously like can't drink a twelve pack of beer and have that be conducive to that sort of thing. But the other thing I will say is I think a lot of people focus too much, especially with resistance training.

There is some evidence that being just overall active lifestyle like going out, I mean, when I was first getting til lifting like back and early to tell because guys like I go and I lived and lay down the rest the day, right? Because I to recover, right? I think the research actually suggests that you're Better off like having kind of an overall active life style. You know that that yeah it's important to rest to recover, but it's ably important to move your body throughout the day. You know active active recovery does have some good da on IT.

awesome.

Earlier we were talking about protein.

Actually, several times we talked about protein, and I neglected to ask a question that is very timely because I just did in an episode, a solo epo de of this podcast recently about skin health and appearance. And I looked at the data on ingesting collagen could be from bone broth or other sources of collagen, typically its powdered colleagues, anywhere from five to thirty grams of collagen. And I was kind of surprised at the results. I also talked to some german ologies basis. The results say, in these paper s the meaning sis.

I looked at and in speaking in with these thermal logic, that the conclusion was that regular consumption of college, in on the order of anywhere from five to thirty grams per day, with a little bit of vitamin, a couple hundred milligrams of vitamin c, for whatever pathway later reason, seem to prove skin appearance, fewer wrinkles, reduction wrinkles, more skin tautness appearance of moisture, that these are subjective measures, right? I don't think they were calibrating the skin and looking at ten cells strength and like that, but people felt they look Younger at sea. And I was surprised, really surprised, because without making this too longer a question or story, a few years back, there were some claims by not to be named individuals on instagram saying, well, you want to improve the function of your liver. liver. If you want to improve the function of your heart, eat heart if you want a new an hour, just like, no, okay, you're the nutrition about chemistry guy, science guy have a little bit of a background and called physiology that I rarely talk about but in any case.

but you know physical .

ology yeah I mean, there is we brought the great there is like zero evidence that ingesting a protein which of course is broken down into its minister constituent in the gut would somehow lead to selective shuttling of those emo assets from liver that you just to your liver. That just is like a there's only one word for that. It's like a crazy unsubstantial claim.

And then some papers were sent my way, which were in a different language. And like I was trying anyway zero minus one evidence, as I would say, yeah and yeah the whole notion that consuming college in protein, which doctor gt quality and ten no nails and all stuff growth but yeah that's what IT is um somehow leads to improvement in actual college in which is of course is a native protein of the body right? So I went digging.

I just want to up before I get your your answer. I went digging and I found again, and not to be named individual has this kind of wild story on the internet that, oh well, this is because it's broken down into the die petites and try peptides in the gut that somehow informed the body that there's an injury in the collagen, and we have caused, in quote, breakdown, a college in A K injury or no breakdown, a college gen and lasting and the skin all the time. And then the body recognizes the presence of those die peptides and tri peptides.

So little groups of tools, three peptides, not just one. And then so selectively to the skin and so it's like once again, it's like IT makes sense of mechanism if IT were true but like I just had to like raw my eyes, I say, oh no OK i'm going to pictures over the lane as I am right now. So lane, take IT away.

What's the story? Interesting college in improve skin appearance. And does do we have any idea what the ism might be?

Okay.

I belong IT question folks, but had to set the stage.

Well, first off, I will never make somebody apologize for giving a long winded preambles, right? Because you know how long i'm about to go.

We're both scientists.

So I will tell you, I actually, like after I commented on that post, I went looked up some more research and i've actually changed my mind a little bit OK, which which probably be surprised, haven't completely changed my mind, but I ve shifted a little bit. So first of my first thought was exactly what you thought was this is all getting broken down to constitute the asset.

This is not like you're taking college and just like putting in the place you want IT like just, you know, but like that sort of thing. So my and my skepticism was also because one of the highest quality protein, metabolic labs out there where john travelling is is, is, look, van loon, luke van loon labs one of the best protein metabolic labs in um the world and they were publishing research back when I was in graduate school. Fact, I think Jordan, I were actually in graduate school the same time.

So they did the study where they looked at. After exercise giving either way protein or college and protein and they looked at skull muscle protein to this, and they looked at connective tisa protein 3 thesis， right? And they saw no difference between way protein and collagen protein in connective tissue sentences after exercise.

And so, but by the way, college do not stimulate muscle protein in thesis, even like twenty five grams. I think IT was which most protein sources, even like plant protein sources, will stimulate most protein, like twenty five grams. So very quality terms.

