Today marks the start of a one month dietary experiment with the Paleo Diet. In short, you could call this the Stone Age Diet, or Caveman Diet if you will.
It’s allegedly the diet that evolution has designed us to eat, that the evolving human has been eating over the last few million years, but noticable before agriculture was invented in the last few thousand years. So there’s no grains of any kind on the Paleo Diet, which for me isn’t such a big deal, as I’ve mostly cust grains out of my diet already any. The Zone diet has helped with that, but also I don’t eat wheat for personal reasons.
But what is going to be a big deal for me: is no dairy! I routinely have at least a pint of milk a day + cheese and yoghurt. So cutting out the dairy is going to be tough.
This is why this is a month’s experiment. I am totally unconvinced that we shouldn’t eat (or drink) dairy products. Yes it’s cows milk, but it’s also very close to human breast milk, and that as we all know, is very good for us. Yes there’s an argument that today’s mass produced milk is poor quality, but I only buy organic milk, and have whole milk as often as not. (And raw unpasturised milk when I can get it.)
However there is only so much reading you can do on a subject and so much canvasing of other’s opinion, before you have to take the plunge and give it a try. I figure that 4 weeks out of your life is a small amount of time to invest in testing out something new. If you find it’s something that works for you, then you’ve made a wise investment. And if nothing else, it gives you something to talk about!
Personally I suspect that most of the health claims that the Paleo diet makes come from reducing the starchy carbs and processed food associated with a western diet, rather than a lack of dairy. As I eat a pretty clean diet anyway: mostly meat, veg, fruit and nuts (+ dairy atm), I suspect that I won’t see much difference. However I know enough people who eat Paleo Zone to make me think giving it a go is a good idea.
So I’ll report back at the end of September, and we’ll see if I feel better, worse (unlikely) or the same, and of course if my Crossfit workout performance has improved or not.
This video from Sky, starts with a short report on dementia research that has shown that those with a high BMI in their middle age, have physically smaller brains later in life! Ok, we all know that BMI is a very flawed system of measuring obesity for anyone who resembles an athletic type, but for the masses, it works well enough.
So I ask you, since when did a 12 week experiment, satisfy the desire to investigate the “long-term effects on vascular health.“ Mice only live a few years, so doing a whole lifetime study and actually measuring what counts wouldn’t be unreasonable, i.e.: actual mortality rates rather than guessing the outcome and quality of life (measured by activity levels say). I say guessing because as you’ll see, most of the increased factors they normally associate with heart disease were absent.
Before I get into that though, here are some details missing from the BBC article, on the actual composition of the diets. They only studied 3 permutations it seems:
a standard diet of mouse “chow” (65 percent carbohydrate; 15 percent fat; 20 percent protein);
a “Western diet” in keeping with the average human diet (43 percent carbohydrate; 42 percent fat; 15 percent protein; and 0.15 percent cholesterol);
a low-carb/high-protein diet (12 percent carbohydrate; 43 percent fat; 45 percent protein; and 0.15 percent cholesterol).
They don’t however say how the percentage was split up. I assume it was calories, but it could have been weight or scoops maybe?
Why scientists such as these fail to do a thorough job is beyond me. Any mathematician will tell you, you can’t take 3 points on a graph and use that to predict a complicated trend. Similarly ask any scientist how to test for a specific correlation, and they’ll tell you change just one variable at a time, something these researchers also failed to do. If they were really trying to test the effects of carbs in the diet, they would have kept the ratios of protein : fat the same, but in each one it’s a different ratio. This alone makes the entire “study” a pointless waste, as you cannot work out what single factor might have caused the effect.
E.g. if only doing 3 tests as above, then something like this would have been significantly better as only 1 macro nutrient ratio changes:
70% carbs, 15% fat, 15% protein
40% carbs, 30% fat, 30% protein
10% carbs, 45% fat, 45% protein
Already it becomes more complicated however, as what do you do with total calories? Do you increase protein and fat as carbs reduce, in order to maintain a consistent calorie count? Or do you keep absolute calories of protein and fat constant, and let absolute calorie count reduce in line with the carb reduction? See, straight away you need to double the number of tests, and we haven’t even got to look at differing protein to fat ratios yet!
