TXNIP and Obesity Guest Post by Brock Cusick

Howdy folks, we interrupt Ray May for this highly-anticipated guest blog post by none other than Brock Cusick, frequent 180 commenter, follower since the dawn of http://www.180degreehealth.com/, and author of the blog http://cusickonnutrition.blogspot.com/.  While we can never expect any two people to have identical views, even when those two people grew up watching the movie Condorman on every single sick day, I have allowed Brock to share his views openly - discussing some new research he has come across that identifies yet another important link in the body weight regulation system of the human body.  I hope it triggers some great conversation.  I share some of the thoughts I exchanged with Brock about this in the comments section.  Anyway, thanks Brock - for the post and your inspiration.  Like the time you wrote me, "If do right, no can defense."      

The Body's Fatness Regulator Has Been Found
There are moments when a single piece of information falls into your lap and whole new vistas become clear. Many small pieces of information previously formless snap together into a working whole, and what was confusing just moments before, becomes discernible. I had one of those moments on Tuesday, the 26th of April, 2011 - and I would like to share it with you.

This post is about weight loss and diabetes, why we get fat, and how we can lose it.

Researchers at Yeshiva University’s (go Macabees!) Albert Einstein School of Medicine have identified and characterized a curious little protein (link goes to synopsis; full paper costs $30) produced in the hypothalamus (long known to be involved in body fat regulation) called thioredoxin-interacting protein (TXNIP, which I pronounce “ticks-nip”). Unsurprisingly this TXNIP has an influence on “thioredoxins”, a class of proteins found in many tissues throughout the body.

The best way to think of TXNIP is as a graduated signal - like a light on a dimmer switch going from “off” to “barely on” and all the way up to “bright as possible.” The hypothalamus senses certain things about the body’s current condition and then produces the appropriate level of TXNIP so it may instruct all of the thioredoxin-producing tissues of the body how to behave. In this way the diverse tissues of the body (which have no way of communicating directly with each other) act in unison.

Just what TXNIP signals is absolutely incredible. High TXNIP levels cause white fat cells to retain fat, brown fat cells to reduce heat production, and all of the body’s tissues to become insulin and leptin resistant, while low TXNIP levels cause white fat cells to release lipids (lipolysis), brown fat cells to produce heat (thermogenesis), and all other tissues to become insulin and leptin sensitive. In one fell swoop one protein explains obesity, Type II Diabetes and cold feet. Moreover weight gain and diabetes occurred “in the absence of any effect on feeding behavior. Oxygen consumption, respiratory quotient, physical activity, and brown fat temperature were decreased in hTXNIP-expressing mice compared with controls, suggesting that lower energy expenditure in hTXNIP-expressing mice accounted for their higher rate of body weight gain.”

To translation the geek-speak: The mice that got fat didn’t eat any more than the lean mice; their bodies just became insulin resistant, partitioning calories over to the love handles and “paying” for the calorie deficit by throttling down various metabolic activities. If that doesn’t shut up the “calories in/calories out” and “Just eat less! Have discipline!” crowd, they can no longer lay claim to being in any reality-based community.

The paper then goes on to identify the three factors that regulate TXNIP expression, and they are blood sugar, insulin and leptin. High blood sugar, low insulin and low leptin all cause TXNIP expression to increase, while low blood sugar (or, “healthy levels of blood sugar”), high insulin and high leptin all cause TXNIP to fall.

(What’s that, you say? Insulin spikes cause TXNIP to fall, inducing lipolysis? Yessir! I bet those Glycemic Index folks are feeling pretty silly now.)

Of the three signals the paper does not identify which input (sugar, insulin or leptin) has the strongest effect on TXNIP, but I suspect it is blood sugar - diabetics often have high insulin and leptin levels without any reversal in their symptoms. Or perhaps any one input being “out of desired range” is enough to send TXNIP up. At this point it’s an unanswered question.

