Fat Loss Guru Q&A

Whole Eggs: Dietary Evil or the New Superfood

ANSWER: It’s overly simplistic to say that the saturated or animal fats cause heart disease. It’s even more simplistic and incorrect to say that foods high in dietary cholesterol such as egg yolks, will always lead to an increase in cholesterol in the blood.

Many other factors are involved, including the type of saturated fat, individual genetics, current health status, exercise and the big picture of what else is consumed in the rest of the diet.

Research Says Eggs Are Not Evil

Recent research has been showing that the cholesterol in eggs is handled by most people’s bodies in a way that doesn’t cause heart disease and that dietary cholesterol does not necessarily translate to increased blood cholesterol or an unfavorable ratio of HDL to LDL cholesterol.

After a recent study published in The Journal Of Nutrition, Dr. Robert Nicolosi at the University of Massachusetts said, “Our data shows that eating an egg a day is not a factor for raising cholesterol.”

A study reported at the 2006 experimental biology meeting in San Francisco made similar findings. The researchers discovered that when people ate three or more eggs per day, the amount of low density lipoprotein (LDL) in their bloodstream did in fact increase as previously reported.

However they also found that the subjects actually made bigger LDL particles which were less likely to enter artery walls and build up as artery-clogging plaque.

As a result of these and similar findings, head researcher Christine Green said that a growing body of scientific evidence suggests that eggs should not be considered a “dietary evil.” Whole Eggs Have “Super-Food” Qualities

Whole eggs have a lot going for them nutritionally speaking. The egg yolks contain a highly bioavailable source of lutein and zeaxanthin which are carotenoids that protect against cataracts and macular degeneration.

Eggs are a great source of high biological value, complete protein and the protein is split almost evenly between the yolk and the white. One large egg contains 6.3 grams of protein with 3.5 grams in the white and 2.8 grams in the yolk.

Although whole eggs appear to have been exonerated, it still may not be wise to suggest that anyone can eat eggs in unlimited quantities, for both health and body composition reasons.

Dr. Udo Erasumus in his book, Fats That Heal, Fats That Kill, said that in 70% of the affluent populations of the world, increased cholesterol consumption decreases cholesterol production in the body through a regulating feedback system that protects them. The other 30% of the population may not have adequate feedback, and are wise to limit their dietary cholesterol consumption.

Unlimited egg consumption is also not wise from a caloric perspective. In a fat burning program, you need to consider calories as well as nutritional value and health impact.

Whole Eggs And Fat Loss

Whole eggs are not low calorie foods - they’re fairly calorie dense, while egg whites are extremely low in calories, which is why egg whites are one of the top choices for lean protein on fat loss and bodybuilding diets.

Now that this news about the health value of whole eggs is starting to become more widely circulated, bodybuilders and fitness enthusiasts have been criticized for their long held practice of throwing away the egg yolks.

However, In all my years of training and consulting, even back in the late 1980’s, and 1990’s I’ve never thrown away all my yolks.

My menu plans typically contain one or two whole eggs with 8-12 egg whites. I know that’s a lot, but that’s a man-sized bodybuilder meal. For non-bodybuilders or people with lower calorie needs, it might be one whole egg and 3-6 whites.

Why do I do this? Because this provides the high protein without so many calories. Take a look at this egg white - egg yolk comparison:

3 whole large eggs: 225 calories, 18.9 g protein, 15 g fat8 egg whites & 1 whole egg: 211 calories, 34.3 g protein, 5 g fat

Do you see what was accomplished here? I didn’t remove egg yolks because I’m afraid of cholesterol. I removed most of the egg yolks because I was on a calorie budget and I was on a higher protein diet and I wanted more protein with fewer calories. Make sense?

Another reason that bodybuilders use liquid egg whites so often is for convenience. They can pour them from the carton right into the fry pan and they don’t have to do all that shell cracking and egg white separating.

Let me leave you with a funny story. Whole Eggs - “Better Than Steroids?"

When I started bodybuilding as a teenager, I latched onto the teachings of a bodybuilding guru trainer from North Hollywood named Vince Gironda.

Gironda trained all the top movie stars back in his day including Erik Estrada, Clint Eastwood, Tommy Chong, Carl “Apollo Creed” Weathers and too many others to mention.

He was also the Trainer of bodybuilding champions such as Larry Scott, the First Mr. Olympia, and believe it or not, he was Arnold’s first trainer when Joe Weider sent the budding young star to America from Austria.

Gironda had been saying from day one (back in the 1950’s and 1960’s) that the whole egg was “nature’s perfect food” and he compared them to “natural steroids.”

On some of his low carb “muscle definition” diets, he said you could eat as many whole eggs as you wanted and even scramble them in butter. He said that he had some of his champion bodybuilders on up to three dozen eggs a day!