In the end, they should have done dozens of diets, of varying compositions. Not only looking at scientifically derived permutations as above, but also looking as specific commercial diets. (2) above happens to coincide with the Zone Diet proportions for example. Why not do Weight Watchers, Atkins, South Beach, Eskimo, Japanese, et al?
However, ignoring all that for the moment and assuming some actual value may be derived from this poor excuse for science. Let’s have a look at some of their findings. One key interesting point was:
“…the study also found that standard markers of cardiovascular risk, including cholesterol, were not changed in the animals fed the low-carb diet, despite the clear evidence of increased vascular disease.”
More evidence confirming that cholesterol does not in fact cause heart disease and the cholesterol hypothesis is a con, but I digress! It goes on to say:
“the usual markers thought to contribute to vascular disease, including the animals’ cholesterol and triglyceride levels, oxidative stress, insulin and glucose, as well as levels of some inflammatory cytokines… there was either no difference in measurements… or the numbers slightly favored the low-carb cohort,”
So they are saying that all the usual “well known” indicators of heart disease were either unchanged on the low carb diet, or better. Yet they have chosen to pick out the one indicator that went the other way, and highlighted that. Is this an example of that crazy saying that it’s the exception that proves the rule?!?
Basically there’s nothing to conclude from this little test. The test wasn’t big enough, wasn’t complete, wasn’t rigorous and wasn’t long enough to draw any conclusions. The fact that the classic markers were contradictory should be enough to show that. At the end of the day, what counts, and what is often missing from so called scientific studies (including most Statin research, but don’t get me started on those!) is the only measure that counts: actual mortality rates.
It is unforgivable for people to be warned off diets that conclusively make them thinner and healthier, because of a few weeks poor study of a few mice. Getting back to what really annoys me though, is the prat that the BBC rolled out to comment on it. He said:
“For now, it appears that a moderate and balanced diet, coupled with regular exercise, is probably best for most people.”
No shit Sherlock! The issue as ever, is what does “moderate and balanced” actually mean? Certainly it doesn’t mean what what Professor Alan Maryon-Davis, president, UK Faculty of Public Health, said:
“This research helps to back up the basic message that our diet should contain more starchy carbohydrate, not less”
My jaw hit the floor when I read that. You can’t draw that conclusion from this study at all. It’s a shameless example of someone using this doubtful study to spout his own personal agenda and draw wild conclusions from it. What these types fail to do, is define what they mean by “balanced”. Certainly in my book, balanced does not mean a diet where carbs out number protein and fat combined by 2:1, as the so called normal diet in this test was. How is that balanced? Muppets, they make me so cross!
I forget why I’m reading this book now (someone must have recommended it to me) but the Carbohydrate Addicts Diet has an interesting twist on the usual “low carb is best” mantra of alternative diets. It boils down to this:
1) Eat 2 very low carb “Complementary meals” per day. E.g. 3-4oz of protein + 2 cups of salad or low carb density veg.
2) Every day eat a “reward meal” which can consist of anything you want, without limit. Obviously it’s best if it’s a balanced meal, but if you want frois gras on crackers, a 1lb steak with roast potatoes, and 1/2 a chocolate gateaux, all washed down with a bottle of wine, you can.
3) The gotcha is that the reward meal has to be started and finished within 60 minutes (including any booze). They believe that this avoids a “second wave” of insulin that’s normally released 75-90 minutes into a meal.
4) Also there’s absolutely no snacking and no carbs throughout the rest of the day, not even half a sugar in your coffee. Everything gets saved for your reward meal. After all, you can have anything you want, it’s always less than 24 hours away.
I might give this a go for a month and see if it works. I can imagine that after 2 weeks of having a reward meal of a whole chocolate gateaux, smothered in a litre of ice cream, the novelty might wear off and you start eating more sensibly.
Someone has asked me to help them get started on the Zone diet eating plan, as they are finding it hard to get their head round the books. I originally sent them the example meal plans you can get off the main zonediet.com site, but the feedback was that they were too expensive for someone on a tight budget.