Despite the uncertainty I just mentioned, this is still fantastic science and quickly leads us to what we have to do if weight loss and diabetes reversal are our goals. Anything we can do to get blood sugar low and keep it there, and anything we can do to get insulin and leptin up and keep them there, is going to work in our favor and possibly lead to weight loss. Below are the strategies I believe will trigger immediate and “effortless” weight loss-

Carbohydrates. Fiber-rich, fresh carbohydrates are the “triple threat” for weight loss (emphasis on the fiber). The fiber will ferment into short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs) in the hindgut, turbo-boosting insulin sensitivity and thus lowering blood sugar; the glucose will spike your insulin; and the calories will spike your leptin. Between these three factors TXNIP is toast. Instant leaning out. Make these the basis of your diet - fresh whole grains (brown rice, corn, oats, wheat - whatever) and potato variants with the skins on (the skin is where the fiber is). If you have the means to make fresh flour, chapati it up.

Keep protein and fat low. There’s nothing wrong with protein and fat, but they don’t boost insulin or tame blood sugar as well as carbs. Each calorie of fat or protein you eat is going to be a calorie of carbs you don’t eat before you’re stuffed for the day.

The proteins you do eat should be a mix of “normal” meat and gelatin. Fats should definitely be saturated - especially coconut oil.

Eat the Food. Never skip meals and always eat to appetite. This is about leptin, people! Leptin, leptin, leptin! This woman lost 232 lbs. over two years after switching to a regimen that never skipped meals while making no changes to the quality of her diet whatsoever. I think we can do better.

Also, if you're really craving something that's "off diet", just go for it. The stress of thinking about while you dutifully eat your potatoes just isn't worth it, and maybe you're craving it because your body knows you need some vitamin, mineral or other quality. Trust your instincts and just get back on the horse at the next meal. It's okay, I promise; I won't come over to your house and berate you for being a bad person.

No Milk. For reasons that aren’t clear to me, but many people have reported this, it is very easy to gain build muscle and lean tissues while drinking milk but damn near impossible to lose weight. Evolutionarily this makes sense - the last thing you want a nursing infant to do is lose weight. So this means that for the duration of your weight-loss effort, keep dairy to a minimum (or none at all, if you can manage). Butter (and especially ghee) is probably alright though since it lacks the proteins and sugars of milk that seem to be so anti-weight-loss.

Frequent Feeding. The TXNIP study found that any sort of fasting caused TXNIP to inexorably rise, while meals immediately quenched TXNIP production (the insulin and leptin signal). Meanwhile other studies on both humans and horses found that frequent meals kept leptin up and blood sugar low the whole day long, while infrequent meals produced wide swings in both. Don’t listen to those leangains guys - frequent little meals (FLM) is the way to go.

Anita Mills (who I linked to above in “Eat the Food”) also ate small frequent meals. Her Doctor’s advice was spot on (if incomplete) for keeping blood sugar lower and leptin higher.

Helpful note: In the last week I have already started making FLMs, and it’s quite convenient. I just make my breakfast as usual but double the amount I make and then divide it into four portions. I then eat one immediately and the other three portions go into tupperware for work. Dinner is eaten with the family normally. No sweat.

Correct Exercise. This is just as important as any dietary change. Lift weights, do bodyweight exercises, and/or Maxercise. Read Matt’s post at the previous link and his post on the PACE system by Al Sears to understand more fully the reasons why this is important, but the short version is - because it lowers cortisol and blood sugar.

Speaking of cortisol …

Lower Cortisol. Straight from Wikipedia, cortisol’s “primary function [is] to increase blood sugar”. Cortisol is bad for weight loss, mm’kay? So meditate, go for walks, do yoga - whatever. Almost anything that reduces cortisol is probably a good thing. Foods that lower cortisol, such as orange juice and ice cream, might also be helpful in moderation.