I didn’t really understand what a ketogenic diet was at the time, but being an obedient, guru-following teenage bodybuilder, desperate for muscle, I did what he said. I ate up to 3 dozen whole eggs a day for months on end.

Well, there was no miraculous steroid-like effect, and I didn’t drop dead of a heart attack either.

One thing I did notice is that I DID NOT LOSE FAT like Gironda said I would.

The reason should be obvious: three dozen whole eggs is 2700 calories (more if you use extra large or jumbo eggs). I was at nearly maintenance calories from the eggs alone, and eggs weren’t the only thing I was eating.

Gironda, like many other low carb gurus, did not place any restrictions on calories, only on foods. Gironda was a genius, years ahead of his time, but this was the flaw in his program. Even on low carb diets, you STILL need a caloric deficit to lose body fat.

Thus, my approach changed and I started removing yolks to keep me more easily within my caloric deficit without losing the quality protein… but I never cut all the yolks because of their nutritional value.

To this day, I still keep one or two yolks in my omelettes and scrambles… sometimes more, as long as it fits in my calorie budget.

Get crackin!

Tom Venuto

Fat Loss Coach

WWW.BURNTHEFAT.COM

P.S. One last thing. Keep in mind that the quality of the egg is only as good as the quality of the bird it came from. This is why many health experts recommend free range eggs and/or omega-3 eggs.

P.P.S. For more information about fat burning nutrition, visit: www.burnthefat.com

How to Gain Lean Muscle Without Turning into a Tub of Lard

ANSWER: It’s true that BURN THE FAT, FEED THE MUSCLE is primarily a fat burning program and as you’re reading through the book, you’ll see that the entire manual is written with references to getting leaner.

However, with a few simple tweaks, the program can definitely be used for gaining muscle. The primary adjustment would be an increase in the calories.

To gain lean body mass, you need a calorie surplus. The biggest dietary reason most people fail to gain lean muscle is that they’re simply not eating enough. Many times when they come off a fat loss program, they are completely paranoid about “losing their abs.”Of course, that’s a legitimate concern because it’s VERY easy to lose your abs if you get lazy with your diet or you think that a muscle gaining diet means eating everything in sight. To gain muscle and stay lean it takes continued discipline and dietary restraint, but the fact is, you just can’t gain any muscle if you’re afraid to eat more.

The trick in gaining lean muscle without fat gain is to select a small calorie surplus. Overeating, even on clean, bodybuilding foods is going to make you gain fat along with the muscle.

Gaining fat and muscle weight at the same time is commonly known as “bulking up” and that’s the old school approach to building muscle. We don’t want to do that. The whole idea is to Feed The Muscle and build lean body mass only.

Although BFFM is written with a fat loss slant, all the calorie formulas are included in chapter 6, so you can figure out exactly how many you need to lose, maintain, OR gain weight.

A typical male maintains on about 2700 calories per day and a typical female at about 2100 calories, but it’s good to plug your stats into the formulas to individualize, and you need to recalibrate calories anyways, after you come off a long fat loss phase.

What I would recommend for lean gains is to add a 10-15% calorie surplus on top of your maintenance level as your starting point. You will probably need a second increase in calories after a few months or after you’ve begun to add some lean mass in order to keep the lean gains coming.

The only other major adjustments for gaining lean mass would be the protein-carb-fat ratios (covered in detail in chapter 8) and of course, the amount of cardio.

Weight gain programs require more carbs in the macronutrient mix and less cardio. Endomorph types may need to keep 3 days of cardio in the mix to avoid losing their abs. In some cases for ectomorph “hard-gainer” body types, they should cut the cardio completely during the muscle gain phase.

For the endomorph body type who tends to gain fat easily, I recommend continuing to use a carb or calorie cycling method even for the muscle gaining phase. The difference is in the number of calories.

For fat loss, I typically recommend a carb cycle with a 20-30% caloric deficit for 3 days, followed by one full day at maintenance or even maintenance + 5-10%, with ALL the caloric increase coming from carbs.

For lean muscle gain without fat gain, I’d recommend a cycle with 3 days at a 15% surplus, followed by 3 days at maintenance or a small caloric deficit of 5-10% below maintenance.

These are just guidelines. They are not written in stone. I have seen all types of calorie cycling variations work for different people. Any non-linear calorie approach is superior, in my opinion, for keeping the gains lean.

All the other principles in BFFM, such as eating the “foods that burn fat" and avoiding the “foods that turn to fat” apply as equally to weight gain programs as they do to fat loss programs.

In fact, many BFFM “graduates” quickly reached their fat loss goal using these techniques, and then with a few simple adjustments, shifted into a “muscle-gaining phase.” Same program, but one change in calorie levels.