Is a mother, anybody telling you like your like collegians good for building muscle? I mean, it's Better than no omino assets, but it's one of the worst you can get in terms of all protein sources. So that study, I again, since I know this lab, I have a lot of trust of the data that comes out of there, right? And I was a world design studies, well executed study within.

There's these men analysis out there looking at skin, looking at know, even like some were trying to make associations with connective tissue injuries and what not. And again, i'm always a little bit have the heb gbs when we we jump stricter, we haven't outcome, but we don't know what the mechanism is, right. And then I start reading A A review by look van loon actually and talking about like the so the collagen is um three alpha helix is.

So if you think about DNA, right, it's a double helix, right? So think about three helix is in an alpha helix just refers to the way of protein shaped. And they are they have a very large amount of policing.

So gay scene is an onest al middle acid. And every third residue in collagen in the three alphatec xs, every third resident is a glin molecule. So thirty three percent of college in is licensed.

Then I have want to say ten percent is polling. And then another, like ten percent ish is hydras y proving. So proving the ta hiddink on molecule audit IT, and that's apparently the the hype body needs to know this.

But just for fun stuff, the hydrants y proline helps stabilize the structure because of the hydrogen bonding with hydro on molecules, which I found interesting. So you have these three minal assets and a minor I derivatives that make up over half the minal assets in the college and protein. And well, my next thing was, well, a lot of nona central mille access, if you give them in the diet, they don't really raise nona central middle is in the plasma, because the god extract a bunch of them.

Glass is different if you give. There was a study looking at giving just one gram of pure glass in, and looking at the rise in plastic, gi, seen and IT. I think I went up like, I think the the like native level of gay scene in the plasma something like two hundred eighty microvolts and after giving a gram of IT IT went up like four hundred micrometers.

Er i'm giving my best estimate based on the graph I saw and so but I got thinking, okay, that's I guess possible if you have more glenn and proline, I didn't look I didn't see the prolonged ata. But if you have more glycine and prose that's winding up in the plasma, not that they're being directed to those tissues, but since those tissues use so much of that amino acid, perhaps IT does help. And then if you look at like way protein versus colligan and the content of glasses and polin, I think collagen has like three to ten times the amount of licking and proving and IT compared red the way protein.

So am I rated to say collagen help skin and connective tissue one IT? I'm not because i'm so you know the study looking at connected tisa synthesis doesn't show anything, so the mechanism is incomplete, but there is a plausible at least they've shown that glen can go up in the plasma from taking IT in. And IT is a big component of collagen.

So aren't we just suggesting that people take licence .

instead of college? 对。 I think what they would say is like there's because you're getting hydrox y protein in the college in the colleague that you're taking that probably I know how much high dropping pRobing is typically in the diet， you know.

Um but I would say again, I am a little bit nervous about like a lot of subjective measures of skin appearance and can tightness. I'm not saying faking data. I'm just saying that data is easy to get wrong because IT is subjective, right? It's less the the more by the more objective things are, the more by as you introduce.

So I hope open the idea that soft and collegian could help with skin, hair, nails. I'm not convinced by the data, and i'm not going to tell people to spend their money on IT just yet, but i'm going to stop short of saying that I think it's B S. Uh and i've actually changed my tune slightly on that um from looking in this a little bit further.

Thank you for that very thoro answer and very clear answer. If nothing else, IT tells us that college in protein is going to be least ideal for post workout protein because of the fact that you know IT lacks the very amount of Lucy is set up so might be might be good for skin um definitely not a great protein for dietary protein reasons.

No it's very very low in the branch to assets like the lowest. And Lucy of any protein source i'm aware of, I think it's like two percent Lucy which is like most even like the worst plant may sources of Lucy, like six point five percent Lucy, so like the worst sources of protein, the dye are still like three times more Lucy than you get in college. In proteins .

quality way protein would be .

the high bee. And twelve, thirteen percent yeah.

Eggs way protein.

eggs are going to be around nine percent. Lucy, beef, chicken, most animal sources are around eight percent, and then most of your plant sources are eight percent under great.

Well, doctor lane norton, thank you for coming back here for the second time on the podcast. I must say it's true pleasure is set down with you and discuss training, nutrition supplementation, recovery, pain management, stress, life advice and for so many reasons A S you know a serious scientist, you know our business of science um that that really means something you're serious about the science and you're a light harder guide in the right context and but you're a serious scientist, you believe in the process and you provide the nuance even though that might not be convenient to what somebody wants or convenient to the discussion like why .

not convenient for me? I I stuff be so simple. No right. Sure sure.

You're like the rest of us. And at the same time, I I really appreciate IT because we are now also colleagues in the public health, public facing landscape. Social media sometimes called, but a lot of lime spot cast youtube, but said, and it's required, it's needed that people like you exist.