Ice Cream?? Heh heh. That’s been quite the topic du jour around here, eh? Well actually some amounts of ice cream might be good (or at least “mostly harmless”) for weight loss if you are already very insulin sensitive. Someone who is still diabetic will have increased blood sugar for hours from a bowl of ice cream (or a plate of pasta), but someone with an excellent blood sugar control should see their blood sugars return to normal fairly quickly - while also getting an insulin and leptin boost that quenches TXNIP expression. Until I hear evidence to the contrary, I’m putting this into the “Allowed in moderation” category. The basis for your diet should still be high-fiber starches though, 4 to 5 meals of the day.

Avoid Stimulants. Anything that boosts the adrenal glands is going to boost cortisol as well as adrenaline, causing high blood sugar. Sorry Mr. French-Press, you and I will just have to take a break.

Sleep. It does a body good. Sleep is so important I can’t even summarize it in one paragraph or two. Just get a much as you can. If at all possible, unplug your alarm clock and go to bed early.

And that’s it!

One last point. Let’s call this system something. In honor of the grain-based nature of this diet, the light amounts of protein and fat, the regular exercise and strict diurnal practice of sleeping a lot, I humbly suggest The Neolithic Diet. (Strictly speaking our species has been eating a carb-based diet for 500,000 years (No one tell Art De Vany!), so this diet is actually Paleo. But let’s not confuse people.)

This Neolithic Diet isn’t just theoretical. I put it into practice on April 27, 2011 and will be “live blogging” the results as they come in at my nutrition blog Chicken Soup for the Liver. If you're interested in how it works you can follow me there. Also, if you choose to try this experimental diet with me PLEASE do two things - (1) email me to let me know, and (2) take some “before” pictures. If this regimen is as successful as I hope some “before and after” shots from people other than just myself would go a long way towards convincing even more people to put this into practice. And then we’ll have really started something.

Special thanks Mark A., a 180 reader and friend, for first alerting me to this research. Super-special thanks to Matt Stone, for letting me contribute to the discussion here.
-Brock Cusick; bmcusick@gmail.com

Endurance Exercise and Metabolism

After a grueling 2-mile ride on Aurora’s cruiser bike (“Mojito”) while talking on a cell phone – and carrying a large load (1 book) in the basket on my way to the post office to do a book trade with Riles, I figured now was a perfectly good time to lay out some definitive 180 thoughts on the topic of exercise.

In the last post, we talked about triglycerides. Yes, the blood level can be revealing, but more important is the amount of triglyceride – or fat, that hangs out in the muscles. This is referred to as intramuscular triglyceride, or intramyocellular fat.

It appears that this intramyocellular fat is the primary driver of insulin resistance, and also leptin resistance which increases appetite and reduces metabolism/body temperature even if you are overweight and eating a high-calorie diet (which should normally trigger feedback mechanisms that bring your weight down, like a rise in metabolism and decrease in appetite).

For those uninitiated, low body temperature is a primary focus at 180D… the kind that isn’t related to legitimate thyroid gland dysfunction (much less common). The reasons why body temperature is such an important indicator of overall health and how it can most effectively be brought to normal is all laid out in THIS FREE EBOOK.

Anyway, let’s have a little chat about how exercise impacts this type of fat, how it therefore impacts insulin and leptin resistance, and where exercise figures into the big picture of health attainment and maintenance…

Endurance Exercise

Endurance exercise, something I’m very familiar with after over a dozen years of being an obsessive hiker and backpacker (I actually worked as a Wilderness Ranger for 7 seasons, hiking 500-1,000 miles during the summer, and wrote a book about backpacking many years ago), is a perfect example of a Catch-22.

We know that lots of exercise burns intramuscular fat and is insulin sensitizing. That is why everybody and their uncle in mainstream health is infatuated with it. We’ve known since forever that doing a ton of exercise is a good counter to a diet that otherwise would result in lots of intramuscular fat storage (high-fat, high-omega 6, high-sugar, high-calorie). It is, and the single greatest reason that it has been found to be beneficial is probably the ability to increase insulin sensitivity.

But not so fast. Long-duration cardio or endurance exercise makes the body more proficient at storing intramuscular fat, because intramuscular fat just so happens to comprise a large percentage of the bodily fuel used to do this type of exercise. Generally speaking, the higher the intensity level and the shorter duration of the exercise, the higher the ratio of glucose to fat used as fuel and vice versa. And, after a couple hours of exercise, much of the glucose is used up, and the ratio of fat burned to glucose burned becomes even higher.