I agreed then to summarise the zone diet and to put together some example cheap recipes, starting initially with breakfast to get the ball rolling. If you are struggling to get started on the zone, or just find it all too confusing and want zone help, hopefully this post will assist you. It’s not meant to be an exhaustive regurgitation of the Zone and it’s not ideal either due to the budgetary restriction, but this is what I came up with, what do you think?
Key Principals of the Zone Diet to Remember
1) At each meal, balance Protein, Carbohydrates (carbs) and a small amount of Fat. It’s this balance that helps you not feel hungry.
2) Examples of Protein: meat, fish, most cheese.
3) Examples of Fat: olive or vegetable oil, nuts, seeds, butter, cream cheese, mayonnaise, salad cream.
4) Examples of Carbs: vegetables, fruit, bread, pasta, cereal, rice, juice (if not diet), most sauces.
5) For carbs, try to eat mostly vegetables and some fruit. Eat bread, pasta, cereals, rice and potatoes very sparingly only.
6) Semi Skimmed milk is a great combination food, it is Protein, Carbs and Fat in perfect balance.
7) In most cases, you can count cheese as a source of protein AND fat.
Eating Plan
1) Eat 3 meals and 2 snacks per day.
2) One snack should be last thing as night, this is very important as it puts your body in the right state for when it does all its healing whilst you’re asleep.
3) Don’t go more than 4-5 hours without eating.
4) Don’t wait till you’re hungry before you eat, if you do you are more likely to over eat.
Example Breakfasts as cheap as I can make them
1) 2 oz sliced ham (protein), 1 large apple (carbs), a teaspoon of mayonnaise (fat), 1/3 pint of semi skimmed milk (protein, carbs and fat).
2) 2 eggs (protein), 1 slice of toast (carbs), 2/3 teaspoon of butter (fat), 1/3 pint of milk.
3) 3 oz of any meat, ham, chicken, turkey, beef etc (protein), 3 small fruits, e.g. satsuma, kiwi, and peach, 3 macadamia nuts (fat).
4) Cheese on toast or cheese sandwich: 3 oz cheddar cheese (protein and fat), 1 slice of toast/bread (carbs), 1 small fruit, e.g. apricot (carbs).
5) 3 oz low fat cottage cheese (protein), 1 large apple and a Satsuma (carbs), 9 almonds (fat). Drop the almonds if you get full fat cottage cheese.
6) Bacon and egg butty: 3 rashers of bacon and 1 egg (protein), 1 slice of bread and a good squirt of brown sauce (carbs), 1 teaspoon of butter (fat).
7) Can you come up with a 7th breakfast that balances protein, carbs and fat? Post one in the comments below.
Note the above assumes you are using real meat you’ve prepared yourself. If you get the pre-sliced packs of reformed sandwich meat from the supermarkets (which is not recommended), increase the weight by a half again, e.g. 3 oz instead of 2 oz.
Examples of a Snack (remember to eat one no more than an hour before bed):
1) A really simple one is just a cup (1/3 pint) of semi skimmed milk.
2) 1 oz of cheddar cheese and a small fruit, e.g. peach.
3) 1 oz of any meat, a small fruit and 3 cashew nuts.
4) 1 oz of cheddar cheese and a small glass of wine!
I know I said these were breakfast ideas, but once you get out of the habit of breakfast only being cereal or toast, then breakfast becomes just another meal in the day. Which means the above examples work just as well for lunch too.
I’ve not done a Zone Diet update post for a while, but that’s not because I’ve stopped following a Zone Diet plan. As I mentioned on my last zone diet post, I had sort of reached a plateaux and got “stuck” if you will around the 13st0 (182lb / 83kg) mark and about 17-18% body fat. You may recall that I started the Zone in March 2007 at just under 15 stone and 30% body fat (my waist was 43 inches at the widest point). I set myself a 12 month goal to get to 12st7 (175lbs / 80kg) at 15% body fat. Clearly I didn’t make it.
Of course getting stuck was entirely of my own making, as I’d become complacent, no longer weighing food but measuring my zone blocks by eye only. My alcoholic intake was also far too high (being measured in bottles of wine per week) as were my occasional chocolate treats. The sad reality was that “occasional” was getting ever more frequent, like 2-3 times per week, and “treat” was probably more accurately described as typically 3 different chocolate bars each time!