And I will go so far to say that, no, I am not alone in this, right, because i've talked about this with with rogan and with Gabriel lion, doctor Gabriel al lion, excuse me, and others, you know, in an ocean of noise, some of which has validity, right? But in an ocean of noise about nutrition, in training and all these different things in how to evident space, blank and science space, that are you really, really clearly are peer signal like you, you're going to take as much time and as much effort to communicate the real signal. And you today have really defined for us, for you what is real versus is not real, which versus a maybe.

And I just want people to hear that loud and clear, because I think sometimes people pay attention how spirit you are, and they miss the fact that in that spirit, nature and in the nuance and in the look, we're both long winded times like I know, because I know this for myself, but I certainly know IT for you that that comes from a place of respect for the science, respect for your audience, that is not being dismissive, that's actually respect for them. IT would be disrespectful to just give them the answer they want to give them a quick answer without the explanation. So I just really want to extend, like a real voice of gratitude for you, for what you did us today.

Just far too much to list off. It's also valuable, just so so valuable. And also what you do on social media and the way you do IT. And look, I also really love and respect your your fighting spirit because you're fighting, you're fighting for truth, you're fighting for good. And I also love the post in that the pictures of your kids, they're delighted and it's great to see that the baLance in your life you've created. So I could go on and on, but i'm going to cut this short by just saying a giant thank you for being the signal among all the noise.

Well, speak for yourself of being long with IT because i'm not. But I honestly, I appreciate that. That means a lot to me. I recognize how you know valuable your platform is and how many people want to be on IT.

And the fact I but asked to come on again, I really appreciate IT and to be able to have the opportunity to disseminate this information and not just talk about the studies to talk about hey, here's here's a method of thinking. Here's a way to approach this stuff. And I mean, you kind of point IT out like, I would love to be able to say, yes, he was bad.

Like, I love to give you that answer, but I can, I can do that. I make myself do IT. Because I look at the evidence and i'm glad you said spirit, I do feel like I do have some fighting spirit.

But at the end of the day, I I tell people, you know i'm human. I got own biases mm beliefs um and I like making money like anybody, but I and I like to be right. But at the end of the day, I I want to help and I believe that if I continue to execute on that mission that you know financial stuff will take care of itself. And at the the day, I just want to be want to be a that positive on the world. So thank you for give me that chance.

It's been a true pleasure and you're absolutely more than net positive on the world. Um and we'll just have to have you come back and talk us again before along.

Thank you so much any time. Thank you.

Thank you for joining me for today's discussion with doctor lane norton. To learn more about his work, please see the links in our show note captions. If you're learning from end or enjoying this podcast, please subscribe our youtube channel.

That's a horrific zero cost way to support us. In addition, please be sure to follow the podcast on both spotify and apple. And on both spotify, apple, you can leave us up to a fire star review.

Please also check out the sponsors mentioned at the beginning. And throughout today's episode, that's the best way to support this podcast. If you have questions for me or comments about the podcast or guess or topics that you like me to consider for the huberman lab podcast, please put those in the comments section on youtube.

I do read all the comments. Those of you that haven't heard, I have a new book coming out. It's my very first book is entitled protocols and Operating manual for the human body.

This is a book that i've been working on for more than five years, and that's based on more thirty years of research and experience. And that covers protocols for everything from sleep to exercise to stress control, protocols related to focus on motivation. And of course, I provide the scientific substantiation for the protocols that are included.

The book is now available by presale at protocols book dot com. There you can find links to various vendors. You can pick the one that you like best. Again, the book is called protocols and Operating manual for the human body. If you're not a ray following me on social media, I am huberman lab on all social media platforms, so that instagram, twitter, now known as x threads, facebook and linton, and on all those platforms, I discuss science and science related tools, some of which overlap with the contents of the huberman lab podcast, but much of which is distinct from the contents of the huberman lab podcast. Again, that's huberman a lab on all social media platforms.

If you haven't always subscribe to our neural network news letter, our neural network newsletter is a zero cost monthly newsletter that includes what we call protocols, which are brief, one to three page PDF that cover things such as neuroplasticity and learning dopamine optimization, how to get Better sleep, things like deliberate cold exposure. We have a foundational fitness protocol. We have a protocol all about habit forming in much more to sign up again, at completely zero cost.

You simply go to huberman lab dot 点 com， go to the menu function in the corner, scroll down to newsletter, and you provide your email. I should point out that we do not share your email with anybody. Thank you for joining me for today's discussion without your lane norton. And last but certainly not least, thank you for your interest in science.