So, in a nutshell, working 10-hour days which often included more than 15 miles of hiking at moderate intensity levels (right in the perfect heart rate range for optimal fat burning), had the following impact on me AND most of my co-workers (generally speaking)…

1) Go from not exercising much to exercising a ton – lose fat at an incredibly rapid rate, can get away with anything diet-wise (I used to eat a half dozen cake doughnuts and a quart of chocolate milk for my first breakfast of the day), feel awesome

2) Get kind of tired and drained after a few months, with greater proneness to illness and injury - in my case an increase in digestive problems, have a drop in metabolism (my morning body temperature dropped from 97.9 to 96.2, resting pulse into the 30’s and low-40’s), and no longer lose an ounce exercising 10 hours a day, even if you are not eating that much food… but note, physical conditioning is superhuman

3) Stop exercising at the end of the season and have ravenous hunger, lethargy (I always promised myself I’d “stay in shape” after the season but went 0 for 12 during my avid hiking years), and gain fat at an incredibly rapid rate – usually eclipsing my weight prior to the beginning of the season

Of course, part of this is due strictly to calorie deficit. It’s impossible to eat as many calories as you burn, no matter how hard you try to stuff yourself. One season I consumed 2 pounds of butter, 4 gallons of whole milk, 10 pounds of fatty beef and pork, and a heck of a lot more each week and still lost 10 pounds of body fat in about 5 weeks. I figure I must have eaten about 5,000 calories per day during this time but burned an average of 6,000, for a daily 1,000 calorie deficit. Get lean enough, and this will crush your metabolism, which brings up an important point…

Endurance exercise slows down your metabolism!

Most people think that burning more calories means that your metabolism is higher. This is not true. Driving your car more often does not change its gas metabolism. Rather, it works something like this…

In my case, as a hiking fanatic for 5 months out of the year, I might have started the season with a 1:1 appetite to metabolism ratio (AM Ratio) at 175 pounds while sedentary. I was burning 3,000 calories at rest, and had the appetite for 3,000 calories each day on average.

By the 5th week I’d weigh 165 pounds, but let’s say now that my resting metabolism dropped to 2,500 while I burned 3,500 through exercise for a total of 6,000 calories per day. I could maintain weight eating twice as many calories, but my actual metabolism had dropped, hence the fall in body temperature (more significant) and heart rate (less significant – and can just be a sign of improved cardiovascular efficiency).

But no matter what, I never would lose weight below 165 (I did my first season, going from 170 to 155, but my body adapted to never let that happen again).

As you get more and more “in shape” for endurance exercise, your body is able to do increasingly more difficult and longer-duration exercise while burning fewer and fewer calories. Testosterone levels drop along with your resting metabolism, and you lose muscle mass as well – making you able to perform endurance exercise more efficiently.

So, the irony is that to be a really good endurance athlete, you must have as little muscle as possible, store intramuscular triglyceride for fuel very efficiently, and burn as little calories as possible while exercising. These are the precise adaptations that occurred with me and my co-workers, which is why, doing ever-increasing amounts of work in a work day as we got in better and better shape, our rate of weight loss would slow and then stop completely.

Basically, if you want to get to where you can exercise 10 hours a day without losing any weight, burn fewer calories at rest AND during exercise, and develop an unprecedented ability to store fat eating to appetite if you stop exercising, then I highly recommend endurance exercise. It is unparalleled for making your body a fat storage machine. I would say that by the end of the season my resting metabolism was probably near 2,000 calories per day instead of 3,000, and my appetite was probably around 4,000 calories per day – 2:1 AM Ratio, which leads to rapid fat storage if you are not a believer in willpower like me.

Unfortunately, most exercise fanatics point to what happens during the first phase of exercise – an improvement in insulin sensitivity from burning all that muscle fat, fat loss, improved cardiovascular performance, and the ability to eat more food and still lose weight.