So 3-4 bottles of wine a week + 8-10 chocky bars a week + of course Friday curry night, it’s no wonder really I wasn’t losing any weight. It is however a testament to the zone that I wasn’t gaining any either. All that changed 4 weeks ago though…
4 weeks ago I started working full time for my new client in London and so have been working away from home and preparing every meal for just myself. The main consequence of this is that I’m rather lazy about what I eat. That doesn’t mean sandwiches and take aways, that means lots of cold meats, fruit and nuts.
Yes there are the exceptions to spice things up, like shallow fried fillet steak (cooked blue of course) with cream cheese… for breakfast! Hmmm yummy. It’s not that extravagant either. For a typical 4 block breakfast, take just 3oz of steak, quickly fry it with a minimum of olive oil (with a bit of salt and pepper and herbs to taste), smear some cream cheese (lowish fat) on the top when done, have with a cup of milk, an apple and a peach (or similar). A very quick and very zone meal.
You could legitimately argue that the cream cheese is not the best choice for a fat source and you’d be right. Everyone has to find the right balance in their diet and personally I like a sauce of some kind with my steak, 3 tea spoons of Philadelphia Light fit the bill for me. You go ahead and have nuts instead if you want to.
Anyway, back to the point: I’ve also pretty much knocked the chocolate on the head completely and only have a drink a couple of times a week now. So 4 weeks of much more strict zoning and guess what: I am now at my target weight of 12st7 with a waist measurement of 35 inches (and 8” loss) which according to the charts in the back of the Zone books, puts me at 15% body fat exactly… I’ve made it! I’m finally at the target I set myself.
So great, I’ve done it, time to come off the diet, right? That’s what “diets” are for aren’t they, for losing weight, then abandoning when you’re done? Sounds silly doesn’t it? And indeed it is.
It’s a shame that the Zone is called a “diet” at all, but it is for obvious reasons. The word diet simply describes the food you eat. Everyone reading this blog is “on a diet” whether that’s a conscious weight loss one, or an unconscious one of pie and chips, being dictated by cooking programs on TV and what the super markets currently have on offer.
I’m not “on a diet” in the common vernacular in that it’s a temporary thing to be discarded when an arbitrary weight is reached. Rather I have permanently altered the way I eat: I eat a balance of protein, carbs and a little fat with each meal and I’ve almost completely removed what I call Junk Carbs from my diet (starchy carbohydrate sources designed to simply bulk up a meal, e.g. bread, pasta, rice, wheat, cereals). Let’ call this a Zone Eating Plan and dispense with the word Diet altogether. This has resulted in a weight loss of 2.5 stone, a loss of 8 inches off my waist, and a drop from 30% body fat to 15% percent.
BUT this leads me to a small dilemma: clearly I have yet to reach a steady state whilst following a Zone Eating Plan, unless of course its effectiveness is offset by eating chocolate and drinking too much wine! As a result, if I continue to eat the way I have in the last month, I fully expect to continue to lose body fat. Here’s the rub though, several people have said to me that I shouldn’t lose any more weight, but it occurs to me that everyone who has said this is (if I can be crude) fatter than I am and so I wonder if there are (conscious or unconscious) ulterior motives behind their statements. What is an ideal target to aim for now?
I consider body fat percentage to be the better measure, rather than absolute weight, as it takes into account muscle vs fat. But now that I’ve lost half the fat I started with, what next? I still don’t have a six pack… maybe some vanity can be afforded now that I believe I have the tool to expose it? I say expose because Crossfit has given me the muscle definition already, it’s just currently hidden behind a (now not too thick) layer of stomach fat.
Or perhaps I should consider weight? More on this another day but I am going to be entering the Northern British Masters Weight Lifting competition next year and the closest weight category boundaries areat 77k and 85kg, so I’m within range of the lower 77kg category. Maybe that would be a good target?
The issue here is that I know I work well with a target in mind, as my Dad is fond of saying, “Aim at nothing, and you’ll hit it every time!”. So which target should I set?