Using the BFFM techniques for muscle mass gains, most people can expect to gain 1/2 pound to 1 pound per week of lean body mass with no increase in body fat, (1/2 to 3/4 of that for women).

It’s not that hard to put on the first 10-12 pounds of lean muscle. After that, gains tend to slow down a bit.

These types of gains can be achieved completely natural - and in fact, natural is the only way I’d ever recommend you do muscle gaining programs.

Train hard and expect success,

Tom Venuto

Fat Loss Coach www.burnthefat.com

Basketball for Fat Loss?

ANSWER: I just plugged basketball into my calories burned calculator and it says that if you weigh 185 pounds, moderate basketball (full court game play) burns 839 calories per hour. Moderate basketball (non-game) is 528 calories per hour. I’m guessing “non-game” means either half court or just casual play with your buddies.

Either way, 528-839 calories burned per hour sounds like a good fat burner to me - especially the all-out, full court basketball. Don’t you agree?

Basketball also gives you a wide variety of different physical challenges and intensity levels - running down the court, jumping, pivoting, shooting - and you said you enjoy it.

If you feel guilty when you finish your game, as if you didn’t burn enough, when the game is over, just run intervals up and down the court… do about 6-10 of them or until you yak. (just kidding).

If I were to clarify my position on cardio training in my fat loss book today, I don’t think I would change my recommendations much. I'm a very strong proponent of exercise and becoming more active to burn fat rather than just cutting calories. However, I might change some of the language to make it clearer that fat loss is about BURNING calories and that your choices for HOW to burn them are virtually infinite.

The problem, in my opinion?

The word “aerobics” sets people off… especially the macho guys. There’s an instant emotional connotation carried in the word “aerobics, and it’s negative for many people. “Aerobics” is also usually a very narrow definition making for a fairly small list of choices.

I like the word “cardio” a little better, because it’s a little broader, but even “cardio” carries with it some pre-conceived notions and it’s unclear whether various types of “cardio” exercise are good fat burners.

Is basketball cardio? I suppose it depends on your definition.

Is basketball a good fat burner? Sure. But you might not think so if you were inflexible about how you define exercise and training.

What I would do if I wanted to most clearly define what makes a good fat burner, I’d recommend that you focus on:

“INCREASING ENERGY EXPENDITURE” (BURN MORE!)

This description leaves the choice of activity up to your own personal interpretation and personal preference.

Is 500 to 800 calories per hour a lot of energy to expend? You bet. Better still is the fact that you enjoy it. I know, I know, everyone wants to be told EXACTLY what to do; how many minutes, what intensity, what type, what heart rate, blah, blah, blah, and gurus are infamous for being dogmatic about their systems as the “best way” or “only way.”

But what if Dan loves basketball and Tom loves the Stepmill and Joe loves to jog and Kyle likes calisthenics and John likes kettlebells and Suzy likes kickboxing? Then what?

By changing your language and focusing on increasing “energy expenditure” (Burning more), that should change your conception of what efficient fat burning exercise is.

DEFINITION OF GOOD FAT BURNING EXERCISE =High # of total calories burned/expended

DEFINITION OF GREAT FAT BURNING EXERCISE =High # of total calories burned/expended and high # expended per unit of time

DEFINITION OF WHOOP-ASS FAT BURNING EXERCISE =High # of total calories burned and high # burned in a short period of time and you love doing it! It’s play time!

Fat oxidation and excess post exercise energy expenditure and all that other scientific stuff (that I could bore you to death talking about) does matter, but your primary focus should be on:

1) Burning as many calories as you can in the time you have.

2) Finding something you like to do.

3) Focusing on RESULTS above all else… Is your body fat decreasing or not?

Last, but not least, don’t forget that optimal fat loss is achieved with a three-part approch including nutrition, weight training and “cardio” training.

I’m not saying that basketball should replace your strength training. I’m suggesting that basketball or other sports can be a perfectly viable alternative to traditional aerobics or cardio if they’re high energy cost activities.

Using my new definition for fat burning exercise should help lift the fog of confusion that has been created by only defining fat burning exercise as”aerobics” or “cardio.”

The word “Aerobics” is somewhat restrictive in scope and definition. The possibilites for “expending energy” are endless. So now, go forth and BURN THE FAT… however you choose to do it… just do it!

Train hard and expect success,

Tom Venuto

Fat Loss Coach

WWW.BURNTHEFAT.COM

PS. By the way, you don’t see a lot of fat jiggling around the court in the NBA do you?

Are Toxins in your fat cells released when you lose weight?