What they ignore, is that the vast majority (call it 19 outta 20) of people that have insulin resistance and are overweight DO NOT continue long-duration exercise for the rest of their lives once they start it. Those who start and then stop, take 1 step forward and 2 steps back, just like someone who goes on a low-carb diet and then quits it at some point (also call it 19 out of 20 people), which has almost an identical impact (you burn a higher percentage of fat to glucose for fuel, and thus store it in muscle better, you raise cortisol – which is also fattening and happens with endurance exercise, and so on).  More on cortisol and weight gain in this video:



Grand conclusion:

If you want to be able to eat to appetite and exercise as a leisure activity, solely for pleasure, while being healthy, insulin sensitive, and not gain weight – then endurance exercise will take you farther from that destination. I don’t see how anyone could argue otherwise.

If you want to be a prisoner of exercise, dependent on doing hours of it per day to maintain your weight and be insulin sensitive, then endurance exercise is your ticket.

Stay tuned for more on the short-duration type of exercise and high-intensity exercise recommended by various fitness moguls like Craig Ballantyne, Scott Abel, Rachel Cosgrove, Chad Waterbury, and others in the next post.

P.S. – I still like hiking. It is an enjoyable activity for me. But I do not recommend doing it habitually for several hours on end – more than a couple times per week. Every time I do lots of hiking my weight set point increases. One example is that when I tried overfeeding for the first time after not hiking for 2 years, my weight increased from 174 to 179 and then started creeping back down. After a summer of very intense hiking, where my weight bottomed out briefly at 168, I tried overfeeding again at the end of the season and my weight went up to 194.5 (thanks in part to a 2-week blood sugar monitoring vegan stint, which was, in hindsight, lower in calories than I first estimated and sent my appetite into the stratosphere).

Picture of Flat Top Mountain from a hike almost exactly 1 year ago - Wind River Range, Wyoming. 

Lower Triglycerides

Here are a couple of fresh new videos about Triglycerides - little fat molecules that hang out in our blood, tissues, and liver.  The first is an ode to what you can do to lower your triglyceride levels if that is an issue, and what metabolic effects can be expected if you do (reduced leptin and insulin resistance and a corresponding decrease in the appetite to metabolism ratio, increased energy levels, and so on). 

The gist, for you video haters out there, would be to:

1) Increase the starch to simple sugar ratio in the diet - particularly fructose found in soft drinks and juices
2) Reduce alcohol consumption
3) Increase fiber intake (unrefined starches instead of refined starches)
4) Decrease the omega 6 to omega 3 ratio in your diet (which can take years to take effect)
5) Eat solid foods, and no liquid calories

By the way, the shirt says "Arnold is Numero Uno," his vintage shirt from the movie Pumping Iron.  Chris from http://www.zentofitness.com/ should like it. 



Next up is a simple video on why the belief that "spiking" insulin again and again leading to insulin resistance as portrayed by various low-carb authors is a myth.  Excess triglycerides appear to be the predominant cause of insulin resistance, not spikes in insulin from a high-carbohydrate meal.  If the latter was the case, rural Asia and Africa, home to a diet consisting of 60-90% of calories as carbohydrate, would have the highest, and not the lowest rates of obesity, type 2 diabetes, and metabolic syndrome.



For more specific guidelines that can assist in overcoming hypertriglyceridemia using diet and lifestyle change, please read THIS FREE EBOOK

Last but not least - It's About Friggin' Time (AFT) for a new 180 Kitchen Video.  This time - it's my all-time favorite without any shadow of a doubt. Click here to become a Corn Star. 

RRARF Addendum

As many of you know, over the last couple of months we've been exploring a diet that displaces more fat with starch as opposed to eating more or less equal amounts of the two.  When it comes to lowering cortisol, improving leptin sensitivity, improving insulin sensitivity, impoving body composition, raising metaoblism, and keeping fat gain minimal while eating to appetite or slightly beyond appetite - which are basically the objectives of the eating and lifestyle program created in the FREE EBOOK, starch immediately stands out as being superior to fat in each and every one of those categories. 

And of course, the vast majority of the most metabolically-healthy people on earth eat what could be called a "starch-based diet" in which well over half of ingested calories come from some starchy staple - such as corn, wheat, rice, or root vegetables (Asians, rural South and Central Americans, Pacific islanders (formerly), rural Africans, and so on). 

This is actually a pretty interesting debate amongst the low-fat plant-based gurus.  I score it:  McDougall 10, Furhman 7, Esselstyn 4,
Mills -2,368, Creepy Bald guy next to Mills 0 



Last week I added this "Addendum" to the FREE EBOOK, the first of many to come I'm sure.  Anyway, this is what was added.  Hopefully this brings some clarification to those who have been confused recently.  To read the rest of the book, go to www.180degreehealth.com

RRARF August 2010 ADDENDUM

While RRARF (Rehabilitative Rest and Agressive Re-Feeding) is very successful at raising body temperature, improving digestion and overall well-being – one question remains…. Can it be done more efficiently? Can it be improved upon? Okay, I guess that’s two questions.

By more efficiently, I mean with less fat gain and greater lean body mass gain as well as a greater rise in temperature per calorie ingested.

I believe the answer to those questions is “yes.” So what’s better? Getting more calories from starches or getting more calories from fat?

Upon close scrutiny of the literature on overfeeding, a clear picture emerges. Straight studies comparing overfeeding with a high-fat/low-starch diet vs. a high-starch/low-fat diet yields clear-cut results. The higher the ratio of starch to fat when overfeeding, the greater the lean body mass gains and the lesser the body fat gains. Not only that, but since starch is not something that the body can readily store like it can fat molecules, the excess calories ingested MUST force an increase in body heat and physical energy to a much greater degree than fat overfeeding.

The physics of it all is actually quite simple. The most efficient way for your body to store fat is to pack fat molecules into fat cells. For this to happen in the absence of dietary fat means that a great deal of carbohydrate must be converted to fat – triglycerides, before it can be efficiently stored. However, this is a very inefficient process. When large quantities of fructose are ingested during overfeeding, the effect is very fattening because a great deal of the fructose is converted to fat in the liver. However, this is not true when talking about starch overfeeding.

Thus, when the ratio of carbohydrate to fat is very high, and the ratio of starch to fructose (and also glucose in simple as opposed to complex form as is found in starches) is also high, the more of the excess energy is stored into muscle tissue and the less into fat. There are also implications that a diet with a high starch to sugar + fat ratio is protective against heart disease – increasing the HDL to triglyceride ratio for starters. I never thought that controlling the macronutrient ratios in such a way would have such a direct bearing upon body composition, but to ignore the simple truths revealed in the medical literature regarding such a thing would be sheer denial of irrefutable fact.

http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/reprint/62/1/19

http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/reprint/67/4/631.pdf

While choice, personal preference, carbohydrate tolerance, digestive abilities, and more will determine what you personally choose as your version of RRARF, there is no question that eating more starch and less fat by percentage of calories is a route that will produce more body heat and more lean body mass with less body fat than any other method.

Of the starches, those highest in amylose content and resistant starch – such as legumes, red potatoes, corn, and intact whole grains like Basmati rice (vs. those ground into flour as in bread/pasta) – particularly those that have been cooked and then chilled which forms a type of metabolically-stimulating resistant starch known as RS3, are ideal. A version of RRARF where these types of starchy foods are maximized and other foods more or less minimized in comparison is probably the most efficient route to take.

The reasons why that is goes far beyond a larger increase in lean body mass in comparison to fat gains, but incorporates positive changes in the microbial environment of the gut, intestinal production of the most metabolically-stimulating and insulin-sensitizing fatty acids known (such as butyric and propionic acids), and perhaps most-importantly – pronounced appetite inhibition with an increase in metabolism, meaning that weight gain is minimal or weight is even lost eating to appetite while metabolism simultaneously rises (the Holy Grail of health and weight loss).