ANSWER: Yes, your fat cells can accumulate numerous types of toxins. For example, almost everyone has traces of pesticides in their bodies. Many people freak out when they hear this, so they become more likely to fall for all kinds of bizarre and usually unproven "detoxification" rituals. It is a shame that our environment has become polluted, but the real questions are whether trace amounts of these substances pose any health risk and whether you actually have toxic levels in your body.

One group of substances that has come to attention recently in the context of fat loss, (in addition to health concerns), is organochlorines, including DDT, PCB’s and Dioxins. There is scientific evidence that these chemicals can be stored in fat cells and are released into your system when fat is lost.

The fish and wildlife service web page (fws.gov) has some detailed info on the chemistry and toxicology. One part was of particular interest:

"Organochlorines (OC's) are compounds that contain carbon, chlorine, and hydrogen. Their chlorine-carbon bonds are very strong which means that they do not break down easily. They are highly insoluble in water, but are attracted to fats. Since they resist metabolism and are readily stored in fatty tissue of any animal ingesting them, they accumulate in animals in higher trophic levels. This may occur when birds eat fish that have been exposed to the contaminant. It may also affect humans if they drink milk of a dairy cow that has ingested the chemical because the chemical is excreted in its milk fat. This is called biological magnification."

Some people may recall Rachel Carson and "Silent Spring" back in the 1960's which was largely responsible for the environmental movement and banning of DDT pesticides. Despite being banned decades ago, these chemicals can remain in our environment and in our bodies for years and organochlorine pollution appears to remain a very real issue today.

As for the release of these substances from your fat cells with weight loss, well, what can you say; those are the consequences of environmental pollution and this is just one more reason to stay lean and eat clean and perhaps also, do your share to take care of our environment, if you are so inclined. But I do believe for the most part, your body is quite well equipped to naturally detoxify most toxins that are ingested in "normal" (small) amounts or would likely be released slowly with normal rates of fat loss. I don't think this is a reason NOT to lose weight, although some researchers say that obese men and women have to "weigh the health advantages of losing the weight with a potentially harmful effect."

Unfortunately, there is another twist: Some data suggests that if these chemicals are released into your system as you lose weight, they could hamper fat loss by decreasing thyroid (T3 conversion) or reducing thermogenesis during weight loss if an obese person had accumulated these chemicals in their fat cells.

Everyone who loses weight experiences some degree of metabolic adaptation as they diet and lose weight, and some obese people seem to have a defect in thermogenesis or their hormones may be out of whack. Scientists began wondering if chemicals released from stored fat into circulation could be a cause of this metabolic slowdown. To the best of my knowledge, these findings have not been confirmed as causative through experimental research, but it's a disturbing prospect because getting lean is hard enough as it is.

Regarding the question about nausea and lightheadedness, I looked at several scientific studies on this subject and even after reading the full papers, I did not see any references to nausea or light headedness being related to Organochlorine release with weight loss. I did, however, see references to suppressed immune system and estrogenic effects in addition to the effects on thyroid. Light headedness could be as simple as low glycogen or blood sugar and caloric deficit.

If you take this research at face value it creates quite a conundrum, doesn't it? My advice is... don't. Don't be alarmist. Take the weight off anyway. Do it slowly and safely, and then keep it off - do NOT cycle up and down in weight. Also, this might be yet one more good reason to question the wisdom of losing weight quickly since the total body burden of OC's is greater in overweight people than in lean people, leaving them more susceptible to adverse effects. As one researcher said, "it could be preferable to moderate body weight loss."

I wouldn't let articles about "the typical American diet poisoning you with toxins" make you worry too much or jump on any bizarre detox rituals that don't have scientific support. You have to be pretty careful in the area of "detoxification" because it is filled with quackery and pseudoscience. Packaged, processed and refined foods are unhealthy. But this issue isn't about chemicals used in food processing, nor is it as simple as saying that eating "junk food" fills you with toxins. This is an environmental pollution issue, where the toxins find their way into our food supply - even "clean foods" - and then into our bodies, where in this case, they remain there for years.

I know it would be great if I could end this article by telling you how to get the OC’s out of your system. Unfortunately, the research data I have read does not propose a solution yet. Some people choose organic to avoid pesticides that are still used today, although the benefits of that would be preventative, not retroactive. For now, the best bet is to lose weight at a sensible rate, maintain a healthy weight, and eat clean, unprocessed foods as much as possible.

If you'd like to learn more about how to decrease your body fat level in a safe, sensible, natural way, then visit: www.burnthefat.com
About the Author:

Tom Venuto is a natural bodybuilder, certified strength and conditioning specialist (CSCS) and a certified personal trainer (CPT). Tom is the author of "Burn the Fat, Feed The Muscle,” which teaches you how to get lean without drugs or supplements using methods of the world's best bodybuilders and fitness models. Learn how to get rid of stubborn fat and increase your metabolism by visiting: www.burnthefat.com