This is just the tip of the iceberg on the potential benefits of a high-starch diet, particularly one that maximizes amylose and resistant starch-rich carbohydrates. I have tentative plans of elaborating on this topic in exhaustive detail in a future eBook, entitled something like 180 Degree Carbohydrate. Actually, that’s a pretty weak title for such an important topic. I’ll come up with something better hopefully.

Also see 180 Kitchen for a great recipe and meal plan that incorporates resistant starch on a program with a higher ratio of starch to fat.

Further reading:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resistant_starch
http://veganmaster.blogspot.com/2008/08/mnp-100-muscle-and-34-selected.html

The Flavor-Calorie Theory

In March I did a quick video introducing Seth Roberts, a Berkeley psychologist, and his interesting theory known as the flavor-calorie association theory of body weight set point regulation. I also mentioned Roberts’s pioneering work in 180 Degree Metabolism – in the lengthy discussion about the going theories on what causes leptin resistance and a rise in set point.



I am still incredibly captivated by this theory, and really struggle to find loopholes and flaws in it. It’s come to the forefront recently as I have experienced a tremendous anorectic (hunger-suppressing) effect from eating a high-starch/low-fat diet, which contains much lower flavor intensity (it’s bland as hell) and much lower calorie density (8 pounds of potatoes contain the same amount of calories as 1 pound of butter, for example) – both prominent factors in the creation of flavor-calorie associations that increase hunger and lower metabolism. These, of course, are telltale signs of an increase in bodyweight set point. I, on the other hand, have experienced a big decrease in appetite and a rise in metabolism – down 5 pounds in the first 27 days of July.

For more on increasing metabolism, please read this FREE 180DegreeHealth EBOOK.

Here are the prime factors in the flavor-calorie theory, which explains numerous diets all under one umbrella…

1.) Calorie density – the more calorie-dense a food is, the more it triggers an activation of reward centers in the brain and a mysterious rise in weight set point.

2.) Absorption rate – the faster a food is absorbed, the stronger the flavor-calorie association and the larger the rise in the activation of reward centers in the brain and a rise in set point that occurs when these pleasure centers are tickled.

3.) Flavor-intensity – the more highly-flavored the food is, the more it raises set point

4.) Food familiarity – the more you eat ditto foods with a strong flavor-calorie association (like, say, Cool Ranch Doritos), the more you start to prefer those foods, the stronger the flavor-calorie association becomes, and the more fattening those foods become.

5.) Liquid vs. Solid – Liquids, in general, promote stronger flavor-calorie associations and are more fattening than solid foods – raising the set point.

There is ample evidence supporting all of these arms of the flavor-calorie association hypothesis. Of course, what I just described is the food produced by food companies – packaged/processed foods, fast food, and other restaurant food. This is something that anyone with personal experience and the eyes to see can observe. Most don’t develop severe weight problems eating homemade, solid, unsweetened, unrefined food with a low calorie density and no added flavor enhancers. Most who do develop weight problems do so by repeatedly eating specific foods that are scientifically-designed to outcompete other foods in activating reward centers in your brain and creating strong flavor-calorie associations that make plain food increasingly unpalatable and undesirable.

Food companies have this down to a science – serving up food that is designed to be masticated and absorbed more quickly, enhanced with MSG and other flavor enhancers, and washed down with a highly-sweetened beverage in liquid form, sometimes sweetened with Aspartame or other highly-sweetened substance that causes a stronger flavor-calorie association and an increase in bodyweight set point.

The reasons why I find this theory to be so compelling:

1) Humans are the only creatures that have the intelligence to specifically manipulate their food in such a way (combining certain ingredients, cooking, adding spices, chemical flavor enhancers). The only creatures that eat food that comes in such a package are humans and their pets, the only creatures on earth that suffer from obesity (and giant squirrels and chipmunks that are fed this food by humans).

2) In simple laboratory studies, feeding a highly-sweetened substance like Saccharin, an artificial sweetener with no calories, increases food consumption and body weight.  According to Roberts's theory, you would also see artificially-sweetened beverages consumed by themselves as opposed to with a big calorie load in a mixed meal NOT be fattening or induce greater calorie consumption, which may indeed be true. 

3) In simple laboratory studies, feeding more liquid calories and fewer solid food calories increases calorie consumption and body weight. For example, feeding sucrose in granulated form is not fattening. Feeding sucrose as part of a liquid solution is very fattening.

4) High-fructose corn syrup, which is a liquid and is also sweeter than sucrose due to its higher concentration of fructose, is markedly more fattening than white sugar.

5) The strongest association between obesity and food is the association between obesity and soft drinks, highly-sweetened, rapidly-absorbed, liquid food that tastes exactly the same every time you drink it.

6) Lab animals that are fed “chow,” which, because it is more palatable than fat, carbohydrate, and protein separated into different bowls, causes the lab animals to become fatter and maintain a higher weight set point than controls. When the controls are switched to chow, they do not gain weight, suggesting that flavor-calorie associations that affect bodyweight set point occur in youth to a greater degree than adulthood (perhaps a reason why Granny can eat all kinds of things without getting fat that make YOU blow up like a balloon).

7) Feeding humans less calorie-dense foods, such as a diet high in fiber and water content from fruit, vegetables, and unrefined starches causes a massive decrease in calorie consumption – up to an instant 40% decrease with no decrease in satiation reported (from Burkitt et. al.’s Western Disease).

8) Diets that are sweetened vs. diets that are unsweetened are much more fattening and promote greater calorie intake.

9) Refined carbohydrates, which are more calorie-dense and more rapidly absorbed tend to increase calorie intake and body fat, whereas unrefined carbohydrate diets have the opposite effect.

10) Low-carbohydrate diets are comprised of foods that are not particularly palatable, and typically decrease appetite and body weight.

11) Low-carb diets that contain artificial sweeteners often negate the hunger-suppression and weight loss effect of a low-carb diet. Even Atkins reported this, and advised those who weren’t losing weight to make sure they excluded aspartame from their diets.

12) Displacing more homecooked food, which generally has low flavor-intensity, natural flavor variability, slow absorption, and less calorie-density with packaged, processed, refined, rapidly-absorbed, chemical flavor-enhanced ditto foods and restaurant foods parallels a huge rise in obesity. It’s reported that calorie intake per capita has increased 20% in the United States since the early 70’s.

13) Obesity was unheard of in all places in which unrefined carbohydrates were ingested as opposed to refined carbohydrates.

14) There are strong associations between obesity and the flavor enhancer MSG.

I could go on for a while here, but that is a good starting point. Ideally we would all be able to raise body temperature without any increase in body weight. Instead, this could be achieved by lowering body weight set point. Of course, lowering the weight set point is easier said than done, and is, as I discussed in my conversation with Sean Croxton last night, perhaps the most important secret yet to be revealed.

But I do find this theory to be solid and applicable. Those attempting to lose weight may find much better success…

- eating almost exclusively homecooked whole foods

-cooking differently each time or with the addition of different spice combinations to reduce flavor-calorie associations

-eating lots of food that is not calorie dense – like root vegetables and vegetables

-avoiding all liquid calories

-eating foods that require lots of chewing

-keeping fat intake reasonable (which decreases flavor-calorie associations), and being wary about foods with strong flavor-calorie associations where fat and carbohydrate are conjoined and in ditto form – pizza, ice cream, fast food, chips, cookies, etc.

-keeping sweets to a minimum, especially when combined with a calorie-dense meal. Fruit, which has a very low-calorie density, eaten by itself, does NOT form strong flavor-calorie associations. When consumed with a high-calorie load after a mixed meal, I find fruit to be very fattening, and juices even more so, which would be expected if Roberts’s theory is accurate.

-not seasoning foods too heavily

For more on Seth’s theory, read the Shangri-La Diet or Seth’s free report here:

http://sethroberts.net/about/whatmakesfoodfattening.pdf